Skip to main content

Full text of "The works of Nathaniel Lardner"

See other formats 


I 


»■ '" 


/ 


THE 


WORKS 


OF 


v/ 

NATHANIEL    LARDNER,   D.   D. 


WITH  A  LIFE  BY  DR.  KIPPIS. 


IN    TEN    VOLUMES. 


VOL.  III. 


LONDON : 
WILLIAM  BALL,  34,  PATERNOSTER-ROW. 

MDCCCXXXVIII. 


JOHN    CIJIMJS    AND    SON,    IlUNtiAY. 


CONTENTS  OF  THE  THIRD  VOLUME. 


PART  II. 


CHAP. 

XLIV. 
XI.V. 

XLVI. 

XLVII. 

XLVIII. 

XLIX. 

L. 

LI. 

LII. 

LIII. 

LIV. 

LV. 


LVI. 

LVII. 

LVIII. 

LIX. 
LX. 

LXl 

LXII 


Cyprian,  Bishop  of  Carthage 

Writings  ascribed  to  St.  Cyprian,  or  joined  with 
his  works  .... 

St.  Cornelius  and  St.  Lucius,  Bishops  of  Rome 

Novatus,  otherwise  called  Novatian 

Dionysius,  Bishop  of  Rome 

Commodian  .  .  -  - 

Malchion  .  .  .  . 

Anatolius,  and  three  others,  Bishops  of  Laodicea 

Theognostus  .  .  .  . 

Theonas,  Bishop  of  Alexandria 

Pierius,  Presbyter  of  Alexandria 

I.  Dorotheus,  presbyter  of  Antioch.  II.  Doro- 
theus,  author  of  the  Synopsis  of  the  lives 
of  the  prophets,  and  of  the  apostles  and 
disciples  of  Christ  ... 

Victorinus,  Bishop  of  Pettaw 

Methodius,  Bishop  of  Olympus  in  Lyciai 

Lucian,  Presbyter  of  Antioch  ;  and  Hesychius, 
Bishop  in  Egypt 

Pamphilus,  Presbyter  of  Caesarea 

Phileas,  Bishop  of  Thmuis  in  Egypt ;  and  Phi- 
loromus.  Receiver  General  at  Alexandria    - 

Peter,  Bishop  of  Alexandria,  and  the  Meletians 

An  Answer  to  Mr.  Jackson's  Remarks 

Archelaus,  Bishop  in  Mesopotamia 


A.  n. 

PAGB 

248 

1 

250 

55 

251 

74 

251 

78 

259 

127 

270 

131 

270 

135 

270 

140 

270 

148 

290 

153 

283 

155 

.  .  . 

159 

290 

162 

290 

181 

290 

202 

294 

216 

296 

234 

300 

237 

•  •  . 

243 

•  •  • 

252 

CONTENTS. 


CHAP. 
XIII. 

Mani,  and  his  Followers 

A.  D.   PAGF. 

Sect. 

,  I. 

A  general  history  of  the  Manichees 

...     259 

II. 

The  history  of  Mani               _            .            . 

.  .  .     30J 

IK. 

Mani's  Predecessors  and  Works 

...     317 

IV. 

The  Sentiments  of  the  Manichees  concerning 

divers  Points                    _             .             . 

...     328 

V. 

Their  Woi-ship          -            -            -            - 

...     384 

VI. 

The  Manichaean  doctrine  concerning  the  scrip- 

tures  -  -  -  ....     389 

VII.    Various  readings  and  select  passages  in  Faustu? 

the  Manichee  .  _  . 

Vin.  The  conclusion  of  the  history  of  the  Manichees 

IX.     The  Paulicians  .  _  .  . 

Remarks  upon   Mr.   Bower's  Account  of  the 

Manichees  .  _  _  . 

LXIV.  Arnobius  -  _  .  . 

LXV.  Lactantius  .  .  .  _ 

LXVI.  Of  burning  the  Scriptures,  and  of  Traitors,  in 

the  time  of  Dioclesian's  Persecution 
LXVII.  TheDonatists  -  - 

LXVIII.  Alexander,  Bishop  of  Alexandria 

LXIX.  Arius  and  his  Followers         .  _  - 


.  .  . 

436 

.  .  . 

438 

446 

449 

306 

456 

306 

481 

... 

549 

.  .  . 

553 

306 

566 

31G 

569 

THE 


CREDIBILITY 


or    THE 


GOSPEL     HISTORY, 


OR, 


THE     PRINCIPAL     FACTS    OF    THE    NEW    TESTAMENT 
CONFIRMED   KY  PASSAGES  OF   ANCIENT   AUTHORS, 
WHO    WERE    CONTEMPORARY    AVITH    OUR    SA- 
VIOUR,   OR    HIS    APOSTLES,    OR    LIVED 
NEAR    THEIR    TIME. 


PART  II. 


VOL.    III. 


THE 


PRINCIPAL  FACTS 


OF    THE 


NEW    TESTAMENT 

CONFIRMED,  &c. 

PART  II.  CHAP.  XLIV. 

CYPRIAN,  BISHOP  OF  CARTHAGE. 

I.  His  history,  and  character,  and  testimonies  to  him.  II. 
His  icorhs.  III.  His  testimony  to  the  books  of  the  New 
Testament ;  and  Jirst,  of  the  J'oiir  angels.  lY.  Oj'  the 
Acts  oj' the  Apostles.  V.  Of  St.  PauVs  thirteen  epistles. 
VI.  Of  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews.  VII.  Of  the  catholic 
epistles.  VIII.  Of  the  Revelation.  IX.  Respect J'or  the 
scriptures.  X.  General  titles  and  divisions  oJ'  the  scrip- 
tures. XI.  OJ'  Christian  apocryphal  writings.  XII. 
OJ"  Jewish  apocryphal  icritings.  XIII.  The  su)7i  of  his 
testimony. 

The  account  which  St.  Jerom  has  given  of  St.  Cypriaji, 
in  his  book  of  Illusti'ious  Men,  is  but  short.  It  is  to  this 
purpose :  '  Cyprian^  of  Africa  first  taught  rhetoric  with 
'  great  applause.  Afterwards,  being-  converted  to  chris- 
'  tianity  by  a  presbyter  named  Cfecilius,  whose  name  he  also 
'  took,  he  gave  all  his  estate  to  the  poor ;  and  after  no  long 

*  Cyprianus  Afer,  primum  gloriose  rhetoricam  docuit:  exiade,  suadente 
presbytero  Caecilio,  a  quo  et  cognomentum  sortitus  est,  Christianus  factus, 
omnem  substantiam  siiain  paupenbus  erogavit ;  ac  post  non  multum  temporis 
electus  in  presbj-terum,  etiam  episcopus  Carthaginiensis  constitutiis  est.  Hujus 
ingenii  superfiuum  est  indicem  texere,  ciun  sole  clariora  sint  ejus  opera.  Passu-s 
est  sub  Valeriano  et  Gallieno  principibus,  persecutioue  octava,  eodem  die  quo^ 
Romae  Cornelius,  sed  non  eodem  anno.     De  V.  I.  cap.  67. 

B   2 


4  Credibililij  of  the.  Gospel  Ilislory. 

'  time  he  was  made  presbyter,  and  then  bishop  of  Carthage. 
'  It  is  needless  to  give  a  catalogue  of  his  works,  which  are 
'  brighter  than  the  sun.  He  suffered  under  the  emperor 
'  Valerian  and  Gallienus,  in  the  eighth  persecution,  the 
'  same  day  that  Cornelius  died  at  Rome,  but  not  in  the  same 
'  year.' 

A  more  particular  history  of  St.  Cyprian  may  be  collected 
from  his  life,  written  by  his  deacon  Pontius,  from  his  own 
works,  the  mention  made  of  him  by  other  ecclesiastical 
M'riters,  and  those  Acts  of  his  martyrdom,  which  are  gene- 
rally reckoned  genuine,  and  are  allowed  by''  Basnage  to 
contain  for  the  most  part  matters  of  fact  truly  related, 
though  he  thinks  they  have  some  interpolations.  It  is  fit  I 
should  here  give  a  short  history  of  this  celebrated  bishop  of 
the  third  century. 

Beside  the  name  of  Cyprian,  he  had  that  of  "^  Thascius  ; 
and  bore  likewise,  as  we  have  already  seen,  the  name  of 
Coecilius,  from  the  presbyter  by  whom  he  was  converted. 
His  whole  name  therefore  was  Thascius  Coecilius  Cypri- 
anus.  He  was  an  African,  as  we  have  been  assured  by 
Jerom  ;  but  that  he  was  born  at  Carthage  is  not  certain.  His 
conversion  happened,  according  to  '^  bishop  Pearson,  in  the 
year  24G  :  and  therefore,  since  he  suffered  martyrdom,  in  the 
year  258,  the  gi-eatest  part  of  his  life  was  spent  in  heathenism, 
and  he  might  be  born  before  the  end  of  the  second  century. 
Csiecilius'^  was  not  only  a  presbyter  by  office,  in  the  church 
of  Carthage,  but  venerable  likewise  for  his  age,  at  the  thne 
of  Cyprian's  conversion. 

Jerom  says,  that  Cyprian,  in  the  former  part  of  his  life, 
taught  rhetoric  with  great  applause.  Lactantius'  writes  to 
the  same  purpose  ;  and  the  like  occurs f^  in  Eusebius's  Chroni- 
cle. Fabricius,''  however,  was  of  opinion,  that  Cyprian 
rather  showed  his  eloquence  at  the  bar,  than  taught  it  in  the 
schools  ;  which,  he  thinks,  may  be  concluded   from  Avhat 

**  Noa  enira  legitima  omnino  sunt  atque  sincera,  quae  cum  Cypriani  operi- 
bus  edita  sunt  ex  Vet.  Cod.  MS.  Etsi  niulta  in  illis  verissima  contineri, 
faciles  largiamur.     Annal.  Polit.  Ecc.  257.  num.  5.  •=  Cyprianus 

qui  et  Thascius. — Pupieno  S.  Ep.  Cyprian,  66.  [al.  G9.]  Vid.  et  Passionis 
Act.  p.  13.  ^  Vid.  Ann.  Cypr.  p.  6.  ^  Erat  sane  illi 

etiam  de  nobis  contubernium  viri  justi  ef  laudabilis  memoria>  Cjecilii,  et  aetate 
tunc  et  honore  presbyteri,  qui  eum  ad  agnitionem  verae  divinifatis  a  seculari 
errore  correxerat.     Cypr.  Vit.  per  Pont.  p.  3.  '  Cyprianus  mag- 

nam  sibi  gloriam  ex  artis  oratoriae  professione  quaesierat.  Lact.  Div.  Inst.  lib. 
V.  cap.  1.  8  Cyprianus  primum  rhetor,  deinde  presbyter,  ad  ex- 

tremimi  Carthagiensis  episcopas,  martyrio  coronatur.     Eus.  Chr.  p.  175. 

''  Non  rhetoncam  adeo  in  schoHs  docuisse,  quam  in  foro  exercuisse  Cypri- 
anus videtur.  Confer  quae  ipse  de  se  Cyprianus  hbro  ad  Donatum,  non  longe 
ab  initio.     Fabric,  annot.  ad  Hieron.  de  V.  I.  c.  G7. 


Cyprian  of  Carthage.  A.  D.  248.  5 

Cyprian'  liimseiriias  iiitiiuatcd  of  his  having  lived  in  great 
plenty  and  splendour:  but  the  words  Mliich  that  learned 
writer  refers  to,  need  not*^  to  be  understood  as  a  description 
of  Cyprian's  own  circumstances.  Undoubtedly  Cyprian  had 
a  good  estate  which  he  sold,  and  gave  to  the  poor,  soon  after 
his  conversion,  as  Jeroni  informs  us;  and  still  more  parti- 
cularly' Pontius,  who  mentions  this  as  one  of  the  extraor- 
dinary actions  of  Cyprian  before  baptism,  whilst  he  was  yet 
a  catechumen  :  but  Jerom,  who  was  not  ignorant,  as  it  seems, 
of  our  bishop's  circumstances,  and  has  often  mentioned  him 
in  his  works,  and'"  had  a  great  opinion  of  his  eloquence, 
never  gives  him  the  title  or  character  of  a  pleader,  or  a 
magistrate;  and  in  one"  place,  beside  that  already  quoted 
from  his  Catalog'ue  of  Ecclesiastical  Writers,  expressly  says, 
that  Cyprian  taught  rhetoric  at  Carthage.  Not  to  add,  that 
what  he  said  of  Cyprian  to  the  same  purpose"  in  the  Chroni- 
cle ought  to  be  reckoned  Jerom's  rather  than  Eusebius's. 
And  that  Cyprian  taught  rhetoric  in  the  schools  is  plaiidy 
said''  by  St.  Augustine,  who  must  be  reckoned  a  material 
evidence.  But  ]  do  not  perceive  him,  or  any  one  else  to  say, 
that  Cyprian  ever  pleaded,  or  exercised  the  office  of  a  magis- 
trate. And  in  that  way  he  might  come  to  have  a  good 
estate,  and  be  greatly  respected.  The  professioji  of  rhetoric 
could  not  but  be  very  profitable  i  at  that  time,  especially  if 
the  professor  himself  was  a  man  of  ability  in  his  way,  as 
Cyprian  was.  Possibly  Cyprian  had  a  stated  salary  :  if  not, 
the  gratuities  of  his  numerous  scholars  could  not  but  be  very 
considerable.  His  reputation  being  great,  all  the  youth  in 
general  in  those  parts,  who  were  of  any  fortune,  or  who  aimed 
to  be  magistrates  and  judg'es,  or  pleaders,  would  come  to  his 

'  Ad  Donat,  p.  2  et  3.  Oxon.  1682.  ^  Vid.  Vit.  S.  Cyprian,  a  Bene- 

dictino  Adomat.  num.  1.  p.  39.  Paris.  1726.  '  Nondum  secunda 

nativitas  novum  hominem  splendore  toto  divinae  lucis  oculaverat. — Distractis 
rebus  suis  ad  indigentiam  pauperum  sustentandara  tota  prsedia  pretio  dispen- 
sans, — &c.  Pont.  p.  2.  Oxon.  ■"  Beatus  Cyprianus  instar  fontis 

'  purissimi,  dulcis  incedit  et  placidus.  Hieron,  Ep.  49.  al.  13.  ad  Paulinimi. 
p  567.  m.  Ed.  Bened.  Cyprianus,  vir  eloquentia  pollens  et  martyrio.  Id.  ad 
Magn.  Ep.  83.  p.  655.  "  Proponamus  nobis  beatum  Cyprianum, 

qui  prius  idololatriae  assertor  fuit,  et  in  tantam  gloriam  venit  eloqiienticc,  ut 
oratoriam  quoque  doceret  Carthagini.     Id.  Comm.  in  Jonae,  cap.  3. 

°  See  before,  note  s.  p  Inter  quos  et  Cyprianus. — Qui  enim 

in  ludo  perversitatis  humanae  et  suam  et  aliorum  linguas  docuerat  loqui  nien- 
dacium,  ut  quod  ab  adversario  objiceretur,  astuta  fallacia  negaretur,  jam  in 
alia  schola  didicerat  confitendo  devitare  adversarium.  August.  Senn.  312. 
Tom.  V.  Bened.  [Al.  de  diversis  116.]  i  Quid  si  ctiam  figuras 

locutionis,  quae  ilia  arte  traduntur,  in  iis  saltem  qiiae  de  Apostoli  eloquio  com- 
memoravi,  ostendere  voluissem  'i — Haec  omnia,  quando  a  niagistris  docentur, 
pro  magno  habentur,  magno  emuntiir  pretio,  magna  jactatione  venduntur. 
Aug.  de  Doct.  Christ.  1.  iv.  cap.  7.  u.  14.  T.  iii.  P.  i. 


6  Credibilily  of  the  Gospel  History. 

school.  Besides,  Cyprian  was  not  only  master  of  the  theory 
of  his  art,  but  of  the  practical  part  likewise.  He  not  only 
understood  the  rules  of  rhetoric,  and  how  to  teach  others 
eloquence,  but  he  was  also  eloquent  himself;  and  very  pro- 
bably composed  for  others  arguments,  or  pleadings,  or 
harangues,  or  panegyrics,  and  such  like  discourses,  for"" 
which  he  v»  ould  be  well  recompensed :  and  in  these  two 
thing's,  teaching-  persons  rhetoric,  or  qualifying  them  for  the 
bar,  and  perhaps  sometimes  composing  pleadings  for  his 
scholars,  or  others,  I  take  to  be  comprehended  the  full  mean- 
ing- and  intention  of  St.  Augustine's  *  words,  Avhere  he  speaks 
of  Cyprian's  promoting  or  improving  forensic  disputes  and 
contentions. 

Cyprian  had  a  quick  advancement  to  the  highest  offices 
in  the  church.  This  is  intimated  by  Jerom,  and  more  parti- 
cularly related  by'  Pontius.  Bishop  Pearson"  computes, 
that  he  was  made  presbyter  in  247,  and  bishop  of  Carthage 
near  the  end  of  the  year  248.  The  learned  Benedictine,  who 
writes  the  life  of  St.  Cyprian  prefixed  to  Stephen  Baluse's 
edition  of  this  father,  thinks,  that'  he  might  be  baptized  in 
the  year  244  or  245,  and  made  bishop  in  248  or  249,  sup- 
posing it  to  be  scarcely  possible  to  determine  exactly  and  with 
certainty  the  year  of  those  events.  Pagi  likewise  thought 
it  to  be  doubtful,  whether"'  Cyprian  was  advanced  to  the 
episcopate  in  the  year  248  or  249. 

Cyprian"  was  made  bishop  against  his  own  inclhiation, 
at  the  general  and  earnest  desire  of  the  people  of  Carthage. 
But  his  election  y  was  opposed  by  several  presbyters  of  that 
church,  five  in  number,  Avho'  afterAvards  gave  him  a  great 
deal  of  uneasiness.     It  is  no  where  expressly  said  Avho  was 

■■  Nunc  probabo  quas  tu  ab  ore  nostro  laudes  Cyprianae  desideres.  Certe  ai 
adhuc  in  schola  rhetonim  verba  discipulis  venderem,  prius  ab  eis  mercedem 
sumerem.  Vendore  tibi  volo  laudem  pudicissimEe  conjugis  tuse;  prius  mihi 
mercedem  da,  pudicitiam  tuam.     Aug.  Ep.  259.  n.  4.  al.  125. 

'  Et  ut  tantae  vocis  tuba,  quae  forensium  mendaciorum  certamina  solebat 
acuere,  ad  prosternendum  pretiosis  sanctomm  mortibas  dialDolum  Cliristo  mi- 
iitantes  et  in  ipso  gloriantes  devotos  martyres  excitaret.  August.  Semi.  312. 
al.  de  diversis  116.  '  Presbyteriiun  et  Sacerdotium  statim  accepit. 

Pont.  p.  2.  Judicio  Dei  et  plebis  favore  ad  officium  sacerdotii  et  episcopatus 
gi'adum  adhuc  neophytus,  et,  ut  putabatur,  novel'a«,  eleclus  est.  Id.  p.  3. 

"  Pearson.  Ann.  Cypr.  p.  8,  9.  "  Vit.  S.  Cypr.  (ut  supra)  sect, 

ii.  p.  42.  et  sect.  iv.  p.  45.  fin.  "  Vid.  Pagi  Crif.  248.  n.  2. 

"  Non  praeteribo  etiam  illud  eximium,  quemadmodum  cum  in  dilectionera 
ejus  et  honorem  totus  populus  adspirante  Domino  prosiliret,  hurailiter  ille 
secessit,  antiquioribus  cedens  et  indignum  se  titulo  tanti  honoris  existimans,  ut 
dignus  magis  fieret.     Pont.  p.  3.  ^    Quidam  ilii  rostiterunt,  etiam 

ut  vinceret.  Pont.  p.  3.  Vid.  etiam  Cypr.  Ep.  43.  al.  40.  '  Vid 

Pear.  Ann.  Cypr.  251.  n.  3. 


CvPKiAN  OF  Cautmage.  A.  D.  248.  7 

Iiis  immediate  predecessor;  but^*  it  is  probably  concluded 
by  learned  men,  that  bis  name  Mas  Donatus. 

The  beginning-  ot'St.  Cyprian's  episcopate  was  peaceable, 
under  the  emperor  Philip  ;  but''  near  the  end  of  the  year  240, 
or  early  in  the  year  250,  began  the  Decian  persecution.  This 
bishop  of  Carthage  was  extremely  obnoxious  to  the  heathen 
people ;  and  they  often  demanded  in  a  clamorous  umnncr, 
in  the  theatre,  and  other  public  places,  that  he  should  be 
thrown  to  the  lions,  as  is  related  by^  Pontius,  and''  by  Cy- 
prian himself.  Hereupon  he  retired,  (as  Pearson  supposeth,^ 
in  Jan.  250,)  judging  it  to  be'  for  the  good  of  his  people, and 
agreeable  to  the  doctrine  of  Christ  in  the  gospel,  ands  hav- 
ing- also  received  a  divine  direction  to  that  purpose.  The 
government  not  being-  able  to  find  him  out,  he  was''  pro- 
scribed, and  proclamation  was  made  at  Carthage,  That  if 
any  one  had  any  goods  of  Caecilius  Cyprian,  bishop  of  the 
christians,  he  should  discover  them.  Nor  is  the  place  where 
he  absconded  known  to  this  day.  In  this  retirement,  which 
lasted  about  fourteen  months,  he  was  not  idle,  nor  unprofit- 
able, as  appears  from  the  many  epistles  written  by  him  dur- 
ing- that  time,  a  large  part  of  which  are  still  extant.  Cyprian 
seems  to  have  taken  with  him  from  Carthage,  one  of  his 
deacons,  named  Victor,  and  some  other  fiiends.  It  is  plain, 
he'  had  such  company  with  him  at  the  beginning  of  his  re- 
tirement. They  may  be  supposed  to  have  been  of  great  use 
to  him  in  taking  copies  of  his  letters  sent  to  Carthage  and 
other  places :  and  to  their  diligent  and  faithful  attendance 
on  their  bishop",  as  well  as  perhaps  to  the  kind  assistance 
likewise  of  some  others,  who  came  to  him  afterwards,  we 
ought  to  reckon  ourselves  indebted  for  the  letters  above  men- 
tioned,  now  in  our  hands. 

The  heat  of  the  persecution  being  abated,  in  the  year  251, 

^  Vid.  Pears.  Ann.  Cypr.  248.  n.  3.  et  Benedic.  Vit.  St.  Cypr.  n.  4.  p.  45. 

''  Vid.  Pagi  Crit.  250.  n.  4.  "^  maxime  cum  et  sutiragiis 

.saepe  repetitis  ad  leonem  postularetiir.     Pont.  p.  4.  "^  Nee  me  in 

conspectum  publicum,  et  maxime  ejus  loci,  ubi  toties  flagitatus  et  quaesitus 
fui.ssem,  temere  committere.  Cypr.  Ep.  14.  [al.  6.]  p.  31.  Oi1o  statim  tur- 
bationis  impetu  primo,  cum  me  clamore  \'iolento  frequenter  populus  t  agitas?et, 
non  tam  meam  salutem,  quam  quietem  fratrum  publicam  cogitans,  interim 
secessi,  Ep.  20.  [al.  15.]  p.  42.  Vid.  et  Ep.  59.  [al.  55.]  p.  130. 

«  Ann.  Cyp.  p.  1 7.  n.  2.  Conf.  Pagi  250.  n.  5.  "■  See  note  ^. 

E  Et  audietis  omnia,  quando  ad  vos  reducem  me  Dorainus  fecerit,  qui  ut 
secederem  jussit.  Ep.  16.  [al.  10.]  p.  38.  Credidit  se,  nisi  Domino  latebram 
tunc  jubenti  paniisset,  etiam  ipsa  passione  peccare.  Pont.  p.  5.  in. 

''  Statim  denique  pro  talibus  merit  is  etiam  proscriptionis  gloriam  con«ecutus 

est.  Pont.  p.  4.    Persecutio  enim  veniens me  proscriptionis  onere  depressit, 

ciun  publice  legeretur  :  Si  quis  tenet  vel  possidet  de  bonis  Caecilii  Cypriani 
episcopi  Christianorum.  Ep.  66.  [al.  69.]  p.  166.  '  Salutant  vos 

Victor  diaconus,  et  qui  mecum  s-imt.  Ep.  5. 


8  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

soon''  after  Easter,  Cyprian  came  out  of  the  place  of  his 
retirement,  and  returned  to  Carthage,  In  the'  month  of 
May,  in  the  same  year,  he  held  a  council  for  regulating-  some 
affairs  of  the  church,  particularly  the  treatment  of  such  as 
had  lapsed  in  the  persecution :  and  in  the  year  following'" 
a  second  council,  in  which  the  same  affair  was  farther  con- 
sidered and  regulated.  There  were,  beside  these,  several 
other  councils  held  at  Carthage  in  the  time  of  this  bishop  of 
that  city ;  three  of  which  were  engaged  about  the  question 
of  the  baptism  of  heretics,  in  which  Cyprian  differed  from 
Stephen  bishop  of  Rome,  and  some  others.  Cyprian  was  of 
opinion,  that"  all  baptism  out  of  the  catholic  church  was 
null  and  void,  and  that  they  who  had  received  such  baptism 
only  ought  to  be  baptized  when  they  come  over  from  heretics 
to  the  church.  What  was  Stephen's  opinion  is"  disputed ; 
whether  he  held  that  baptism  by  all  sorts  of  heretics  m  as 
valid,  and  that  they  who  came  from  them  needed  not  to  be 
baptized ;  or,  whether  he  maintained  the  validity  of  that 
baptism  only  which  was  performed  in  the  name  of  the  Father, 
the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Ghost.  The  most  remarkable  of  these 
three  councils  was  the  last,  at  which  were^  present  eighty- 
five  or  eighty-seven  bishops,  beside  presbyters,  and  others. 
It  was  held  in  256,  and  the  acts  of  it  are  still  in  being.  Of 
these  councils  I  give  no  farther  account,  that  I  may  have 
the  more  room  to  show  the  excellent  conduct  of  Cyprian  in 
some  other  matters,  which  deserve  particular  notice  in  this 
place. 

About  this  time  a  pestilential  distemper  wasted  the  Ro- 
man Empire,  raging  in  some  part  of  it  for  several  years. 
Some  learned  men  think  it  begun  in  the  reign  of  Decius, 
and  increased  very  much  under  Gall  us,  about  the  year  252, 
in  whose  time  it  is  placed  byi  Eusebius  in  his  Chronicle, 


k 


Vid.  Ann.  Cypr.  p.  48.  n.  3.  '  Ann.  Cypr,  ib.  n.  5.  Conf.  Pagi, 

251.  n.  17,  18,  21.  "'  Ann.  Cypr.  p.  35.  n.  6,  7.  Vid.  etiamCypr.  Ep. 

59.  al.  55.  et  conf.  Pagi,  252.  n.  8.  "  visum  est  ei  cum  ferme 

octoginta  coepiscopis  suis  Africanarum  ecclesiarum,  omnem  hominein,  qui 
extra  ecclesiae  catholicae  communionem  baptizatus  fuisset,  oportere  ad  ecclesiam 
venientem  denuo  baptizari.  August,  de  Bap.  cotitr.  Donat.  1.  i.  cap.  18.  p.  93, 
94.  T.  ix.  Bened.  Ecce  in  unitate  video  Cyprianum  et  alios  collegas  ejus,  qui 
facto  concilio  censuerunt  oranes,  qui  extra  ccclesiaj  communionem  fuerint  bap- 
tizati,  baptismum  non  habere  ;  et  ideo  eis  dandum  esse,  cum  veniunt.  Ib.  1.  ii. 
c.  6.  p.  100.  D.  Conf.  Cypr.  ad  Jub.  Ep.  73.  et  Cone.  Carth. 

"  Vid.  Tillemont,  Mem.  Ecc.  T.  iv.  St.  Cyprien,  art.  42,  et  note  xxxix.  Du 
Pin.  Bibl.  St.  Cyprien,  Basn.  Ann.  256.  n.  3,  4.  Pagi  Crit.  in  Bar.  256.  n.  4,5,  6. 

p  There  were  present  eighty-five  bishops,  one  of  which  had  two  proxies,  who, 
at  the  same  time  he  voted  himself,  gave  in  also  the  votes  of  two  absent  bishops, 
according  to  the  power  they  had  given  him.  The  number  of  votes  therefore 
was  in  all  eighty-seven.  "i  Sub  hoc  [Callo]  pestilens  morbus  multas 


CVPUIAN    OF   CAilTUAGE.    A.    D.    248.  9 

and"^  by  Eutropius,  and  ])y*'  several  other  ancient  writers. 
Pagi'  is  of  opinion,  that  this  pestilence  alHicted  the  Koinan 
Empire  fifteen  years,  beginnin<»-  under  Gall  us  and  Volusian, 
in  the  year  252,  and  ceasing-  in  267.  In  this  aiHiction  Car- 
thage had  its  share ;  and  upon  that  occasion  Cyprian  was 
not  negligent  in  the  duties  of  his  episcopal  function.  His 
deacon  Pontius  iiifonns  us,  that"  he  called  together  his  peo- 
ple, and  discoursed  to  them  of  the  obligation  of  compa:?sion, 
showing-  out  of  the  divine  scriptures,  how  acceptable  offices 
of  kindness  are  unto  God;  adding,  that  it  would  be  no  ex- 
traordinary thing-,  if  we  should  take  care  of  our  own  people  : 
"  He  only  is  perfect  who  does  more  than  publicans  and 
heathens ;"  Matt.  v.  45, 46.  We  are  to  propose  to  ourselves, 
said  Cyprian,  the  imitation  of  our  heavenly  Father,  who 
causeth  his  sun  to  rise,  and  sendeth  rain  upon  all  men ;  and 
thereby  to  show  that  we  are  not  unworthy  of  our  high  birth. 
This  discourse  had  a  g-ood  effect ;  and  in  the  time  of  that 
calamity  there  were  the  most  generous  acts  of  goodness  per- 
formed by  the  christians  at  Carthage,  as'  Pontius  relates, 
and  I  sometime  may  have  an  opportunity  to  show  more  at 
larg'e.  Upon  this  occasion,  likewise,  Cyprian  Avrote  a  trea- 
tise entitled,  Of  3Iortality,  or  of  the  Plague  ;  and,  as  is'* 
computed,  in  the  year  252. 

There  was  another  occasion,  in  which  the  virtue  of  Cy- 
prian and  the  people  under  his  care  was  very  conspicuous. 
Some  barbarous  people  of  Africa  made  inroads  into  Numidia, 
and  carried  off  with  them  captives  a  great  number  of  chris- 
tians. The  bishops  of  Numidia  gave  Cyprian  notice  of  that 
disaster.  Hereupon  he  made  a  collection  at  Carthage  for  the 
redemption  of  those  who  had  been  carried  captive  ;  and^  the 

totiiB  orbis  provincias  occupavit,  maximeque  Alexandriam  et  ^gyptum,  iit 
scribit  Dionysius,  et  Cypriani  de  mortalitate  testis  est  liber.  Euseb.  Chron.  p.  4?. 

*■  Sola  pestileutia  et  morbis  atque  aegritudinibiis  notiis  eoaini  [Galli  et  Volu- 
siani]  principatios  fuit.     Eutr.  '  Vid.  Pagi  Crit.  252.  n.  25. 

'  Vid.  Pagi  ib.  252.  n.  24.  et  seq.  265.  n.  5.  "  Aggregatum 

primo  in  loco  uno  plebem  de  miericordiae  bonis  instituit,  docens  divinae  lec- 
tionis  exemplis,  quantum  ad  promerendum  Deum  prosint  officia  pietatis.  Tunc 
deinde  subjungit,  non  esse  rairabile,  si  nostras  tantum  debito  caritatis  obsequio 
laveremus ;  eum   perfectum  posse  fieri  qui  plus  aliquid  publicano  vel  ethnico 

fecerit. Et  qui  se  Dei  f ilium  profitetur,  cur  non  exemplura  Patris  iinitatur  ? 

Respondere,  inquit,  nos  decet  natalibus  nostris,  et  quos  renatos  per  Deum  con- 
stat,   degeneres  esse  non  congruit.  Pont.  p.  5.  "  Id.  p.  6. 

"  Vid.  Pearson.  Ann.  Cypr.  p.  39.  n.  17.  et  Basn.  258.  n.  14. 

"  Misimus  autem  sestertia  centum  niillia  nummorum, Et  optamus  qui- 

dem  nihil  tale  de   caetero   fieri, Si  tamen  ad  explorandam  nostri  animi 

caritatem,  et  examinandam  nostri  pectoris  fidem,  tale  aliquid  accideret,  nolite 
cunctari  nuntiare  haec  literis  vestris ;  pro  certo  habentes,  ecclesiam  nostram  et 
fratemitatem  istic  universam,  ne  haec  ultra  fiant,  precibus  orare ;  si  facta  fuerint, 
bbenter,  et  largiter  subsidia  prcestare.    Ep.  62.  al.  60. 


10  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

whole  sum  contributed  by  Cyprian  himself  and  his  people, 
and  some>  bishops  and  other  christians  then  at  Carthage, 
amounted  to  about  seven  hundred  and  eighty  pounds  ;  which 
Cyprian  sent  to  the  bishops  of  the  province  of  Numidia,  to- 
gether with  his  own  and  his  people's  prayers,  that  no  such 
like  disasters  might  befall  them  again ;  at  the  same  time  assur- 
ing- them  that,  if  there  should,  the  christians  with  him  would 
be  always  ready  to  send  relief  to  their  brethren. 

But  the  most  glorious  scene  of  Cyprian's  life  remains. 
The  emperor  Valerian,  who  for  some  tilne  had  been  very 
favourable  to  the  christians,  became  their  persecutor.  Cy- 
prian, having-  been  brought  before  the  proconsul,  made  a 
confession  of  the  christian  faith,  and  was  banished  to  Curu- 
bis.  So  far  we  are  informed  by^  Pontius,  Avho^  refers  to 
the  Acts  for  particulars ;  and  by  the  Acts  which  we  now 
have,  we  are  informed  that,"^  on  the  30th  day  of  August,  257, 
Cyprian  was  brought  before  the  proconsul  Aspasius  Pater- 
nus ;  and  being-  examined  by  him,  owned  himself  to  be  a 
christian,  and  a  bishop  ;  declaring  that  he  knew  no  other 
gods,  beside  the  one  tiue  God,  who  made  the  heaven  and 
the  earth,  the  sea  and  all  things  therein.  Being  stedfast  in 
this  profession,  the  proconsul  banished  him  to  Curubis.  His 
deacon,''  Pontius,  accompanied  him  to  the  place  of  his  exile, 
where  he  arrived  the  l-3t]i  or  14tli  of  September.  Cyprian 
had  many  fellow-sufferers,  great  numbers  of  christians  in 
the  province  of  Numidia  were  apprehended,  and  sent  to  the 
mines.     We  have**  a  letter  of  Cyprian,  Avi'itten  in  his  exile, 

y  Mr.  Marshall,  in  a  note  upon  this  epistle  of  St.  Cyprian,  p.  177,  says,  '  that 
'  sum  was  collected  from  his  own  church  only,  over  and  above  the  several  sums 

*  contributed  from  such  bishops  as  happened  to  beat  Carthage  when  this  case  was 

•  laid  before  our  author.'  And  so  Fleury  understood  it ;  see  his  Ecclesiastical 
History,  B.  vii.  ch.  14.  p.  420.  But  Tillemont  takes  it,  as  I  have  done  above, 
that  the  contributions  of  Cyprian's  church,  and  of  some  bishops  then  at  Car- 
thage, all  together  amounted  to  that  sum.  Tout  cela  ensemble  fit  une  somme 
de  vingt-cinq  mille  livres.  Mem.  Ec.  St.  Cypr.  art.  37.  p.  210.  Which  is 
rightest,  I  am  not  much  concerned  to  determine.  The  thing  is  of  no  great 
importance.  ^  His  tam  bonis  et  tam  piis  actibus  supervenit  exilium. 
Pont.  p.  6.  Ut,  imminentis  martyrii  pleniore  fiducia,  non  exulem  tantummodo 
CurubLs,  sed  et  martyrem  possideret.  ib.  7.  '  Et  ut,  quid  sacerdos 
Dei  Proconsule  interrogante  responderet,  taceam  ;  sunt  Acta  quaj  referant.  ib. 
p.  6.  ''  Imperatore  Valeriano  quartum  et  Gallieno  tertium  Consuli- 
bus,  tertio  Calendarum  Septembrium,  Carthagine  in  secretario  Patemus  Procon- 
sul Cypriano  dixit Exquisivi  ego  de  nomine  tuo :  quid  mihi  respondes  ? 

Cyprianus  episcopas  dixit:  ChrLstianus  sum,  et  Episcopus.  Nullos  alios  Deos 
novi,  nisi  unum  et  venim  Deum,  qui  fecit  caelum  et  terram,  mare  et  qua  in 

eis  sunt  omnia. Poteris  ergo  secundum  prseceptum  Valeriani  et  Gallieni 

exul  ad  urbem  Curubitanam  proficisci.     Cypr.  Pass.  p.  11.  "  Nam 

et  me  inter  doraesticos  comites  dignatio  cantatis  ejus  delegerat  exulem  volun- 
tariuin.  Pont.  p.  7.  *"  Ep.  76.  al.  77. 


Cyprian  of  Cauthage.  A.  D.  248.  11 

which  is  inscribed  to  nine  bishops  by  name,  and  beside  them 
to  others,  presbyters,  deacons,  and  the  rest  of  the  brethren 
in  the  mines,  martyrs  of  God  the  Father  Ahnighty,  and  Jesus 
Christ  our  Lord.  And  those  confessors,  who  were  not  all 
in  one  and  the  same  place,  but  in  mines  at  some  distance 
from  each  other,  answer  him  again  in  three  several  letters, 
Avhich  are  still  extant  in  St.  Cyprian's  Morks. 

Whilst'  Cyprian  continued  at  Curubis,  Galerius  Maximus 
succeeded  Pateriuis  as  proconsid  of  Africa.  lie  recalled 
Cyprian  ti-om  his  banishment,  who  then  Ment  to  his  gardens, 
or  country  house,  near  Carthage,  by  the  orders,  as  it  seems, 
of  the  proconsul.  Those  gardens  had  been  sold  by  Cyprian, 
and  the  price  of  them  given  for  the  benefit  of  the  poor,  as 
was  formerly  observed ;  but,'  by  some  favourable  provi- 
dence, they  were  ag'ain  returned  to  the  possession  of  our 
bishop. 

Soon  after  his  arrival  there,  Cyprian  understood  that  there 
were  orders  given  for  bringing  him  before  the  proconsul, 
who  was  then  at  Utica,  a  city  of  Africa,  about  forty  miles 
distant  from  Carthage ;  but,  being  desirous  rather  to  die  in 
the  presence  of  his  own  people,  he  thought  fit  to  go  from 
his  country  seat,  and  concea*  himself  for  a  while.  Of  this 
he  gives  an  accounts  in  his  last  letter  to  his  clergy  and  peo- 
ple. The  proconsul  being  come  from  Utica  to  Carthage, 
Cyprian  returned  to  his  gardens,  where  many  persons  of  the 
best  rank  in  the  city  came  to  him,  entreating  liim  to  retire, 
and  offering'  him  likewise  a  safe  place  of  retreat :  but  he 
would  by  no  means  comply  w^ith  those  proposals.  This  is 
written^  by  his  deacon  Pontius. 

On  the  13th  of  September  258,  an  officer,  with  '  soldiers, 

*  Cumque  diu  ibidem  moraretur,  successit  Aspasio  Paterno  proconsuli  Gale- 
rius Maximus,  proconsul,  qui  sanctum  Cyprianum  episcopum  ab  exilio  revoca- 
tum  sibi  jussit  prajsentari.  Cumque  Cyprianus  sanctus  martyr  electus  a  Deo, 
de  civitate  Curubitana,  in  qua  exilio  praecepto  Aspasii  Paterni  tunc  proconsulis 
datus  fuerat,  regressus  esset,  ex  i^acro  praescripto  in  hortis  suis  manebat.  Act. 
pass.  p.  12.  f  Ad  horto-,  inquam,  quos  inter  iiiitia  fidei  suae  ven- 

ditos,  et  Dei  indulgentia  restitutes,  pro  certo  iterum  in  usus  pauperiim  vendidis- 
sct,  nisi  invidiam  de  persecutione  vitaret.  Pont.  p.  8.  fin.  s  Cum 

perlatum  ad  nos  fuisset,  fmtres  carissimi,  frumeatarios  esse  missos,  qui  me  Uticam 
perducerent,  et  consilio  carissimorum  persuasum  esset,  ut  de  hortis  nostris  in- 
terim secederemus,  justa  interveniente  causa,  consensi ;  eo  quod  episcopum  in 
ea  civitate,  in  qua  ecclesiae  dominicae  praeest,  illic  Dominum  confiteri,  et  plebem 
universam  praepositi  praesentis  confessione  clarificari.  Cypr.  Ep.  81.  [al.  83.] 
init.  p.  238.  ''  Conveniebant  interim  plures  egregii  et  clarissimi 

ordin  is  et  sanguinis,  sed  et  seculi  nobilitate  generosi:  qui  propter  amicitiam 
ejus  antiquam,  secessum  subinde  suaderent:  et,  ne  parum  esset  nuda  suadela, 
etiam  loca  in  quae  secederet  offerebant.  llle  vero  jam  mundum  suspensa  ia 
caelum  mente  neglexerat,  nee  suadelis  blandientibus  annuebat.  Pont.  p.  8. 

'  Cum  ecce  Proconsulis  jussu  ad  hortos  ejus — cum  militibus  suis  princeps 


12  CredibilUy  of  the  Gospel  History. 

was  sent  to  Cyprian's  g-artlens  by  the  proconsul  to  bring  him 
before  him.  Cyprian  then  knew  his  end  was  near  ;  and  with 
a  ready  and  constant  mind,  and  a  cheerful  countenance,  he 
went  without  delay  to  Sexti,  a  place  about  six  miles  from 
Carthage,  where '^  the  proconsul  was  for  the  sake  of  his  health. 
Cyprian's  cause  was  defeiTed'  for  that  day.  He  was  there- 
fore ordered  to  the  house  of  an  officer,  where  he  was  kept 
that  night,  but  was  well  accommodated,  and  his  friends  had 
fi'ee  access  to  him.  The  news  of  this  having-  been  brought 
to  Carthage,  a  great  number  of  people  of  all  sorts,  and  tlie 
christians  in  general,  flocked  thence  to  Sexti ;  and  Cyprian's 
people  lay  all  night  before  the  door  of  the  officer,  thus"" 
keeping,  as  Pontius  expresses  it,  the  vigil  of  their  bishop's 
passion. 

The  next  morning,  the  14ih  of  September,  he  was  led  to 
the  proconsul's  palace,  surrounded"  by  a  mixed  multitude 
of  people,  and  a  strong  guard  of  soldiers.  '  After"  some 
'  time  the  proconsul  came  out  into  the  hall ;  and  Cyprian 
'  being  set  before  him,  he  said,  "  Art  thou  Thascius  Cy- 
'  prian  ?"  Cyprian  the  bishop  answered,  '*  I  am."  Galerius 
'  Maxhnus  the  proconsul  said,  "  The  most  sacred  emperors 
'  have  commanded  thee  to  sacrifice."  Cyprian  the  bishop 
'  answered,  I  do  not  sacrifice."  Galerius  Maximus  said, 
'  "  Be  well  advised."  Cyprian  the  bishop  answered,  "  Do 
'  as  thou  art  commanded :  in  so  jvist  a  cause  there  needs 
'  no  consultation."  The  proconsul  having  advised  with  his 
'  council,  spoke  to  Cyprian  in  angry  terms,  as  being-  an  enemy 

repente  subitavit.  id.  ibid.  ^ et  in  Sexti  perdiLxerunt ;  ubi  idem 

Galerius  Maximus  proconsul  bonae  valetudinis  recuperandae  gratia  secesserat. 
Act.  Pass.  p.  12.  '  Sed  dilatus  in  crastinum,  ad  domum  principis  a 

praetorio  revertebatur Receptum  eum  tamen  et  in  domo  principisconstitutum 

una  nocte  continuit  custodia  delicata  j  ita  ut  convivaj  ejus,  et  cari  incontuber- 
nio  ex  more  fuerimus.  Pont.  p.  9.  "*  Plebs  interim  tota,  soUicita  ne 

per  noctem  aliquid  sine  conscientia  sui  fieret,  ante  fores  principis  excubabat. 
Concessit  ei  divina  tunc  bonitas,  vere  digno,  ut  Dei  populus  etiam  in  sacerdotis 

passione  vigilaret.  id.  ib.  "  Egressus  est  domiim  principis, et 

agminibus  multitudinis  mixtae  ex  omni  parte  vallatus  est.  Sic  autem  comitatui 
ejus  infinitus  exercitus  adhserebat,  quasi  ad  expugnandam  mortem  manu  facta 
veniretur.  ib.  p.  9.  °  Cimique  oblatus  fuisset,   Galerius  Maxi- 

mus proconsul  Cypriano  episcopo  dixit,  '  Tu  es  Thascius  Cyprianus  ?'  Cy- 
prianus  episcopus  respondit,  '  Ego :'  Galerius  Maximus  dixit,  '  Jusserunt  te 
'  sacratissimi  imperatores  ca^remoniari.'  Cyprianus  episcopus  dixit,  '  Non 
'  facio.'  Galerius  Maximus  ait,  '  Consuletibi.'  Cyprianus  episcopus  respondit, 
'  Fac  quod  libipraeceptum  est:  in  re  fam  justa  nulla  est  consultatio.'  Galerius 
Maximus,  coUocutus  cum  consilio,  sententiam  vix  aegre  dixit  verbis  hujusmodi: 

*  Diu  sacrilega  mente  vixisti,  et  plurimos  nefariae  tibi  conspirationis  homines 
aggregasli '    Et  his  dictis,  decretum  ex  tabella  recitavit,  '  In  Thascium  Cy- 

*  prianum  gladio  animadverti  placet.'     Cyprianus  episcopus  dixit,  *  Deo  gra- 

*  tias.'     Act.  Pass.  p.  13. 


Cyprian  of  Carthage.  A.  D.  248.  13 

•  to  the  gods,  and  a  seducer  of  the  people ;  and  then  read 
'  his  sentence  out  of  a  tablet :  "  It  is  decreed,  that  Thascius 
'  Cyprian  be  beheaded."  CJyprian  the  bishop  said,  "  God 
'  be  thanked."  '  This  is  the  account  given  in  the  Acts  of  St. 
Cyprian's  passion  ;  and^  Pontius  writes  to  the  like  purpose. 

Cyprian''  aa  as  then  led  away  to  the  field  of  Sexti,  a'  large 
level  spot  of  ground,  encompassed  with  trees,  the  boughs  of 
which  M  ere  then  loaded  with  spectators  ;  and,  in  the  presence 
of  a  great  number  of  people,  Cyprian  was  there  beheaded, 
according  to  the  sentence  pronounced  upon  him. 

Lactantius,  who  himself^  greatly  conmiends  the  style  of 
St.  Cyprian's  works,  says  they  were  despised  by  the  learned 
heatliens  that  had  looked  into  them  :  and  informs  us,  that'  he 
had  heard  a  person,  a  man  of  considerable  eloquence,  altering* 
one  of  the  letters  of  his  name,  call  him  Coprian  ;  thereby 
intimating,  that  when  he  was  a  man  of  good  parts,  and  quali- 
fied for  great  things,  he  had  followed  silly  fables.  But  it 
seems  to  me  reasonable  to  suppose,  that  Cyprian,  who  was 
a  man  of  bright  natural  parts,  and  no  inconsiderable  acquired 
abilities,  had  well  informed  himself,  and  had  received  some 
good  evidence,  of  those  principles,  for  the  sake  of  which  he 
abandoned  a  reputable  and  profitable  employment,  if  not  an 
honourable  and  plentiful  station,  without  any  worldly  pros- 
pects whatever ;  and  in  the  service  of  which  he  spent  ten 
years,  during  his  episcopate,  in  great  labour  and  much  op- 
position ;  and  at  length  cheerfully  resigned  his  life,  as  a  con- 
firmation of  the  truth  of  them,  and  as  an  example  of  con- 
stancy, by  which  his  people,  persons  whom  he  tenderly 
loved,  might  be  induced  to  suffer  any  thing  rather  than  deny 
them.  The  whole  tenor  of  Cyprian's  life,  after  his  conver- 
sion, was  peaceable,  charitable,  and  beneficial  to  men  of  all 
characters  in  distress ;  the  manner  of  his  death,  undaunted, 
willing",  and  ready,  without  seeking  it,  are  a  very  valuable 

P  Pont.  p.  9.  f,  10.  init.  i  Et  die  idem  Cyprianus  in  agrum  Sexti 

productus  est.  Act.  Pass.  p.  13.  ■■  Ipse  autem  locus  aequalis  est  ubi 

pati  contigit,  ut  arboribus  ex  omni  parte  densatis  sublime  spectaculum  prasbeat. 
Sed  per  enormitatem  spatii  longioris  visu  denegato  per  confusam  nimis  turbam, 
personae  faventes  in  ramos  arborum  repserant.  Pont.  p.  10.  *  Unus 

igitur  prsecipuus,  et  clarus  extitit  Cyprianus,  quoniam  et  magnam  sibi  gloriam 

ex  artis  oratoriae  professione  qusesierat Erat  enim  ingenio  facili,  copioso, 

suavi,  et  (quae  sermonis  maxima  est  virtus)  aperto  ;  ut  discemere  nequeas, 
utrumne  ornatior  in  eloquendo,  an  facilior  in  explicando,  an  potentior  in  per- 
suadendo  fuerit.  Lact.  Divin.  Inst.  lib.  v.  cap.  1.  sub.  fin. 

*  Hie  tamen  placere  ultra  verba,  sacramentum  ignorantibus  non  potest 

Denique  a  doctis  hujus  seculi,  quibus  forte  ejus  scripta  innotuerunt,  derideri 
solet.  Audivi  ego  quemdam  hominera  sane  disertum,  qui  eum  immutata  una 
litera  Coprianum  voceret ;  quasi  quod  elegans  ingenium,  et  melioribus  rebus 
aptum,  ad  aniles  fabulas  contulisset.  ib. 


14  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

testimony  in  behalf  of  the  truth  and  excellence  of  the  prin- 
ciples of  the  christian  religion. 

I  have  no  design  to  draw  at  length  Cyprian's  character. 
What  has  been  said  just  now  may  suffice.  However,  I  can- 
not forbear  observing,  in  the  words  of"  Mr.  Marshall,  for 
giving-  my  readers  some  farther  idea  of  our  author,  that  he 
was  a  bishop  of  a  most  flourishing  church,  the  metropolis  of 
a  province ;  that  he  was  a  man  made  for  business,  had  a 
diligent  and  active  spirit,  and  talents  equal  to  the  charge 
wherewith  he  was  entrusted ;  and  I  would  add,  that  he  was 
not  only  a  man  of  great  authority  in  his  life-time,  but  like- 
wise of  great  reputation  afterwards.  This  has  appeared  in 
part  from  what  has  been  taken  from  Jerom  and  Lactantius. 
They  who  are  desirous  of  knowing  more  of  the  praises  that 
have  been  given  Cyprian  by  ancient  writers,  may  consult" 
Ruinart  and^"  Tillemont.  I  shall  observe  only  a  few  things 
from  St.  Augustine.  In  his  time  the  day  of  St.  Cyprian's 
martyrdom  was  a  festival  not  only  at  Carthage,  but  in  other 
places  of  Africa,  as  appears  from''  five  sermons  of  Augustine, 
still  extant,  delivered  by  him  on  that  day  at  Hippo.  It  may 
be  concluded  fromy  what  he  says,  as  well  as  from  some 
other  ancient  writers,  that  the  anniversary  of  Cyprian's  mar- 
tyrdom was  then  observed  also  in  other  parts  out  of  Africa. 
Augustine^  calls  Cyprian  a  most  agreeable  writer,  as  well 
as  a  blessed  martyr.  He  assures  us,  that*  Cyprian  was  then 
generally  well  known  in  the  world,  partly  for  the  constancy 
and  fortitude  of  his  sufferings,  partly  for  the  charms  of  his  most 
agreeable  writings.     A  remark  of  Augustine  "^  upon  the  drS- 

"  See  Mr.  Marshall's  preface,  p.  14.  '  Admonit,  in  Vit.  at  Act.  S.  Cy- 

prian, ap.  Act.  Mart.  Sin.  et.  Sel.  p.  198,  199.  "  Tillein.  St.  Cyprien. 

art.  62,  63,  64.  "  Serm.  309. 313.  T.  v.  Bened.  y  Quis 

enim  hodie,  non  dicam  in  hac  nostra  civitate,  sed  plane  per  Africam  totam, 
transmarinasque  regiones,  non  Christianns  solum,  sed  Paganus,  aut  Judaeus,  aut 
etiam  Haireticus,  possit  inveniri,  qui  non  nobiscum  dicat  Natalem  Martyris 
Cypriani  ?  Aug.  Serm.  310.  al.  de  Diversis.  1 13.  in.  ^  Nonne  adspicimus, 

quanto  auro  et  Eugento  et veste  suffarcinatus  exieritde  .Slgypto  Cyprianus,  doctor 
suavissimus,  et  martyr  beatissimus  ?  quanto  Lactantius,  &c.  Aug.  de  Doctr.  Chr. 
lib.  ii.  cap.  40.  n.  61.  *  Verum  quia  non  solum  dixit  quee  audirentur, 

sed  scripsit  etiam  quae  legerentur ; et  innotuit  regionibus  multis  paitim  per 

famam  fortissimaj  passionis,  partim  per  dulcedinem  suavissimae  lectionis.  Serm. 

310.  sub.  fin.  •'  Est  tale  aliquid  in  epistola  beatissimi  Cypriani 

Ait  ergo  quodam  in  loco :  '  Petamus  hanc  sedem :  dant  secessum  vicina  secreta : 
*  ubi  diim  erratici  palmitum  lapsus  pendulis  nexibus  per  arundines  bajulas 
'  repunt,  viteam  porticum  frondea  tecta  fecerunt.'  Non  dicuntur  ista  nisi  mira- 
biliter  affluentlssima  i'ecunditate  facundiae,  sed  profusione  nimia  gravitati  dis- 
plicent.  Qui  vero  haec  amant,  profecto  eos  qui  non  ita  dicunt,  sed  castigatius 
eloquuntur,  non  posse  ita  eloqui  existimant,  non  judicio  ilia  evitare.  Quaprop- 
ter  ille  vir  sanctus  et  posse  se  ostendit  sic  dicerc,  et  nolle,  quoniam  postmodum 
nunquam.     Aug.  De  Doctr.  Chr.  lib.  iv.  cap.  13.  n.  31. 


Cyprian  of  Cauthage.  A.  D.  248.  15 

ference  of  style  in  Cyprian's  works  may  be  esteemed  a 
proof"  both  of  his  own  judgment,  and  of  the  j udgment  and 
abilities  of  our  author  in  that  way. 

As  my  history  of  St.  Cyprian  is  but  short,  I  would  refer 
my  readers  10*=  Cave,  and  others,  who  have  written  his  life 
more  at  large;  and  particularly  to'^  Le  Clerc,  who  has  done 
the  same,  in  the  free  way.  I  should  have  been  well  pleased 
to  insist  upon  Cyprian's  visions  and  revelations  ;  but  it  would 
require  more  room  than  1  can  spare  here :  besides,  though  I 
have  sometimes  taken  notice  of  such  things,  as  in  the  histories 
of  Greg-ory  of  Neocaesarea,  and  Dionysius  of  Alexandria, 
and  perhaps  occasionally  in  some  other  chapters,  that  I 
might  not  leave  this  matter  altogether  untouched  ;  there  is 
another  place  in  this  work,  where  it  may  be  proper  to  ob- 
serve distinctly  the  continuance  of  miraculous  powers,  or 
extraordinary  gifts  of  the  Spirit,  in  the  church  after  the  time 
of  the  apostles  ;  and  for  that  place  I  reserve  the  farther 
consideration  of  Cyprian's  claims  to  a  share  in  such  gifts. 

II.  St.  Cyprian's  works  are  distributed  into  two  parts ; 
Tracts,  or  Treatises ;  and  Epistles.  The  tracts  are  upon  a 
variety  of  subjects.  Some  are  defences  of  the  christian  re- 
ligion against  Jews  and  Gentiles,  some  upon  christian  mo- 
rality, others  concerning  the  discipline  of  the  church.  His 
epistles  were  written  partly  in  the  time  of  his  retirement 
under  the  Decian  persecution,  partly  afterwards.  With  them 
are  joined  divers  epistles  of  others  sent  to  him ;  they  are 
very  useful  and  entertaining ;  I  need  not  give  a  more  parti- 
cular account  of®  them.  However,  it  may  not  be  amiss  to 
observe,  that  St.  Jerom^  does  not  reckon  Cyprian  to  have 
written  any  commentaries  upon  scripture ;  though  in  a  chain 
upon  St.  Luke's  gospel,  mentioned  by  ^  Montfaucon,  Cyprian 
is  said  to  be  one  of  the  ancient  writers,  from  whom  those 
interpretations  are  taken.  James  le  Long'^  has  put  Cyprian 
among  the  commentators  upon  scripture ;  but  it  is  only  for 
the  sake  of  his  treatise  on  the  Lord's  Prayer. 

Though  I  give  no  account  of  the  several  editions  of  St. 
Cyprian's  works,  I  may  be  allowed  to  observe  here,  that' 

"  Cav.  Hist.  Lit.  and  Lives  of  the  Primitive  Fathers.  Tillemont  Mem.  T. 
iv.  Part,  i,  Du  Pin  BibL  Ruinart.  Act.  Mart.  Sine,  et  Sel.  Vit.  S.  Cypr.  a 
Benedictino  adornat.  Basnag.  Annal.  Pagi  Crit.  Pearson  Ann.  Cypr.  Dodwell. 
Diss.  Cypr.  "  Bibl.  Univ.  T.  xu.  p.  207,  &c.  ^  It  is 

said  there  are  some  letters  of  St.  Cyprian  at  Venice,  which  have  not  been  yet 
printed.     Vid.  Montfaucon.  Diar.  Ital.  cap.  5.  p.  75.  ^  Beatus 

Cyprianus  instar  fontis  purissimi,  dulcis  incedit  et  placidiis ;  et  quum  totus  sit 
in  exhortatione  virtutum  occupatus  persecutioniim  angustiis,  de  scripturis  divinis 
nequaquam  disseruit.  Hieron.  ad  Paulin.  Ep.  49.  [al.  73.]  p.  567.  m, 

«  Vid.  Bibl.  CoisUn.  p.  25  L  "  Vid.  Le  Long  Bibl.  Sa.  T.  ii.  p. 

693,  Paris.  1723.  '  I  have  made  but  little  use  of  Mr.  Marshall's 


16  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

we  have  a  beautiful  edition  of  them  in  English,  with  useful 
and  valuable  notes,  by  the  late  Mr.  Nathaniel  Marshall,  pub- 
lished in  the  year  1717. 

Some  pieces  have  been  ascribed  to  St.  Cyprian  which  are 
not  his  ;  but  learned  men  are  now  so  generally  agreed  what 
are  his  genuine  works,  what  not,  that  I  need  not  enlarg-e 
upon  that  point.  As  several  of  those  tracts  which  formerly 
had  been  reckoned  his,  and  some  others,  are  still  usually 
bound  up  together  with  his  works,  and  are  useful,  and 
written  by  good  hands,  I  shall  make  some  extracts  out  of 
them  m  a  chapter  apart,  and  there  g-ive  a  short  history  or 
account  of  each  of  them. 

All  St.  Cyprian's  works,  both  tracts  and  epistles,  abound 
with  texts  of  the  scriptures  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament. 
But  there  is  one  tract,  entitled  Testimoiiies  against  the  Jews, 
to  Quirinus,  in  three  books ;  which  tract  is  little  more  than 
a  collection  of  texts  of  scripture  under  several  heads ;  for 
there  is  nothing-  in  it  properly  Cyprian's,  beside  two  short 
prefaces,  and  those  several  heads,  or  the  titles  of  the  chap- 
ters of  the  Avork,  and  the  names  of  the  books  of  scripture, 
from  which  he  takes  his  testimonies.  The  genuineness  of 
this  tract  has  been  called  in  question  by  some,  particularly 

translation.  All  my  passages  out  of  St.  Cyprian,  except  perhaps  two  or  three, 
or  four  at  most,  were  collected,  translated,  and  put  in  the  order  they  are  now 
in,  before  I  was  acquainted  with  it.  However,  I  have  made  some  improve- 
ments by  Mr.  Marshall's  performance,  and  have  now  taken  care  to  make 
several  references  to  him,  which  I  hope  the  attentive  reader  will  perceive.  As 
I  have  not  read  over  Mr.  Marshall's  translation,  my  testimony  can  be  of  no 
gi-eat  value.  But  so  far  as  I  have  had  leisure  and  opportunity  to  read  and  ex- 
amine it,  it  appears  to  be,  together  with  the  notes,  a  work  of  much  labour  and 
study,  and  to  deserve  great  commendation.  Nevertheless  there  is  a  particular 
or  two,  which  I  must  remark.  Mr.  Mai-shall,  in  his  preface,  p.  17,  18.  ex- 
presseth  himself  in  these  very  words.     '  I  know  not  whether  it  be  worth  while 

*  to  take  notice  of  one  particular  liberty  which  I  have  taken,  of  prefixing  the 

*  title  of  saint  to  the  several  apostles  and  evangelists,  as  they  occur  in  our  author, 
'  though  he  himself  has  named  them  simply  and  plainly,  without  any  such  ap- 
'  pellation.'  And  afterwards  he  says :  '  I  have  here  and  there  also  expressed  my 
'  author's  sense  in  the  language  of  holy  scripture,  where  he  himself  did  not  mean 
'  to  quote  it.  But  then  in  such  cases,  I  never  refer  to  the  passage  in  the  mar- 
'  gill,  as  I  always  do  where  he  particularly  cites  any  verse  or  chapter  of  the 

*  inspired  writers.'  But  it  appears  to  me,  that  both  these  are  unwarrantable 
and  unjustifiable  liberties,  not  proper  to  be  taken  in  translating  ancient  authors. 
With  ri'gard  to  the  first,  though  of  no  very  great  importance;  it  seems  to  me 
to  be  rather  better  to  show  primitive  writers  in  their  own  original  simplicity 
and  plainness,  as  near  as  possible.  With  regard  to  the  other  liberty,  which 
Mr.  Marsliail  says  he  has  taken,  it  appears  to  me  altogether  unjustifiable. 
Ordinary  readers  will  be  liable  to  be  misled  by  that  method  -.  and  I  believe  it 
must  be  attended  with  some  bad  consequences,  which  good  Mr.  Marshall  was 
not  aware  of.  Perliaps  this  remark  will  be  illustrated  and  confirmed  by  sorae- 
wliat  to  be  taken  notice  of  by  and  by,  at  numb.  6. 


Cyprian  of  Cakthage.  A.  U.  248.  17 

by''  Rivet.  Here  books  of  scripture  are  expressly  quoted 
by  name,  which  is  sekloui  done  iu  Cyprian's  otlier  Avorks. 
Here  also  texts  of  scripture  are  cited,  according*  to  difl'erent 
reading-s  from  tliose  foun<l  in  his  other  Avritings.  Neverthe- 
less, it  is'  generally  thought  hy  learned  men,  tjiat  these  ob- 
jections are  of  no  great  moment,  this  tract  having"  been 
quoted  as  St.  Cyprian's  by  several  ancient  writers.  Bishop 
Pearson"'  placeth  these  books  in  the  year  248.  The  learned 
Benedictine"  before  mentioned  supposetli  likewise  that  they 
were  written  whilst  Cyprian  was  presbyter,  or  soon  after  he 
was  made  bishop  ;  and  he  offers  some  arg'uments  that  deserve 
consideration.  Bishop  Fell  thinks  this  one  of  the  first  of 
St.  Cyprian's  tracts ;  and  upon  the  ground  of  this  opinion, 
concerning-  the  early  date  of  this  work,  is  founded  a  solution 
of"  the  difficulty  taken  from  the  different  citations  of  scrip- 
ture, in  this  and  other  writings  of  this  father.  Mr.  Simon, 
who  dislikes  Fell's  solution,  g"ives''  another;  but  whether  it 
be  better  than  the  bishop's  I  cannot  say.  Basnage,  whoi 
makes  no  doubt  of  the  genuineness  of  this  tract,  and  even 
thinks  Pontius  has  referred  to  it,  supposetli  it  written  when 
Cyprian  was  bishop,  and  after  the  Decian  persecution. 
Stephen  Baluze  maintains  the  genuineness  of  this  work  ;  but 
then  at  the  same  time  he  allows  that  it  has  been  much  inter- 
polated. The  words  of  one,  who  was  well  furnished  w.th 
manuscripts  of  St.  Cyprian's  works,  are  so  remarkable  to 
this  purpose,  that  the  reader  may  expect  to  see  them  in  the"^ 
marg"in. 

''  Si  tamen  libri  illi  [ad  Quirinum]  sunt  Cypriani  omnes.  Aliquos  enim 
ad  Quirinum  scripsisse,  ex  Hieronymo,  et  aliis,  qui  eorum  mentionem  faciunt, 
probavit  Pamelius.  Sed  an  sint  ii  ipsi  libri,  quos  habemus,  dubium  reddunt 
citationes  librorum,  quas  his  formulis  enuntiat,  praeter  Cypriani  in  aliis  opusculis 
morem,  Kara  Lucam,  Kara  Marcum,  &c.  Rivit.  Crit.  Sacr.  1.  ii.  cap.  15.  p. 
1097.  '  Vid.  Notas  Ed.  Oxon.  p.  17.  Du  Pni.  Bibl.  TiUemont. 

Tom.  iv.  St.  Cyprien,  art,  64.  el  note  54.  ■"   Ann.  Cypr.  p.  9. 

num.  1.  "  Vit.  S.  Cyprian,  p.  44.  num.  4.  " varie- 

tatis   istius vix  alia  ratio  reddi  poterit,  quam  quod  diversis  temporibus 

scriberentur ;  et  proinde  dicendum  tractatum  hunc  reliqua  omnia  quae  sequun- 
tur  pi'severtisse.     Edit.  Ox.  in  not.  p.  17.  p  II  [I'Eveque  d'  Oxford] 

n'a  pas  pris  garde,  que  cette  ancienne  traduction,  qui  etoit  entre  les  mains  du 
peuple,  et  qu'  on  lisoit  dans  les  eglises,  n'  empechoit  point  ceux  qui  savoient  la 
langue  Grecque  de  traduire  le  Grec  des  Septante,  et  celui  du  Nouveau  Testa- 
ment, a  leur  maniere,  quand  ils  le  jugeoient  a  propos.  C  est  principalement 
a  cela  qu'  on  doit  attribuer  cette  diversite  de  version  des  memes  passages,  qui 
est  dans  les  differens  livres  de  ce  savant  Eveque.  R.  Simon  Critique  des  Coram, 
du  N.  T.  chap.  i.  p.  15.  'i  Ni  a  vero  aberret  conjectura,  non  ex 

titulo,  quo  Quirinus  afficitur,  sed  ex  verbis  Pontii,  libriun  ab  episcopo  Cypriano, 
sed  extincta  Decii  persecutione,  confectum  fuisse  censemus :  "  Quis  emolumen- 
Uim  gratise  proficientis  ostenderit?"  quibus  innuit  libros  ad  Quirinum,  quorum 
ad  praefationem  digitum  Pontius  intendisse  videtur.     Basn.  An.  258.  num.  14. 

■■  Si  qua  sunt  loca  in  operibus  sancti  Cypriani,  de  quibus  pronuntiari  non 
VOL.    HI.  C 


IS  Credibility  oftlie  Gospel  History. 

And  hence,  if  I  mistake  not,  arises  the  truest  and  best 
solution  of  the  difhculty  before  mentioned.  Bishop  Fell 
thought  the  different  method  of  citing  scriptures,  and  the 
different  reading-  of  texts  or  passages,  in  this  and  the  other 
works  of  Cyprian,  to  be  owing  to  the  distance  of  the  times 
of  writing  them.  This  was  one  of  Cyprian's  first  pieces  ; 
the  rest  was  written  at  different  times  afterwards. 

Simon  says,  that  though  there  was  at  that  time  a  Latin 
version  generally  used  by  Latin  christians,  yet  it  was  not 
uncommon  for  those  who  had  learning,  and  understood 
Greek,  to  translate  for  themselves  from  the  original  when 
they  saw  fit.  And  to  this  principally,  says  he,  we  ought  to 
ascribe  that  diversity  of  translation  of  the  same  passages, 
which  is  found  in  the  different  books  of  this  learned  bishop. 
Nor  is  it  impossible  that  this  method  may  have  been  used 
by  some  learned  men  at  that  time  ;  Cyprian  in  particular. 
Massuet**  indeed  is  pleased  to  make  a  doubt  Avliether  Cyprian 
understood  Greek  ;  but  I  think  he  is  singular  here  :  others 
have  a  better  opinion  of  our  bishop's  learning ;  for  it  has 
been  generally  supposed,  that  Firmilian's  letter  written  in 
Greek,  was  translated  into  Latin  by  him.  I  formerly  referred' 
to  several  men  of  this  sentiment.  To  them  I  would  now  add" 
the  learned  Benedictine,  author  of  St.  Cyprian's  life  :  ajid  it 
appears  to  be  highly  probable,  that  Cyprian,  who  in  the 
former  part  of  his  life  professed  rhetoric  with  reputation  in 
the  city  of  Carthage,  was  not  unskilled  in  the  Greek  tongue. 
And  in  his  remaining  writings  we  find  mention  of  some 
Greek  authors,  particularly^  Plato,  and  Hermes  Trisme- 
gistus,"  Hippocrates,  and  Soranus :  and  he  mentions  them 

possit  ea  certe  illius  esse,  id  vero  in  primis  asseri  potest  de  libris  Testimonioruni 
ad  Quirinum.  Plures  enim  codices  plus  habent  quam  vulgat8e  editiones,  alii 
minus.  Itaque,  quoniam  impossibile  est  discemere  ea  quae  vere  Cypriani  sunt 
ab  iis  quse  post  ilium  a  studiosis  addita  sunt,  nos  retinuimus  ea  quae  reperta 
nobis  sunt  in  antiquis  exemplaribus  manuscriptis.  Porro  duo  tantum  priores 
libri  extant  in  editione  Spirenji,  in  veteri  Veneta,  et  in  ea  quam  Remboldus 
procuravit.    Erasmus  tertiam  emisit  ex  codice  scripto  monasterii  Gemblacensis 

Habui  autem  unum  et  viginti  exemplaria  vetera  horum  librorum,  quorum 

tamen  quinque  habent  tantum  libros  duos  priores.  Baluz.  Not.  ad  Cyprian. 
p.  596.  *  Cyprianum  autem  Graece  doctum  fuisse,  nullo  argumento 

constat.     Massuet.  Diss,  in  benae.  ii.  n.  54.  p.  102.  '  See  Vol.  ii. 

ch.  39.  note  *.  "  Haec  autem  Firmiliani  epistola,  quae  Latine  reddita 

exstat  inter  Cyprianicas  septuagesima  quinta,  sic  Cyprianicum  stilum  redolet, 
ut  non  alium  interpretem  habuisse  videatur.  Vit.  S.  Cypr.  n.  31.  p.  118. 
init.  '  In  quo  et  Plato  pari  ratione  consentit ;  et  unum  Deum  servans, 

caeteros  angelos,  vel  daemonas  dicit.  Hernies  quoque  Trismegistusunura  Deum 
loquitur,  eumque  incomprehensibilem  atque  inaestimabilem  conlitetur.  De 
Idol.  Van.  p.  14.  "  Non  invenio  unde  hoc  nomen  assumant ;  nisi 

forte  qui  plura  et  secretiora  legenint  apud  Hippocratem  et  Soranum  KktviKsg 
istos  deprehenderunt.     Ep.  69.  al.  76.  p.  186. 


Cyprian  of  Carthage.  A.  D.  248.  19 

as  if  he  was  ao<[uainted  with  their  worilcs,  especially  those  of 
the  two  former. 

But  yet  it  seeiiis  to  me  that  the  foremeutioned  reasons  are 
not  sutiicient  to  account  for  tlie  diversity  we  are  speaking- 
of:  I  rather  think  it  to  be  chieHy  owing-  to  the  additions 
and  alterations  that  have  been  made  in  the  books  of  Testi- 
monies. Such  a  collection  of  texts  of  scripture  is  very  lia- 
ble to  be  altered.  It  is  likely  that  some  texts  have  been 
added  in  latter  ages,  according  to  the  version  or  readings 
then  m  use :  and  other  passages,  m  hich  were  in  the  work 
from  the  beginning,  have  been  altered  according  to  the  read- 
ings in  use  in  the  age  of  the  copier  or  transcriber.  The  ac- 
count which  Stephen  Baluze  gives  of  the  manuscripts  of  these 
books  appears  to  me  to  put  this  out  of  question.  Such  ad- 
ditions and  alterations  may  have  been  made  w  ithout  any 
bad  intention,  barely  M^ith  a  view  of  rendering  the  work 
more  useful  and  more  generally  acceptable  ;  though  they 
who  are  curious  would  be  better  pleased  to  see  these  books 
genuine  and  uncorrupted  in  their  original  size,  however 
small,  just  as  they  came  out  of  Cyprian's  hands.  And  as  I 
think  such  books  as  these,  consisting  chiefly  of  collections 
of  texts  of  scripture,  are  more  especially  liable  to  altei*ation, 
both  by  interpolation  or  addition,  and  by  changing  the  origi- 
nal readings  for  such  as  afterwards  were  in  use  and  were 
more  modern;  so.  I  likewise  question  whether  we  can  be 
sure,  that  in  St.  Cyprian's  other  works  we  always  have  the 
passages  in  the  Latin  version  made  use  of  by  him,  and  as  they 
came  from  him.  I  think  bishop  Fell  speaks  in  the  same 
manner:  I  put  his  words  at  the  bottom  of  the^  page. 

Upon  the  whole,  there  can  be  no  doubt  made  but  St. 
Cyprian  published  a  work  with  this  title ;  but  it  seems  that 
the  books  of  Testimonies  which  we  now  have,  or  at  least 
some  part  of  them,  are  liable  to  objections  that  have  not 
been  rully  cleared  up  :  for  which  reason  it  may  be  thought 
proper,  that  they  should  be  quoted  with  some  particular 
caution.  Whenever  therefore  I  take  any  thing'  out  of  the 
books  of  Testimonies,  I  intend  to  mention  them  expressly. 

"  Sperabam  quidem  ex  largo  hoc  quod  in  traclatu  isto  habetur  scripturarum 
spicilegio,  ad  versionis  Latinae,  quae  Hieroaymianam  praecessit,  restitutionem, 
gradum  aliquem  praestrui  potuisse.  Et  certe,  si  modo  sibi  ubique  constaret 
Cypriani  textus,  loca  ilia  quae  a  lectione  vnlgata  discrepare  deprehenduntur, 
pro  antiquae  versionis  reliquiis  non  immerito  haberemus.  Sed  cum  ea  sit 
lectionum  in  MSS.  codicibus  varietas,  ut  plura  siniul  occurrant,  quae  a  vulgatis 
discrepent ;  et  in  his  quid  a  Cypriano  scriptum  fuerit,  codicibus  sibi  invicem 
non  respondentibus,  minime  constet :  porro,  cum  primorum  seculorum  patres 
in  S.  Scripturis  laudandis  diversimode  se  habeant;  curam  hanc  tantum  non 
deploratam  censemus.     Annot.  ad  Testim.  Libros,  p.  17. 

c  2 


20  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

There  is  another  tiactof  St.  Cyprian,  which  is  written  much  in 
the  same  way  with  those  books  of  Testimonies  ;  it  is  entitled, 
An  Exhortation  to  Martyrdom :  but  I  do  not  know  that  such 
objections  have  been  made  against  this  as  against  the  former. 
III.  As  I  hav  e  already  set  before  the  eyes  of  my  readers 
such  numerous  passages  of  scripture  in  the  christian  writers, 
whose  works  we  have  perused,  I  might  now  perhaps  begin 
to  contract,  and  be  more  brief :  however,  I  have  determined 
to  proceed  in  the  method  that  has  been  hitherto  taken,  with- 
out much  altei-ation,  until  we  come  below  Eusebius  of  Cae- 
sarea.  And  it  is  my  design  to  omit  nothing-  material,  purely 
for  the  sake  of  brevity.  Let  such,  therefore,  as  have  not  an 
opportunity  of  reading  over  the  voluminous  Avritings  of  the 
fathers,  accept  of  the  following  account  of  the  notice  St. 
Cyprian  has  taken  of  the  several  books  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment. I  propose  by  this  method  to  enable  every  one  to  judge 
in  some  measure  of  the  difference  between  the  books  of  Tes- 
timonies, as  we  now  have  them,  and  St.  Cyprian's  other 
pieces;  and,  besides,  there  are  several  citations  in  this 
writer's  works  that  deserve  some  remarks. 

1.  St.  Cyprian  speaks  expressly  ofy  four  gospels,  which 
he  compares  to  the  four  rivers  of  paradise:  these  gospels  are 
received  by  the  church,  and  are  her  property,  witfiin  her 
circuit;  by  which  she  is  overflowed,  and  her  plants  are 
enabled  to  bear  fruit.  As^  paradise  had  its  four  rivers,  so 
the  church  has  its  four  gospels. 

2.  In  the  second  book  of  Testimonies :  '  Likewise*  in  the 
gospel  according  to  Matthew ;  "  Now  when  Jesus  was 
born  in  Bethlehem  of  Judea,  in  the  days  of  Herod  the 
king,  behold  there  came  Avise  men  from  the  east  to  Jeru- 
salem ;"  '  ch.  ii.  1,  2.  In  this  work  is  quoted  also  the 
first  chapter  of  this''  gospel.  In  other  pieces  this  gospel  is 
cited  thus :  '  Likewise  "^  the  Lord  has  commanded  us  in  his 
gospel,  "  that  we  should  call  no  man  our  father  upon  earth, 
forasmuch  as  one  is  our  Father  who  is  in  heaven  ;"  ch.  xxiii. 
9.     Again  :  in  the  gospel"^  the  Lord  speaks  and  says ;  "  He 

'  Ecclesia,  paradisi  instar  exprimens,  arbores  fructiferas  intra  muros  suos  intus 
includit,  ex  quibus  quae  non  facit  fructum  bonum,  exciditur,  et  in  ignem  mittitur. 
Has  arbores  rigat  quatuor  fiuminibus,  id  est,  Evangeliis  quatuor,  quibus  baptismi 
gratiam  salutaris  ccelesti  inundatione  largitur.  Num  quid  de  ecclesiae  fontibus 
rgare  potest,  qui  intus  in  ecclesia  non  est  ?  Ep.  73.  p.  202. 

*  See  Mr.  Nath.  Marshall's  note  upon  the  place,  p.  235. 

'■  Item  in  evangelio  caia  Matthaeum  :  Et  cum  Jesus  natus  esset  in  Bethlehem 
Judae  in  diebus  Herodis  regis Testim.  1.  ii.  cap.  29.  p.  50. 

''  Lib.  ii.  cap.  6.  et  7.  36.  ^  Item  Dominus  in  evangelio  sue 

praecepit,  ne  vocemas  nobis  patrem  in  teira,  &c.     DeOrat.  Dom.  p.  142. 

''  In  evangelio  Dominas  loquitur  et  dicit :  Qui  diligit  patrem  aut  matrem 
super  me,  non  est  nae  dignus.     De  Exhorta.  Mart.  cap.  6.  p.  173. 


Cyprian  of  Carthage.  A.  D.  248.  21 

that  loveth  father  or  mother  more  than  ine  is  not  worthy  of 
nie,"  and  m  hat  follows.' 

3.  In  the  third  book  of  Testimonies:  '  Likewise^  in  the 
gospel  according-  to  Mark  ;  "  And  when  ye  stand  praying- 
forgive,  if  ye  have  ought  against  any,  that  your  Father  also 
which  is  in  heaven  may  forgive  you  your  trespasses ;"  ' 
ch.  xi.  25,26.  So  this  gospel  is  several  times  quoted  in  this 
work :  in  other  tracts  after  this  manner;  '  Whom'  the  Lord 
reproves  and  blames  in  his  gospel,  saying- :  "  Ye  reject  the 
commandment  of  God,  that  ye  may  keep  your  own  tradi- 
tion ;"  '  ch.  vii.  9. 

4.  In  the  first  book  of  Testimonies:  '  Likewise?  in  the 
g-ospel  according*  to  Luke;  "And  it  came  to  pass,  that  when 
i^lisabeth  heard  the  salutation  of  Mary,  the  babe  leaped  in  her 

womb,  and  Elisabeth  was  filled  with  the  Holy  Ghost "  * 

Luke  i. 41,42, 4^3.  In  the  tract  on  the  Lord's  prayer; '  Which *• 
the  Lord  teacheth  iu  his  gospel,  saying  :  "  Two  men  Avent  up 
to  the  temple  to  pray,  the  one  a  pharisee,  the  other  a  pub- 
lican," '  to  the  end  of  the  parable,  ch.   xviii.   10 14. 

Again  :  '  So  '  the  widow  Anna,  as  it  is  written  in  the  gospel, 
"  departed  not  from  the  temple,  but  served  God  with  fastings 
and  prayers,  night  and  day  ;"  '  ch.  ii.  37. 

6.  In  the  first  book  of  Testimonies :  '  Likewise''  in  the 
gospel  according-  to  John  ;  "  He  came  to  his  own,  and  his 
own  received  him  not.  As  many  as  received  him,  to  them 
gave  he  power  to  become  the  sons  of  God,  even  to  them 
that  believe  on  his  name:"  '  ch.  i.  11,  12.  In'  the  next 
book  of  Testimonies  he  quotes  the  first  five  verses  of  this 
gospel.  In  one  of  his  epistles :  '  Let"'  them  imitate  the  Lord, 
who  near  the  time  of  his  passion  was  not  more  proud,  but  more 
humble  ;  for  then  he  washed  his  disciples'  feet,  saying- :  "  If 
I  your  lord  and  master  have  w^ashed  your  feet,  ye  also  ought 
to  wash  the  feet  of  others;  for  I  have  given  you  an  example, 
that  ye  should  do  as  I  have  done ;"  '  John  xiii.  14, 15. 

®  In  evangelic,  in  prece  quotidiana:  Remitte  nobis  debita  nostra [Matth. 

vi,  12.]  Item  cat  a  Marcum:  Et  cum  steteritis  ad  orationem,  remittite,  &c. 
Test.  lib.  iii.  cap.  22.  p.  72.  ^  Quos  increpat  Dominnset  objurgat 

in  evangel  io  suo,  dicens:  Rejicitis  mandatum  Dei,  ut  traditionem  vestram  sta- 
tuatis.     De  Unitate  Eccl.  p.  117.  s  Item  in  evangelio  ro/rt  Lucam : 

et  factum  est, ut  audivit  salutationem  Mariae  Elisabet.    Testim.  1.  i.  cap.  8.  p.  37. 

*"  Quae  Dominus  in  evangelic  sue  ponit,  et  dicit :  Homines  duo  ascenderunt 
in  templum  orare,  unus  pharisaeus,  et  unus  publicanus.  De  Orat.  Dom.  p. 
141.  '  Sic  Anna  vidua sicut  in  evangelic  scriptum  est.    lb.  p.  155. 

''  Item  in  evangelic  cata  Joannem :  In  sua  propria  venit,  et  sui  eum  non 
receperunt.     Testim.  1.  i.  cap.  3.  p.  21.  '  Lib.  ii.  cap.  3.  p.  32. 

""  Imitentur  Dominum,  qui  sub  ipso  tempore  passicnis  non  superbior,  sed 
humilior  fuit.  Tunc  enim  apostolorum,  [discipulorum,  Baluz.]  sucrum  pedes 
lavit,  dicens:  Si  ego  lavi  pedes  vestros  magister  et  dominus,  et  vos  debetis 


22  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  Histori/. 

IV.  Tlie  book  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  is  frequently 
quoted  by  St.  Cyprian  by  that  title;  but  he  has  no  where, 
that  I  remember,  mentioned  the  name  of  the  writer.  '  Ac- 
cording- to"  what  Peter  says  to  the  Jews  in  the  Acts  of 
the  Apostles;  (ch.  ii.  38.)  "  Repent,  and  be  baptized  every 
one  of  you  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  for  the 
remission  of  sins,  and  ye  shall  receive  the  gift  of  the  Holy 
Ghost."  '  Again  :  '  As  °  we  read  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apos- 
tles ;  (ch.  iv.  32.)  "  And  the  multitude  of  them  that  believed 
acted  with  one  heart  and  soul.'  The  same  text  is  expressly 
quoted  in  another  place,  as  scripture :  '  This?  is  evident  from 
the  divine  scripture,  which  says,  "  The  multitude  of  them 
that  believed  acted  with  one  heart  and  soul,"  that  is,  with  great 
unanimity.'    Accordingly  this  book  is  cited  by  St.  Cyprian  for 

Eroof  of  what  he  asserts.  Having  q  noted  the  book  of  Tobit, 
e  adds  ;  '  Nor^i  do  we  so  allege  these  things,  my  brethren, 
as  not  to  prove  what  the  angel  Raphael  says  [|in  Tobit] 
by  the  testimony  of  truth.  In  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  the 
truth  of  this  is  showed  ;  and  that  souls  are  delivered  by 
alms  not  only  from  the  second,  but  likewise  from  the  first 
death,  is  made  manifest  by  fact  and  experience.'  For  this 
he  alleges  the  history  of  Tabitha,  Acts.  ix.  36 — 41. 

I  must  add  one  quotation  more.  In  the  third  book  of 
Testimonies:  '  Likewise  in"^  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  ch. 
XV.  28,  29,  "  It  seemed  good  unto  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  to 
us,  to  lay  upon  you  no  other  burden  than  these  thing's, 
which  are  of  necessity,  [|or,  these  necessary  things ;]  that 
ye  abstain  from  idolatries,  and  effusion  of  blood,  and  for- 
nication. And  whatever  things  ye  would  not  should  be 
done  unto  you,  neither  do  ye  unto  others."  This  is  a  very 
extraordinary  reading-,  and  requires  some  remarks. 

We  ought  here  to  recollect  the  substance  of  Stephen  Ba- 

aliorum  pedes  lavare.  Exam  plum  enim  dedi  vobL«,  ut,  sicut  ego  feci,  et  vos 
facialis.  Ep.  14.  [juxta  Pamel.  vi.  Baliaz.  v.]  p.  32.  "  Secundum  quod 

in  Actis  apostolorum  Petrus  ad  eos  loquitur,  et  dicit :  Poenitemini,  et  baptizetur 
unusquisque  vestrum  in  nomine  Domini  Jesu  Christi. — Ep.  73.  p.  205. 

"  Sicut  legimas  in  Actis  apostolorum  :  Turba  autem  eonmi  qui  crediderant, 
anima  et  mente  una  agebant.     De  Opere  et  Eleemosynis,  p.  208. 

P  Probat  scriptura  divina,  quae  dicit :  De  Unit.  Eccl.  p.  119. 

'*  Nee  sic,  fratres  carissimi,  ista  proferimus,  ut  non  quod  Raphael  angelus 
dixit  veritatis  testimonio  comprobemus.  In  Actibus  apostolorum  facti  fides 
posita  est,  et  quod  eleemosynis  non  tantum  a  secunda,  sed  a  prima  morte  animae 
liberentur,  gestae  et  impletai  rei  probatione  comj)ertum  est  Tabitha  operationibus 
jastis  et  eleemosynis  praistandis  plurimuin  dedita,  &c.  De  Opere  et  Eleem.  p. 
199.  '  Item  in  Actibus  apostolorum :  Visum  est  Sancto  Spiritui  et 

nobis,  nullam  vobis  imponere  sarcinam,  quani  ista,  quae  ex  necessitate  sunt ; 
abstinere  vos  ab  idololatriis,  et  sanguinis  etfiisione,  et  fornicatione.  Et  quae- 
cunque  vobis  fieri  non  vultis,  aliis  ne  feceritis.    Testim.  1.  iii.  cap.  119 


Cyprian  of  Caktmage.  A.  D.  248.  23 

luze's  note  before  referred  to ;  That  these  books  of  Testiruo- 
iiies  are  very  much  iiiterpohited,  and  that  Avhereas  he  had 
one  and  twenty  manuscript  copies  of  them,  five  of  those 
manuscripts  wanted  the  third  book.  Moreover,  in'*  his  note 
upon  the  passage  just  transcribed,  he  mentions  one  copy, 
where  this  passage,  and  what  follows  to  the  end  of  the  tliird 
book,  is  M'anting- :  so  that  this  passage  was  wanting  in  six 
copies  of  the  one  and  twenty. 

I  shall  immediately  observe  a  place  in  Irenteus,  or  rather 
in  the  Latin  version  of  that  father,  where  the  texts  of  Acts 
XV.  20  and  29,  are  quoted  very  agreeably  to  the  reading  Me 
have  before  us.  In  that  place  is  recited  Acts  xv.  from  v.  7. 
to  V.  29.  There  James  in  his  speech  says  ;  '  Wherefore^  my 
<  sentence  is,  that  we  trouble  not  them  w  hich  from  among  the 
*  Gentiles  are  turned  to  God  :  but  that  we  command  them  to 
'  abstain  from  the  vanity  of  idols,  and  from  fornication,  and 
'  from  blood  :  and  that  whatever  things  they  would  not  have 
'  done  unto  them,  neither  should  they  do  unto  others.'  And 
afterwards,  reciting-  the  epistle  itself;  '  For"  it  seemed  good 
'  to  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  to  us,  to  lay  upon  you  no  greater  bur- 
'  «len  than  these,  which  are  necessary  things:  That  ye  abstain 
'  from  things  sacrificed  to  idols,  and  blood,  and  fornication  : 
'  and  that  whatever  things  ye  would  not  have  done  unto  you, 
'  neither  should  ye  do  unto  others  :  from  which  if  3  e  keep 
'  yourselves,  ye  shall  do  well,  walking  in  the  Holy  Ghost.' 

This  Latin  version  of  Irena?us  was  not  published,  accord- 
hig  to  Mr.  Dodwell's^  computation,  till  some  time  after  the 
year  of  Christ  385;  though'"  3Iassuet  thinks  it  more  ancient 
by  a  great  deal;  and''  Mill  supposcth  that  it  was  made  in 
Irenoeus's  life-time,  or  soon  after  his  death,  before  the  end  of 
the  second  century  :  but  I  am  apt  to  think  that  Dodw ell's 
date  of  this  translation  is  early  enough  ;  and  possibly  some 
readings  of  texts  in  this  translation;  as  we  noAv  have  it,  were 
not  in  being  till  afterwards. 

Here  the  principal  differences  from  our  present  reading 
may  be  reckoned  two  ;  an  omission  ;  and  an  addition.  The 
omission  is  of  that  particular,   "  things  strangled ;"  the  ad- 

'  Ista,  et  quoe  deinceps  sequuntur  usque  ad  finem  libri,  desunt  in  codice 
Gratianopolitano.     Baluz.  Not.  p.  601.  '  Propterea  ego  secundum 

me  judico,  non  molestari  eos,  qui  ex  Genfibus  convertuntur  ad  Deum  ;  sed 
praecipiendumeis,  utiabstineant  a  vanitatibus  idolorum,  et  afomicatione,  et  a  san- 
guine :  et  quBecumque  nolunt  sibi  fieri,  aliis  ne  faciant.  Iren.  contr.  Haer.  lib. 
iii.  c.  12.  p.  199.  Massuet.  "  Placuit  enim  Sancto  Spiritui,  et  nobis, 

nullum  amplius  vobis  pondus  imponere,  quam  hac,  quae  sunt  neces.'ana  :  ut 
abstineatis  ab  idolothj'tis,  et  sanguine,  et  Ibmicafione :  et  quaecumque  non 
viiltis  fieri  vobis,  aliis  ne  faciatis :  a  quibus  custodientes  vos  ipsos,  bene  agetis, 
ambulantes  in  Spiritu  Sancto.  Ibid.  "  Vid.  Diss.  Iren.  v.  num.  9,  10. 

*  Massuet.  Diss,  in  Iren.  ii.  num.  53,  54.  "  Mill.  Prol.  n.  608. 


24  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

dition  is  of  a  precept,  or  proliibitioii  rather,  "  not  to  do  to 
others  what  they  would  not  have  to  be  done  to  themselves." 
However,  there  are  likewise  some  other  variations  that  may 
require  some  notice  as  we  g-o  along. 

1.  To  begin  with  the  omission.  Dr.  Mill,^  in  his  notes 
upon  Acts  XV.  20,  is  by  all  means  for  retaining  "  and  things 
strangled "  in  the  text,  as  the  right  reading* :  but  in  his 
Prolegomena^  he  expresseth  himself  as  strongly  on  the  other 
side  that  this  particular  is  an  interpolation  of  the  original 
text.  But  let  us  see  whether  we  cannot  hold  that  learned 
writer  to  his  first  opinion. 

He  owns  that  all  the  Greek  manuscripts  of  the  Acts  of 
the  Apostles  have  this  article  of  the  decree  except  one ;  and 
all  versions,  and  likewise  all  the  Greek  fathers  and  commen- 
tators in  general :  and  it  is  very  observable,  that  among 
those  Greek  fathers  there  are  two  of  great  antiquity  who 
have  cited  the  decree  as  we  now  have  it;  I  mean*  Clement 
of  Alexandria,  who  has  so  cited  it  in  two  places,  and''  Origen. 
After  this,  what  good  authority  can  there  be  for  the  omission  ? 
Let  us  attend. 

The  main  thing  seems  to  be  this,  that  as  Dr.  Mill  sup- 
poseth  the  Italic  version,  as  it  is  called,  (that  is,  the  ancient 
Latin  version,  chiefly  in  use  among-  the  Latin  christians 
before  St.  Jerom's  time,  and  made,  as''  Mill  thinks,  about 

y  Kai  Tn  TTvtKra.]  Omittiint  Cant.  Iren.  1.  iii.  c.  12.  Tert.  de  Pud.  c.  12. 
Cyprian.  1.  iii.  ad  Qtiirin.  Hieron.  Com.  in  Galat.  v.  (qui  tamen  in  nonnullis 
exeniplarihusscriptumdicit,  etasutfocatis;)  Ambios.  in  Galat.  ii.  (qui  additum 
vult  a  sophistis  Graecorum  quos  vocat ;)  Augustin.  ut  et  Gaudentius  ac  Euche- 
rius,  quibus  interpretamenti  loco  additum  videtur  ro  ttviktov.  Per  sanguinem 
enim  hie  sanguinem  suffocatum  intelligi  putant.  Caetenom  retinent  Graeca  quae 
quidem  vidimus  omnia,  (excepto  uno  Cant.)  Versiones  omnes,  etiam  Vulgata 
Lat.  Orig.  lib.  viii.  Contra  Celsum,  Patres  et  Tractatores  Grseci  universim ;  ut 
proinde  minime  solicitandum  arbitrer.  Mill,  in  Act.  Ap.  xv.  20. 

^  Kai  rr]Q  ■Kopvnaq,  km  th  cuiiutoq^  Act.  xv.  20, 29.  Cant.  Irenaei  interpres, 
Tert.  Cyprian.  Pacian.  Ambr.  Gaudentius,  Eucherius,  Fulgentius,  Hieron.  alii. 
Certe  medium,  km  rs  -kvikt^,  ipsius  Lucae  non  est,  sed  Christianorum  veterum, 
qui  cum  in  hac  epistola  synodica  omnem  sanguinis  esum  sibi  interdictum 
vidissent  ?  eosque  decretum  extendebant,  ut  etiam  a  morticinis  eo  ipso  sibi 
abstinendum  fuisse  censuerint ;  ne  quo  modo  scilicet  sanguine  contaminarentur, 
vel  inter  viscera  sepulto  ;  ut  loquitur  Temillianus.  Ex  hac,  ecclesiae  praxi 
adscripsit  quispiam,  hand  dubito,  scholion,  rs  ttvikvs,  ad  marginem  codicis : 
quo  ostenderetur  in  proecepto  de  abstinentia  a  sanguine,  includi  etiam  absti- 
nentiam  a  morticino,  adeoque  a  quolibet  sufFocato.  Hoc  autem,  ceu  partem 
textus  genuinam,  transtulenint  scribae  in  corpus  epistolae  hujiis  synodicae,  jam 
ante  tempora  ClcmentLs  Alexandrini.  Mill.  Proleg.  n.  441,  442.  ed  Kuster,  vid. 
etiam  n.  641.  ^   Ecv^tv,  Kpaaav,  riji  TrvivfiaTi  tw  aytq)  Kai  r]fiiv, 

fttjStv  ttXiov  iTTiBioQai  iifiiv  fiapoc,  ttXtjj/  tojv  nravayKtQ'  aTrix^aQai  iidoXoOv- 
Tiav,  Kai  aifiaroQ,  Kai  ttviktojv,  koi  ttjq  iropvitar'  tK  u>v  diaTTjpsvriQ  eavrag, 
ev  TTpaKiTE.  Clem.  Al.  Paed.  1.  ii.  cap.  7.  p.  172.  B.  C.  Paris.  Vid.  etiam  Strom, 
lib.  iv.  p.  512.  D.  513.  A.  ''  See  of  this  work  Vol.  ii.  ch.  38. 

aum.  28,  "  Vid.  Mill.  Proleg.  num.  377,  &c. 


Cyprian  of  Carthage.  A.  D.  248.  25 

the  end  of  the  second  century,)  had  oidy  three  particulars 
in  the  decree,  omitting'  "  things  strangled."  But  alloM'ing 
th  s,  it  Avould  not  prove  that  to  be  the  right  reading  ;  for, 
that  "  things  strangled"  were  in  some  ancient  Greek  copies, 
and  those  good  copies,  is  apparent  from  Clement  and  Origen  : 
therefore  it  is  probable  that  the  ancient  Latin  version,  if  it 
wanted  that  article,  was  corrupted  in  this  place ;  as,  it  is 
not  unlikely,  it  might  be  also  in  many  other. 

But  I  see  no  certain  nor  probable  evidence  that  the  most 
ancient  Latin  version,  or  any  Latin  version  whatever,  before 
the  end  of  the  second  century,  Avanted  this  particular.  In- 
deed, Jerom*^  informs  us,  that  in  his  time  some  Latin  copies 
had  "  things  strangled,"  others  not :  but  he  does  not  say 
that  they  which  wanted  that  particvdar  were  the  best  or  th.e 
most  exact.  It  is  highly  probable  that  he  preferred  those 
which  had  it ;  inserting"  it''  in  the  Latin  New  Testament '^  pub- 
lished by  him,  corrected  by  the  Greek ;  as  it  is  now  also  the 
reading'  of  the  Latin  Vulgate. 

Having  thus  considered  this  passage  of  Jerom,  which  I 
take  to  be  one  of  Mill's  main  authorities  for  his  supposition 
that  the  ancient  Italic  version  wanted  this  particular,  I  shall 
now  take  things  in  the  order  of  time  :  but  we  have  no  occa- 
sion to  review  the  Greek  writers,  their  sentiment  having" 
been  already  sufficiently  owned.  I  would  only  just  observe, 
that  we  have  no  way  of  knowing  how  Ireiifeus  read  this  por- 
tion of  scripture ;  his  Greek  being  lost,  and  his  Latin  inter- 
preter not  strictly  following  his  Greek  original,  but  putting- 
texts  of  scripture  according  to  the  Latin  version  in  use  in  his 
time,  as  is  fairly  owned  bys  Mill  himself;  and  possibly 
sometimes  altering  and  corrupting  even  that  according-  to  his 
own  sentiments,  or  the  prevailing  sentiments  of  the  time  in 
which  he  lived. 

As  for  Tertullian,  one  would  be  apt  to  conclude,  from  his*^ 

^  In  Actibiis  apostolorum  narrat  historia Seniores,  qui  lerosolymis  erant, 

et  apostolos,  pariter  congregates,  stafuisse  per  literas,  ne  superponeretur  eis 
juguni  legis,  nee  amplius  observarent,  nisi  ut  custodierent  se  ab  idolothytis,  et 
sanguine,  et  fornicatione  ;  sive  ut  in  nonnullis  exemplanbus  scriptum  est,  et  a 
suffocatis.     Hieron.  Coram,  in  Ep.  al.  Gal.  cap.  v.  2.  ^  Vid.  Mill. 

Proleg.  num.  849.  ^  Novum  Testamentum  Grsecae  fidei  reddidi. 

Hieron.  De  V.  I.  cap.  135.  ^  In  Latinis  autem,  [Irenaei]  Interpreti 

id  unum  curae  erat,  ut  scripturae  testimonia,  quae  in  hoc  opere  occuiTunt,  expri- 
merentur  verbis  interpretationis,  quae  Celtis  suis,  totique  occidenti  jam  in  usu 
erat,  Italicae,  sive  vulgats.  Unde  factum,  ut  paucis  in  locis,  nee  nisi  ex  con- 
textu  orationis,  certo  satis  assequi  possis,  quaenam  fuerit  codicis  Irenaeani  lectio. 
Mill.  Pr.  n.  368.  ^  Erubescat  error  vester  Christianis,  qui  ne  ani- 

maliuin  quidem  sanguinem  in  epulis  esculentis  habemus  ;  qui  propterea  quoque 
suffocatis  et  morticinis  abstinemus,  ne  quo  sanguine  contaminemur,  vel  intra 
viscera  sepulto,  &c.  Apol.  cap.  9.  p.  10.  D. 


26  CredihiliUj  of  the  Gospel  History, 

Apology,  written  about  the  year  200,  that  he  read  all  four 
things  as  we  do.  He  then  plainly  understood  the  decree  of 
the  council  at  Jerusalem,  to  prohibit  "  things  strangled  :" 
and  it  is  supposed  that  at  that  time,  and  for  some  while 
afterwards,  all  christians  in  general  understood  the  decree 
to  prohibit  the  eating-  the  blood  of  brute  animals.  There 
are  remaining-'  passages  of  ancient  Avritings  that  seem  to  put 
this  matter  beyond  all  dispute.  Nevertheless,  Tertullian,"* 
in  his  tieatise  De  Pudicitia,  written  after  his  iipology, though 
the  time  is  not  exactly  known,  quotes  the  decree,  as  if  he 
read  only  three  things :  but  then  it  is  observable  that  he 
there  seems  disposed  to  understand  the  prohibition  of  "  blood" 
concerning  murder  or  homicide ;  at  least,  he  would  bring  in 
this  byway  of  consequence.  And  besides,  there  is  too  much 
reason  to  suspect  that  this  interpretation  is  given  or  hinted 
by  him  to  serve  a  particular  purpose,  and  increase  the  ma- 
lignity and  scandal  of  fornication. 

The  next  author  cited  by  Mill  is  St.  Cyprian.  I  have 
transcribed  the  passage  above '  at  length.  It  is  the  passage 
that  gives  occasion  to  our  present  inquiry :  but  it  has  been 
shown  that  we  have  no  good  reason  to  look  upon  it  as  Cy- 
prian's. Indeed  it  is  highly  probable  that  the  reading  we 
have  now  in  this  work  is  very  late.  In  that  passage  every 
thing  is  to  be  understood  as  of  a  moral  nature :  instead  of 
"  blood"  is  put "  effusion  of  blood,"  that  it  might  be  the  more 
certainly  understood  of  murder,  or  homicide :  for  that  this  Is 
whatweare  hereto  understand  by  "  effusion  of  blood,"  I  think 
cannot  be  questioned.  I  am  sure  Dr.  Hammond  ^  took  this 
passage,  or  this  writer,  whoever  he  is,  in  that  sense. 

The  next  author  is  Ambrosiaster,anthor  of  the  Commentary 
upon  St.  Paul's  thirteen  epistles,  placed  by  Cave  as  flourish- 
ing about  the  year  354,  who  supposeth"  the  real  author  to 
be  Hilary,  deacon  of  Rome,  and  that  this  work  was  written 


'  ITwc  nv  TTcu^ia  (payoifv  oi  rotaroi,  oig  jiij^s  nXoyoiv  ^wwv  aifui  <paynv  i'iov  ; 
Epist.  Eccles.  Vienn.  et  Lugd.  ap.  Euseb.  H.  E.  1.  v.  cap.  1.  p.  159.  A.  Vid. 
etiam  Clem.  Al.  Pad.  lib.  ii.  cap.  7.  p.  \T2.  B.  C.  Strom.  1.  iv.  p.  512,  513. 
A.  et  Paed.  1.  iii.  cap.  3.  p.  228.  B.  C.  TertuUian  ut  supra,  Ap.  cap.  9.  Vid. 
etiam  Origenem,  ut  laudatum  supra,  p.  24,  note  ''.  Tantumque  ab  humano 
sanguine  cavemus,  ut  nee  edulium  pecorum  in  cibis  sanguinem  noverimus. 
Minuc.  Pel.  cap.  30.  ''  Visum  est,  inquiunt,  Spintui  Sancto  et  nobis, 

nullum  amplius  vobis  adjicere  pondus,  quam  eorum,  a  quibus  necesse  est  ab- 
stineri,  a  sacrificiis,  et  a  fornicationibu?:,  et  sanguine,  a  quibus  observando  recte 
agitis,  vectante  vos  Spiritu  Sancto.  Sufificit  et  hic  servatum  esse  mcEchias  et 
fornicationis  locum  houorLs  sui  inter  idololatriam  et  homicidiura.  Interdictum 
enim  sanguinis  rnulto  magis  humani  intelligemus.  de  Pud.  c.  12. 

'  See  p.  22.  ""  Vid.  Hammond,  Annot.  in  Act.  xv.  29. 

"  Hist.  Lit.  P.  i.  p.  IGS. 


Cyprian  of  Carthage.  A.  D.  2-iS.  27 

about  the  year  384.  Kichard  Siiiioii°  is  of  the  same  opinion 
concerning-  the  author  of  these  Commentaries:  but''  the 
Benedictine  editors  of  St.  Anibrose  are  not  so  clear  upon 
this  point.  This  writer,  Avhoevcr  he  be,  probably  however 
of  the  fourth  or  fifth  century,  oniitsi  "  things  strangled." 
He  even  contends  that  that  clause  ought  to  be  left  out,  and  that 
it  is  an  interpolation  of  the  Greek  writers,  or  Greek  sophists, 
as  he  calls  them  with  much  scorn  and  indignation.  He  ■■ 
understands  the  prohibition  "  from  blood,"  of  the  blood  of 
animals,  not  of  homicide.  We  are  obliged  to  him  for  one 
thing,  the  assurance  be  gives  us  that  the  Greek  niLinuscripts 
of  his  time  universally  agreed  in  this  clause,  "  and  from 
things  strangled."  If  he  had  known  of  any  Greek  writers 
or  Greek  copies  of  the  New  Testament,  that  had  favoured 
his  omission,  he  would  not  have  been  quite  so  angry  with 
the  Greeks. 

Pacian,  bishop  of  Barcelona,  about  the  year  370,  is  another 
writer  who*  omits  "  thing-s  strangled."  He  understands 
"  from  blood,"  to  mean  homicide ;  and  says,  that  the 
direction  given  by  the  council  to  abstain  from  these  three 
crimes;  "  things  sacrificed  to  idols,"  or  idolatry;  "  from 
blood,"  or  from  murder ;  and  "  from  fornication  ;"  is  the 
sum  and  substance  of  the  whole  gospel,  or  christian  reve- 
lation. 

The  next  writer  alleged  by  Mill  is  Gaudentius,  placed  by 
Cave  at  the  year  387.     He*  seems  to  have  read  only  three 

°  Hist.  Crit.  des  Commentateurs  du  Neuf  Testament,  Ch.  ix.  p.  133,  &c. 

P  Vid.  Admonit.  in  Commentaria  in  13.  Ep.  Beati  Pauli.  Ed.  Bened. 

1  Denique  tria  h^ec  mandata  ab  apostolis  et  senioribus  data  reperiuntur,  quae 
ignorant  leges  Romanae,  id  est,  ut  abstineant  se  ab  idololatria,  et  sanguine,  sicut 
Noe,  et  fomicatione.  Quae  sophistae  Graccorum  non  intelligentes,  scientes 
tamen  a  sanguine  abstinenduni,  adulterarunt  scriptmam,  quartum  mandatura 
addentes,  et  a  suffocate  abstinendum.  Anibrosiast.  in  Gal.  cap.  2.  p.  215.  Ed. 
Bened.  "■  Ergo  haec  iliicita  esse  ostensa  sunt  gentibus,  quae  putabant 

licere:  ac  per  hoc  non  utiqueab  homicidio  prohibiti  sunt,  cum  jubentur  a  san- 
guine observare.  Sed  hoc  acceperunt,  quod  Noe  a  Deo  didicerat,  ut  observa- 
rent  se  a  sanguine  edendo  cum  came.     Id.  ibid.  p.  214.  F. 

'  Visum  est  enim  Sancto  Spiritui,  et  nobis,  nullum  amplius  imponi  vobis 
pondus,  praeterquam  haec  :  Necesse  est,  ut  abstineatis  vos  ab  idolothytis,  et  san- 
guine, et  fomicatione ;  a  quibus  observantes,  bene  agetis.  Valete.  Haec  est 
Novi  Testament!  tota  conclusio.  Despectis  in  multis  Spiritus  Sanctus  haec  nobis, 
capitalis  periculi  conditione,  legavit.  Reliqua  peccata  raeliomm  operum  com- 
pensatione  curantur.    Haec  vero  triacrimina, — ut  veneni  calix,  ut  lethalis  amndo 

metuenda  sunt Qmdvero  faciet  contemptor  Dei?  Quid  aget  sanguinarius  > 

Quod  remedium  capiet  fornicator  ?  Numquid  aut  placare  Dominum  deserter 
ipsius  poterit "'  aut  conservare  sanguinem  suuni,  qui  fudit  alieniun  ?  aut  redinte- 
grare  Dei  templum,  qui  lUud  fomicando  violavit?  Ista  sunt  capitalia,  fratres, 
ista  mortalia.  Pacian.  Paraen.  ad  poenit.  T.  iv.  p.  315.  H.  Bibl.  Patr. 

'  Et  idcirco  Beatus  Jacobus  cum  caeteris  apostolis  decretum  tale  constituit  in 
ecclesiis  observandimi :  "  ut  abstineatis  vos,"  inquit,  "  ab  immolatis,  et  a  san- 


28  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

things,  and  understands  "  blood"  of  the  blood  of  anhnals  ; 
for  he  explains  it  to  mean  "  things  strangled  :"  or,  as  "  Mill 
expresseth  it,  Gaudentius  and  Eucherius  thought  this  clause 
added  by  way  of  interpretation. 

St.  Augustine  likewise,  placed  by  Cave  at  the  year  396, 
is^  alleged  upon  this  occasion  by  Dr.  Mill :  and,  if  the  pas- 
sage in  the  Speculum  be  his,  he  read  only  three  prohibitions  ; 
"  from  things  sacrificed  to  idols,  from  blood,  and  from  for- 
nication." From  this  passage  it  appears,  that  by  many  at 
that  time  all  these  prohibitions  were  understood  to  be  of  a 
moral  kind.  Their  explication  of  them  is  idolatry,  murder, 
and  fornication,  Avhich  they  therefore  thought  to  be  the  only 
three  mortal  sins.  In"  another  place,  Acts  xxi.  25,  is  cited 
by  Augustine,  where  "  things  strangled"  are  wanting.  There 
is^  yet  another  place,  Avhere  Augustine  speaks  of  this  matter, 
and  somewhat  largely.  Here  again  is  mention  made  of  the 
interpretation,  which  some  gave  of  blood,  meaning  thereby 
murder;  which  sense  Augustine  himself  rejects  here,  as  he 
did  before.  Thence  we  learn  likewise,  that  in  St.  Augustine's 
time  the  decree  of  the  council  in  its  ancient  sense  and  inter- 
pretation was  regarded  y  by  very  few  christians  among  the 

guine,"  id  est,  "  a  sufFocatis."  Praetenuiserunt  homicidium,  adulterium,  et 
veneficia  ;  quoniam  nee  nominari  ea  in  ecclesiis  oporteret,  quae  legibus  etiam 
gentilium  punirentur.  Praetermisemnt  quoque  illas  oranes  miiiutias  observa- 
tionum  legaliiim,  et  sola  haec,  quae  praediximus,  custodienda  sanxerant ;  ne  vel 
sacrificatis  diabolo  cibis  profanemur  iinniundis,  vel  ne  mortuos  [f.  "  mortuo  "] 
per  viscera  suffocatoram  animalium  sanguine  polluamur,  vel  ne  in  immimditiis 
fomicationum  corpora  nostra,  quae  teinpla  Dei  sunt,  violemus.  Gaudent.  de 
Maccabasis.  Tract,  xv.  Bibl.  Patr.  Max.  Tom.  v.  p.  967.  F.  G. 

"  Ut  et  Gaudentius  ac  Eucherius,  quibus  interpretamenti  loco  additum  videtur. 
Mill.  ad.  Act.  xv.  20.  "  Ubi  videmus  apostolos,  eis  qui  ex  gentibus 

crediderunt,  nulla  voluisse  onera  veteris  legis  imponere,  quantum  adtinet  ad 
corporalis  abstinentiam  voluptatis  ;  "  nisi  ut  observarent  ab  his  tribus,  id  est, 
ab  eis  quae  idolis  immolarentiir,  et  a  sanguine,  et  a  fomicatione."  Unde  non- 
nulli  putant  tria  tantum  crimina  esse  mortalia,  idololatriam,  et  homicidium,  et 
{'omicationem ;  ubi  utique  et  adulterium,  et  oninis  praeter  uxorem  concubitus 
intelligitur :  quasi  non  sint  mortifera  crimina  quaecumque  alia  sunt  praeter  haec 
tria,  quae  a  regno  Dei  separant,  aut  inaniter  et  fallaciter  dictum  sit :  "  Neque 
fures,  neque  avari,  neque  ebriosi,  neque  maledici,  neque  rapaces,  regnum  Dei 
possidebunt."  [1  Cor.  vi.  10.]  August.  Specul,  de  Libro  Act.  Apost.  Tom.  iii. 
Bened.  *  De  gentibus  autem  qui  crediderunt,  nos  mandavimus, 

judicantes,  nihil  ejusmodi  servare  lUos,  "  nisi  ut  se  observeut  ab  idolis  immo- 
late, et  a  sanguine,  et  a  fomicatione.     Aug.  Ep.  82.  n.  9.  Bened.  al.  Ep.  19. 

*  Et  in  Actibus  apostolorum  hoc  lege  praeceptum  ab  apostolis,  ut  abstinerent 
genles  tantum  "  a  fomicatione,  et  ab  immolatis,  et  a  sanguine  •,"  id  est,  ne 
quidquam  ederent  camis,  cujus  sanguis  non  esset  efiusus.  Quod  alii  non  sic 
mtelligunt,  sed  a  sanguine  praeceptum  esse  abstinendum,  ne  quis  homicidio  se 

contaminet.  Aug.  Con.  Faust,  lib.  xxxii.  cap.  13.  ^  quis  jam 

hoc  Chrisfianus  observat,  ut  turdos  vel  minutiores  aviculas  non  adtingat,  nisi 
quaram sanguis effusus est, aut leporem non edat, si  manu  acervice  percussus,nuIlo 
cruento  vulnere  occisus  est  ?  Et  qui  forte  pauci  adhuc  tangere  ista  formidant,  a 


CvpniAN  OF  Carthage.  A.  D.  248.  29 

Latins,  who  tliouglit  all  M'holesome  food  genorally  oaten  l)y 
men,  to  be  lawful  ;  or,  that  tliey  were  under  no  obligation 
to  observe  a  distinction  of  meats. 

Beside  these  writers.  Mill  refers  also  to  Euchcrius  of  the 
fifth,  and  Fulgentius  of  the  sixth  century,  as  favouring-  the 
omission  of  the  particular  in  dispute.  But  1  do  not  think  it 
needful  to  g-o  any  lower. 

However,  we  ought  not  to  pass  by  the  one  single  manu- 
script on  that  side  the  question  :  it  is  tlie  fomous  Cand)ri<lg'e 
manuscript,  which'  Mill  owns,  with  Simon,  to  have  been 
Avritten  in  the  western  part  of  the  world  by  a  Latin  scribe, 
and''  to  be  interpolated  and  corrupted  to  a  great  degree.     I 

f)ut''  in  the  margin  the  character  Avhich  Mr.  Wetstein  has 
ately  given,  in  a  few  words,  of  this,  and  some  other  manu- 
scripts, in  his  preface  to  the  late  edition  of  Curcellaeus's  New 
Testament  with  various  readings.  That  character  will  have 
a  good  deal  of  weight  Avith  those  who  are  acquainted  with 
the  author's  exact  skill  in  this  part  of  learning. 

I  think  it  may  not  be  amiss  for  us  now  to  collect  the  evidence 
we  have  had  before  us,  in  a  few  propositions. 

(1.)  All  the  Greek  writers  read  this  text  as  we  now  have 
it  in  our  Greek  copies  ;  and  some  of  those  Greek  writers  are 
very  ancient,  having  flourished  in  the  second  century,  or  the 
beginning  of  the  third. 

(2.)  All  christians  in  general,  all  over  the  world,  Greeks 
and  Latins,  in  the  second  century,  and  probably  in  the  third 
likewise,  understood  the  decree  of  the  council  at  Jerusalem 
to  forbid  the  eating  the  blood  of  brute  animals. 

(3.)  There  is  no  clear  proof,  that  in  any  Latin  version,  or 
any  copies  of  the  New  Testament,  of  the  second  or  third  cen- 
tury, the  reading  of  this  text  was  different  from  ours;  for 
the  passages  in  the  version  of  Irena;us,  and  in  the  testimonies 
of  Cyprian,  are  not  to  be  relied  upon  as  genuine.  And  Ter- 
tullian  may  be  reckoned  to  afford  as  much  evidence  for  the 

caeteris  irridentur :  ita  omnium  animos  in  hac  re  tenuit  ilia  sententia  veritatis. 
Non  quod  intrat  in  os  vestrum,  vos  coinquinat,  sed  quod  exit ;  nullam  cibi 
naturam,  quam  societas  admittat  humana,  sed  qus^  iniquitas  committit,  peccata 
condemnans.     Id.  ibid.  ^  Certe  textus  ipse  codicis,  Graecus  pariter 

ac  Latinus,  est  Latini  scribae :  quod  ostendit  Simonius,  Hist.  Text.  Nov.  Test.  cap. 
30.     Mill.  Proleg.  n.  1271.  *  Et  jam  quidem  ad  ipsius  codicis  partes 

accedimus  :  Latina  translationem  Italicam  exhibet,  qualis  turn  temporis  inter- 
polata  ferebatur,  ante  castigationem  Hieronymi :  Graeca  vero,  textum  mirifice 
comjptum,  &c.     Id.  ib.  niBn.  1272.  *"  Inter  Bodleianos  codices  ille 

qui  Acta  apostolomm  continet,  item  Cantabrigiensis,  et  Claromontanus, a 

librario  Latino  scripti,  et  ad  Versionem  Italicam  corruptam  tam  inepte  atque 
imperite  deformati  atque  depravati  sunt,  ut  risiun  moveant,  qui  illis  locum  dig- 
nitatemque  genuinomm  codicum  Graecorum  conciliare  studuerunt.  Prasfat.  in 
Nov.  Test.  Amstel.  1735 


a.)  ^ 

*'  tnin<>s 


30  CredibiUly  of  the  Gospel  History. 

common  reading  as  against  it.  Jerom  bears  witness  only  for 
tlie  reading"  of  some  Latin  copies  in  his  time,  without  saying" 
that  they  who  wanted  this  particular  were  ancient ;  and  the 
other  writers  alleged  by  Mill,  who  cite  the  text  without 
"  things  strangled,"  aie  likewise  of  the  fourth  century,  or 
later. 

We  see  a  probable  rise  and  occasion  of  omitting 
;s  strangled,"  in  some  Latin  copies  about  that  time;  I 
mean  the  fourth  century,  or  towards  the  end  of  it :  among 
the  christians  of  the  western  part  of  the  Roman  empire,  where 
the  Latin  tongue  chiefly  obtained,  the  decree  of  the  council 
of  Jerusalem  ceased  to  be  observed  according  to  its  original 
intent  and  meaning,  and  most  ancient  interpretation.  As 
they  no  longer  observed  a  distinction  of  meats,  and  often  eat 
things  strangled  without  any  scruple,  some  took  an  unwar- 
rantable liberty  with  the  text,  and  left  that  particular  out  of 
their  copies;  that  their  conduct  might  not  seem  to  be  ex- 
pressly condemned  by  a  command  or  advice  given  by  apos- 
tles and  elders  in  council  assembled.  Novt^  also  it  became 
a  common  thing,  though  not  universal,  to  interpret  that  par- 
ticular, "  from  blood,"  as  a  prohibition  of  homicide.  These 
two  things  at  least  are  extremely  manifest ;  that  at  the  end 
of  the  fourth  century,  and  the  beginning  of  the  fifth,  many 
among  the  Latin  christians  neglected  the  distinction  of  meats, 
and  likewise  understood  that  prohibition  in  the  sense  just 
mentioned.  And  I  think  it  may  be  hence  collected  with 
probability,  that  this  gave  occasion  for  leaving  out  "  things 
strangled"  in  some  copies;  for  that  clause  appeared  un- 
suitable to  the  general  practice,  and  was  a  strong  objection 
to  a  common  interpretation  of  another  article  in  the  decree. 
In  the  passage,  as  it  stands  in  the  version  of  Irenseus,  and 
in  Cyprian's  Testimonies,  every  thing"  in  the  proposal  of 
.James,  and  in  the  epistle  of  the  council,  is  of  a  moral  nature. 
This  affords  ground  for  suspicion  of  an  undue  liberty  taken 
with  the  text,  to  make  it  agree  with  the  prevailing  senti- 
ments and  practices  of  some  christians  of  later  times.  The 
passage  in  Cyprian's  third  book  of  Testimonies  is  absolutely 
unjustifiable  in  two  particulars;  "from  idolatries,"  and 
"  from  effusion  of  blood  ;"  which  are  readings  altogether 
imsupported  by  good  authorities,  and  I  suppose  will  not  now 
be  defended  by  any  man  of  sense. 

(5.)  As  for  the  Cambridge  manuscript,  it  deserves  no  far- 
ther notice  here.  One  single  manuscript,  and  that  corrupted 
and  interpolated,  can  never  be  equal  to  many,  to  all  other  ;  no 
more  than  one  witness,  and  he  a  suspected  one,  ought  to  be 
credited  against  forty  others,  and  more. 


Cyprian  of  Caktiiaoe.  A.  D.  248.  31 

(6.)  I  suppose  it  tlion  to  he  hisilily  probable,  that  our  pre- 
sent coiiuuoii  reading-  ol"  this  text  is  right;  as  1  believe  the 
first  christians  understood  it  right,  wlien  they  took  it  to  con- 
tain advice  to  abstain  from  eating  the  blood  ot"  annuals. 

2.  We  are  now  to  take  into  consideration  the  addition  to 
our  common  text:  Acts  xv.  20,  and  29;  ^>hieh  is,  "  And 
whatever  things  ye  would  uot  should  be  done  unto  you, 
neither  do  ye  unto  others."  Of"  this  1  have  already  taken 
some  notice  in*'  the  chapter  of  Theophihis  bishop  of  Antioch, 
about  the  year  181,  because  Dr.  Milh'  had  mentioned  it  as 
a  conjecture  of  his,  that  that  ancient  father  had  referred  to 
this  reading-  in  the  Acts.  But  1  then  intimated,  that  I  thought 
that  conjecture  to  be  entirely  Avithout  foundation  ;  and  I 
gave  some  reasons,  which  I  suppose  might  be  satisfactory. 
I  am  now  more  fully  confirmed  in  the  same  opinion,  and 
think  there  is  not  any  the  least  ground  to  suppose  that 
Theophilus  refeiTed  to  this  additional  reading  in  the  Acts. 
For,  first,  there  is  no  reason  to  believe  that  this  prohibition, 
or  precept,  call  it  Avhat  you  please,  was  then  in  any  copy  of 
the  Acts,  as  shall  be  shown  more  distinctly  by  and  by.  Se- 
condly, allowing-  this  prohibition  to  have  been  then  in  the 
Acts,  yet  Theophilus  did  not  refer  to  it,  but  rather  to  some 
text  of  the  gospels  Avhere  this  equitable  rule  is  spoken  of  as 
the  doctrine  of  the  prophets  ;  if  indeed  Theophilus  referred 
at  all  to  any  part  of  the  New  Testament,  and  not  solely  to 
the  writings  of  the  prophets.  And,  since  the  publication  of 
the  forecited  volume,  I  have  observed  that  the  learned  Mr. 
Wolff,^  in  his  edition  of  Theophilus,  (which  I  had  not  then 
seen,)  puts  in  the  marginal  note  upon  the  passage  of  his  author 
a  reference  to  Luke  vi.  31 ;  which  certainly  is  not  impro- 
perly done ;  though  I  think  it  altogether  as  likely  that  The- 
ophilus referred  to  Matt.  vii.  12,  or  xxii.  40 ;  if  indeed  he 
referred  to  any  text  of  the  New  Testament.  But,  upon  the 
whole,  it  appears  to  me  somewhat  probable,  that  Theophilus 
referred  to  the  writings  of  the  prophets  themselves,  and  to 
them  only  ;  and  I  should  think  it  must  appear  so  to  others 
likewise,  who  are  pleased  to  read  and  consider  the  context. 

Though  Mill  had  a  conjecture  that  Theophilus  referred  to 
this  additional  reading  in  the  Acts,  yet,  with  his  Monted 
critical  skill,  he  supposed  this  reading  not  to  be  genuine, 
but  an  interpolation,  however  ancient ;  m  hich  opinion  I 
shall  endeavour  to  support,  except  that  I  do  not  judge  this 
interpolation  to  be  very  ancient,  but  very  modern  :  neverthe- 
less, that  judicious  critic  has  an  observation  upon  this  reading, 

"^  See  Vol.  ii.  chap.  xx.  <*  Vid.  Mill,  ad  Act.  xv.  20. 

*  Vid.  Theoph.  ad  Aiitol.  1.  ii.  cap.  49.  p.  228.  Hamburg.  1724. 


32  Credlbilit])  oftlie  Gospel  History. 

as  it  stands  in  Acts  xv.  29,  which  will  not  hold  ;  for  he  says 
that  this  reading  in  that  place  disturbs  the  sense,  and  breaks 
the  connection ;  which  indeed  it  would  do,  if  this  rule  were 
there  delivered  in  a  preceptive,  positive  form :  but  as  they 
who  had  this  reading-,  put  that  equitable  rule  here  in  nega- 
tive terms,  in  the  form  of  a  prohibition,  the  sense  is  not  dis- 
turbed ;  and  it  might  be  added  after  this,  as  well  as  after 
the  foregoing"  particular ;  "  from  Avhicli  if  ye  keep  your- 
selves, ye  shall  do  well." 

The  authorities  for  this  additional  reading  are  represented 
by  Mill  in  his  notes  upon  Acts  xv.  20,  and  29.  They  con- 
sist of  eight  manuscripts,  five  of  which  have  this  additional 
clause  at  v.  20 ;  and  three  more  at  v.  29 ;  one  version,  and 
three  christian  writers.  All  these  authorities,  especially  the 
manuscripts,  we  shall  observe  particularly ;  and,  as  we  ex- 
amine their  character  and  quality,  we  may  possibly  see  rea- 
son to  reduce  their  number. 

The  first  manuscript  alleged  for  this  reading  is  that  called 
Stephens's  second  manuscript.  According  to  Mill  himself, 
this  manuscript'  is  very  interpolated,  especially  in  the  Acts. 
He  thinks  this  Greek  manuscript  agrees  so  much  with  the 
Latin  Vulgate,  that  he  cannot  but  conclude  it  to  have  been 
corrected,  or  formed  upon  that  translation,  and  even  a  cor- 
rupt and  faulty  copy  of  that  translation.  This  judgment  of 
our  Mill  upon  this  manuscript  of  Stephens's  is  very  observa- 
ble ;  but  Mr.  Wetsteins  asserts,  and  proves  it  to  be  the 
same  with  that  called  Beza's  manuscript,  or  the  manuscript 
of  Cambridge. 

The  next  is  Stephens's  tenth  manuscript,  which  ^  Mill  says 
likewise  agrees  mightily  with  the  Latin  Vulgate. 

The  third  is  the  Cambridge  manuscript.  We  formerly 
showed  sufficiently  what  is  its  character  :  and  are  here  far- 
ther to  take  notice,  that  it  has  been  just  now  observed  to  be 
the  same  with  Stephens's  second  manuscript.  Mill  there- 
fore, though  without  knowing  it,  has  twice  mentioned  one 
and  the  same  manuscript  under  diflferent  names. 

The  fourth  is  a  Geneva  manuscript,  of'  which  Mill  gives 
a  good  character,  though  he  thinks  the  scribe  to  have  been 
careless  and  ignorant. 

The  fifth  is  that  called  Covel's  fourth  manuscript,  which 
Mill  says  is  a''  modern,  or  late  manuscript. 

'  quae  baud  coacordarent  cum  versione  vailgata,  et  quidem  codice  ejus 

corrupto,  glossematibusque,  et  subinde  inlegris  TrepiKorraic  satis  prolixis,  in  Actis 
prae.«rtim  apostolonim  interpolate.  Mill.  Proleg.  n.  lUiO. 

8  Vid.  Proleg.  ad  Nov.  Test.  Gr.  edit,  accuratissimum.  cap.  4.  p.  22 27. 

"  Mill.  Prol.  n.  1171.  '  lb.  n.  1500,  1501.  "  Manu 


Cyprian  of  Cahtiiagk.  A.  D.  248.  33 

These  are  all  the  manuscripts,  Mhioli  arc  put  by  Mill  in 
his  notes  upon  Acts  xv.  20,  as  having-  this  additional  reading-. 
At  V.  20  some  more  are  mentioned,  as  having  it  there. 

The  first  of  these,  and  the  sixth  in  our  order,  is  that  which 
Mill  calls  Stephens's  first  manuscript ;  by  which  Mill  means 
the  Complutensian  edition,'  as  he  has  himself"  informed  us. 
Therefore  this  is  not  a  manuscript,  hut  a  printed  copy. 

The  next,  or  seventh,  is  Laud's  Second.  It  agrees 
mightily  with  that  in  the  Vatican,  as"^  Mill  says. 

The  last  and  eighth  is  the  Seidelian  manuscript,  mentioned 
by  Kuster,  supposed  to"  be  about  seven  hundred  years  old, 
or  written  in  the  tenth  century. 

These  are  all  the  manuscripts  said  to  have  this  additional 
clause.  As  placed  in  Mill's  New  Testament,  they  appear  to 
be  eight  hi  number;  but  are  really  six  only;  Stephens's 
second  manuscript  being*  the  same  with  that  at  Cambridge ; 
and  Stephens's  first  manuscript,  as  it  is  called,  being-  no 
manuscript  but  a  printed  copy. 

The  only  version  that  has  this  reading  is  the  Ethiopic,  a 
very  inaccurate  version,  as  some  think,  and  of  little  value; 
by  some  others,  however,  it  is  judged  not  to  be  contemptible : 
I  may  not  stay  to  examine  its  merit  particularly  ;  I  therefore 
refer"^  to  divei*s  learned  writers  upon  this  head,  Avho  may  be 
consulted  by  such  as  have  leisure.  I  shall  only  observe, 
that  it  very  seldom  can  be  reasonable  to  follo^v  one  single 
version,  where  it  differs  from  all  others,  especially  when  that 
version  has  no  evidences  of  early  antiquity,  neither  internal 
not  external,  but  Avhat  are  very  doubtful  and  uncertain. 

The  christian  writers  mentioned  by  Mill  are,  St.  Irenseus, 
St.  Cyprian,  and  Rabanus  in  the  ninth  century ;  for  as  for 
Theophilus,  bishop  of  Antioch,  Mill  does  not  place  him  Avith 
these  three.  That  learned  critic  mentioned  it  only  as  a  con- 
jecture, that  possibly  Theophilus  might  refer  to  this  reading- 
in  the  Acts.  But  I  have  already  shown  that  conjecture  to 
be  without  foundation  ;  because,  even  allowing  this  clause 
to  have  been  then  in  the  copies  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles, 
there  is  no  reason  to  think  Theophilus  referred  to  this  text, 
but  rather  to  some  text  in  the  gospels,  if  he  refers  to  any 
place  at  all  of  the  New  Testament;  and  likewise  because 

recenti.  ib.  n.  1487.  '  lb.  n.  1159.  '"  Ibid.  n.  1439. 

"  Vid.  Kusteri  Praef.  in  Mill.  Nov.  Test.  p.  8.  fin.  •>  Vid.  Scalig. 

de  Emendation.  Temp.  1.  7.  p.  682.  Walton  Proleg.  xv.  p.  97.  &c.  Ludolf 
Praef.  in  Lexicon  yEthiop.  p.  2,  3,  et  ejusd.  Hist.  Jithiop.  lib.  iii.  cap.  4.  Ri. 
Simon.  Hist.  Cnt.  des  Vers,  du  Nov.  Test.  Ch.  xvii.  p.  193,  &c.  Mill.  Proleg. 
num.  1188,  1189.  Beausobre  et  L'Enfan  Pref.  generale  sur  le  Nov.  Test,  page 
213. 

vol.   m.  D 


34  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

there  is  no  reason  to  suppose  that  this  clause  was  then  in  the 
Acts,  as  Me  have  now  shown  in  part,  and  proceed  to  show 
stiU  farther. 

The  only  christian  A\Titers,  then,  who  favour  this  reading, 
are  the  tliree  above  mentioned :  but  by  Irenoeus  we  are  to 
understand  only  his  Latin  interpreter,  whose  age  we  do  not 
certainly  know  ;  and  possibly  that  translation  has  been  inter- 
polated in  some  places  since  it  was  first  made.  Nor  are  we 
by  St.  Cyprian  to  understand  St.  Cyprian  himself,  but  the 
interpolator  of  his  third  book  of  Testimonies,  whose  age  we 
do  not  know,  but  possibly  he  lived  as  late  as  Rabanus,  or 
since. 

The  very  few,  and  those  late  quotations  of  this  place  in 
the  Acts,  according  to  this  reading,  show  it  to  be  an  interpo- 
lation, and  that  it  never  was  in  many'  copies  of  that  book  of 
scripture,  and  those  only  late  copies. 

Beside  that  we  do  not  find  this  reading  in  the  most  ancient 
writers,  nor  in  any  one  Greek  writer  whatever,  there  is 
positive  evidence  as  to  divers  of  the  ancient  christian  Avriters, 
both  Greek  and  Latin,  that  they  had  not  this  clause  in  their 
copies.  This  appears  from  their  citations  of  the  whole  decree 
of  the  council  at  Jerusalem,  together  m  ith  the  last  farewell, 
or  the  concluding' .words  of  the  decree  of  the  apostles  and 
elders,  or  from  some  remarks  made  by  those  writers  upon  the 
decree.  I  mean,  Clement  of  Alexandria,  who  has  twice 
cited  this  text ;  Tertullian,  Ambrosiaster,  Pacian,  Gauden- 
tius,  Augustine.  I  have  above  cited  their  passages  very 
much  at  length,  in  considering  that  particular,  "  things 
strangled,"  that  every  one  might  perceive  as  much.  To 
those  passages  therefore,  transcribed  at  the  bottom  of  the 
page,  I  refer  such  as  are  pleased  to  examine  them :  and  to 
those  writers  might  be  added  Jerom.  This  shows,  that  in 
the  fourth,  as  well  as  more  early  centuries,  this  clause  was 
wanting  in  most,  and  those  the  best,  if  not  in  all  copies. 

There  is  one  thing'  more,  which  may  deserve  to  be  men- 
tioned here  :  1  do  not  perceive  that  this  clause  is  found  at 
Acts  xxi.  25.  in  any  manuscript  copy  of  that  book,  or  in  any 
version,  or  writer  whatever.  This  is  an  argument,  that 
neither  was  it  originally  in  Acts  xv.  20  and  29 ;  for  if  it  had 
been  originally  in  both  those  places,  it  would  have  appeared 
here  likewise. 

I  think,  then,  that  there  is  not  any  reason  to  suppose  this 
precept,  or  prohibition,  to  have  been  originally  put  in  their 
epistle  by  the  apostles  and  elders  assemljled  at  Jerusalem  : 
but,  on  the  other  hand,  there  is  very  good  evidence,  that  it 
is  an  interpolation,  probably  inserted  some  time  near  the  end 


Cy.piiian  UK  Carthage.  A.  D.  248.  35 

of  the  fourth  century,  or  afterwards,  by  some  Latin  christian, 
in  order  to  render  tiie  whole  decree  of  the  council  agreeable 
to  the  sentiments  and  practices  that  prevailed  in  the  age  and 
place  in  which  he  lived;  for  the  few  manuscripts  that  have 
this  reading-  are  of  small  weight  against  the  nmch  greater 
number  that  want  it.  One  version,  corrupt  too  and  inac- 
curate, as  it  seems,  is  of  no  authority  against  all  others. 
The  christian  writers  that  have  followed  this  reading  are  so 
few,  that  they  scarce  deserve  to  be  mentioned;  especially 
considering,  that  the  only  one  of  them  whose  name  we  know 
is  Rabanus,  of  the  ninth  century  ;  for  who  was  Irenoeus's 
interpreter,  and  when  he  lived,  and  who  was  the  interpolator 
of  Cyprian's  Testimonies,  and  when  he  lived,  are  things 
altogether  uncertain  and  unknown. 

I  conclude,  then,  that  the  present  readings  of  Acts  xv.  20, 
and  29,  in  our  ordinary  copies  of  the  New  Testament  are  the 
true  and  genuine  origmal  readings :  or,  to  be  a  little  more 
particular  and  distinct,  in  proportion  to  the  evidence  of 
things,  I  reckon  it  highly  probable,  that  the  clause,  "  and 
from  things  strangled,"  was  originally  in  the  decree  ;  and 
certain  that,  according"  to  the  most  ancient  interpretation  of 
the  decree,  it  was  understood  by  all  christians  in  general  to 
forbid  eating  the  blood  of  brute  animals.  As  for  the  addi- 
tional article,  which  we  have  just  now  considered,  it  is  plaiidy 
an  interpolation ;  and,  unless  there  be  some  other  evidence 
for  it,  which  I  am  unacquainted  with,  I  do  not  see  how  it  can 
be  received  as  a  part  of  the  apostolical  decree  by  any  chris- 
tian critic,  who  is  duly  concerned  for  the  integrity  and  purity 
of  the  sacred  scriptures. 

1  have  insisted  thus  long*  upon  the  reading"  of  this  portion 
of  scripture,  not  only  because  Mill  himself  had  pronounced 
a  wrong  j  udgment  upon  it  in  his  Prolegomena,  as  I  conceive, 
but  because  there  is  an  agreement  to  the  like  purpose  inf 
Curcellpeus,  for  leaving  out  the  clause  of"  things  strangled." 
And  I  am  apprehensive  that  unless  we  retain  the  true  read- 
ing of  this  place,  for  the  main  part  at  least,  we  shall  not 
rightly  understand  it ;  nor  shall  we,  unless  we  have  the  true 
sense  and  design  of  this  decree,  maintain,  as  we  ought  to  do, 
the  dignity  of  the  apostolical  character  and  commission. 
Finally,  the  misunderstanding  of  this  decree  must  be  to  the 
prejudice  of  the  christian  revelation  itself,  in  the  esteem  of 
many. 

Having-  no^v,  as  I  hope,  settled  the  true  reading-  of  the 
determination  of  the  apostles  and  elders  upon  the  point  in  con- 
troversy at  that  time,  I  wish  I  were  likewise  able  to  explain 

P  Vid.  Cincdlaei  Dialr.  de  Esu  sanguinis  inter  Chriitianos,  cap.  11. 

D  2 


36  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  llistory. 

(hat  determination  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  scrupulous  and 
the  judicious  :  but  such  a  performance,  even  supposing  that 
ability,  would  require  a  longer  digression  than  could  be 
allowed  of  in  this  place ;  for  which  reason  that  attempt  must 
be  deferred. 

V.  We  are  in  the  next  place  to  consider  St.  Cyprian's  tes- 
timony to  the  epistles  of  the  apostle  Paul. 

1.  '  Accordingi  to  what  the  blessed  apostle  Paul  writes 
'  in  his  epistle  to  the  Romans  ;  "  Every  one  shall  give  an  ac- 
'  count  of  himself:  therefore  let  us  not  judge  one  another :"  ' 
ch.  xiv.  12,  13. 

2.  He  quotes  the  latter  part  of  the  first  chapter  of  the 
epistle  to  the  Romans  very  agreeably  to  the  reading  Ave  saw 
formerly  "^  in  Clement  of  Rome,  ver.  -32,  "  Who,"  says^  he, 
"  when  they  knew  the  righteousness  of  God,  did  not  consider, 
that  they  who  do  such  things  are  worthy  of  death  ;  nor  only 
they  who  commit  them,  but  they  also  that  consent  to  them 
that  do  them."  The  meaning  of  the  text,  according-  to  this 
reading,  is,  that  not  only  they  who  actually  commit  the  sins 
beforementioned,  are  liable  to  punishment,  but  they  also 
who  approve  of,  and  consent  to  such  evil  things.  So  it  is 
said  of  Paul,  that*  he  was  "  consenting  to  Stephen's  death," 
Acts  viii.  1. 

3.  In  the  first  book  of  Testimonies :  *  In"  the  first  epistle 
of  Paul  to  the  Corinthians ;  "  Moreover,  brethren,  I  would 
not  that  ye  should  be  ignorant,  how  that  all  our  fathers  were 
under  the  cloud."  Likewise  in  the  second  epistle  to  the 
Corinthians:  "  Their  minds  are  blinded  unto  this  day  :"  ' 
see  1  Cor.  x.  i.  and  2  Cor.  iii.  13,  14. 

4.  In  one  of  his  epistles,  '  The^  blessed  apostle  Paul  also, 
chosen  and  sent  of  the  Lord,  and  appointed  pi'eacher  of  the 
gospel,  says  the  same  thing  in  his  epistle  ;  "  The  Lord  Jesus, 
the  same  night  in  which  he  was  betrayed,  took  bread ;  and, 

"^  Secundum  quod  beatus  apostolus  Paulus  in  epistola  sua  ad  Romanes scribit 
et  dicit ;  Unusquisque  nostrum  pro  se  rationem  dabit ;  non  ergo  nos  invicem 
judicemus.     Cypr.    Ep.  C9.  al.   76.  p.    188.  ■■  See  Vol.   ii. 

p.  41.  *  Sed  et  hoc  idem  Paulus  apostolus  scribit,  et  dicit Qui 

fum  justitiam  Dei  cognovLssent,  non  intellexerunt,  quooiam  qui  talia  agunt, 
morte  sunt  digni :  non  tantum  qui  faciunt  ea,  sed  et  qui  consentiunt  eis  qui 
hxc  agunt.  Ep.  67.  al.  68.  p.  175.  *   "SavXog  St  r)v  avvtvcoKiov  ti] 

avaiperrei  uvth.  "  In  epistola  Pauli  ad  Corinthios  prima  :  Nolo  enim 

vos  ignorare,  fratres,  quia  patres  nostri  omnes  sub  nube  fuerunt.  Item  in  epistola 
ad  Corinthios  secunda :  Obtusi  sunt  sensus  eorum,  &c.  Testim.  Lb.  i.  cap.  4. 
p.  22.  "  Beatus  quoqiie  apostolus  Paulus,  a  Domino  electus  et  missus, 

tt  praedicator  veritatis  evangelica;  constitutus,  hcec  eadem  in  epistola  sua  ponit, 
dicens;  Dominus  Jesus,  in  qua  nocte  tradebatur,  accepit  panem,  et  gratias 
agens,  [egit,  et,  Baluz.]  frcgit,  et  dixit,  Hoc  est  corpus  meum,  quod  pro  vobis 
tradetur.     Hoc  facite  in  meam  comniemordtionem,  kc.  Ep.  63.  p.  152. 


Cyprian  of  Cakthage.  A.  D.  248.  37 

giving'  thanks,  broke  it,  and  said,  This  is  my  body,  whicli 
M  ill  be  given  for  you  :  this;  do  in  remembrance  of  me :"  '  1 
Cor.  xi.  2:3,  24. 

5.  In  one  of  his  tracts  :  *  Likewise"^  the  blessed  apostle 
Paul,  full  of  the  inspiration  of  the  Lord  ;  "  Now  he  that 
ministereth,"  says  he,  "seed  to  the  sower,  will  both  minister 
bread  for  your  food,  and  multiply  your  seed  sown,  and  in- 
crease the  fruits  of  your  righteousness,  that  ye  may  be  en- 
riched in  all  things;"  '  2  Cor.  ix.  10,  11. 

(J.  In  the  first  book  of  Testimonies,  '  Likewise''  Paul  to 
the  Galatians ;  "  But  when  the  fulness  of  time  was  come, 
God  sent  forth  his  Son,  made  of  a  w  oman — "  '  Gal.  iv.  4.  In 
another  work,  '  The>  apostle  Paul,  admonishing  and  saying, 
"  Therefore,  M'hilst  we  have  opportunity,  let  us  do  good  to 
all  men,  especially  to  them  mIio  are  of  the  household  of  faith. 
And  let  us  not  be  weary  in  doing  well ;  for  in  due  season 
we  shall  reap,  if  we  faint  not :"  '  so  he  transposeth  the  words 
of  these  two  verses.  Gal.  vi.  10,  9. 

7.  St.  Cyprian  expressly  quotes  the  epistle  to  the  Ephe- 
sians,  not  only  in  the  third  book  of  ^  Testimonies,  but  likewise 
in  oneof  his  epistles, after  this  manner :  'But^  the  apostlePaul, 
speaking  of  the  same  thing  more  clearly  and  plainly,  w  rites 
to  the  Ephesians  and  says,  "  Christ  loved  the  church,  and 
gave  himself  for  it,  that  he  might  sanctify  and  cleanse  it 
Mith  the  washing  of  water  ;"  Eph.  v.  25,  26.  The  text  cited 
in  the  Testimonies  is,  ch,  iv.  30,  "  And  grieve  not  the  Holy 
Spirit  of  God,  whereby  ye  were  sealed  in  the  day  of  redemp- 
tion:" which  is  a  remarkable  and  vmcommon  reading-.  How- 
ever, it  is  found  again  in''  St.  Augustine. 

8.  In  the  third  book  of  Testimonies,  '  Likewise*^  Paul  to 
the  Philippians ;  "  Who  being  appointed  in  the  form  of  God, 
did  not  earnestly  affect  to  be  equal  to  God,  but  made  him- 

"  Item  beatus  apostolus  Paulus,  dotninicae  inspirationis  gratia  plenus :  Qui 
administrat,  inquit,  &c.     De  Op.  et  Eleem.  "  Item  Paulus  ad 

Galatas :  At  ubi  advenit  impletio  temporis,  misit  Deus  filium  suum  natum  de 
miiliere.     Testim.  1.  i.  c.  8.  p.  37.  ^  Paulo  apostolo  admonente  et 

dicente;  Ergo,  dum  tempus  habemus,  &c.     DeOp.  et  Eleem.  p.  208. 

^  Paulus  ad  Ephesios :  Nolite  contristare  Spiritum  Sanctum  Dei,  in  quo  sig- 
nati  estis  in  die  redemtionis.  Test.  1.  iii.  cap.  7.  p.  64.  "  Sed  et 

Paulus  apostolus  hoc  idem  adhuc  apertius  et  clarius  manifestans  ad  Ephesios 
scribit  et  dicit:  Christus  dilexit  ecclesiam,  &c.  Ep.  69.  al.  76.  p.  181. 

*"  Ex  hoc  locutionis  modo  arbitror  dictum  illud  ab  apostolo :  Nolite  con- 
tristare Spiritum  Sanctum  Dei,  in  quo  signati  estis  in  die  redemtionis.  Aug. 
<)e  Gen.  ad  lit.  1.  iv.  n.  18.  p.  166.  B.  Tom.  iii.  P.  i.  Bened. 

"^  Item  Paulus  ad  Philippenses:  Qui  in  figura  Dei  constitutus,  non  rapinam 
arbitratus  est  esse  se  sequalem  Deo,  sed  se  exinanivit,  formam  servi  accipiens,  in 
similitudinem  hominis  factiis,  et  habitu  inventus  ut  homo.  Humiliavit  se, 
factus  obediens  usque  ad  mortem,  moilem  autem  crucis.  Test.  1.  iii.  c.  39.  p.  76. 


38  Credibilitij  of  the  Gospel  Hisloiy. 

self  of  no  reputation,  taking-  the  form  of  a  servant,  being- 
made  in  the  likeness  of  man,  and  found  in  fashion  as  a  man, 
he  humbled  himself,  becoming  obedient  unto  death,  even  the 
death  of  the  cross :"  '  Philip,  ii.  G,  7, 8.  The  same  passage  is 
likewise  found  in  the  second  book  of  Cyprian's''  Testimonies, 
and  plainly  in  the  same  sense.  I  have  already  quoted"  this 
passage  from  some  Greek  a^  riters,  Avho  interpret  this  text 
according  to  the  translation  just  given.  It  is  likewise  found 
again,  and  plainly  in  the  same  sense,  in^  Novatus,  or  Nova- 
tian,  as  he  is  usually  called,  a  Latin  author,  and  contempo- 
rary with  St.  Cyprian.  Mr.  Marshall  translates  the  first 
words  of  the  passage  above  quoted  from  the  third  book 
of  Cyprian's  Testimonies  in  this  manner :  That  though  he 
was  appointed  to  appear  in  the  form  of  God,  he  did  not 
boast  of  his  equality  Avith  God,  but  emptied  himself.  And 
besides,  Mr.  Marshall  has  a  long  and  judicious  note  upon 
this  citation  of  our  author :  he  says,  '  he  cannot  acquiesce  in 
our  common  construction  of  the  words,  "  thought  it  no 
robbery,"  &c.as  if  they  intimated  anything  liketo  his  claim- 
ing an  equality  ;  because  the  apostle  here  is  speaking  of 
our  Saviour's  humility  and  condescension,  and  rather  re- 
presents him  as  receding  from  his  just  rights,  than  as  in- 
sisting on  them.  Though  he  received  so  much  honour 
from  his  Father,  and  was  appointed  to  represent  his  person, 
yet  when  he  came  to  suffer,  he  did  not  insist  on  his  first 
pretensions ;  did  not  seem  (then)  to  think  he  had  any  claim 
to  the  divinity,  or  might  assume  it ;  boasted  not  (then)  of 
his  near  alliance  to  the  Deity  ;  but,  instead  of  it,  emptied 
himself,  behaved  and  acted  like  a  person  void  of  any  such 
powers.  Novatian,  in  his  book  De  Trinitate,  cap.  17, 
understands  our  apostle  in  this  sense ;  which  I  must 
acknowledge,  with  Mr.  Le  Clerc,  seems  to  me  the  most 
natural  and  easy.  See  Mr.  Le  Clerc  upon  the  place  in  his 
Supplement  to  Dr.  Hammond  ;  and  Dr.  Whitby,  who  gives 
instances  out  of  Heliodorus,  wherein  the  words  ap7ray/na 
ij^H^tro,  which  we  translate,  "  thinking  a  robbery,"  plainly 
signify,  catching  at  an  opportunity,  embracing  any  thing  as 
extremely  desirable.'  So  writes  Mr.  Marshall.  Mr. 
Wolffs  has  discoursed  largely  of  this  matter,  and  deserves 
to  be  consulted. 

9.  That  passage,  as  was  observed,  is  in  Cyprian's  books  of 

<»  Test.  1.  ii.  cap.  13.  «  See  Vol.  ii.  ch.  IG.  n.  7.  ch.  38.  n,  28. 

'  Qui  cum  in  forma  Dei  asset,  non  rapinam  arbitratus  est  a?qualem  se  Deo 
esse ;  sed  semetipsum  exinanivit,  fonnara  servi  accipiens,  in  similitudine  homi- 
num  factus,  &c.  Novat.  de  Reg.  Fid.  cap.  22.  [al.  17.]  p.  174.  edit.  Jo.  Jacks, 

8  Vid.  Wolff.  Curre  in  Ep.  ad  Philip,  cap.  2.  6—8 


CvPRiAN  OF  Carthage.  A.  D.  248.  39 

TestiTiionies.  In  another  Mork,  '  Miiuliul''  of  Avhich  tlie 
blessetl  apostle  Paul  says  in  liis  epistle  [or  in  one  of  his 
epistles]  :  "  For  nie  to  live  is  Christ,  and  to  die  is  gain :"  ' 
Philip,  i.  21. 

10.  In  the  third  book  of  Testimonies;  '  In'  the  epistle  of 
Paul  to  the  Colossians;  "  Continue  in  prayer,  vvatchin"'  in 
the  same:"  '  Coloss.  iv.  2.  In  another  Mork:  *  Likewise'' 
the  blessed  apostle  Paul,  full  of  the  Holy  Ciiost,  and  sent  to 
call  and  convert  the  Gentiles,  warns  and  teaches:  "  Beware, 
lest  any  man  spoil  you  through  philosophy  and  vain  deceit, 
after  the  tradition  of  men,  after  the  rudiments  of  the  world, 
and  not  after  Christ:  for  in  him  dwelleth  all  the  fulness  of 
the  Godhead."  '  Col.  ii.  8. 

11.  In  the  books  of  Testimonies  the'  first  and"^  second 
epistles  of  Paul  to  the  Thessalonians  are  expressly  cited  : 
and  in  "  other  Avorks  also  passages  of  both  these  epistles  are 
cited  by  Cyprian  as  words  of  the  apostle  Paid. 

12.  '  For''  if  the  apostle  Paul,  writing-  to  Timothy,  said, 
"  Let  no  man  despise  thy  youth,"  how  much  more  may  it 
be  said  to  you  by  your  col  eagues,  Let  no  man  despise  thy 
age?'   1  Tim.  iv.  12. 

13.  '  Therefore P  the  apostle  Paul  writes  to  Timothy,  and 
directs,  "  That  a  bishop  should  notstrive,  but  be  gentle,  and 
apt  to  teach ;"  '  2  Tim.  ii.  24. 

14.  In  the  books  of  Testimonies'!  these  two  epistles  are 
quoted  by  Cyprian  distinctly,  as  the  first  and  second  to 
Timothy. 

15.  In  the  third  book  of  Testimonies :  '  To"^  Titus,  [that 
is,  in  the  epistle  of  Titus,  as  appears  from  what  there  pre- 
cedes,] "  A  man  that  is  an  heretic,  after  the  first  and  second 
admonition,  reject;  knowing  that  such  an  one  is  subverted, 
and  sinneth,  being  condemned  of  himself."  '  Tit.  iii.  10, 11. 
In  a  synodical   epistle  of  Cyprian,  and  other  bishops  in 


*"  Cujus  rei  memor  beatus  apostolus  Paul  us  in  epistola  sua  ponit  et  dicit :  Mihi 
vivere  Christus,  et  mori  lucrum.     De  Mortal,  p.  158.  '  In  epistola 

Pauli  ad  Colossenses :  Instate  orationi,  vigilantes  in  ea.     Test.  1.  iii.  cap.  120. 

■^  Item  beatus  apostolus  Paulus,  plenus  Spiritu  Sancto,  et  vocandis  forman- 
disque  gentibus  missus,  contestetur  et  instruat,  dicens :  videte  ne  quis  vos  de- 

praedetur, quia   in  ipso  habitat   omnis  plenitudo  divinitatis.     De  bono 

Patient,  p.  210.  '  Test.  1.  iii.  cap.  88.  ■"  Test,  1.  iii. 

cap.  68.  "  De  Mort.  p.  164.  Ep.  14.  [al.  5.]  p.  32. 

°  Nam  si  apostolus  Paulus,  ad  Timotheum  scribens,  dixit :  Juventutem  tuani 
nemo  despiciat,  &c.     Ep.  3.  [al.  6.5.]  p.  6.  p  Cui  rei  prospiciens 

beatus  Paulus  apostolus  ad  Timotheum  scribit  et  monet,  episcopum  non  liti- 
giosum,  sed  mitem  et  docibilem  esse  debere.     Ep.  74.  p.  215. 

1  Testim.  lib.  iii.  cap.  67.  76,  77.  et  passim.  ■•  Ad  Titum : 

Haereticum  hominem  post  unam  aiit  secundam,  &c.  Test.  1.  iii.  c.  78. 


40  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

Africa,  seut  to  some  of  their  brethren  in  Spain  ;  '  Forasmuch' 
as  the  apostle  directs,  that  a  "  bishop  must  be  blameless,  as 
the  steward  of  God."  '  Tit.  i.  7. 

Mr.Hallettjin  his'  learned  Discourse  of  Heresy  and  Schism, 
explaining-  the  forecited  ditiicult  text  to  Titus,  expresseth 
himself  in  this  manner :  '  What  I  take  to  be  the  true  inter- 
'  pretation  of  the  character,  self-condemned,  has  been  often 
'  published,  and  yet  has  been  strangely  overlooked  of  late 
'  years.  The  oldest  writer  that  I  have  found  it  in  is  Jerom, 
'  who  in  his  comment  upon  the  place  says,  "  A  heretic  is  said 
'  to  be  condemned  of  himself,  because  (while  a  fornicator,  an 
'  adulterer,  a  murderer,  and  other  vicious  persons,  are  cast 
'  out  of  the  church  by  the  priests)  heretics  pass  sentence  upon 
'  themselves,  and  of  their  own  accord  depart  from  the  church ; 
'  which  departure  is  as  a  condemnation  passed  on  them  by 
'  their  ov.  n  consciences."  '  And  Mr.  Hallett  there  shows  that 
this  has  been  the  opinion  of  divers  learned  moderns,  parti- 
cularly of  Estius,  bishop  Barlow,  and  Dr.  Hammond. 

1  shall  here  add  a  passage  from  Cyprian,  which  may 
show  that  interpretation  to  be  older  than  Jerom ;  as  Mr. 
Hallett  likewise  supposes,  for  he  takes  it  to  be  the  true 
nieaningof  the  text.  '  Which,' says"  Cyprian,  '  the  apostle 
Paul  confirms,  when  he  teaches  and  reqxiires  that  a  heretic 
be  rejected,  as  being  subverted,  a  sinner,  and  condemned  of 
himself:  for  the  ruin  of  such  an  one  must  be  laid  to  his  own 
charge,  who  is  not  cast  out  by  the  bishop,  but  of  his  own 
accord  forsakes  the  church,  passing  sentence  upon  himself 
by  his  heretical  presumption.' 

16.  The  epistle  to  Philemon  is  not  found  quoted  in  the 
remaining  works  of  Cyprian.  The  shortness  of  it  may  be 
supposed  to  be  the  reason. 

A  I.  The  epistle  to  the  Hebrews  is  no  where  expressly 
quoted  by  St.  Cyprian ;  nor  are  there  in  his  Avorks  any 
passages  that  contain  allusions  to  it.  He  may  have  some 
texts  of  the  Old  Testament  which  are  cited,  or  alluded  to, 
in  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews ;  but  he  does  nc^t  take  them 
from  that  epistle,  but  from  the  original  books  themselves. 

'  quando  et  apostolus  moneat  ac  dicat :  Episcopum  oportet  esse  sine 

crimine,  quasi  Dei  dispensatorem.     Ep.  67.  [al.  68.]  p.  173. 

'  See  Mr.  Hallett's  Notes  and  Discourses,  Vol.  iii.  p.  377,  &c. 

"  Quisquis  autera  de  collectis  foras  exierit,  id  est,  si  quis,  quamvis  in  ecclesifl 
gratiam  consecutus,  recesserit,  et  ab  ecclesia  exierit,  reum  sibi  futurum,  id  est, 
ipsuni  sibi  quod  pereat  imputaturum.  Quod  apostolus  Paulas  explanat,  doceos 
et  praecipiens  hsereticum  vitandum  esse,ut  perversum,  et  peccatoreni,  et  a  seme- 
tipso  damnatum.  Hie  enim  reus  sibi  ent,  qui  non  ab  episcopo  ejectus,  sed 
sponte  de  ecclesia  profugus,  et  haeretica  praesumptione  a  semetipso  daranatus. 
Ep.  CO.  [al.   76.]  p.  182. 


CvpiuAN  OF  Carthage.  A.  D.  248.  41 

This  is  so  plain  that  I  suppose  no  one  will  contest  it.  Dr. 
Mill^  allows  that  this  epistle  is  no  where  cited  by  St.  Cy- 
prian ;  and  his  not  quoting-  this  epistle,  which  is  so  large,  in 
any  of  his  tracts  or  epistles,  may  be  reckoned  an  argument 
that  he  m  as  not  accjuainted  with  it,  or  that  he  did  not  esteem 
it  a  part  of  holy  scripture.  Accordingly,  Mr.  Ilallett,"  in 
the  Introduction  to  his  Paraphrase  and  Notes  on  the  three 
last  Chapters  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  admits  it  to  be 
very  likely  that  St.  Cyprian  was  of  the  same  opinion  with 
some  others  of  the  Latin  church  at  that  time,  who  did  not 
receive  this  as  a  canonical  epistle. 

And  indeed,  that  this  Latin  father  did  not  reckon  the 
epistle  to  the  Hebrews  to  have  been  written  by  the  apostle 
Paul,  is  farther  evident  from  an  observation  twice  mentioned 
by  him,  concerning'  the  number  of  churches  to  Avhich  that 
apostle  had  Mritten.  In  the  first  book  of  Testimonies," 
Cyprian  having  quoted  the  words  of  Hannah,  "  the  barren 
has  borne  seven,  and  she  that  has  many  sons  '  [or  children]  is 
waxed  feeble,"  (1  Sam.  ii.  5.)  g-oes  on:  The  seven  sons  are 
seven  churches ;  for  which  reason  Paul  wrote  to  seven 
churches;  and  the  Revelation  has  seven  churches,  that  the 
number  seven  may  be  preserved.'  In  another  tract,  having- 
mentioned  the  seven  golden  candlesticks  in  the  Revelation, 
the  seven  pillars  in  Solomon's  Proverbs,  upon  which  Wisdom 
built  her  house,  and  likewise  the  forementioned  seven  in  the 
Hrst  book  of  Samuel,  and  the  seven  women  in  Is.  iv.  1,  he 
adds;  '  And>  the  apostle  Paul,  who  was  mindful  of  this 
authorized,  and  well-known  number,  writes  to  seven 
churches ;  and  in  the  Revelation  our  Lord  sends  his  divine 
and  heavenly  instructions  and  commands  to  seven  churches 
and  their  ang-els.'  By  the  seven  churches,  to  which  Paul 
wrote,  Cyprian  unquestionably  meaneth  the  churches  of 
Rome,  Corinth,  Galatia,  Ephesus,  Philippi,  Colosse,  and 
Thessalonica ;  as  is  also  observed  by  bishop  Fell^  in  a  note 
upon  this  passag-e. 

"  Tertullianum  nescio  an  secutus  sit  Cj'prianus ;  in  cujus  openbus  epistolam 
hanc  [ad  Hebraeos]  nusquara  citatam  reperias.     Prol.  n.  216. 

*  See  Introd.  p.  xviii.  *  Item  in  Basileion  primo  :  '  Sterilis  sep- 

*  tem  pepCTit,  et  quae  pluiimos  habebat  filios,  infirmata  est.'  Filii  autem  sep- 
tem  sunt  ecclesiae  septem.  Unde  et  Paulus  septem  ecclesiis  scribit,  et  Apoca- 
lypsis  ecclesias  septem  ponit,  ut  sen'etur  septenarius  numerus.  Test.  1.  i.  cap. 
20.  ^  Et  apostolus  Paulus,  qui  hujus  nuraeri  legitimi  et  certi  meminit, 

ad  septem  ecclesias  scribit.  Et  in  Apocalypsi  Dominus  mandata  suadivina  et 
prsecepta  coelestia  ad  septem  ecclesias  et  earum  angelos  scnbit.  De  exhort. 
Mart.  cap.  11.  p.  179.  '  Ad  septem  ecclesias  scribit.]     Nimirum 

ad  Romanes,  Corinthios,  Galatas,  Ephesios,  Philippenses,  Colossenses,  et  Thes- 
salonicenses.  Si  requiratur,  quo  in  loco  Paulus  hujus  legitimi  et  certi  uumeri 
raeminerit,  forte  dicendum,  hoc  ab  eo  praestitum.     Hebr.  xi.  30. 


42  Cicdibilily  of  the  Gospel  History. 

Nevertheless,  that  learned  writer  adds  there  a  remark 
Avhich  appears  to  me  very  particular  :  '  If  it  be  asked,'  says 
he,  '  in  Avliat  place  Paul  has  mentioned  j^so  he  understands 
'  the  word  meminit]  this  authorized  and  m  elUknoAvn  number, 
'  perhaps  it  must  be  said,  that  it  is  done  by  him  in  Hebr.  xi. 
'  30.  "  By  faith  the  Avails  of  Jericho  fell  down,  after  they 

*  Mere  compassed  about  seven  days."  '  But  I  suppose  it  can 
scarce  be  doubted  but  Cyprian's  meaning'  is,  that  as  a  regard 
had  been  had  to  the  number  seven  by  many  persons  upon 
various  occasions ;  so  likewise  Paul  had  remembered,  '  was 
'  mindful  of,'  showed  his  respect  to,  that  number,  by  writing- 
epistles  to  seven  churches,  and  no  more. 

From  these  passages  then  it  may  be  reckoned  evident, 
that  Cyprian  supposed  the  apostle  Paul  had  written  to  no  more 
than  seven  churches,  and  that  his  other  epistles  were  sent  to 
particular  persons.  Cyprian  therefore  did  not  compute  the 
epistle  to  the  HebreAvs  among-  the  works  of  the  apostle 
Paul. 

Since  the  writing  what  is  above,  relating  to  this  epistle  to 
the  Hebrews,  I  have  had  an  opportunity  to  consult  Mr.  Mar- 
shall's English  translation  of  St,  Cyprian.  The  passage  of  our 
author  last  cited  is  there  rendered  after  this  manner  ;  '  Thus" 
'  the  apostle  St.  Paul,  bearing  in  his  mind  this  remarkable 
'  and  distinguished  number,  hath  written  precisely  to  seven 
'  churches.  And  in  the  Revelation  our  blessed  Lord  directs 
'  his  heavenly  instructions  to  seven  churches  and  their  seven 
<  angels.'  And  in  the  notes  upon  this  place  Mr.  3Iarshall 
omits  the  above-mentioned  remark  of  bishop  Fell,  which  I 
have  taken  the  liberty  to  censure,  without  translating  it,  or 
saying  any  thing-  about  it.  He  likewise  adds  another  remark 
of  his  own,  which  is  much  better,  in  these  very  words ;  '  So 
'  that  our  author  (I  observe)  did  not  ascribe  the  Hebrews 
'  to  Paul.' 

Here  therefore  it  will  be  very  proper  to  take  notice  of  Mr. 
Marshall's  translation  of  a  passage  in  St.  Cyprian's  works. 
It  is  in  the  Acts  of  the  council  at  Carthage  in  the  year  256, 
where  our  bishop  presided.  There  a  part  of  the  thirty-third 
suffrage,  that  of  Felix  of  Amaccora,  is  thus  rendered ; 
'  Wherefore  to  me  it  is  manifest,  that  neither  heretics  nor 
'  schismatics  are  capable  of  the  heavenly  gift,  who  have  been 

*  so  presumptuous  as  to  expect  it  from  men  Avho  are  sinners 

*  an(l  aliens  from  the  church.'  Here  that  expression,  hea- 
venly gift,  seems  to  be  taken  from  Hebr.  vi.  4,  but  there  is 
no  such  expression  in  the  original  Latin.     Felix  says,  that** 

•  See  Mr.  N.  Marshall's  St.  Cyprian,  p.  179. 

''  Et  ideo  manifestura  est,  nee  hartticos  nee  schismaticos  aliquid  cooleste 


Cyprian  of  Cakthage.  A.   D.  248.  43 

heretics  and  schismatics  are  not  capable  of  any  tiling'  hea- 
venly ;  that  is,  spiritual  or  divine.  This  wrong  version 
seems  to  be  owing  to  the  liberty  A^hich  Mr.  Marshall  gave 
himself,  and  which  1  observed*^  formerly.  He  says  in  his** 
preface,  '  1  have  here  and  there  also  expressed  my  author's 
'  sense  in  the  language  of  holy  scripture,  where  he  himself 
'  did  not  mean  to  quote  it :  but  then  in  such  cases,  I  never 
'  refer  to  the  passage,  as  I  always  do  where  he  particularly 
'  cites  any  verse  or  chapter  of  the  inspired  writers.'  But 
yet  here  Mr.  3Iarshall  has  not  only  expressed  his  author's 
sense  in  the  language  of  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews, '  where 
*  he  himself  did  not  mean  to  quote  it,'  but  he  has  also 
marked  and  distinguished  this  expression  by  putting  it 
in  the  body  of  his  translation  in  Italic  letters,  and  by  re- 
ferring in  the  margin  to  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  and 
also  by  putting  this  reference  or  quotation  at  the  end  of 
the  volume  in  the  table  of  the  texts  of  scripture  cited  by 
St.  Cyprian.  To  what  shall  we  ascribe  this  ?  I  conceive 
of  this  matter  thus  :  In  translating  this  suftrage,  Mr.  Marshall 
put  in  practice  the  liberty  we  have  noted  ;  he  then,  at  first, 
wrote  out  that  passage  without  any  distinction  of  letters,  and 
without  any  marginal  reference  to  a  book  of  holy  scripture; 
but  some  good  while  after,  when  he  came  to  revicAv  and 
read  over  his  version,  and  no  longer  had  the  original  before 
him,  seeing  this  expression,  he  thought  it  worthy  of  obser- 
vation ;  and  therefore  presently  marked  it  with  his  pen  for 
Italic,  and  put  a  reference  in  the  margin,  whence  it  came 
also  into  the  table  of  texts  at  the  end  of  the  volume.  This, 
I  think,  is  a  likely  way  of  accounting  for  this  matter;  how- 
ever, it  may  be  partly  accounted  for  another  way  ;  for 
the  marking  that  expression  for  Italic,  the  marginal  refer- 
ence, and  its  place  in  the  table  of  texts,  may  be  all  owing' 
to  some  person  employed  under  Mr.  Marshall.  But  still 
the  translator  is  accountable  for  all  that  ensued  upon  his 
wrong  translation;  and  if  Mr.  3Iarshall  was  not  deceived 
and  misled  by  his  own  version,  some  one  else  very  near  him 
was  imposed  upon  ;  and  in  like  manner  must  all  others  be 
deceived  who  read  this  passage  in  his  translation,  and  have 
no  opportunity  of  consulting  the  original. 

VII.  I  shall  now  observe  this  writer's  testimony  to  the 
catholic  epistles. 

1.  We  find  no  quotations  or  allusions  to  the  epistle  of  St. 
James  in  St.  Cyprian's  works. 

posse  suscipere,  qui  a  peccatoribus  hominibus,  et  ab  ecclesia  extraaeis  audeant 
accipere.  ap.  Cypr,  p.  236.  "^  See  before,  p.  16,  note  ^. 

■*  P.  xviii. 


44  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

2.  The  apostle  Peter's  first  epistle  is  often  quoted  by  St. 
Cyprian.  '  Likewise*"  Peter,  upon  whom  by  the  gracious 
vouchsafement  of  the  Lord  the  church  is  budt,  says  in  his 
epistle,  (1  Pet.  ii.  21,22,  23,)  "  Christ  suffered  for  us,  leav- 
ing you  an  example,  that  ye  should  follow  his  steps ;  who 
did  not  sin,  neither  was  guUe  found  in  his  mouth  ;  who,  m  hen 
he  was  reviled,  reviled  not ;  when  he  suffered,  he  threatened 
not,  but  committed  [or  yielded]  himself  to  them  that  judged 
him  unrighteously  :"  '  meaning  Pontius  Pilate.  So  Cy- 
prian must  have  read  this  text,  it  being-  quoted  by  him  after 
the  same  manner  likewise  in  the*^  books  of  Testimonies.  I 
may  not  stay  to  consider  which  reading  is  preferable, 
whether  this,  or  that  now  more  commonly  received,  to  him 
that  judgeth  righteously:  I  would  therefore  refer  my 
readers,  for  farther  satisfaction,  tos  Mr.  Wolff's  notes  upon 
the  place. 

This  epistle  is  several  times  quoted  in  the  third  book  of 
Testimonies  with  this  title.  The*'  epistle  of  Peter  to  the  people 
of  Pontus :  who  are  the  persons  lirst  named  in  the  inscrip- 
tion of  the  epistle. 

In  his  other  Avorks,  Cyprian  quotes  this  as'  the  epistle  of 
the  apostle  Peter,  and''  of  Peter  the  apostle  of  Christ. 

3.  The  second  epistle  of  St.  Peter  is  not  at  all  quoted  by 
Cyprian.  One  may  be  well  apt  to  think  it  Mas  not  received 
by  him  as  a  sacred  book  ;  otherwise  it  could  not  have  been 
omitted  by  a  Avriter  whose  works  so  much  abound  with 
citations  of  scripture,  and  who  had  such  controversies 
about  the  treatment  of  heretics.  If  this  epistle  had  been  a 
part  of  Cyprian's  canon,  it  is  likely  he  would  have  applied 
divers  passag-es  of  it  to  the  heretics  and  schismatics  of  his 
own  time,  as  he  does*  the  texts  of  St.  John's  first  Epistle 
relating  to  antichrist. 

This  may  well  bring  to  our  mind  the"'  passage  formerly 
cited  out  of  Firmilian's  letter  to  our  author,  where  we  were 
willing  to  suppose  that  Firmilian  had  a  reference  to  St, 

*  Item  Petnis,  super  quern  ecclesia  Domini  dignatione  fundata  est,  in  epistola 
sua  ponit  et  dicit :  Christus  passus  est  pro  nobis,  relinquens  vobis  exemplum, 
ut  sequamini  vestigia  ejus;  qui  peccatum  non  fecit,  nee  dolus  inventus  est 
in  ore  ejus  -.  cum  malediceretur,  non  maledicebat ;  cum  pateretur,  non  com- 
minabatur;  tradebat  autem  se  judicanti  injuste.  De  Bono  Pat.  p.  213, 
214.  ^  Tradebat   autem    se    judicanti    injuste.      Test.    1.    iii. 

cap.  39.  8  Vid.  Job.  Chr.  Woltf.  Cur.  Philolog.  ct  Crit.  Tom. 

V.  p.  122,  123.  ''  De  hoc  ipso  in  epistola  Petri  ad  Ponticos.  Test. 

1.  iii.  c.  36.  vid.  et  c.  37.  39.  '  Secundum  quod  I'etrus  apostolus  in, 

epistola  sua  prjumonct  et  docet,  dicens :  Sobrii  estote,  &c.  De  Zel.  et  Livore 
p.  221.  ''  Petrasetiain  apostolus  ejus  docuerit,  ideo  persecution&s  fieri, 

ut  probemur: — r-posuit  enim  in  epistola  sua  dicens  :  Ep.  58.  [al.  56.]  p.  121. 

'  See  below  4.  note'  and  num.  10.  ■"  Vol.  ii.  Ch.  39.  num.  14. 


CvPiuAN  OF  Carthage.  A.  D.  248.  45 

Peter's  second  Epistle.  Nevertheless,  perhaps  Cyprian's 
entire  silence  about  this  epistle  may  induce  some  to  doubt 
whether  Firmiliau  did  really  refer  to  it.  Farther,  the  entiiij 
silence  of  Cyprian,  and  the  very  small  notice  taken  of  this 
epistle  by"  Orig'en,  another  acquaintance,  and  a  very  inti- 
mate friend  of  Firmilian,  may  occasion  a  doubt,  whether  this 
second  epistle  was  received  by  Firmilian  as  an  epistle  of 
Peter. 

I  have  no  desire  to  set  aside  our  second  Epistle  of  Peter, 
as  not  genuine  ;  but  I  think  it  incumbent  upon  me  to  men- 
tion such  observations  as  these  M'hen  they  otter :  and  I  must 
still  proceed  to  observe,  that  we  have  Firmilian's  letter  to 
Cyprian  in  a  Latin  translation  only,  nor  do  we  certainly 
know  by  whom  it  was  made.  The  expressions  in  the 
translation  are  very  strong ;  that  Peter  and  Paul  in  their 
epistles  have  cursed,  or  pronounced  censures  upon  heretics, 
and  admonished  us  to  avoid  them ;  but  perhaps  the  words  of 
the  original  were  not  so  express.  What  we  now  have  ren- 
dered '  their  epistles,'  possibly  might  be  only  some"  general 
word  denoting  writings,  or  the  scriptures  :  and  in  what  Fir- 
milian says  of  Peter,  he  might  refer  to  that  apostle's  censure 
of  Simon  Magus,  reputed  an  arch  heretic,  and  recorded 
inP  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  ;  a  book  of  holy  scripture,  and 
universally  received.  It  is  certain,  that  it  is  no  uncommon 
thing  for  ancient  christian  authors  to  quote  Peter  and  Paul, 
meaning  some  words  of  theirs  recorded  in  the  Acts  of  the 
Apostles,  Avithout  mming  that  book,  or  hinting  where  the 
intended  passage  is  to  be  found.  We  shall  see  in  thei  next 
chapter  a  remarkable  instance  of  this  kind,  where  the  apostle 
Paul  is  quoted.  I  place  here"^  in  the  margin  several  such 
quotations  of  the  apostle  Peter  in  divers  authors,  one  of  which 
contains  a  part  of  his  reproof  of  the  forementioned  Simon. 

4.  The  first  Epistle  of  St.  John  is  often  expressly  quoted 
by  Cyprian :  '  And**  the  apostle  John,  mindful  of  the  com- 

"  See  ch.  38.  num.  12.  "  Ex.  gr.  raig  ypa(paiQ,  toiq  ypanjiamv. 

P  Actsviii.  20 — 23.  ''  See  below,  chap.xlv.  num.  vii.  7. 

■■  Et  apostolus  jPetrus  de  Salvatore  testatus  est,  dicens:  Hujus  anima  noii 
derelicta  est  in  inferno,  nee  caro  ejus  vidlt  corruptionem.  [Vid.  Act.  ii.  27.] 
Philastr.  de  Haer.  n.  69.  138,  Ed.  Fabric.  Et  Petrus  apostolus  Mago  Simoni 
dixerat :  Age  poenitentiam,  si  quo  modo  dimittatur  tibi  quod  fecisti.  [Vid. 
Act.  viii.  22.]  Philast.  Haer.  82.  p.  159.  Adtende  enim,  quid  Petrus  aposto- 
lus, Spiritu  Sancto  docente,  commoneat,  qui  ait :  Et  nunc  ergo  vos  quid  tentatis 
Deum,  imponere  jugum  coUo  discennum,  &c.  [Act.  xv.  10,  11.]  P.  Oros. 
de  lib.  arb.  p.  620.  Ed.  Havercamp.  1738.  Sicut  Petrus  ad  Judaeos  ex- 
clamavit :  Dextera  Dei  exaltatus,  acceptum  a  Patre  Spiritum  effudit,  &c.  [Act. 
ii.  33.]  Victorin.  in  Apocal.  ap.  Bib.  Patr.  T.  lii.  R.  415.  D. 

'  Et  Joannes  apostolus,  mandati  inemor,  in  epistola  sua  postmodum  ponit : 
Inhoc,  inquit,  intelligimus,  quia  cognoviraus  cum,  si  praecepta  ejus  custodiamus. 


46  Credibililij  oftJm  Gospel  llislory. 

mand,  writes  in  his  epistle :  "  Hereby,"  says  he,  "  we  per- 
ceive that  we  know  him,  if  we  keep  his  connnandments  :  He 
that  saith,  1  know  him,  and  keepeth  not  his  commandments, 
is  a  liar,  and  the  truth  is  not  in  him  :"  '  1  John  ii.  3. 

4.  1  shall  add  one  passage  more  *  in  the  margin,  where  this 
epistle  is  quoted  as  written  by  the  blessed  apostle  John. 

There  are  two  passages,  where  Cyprian  is  supposed  by  some 
to  fjuote  or  refer  to  the  disputed  text,  concerning  the  three 
witnesses  in  heaven.  The  first  is  to  this  purpose  :  '  The  " 
Lord  says,  "  I  and  the  Father  are  one."  And  again,  of  the 
Father  and  the  Son  and  the  Holy  Spirit  it  is  written  :  "  And 
these  three  are  one  :"  '  1  John  v.  7.  The  other  passage  I  shall 
not  translate.  However,  I  put  it^  in  the  margin,  for  the  sake 
of  those  who  may  choose  to  see  it  here.,  I  do  not  enter  into 
the  merits  of  the  question,  whether  this  clause  be  genuine, 
or  whether  it  was  quoted  or  referred  to  by  St.  Cyprian. 
The  reader  who  is  desirous  of  information  concerning  this 
matter,  may  consult  the"  authors  who  have  treated  of  it 
largely;  but  in  a  following'^  chapter  will  be  found  an  argu- 
ment of  no  small  weight  in  favour  of  the  supposition,  that 
this  clause  was  wanting  in  St.  Cyprian's  copies  of  St.  John's 
epistle. 

5.  In  a  passage  cited  just  now  it  is  said,  John  writes  in  his 
epistle,  meaning-  our  first  Epistle  of  St.  John  :  and  it  must 
be  owned,  that  St.  Cyprian  has  no  where  quoted  any  other 
epistle  of  this  Apostle.  But  this  may  be  accounted  for  by 
the  brevity  of  the  two  other  epistles.  It  is  certain,  that  form 
of  quotation  is  no  proof  of  his  knowing  or  owning  no  other 
epistle  of  St.  John,  the  like  form  being  also  often  used  by  him 
in  quoting  an  epistle  of  St.  Paul.    There  are  some  instances  of 

Ep.  28.  [al.  25.]  p.  54.  '  Item  beatus  Joannes  apostolus  nee 

ipse  ullam  hseresin  aut  schisma  discrevit,  aut  aliquos  speciatira  separates  posuit; 
sed  universos  qui  de  ecclesia  exiissent,  quique  contra  ecclesiam  facerent,  anti- 
christos  appellavit,  dicens:  Audistis  quia  autichristus  venit.  Nuncautem  anti- 
christimulti  facti  sunt,  &c.  [1  Joh.  ii.  18.  19.]  Ep.  69.  [al.  76.]  p.  180. 

"  Dicit  Dominus :  Ego  et  Pater  unum  sumus.  Et  iterum  de  Patre  et  Filio 
et  Spiritu  Sancto  scriptum  est :  Et  hi  tres  unum  sunt.  De  Unitate  Ec.  p.  109. 

"  Nam  si  baptizari  quis  apud  hsereticos  potuit,  utique  et  remissam  peccatorura 
consequi  potuit.  Si  peccatorum  remissam  consecutus  est,  et  sanctiticatas  est, 
et  templum  Dei  factus  est,  queero  cujus  Dei?  Si  creatoris,  non  potuit  qui  in 
eum  non  credidit.  Si  Christi,  nee  hujus  fierit  potuit  templum,  qui  negat  Deum 
Christum.  Si  Spiritus  Sancti,  cum  tres  unum  sint,  quomodo  Spintus  Sanctus 
placatus  e-sse  ei  potest,  qui  aut  Palris  aut  Fihi  inimicus  est  ?  ad  Jubaianum  Ep. 
7.3.  p.  203.  ™  There  may  be  seen  a  large  collection  of  such  authors  in 

Mr.  WoWs  Curae  Philolog.  &c.  in  loc.  Tom.  iv.  p.  293,  &c.  I  therefore  refer 
only  to  a  very  few.     Vid.  Mill,  in  loc.  Emlyn's  Tracts.  Ri.  Simon.  Hist.  Crit. 

du  Texte  du  Nou.  Test.  ch.  xvii.     LeClerc.  Bib.  Univ.T.  xii.  p.  450 455, 

et  passim,  and  Mr.  David  Casley's  Preface  to  the  Catalogue  of  the  manuscripts 
of  tlie  king's  library.  "  See  below  chap.  xlv.  numb,  vi,  10, 11,  12. 


Cyprian  of  Carthage.  A.  D.  248.  47 

this  to  be  found  in  the  passages  already  cited.  I  shall  add 
here  one  more  :  '  And>  again  the  blessed  apostle  says  in  his 
epistle,  (1  Cor.  xii.  26.)  "  Whether  one  member  suffer,  all 
the  members  suffer  with  it;  or  one  member  rejoice,  all  the 
members  rejoice  with  it."  '  It  is  reasonable  to  suppose, 
that  the  second  Epistle  of  St.  John  was  owned  by  Cyprian, 
because  it  is  expressly  cited  by  one  of  the  bishops  in  the 
council  of  Carthage  held  in  250,  of  which  Cyprian  was  a 
principal  part.  That  bishop  there  delivers  his  opinion  upon 
the  point  in  debate  in  this  manner:  '  The^  apostle  John 
'  writes  in  his  epistle,  [that  is,  in  one  of  his  epistles,]  "  If  there 
'  come  any  unto  you,  and  bring  not  the  doctrine  of  Christ, 
'  receive  hhn  not  into  your  house;  neither  bid  him  God 
'  speed.  For  he  thatbiddoth  him  God  speed  is  partaker  of 
'his  evil  deeds:'  2  John  10,  II.  And  St.  John's  third 
epistle  likewise  may  have  been  owned  by  Cyprian. 

6.  There  is  no  notice  taken  of  the  Epistle  of  St.  Jude  in 
the  works  of  this  Avriter. 

VIII.  The  book  of  the  Revelation  is  frequently  quoted 
by  Cyprian  ;  but  he  has  no  where  said  that  it  was  written 
by  John  the  Apostle,  and  but  once  mentioned  the  name  of 
the  writer.  '  And^  in  the  Revelation,  the  angel,  when  John 
would  have  worshipped  him,  refused  it,  and  said,  "  See 
thou  do  it  not ;  for  I  am  thy  fellow-servant,  and  of  thy 
brethren :  worship  the  Lord  Jesus."  '  So  it  is  in  Cyprian. 
We  have  it,  "  Worship  God,"  Rev.  xxii.  9. 

The  Revelation  was  esteemed  by  him  a  book  of  authority, 
as  is  evident  from  the  manner  in  which  he  quotes  it.  Recom- 
mending" works  of  g-oodness,  '  Hear,  says^  he,  in  the  Reve- 
lation, the  voice  of  thy  Lord  justly  reproving-  such  men 
as  these  :  "  Thou  say  est,"  says  he,  "  that  I  am  rich  and 
increased  in  goods,  and  have  need  of  nothing ;  and  knowest 
not  that  thou  art  wretched,  and  miserable,  and  poor,  and 
blind,  and  naked :"  ch.  iii.  17,  18.  Again :  '  So  in  tbe<^ 
holy  scriptures,  by  which  the  Lord  would  have  us  to  be 

J  Et  itenim  posuit  [beatus  apostolus]  in  epistola  sua,  dicens :  Si  patitur 
membrum  unum,  &c.  Ep.  17.  [at.  12.]  p.  39.  ^  Joannes  apostolus 

in  epistola  sua  posuit  dicens :  Si  quis  ad  vos  venit,  et  doctrinam  Christi  non 
habet,  nolite  eum  admittere  in  domum  vestram,  et  Ave  illi  ne  dixeritis.  Qui 
enim  dixerit  illi  Ave  communicat  factis  ejus  malis.  Tract,  p.  242. 

*  Et  in  Apocalypsi  angelus  Joanni  volenti  adorare  se  resistit  et  dicit :  Vide 
ne  feceris,  quia  conservus  tuus  sum,  et  fratrum  tuorum.  Jesum  Dominum 
adora.  De  Bono  Pudicitiae.  p.  220.  ^  Audi  in  Apocalypsi  Domini 
tui  vocem,  ejusmodi  homines  justis  objurgationibus  increpantem :  Dicis,  inquit, 
dives  sum,  et  ditatus  sum,  et  nullius  rei  egeo.  De  Op.  et  Eleem.  p.  202. 

*  Sic  in  scripturis  Sanctis,  quibus  nos  instrui  Dominus  voluit  et  moneri,  de- 
scribitur  civitas  meretrix,  compta  pulchrius  et  ornata.     De  Habitu  Virg.  p.  97. 


48  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

instructed  and  warned,  is  the  harlot  city  described.'  He 
then  cites  Rev.  xvii.  1,  2,  3.  Once  more:  '  And*^  that 
waters  signify  people,  the  divine  scripture  shows  in  the 
Revelation :'  ch.  xvii.  16. 

I  rnay  add  here,  that  words  of  this  book  are  cited  together 
with  other  texts  of  the  New  Testament,  in  a  letter  of  some 
presbyters  and  deacons,  and  others,  confessors  of  the  church 
of  Rome,  to  Cyprian,  Avritten  in  250.  '  And  to  him*"  that 
overcometh  will  I  give  to  sit  upon  my  throne,  even  as  I 
also  overcame,  and  am  set  down  upon  my  Father's  throne.' 
Rev.  iii.  21. 

IX.  St.  Cyprian's  respect  for  the  scriptures  of  the  New 
Testament  appears,  in  his  very  numerous  quotations  of  them, 
in  his  appeals  to  them  as  decisive  in  matters  of  dispute  and 
controversy,  and  in  divers  forms  of  citation,  particularly 
such  as  these  :  "  The*^  Lord  says  in  the  gospel :"  or  "  in  his 
gospel,"  as  in  several  passages  cited  above ;  "  divine  scrip- 
tures," of  the  Acts;  "  sacred  scriptures,"  and  "  divine  scrip- 
tures," speaking-  of  the  Revelation  ;  "  the  blessed  apostle 
Paul,  full  of  the  grace  of  the  inspiration  of  the  Lord  ;  the 
blessed  apostle  Paul,  chosen  and  sent  of  the  Lord ;  the 
blessed  apostle  Paul,  full  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  sent  to 
call  and  convert  the  Gentiles ;"  as  we  have  seen  already. 
Farther:  '  The  Holy  .Spirit,^  foretelling-  and  forewarning-  us 
by  the  apostle,  "  In  the  last  days,"  says  he,  "  perilous  times 
shall  come,"  '  2  Tim.  iii.  1.  Again:  '  Paul'^  in  his  epistles, 
in  which  he  forms  us  to  a  holy  course  of  life,  by  his  divine 
instructions,  says,  (1  Cor.  vi.  19,  20.)  "  Ye  are  not  your 
own,  for  ye  are  bought  with  a  great  price ;  glorify  and 
carry  God  in  your  body."  '  So  Cyprian,'  and  some  other 
ancient  writers,  read  that  text.  In  another  place,  '  The'' 
Holy  Ghost  forewarns  by  the  apostle,  and  says,  "  There 
must  be  also  heresies,  that  they  which  are  approved  may 
be  made  manifest  among-  you,"  '  1  Cor.  xi.  19.  Again ; 
'  And'  therefore  it  is  written;  "  Hold  fast  that  which  thou 

^  Aquas  namque  populos  significare,  in  Apocalypsi  scriptiira  divina  declarat, 
dicens  :  Aquae,  quas  vidisti,  &c.     Ep.  63.  p.  153.  ^  Ep.  31.  [al. 

26.]  p.  63.  ^  In  evangelic  Dominus  loquitur,  dicens :  Qui  confessus 

me  fuerit  coram  hominibus,  &c.     De  Lapsis.  p.  130. 

8  Praenuntiante  per  apostolum  nobis,  et  praemonente  Spiritu  Sancto  :  In 
novissimis,  inquit,  diebus  aderunt  tempora  molesta.     De  Unit.  Ec.  p.  115. 

''  Paulas  in  epi&tolis  suis  dicit,  quibus  nos  ad  cuiricula  vivendi  per  divina 
magisteria  formavit ;  Non  estis  vestri ;  empti  enim  estis  pretio  magno.  Glori- 
ficate  [al.  Clarificate]  et  portate  Deum  in  corpore  vestro.  De  Habit.  Virg. 
p.  93.  '  Vid.  Mill,  in  loc.  ''  Per  apostolum  praemonet 

Spiritus  Sanctus,  et  dicit :  Oportet  et  haereses  esse.     De  Unit.  Ec.  p.  111. 

'  Et  ideo  scriptum  est :  Tene  quod  habcs,  ne  alius  accipiat  coronam  tuam 
DeUnit.  Ec.  p.  117. 


CvpRiAN  OK  Carthage.  A.  D.  248.  49 

*  hast,  that  another  take  not  thy  crown," '  Rev.  iii.  11. 
One  of  the  bishops  at  the  covincil  of  Carthage,  in  the  year 
256,  says;  '1'"  am  of  opinion  that  blasphemous  and 
'  wicked  heretics,  who  pervert  the  sacred  and  adorable 
'  words  of  the  scriptures,  ought  to  be  accursed.'  Afterwards 
another  bishop,  in  the  same  assembly,  says  ;  '  I"  also,  follow- 
'  ing-  the  authority  of  the  divine  scriptures,  am  of  opinion 

*  that  heretics  are  to  be  baptized.'  Cyprian "  earnestly  ex- 
horts all  in  general,  but  especially  christian  minusters,  in  all 
doubtful  matters  to  have  recourse  to  the  gospels,  and  the 
epistles  of  the  Apostles,  as  to  the  fountain  where  may  be 
found  the  true  original  doctrhie  of  Christ.  He  begins  his 
discourse  on  the  Lord's  prayer  on  this  manner;  '  The?  pre- 
cepts of  the  g-ospel,  my  beloved  brethren,  are  to  be  con- 
sidered as  the  lessons  of  God  to  us ;  as  the  foundations  of 
our  hope,  and  the  supports  of  our  faith;  as  spiritual  conso- 
lations to  us,  showing-  us  the  paths  of  righteousness,  and 
setting  us  forward  in  the  way  of  salvation  :  for,  whilst  with 
teachable  and  willing  minds  we  receive  upon  earth  the  in- 
structions conveyed  to  us,  we  are  led  on  insensibly  to  the 
kingdom  of  *i  heaven.' 

The  respect  for  the  scriptures,  particularly  of  the  New 
Testament,  appears  in  the  public  reading-  of  them  in  the 
church.  Cyprian,  in  two  different  letters,  written  in  his  re- 
tirement, gives  his  people  an  account  of  his  having-  there 
ordained  two  persons,  Aurelius  and  Celerinus,  who  were 
before  confessors,  to  be  readers.  In  the  former  of  those  two 
letters  he  relates  the  many  sufferings  of  Aurelius,  and  gives 
him  a  great  character:  and  then  adds ;  '  That"^  he  had  de- 

"  Haereticos  blasphemes  et  iniquos,  verbis  variis  decerpentes  sancta  et  ado- 
rabilia  scripturarum  verba,  execrandos  censeo.     Num.  31.  p.  23o. 

"  Et  ipse  secutus  divmarum  scripturarum  auctoritatem  baptizandos  haereticos 
esse  censeo,  ibid.  num.  33.  vid.  et  num.   37.  p.  337.  °  Nam  si  ad 

divinae  traditionis  caput  et  originem  revertamur,  cessat  error  humanus. Si 

canalis  aquam  ducens,  qui  copiose  prius  et  largiter  profluebat,  subito  deficiat, 

nonne  ad  fontem  pergitur ?     Quod  et  nunc  facere  oportet  Dei  sacerdotes 

praecepta  divina  servantes,  ut,  si  in  aliquo  nutavent  et  vacillavent  Veritas,  ad 
originem  Dominicam  et  evangelicam,  et  apostolicam  traditionem  revertamur, 
et  inde  surgat  actus  nostri  ratio,  unde  et  ordo  et  origo  surrexerit.  Ep.  74.  p.  215. 

P  Evangelica  praecepta,  fratres  dilectissimi,  nihil  sunt  aliud  quam  magisteria 
divina,  fundamenta  aedificandae  spei,  firmamenta  corroborandae  fidei,  nutri- 
menta  fovendi  cordis,  gubernacula  dirigendi  itineris,  pnesidia  obtinendae  salutis ; 
quae,  dum  dociles  credentium  mentes  in  terris  instruunt,  ad  coelestia  regna  per- 
ducunt.     De  Orat.  Dom.  p.  139.  ''  That  passage  I  have  put  down 

as  translated  by  Mr.  Marshall.  "■  Merebatur  talis  clericae  ordinationis 

uiteriores  gradus  et  incrementa  majora,  non  de  annis  suis,  sed  de  meritis  aesti- 
mandus.  Sed  interim  placuit,  ut  ab  officio  lectionis  incipiat ;  quia  et  nihil 
magis  congruit  voci,  quae  Dominum  gloriosa  praedicatione  cont'essa  est,  quam 
celebrandis  divinis  lectionibus  personare  ;  post  verba  sublimia  quae  Christi 
VOL.    III.  E 


50  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

served,  though  young,  a  higher  degree  iu  the  clergy,  but 
he  thought  it  best  that  he  should  begin  with  the  ofhee  of  a 
reader.  Nothing,'  says  he,  '  can  be  more  fit  than  that  he, 
who  has  made  a  glorious  confession  of  the  Lord,  should 
read  publicly  in  the  church  ;  that  he  who  has  shown  him- 
self willing-  to  die  a  martyr  should  read  the  gospel  of  Christ, 
by  which  martyrs  are  formed  ;  and  that  he  should  be  ad- 
vanced from  the  rack  to  the  desk.'  Of  Celerinus  he  writes 
in  the  following  letter;  '  That^  it  was  very  fit  and  becoming- 
that  he  who  was  already  so  illustiious  in  the  world  should 
be  placed  upon  the  pulpit,  that  is,  the  tribunal  of  the 
church ;  that  being  conspicuous  to  the  people  he  may  read 
the  precepts  and  gospel  of  the  Lord,  which  he  faithfully  and 
courageously  observes  and  maintains :'  and  more  there  to 
the  like  purpose  in  behalf  of  his  fitness,  as  a  confessor,  for 
the  office  to  which  Cyprian  had  ordained  him. 

We  have  not  remaining'  any  sermons  or  homilies  of  our 
author :  but  it  may  be  reckoned  very  likely  that  the  scrip- 
tures, which  were  so  much  read  in  the  church  of  Carthage 
by  a  person  particularly  appointed  to  that  office,  were  also 
explained  there  by  the  bishop,  sometimes  at  least ;  and  that, 
from  the  portions  of  scripture  publicly  read  in  the  assemblies 
of  the  faithful,  he  gave  them  exhortations  to  the  practice  of 
virtue.  And  there  is  a  passage  in  Cyprian's  last  letter  to 
his  clergy  and  people,  which  seems  to  put  this  matter  out 
of  question.  He  is  there  giving-  them  some  directions  for 
their  conduct  in  that  time  of  persecution.  '  As^  for  you, 
my  dearest  brethren,  I  must  charge  you  to  be  quiet  and 
peaceable,  according-  to  the  commandments  of  theLord,which 
I  have  frequently  recomiuended  to  you,  and  upon  which 
you  have  very  often  heard  me  preaching.' 

X.  I  would  now  put  down  some  general  titles  and  divi- 
sions of  the  books  of  the  New  Testament,  which  we  find  in 


martyrium  prolocuta  sunt,  evangelium  Christi  legere,  unde  martyres  fiunt,  ad 
pulpitum  post  catastam  venire  ;  illic  fuisse  conspicuum  gentilium  multitiidini, 
hie  a  fratiibus  conspici:  illic  auditum  esse  cum  miraculo  circumstantis populi, 
hie  cum  gaudio  fratemitafis  audiii.  Hune  igitur,  fratres  dilectissimi,  a  me  et  a 
collegis  qui  praesentes  aderant,  ordinatum  sciatis.  Ep.  38.  [al.  33.]  p.  75. 

'  illustrem,  quid  aliud  quam  super  pulpitum,  id  est,  super  tribunal 

ecclesiae  oportebat  imponi,  ut  loci  altioris  celsitate  subnixus,  et  plebi  univei-saj 
pro  honoris  sui  claritate  eonspieuus,  kgat  praecepta  et  evangelium  Domini,  quae 

fortiter  et  fideliter  sequitur  ? Nihil  est  in  quo  magis  confessor  fratribus  prosit, 

quam  et  dum  evangel ica  lectio  de  ore  ejus  auditur,  lectoris  fidem  quisquis 
audient,  imitetur.  Ep.  39.  [al.  34.]  p.  77.  '  Vos  autem,  fratres 

carissimi,  pro  disciplina,  quam  de  mandatis  Dominicis  a  me  semper  accepistis, 
et  secundum  quod  me  tractante  saepissime  didicistis,  quietem  et  tran quill  itatem 
tenete,  &c.  Ep.  81.  [al.  83.]  p.  239. 


Cyprian  of  Carthage.  A.  D.  248.  51 

this  ancient  writer:  wo  shall  at  the  same  lime  observe  more 
tokens  of  high  esteem  ior  them. 

It  is  fit,  hoM  ever,  that  we  should  lirst  take  notice  of  his 
general  division  ol'all  the  scriptures  received  by  christians, 
which  is"  that  of  Old  and  New.  The  study  of  both  these 
Cyprian  recommends  as  very  beneficial  for  confirming-  our 
virtue  and  increasing  our  knowledge  ;  and  he  calls  them  the 
books  of  the  Spirit,  or  inspired  m  ritings,  the  divine  fountains, 
and  fountains  of  the  divine  fulness.  So  he  writes  in  his 
preface  to  his  first  tMo  books  of  Testimonies. 

The  general  titles  and  divisions  of  the  New  Scriptures  are 
such  as  these:  Cyprian  himself,  delivering  his  sentiment  in 
the  forementioned  council,  says;  '  My^  opinion  is,  that 
heretics,  which  by  the  evangelic  and  apostolic  authority  are 
declared  adversaries  of  Christ,  and  antichrists,  Mhen  they 
come  to  the  church,  are  to  be  baptized  with  the  one  only 
baptism  of  the  church.'  In  another  place"  he  observes  Avhat 
is  written  of  obtaining  remission  of  sins  '  in  the  gospels  and 
the  epistles  of  the  apostles.'  Again;  '  Whence,'  says''  he, 
'  is  that  tradition  ?  Does  it  descend  from  the  authority  of  the 
Lord  and  the  gospels,  or  does  it  come  from  the  command- 
ments and  epistles  of  the  apostles?  For  those  things  ought 
to  be  done  which  are  written,  as  God  taught  Joshua  the  son 
of  Nun  :'  Josh.  i.  8.  And  soon  after;  '  Ify  therefore  it  is 
commanded  in  the  gospel,  or  is  contained  in  epistles  or  Acts, 
that  they  who  come  over  from  any  heresy  should  not  be 
baptized,  but  only  have  imposition  of  hands  in  order  to 
penance,  let  that  sacred  and  divine  tradition  be  observed.' 
From  this  passage  it  may  be  argued,  that  the  book  of  the 
Acts  of  the  Apostles  was  joined  with  the  epistles,  not  with 
the  gospels.     We  see  plainly  that  this  general  division  of 

"  — quce  legenti  tibi  [al.  legentibus]  interim  prosint  ad  prima  fidei  linea- 
menta  formanda.  Plus  roboris  [tibi]  dabitur,  et  magis  ac  magis  intellectus 
cordis  operabitur  scratanti  scripturas  veteres  ac  novas  plenius.etuniverea  librorum 
spiritual  ium  volumina  perlegenti.  Nam  nos  nunc  de  divinis  fontibus  imple- 
vimus  modicum,  quod  ibi  interim  mitteremus.  Bibere  et  saturari  copiosius 
poteris,  si  tu  quoque  ad  eosdem  divinse  plenitudinis  fontes  nobiscum  pariter 
potaturus  accesseris.  p.  18.  "  Haereticos  secundum  evangelicam  et 

apostolicam  contestationem  adversaries  Christi  et  antichristos  appellatos,  quando 
ad  ecclesiam  venerint,  unico  ecclesiae  baptismo  baptizandos  esse.  p.  243. 

*  Quod  enim  in  evangeliis  et  apostolorum  epistolis  Jesu  Cluisti  nonien  in- 
sinuaturad  remissionem  peccatorum,  non  ita  est  quasi  aut  sine  Patre, aut  contra 
Patrem  prodesse  cuipiam  solus  Filius  possit.  Ep.  73.  p.  205. 

"  Unde  est  ista  traditio  ?  utrumne  de  Dominica  et  evangelica  auctoritate 
descendeas,  an  de  apostolorum  mandatis  atque  epistolis  veniens  ?  Ea  enim 
facienda  esse,  quae  scripta  sunt,  Deus  testatur  et  proponit  ad  Jesum  Nave,  dicens, 
&c.     Ep.  74.  p.  21 1.  y  Si  ergo  aut  in  evangelio  praecipitur,  aut  in 

apostolorum  epistolis  aut  Actibus  continetur  ; — observetur  divina  hfec  ct  sancta 
traditio.  ibid. 

E   2 


52  Credihility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

the  books  of  the  NeAV  Testament  very  much  obtained  at  tliut 
time;  they  were  all  contained  in  two  codes,  volumes,  or 
general  divisions ;  one  called  the  gospels  or  scriptures  of  the 
Lord  ;  the  other  the  Apostle,  or  the  epistles  of  the  apostles; 
and  in  this  latter  division  Mas  usually  placed  the  book  of  the 
Acts  of  the  Apostles.  I  shall  put^  in  the  marg-in  a  few  more 
examples  of  those  two  general  titles  from  our  author.  We 
likewise  see  very  clearly  that  in  these  two  codes  were  in- 
cluded all  the  scriptures  of  the  New  Testament,  which 
christians  esteemed  divine,  and  received  as  the  rule  of  faith 
and  practice,  to  which  all  were  bound  to  submit,  and  whose 
sacred  and  supreme  authority  Avas  readily  and  cheerfully 
oAvned  by  all  good  christians. 

Nor  were  there  any  christian  books  of  authority  beside 
the  four  gospels,  the  Acts  and  epistles  of  apostles.  It  does 
hence  clearly  appear  that  no  epistles  or  other  doctrinal 
writings  of  any  person,  who  was  of  a  rank  below  that  of  an 
apostle,  were  received  by  christians  as  a  part  of  their  rule 
of  faith.  There  are  in  Cyprian's  works  very  numerous 
citations  of  the  four  gospels,  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  the 
thirteen  epistles  of  the  apostle  Paul,  (excepting  only  that  to 
Philemon,)  the  first  epistle  of  the  apostle  Peter,  the  first 
epistle  of  the  apostle  John,  and  the  Revelation,  which  it  is 
highly  probable  he  believed  to  be  written  by  John  the 
apostle  :  and  all  these  are  quoted  as  writings  of  authority. 
But  in  all  the  works  of  Cyprian  there  is  not  any  one  such 
citation  of  any  other  christian  book  or  author.  It  is  there- 
fore manifest  that  the  writings  of  scriptures  above-named 
were  of  authority,  and  that  no  writings  of  christians,  nor 
apostles,  were  esteemed  to  be  so,  except  the  historical  writ- 
ings of  Mark  and  Luke.  I  inculcate  this  observation  upon 
my  readers:  I  think  it  is  founded  upon  good  evidence;  and 
1  believe  it  will  appear  to  be  of  signal  use  and  great  im- 
portance. 

XL  Nor  have  I  observed  in  Cyprian  any  quotations  of  spu- 
rious apocryphal  christian  Avritings.  Mr.  Jones^  indeed,  in  his 
Alphabetical  Table  of  Apocryphal  Pieces  not  extant,  mentions 
a  book  under  the  name  of  Paul.  See  Cypr.  Ep.  23.  But 
that  book  is  really  nothing  but  a  note  of  Paul,  a  martyr  of 
Cyprian's  om'u  time,  containing  a  kind  of  absolution  of  some 

"  Scias  nos  ab  evangelicis  et  apostolicis  traditioiiibus  non  recedere.  Ep.  4. 
[al.  62.]  p.  7.  Prtcnuntiata  sunt  haec  futura  in  seculi  fine :  et  Domini  voce, 
atquc  apostolorum  confestatione  praedictum  est:  [Vid.  Luc.  xviii.  8.  2  Tim. 
iii.  1  ]  Ep.  (J7.  [al.  68.]  p.  174.  Nee  episcopMS  computari  potest,  qui  evan- 
gelica  et  apostolica  traditione  coulempta,  ncmini  succedens,  a  seipso  ortus  est. 
Ep.  69.  [al.  76.]  p.  181.  '  Mr.  Jones's  New  and  Full  Method,  &c. 

Vol.  i.  p.  148. 


Cypuian  of  Cauthage.  a.  D.  248.  53 

one  or  more  persons  who  had  lapsed  in  the  Decian  persecu- 
tion, and  forged  by  one  Lucian,  as  appears  Irom''  Cyprian's 
complaints  about  that  matter.  Mr.  Jones  afterwards  per- 
ceived this  mistake,  and  acknowledged  it  somewhere,  as  J 
well  remember,  though  the  place  does  not  noM^  offer  itself 
to  me. 

XII.  Nevertheless,  Cyprian  often  quotes  apocryphal  books 
of  the  Old  Testament ;  such  as  Tobit,  the  book  of  Wisdom, 
Ecclesiasticus,  two  books  of  Maccabees,  and  others,  and  in 
terms  of  high  respect :  for  instance,  quoting  the  book  of 
Wisdom  he*"  says,  "  the  Holy  Spirit  therein  teacheth  us." 
And''  the  book  of  Tobit  is  quoted  by  him  as  divine  scripture  : 
but  yet  I  do  not  think  those  citations  prove  that  Cyprian 
esteemed  these  books  to  be  of  authority.  It  is  not  difficult 
for  the  reader  to  recollect  some  things  to  this  purpose 
already  alleged  from  Greek  Avriters,  and  our  observations 
upon  them:  so  Origen*^  often  quotes  the  Shepherd  of  Her- 
mas  as  an  useful  book,  as  scripture,  and  divinely  inspired ; 
but  yet  he  did  not  suppose  passages  alleged  thence  to  be 
decisive  proofs,  or  evidences  of  any  doctrine.  There  was 
allowed  to  these  writers  some  degree  and  measure  of  inspira- 
tion, but  not  that  fulness  of  the  Spirit,  or  that  high  degree 
of  inspiration,  which  was  afforded  to  the  prophets  of  the  Old 
Testament,  and  the  apostles  of  the  New.  It  seems  very  evident, 
from  the  catalogue  of  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament  left  us 
byf  Melito  bishop  of  Sardis,  about  the  year  170,  that  none 
of  the  books  Ave  now  call  apocryphal  had  a  place  in  it. 
Theo  catalogue  of  the  Jewish  sacred  books  found  in  Origen's 
works  has  a  great  agreement  with  Melito's.  It  appears  from 
what  we  have  observed  from''  Africanus,  and'  Origen,  that 
it  was  generally  w  ell  known  among-  christians  of  the  eastern 
part  of  the  world  at  least,  that  the  scriptures  of  the  Old 
Testament,  or  Jewish  canon,  were  written  in  Hebrew ;  and 
that  the  books  we  now  call  apocryphal  were  not  written  in 
Hebrew,  but  in  Greek  ;  and  that  they  were  not  received  by 

**  Nam  frater  noster  Lucianus,  et  ipse  unus  de  confessoribus,  fide  quideiu 
calidus  et  virtute  robustus,  sed  minus  Dominica  lectione  fundatus,  quaedam 
conatus  est,  imperiti  jampridem  se  vulgi  auctorem  constituens,  ut  manu  ejus 
scripti  libelli  gregatim  multis  nomine  Fauli  darenlur.  Cypr.  Ep.  27.  [al.  23.] 
p.  52.  *=  Per  Solomonem  Spiritus  Sanctus  ostendit  et  praecavit, 

dicens  :  Et  si  coram  hominibus  tonnenta  passi  sunt,  spes  eoriun  immortalitate 
plena  est.  [Sap.  iii.  4.]  Cypr.  De  E.xhort.  Mart.  cap.  12.  p.  182. 

■*  Et  ideo  scriptura  divina  instruit,  dicens  :  Bona  est  oratio  cum  jejunio  et 
eleemosyna.  [Tob.  xii.  9.  9.]     De  Or.  Dom.  p.  153.  «  See  Vol.  ii. 

ch.  38.  num.  xxiii.  f  See  Vol,  ii.  ch.  15.  and  Euseb.  H.  B.  iv.  26. 

8  See  Vol.  ii.  ch.  38.  num.  xxvi.  1.  *>  Vol.  ii.  ch.  37.  num.  v. 

'  Vol.  i.  ch.  38.  num.  xxv. 


54  CredihiUUj  of  the  Gospel  History. 

the  Jews  as  a  part  of  their  sacred  scriptures.  And  that  the 
Latin  christians,  who  lived  in  the  western  part  of  the  Roman 
empire,  had  for  the  most  part  the  like  knowledge  and  senti- 
ments upon  this  point  with  those  in  the  east,  may  be  argued 
fi'oni  Rulinus,  and  Jerom;  not  to  insist  now  upon  any  others. 
Rufinus,  as ''  formerly  cited,  assures  us,  that  there  were  some 
books,  not  reckoned  canonical,  but  called  by  the  ancients 
ecclesiastical :  and  of  this  last  sort  he  says  were  the  books 
called  the  Wisdom  of  Solomon,  Ecclesiasticus,  Tobit,  Judith, 
and  the  3Iaccabees.  He  adds,  that'  these  were  read  in  the 
churches,  but  no  article  of  faith  was  to  be  taken  from  them  : 
and  he  delivers  this  as  the  ancient  belief  of  christians.  Jerom 
writes  to  the  like  purpose.  He  says  that™  the  book  of 
Wisdom,  Ecclesiasticus,  Judith,  Tobit,  and  the  Maccabees, 
are  not  in  the  canon,  but  are  to  be  reputed  apocryphal.  In" 
another  place  he  says  again  expressly,  that  the  church  reads 
Judith,  Tobit,  and  the  Maccabees,  but  does  not  receive  them 
as  canonical  scriptures.  These,  he  adds,  and  the  book  of 
Wisdom,  and  Ecclesiasticus  likeAvise,  may  be  read  for  the 
edification  of  the  people,  but  no  doctrine  of  religion  can  be 
proved  by  their  authority.  So  write  these  two  learned  authors 
of  the  fourth  century.  And  that  Cyprian  was  exactly  of 
the  same  judgment  upon  this  point  may  be  argued  from  a 
passage"  cited  above ;  where,  having  quoted  the  book  of 
Tobit,  he  shows  that  he  did  not  desire  the  text  alleged  thence 
should  be  taken  as  a  decisive  proof  of  what  he  advanceth  ; 
and  adds,  that  he  should  confirm  what  was  said  there  by  the 
testimony  of  truth,  meaning  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles :  which 
is  enough  to  satisfy  us  that  he  really  made  a  distinction,  and 
that  this  distinction  was  well  known,  though  it  is  often  ex- 
pressly mentioned.  Those  books  therefore  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, which  we  call  apocryphal,  were  quoted  by  way  of  illus- 
tration, but  not  as  of  authority,  or  alone  decisive  in  any  point  of 

''  lb.  num.  xxiii.  3.  fin.  '  — quae  omnia  legi  quidem  in  ecclesiis 

voluemnt,  non  tamen  profeiri  ad  auctoritatem  ex  his  fidei  confirmandam. 
Caeteras  vero  scriptuiusapocryphasnominarunt,quas  in  ecclesiis  legi  noluerunt. 
Hsec  nobis  a  palribus,  ut  dixi,  fradifa  opportunum  visum  est  hoc  in  libro  desig- 
nare,  ad  instructionem  eorum  qui  prima  sibi  ecclesiae  ac  fidei  elementa  suscipi- 
unt.     Rufin.  in  Symb.  "'  Hie  prologus  scripturarum,  quasi  galeatum 

principium  omnibus  libris,  quos  de  Hebraeo  xertimus  in  Latinum,  convenire 
potest:  ut  scire  valeamus  quidquid  extra hos  est,  inter  airoKpv^n  esse  ponendum. 
Igitur  Sapientia,  quse  vulgo  Salomonis  inscribitur,  et  Jesu  filii  Syrach  liber, 
Judith,  et  Tobias,  et  Pa'^tor,  non  sunt  in  Canone.  Praef.  Ilieron,  de  omnib. 
libr.  V.  T.  Seu  Praef.  in  lil)r.  Reg.  "  Sicut  ergo  Judith,  et  Tobit, 

et  Maccabseorum  libros  legit  quidem  ecclesia,  sed  inter  canonicas  scripturas 
non  recipit :  sic  et  haec  duo  volumina  legat  ad  eedificationem  plebis,  non  ad 
auctoritatem  ecclesiasticorum  dogmatum  confirmandam.  Ejusd.  Praef.  in 
Libr.  Salom.  ad  Chrom.  et  Ileliod.  °  Sec  p.  22. 


Treatises  joined  with  Cypkian's  Works.     A.  D.  250.         55 

doctrine,  unless  confirmed  by  the  inspiration  of  proj)hets  or 
apostles.  Mr.  Marshall,  in  his  notes  upon  St.  Cyprian,  has 
divers  useful  remarks i'  upon  the  citations  of  the  apocryphal 
scriptures  found  in  our  author. 

XIII.  We  have  now  seen  in  St.  Cyprian  a  large  canon  of 
scripture ;  all  the  books  of  the  New  Testament  commonly 
received  by  christians  at  this  present  time,  except  the  epistle 
to  Philemon,  (which  may  have  been  omitted  for  no  other 
reason  but  that  he  iiad  no  particular  occasion  to  quote  it,) 
and  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  and  the  epistle  of  St.  James, 
and  the  second  epistle  of  St.  Peter,  and  the  epistle  of  St. 
Jude.  There  is  no  particular  citation  of  the  third  epistle  of 
St.  John  ;  but,  considering-  its  shortness,  and  that  the  other 
tM'o  epistles  of  that  apostle  are  expressly  mentioned,  there 
seems  not  to  be  any  good  reason  for  supposing*  it  to  have 
been  rejected  by  this  Avriter,  or  unknown  to  him.  Except- 
ing- these  few,  all  the  other  books  of  the  New  Testament 
have  an  ample  testimony  g-iven  them  in  the  works  of  St.  Cy- 
prian ;  and  they  appear  to  have  been  esteemed  inspired  books, 
and  writings  of  authority,  the  rule  of  faith  and  practice  to 
all  christian  people.  Nor  is  there  in  this  eminent  and  cele- 
brated African  bishop  of  the  third  century  one  quotation  of 
any  christian  spurious,  or  apocryphal  scriptures. 


CHAP.  XLV. 


WRITINGS  ASCRIBED  TO  ST.  CYPRIAN,  OR  JOINED 
WITH  HIS  WORKS. 

I.  Pontius.  II.  An  anonymmis  author  concerning  shows. 
HI.  Anonymous  author  concerning  discipline  and  the  be- 
nefit of  chastit  if.  IV.  Anonymous  author  of  the  praise  of 
martyrdom.  V.  Anonymous  author  against  the  Novatian 
heretic.  VI.  Anonymous  author  concerning  rehaptizing  ; 
or,  of  the  baptism  oj'  heretics.  VH.  Anonymou<i  author 
of  a  computation  oj'  Easter. 

I.  I  HAVE  several  times  quoted  The  Life  of  St.  Cyprian, 
written  by  his  deacon  Pontius,  which  Ls  now  usually  pre- 

P  See  the  title  of  apocryphal  writings,  &c.  in  the  Table  of  matters,  at  the 
end  of  Mr.  Marshall's  St.  Cyprian. 


56  Credibilihj  of  the  Gospel  llistury. 

Hxed  to  the  works  of  that  father.  St.  Jerom^  calls  it  ati 
excellent  performance.  Iligaltius''  M'ill  scarce  allow  that  it 
deserves  to  be  reckoned  a  history,  it  is  so  defective  and  so 
rhetorical ;  it  is  however  useful :  and  if  Pontius  was  not  a 
fine  writer,  he  was  a  good  man.  We  have  no  reason  to 
question  his  being  worthy  of  the  confidence  and  friendship 
with  which  that  eminent  bishop  honoured  him.  He  tri- 
umphed in*"  Cyprian's  glorious  martyrdom,  though  at  the  same 
time  he  was  not  a  little  grieved  that  he  did  not  accompany 
him.  He  is  said  to  have  died  a  martyr  himself ;  but  there 
is  scarce  any  good  authority  for  that  supposition.  St.  Jerom 
says  nothing  of  it ;  nor  has  he  mentioned  any  work  of  his, 
beside  this  one  of  Cyprian's  Life  and  Passion,  as  he  expressly 
calls  it.     This  writer  is  placed  by  Cave  at  the  year  251. 

Trithemius  says  thaf*  Pontius  converted  the  two  Philips, 
emperorsof  Rome,  to  the  faith  of  Christ:  biif  it  isthoughtthat 
he  confounds  our  Pontius,  deacon  of  Cyprian  and  an  African, 
with  another  of  this  name  in  Gaul,  who  is  said  to  have  suf- 
fered martyrdom'  in  the  time  of  Valerian  and  Gallienus;  of 
whom  there  areS  Acts  of  martyrdom  still  extant,  where 
that  story  is  related  :  but''  Pagi  has  shown  that  those  Acts 
are  not  to  be  relied  upon  in  that  matter,  as  being-  the  forgery 
of  a  late  writer.  And  Tillemont'  has  been  at  the  pains  to 
demonstrate  at  large  that  they  are  good  for  nothing-. 

Pontius,  in  his  Life  of  Cyprian,  has  quoted  the  gospels  of 
St.  Matthew,  St.  Luke,  the''  first  chapter  in  particular,  and 
St.  John,  and  several  of  St.  Paul's  epistles,  and  the  book  of 
the  Acts  of  the  Apostles'  expressly  by  that  title.     There  is 

*  Pontius,  diaconus  Cypriani,  usque  ad  diem  passionis  ejus  cum  ipso  exilium 
sustinens,  egregium  volumen  vitae  et  passionis  Cypriani  reliquit.  De  V.  I. 
cap.  68.  '*  Vita  Cypriani,  quae  fertur  ab  ejus  diacono  Pontic 

perscripta,  rhetoricae  dictionis  giatiam  magis  qiiam  narrationis  historicae 
diligentiam  praefert.  Rigalt.  Not.  ad  Cypr.  Ep.  81.  [al.  83.]  ed.  Oxon.  p. 
238.  '^  Inter   gaudium   passionis,  et   remanendi   dolorem, 

in  partes  divisus  animus,  et  angustum  nimis  pectus  afFectus  duplices  onerant. 
Dolebo,  quod  non  comes  fuerim?  Sed  illius  victoria  triumphanda  est.     De 

victoria  Iriumphabo  ?  Sed  doleo,  quod  comes  non  sim  ? Multum,  et  nimis 

multum  de  gloria  ejus  exulto :  plus  tamen  doleo,  quod  remansi.  Pont,  in  fine. 

^  Hie  Pontiles  sua  melliflua  praedicatione  et  industria  duos  Philippos  im- 
peratores  ad  Christum  convertit,  &c.  Trithem.de  Scr.  Ec.  cap.  42.  p.  14.  Ed. 
Fabr.  *  Vid.  Fabric,  ib.  not.  "".  ^  Vid.  Baron.  Ann. 

246.  n.  9.  Tillem.  Persecution  de  Teglise  sous  1'  empereur  Valerien.  Art.  7. 
Mem.  Ec.  T.  iv.  P.  i.  p.  26,  27.  Acta  S.  S.  per  Bolland.  &c.  ad  diem.  14 
Maii.  Ruinart.  Act.  Mart.  p.  215.  not.  62.  *>'  Ap.  Baluz.  Miscell.  1, 

li.  p.  124.  &c.  h  Pagi  Crit.  in  Bar.  244.  n.  6. 

'  Not.  7.  sur  la  persecution  de  Valerien.  p.  337—340.  M.  E.  T.  iv.  P.  i. 

''  Sane  et  in  scripturis  tale  aliquid  invenio.  Nam  Zacharias  sacerdos,  pro- 
misRO  sibi  per  angelum  filio,  quia  non  crediderat,  obmutuit :  [Luc.  i.  20,  et  64.] 
Pont.  p.  8.  '  Sed  etsi  in  apostolorum  Actis  eunuchus  ille  describitur, 


Trealises  joined  with  Cyprian's  Wurks.     A.  D.  250.         57 

no  necessity  to  be  n\ore  particular  here,  since  it  may  be  relied 
upon,  and  taken  lor  granted,  that  this  deacon's  canon  was 
the  same  with  his  bishop's. 

11.  There  are  several  treatises,  which  sometimes  have  been 
ascribed  to  St.  Cyprian,  but  are  now  generally  allowed  by 
learned  men  not  to  be  his.  1  shall  here  speak  of  four  of 
them  :  Of  shows  ;  Of  discipline  and  the  benelit  of  chastity  ; 
Of  the  praise  of  martyrdom  ;  Against  the  heretic  Novatian, 
or,  Against  the  Novatian  heretic.  Of  the  first  two,  and  the 
last,  l3u  Pin'"  says,  they  are  ancient  and  useful;  that  they 
appear  to  have  been  all  three  written  by  one  and  the  same 
person,  and  that  they  might  be  reckoned  pieces  of  St.  Cy- 
prian, if  it  were  not  tor  the  difterence  of  style ;  and  that  they 
are  not  ascribed  to  him  in  the  manuscripts,  but  only  in  the 
printed  editions.  As  I  do  not  see  any  plain  marks  of  these 
three  pieces  having*  one  and  the  same  author,  I  shall  give  a 
distinct  account  of  all  the  four  treatises  just  mentioned,  ac- 
cording to  the  order  they  are  placed  in  above,  which  is  the 
same  they  have  in  the  appendix  of  St.  Cyprian's  genuine 
works  in  the  Oxford  edition.  Afterwards  1  shall  make  some 
extracts  out  of  the  book  of  an  anonymous  author.  Concern- 
ing the  rebaptizing-  of  heretics :  and  lastly,  out  of  a  small 
piece,  entitled,  a  Computation  of  Easter  ;  all  these  being 
now  usually  joined  in  the  volume  of  St.  Cyprian's  works. 

I.  1  begin"  with  the  piece.  Of  shows,  which  is  called  an 
epistle  of  an  unknown  author.  It  seems  to  have  been  writ- 
ten by  a  bishop,  then"  unwillingly  separated  from  his  people, 
and  who  had  not  frequent  opportunities  of  writing-  to  them. 
TillemontP  says  that,  whoever  Avas  the  author,  it  is  an  excel- 
lent work:  thafi  it  Avas  written  in  the  times  of  heathenism, 
Mhen"^  exoreisms  were  frequent  in  the  church,  and''  whilst  it 
was  yet  the  custom  to  carry  the  eucharist  home.  That  it 
was  written  in  the  time  of  heathenism,  I  think  apparent  from 
divers  passages.     This  book  is  much  commended  by  the* 

quia  f  oto  corde  crediderat,  a  Philippo  statini  tinctus ;  non  est  similis  compara- 
tio.     Ibid.  p.  2.  "^  S.  Cyprien.  Bibl.  des  Aut,  Ecc.  T.  i.  p.  172. 

"  De  Spectaculis.     Epistola  ignoti  auctoris.  "  Ut  me  salis  con- 

fristat,  et  animum  meum  graviter  affligit,  cum  nulla  milii  scribendi  ad  vos 
porrigitur  occasio,  (detrimentum  enim  est  meum  vobiscum  non  colloqui,) 
ita  nihil  mihi  tantam  Isetitiam  hilaritatemque  restituit,  quam  cum  adest  iiirsus 
occasio.  p.  2.  Ed.  Ox.  p  Mem.  Ec.  T.  iv.  St.  Cyprien.  art.  22.    See 

also  note  xxviii.  ^  Quod  enim  spectaculum  sine  idolo  ?  quis  ludus 

sine  sacrificio  ?  quod  certamen  non  consecratum  mortuo  ?  p.  3.  a.  vid.  quae 
sequuntur.  /  Impudenter  in  ecclesia  daemonia  exorcizat,  quorum 

voluptates  in  spectaculis  laudat.  p.  3.  a.  *  Qui  festinans  ad  spectaculum, 

dimissus,  et  adhuc  gerens  secum,  ut  assolet,  eucharistiam  inter  corpora  obscoena 
meretricium  tulit.  p.  3.  b.  m.  *  Vit.  S.  Cypr.  sect,  xxxv. 


58  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

Benedictine,  who  writes  the  life  of  St.  Cyprian  ;  but  yet  he 
does  not  allow  it  to  be  his  :  for  though  it  has  in  it  those  marks 
of  antiquity  whicli  have  been  observed  by  Tillemont,  and 
though  among-  the  works  ascribed  to  Cyprian,  none  resemble 
his  style  more  than  this,  there  is  no  notice  at  all  taken  of  it  by 
Pontius,  and  there  is  in  it  a  difference  of  style,  which  may 
be  perceived  by  all  who  are  well  acquainted  with  Cyprian's 
works. 

2.  In  this  book  there  are  few  texts  of  scripture  quoted  ; 
which  is  different  from  Cyprian's  ordinary  method,  whose 
works  abound  with  them.  However,  the  author  informs  us 
that "  some  at  that  time  endeavoured  to  defend  their  practice 
of  frequenting  the  theatre,  by  the  apostle's  allusions  to  the 
heathen  games,  refen'ing  particidarly  -to  1  Cor.  ix.  25.  and 
Eph.  vi.  12:  he  is  likewise  supposed  to  refer  to^  Matt, 
xxvii.  52.  He  calls  the  scriptures  of  the  New  Testament"' 
sacred  writings,  and''  divine  scriptures,  and>  heavenly 
scriptures.  He  also  shows  his  respect  for  these  books,  by  his 
indignation  against  those  who  ^  pretended  to  justify  their 
frequenting  the  public  shows  by  the  authority  of  the  hea- 
venly scriptures.  And  at  the  end  of  his  book,  or  letter,  he 
recommends  to  christians,  instead  of  attending  the  theatre, 
the  study  of  the  scriptures,  after  this  manner  ;  '  1°  say  then, 
that  a  good  christian  ought  to  employ  himself  in  diligent 
reading  the  sacred  scriptures ;  there  he  will  find  more 
worthy  objects  for  the  entertainment  of  his  faith  and  hope.' 

3.  So  far  of  this  book,  which,  though  short,  ought  not  to 
be  reckoned  unprofitable  to  us ;  and  1  hope  it  appears  to 
deserve  the  account  I  have  here  given  of  it. 

"  Apostolus  quoque  diinicans  caestuset  dimicationis  nostrae  ad  versus  spiriuialia 
nequitiae  proponit  certamen.  Rursus  de  stadiis  sumit  exempla,  coronae  quoque 
collocat  praemia.  Cur  ergo  homini  Christiano  fideli  non  liceat  spectare  quod 
licuit  divinis  Uteris  scribere  ?  p.  2.  b.  in.  "  Considerabit  etiam  de 

sepulchris  admirabiles  ipsorum  consummatorum  jam  vitas  corporum  redactas  : 
[consumtonim  jam  ad  vitam  corporum  (animas)  reductas.  Baluz.  p.  343.] 
p.  4.  b.  fin.  *  Praescnbat  igitur  istis  pudor,  etiamsi  non  possunt 

sanctae  literae.  p.  2.  b.  f.  "  Vid.  supra  ". 

J  See  the  next  note.  ^ tamen,  quoniara  non  desunt  vitiorum 

assertores  blandi  et  indulgentes  patroni,  qui  praestant  vitiis  auctoritatem,  et, 
quod  est  deterius,  censuram  scripturarum  ccelestium  in  advocationem  criminum 
conveilunt, — Non  pudet,  non  pudet,  inquam,  fideles  homines  et  Christiani 
sibi  nominis  auctoritatem  vindicantes,  superstitiones  vanas  gentihum  cum  spec- 
tacuUs  mixtas  de  scripturisccelestibus  vindicare,  etdivinam  auctoritatem  idolo- 

latriae  conferre. Hoc  in  loco  non  immerito  dixerim,  longe  melius  fuisse 

istis  nullas  literas  nosse,  quam  sic  literas  legere.  p.  2.  a.  b.  ed.  Ox.  Conf.  ed 
Btiluz.  p.  339.  ^  Scripturis,  inquam,  sacris  incumbat  Christianus 

fidelis,  et  ibi  inveniet  condigna  fidei  spectacula. Quam  hoc  decoram  spec- 

taculum,  fratres,  quam  jucundum,  quam  necessarium !  intueri  semper  spem 
siiam,  et  oculos  aperire  ad  salutem  suam.  p.  4.  b.  fin. 


Treatises  joined  with  Cvprian's  Works.     A.  D.  250.         59 

III.  The  second  piece  ascribed  by  some  to  Cyprian  is 
entitled,  Of'  discipline  and  the  benefit  of  chastity  :  In  the 
Oxford  and  Benedictine  editions  it  is  called  an  epistle  of  an 
unknown  author  :  the  time  of  it  too  is  uncertain  :  it  is  evident 
from  the  beg-inuing-  of  it  that  it  was  written  by  a  bishop  :  I 
shall  transcribe*^  the  Mords  by  and  by.  The  learned  Bene- 
dictine before  mentioned  says  this*^  piece  is  very  ancient,  and 
not  unworthy  of  Cyprian  himself;  but  the  difference  of  style, 
and  silence  of  Pontius  about  it,  are  good  reasons  why  it 
ought  not  to  be  reckoned  the  work  of  that  father.  Whoever 
was  the  author,  he  has  cited  the  words  of  divers  books  of 
the  New  Testament. 

1.  '  This,' says''  he,  '  our  Lord  taught,  Avhen  he  said,  that 
a  M  ife  ought  not  to  be  divorced,  "  saving  for  the  cause  of 
adultery  :"  '  Matth.  v.  32. 

2.  '  Hence  he  [the  apostle]  says^  also,  that  "  the  members 
of  Christ  ought  not  to  be  joined  to  the  members  of  an  har- 
lot"— hence  deservedly  adulterers  do  not  "  inherit  the 
kingdom  of  God  :"  '  1  Cor.  vi.  15,  and  9. 

3.  '  The"  apostle  declares  the  church  to  be  the  "  spouse 
of  Christ:"  '  See  2  Cor.  xi.  2. 

4.  '  Hence^  also  the  apostle  has  observed  that  "  that  man 
is  the  head  of  the  woman,"  [1  Cor.  xi.  3 ;  Eph.  v.  23.] 
Nevertheless  he  adds ;  "  lie  that  loveth  his  wife,  loveth 
himself.  For  no  man  hateth  his  own  flesh,  but  nourisheth 
and  cherisheth  it,  even  as  Christ  the  church."  '  Eph.  v. 
28,29. 

5.  '  Hence'  the  apostle  says;  "  This  is  the  will  of  God, 
that  ye  should  abstain  from  fornication."  '  1  Thess.  iv.  3. 

6.  The  respect  which  this  bishop  had  for  the  writings  of 
the  New  Testament  appears  at  the  beginning  of  this  tract, 
or  epistle,  sent  to  his  people.     '  I  reckon,'  says"^  he,  '  that  I 

•"  De  Disciplina  et  bono  Pudicitice.  *^  See  belov/^  num.  vi. 

^  Ubi  supr.  sect.  35.  *  Hanc  sententiam  Christus,  quando  uxorem 

dimitti  non  nisi  ob  adulteriimi  dixit,  p.  6.  a.  ^  Hinc  et  illud  dieit : 

Membra  Christi  membris  meretricis  non  esse  jungenda — Hinc  merito  regnuni 
coelorum  non  tenet  adulteri.  p.  6.  a.  ^  Nam  si  apostolus  ecclesiam 

sponsam   Christi   pronunciat.  p.   5.    a.  ^  Inde  et  apostolus  caput 

mulieris  pronuntiavit  virum — Addit  tamen  et  dicit :  Quoniam  qui  uxorem 
suam  diligit  seipsum  diligit.  Nemo  enim  carnem  suam  odio  habet,  sed  nutrit 
et  fovet  eam,  sicut  et  ChfLslus  ecclesiam.  p.  6.  a.  '  Hinc  apostolus 

dicit:  Haec  est  voluntas  Dei,  ut  abstineatis  vos  a  fomicatione.  p.  6.  a, 

''  Aliquas  officionim  meorum  partes  non  sestimo  praeterisse,  dum  semper 
enitor,  vel  maxime  quotidianis  evangeliorum  tractatibus,  aliquando  vobis  fidei 
et  scientiae  per  Dominum  incrementa  prsestare.  Quid  enim  aliud  in  ecclesia 
Domini  utiLus  geri,  quid  accommodatius  officio  episcopi  potest  inveniri,  quara 
ut  doctrina  divinomm,  per  ipsum  insinuata  collataque,  verborum,  possint  cre- 
dentes  ad  repromissum  regnum  pervenire  coelorum  ?  Hoc  certe  mei  et  operis  et 


60  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

do  not  neglect  to  discharge  some  part  of  my  office,  whilst  I 
endeavour,  especially  by  daily  tracts  upon  the  gospels,  to 
make  some  improv  ements  and  increases  of  your  faith  and 
knowledge  of  the  Lord :  for  what  more  viseful  service  is 
there  in  the  church  of  the  Lord  ?  What  is  there  more  becom- 
ing the  office  of  a  bishop  than,  by  instructions  from  the  divine 
words  of  the  Lord  himself,  to  lead  the  faithful  to  the  enjoy- 
ment of  the  promised  kingdom  of  heaven  ?  This  is  my  con- 
stant and  daily  labour  and  desire,  though  absent  from  you  : 
and  after  my  accustomed  manner  I  endeavour  to  be  present 
with  you  by  the  discourses  I  send  you,  that,  being  built  on 
the  firm  foundation  of  the  gospel,  ye  may  always  "  stand 
armed  against  all  the  wiles  of  the  devil:"'  Eph.  vi.  11. 
And  presently  afterwards ;  '  For  this  purpose  we  not  only 
allege  words  from  the  sacred  fountains  of  the  scriptures,  but 
with  the  words  themselves  we  join  our  prayers  to  the  Lord, 
that  he  will  open  both  to  us  and  you  the  treasures  of  his 
mysteries,  and  enable  us  to  act  according  to  our  knowledge : 
for  great  will  be  his  misery,  "  who  knew  the  Lord's  will,  and 
neglected  to  do  it :"  '  Luke  xii.  47. 

7.  He  concludes  with  recommending-  the  study  of  the 
scriptures;  '  I'  have  said  a  few  things  only,  because  it  is 
not  my  design  to  write  a  volume,  but  to  send  you  a  discourse 
[or  homily].  Do  you  look  into  the  scriptures,  and  improve 
yourselves  by  the  precepts  there  delivered,  relating'  to  the 
virtue  I  have  been  recommending-  to  you.  My  dearest 
brethren,  farewell.'  ; 

8.  1  think  we  may  consider  this  as  an  example  of  the 
homilies  of  the  time  in  which  this  bishop  lived  :  but  it  would 
be  an  additional  pleasure  to  know  more  exactly  the  time 
itself,  and  the  place  of  his  ordinary  residence. 

IV.  The  third  piece,  sometunes  ascribed  to  St.  Cyprian, 
but  now  generally""  discarded  by  learned  men  as  unworthy 
of  that  great  name,  is  entitled.  Of"  the  praise  of  martyrdom. 

muneris,  quotidianum  votivum  negotium,  absens  licet,  obtinere  connitor,  et  per 
literas  praesentiam  meam  vobis  reddere  conor.  Dum  vos  solito  more  allocu- 
tionibits  missis  in  fide  interpello,  ideo  conveuio,  ut  evangelicse  radicis  firmilate 
Eolidati,  adversus  omnia  diaboli  proelia  stetis  semper  armati. — Non  solum  pro- 
ferimas  verba,  quae  de  scriptumrum  sacris  fontibus  veniunt,  sed  et  cum  ipsis 
verbis  preces  ad  Dominum  et  vota  sociamus,  ut  tarn  nobis  quam  vobis  et  sacra- 
mentorum  suorum  thesauros  aperiat,  et  vires  ad  implenda,  quae  cognoscimus 
tnbuat.  Periculum  enim  majus  est  voluntatem  Domini  cognovisfe,  et  in  Dei 
voluntatis  opere  cessasse.  p.  5.  a.  '  Ego  pauca  dictavi,  quoniam 

non  est  propositum  volumen  scribere,  sed  allocutionem  transmittere.  Vos 
scripturas  aspicite,  exempla  vobis  de  ipsis  prseceptis  hujus  rei  majora  conqui- 
rite.     Fratres  carissimi,  bene  valete.  p.  8.  b.  '"  Vid.  I'agi  Crit.  in 

Baron.  251.  n.  xv.  Basnag.  Ann.  258.  n.  xv.  "  Liber  De  Laud© 

Martyrii. 


Treatises  joined  ayith  Cyprian's  Works.     A.  D.  255.         Gl 

Bishop  Fell  thinks  this  to  be*"  only  a  declamation  written  by 
some  one  for  the  exercise  of  his  style.  Basnngei'  and')  Du 
Pin  speak  of  it  in  the  like  manner.  But'  the  learned  Bene- 
dictine has  a  more  favourable  opinion  of  it,  though  he  does 
not  take  it  to  be  a  genuine  Mork  of  St.  Cyprian.  It  appears 
to  me  an  oration  in  form,  and  there  is  a  good  deal  of  alfectatiou 
in  the  style.  It  is  allowed  to  be  ancient,  but  the  exact  time 
of  it  is  not  easily  determined.  Considering-  the  character  of 
this  book,  a  short  account  of  it  will  be  sufficient. 

1.  There  are  here  cited  passages  of  divers  books  of  the 
New  Testament,  particularly  of  the  four  gospels  f  of 
MatthcAv,*  Mark,"  Luke,  and^  John. 

2.  He  has  in  like  manner  quoted  or  referred  to  the  following" 
epistles  of  Paul  ;  to  the  epistle  to  the  Romans,  the  first  to  the 
Corinthians,  the  epistles  to  the  Galatians,  the  Philippians, 
the  Colossians,  and  second  to  Timothy. 

3.  He  quotes  1  Cor.  ix.  24,  after  this  manner ;  '  It  is^" 
the  voice  of  the  most  blessed  Paul,  saying- ;  "  Know  ye  not 
that  they  which  run  in  a  race  strive  many,  but  one  receiveth 
the  prize  ?  But  do  you  so  run  that  all  may  obtain."  ' 

4.  I  shall  put  down  a  passag-e  of  this  Latin  writer,  which 
may  be  thought  to  contain  a  reference  to  Heb.  xi.  but  I  do 
not  think  it  to  be  clear :  however,  it  deserves  to  be  taken 
notice  of  for  the  sake  of  the  sense  as  well  as  for  the  seeming- 
reference.  '  If,'  says''  he,  '  you  area  g-ood  man,  and  believe 
in  God,  why  are  you  unwilling-  to  lay  down  your  life  for 
him,  who  you  know  has  so  often  suffered  for  you  ;  who  has 
been  sawn  asunder  in  Isaiah,  killed  in  Abel,  offered  up  in 
Isaac,  sold  in  Joseph,  crucified  in  the  flesh?  I  omit  other 
;  hings,  which  words  cannot  express,  nor  the  mind  conceive.' 

"  Exercendi  styli  gratia  haec  videntur  scripta,  cum  plenos  Iheatri  cuneos,  et 
populi  strepitum  sibi  reprsesentet  orator.     Not.  p.  8.  ed.  Oxon. 

p  Basn.  ut  supra.  i  Nouv.  Bibl.  St,  Cyprien. 

■■  Vit.  St.  Cyprian,  n.  xxxv.  ^  Legis,  scriptum  esse,  usque  ad 

qu  idrantem  nos  ultimum  reddere.  [Matt.  v.  2G.]  p.  1 1 .  b. 

'  Quaeso  repetas  verba  ccelestia  ;  nam  et  vox  dicentis  est  Christ  i:  Qui  per- 
diderit  animam  suam  pro  nomine  meo,  recipict  in  hoc  seculo  centuplum,  et  in 
futuro  vitam  aeternam  possidebit.  [Marc.  x.  30.]  p.  12.  b. 

"  Sicut  scriptum  est :  Qui  me  confessus  fuerit  in  terris  coram  hominibus,  et 
ego  confitebor  eum  coram  patre  meo,  et  coram  angeli?  suis.  [Luc.  xii.  8.]  p. 
11.  a.  "  Sed  quoniam  ita  Dominus  suo  ore  testatus  est,  esse  habi- 

tacula  penes  patrem  multa.  [Johan.  xiv.  2.]  p.  14.  b. 

"  Vox  est  beatissimi  Pauli,  dicentis:  Nescitis,  quoniam  qui  in  agone 
currant,  multi  certant,  unus  autem  accipit  palmam  ?  Vos  autem  sic  currite, 
ut  omnes  coronemini,  [comprehendatis,  13aluz.]  p.  15.  a- 

*  Si  Justus  es,  et  Deo  credis,  quid  pro  eo  sanguinem  fundere  raetuis,  quem 
pro  te  toiies  passum  esse  cognoscis  ?  In  Esaia  sectus,  in  Abel  occisus,  in  Isaac 
immolatus,  in  Joseph  venumdatus,  in  homine  crucifLxus  est;  et  de  cseteris  qui- 
dem  taceo,  qucE  nee  oratio  potest  dicere,  nee  animus  sustinerd.  p.  15.  a. 


62  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

5.  Finally,  perhaps  he  refers  to  some  passages  of  the 
Revelation  in  some  words  which  I  intend  >  to  put  in  the 
margin  us  an  example  of  this  author's  oratorical  flights.  See 
Rev.  xiii.  8;  vi.  11  ;  vii.  13,  14. 

V.  The  fourth  piece,  ascribed  by  some  to  Cyprian,  is 
entitled.  To,  or^  Against,  the  heretic  Novatian  ;  or.  Against 
the  Novatian  heretic  ;  That  hope  of  pardon  ought  not  to  be 
denied  to  those  who  have  lapsed.  In  the  late  editions  it  is 
called  a  tract  of  an  unknown  author.  Du  Pin  calls  it  a 
homily.  Tillemont,'^  who  allows  that  the  style  of  this 
work  is  difterent  from  Cyprian's,  and  that  therefore  it  is  not 
his,  thinks  however  that  it  might  be  written  soon  after  the 
persecution  of  Decius,  and  then  of  Gallus,  in  the  former  part 
of  the  reign  of  Valerian,  about  the  year  254,  or  255.  He 
refers  to**  two  passages  of  this  work,  which  compared  toge- 
ther seem  to  render  his  opinion  very  probable.  The*^  Bene- 
dictine author  of  St.  Cyprian's  Life,  agrees  with  Tillemont 
about  the  age  of  this  piece.  He  says,  it  is  certain  the  author 
was  contemporary  with  Cyprian,  and  that  it  cannot  be  ques- 
tioned but  he  lived  near  the  beginning  of  the  reign  of  Va- 
lerian, whilst  the  church  had  peace.  He  supposes  him 
likewise  to  have  been  an  African,  and  a  bishop.  Nevertheless, 
he  does  not  allow  this  to  be  a  Avork  of  Cyprian.  And  to  the 
argument  taken  fronj  the  difference  of  the  style  he  adds 
another,  not  insisted  on  by  Tillemont. 

1.  This  piece  abounds  with  texts  of  scripture. 

2.  '  Whose "^  future  ruin,'  says  he,  '  the  Lord  represents 
in  the  gospel,  saying ;  "  And  he  who  hears  my  words,  and 
does  them  not,  I  will  liken  him  imto  a  foolish  man,  who 
built  his  house  upon  the  sand."  ' — Matth.  vii.  26,27.     This 

y  O  beati,  et  quibus  vere  dimissasunt  peccata  ;  si  taraen  qui  Christi  compares 
estis,  aliquando  peccastis.  O  beati,  quos  a  primordio  mundi  Domini  sanguis 
infecit,  et  quos  merito  splendor  iste  nivei  amictus  induerit,  et  candor  stola? 
ambientis  ornarit!  p.  15.  b.  ^  Ad  Novatianum  haereficum  :  Quod 

lapsis  spes  venioe  non  est  deneganda.  *  See  Mem.  Ec.  T.  iv.  Part  i. 

St.  Cyprien.  Art.  41.  ^  Cataclysmus  ergo  ille,  qui  sub  Noe  factus 

est,  figairam  persecutionis  quae  per  tofum  orbem  nunc  nuper  supereftusa  os- 

tendit. Duplex  ergo  ilia  emissio  [columbae]  duplicem  nobis  persecutionis 

tentationem  ostendit ;  prima  in  qua  qui  lapsi  sunt,  vicfi  ceciderunt :  secunda 
in  qua  hi  qui  ceciderunt,  victores  extiterunt.  Nulli  enim  nostrum  dubiura  vel 
incertum  est,  fratresdilectissimi,  illos,  qui  prima acie,  id  est,  Deciana  persecutione, 
vulnerati  fuerunt,  hoc  postea,  id  est,  secundo  praelio,  ita  fortiter  perseverasse,  ut, 
( ontemnentes  edicta  secularium  principum,  [Galli  et  Volusiani,]  hoc  inv  ctum 
haberent:  quod  non  metuemnt,  exemploboni  pastorisanimam  suam  tradere,et 
! anguinem  fundere,  nee  ullam  insanientis  tyranni  srevitiam  recusare.  p.  17.  b. 

I  Vit.  St.  Cyprian,  n.  xxxv.  ^  Quorum  Dorainus  ruinam  in 

evangelio  futuram  his  verbis  sJgnificaverat,  dicens :  Qui  audit  verba  mea,  et  non 
facit  ea,  &c.  p.  1 7.  b. 


TreulUes  joined  with  Cyprian's  Works.     A.  D.  255.         G3 

gospel  is  quoted  liere  in  a  like  manner  several  times.  I 
have  not  observed  any  thing- taken  from  St.  Mark. 

3.  '  Which''  power  the  Lord  gave  to  his  disciples,  as  he 
says  in  the  gospel ;  "  Behold,  I  give  unto  you  power  to 
tread  on  all  the  power  of  the  enemy,  and  upon  serpents 
and  scorpions,  anil  they  shall  not  hurt  you  :"  '  Luke  x.  19. 
In  this  piece  are  many  texts  taken  out  of  this  gospel. 

4.  '  AV'hom'  the  Lord  Christ  reckons  thieves  and  robbers, 
as  he  himself  declares  in  the  gospel,  saying;  "He  that 
entereth  not  by  the  door  into  the  sheepfold,  but  gets  down 
some  other  way,  the  same  is  a  thief  and  a  robber ;"  '  John 
X.  1. 

5.  In  this  piece  are  also  passages  of  divers  epistles  of  St. 
Paul,  particularly  the  epistle  to  the  Romans,  first  to  the 
Corinthians,  the  epistles  to  the  Galatians,  Ephesians,  and 
Philippians;  Avhich  passages  are  cited  expressly  as  the 
apostle's,  meaning  Paul,  though  the  churches  to  whom  those 
epistles  were  sent  are  not  named. 

6.  '  Thes  scripture  saying ;  "  Vengeance  belongeth  to 
me :  I  will  repay,  saith  the  Lord."  '  In  the  margin  of  the 
Oxford  edition  here  is  a  reference  put  to  Heb.  x.  30.  But 
the  quotation  might  betaken  from  Deut.  xxxii.  35,  or  Rom. 
xii.  19 ;  and  very  probably  Avas  taken  from  one  or  other  of 
those  places. 

7.  '  Have  you ''  not  read,  that  "  The  Lord  resisteth  the 
proud,  but  giveth  grace  to  the  humble."  '  Here  too  are 
placed  in  the  same  edition  James  iv.  6,  and  1  Pet.  v.  5.  But 
the  same  thing  is  said  also,  Prov.  iii.  34.  However,  if  the 
writer  intended  any  text  of  the  New  Testament,  he  may  be 
supposed  rather  to  refer  to  the  first  epistle  of  Peter,  which 
was  more  universally  received  than  that  of  James,  whose 
authority,  it  is  certain,  was  not  then  fully  established.  Be- 
sides, as'  St.  Augustine  observes,  there  is  scarce  a  page  of 
the  holy  scriptures  which  does  not  teach  iis  that  "  God 
resisteth  the  proud,  and  giveth  grace  to  the  humble."  There 
was  no  occasion  therefore  for  that  reference  to  the  epistle  of 
James.  However,  Me  have  no  good  ground  to  say  that  this 
author  rejected,  or  did  not  receive  this  epistle;  for  he  may 

*  Quam  potestatem  tmdidit  Dominus  discipulis  suis,  sicut  in  evangelic  ait : 
— p.  17.  b.  '  Quos  Dominus  Cbristus  fures  et  latrones  designat, 

sicut  ipse  in  evangelic  declarat,  dicens: — p.    16.  b.  «  Dicente 

scriptura  :  Mihi  vindictam,  et  egc  retribuam,  dicit  Dominus.  p.  18.  a. 

''  Non  legisti :  Quia  Dominus  superbis  resistit,  humilibus  autem  dat  gratiam  > 
p.  19.  b.  '  — ut  apostolica  ilia  sententia  ubique  tremenda  sit,  quae 

ait,  Quapropter  qui  videtur  stare,  videat  ne  cadat.  Nulla  enini  fere  pagina  est 
sanctorum  librorum,  in  qua  non  sonet,  quod  Deus  superbis  resistit,  humilibus 
autem  dat  gratiam.  Aug.  de  Doclr.  Chr.  lib.  iii.  cap.  23. 


64  Credibililij  of  the  Gospel  History. 

have  owned  it,  though  he  has  not  quoted  it  in  this  work  of 
his. 

8.  '  Have''  you  not  read  ;  "  He  that  hateth  his  brother  is 
in  darkness,  and  walketh  in  darkness,  and  knoweth  not 
whither  he  goeth,  because  that  darkness  has  blinded  his 
eyes?"  '  1  John  ii.  11.  In  another  place,  '  Whom'  John 
calls  "  antichrists ;" '  referring-  probably  to  1  John  ii.  18,  or 
2  John  7. 

9.  '  As™  it  is  written  ;  "  Behold  he  cometh  with  ten 
thousands  of  his  angels,  to  execute  judgment  upon  all,  and 
to  destroy  all  ungodly  men,  and  to  convince  all  flesh  of  all 
the  deeds  of  the  ungodly,  which  they  have  ungodly  com- 
mitted, and  of  all  the  ungodly  words  which  sinners  have 
spoken  of  God  :"  '  Jude  14,  15. 

10.  The  book  of  the  Revelation  is  much  quoted  in  this 
treatise.  '  But"  John  speaks  more  plainly  [than  Daniel 
before  quotedj  both  of  the  day  of  jndgment,  and  of  the  end 
of  the  world,  saying ;  '-  And  when  he  had  opened,"  says  he, 
"  the  sixth  seal,  behold  there  was  a  great  earthquake ;" — 
Rev.  vi.  12  —  17.  Likewise  in  the  same  Revelation  John 
says,  this  also  was  revealed  unto  him ;  "  I  saw,"  says  he, 
"  a  great  throne — "  '  xx.  11, 12.  Thus  he  has  twice  ascribed 
this  book  to  John.  He  has  twice  more  cited  it  by  the  name 
of  Apocalypse  or  Revelation.  In  the  first  of  those  places 
thus ;  '  Hear"  in  the  Revelation  the  voice  of  the  Lord  justly 
reproving  thee,  ch.  iii.  17.  "  Thou  say  est,"  says  he,  "  I  am 
rich,  and  increased  with  goods,  and  have  need  of  nothing  ; 
and  knowest  not  that  thou  art  wretched,  and  miserable,  and 
blind,  and  poor,  and  naked." '  The  other  passage  is  Rev. 
xvii.  15.  In  two  other  places  of  this  treatise  it  is  quoted 
after  this  manner;  "  AndP  since  it  is  written,  that  the  dogs 
shall  remain  Avithout :"  xxii.  15.  Lastly,  '  the'i  scripture 
proclaiming,  and  saying ;  "  Remember  from  whence  thou 

''  Non  legist!:  Quia  qui  odit  fratrem,  in  tenebrisest?  &c.  p.  19.  b. 

'  Quos  Joannes  antichristos  appellat.  p.  16.  b.  '"  Sicut  scriptum 

est :  Ecce  venit  cum  multis  millibus  nuntiorum  suorum,  facere  judicium  de 
omnibus,  et  perdere  omnes  impios,  et  argueie  omnem  carnem  de  omnibus 
factis  impiorum  quae  fecemnt  impie,  et  de  omnibus  verbis  impiis,  quae  de  Deo 
locuti  sunt  peccatores.  p.  20.  b. 

"  Joannes  autem  et  de  die  judicii  et  consummatione  mundi  declarat,  dicens : 

Et  cum  aperuisset,  inquit,  sigillum  sextum Item  in  eadem  Apocalypsi  hoc 

quoque  Joannes  dicit  sibi  revelatum:  Vidi,  inquit,  throniim  magnum,  et  can- 
didum  sedenfem  super  eum,  &c.  p.  21.  a.  b.  °  Audi  m  Apocalypsi 

Dominicam  vocem  justis  te  objurgationibus  increpantem. p.  IG.  a.     Sicut 

Apocalypsis  docet,  dicens:  Aquae,  quas  vidisti,  populi  sunt.  [cap.  xvii.  15.]  p. 
17.  b.  P  Et  cum  scriptum  sit,  Canes  foris  remansuros.  p.  16.  a. 

1  Clamante  scriptura,  et  dicente :  Memento  unde  excideris,  et  age  poeniten- 
tiam.  p.  19.  b. 


Treatises  joined  with  Cypuian's  JForks.     A.  D.  256.         65 

art  fallen,  and  repent:"  ' — ii.  5.  Thus  he  has  quoted  this 
book  six  times,  beside  a  reference  or  two  more,  which  I  do 
not  insist  on :  and  he  sufficiently  shows  that  he  esteemed  it 
a  book  of  authority  ;  but  he  has  no  where  called  the  writer 
apostle,  or  evangelist.  However,  it  may  be  reckoned  very 
probable  that  by  John  he  means  the  apostle  of  that  name  ; 
the  same  who  wrote  the  gospel  and  the  epistle  which  he  has 
quoted. 

11.  The  passages  that  have  been  already  taken  from  this 
treatise  evidently  show  that  the  scriptures  the  writer  quotes 
were  esteemed  by  christians  the  rule  of  their  faith  and  prac- 
tice. Nevertheless,  I  shall  add  one  or  two  more,  containing 
some  forms  of  citation,  and  marks  of  respect  for  these 
books. 

12.  Having  largely  quoted  some  books  of  scripture,  par- 
ticularly St.  Luke's  gospel,  he  says;  '  Let"^  us  then,  my 
beloved  brethren,  stir  up  ourselves  as  much  as  possible ; 
and,  breaking  oft'  the  sleep  of  sloth  and  security,  let  us  be 
watchful  to  observe  the  commands  of  the  Lord :  let  us  seek 
with  all  our  heart  what  we  have  lost,  that  we  may  find ; 
because  "  to  him  that  seeketh,"  saith  the  scripture,  "  it 
shall  be  given,  and  to  him  thatknocketh  it  shall  be  opened  :" 
Matth.  vii.  7,  8.  Let  us  cleanse  our  house  with  a  spiritual 
cleansing,  that  all  the  secret  and  hidden  parts  of  our  breast, 
being  illuminated  by  the  light  of  the  gospel,  may  say, 
"  Against  thee  only  have  I  sinned :"  '  Ps.  li.  4. 

13.  '  We^  read  and  adore,  says  he  to  the  Novatians,  and  do 
not  overlook  the  heavenly  sentence  of  the  Lord,  in  which 
he  says ;  "  Him  that  denies  him  he  also  shall  deny  :"  '  Matt. 
X.  33.  Again ;  '  Hear*  therefore,  ye  Novatians,  with  whom 
the  heavenly  scriptures  are  rather  read  than  understood :  it 
is  well  if  they  are  not  interpolated.' 

14.  We  have  now  taken  so  much  from  this  writer,  that  it 
may  be  proper  to  simi  up  his  testimony.  He  has  cited  texts 
of  all  the  four  gospels,  except  St.  Mark's  ;  and  likewise  the 
epistle  to  the  Romans,  the  first  to  the  Corinthians,  the  epistles 
to  the  Galatians,  the  Ephesians,  and  the  Philippians,  the  first 
epistle  of  St.  John,  the  epistle  of  St.  Jude,  and  the  books  of 

■■  Excitemus  nos  quantum  possumus,  fratres  dilectissimi,  et,  abrupto  inertiae 
et  securitatis  somno,  ad  observanda  Domini  praecepta  vigilemus.  Quaeramus 
tota  mente  quod  perdidimus,  ut  invenire  possimus :  Quia  quaerenti,  ait  scriptura, 
dabitur,  et  pulsanti  aperietur.  Mundemus  domum  nostram  munditia  spiritual!, 
ut  secreta  quaeque  et  abdita  pectoris  nostri,  vero  evangelii  lumine  radiata,  dicant : 
Tibi  soli  deliqui. — p.  20.  b.  ^  Legimus  et  adoramus,  nee  praeter- 

mittimus  ooelestem  Domini  sententiam,  qua  ait  negaturum  ad  negantem.  p. 
19.  a.  '  Audita  igitur,  Novatiani,  apud  quos  scripturae  ccelestes 

leguntur  potius,  quam  intelliguntur,  pamm  si  non  interpolentur.  p.  1 6.  b. 
VOL.    HI.  F 


66  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

the  Revelation.  Though  he  has  not  quoted  all  the  books  of 
the  New  Testament,  because,  it  is  likely,  he  had  not  occasion 
so  to  do  in  this  one  treatise,  yet  it  may  be  well  supposed  his 
canon  differed  very  little  from  ours,  if  at  all.  And  he  has 
given  many  proofs,  in  a  short  compass,  of  his  high  respect 
for  the  books  of  the  New  Testament,  and  for  the  doctrine 
contained  in  them. 

YI.  In  the  late  editions  of  St.  Cyprian's  works  is  a  trea- 
tise" of  some  anonymous  author,  first  published  by  Rigal- 
tius,  entitled,  Of  rebaptizing ;  or.  Of  the'  baptism  of  heretics  : 
that  they  ought  not  to  be  baptized  again,  who  have  been  once 
baptized  in  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ.  This  writer  is  placed 
by  Cave  at  the  year  253.  Of  this  book  Du  Pin  speaks  to 
this  purpose :  '  The^  treatise  of  the  baptism  of  heretics,  pub- 
'  lished  by  Rigaltius,  against  the  sentiment  of  St.  Cyprian,  is 
*  the  work  of  an  ancient  author,  Avho  lived  before  the  time  of 
'  St.  Augustine,  and  probably  at  the  time  with  St.  Cyprian.' 
Of  this  piece  Fleury''  expresseth  himself  in  this  manner: 
'  The  opinion  of  St.  Stephen,  and  the  gTeatest  part  of  the 
'  churches,  was  at  that  time  defended  by  a  certain  author, 
'  whose  treatise  remains,  but  whose  name  we  know  not.  He 
'  speaks y  as  being'  a  bishop  :  and  he,  perhaps,  was  St.  Stephen 
'  himself,  or  some  one  of  his  successors.'  The  Benedictine* 
before  cjuoted  delivers  his  judgment  as  follows  :  '  That  the 
'  author  of  this  piece  was  a  bishop  :  and  that  in  the  work  itself 
'  are  plain  marks  of  his  MTiting  in  the  third  century,  and 
'  whilst  the  controversy  about  the  baptism  of  heretics  was  on 
'  foot,  and  probably  whilst  Cyprian  was  still  living.'  Cave 
not  only  admits  the  episcopal  character  of  this  author,  and 
that  he  was  contemporary  with  Cyprian,  but  is  likewise* 
inclined  to  think  him  to  have  been  of  the  same  country. 

1.  This  book  is  a  good  deal  larger  than  any  one  of  the 
four  preceding-  pieces  :  it  affords  a  very  valuable  testimony 
to  the  books  of  the  New  Testament. 

2.  St.  Matthew's  gospel  is  not  expressly  quoted  in  this 

"  Anonymi  liber  de  Rebaptismate.  Non  debere  denuo  baptizari  qui  semel 
in  nomine  Domini  [nostri]  Jesu  Christi  sint  tincti.  '  De  baptismo 

hsereticoirum.  *  Nouv.  Bib.  des  Auteurs  Ec.  St.  Cyprien.  p.  173. 

Amst.  "  Fleury's  Eccl.  Hist.  Book  vii.  ch.  31,  p.  438,  English 

version.  ^  Et  ideo  cum  salus  nostra  in  baptismate  Spiritus,  quod 

plerumque  cum  baptismate  aquae  conjunctum,  sit  constituta,  siquidem  per  nos 
baptisma  tradetur,  integre  et  solenniter  et  per  omnia  quae  scripta  sunt  adsignetur, 
atque  sine  ulla  ullius  rei  separatione  tradatur  :  aut  si  a  minore  clero  per  neces- 
sitatem  traditum  fuerit,  eventum  expecteraus,  ut  aut  suppleatur  a  nobis,  aut  a 
Doraino  supplendum  reservetur.  p.  26.  b.  ed.  Ox.  confer  ibid.  Rigaltii  notas. 

^  Vit.  S.  Cyprian,  sect.  xxxv. 

*  Denique  stilus,  totaque  scribendi  ratio,  Tertulliani  vel  Cypriani  aetatem, 
quin  et  gentem,  satis  aperte  prodit.  H.  Lit.  P.  i.  p.  93. 


Treatises  joined  with  Cyprian's  Works.     A.  D.  256.         67 

book  by  name,  though  there  are  many  references  to  it,  and 
divers  texts  transcribed  from  it.  The  author  says,  that  the 
disciples  did  justly  believe  our  Lord  to  be  the  Christ,  for 
several  reasons  he  there  mentions;  and  among  others, because'' 
his  star  was  seen  in  the  East,  and  he  was  dilig'ently  inquired 
of,  and  worshipped  by  the  wise  men,  and  honoured  by  them 
Avith  rich  and  splendid  gifts  and  offerings:  Matt.  ii.  2—11. 

3.  And,  not  to  take  notice  of  any  other  places,  he  quotes 
also  some  of  tlie  last  words  of  this  gospel  in  this  manner, 
'  Nor*^  imagine  that  to  be  contrary  to  this  argument  which 
the  Lord  said  ;  "  Go,  teach  the  nations,  baptize  them  in  the 
name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost." 

4.  He  expressly  quotes  St.  Mark's  and  St.  Luke's  gospels 
both  together  after  this  manner;  '  In'^  the  gospel  according 
to  Luke  he  says  to  his  disciples  :  "  I  have  another  baptism 
to  be  baptized  with."  Likewise  [in  the  gospelj  according 
to  Mark,  he  had  said  to  the  like  purpose  to  the  sons  of  Zebe- 
dee ;  "  Are  ye  able  to  drink  of  the  cup  that  I  drink  of,  or 
to  be  baptized  with  the  baptism  that  I  am  baptized  with  ?"  ' 
See  Luke  xii.  50 ;  Mark  x.  38. 

This  passage  seems  to  afford  a  probable  argument  that,  n 
the  code,  or  collection,  or  volume,  of  the  four  gospels,  St. 
Mark's  gospel  was  placed  before  St.  Luke's.  This  I  suppose 
to  be  the  meaning  of  that  expression,  quoting  Mark  after 
Luke ;  likewise  he  had  said ;  or,  he  had  said  to  the  like 
purpose.  But  I  do  not  mention  this  as  a  certain  proof. 
He  refers  likewise  to  divers  things  in*=  the  second  chapter 
of  St.  Luke's  gospel. 

5.  *  As^  it  is  written  in  the  gospel  according  to  John, 
"  They  also  baptized  others :"  '  see  ch.  iv.  2. 

6.  He  has  largely  cited  the  book  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles, 
and  argues  from  divers  things  related  in  it.  He  has  quoted  it 
at  least  five  or  six  times  expressly  by  that  name :  '  And^  our 

*"  quod  in  Oriente  vLsa  ejus  stella  solicitissime  fuisset  a  Magis  requisitus 

et  adoratus,  et  illustribus  donis  et  insignibus  muneribus  honoratus.  p.  25.  b. 
Oxon.  <^  Nee  aestimes  huic  tractatui  contrariiun  esse  quod  Dominus 

dixit:  Ite,  docete  geutes,  linguite  eos  nomine  Patris,  et  Filii,  et  Spiritus  Sancti. 
ibid.  p.  25.  a.  "^  In  evangelic  secundum  Lucam  ad  discipulos  suos 

locutus  est,  dicens :  Habeo  aliud  baptisma  baptizari :  Item  secundum  Marcum 
ad  filios  Zebedaei,  eadem  ratione  dixerat :  Potestis  bibere  calicem  quern  ego 
bibo,  aut  baptismate,  quo  ego  baptizor,  baptizari  ?  p.  28.  b. 

^  Vid.  p.  25.  b.  f  Et,  quod  multo  gravius  est,  sicut  in  evan- 

gelic cata  Joannem  scriptumest,  etiam  alios  baptizibant.  p.  26.  b. 

B  Nam  et  Dominus,  banc  eandem  vocem  Joannis  post  suam  resurrectionem 
in  Actis  apostclcrum  confinnans,  prsecepit  eis,  ab  Hierosolymis  ne  discedere, 
sed  expectare  illam  promissionem  Patris,  quam  audistis  a  me,  quia  Joannes 
quidem  baptizavit  aqua,  vos  autem  baptizabimini  Spiritu  Sancto  non  post  mul- 
tos  hos  dies.  p.  22.  b. 

F   2 


68  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

Lord  likewise  confirming  tliis  same  word  of  John,  after  his 
resurrection  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  commanded  them 
[the  disciples]  that  they  shovild  not  depart  from  Jerusalem, 
"  But  wait  for  that  promise  of  the  Father,  which  ye  have 
heard  of  me :  for  John  truly  baptized  with  water,  but  ye 
shall  be  baptized  with  the  Holy  Ghost  not  many  days 
hence :"  '  Acts  i.  3,  4. 

7.  This  avithor  has  quoted  or  referred  to  several  of  St. 
Paul's  epistles,  particularly  the  epistle  to  the  Romans,  the 
first  to  the  Corinthians,  the  epistles  to  the  Ephesians  and 
the  Philippians,  and  first  to  the  Thessalonians. 

8.  '  Because''  that  being-  baptized  in  the  name  of  Christ, 
they  "  are  redeemed  with  the  most  precious  blood"  of  the 
Lord  :'  1  Pet.  i.  19. 

9.  '  As'  also  the  evangelist  John  says  ;  "  Every  one  that 
loveth  is  born  of  God,  and  knoweth  God,  for  God  is  love,"  '  1 
John  iv.  7, 8. ,  The  author  therefore  had  no  doubt  but  that  this 
epistle  was  written  by  the  same  John  who  wrote  the  gospel. 

10.  '  For''  John  teaching  us  says  in  his  epistle,  (1  John  v. 
6,  7,  8.)  "  This  is  he  that  came  by  water  and  blood,  even 
Jesus  Christ :  not  by  water  only,  but  by  water  and  blood. 
And  it  is  the  Spirit  that  beareth  witness,  because  the  Spirit 
is  truth.  For  there  are  three  that  bear  witness,  the  Spirit, 
and  the  water,  and  the  blood;  and  these  three  agree  in  one."  ' 

11.  '  I'  think,  likewise,  that  1  have  rightly  represented 
the  doctrine  of  the  apostle  John,  who  says  ;  "  For  there  are 
three  that  bear  witness  ;  the  Spirit,  and  the  water,  and  the 
blood  ;  and  these  three  are  one."  ' 

12.  These  quotations  show  that  this  bishop,  contemporary 
with  St.  Cyprian,  had  not  in  his  copies  of  St.  John's  epistle 
the  disputeci  text  concerning-  tlie  witnesses  in  heaven :  and 
they  afford  likewise  a  strong  and  cogent  argument  for  the 
supposition,  that  neither  had  St.  Cyprian  that  text  in  his 
copies. 

13.  There  are  some  expressions  made  use  of  by  this  author, 
which  may  seem  to  imply  that  the  books  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment were  divided  into  sections  or  chapters. 

''  Quia  baptizati  in  nomine  Christi  redemti  sunt  pretiosissimo  sanguine 
Domini,  p,  20.  a.  '  Sicut  et  Joannes  evangelista  dicit :  Et  (jmnis 

qui  diligit,  ex  Deo  natus  est,et  cognoscit  Deum,  quia  Deus  dilectio  est.  p.  28.  b. 

''  Ait  enim  Joannes  de  Domino  nostro  in  epistola  sua  nos  docens :  Hie  est, 
qui  venit  per  aquam  et  sanguinem,  Jesus  Christivs.  Non  in  aqua  tantum,  sed 
in  aqua  et  sanguine.  Et  Spiritus  est,  qui  testimonium  yjerhibet,  quia  Spiritus 
est  Veritas.  Quia  tres  testimonium  perhibent,  Spiritus  et  aqua  et  sanguis,  Et 
isti  tres  in  unum  sunt.  p.  29.  a.  '  Arbitror  autem,  et  apostoli  Joan- 

nis  doctrinam  nos  non  inepte  disposuisse,  qui  ait:  Quia  tres  testimonium  per- 
hibent, Spiritus  et  aqua  et  sanguis,  et  isti  tres  unum  sunt.  p.  30.  b.  31.  a. 


Treatises  joined  with  Cypuian's  Works.     A.  D.  256.         69 

'  And,  therefore,  says'"  he,  we  shall  be  obliged  to  bring 
together  the  several  paragraphs  [literally,  short  chapters] 
of  the  sacred  scriptures,  relating  to  this  purpose.'  After- 
wards;  '  Forasmuch"  as  it  is  irianifestly  declared  by  our 
Lord  in  that  sentence,  (Matt.  x.  33.)  "  Whosoever  shall 
deny  me  before  men,  him  will  I  also  deny  before  my  Father 
M'hich  is  in  heaven."  But  the  phrases  used  in  these  places 
may  denote  no  more  than  a  text  or  passage,  and  do  not  cer- 
tainly imply  that  the  books  themselves,  whence  they  are 
taken,  were  divided  into  larger  or  smaller  sections. 

14.  We  are  now,  according  to  our  usual  method,  to  observ^e 
a  few  forms  of  citation,  and  some  tokens  of  respect  for  the 
scriptures. 

'  Nor"  shall  I  omit,'  says  the  author,  '  what  the  gospel 
deservedly  relates  ;  for  our  Lord  said  to  the  man  sick  of  the 
palsy.  Matt.  ix.  2  ;  "  Son,  be  of  good  cheer,  thy  sins  be 
forgiven  thee."  '  Again;  '  ThisP  we  find  mentioned  in  the 
gospel.'  In  another  place  ;  '  Toi  which  things  perhaps  you 
will  M'eakly  answer,  according-  to  custom,  that  the  Lord  hath 
said  in  the  gospel,  John  iii.  5 ;  "  Except  a  man  be  born  of 
water,  and  of  the  Spirit,  he  cannot  enter  the  kingdom  of 
God."  '  To  which  he  replies  by  an  observation  upon"^  the 
New  Testament,  as  he  expressly  calls  it.  Farther;  '  As''  the 
holy  scripture  declares,  out  of  which  we  shall  bring-  plain 
proofs  of  what  we  assert.'  He  means  particularly  the  New 
Testament.  '  The*  holy  scripture  foretold,  that  they  who 
should  believe  in  Christ,  should  be  baptized  with  the 
Spirit:'  as  John  vii.  39;  Matt.  iii.  11 ;  and  in  other  places. 
'  As"  the  scripture  saith;  "  Out  of  his  belly  flowed  rivers 
of  the  living  water  :"  '  John  vii.  38.  He  observes,  that"^  the 
Jews  received  only  the  ancient  scriptures.  '  The  scriptures 
of  the  New  and  Old  Testament,'  he "  says,  clearly  declare ' 

"'  Et  ideo  quaecumque  sanctarum  scripturarum  ad  hanc  partem  pertinentia 
sunt  capimla,  necessario  in  unum  congeremus.  p.  22.  b. 

"  Per  hujusmodi  clamulam  quia  manifestissime  a  Domino  dictum  est :  Qui- 
cumque  me  negaverit  coram  hominibus,  negabo  eum  et  ego  coram  patre  meo, 
qui  est  in  ccelis.  p.  28.  a.  °  Sed  nee  illud  omiserim,  quod  evange- 

lium  merito  praedicat.     Ait  enim  paralytico  Dominus  noster,  &c.  p.  30.  b. 

p  Sicuti  non  solum  Pet  mm  hoc  passum  esse  in  evangelic  deprehendimus. 
p.  25.  a.  1  Ad  quae  fortasse  tu  continue  impatienter  respondeas, 

ut  soles,  dixisse  in  evangelio  Dominum :  &c.  p.  23.  a. 

■■  Sed  in  eodem  Novo  Testamento.  p.  23.  a.  '  Sicut  declarant 

nobis  sanctae  scripturae,  quarum  per  singula  quaeque  eorum  quae  enarrabimus, 
adferemus  perspicuas  probationes.  p.  23.  a.  *  Quoniam  eos,  qui  in 

Christum  credituriessent,  scriptura  sancta  praedixit  oportere  in  spiritu  baptizari. 
p.  23.  b.  "  Sicuti  scriptura  dicit :  Flumina  de  ventre  ejuscurrebant 

aquae  vivae.  p.  29.  a.  "  Sicuti  nee  super  Judaeos,  qui  veteres  tantum 

scripturas  recipiunt.  p.  27.  b.  *  Quanquam  scripturae  novi  et 


70  CredibiiUij  of  the  Gospel  History. 

what  he  there  asserts.  Again;  of"  this  he  '  has  no  advan- 
tage who  has  not  the  love  of  that  God  and  Christ  who  is 
preached  by  the  law  and  the  prophets,  and  in  the  gospel.' 
'  Because  thaty  both  prophets  and  apostles  have  thus  taught; 
for  James  says  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  :'  Acts  x.  14. 
Finally  he  complains  of  some  who  advanced  things  ^  contrary 
to  the  precept  of  the  law  and  of  all  the  scriptures. 

Here  are  many  marks  of  high  respect  for  the  books  of  the 
New  Testament,  M'hich  are  equalled  with,  or  reckoned  supe- 
rior to,  those  of  the  Old  Testament ;  and  together  with  them 
are  esteemed  the  rule  of  christian  belief  and  practice.  And 
the  apostles  are  joined  with  the  prophets. 

15.  There  is  still  a  remarkable  passage  to  be  tran- 
scribed concerning  an  apocryphal  writjng,  which  passage 
farther  confirms  the  authority  of  the  sacred  scriptures  of  the 
New  Testament. 

He  argues  against  some  heretics  who  made  use  of  fire,  as 
well  as  water,  in  the  administration  of  baptism.  '  But,' 
says''  he,  '  the  principal  foundation  (not  to  mention  any 
other)  of  this  false  and  pernicious  baptism,  is  a  book  forged 
by  those  same  heretics  for  the  sake  of  this  very  error,  which 
is  called  the  preaching  of  Paul.  [Some  think  it  should  be 
Peter.  It'^  might  be  called  by  both  these  names.]  In 
which  book,  contrary  to  all  the  scriptures,  you  will  find 
Christ,  who  alone  never  offended  at  all,  both  making  con- 
fession of  his  own  sin,  and  almost  against  his  will  compelled 
by  his  mother  Mary  to  receive  John's  baptism  :  likewise, 
that  when  he  was  baptized,  fire  was  seen  upon  the  Avater  ; 
which  is  not  A\Titten  in  any  gospel.  And  when  a  consider- 
able time  had  passed,  you  w  ill  find  also,  that  Peter  and  Paul, 
after  they  had  had  a  conference  together  about  the  gospel  at 
Jerusalem,  and  there  had  been  some  mutual  difference  be- 

veteris  testamenti  raanifeste  pi-aedicant.  p.  28.  b.  "  Quia  hoc  facto 

nihil  proficit,  qui  non  habet  dilectionem  ejus  Dei  et  Christi,  qui  per  legem  et 
prophetas  et  in  evangelio  hoc  mode  praedicatur.  p.  28.  b.  ^  Quia  et 

prophetse  et  apostoli  ita  prgedicarunt.     Ait  enim  Jacobus  in  Aclis  apostolorum. 
p.  27.  b.  ^  Contra  prseceptum  legis  et  omniuni  scripturarum.  p.  22.  b. 

*  Est  autem  adulterini  hujus,  immo  intemecini  baptismatis,  si  quis  alius 
auctor,  turn  etiam  quidam  ab  eisdem  ipsis  haereticis  propter  hunc  eundera 
errorem  confictus  liber,  qui  inscribitur  Pauli  Praedicatio.  In  quo  libro  contra 
omnes  scriptura.";,  et  de  peccato  proprio  confitenfem,  qui  solus  omnino  nihil 
deliquit,  et  ad  accipiendum  Joannis  baptisma  pene  invitum  a  matre  sua  esse 
compulsum.  Item,  cum  baptizaretur,  ignem  super  aquam  esse  visiun,  quod  in 
evangelio  nullo  est  scriptum  ;  et  post  tauta  tempora  Petrum  et  Paulum,  post 
conlationem  evangelii  in  Hierusalem  et  mutuam  altercationem  et  rerum  agen- 
darum  dispositionem,  postremo  in  urbe  quasi  tunc  primum  invicem  sibi  esse 
cognitos.  Et  quffidam  alia  hujuscemodi  absurde  ac  turpiter  in  ilium  librum 
invenies  congesta.  p.  30.  ^  Vid.  Baluz.  Notas  ad  h.  1. 


Treatises  joined  with  Cypuian's  Wvrks.     A.  D.  25G.  71 

tween  them,  and  an  agreement  had  been  entered  into  about 
the  disposition  of  things  for  time  to  come;  after  all  these 
things,  I  say,  you  will  Hnd  them  meeting  in  the  city  [mean- 
ing Rome]]  as  if  they  had  never  known  each  other  before. 
And  some  other  things  of  this  kind  there  are  absurdly  and 
shamefully  forged :  all  which  you  may  see  heaped  together 
in  that  book.' 

16.  There  are  then  in  this  treatise  many  quotations  of 
words  of  the  gospel  of  St.  Matthew.  The  gospels  of  St. 
Mark,  St.  Luke,  and  St.  John,  are  expressly  quoted  by 
name ;  as  is  also  the  book  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  very 
often ;  beside  other  places  where  passages  are  taken  out  of 
it ;  but  he  has  not  mentioned  the  name  of  the  writer  of  that 
book.  Here  are  likewise  quotations,  or  I'eferences,  to  several 
epistles  of  St.  Paul ;  but  the  epistles  themselves,  or  the  per- 
sons to  whom  they  were  sent,  are  not  expressly  named.  It 
is  likely  that  one  main  reason  of  this  method  of  citing  Mas, 
that  those  scriptures  Mere  so  weW  known  among  christians, 
that  almost  every  one  Mould  know  whence  the  passages  were 
taken,  without  citing  the  epistles  by  name  expressly.  Words 
of  the  first  epistle  of  St.  Peter  are  adopted  by  him.  The 
first  epistle  of  St.  John  is  quoted,  and  ascribed  to  John  the 
apostle  and  evangelist :  and  we  have  observed  several  forms 
of  citation,  and  also  marks  of  the  greatest  respect  for  the 
scriptures,  and  the  New  Testament  in  particular.  Finally, 
he  mentions  an  apocryphal  spurious  book,  on  M'hich  he  has 
made  divers  just  criticisms,  showing"  it  to  be  a  forgery,  and 
expressing  the  utmost  indignation  against  it ;  but  he  aflTords 
no  plain  proofs  that  the  books  of  the  New  Testament  were 
then  divided  into  any  chapters  or  sections. 

VII.  There  is  yet  another  piece,  called,'^  A  Computation 
of  Easter;  of  M'hich  I  shall  here  give  an  account,  it  being- 
placed,  in  the  Oxford  edition,  in  an  appendix  to  St.  Cyprian's 
works ;  and  there  being  good  reason  to  believe  it  m  as  written 
about  his  time.  Du  Pin**  and*^  Tillemont  allow  the  anti- 
quity of  it :  though  they  think  the  diiference  of  style  so 
manifest,  as  to  show  plainly  that  it  is  not  a  work  of  Cyprian. 
Cave*^  says  it  is  an  ancient  tract;  and  if  not  written  by 
Cyprian,  it  is,  however,  the  w^ork  of  some  contemporary.  In 
the  Oxford  edition  of  St.  Cyprian's  works  this  piece  is  pub- 
lished as  being  probably  genuine;  and  in  his  notes  the  learn- 
ed editor  delivers  his  judgment  upon  it  to  this  purpose,  in 
answer  to  Seneschal,  Mho  had  denied  it  to  be  written  by 

•=  De  Pa'cha  Computus.  ^  Nouv.  Bibl.  St.  Cyprien. 

«  Mem.  Ec.  T.  iv.  St.  Cyprien.  art.  65. 
f  Hist.  Lit.  P.  i.  p.  89. 


72  Cr edibility  of  the  Gospel  History: 

Cyprian  :  '  Thats  he  will  not  be  positive  it  is  the  work  of 
that  father ;  but,  if  it  be  falsely  ascribed  to  him,  yet  it  is 
not  spurious,  or  suppositious,  but  manifestly  ancient,  and 
written  about  that  time.'  It  is  indeed,  so  far  as  I  am  able  to 
judge,  all  over  ancient ;  abating  only  the  errors  of  the  copies, 
which  seem  to  be  not  a  few. 

There  are  in  it  divers  marks  of  antiquity :  the  author'' 
concludes  his  chronology  at  the  fifth  year  of  Gordian,  and 
the  consulship  of  Arrianus  and  Papus,  which  is  the  year  of 
our  Lord  243.  It  is  likely,  therefore,  that'  he  wrote  not 
much  after  that  time.  Pagi''  thinks  this  book  was  published 
in  that  very  year.  Farther,  the  author  says,  '  that'  Christ, 
having  been  baptized  in  the  fifteenth  year  of  Tiberius,  was 
crucified  in  the  sixteenth  year  of  the  ^ame  reign ;'  which 
opinion  is  ancient,  and  is  more  than  once  insisted  on  by 
him.  I  might  add,  that"^  the  doxology  at  the  conclusion  of 
this  work  is  ancient  and  unexceptionable. 

If  Pagi  be  in  the  right,  that  the  fifth  year  of  Gordian, 
mentioned  in  this  piece,  is  the  year  of  its  publication,  this  is 
an  additional  argument,  beside  the  difference  of  style,  that 
it  is  not  Cyprian's ;  it  being  probable  that  he  was  not  con- 
verted so  soon. 

1.  Though  I  do  not  by  any  means  suppose  this  to  be  a 
work  of  St.  Cyprian,  it  deserves  to  be  taken  notice  of  on 
account  of  its  antiquity.  And  it  is  valuable  for  the  testimo- 
nies it  contains  to  some  facts,  as  well  as  the  books  of  the  New 
Testament,  which  I  am  now  to  observe. 

2.  This  writer  says,  expressly,  that"  there  are  four  gospels; 

8  Ego  me  vatem  non  spondeo.  Sed  si  psaudepigraphus  sit,  at  spurius  non 
est,  et  supposititius ;  sed  antiquum  esse  liquet:  et  Cypriani  aetata  scnptum, 
res  ipsa  docet.     Not.  p.  63.  ^  A  quo  tempore,  id  est,  a  passione, 

usque  ad  annum  quintum  Gordiaiii,  Ariano  et  Papo  consulibus,  suppleti  sunt 
anni  ccxv.  p.  70.  b.  '  Vid.  Not.  ed.  Ox.  p.  70. 

•^  Fellus  V.  C.  in  notis  ad  Computum  de  Pascha,  cujus  S.  Cyprianum  auc- 
torem  credit,  quique  perducitur  usque  ad  annum  quintum  Gordiani,  observat, 
Chionicorum  Scriptores  res  perducere  ad  annum  aliquem  insigniorem  etiam 
paulo  praeteritum ;  idque  in  eo  opera  videri  factum,  nimirum  ad  annum  Gor- 
diani Imp.  ultimum.  Verimi  auctor  non  ad  ultimum  Gordiani  annum,  sed  ad 
ejus  Quinquennalia  respexit,  quibus  scriptores  de  more  opera  sua  publicabant. 
Pagi  Crit.  in  Bar.  A.  D.  243.  '  Hi  sunt  apostoli,  quorum  sermo- 

nibus  aedificati  recognovimus  Dominum  nostrum  anno  sexto  decimo  imperii 

Tiberii  Caesaris  passum,  cum  esset  ipse  annorum  xxxi.  p.  69.  b. quibus 

suppletis  Dominus  Jesus  a  nativitate  sua  baptizatus  est  a  Johanne  anno  quinto 
decimo  imperii  Tiberii  Caesaris;  cujus  anno  sexto  decimo  passus  est,  et  resur- 
rexit.  p.  70.  b.  ■"  Ac  propterea  Deo  Patri  Omnipotenti,  qui  nos  ad 

gratiam  tantam  vocavit,  et  divina  sacramenta  manifestavit,per  Jesum  Christum 
filium  ejus  Dominum  et  Salvatorem  nostrum  semper  sine  cessatione  gratias 
agamus.  p.  70.  b.  "  Et  sic,  per  banc  multifomiem  trinitalem,  et 

ipsae  duodocira  horse  evangelium  unum  in  quatuor  partes  divisum  ostenderuut. 


Treatises  joined  with  C\'pmM!i''s  Works.     A.  D.  243.  73 

or,  as  another  copy  has  it,  evarioelists  ;  and  twelve  apostles  ; 
and  that  the  gospel  is  one  divided  into  four  parts. 

3.  He  has  not  mentioned  the  names  of  the  evangelists,  but 
he  has  quoted  words  of  the  gospels  of  St.  Matthew,  St.  Luke, 
and  St.  John.  I  shall  transcribe  a  few  passages,  chiefly  to 
show  the  author's  method  of  citing-,  and  his  respect  for  the 
scriptures  in  general. 

4.  '  These"  are  the  days,  of  which  the  Lord  says  in  the 
gospel ;  "  And  except  those  days  Avere  shortened,  there 
should  be  no  flesh  saved  :"  '  Matt.  xxiv.  22. 

5.  '  Of  whomP  Simeon,  a  just  man,  holding'  him  in  his 
hands,  said  to  Mary,  his  mother ;  "  Behold  this  [|child]  is 
set  for  the  fall  and  rising*  again  of  many  in  Israel,  and  for  a 
sign  which  shall  be  spoken  against :"  '  Luke  ii.  28,  34. 

6.  '  And  rightly  i  said  our  Lord  and  Master  himself  to 
the  Jews ;  "  If  ye  were  Abraham's  children,  ye  would  do  the 
works  of  Abraham  :"  '  John  viii.  39. 

7.  He  has  a  remarkable  quotation  of  the  Acts  in  this 
manner  ;  '  From"^  Joshua  the  son  of  Nun  to  Samuel  the  judge, 
and  priest  of  God,  according-  to  the  blessed  apostle  Paul, 
who  has  taught  by  the  Spirit  of  God,  were  filled  four  hun- 
dred and  fifty  years  :'  See  Acts  xiii.  20. 

This  seems  to  show  at  once  that  the  Acts  was  esteemed  a 
book  of  the  inspired  scriptures,  and  that  it  was  ^vell  known ; 
otherwise,  the  author  Avould  have  shown  more  particularly 
where  these  words  of  the  apostle  Paul  were  to  be  found. 

8.  He**  says,  '  We  are  built  upon  the  words  of  the  apos- 
tles.' Perhaps  he  refers  to  Eph.  ii.  20:  but  whether  he 
does  or  not,  this  observation  is  worthy  of  our  notice. 

9.  '  Which  make,'  says*^  he,  '  according  to  the  Revelation, 
"  a  thousand  two  hundred  and  sixty  days;"  in  which  days 
that  antichrist  will  make  a  great  destruction  ;  and  therefore 
no  christian  will  be  able  to  offer  sacrifice  to  God,  because 
that  most  wicked  one  will  begin  to  sit  in  the  temple  of  God, 
and  to  say  to  the  ignorant  that  he  is  God  ;  whom  our  Lord 

et  tres  menses  per  quatuor  tempora,  id  est,  per  quatuor  evangelia,  a  ChrLsto 
electos  xii.  apostolos  nobis  demonstraverunt.  p.  G9.  b. 

°  Ipsi  sunt  dies,  de  quibus  ait  Dominus  in  evangelio,  &c.  p.  68.  b. 

P  P.  69.  a.  b.  "i  Et  merito  Dominus  et  Magister  noster  dicebat 

Judseis,  &c.  p.  Gl.  a.  ■■  — a  Jesu  filio  Nave  usque  ad  Samuelem 

judicem,  et  Dei  sacerdotem,  secundum  Pauli  B.  apostoli  sermonem,  qui  Spiritu 
Dei  edoctus  retulit  eos  implevisse  annos  cccl.  p.  67.  a. 

^  See  before  note  '.  '  — qui  fiunt  dies,  secundum  Apocalypsim, 

mille  cclx.  in  quibus  diebus  ille  antichristus  magnam  faciet  vastationem  :  et 
ideo  tunc  nemo  Christianorum  poterit  Deo  sacnficium  offerre,  quoniam  ipse 
nequissimus  incipiet  in  templo  Dei  sedere,  et  ignorantibus  se  Deum  affirmare : 
quem  oportet  Jesiun  Dominum  et  Salvatorem  nostrum  spiritu  oris  sui  inter- 
ficere,  et  praesentia  adventus  sui  evaciiare.  p.  68.  a.  b. 


74  CredibiUti/  of  the  Gospel  History. 

and  Saviour  Jesus  will  kill  [or  consume]  "  with  the  breath 
of  his  mouth,  and  destroy  with  the  brig-litness  of  his  com- 
ing-." Here  is  a  quotation  of  Rev.  xii.  6 ;  and  a  reference 
to  2  Thess.  ii.  4,  S. 

10.  I  forbear  to  insist  on  any  other  allusions  to  the  books 
of  the  New  Testament,  or  any  other  expressions  that"  may 
seem  to  intend  the  whole  collection  of  them.  He  speaks  of" 
the  holy  and  divine  scriptures  in  words,  which  may  more 
directly  relate  to  the  Old  Testament ;  but  it  cannot  be 
questioned,  that  he  had  an  equal  respect  for  the  New  ; 
which  contains  the  words  of  our  Saviour,  and  of  our  Lord 
and  Master  Jesus  Christ,  and  his  apostles. 


CHAP.  XLVI. 

ST.  CORNELIUS  AND  ST.  LUCIUS,  BISHOPS  OF  ROME. 

I.  St.  Cornelius.     H.  St.  Lucius. 

I.  '  CORNELIUS,'' bishop  of  the  city  of  Rome,  to  whom 
'  there  are  eight  of  Cyprian's  letters  still  extant,  wrote  an 
'  epistle  to  Fabius,  bishop  of  Antioch,  concerning  the  synod 
'  at  Rome,  in  Italy,  and  Africa  ;  and  another  concerning"  No- 

*  vatus,  and  of  those  that  had  lapsed  ;  a  third  concerning-  the 
'  acts  of  the  synod  ;  a  fourth  to  the  same  Fabius,  which  is  very 
'  long-,  and  contains  the  rise  and  condemnation  of  the  Novatian 

*  heresy.     Having  been  crowned  with  martyrdom  for  Christ, 

*  he  was  succeeded  by  Lucius.'  So  writes  St.  Jerom  in  his 
Catalogue  or  Book  of  Illustrious  men. 

Fabian,  who  sat  in  the  see  of  Rome  fourteen  years,  of 
whose  ordination  Eusebius''  has  given  us  a  very  remarkable 

"  in  quibus  oportet  primo  Enoch  et  Eliam  venire,  et  per  suam  prophe- 

tiam  magnse  multitudini  evangelium,  id  est,  Novum  Testamentum  confirmare. 
p.  68.  a.  "  Multo  quidem  non  modico  tempore  anxii  fuimus  et 

sestuantes,  non  in  sBeciilaribns,  sed  in  Sanctis  et  divinis  scripturLs,  quaerentes 
invenire,  quisnam,  &c.  p.  63.  a. 

*  Cornelius,  Romanae  urbis  episcopus,  ad  quem  octo  Cypriani  exstant  epis- 
tolae,  scripsit  epistolam  ad  Fabium,  Antiochenae  ecclesiae  episcopum,  de  synodo 
Romana,  Italica,  Africana;  et  aliam  de  Novatiano,  et  de  his  qui  lapsi  sunt; 
tertiam  de  gestis  synodi ;  quartam  ad  eundem  Fabium  valde  prohxam,  et  No- 
vatianae  haercseos  caasas  et  anathema  continentem.  iRexit  ecclesiam  annis 
duobus  sub  Gallo  et  Volusiano,  cui  ob  Christum  martyrio  coronate  successit 
Lucius.     De  V.  I.  cap.  66.  *>  H.  E.  L,  vi.  cap.  29. 


Cornelius  of  Rome.     A.  D.  251,  75 

history  suft'ered  martyrdom''  in  the  month  of  January,  250. 
After  his  death  there  was  a  vacancy  for  about  the  space  of 
sixteen  months,  upon  account  of'^  the  troubles  they  were  in, 
during-  which  time  the  clerg-y  of  Rome  governed  the  church. 
In  the  beginning"  of  June,  251,  the  heat  of  the  persecution 
being  somewhat  abated  at  Rome,  even  before  the  death  of 
Decius,  Cornelius  was  chosen  bishop  and  successor  of  the 
above-named  Fabian  with  the  general  approbation'^  of  the 
clergy  and  people  of  the  church  of  Rome,  and  the  concur- 
rence' of  sixteen  bishops,  then  in  the  city,  as  St.  Cyprian 
writes. 

The  election,  however,  was  not  unanmious.  Some,  both 
of  the  clergy  and  people  of  Rome,  dissented  .  by  whom 
Novatus  was  chosen  bishop,  who  Avas  ordained  also  by  three 
Italian  bishops. 

Both  Cornelius  and  Novatus  sent  abroad?  letters  and 
deputies  to  foreign  bishops  and  churches,  notifying  their 
election  and  ordination  :  but  Cornelius's  letters  and  deputies 
met  with,  generally,  the  most  favourable  reception  •  he  there- 
fore was  approved  of  as  rightful  possessor  of  that  see ;  and 
Novatus  is  esteemed  the  first  antipope,  and  the  first  author 
of  schism  at  Rome. 

In'*  October,  251,  Cornelius  convened  a  numerous  council 
at  Rome,  consisting'  of  sixty  bishops,  an<l  a  much  larger 
number  of  presbyters  and  deacons,  who  all  confirmed  his 
election,  and  condemned  Novatus,  and  the  rigid  doctrine  he 
now  went  into  concerning  the  lapsed.  Cornelius  likewise 
took  the  sentiments  of  other  bishops  of  Italy,  who  could  not 
be  present  at  the  council  held  at  Rome ;  which  is,  probably, 
what''  Jerom  means  by  the  Italian  synod.  And  the  same 
things  having  been  resolved  upon  in  a  council  at  Carthage,  we 

•=  Vid.  Pagi  Crit.  250.  n.  vii.  ^  quibus,  post  excessum 

nobilissimae  memorise  viri  Fahiani,,  nondum  est  episcopus  propter  rerum  et 
temporum  difficultates  constitutus.  Cleri  Roman.  Epist.  ap.  Cyprian.  Ep.  30. 
[al.  31.]  p.  58.  Oxon.  ^  Factus  est  autem  Cornelius  episcopus 

de  Dei  et  Christi  ejus  judicio,  de  clericornm  pene  omnium  testimonio,  de  ple- 
bis  quae  tum  afFuit  suffragio,  et  de  sacerdotum  antiquorum  et  bonorum  virorum 
coUegio  ;  cum  nemo  ante  se  factus  esset,  cum  Fabiani  locus — vacaret.  Cypr. 
Ep.  55.  p.  104. — qui  episcopo  Cornelio  in  catholica  ecclesia  de  Dei  judicio  et 
cleri  ac  plebis  suffragio  ordinato,  profanuni  altare  erigere, — tentaverit.  Id.  Ep. 
68.  Pam.  67.  p.  177.  ^  Et  factus  est  episcopus  a  plurimis  collegis 

nostris,  qui  tunc  in  urbe  Roma  erant,  qui  ad  nos  literas  honorificas,  et  laudabiles, 
et  testimonio  suae  praedicationis  illustres  de  ejus  ordinatione  miserunt.  Cypr.  Ep. 
55.  [Pam.  52.]  p.  104.  Episcopo  in  ecclesia  a  sedecim  coepiscopis  facto.  Ibid, 
p.  112.  g  Vid.  Cypr.  Ep.  44.  init.  et  Ep.  45.  [42.]  p.  87.  Oxon. 

''  Vid.  Pagi  Crit.  251.  n.  xxvi.  Basn.  251.  n.  viii. 

'  Vid.  Euseb.  1.  vi.  cap.  43.  p.  242.  A. 

"  Vid.  Pagi  ibid,  et  Tillemont,  St.  Comeille.  Art.  8.  p.  33,  34.  Tom.  iii. 
P.  ill. 


76  CrcdihiUUj  of  the  Gospel  Ilistorij. 

have  at  length  the  three  synods  mentioned  by  Jeroni,  and 
the  sense'  of  Eusebius,  whom  Jerom  copied. 

There  is  little  certainly  known  of  Cornelius's  life,  before 
he  was  advanced  to  this  bishopric ;  except  that™  Cyprian 
says  he  had  passed  through  all  the  lower  offices  in  the  church, 
and  behaved  well  therein. 

St.  Jerom  in  his  Catalogue,  as  we  have  seen  already,  says 
that  Cornelius  was  crowned  with  martyrdom.  He  speaks 
to  the  like  purpose"  elsewhere.  St.  Cyprian"  likewise  calls 
Cornelius  a  martyr :  but,  though  Jerom  seems  to  say  that 
Cornelius  died  at  Rome,  it  is  at  present  the  general!'  opinion 
that  he  died  at  Circumcellfe,  now  Civita  Vecchia,  whither 
he  had  been  banished  by  Gallus.  Jerom  having  said  of 
Cyprian,  tliati  he  died  on  the  same  day  of  the  month,  though 
not  hi  the  same  year,  with  Cornelius,  it  is  concluded  that 
Cornelius  died  on  the  14th  of  September,  252. 

Jerom  says  that  Cornelius  governed  the  church  two  years, 
under  Gallus  and  Volusian.  But  those  two  years  must  not 
be  reckoned  complete ;  for  the  most  learned  critics  and 
chronologers  compute  that"^  his  episcopate  was  not  above 
one  year,  three  months,  and  ten  days ;  part  under  Decius, 
and  part  under  Gallus  :  and  yet  Eusebius  gives  him^  about 
three  years.  However,  he  may  be  supposed  to  allow  him 
all  the  space  of  time  from  the  death  of  Fabian,  including  the 
vacancy  of  the  see.  But  Du  Pin*  is  greatly  mistaken  in 
saying  that  be  died  near  the  end  of  the  year  253,  having 
been  bishop  two  years  and  some  months. 

Cornelius  has  a  place  in  Jerom's  Catalogue  of  ecclesiasti- 
cal Writers,  Avho  mentions  four  of  his  letters  sent  to  Fa- 
bius;  though  it  is"  supposed  now,  by  some  learned  men, 

'  Euseb.  1.  vi.  cap.  43.  p.  242.  B.  Conf.  eund.  p.  245.  D. 

'"  Nam  quod  ad  Corneliuin — non  iste  ad  episcopatum  subito  pervenit,  sed 
per  omnia  ecclesiastica  officia  promotus,  et  in  divinis  administrationibus  Domi- 
num  ssepe  promeritus,  ad  sacerdotii  sublime  fastigiuin  cunctis  religionis  gradibus 
ascendit.     Cypr.  Ep.  55.  [al.  52.]  p.  103.  "  Sub  Decio  et  Valeriano 

persecutoribus,  quo  tempore  Cornelius  Roma,  Cyprianus  Carthagine,  felici 
cruore  martyrium  pertulerunt. — De  Vit.  Paul.  Erem.  T.  iv.  P.  ii.  Edit.  Bened. 

"  Unde  illic  repentina  persecutio  nuper  exorta  sit,  unde  contra  ecclesiam 
Christi  et  episcopum  Cornelium  beatum  martyrem,  vosque  omnes  secularis 
poteslas  subito  prorupent.  Cypr.  Ep.  61.  [al.  58.]  p.  144.  Si  vero  apud  Cor- 
nelium I'uit,  qui  Fabiano  cpiscopo  legitima  ordinatione  successit,  et  quem,  prae- 
ter  sacerdotii  honorem,  martyrio  quoque  Dominus  gloriticavit.  Id.  Ep.  69. 
[al.  76.]  p.  181.  P  Tillemont,  St.  Corneille.  Art.   16.  Pearson. 

Annal.  Cypr.  252.  n.  xii.  xiii.  Pagi  252.  n.  xii.  xiii.  Basn.  252.  n.  x. 

1  Passus  est — eodem  die  quo  Romae  Cornelius,  sed  non  eodem  anno.  D.. 
V.  I.  cap.  67.  ^  Vid.  Pearson.  An.  Cypr.  251.  n.  vi.     Pagi 

251.  n.  xix.  Tillem.  ut  supra,  Art.  16.  p.  70.  et  note  14. 

»  II.  E.  1.  vii.  cap.  2.  I  Nouv.  Bibl.  T.  i.   p.   180.  Amstcrd. 

"  Vid.  Basnag.  Ana.  252.  n.  xi. 


Cornelius  of  Rome.     A.  D.  25 1 .  77 

that  Eusebius^  speaks  of  but  three  epistles  of  Cornelius  to 
that  bishop  of  Antioch.  However,  it  cannot  be  questioned 
but  Cornelius  wrote  other  letters  beside  those  mentioned  by 
Jerom.  Eusebius'"  speaks  of  a  letter  of  his  to  Dionysius  of 
Alexandria.  He  likewise  wrote  several  letters"  to  Cyprian, 
two  of  which  y  we  still  have.  And  Tritemius  expressly  says, 
that^  Cornelius  wrote  many  letters  to  Cyprian  bishop  of 
Carthage,  and  other  letters  to  others.  The  eig^ht  letters  of 
Cyprian  to  Cornelius,  mentioned  by  Jerom,  still  remain. 

1  shall  by  and  by  make  use  of  the  long-  letter  to  Fabius, 
mentioned  by  Jerom,  there  being*  considerable  fragments  of 
it  preserved  by  Eusebius  in  his  Ecclesiastical  History. 

There  are  not  many  texts  of  scripture  quoted  in  the  two 
remaining  letters  of  Cornelius  to  Cyprian,  or  the  just-men- 
tioned fragments :  but  it  may  be  well  taken  for  granted,  that 
he  received  the  same  books  with  Cyprian  and  other  chris- 
tians of  that  age. 

I  take  no  notice  of  the  pieces  which,  without  ground,  have 
been  ascribed  by  some  to  this  bishop  of  Rome.  •Such  as 
desire  farther  information  of  these  may  consult^  Basnage,*' 
Tillemont,  and  others. 

II.  Cornelius,  as  St.  Jerom  says,  was  succeeded  by  Lucius. 
Herein  he  agrees  with''  Eusebius,  who  adds,  that  Lucius  did 
not  sit  out  full  eight  months.  At  present,  the  day  of  his 
ordination  and  the  duration  of  his  episcopate  are  reckoned*^ 
uncertain.  However,  bishop  Pearson  thought  it  probable 
that^  Lucius  was  ordained  on  the  25th  of  September,  and  sat 
five  whole  months  and  ten  days,  dying  on  the  fourth  of 
March,  253.  Basnage^  differs  very  little  from  him.  Lucius 
was  banished  from  Rome  under  Gall  us ;  but  he  soon°  return- 
ed. Of  his  speedy  release  there  is  no  reason  known,  beside 
the  divine  goodness.  We  have  a  letter  of  St.  Cyprian  to 
Lucius,  wherein  he  congratulates  him'^  upon  his  return  from 

"  H.  E.  L.  vi.  cap.  43.  p.  242.  B.  C.  D.  "  — k«i  KopvrjXuf)  n^ 

Kara  'Pwfirjv  ypaipii,  StKuntvoQ  avm  Tr}V  Kara  ts  "RonaTH  ettitoXj;!/.  H.  E. 
1,  vi.  cap.  46.  p.  247.  D.  ''  Vid.  Basnag.  ibid. 

y  Apud  Cyprian.  Ep.  49,  50.  [juxta  Pamelium.]  46,  48. 

^  ■  Ad  Cyprianum  Carthaginensem  episcopum  plures  scripsit  epistolas,  et 
alias  ad  alios.     Trithem.  de  Script.  Ec.  cap.  40.  *  Ann.  252.  n.  xii. 

^  Mem.  Ecc.  T.  iii.  P.  iii.  Saint  Corneille,  Art.  17.  p.  71.  et  Note  xv. 

<=  Lib.  vii.  cap.  2.  "^  Pagi  Crit.  252.  n.  14  —  17. 

^  Annal.  Cyprian.  252.  n.  15.  ^  Ann.  252.  n.  13. 

B  Pearson,  ib.  n.  18. 

•^  Et  nuper  quidem  tibi,  frater  carissime,  gratulati  sumus,  cum  te  honore 
geminato  in  ecclesiae  suae  administratione  confessorem  pariter  et  sacerdotem 
constituit  divina  dignatio.  Sed  et  nunc  non  minus  tibi  et  comitibus  tuis  atque 
universae  fratemitati  gratulamur,  quod  cum  eadem  gloria  et  laudibus  vestris  re- 


78  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

his  exile,  as  he  says  he  had  done  before  upon  his  ordination 
and  confession.  In  another  letter,  written  afterwards  to  Pope 
Stephen,  Cyprian'  calls  Lucius  a  martyr;  but  that  word  is 
not  here  to  be  understood  strictly  ;  for,  properly  speaking, 
Lucius  was  only  a  confessor. 

AVe  know  of  no  writings  of  Lucius''   but  such  as  are 
ascribed  to  him  without  fiTound, 


CHAP.  XLVIL 

NOVATUS,  OTHERWISE  CALLED  NOVATIAN 

I.  His  history.  IL  His  and  his  followers'  peculiar  opinions. 
in.  The  time  oj'  his  taking  up  his  particular  sentiment. 
IV.  History  of  his  followers.  V.  His  xcorks.  VI.  His 
character.  VII.  His  testimony  to  the  hooks  oj' the  JSTew 
Testament.  VIII.  Scriptures  received  by  the  Novatians, 
hisjbllowers. 

ST.  JEROM'S  chapter  of '^  Novatus,  next  following  that  of 
Dionysius  of  Alexandria,  being  short,  I  shall  transcribe  it 
here  entire  :  '  Novatus,'^  presbyter  of  the  city  of  Rome,  hav- 
'  ing  endeavoured  to  invade  the  episcopal  chair  in  opposi- 
*  tion  to  Cornelius,  formed  the  sect  of  the  Novatians,  whom 
'  the  Greeks  call  pure ;  not  allowing  apostates  to  be  received, 
'  though  they  repent.  The  first  author  of  this  rigid  princi- 
'  pie  was  Novatus,  Cyprian's  presbyter.  His  works  are  such 
'  as  these ;  Of  Easter,  Of  the  Sabbath,  Of  Circumcision,  Of 

duces  vos  denuo  ad  suos  fecerit  benigna  Domini  et  larga  protectio.  Cypr.  Ep. 
6L  [al.  58.]  init.  '  Servandus  est  enim  antecessorum  nostrorum 

beatoairn  martyrum  Comelii  et  Lucii  honor  gloriosus. llli  enim  pleni 

Spiritu  Dei  et  in  glorioso  martvrio  constituti  dandam  esse  lapsis  pacem  censue- 
runt.     Ep.  G8.  [al.  67.]  p.  17'9.  "  Vid.  Basnag.  ibid.  n.  xiv. 

^  Of  Novatus.]  He  is  now  generally  called  Novatian  :  but  I  hope  to  show 
at  the  end  of  this  chapter,  that  his  true  name  is  Novatus. 

**  Novatianus  Romanae  urbis  presbyter,  adversus  Comelium  calhedram 
sacerdotalem  conatus  invadere.  Novatianorum,  quod  Graece  dicitur  KoBapwv 
[al.  Ko^apov]  dogma  constituit,  nolens  apostatas  suscipere  pcenitentes.  Hujus 
auctor  Novatus,  Cypriani  presbyter,  fuit.  Scripsit  autem  de  Pascha,  de  Sab- 
bato,  de  Circumcisione,  de  Sacerdote,  de  Oratione,  de  Cibis  Judaicis,  de  In- 
stantia,  de  Atlalo,  multaque  alia,  et  de  Trinitate  grande  volumen,  quasi  txtrojutjv 
operis  Tertulliani  faciens;  quod  plerique  nescientes,  Cypriani  existimant 
Ilieron.  de  Vir.  111.  cap.  70. 


NovATus.     A.  D.  251.  79 

*  the"^  bigh-priest,  Of  prayer,  Of  Jewish  meats,  [another"^ 
'  piece,  the  title  of  which  1  do  not  understand,]  Concerning 

*  Attains ;  and  many  others ;  and,  Of  the  Trinity,  a  large 
'  volume,  being  a  kind  of  epitome  of  a  work  of  Tertullian. 
'  Many  by  mistake  consider  this  as  a  work  of  Cyprian.' 

There  is  another  authentic  account  of  Novatus  in  the  frag- 
ments of  the  before-mentioned  long  letter  of  Cornelius  to 
Fabius,  bishop  of  Antioch,  which  we  have  preserved 
in  Eusebius's  Ecclesiastical  History.  As  it  is  the  usual 
method  of  this  work  to  take  the  history  of  writers,  as  often 
as  we  can,  from  contemporaries,  it  is  fit  we  should  hear 
Cornelius. 

In  this  letter,  written  after  the  council  of  Rome,  where 
Novatus  and  his  principles  had  been  condemned,  near  the 
end  of  the  year  251,  or  at  the  beginning  of  252,  Cornelius 
informs  Fabius,  that  several  of  those,  who  had  sided  with 
Novatus,  had  now  deserted  him.  '  3Iaximus,'  says*^  he,  '  a 
'  presbyter  among  us,  and  Urbanus,  who  have  acquired 
'  great  honour  by  the  confessions  they  have  made  of  our 

*  religion;  and  Sidonius,  and  Celerinus,  a  man  who,  through 
'  the  divine  mercy,  has  patiently  endured  all  kinds  of  tor- 
'  ments,  and  by  the  strength  of  his  faith,  surmounting  the 
'  weakness  of  his  body,  completely  vanquished  the  enemy ; 
'  all  these,  he*^  says,  having  detected  Novatus's  subtilty,  his 
'  lies,  perjuries,  unsociable  and  wolfish   disposition,  were 

*  returned  to  the  holy  church,  giving  proofs  of  all  these 
'  things  in  the  presence  of  divers  bishops  and  presbyters, 
'  and  a  great  number  of  the  laity  ;  lamenting  and  confessing 
'  their  fault,  that,  being  seduced,  they  had  for  a  time  with- 

*  drawn  themselves  from  the  church.'  And  soon  afiter,  as 
Eusebius  says,  Cornelius  adds;  '  Thiss  wonderful  man,  this 
'  zealous  defender  of  church  discipline  in  all  its  strictness, 
'  when  he  had  determined  to  seize  the  episcopate,  which  was 
'  not  assigned  him  by  heaven,  chose  out  two  of  his  associates, 

*  men  of  an  abandoned  character:  these  he  sent  into  an 
'  obscure  corner  of  Italy,  to  fetch  thence  three  bishops,  sim- 
'  pie  and  illiterate  men,  whom  they  persuaded  to  believe  that, 

*  a  difference  having  arisen  at  Rome,  they  ought  by  all  means 
'  to  hasten  thither  to  assist  as  mediators,  together  with  other 

*=  Of  the  high  priest.]  In  the  Latin,  de  Sacerdote.  But  whether  my  trans- 
lation be  right,  I  cannot  say.  Du  Pin  translates,  du  Souverain  Pontife;  Tille- 
mont,  sur  le  Pontife.  ^  Another  piece,  the  title  of  which  I 

do  not  understand.]  In  the  Latin  of  Jerom,  de  Instantia  :  in  the  Greek  ver- 
sion of  Sophroniiis,  Trtpt  riov  tvf^wTwv  :  by  Du  Pin  translated,  de  la  Fer- 
mere,;  by  Tillemont,  sur  I'lnstance.  ^  Ap.  Euseb.  H.  E.  1.  vi. 

cap.  43.  p.  242.  D.  f  Ibid.  p.  243.  A. 

«  Ibid.  C.  D.  et  p.  244. 


80  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  ilistorij. 

'  bishops,  in  composing*  it.  When  they  were  come  to  Rome, 
'  they  being,  as  1  said,  persons  of  little  experience,  and  un- 
'  acquainted  with  the  arts  and  subtilties  of  designing  men,^ 
'  he  shut  them  up  in  a  private  apartment  with  some  of  his 
'  confidants ;  and  when  he  had  made  them  eat  and  drink  to 
'  excess,  at  four  of  the  clock  in  the  afternoon''  he  compelled 
'  them  to  ordain  him  bishop,  by  a  vain  and  ineffectual  im- 
'  position  of  their  hands.  Not  long  after  one  of  those  bishops 
'  came  to  the  church,  with  tears  lamenting  and  confessing 
'  his  fault ;  whom  we  received  to  communion  as  a  layman, 
'  at  the  earnest  entreaties  of  the  people.  Having  deposed 
'  the  other  two,  we  appointed  successors  in  their  room,  whom 
'  Ave  have  sent  to  take  possession  of  their  sees.  Such  dis- 
'  turbances  and  divisions  has  this  zealous  defender  of  the 
'  gospel  caused  in  a  church  where  he  knows  there  are 
'  forty-six  presbyters,  seven  deacons,  and  as  many  sub-dea- 
'  cons ;  forty-two  acolyths,  exorcists,  readers,  and  porters, 
'  fifty-two ;  and  above  fifteen  hundred  widows  and  other 
'  indigent  persons  ;  who  are  all  maintained  by  the  grace  and 
'  bounty  of  the  Lord.  But  no  respect  for  all  these,  nor  for 
'  the  vast  multitude  of  the  people  of  this  large  and  flourish- 
'  ing  church,  could  restrain  him  from  so  desperate  an 
'  attempt.'  Then,  says  Eusebius,  after  some  other  things 
intervening,  he  proceeds ;  '  And  what  was  the  grounds  of 
'  these  aspiring  thoughts  ?  upon  what  worthy  deeds  of  his 
'  did  he  build  his  hopes  of  a  bishopric  ?  was  it,  that"  he  had 
'  been  always,  and  from  the  beginning  of  the  church  ;  or  had 
'  sustained  many  combats  in  its  defence ;  or  had  been  in 
'many  dangers  for  the  sake  of  religion?  No:  the''  first 
'  occasion  of  his  faith  was  a  dangerous  distemper ;  and,  when 
'  all  hopes  of  life  Mere  g"one,  he  received  baptism  by  the 
'  pouring  on  of  Avater  as  he  lay  in  his  bed,  if  that  may 
'  be  calhid  baptism.  Moreover,  afterwards,  through  fear 
'  and  fondness  of  life,  in  the  time  of  persecution  he  disowned 
'  his  being  a  presbyter.  For  being  desired  by  the  deacons 
'  to  come  out  of  his  chamber,  where  he  had  shut  himself  up, 
'  and  to  comfort  and  encourage  the  brethren  as  became  a 
'  presbyter  to  do,  he  was  so  far  from  complying  with  their 
'  entreaties,  that  he  put  them  oflT  Avith  scorn,  saying  he  would 
'  be  no  longer  a  presbyter,  and  that  he  Avas  for  another  sort 
'  of  philosophy.'  And  to  pass  over  some  other  things,  says 
Eusebius,  he  observes ;  '  Thus'  behaved  this  person,  Avho 

I'  'Qp^t  StKary.  ib.  p.  243.  D. 

'   Af)a  yt  dia  to  iK  opxtjc  ffTy  {kkXtjiti^  avt^pa^pOai ;  ib.  p.  244.  B. 

"^   AXX'  fK  «<rtv.  ({)  yt  w^op^iri  m  iriTivcrai  ytyovtv, k.  X.  ib.  C. 

'  P.  245.  A, 


NovATus.     A.  D.  251.  81 

'  had  been  made  presbyter  by  the  special  favour  of  the  bishop 
'  of  that  time,  when  all  the  clergy  and  most  of  the  people  op- 

♦  posed  it ;  forasmuch  as  it  was  not  a  regular  thing,  to  admit 
'  a  man  into  the  number  of  the  clergy,  who  had  only  been  be- 
'  sprinkled  as  he  was  in  his  bed  under  a  distemper.'  Cornelius 
says  likewise,  in  this  letter,  that""  Novatus  had  obliged  his 
followers  to  take  an  oath  upon  the  eucharist,  that  they  would 
never  forsake  him,  to  go  over  to  his  adversary.  Neverthe- 
less, Cornelius  soon  after  adds;  '  He"  is  now  left  almost 
'  alone,  the  brethren  deserting*  him  daily,  and  returning  to  the 
'  church.  Whom  also  Moses,  a  blessed  martyr,  who  among 
'  us  lately  suffered  a  glorious  martyrdom,  perceiving  the 
'  confidence  and  presumption  of  the  man,  separated  from  his 

*  communion, together  Avith  five  presbyters,  who  with  him  had 
'  schismatically  forsaken  the  church.'  To  conclude;  Euse- 
bius"  says,  that  at  the  end  of  this  epistle  Cornelius  expressly 
mentions  the  names  of  the  bishops  who  had  met  in  council 
at  Rome,  and  there  condemned  Novatus,  and  the  names  of 
the  churches  they  governed ;  as  also  the  names  of  those 
bishops  who  could  not  be  present  at  Rome,  but  by  letters 
had  signified  their  concurrence  in  the  same  resolutions,  and 
the  names  of  the  cities  to  which  they  belonged. 

We  have  now  seen  the  account  which  Cornelius  gives  of 
Novatus ;  and  if  there  m  ere  remaining-  any  letter  of  Novatus 
relating  to  Cornelius  and  his  election,  it  is  very  likely  we 
should  not  be  unwilling  to  produce  it.  However,  having 
put  down  these  histories  from  Jerom  and  Cornelius,  I  shall 
endeavour  to  take  in  a  few  other  particulars,  and  make  some 
remarks. 

PhilostorgiusP  says  that  Novatus  was  a  Phrygian ;  but 
Photius,  who  relates  this  from  him,  adds,  that  he  does  not 
know  whence  he  learned  it.  Valesiusi  indeed  is  inclined  to 
give  credit  to  Philostorgius ;  but  I  think  that"^  Mr.  Jackson 
has  shown  it  to  be  very  improbable:  nor  does  there  appear 
to  be  any  other  ground  for  that  supposition,  but  that  the  sect 
of  the  Novatians  was  numerous  in  Phrygia. 

It  is  probable,  from  the  account  which  Cornelius  gives  of 
Novatus's  sickness  and  baptism,  that  he  was  not  born  of 
christian  parents.  It  is  generally  thought  that  he  was  at 
first  a  stoic  philosopher.    So'  says  Cave.    And  Mr.  Jackson' 

■"  P.  245.  B.  "  lb.  C.  °  lb.  D. 

p  PhUost.  H.  E.  1.  viii,  cap.  15.  i  Vales.  Not.  ad  Pocrat.  H. 

E.  1.  iv.  c.  28.  p.  57.  '  Vid.  Jackson,  Praef.  p.  viii. 

'  Novatianus,  ex  stoico  philosopho  Christianus.     Cav,  Hist.  Lit. 

'  Consentiunt  autem  oinnes,  ex  stoico  philosopho  Christiaai  noraeii  induisse 
Romae,    Jackson,  ibid. 

VOL.    III.  Q 


82  Credibility  of  the  Guspel  History. 

thinks  this  agreed  on  all  hands.  But  I  do  not  know  of  any 
ancient  writers  who  call  Novatus  a  stoic,  though  his  philo- 
sophy and  eloquence  be  often  mentioned  by"  them.  Tille- 
mont  was  aware  of  this,  and  says,  '  that "  the  ancients  have 

*  not  expressly  said  what  was  the  philosophy  which  he  pro- 

*  fessed  :  but  we  know  that  it  was  the  stoic  philosophy  which 
'  taught  that  rigour,  and  that  parity  of  sins,  m  hich  Cyprian 
'  reproaches  Novatus  with.'  And'"  Du  Pin  is  so  cautious, 
as  to  say  no  more  than  that  Novatus  had  been  a  philosopher 
before  he  was  a  christian.  After  the  same  manner  speaks" 
Frederic  Spanheim. 

Novatus  was  presbyter  of  the  church  of  Rome :  that  is  out 
of  question.  But  Cornelius  does  not  inform  us  of  the  name  of 
the  bishop  by  M'hom  he  was  ordained :'  it  is  ho^A  ever  very 
probable  that  it  was  Fabian,  or  one  of  his  near  predecessors. 

St.  Jerom  says  that  Novatus,  Cyprian's  presbyter,  Avas  the 
first  author  of  the  sect  which  Novatus  formed.  St.  Cyprian, 
M'ho  gives  a  very  bad  character  of  his  presbyter,  confirms  y 
that  account ;  making-  him  the  principal  cause  of  all  the  dis- 
turbances that  happened  at  Rome  :  and^  Pacian,  who  was 
well  acquainted  with  St.  Cyprian's  letters,  writes  to  the 
same  purpose.  But  the  Greek  writers  take  no  notice  of  this  : 
nor  is  there  any  mention  of  that  African  Novatus  in  the 
fragments  of  Cornelius's  letter  to  Fabius,  which  1  have  largely 
transcribed. 

Cornelius  says,  that  in  the  time  of  the  persecution  Novatus 
refused  to  comfort  the  brethren,  though  desired  by  the  dea- 
cons ;  and  that  he  even  disclaimed  the  character  of  a  pres- 
byter, and  in  effect  renounced  the  christian  religion ;  saying 
that  he  was  for  another  kind  of  philosophy.     But  it  may  be 

"  Jactet  se  licet,  et  philosophiam  vel  eloqiientiam  suam  superbis  vocibus  prae- 

dicet.   Cypr.  Ep.  55.  [al.  52.]  p.  1 12.    Quid  ad  hsec  IVovatiaaus  ? in  pemi- 

ciem  fratrum  lingua  sua  perstrepens,  et  facundiae  venenatae  jacula  contorquens ; 
raagis  durus  seciilaris  philosophise  pravitate,  quam  philosophias  dominicae  levi- 
tate pacificus,  &c.  Id.  Ep.  60.  [Pam.  57.]  p.  142.  Ignosco  tamen,  frater,  si 
quid  et  tu  de  tuo  auctore  pi-sesumis,  et  Novatiani  philosophiani,  per  quam  ille 
naufragium  religionis  incurrit,  cum  Hesiodi  auctoritate  conjungis.  Pacian.  ad 
Sympson.  Ep.  2.  p.  308.  C.  ap.  B.bl.  Patr.  T.  iv.  Ita  tuus  iste  philosophus, 
sapientiam  suam  quseiens  statuere,  &c.     Id.  Ibid.  G. 

"  TiUemont,  Saint  Comeille,  Art.  iv.  Mem.  Ec.  T.  iii.  P.  iii.  p.  15. 

"  B.b.  des  Aut.  Ecc.  Novatien.  "  Novatianus,  ex  pliilosopho  etclinico 

factus  Romanae  ecclesise  presbyter,  &c.     Fr.  Span.  Hist.  Ec.  Sec.  iii.  p.  781. 

y  Idem  est  Novatus,  qui  apud  nos  primum  discordiae  et  schismatis  incendium 
seminavil;— qui  in  ipsa  persecutione  ad  evcrtendas  fratrum  mentesalia  quaedam 
persecutio  nostris  fiiit.  Plane,  quoniam  pro  magnrtudine  sua  debeat  Car- 
thaginem  Roma  pnccedere,  illic  majora  et  graviora  commisit.  Qui  istic  adver- 
sus  ecclesiam  diaconum  fccerat,  ilhc  episcopiun  fecit.  Cypr.  Ep.  52.  [al.49.] 
p.  97.  ^  Ep.  3.  p.  310.  E.  F.  ap.  Bibl.  PP.  T.  iv. 


NovATus.     A.  D.  251.  83 

suspected  tliathcre  is  some  mistake,  or  some  inisrepresentation. 
It  is  manifest,  that  during  a  large  part  of  the  Decian  perse- 
cution, and  for  some  good  m  hile  after  the  martyrdom  of  Fa- 
bian, Novatus  maintained  his  rank,  and  was  in  great  repute 
with  his  brethren  the  clergy  of  Rome.  For  the  letter  sent 
to  Cyprian  in  the  name  of  the  Roman  clergy,  and  allowed'' 
by  all  to  have  been  drawn  up  by  Novatus,  Avas  not  written 
till  about''  the  end  of  August,  250 :  and  the  anonymous 
author  of  the  tract  against  Novatus,  joined  with  St.  Cyprian's 
works,  says,  '  that "  Novatus,  so  long  as  he  M'as  in  the  church, 

*  bewailed  the  faults  of  other  men  as  his  own,  bore  the  bur- 

*  dens  of  the  brethren,  as  the  apostle  directs,  and  by  his 

*  exhortations  strengthened  such  as  were  weak  in  the  faith.' 
Possibly  some  retirement  of  Novatus  is  the  foundation  of  this 
charge.  But  every  flight  or  retreat,  in  time  of  persecution, 
is  not  really  blamable ;  though  such  things  rarely  escape 
censure.  There  were  other  good  and  eminent  men  about 
that  time  who  did  the  same  ;  Cyprian  in  particular,  avIio  yet 
afterwards  had  a  glorious  martyrdom.  And  Novatus's  trea- 
tise of  Jewish  meats  was**  actually  written  in  some  retired 
place:  and,  as  it  is  a  letter,  it  appears  farther  from  it,  that 
he  was  upon  good  terms  with  those  to  whom  he  writes,  and 
that  he  had  written  to  them  more  than  once,  to  comfort  them, 
since  his  retreat ,  where  also  he  had  received  divers  affec- 
tionate letters  from  them,  asking'  his  council  and  assistance. 

*  Nam  in  epistola  sua  ita  posuerunt Additum  est  etiara,  Novatiano  tunc 

scribente,  et  quod  scripserat  sua  voce  recitante,  et  presbytero  Moyse,  tunc  adhuc 
confessore,  nunc  jam  martjTe,  subscribente ;  ut  lapsis  infirrais,  et  in  exitu  con- 
stitutis,  pax  daretur.  Quae  literae  per  totuni  raundum  missae  sunt,  et  in  notitiani 
ecclesiis  omnibus  et  universis  fratribus  perlatae  sunt.  Cypr.  ad  Antonian.  Ep. 
55.  [al.  52.]  p.  102.  Vid.  etiam  Pacian.  Ep.  3.  p.  310.  D. 

^  Mense  Augusto  exeunte  clerus  Romanus  scnbit  ad  Cyprianum  literas,  &c. 
Pearson.  Ann.  Cypr.  A.  250.  n.  xvi.  Conf.  Pagi  Crit.  250.  n.  xii. 

*■  Unde  igitur  et  tam  sceleratus,  et  tam  perditus,  tarn  discord  iae  furore  vesa- 
nus,  extiterit  iste  Novatianus,  invenire  non  possum  ;  qui  semper  in  domo  una, 
id  est,  Christi  ecclesia,  proximorum  delicta  ut  propria  fleverit,  onera  fratrum  ; 
sicut  apostolus  hortatur,  sustinuerit,  lubricos  in  fide  ccelesti  allocutione  cono- 
boravit.     Anon,  ad  Novat.  Hseret.  p.  19.  m.  Oxon. 

^  Etsi  mihi,  fratressanctis3imi,exoptatissimusdies  ille, — quo  literas  vestras  et 
scripta  suscipio  (quid  enim  me  aliud  nunc  faciat  liberiorem  ?)  tamen  non  minus 
egregium  diem  et  inter  eximios  arbitror  computandum,  quo  similes  vobis 
affectus  debitae  caritatis  remittens,  et  ego  ad  vos  compari  voto  literas  scribo. 
Nihil  enim  me,  fratres  sanctissimi,  tantis  constrictum  vinculis  tenet,- — quam  ne 
jacturam  vobis  quamdam  per  absentiam  meam  putetis  illatam,  cui  remedium 
connitor  dare,  dum  elaboro  vobis  me  prsesentem  frequentibus  Uteris  exhibere. 
Quamquam  ergo  et  ofiicium  debitum  et  cura  suscepta  et  ipsa  ministerii  imposita 
persona  hanc  a  me  hterarum  scribendarum  exposcunt  necessitatem — Quam 
vero  sint  perversi  Jiidsei  et  ab  intellectu  suse  legis  alieni,  duabus  epistolis  supe- 
rioribus,  ut  arbitror,  plene  ostendi.  De  Cib.  Jud.  cap.  1.  p.  255 — 258.  Ed 
Jackson. 

G    2 


84  CrecJibilil)/  of  the  Gospel  History. 

Mr.  Jackson^  siipposetli  that  this  letter,  or  treatise,  was  sent 
by  Novatus  from  the  place  of  his  retreat  under  the  Decian 
persecution  near  the  end  of  the  year  250,  to  the  people  of 
the  church  of  Rome,  from  whom  he  was  then  necessarily 
absent.  If  this  could  be  relied  upon,  it  might  entirely  wipe 
off  the  blot  which  Cornelius  has  cast  upon  Novatus  :  for  then 
it  mioht  be  reckoned  that  this  retreat  is  the  thino-  to  which 
Cornelius  refers,  but  gives  it  a  wrong"  turn  ;  whilst  from  that 
letter  it  appears  not  to  have  given  offence  to  any  body  at 
that  time.  But*^  some  think  that  Novatus  there  writes  in 
the  character  of  a  bishop.  Then  this  piece  must  be  supposed 
to  have  been  written  after  his  ordination,  and  separation  from 
the  church,  to  those  christians  that  adhered  to  him,  and  stood 
firm  in  the  persecution  they  endured,  even  when  he  was  oblig"- 
ed  to  be  absent  from  them.  If  this  should  be  thought  most 
probable,  it  shows,  however,  the  good  temper  of  Novatus  at 
that  time,  his  concern  for  the  people  under  his  care,  his  dili- 
gence in  his  charge,  and  the  mutual  affection  between  him 
and  his  people ;  and  that  both  he  and  they  were  odious  to 
heathens  as  well  as  to  catholics :  whereas  Cyprian ^  intimates, 
that  though  Cornelius  Avhen  bishop  was  persecuted,  the 
Novatians  lived  at  ease;  which  might  be  the  case  then,  and 
yet  at  some  other  time  the  Novatians  might  have  their  full 
share  in  the  troubles  brought  upon  christians.  Cyprian 
himself  Avas  not  insensible  of  this,  though'^  he  denies  they 
could  gain  any  honour  by  it;  which  I  shall  not  dispute  with 
him  at  present.  But  whenever  this  letter  was  written,  whe- 
ther before  or  after  his  episcopal  ordination,  it  does  honour 
to  Novatus.  It  is  not  the  letter  of  a  man  who  deserted  his 
charge,  or  apostatized  from  the  gospel,  though  he  had  re- 

*  Praefat.  p.  xi.  '  II  le  qualifie  du  nom  de  lettre,  aussi  bien  que 

les  deux  autres  dont  nous  venoas  de  parler ;  et  il  I'addresse,  Au  peuple  qui 
demeure  ferrae  dans  Vevangile.  [Plebi  in  evangelic  pei-stanti.]  II  y  parle  en 
Eveque,  et  dit,  que  ceiix  a  qui  il  ecrit,  et  dont  la  charge  lui  avoit  ete  commise, 
gardoient  I'evangile  dans  toute  sa  purete,  sans  meslange  d'aucune  doctrine  faitsse 
ou  corrompue,  et  qu'  ils  I'enseignoient  de  la  meme  maniere  aux  autres  avec 
courage  et  avec  force.  Par  ou  nous  avons  lieu  de  juger  que  c'etoit  depuis  son 
schisme.  II  etoit  alors  absent  de  son  peuple  pretendu.  Tillemont.  les  Nova- 
tiens.  Art.  3.  p.  87,  88. 

8  Quid  ad  haec  Novatianus  ? Agnoscitne  jam,  qui  sit  sacerdos  Dei  ?  quae 

sit  ecclesia  et  domus  Christi  ?  Qui  sint  Dei  servi,  quos  diabolus  infestet  ?  Qui 
sint  Christian!,  quos  antichristus  inipugnet  ?  Neque  enim  quserit  illos,  quos 
jam  subegit ;  aut  gestit  evertere,  quos  jam  suos  fecit.  Inimicuset  hostiseccle- 
siae,  quos  alienavit  ab  ecclesia  et  foras  duxit,  ut  captivos  et  vinctos  contemnit 
et  praiterit.     Cypr.  ad  Cornel.  Ep.  60.  [57.]  p.  142. 

''  Quamquam,  etsi  aliquis  ex  talibas  fuerit  apprehensus,  non  est  quod  sibi 
quasi  in  confessione  nominis  blandiatur ;  cum  constet,  si  occisi  ejusmodi  extra 
ecclesiam  fuerint,  fidei  coronam  non  esse,  sed  pcenam  potius  esse  perfidiae. 
Ibid.  p.  143.  in  it. 


NovATus.     A.  D.  251.  85 

tired.  To  all  whicli  I  would  add  from  Mr.  Jackson,  who 
scruples  not  to  call  thisstory  of  Cornelius'  a  calumny,  that "^ 
Cyprian  takes  no  notice  of  this  faultainong  all  his  reproaches 
of  No  vat  us. 

Another  thing  to  be  observed  of  Cornelius's  letter  is,  that 
it  afl'ords  unexceptionable  evidence  of  Novatus  having  been 
ordained  bishop  by  the  hands  of  three  bishops. 

Cornelius  gives  a  sad  account  of  the  ordination  of  Novatus, 
and  of  the  persons  and  methods  by  whicli  it  was  procured  : 
but  it  ought  to  be  remembered  that,  in  some  of  the  passages 
above  transcribed,  he  owns  that  Novatus  had  with  him  for  a 
while  five  presbyters  and  several  confessors ;  some  of  whom 
were  of  great  eminence,  and  had  gained  much  honour  by 
their  confessions.  Cornelius,  in  a  letter  to  Cyprian,  giv- 
ing an  account  of  the  return  of  some  of  them  to  the 
church,  writes,  that'  they  owned  they  had  concurred  in  the 
ordination  of  Novatus.  From  Pacian™  it  may  be  argued, 
that  Novatus  Mas  ordained  upon  their  particular  recom- 
mendation :  and  St.  Cyprian,  in  the  letter  he  wrote  to  the 
same  confessors,  to  congratulate  them  upon  their  return  to 
the  church,  reminds  them"  '  of  the  great  grief  they  had 
'  given  him  when  they  approved  of  the  schism  and  heresy 
'  of  Novatus  :  so  that  it  seemed,'  he  says,  '  as  if  they  had  lett 
'  their  glory  behind  them  in  the  prison,'  Since  then  so  large 
a  part  of  the  church  of  Rome,  some  of  them  men  of  eminence, 
and,  in  ail  other  matters,  of  unblemished  virtue,  approved  of 
the  ordination  of  Novatus ;  and  at  last  came  over  to  Cor- 
nelius, as  may  be  supposed,  chiefly  for  peace'  sake,  and  in 
deference  to  the  sentiments  of  the  majority  of  their  brethren  ; 
it  may  be  questioned  whether  that  affair  was  altogether  so 
scandalous  as  Cornelius  has  represented  it;  and  it  may  be 
justly  suspected  that  he  useth  strong  and  aggravating*  ex- 
pressions.    Besides,  Novatus  and  his  people  made  gi-ievous 

'  Pi-aef.  p.  xi.  ^  Cujusmodi  criminis  Cypnanus  intei"  omnia 

opprobria  contra  ilium  exaggerata,  Ep.  57.  non  incusavit.     lb.  p.  xii. 

'  tantummodo  circumduc'os  commisisse  se   quoque  schismatica,  et 

haeresis  auctores  fuisse,  ut  paterentiir  ei  manus,  quasi  in  episcopura,  imponi. 
Cornelius  ap.  Cyprian.  Ep.  49.  [46.]  p.  92. 

""  Invenit  [Novatus  Carthaginensis]  aliquos  ex  eorum  numero,  qui  tempes- 
tatem  persecutionis  ilFius  evaserant ;  apud  quos  banc  ipsam  de  lapsis  receptis 
Cornelio  conflaret  invidiam.  Dat  eonim  epistolas  ad  Novatianum.  llle  ex 
auctoritate  epistolarum,  sedente  jam  Romee  episcopo,  advereum  fas  saceidotii 
singularis,  alterius  episcopi  sibi  nomen  assumit.     Pacian.  Ep.  3.  p.  310.  F. 

"  Dolebam  vehementer,  et  graviter  angebar. — Posteaquam  vos  de  carcere 
prodeuntes  schismaticus  et  hsereticus  error  excepit,  aic  res  erat,  quasi  vestra 
gloria  in  carcere  remansisset.  lllic  enim  resedisse  vestri  nominis  dignitos  vide- 
batur,  quando  milites  Christi  non  ad  ecclesiam  de  carcere  redirent,  in  quern  prius 
cum  ecclesise  laude  et  gratulatione  venissent.     Cypr.  Ep.  54.  [Pam.  51.]  p.  99. 


S6  Credibility  of  ihe  Gospel  History. 

complaints,  and  cast  foul  reflections  upon  Cornelius;  as" 
appears  from  one  of  Cornelius's  own  letters  to  Cyprian,  and 
from  divers  ofi'  Cyprian's  letters  still  remaining.  Though 
therefore  every  thing"  said  by  Novatus  and  his  party  might 
not  be  true,  yet  it  is  not  impossible  but  Cornelius  himself 
may  have  taken  some  steps  which  could  not  be  fully  justi- 
fied. So  much  I  think  we  may  be  allowed  to  say  in  behalf 
of  Novatus,  a  man,  whose  faults  stand  in  full  light,  recorded 
in  the  writings  of  his  enemies ;  not  without  some  aggravations 
and  false  colourings,  as  it  seems  ;  whilst  we  have  not  remain- 
ing* one  line  of  his  in  defence  of  himself,  or  against  his  ad- 
versaries. 

What  became  of  Novatus,  after  the^  contest  about  the 
bishoprick  of  Rome,  is  not  certainly  known.  Socrates i 
however  says  expressly,  that  he  suffered  martyrdom  in  the 
persecution  raised  by  the  emperor  Valerian.  From  Pacian, 
bishop  of  Barcelona  about  the  year,  370,  we  know  that  the 
Novatians  gloried  in  the  founder  of  their  sect  as  a  martyr. 
Symprouian,  against  whom  Pacian  writes,  affirmed,  that 
Cyprian  had  made  mention  of  Novatus  as  a  martyr,  and 
having"  died  before  him  :  but  ^  Pacian  denies  the  truth  of  this, 
and  says,  that  if  Novatus  did  suffer  somewhat  from  heathens, 
yet  he  was  not  put  to  death.  Eulogius,  archbishop  of 
Alexandria  near  the  end  of  the  sixth  century,  another  writer 

"  Qui  [confessores]  cum  venisseat,  et  a  presbyteris  quse  gesserant  exigerentur, 
novissime  quod  per  omnes  ecclesias  literce  calumniis  et  maledictis  plense,  eomm 
nomine  frequentes  missae  fuissent,  et  pene  oranes  ecclesias  perturbassent ;  cir- 
cumventos  se  esse  affirtna^'erunt,  nee,  quid  in  Uteris  inesset,  scisse.  Cornel, 
ap.  Cypr.  Ep.  49.  [al.  46.]  p.  92. 

p  quando,  hteris  ab  utraque  parte  susceptis,  tuas  literas  legimus,  et 

episcopatus  tui  ordinationem  singularem  auribus  intimavimus.  Honoris  etiam 
communis  memores,  et  gravitatis  sacerdotalis  ac  sanctitatis  respectum  tenentes, 
ea  quae  ex  diverse  in  librum  ad  nos  transmissum  congesta  fuerant  acerbationi- 
bus  criminosis  respiiimus,  considerantes  pariter  et  ponderantes  quod  in  tanto 
frdtrum  numero,  religiosoque  conventu, — nee  legi  debeant,  nee  audiri.  Neque 
enim  facile  prornenda  sunt,  et  incaute  ac  temere  publicanda,  quae  discordioso 
stylo  scripta  audientibus  scandalum  moveant,  et  fratres  longe  positos  ac  trans 
mare  constitutes  incerla  opinione  confundant.  Cypr.  Ep.  45.  [al.  42.]  p.  87. 
Quod  autem  qusedam  de  illo  in  honesta  et  maligna  jactantur,  nolo  mircris.^— . 
Explorasse  autem  coUegas  nostros  scias,  et  verissime  comperisse,  nulla  ilium 
litx;lli,  ut  ([uidara  jactant,  labe  maculatum  esse  ;  sed  neque  cum  episcopis  qui 
sacrificaveruiit  communicationera  sacrilegam  miscuisse.-— Sed  et  quod  passim 
communicare  sacrificatis  Cornelium  tibi  nuntiatiimest,  hoc  etiam  de  apostatarum 
fictis  rumoribus  nascitur.    Cyprian,  ad  Antonian.  Ep.  55.  [al.  52.]  p.  105,  106. 

1  Socrat.  H.  E.  1.  iv.  cap.  28.  p.  246.  B. 

■■  Nam  quod,  ante  pa.«sum  Novatianum  putas,  et  Cyprianum  dixisse  sub- 
jungis :  Pnecessit  me  adversarius  meus ;  vide,  quam  manifeste  respondeam. 
Novatianus  nunquam  martyrium  tulit,  nee  ex  verbis  beatL«^imi  Cypriani  auditura 

istud,  aut  lectum  est. Porro,  etiamsi  passus  est  aliquid  Novatianus,  non  tameu 

etiam  occisus,  non  tamen  coronatus.     Pacian.  Ep.  3.  p.  308.  G.  H. 


NovATus.     A.  D.  251.  87 

against  the  Novatians,  speaks  of  a  book^  they  had  among 
them,  called  the  Martyrdom  of  Novatus.  But  he  treats  it 
as  a  forgery,  and  shows  it  was  false  and  fabulous.  Accord- 
ing to  his  account  it  was*  a  trifling-  thing,  a  little  book  of  a 
few  pages.  It  may  be  questioned  then  whether  there  be  a 
sufticient  evidence  remaining  to  satisfy  us  that  Novatus  died 
a  martyr :  though  it  may  be  reckoned  probable  from  the 
common  opinion  of  his  followers,  and  from  the  forecited 
passage  of  the  treatise  concerning  Jewish  meats,  written  in 
a  place  of  retreat  or  banishment,  that  he  was  a  confessor. 
Nor  does  Pacian  deny  this,  but  seems  to  grant  as  much. 

II.  Novatus  is  generally  reckoned  a  schismatic  and  a 
heretic.  Cornelius,  in  his  letters  to  Cyprian,  gives  him"  both 
these  hard  names :  and  Cyprian  likeM'ise  speaks  ^  in  the  same 
manner.  What  was  his  schism  we  have  seen  ;  what  was  his 
heresy  is  not  quite  so  clear.  St.  Jerom,  as  before  cited,  says 
Novatus  was  against  receiving  apostates,  though  they  re- 
pented. And  undoubtedly  that  was  his  opinion,  but  perhaps 
not  the  whole  of  it ;  for,  as  this  dispute  had  its  rise  upon 
occasion  of  the  great  numbers  of  persons  who  had  lapsed 
some  way  or  other  in  the  Decian  persecution,  Novatus  seems 
to  have  extended  his  severe  doctrine  to  all  such ;  not  only 
apostates,  or  those  who  had  actually  sacrificed,  but  to  others 
also,  who  had  been  guilty  of  any  slip  or  fault  at  that  time. 

Eusebius  says  that'"^  Novatus  excluded  those  from  all 
hopes  of  salvation  who  had  lapsed  in  time  of  persecution, 
though  they  gave  signs  of  a  sincere  conversion  and  re- 
pentance :  but  Socrates  says,  his^  opinion  v.'as,  that  they 
who  had  sacrificed  in  the  persecution  should  not  be  received 
to  communion  :  they  should  be  exhorted  to  repent ;  but 
their  pardon  should  be  referred  to  God,  who  is  able  and  has  a 
right  to  forgive  sins.  And  this  is  the  principle  of  the  Nova- 
tians; which y    Cyprian  ridicules  and  exposes,   and   Am- 

^  Eulog.  Contr.  Novat.  Libr.  vi.  ap.  Phot.  Cod.  208.  p.  530.  et  Cod.  280.  p. 
1621.  ^   KaKOTrXaTov  t(  kui  aSiararov  ypafifiaTioiov.  lb.  p.  1621.  m, 

"  Et  scias  quales  duces  et  protectores  iste  schismaticiis  et  hnereticus  lateri  suo 
seniper  junctos  habeat.  Cornel,  ap.  Cyprian.  Ep.  50.  [al.  48.]  p.  94.  Vid.  et  ep. 
49.  p.  92.  "  Posteaquam  vos  de  carcere  prodeunles  schismaticus  el 

haereticus  error  excepit.     Cypr.  Ep.  54.  p.  99.  Vid.  supra,  not."  p.  85. 

"  — ug  jxijKtr  sariQ  avroig  (jwrijpiag  tXTTi^oQ,  fitj  S'  ti  Tcavra  ra  hq  evi^po- 
^rjv  yvijmav  km  KaGapav  t^ofioXoyrjaiv  eTriTiXoiev.     Eus.  L.  vi.  cap.  43.  init. 

"  M);  0£;^£(T3at  thq  nziTtQvKOTaq  tig  ra  fivrrjpia'  nXXa  TrporpeTTtiv  fiev  avTsg 
eig  [itrai'oiav,  ri)v  Se  avyxi^piimv  i—irptTnu'  Qtijt,  t(ij  Ivvajxtvtj}  Kai  i^aaiav 
EXOvri  ffvy^Mptiv  ujxapT^jiaTa.     Socr.  L.  iv.  cap.  28.  p.  245.  B. 

y  Atque  O  frustrandse  tratemitatis  irrLsio !  O  miseromm  lamentantiuni  caduca 

deceptio  ! hortari  ad  satisfactionis  poenitentiam,  et  subtrahere  de  satisfactione 

medicinara  ;  dicere  fratribiis  nostris,  Plange,  et  lachrymas  funde,  et  diebus  et 


88  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

brose^  condemns,  and  shows*  to  be  extremely  absurd  and 
unreasonable. 

This,  most  probably,  is  the  true  account :  and  perhaps 
Eusebius,  and"^  some  others,  who  speak  much  after  the  same 
manner  with  him,  ought  to  be  so  understood  likewise,  though 
they  seem  to  express  themselves  differently ;  for  Ambrose 
too  charges  them*^  Mith  denying  salvation  to  men.  The 
meaning  of  those  writers  I  suppose  to  be  this,  that  the  Nova- 
tians,  even  by  their  hard-hearted  doctrine,  and  letting  them 
die  out  of  the  communion  of  the  church,  discouraged  men's  * 
repentance,  and  consequently  obstructed  their  pardon  and^ 
salvation.  Novatus  then  forbade  the  receiving  to  the  com- 
munion of  the  church  such  as  had  fallen  in  time  of  persecu- 
tion, whilst  other  christians  were  for  r&ceiving-  them  after 
tokens  of  repentance,  suitable  to  the  kind  and  degree  of  the 
offence ;  some  after  a  shorter,  others  not  till  after  a  longer, 
time  of  humiliation  and  penance;  all  however  who  desired 
it  in^  the  near  approach  of  death.  In  this  way  of  conceiving- 
of  this  matter  we  are  confirmed  by  the  accounts  Eusebius 
has  left  us  of  the  epistles  of  Dionysius  of  Alexandria  to  seve- 
ral, upon  the  doctrine  of  repentance,  and  the  various  degrees 
or  kinds  of  offences. 

But  though  the  controversy  upon  this  head  was  occasioned 
by  the  falls  of  some  under  persecution,  it  is  not  unlikely 
that  Novatus  himself,  or  his  followers  afterwards,  carried  this 
rigour  and  severity  to  other  sins,  sometimes  called  mortal, 
and  reckoned  more  heinous  than  others ;  such  as  adultery, 
fornication,  and  the  like  ;  withholding' the  communion  of  the 
church  from  all  who  were  surprised  into  any  of  these.     So 

noctibus  ingemisce, — sed  extra  ecclesiara  post  omnia  ista  morieris :  quaecumque 
ad  pacem  pertinent,  facies :  sed  nullam  pacem,  quam  quaeris,  accipies.  Cypr. 
Ep.  55.  [Pam.  52.]  p.  114.  in.  ^  Quid  autem  durius,  quam  ut 

indicant  poenitentiam,  quam  non  relaxant ;  cum  utique,  veniam  negando,  in- 
centivum  auferant  pcenitentioe?  Amb.  de  Pcen.  1.  i.  cap.  1.  n.  iv.  p.  390.  BenM. 

^  Frastra  enim  dicitis,  vos  prsedicare  poenitentiam,  qui  tollitis  fructum  pcEui- 
lentiee.  Homines  enim  ad  aliquod  studium  aut  praemiis  aut  fructibus  incitantur. 
Id.  ib.  cap.  16.  p.  413.  Conf.  cap.  11.  p.  404. 

^  —  adimendo  spem  salutis,  denegando  misericordiam  patris,  respuendo 
poenitentiam  fratris.  Anonym,  ad  Novatian.  Haeret.  apud  Cyprian,  p  16.  a. 
Oxon.  Et  tu  jam,  Novatiane,  judicas,  et  nullam  spem  pacis  ac  misericordiae 
habere  lapsos  praedicas.     Id.  p.  19.  infr.  m,  •=  Sed  quid  mirum,  si 

salutem  negatis  aliis,  qui  vestram  recasatis  ?  Ambr.  ib.  1.  ii.  c.  4.  [al.  5.]  p.  422. 

•^  Hinc  ergo  apparet,  Novatianum  cum  dole  dicere  agendam  poenitentiam. 
Ut  quid  enim  poeniteret,  si  delictum  aboleri  negatur  ?  Ex  Vet.  et  Nov.  Test. 
Qu.  cii.  ap.  August.  T.  iii.  in.  App. 

^  En,  qui  salutis  viam  fratribus  inexorabili  religione  praecludat !  Pacian. 
Ep.  2.  p.  309.  A.  '  Ut  lapsis  infirmis  et  in  exitu  constitutis  pax 

daretur,  ap.  Cypr.  Ep.  55.  [al.  52.]  p.  102. 


NovATus.     A.  D.  251.  89 

say"  Pacian,  aiul'^  Socrates,  and  the'  authorof  the  Questions 
out  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament,  and''  St.  Ambrose,  that 
the  Novatians  did  not  allow  the  church  a  right  to  pardon 
mortal  sins,  or  greater  sins,  committed  after  baptism.  And 
St.  Ambrose  will  have  it  that'  Novatus  was  more  rigid  than 
his  followers,  refusing  pardon  to  sins,  small  as  well  as  great. 
Theodoret  therefore  says,  that™  among  the  Novatians  repent- 
ance is  not  to  be  mentioned:  and  Cyprian  in"  very  strong 
terms  calls  Novatus  not  only  a  deserter  of  the  church,  but  an 
enemy  of  mercy,  a  murderer  of  repentance,  a  teacher  of  pride, 
a  corrupter  of  truth,  and  a  destroyer  of  charity. 

This  then  was  the  heresy  of  Novatus ;  the  principle  by 
which  he  and  his  people  were  distinguished  from  other 
christians  :  for  Avhich  they  arrogated  to  themselves,  (as" 
Eusebius,  andP  Augustine,  and'*  Ambrose,  and "^  other  writers 
intimate,)  or  received  from  their  adversaries,  by  way  of  de- 
rision, the  denomination  of  pure,  or  puritans. 

Nor  does  it  appear  that  Novatus  went  into  any  other  error 
of  moment;  for  Cyprian  is  not  unwilling  to  allow  that^  he 
agreed  with  catholic  christians  upon  the  doctrine  of  the 
Trinity.  Sozomen,  the  ecclesiastical  historian,  says  this*  Avas 
the  only  innovation  made  by  the  founder  of  the  Novatian 
sect,  not  to  receive  penitents  to  communion  :  and  he  adds, 
that**  they  celebrated  Easter  at  the  same  time  with  the  Ro- 

8  Tractatiis  omiiis  Novatianorum,  quem  ad  me  confertis  undique  proposi- 
tionibus  destinasti,  Symproniane  frater,  hoc  continet:  quod  post  Laptisinum 
poenitere  non  liceat :  quod  mortale  peccatum  ecclesia  donare  non  possit ;  inio 
quod  ipsa  pereat  recipiendo  peccantes.  Pacian.  Ep.  3.  init. 

*"  Ev  KaicFapiK}  ttjq  KaTnraSoKiag  thq  [lera  to  ^aTTTiafia  r'ifiapTrjKOTaQ  i%- 
(uQsai  rrjQ  Koivcoviag,  wg  oi  'Navanavot.     Socrat.  L.  v.  c.  22.  p.  288.  B. 

'  Novatianus,  majora,  inquit,  crimina  nominatim  remitti  prohibentur,  id 
estj-idololatria  et  fornicatio  post  lavacrum.  Qu.  cii.  August.  T.  iii. 

^  Sed  aiunt  se,  exceptis  gravioribus  criminibus,  relaxare  veniam  levioiibus. 
Non  hoc  quidem  auctor  vestri  erroris  Novatianus,  qui  nemini  pcenitentiam  dan- 
dam  putavit.  Ambr.  de  Pcenit.  1.  iii.  c.  3.  p.  393.  B. 

'  Ita  nee  Novatianus  probatur,  qui  veniam  interchisit  omnibus.  Ambros. 
ib.  vid.  et  not.  ''.  ■"   Kai  TraJTtXwg  tov  Tt]Q  [liTavoiag  tujv  oikuwv 

ffv\\oytii)v  i^opi^Hffi  \oyov.     Theod.  H.  F.  1.  iii.  cap.  5. 

"  — deserter  ecclesiae,  misericordiae  hostis,  interfector  poenitentias,  doctor 
juperbiae,  veritatis  corruptor,  perditor  caritatis.  Cypr.  ad  Com.  Ep.  60.  [al. 
57.]  p.  142.  "  Ka0ap«e  tavrng  a7ro(pr]vavTwv.  1.  vi.  cap.  43.  init. 

P  Cathari,  qui  seipsos  isto  nomine  quasi  propter  munditiara  superbissime 
atque  odiosissime  nominant.     Augustine.  Haer.  38. 

'*  Ut  sunt  doctores  Novatianorum,  qui  mundos  se  appellant.  Ambr.  ib.  1. 
1.  cap.  1.  p.  390.  ■■  Eulog.  ap.  Phot.  Cod.  280.  p.  1620.  v.  50. 

'  Quod  vero  eumdem  quem  et  nos  Deiuii  Patrem,  eumdem  Filium,  eumdem 
Spiritum  Sanctum,  nosse  dicuntur,  nee  hoc  adjuvare  tales  potest.  Ep.  69.  [al. 
76.]  p.  183.  '  tiavarog  fitvyaft,  6g  «pxJjyoc  EytvtTo  rrjg  wptatwg, 

rag  fterctfieXufityHg  £7ri  Toig  aj.iapTi]fia(nv  ug  Koivioviav  8  TrpotruTo,  koi  TetTO 
[tovov  sKctiyoTOfiei.     Sozom.  1.  vi.  cap.  24.  p.  670.  A.  "  Ibid. 


90  Credibiidij  of  the  Guspel  History, 

mans.  Nevertheless,  afterwards  there  arose  a  dispute  among 
them  upon  this  point,  m  hich  divided  the  sect ;  as  is  related 
by  "  Socrates  and  "  Sozomen. 

I  took  notice  just  now,  that  Cyprian  was  not  unwilling"  to 
allow  that  Novatus  thought  rightly  about  the  Trinity ;  but 
M'hether  he  was  really  orthodox,  or  held  the  Nicene  faith,  is 
another  question,  and  a  point  not  so  easily  decided.  From" 
Jerom  andy  Rufinus  we  learn,  that  the  people  of  the  Mace- 
donian sect  at  Constantinople  were  fond  of  the  book  which 
Novatus  wrote  upon  the  Trinity,  supposing  it  favourable  to 
their  notion  about  the  Spirit.  And  among  the  moderns 
Frederic  Spanheim  says,  that^  though  Novatus  maintained  a 
Trinity  of  persons  in  one  Godhead,  against  Sabellius,  and 
asserted  Christ's  divinity,  yet  he  speaks  in  a  most  dangerous 
manner  of  the  Spirit,  as  less  than  Christ,  and  a  creature. 
Tillemont^  says,  that,  in  the  22d  and  24th  chapters  of  his 
book  upon  the  Trinity,  he  teaches  the  Son  to  be  less  than  the 
Father,  and  the  Spirit  to  be  less  than  the  Son;  and  that  there 
are  in  him  other  things  tending-  to  Arianism.  Du  Pin'^  and"^ 
Bishop  Bull  are  better  satisfied  Avith  the  treatise  upon  the 
Trinity.     But  enough  of  that  matter. 

The  Novatians  are  said  by  several  ancient  writers  to  have 
condemned  second  marriages  as  unlawful  and  sinful,  insomuch 
that  they  would  not  receive  those  to  communion  who  married 
a  second  time.  So*^  Epiphanius,  and*^  Augustine  in  his  Book 
of  Heresies  :  and  in  another  work,  entitled,  Of  the  Advantage 
of  Widowhood,  if  it  be  his,  he'  joins  them  with  the  Cata- 
phrygians,  as  agreeing  with  them  in  this  respect :  and  Rufi- 
nus°  upon  the  Creed  says  roundly,  that  Novatus,  meaning,  I 

"  Socr.  1.  V.  cap.  21.  p.  282.  ^  Soz.  1.  vi.  cap.  24. 1.  vii.  cap.  18. 

"  Transit  ad  inclytum  martyrem  CyprJanum,  et  dicit,  Tertulliani  librum,  cui 
titulus  est  de  Trinitate,  sub  nomine  ejus  Constantiuopoli  a  IMacedonianse  partis 
haereticis  lectitari.  In  quo  crimine  mentitur  duo.  Nam  nee  Tertulliani  liber 
est,  nee  Cypriani  dicitur,  sed  Novatiani,  cujus  et  inscnbitur  titulo  et  auctoris 
eloquium  styli  proprietas  demonstrat.  Hieron.  Apol.  adv.  Ruf.  1.  2.  p.  415. 
T.  iv.  Bened.  ^  Vid.  Ruf.  de  Adult.  Libr.  Orig.  ap.  Hieron.  T.  v.  p.  253. 

^  Ac  quamquam  in  una  deitate  perj-onarura  Tnnitatem  distinguit,  contra 
Sabellium,  adstruatque  Christi  divinitatem  :  tamen  de  Sp.  S.  ut  minore  Chnsto, 
et  creatura,  locutus  admodum  periculose  est.     Spanh.  Hist.  Ec.  Sect  iii.  p.  782. 

^  See  TiUemont.     Les  Novatiens,  art.  3. 

''  Du  Pin.  Bibl.  des  Auf.  Eccl.  "  Def.  Fid.  >'ic.  Sect,  ii.cap.  x. 

^  OiiTOi  CE  s  ftsXovrai  ciya/iotf  nriKOiviiivtiv'  a  yap  nc  [iera  to  ftaitriana 
iTvva<pQtii]  yvvaiKi  ItvTipq.,  Trupa  thtoiq  ovk  eiff^sx^'^"'^"'^'  *"•  Epiph.  Haer.  59. 
n.  iii.  \>.  495.  ®  Secundas  nuptias  non  admittunt.     Hajr.  38. 

''  Aug.  de  Bono.  Vid.  cap.  4.  T.  vi,  Bened. 

8  Et  quod  Novatus  solicitavit,  lapsis  pcenitentiam  denegando,  et  secundas 
nuptias,  cum  forte  iniri  eas  necessitas  exegerit,  condemnando.  Rufin.  in  Symb. 
Ap.  cap.  39.  p.  22G.  ap.  Cyprian.  Op.  edit.  Baluz.  p.  27.  Oxon.  ap.  Hieron. 
Ojjer.  p.  142.  f.  T.  v.  Benedict. 


NovATus.     A.  D.  251.  91 

suppose,  his  sect,  forbade  second  marriages  absolutely,  and 
in  all  cases.  Theodorct  says  this'*  was  an  additional  doctrine 
of  the  Novatians.  Socrates'  asserts,  that  the  Novatians  were 
not  all  of  one  mind  upon  this  head  :  the  Novatians  in  Phry- 
gia,  he  says,  condennied  second  marriages  ;  they  of  Constan- 
tinople had  no  positive  rule  concerning  this  matter ;  but  the 
Novatians  in  the  West  received  big-amists  to  communion 
without  scruple.  This  is  likely  to  be  the  truth  :  some  had 
this  rigid  sentiment,  but  not  all;  for  it  being-  not  a  doctrine 
of  Novatus  himself,  but  added  afterwards,  as  Theodoret  as- 
sures us,  all  the  sect  v/as  not  agreed  in  this  point.  How- 
ever, here  we  see  another  sin,  beside  apostasy,  that  excluded 
men  from  communion ;  for  the  Novatians,  that  condemned 
second  marriages,  esteemed  such  as  married  a  second  time 
after  baptism  to  be  unworthy  of  that  privilege. 

And  perhaps  it  may  be  allowed  not  to  be  an  improbable 
conjecture,  that  this  principle  was  borrowed  from  the  Mon- 
tanists,  and  therefore  prevailed  most  among  the  Novatians  of 
Phrygia ;  though,  possibly,  some  few  in  other  places  also 
approved  of  the  same  rigid  doctrine.  Paciau  expressly  says, 
that''  the  Novatians  made  great  vise  of  Tertullian  ;  meaning-, 
J  suppose,  those  works  of  his  which  were  written  after  he 
had  imbibed  the  Cataphrygian  doctrine.  Pacian  says  like- 
M'ise,  that'  Avhen  S^mpronian  first  wrote  to  him,  he  did  not 
well  know  what  to  think  of  him  ;  whether  he  ought  to  take 
him  for  a  follower  of  Montanus,  or  of  Novatus. 

It  is  scarce  needful  to  observe,  that  they  baptized  afresh  all 
who  came  over  to  them  from  other  sects ;  because  it  seems  to 
be  a  necessary  consequence  of  their  refusing  communion  with 
other  christians,  as  not  sufficiently  pure.  This  was  the  doc- 
trine of  Novatus  himself,  as  Cyprian  allows™  plainly.  He 
says  that  herein  Novatus  aped  the  catholic  church. 

I  shall  add  here  but  one  thing  more.  Eulogius"  says  that 
the  Novatians  of  Alexandria  did  not  pay  due  reverence  to  the 

^  O'l  is  Turn  ?uiSoy(Oi  Kai  trepa  n^)  Soyfiari  irpo^tQiiKCKyC  tsq  yap  Sivrepoic 
yufioiQ  wfiiKr]i:oTag  rmv  Upuv  e^eXawHO'i  fjVTrjpiov.  Haer.  Fub.  1.  iii.  e.  v.  p. 
229.  D.  '  Socr.  1.  v.  cap.  22.  p.  288.  B.  C.  ^  Terhillianiis 

post  haeresim  suam  :  (nam  raulta  inde  sumpsistis.)     Pacian.  Ep.  3.  p.  314.  £. 

'  Cum  prinium  scripseras,  Cataphrygem  putabam.     Id.  ib.  p.  308.  A. 

■"  Nee  nos  movet,  irater  carissime,  quod  in  literis  tuis  complexns  es,  Nova- 
tienses  rebaptizare  eos,  quos  a  nobis  solicitant. — Nam  Novatianus,  simiarum 
more,  quae,  cum  homines  non  sint,  homines  tamen  imitantur,  vult  ecclesiae 
cathoUcfe  auctoritatem  sibi  et  veritatem  vindicare,  quando  ipse  in  ecclesia  non 
sit. — Sciens  etenini  unujn  esse  baptisma,  hoc  unum  sibi  vindicat,  ut  apud  se 
esse  ecclesiam  dicat,  et  nos  haereticos  faciat.  Cyprian,  ad  Jubaian.  Ep.  73.  p.  1 98. 

"  —  0»;ffi  KM  TUQ  iv  AXiKav^pi^f  "SavaTiavag  Kara  to)v  naprvpti)v  ts  XptT« 
•civoXoyavrac-     Eulog.  ap.  Phot.  Cod.  280.  p.  1617.  fin. 


92  CredibUily  of  the  Gospel  History. 

martyrs,  iior°  allow  that  tliere  was  any  virtue  in  their  re- 
liques.  He  does  not  say  that  this  was  the  common  opinion 
of  the  Novatians  ;  but  it  seems  to  me,  that  their  rigid  princi- 
ples would  generally  lead  them  to  deny  those  who  suffered 
in  the  catholic  church  to  be  true  martyrs.  Nay,P  the  catho- 
lics would  not  alloAv  the  Novatians  to  have  any  martyrs  :  how 
then  could  the  Novatians  suppose  there  were  martyrs  among" 
their  adversaries  ?  especially 'i  since  they  thought  the  church 
quite  corrupted,  ruined,  and  destroyed,  by  receiving-  great 
sinners  upon  repentance,  and  communicating  with  them. 
They  might  likewise  think  themselves  obliged  to  ape  the 
catholics  in  this,  as  well  as  in  some  other  matters :  and, 
besides,  the  allowing  this  would  be  giving  an  advantage""  to 
some  arguments  brought  by  the  catholics  against  their  relent- 
less unforgiving  doctrine  ;  Avhich  would  be  in  effect  yielding 
up  their  cause,  and  the  main  ground  of  dissension  and  sepa- 
ration. 

This  is  said,  supposing  Eulogius  by  martyrs  to  mean 
martyrs  in  the  catholic  church,  since  the  separation  of  the 
Novatians.  If  he  means  all  martyrs  in  general,  and  such  as 
were  allowed  that  character  by  the  Novatians  themselves,  as 
having  suffered  in  communion  with  them,  or  in  the  pure 
times  of  the  church,  before  the  rise  of  this  controversy  ;  then 
it  M  ill  be  thought  by  some,  that  what  Eulogius  complains 
of  may  be  esteemed  rather  a  proof  of  the  judgment  and  good 
sense  of  the  Novatians,  that  they  had  not  that  excessive 
veneration  of  martyrs,  which  was  then  become  fashionable 
among  christians. 

III.  When  Novatus  embraced  the  rigid  principle  above 
described,  is  disputed.  Some  think  it  was  taken  up  only 
as  acceptable  to  some  people,  and  as  a  method  of  throwing" 
hatred  upon  Cornelius,  who  had  obtained  the  see  of  Rome,and 
was  for  allowing  the  peace  of  the  church  to  such  as  had  fallen 
in  time  of  persecution,  and  gave  proofs  of  repentance.     80  ^ 

°  lb.  p.  1620.  in.  p  See  before,  p.  84.  Note  \ 

1  Nu/line  apud  nos  confessores,  martyres  nuUi,  nulli  immaculati  atque  integri 
sacerdotes,  quos  catenae,  quos  ignes,  quos  gladii  probaverunt  ?  Fuere,  inquies ; 
sed  negatores  recipiendo  perierunt.— Interim  cui  persuadere  poteris,  quod,  lap- 
sis  receptis,  ecclesia  tota  conciderit  ?  quod,  admissis  poenitentibus,  admittentium 
populus  negator  effectus  sit?  Pacian.  Ep.  p. 309.  G. 

■■  Plurimos  comperimus  se  denuo  ret'ormasse  post  lapsuni,  et  pro  nomine 
Dei  passos.  Num  possuraus  his  martyrum  consortia  negare,  quibus  Dominus 
Jesus  non  negavit  ?  Audemus  igitur  dicere,  nou  ease  his  vitam  redditam,  qui- 
bus Christus  coronam  reddidit  ?  Ambr.  de  Poen.  1.  i.  cap.  9.  [al.  10.]  p.  401. 
Et  Conf.  Anonym,  ad  versus  Novatian.  ap.  Cypr.  p.  17.  fin.  p.  18.  init.  Oxon. 

*  Audite,  quaeso,  et  totum  ordinem  vestris  erroris  advertite.  Comehus,  jam 
Romae  episcopus  a  sexdecim  episcopis  factus,  locum  cathedrae  vacantis  acce- 
perat. — Tum  forte  quidam  presbyter  Novatus  ex  Africa — Romam  venit. — Ncc 


NovATus.     A.  D.  251,  93 

Pacian  seems  to  say.  And*  Tillomont  argues,  that  No- 
vatiis  did  not  make  any  schism  in  the  church  till  after  the 
election  of  Cornelius.  But  Pearson"  and^  some  others  have 
tliought  the  schism  commenced  at  the  very  beginning-  of 
251 :  M  liich  is  argued  from  some  words  of  Cornelius  in  the 
letter  formerly  abridged  by  us;  M'here  he  says  that"  Moses 
the  martyr,  who"  is  supposed  to  have  died  early  in  the  year 
251,  had  withdrawn  himself  from  Novatus,  and  five  other 
presbyters.  The  learned  Benedictine,  who  writes  the  life  of 
St.  Cyprian,  takesy  a  middle  Avay,  as  he  says,  between  these 
two  sentiments;  bethinks  the  schism  did  not  break  out  till 
after  the  election  of  Cornelius,  but  that,  for  some  good  while 
before,  the  foundation  of  it  was  laid,  and  divers  steps  taken; 
which  I  apprehend  must  be  granted  :  what  Cornelius  says 
of  Moses  seems  a  good  proof  of  it.  Another  argument  of  this 
may  be,  that  the  ordination  of  Novatus  very  speedilyfollowed 
that  of  Cornelius,  so  that  the  deputies  from  Novatus  arrived 
in  Africa  about  the  same  time  with  those  from  Cornelius, 
as  appears  from^  St.  Cyprian,  and  is  allowed  by  Tillemont.* 

Whenever  Novatus  first  approved  the  rigid  maxims  upon 
which  his  sect  Avas  formed,  it  is  now  the''  common  opinion 
of  learned  moderns  that  Novatus,  presbyter  of  Carthage, 
under  Cyprian,  was  the  first  author  of  these  measures ; 
agreeably  to  the  passages  of  Jerom,  Cyprian,  and  Pacian, 
which  we  took  notice  of  some  while  ago.*^ 

In  January,  251,  say*^  Pearson  and*^  Pagij  Novatus  came 

miilto  post,  Novatianum  istum  episcopatu  Cornelii  anxium,  (nam  sibi  speraveratj) 
cum  aliquantis,  ut  in  tali  re  solet,  ex  sua  parte  fautonbus  nutantem  impellit, 
dubitantem  fovet,  ut  magnum  aliquid  speret,  hortatur.  Invenit  aliquos  ex 
eonim  numero  qui  tempestatem  persecutionis  illius  evaserant ;  apud  quos  banc 
ipsam  de  lapsis  receptis  Cornelio  conflaret  invidiam.  Pacian.  Ep.  3.  p.  310. 
E.  F.  «  See  TiUem.  Mem.  Ecc.  T.  iii.  St.  Corneille,  art.  3.  et  note  iii. 

"  Vid.  Pearson.  Ann.  Cyprian.  251.  num.  i.  "  Vales.  Annot.  in 

Eus.  1.  vi.  c.  43.  p.  137.  a.  "  Euseb.  1.  vi.  c.  43.  p.  245.  C.  D. 

"  Vid.  Pearson,  ib.  et  Pagi  Crit.  251.  n.  xiv. 

y  Sic  mediam  inter  utrosque  viam  inibo,  ut  ex  utraque  sententia  aliquid 
assumam,  aliquid  etiam  refellam.  Etsi  enim  schisma  ante  Cornelii  ordina- 
tionem  erupisse  non  credam,  videtur  tamen  multo  ante  occultis  molitionibus 
infonnatam  et  praeparatam.  Vit.  St.  Cypr.  ap.  Cypr.  Bened.  p.  84.  vid.  etiam 
p.  85,  86.  ^  Vid.  Cypr.  Ep.  44.  [al.  41.]  Ep.  45.  [al.  4-2.] 

^  II  paroit  assez,  que  ces  deiLX  lettres  furent  apporteos  en  mSme  temps.  Et 
c'est  ce  qui  nous  oblige  de  dire,  que  la  faction  de  Novatien  avoit  commence 
a  se  former  des  devant  I'election  de  S.  Corneille,  et  qu'  elle  eclata  aussitost 
que  Ton  parla  de  Velire.     Tillem.  St.  Corneille  art.  7.  p.  26. 

''  Et  I'election  de  Corneille — i'ut  neanmoins  troublee  aussitost  par  im  schisme 
ti'es  dangereux,  dont  Novat  fut  I'auteur,  et  Novatien  I'executeur  et  le  ministre. 
Tillemont.  Saint  Corneille,  art.  3.  p.  10. 

<•  See  before,  p.  78,  84.  ^  Ann.  Cypr.  251.  n.  i. 

*  Sub  initio  itaque  Januarii  Novatus,  relicto  in  Africa  Felicissimo,  Romara 


94  CredibiliUj  of  the  Gospel  History. 

from  Africa  to  Rome,  and  there  drew  Novatiis,  presbyter  of 
that  city,  into  his  measures  ;  or  as  they  express  it,  separated 
him  from  the  church.  Moses,  who  before  was  intimate  with 
Novatus,  hereupon  shows  his  dislike  of  him,  and  of  five  other 
presbyters,  of  the  same  sentiments  and  measures.  Moses 
dies  soon  after.  When  the  persecution  abated,  the  disturb- 
ance broke  out,  upon  account  of  the  election  of  a  bishop  at 
Rome. 

But  here,  in  my  opinion,  arises  a  very  considerable  diffi- 
culty. Moses  is  supposed  to  have  died  at  Rome  in  January, 
or  February,  251,  and  before  his  death  to  have  shown  a 
dislike  of  Novatus,  and  five  other  presbyters  of  Rome,  on 
account  of  measures  they  had  been  led  into  by  Novatus, 
presbyter  of  Carthage,  lately  arrived  there.  But'  Tillemont 
shows  it  to  be  very  probable  that  Novatus,  Cyprian's  pres- 
byter, was  yet  in  Africa  in  February,  if  not  also  in  March, 
the  same  year.  And  I  own  it  seems  to  me  most  probable 
that  he  must  have  been  at  Carthage  in  the  month  of  March : 
how  then  is  it  possible  that  he  should  have  misled  those 
presbyters  at  Rome  before  the  death  of  Closes  ? 

I  beg  leave  therefore  to  mention  a  thought,  to  be  con- 
sidered and  examined  by  the  curious  :  it  seems  to  me  that 
too  much  regard  is  paid  to  w  hat  Cyprian  writes  of  his  pres- 
byter Novatus,  as  if  he  had  been  the  chief  author  of  all  the 
disturbances  at  Rome.  For  the  Greek  writers,  who  appear 
to  be  well  acquainted  with  the  Novatian  sect,  say  nothing  of 
this  African  Novatus  ;  nor  does  Cornelius  in  the  fragments 
of  his  letter  to  Fabian  of  Antioch,  preserved  in  Eusebius, 
take  any  notice  of  him.  Indeed  Cornelius,  in  a^  letter  to 
Cyprian,  mentions  this  person  among  other  legates  iii  the 
second  deputation  sent  by  his  rival  from  Rome  to  Africa; 
but  he  does  not  lay  any  thing"  particularly  to  his  charge : 
and  he  there''  actually  calls  another  person  author  of  the 
schism.  It  is  apparent,  from  Cyprian's  answer  to  that  letter, 
that'  Cornelius  had  never  sent  him  any  account  of  the  con- 

venit,  et  separavit  ab  ecclesia  Novatianum.  Quare  Novatianiim,  antea  sibi 
maxime  familiarem,  Moyses  presbyter  et  confessor  illustns,  adhuc  superstes, 
sed  paulo  ante  mortem,  a  communione  sua  separavit,  ut  habet  Cornelius  epis- 
tola  ad  Fabium  Antiochensem  cpiscopum,  apud  Eusebium.  lib.  vi.  cap.  43. 
Moyses  autem  paulo  post  moritur  in  carcere,  hoc  ipso  mense  exeunte.  Pagi 
Cnt.  251.  n.  xiv.  '  See  Tillem.  Mem.  Ec.  Corneille,  Art.  3.  note  iii. 

K  Puto  Nicostratum,  et  Novatum,  et  Euaristum,  et  Primura,  et  Dionysium 
illo  jam  pervenisse.  Invigiletur  ergo,  &c.  Com.  ad  Cyprian,  ap.  Cypr.  Ep. 
.50.  [al.  48.]  ''  Euaristum  vero  auctorem  schismtitLs  fukse,  &c.  lb. 

'  Nam  de  Novato  nihil  inde  ad  nos  fuerat  nuntiandum,  cum  magis  per  nos 
vobLs  debcat  Novatus  ostendi,  rerura  novarum  semper  cupidus,  &c.  Cyprian 
Ep.  52.  [al.  49.]  p.  96. 


NovATiJS.     A.  D.  251.  95 

duct  of  the  African  Novatus.  But  Cyprian,  upon  the  bare 
mention  of  the  name  of  his  presbyter,  being  full  of  resent- 
ment, goes  into  a  kind  of  tlechunation  :  and,  beside  what 
that  Novatus  had  done  at  Carthage,  he  tells  Cornelius  a  story 
of  what  he  supposed  he  had  done  at  Rome  :  and  he  seems  to 
think  he  knew  this  better  than  Cornelius  himself;  at  the 
same  time,  m  hat  lie  says  appears  to  have  no  other  foundation 
but  suspicion  and  conjecture. 

I  Mould  therefore  dispose  things  at  Rome  about  this  time 
in  the  following  order:  Moses  died  in  January,  or  the  be- 
ginning of  February, 251 :  before  his  death  he  observed  cabal- 
ling- and  interest-making  for  the  chair  of  Rome;  which 
occasioned  his  showing-  a  dislike  of  Novatus,  and  five  other 
presbyters  of  that  city.  Perhaps  likewise  some  schemes 
were  now  proposed  relating  to  the  treatment  of  the  lapsed, 
which  he  did  not  approve  of.  After  his  death,  and  before 
the  election  of  Cornelius,  which  happeiied  in  June,  251, 
Novatus  of  Carthage  came  to  Rome,  and  joined  the  party  of 
the  Roman  presbyter  of  that  name :  and  I  suppose  he  con- 
tinued to  favour  that  interest ;  and  he  may  be  allowed  to 
have  fomented  the  dissensions  at  Rome.  But,  so  far  as  lean 
perceive,  there  is  no  ground  for  thinking-  the  African  Nova- 
tus the  first  author  of  the  Nov  atian  rigid  principle,  and  the 
Novatian  sect,  but  the  conjectural  story  of  Cyprian,  and  the 
authority  of  those  few  other  writers,  who  have  taken  things 
upon  trust  from  him,  without  any  nice  inquiry  or  examina- 
tion. 

As  for  the  exact  time  when  our  Novatus  took  up  his  rigid 
scheme  of  church  discipline;  whether  before  or  after  the 
ordination  of  Cornelius,  and  the  particular  occasion  of  it, 
and  whether  it  was  tjie  result  of  his  own  serious  thoughts,  or 
whether  he  was  led  into  itby  views  of  private  interest,  or  by  the 
management  of  some  designing  and  artful  adviser ;  these  are 
matters  very  much  in  the  dark.  1  know  of  no  remaining 
evidence  sufficient  to  afford  satisfaction  in  these  points ;  nor 
do  I  see  how  they  can  ever  be  fully  cleared  up,  unless  some 
more  of  ovu'  author's  own  writings,  or  of  his  followers,  shoidd 
be  brought  to  light,  which  we  have  no  reason  to  expect. 

IV.  When  Novatus  was  ordained,  he  and  his  people  were 
not  idle  or  inactive,  but  supported  his  election  to  the  utmost 
of  their  power.  His  deputies,  as  was  observed  before,  arrived 
at  Carthage  about  the  same  time  with  those  from  Cornelius. 
It  is  now''  the  general  opinion  of  learned  men,  that  Corne- 
lius was  ordained  on  the  fourth  day  of  June,  251  ;  and  those 

•^  Vid.  Pearson.  Ann.  Cypr.  2.51,  n.  vi.  vii.  viii.  ix.  Pagi  Crit.  251.  n.  xix. 
et.  seq.  Tillemont.  S,  Corneille,  Art.  ii. 


96  CredibiliUj  of  lite  Gospel  History. 

learned  men  suppose  that  the  deputies  of  Novatiis  might  come 
to  Carthage  m  ith  an  account  of  his  ordination  likewise  in  the 
month  of  July  the  same  year.  There^  matters  Mere  held  in 
suspense  for  a  while,  till  they  should  receive  a  clearer  ac- 
count of  Cornelius's  election. 

Novatus  sent  abroad  letters  and  deputies  to  many  other 
churches,  as  is  apparent  from  the  epistles  of"'  Cornelius  and" 
Cyprian,  authentic  witnesses  in  this  case.  And  though  the 
churches  Mere  generally  restored  to  peace  and  tranquillity 
in  the  space  of  a  few  years,  as°  appears  from  what  Dionysius 
of  Alexandria  writes  in  a  letter  to  pope  Stephen,  it  is  never- 
theless certain  that  they  had  been  greatly  disturbed  })y  this 
affair.  The  many  epistles  or  treatises,  written  by  the  same 
Dionysius  upon  this  occasion,  are  a  proof  that  many  relished 
the  rigid  doctrine  of  this  sect.  Fabius,  bishop  of  Antioch, 
in  particular,  had  been  their  friend  and  favourer.  Marciani, 
bishop  of  Aries,  was  tirm  in  the  same  principle  and  cause  in 
the  time  of  popei'  Stephen;  nor  is  it  known  that^  he  ever 
deserted  them. 

besides,  for  keeping"  up  their  interest,  there  were  new 
bishops  ordained,  and  set  over  those  who  anywhere  separated 
from  the  catholic  church  upon  the  ground  of  this  principle. 
Of  this  also  there  is  authentic  evidence  from "^  Cyprian  him- 
self. There'  seems  to  have  been  a  new  bishop,  by  name 
Maximus,  appointed  for  the  Novatian  party  at  Carthage, 
Cyprian's  own  diocese. 

Though  therefore  Novatus  and  his  principles  had  been 
condemned  and  rejected  by  most  christian  bishops,  and  by 
the  majority  of  the  clergy  and  people  of  their  several 
churches,  at  the  time  of  Dionysius's  writing  the  forementioned 
letter  to  Stephen,  Novatus  still  continued  to  have  a  numerous 

'  Sed  cum  statuissemus  collegae  complures,  qui  in  unum  conveneramus,  ut 
legatis  ad  vos  coepiscopis  nostris  Caldonio  et  Fortunate  missis,  omnia  integra 
suspenderentur,  donee  ad  nos  iidem  collegae  nostri,  rebus  illic  aut  ad  paceni 
redactis  aut  pro  veritate  compertis,.redirent.  Cypr. ad  Corn.  Ep.  48.  [al.  45.] 
p.  90,  91.  Conf.  Ep.  44.  [al.  41.]  p.  85.  ""  — Novissime,  quod  per 

omnes  ecclesias  literae,  calumniis  et  maledictis  plena,  eorum  nomine  frequentes 
mLssfE  fuissent,  et  pane  omnes  ecclesias  perturbassent.  Cornel,  ap.  Cypr,  Ep. 
49.  [al.  46.]  p.  22.  "  — et  perplurimas  civitates  novos  apostolos 

sues  mittiit. — Cypr.  Ep.  55.  p.  112. 

"  Vid.  Euseb.  1.  vii.  cap.  4.  et  Pagi  Crit.  256.  n.  xiv.  xv. 

p  Vid.  Cypr.  Ep.  C8.  [al.  G7.]  i  See  TiUemont.  St.  Cyprien.  Art.  39. 

"■  — et  jier  plurimas  civitates  novos  apostolos  suos  mittat, — cumque  jampri- 
dem  per  omnes  provincias  et  per  urbes  singulas  ordinati  sint  episcopi  in  aetata 
antiqui,  in  fida  integri,  in  pressura  probati,  in  ptrsecutione  proscripti,  ille  super 
COS  craare  alios  pseudoopiscopos  audeat.     Cypr.  Ep.  55.  p.  1 12. 

'  Nam  et  pars  Novatian i  maximum  presbytcrum,  nuper  ad  nos  a  Novatiano 
legafum  missum,  atqua  a  nostra  commuuicationerejectum,  nunc  isticsibi  fecisse 
pseudoepiscopum  dicitur.     Id.  Ep.  49.  p.  132. 


NovATus.     A.  D.  251.  97 

party  in  luauy  places,  separated  from  the  catholic  church. 
However,  we  find  no  farther  mention  made  of  them  in  the 
third  century,  though  that  has  been  distinguished  by  Cave 
with  the  name  and  title  of  the  Novatian  age. 

One  of  the  canons*^  of  the  council  at  Nice,  in  325,  relates 
to  them.  Socrates"  says,  '  that  Constantine,  solicitous  for 
'  peace,  and  desirous  to  secure  the  concord  and  harmony  of 
'  the  churches,  invited  Acesius,  bishop  of  the  Novatian  sect,  to 
'  come  to  that  council.  When  the  creed  had  been  com- 
'  posed  and  subscribed  by  the  synod,  the  emperor  asked 
'  Acesius,  whether  he  also  assented  to  that  creed,  and  to  the 
'  determination  concerning  the  feast  of  Easter  ?  He  answered 
'  the  emperor,  that  there  was  nothing  new  in  Avhat  the  synod 
'  had  determined ;  for  it  was  the  same  that  had  been  deli- 
'  vered  to  him  as  from  the  beginning-,  and  from  the  times  of 
'  the  apostles ;  both  with  regard  to  the  form  of  faith,  and  the 
'  time  of  keeping-  Easter.  Whereupon  the  emperor  inquiring-, 
'  What  then  was  the  occasion  of  his  separation  from  the  com- 
'  munion  of  the  church  f  he  related  what  had  happened  under 
'  Decius  in  the  time  of  the  persecution,  and  gave  him  an 
'  account  of  the  strictness  of  their  severe  rule  of  discipline  ; 
'  which  was,  that  they  who  after  baptism  committed  any 
'  such  sin,  as  the  divine  scriptures  call  mortal,  should  not  be 

*  admitted  to  a  participation  of  the  divine  mysteries  ;  they 
'  should  be  exhorted  to  repentance,  but  pardon  ought  not  to 
'  be  expected  from  the  priests,  but  from  God,  who  is  able 

*  and  has  authority  to  forgive  sins.  When  Acesius  had  said 
'  this,  the  emperor  replied  ;  Set  a  "  ladder,  then,  Acesius, 
'  and  go  up  to  heaven  alone."  ' 

The  same  story  is  told  by  ^  Sozomen,  possibly  taken  from 
Socrates.  It  ought  however  to  be  observed,  that'"^  Valesius 
disputes  the  truth  of  this  relation  :  on  the  other  hand,  Bas- 
nag-e''  defends  it  against  the  objections  of  that  learned  writer. 

Those  ancient  ecclesiastical  historians  have  not  particularly 
informed  us  of  the  place  where  Acesius  was  then  bishop. 
Tillemont,  speaking-  of  this  matter,  says,  Acesius^  was  bishop 
in  those  parts ;  that  is,  somewhere  not  very  far  off  from  Nice. 
Basnag-e"^  argues  that  he  was  then  bishop  of  the  Novatians 
at  Byzantium.  It  is  certain  he''  was  afxerwards  bishop  of 
that  people  in  that  city,  then  called  Constantinople. 

In^  326,  Constantine  made  a  law  somewhat  favourable  to 

*  Can.  viii.  "  Socrat.  1.  i.  cap.  10.  "  Soz.  1.  i.  cap.  22. 

"  Vales.  Annot.  p.  9.  "  Basa.  Ann.  325.  num.  xxxiii. 

y  Ce  prince  fit  en  eftet  venir  a  Nicee  Acese,  qui  estoit  leur  evesque  en  ces 
quartiers  la.     Tillemont,  Les  Novatiens.  Art.  4.  p.  94.  '  Basn.  ibid. 

"  Vid.  Soz.  Lb.  ii.  cap.  32.  p.  493.  D. 

''  Vid.  Basn.  Ann.  326.  n.  iii.  iv.  Pagi  Crit.  32G.  n.  ix.  x.  Tillem.  ib.  p.  95. 
VOL.    Til.  H 


98  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

thein,  allowing  them  their  churches  and  cemeteries,  provided 
they  had  never  belonged  to  the  catholics.  Buf  in  the 
severe  edict*^  of  331,  or  thereabout,  the  Novatians  are  joined 
with  the  Valentinians,  Marcionites,  Paulians,  and  Cataphry- 
gians,  and  other  heretics :  their  places  of  worship  are  to  be 
taken  from  them;  they  are  forbidden  to  assemble  in  public 
or  private ;  and  their  books  are  to  be  sought  for  and  de- 
stroyed. Buf  it  is  the  opinion  of  some  learned  men,  that 
this  edict  had  but  little  efi'ect  with  regard  to  the  Novatians. 
Sozomen's  reflections  upon  this  edict  are  such  as  these:  '  By  ^ 
'  means  of  this  law  other  sects  have  been  in  a  manner  buried 
'  in  oblivion :  for  in  the  times  of  the  preceding  emperors^  all 
'  the  followers  of  Christ,  though  they  had  dift'erent  opinions, 
'  were  considered  by  the  Gentiles  as  ail  one,  and  sufiered  all 
'  alike.  Nor  could  they  disturb  each  other,  because  of  the 
'  common  calamities  ;  for  which  reason,  they  all  had  their  as- 
'  semblies  without  much  difficulty:  and  as  they  frequently 
'  met  together,  though  they  were  few  in  number,  they  were 
'  not  c|uite  broken,  but  kept  up  their  several  interests.  But'' 
'  after  the  publication  of  this  edict,  they  could  not  meet  pub- 

*  licly,  it  being  prohibited;  nor  privately,  the  bishops  and 
'  clergy  of  every  city  narrowly  observing  them.     From  that 

*  time  great  numbers  of  them  were  induced  out  of  fear  to  join 
'  themselves  to  the  catholic  church.  And  they  who  per- 
'  sisted  in  their  particular  sentiments  not  leaving  successors, 
'  their  sects  died  away  ;  forasmuch  as  they  were  not  allowed 
'  to  assemble  together,  nor  could  they  Avithout  danger  teach 
'  their  principles  privately  to  any.  And  indeed  the  other  sects 
'  from  the  beginning  had  but  few  followers,  either  because  of 
'  the  absurdity  of  their  opinions,  or  the  unskilfulness  of  their 
'  teachers  :  but  the  Novatians  having  good  leaders,  and  being 
'  of  the  same  mind  with  the  catholic  church  upon  the  doctrine 
'  of  the  Deity,  were  numerous  from  the  beginning",  and  have 
'  continued  to  be  so,  without  suffering  much  by  this  law  : 
'  and  the  emperor  himself,  as  may  be  supposed,  softened  it 
'  of  his  own  accord  with  regard  to  them,  designing  rather  to 
'  fright  than  hurt  his  subjects.     And  moreover  Acesius,  then 

*  bishop  of  that  sect  at  Constantinople,  being  esteemed  by 
'  the  emperor  for  the  sanctity  of  his  life,  it  is  likely,  spoke  a 

•=  Ap.  Euseb.  Vit.  Const.  1.  iii.  cap.  64.  et  seq.  **  See  Tillem.  as 

before,  p.  95.  *  Vid.  Basnag.  ib.  Tillem.  as  before.         ''  Sozom.  1.  ii.  c.  32. 

K  Ext  nfv  yap  rwv  irpiv  fiaaiXtiov,  oaoi  rov  X^pi'^ov  ioi^ov,  ei  km  rag  SoS,ag 
Ittiptpovro,  TTpoQ  Tiov  'EX.XjjvtTwi'  01  avroi  tvoixiil.ovTO,  Kai  KaKdiQ  ojioutjc  ftrafTxoV 
rrtjiac  St  auTsij  iroXvTTQayfiovtiv  Cia  tciq  KoivaQ  avfKpopaq  hk  i^CvvaVTO'  Kai  Sia 
THTO  paSiojQ  Kciff  iavTHQ    fKWTOi  (JvviovTtg  (KKXrirTia'Cov.      Ibid.  p.  493.  B. 

''  Mtra  St  TBTOV  rov  vofiov,  nrt  Si]fioma  tKKKnaia'Ctiv  t]dvi'avTO  KoAvojitvoi, 
art  \a6pa,  rwv  Kara  rroKiv  firiffKOTraJv  Kai  KXrfpiKuiv  naparripHvrdiv'  k.  X.  ib  C. 


NovATus.     A.  D.  251.  99 

'  good  word  for  the  church  under  his  care.  As  for  the 
'  Cataphryg'ians,  in  other  parts  of  the  empire  they  declined, 
'  as  most  others  did,  excepting-  only  in  Phrygia,  and  the 
'  neighbouring-  countries ;  where  from  the  time  of  Montanus, 
'  they  have  been  numerous,  and  still  continue  so  to  be.' 

The  Novatians  suffered  together  with  the  catholics  in  the 
Arian  persecution  under  Constantius,  about'  the  year  356. 
Agelius,  then  bishop  of  the  Novatians  at  Constantinople,'' 
saved  himself  by  flight:  but  many  of  his  people,  eminent 
for  piety,  suffered  greatly  at  that  time.  '  The  Arians,'  as 
Socrates'  says,  '  demolished  many  churches  in  divers  cities, 
'  by  orders  of  Macedonius,  their  bishop  at  Constantinople. 
'  The  emperor's  edict,  and  the  violence  of  Macedonius, 
'  threatened  likewise  a  church  of  the  Novatians  at  Constan- 
'  tinople.  Its  ruin  was  near,  and  the  persons  were  at  hand 
'  to  whom  the  execution  was  committed  :  but  the  Novatians 
'  prevented  them  after  a  sort ;  for,  gathering  together  in  a 
'  great  multitude,  and  being  assisted  likewise  by  a  good 
'  number  of  well-meaning  catholics,  they  pulled  down  the 
'  church,  and  conveyed  all  the  materials  to  another  place 
'  without  the  city.'  So  writes  Socrates.  And  Sozomen"" 
confirms  his  account.  About  the  same  time  the  church"  of 
the  Novatians  at  Cyzicum  was  quite  demolished  by  Eleusius, 
the  Arian  bishop  at  that  city,  an  intimate  fi-iend  of  the  fore- 
mentioned  Macedonius. 

The  Novatians  hoM  ever  had  honourable  satisfaction  made 
them  afterwards.  With  the  leave"  of  the  emperor  Julian 
they  rebuilt  their  church  at  Constantinople  in  a  splendid 
manner,  calling  it  now  Anastasia.  As  for  their  church  that 
had  been  pulled  down  at  Cyzicum,  Julian  sent?  orders  to 
Eleusius  to  rebuild  it  in  two  months'  time  at  his  own  expense, 
upon  the  pain  of  a  very  heavy  forfeiture. 

Under  i  Valens  again,  the  Novatians,  as  well  as  others  who 
held  the  consubstantial  doctrine,  were  forbidden  to  worship 
at  Constantinople.  The  churches  of  the  Novatians  Avere  shut 
up,  and  their  bishop  Agelius  was  banished  :  but  the  empe- 
ror's displeasure  against  the  Novatians  "^  was  moderated  by 
3Iarcian,  a  pious  and  learned  man,  who  formerly  had  a 
military  post  in  the  imperial  palace,  but  was  now  presbyter 

'  See  Tillemont,  Mem.  Tom.  vi.  P.  ii.  Les  Ariens,  Art.  63. 

^  Vid.  Socrat.  lib.  li.  cap.  38.  p.  142.  B.  C. 

'  Ka07jpsv  fitv  nv  oi  apiavi^ovrtc,  MaiciCovM  KeXtvomog,  aX\a^  n  iroKKac 
Kara  ttoXhq  SKKXrjffiag.  Socrat.  ib.  p.  143.  A.  "'  L.  iv.  cap.  20.  p. 

570.  C.  D.  "  Socrat.  1.  ii.  cap.  38.  p.  144.  A.  B. 

"  Socr.  ib.  p.  143.  D.  144.  A.  p  Socrat.  1.  iii.  cap.  1 1.  Sozom.  I. 

V.  cap.  5.  p.  601.  "i  Vid.  Socra*.  1.  iv.  cap.  9. 

■■  Socr.  ib.  et  1.  v.  cap.  21. 

H   2 


100  CredibilUy  of  the  Gospel  History. 

in  the  church  of  the  Novatians,  and  had  been  appointed  pre- 
ceptor in  polite  literature  to  the  emperor's  daughters  Anas- 
tasia  and  Carosa.  In  regard  to  him  therefore  the  churches 
of  the  Novatians,  which  for  some  while  had  been  shut  up, 
were  opened  again.  Nevertheless,  even  after  this,  the* 
Novatians  were  not  quite  void  of  disturbance  from  the 
Arians.  So  writes  Socrates :  and  to  the  same  purpose 
Sozomen,  who^  adds,  that  Agelius  was  soon  recalled  from 
his  banishment,  and  officiated  in  the  churches  as  before. 

In  the  year"  383,  Theodosius  had  a  synod,  or  conference, 
at  Constantinople,  for  putting  an  end  to  those  dissensions 
which  there  were  in  the  empire  by  reason  of  different  sects 
of  religion.  And^  Socrates  says  that  the  emperor  Avas  so 
well  pleased  Avith  the  orthodoxy  of  the  Novatians,  in  holding- 
the  doctrine  of  the  consubstantiality,  that  he  gave  them  leave 
to  assemble  for  divine  worship  in  cities  ;  and  appointed  that 
their  churches  should  enjoy  the  same  privileges  with  those 
of  his  own  sentiments. 

Tillemont"'  observes  that  the  Novatians  are  never  named 
in  the  laws  of  Theodosius  against  heretics,  though  they  were 
put  in  that  rank,  in  381,  by  an  oecumenical  council.  He" 
adds  that  y  Socrates,  to  prove  the  affection  which  Theodosius 
had  for  this  people,  says,  that  emperor  pardoned  Symmachus 
at  the  request  of  Leontius,  bishop  of  the  church  of  the  Nova- 
tians at  Rome,  about  the  year  388. 

Socrates'  speaks  of  their  sees  at  Constantinople,  Nice, 
Nicomedia,  and  Cotieeus  in  Phrygia,  as  the  chief  sees  of 
that  sect  in  the  fourth  century ;  in  the  east  at  least,  for 
he  supposeth  them  to  be  besides  very  numerous  in  '^  the 
West. 

What  were  their  numbers  in  these  cities  does  not  appear. 
Socrates^  seems  to  say  they  had  three  churches  within  Con- 
stantinople, beside  that  which  was  destroyed  :  but  perhaps 
he  means  no  inore  than  that  they  had  three  in  all. 

The  pieces  written  against  them  by  *^  St.  x4mbrose,'^  Pacian, 
the*"  anonymous  author  of  the  Questions  out  of  the  Old  and 

'  Socrat.  ib.  p.  218.  B.  C.  '  Sozom.  1.  vi.  cap.  9.  p.  649.  C. 

"  Vid.  Basa.  283.  n.  vi.  et  Tillemont,  Les  Novatiens,  Art.  5.  p.  98,  99. 

»  Vid.  Socrat.  1.  5.  cp.  10.  p.  269. B.C. cap.  22.  p.  280. B.  etConf.  Sozom. 
1.  viii.  cap.  1.  p.  754.  D.  "  Tillem.  Les  Novatiens,  p.  99. 

«  Ibid.  y  Socrat.  1.  v.  cap.  14.  p.  273.  C. 

"  Socrat.  1.  iv.  cap.  28.  p.  246.  Conf.  Sozom.  1.  vi.  cap.  24. 

*  1.  vii.  cap.  11.  Conf.  cap.  9.  ''  e'tg  ct  toq  aWag  rptiQ  {roaavrac 

yap  tvrog  rrjc  TroXtwg  tXHOiv  oi  tojv  'Savariavwv  ikkXtjuiuc)  (ruvtp\o}iivot 
aWrjXoic  uvvjjvxovTo.  Socr.  1.  ii.  cap.  38.  p.  144.  A. 

'  Ambr.  de  PcEnit.  hbri  duo.  ^  Pacian.  ad  Sympron.  Epist.  tres. 

^  Qu.  cii.  ap.  Augustin.  Tom.  iii.  in  app.  Bened. 


NovATUs.     A.  D.  251.  101 

New  Testament;  the  notice  taken  of  them  by  ^  Ba.sil,ff  Gregory 
Nazianzen;  the  accounts  given  of  them  by  Socrates  and  8ozo- 
men  in  tlieir  ecclesiastical  histories,  are  proofs  of  their  being- 
numerous,  and  in  most  parts  of  the  world,  in  the  fourth  and 
fifth  centuries.  Not  to  insist  now  particularly  on''  Philaster,' 
Epiphanius,''  Augustine,'  Theodoret,  who  hav^e  written  pro- 
fessedly of  heretics  and  their  opinions.  St.  Jerom  likewise 
frequently  confutes  the  Novatians  in  his  commentaries,  and 
in  his  epistles.  Among  the  epistles  of  Isidore  of  Pelusium, 
who  nourished  about  the  year  412,  there™  are  two  against 
the  Novatians.  And  that  they  subsisted  in  some  parts  after 
this,  appears  from  the  books"  of  Eulogius,  bishop  of  Alex- 
andria, written  against  them  not  long  before  the  end  of  the 
sixth  century. 

The  vast  extent  of  this  sect  is  manifest  from  the  names  of 
the  authors  who  have  mentioned  them,  or  written  against 
them,  and  from  the  several  parts  of  the  Roman  empire  in 
which  they  Mere  found.  And"  Socrates  mentions  one  Mark, 
bishop  of  the  Novatians  in  Scythia,  who  was  present  at  Con- 
stantinople with  Paul  in  his  last  sickness,  Avho  died  in  the 
year  4^39. 

The  Novatians  had  among  them  some  men  of  note  and 
eminence.  Not  to  say  any  thing  more  of  Acesius,  already 
mentioned,?  Socrates  and'i  Sozomen  have  celebrated  Euty- 
chian  as  a  worker  of  miracles  ;  a  man  of  this  sect  in  the  time 
of  Constantine,  who  lived  a  solitary  life  upon  the  mountain 
Olympus  in  Bithynia. 

Agelius  succeeded  Acesius  as  bishop  of  the  Novatian  peo- 
ple at  Constantinople  :  he  enjoyed  that  honour,  as"^  it  seems, 
near  fifty  years,  dying"  in  the  sixth  year  of  the  reign  of  The- 
odosius,  that  is,  the  year  of  Christ,  384.  Socrates  says  of 
him,  '  that^  he  lived  an  apostolical  life:  he  Avent  bare-foot, 
'  and  More  but  one  coat,  according  to  the  precept  in  the 
'  gospel.'  Sozomen '  Mrites  of  this  bishop  exactly  to  the  same 
purpose,  only  in  different  Mords  :  as  before  shown,  he  saved 
himself  by  flight  in  the  Arian  persecution  under  Constantius  : 
he  M  as  banished  by  Valens,  but  obtained  a  speedy  release  at 
the  intercession  of  Marcian.  Though  Agelius,  as  both 
these  ecclesiastical  historians   assure  us,  was  a  very  pious 

f  Basil,  ad  Amphil.  Can.  i.  Ep.  188.  p.  268.  A.  Bened. 
8  Gr.  Naz.  Orat.  39.  p.  635.  636.  "  Philast.  Haer.  82. 

'  Epiph.  Haer.  59.  p.  493,  &c.  ''  Aug,  de  Hser.  cap.  38. 

'  Theod.  Haer.  Fab.  1.  iii.  cap.  5.  ■"  Isid.  1.  i.  Ep.  338,  339. 

"  Ap.  Phot.  cod.  208.  p.  528.  cod.  280.  p.  1597.  °  L.  vii.  cap. 

46.  p.  390.  P  Socrat.  1.  i.  cap.  13.  i  Sozom.  1.  i.  cap.  14. 

'  Vid.  Socrat.  1.  v.  cap.  12.  in.  et  cap.  21.  in.  '  Socr.  1.  iv.  cap.  9. 

'  Sozora.  1.  vi.  cap.  9. 


102  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

person,  he"  was  not  a  man  of  great  abilities  ;  however,  he 
liad  under  him  Sisinnius,  a  man  of  fine  parts  and  learning- : 
he  was  of  use  to  his  bishop  in  the  forementioned  conference 
at  Constantinople,  in  383,  though  he  was  then  only  reader. 

When  Agelius  died,  Sisinnius  was  presbyter  in  the  church 
of  the  Novatians ;  and  Agelius  nominated  him  to^  be  his 
successor  :  but  his  people  rather  desired  Marcian,  who  had 
been  so  serviceable  in  the  persecution  under  Valens.  Age- 
lius complied  with  them,  provided  that  Sisinnius  should  suc- 
ceed Marcian,  as  he  did  in  395. 

Socrates'"^  enlarges  in  the  character  of  Sisinnius.  He  was 
educated,  together  with  the  emperor  Julian,  under  Maximus 
the  philosopher:  he  was  skilled  in  all  parts  of  philosophy, 
especially  in  logic  :  he  was  an  excellent  disputant ;  insomuch 
that  Eunomius  was  shy  of  entering  into  an  argument  with 
him,  and  often  avoided  him  :  he  had  great  understanding 
in  the  scriptures  ;  was  eloquent;  and  had  a  good  knowledge 
of  the  world  :  he  was  moreover  a  man  of  ready  wit.  So- 
crates, to"  whom  the  reader  is  referred,  has  recorded  some 
of  his  remarkable  sayings.  '  He  was  in  great  reputation  for 
'  his  learning,  and  upon  that  account  was  respected  by  all 
'  his  successors  ;  he  was  likewise  honoured  with  the  esteem 
'  and  affection  of  many  of  senatorian  rank:  he  published  a 
'  good  number  of  books :  but  he  appeared  too  nice  in  his 
'  language,  and  affected  poetical  phrases :  he  was  therefore 
'  more  admired  as  a  speaker  than  a  writer  :  for  indeed  there 
'  was  a  certain  gracefulness  in  liLs  person,  in  his  speech,  his 
'  garb,  his  aspect,  and  every  motion  of  his  body.  In  a 
'  word,  he  was  beloved  by  men  of  all  sects,  especially  by 
'  the  bishop  Atticus.'     So  writes  Socrates. 

Sisinnius  diedy  in  407,  and^  was  succeeded  by  Chrysan- 
thus,  son  of  Marcian,  immediate  successor  of  Agelius,  Chry- 
(santhus  in  his  younger  years  had  a  military  post  in  the  palace. 
In  the  reign  of  Theodosius  the  First  he  was  governor  in 
Italy,  and  after  that  vicar  of  the  British  islands  :  in  both 
which  charges  he  behaved  with  groat  reputation.  Being 
advanced  in  years,  he  returned  to  Constantinople,  and  put 
up  for  preefect  of  that  city  :  but,  instead  of  that,  he  was 
against  his  own  will  compelled  to  accept  of  a  bishoprick  : 
for  Sisiimius,  when  near  his  end,  having  mentioned  him  as 
a  fit  person  to  succeed  him,  and  his  people  looking  upon  what 

"  SuTJjvai  Ss  Xoyoic  TTffii  T»  doyfjiaTOQ  hk  ia-)(vn',  armyvio^rjv  vtz'  avno, 
^imvviov  ovojia,  vpofj  to  ciaXexdnvai  TrpotfiaWeTO.  Socr.  1.  v.  cap.  10.  p. 
267.  C.  '  Lib.  V.  cap.  21.  p.  280.  C.  D. 

"  Lib.  V.  cap.  2L  et.  1.  vi.  cap.  22.  *  lb.  L  vi.  cap.  22. 

y  Socr.  1.  vii.  cap.  6.  p.  343.  C.  '■  lb.  cap.  12. 


NovATus.     A.  D.  251.  103 

Sisinnius  said  as  a  law,  earnestly  entreated  him  to  accept  the 
episcopal  office.  Whereupon  Chrysanthus  fled.  But  the 
people,  having  found  him  in  Bithynia,  at  length  prevailed 
upon  him  by  their  importunity.  '  lie  was,'  as  Socrates  says, 
'  a  man  of  signal  prudence  and  modesty  ;  and  by  his  means 
'  the  churches  of  the  Novatians  were  not  only  upheld,  but 
'  increased.  He  was  liberal  to  the  poor  out  of  his  own 
'  estate;  but"^  received  nothing-  from  the  churches  under  his 
'  care,  beside  two  loaves  of  the  sacred  bread  every  Lord's 
'  day.  Such  was  his  concern  to  promote  the  interest  of  his 
'  people,  that  he  took  Ablabius,  the  best  rhetorician  of  that 
'  time,  out  of  the  school  of  the  sophist  Troilus,  and  ordained 
'  him  presbyter.'  Socrates  says,  that  his  polite  and  ingeni- 
ous sermons  were  extant  in  his  time.  He  adds,  that  Ablabius 
was  afterwards  bishop  of  the  Novatians  at  Nice,  at  the  same 
time  teaching  rhetoric. 

By  all  these  things  we  see  plainly,  that  under  good  catho- 
lic princes  the  Novatians  enjoyed  great  liberty  of  worship, 
and  were  admitted  to  places  of  trust  and  honour. 

Chrysanthus  was  succeeded  by''  Paul,  Avho  had  been  a 
teacher  of  the  Latin  tongue ;  but,  laying  aside  that  employ- 
ment, he  betook  himself  to  an  ascetic  life.  Whilst  he  was 
bishop  he  was  almost  luiiversally  beloved  at  Constantinople. 
He  died  in  439.  Socrates  says,  that*^  at  his  funeral  he  in  a 
manner  united  all  sects  of  religion  into  one  church  ;  for 
they  all  accompanied  his  body  to  the  grave,  singing  psalms, 
he  having  been  greatly  esteemed  for  the  simplicity  and 
integrity  of  his  manners. 

Cassiodorus,  who  Avrote  about  the  middle  of  the  sixth 
century,  makes  mention  of*^  a  learned  Novatian,  whom  he 
knew,  named  Eusebius ;  who,  like  Didymus  of  Alexandria, 
was  blind  from  his  childhood :  he  was  exceedingly  well 
acquainted  with  authors  and  books,  as  well  as  things,  and 
showed  a  wonderful  strength  of  memory  :  he  usually  re- 
sided in  Asia.     Cassiodorus  does  not  say  any  thing  of  his 

^  Kac  irpoJTOQ  toiq  tttojxoiq  oiKoOtv  xp^f^^ov  htvufitv'  utto  t£  twv  iKKXr^cnuv 
aStv  iSi^ciTOi  -ttXtip  Kara  Kvpianrjv  c)jx)  aprnQ  tuv  ivKoyiuiv  e\an(3aviv.  lb.  p- 
348.  D.  ^  Socrat.  1.  vii.  cap.  17.  init.  <=  lb.  cap.  46. 

"^ nisi  de  partibus  Asiae  quemdam  ad  nos  venire  Eusebium  nomine 

contigisset,  qui  se  infantem  quinque  annorum  sic  ccecatiun  esse  narrabat, — 
Hie  tantos  auctores,  tantos  libros  in  memoriae  suae  bibliotheca  condiderat,  ut 
legentes  probabiliter  admoneret,  in  qua  parte  codicis,  quod  praedixerat,  in\'eni- 
rent.  Disciplinas  omnes  et  animo  retinebat,  et  expositione  planissima  luci- 
dabat. — Hoc  etiam  Josephum,  Originem,  et  Hieronymum  commemorasse  in 
suis  opusculis  asserebat. — Cujus  instructione  commonilus,  multos  codices  anti- 
quos  reperi,  qui  apud  me  habebantur  incogniti.  Quem  tamen  adhuc Novatianae 
pravifaf is  errore  detentum,  misericordia  Domini  suiFragante,  rectae  fidei  credimus 
illuminatione  complendum.  Cassiod.  Instit.  1.  v.  p.  512. 


104  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

quality.  Possibly  the  loss  of  eye-sight  discouraged  his 
accepting^  any  offices  civil  or  ecclesiastical.  However,  he 
made  a  good  improvement  of  his  leisure  :  he  stored  his  mind 
with  useful  knowledge,  and  was  communicative  in  conversa- 
tion as  he  had  opportunity. 

I  do  not  here  reckon  Socrates  and  Sozomen  among  the 
great  men  that  have  done  honour  to  this  sect;  because, 
though  they  sometimes  speak  favourable  of  them,  and  there- 
fore by  some  have  been  taken  for  Novatians,  there  is*^  good 
reason  to  think  they  were  catholics. 

However,  from  the  several  instances  that  have  been  men- 
tioned, it  may  be  inferred,  that  this  people  had  among-  them 
not  a  few  men  of  polite  learning  and  fine  accomplishments. 

Though  there  Avere  Novatians  in  some  places  at  the  latter 
end  of  the  sixth  century,  or  afterwards,  as  we  have  seen,  yet 
it  is  probable  that  they  declined  after  the  middle  of  the  fifth 
century,  if  not  sooner. 

Socrates,  having  given  an  account  of  the  ordination  of 
Cyril,  Avho  succeeded  Theophilus  at  Alexandria  in  412,  says; 
'  From'  that  time  the  bishoprick  of  Alexandria  exceeded 
'  the  bounds  of  the  priesthood,  and  exercised  a  kind  of 
'  princely  authority  and  government ;  for  Cyril  immediately 
'  shut  up  the  churches  of  the  Novatians,  and  took  away  all 
'  their  sacred  vessels  and  ornaments  :  and  as  for  their  bishop 
'  Theopemptus,  he  deprived  him  of  all  he  had.' 

The  same  ecclesiastical  historian,  having  mentioned  the 
names  of  several  bishops  of  Rome,  as  Damasus,  Siricius, 
Anastasius,  adds  :  '  After=  Anastasius  succeeded  Innocent, 
'  who  was  the  first  that  persecuted  the  Novatians  at  Rome, 
'  taking  away  from  them  many  churches.'  This  pope  Inno- 
cent'' was  ordained  in  401,  and  died  in  417. 

Afterwards  Socrates  writes  to  this  purpose  :  '  After'  Inno- 

*  cent,  Zosimus  governed  the  church  of  Rome  for  the  space 
'  of  two  years :  and  after  him   Boniface  presided   in   that 

*  church  three  years,  who  was  succeeded  by  Celestinus. 
'  This*^  Celestinus  also  [as  Innocent  had  begun  to  do]  de- 

*  Vid.  Vales,  de  Vita  et  Scriptis  Socrafis  atque  Sozomeni ;  et  Basaag.  Ann. 
439.  num.  v.  etTillem.  Les  Novafiens,  Art.  vii.  Tom.  iii.  P.  iii.  p.  110. 

'  Koi  yap  «5  (Ktivs  r)  fviffKOirtj  AXe^avcpnaQ  irapa  Trjc  hpa-iKt]^  raXiioQ 
KaraCvvaztvHv  rwv  Trpayf.iaTojv  tXajSe  r)]v  apx'lV  svOtojg  hv  KvpiWoQ  tuq  tv 
AXt'^ctvcpiuf  'NavaTiavwv  8KK\r}ffiag  aTroKkuauQ,  Travra  fitv  avriov  ra  itpa 
Kstfir]Xia  tXafitv'  tov  ct  (.TridKOirov  avroiv  Qf-oirtfi-KTov  iravrwv,  wv  ft;)^£7',a0£tXfro. 
Socr.  I.  vii.  cap.  7.  *='   jviera  <^t  kva^aaiov  Ivvokivtioq'  6q  Trpiorog 

THQ  tv  'Poifiy  'HavariavHQ  tXnvvfLv  7;p?«ro,  TToXXag  ts  avriov  tKicXjjrriag  aiptiXsTO. 
lb.  cap.  9.  ''   Vid.  Pagi  Crit.  in  Bar.  402.  xix.  417.  iv.  et  seq. 

'   lb.  cap.  11.  ^  Kat  HTOQ  o  KsXeTtt'OC  rag  tv  'Pwfirj  'SavaTiavuv 

V-KKi^aiciQ  aipttXero,  Kat  tov  tizmKoirov  avruv  PvriKuXav  kot  oixutQ  iv  Trapa- 


NovATus.     A.  D.  251.  105 

*  prived  the  Novatians  at  Rome  of  their  churches,  and  forced 
'  their  bishop  Rusticula  to  assemble  them  in  private  houses 
'  in  some  obscure  ph\ce.     For  until  that  time  the  Novatians 

*  had  flourished  mightily  at  Rome,  having-  a  great  number 
'  of  churches,  and  large  congregations;  but  envy  laid  hold 
'  of  them  also,  the  bishoprick  of  Rome,  like  that  of  Alexan- 
'  dria,  having  long  since  surpassed  the  sacerdotal  dignity, 
'  and  assumed  secular  power  and  authority  :  for  which  reason 
'  those  bishops  would  not  allow  these  persons  to  meet  together 
'  freely,  though  they  were  of  thesame  opinion  with  themselves: 
'  they  commended  them  indeed  for  their  soundness  in  the 
'  fliith,  but  took  away  from  them  every  thing  they  had.  The 
'  bishops  of  Constantinople  acted  in  a  different  manner ; 
'  treating  the  Novatians  with  abundance  of  affection  and 

*  mildness,  and  permitting  them  to  assemble  within  the  walls 
'  of  the  city,  as  has  been  shown.' 

Celestinus  is  supposed  to  have  possessed  the  see  of  Rome 
from  the  year  424  to  432. 

I  conclude  my  history  of  the  Novatians  with  these  passages 
of  Socrates,  which  are  recommended  to  the  reader's  obser- 
vation. 

V.  We  saw  formerly  a  catalogue  of  the  w  orks  of  Novatus 
in  Jerora,  but  not  complete  :  for  Jerom  says,  there  were  many 
other  beside  those  expressly  named  by  him.  Trithemius 
likewise,  having  mentioned  the  same  books  that  Jerom  does, 
adds  ;  '  that^  Novatus  w  rote  many  letters  to  divers  persons  ; 
'  and  that,  besides,  he  is  said  to  have  written  some  other 
'  pieces,  but  he  was  not  acquainted  with  them.' 

1.  A  very  few  only  of  those  works  have  come  down  to  us. 
We  have  however  a  small  piece,  entitled,  Of  Jewish  meats, 
which  is  supposed  to  be  the  same  that  Jerom  mentions.  Mr. 
Jackson,  whose  edition  of  Novatus,  or  Novatian,  (as  he  calls 
him,)  I  make  use  of,  thinks  this™  treatise,  or  epistle,  was 
written  in  the  year  250,  before  the  end  of  the  Decian  perse- 
cution:  but  of  this,  I  think,  we  cannot  be  positive  :  for,  as'^ 
before  observed,  it  may  be  questioned  whether  this  treatise 
was  not  written  by  Novatus  after  his  episcopal  ordination, 
and  after  his  separation  from  the  church  ;  consequently,  after 

fiv^q)  avvayeiv  r]vayKa<yiv'  aypi  yap  tuts  'Savariavoi  jUsyoXwc  siri  Tr)Q  'Pwp;g 
r]v6t](rav,  eKKXtiuuiQ  TrXurac  iXOVTtg,  km  Xaov  ttoXvv  crvvadpoiXovTSQ.  k.  X.  ibid. 

'  Epistolas  plures  ad  diversos,  alia  insuper  nonnulla,  scnpsisse  dicitur,  quae 
ad  notttiam  meam  non  venerunt.     Trithem.  de  Script.  Ec.  cap.  44. 

""  Priorem  [de  Cibis  Judaicis]  scripsit  elflagitante  plebe  Romana,  cum  sub 
persecutione  Deciana  (quae  exorta  est  Romaeanno  249  exeunte,  et  post  annum 
deferbuit,  ineunte  anno  251)  secessisset ;  quod  plane  innuit  in  primo  epistolaj 
capita  ;  adeo  ut  hsec  scriberetur  anno  250,  forte  sub  finem  anni.  Jackson.  Prasf. 
p.  xi  "  See  before,  p.  84 


106  Credibildtj  of  the  Gospel  History. 

the  middle  of  the  year  251.  I  allow  it  was  written  in  some 
time  of  trouble,  and  in  a  place  of  retreat  or  banishment ;  but 
what  was  that  time  does  not  appear ;  whether  the  persecution 
of  Decius,  or  Gall  us,  or  Valerian :  therefore  the  date  of  it 
must  be  left  uncertain.  Du  Pin°  says,  it  appears  probable 
to  him  that  this  piece  Avas  written  after  that  Novatus  was 
become  the  head  of  a  party,  during-  the  persecution  of 
Gallus  and  Volusian. 

2.  There  is  also  still  extant  the  treatise,  Of  the  Trinity,  or, 
Of  the  rule  of  faith,  which  Jerom  calls  a  large  volume.  I 
think  this!'  book  is  now  generally  allowed  by  learned  men 
to  be  the  work  of  our  Novatus:  and  it  is  the  largest  piece  of 
his  now  remaining.  Concerning  the  time  of  writing  it  Mr. 
Jackson T  mentions  two  opinions;  the  fi'rst,  Pamelius's  and 
his  own,  that  it  was  Avritten  before  the  schism,  which  began 
in  251 ;  the  other,  that  of  Dr.  Cave,  who  supposed  that  this 
A\  ork  was  composed  after  the  schism,  not  before  the  year 
257;  here  being  notice  taken  of  the  heresy  of  Sabellius, 
which  appeared  about  that  time.  Mr.  Jackson  might  have 
mentioned  a  third  opinion,  that  of"^  Baronius ;  who  thought 
this  book  was  not  published  by  Novatus  till  about  the  year 
270,  as  supposing  him  not  only  to  argue  against  Sabellius, 
whom  he  mentions  by  name,  but  also  against  Paul  of  Samo- 
sata,  whom  he  does  not  name.  And"  Tillemont  thinks  this 
opinion  not  improbable,  though  not  certain. 

Let  us  consider  Mr.  Jackson's  arguments.  In  the  first 
place  he  asks  ;  How*  Avill  Cave  prove  that  Sabellius  was  not 
known  in  the  world  for  his  heresy  before  257  ?  But  to  this 
there  is  an  obvious  answer  at  hand,  that  Cave  is  not  singular 
in  this  supposition.  It  is  the  opinion  of  very  many  learned 
men,  that  Sabellius  did  not  publish  his  particular  sentiments 
till  254  or  255,  or  thereabout,  as  1  have  observed  in  another" 
place.  And  secondly,  it  is  very  easily  proved  that  Sabel- 
lianism  was  not  known  long-  before  the  year  257  :  for  in  that 
year  Dionysius  of  Alexandria  sent  Pope  Xystus  or  Sixtus  the 

"  Bibl.  des  Auteurs  Ecc.  Novat.  p.  182.  p  See  Du  Pin.  Bibl. 

Novatien.  Baron.  Ann.  272.  xv.  TiUem.  Les  Novatiens,  Art.  3. 

1  Statuendum  restatf  quantum  possumus)  quo  tempore  conscripsit  Novatianus 
librum  de  Trinitate.  Et  cum  Pamelio  omnino  arbitior  ego  ilium  hoc  opus 
composuisse,  antequam  in  schisma  incideret,  quod  fuit  inceptum  25 1 .  Aliter 
quidem  judical  doctiss.  Cavius,  hac  ductus  ratione,  quod  hsereseos  Sabellianae 
meminit,  quae  (ut  dicit  Cavius)  circa  annum  257  exorta  est.  Jackson.  PitEf. 
p.  xii.  xiii.  •■  Baron.  Ann.  272.  n.  xv. 

*  See  Tillem.  Les  Novatiens,  Art.  iii.  p.  89. 

*  Sed  quomodo  probaverit  Cavius  Sabellium  propter  hseresin  non  esse  notum 
ante  an.  257  ?  Hsec  est  mera  viri  docti  conjectura,  &c.  lb.  p.  13. 

"  See  before,  Vol.  ii.  ch.  xliii. 


NovATus.     A.  D.  251.  107 

second  an  account  of  what  he  had  said  and  written  in 
that  controversy,  Avhich  had  its  rise  in  Ptolemais  in  Egypt ; 
and  therefore  probably  liad  not  been  on  foot  above  a  year  or 
two,  or  three  at  the  most.  Therefore  Sabellianisni  was  not 
known  in  the  West  before  the  year  255,  or  25G,  or  257.  This 
argument  needs  not  to  be  enlarged  upon.  I  should  think 
that  any  man  may  perceive  from  the  history  of  the  third 
century,  particularly  from  Avhat  we  have  written  concerning* 
Novatianism,  that  supposing  Sabellianisni  to  have  appeared 
before  250,  and  allowing  it  likewise  to  have  been  at  all  dif- 
ferent from  the  common  and  prevailing  sentiment  of  chris- 
tians at  that  time,  such  was  the  vigilance  of  the  bishops  of 
the  church,  Dionysius  would  have  sent  an  account  of  it  to 
Rome  long  before  257.  What  a  noise  did  Novatianism 
make  !  how  many  deputies  were  there  sent  to  and  fro  !  what 
a  number  of  letters  and  treatises  were  there  written  upon 
that  subject  in  the  space  of  a  very  few  years  !  I  think  then 
that  Dionysius's  account  of  the  rise  of  Sabellianisni  is  an 
invincible  argument  that  it  did  not  appear  in  Egypt  before 
254,  or  255,  or  256.  Therefore  this  book  of  Novatus  could 
not  be  written  before  256,  or  257.  It  is  not  very  unlikely 
that,  soon  after  the  first  intelligence  of  this  doctrine  came  to 
Italy  from  Dionysius,  or  from  some  other  person,  Novatus, 
much  disliking  it,  composed  this  treatise  of  the  Trinity  :  and 
possibly  he  was  as  well  qualified  to  treat  the  subject  as  any 
man  in  the  West. 

If  this  argument  needed  any  farther  enlargement,  it  might 
be  added,  that  the  catholics  of  Pentapolis,  Avho  disliked  some 
expressions  of  Dionysius  in  his  writings  against  Sabellius, 
laid  their  charges  against  him  before  his  namesake  of  Rome, 
Avhose  episcopate  began  in  259  :  therefore  Dionysius  had  but 
lately  written  in  this  controversy.  If  his  work  had  been 
published  long-  ago,  these  offended  catholics  would  not  have 
deferred  their  accusations  till  259,  or  260,  nor  have  chosen 
to  bring  them  to  Dionysius  of  Rome,  the  ancient  and  honour- 
ed friend  and  correspondent  of  him  of  Alexandria. 

Nevertheless,  Mr.  Jackson  thinks  that^  the  heresy  of  Sabel- 
lius began  about  220,  that  is,  30  years  before  the  schism  at 
Rome  ;  consequently  Cave  is  mistaken  no  less  than  thirty 
and  seven  years  concerning  the  time  of  Sabellius. 

Mr.  Jackson  w  ould  support  his  opinion  by  the  chronicles 

^  Et  tandem  exhinc  apparet,  triginta  circiter  esse  annos  inter  schisma  Nova- 
tiani  et  incceptam  haeresin  Sabellii  ;  et  Cavius  rations  temporis  erravit  fere 
triginta  et  septem  annos.  lb.  p.  18. 


108  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

of"  Isidore  of  Seville,  and''  Ado,  which  place  Sabellius 
about  the  year  220 :  but  chronicles  v/ritten,  one  in  Spain  in 
the  seventh,  the  other  in  Gaul  in  the  ninth  century,  are  of 
little  authority  against  Dionysius,  a  contemporary  upon  the 
spot.  It  is  likely  those  chroniclers  mean  Noetus ;  who  might 
appear,  or  be  famous,  about  that  time  :  they  might  confound 
these  two  persons,  their  opinions  agreeing-  in  the  main,  as  is 
supposed;  and  Sabellius  being  more  known  than  Noetus,  as 
we  are  informed  by  the  learnedJ  Augustine,  who  is  certainly 
a  good  witness  in  this  matter,  and  assures  us  that  even  in  his 
time  Noetus  was  known  to  very  few,  and  that  these  two 
heresies  were  reckoned  one  and  the  same.  It  is  an  additional 
argument  that  these  chroniclers  mean  Noetus,  or  confound 
him  and  Sabellius,  in  that  they  make  no'  distinct  mention  of 
the  former.  There  is  the  more  reason  to  think  Ado  means 
Noetus  when  he  speaks  of  Sabellius,  because  he  joins  Hip- 

fiolytus  with  him  ;  and  it  is  generally  supposed  that  Hippo- 
ytus  wrote  against  Noetus  in  his  book  against  all  heresies, 
and  that  this  was  the  last  heresy  in  that  work.  In  short, 
Noetianisra  and  Sabellianism  were  confounded,  and  reckoned 
one  and  the  same  heresy,  by  the  Latins  in  the  time  of  Au- 
g"ustine  and  afterwards :  and  the  best  use  that  can  be  made 
of  these  two  chroniclers  is  to  confirm  the  common  supposi- 
tion, that  Noetus  either  appeared,  or  was  condemned,  about 
the  year  220,  or  soon  after. 

Lastly,  Mr.  Jackson  says,  it  is^  not  likely  that  Novatus 
should  write  so  good  a  book,  in  all  things  conformable  to 
the  catholic  doctrine,  after  he  had  fallen  into  his  detestable 
schism,  and  an  opinion  so  contrary  to  the  divine  goodness 
and  mercy. 

"*  hoc  diserto  testimonio  confirmat  Isidorus  Hispalensis,  qui  in  chronico 

ad  annum  a  mundo  condito  5419,  siveanno  Domini  221,  sub  imperio  Aurelii 
Antonmi  Heliogabali  scnbit  ortum  fuisse  Sabelliura  haeresiarclium.  lb.  p.  18. 

=*  Huic  vero  convenit  Ado  Viennensis,  quo  auctore,  Sabellius  erat  haeresi- 
arches  aimo  circiter  220,  imperante  Aurelio  Heliogabalo,  sub  cujus  imperio 
simul  cum  Ilippolyto  vixisse  tradit  Ado.  Verba  illius  sunt  in  chronico  ab 
an.  220.  ad  an.  224.  '  Sabellius  hseresiarches  oritur.  Hippolytus  episcopus, 
'  multorum  condilor  opusculorum,  temporum  canonem  conscripsit,  et  hue 
•  usque  perduxit.'  lb.  ibid.  ^  SabeUiani  ab  illo  Noeto,  quem  supra 

memoravimus,  defluxisse  dicuntur.— Sed  qua  causa  duas  haereses  eas  Epipha- 
nius  computet,  nescio ;  cum  fieri  potuL«se  videamus,  ut  fuent  Sabelhus  iste 
famosior,  et  ideo  ex  illo  celebrius  hsec  hseresis  nomen  acceperit.  Noetiani 
enim  difficile  ab  aliquo  sciuutur;  SabeUiani  autem  sunt  in  ore  multorum. 
Aiigufit.  Hser.  cap.  41.  ==  Nee,  quantum  cogito,  verisimile  est 

ilium  condidisse  tam  egregium  1  ibrum  in  omnibus  catholicae  doctrinae  et  pietati 
primaevae  ecclesiae  apprime  consonum,  postquam  in  schisma  delestandum  et 
sententiam  bonitati  et  misericordiae  divinae  adversantem  se  demersisset.  Ibid. 


NovATus.     A.  D.  251.  109 

How  detestable  his  schism  was  I  cannot  say,  though  I  do 
not  justify  his  conduct:  for,  whatever  pretensions  he  might 
have  to  the  chair  of  Rome,  on  account  of  his  eminent  learn- 
ing", or  uncommon  services,  or  the  expectations  given  him, 
possibly  by  a  large  number  of  the  clergy  and  people  of  that 
church  ;  yet,  when  another  was  chosen,  as''  Cyprian  observes, 
it  might  be  his  duty  to  acquiesce.  Nor  is  it  unlikely  that 
as  good  books  as  this  of  Novatus  upon  the  Trinity  have  been 
written  by  men  who  have  had  false  apprehensions  of  the 
divine  goodness  and  mercy  in  some  respects.  Finally,  I 
wonder  why  Mr.  Jackson  should  make  a  question  of  Novatus 
writing-,  at  any  time,  a  book  upon  the  catholic  principles 
about  the  Trinity,  when  there  appear  not  any  traces  of  a 
difference  upon  this  point  between  him  and  his  followers, 
and  the  catholics  of  that  time.  It  is  not  unlikely  that  No- 
vatus was  from  the  beginning-,  and  always  contiiuied  to  be, 
as  orthodox  in  that,  and  most  other  matters,  as  christians 
generally  were  in  that  age. 

Upon  the  whole,  I  believe  there  are  very  few  but  must  be 
of  opinion  that  this  treatise,  the  principal  remaining"  work  of 
Mr.  Jackson's  author,  was  not  written  till  somewhile  after 
his  detestable  schism,  as  Mr.  Jackson  calls  it. 

I  cannot  forbear  observing  here,  though  it  is  not  necessary, 
that  several  of  the  ancient  writers  concernino"  heresies  confirm 
the  more  common  opinion  of  the  time  of  Sabellianism,  par- 
ticularly Epiphanius  and  Augustine :  their  order  is  this ; 
Noetians,  Valesians,  Novatians,  Angelics,  Apostolics,  Sabel- 
lians.  They  supposed  therefore  that  Novatianism  sprang"  up 
in  the  space  of  time  between  Noetus  and  Sabellius. 

From  what  has  been  said,  the  conclusion  is  very  evident ; 
that  the  earliest  probable  date  of  this  work  is  that  assigned 
by  Cave,  which  is  the  year  257,  several  years  after  the  author's 
episcopal  ordination. 

3.  Beside  these  two  treatises,  which  we  suppose  to  be  the 
same  that  are  mentioned  by  Jerom,  there  is  extant  a  letter 
of  the  Roman  clerg"y  to  Cyprian,  written  during  the  vacancy 
of  the  see  after  the  death  of  Fabian,  in  August,  250.  It  is 
allowed  that''  Novatus  drew  up  this  epistle,  and*"  it  is  much 
commended, 

*  Factus  est  autem  Cornelius  episcopus  de  Dei  et  Christi  ejus  judicio,  de 
clericonun  pene  omnium  testimonio,  de  plebis  quBe  tum  affuit  suffragio, — cum 
nemo  ante  se  factus  esset,  cum  Fabiani  locus vacaret. — Quisquis  jam  epis- 
copus fieri  voluerit,  foris  fiat  necesse  est ;  nee  habeat  ecclesiasticam  ordina 
tionem  qui  ecclesiae  non  tenet  unitatem  ;  quisquis  ille  fuerit,  multum  de  se  licet 
jactans,  et  sibi  plurimiun  vindicans.     Cypr.  Ep.  55.  [al.  52.]  p.  104. 

*"  Additum  est  etiam,  Novatiano  tunc  scribente,  et,  quod  scrip.serat,  sua  voce 
recitante,  &c.     Cypr.  ad  Antonian.  Ep.  55.  [al.  52.]  p.  102.  <=  Men?e 


110  CredibilUy  of  the  Gospel  History. 

4.  There  is  still  another  letter,  written  before  the  end  of 
the  same  year  to  Cyprian.  These  two  letters  are  among*'* 
Cypriai\,'s.  But  it  is  not  so  certain  that  Novatus  had  the 
chief  hand  in  penning*  this,  as  the  former.  Mr.  Jackson, 
however,  has  done  well  in  publishing  it  together  with  the 
other  things  ascribed  to  Novatus. 

5.  In  these  pieces  there  is  not,  that  I  remember,  any  thing 
concerning  the  particular  sentiment  which  Novatus  is  sup- 
posed to  have  maintained  after  his  episcopal  ordination  ;  or 
relating-  to  the  differences  between  him  and  some  other 
christians  :  yet  surely  there  must  have  been  such  things. 
It  may  be  argued  from^  Cyprian's  letters:  and'  Jerom 
speaks  of  epistles  of  Novatus  that  were  schismatical. 

6.  St.  Jerom  in  his  Catalogue,  among  other  works  of 
Novatus,  mentions  two  m  ith  these  titles.  Of  Easter,  Of  Cir- 
cumcision. And  in  the  Appendix  to  St.  Jerom's  works, 
there  are  two  treatises,  or  epistles,  without  the  name  of  the 
author;  one  entitled.  Of  the  Celebration  of  Easter  ;  the  other, 
Of  the  true  Circumcision.  The  former  of  these  is  now  allowed 
to  be°  St.  Augustine's, and  is  published^'  among' his  letters: 
as  for  the  other,  it  is  generally  allowed  to  be  the  Avork  of 
some  later  author  than  Novatus,  forasmuch  as  here  is  express 
mention  made  of  the  Manicheans  and  Arians:  nor  is  there' 
any  good  reason  to  take  it  for  a  work  of  St.  Jerom  :  it  must 
therefore  be  looked  upon  as  the  composition  of  some  anony- 
mous writer :  whose  time  is  uncertain.  I  shall  take  notice 
of  a  few  things  observable  in  it. 

1.  Here  are  many  quotations  of  the  books  of  the  Old  and 
New  Testament,  or  references  to  them. 

2.  The  author  several  times  quotes  the  first''  chapter  of 
St.  Matthew's  gospel. 

Augusto  exeunte,  clems  Romanus  scribit  ad  Cyprianum. — Sunt  autem  hae 
cleri  Romani  literae  praeclare  scripte,  et  Uteris  ipsuis  Cypriani  pene  aequandae: 
ex  qiiibus  de  ingenio  et  eloquentia  Novatiani  judicium  teiTi  potest.  Hie  enim 
banc  epistolam  exaravit.  Pearson,  Ann.  Cypr.  250.  n.  xvi.  Conf.  Pagi  Crit. 
230.  n.  xii.  •>  Ap.  Cypr.  Ep.  30,  36.  [al.  30,  31.] 

*  Sed  enim  supervenerunt  postmodum  aliae  literce  tuae, — in  quibus  animad- 
verti  animum  tuum  Novatiani  Uteris  motum  nutare  ccepisse,  &c.     Cypr.  ad 

Ant.  Ep.  55.  [al.  52.]  p.  101.  et  passim.  '  simulque  epistolas 

Novatiani,  ut,  dum  schismatici  hominis  venena  cognoscimus,  libentius  sancti 
martyris  Cypriani  bibamus  antidotmn.  Hieron.  ad  Paul.  Concord.  Ep. 
10.  [al.  21.]  p.  17.  in  Ed.  Bened.  Ego  Origenem  propter  eruditionem  sic 
interdum  legendum  arbitror,  quomodo  Tertullianum,  Novatum,  Arnobium, 
Apollinarium ;  &c.     Id.  ad  Tranquill.  Ep.  56.  [al.  76.]  589.  f. 

8  Vid.  Martian.  Annotat.  ap.  Hieronym.  T.  v.  p.  175. 
"  Augustin.  Ep.  hb.  2.  Ep.  55.  Bened.  [al.  119.  T.  ii.] 

*  Vid.  Censuram  epistolaede  vera  Circumcisione,  apud  Hieron.  T.  v.  p.  150. 
''  Foris  scriptus  est,  cum  evangelista  ait :  Liber  generationis  Jesu  Christi, 


NovATus.     A.  D.  251.  Ill 

3.  He  takes  notice  of  the  enrolment  of  Cyrenius,  or  Cy- 
rinus,  as  he  calls  him,  in  Luke  ii.  1 — 5. 

4.  He  also  expressly  quotes™  the  beginning  of  St.  John's 
gospel. 

5.  He  cites  Rom.  ix.  4,  5.  very  remarkably  in  this"  man- 
ner :  "  To  whom  pertaineth  the  adoption,  and  the  glory,  and 
the  covenant,  and  the  giving  of  the  law,  and  the  service,  and 
the  promises;  of  whom  also  is  Christ  according  to  the  tiesh, 
who  is  blessed  for  ever." 

6.  In  this  piece  is  likcAvise  cited"  the  beginning-  of  St. 
John's  first  epistle ;  and  there  are  passages  out  of  many 
other  books  of  scripture,  as  before  observed  :  but  I  do  not 
think  it  needful  to  take  any  farther  notice  of  particular  cita- 
tions in  this  work. 

VI.  I  do  not  draw  the  character  of  Novatus :  I  am  not 
satisfied  to  make  such  an  attempt  upon  the  ground  of  those 
few  writings  of  his  that  remain,  when  there  were  so  many 
more,  and  the  history  we  have  of  him  is  so  imperfect.  I  find, 
however,  that?  learned  moderns  do  allow  him  wit,  or  good 
natural  parts;  learning  and  eloquence,  or  a  fine  pen;  and 
Jerom  of  old,  who  was  better  qualified  to  judge  than  we  are, 
in  several  respects,  especially  because  he  had  more  of  this 
writer's  works  than  we  have,  in  a  letter  to  pope'^  Damasus, 
speaking  of  Tertullian  and  Novatus,  calls  them  very  eloquen* 
men. 

The  sentiment  of  Novatus  upon  church  discipline  is  often 
spoken  of  by  ancients  and  moderns,  as  contrary  to  the  divine 
goodness  and  mercy.    Upon  this  account  he  has  been  called  ■" 

filii  David,  filii  Abraham.  De  Vera  Circuracisione,  ap.  Hieron.  T.  v.  p.  153. 
m.  Forts  scnbitur  per  Malfhaeuni :  Christi  autem  generatio  sic  erat :  Cum 
esset  desponsata  mater  ejus  Maria  Joseph.     lb.  infra,  med.  pag. 

'  Rogo  hie,  ubi  sub  Cyrino  census  investigatio  ?  ubi  edictum  Csesaris  ?  ubi 
necessitas  profitendi  ?  lb.  p.  ]  62,  in.  '"  Intus  scribitur,  cum  per 

Joannem  dicitur  :  In  prmcipioeratVerbum,  etVerbumeratapudDeum,  etDeus 
erat  Verbum.     lb.  p.  153.  infr.  m.  "  Quorum  adoptio  est  fihorum, 

et  gloria,  et  testamentum,  et  legislatio,  et  obsequium,  et  promissa :  ex  quibus 
etiam  est  Christus  secundum  camem,  qui  est  benedictus  insecula.  lb.  p.  151. 
in.  °  Cum  beatus  Joannes  mvisibilem  et  visibilem,  Deum  et 

hominem,  brevi  quasi  charactere  signaverit.  Sic  enim  ait :  Quod  fuit  ab  initio, 
fratres,  quod  audivimus.  Ecce  libri  ilUus  interiorem  partem.  Quod  sequitur : 
Et  vidimus  oculis  nostris,  et  manus  nostrae  palpaverunt  de  verbo  vitae.  Ecce 
libri  pars  exterior,  &c.  p.  154.  init. 

P  Novatianus  Stoicorum  philosophorum  scita  profitebatur,  homo  acerrimi 
ingenii,  raultijugae,  doctrinae,  nee  facundiae  vulgaris.  Admon.  in  Ambros. 
libr.  de  Posnit.  T.  li.  p.  385.  Ed.  Bened. 

1  Non  quod  non  potuerim  et  ad  illas  aliquid  respondere,  sed  quod  ab 
eloquentissimis  viris,  Tertulliano  nostro  scilicet  et  Novatiano,  Latino  sermone 
editae.     Hieron.  Ep.  125.  T.  ii.  p.  563.  Bened. 

■■  Quis  ante  crudelissimum  Novatianum  crudelem  Deum  dixit,  eo  quod 


112  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

a  mun  of  a  most  cruel  disposition,  and  has  been  said  to  charge 
God  himself  with  cruelty.  Nevertheless,  in  his  book  of  the 
Trinity  he  appears  to  have  had  honourable  sentiments  of  the 
Deity,  saying-^  that  God  excels  all  other  beings  in  benevo- 
lence, goodness,  justice,  and  mercy.  Nor  did  he  deny  the 
power  or  Avill  of  God  to  pardon  great  sins  after  baptism  ; 
though  he  would  not  allow  such  a  power  in  the  church,  or 
to  be  lodged  with  the  ordinary  ministers  of  the  gospel. 

1  would  add,  that  he  may  be  thought  to  have  one  ad- 
vantage, in  that  all  his  litigious  and  controversial  writings, 
if  there  were  any  such,  are  lost :  for,  next  to  the  happiness 
of  escaping  disputes  and  controversies,  may  be  reckoned  the 
having-  them  buried  in  oblivion  :  but  though  this  may  be 
esteemed  an  advantage  to  him,  I  cannot  tell  whether  it  be 
so  to  VIS.  It  is  not  unlikely  that,  if  more  of  his  Avorks  were 
in  being,  we,  as  well  as-  Jerom,  should  be  willing  to  read 
them.  Since  he  is  upon  record,  as  author  of  a  sect  that  sub- 
sisted for  several  ages,  it  might  be  desirable  to  know  from 
himself  the  grounds  he  went  upon.  The  writings  of  catholic 
authors,  it  is  to  be  hoped,  would  afford  a  sufficient  preserva- 
tive against  infection :  and,  together  with  the  venom  of  his 
erroneous  doctrine,  there  might  have  been  conveyed  to  us 
somewhat  healing'  and  nourishing. 

1  have  given  above  the  true  reason  why  I  decline  drawing- 
the  character  of  Novatus.  As  Du  Pin  saw  no  occasion  to 
be  so  scrupulous,  it  is  by  no  means  iit  my  readers  should 
be  deprived  of  the  commendation  he  has  given  the  founder 
of  the  Novatian  sect.  '  This  author,'  says"  he,  '  had  abund- 
'  ance  of  wit,  learning,  and  eloquence  :  his  style  is  pure,  neat, 
'  and  polite :  his  expressions  are  chosen,  his  thoughts  natural, 
'  and  his  reasonings  just:  he  is  full  of  citations  of  texts  of 
'  scripture,  that  are  much  to  the  purpose:  moreover,  there 
'  is  a  great  deal  of  method  and  order  in  those  treatises  of  his 
'  Avhich  we  have  :  and  he  always  expresseth  himself  with 
'  mildness  and  moderation.'  What  greater  character  could 
be  desired  by  a  catholic  m  riter  ! 

VII.  Though  the  pieces  of  Novatus,  and  especially  the 
treatise  of  the  Trinity  or  the  Rule  of  faith,  abound  with  texts 
of  the  Old  and  New  Testament,  there  are  not  many  books  of 
either  cited  expressly  and  by  name. 

1.  A  great  number  of  passages  are  quoted  out  of  St. 

mallet  mortem  morlentis  quam  ut  revertaturet  vivat  ?  Vincent.  Lir.  Comm.  p. 

355.  Paris.  1669.  ^  et  omnibus  divitiis  ditior,  omni  prudentia 

piTidentior,  et  onmi  benignitate  benignior,  omni  bonitate  melior,  omni  justitia 
justior,  omni  dementia  clementior.     De  Reg.  Fid,  cap.  2.  p.  24.  Jackson. 
'  Sed  before,  note  %  p.  110.  "  Biblioth.  p.  182. 


NovATus.     A.  D.  251.  113 

Matthew's  gospel.  '  Iliin,'  says*^  he,  '  the  ancient  prophe- 
cies, as  Avell  as  the  gospels,  testify  to  be  the  son  of  Abraham, 
and  the  Son  of  David.'  Here  is  probably  a  reference  to 
the  first  chapter  of  St.  Matthew's  gospel.  The  words  of 
Matt.  i.  23.  are'*'  quoted  by  him  in  another  place.  Once 
more :  '  So  '^  Christ  himself  says  ;  "  Lo,  I  am  with  you  unto 
the  end  of  the  m  orld  :"  '  chap,  xxviii.  20. 

2.  To  St.  Mark's  gospel  there  are  very  few,  if  any,  refer- 
ences. However,  we  may  take  a  passage  or  two  to  be  con- 
sidered. '  If  >'  it  belong-  to  God  only  to  forgive  sins,  Christ 
forgiveth  sins:'  see  Mark  ii.  5,  6,  7.  '  God'  is  not  wor- 
shipped by  the  belly,  nor  with  meats,  which  the  Lord  says 
perish,  and  are  purged  in  the  draught,  according  to  the 
course  of  nature :'  See  Mark  vii.  19. 

3.  '  They'^  also  urge  and  insist  upon  what  is  said  in  the 
gospel  of  Luke :  "  The  Holy  Ghost  shall  come  upon  thee, 
and  the  power  of  the  Highest  shall  overshadow  thee ;  there- 
fore that  holy  thing  which  shall  be  born  of  thee  shall  be 
called  the  Son  of  God  :"  chap.  i.  35. 

4.  '  For''  "  and  the  word,"  says  John,  "  was  made  flesh, 
and  dwelled  among  us:"  '  John  i.  14.  This'^  gospel  is  ex- 
pressly quoted  as  John's  several  times  by  this  writer. 

5.  The  book  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  is  no  where  ex- 
pressly quoted,  or  very  plainly  referred  to,  in  the  remaining 
pieces  of  Novatus  :  but  it  may  be  reckoned  probable  that  he 
has  an  eye  to  the  history  contained  in  the  first  chapters  of 
that  book  when  he  says  ;  '  The''  Holy  Spirit,  the  comforter, 
whom  Christ  had  promised  to  the  disciples,  is  he  who  ex- 
plained to  them  the  evangelic  mysteries,  and  illuminated 
them  with  the  knowledge  of  divine  things  ;  by  whom  being' 

"  Hunc  enim  Abrahae  filium,  hunc  David,  hunc  non  minus  et  velera  prae- 
dicta  et  evangelia  testantur.     De  Regula  Fidei,  cap.  9.  p.  58. 

"  Et  vocabitis  nomen  ejus  Emmanuel,  quod  est  interpretatum,  Nobiscum 
Deas.     lb.  cap.  24.  [al.  19.]  p.  186  '^  Sic  Christus  ipse 

dicit,  Ecce  ego  vobiscum  sum  usque  ad  consummationem  seculi.  cap.  12.  p.  87. 

y  Quod  si,  cum  nullius  sit,  nisi  Dei,  peccata  dimittere,  idem  Christus  peccata 
dimittit.     De  Reg.  Fid.  c.  1-3.  p.  97,  98. 

^  Deus  ventre  non  colitur,  nee  cibis,  quos  Dominus  dicit  perire,  et  in  secessu 
naturali  lege  purgari.     De  Cib.  Jud.  cap.  5.  p.  275. 

*  Proponunt  enim  atque  ilia  praetendunt,  quae  in  evangelio  Lucse  relata  sunt, 
— Spiritus  Sanctus  veniet  in  te De  Reg.  Fid.  cap.  24.  [al.  19.]  p.  186. 

^  Nam,  Et  Verbum,  inquit  Joannes,  caro  factum  est,  et  inhabitavit  in  nobis. 
lb.  c.  10.  p.  74.  '^  Ac  sic  Joannes  nativitatem  Christi  describens. 

De  Reg.  Fid.  cap.   13.  init.     Si  enim  Joannes  dicit.  Omnia  per  ipsum  facta 
sunt.  cap.  17.  [al.  25.]  init.  et  passim. 

^  Hie  est  enim qui  evangelica  sacramenta  distinxit,  qui  in  ipsis  inlumi- 

nator  rerum  divinarum  fuit,  quo  confirmati  pro  nomine  Domini  nee  carceres 
nee  vinculatirauemnt;  quinimo  ipsas  seculi  potestates  et  torraenta  calcaverunt 
lb.  c  29.  p.  220. 

VOL.    III.  I 


114  Credibilily  of  the  Gospel  History. 

confirmed,  they  endured  bonds  and  imprisonments  for  the 
name  of  the  Lord,  and  triumphed  over  the  powers  of  the 
world,  and  over  all  torments.'  I  place  in  the  margin* 
another  passage,  in  which  he  quotes  the  words  of  Joel : 
which  are  also  alleged  by  St.  Peter,  Acts  ii.  16,  17.  See 
Joel  ii.  28. 

6.  I  proceed  to  St.  Paul's  epistles. 

1.  The  epistle  to  the  Romans  is  often  quoted  as  St.  Paul's 
by  this  presbyter  of  the  church  of  Rome,  who  was  also  after- 
wards chosen  bishop  by  a  part  of  the  same  church.  'The^  apos- 
tle Paul  writes  in  his  epistle:  "  Whose,"  says  he,  "  are  the 
fathers,  of  whom  is  Christ  according  to  the  flesh,  who  is  over 
all,  God  blessed  for  ever,"  Rom.  ix.  5.  In  the  epistle  penned 
by  Novatus,  sent  to  Cyprian  by  the  presbyters  and  deacons 
of  the  church  of  Rome  in  250,  it  is  said  :  '  Otherwise  s  the 
apostle  had  not  so  commended  us,  saying  :  "  That  your  faith 
is  spoken  of  throughout  the  whole  world,"  '  Rom.  i.  8. 

2.  '  Lastly,''  the  apostle  Paul  knew  this  harmony  and  unity, 
with  a  distinction  of  persons ;  for,  writing  to  the  Corinthians, 
''  I,"  says  he,  "  have  planted,  iVpollos  w  atered,  but  God  gave 
the  increase  :"  '  intending  1  Cor.  iii.  6,  7,  8. 

3.  '  Lastly'  the  apostle  Paul :  "  Having,"  says  he,  "  the 
same  spirit,  as  it  is  written,  I  believed,  therefore  have  I 
spoken  :  we  also  believe,  and  therefore  speak,"  '  2  Cor.  iv. 
13. 

4.  '  And''  in  another  place  [the  apostle  Paul  :]|  "  Now  a 
mediator  is  not  a  mediator  of  one,  but  God  is  one,"  '  Gal.  iii. 
20.  Words  of  this  epistle  are  several  times  cited  by  this 
writer  as  the  apostle  Paul's. 

5.  '  Of  Avhom  the  apostle  Paul :  "  He  that  descended  is 
the  same  that  ascended  above  all  heavens,  that  he  might  fill 
all  things,"  Eph.  iv.  10. 

6.  '  But""  why  should  we  pass  by  that  place  in  the  apostle? 

^  Est  eaim  per  Joeleni  prophetam  repromissus,  sed  per  Christum  redditus  : 
In  novissimis,  inquit,  diebus  effuudam  de  Spiritu  meo  super  servos  et  ancillas 
meas.     lb.   p.  218.  '  Quod  si  et  apostolus  Paulus,   Quorum, 

inquit,  patres,  et  ex  quibus  Christus  secundum  camera,  qui  est  super  omnia 
Deus  benedictus  in  secula,  in  suis  Uteris  scribit.  cap.  13.  p.  99. 

s  Quoniam  nee  tantas  de  nobis  laudes  apostolus  protulisset,  dicendo :  Quia 
fides  vestra  prtedicatur  in  toto  mundo,  p.  289.  "^  Denique  novit  hanc 

concordiae  unitatem,  cum  personarum  tamen  distinctione.  Nam,  cum  ad 
Corinthios  scriberet.  Ego,  inquit,  plantavi,  &c.  de  Reg.  Fid.  cap.  27.  [al.  22.] 

'  Denique  apostolus  Paulus,  Habentes,  inquit,  eumdum  spiritum.  cap.  29.  p. 
219.  '^  Et  alio  in  loco:  Mediator  autem  unius  non  est,   Deus 

autem  unus  est.  cap.  30.  p.  230.  '  De  quo  apostolus  Paulus: 

Qui  descendit,  ipse  est  qui  ascendit  super  omnes  coelos.  cap.  17.  [al.  25.]  p.  134. 

"  Cur  autem — ilium  prsetereamus  apud  apostolorum  locum  ?  Qui  cum  in 
forma  Dei  esset,  non  rapinam  arbitratus  est  gequalem  se  Deo  esse.  De  Reg.  Fid. 


NovATus.     A.  D.  251.  115 

"  Who  being  in  the  form  of  God,  did  not  earnestly  seek  to 
be  like  God ;"  or,  "  to  be  equal  with  God."  '  Philip,  ii. 
6 — 12.  That  Novatus  understood  this  text  after  that  manner, 
was  shown"  formerly. 

7.  '•  For  w  hether,  says°  the  apostle,  "  they  be  thrones,  or 
dominions,  or  principalities,  or  powers,  things  visible  and 
invisible,  by  him  all  things  consist," '  Col.  i.  16,  17. 

8.  There  are  not  in  Novatus  any  passages  taken  out  of  the 
first  or  second  epistle  to  the  Thessalonians. 

9.  '  TheP  apostle  Paul  also  :  "  Who  only,"  says  he, "  hath 
immortality,  and  dwelleth  in  the  light  which  no  man  can 
approach  unto,"  '  1  Tim.  vi.  16. 

10.  '  AndT  Christ  is  said  to  be  "  one  Master,"  '  Matt,  xxiii. 
8,  10.  '  but  yet  we  read  that  the  apostle  Paul  also  is  a 
"  master,"  '  or  teacher,  2  Tim.  i.  11. 

11.  '  Under "^  whom  [Christ]  it  is  now  rightly  said  :  "To 
the  pure  all  things  are  pure, — "  '  Titus  i.  15. 

12.  The  epistle  to  Philemon  is  no  where  quoted,  or  referred 
to,  in  the  remaining  works  of  Novatus. 

13.  With  regard  to  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  I  shall  take 
what  may  deserve  any  notice  in  this  writer.  He  observes, 
'  It  is^  assured  of  Christ,  both  by  prophets  and  apostles,  that 
he  sitteth  at  the  right  hand  of  the  Father,'  See  Heb.  i.  3. 
But  this  is  so  often  spoken  of  in  the  New  Testament,  in  the 
gospels.  Acts,  and  epistles,  that  it  cannot  ati'ord  any  argument 
for  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews.  Again,  he  says,  '  that* 
Christ  is  found  to  be  greater  and  better  not  than  one  angel 
only,  but  than  all  the  angels.'  See  Heb.  i.  4,  "  Being  made 
so  much  better  than  the  angels,  as  he  has  by  inheritance 
obtained  a  more  excellent  name  than  they."  But  this  too  is 
often  said  in  the  New  Testament,  as  Eph.  i.  21 ;  Philip,  ii. 
10;  Col.  16 — 18  :  and  therefore  here  is  no  proof  of  a  refer- 
ence to  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews.  Mr.  Hallet,  having 
allowed  that  St.  Cyprian  and  our  Novatus  had  not  quoted 

cap.  22.  [al.  17.]  p.  173,  174,  175.  Hie  ergo,  quamvis  esset  in  forma  Dei,non 
est  rapinam  arbitratus  sequalem  se  Deo  esse.  p.  176.  vid.  etiam  quae  ibidem 
sequimtur.  et  p.  177,  178.  "  See  p.  38. 

°  Sive  enim,  inquit  apostolus,  Ihroni,  sive  dominationes,  sive  virtutes,  sive 
potestates,  visibilia  et  invisibilia,  omnia  per  ipsum  constant,  cap.  13.  p.  94. 

p  Apostolus  quoque  Paulus  :  Qui  solus,  mquit,  habet  immortalitatem,  &c. 
cap.  30.  p.  230.  "i  Et  raagister  unus  Christus  est  dictus ;  at  enim 

legimus,  quod  magister  sit  etiam  apostolus  Paulus.  ib.  p.  233. 

■"  Subquo  merito  jam  dicitur:  Omnia  munda  mundis.  De  Cib.  Jud.  cap. 
5.  p.  273.  *  Aut  cum  sedere  ad  dextram  patris  et  a  prophetis  et  ab 

apostolis  approbatur.     De  Reg.  Fid.  cap.  26.  p.  201. 

'  Qui  non  uno,  sed  omnibus  angelis  et  major  et  melior  invenitur.  ib.  cap. 
20.  [al.  25.]  p.  162. 

I  2 


116  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

this  epistle,  adds;  '  There"  are  many  passages  in  the  epistle 
'  to  the  HebreMS  very  pertinent  to  the  purpose  of  their 
'  writings ;  upon  which  account  it  looks  very  likely  that  they 
'  were  of  the  same  opinion  with  some  others  of  the  Latin 
'  church  at  that  time,  who  did  not,  as'  Jerom  tells  us,  receive 
'  this  as  a  canonical  epistle.' 

I  infer  then,  that  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews  was  not  received 
by  Novatus  as  an  epistle  of  the  apostle  Paul.  Indeed" 
Epiphanius'^  and  Jerom  seem  to  say  that  the  passage  in  the 
epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  chap.  vi.  4 — 8,  Mas  the  main  text  by 
which  the  Novatians,  and  even  Novatus  himself,  had  been 
misled.  But,  however  it  may  have  been  with  the  Novatians 
in  after  times,  I  think  there  can  be  no  reason  to  suppose  that 
Novatus  himself  insisted  upon  this  passage;  his  remaining- 
works  afford  a  decisive  argument  that  he  did  not  receive  the 
epistle  to  the  Hebrews :  nor  does  the  anonymous  author  of 
the  piece,  Against  the  Novatian  heretic,  usually  joined  with 
8t.  Cyprian's  works,  take  any  notice  of  this  text.  We  know 
likewise,  from  the  several  authors  who  wrote  against  the 
Novatians,  that  there  Mere  other  texts  of  scripture  alleged 
by  them  in  support  of  their  peculiar  notion  ;  they  argued 
fromy  the  m  ords  of  Christ  in  Matt.  x.  33  :  "  Whosoever  shall 
deny  me  before  men,  him  also  will  I  deny  before  my  Father 
which  is  in  heaven:"  from^  Matt.  xii.  32;  from*  Acts  viii. 
22  ;  and  from''  1  John  v.  16 ;  not  to  mention  any  other  texts. 

What  has  been  just  uom'  said  is  of  use  to  shoM^  the  mistake 
of  some  moderns.  Mho  have  supposed  that  many  catholic 
christians  among  the  Latins  Mere  induced  to  set  aside  the 
epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  because  the  Novatians  perverted  a 
passage  in  the  sixth  chapter  of  it.  Much  to  our  purpose  are 
the  observ^ations  of  Beausobre  and  L'Enfant: '  For'^  it  is  false,' 

"  See  his  Introduction  to  his  Paraphrase  and  Notes  upon  the  epistle  to  the 
Hebrews,  p.  18.  "  Hieron.  ad  Dardan.  Ep.  129. 

"  !S0aXXtt  ^£  avTHQ  ToptjTov  Ts  airozoKs  Eipr]^uvov  (Heb.  vi.  4  —  8.)  Epiph. 
Haer.  59.  n.  ii.  p.  494.  A.  13.  "  Verum  neMontanus  et  Novatus 

hie  rideant,  qui  contendunt  non  posse  renovari  per  poDnitenliam  eos  qui  cruci- 
fixerunt  sibimet  Filium  Dei,  et  ostentui  habuerunt,  consequenter  hunc  errorem 
solvit,  et  ait.     Hieron.  adv.  Jovin.  1.  2.  p.  195.  Bened. 

y  Ad  Novatian.  Haeret.  p.  18.  a.  ap.  Cyprian. 

^  Vid.  Q.  cii.  ex  Vet.  et  Nov.  Test.  ^  Sed  soles  alio  dolo  fraudem 

hanc  velle  contegere,  dicens  eodum  sensu  etiam  Pctmm  apostolum  dixisse 
Simoni :  Age  pcenitentiam  ab  hac  malitia  tua,  si  forte  remittatur  tibi.  ib. 

''  Unde  nee  ilia  quastio  vestra  quidquam  poterit  adferre  ponderis,  quam 
suinitis  de  epistola  Johannis  dicentis ,  Qui  scit  Iratrem  suum  peccare  peccatutn 
non  ad  mortem,  petat,  &c.  Ambr.  de  Pcenit.  1.  i.  cap.  10.  Conf.  Pacian.  Ep.  3. 
p.  312.  G. 

"  Car  il  est  faux,  que  1'  eglise  de  Rome  n'ait  pas  reconnu  I'epitre  aux 
Hebreux,  &c.     Pi'sef.  sur  I'Ep.  aux  Hebr.  n.  ii.  p.  413,  414. 


NovATus.     A.  D.  2ol.  117 

say  they,  '  that  the  church  of  Rome  did  not  acknowledge 
'  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  because  the  Novatians  abused 
'  the  words  of  chap.  vi.  4,  5,  6,  to  exclude  from  the  benefit 
'  of  repentance  and  from  the  peace  of  the  church  those  >vho, 
'  after  baptism,  had  fallen  into  idolatry  or  other  crimes. 
'  There  is  no  likelihood  that  the  church  of  Rome  would  reject 
'  a  book  Avhich  had  been  held  for  canonical,  because  some 
'  new  heretics  endeavoured  to  make  an  advantage  of  it  for 
'  the  support  of  their  errors:  besides,  it  is  certain  that  at  Rome 

*  they  counted  but  thirteen  epistles  of  St.  Paul  before  the 
'  rise  of  the  sect  of  the  Novatians,  as  appears  from  the  testi- 

*  mony  of  Cains,  presbyter  of  Rome,  who  wrote  at  the  begin- 
'  ning-  of  the  third  century  ;  whereas''  the  heresy  of  Novatns, 

*  likewise  presbyter  of  Rome,  did  not  begin  to  appear  till 
'  after  the  middle  of  that  age.'  So  those  learned  writers : 
and  I  think  their  argument  conclusive. 

But  yet  it  must  be  owned  that  Philaster,  who  flourished 
about  the  year  380,  says, '  In  his  time*^  it  was  customary  in 
'  some  places  to  omit  the  public  reading"  of  the  epistle  to  the 

*  Hebrews;  and  that  one  reason  of  that  practice  was  theadvan- 

*  tage  which  the  Novatians  endeavoured  to  makeof  it.'  Never- 
theless this  does  not  alter  my  opinion  of  the  forementioned 
of  those  commentators.  Philaster  only  informs  us  what  was 
the  practice  of  some  churches  in  his  time,  near  the  end  of  the 
fourth  century  :  as  for  the  sentiments  of  the  Latin  christians 
in  the  former  part  of  the  third  century,  and  downwards  till 
below  the  middle  of  it,  we  need  no  information  from  him; 
being  already  sufficiently  informed  about  them  by  Tertullian, 
Caius,  the  works  of  Cyprian,  and  Novatus  himself,  not  t« 
mention  now  any  other  writers. 

7.  Our  next  article  will  take  in  the  seven  catholic  epistles, 
and  the  book  of  Revelation. 

1.  There  are  no  references  in  this  author  to  the  epistle  of 
St.  James,  nor  to  the  first  or  second  epistle  of  St.  Peter. 
However,  we  shall  observe,  >vith  regard  to  the  last  mentioned 
epistle,  that  he  says:  '  The^  several  parts  of  the  Avorld  are 
so  firmly  connected  together  as  not  to  be  dissolved  by  any 

^  Or  I'heresie  de  Novat.  aussi  pretre  de  Rome,  ne  commenca  qu'  apres  ]e 
milieu  de  ce  siecle  la.  ib.  p.  414. 

*  Et  quia  addidemnt  in  ea  quaedam  non  bene  sentientes,  inde  non 

legitur  in  ecclesia :  etsi  legitur  a  quibusdam,  non  tamen  in  ecclesia  legitur 
populo,  nisi  tredecim  epistolee  ipsius,  et  ad  Hebraeos  interdura.  Et  quia  et 
factum  Christum,  dicit  in  ea,  inde  non  legitur.  De  pcEnitentia  autem  propter 
Novatianos  aeque.  Philast.  Hser.  41. 

^  ut  ex  disparibus  elementis  ita  sit  unus  mundus  ista  coagmentata  con- 

spiratione  solidatus,  ut  nulla  vi  dissolvi  possit,  nisi  quum  ilium  solus  ipse  qui 
fecit,  ad  majora  alia  pnsstanda  nobis,  solvi  jussent.  de  Reg.  Fid.  cap.  2.  p.  19. 


118  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

power,  till  he  alone  who  made  it  shall  command  it  to  be  dis- 
solved for  affording  a  better  state  for  us.'  See  2  Pet.  iii.  11, 
12,  13.  Again,  he  speaks  of  the^  world's  hastening  to  the 
fiery  day  of  judgment:  see  2  Pet.  iii.  7.  But  this  was  so 
common  an  expectation,  that  the  present  world  should  be 
sometime  destroyed  by  fire,  that  these  expressions,  in  my 
opinion,  are  not  suflicient  to  determine  a  particular  reference 
to  this  epistle.  Mr.  Jackson,''  in  a  note  upon  the  first  cited 
passage,  owns  that  this  was  an  expectation  of  the  stoics. 

2.  '  For'  John  also  says:  "  No  man  hath  seen  God  at  any 
time,"  1  John  iv.  12.  Again,  '  We"^  find  it  written,  that 
God  is  called  love,  and  that  he  is  called  light;'  see  1  John 
iv.  8.  and  i.  5. 

3.  I  remember  not  any  thing  in  this  writer  relating  to  the 
other  two  epistles  ascribed  to  St.  John. 

4.  There  is  nothing  in  Novatus  taken  out  of  the  epistle  of 
St.  Jude. 

5.  '  But'  there  is  a  woe  appointed  to  those  who  add,  and 
to  those  who  lake  away.'  Sec  Rev.  xxii.  18,  19.  But 
whether  this  will  be  reckoned  material  I  cannot  say. 

8.  We  are  next  to  observe  some  forms  of  citation  and 
general  divisions  of  the  scriptures,  and  afterwards  some 
marks  of  respect  for  them. 

1.  '  "  Of'"  two  sparrows,"  '  saith  the  Lord,  "  one  does  not 
fall  without  the  will  of  your  Father ;"  '  see  Matt.  x.  29,  30. 
'  Although"  we  hasten  to  other  things,  yet  that  I  think  ought 
not  to  be  omitted  which  the  Lord  saith  in  the  gospel,  for 
representing  his  majesty  :  "  Destroy  this  temple,  and  in  three 
days  I  will  raise  it  up  again," '  John  ii.  19.  '  Lastly"  in  the 
gospel ;  "  the  hour  cometh,"  saith  the  Lord,  "  when  neither 
in  this  mountain,  nor  at  Jerusalem,  shall  ye  worship  the 
Father,"  '  John  iv.  21.  And  in  like  manner  in  other  places, 
as  may  be  seen  in  part  in  what  has  been  transcribed.  He 
also  calls  the  New  Testament  in  general p  the  evangelic 
scripture. 

B  Sive  quoniam  ad  igneum  diem  judicii  mundus  iste  festinat.  ib.  cap.  8.  p.  56. 

''  Stoici  contra  (prope  cum  Christianis)  igne  dissolutum  iri  sstatuebant.  Not. 
ii.  p.  19.  '  Nam  et  Joannes,  Deum  nemo,  inquit,  vidit  unquani, 

cap.  18.  [al.  2fi.]  p.  13G.  ^  Invenimus  enim  scriptum  esse,  quod 

Deus  caritas  dictus  sit, — et  quod  Deus  lux  dictus  est.  cap.  7.  in. 

'  Sed  vae  est  adjicientibus,  quomodo  et  detrahentibus,  positiun.  cap.  16.  [al. 
24.]  p.  123.  "■  Ex  duobus,  inquit  Dominus,  passeribus,  unus  non  cadet 

sine  Patris  voluntate.  cap.  8.  p.  53. 

"  IHud  non  arbilror  praetennittendum,  quod  in  evangelio  Dominus  ad  sig- 
nificantiam  suie  majestatis  exprcssit  dicendo.  cap.  21.  [al.  16.]  init. 

"  Denique  in  evangelio,  Veniet  hora,  aiebat  Dominus,  &c.  cap.  6.  p.  44. 

P  Prsesertim  cum  animadvertat  scripturam  evangelicam — cap.  13.  p.  96. 


NovATus.     A.  D.  251.  119 

2.  '  Tliisi  same  Jesus,  the  Son  of  God,  we  read  to  be  pro- 
mised in  the  Old  Testament,  and  observe  exhibited  in  the 
New  Testament.'  '  Him  the  ancient  prophecies,  as  Avell  as 
the  gospels,  testify  to  be  the  son  of  Abraham :'  see  before 
Numb.  vii.  1.  '  Justly"^  do  we  believe  and  hold,  according 
to  the  doctrine  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament,  that  Christ 
Jesus  is  God  and  man.'  The  phrase  of  Old  and  New  Testa- 
ment is  frequent  in  this  writer. 

3.  He  calls  the  scriptures  sacred  and  divine,  and  at  the 
same  time  shows  their  use  and  authority  for  confirming- 
the  truth  of  doctrines,  or  for  confuting  errors.  '  That* 
Christ  is  not  only  man,  but  God  also,  is  proved  by  the 
sacred  authority  of  the  divine  writings.'  '  The'  divine 
scripture  easily  detects  and  confutes  the  frauds  of  heretics.' 
Again  :  '  The"  divine  scripture  of  the  Old  and  New  Testa- 
ment.' And  ^  sacred  scriptures,'"  heavenly  scriptures :  this 
last  is  a  common  expression  in  our  author.  He"  affirms  the 
scriptures  are  infallible:  hey  says  it  is  one  and  the  san)e 
spirit  that  spoke  in  the  prophets  and  the  apostles :  but  he 
gives  the  advantage  to  these.  Among  the  offices  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  he  mentions  this  as  one,  that^  he  guards  the  gospels. 

9.  We  are  now  to  sum  up  the  testimony  of  this  writer.  We 
have  not  seen  in  him  passages  of  all  the  books  of  the  New 
Testament  commonly  received  at  that  time  :  but  there  is  no 
reason  to  think  he  differed  upon  this  head  from  other 
christians  ;  there  not  having  been  any  accusations  brought 
against  him  upon  that  account.  Every  one  knoMs  now  what 
are  the  books  I  mean:  the  four  gospels,  the  Acts,  thirteen 
epistles  of  St.  Paul,  the  first  epistle  of  St.  Peter,  and  the 
first  epistle  of  St.  John  :  most  of  these  we  have  seen  quoted 
by  him,  and   it  may  be  taken  for  granted  that  the  rest  also 

•i  Hunc  enim  Jesum  Christum — et  in  vcteri  Testamento  legimus  esse  lepro- 
missum,  et  in  novo  Testamento  animadvertimus  exhibitum.  cap.  9.  in. 

'  Merito  secundum  institutionem  veteris  et  novi  Testamenti,  et  Deum  homi- 
nem  Christum  Jesum  et  credimus  et  tenemus.  cap.  17.  [al.  25.]  p.  128. 

^  Quia  Christus  non  homo  tantum,  sed  et  Deus,  divmarum  literarum  sacris 
auctoritatibus  approbatur.  cap.  26.  [al.  21.]  in. 

*  Sed  enim  scriptura  divina  hsereticorum  et  fraudes  et  furta  facile  convincit 
etdetegit.  cap.  24.  [al.  19.]  p.  187.  "  Quandoquidem  non  tarn 
veteris  quam  etiam  novi  Testamenti  scriptura  divina.  cap.  26.  [al.  29.]  p.  201. 

*  ScripturaB  sanctas.  cap.  30.  p.  229. 

*  Et  poteram  quidem  omnium  scripturaram  coelestium  eventilare  tractatus. 
cap.  21.  [al.  16.]  init.  Sed  quo  modo  hoc  tenemus  et  legimns  et  credimus,  sic 
scripturarum  ccelestium  nullam  partem  praeterire  debemus.  cap.  30.  p.  230. 

"  Non  utique  ex  scripturarum  coelestium  vitio,  quae  nunquam  fallunt.  cap. 
30.  p.  232.  ^   Unus  ergo  et  idem  spiritus,  qui  in  piophetis  et  apos- 

tolis,  nisi  quoniam  ibi  ad  momentum,  hie  semper,  cap.  29.  p.  219. 

'  evangelia  custodit.  cap.  29.  p.  223. 


120  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

M  ere  a  part  of  liis  canon.  He  likewise  received  the  book  of 
ti.e  Revelation  :  we  saw  a  passage  in  him  which  may  be  sup- 
posed to  refer  to  it.  Besides,  we  know  it  was  received  by 
St.  Cyprian  of  Africa,  w  ith  w  hom  the  church  of  Rome  held 
a  friendly  correspondence.  It  was  also  received  by  the 
anonymous  writer''  against  the  Novatian  heretic,  supposed 
contemporary  with  Novatus.  This  book  is  much  quoted  in 
that  piece ;  which  is  an  argument  that  it  was  a  book  of  au- 
thority with  those  against  whom  he  wrote.  We  perceive 
farther,  from  the  writings  of  Novatus,  that  he  did  not  receive 
the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews  as  a  part  of  sacred  scripture,  for 
he  never  quotes  it ;  though  there  are  in  it  many  texts,  which 
he  would  certainly  have  reckoned  to  be  to  his  purpose,  if  the 
epistle  had  been  of  authority  with  him.  '  As  for  the  disputed 
catholic  epistles,  that  of  James,  the  second  epistle  of  St. 
Peter,  the  second  and  third  of  St.  .John,  and  that  of  St.  Jude, 
we  have  no  clear  evidences  what  Avas  his  opinion  of  them. 
He  had  a  great  regard  for  the  scriptures  of  the  Old  and  New 
Testament  commonly  received.  We  have  seen  in  him  many 
undeniable  proofs  of  that  peculiar  respect  which  was  shown 
the  scriptures  by  all  christians  in  general,  as  esteeming  them 
books  of  authority,  by  which  all  disputes  and  controversies 
were  to  be  decided.  Finally,  it  ought  to  be  observed,  that 
there  is  not  in  this  learned  writer  of  the  third  century  any, 
the  least,  notice  taken  of  spurious  apocryphal  christian 
writings. 

VHI.  It  remains  only  that  we  observe  the  sentiments  of 
the  Novatians  concerning  sacred  scripture.  Having-  before 
carried  down  their  history  a  good  way  below  the  time  of 
their  founder  and  first  leader,  it  may  be  thought  requisite 
to  make  a  distinct  article  of  their  testimony  :  but  a  short  one 
will  suffice. 

1.  For,  as  we  meet  not  with  many  complaints  against  them 
relating  to  this  matter,  it  may  be  concluded  that  they  had 
all  a'ono-  the  same  canon  with  the  catholic  christians  of  the 
several  countries  where  they  lived. 

2.  Philaster''  expressly  says  that  the  Novatians  agreed 
v/ith  the  catholic  church  in  receiving-  the  scriptures  of  the 
Old  and  New  Testament;  which  is  not  contradicted  by 
Epiphanius,  Theodoret,  or  Augustine,  who  also  have  written 
professedly  of  heretics  and  their  opinions.  Socrates,  giving* 
an  account  of  the  difference  between  the  catholics  and  Nova- 

"  See  before,  p.  G.5. 

''  Novatiani  surrexerunt  post  persecutionem  postremam  e  Novate  quodam, 
qiii,  sicut  ecclesia  catholica,  credebant  antea,  vetus  Testaraentum  et  novum 
accipientes.  Philastr.  Haer.  82. 


NovATus.     A.  D.  251.  121 

tians,  assures  us,  that  each''  side  endeavoured  to  support 
itself  by  the  authority  of  the  divine  scriptures. 

3.  This  account  is  confirmed  by  the  arg-uments  of  those 
writers  who  desig-nedly  confute  the  Novatians  ;  for,  in  their 
arguments,  they  quote  to  them  as  books  of  authority  all  the 
books  commonly  received  by  christians;  particularly'^  the 
Acts  of  the  Apostles. 

4.  It  is  probable,  likewise,  that  they  kept  pace  with  the 
catholics  in  admitting-  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews.  That 
some  of  them  in  some  places  received  this  epistle,  may  be 
inferred  from  the  passages  of  Epiphanius  and  Jerom  before 
quoted:  and  St.  Ambrose,  in  his  books  upon  this  contro- 
versy, considers "^  the  objection  taken  from  Hebr.  vi.  4—8, 
as  does*^  Eulogius  of  Alexandria ;  who  likewise  says  thats 
they  argued  from  Hebr.  x.  26,  27 ;  but  I  do  not  observe 
that  Pacian,  or  the  anonymous  author  of  the  Questions  out 
of  the  Old  and  Nev/  Testament,  in  v/riting-  against  this  sect, 
take  any  notice  of  the  objection  founded  upon  the  passage 
in  the  sixth  chapter  of  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews.  It  is 
therefore  my  opinion,  that,  whilst  the  catholics  were  not 
agreed  in  receiving  this  episistle,  so  long- there  were  also  dif- 
ferent sentiments  about  it  among*  the  Novatians. 

5.  1  can  say  little  concerning'  the  opinion  which  these 
people  had  about  the  disputed  catholic  epistles. 

6.  As  for  the  book  of  the  Revelation,  it  was  certainly 
received  by  them  :  it  is  quoted  by  most,  if  not  all,  the  authors 
who  write  against  them. 

"^  Ovrio  ?£  an<poTipttiv  emnXKoi'Tiov  ra  tvavria,  /cat  £k  roiv  Oeiwj/  oxvpsvTii^v 
a  tKUTipoQ  iXiyev.     Socrat.  1.  iv.  cap.  28.  p.  245.  D. 

■*  The  Acts  are  quoted  by  several  writers  in  their  arguments  against  the 
Novatians,  as  Epiphan.  Haer.  59.  n.  viii.  p.  500.  et  Ambros.  de  Poenit.  1.  i.  cap. 
8.  p.  39^.  E.  cap.  10.  p.  403.  B.  C.  Quid  Paulus  apostolus?  erubescit,  cum 
Atheniensem  ilium  versum  et  dixit  et  comprobat !  Nam  in  Actis  apostolorum 
ita  ponit,  &c.  Pacian.  Ep.  3.  p.  308.  B.  C.  Vid.  etiam  Qu.  ex  V.  et  N.  T. 
Qu.  cii.  ®  Cum  igitur  tam  evidenti  et  ipsius  apostoli,  et  scriptorum 

ejus  exemplo  redarguantiu",  tamoa  adhuc  obniti  volunt,  et  auctoritatem  aiunt 
apostolicae  sibi  sutfragari  sententiie,  allegantes  scriptum  ad  Hebraeos  :  Impossi- 
bile  enim,  &c.  Ambr.  de  Poenit.  1.  ii.  cap.  2.  p.  417.  C.  D. 

^  Eulog.  ap.  Phot.  Cod.  280.  p.  1604  8  lb.  p.  1609.  in. 


A  NOTE   UPON  CHAP.  XLVII. 

IT  is  commonly  said,  by  learned  moderns,  that  the  Greek 
writers  of  the  church  have  mistaken  the  name  of  Corne- 
lius's rival, calling-  him  Novatus,''  and  confounding  this  pres- 
byter of  Rome  with  the  presbyter  of  Carthage:  whereas  his 
name,  they  say,  was  Novatianus,  or  Novatian.  So  Cave  and 
Ruinart,  and  Petavius,  not  to  mention  any  more.  Hosce  duos 
nominum  similitudine  decepti  perpetuo  fere  confundunt 
scriptores  Grseci.  Cav.  H.  L.  in  Novatian.  Quin  ct  ad 
ipsum  Novatianum,  quem  Eusebius  Novatum  vocat,  Grae- 
corum  more,  qui  Novati  et  Novatian i  tiomina  scepius  con- 
fundunt. Ruin.  Act.  M.  Sine,  et  Sel.  de  S.  Dionys.  Alex, 
n.  vii.  p.  180.  GriBci  enim  Novatum  et  Novatianum  inter  se 
confuderunt,  similitudine  nominum  decepti.  Quo  in  errore 
fuit  Eusebius  noster.  Vales.  Annot.  in  Euseb.  1.  vi.  c.  45. 

1.  My  first  argument  therefore  in  support  of  the  present 
assertion  is,  that  this  presbyter  of  Rome  is  generally  called 
Novatus  by  the  Greek  writers;  by  Eusebius,  and  Socrates, 
and  Sozomen,  and  divers  others :  and  I  know  of  no  reason 
why  they  should  be  deceived  herein.  Eusebius  had  before 
him  the  letter  of  Cornelius  to  Fabius,  bishop  of  Antioch,and 
the  letter  of  Dionysius  of  Alexandria  to  this  presbyter,  and 
divers  other  letters  of  the  same  Dionysius,  upon  the  contro- 
versy about  receiving  the  lapsed  :  and  the  two  last  mentioned 
ecclesiastical  historians  were  well  acquainted  with  the  No- 
vatians  at  Constantinople,  who  may  be  supposed  to  have 
known  the  name  of  the  founder  of  their  sect.  Let  me  add 
here,  to  all  the  Greek  writers  already  mentioned,  Athanasius ; 
who  expressly  says,  that  the  Novatians  were  so  called  from 
Novatus;  airo  ^oHUTsNosaTiavoi.  Orat.  i.  contr.  Ar.  p.  407.  B. 

2.  There  are  still  remainino-  in  Latin  authors  traces  of 
their  agreement  with  the  Greek  writers  upon  this  head.  For 
this  I  allege  the  words  of  J.  A.  Fabricius :  Eusebii  et  Rufini 
editiones,  "koumtv  Novato  vi.  45.  Sed  Novatiano  utique  fuit 
itii  nomen,  non  Novato,  qui  episropum  Romanum  se  contra 
Cornel ium  ordinari  passus  est  anno  251,  quo  has  ad  cum 
litenis  Dionysius  Alexandrinus  exaravit.  Fabric,  not.  (f) 
ad  Ilieron.  de  V.  I.  cap.  69.  Rufinus  therefore,  in  his  trans- 
lation of  Eusebius,  at  the  place  referred  to,  has  Novatus,  as 
Fabricius  owns.  I  shall  next  allege  a  passage  taken  from 
tlie  notes  of  the  Benedictine  editors  of  St.  Ambrose's  Avorks  : 
Romana    editio   ubique    Novatum    fecit  e  Novatiano :  qua 

»  See  note  %  p.  78. 


A  note  upon  CHAP.  XLVIL  123 

mutatione  inductus  in  erroreni  Petavius  Anibrosium  nostrum 
lis  patribus  a  quibus  anibo  hajresiarchse  inter  se  confun- 
duntur,  accensuit.  Verum  doctissinius  vir  secus  sensisset, 
si  quam  aliani  editionem,  aut  qiiemlibet  manu  exaratum 
codiceni  consuluisset.  Not.  in  Anibros.  de  Poenit.  I.  i.  cap. 
3.  p.  393.  Hence  then  1  learn,  that  in  the  Roman  edition  of 
St.  Ambrose's  ^vorks  is  Novatus,  where  in  other  editions  we 
now  have  Novatianus.  Indeed  the  Benedictine  editors  of 
Ambrose  say,  that  all  the  manuscripts  have  Novatianus. 
But,  in  answer  to  this,  two  things  may  be  said  :  1.  That  it 
is  likely  the  Roman  editor  did  not  put  Novatus  M'ithout  some 
reason.  2.  It  is  very  likely  that  in  some  manuscripts  of  divers 
Latin  authors  the  name  of  the  presbyter  of  Rome  may  be 
found  written  Novatus ;  and  Avhat  is  to  be  farther  offered 
will  confirm  this  supposition.  I  therefore  proceed  in  the 
second  argument.  The  Benedictines  themselves  have  so 
printed  his  name  in  their  edition  of  St.  Hilary  of  Poictiers : 
Nam  in  urbe  Roma  sub  Novato  et  Sabellio  et  Valentino 
htereticis  factum  concilium,  ab  Orientalibus  confirmatum 
est.  Hilar,  ex.  op.  Hist.  Fragm.  iii.  p.  1320.  F.  Et  vid. 
ibidem  annotata.  Farther,  I  find  his  name  frequently  printed 
Novatus  in  the  edition  of  St.  Jerom's  works  by  Martianay,  a 
Benedictine  likewise,  of  the  congregation  of  St.  Maiir.  Quid 
respondebit  Novatus  negans  pcenitentiam,  &c.  Hieron.Conmi. 
in  Joel,  cap  2.  p.  135(S.  iu  Tom.  iii.  Heec  diximus,  non  quo 
juxta  Novatum  tollanms  spem  prenitentise.  Id.  in  Amos, 
cap.  5.  p.  1407.  m.  Facessat  itaque  Novatus  errantibus  manus 

non  porrigens. Id.  in  Ep.   38.  [al.  61.]  T.   iv.  p.  307. 

Ego  Origenem  propter  eruditionem  sic  interdum  legendum 
arbitror,  quomodo  Tertullianum,  Novatum,  Arnobium,  &c. 
Ep.  5G.  [al.  76.]  p.  589.  ib.  Verum  ne  Montanus  et  Nova- 
tus hie  rideant,  &c.  adv.  Jovin.  1.2.  p.  195.  m.  Non  est  loci 
hujus,  ut  pcenitentiam  pra^dicem,  et  quasi  contra  Montanura 
Novatumque  scribens,  dicam,  &c.  ad  Ocean.  Ep.  84.  [al.  30.]] 
p.  659.  Montanus  et  qui  Novati  schisma  sectantur,  nomen 
sibi  munditise  preesumsere.  In.  Ep.  ad.  Tit.  cap.  1.  p.  414. 
f.  I  have  put  down  all  these  passages  out  of  Martianay's 
editions  of  Jerom's  Avorks,  hoping"  I  may  rely  upon  him  for 
the  right  readings.  I  observe,  indeed,  that,  in  the  index  of 
matters  at  the  end  of  St.  Jerom's  fourth  tome,  Martianay  dis- 
ting"uishes  between  Novatian,  and  Novatus  the  presbyter  of 
Carthag-e  :  supposing'  that  where  Jerom  mentions  Novatus 
he  intends  this  last  person,  and  not  the  presbyter  of  Rome  : 
but,  I  believe,  most  learned  men  will  think  Martianay  mis- 
taken :  Jerom  plainly  speaking  of  a  writer,  and  the  principal 
author  of  the  Novatian  sect ;  therefore  he  must  intend  the 


124  CredibiUlij  of  the  Gospel  History. 

presbyter  of  Rome  :  for  Cyprian's  presbyter  is  never  rec- 
koned a  writer.  And  though  the  Benedictine  editors  of  Am- 
brose affirm  that,  in  the  manuscripts  of  that  father's  work 
de  Pcenitentia,  the  name  of  this  person  is  Avritten  Novatian  ; 
yet  there  are  certainly  t^^  o  or  more  Latin  authors,  who  write 
it  Novatus  :  those  Benedictines  seem  not  able  to  deny  it. 
They  blame  Petavius  for  reckoning-  Ambrose  among"  the 
fathers,  by  whom  these  two  presbyters  have  been  confounded: 
but  they  were  not  pleased  to  cite  Petavius,  nor  to  refer  to  tlie 
place  where  he  speaks  of  this  matter.  1  shall  therefore 
transcribe  here  the  passage  which  I  suppose  to  be  intended 
by  those  Benedictines :  Sic  igitur  Novatianorum  secta  ab 
ambobus  illis  auctoribus  piofectn,  a  posteriore  prsesertim, 
hoc  est,  Novatiano.  magnum  incrementum  accepit.  Sed 
Graeci,  uti  dixi,  Patres  unum  duntaxat  sectce  conditorem 
nominant,  Novatum  sive  NavaTov,  Romanum  presbyterum : 
quemadmodum  Euseb.  1.  6.  cap.  45.    Theodoretus,  Epipha- 

nius  hoc  loco,  Gregorius  Nazianz.  adeoque  Socrates, et 

complures  alii.  Imo  etiam  e  Latinis  Aug'ustin.  1.  de  Hser. 
Philastrius,  Ambr.  in  L.  de  Pcen.  Distinguit  autem  Cypri- 
anus  passim  in  Epist.  etPacianus,  ac  Latini  omnes,  qui  de 
hac  haeresi  subtilius  disputarunt.  Petav.  Animadv.  ad  Hser. 
lix.  T.  ii.  Epiphan.  p.  226.  Here  then  are  two  more  Latin 
authors  to  be  added  to  the  foregoing, Philaster  and  Augustine: 
their  words  are  these :  Novatiani  surrexerunt  post  persecu- 

tionem  postremam  a  Novato   quodam Philast.  de  Hoer. 

cap.  82.  Cathari,  qui  seipsos  isto  nomine,  quasi  propter  mun- 
ditiam,  superbissime  atqvie  odiosissime  nominant,  secundas 
nuptias  non  admittunt,  poenitentiam  denegant,  Novatum 
sectantes  hoereticum :  unde  ctiani  Novatiani  appellantur. 
Aug\  de  Hoer.  cap.  38.  Vid.  eund.  De  Utilit.  Jejun.  cap.  9. 
n.  IE  et  contr.  Crescon.  1.  ii.  c.  1.  n.  2.  These  are  two 
material  witnesses,  LatiTi  authors,  who  wrote  professedly  of 
heresies;  and  the  latter  of  them  a  man  of  great  learning.  I 
must  add  here  that  Rufinus,  not  only  in  his  version  of  Euse- 
bius  before  taken  notice  of,  but  in  his  explication  of  the 
creed  likewise,  has  Novatus:  Et  quod  Novatus  sollicitavit, 
lapsis  poenitentiam  denegando,  et  secundas  nuptias,  cum 
forte  iniri  eas  necessitas  exegerit,  condemnando.  Symb.  Ruf. 
ap.  Hieron.  T.  v.  p.  130.  f.  Pelagius  Miitesthe  name  in  the 
sanie  manner:  Quamvis  ergo  tota  epistola  contra  Novatum 
sit,  &c.  Pelag.  in  2  Cor.  cap.  2.  ap.  Hieron.  T.  v.  p.  1015. 
Li  the  decree  of  Gelasius  his  name  is  Avritten  Novatus.  Ap. 
Labb.  Cone.  T.  iv.  p.  12(i5.  I  shall  mention  one  author 
more:  Euerunt  hi  enim  aliquando  nobiscum,  sed  quodam 
Novato  auctore  disrupti  sunt :  non  tamen  htereticis  cose- 


^  Note  upon  CHAP.  XLFII.  125 

quandi,  quia  non  a  confessione  catholicu,  sed  a  caritate  dis- 
seatiunt.  Consult  Zach.  et  Apoll.  I.  i.  c.  17.  ap.  Dacher. 
Spic.  T.  X.  p.  89.  And  I  make  no  doubt  but  the  name  of 
our  Roman  presbyter  will  be  found  so  written  in  the  manu- 
scripts of  many  Latin  authors,  if  consulted. 

3.  The  common  appellation  of  this  peoj)Ie  shows  that  the 
name  of  their  leader  wasNovatus,  not  Novatian.  If  his  name 
had  been  Novatian,  his  followers  would  have  been  called  by 
the  Greeks  N(a'a7(aj'a«ot,or\avo7(ai'tffTa<,  Novatianists:  whereas 
they  are  called  by  them  ^avuTiauor  and  in  like  manner  by 
the  Latins  Novatiani,  Novatians,  from  Novatus.  This  is 
evident  from  the  passage  of  Augustine,  before  cited ;  and 
from  a  passage  in  his  answer  to  Cresconius,  a  Donatist  and 
grammarian  :  Tuque  potius  eis  facis  injuriam,  cum  scribis, 
in  Latino  sermone,  non  nisi  Latinam  reg'ulam  probans, 
Donatianos  a  Donato,  sicut  ab  Ario  et  Novato  Arianos  et 
Novatianos,  velles  vocari.  Contr.  Crescon.  1.  ii.  c.  1.  n.  2. 
T.  ix.  To  these  passages  innumerable  others  might  be  added. 
I  recollect  but  one  exception  among  the  Latin  writers :  Nee 
nos  movet,  frater  carissime,  quod  in  literis  tuis  complexus 
es ;  Novatianenses  rebaptizare  eos,  c(uos  a  nobis  sollicitant. 
Cypr.  Ep.  73.  p.  198.  This  passage  is  cited  in  Augustine 
in  the  same  manner :  De  Baptismo,  contra  Donatistas,  I.  iii. 
cap.  12.  Therefore  I  do  not  dispute  the  genuineness  of  this 
reading-:  but  no  one  will  suppose  that  this  one  instance  can 
assure  us  of  the  right  name  of  the  author  of  the  sect :  for  if 
his  name  had  been  Novatian,  the  common  appellation  of  hLs 
folloAvers  would  have  been  Novatianenses,  or  Novatianistoe, 
and  we  should  have  found  it  continually  in  Latin  authors  : 
as  we  too,  upon  that  supposition,  should  call  them  Nova- 
tianists,  not  Novatians.  Nay,  though  we  had  found  these 
people  several  times  called  Novatienses,  it  could  not  have 
amounted  to  a  proof  that  their  leader  Avas  called  Novatianus, 
if  there  were  a  great  deal  of  evidence  to  the  contrary.  It  is 
allowed  that  the  name  of  Pelagius  is  rightly  so  written  in 
Latin,  and  his  followers  therefore  generally  called  Pelagiani. 
Yet  they  are  not  seldom  called  Pelagianistse,  a  word  derived 
immediately  from  Pelagianus,  not  from  Pelagius.  But  no 
body  therefore  concludes  that  the  name  of  their  leader  was 
Pelagianus,  and  not  Pelagius.  I  put  down  only  an  instance 
or  two  of  that  way  of  writing  the  appellation  of  that  sect. 
Adversus  Pelagianistas  quoque  novos  nostrorum  temporum 
heereticos  —  per  annos  fere  decern  laboravit.  Possid.  de  Vit. 
August,  cap.  18. — illosque  Manichceos,  Donatistas,  Pelagi- 
anistas,— ex  magna  parte  defecisse, — congaudens.  Id.  ib. 

4.  I  know  not  of  any  one,  in  any  age,  called  Novatian, 


126  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

unless  the  person  in  dispute  was  so  named  :  but  there  hare 
been  many  called  Novatus  :  as  Junius  Gallio,  Seneca's  elder 
brother,  born  at  Corduba  in  Spain,  whose  original  name  was 
M.  Aniiaeus  Novatus.  Beside  the  presbyter  of  Carthage 
under  Cyprian,  there  was  at  that  time  a  bishop  in  Africa 
named  Novatus,  who  was  present  at  the  council  of  Car- 
thage in  256.  Vid.  Cypr.  Tr.  p.  230.  Novatus,  a  bishop,  was 
present  at  the  council  of  I\Iilevi,  in  Africa,  in  the  year  416. 
Vid.  Augustin.  Ep.  176.  [al.  92,]  The  same  Novatus,  or 
another  bishop  of  that  name,  is  afterwards  mentioned  by 
Angustine,  in  a  letter  written  about  the  year  429.  A  Sanctis 
fratribus  et  coepiscopis  meis  Urbano  et  Novato,  qualis  sis 
vir  et  quantus  accepi.  Aug.  Ep.  229.  [al.  262].  A  letter 
of  Augustine  written  in  405,  is  sent  to  one  Novatus,  supposed 
to  be  the  same  Novatus,  bishop  of  Sitifi,  who  was  present  at 
the  conference  at  Carthage,  in  411.  A^id.  Aug.  Ep.  84.  [al. 
242.]  et  August.  Vit.  a  Benedictin.  concinnat.  1.  vi.  cap.  6. 
n.  4.  et  Collat.  Carthag.  n.  143.  et  204.  There  was  formerly 
a  place  at  Rome  called  Thermoe  Novati :  from  whom  so  called, 
I  do  not  enquire.  Yit.  Montfauc.  Diar.  Ital.  cap.  14.  p.  203. 
There  is  likewise  a  writer  of  this  name  whose  work  indeed 
I  never  saw  ;  but  it  is  to  be  found  in  divers  curious  libraries : 
this  is  the  title.  Novatus  Catholicusde  Humilitaieet  Obedi- 
entia.  Vit.  Montf.  Bib.  MSS.  T.  i.  p.  46,  67,  1373.''  This 
consideration  alone  is  sufficient  to  render  it  probable  that 
the  person  of  whom  we  are  speaking  was  called  Novatus : 
for  it  is  not  likely  he  should  have  a  name  by  which  no  other 
man  was  ever  called. 

5.  Some  learned  moderns  seem  to  have  supposed  that  the 
name  of  the  person  v.  as  Novatus.  I  guess  that  Beausobre 
and  L'Enfant  were  of  this  opinion,  because  they  write  his 
name  in  French  No  vat :  as  may  be  seen  in  a  passage  formerly 
quoted,  p.  11 7.  note  '\  In  Du  Fresno's  Latin  translation  of  the 
Paschal  Chronicle,  the  name  Novatus  is  preserved,  p.  271.  D. 
272.  A  Paris.  1688.  And  I  am  apt  to  think  it  will  be  found, 
(though  this  single  instance  only  now  offers  itself  to  me,) 
that  several  learned  moderns  have  kept  the  name  Novatus 
in  their  Latin  tianslations  of  Greek  writers. 

ObJ.  I  can  tjiink  of  but  one  objection  of  moment,  which 
is,  that  this  person's  name  is  always  written  Novatian  by  St. 
Cyprian  ;  and  it  must  be  owned  that  this  is  a  considerable 
difficulty:  nevertheless,  I  think  it  ought  not  to  prevail 
against  so  much  evidence  as  we  have  seen  on  the  other  side. 

°  So  I  wrote  in  the  first  edition :  but  the  book  is  easy  enough  to  be  found. 
It  is  in  Bib.  PP.  Maxima,  T.  v.  p.  1082,  1083,  where  it  makes  little  more  than 
one  folio  page.     It  is  also  in  Bib.  PP.  Morel!.  Paris,  1644,  T.  ii.  p.  75,  &c 


DiONYSios  of  Rome.     A.  D.  259.  127 

The  case  seems  to  me  to  be  this  ;  Cyprian  wouhl  have  it 
that  his  presbyter  Novatus  was  the  principal  author  of  the 
disturbances  at  Rome,  [See  before,  p.  94.]  And  therefore 
he  called  the  presbyter  of  Rome  Novatian,  as  if  he  had  been 
only  a  follower  of  Novatus  of  Carthage  :  and,  having-  once 
given  him  that  name,  he  used  it  ever  after.  Moreover, 
having-  occasion,  or  being  of  himself  mightily  disposed, 
frequently  to  mention  these  two  presbyters  together,  no 
shorter  way  of  distinguishing  them  could  bethought  of,  than 
to  call  one  Novatus,  the  other  Novatianus:  and  St.  Cyprian 
having  often  called  him  of  Rome  Novatian,  I  suppose  he  was 
without  scruple  followed  by  many  Latin  writers ;  though, 
I  think,  not  universally  ;  far  from  it :  for  we  have  seen  above 
sufiicient  evidence  that,  notwithstanding-  Cyprian's  way  of 
writing,  there  were  not  a  few  ancient  Latin  authors,  who 
always,  or  generally,  called  the  presbyter  of  Rome,  and 
Cornelius's  rival,  Novatus. 

It  will  be  thought  by  some  that  T  have  dwelt  too  long- 
upon  so  trifling  a  thing  as  a  man's  name :  but,  having  long- 
ago  had  doubts  about  it,  I  have  chosen  to  put  down  here  the 
collections  I  had  made  upon  the  point.  Let  others  make 
what  use  of  them  they  think  fit. 


CHAP.  XLVIIL 

DIONYSIUS,  BISHOP  OF  ROME 

I.  His  history  and  icorks.     il.  His  character.     IIL  His 
testimony  to  the  scriptures. 

I.  DIONYSIUS  of  Rome  has  been  already  mentioned  by 
us  in  the  history  of  his  contemporary  and  namesake  of  Alex- 
andria. He^  M  as  first  presbyter,  afterwards  bishop  of  Rome. 
His  predecessor  Xystus,  or  Sixtus  the  second,  suffered  mar- 
tyrdom*^ under  the  emperors  Valerian  and  Gallienus,  on  the 
sixth  day  of  August,  in  the  year  of  Christ  258.     It  is  now 

*  Vid.  Euseb.  1.  vii.  cap.  7.  p.  254.  A.  ''  Xystum  autem  in 

coemeterio  animadversum  sciatis  octavo  iduum  Augustarum  die.  Cypr.  Ep. 
80.  [al.  82.]  p.  238.  Jam  de  Xysto,  bono  et  pacifico  sacerdote,  ac  propterea 
beatissirao  martyie,  ab  urbe  nuntius  venerat.  Pont,  de  Vit.  Cyprian,  p.  8.  m. 
Sixti  martyris,  et  Romanae  ecclesiae  episcopi.  Hieron.  ad  Ctesipli.  Ep.  43.  p- 
476.  fin.  Bened. 


128  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  Ui&lory. 

the  general  opinion*^  of  learned  men  that,  after  the  death  of 
Xystus,  the  see  of  Rome  was  vacant  almost  a  whole  year, 
that  Dionysius  was  ordained  bishop  of  that  city  on  the  22d 
day  of  July,  259,  and  died  the  26th  of  December,  269. 

In  the  time  of  his  episcopate,  probably  near  the  beginning- 
of  the  sole  reign  of  Gallienus,  not  long  after  the  defeat  of 
Valerian  by  the  Persians,  and  therefore  about  the  year  of 
our  Lord  260  or  261,  the  christians  at  Caesarea  in  Cappadocia 
Avcre  in  great  distress  ;  occasioned,  as  it  seems,  by  the  inroads 
of  some  barbarous  people:  for  Sf.  Basil  "^  in  one  of  his  epis- 
tles says,  '  that  Dionysius  wrote  to  the  church  of  Caesarea, 
'  and  by  his  letters  comforted  them  when  under  affliction, 
'  and  likewise  sent  some  persons  to  redeem  those  of  the 
'  brethren  that  had  been  taken  captive.'  The  memory  of 
this  benefit,  St.  Basil  says,  was  preserved  at  Ceesarea,  not 
only  by  the  tradition  of  their  ancestors,  but  also  by  the  let- 
ter of  that  good  bishop  in  their  possession. 

He  was  appealed  to  in  the  aflair  of  Sabellianism,  and  pro- 
bably in  the  beginning  of  his  episcopate,  in*  the  year  260, 
or  soon  after.  '  Some  catholics  of  Pentapolis,'  as  Athana- 
sius*  writes,  '  dissatisfied  with  some  expressions  used  by 
'  Dionysius  of  Alexandria,  in  his  writings  upon  that  argu- 
'  ment,  went  to  Rome,  and  accused  him  there  to  his  namesake 
'  Dionysius,  bishop  of  Rome :  and  he,  having-  heard  them, 
'  wrote  at  once  against  the  followers  of  Sabellius,  and  against 
'  those  opinions  for  which  Arius  has  been  expelled  the  church ; 
'  declaring  that  the  opinions  of  Sabellius,  and  of  those  who 
'  say  the  Word  of  God  is  a  creature,  a  workmanship,  and 
'  made,  though  directly  opposite  to  each  other,  were  equally 
'  impious.  He  also  wrote  to  Dionysius,  to  inform  him  of 
'  the  things  laid  to  his  charge ;  who  immediately  replied, 
'  entitling  his  book,  A  Confutation  and  Apology.'  So  writes 
Athanasius  in  his  epistle  concerning  the  opinion  of  Dionysius 

"  Vid.  Cav.  Hist.  Lit.  Pagi  Crit.  in  Baron.  258.  n.  vii.  271.  n.  x.  Basnag, 
Ann.  259.  n.  viii.     Tilleni.  Mem.  T.  iv.     St.  Denys  Pape. 

^  OiSafiiv  yap,  fivrj^rjc  aKoXaOi^i,  irapa  tiov  iraTepwv  tifioiv  airtjBtvTun',  koi 
niro  ypajifiaTiov  ruiv  tri  Kai  I'vv  Trt<pv\ayjin>ii)v  Trap  t'lf^iiv,  ^iSaSKOfitvoi,  Aiovv- 
aiov  iKHi'ov,  T0%'  jiaKapiuiTarov  nrLnicoTTOv, — tTrtcTKenTOfiivov  Sia  ypafifiarwv  rrjv 
rifitTipav  iKKKi]C!iav  Tuiv  KaKTapfiov,  Kai  TrapaKccXsvTa  rsg  Tranpag  t'lfiiDV  5ia 
ypafi^iarcoi',  kch  Trffnreiv  tsq  a-rrokvrpHfitvsQ  t/c  rr]Q  aixna\u)ciag  ti]v  aSt\^OTt]Ta. 
Basil.  Ep.  70.  [al.  220.]  T.  iii.  p.  164.  B.  C.  Bened. 

*  Vid.  Basnag.  Ann.  259.  n.  viii.  ^  — avijXBov  ttg  rr/v 'Paj/t»jv, 

i:at  KciTHpt]Ka(nv  avTs  Ttapa  t(i)  ofnovvjUji  avra  Aievv(n(i)  r<iJ  tiricTKOTVif)  'Pwfiijg. 
ic(fKtn'og  aKsaag  typa-^ev  ofia  Kara  rs  twv  ra  SnjSfXXis  Co^aZovrwv,  (cat  Kara 
Tojv  (j)povsvTu)v  Tavra  airtp  Kca  kpnog  Xsyajv  tS,e^\i]6ri  rijg  tKKXijatag — eire'^nXt 
St  Kai  Ainvvniif)  6i)Xt,)riai,  TVtpioiv  uprjKam  Kar  avTn'  KaiavTtypai\)iv  ivQvgavrog, 
Kai  tinypai\ji  to.  [ii(iXia  iXtyx»  Kai  mroXoyiag.  Athan.  de  Sent.  Dionys.  T.  i. 
p.  252. 


DiONYsius  of  Rome.     A.  D.  259.  129 

of  Alexaiulria.  In  another  work  he  says;  '  Wlien^  some 
'  brought  accusations  to  the  bishop  of"  Rome,  against  the 
'  bishop  of"  Alexandria,  as  if  he  had  said  the  Son  Mas  a  crea- 
'  ture,  and  not  consubstantial  to  the  Father,  the  synod  at 
'  Rome  was  offended,  and  the  bishop  of  Rome  sent  the  judg- 
'  ment  of  them  all  to  his  namesake.  lie  afterwards  vindi- 
'  cated  himself,entitlinghisbook,AConfutationand  Apology: 
'  and  thus  he  writes  to  him ;'  that  is,  to  Dionysius  of  Rome. 

Theie  was  therefore  a  synod  at  Rome,  which  had  some 
concern  in  this  business  :  but,  whether  it  was  convened  upon 
occasion  of  the  accusations  brought  against  Dionysius  of 
Alexandria,  or  whether  his  accusers  found  it  assembled,  and 
laid  their  charges  against  him  before  Dionysius  of  Rome,  and 
the  whole  synod,  is  not  clear.  Hence  also  we  perceive  that 
Dionysius  of  Rome  wrote  in  that  controversy ;  but  whether 
one  piece  only,  or  a  treatise,  and  an  epistle  besides  to  Diony- 
sius of  Alexandria,  is  not  certain.  A  large  fragment  of  what 
he  wrote  upon  this  point  remains  cited  in  a  work  of  Athana- 
sius.     1  shall  transcribe  a  part  of  it  presently. 

It  should  be  observed,  that  Dionysius,  whilst  presbyter 
only,''  Mrote  to  his  namesake  of  Alexandria  upon  the  question 
of  the  baptism  of  heretics.  And  now,  I  think,  we  have  men- 
tioned all  the  works  of  this  bishop  of  Rome,  of  which  Ave 
have  any  certain  notice:  I  mean,  the  letter  just  named,  the 
letter  to  the  Ctesareans  mentioned  by  Basil,  and  what  he 
wrote  in  the  Sabellian  controversy:  for  Jerom  has  not  al- 
lotted him  any  distinct  article  in  his  Catalogue  of  Ecclesi- 
astical Writers :  and  as  for  decretal,  or  other  epistles  ascribed 
to  him,  they  are  allowed'  by  learned  men  to  be  spurious: 
nor  does  there  remain  any  thing*  of  his  genuine  writings, 
beside  the  fragment  just  mentioned. 

To  this  Dionysius  was  sent  one  of  the  letters  about  baptism, 
written  by  Dionysius  of  Alexandria,  as''  shown  formerly: 
as  also  another  letter  by  the  same  person  concerning  one' 
Lucian.  To  him  likewise  were'"  addressed  the  four  books 
concerning  Sabellianism,  written  by  the  same  Dionysius  of 
Alexandria,  as  we  are  assured  by  Eusebius ;  with  whom 
Athanasins  agrees  when  he  says,  the  vindication  which  that 

s  AXXa  rivuiv  airinaaf^uvotv  vapa  Ttj)  tiriaKOTrii)  'ViiijirjQ  tov  t)]q  AXt^av- 
^peia^  STTicTKOTrnv,  wq  Xtyovra  7roir;/ia,  Kai  fir}  ofiosaiov  tov  viof  Tq)  irarpi,  r/ 
fiev  Kara  'Po)fi>]v  avvo^oQ  r\yavaKTi}ai.v,  6  cs  Tt\^  'Pcofirji;  iirKSKOTroQ  rrjv  ttuvtuv 
yvwfitiv  ypa(pH  Trpof  tov  ofiojvv[J.ov  iavTd.  KcfKHVog  Xonrov  a-KoXoyHfitvoQ  to  fxiv 
l3if3Xwv  emypacpti  fXty^a  Kai  mroXoyiaQ'  ypacpsi  ds  tuvtu  irpoQ  txtivov-  Athan. 
de  Synodis,  p.  757.  F.  >>  Vid.  Ens.  lib.  vii.  cap.  5.  252.  C. 

'  Vid.  Pagi  Cr.t.  in  Baron.  2G9.  n.  iii.  Ba?n.  259.  n.  ix.  TiUeni.  Mem.  St. 
Denys  Pape.  p.  701,  702.  ^  See  before,  ch.  xliii.  n.  vi.  vol.  iii. 

'  See  the  same,  ibid.  ""  See  the  same,  numb.  vii. 

VOL.    III.  K 


130  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

bishop  made  of  hiiuself, entitled,  A  Confutation  and  Apology, 
was  inscribed  to  Dionysius  of  Home.  And  lastly,  to  him, 
and  Maximus,  bishop  of  Alexandria,  by  name,  as  well  as  to 
all  other  bishops  and  clergy,  and  the  universal  church,  was 
directed"  the  8y nodical  epistle  of  the  council  of  Antioch, 
which  condemned  Paul  of  Samosata  :  but  Dionysius  dying 
before  the  end  of  the  year  269,  he  never  saw  it ;  and  possibly 
he  was  dead  at  the  time  of  writing  it,  though  the  fathers  of 
the  council  had  not  received  any  account  of  his  death. 

II.  We  are  not  without  proofs  of  the  eminence  and  dis- 
tinction of  this  bishop  for  his  personal  merit,  as  well  as  the 
dignity  of  his  see.  His  epistolary  correspondence  and  friend- 
ship, Avhilst  yet  presbyter  only,  with  the  great  Dionysius  of 
Alexandria,  is  an  argument  he  was  a  man  of  more  than  common 
accomplishments.  Eusebius,  who  read  the  fourth  letter  of 
the  Alexandrian  bishop  upon  baptism,  which  we  have  not, 
observes,  that  from  the  testimony  there  given  him  it  may  be 
perceived  that°  Dionysius  of  Rome  was  a  very  learned  and 
admirable  man.  Basil,  in  the  place  before  quoted,  styles 
himP  '  a  most  blessed  bishop,  illustrious  for  the  orthodoxy 
'  of  his  faith,  and  every  other  virtue:'  and  he*i  elsewhere 
mentions  him  together  with  Irenseus,  Clement  of  Rome,  and 
Dionysius  of  Alexandria,  and  other  ancient  ecclesiastical 
writers  of  chief  note.  I  need  not  insist  any  farther  upon  the 
regard  which  Athanasius  has  shown  him. 

III.  However,  I  am  now  to  transcribe  from  Athanasius  a 
part  of  the  fragment  of  this  bishop  of  Rome,  which  he  has 
preserved.  It  will  represent  to  ns  his  respectful  manner  of 
speaking  of  the  scriptures  in  general  ;  and  it  contains  quota- 
tions out  of  some  books  of  the  New  Testament. 

'  The  true  disciples  of  Christ,'  says"^  Dionysius,  '  know 
very  well  that  a  Trinity  is  taught  by  the  divine  scriptures; 
but  that  neither  the  Old  nor  the  NeAv  Testament  teaches  three 
Gods.'  Afterwards:  '  But^  the  Son  always  was,  if  he  "  is 
in  the  Father,"  as  he  himself  says:  (John  xiv.  II.)  and  if 
Christ  be  his  word  and  wisdom  and  power,  as  ye  know  the 

"  Vid.  Euseb.  1.  vii.  cap.  30.  init.  "  E?  r/e  yvtuvai  -n-apt^tv, 

oTTwr  Kai  avTOc  ovrogXoyiog  ts  Kat  Qavyiaaioq  irpoq  rs  kut  AXi^av^ptiav  Aiovvais 
fienftprvprjTai.  Eus.  1.  vii.  c.  7.  fin.  p  Aiovvaiov  £K£tvoj/,  tov  f.iaKa- 

plOJTUTOV     iiridKOTTOV,      TTUp      VfllV     tTtl     Op9oTT]Tl     TTlTtWCj     KCtl    T7J     XoiWy    UpCTT;) 

SiaTTpeipavra.   Btisil.  ut  supra.  '*   Eiprjvawg  tKiivog,  Kai  VJcqji'qc  6 

'Poiiiaiog,  Kcu  Aiovvatoc.  6  'Pw^iaiog.  k.  X.  Id.  de  Sp.  S.  cap.  29.  p.  GO.  Bened. 
'   Ovroi  yap  rpiaSa  fitv  Kr}pvTT0Hf.vr\v  viro  ttjc  Oiuiq  ypa<priQ  ffacpcog  nrizavratf 
rnug  St  Gtsc  hte  iraXaiav  an  Kanniv  Sia6r]Kr}v  Kt]pvTTn(Tav.  ap.  Alh.  de  Decret. 
Nicen.  Syn.T.i.  p.  23].  F.  Bened.  "    Aa  de  rjv,  si  ye  ev  riij  varpi 

Kiv,  6>Q  avTOQ  (priTi'  Kui  ti  \oyoq  kcu  (TO0irt  Kat  Ivvayug  o  XpiToc'  tuvtci  yap  eivat 
TOV  Xpirov  ai  Qeiai  Xeyaai  yparpai,  wcrirep  £7ri<ra(T0c.  ib.  p.  232.  A. 


COMMODIAN.      A.   D.   270.  131 

divine  scriptures  say,  Christ  is.'  Ho  argues :  *  Was'  he 
made,  who  is  "  The  first-begotteu  of  every  creature?"  ' 
Col.  i.  15.  '  He  observes,  that"  in  many  places  the  divine 
oracles  say  Christ  was  begotten ;  no  where  that  he  was 
made.'  Finally,  at  the  conclusion  of  the  fragment:  "  For^ 
I,"  says  he,  "  and  the  Father  are  one."  And, "  1  in  the  Father, 
and  the  P'athor  in  me,"  '  John  x.  30  ;  xiv.  10,  11. 

This  is  all  I  have  to  produce  from  Dionysius  :  though  it 
be  little,  it  suffices  to  show  the  concurrence  of  this  bishop 
of  Rome  with  other  christians  of  that  time  in  acknowledging 
the  divine  scriptiues,  and  divine  oracles,  to  be  the  rule  of 
faith  by  which  all  doctrines  were  to  be  tried.  He  likewise, as 
well  as  others,  teaches  us  where  these  oracles  are  to  be 
found  ;  namely,  in  the  Old  and  New  Testament,  which  con- 
tain all  the  scriptures  that  were  in  the  strictest  sense  sacred 
and  divine. 


CHAP.  XLIX. 

COMMODIAN. 

1.  His  history  and  work.     II.  Select  passages.     HI.  His 
testimony  to  the  scriptures. 

I.  COMMODIAN,  a  Latin  author,  formerly  supposed  by 
some  to  have  lived  in  the  time  of  Constantine,  near  the  be- 
ginning of  the  fourth  century,  now^  with  more  reason  rec- 
koned contemporary  with  St.  Cyprian,  or  to  have  lived  soon 
after  him,  is  not  at  all  mentioned  by  St.  Jerom.  As  Genna- 
dius,  who  wrote  near  the  end  of  the  fifth  century,  has  given 
Commodian  a  place  in  his  book  of  ecclesiastical  writers,  I 
place''  the  whole  article  entire  at  the  bottom  of  the  page. 

*  Hoiriiia  6  TrpwroTOKog  vaffijc  KTiaewQ ;  ib.  D. 

"   Kai  7roXXax«  Se  twv  Cttcuv  Xoyiiov  ytytvriaQai. — Xtyo/xtvitiv — ^k.  X.  ibid. 

"  Eyo)  yap,  (pi]ai,  km  6  Trarrip  iv  ifffiev'  Kai  ejio  ev  Tiii  Trarpi,  Kai  o  TraTtjp  tv 
moi'  ibid.  E.  '  They  who  desire  to  know  more  of  Com- 

modian and  his  lime,  and  the  editions  of  his  work,  will  do  well  to  consult  Cav. 
Hist.  Lit.  T.  i.  p.  136,  &c.  and  Fabr.  De  Verit.  Rel.  Clirist.  p.  227,  &c.  I 
make  use  of  Da vies's  edition  at  the  end  of  Minucius  Felix.  Cantabr.  1712. 

''  Commodianus,  dum  inter  seculares  literas  etiam  nostras  legit,  occasioncra 
accepit  fidel.  Factus  itaque  Christianus,  et  volens  aliquid  studiorum  suorum 
muneris  olferre  Christo,  suse  salutis  auctori,  scripsit  mediocri  sermonc,  quasi 
versa,  libruni  adversum  Paganos,    Et  quia  parum  nostrarum  attigerat  literarum, 

K   2 


1 32  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

He  speaks  loosely*^  of  its  being  then  two  hundred  years 
from  Christ  to  his  own  time.  It  is  likely,  therefore,  that"^ 
it  was  not  quite  three  hundred  years  since  Christ  when  he 
wrote :  nor  are  there  any  expressions  throughout  the  work 
that  should  induce  us  to  think  he  lived  after  the  alteration 
of  the  state  of  things  made  by  the  conversion  of  Constantine. 
Cave  therefore  seems  to  have  rightly  concluded  that  he  wrote 
about  the  year  270. 

It  is  no  improbable  conjecture,  that  Commodian  was  a 
native  of  Africa :  it  is  certain  he'^  was  originally  a  heathen  : 
it  appears  from  his  acknowledgments  in  many  places. 

It  may  be  argued  that  he  was  not  an  illiterate  person ; 
for,  as  he  himself  says,  he*^  was  converted  by  reading  the 
law ;  that  is,  as=  Rigaltius  understands  him,  the  scriptures 
of  the  Old  and  New  Testament.  Gennadius  plainly  sup- 
poseth  him  to  have  been  acquainted  with  secular  authors 
before  he  read  the  sacred  scriptures. 

The  only  work  of  this  author  mentioned  by  Gennadius  is 
still  in  being  ;  consisting  of  eighty  sections,  or  instructions, 
all  acrostics,  in  a  style  between  verse  and  prose. 

Gennadius  calls  it  a  little  book  against  the  Pagans  ;  but  no 
one  can  suppose  that  to  have  been  the.  title  originally  :  it  is 
more  likely  that'^  it  was  in  general  entitled,  Instructions. 
Nor  is  it  against  heathens  only  ;  christians  likewise  are  here 
instructed  and  admonished,  as'  Rigaltius  clearly  perceived. 

In  the  former  part  of  the  work  Commodian  derides  and 
exposes  the  heathen  deities  and  their  worship ;  this  was  an 
easy  thing  :  herein,  for  certain,  the  christians  triumphed  ; 

magis  illorum  destruere  potiiit  dogmata,  quam  nostra  firmare.  Unde  et  de 
divinis  repromissionibus  advereum  illos  vili  satis  et  crasso,  ut  ita  dixerim,  sensu 
disseruit,  illis  stuporem  et  nobis  desperationem  incutiens,  TertuUianmn,  et 
Lactantium,  et  Papiam,  auctores  secutus.  IMoralem  sane  doctrinam,  et  maxima 
voluntariae  paupertatis  araorem  optime  prosecutus,  studentibus  inculcavit. 
Gennad.  De  V.  I  cap.  15. 

<=  Cur  annis  ducentis 

fuistis  infantes  ? Instr.  vi.  p.  202. 

■*  Vid.  Davis,  not. 

*  Ego  similiter  erravi  tempore  multo, 
Fana  proscquendo,  parentibus  insciis  ipsis.     Instr.  i.  p.  199. 
Gens  et  ego  fui  perversa  mente  moratus.     Instr.  xxvi.  p.  221. 
Et  ego,  qui  moneo,  idem  fui,  nescius  errans.     lb.  xxxiii.  p.  226. 

de  cloaca  levatus. lb.  bdii.  p.  253. 

'  Abstuli  me  tandem  inde,  legendo  de  lege.     Instr.  i.  p.  199. 
8  Legem  hie  et  alibi  passim  appellat  libros  utriusque  Testament!.     Rigalt. 
'■  Ob  ea  perdoctus  igaoros  instruo  verum.     Instr.  i.  p.  199. 
'  Lilx;llo  suo  Commodianus  titulum  fecit  Instructiones,  scilicet  ad  paganos, 
ut  ab  idolorum  cultu  ad  veram  ChrLstianffi  legis  philosophiam  convertantiir  : 
quin  etiam  ad  Christianos  ipsos,  ne  obliti  Christiauorum  ad  secularia  redeaat. 
Rigalt.  in  Praef.  ap.  Davis,  p.  197. 


CoMMODiAN.     A.  D,  270.  133 

and  Conimodian's  tlioughts  are  both  just  aud  acute.  He 
likewise  instructs  tlie"^  Jews;  and  not  content  with  this  he 
also  instructs  christians.  This  was  yet  a  gTeater  and  more 
dithcult  attempt.  To  confute  error  by  reason  and  argument 
is  a  laudable  performance  ;  but  it  may  be  soon  done,  and 
without  nuich  labour :  to  persuade  men  to  act  as  christians 
and  friends  of  truth,  requires  more  time  and  pains.  Com- 
modian  aimed  at  this  difficult  work  :  and  accordingly  he 
instructs  'catechumens,  the  "'faithful,  "christian  women,  the 
"inferior  clergy,  the  ''pastors  or  bishops  of  the  church, ''and 
the  ag"ed  ;  not  to  mention  any  otlier  particulars. 

Commodian'^  had  no  office  in  the  church;  but  he  endea- 
voured to  be  useful  by  propounding*  good  instructions :  and 
if  he  was  not  a  fine  writer,  he  was  an  honest  man  and  a 
zealous  christian. 

II.  Having'  given  this  history  of  Commodian,  and  his  work, 
J  shall  make  some  extracts  out  of  him,  for  showing  the  senti- 
ments of  christians  at  that  time. 

1.  He  often  says  that'  the  heathen  people  were  deceived 
and  imposed  upon  by  their  priests. 

2.  Commodian^  believed  that  men  have  free-will ;  that  they 
are  born  reasonable  beings,  not  brutes ;  and  that  with  the  help 
of  those  means  Avhich  God  affords  them,  they  are  able  to 
convert  themselves  from  error  and  sin,  if  they  will  but  use 
their  natural  powers,  and  exercise  thought  and  considera- 
tion. 

3.  He  shows  what"  was  the  common  opinion  of  christians 
at  that  time  concerning  the  fall  of  the  angels. 

^  Instr.  xxxvii.  xxxviii.  xxxix.  xl.  '  lb.  n.  xlvi, 

"  n.  xlvii.  xlviii.  et  passim.  "  lix.  Ix. 

°  Mysterium  Chnsti,  zacones,  exercite  caste. 

Idcirco  ministri  facite  praecepta  magistri.     Inst.  n.  Lxviii. 
P  Pastor,  si  confessus  fuerit,  geminavit  agonem,  &c.    n.  Ixix.         i  Ibid. 
■■  Non  sum  ego  doctor,  sed  lex  docet  ipsa  clamando.   numb.  Ixiii.  p.  256. 
"  Vos  autem  seducunt  sacerdotes  pauci.     Instr.  viii.  p.  205. 

Deludunt  vos  pauci  scelerati  vates  inanes, 

Extricare  suam  dum  quaerunt  vitam. 

Subornant  aliis  esse  sub  mysterio  falsum, 

Inde  simulantes  concuti  numine  quodam, 

Majestatemque  canunt,  et  se  sub  figura  fatigant,  &c.    num.  xvii.  p.  212. 
'  Gens,  homo,  tu  frater,  noli  pecus  esse  feriniun, 

Erue  te  tandem,  et  tecum  ipse  retracta. 

Non  utique  pecus,  nee  bestia  es,  sed  homo  natus. 

Tu  le  ipse  doma  sapiens,  et  intra  sub  arma.     num.  xxxiv.  p.  227, 
"  Cum  deus  Omnipotens  exomaret  mundi  naturam, 

Visitari  voluit  terram  ab  angelis  istam. 


134  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

4.  Commodian '^  heartily  embraced  the  doctrine  of  the 
expected  iiiillennium.  He  deserves  to  be  added  to  authors'^ 
foniierly  nieiitioiied. 

5.  lie  mentions^  the  Lord's  day:  and,  asy  Rigaltius 
understands  it,  the  passage  shows  that  christians  had  love- 
feasts  upon  that  day. 

6.  What  he  says^  of  antichrist  may  deserve  the  notice  of 
the  curious. 

III.  Nothing-  remains  but  that  we  observe  the  scriptures 
cited  by  him. 

1.  Commodian  quotes  several  books  of  the  Old  Testament; 
and  in  one  place  ^  Tobit. 

2.  He  expressly  speaks  of  the*^  Old  Testament,  which 
prophesied  of  Christ :  therefore  there  was  another  which 
was  called  the  New  Testament :  he  likewise  in  the  same 
place  speaks  of  the  old  and  new  law. 

3.  He  quotes  or  alludes  to  divers  things'^  in  the  gos- 
pels. 

4.  He  refers  to  the  history  of  St.  Stephen*^  in  the  Acts 
of  the  Apostles. 

5.  He  quotes  divers  of  St.  Paul's  epistles ;  as^  the  first 


Tanta  fuit  foiTna  fseminaram,  quae  flecteret  illos, 

Ut  coinquinatinonpossentcoelo  redire.     num.  iii. 

Reddere  decrevit  nos  ipso  in  aureo  seclo.  n.  xxix.  p.  224.  Conf.  n. 

xxxiv.  p.  228. 
De  coelo  descendet  civitas  in  anastasi  prima. 


Resurgemus  illi,  qui  fuimus  illi  devoti. 

Recipiuntque  bona,  quoniam  mala  passi  fuere. 

Et  generant  ipsi  per  annos  mille  nubentes. 

Comparantur  ibi  tota  vectigalia  ferraj,  &c.     n.  xliv.  p.  237,  238.  vid. 
et  n.  Ixxx.  "*  See  Vol.  ii.  ch.  xliii. 

"  De  die  Dominica  quid  dicis?  Si  non  ante  locavit, 

Excita  de  turba  pauperem,  quem  ad  prandium  ducas.  num.lxi.  p.  254. 
y  Hie  vero  locus  indicat,  sevo  Commodiani  in  ecclesia  diebus  Dominicis 

agapas  in  usu  fuisse.  Rigalt.  ^  Vid.  num.  xli. 

*  Prandia  ab  eo  prospice  Tobia,  qui  semper 

Omnibus  omnino  diebus  cum  paupere  sumpsit.  num.  Ixi.  p.  254. 

Est  Dei  lex  prima  fundamentum  posterae  legis. 

Nam  lestamentum  vetus  de  illo  proclamat.     Instr.  xxv.  p.  220. 

Tdcirco  coecus  coccum  in  fossam  deducit.    num.  xxvii.p.  220. 

Unde  Deus  clamat,  Sfulte,  hac  nocte  vocaris.    n.  Ixiv.p.  256.  Vid.  Luc. 

xii.  20.  Vid.  n.  Iv.  p.  247,  et  alibi  passim. 
In  talibus  spes  est  vestra  de  Christo  refecto.    n.  Ixi.  Vid.  Matfh.  xxv. 
Rectam  qui  diligit  Stephanus  sibi  vitam  in  iter.    n.  Ixii.  p.  254. 
Cnix  autem  stultitia  facta  est,  adulterse  genti.    n.xxxvi.  p.  229. 


b 


CoMMODiAN.     A.  U.  270.  135 

to   the  Corinthians,  the'    epistle   to   the   Philippians,  thc^ 
epistles  to  Timothy  and  Titus. 

().  1  cannot  well  tell  whether''  he  refers  to  the  epistle  of 
St.  James. 

7.  He  plainly  refers'  to  1  John  ii.  15. 

8.  He  very  frequently  transcribes  or  refers  to  the''  book 
of  the  Revelation,  and  once'  expressly  quotes  it. 

9.  Coniinodian's  respect  for  the  scriptures  appears  many 
ways,  in  frequently  adopting-  the  words  of  it,  and  in  the 
manner  of  quoting-  it. 

10.  He  quotes'"  the  writings  of  the  blessed  Paul  as  of 
authority  :  in  one  place,"  '  Paul,  or  rather  God  by  him,  says.' 
He  refers"  all  men  to  the  law,  that  is,  the  scriptures,  in  order 
to  their  understanding  religion. 

11.  It  is  pleasing-  to  observe  this  high  respect  for  scrip- 
ture running-  through  the  writings  of  all  early  christiaivs  in 
general. 


CHAP.  L. 

MALCHIOX. 

J.  His  history,  and  testimonies  to  him.     II.  Remarks,  and 
his  testimony  to  the  scriptures. 

I.  SAYS  Jerom   in  his^'   Catalogue :    '  Malchion,    a   most 
'  eloquent  presbyter  of  the  church   of  Antioch,  who  had 

'  Vobis  autem  Deus  est  venter,  et  praeraia  jura. 

Suggerit  hoc  Paulus  apostolus,  non  ego  duplex,    n.  xxxi.  p.  225.  Vid. 
ad  Philip,  cap.  iii. 
8  Apostolus  autem  tales  jubet  esse  magistros. 

Sit  patiens  rector,  &c.    n.  Ixix.  p.  260. 
•*  Maledicti  retine  linguam,  unde  Dominuin  adoras.     n.  Ixiii.  p.  255. 

Vid.  Jac.  iii.  9. 
'  Nolile  diligerc  niundum,  neque  ambituni  ejus.     n.  Ivii.  p.  249. 
''  Vid.  Instr.  xli.  xlii.  xliii.  Ixxx.  et  passim. 

'  ut  femnt  operta  Joannis.     n.  xliii.  p.  237. 

"'  Audi  vocem,  quae  vis  Christiana  manere, 

Beatus  Paulus  qualiter  te  ornari  praecipit.  n.  Ix.  in. 
"  Apostolus  Paulus  clamat,  immo  Deus  per  ipsum.     n.  Iviii.  p.  250. 
"  Omnipotentis  enim  in  lege  quaerite  cuncti. 

Lex  docet,  in  medio  ciet,  consulite  pro  vobis.     n.  xxii.  p.  217. 
•■"  Malchion  disertissimus  Antiochenae  ecclesiae  presbyter,  quippe  qui  in  eadem 
urbe  rhetoricam  fiorentissime  docuerat.  adversum  Paulum  Samosatenum,  qui 


136  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  Ilislory. 

'  taught  rhetoric  in  the  same  city  with  great  applause,  held 
'  a  disputation  with  Paul  of  Saniosata,  bishop  of  the  church 
'  of  Antioch,  who  had  revived  the  opinion  of  Artemon  :  which 
'  disputation  was  taken  down  by  short-hand  writers,  and  is 
'  still  extant.  There  is  also  another  large  epistle  written  by 
'  him  in  the  name  of  the  synod,  and  directed  to  Dionysius 
'  and  Maximus,  bishops  of  Home  and  Alexandria.  He 
'  flourished  under  Claudius  and  Aurelian.' 

So  Jerom  in  the  above-mentioned  work.  Malchion''  is 
again  mentioned  by  him  in  his  letter  to  Blagnus  among  other 
ancient  christian  authors. 

Eusebius,  in  his  account  of  the  last  council  of  Antioch, 
in  the  affair  of  Paul,  speaks  of  Malchion  after  this  manner 
in  his  Ecclesiastical  History : '  But''  the  person  who  especially 
'  convicted  and  confuted  him,  when  he  endeavoured  to  con- 
'  ceal  himself,  was  Malchion,  an  eloquent  man,  and  a  sophist, 
'  president  of  the  school  of  Greek  literature  at  Antioch  ;  who, 
'  for  his  uncommon  soundness  in  the  faith  of  Christ,  had  the 
'  honour  to  be  made  a  presbyter  in  that  church.  Being  the 
'  only  person  of  all  present  that  M'as  able  to  detect  that  sub- 
'  tie  and  deceitful  man,  he  entered  into  dispute  with  him  : 
'  v/hich  disputation  was  taken  down  by  short-hand  writers, 
'  and  we  know  it  to  be  still  extant.' 

Theodoret  calls  this  person  Malachion  :  he"  says  that  he 
was  formerly  a  sophist,  afterwards  ordained  presbyter ;  that 
he  disputed  with  Paul,  and  convicted  him  of  holding  the 
opinion  he  was  charged  with. 

These  are  the  principal  remaining  accounts  of  Malchion, 
and  testimonies  to  him  ;  for  I  think  it  scarce  worth  observ- 
ing- M'hat  is  said  by  so  late  a'=  writer  as  Trithemius,  that 
Malchion  taught  rhetoric  at  Antioch  with  applause  many 

Antiochense  ecclesise  episcopus  dogma  Artemonis  instaurarat,  excipientibus 
notariis  disputavit ;  qui  dialogus  usque  hodie  exbtat.  Sed  et  alia  grandisepis- 
tola  ex  persona  synodi,  ab  eo  scripta,  ad  Dionysium  et  Maximum,  RomantB  et 
AlexandrinjE  ecclesiac  episcopos,  dirigitur.  Floruit  sub  Claudio  et  Aureliano. 
De  V.  I.  cap.  71.  ^'  Necnon  presby teroram  Pamphili, Pierii, 

Luciani,  Malchionis,  ad  Mag.  Orat.  ep.  83.  [al.  84.]  p.  G56.  m. 

"^  MaXtTa  S'  avTOV  tvBvvuQ  i'KiK^vnTOfitvov  lu]\tyi,t.  MaXxicov'  avjjp  ra  Tt 
aXKa  Xoyio^,  km  (to^itjjc>  ''"'^v  tn  AvTioxtiaq ' EKKriviKo>v  Traidivrripuov  ^tnrpt/Sj/c 
■Kpoiroic'  H  fujv  aWa  Kai  d'  iinfpftaWHaai'  TtjQ  tiQ  Xf)t'?ov  TnTiMQ  yvr]aioTr]Ta 
7rpt(TpuTr]ptH  TriQ  avToQi  TrapoiKuig  r]'^io>ixtvog  ovtoq  ytrci,  nn(ni]nii»fxivit)v  ra-^v- 
ypa/ptjjv,  ZriT)](nv  npog  uvrop  ivriinctjiivoQ,  rjv  Kai  ug  Stvpo  (ptpoiitVTjV  lafiev,  iiovog 
laXVOE  TOiv  aWoiv  KpvipivHv  ovTa  KM  aTraTr\kov  (paipatTM  rov  av6pwTrov.  Eus. 
1.  vii.  c.  29.  ''   MaXaxtwrog  6e  nvot;  nporepov  p.(.v  ao(^i'7tv(TavToc, 

v'^ipov  Se  TH  TrpiafivTipii  nurj^tvTog  xnporovKf,  r>ji'  Trpof  tov  TlavKov  Troujfra- 
ftivfi  SiaXi^iv,  KjyiopuOrj  rov  Xpi^ov  avBpoJTTov  Xtyiov,  k.  X.  Theod.  Il;eret.  l'\ib. 

L.  ii.  c.  8.  p.  223.  B.  "^ (|uippe  qui  rhetoricam  in  eadem 

civitate  multis  annis  florentissime  docuit.     Trithcm.  de  Script.  Ecc.  cap,  45. 


Malchion.     a.  D.  270.  137 

years:  and  yet  peiliaps  he  conclutled  as  much  from  an 
expression  of  Theodorct.  Indeed  we  do  not  find  much 
notice  taken  of  Malchion  in  ancient  Avriters.  The  Greek 
christians  however  have  put  him  into  their  calendar  for  the 
service  he  did  in  opposin<>-  Paul  of  Samosata,  as  has  been 
observed  by  Valesiusf^  and  others. 

II.  Having-  put  down  these  testimonies  to  this  author,  I 
propose  to  mention  some  observations. 

1.  It  is  probable  that  Malchion  was  originally  a  heathen  : 
Jerom  does  not  expressly  say  so,  but  he  says  he  taught 
rhetoric  at  Antioch  with  reputation  ;  which  is  near  the  same 
with  what ''  he  says  of  Cyprian,  who  certainly  was  at  first  a 
heathen.  Nor  does  Eusebius  expressly  say  it :  but  that  he 
taught  Greek  literature,  as  I  have  translated  him,  or'  pro- 
fane learning,  as  Du  Pin  renders  the  same  phrase.  And 
Theodoret,  as  well  as  Eusebius,  says,  that  Malchion  was  at 
first  a  sophist.  I  presume  these  testimonies  therefore  may 
aftord  a  probable  argument  that  Malchion  was  originally  a 
heathen  ;  but  whether  they  are  sufficient  to  put  the  point 
beyond  dispute  I  cannot  say. 

2.  Malchion  was  an  author,  or  a  christian  writer.  The 
Disputation  or  Conference,  mentioned  by  Eusebius  and 
Jerom,  must  be  reckoned  his.  It  was,  as  we  may  well  sup- 
pose, published  by  him,  and  not  by  Paul  ;  and  both  Euse- 
bius and  Jerom  speak  of  it  as  extant  in  their  times ;  but  it 
appears  to  me  somewhat  probable  that  Eusebius  had  never 
read  it :  he  says  we  know  it  to  be  still  extant.  If  he  had 
seen  it,  I  suppose  he  would  have  expressed  himself  diflfer- 
ently. 

Jerom  ascribes  likewise  to  Malchion  the  epistle  of  the  last 
council  of  Antioch,  of  which  we  have  fragments  in  Eusebius's 
Ecclesiastical  History  :  indeed  Cave'^  makes  a  doubt  of  this ; 
he  suspects  that  Jerom  said  it  of  his  own  head,  without  any 
good  authority  :  but  most  other'  learned  moderns,  whom  I 
have  consulted,  allow  that  epistle  to  have  been  composed  by 
Malchion,  I  mean  particularly  Fabricius,  Tillemont,  and 
Fleury.  Du  Pin  does  not  declare  his  opinion ;  he  only 
observes  that  Jerom  says  Malchion  was  also  the  author  of 
the  letter  written  in  the  name  of  the  synod  against  Paul  of 

——v'^epiv  ?e  TrpEcrpvTeps  Tifirjdevrog  ■j(tipoTovia.  Vid.  not.  '^. 

s  Vales.  Annot.  in  Eus  1.  vii.  cap.  29.  Vid.  et  Tillem.  Mem.  Ec.  T.  iv.  P. 
ji.     Paul  de  Saraosates,  art.  5.  p.  268.  ^  Vid.  de  V.  I.  cap.  67. 

'  — les sciences prolanes.     Du  Pin.  Bibl.  p.  193.  "^  Cav.  Hist.  Lit. 

in  Malchion.  '  Vid.  Fabric.  Bibl.  Gr.  1.  vi.  c.  4.  Tom.  xi.  p. 

346.  Cette  lettre  fiit  composee  par  Malquion.  Tillem.  ut  supra,  p.  630.  See 
likewise  Fleury's  Eec.  Hist.  B.  8.  ch.  iv.  p.  479. 


1 38  Credibilily  of  the  Gospel  History. 

Samosata.  I  see  no  good  reason  to  dispute  Jerom's  account ; 
and  the  piece  shows  its  author;  Malchion  Mas  a  sophist,  and 
the  epistle  is  a  common  place  of  accusation. 

We  have  no  certain  account  of  any  other  works  of  Mal- 
chion, beside  the  disputation  and  epistle  just  mentioned. 
Jerom  mentions  these  two  only,  without  so  much  as  hinting- 
there  were  any  other.  Trithemius  indeed  says  that™  Mal- 
chion composed  several  excellent  Avorks  of  great  use  against 
heretics ;  but  that  is  a  mere  flourish :  he  mentions  none  by 
name  but  the  two  we  have  taken  notice  of  already. 

3.  There  is  nothing-  now  remaining-  of  Malchion  that  can 
be  depended  on  as  genuine,  beside  the  fragments  of  the 
synod ical  epistle  in  Eusebius,  of  which  I  gave  a  large  ac- 
count" formerly.  It  has  been  observed  by"'  several  learned 
men,  that  Leontius  of  Byzantium,  who  lived  near  the  end  of 
the  sixth  century,  has  quoted  tM  op  passages  of  the  Disputa- 
tion or  conference  with  Paul :  but  Du  Pin  says  ifi  is  not 
altogether  certain  that  they  are  genuine.  Tillemonf^  observes 
likewise,  that  there  is  a  passage  out  of  it  in  the  letter  of  Peter 
the  deacon  to  Fulgentius,  and  other  African  bishops ;  which 
Peter  flourished  in  the  same  sixth  century,  but  earlier  than 
Leontius  above  named  ;  it  is  only  a  part  of  ^  what  is  cited  by 
Leontius.  I  have  not  made  any  use  of  these  fragments  m  my 
history  of  Paul'  formerly  given;  nor  do  T  intend  now  to 
take  any  thing"  out  of  them. 

Trithemius  expresseth  himself  as"  if  that  Disputation  was 
in  being  in  his  time:  but^  Fabricius  well  observes,  in  a  note 
upon  him,  that  those  words  mean  no  more  than  that  it  was 
extant  in  the  time  of  Jerom,  not  of  Trithemius.  The  same 
observation,  I  suppose, ought  to  be  applied  to'"  Bede  in  the 
eighth,  and^  Freculph  in  the  ninth  century;  who  likewise 
speak  of  this  piece  as  extant  in  their  times :  but  they  only 
transcribe  Jerom  ;  and  it  is  he  in  all  these  places,  who  is  to 
be  understood  to  say  it  >vas  then  extant,  that  is,  in  his  time. 

If  the  citations  of  Leontius  and  Peter  the  deacon  are  not 
to  be  relied  upon,  then  we  have  not  any  certain  notice  of  this 

"  Edidit  nonnuUa  praeclara  opuscula,  quee  suo  tempore  ad  fidei  christianae 
defensionem  contra  haereticos  multiiin  conducere  videbantur.  Trithem.  de  Scr. 
Ec.  cap.  45.  "  Vol.  ii.  ch.  xliii.  °  Fabric,  ut  supra. 

Vales,  ut  supr.  Tillera.  ib.  p.  630.  p  Vid.  Baluz.  ConcU.  p.  19 — 22. 

•I  Mais  il  n'est  pas  entierement  certain,  qu'ils  fussent  veritables.  Du  Pin,  in 
Malchion,  as  above,  p.  193.  ■■  Tillem.  ubi  supr.  p.  629. 

'  Vid.  Baluz.  Cone.  p.  21.  '  Vol.  ii.  ch.  xliii. 

"  Dc  quibus  exstat  opus  insigne  Dialogorum  contra  Paulum  Samosa- 

tenum.     Trithem.  ut  supr.  "  Extabat  Hieronymi  tempore,  noa 

Trithemii.  Fabric.  "  Vid.  Bed.  Chr.  p.  22.  Cantabr.  1722. 

"  Freculp.  Chr.  T.  iii.  1.  iii.  c.  11.  ap.  Bib.Patr.  Tom.  xiv.  p.  1166.  D. 


Malchion.     a.  D.  270.  139 

work  after  Eusebius  and  Jeroiii :  m  hat  has  been  the  occa- 
sion of  so  g^reat  neglect  of  this  piece  I  cannot  say  ;  but, 
niethinks,  it  is  pity  it  is  not  still  extant. 

4.  I  would  observe,  in  the  fourth  pUice,  that  Malchion 
was  the  principal  director  of  the  last  council  of  Antioch 
concerned  about  Paul  of  Samosata.  In  the  first  council 
moderate  principles  prevailed  :  in  the  last^  council,  when 
Firniilian  was  dead,  and  several  other  eminent  bishops  ab- 
sented for  some  reason  or  other,  very  dift'erent  measures 
were  taken  :  these,  as  I  formerly  "^  intimated,  may  be  chiefly 
ascribed  to  Malchion.  We  have  now  seen  further  proof  of 
that  supposition  ;  Eusebius  assures  us  that  Malchion  only, 
and  no  other,  was  able  to  detect  or  confute  Paul :  and  Jerom, 
besides,  informs  us  that  the  large  epistle  written  in  the  name 
of  that  council  was  composed  by  3Ialchion  :  what  better 
evidence  can  be  desired  of  this  matter?  Nor  is  this  my 
thought  only.  Du  Pin,  speaking  of  Malchion,  says;  '  he^ 
'  had  a  famous  dispute  with  Paul  of  Samosata  in  the  second 
'  council  of  Antioch,  held  in  270;  and  after  having  detected 
'  the  errors  Avhich  that  heretic  endeavoured  to  conceal,  he'' 
'  caused  him  to  be  condemned  by  the  council.' 

5.  I  observe,  in  the  fifth  place,  what  Avas  Malchion's 
opinion  concerning  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  does  not 
clearly  appear.  Eusebius  speaks  of  Malchion  as  a  man  of 
uncommon  soundness  in  the  faith  of  Christ :  but  if  Eusebius 
was  an  Arian,as  some  think,  and  if  that  character  relates  to  the 
doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  this  testimony,  instead  of  assuring  us 
of  Malchion's  orthodoxy  upon  that  head,  may  rather  occa- 
sion a  suspicion  that  he  Arianised.  There  is  another  thing, 
which  may  occasion  a  doubt  whether  Malchion  held  the 
Nicene  faith.  The  council  of  Nice  established  the  homou- 
sian,  or  consubstantial  doctrine  :  but  it  is  said  that  the  coun- 
cil of  Antioch  (in  which,  as  has  been  shown,  Malchion 
directed  and  governed)  rejected  the  word  consubstantial  as 
improper.  This  has  been  taken  notice  of  by  several  ancient 
writers  of  the  fovirth  century  ;  *=  Athanasius,  '^  Hilary  of 
Poictiers,  and  ^  Basil.  This  therefore,  if  the  council  of  Nice 
be  the  standard  of  orthodoxy,  casts  a  suspicion  upon  that  of 

y  See  Vol.  viii.  ch.  xliii.  ^  Id.  ibid.  •*  Du  Pin,  as  before,  p.  193. 

''  il  le  fit  condamner  parle  Concile,  ib. 

"^  Aia  THT  eucorwQ  EvXa^-qQtvTtg  ro  TOisrov  ao<pi(J^ia  rs  'S.afioaaTeiag,  eiprjKam, 
fii)  uvai  Tov  XpiTov  b^oHdiov.     Ath.  de  Synod,  p.  759.  B. 

^  Male  homousion  Samosatenus  confessus  est :  sed  numquid  melius  Aril 
negaverant  ?  Octoginta  episcopi  olim  respuemnt ;  sed  trecenti  et  decern  octo 
nuper  receperunt,  &c.    Hil.  de  Syn.  n.  Ixxxvi.  p.  1200.  Conf.  Facund.  1.  x.  c.  6. 

*  Kai  yap  toj  ovn,  oi  £7ri  Ilav\(i)  rq)  'Safiorrarei  avviKQovTiQ,  Su(3aXov  ttjv 
Xi^iv,  i)Q  SK  ivffrjfiov.  Basil.  Ep.  52.  [al.  300.]  p.  145.  B. 


140  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

Antioch ;  and^  there  is  no  small  difficulty  in  reconciling 
these  councils.  But  I  may  not  stay  to  inquire  exactly  into 
that  matter ;  it  is  sufficient  for  me  at  present  to  give  these 
points,  and  refer  to  those  ancient  writers  above-named,  and 
somes  learned  moderns  of  great  note,  who  have  endeavoured 
to  reconcile  this  contradiction,  real  or  apparent;  and  to  show 
that,  notwithstanding  the  different  sentiments  and  conduct 
of  these  two  councils  with  regard  to  this  word,  yet  they  both 
held  the  same  doctrine. 

6.  With  regard  to  Malchion's  canon  of  scripture :  as  we 
have  nothing  of  him  remaining'  besides  the  above-mentioned 
fragments  in  Eusebius,  and  1  have  formerly''  observed  the 
notice  taken  of  scripture  in  the  synod  ica!  epistle  of  the  coun- 
cil of  Antioch,  I  have  nothing  farther  to  add  here  upon 
this  head,  but  only  to  say.  That  it  ought  to  be  taken  for 
granted  that  Malchion  owned  and  respected  those  scriptures 
which  were  generally  received  at  that  time  among  christians ; 
but  what  was  his  opinion  concerning  the  books  of  the  New 
Testament,  then  doubted  of  by  some,  cannot  be  certainly 
known. 


CHAP.  LI. 

ANATOLIUS,  AND  THREE  OTHERS,  BISHOPS  OF  LAODICEA. 

I.  Anatolhis,  bisJiop  of  Laodicea  in  Syria,  his  history  and 
works.  IT.  His  testimony  to  the  scriptures.  III.  Euse- 
bius, likewise  bishop  of  Laodicea.  IV.  Stephen.  V. 
Theodotus,  bishops  of  the  same  city. 

T.  SAYS  Jerom  :  '  Anatolius,='  a  native  of  Alexandria,  bishop 
'  of  Laodicea  in  Syria,  flourished  under  the  emperors  Probus 

^  De  hac  synodorum  avnXoyit^  laborarunt  theologi,  qua  veteres,  qua  neoterici. 
Bull.  Def.  Fid.  Nic.  p.  29.  a.  m.  e  Petav.  de  Trin.  1.  iv.  c.  5.  num. 

ii.  iii.  Bull.  Def.  Vid.  Nic.  Sect.  ii.  cap.  1.  num,ix.  x.  xi.  Basnag.  Ann.  269. 
num.  vi.  Tillem.  ut  supr.  Paul  deSamos.  art.  5.  p.  G31,  632. 

•"  See  Vol.  ii.  ch.  xliii.  *  Anatolius  Alexandrinus,  Laodiceae 

Syriae  epLscopus,  sub  Probo  et  Caro  imperatoribus  floruit.  Mirae  doctrinae  vir 
fuit  in  arithmetica,  geometria,  astronomia,  granimatica,  rhetorica,  dialectica. 
Cujus  ingenii  magnitudiuera  de  volumine,  quod  super  Pascha  composuit,  et 
decem  libris  de  arithnietica2  institutionibus,  intelligere  possumus.  Hier.  de  V. 
I  c.  73. 


Anatolics.     a.  D.  270.  141 

'  and  Carus.  lie  was  exceedingly  well  skilled  in  arithmetic, 
'  geometry,  astronon)y,  grammar,  rhetoric,  logic.  The 
'  greatness  of  his  capacity  may  be  perceived  from  his  work 
'  concerning  Easter,  and  from  his  ten  books  of  institutions 
'  of  *"  arithmetic' 

Probus  reigned  from  276,  to  August  282  ;  Carus  the 
remainder  of  that  year,  and  all  283.  Nevertheless,  Cave  has 
placed  Anatolius  as  flourishing  about  the  year  270,  and  not 
much  amiss;  Eusebius,  whom  he  succeeded,  having  died, 
as  is''  supposed,  in  269  or  270;  though  some^  think  not 
before  272. 

Anatolius  is  placed  in  Jerom's  Chronicle  at  the  third  year 
of  Probus,  the  year  of  Christ  278,  after  this  manner :  '  Anato- 
'  lius,  "^bishop  of  Laodicea,  well  acquainted  with  all  the 
'  principles  of  the  philosophers,  is  now  much  celebrated.' 

Nor  did  Jerom  forget  Anatolius*  in  his  letter  to  Magnus. 

Jerom  undoubtedly  Mas  indebted  to  Eusebius  for  what  he 
knew  of  this  person.  Now  tlierefore  we  will  see  what  Euse- 
bius himself  writes  of  him  in  his  Ecclesiastical  History. 

He  says  'that^  Anatolius  was  an  Alexandrian,  and  bishop 
'  of  Laodicea  after  Eusebius  ;  and  that  for  eloquence,  and  for 
'  skill  in  philosophy  and  the  Greek  literature,  he  was  the  most 
'  eminent  person  of  his  time  ;  being  a  complete  master  of 
'  arithmetic,  geometry,  and  likewise  of  logic,  natural  philo- 
'  sophy,  and  rhetoric  :  for  the  sake  of  which  qualifications, 
'  as  is  said,  he  was  desired  by  the  people  of  Alexandria  to 
'  set  up  a  school  for  the  Aristotelian  philosophy.' 

When  that  request  was  made  we  cannot  say  exactly  ;  but, 
if  ever,  undoubtedly  before  he  left  Alexandria,  and  was 
advanced  to  the  episcopal  office.  Nor  is  there  any  certain 
information  given  us  of  his  complying  with  that  request : 
though  Fabricius  in''  one  place  scruples  not  to  say,  without 
hesitation,  that  he  set  up  such  a  school  at  Alexandria. 

Anatolius  and  his  friend  Eusebius  performed  signal  ser- 

''  They  who  desire  to  see  what  learned  moderns  say  of  AnatoHus  may  con- 
sult Cav.  H.  Lit.  T.  i.     TiUem.  Mem.  Ec.  T.  iv.  P.  ii.  p.  637 643.    Fabr. 

Bib.  Gr.  T.  ii.  p.  274,  &c.  T.  v.  p.  277.  "  See  Tillem.  Mem.  Ec.  T. 

iv.  p.  ii.  p.  641.     Basnag.  Ann.  269.  n.  ix.  ^  Pagi  Ann.  269.  n.  ix. 

*  Anatolius,  Laodicenus  epi^copus,  philosophorum  disciplinis  eruditus,  plu- 
rimo  sermone  celebiatur.     Chr.  p.  177.  ^  Ep.  83.  al.  84. 

8  Fevog  fiev  KM  avrog  AXtKavcpevg'  Xoywv  S'  tvcKa,  icanrat^tiaQTriQ'EWfjvdiv, 
<piXoffO(l)iaQ  re,  ra  vpoira  ruv  juaXt<ra  Ka6'  I'mag  ^OKifiuiTaTotv  ainviyKajuvoQ,  q.Tt 
api6fir]TiKr]Q, — tXiiXaKiog  eiQ  aKpov.  'Qv  tViKa  Kai.  ri]g  £7r'  AXiKavCptuig  Ap(<ro- 
reXng  ciaCoxtjc  rrjv  ciciTpijirjv,  Xoyog  tyft  TrpOQ  roiv  TTjCe  TrfiXiTaJV  ffv^ijaaaOai 
avTov  a^KoQrjvai.     Eus.  H.  E.  1.  vii.  c.  32.  p.  284.  D.  285.  A. 

^  Anatolius — Alexandriae  scholam  Aristotelicam  constituit,  factus  deinde 
episcopus  in  Syria  Laodicenus  circa  A.  Chr.  270.  Bib.  Gr.  T.  ii.  p.  274. 


142  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

vices  for  the  people  of  Alexandria,  both  christians  and  others; 
when  Bruchiuni,  or  Pyruchium,  one  of  the  quarters  of  that 
city,  in  which  too  was  the  citadel,  suft'ered  under  the  extre- 
mities of  a  siege,  Anatolius  Avas  shut  up  in  Bruchium ; 
Eusebius  Avas  without,  among*  the  Romans,  the  besiegers. 
One  of  those  services  is  particularly  related  by'  our  Eccle- 
siastical historian,  to  whom  I  refer.  Anatolius  had  the  bet- 
ter opportunity  to  be  useful  to  the  public  by  means  of  the 
high  esteem  he  Avas  in:  for  Eusebius  says,  that''  Avith  uni- 
versal consent  he  had  pre-eminence  above  all  the  magistrates 
or  senators  of  Alexandria,  that  were  in  Bruchium. 

Learned  men'  find  no  small  difficulty  in  settling  the  time 
of  this  siege.  Tillemont  thought  it  ™  to  be  in  the  reign  of 
Gallienus  in  263  or  264;  Basnage"  in  262  or  263;  whose 
opinions  seem  to  me  more  probable  than  theirs  Avho  place 
it  later. 

Soon  after  the  siege  was  over,  Anatolius"  left  Alexandria. 

Our  historian  tells  us  '  that?  Theotecnus,  bishop  of  Csesa- 
'  rea  in  Palestine,  ordained  Anatolius  bishop,  intending  that 
'  he  should  succeed  him ;  and  it  is  certain  that  for  a  short  time 
'  they  both  presided  together  in  that  church  :  but  Anatolius, i 
'  going  to  Antioch  to  be  present  at  the  council  called  upon 
'  the  occasion  of  Paul  of  Samosata,  as  he  was  passing  through 
'  Laodicea,  Avas  detained  there  by  the  brethren,  Eusebius 
'  being  dead.' 

It  is  reasonable  to  think  that  our  historian  must  mean  the 
last  synod  in  the  affair  of  Paul,  Avhich  Avas  held  in  269. 
After  this  he  says  nothing  farther  of  Anatolius.  But  here 
he  died  ;  for,  as  the  historian  adds,  he'"  Avas  succeeded  by 
Stephen,  the  last  bishop  of  Laodicea,  before  the  persecution 
of  Diocletian  began. 

'  Anatolius,'  says^  Eusebius,  '  did  notAvrite  many  books : 
*  however,  from  those  Avhich  have  come  down  to  us  may  be 
'  perceived  both  his  eloquence  and  his  extensive  knowledge 
'  and  learning,particularly  from  his  Avork  concerning  Easter.* 

'  L.  vii.  c.  32.  p.  285,  tt  286.  A.  ''  Mvpiag  fitv  hv  thSs  km 

aXKaQ  apiTtiac  iv  ry  Kar  A\t^avSpitav  th  IIvjOSxeis  TtoKiopKiq.  nvi]fioviv>i(nv' 
q.Ti  Tuv  tv  rtXii  Tipovoniac  e^aipsTn  Trpog  aTravTwv  7]Ki-(0[itvs'  ib.  p.  285.  A. 

'  Vid.  Pagi  in  Baron.  Ann.  2G9.  n.  ix.  x.  xi.  ■"  See  his  Hist,  des 

Emp.  in  Gallien.art.  12.  T.  iii.  P.  iii.  p.  974,  975.  et  p.  1175. 

"  Basn.  Ann.  262.  n.  iii.  "  Eus.  ib.  p.  286.  B. 

P  Terif)  irpwTOQ — QeoTtKvOQ  ^^sipac  tig  tTn(TKoiry)v  firirtOuKE.  ib.  p.  288.  A. 

•I   Eus.  ib.  A.  B.  ■"   Kai  rs  Ai'aroXi«  ^£  tov  (iinv  fiiraWa^cn'TOc, 

Tt]e  £(C£t(T£   TTCtpOlKiaC  V'TUTOQ  TWV  TTpO  CllJlJjlii   KaOlTClTai    2r£0rtVOf.     lb.  p.  288.  B. 

°  Ov  fitv  sv  taTTs^uaOt)  -KKwra  np  AvaTo\ui>  avyypafi^iaTa'  roaavra  5'  iig 
r^jiag  i\i]\vOe,  ti  wv  avrn  KarctjiaOuv  dvvarov  o/in  to,  ti  \oyiov  kcu  iroKvfiaQtg' 
IV  oiQ  fiaXiTa  TCI  TTipi  th  iraaxc-  oo'iavTci  Trapi-iiffiv.  ib.  p.  28G.  B.  C. 


Anatolius.     a.  D.  270.  143 

— '  The*  same  Anatolius  left  also  the  Principles  of  Aritlime- 
'  tic  in  ten  books,  and  likewise  some  other  works,  inominients 
'  of  his  diligence  in  studying"  the  divine  scriptures,  and  of  his 
'  understanding-  therein.' 

Eusebius  has  inserted  in  his  Ecclesiastical  History"  a  long- 
passage  of  Anatolius's  book  upon  Easter,  or  his  Paschal 
canons,  as  he  there  calls  it:  and  yEgidius  Bucherius  has 
published  the  same  work  in  an  ancient  Latin  version  said 
to  be  llufinus's;  which  is  generally  allowed  to  be,  for  the 
main  at  least,  the  genuine  work  of  Anatolius.  It  is  thought 
by  some,  that  there  are  remaining  fragments  of  his  other 
work,  the  Institutions  of  Arithmetic.  Fabricius^  has  pub- 
lished some  fragments  in  Greek,  which  he  supposed  to  be  of 
Anatolius. 

There  were  others  of  this  name,  which  ought  to  be  dis- 
tinguished from  our  Anatolius.  Fabricius"'  has  mentioned 
several.  Cave''  also  well  argues,  that  our  Anatolius  is  dif- 
ferent from  him  whom^  Eunapius  speaks  of  as  master  of 
Jamblichus;  though^  Valesius  confounded  them:  and 'Bas- 
nage  is  pleased  to  signify  his  approbation  of  Valesius's 
opinion. 

Anatolius,  in  the  passage''  cited  by  Eusebius  from  his 
Paschal  canons,  mentions  several  Jewish  writers ;  Philo, 
Josephus,  MusEcus,  and  others  more  ancient;  two  of  the 
name  Agathobulus,  called  rabbins,  or  masters ;  and  Aristo- 
bulus,  one  of  the  seventy  translators  of  the  Old  Testament, 
or  part  of  it.  He  likewise*^  mentions  some  book  of  Enoch  : 
and  in  that  part  of  his  Avork,  which  w^e  have  in  Latin  only, 
very  honourable  mention  is  made  of*^  Origen. 

H.  As  there  remains  but  a  small  part  of  the  work  of  Ana- 
tolius, except  what  is  the  Latin  translation,  a  brief  account 
of  his  testimony  to  the  scriptures  will  suffice. 

1.  He  quotes  '  as  from  the  gospel''  these  words  :  Now  the 

'  Kai  apiOjiTiTiKag  St  KaraXtKonrtv  6  aurog  iv  oXoig  SiKa  avy/pafifiamv  tiaa- 
yuyag,  kch  aWa  tuyfiara  Ti}c,jrif>i  ra  Beta  nxo\7]C  ts  avrs  Kai  vokvTTiipiaQ.  ib. 
p.  287.  D.  288.  A.  "   E/c  rwv  xtpi  r«  Tratr^a  AvaroXis  Kavovdiv. 

K.  X.  p.  286.  C.  D.  et  p.  287.  '  Bib.  Gr.  1.  iii.  c.  xi.  T.  ii.  p. 

275—278.  *  Bib.  Gr.  T.  v.  p.  277.  Vid.  et  T.  ii.  p.  275. 

"  Hist.  Lit.  T.  i.  p.  136.  y  Eunap.  Vit.  Jambl.  init. 

'  Ann.  in  Euseb.  p.  158.  =>  Ann.  269.  n.  ix.  *>  Eus.  p.  287. 

'^  Hapw^-aTiKa  kui  ra  iv  T(f>  Ej/wi^  fiaOrjuaTa.  ib.  p.  287.  D. 

^  Sed  et  Origenes,  omnium  doctissimus,  et  calculi  componendi  perspica- 
cissimus,  (quippe  qui  et  i^aXic£rrj;c  vocatus,)  libellum  de  Pascliate  luculentissime 
edidit.  Anatol.  ap.  Bucher.  p.  439.  ^  Contra  evangelii  dictum, 

dicentis:  Prima  autem  die  azymorum  accesserunt  discipuli  ad  Jesum.  Quin 
dubium  non  est,  quin  xiv.  dies  sit  in  quo  discipuli  Domiuura  interrogavenint, 
secundum  raorem  antiquitus  sibi  constitutum :  Ubi  vis  paremus  tibi  comedere 
Pascha?  p.  443.  sub.  tin. 


H-4  Credibililij  of  the  Gospel  Hislonj. 

first  day  of  the  feast  of  unleavened  bread,  the  disciples  came 
to  Jesus,  saying-  mito  him  ;  "  Where  wilt  thou  that  we  pre- 
pare for  thee  to  eat  the  passover?"  '  Matth.  xxvi.  17.  And 
see  Mark  xiv.  12 ;  Luke  xxii.  7. 

2.  He  quotes  also  those *^  Avords  of  the  Lord  ;  "  My  soul 
is  exceeding-  sorrovful,  even  unto  death,"  Matth.  xxvi.  38. 
And  in  the  same  manner  and  in  the  same  place,  the  words 
of  Luke  XV.  6.   . 

•3.  Hes  expressly  mentions  John  the  evangelist,  the  same 
that  leaned  on  the  Lord's  breast. 

4.  He  quotes^  very  respectfully  the  direction  of  the  apos- 
tle in  Rom.  xii.  15,  intimating  that  it  ought  to  be  attended 
to  as  spoken  by  the  Lord  himself. 

5.  In  the  passage  of  the  Paschal  canons,  preserved  by 
Eusebius,  there  is  a  manifest  reference  to  the  latter  part  of 
the  third  chapter  of  St.  Paul's  second  epistle  to  the  Corin- 
thians; '  But,'  says'  he,  '  all  these  proofs  are  not  necessary 
'  for  those  fiom  m  hom  the  veil  of  the  law  of  Moses  is  taken 
'  off;  who  may  with  "  open  face"  always  "  behold  as  in  a 
'  glass  Christ,"  and  the  things  of  Christ,  both  his  doctrine 
'  and  his  sufl'erings :'  see  2  Cor.  iii.  14 — 18 :  and  in  the 
Latin  translation  of  this  work  we  find  the  words  of'  2  Cor. 
vi.  14. 

6.  He  speaks^  with  respect  of  the  Old  as  well  as  the  New 
Testament. 

7.  He  says  of  some,  that'"  they  can  by  no  means  prove 
their  point  by  the  authority  of  the  divine  scripture. 

8.  Though  this  be  little,  here  issufficienttoshow  that  this 
learned  Alexandrian  concurred  with  other  christians  in  a 

^  Aliud  enim  est  secundum  quod  ab  apostolo,  imo  a  Domino  praeceptum 
est,  cum  contristato  contnstari  [Rom.  xii.  15.]  et  cum  cmce  passo  compati,  ipso 
dicente :  Tristis  est  anima  mea  usque  ad  mortem  :  ahud  cum  victore  inimicum 
antiquum  triumphante,  ac  summo  triumpho  devicto  adversario  laetante  coUaetari, 
ipsomet  prsecipiente,  congratularaini  mihi,  quia  inveni  ovem  quam  perdideram. 
Anatol.  ib.  p.  445.  e  Quorum  exemplum  sequentes  usque  hodie 

omnes  Asiae  episcopi  (quippe  qui  et  ipse  ab  aiictore  irreprehensibili,  Joanne 
scilicet  evangelista,  et  pectoris  Domini  incubatore,  doctrinarum  sine  dubio 
spiiitiuliura  potatore,)  regulam  suscepenint.  ib.  p.  44. 

^  See  before,  note  ^  '  Hcipiijui  h  rag  rouivTag  tojv  aTroSii^tutv 

vXag  a-iraiTU)v,  ow  ■!Tipu}p)}rc<i  fiiv  to  itti  th  'MwvaiwQ  vo[j.(o  (caXu/ijua"  avaKtKa- 

Xv/llllVIJ   Ct   TO)    TTpoaoJTTIlJ   XoiTTOV    7]Crj    XptTOX'  KCtl  TU    XpiTS  Utl  KaTOTTTpl^tcQal, 

fxaOtifiara  re  km  TraOrinara.  Eus.  lb.  p.  287.  D. 

■^  Quia  solemnitas  Dominicae  resurrectionis  lux  est.  Et  non  eit  communi- 
catio  lucis  cum  tenebris.  Anat.  ap.  Buch.  p.  443.  '  Quod  in  veteri 

Cjuidem  tcstamento  non  potest  probabOiter  inveiiiri,  Domino  per  Moysen  prae- 
C'piente:  Septem  diebus  comedetis  azyma,  &c.  ib.  p.  443. 

■"  Nam  qui  ab  aetate  lunae  Pascha  definiunt  posse  celebrari,  non  solummodo 
il!ud  auctontate  divinae  scripturae  affirmare  non  possunt,  sed  et — animarura 
periculum  inciurunt.  ibid. 


Anatolius.     a.  D.  270.  145 

high  respect  for  the  scriptures  of  the  Old  and  New  Testa- 
ment :  and  it  is  likely  that  his  canon  was  much  the  same 
with  tiiat  of  Origen. 

III.  Jt  may  be  proper  to  take  notice  here  of  Eusebius,  not 
only  because  he  was  predecessor  of  Anatolius  in  the  see  of 
Laodicea,  but  also  because  he  was  of  Alexandria,  and  they 
were  intimate  friends  whilst  they  lived  in  their  native  city. 

Though  Eusebius  was  not  an  author,  and  therefore  is 
wanting-  in  Jerom's  Catalogue,  and  in  many  other  histories 
of  ecclesiastical  writers,  he  was  a  man  of  no  small  considera- 
tion, and  is  mentioned  as"  an  eminent  person  in  Eusebius's 
or  Jerom's  Chronicle. 

It  is  likely  my  readers  may  remember  that  this  Eusebius 
has  been  already  mentioned  with  honour  in  this  work,  in  our 
history  of  Dionysius  of  Alexandria.  Eusebius  was  then  a 
deacon  in  that  church.  The  words  of  Dionysius  speaking- 
of  the  state  of  affairs  there  in  the  persecutions  of  Decius  and 
Valerian,  and  which  were  '  formerly  cited,  are  these;  '  The 

*  deacons  that  survive  after  those  that  have  died  of  the  plague 
'  are  Faustus,  Eusebius,  Chseremon  :  Eusebius,  I  say,  whom 
'  God  qualified  from  the  beginning,  [preferring- here,  it  is  likely, 
'  to  his  conduct  in  the  Decian  persecution,]  and  furnished 
'  with  great  resolution  and  ability  for  fulfilling-  the  office  of 
'  ministering-  to  the  confessors  in  prison,  and  for  burying-  the 
'  bodies  of  the  perfect  and  blessed  martyrs,  not  without  the 
'  utmost  peril.' 

Our  historian,  having  finished  his  quotation  of  that  letter 
of  Dionysius,  adds :  '  ItP  ought  to  be  observed  that  Eusebius, 
'  whom   Dionysius  calls  deacon,  was  afterwards  bishop  of 

*  the  church  of  Laodicea  in  Syria.' 

Eusebius,  still  deacon,  acconqianied  Dionysius  Avhen  he 
made  his  confession  before  Emilian  the  praefect  of  Egypt  in 
257,  asi  formerly  shown. 

His  settlement  in  Laodicea  is  related  by  his  namesake,  the 
ecclesiastical  historian,  in  this  manner:  '  Socrates'  was  suc- 
'  ceeded  in  the  care  of  the  church  of  Laodicea  by  Eusebius 
'  a  native  of  the  city  of  Alexandria.     The  occasion  of  his 

*  removal  was  the  affair  of  Paid.  Passing-  through  Syria 
'  upon  that  account,  he  was  seized  by  those  who  were  con- 
'  cerned  for  the  interest  of  religion  in  those  pai'ts,  who  would 
'  by  no  means  let  him  return  home.     He  was  succeeded  by 

"  Eusebius  Laodicenus  insignis  habetur.     Chron.  p.  177.  init. 
°  See  Vol.  ii.  ch.  xl.  et  Eus.  H.  E.  1.  vii.  c.  xi.  p.  261.  B. 
P  See  Vol.  li.  ch.  xliii.  et  Eus.  261.  C. 
**  See  Vol.  ii.  ch.  xliii. 
'  Eus  H.  E.  1.  vii.  c.  32.  p  284.  D. 
VOL.    III.  L 


146  Credibiliiy  of  the  Gospel  History. 

'  Anatolius;  one  good  man  cometh  after  another,  as  the  say- 
'  ing-  is.' 

It  may  be  well  supposed  that  the  time  of  Eiisebius's  going 
into  Syria  was  the  year  264,  or  thereabout,  Avhen  the  first 
councU  was  held  at  Antioch  upon  the  case  of  Paul  of  Samo- 
sata:  then  Eusebius  entered  upon  this  see,  and  was  succeeded 
by  Anatolius  about  the  year  270. 

IV.  '  After'  the  death  of  Anatolius,'  as  Ave  are  informed 
by  our  historian,  '  Stephen  was  advanced  to  the  president- 
'  ship  of  that  church,  and  was  the  last  bishop  there  before 
'  the  persecution :  he  was  admired  by  many  for  his  elo- 
'  quence,  and  philosophy,  and  Greek  learning.  However, 
'  when  the  persecution  broke  out,  he  did  not  behave  like 
'  a  philosopher;  but  showed  himself  rather  to  be  a  dis- 
'  sembler,  and  mean  spirited.'  What  was  his  fault  is  not 
certainly  known  :  we  may  be  disposed  to  think  that  he 
apostatized,  and  renounced  the  christian  religion,  though 
Eusebius  does  not  expressly  say  it :  thereby,  as  1  apprehend, 
showing  both  his  sincerity  as  an  historian,  and  his  tenderness 
for  the  reputation  of  a  brother,  and  a  fellow-creature,  over- 
come by  temptation. 

V.  Eusebius  proceeds:  '  Nevertheless^  that  church  did 
'  not  fall  to  ruin  :  it  was  restored  to  its  wonted  splendour  by 
'  Theodotus,  who  was  designed  bishop  of  that  church  by 
'  God  himself,  the  Saviour  of  all  men.  He  by  his  actions 
'  showed  himself  to  be  Avhat  his  name  signified,  [a  man  given 
'  of  God,]  and  a  true  bishop.  He  was  an  excellent  physician 
'  for  the  body  ;  but  for  the  cure  of  souls  he  had  not  his  equal, 
'  such  were  his  humanity,  his  integrity,  his  compassion  for  the 
'  afflicted,  and  his  diligence  in  relieving  those  who  needed 
'  his  assistance:  with"  which  was  joined  uncommon  skill  in 
'  the  divine  scriptures,  or  the  things  of  religion.' 

To  this  person  Eusebius  inscribed  his  Evangelical  Pre- 
paration ;  there'  styling  him  'beloved  of  God, and  an  orna- 
'  ment  to  the  episcopal  office.' 

What  Eusebius  says  of  his  being  an  excellent  physician 
for  the  body  has  induced'"  Fabricius  to  put  Theodotus  into 
his  Catalogue  of  ancient  Physicians. 

This  bishop  of  Laodicea,  so  much  commended  by  our 
Eusebius,  is  reputed  an  Arian  by  several  learned  moderns, 

»  Eus.  ib.  p.  288.  A.  B.  '  lb.  p.  288.  B.  C. 

"  rioXu  es  i]v  avTM  kcu  to  irtpi  ra  Srfia  fiadr^^ara  avvriOKrjfiivov.  ib.  p. 
288.  C. 

"   TYivSt  ffoi,  Srsiov  ETniTKOTrit)v  ypi^fia,  Otodore,  (j>i\r}  Sty  Kai  upa  KirpaXr}, 

rrvvivxaic  nrefojvrifra.  Prsp.  Ev.  cap.  1.  iiiit.  "   Vid.  Bib.  Gr.  T. 

xjii.  p.  433. 


Stephen.     A.  D.  280.  H7 

to  whom  I  shall  refer  in  the  margin  ;  as  "  Vigerus,  editor  of 
Eusebius's  Preparation,  >  Pagi,  and  '  Tillemont. 

And  there  is  more  than  a  little  ground  for  that  supposition; 
for  Arius  in  his  letter  to  Eusebius  of  Nicomedia*  names 
Theodotus  among  others  his  favourers;  Theodoret''  intimates 
that  the  same  persons  defended  the  Arian  doctrine  at  the 
council  of  Nice.  In  another  place*"  he  mentions  Theodotus 
among  those  mIio  had  imbibed  the  Arian  principle,  and  were 
its  principal  patrons;  he  likewise  says  that'^  he  came  to 
Antioch  with  Eusebius  of  Nicomedia  in  331,  to  depose 
Eustathius.  Athanasius*^  affirms  that  Theodotus,  and  others 
whom  he  names,  had  written  the  like  things  with  Arius 
before  the  council  of  Nice :  not  to  insist  upon  the  letter  of 
Constantine^  in  Gelasius  Cyzicenus,  written  to  him  after  the 
council  of  Nice. 

When  Theodotus  entered  upon  the  episcopate  is  not  cer- 
taiidy  known.  Vigerus,  in  the  preface  before  cited,  says  he 
succeeded  Stephen  about  the  third  year  of  Constantine,  or 
the  year  of  Christ  308  ;  which  is  not  altogether  improbable, 
it  being  evident  from  Eusebius  that  Stephen  was  bishop 
before  the  persecution,  and  for  some  time  after  it  began : 
but  the  exact  time  of  Stephen's  death  or  removal,  and  of 
the  accession  of  Theodotus,  I  think  cannot  be  determined. 
However,  Pagis  well  observes  that  Theodotus  died  before 
the  council  of  Jerusalem  in  336,  because  Sozomen  mentions 
George,  then  bishop  of  Laodicea,  as  present  at  it. 

Theodotus  is  wanting'  in  Cave  and  Du  Pin,  not  being 
generally  reckoned  an  author:  but  perhaps  he  might  be 
justly  so  esteemed,  considering  what  is  said  of  him  by 
Athanasius.  It  is  true,  Athanasius  does  not  quote  Theo- 
dotus as  he  does  some  others;  but  the  reason  was  that'^  the 
letters  were  not  at  hand,  as  he  says ;  which  he  mentions  by 
way  of  excuse  for  sending  no  more  out  of  them  :  for  which 
cause  he  omitted  to  cite  several,  whom  by  name  he  charges 
with  having  written  the  like  things  w  ith  Arius. 

This  chapter  began  with  Anatolius,  whose  history  was  the 

"  Hunc  ego  non  alium  arbitror,  quain  Laodicenum  episcopum,  qui 

Stephano   in   episcopatu   successit,  Arianae  impietatis  fautorem   acerrimum. 
Viger.  inpraef.  ad  fin.  y  Ann.  318.  n.  xvii.  et  xviii. 

^  See  his  history  of  the  Arians,  art.  4.  and  note  2.  and  elsewhere.  Mem. 
T.  vi.  »  Ap.  Thdrt.  1.  i.  cap.  5.  p.  21.  A.  et  Epiph.  H.  69.  n.  vi. 

"  Thdrt.  1.  i.  c.  7.  p.  26.  A.  <=  Id.  1.  5.  c.  7. 

^  L.  i.  c.  21.  p.  52.  B.  *   npo  It  rs  ytvtcsBai  rtjv  iv  Ntcnri^ 

(Tvvodov,  typa\l/av  km  o'l  inpi  Evfft^cov, kui  OioSotov,  k.  X.  Ath.  de  Synodis, 

n,  xvii.  T.  i.  p.  7-30.  D.  f  Ap.  Labb.  Cone.  T.  ii.  p.  283. 

.s  Ann.  318.  n.  xviii.  ''   Kairag  fitv  tiriToXag  avrwv  sk  eff^of 

ev  lroi/i(^  were  Kai  aKO'^eiKai.  Athan.  ib.  p.  731.  D. 

L    2 


148  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

principal  design  of  it :  however,  we  have  been  led  to  take 
notice  of  several  others  mentioned  by  Eusebiiis ;  and  I  pre- 
sume it  may  not  be  unacceptable  to  any,  as  it  serves  to  repre- 
sent the  state  of  Christianity  at  that  time. 


CHAP.  LII. 


THEOGNOSTUS. 


I.  His  history.     II.  His  testimony-  to  the  books  oj' the 

Nero  Testament, 

THEOGNOSTUS,^  an  ancient  writer,  no  where  mentioned 
by  Eusebius  or  Jerom,  flourished,  as*"  Cave  thinks,  about 
the  year  282 ;  and,  though  we  have  not  now  any  certain 
proofs  of  his  exact  ag'e,  that  computation  cannot  be  very 
erroneous ;  as  may  appear  from  what  we  shall  observe 
presently. 

Theognostus  is  mentioned  by  Athanasius,  Philip  Sidetes, 
Stephen  Gobar,  and  Photius. 

Athanasius  has  spoken  of  him  in  two  of  his  works  :  in  the 
first  he  quotes  him  against  the  Arians,to  show*^  that  the  fathers 
of  the  Nicene  council  did  not  first  begin  to  vise  the  expres- 
sion, '  Of  the  substance,'  it  having  been  before  used  in  the 
same  subject  by  Theognostus ;  whom  Athanasius  here  calls'^ 
a  learned  or  an  eloquent  man.  In  the  other'^  work  Athana- 
sius mentions  Theognostus  together  with  Origen  :  he  gives 
Theognostus  the  character  of  an  admirable  man,  and  worthy 
of  esteem  :  he  speaks  of  them  both  in  an  honourable  manner, 
and  as  ancient  men.  In  that  same  Avork  he  afterwards 
alleges  a  passage  from  Theognostus,  which  I  intend  to  make 
use  of  by  and  by. 

*  Concerning  this  writer  may  be  seen  Cav.  Hist.  Lit.  Du  Pin,  Bib.  des  Aiit. 
Ecc.  Tom.  i.  Bull.  Def.  Fid.  Nee.  Sect.  ii.  cap.  10.  sect.  vii.  Dodwell.  Diss.  Iren. 
in  Ap.pend.  p.  5]  1.  Fabric.  Bib.  Gr.  lib.  v.  cap.  1.  p.  276.  Tillemont,  Origene, 
art.  37.  Mem.  Ecc.  T.  iii.  P.  3.  p.  269,  270,  and  some  authors  to  be  hereafter 
mentioned  in  this  chapter.         ''  Vid.  Cav.  Hist.  Lit.  T.  i.  p.  146,  147.  Oxon. 

•^  MaO£r£  Toivvv,  w  xpt'O/^aX"'  Apuavoi,  on  Otoyvoj^og,  avr]p  Xoyiog,  « 
7rap7jTt}iyaro  to  t/c  rjjc  ovauiQ  htthv.  Ath.  de  Decret.  Nic.  Syn.  p.  230.  B. 

**  HaXaioi  jitv  sv  avCpeg,  Qniytvrif;  6  Tro\vfiaOi]C  Kca  (jiiXoTrovog,  km  Bfoyvwrog 
6  ^avfiamog  Kai  ffTraoaiog.  Id.  Ep.  4.  ad  Scrap,  p.  702.  C. 

"  lb.  p.  703.  B.  C.  D. 


TiiEOGNOsTus.     A.  D.  282.  149 

Stephen  Gobar*^  says  that  Atlianasi us  had  often  mentioned 
Orig-en  and  Theo<>nostiis  in  an  honourable  manner  :  whether 
he  means  only  these  two  phues,  or  whether  there  M'ere  stiU 
some  more  in  Avhich  Tlieognostus  >vas  mentioned  by  Atha- 
nasius,  we  cannot  say  positively. 

In  the  Fragment  of  Philip  Sidetes,  published  by  Mr. 
Dodwell,  it  is  said  that  Theognostus  was  president  of  the 
christian  or  catechetical  school  at  Alexandria.  The  order 
of  those  presidents,  according-  to  that  writer,  is  this ;  Origen^ 
Mas  the  fourth  :  after  Origen,  Heraclas ;  after  him  Diony- 
sius  ;  after  him  Pierius;  after  Pierius,  Theognostus.  What 
regard  ought  to  be  had  to  Philip,  1''  cannot  certainly  say  ; 
but  as  we  are  not  able  to  disprove  w  hat  he  writes,  so  I  think 
likewise  that  it  is  not  safe  to  depend  entirely  upon  him. 

From  Photius  we  learn  that'  Theognostus  published  a 
Avork  called  Hypotuposes,  or  Institutions,  in  seven  books  or 
discourses.  The  title  of  the  work  in  Photius's  copy  was 
this  :  '  The  Institutions  of  the  blessed  Theognostus,  an  Alex- 
'  andrian,  and  Exegetus ;'  mIiIcIi  last  wonl  I  rendered  by 
some  learned  men,  commentator  and  interpreter  of  the  sacred 
books :  but  that  meaning  appears  to  me  at  least  doubtful ; 
nor  can  I  assign  any  other  with  w  hich  I  am  fully  satisfied. 
Mr.  Dodwell,  in  his  notes''  uj)on  the  forecited  passage  of 
Philip,  says  that  the  title  of  the  work  was  borrowed  from 
Clement,  and  that  the  title  given  the  author  denotes  his 
public  office  of  teaching  in  the  school  of  Alexandria. 

Photius  says,  '  that'  in  the  first  book  Theognostus  dis- 
'  courseth  of  the  Father,  and  endeavours  to  prove  him  crea- 
'  tor,  even  against  those  who  supposed  matter  coeternal  with 
'  God.'  One  may  be  apt  to  think  that  this  part  of  our 
author's  work  was  very  curious  and  philosophical.  After- 
wards Photius  expresseth  his  dislike  of  the  doctrine  of  the 
first  six  books  of  the  Institutions  in  several  respects,  saying 
that  the  author"^  speaks  of  a  Son  as  a  creature  ;  that  he  too 

'On  Qpiytvtjv  Kai  Bfoyj/wTov  6,  re  fiiyciQ  AQavaawg  o  AXe^avdpung  tv 
TTcXXotg  aniSfxiro  Xoyoic-  ap.  Phot.  Cod.  232.  p.  904. 

6   Teraproc  Trpoe^e  rt]Q  xpfjiaw/CTje  ^larpi^rig  Qpiyev»je'  Mera  Qpiyevriv 

l^ura  TIupiov  QtoyviO'roq.  Fragm.  Ph.  Sid.  ap.  Dodw.  Diss.  Iren.  p.  488. 

*•  See  before,  Vol.  ii.  chap,  xviii.  '  AvtyvwdOriaav  Gtoyvwra 

AXt^avSptioQ  Xoyoi  itrra'  wv  tj  Emypacj))],  rs  /xaKapin  Qtoyvtorn  A\t^avVpii>)Q 
Krti  ih]yr}Ts  vTT-OTVTrtofTHQ.  Phot.  Cod.  cv.  280.  in. 

''  Ipsum  illius  operis  titukim  a  Clemente  sumptum  decesaore  coiisttit.  Et 
quidein  locum  ilkini  scliolie  cafccheticae  magistraleni  denotat,  docendiqiie 
nuinus  publicum  vox  ilia  eKr^yTjTrjg.  Dodwell,  ut  supr.  p.  512. 

'  Ev  fiei'  av  t<i>  7rpu)T({)  \oy(;j  huXanfiuvu  Tript  th  irarpoc  km  oti  eti  drj/ii- 
^PyOQ,  iiriXHpiov  StiKvvvai,  km  Kara  tojv  viroriQsvTiov  (Tvvatdwv  vXrjv  T<i>  Oecf). 
Phot.  ib.  p.  280.  in.  "  Ywv  dt  XiyMV,  KTia^xa  avrov  a-irofmvei,  lb. 


150  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

closely  followed  Origen  in  some  of  his  peculiarities,  which 
raay  be  found  iu  his  books  of  Principles  ;  and  that  with  him 
he  supposeth  angels  and  deemons  to  have  certain  line  bodies. 
With  the  seventh  or  last  book  Photius  appears  well  enough 
satisfied.  He  gives  an  agreeable  character  of  this  writer's 
style :  it  is,  he  says,  full  and  expressive,  and  yet  has  nothing 
redundant ;  he  has  the  Attic  purity  and  elegance  without 
affectation ;  and  in  the  greatest  plainness  and  perspicuity 
there  is  nothing  mean  and  vulgar. 

If  Ave  had  had  Photius's  extract  entire,  Ave  should  not  have 
been  at  a  loss  about  the  exact  age  of  Theognostus ;  for  he 
put  down  the  time  Avhen  he  flourished :  but  the  last  words 
of  the  extract  are  wanting. 

We  may  however  conclude,  from  what  we  have  seen,  that 
Theognostus  Avas  an  Alexandrian,  and  that  he  flourished 
some  time  after  Origen,  before  the  end  of  the  third  century. 

Eusebius's  silence  about  this  writer  has  occasioned  divers 
surmises  and  speculations.  Baronius"  cannot  help  thinking 
it  happened,  not  without  a  malicious  and  fraudulent  design, 
to  bury  in  oblivion  the  name  and  Avritings  of  a  strenuous 
asserter  of  the  consubsthntial  doctrine:  Huet"  is  almost  of 
the  same  mind,  and  suspects  that  these  Institutions  had  been 
interpolated  by  the  Arians  in  the  space  of  time  betAveen 
Athanasius  and  Photius:  but''  Tiilemont  is  not  convinced 
by  their  reasonings.  Indeed,  he  who  carefully  compares 
Athanasius  and  Photius  Avill  perceive  that  they  both  read 
exactly  one  and  the  same  Avork  ;  and  that  the  Institutions 
were  as  uncorrupted  in  the  time  of  the  latter,  as  of  the  former. 
Athanasius  found  in  them  somcAvhat  to  his  purpose ;  but 
there  Avere  other  things  he  did  not  like.  He'i  says  that,  in 
what  he  alleges  out  of  the  second  book  of  the  Institutions, 
Theognostus  speaks  his  OAvn  sentiments  ;  but  there  were 
other  things  proposed  only  in  the  way  of  argument  and  dis- 

"  Et,  ut  omittamiis  de  aliis  dicere,  nonne  dolo  malo  Theognosti,  theologorum 
celeberrimi,  nomen  atque  scripta  silentio  obvoluta  reliquit,  quod  consubstan- 
tialis  nominis  esset  aseertor  ?  At  is  non  praeteriit  Athanasium.  Baron.  Ann. 
109.  lix.  °  Sane  studiosissimum  vimm,  et  disertum,  et  admi- 

randum  eum  appellat  Athanasius :  atque  idcirco  pvEetermissam  ab  Eusebio 
mentionem  illius  probabile  est,  quod  ab  Arianis  partibiis  fuerit  alienus.  Qua- 
propter  corruptas  ejus  Hypotyposes  ab  hujus  sectae  patronis,  quemadmodura 
et  Clementis  libruni  eodem  titulo  inscriptum,  non  immerito  Andreas  Schottus 
conjectat.  Huet.  Origen.  lib.  i.  sect.  i.  num.  3. 

P  Neanmoins  S.  Athanase  marque  assez,  que  des  son  temps  il  y  avoit  des 
choses  difficiles  dans  cet  auteur  sur  la  divinite  de  Jesus-Christ.  Mais  il  dit,  que 
ce  n'estoit  que  comma  pour  discuter  la  verite,  et  qu'il  exprimoit  ensuite  son 
vrai  sentiment.     Tillem.  ib.  269.  '^  'O  fitv  sv  OioyvtD';oQ  ra 

TrgoTtpa  oiq  tv  yvfivaaia  i^tTarraq,  vTipov  T7]v  tavm  So^av  T^Stig,  ovtwq  tiot]Kiv. 
Ath.  de  Decret.  Nic.  Syn.  p.  230.  C 


TuEOGNOSTus.     A.  D.  282.  151 

putations.  In  like  manner/  Pliotius  is  not  positive  that  the 
thino's  he  condemns  were  the  real  sentiments  of  the  author 
of"  the  Institutions;  at  least  he  is  aware  of  this  apology  for 
him :  but  he  disallows  it,  and  says  such  things  ought  not 
to  be  published  to  the  world  in  writing  at  any  rate.  Mr. 
Dodwell*  ascribes  Eusobius's  silence  to  nothing'  but  negli- 
gence, and  supposeth  him  less  accurate  in  matters  near  his 
own  time  than  elsewhere.  Certainly  Eusebius  did  not  know 
every  thing  ;  nor  had  he  a  fair  opportunity,  or  sutiicient 
leisure,  to  bring-  every  thing-  he  knew  into  his  Avritings.  It 
must  be  reckoned  very  probable  that  Jeroni  was  unacquainted 
with  this  Avriter's  works,  though  they  have  been  so  expressly 
cited  by  Athanasius. 

There  is  yet  another  way  of  accounting-  for  the  seeming 
inconsistence  between  the  commendations  Theognostus  had 
received  from  Athanasius,  and  the  censure  passed  on  him  by 
Photius :  it  is  that  taken  ^  by  Du  Pin,  w  ho  supposeth  that  in 
several  ages  there  have  been  differences  of  expression  about 
the  same  doctrine.  He  therefore  says  that  Photius  is  to  blame 
for  accusing  Theognostus  of  error  upon  the  divinity  of  the 
Son,  purely  because  of  some  ways  of  speaking-  that  did  not 
entirely  agree  with  those  of  his  own  age;  not  considering 
that,  though  the  ancients  have  expressed  themselves  differ- 
ently, the  doctrine  >vas  always  the  same  at  the  bottom  ;  and 
that  it  would  be  unjust  to  expect  of  them  that  they  should 
speak  as  exactly,  and  with  as  much  precaution,  as  they  who 
came  after  the  rise  and  condemnation  of  heresies. 

As  the  Institutions  of  Theognostus  have  been  so  little  taken 
notice  of  by  the  several  sects  of  christians  in  past  ages,  it 
may  be  thought  that  this  work  of  our  author  was  not  neces- 
sary ;  however,  it  might  be  useful  :  and  the  curious  and 
judicious,  I  believe,  w^ould  read  it  with  satisfaction  and  im- 
provement if  it  were  now  in  being. 

II.  We  are  obliged  to  Athanasius  for  the  passages  he  has 
cited:  1  am  now  to  observe  one  of  them.  Athanasius  is 
treating  of  the  sin  against  the  Holy  Ghost :  he  first  quotes 
Origen  and  then  Theognostus ;  he  informs  us,  'that"Theog-- 
'  nostus,  in  confirmation  of  what  had  been  before  asserted 
'  by  him,  alleges  those  words  of  our  Saviour  spoken  to  the 

'    Eire  {log  av  rig  siiroi)  tK^iaoa^ivog  Ttjv  virtp  avTS  a-KoKoyiav,  tv  yv/ivamag 

\of(i)  Kai  H  to^r]Q  ravra  TrporiOeig' eyy pafu  dt   Xoya   Kai  koij/s  TrpoKHnOai 

fitWovTog  vofXH  TOig  ttcktiv,  UTig  d/c  iv  avno  (S\aa(j)t]iJtiag  Tr]v  7rpoeipr]fuvt])>  iig 
a9iou)<Tiv  ETTKptpei  UTToXoyiav,  (tg  arrOtvt]  KaTeSpafxe  ffvvrjyoptav.  Phot.  ib.  p.  280. 

^ quamquam  ejus  nuUus  inemiait  Eusebius,  in  rebus  sui  temporis  minus 

profecto,  quam  in  reliquis,  accuratus.  Dodw.  ib.  p.  512. 

*■  Du  Pin.  ib.  p.  192.  "  Ath.  Ep.  4.  ad  Serap.  p.  703.  B.  C. 


152  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

'  disciples :  "  1  have  yet  many  things  to  say  unto  you,  but 
'  ye  cannot  bear  them  now  :  howbeit,  when  the  Holy  Ghost  is 

*  come  he  will  teach  you  :"  John  xvi.  12,  13.  Then  he  adds: 
'  as  our  Saviour  speaks  to  such  as  are  not  yet  able  to  receive 
'  those  things  that  are  perfect,  he  condescends  to  their  weak- 
'  ness:  but  the'  Spirit  is  given  to  those  that  are  perfect. 
'  No  man  therefore  ought  to  say,  that  the  teaching  of  the 
'  Spirit  excels  the  doctrine  of  the  Son  :  but  whereas  the  Son 
'  condescends  to  the  imperfect,  the  Spirit  is  the  seal  of  those 
'  who  are  perfected.  Wherefore  it  is  not  because  of  any 
'  superior  excellence  of  the  Spirit  above  the  Son,  that  the 
'  blasphemy  against  the  Spirit  is  mexpiable  and  unpardon- 

*  able  ;  but  because,  by  those  who  are  imperfect,  pardon  may 
'  be  obtained  :  for"  those  "  who  have  tasted  of  the  heavenly 
'  gift,"  (Heb.  vi.  4.)  and  have  been  Inade  perfect,  there 
'  remains  no  excuse,  or  any  means  of  escape.' 

From  that  expression,  '  tasting  the  heavenly  gift,'  I  would 
infer  that  our  author  received  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews. 
This  may  be  further  argued  from  what  precedes  in  Athana- 
sius  :  for,  proceeding  to  the  testimonies  of  Origen  and  The- 
ognostus  concerning  the  subject  he  was  upon,  he  thus  ex- 
presseth  himself;  '  They''  both  write  of  this  matter,  saying 
'  that  this  is  the  blasphemy  against  the  Holy  Ghost ;  when 
'  they  who  have  been  favoured  with  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost 

*  in  baptism  return  to  sin  :  therefore,  say  they,  such  receive  no 

*  remission,  according  to  w  hat  Paul  also  says  in  the  epistle 
'  to  the  Hebrews  :  "  For  it  is  impossible  for  those  who  were 

*  once  enlightened,  and  have  tasted  of  the  heavenly  gift,  and 
'  were  made  partakers  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  have  tasted 
'  the  good  word  of  God,  and  the  powers  of  the  world  to 
'  come,  if  they  fall  away,  to  renew  them  again  unto  repent- 
'  ance  :"  ch.  vi.  4,  5,  6.  This  they  both>  say.'  Then  he 
alleges  their  passages  in  order. 

And  this  recompense  then  we  have  of  the  labour  of  our 
inquiry  into  the  life  and  writings  of  Theognostus  :  that  we 
have  found  ^  another  learned  Alexandrian,  of  the  third  cen- 
tury, who  received  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews. 

'''  Toic  Se  rtXtiMfievoig  avyyivirai  to  Trvivjia  to  uyiov,  km  sdrjirs  Tig  tK  tutuv 
avipaiT]  rr]V  th  irvtvfiaroQ  liCaaKoXuiv  virtcijiaWuv  Ti]q  th  vis  ^iSaxr]Q-  ibid.  C. 

"  Etti  Ce  roic  yivaajitvoig  rrjc  apavis  [al.  nrapaviii]  fwpiag,  kui  riXiujdtimv. 
K.  X.  ibid.         '  "  lb.  p.  702.  CD. 

y   Tavra  ce  Koivf/  juv  XiynTi,  kui  ihavct  ikcitoq  Trno-riOr^'n  tiavoiav.  ib.  E. 

^  See  before  ot  Origeu,  Vol.  ii.  ch.  xxxviii.  num.  x.  and  Dionysius  of  Alex- 
andria, ch.  xliii. 


Theonas.     a.  D.  290.  153 

CHAP.  LIIL 

THEONAS,  BISHOP  OF  ALEXANDRIA. 

1.  His  liistoni.     II.  An  epistle  ascribed  to  him.     III.  His 
testimoni)  to  the  books  oJ'theJSTew  Testament. 

I.  THEONAS,  as''  Jerom  says  in  his  Chronicle,  Avas  the 
fifteenth  bishop  of  Alexandria.  He  held  that  see,  as  we  are 
informed ''  by  Eusebius, rjineteen  years;  who  in  thesanie  place 
speaks  of  Pierius  and  Achillas,  as  flourishing-  among-  the 
presbyters  in  that  episcopate,  and  observes  the  succession 
of  the  bishops  of  Alexandria  about  that  time:  after  Diony- 
sius  Mas  Maximus  ;  then  Theonas,  about  the  year  of  Christ 
282,  who  was  succeeded  by  Peter,  of  Avhom  we  shall  write 
hereafter. 

II.  There  is  extant  a''  letter  from  Theonas  to  Lucian,  chief 
chamberlain  to  the  emperor,"*  which  emperor  was  not  a 
christian.  But  learned  men  are  not  fully  satisfied  who  this 
Theonas  is  :  the  editor  makes  a  scruple  of*^  ascribing*  it  to 
the  bishop  of  Alexandria  ;  though  he  thinks  it  ought  to  be 
received  as  a  genuine  monument  of  antiquity,  composed  in 
the  beginning"  of  the  fourth  century  :  and  indeed,  according 
to  the  tenor  of  the  epistle  itself,  Christianity  was  not  yet  fully 
established;  though ^  it  had  made  great  progress  in  the 
world,  even  under  persecutions. 

Cave  allows  that^  Theonas,  author  of  this  letter,  was  a 
bishop  ;  but  whether  of  Alexandria,  or  some  other  place,  he 
cannot  determine  :  the  letter  he  thinks''  to  have  been  written 

*  Alexandriaae  ecclesiae  quint-usdecimus  episcopus  praefuit  Theonas,  ann.  xix. 
Hieron.  Chr.  p.  177.  f.  "  H.  E.  1.  7.  c.  32.  p.  289.  C.  D. 

'^  Theonas  episcopus  Luciano  Praeposito  Cubiculariomm  invictissimi  principis 
nostri.  .  Theon.  ap.  Luc.  Acher.  Spic.  T.  xii.  p.  545.  Sed  quia,  ut  sentio, 
diversis  officiis  estis  adscripti,  et  omnium  tu,  Luciane,  praepositus  diceris.  Id. 
ib.  p.  547.  •*  Nam  quanto  magis  princeps  ipse  nondum  christianse 

religioni  adscriptus. — ib.  p.  546.  '  Vid.  Praef.  p.  21,  22. 

f  Gratias  ago  Omnipotenli  Deo,  et  Domino  nostro  Jesu  Christo,  qui  fidem 
suam  per  universum  orbem  in  salutis  nostrae  unicum  remedium  manifotare,  ac 
etiam  in  tyrannorum  persecutionibus  ampliare,  non  destitit,  &c.  Theon.  ib.  p. 
545.  8  Theonas — dignitate  episcopus :  cujusnam  vero  loci  hand 

facile  est  divinaie.     H.  L.  T.  i.  p.  172.  ''  iEtatem  si  quaeras, 

circa  annum  305— claruisee  arbitror,  nempe  sub  Constantio  Chloro,  qui  Ciesar 
creatus  est  anno  292. — Augustus  renuntiatus  est  ann.  305  ;  obiit — an.  30G. 
Cav.  ib. 


154  Credibililij  of  the  Gospel  History. 

about  the  year  305 ;  but  he  delivers  tliis  opinion  as  con- 
jectural only  upon  a  point  that  cannot  be  clearly  decided. 

Tillemont  is  much  disposed  to  think '  it  a  genuine  epistle 
of  Theonas,  bishop  of  Alexandria,  written''  about  the  year 
290.  Lucian  he  supposeth  to  have  been  chief  chamberlain 
to  the  emperor  Dioclesian,  and  a  faithful  servant  of  Jesus 
Christ. 

1  am  inclined  to  assent  to  Tillemont  concerning-  the  author 
of  the  epistle  and  the  time  of  writing-  it. 

The  letter  was  undoubtedly  written  in  Greek  ;  we  have 
only  a  translation  in  but  indifferent  Latin. 

HI.  As  the  several  learned  critics  above  quoted  admit  the 
antiquity  of  this  piece,  I  shall  observe  the  author's  testimony 
to  the  scriptures. 

The  author  often  delivers  his  christian  counsels  to  Lucian, 
and  by  him  to  other  christians  in  the  imperial  palace,  in 
words  of  the  New  Testament,  or  in  expressions  allusive  to 
them :  but  without  quoting-  any  particular  books,  which 
mig-ht  not  be  judged  proper  in  an  epistle. 

He'  mentions  the  gospel  and  apostles,  as  the  divine  oracles 
of  christians. 

He""  recommends  the  daily  reading-  of  the  sacred  scrip- 
tures, and  meditating-  upon  them,  as  the  best  means  of  im- 
proving- the  mind  in  every  virtue,  and  as  the  most  useful 
helps  for  enabling-  Lucian,  and  the  other  christians  with  him, 
to  discharge  their  several  offices  Avith  reputation,  as  became 
the  followers  of  Jesus  Christ. 

'  La  leltre  de  I'eveque  Theonas  a  Lucien — est  selon  toutes  les  apparences 
un  fruit  de  la  piete  de  nostre  saint.  Lucien  estoit  lechefdes  charabellans  de 
I'empereur  Diocletien,  et  un  fidele  serviteur  de  J,  Ch.  Tillem.  Saint  Theonas. 
M.  E.  T.  iv.  P.  3.  p.  1218.  ^  Id.  ib.  p.  1223. 

'  Interdum  et  divinas  scripturas  laudare  conabitur,  quas  miia  diligentia  et 
largissimo  impendio  Ptolomseus  Philadelphus  in  hnguam  nostram  traduci 
curavit :  laudabitur  et  interim  evangelium  apostoiiKque,  pro  divinis  oracuhs. 
Theon.  ib.  548. 

"'  Non  praetercat  dies,  quin,  opportuno  tempore  dato,  aliquid  sacrarum 
lectionum  legatis,  ahquid  contemplemini,  nee  sacrae  scripturse  literaturam 
abjiciatis.  Nihil  adeo  animam  pascit,  et  mentern  impinguat,  sicutsacra;  faciunt 
lectioncs.  Scd  ex  ilHs  hunc  maxime  capite  fructum,  ut  patientia  vestra  juste 
et  pie,  hoc  est,  in  caritate  Christi,  vestra  ofiicia  exsequamini,  et  transitoria 
omnia  ob  ejus  promissiones  setemas  contemnatis.  ib.  p.  550. 


PiERius.     A.  D.  283.  155 

CHAP.  LIV. 

PIERIUS,  PRESBYTER  OF  ALEXANDRIA. 

'  PIERIUS,'  says*  Jerominhis  Catalogue  of  Ecclesiastical 
writers,  '  presbyter  of  the  church  of  Alexandria,  taught  the 
'  people  with  great  reputation  in  the  time  of  the  emperors 
'  Cams  and  Dioclosian,  when  Theonas  was  bishop  of  that 
'  church  :  such  was  the  elegance  of  his  discourses  and  Irea- 
*  tises,  which  are  still  extant,  that  he  was  called  the  younger 
'  Origen.  It  is  certain  that  he  was  a  great  ascetic,  and  an 
'  admirer  of  voluntary  poverty,  and  that  he  was  well  skilled 
'  in  logic  and  rhetoric,  and  that  after  the  persecution  he 
'  spent  the  rest  of  his  days  at  Rome.  There  is  a  very  prolix 
'  homily  of  his  upon  the  prophet  Hosea,  which  was  pro- 
'  nounced  on  Easter-eve,  as  the  discourse  itself  shows.'  That 
is  St.  Jerom's  summary  account  of  this  writer. 

Cams  reigned  in  282  and  283.  Dioclesian  reigned  from 
284  to  305.  '  And,'  as  Eusebius''  informs  us,  '  Maximus, 
'  immediate  successor  of  Dionysius,  governed  the  church 
'  of  Alexandria  eiohteen  years,  and  was  then  succeeded  by 
'  Theonas  :  under  him  Achillas,  made  presbyter  at  the  same 
'  time  with  Pierius,  was  famous.  He  was  intrusted  with  the 
'  care  of  the  catechetical  school,  and  was  an  excellent  ex- 
'  ample  of  a  truly  philosophical  and  christian  conversation, 
'  Theonas,  having  borne  the  episcopal  office  nineteen  years, 
'  was  succeeded  )>y  Peter,  who  obtained  great  honour  during 
'  his  episcopate,  which  he  held  twelve  years.  He  governed 
'  the  church  three  years  before  the  persecution :  the  rest  of 
'  his  time  he  passed  in  a  more  strict  and  mortified  course  of 
'  life,  but  still  without  neglecting  the  common  good  of  the 
'  churches ;  for  which  reason,  in  the  ninth  year  of  the  per- 

=•  Pierius,  Alexandrinae  ecclesiae  presbyter,  sub  Caro  et  Diocletiaao  principibus, 
60  tempore  quo  earn  ccclesiam  Theonas  episcopus  regebat,  florentissiiiie  docuit 
populos ;  et  in  tantam  sermonis  diversommque  tractatuum,  qui  usque  hodie 
exstant,  venit  elegantiam,  ut  Origenes  junior  vocaretur.  Constat  hunc  mirae 
a(TKt)fftu)g,  et  appetitorem  volimtariae  paupertatis,  scientissimumque  dialecticae 
et  rhetoricae  artis,  et  post  persecutionem  omne  vitee  suae  tempus  Roniae  fuisse 
versatiim.  Hujiis  est  longissimus  tractatus  de  propheta  Osee,  quern  in  vigOia 
Paschae  habitum,  ipse  sermo  demonstrat.     Hieron.  De  V.  I.  cap.  76. 

Kai  £7r'  AXi^av^paag  Se  Ma^ifiov  OKTuiKaiciKa  trem  utra  ti]v  AioiniaiH 
TtXivrrjv  nriffKOTTtvaavra,  Qaovag  ^la^tx^rai'  Kaff  6v  itcl  ttjq  AXi^ai'dpuag  t~i 
ravTOV  Til)  Ylupu^  irpiff^rrrspin  t}t,iw[iivog  A^iXXag  fyvwpt^ero,  Ttjg  Upag  7ri<?-twg 
TO  Si!)a(rKa\(iov  eyKtxiipiffiiivog.     Euseb.  H.E.  1.  vii.  c.  32.  p.  289,  290. 


156  Credibilily  of  the  Gospel  Histoi-y. 

sedition,  he  was  honoured  with  the  crown  of  Martyrdom, 
'  being-  beheaded.'     So  writes  Eusebius. 

Maximus  therefore,  having-  succeeded  Dionysius  in  264 
or  265,  was  himself  succeeded  by  Theonas,  in  282 ;  he  by 
Peter  in  300,  who  died  a  martyr  in  the  year  311  or  312,  as 
is  computed.  Achillas,  just  mentioned  by  Eusebius  as 
catechist,  was  bishop*^  of  Alexandria  after  Peter;  but  for  a 
short  time'^  only,  as  it  seems  :  indeed,  since  Achillas  was 
ordained  presbyter  about  the  same  time  with  Pierius,  and 
had  the  care  of  the  school  under  Theonas,  it  may  be  argued 
that  he  must  have  been  somewhat  advanced  in  years  in  311, 
when  he  came  to  be  bishop  :  he  was  succeeded  by  Alexander 
in  312  or  313.  I  have  here  put  down  these  several  succes- 
sions at  Alexandria ;  I  believe  it  will  not  be  disagreeable 
to  my  readers. 

Farther,  Eusebius,  speaking-  of  the  most  eminent  men  of 
his  own  time,  or  near  it,  says,  '  One®  of  these  was  Pierius, 
'  presbyter  of  Alexandria,  celebrated  for  his  strict  course 
'  of  life  and  philosophical  learning :  Le  was  likewise  admired 
'  for  his  diligence  in  the  study  of  the  scriptures,  and  his 
'  expositions  of  them,  and  his  public  discourses  of  the  peo- 

In  Jerom's  letter  to  Magnus,  Pierius  is  placed  among  other 
learned  christian  writers  next  after  Pamphilus. 

In  another  place  he  mentions  Pierius's*^  interpretation  of 
1  Cor.  vii.  7 ;  and  reckons  him  among  several  others,  who, 
as  he  says,  had  largely  explained  that  epistle.  Cave^ 
understands  Jeroni  to  mean  some  commentary  ;  but  I  do  not 
think  it  necessary  to  take  him  in  that  sense  :  several  of  the 
writers  there  mentioned  may  have  largely  explained  that  text 
in  their  homilies,  or  letters,  or  treatises,  without  making  a 
commentary  upon  the  epistle. 

In  his  prologue  to  his  Commentary  ujjon  Hosea,^'  Jerom 
again  mentions  the  long  discovirse  of  our  author  upon  that 
prophet,  which  he  spoke  of  in  his  Catalogue:  he  calls  it  an 
extemporary  and  eloquent  discourse. 

"=  Vid.  Euseb.  Chron.  p.  180.     Socrat.  1.  i.  cap.  5. 

^  Axi^nQ  jJ-iv  oXiyov  xP^vov  Tvpovrri,  km  ra  ttjc  €KK\r)<TtaQ  /car£%£  TrrjCiaXia. 
fura  h  THTov  AXi^avc^oQ.  k.  X.     Theodoret.  H.  E.  1,  i.  c.  2. 

«  Euseb.  ib.  p.  289.  A.  ^  Origenes,  Dionysias,  Pierius,  Euse- 

bius Csesariensis,  Didjmius,  Apollinaris,  latissime  banc  epistolam  inlerpretati 
sunt ;  quorum  Pierius,  quum  sensum  apostoli  ventilaret  atque  edisseret,  et  pro- 
posuisset  illud  exiii^uere,  Volo  autem  omnes  esse  sicut  meipsum,  adjecit:  ravra 
Xeywj/  TlavKoQ  avriKpvQ  ayafxiav  kr]pv(T<rti.     Ilieron.  Ep.  31.  [al.  52. J  p.  24.3. 

8  Scripsisse  commentarios  in  primam  ad  Corinlhios  epistolam  auctor  est 
Hieronynms.     Cav.  II.  L.  in  Pierio.  ^  Pierii  quoque  Icgi  tracta- 

tum  longissimum,  ciuem  in  exordio  hujus  prophetae  die  vigiliarum  Dominicae 
passionisextemporali  et  diserto  sermone  profudit.  Hieron.  Pr.  in  Osee,  p.  12-35. 


PiEuius.     A.  D.  283.  157 

It  has  been  observed  by  several  learned  men '  of  late  times 
that  there  were  copies  of  the  Bible,  or  however  of  some  parts 
of  it,  called  Pierius's,  wliich  were  in  great  esteem  :  that 
observation  is  founded  upon  a  passage  of  St.  Jorom  in  his 
commentary  upon  Matt.  xxiv.  36;  "  But  of  that  day  and 
hour  knoweth  no  man,  no,  not  the  angels  in  heaven,  but  my 
Father  only."  Jerom  says,  '  tliat'^  in  some  Latin  copies  of 
'  his  time  was  added,  "  nor  the  Son  ;"  whereas  in  the  Greek 
'  copies,  particularly  the  copies  of  Origen  and  Pierius,  that 
'  clause  was  wanting.' 

These  things  concerning*  Pierius  I  have  collected  from 
Eusebius  and  Jerom,  authors  of  the  best  credit.  Philip 
Sidetes^  says,  '  that  Pierius  was  catechist  at  Alexandria  after 
'  Dionysius:  the  next  after  him,'  he  says,  '  was  Theognostus, 
'  then  Serapion,  then  the  great  Peter,  who  suffered  martyr- 
'  dom.'  And  Photius  informs  us  that'"  in  his  time  it  was 
said  that  Pierius  was  president  of  the  school  of  that  city  : 
accordingly  it  is  noAv  generally  taken  for  granted,  by  learned 
men,  that  he  had  some  while  that  charge ;  but  I  think  with- 
out good  foundation,  since  it  Is  no  where  mentioned  by 
Eusebius  or  Jerom  :  and  why  they  should  omit  this,  when 
they  so  particularly  mention  his  fame  for  popular  discourses, 
I  cannot  tell.  Eusebius  mentions  Pierius  and  Achillas 
together  :  he  expressly  says  of  this  last  that  he  was  catechist; 
why  did  he  not  say  the  like  of  Pierius,  if  true?  Philip  says 
that  Pierius  was, catechist  after  Dionysius.  When  did  he 
succeed  his  predecessor  in  that  chair — when  he  was  made 
bishop,  or  after  his  death  ?  Dionysius  was  chosen  bishop  in 
247  or  248,  and  died  in  the  year  264  or  265.  At  M'hich  of 
those  seasons  did  Pierius  take  upon  him  the  catechetical 
office?  Is  either  of  them  consistent  with  what  Jerom  says  of 
Pierius,  that  he  flourished  imder  Carus  and  Dioclesian,  and 
survived  the  persecution  ?  Tillemont"  is  much  of  my  mind  : 
and  Cave,  though  at  the  beginning-  of  his  article  of  Pierius 
he  roundly  calls  him  master  of  the  school  at  Alexandria, 

'  Origenis  ejusdem,  Adaraantii  a  flagrantibus  studiis  cog-nominati,  ut  etiam 
Pieiii,  doctoris  Alexandiini,  exemplaria  quoque  Novi  Testament!  in  magno 
pretio  habebantur,  tamquam  omnium  purissima.  Eorum  mentionem  reperio 
apud  Hieronymum  ad  Matth.  xxiv.  Hody  de  Bibl.  Text.  1.  iv.  c.  2.  p.  622. 
Conf.  Mill,  ad  Matth.  loc.  et  in  Prolegom.  n.  dccxxvii. 

^  In  quibusdam  Latinis  codicibus  additum  est,  neque  fi/ius :  quiim  in 
Graecis,  et  maxime  Adamantii  et  Pierii  exemplaribus,  hoc  non  habeatiir  ad- 
scriptum.  Sed  quia  in  nonnullis  legitur,  disserendum  videtur.  Hieron.  in 
Matth.  p.  118.  '  Mfra  rarov  IIiEpioc,  fitTa  Hiepiov  Qioyvw^og' 

K.  X.  Philip.  Sid.  ■"  Vid.  Phot.  Cod.  118,  119. 

"  Mem.  Ecc.  T.  iv.  Saint  Theonas.  p.  583.  Ed.  de  Paris.  T.  iv.  P.  3.  p. 
1225.  a  Bruxelles. 


158  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

afterwards    proposes    divers    difficulties  affecring*   Philip's 
account. 

Photius  says  that  Pierius  was  a  martyr  ;  and  that  a  brother 
of  his,  named  Isidore,  suffered  at  tlie  same  time  :  but  the 
silence  of  Eusebius  must  needs  render  this  doubtful :  and 
Jerom  is  positive  that  Pierius  outlived  the  persecution  under 
Dioclesian,  as  before  seen :  nor  does  Tillemont  receive  this 
account. 

But  though  we  have  no  good  reason  to  think  that  Pieriits 
was  a  martyr,  he  appears  to  have  been  in  great  esteem. 
Epiphanius"  speaks  of  a  church  at  Alexandria  called  by  his 
name:  and  Photius''  intimates  that  there  were  temples  and 
churches  built  by  the  faithful  in  honour  of  him  and  his 
brother. 

There  is  still  somewhat  farther  to  be  taken  from  Photius, 
who  read  a  work  of'^i  Pierius  in  twelve  books  or  discourses  : 
Photius  does  not  mention  any  other  title.  His  character  of 
it  is. this:  'His  style  is  clear  and  perspicuous,  easy  and 
'  familiar,  like  that  of  extemporary  discourse.  He  expresseth 
'  himself  after  the  manner  of  the  ancients,  very  differently 
'  from  what  now  obtains  in  the  church.  Of  the  Father 
'  and  the  Son  he  speaks  rightly  enough,  except  that  he 
'  makes  two  substances  and  two  natures :  nevertheless,  as 
'  appears  from  what  precedes  and  follows  the  place  I  refer 
'  to,  by  substance  and  nature  he  may  mean  only  subsistence, 
*  and  not  in  the  sense  of  the  Arians.  But  of  the  Spirit  he 
'  speaks  dangerously  and  impiously,  for  he  makes  him  in- 
'  ferior  in  glory  to  the.  Father  and  the  Son. — And,  with 
'  Origen,  he  seems  to  hold  the  pre-existence  of  souls.' 

PKotius  here  also  mentions  Pierius's  writing  upon  Hosea 
and  Easter,  and  therein  treating  of  the  Cherubim  and  Jacob's 
stone  pillar  ;  and  something  written  by  him"^  upon  St.  Luke  ; 
which  words  of  Photius  are  not  very  clear  :  but  it  seems  as 
if  the  title  of  one  of  the  twelve  books  above  mentioned  was 
to  this  purpose:  Upon  Luke,  or  Observations  upon  Luke's 
gospel. 

This  is  Avhat  we  know  of  Pierius:  from  which  it  is  easy 
to  conclude,  that  in  his  time  he  adorned  the  christian  pro- 
fession by  his  piety,  learning,  and  public  labours.  As  we 
have  none  of  his  works,  we  cannot  particularly  judge  of  his 
sentiments ;  but  from  the  testimonies  which  we  have  col- 

°  Haer.  69.  c.  2.  p.  728.  C.  p  'Oig  ujq  (paai,  km  vtwg  icai  otKoi 

VTTO  Tojv  tvrripsvToiv  iSpvvOt]fTav.     Cod.  118.  p.  300.  A. 

•i   A.oy>ii  Se  to  PifiXiov  Trepuixt  SioStKa.     Cod.  119.  p.  300. 

■■  Ex"  ^'  XP^'^'-^  *'S  TovXoyov,  a  »)  iwiypuf)],  Eig  tov  Kara  AdKav.  k.  \.  lb. 
p.  300.  m. 


DonoTHEus.  159 

lected  it  appears  that  a  great  part  of  his  time  and  labour  was 
employed  in  studying-  and  interpreting-  the  scriptures;  and 
it  may  be  supposed  tliat  liis  canon  was  the  same  as  that  of 
Origen,  or  very  little  different. 

Pierius  is  placed  by  Cave  at  the  year  283:  some  may 
be  apt  to  think  he  should  have  been  put  lower;  but  it  is 
likely  that  learned  writer  supposed  Pierius  was  made  pres- 
byter in  the  begiiuiing-  of  the  episcopate  of  Theonas.  More- 
over, Jerom  spoke  of  Pierius  as  flourishing-  in  the  reign  of 
Car  us. 


CHAP,  LV. 

I.  Dorothejfs,  presbyter  of  Andoch.  II.  Dorotheus,  autlior 
of  the  Synopsis  of  the  life  of  the  prophets,  and  of  the 
aj)ostles  and  disciples  of  Christ. 

I.  SAYS  Eusebius,  in  his  Ecclesiastical  History,  '  About 
'  this  time  Timteus  succeeded  Domnus  in  the  episcopate  of 
'  the  church  of  Antioch,  whom  Cyril  succeeded  within  our 
'  memory.  In^  his  time  was  Dorotheus,  presbyter  of  the 
'  church  of  Antioch,  a  learned  man  whom  he  knew.  He 
'  was  very  studious  in  the  sacred  scriptures,  and  acquainted 
'  himself  so  far  with  Hebrew,  as  to  be  able  to  read  the  ancient 
'  scriptures  in  their  own  language  with  understanding- :  he 
'  was  a  man  of  a  liberal  mind,  [or  was  extremely  Avell  edu- 
'  cated,  or  perhaps  was  a  man  of  high  birth,]  and  was  not 
'  unskilled  in  Greek  literature :  but  he  was  an  eunuch  from 
'  his  birth  :  this  being-  an  extraordinary  thin^,  the  emperor 
'  took  notice  of  him,  and  made  him  overseer  of  the  purple 
'  dye-house  at  Tyre.  We''  have  heard  this  person  expound 
'  the  scriptures  indifferently  well.  Cyril  was  succeeded  in 
'  the  episcopate  of  Antioch  by  Tyrannus.' 

I  have  transcribed  this  passage  after  this  manner  witli  the 
connexion,  that  we  might  the  better  perceive  the  time  of 

^  Krt0'  ov  AojpoOsov  Trpifffieis  th  Kara  AvTiO)(^tiav  rj^tiojievov  rriviKadt  Xoyiov 
avSpa  tyvoJixEV'  (piXoKciKog  f '  avrog  wepi  ra  Sreia  ytyovwg,  km  rrjg  'Efipaiojv  im- 
fiiXtjOr]  yX.a>rr»/c-  w?  Kai  avTCiiQ  raig  "E/3paV(caic  ypa(paiQ  tirv^^fiovuiQ  ivTvyxavtiv' 
r]v  S  HTOQ  Tijjv  juaXiTfl  tKtvQipiov,  TrpoTraiStiag  ts  tjjj  Ka9'  'EWrjvag  hk  ajioipoQ' 
K.  X.  Eus.  I.  vii.  cap.  32.  in.  p.  284.  B.  C. 

TuTH   fitrpiwg    Titq    ypa^ag    itti   t-j/c;  iKKXyjinac    Siijys/Jiivs    KaTr]Ksaajxt.v' 
ib.  C. 


160  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

Dorotheus.  Cyril  "^  is  supposed  to  have  been  bishop  of 
Antioch  from  about  the  year  280,  to  the  year  300,  or  longer. 
We  may  therefore  reckon  that  Dorotheus  flourished  about 
200,  and  afterwards.  Who  is  the  emperor  meant  by  Euse- 
bius  is  not  certainly  knoM  n  ;  but  it  seems  to  me  not  impro- 
bable to  be  Dioclesian,  in  the  early  part  of  his  reign. 

It  ought  to  be  supposed  that  Dorotheus  first  served  in 
civil  offices,  and  after  that  became  presbyter  in  the  church 
of  Antioch. 

This  Dorotheus*^  ought  to  be  distinouished  from  one  of  the 
same  name,  elsewhere  mentioned  by''  Eusebius,  who  was 
one  of  the  eunuchs  of  Dioclesian's  palace,  and  suffered  mar- 
tyrdom ;  and  from  another  Dorotheus,  author  of  the  Synopsis, 
or  short  history  of  Christ's  apostles  and  seventy  disciples. 
Fabricius*^  indeed  supposeth,  that  this- presbyter  of  Antioch, 
and  the  martyr  of  the  same  name,  were  one  and  the  same 
person,  and  that  there  is  not  sufficient  reason  to  distinguish 
them  .  but  I  think  he  is  almost  singular  in  that  opinion. 

Dorotheus,  presbyter  of  Antioch,  not  being-  a  writer,  is  not 
in  Jerom's  Catalogue  :  and  for  the  same  reason  there  is  no 
distinct  article  allotted  him  in  Cave,  or  other  modern  authors 
of  ecclesiastical  libraries,  or  such  like  works:  nevertheless 
I  have  thought  it  proper  to  insert  his  history  here  distinct- 
ly, though  it  be  short,  as  a  proof  that  there  were  men  of 
learning  and  quality  among  christians  in  those  early  ages; 
and  that  Christianity  did  not  discourage  any  branch  of 
useful  knowledge :  though,  as  we  have  here  and  often  else- 
where occasion  to  observe,  the  scriptures  were  their  principal 
study. 

II.  I  take  this  opportunity  to  give  an  account  of  the  sup- 
posed author  of'  The  Synopsis  of  the  life  and  death  of  the 
prophets,  and  also  of  the  apostles  and  disciples  of  Jesus 
Christ.' 

It  has  been  thought  by  some  thats  he  was  bishop  or  pres- 
byter of  Tyre  at  the  beginning  of  the  fourth  century,  in  the 
year  303,  about  which  time  he  underwent  many  sufferings 
in  the  persecution  begun  by  Dioclesian,  and  afterwards  died 

•=  See  Tilleni.  in  St  Lucien  d'Antioche.  Mem.  T.  v.  P.  iii.  p.  149,  et  note 
(4)  p.  406,  et  Pagi  Ann.  283.  n.  viii.  Basnag.  Ann.  283.  n.  ix. 

d  Vid.  Cav.  in  Dorotheo  Tyr.  Hist.  Lit.  T.  i.  p.  1G3.  et  Pagi  Ann.  283.  n. 
viii.  Basa,  Ann.  283.  n.  ix.  Tillem.  Mem.  Ec.  T.  v.  P,  ii.  p.  9,  et  note  (8) 
p.  342.  «  H.  E.  1.  viii.  c.  1.  p.  292.  A.  et  cap.  vi. 

^  Bib.  Gr.  T.  vi.  p.  145.  in  notis.  s  Dorotheus,  Tyriorum  urbis, 

ut  volunt,  epL'-copiis.  Presbyterum  quidem  cum  martyrologio  Romano  faciunt 
recentiores.  Quod  non  aliunde  profluxisse  videtur,  quam  quod  hunc  cum 
DoTOtheo  Antiochcno  male  confuderunt.  Cav.  H.  L.  [ad  ann.  303.]  T.  i.  p. 
163.  a. 


l)l)ROTHEUS.  161 

a  nmvtyr  under  Julian  In  the  year  363,  when  lie  was  107 
years  of  age. 

Cave''  has  divers  just  observations  upon  this  piece  and  its 
author :  he  thinks  the  Synopsis  to  be  the  Mork  of  an  anony- 
mous author  in  the  sixth  century.  Frederick  Spanheim 
computed'  the  author  to  have  lived  in  the  same  age.  Cave 
>vas  of  opinion,  that  they  who  called  this  Dorotheus  presbyter, 
instead  of  bishop  of  Tyre,  confounded  him  with  Dorotlieus 
presbyter  of  Antioch.  And  may  1  not  rather  say,  (if  1  too 
may  propose  a  conjecture,)  that  possibly  this  Dorotheus  is  a 
mere  fictitious  person  called  bishop  of  the  church  of  Tyre 
for  no  other  reason  but  because  Dorotheus,  of  whom  we 
spoke  before,  is  said  by  Eusebius''  to  have  been  overseer  of 
the  purple  dye-house  at  Tyre? 

Tillemont  argues,  that'  there  could  be  no  bishop  of  Tyre 
at  the  beginning  of  the  fourth  century  named  Dorotheus  ; 
if  there  had  he  would  have  been  mentioned  by  Eusebius  or 
Jerom. 

Fabricius™  may  be  consulted  for  the  editions  of  this  work. 

As  for  the  work  itself,  though  it  has  been  too  often  quoted, 
it  is  now  generally  allowed  by  learned  men  to  be  fabulous, 
and  of  little  or  no  value.  For  preventing  such  quotations 
of  it  for  time  to  come,  and  that  my  readers  may  be  the  better 
satisfied  about  its  real  character,  1  shall  place  divers  cen- 
sures upon  it  in  the  margin.  One  is  that"  of  the  author  of 
the  Collection  of  the  Bibliotheca  Patrum  Maxima,  which  I 
make  use  of;  another  is  taken"  out  of  Bellarmine's  book  of 

•'  1.  Ex  hoc  fragmento  perspicere  licet,  hunc  Dorothei,  ut  pree  se  fert, 
exscriptorem,  scripsisse  Probo  et  Philoxeno  Coss.  hoc  est,  anuo  Christi  525. — 
2.  Admodum  probabile  est,  hunc  anonyraum  fuisse  ipsius  Synopsis  Dorotheaiiae 
conditorem.     Cav.  ib.  p.  170.  '  Quod  vero  habet  Epiphaniu-, 

Haer.  h.  quae  est  Alogorum,  et  ex  eo  Pseudo-Dorotheus  in  Synopsi  de  Ixx. 
discipulis,  secuU  minimum  vi.  scriptor,  hinc  Nicephorus,  et  alii,  fuisse  Marcmn 
unum  ex  iis  qui  a  Christo  adlecti  fuerunt,  magis  dubium,  imo  falsum.  Spanh. 
De  Hist.  Evang.  Scriptor.  cap.  12.  0pp.  T.  ii.  p.  275. 

'' Kai  TifiTjirai  yi  nrirpoTrtj  ti]Q  Kara  Tvpov  aXu  lya  (3a(pi]g.     Eus.  H.  E. 

p.  284.  C.  '  Mais  il  est  encore  plus  d.thcile  de  s'lmagioer,  que 

s'll  y  avoit  ete  en  ce  temps  la  un  Dorothee  tel  que  le  depeint  Theophane, 
Eusebe  n'en  eut  ricn  ecrit,  ni  S.  Jerome  mesme,  qui  le  doit  reverer  coinme 
un  pere  de  I'eglise,  et  comme  ua  martyr,  &c.  TiUem.  Not.  8.  sur  S.  Doro- 
thee. lb.  p,  342.  "•  Bib.  Gr.  T.  vi.  p.  145,  14C. 

"  Dorotheus — E.xtat  hie  sub  ejus  nomine  Synopsis, — sed  plane  fabulosa, 
nulliusque  apud  eruditos  auctoritatis.  Vid.  Ind.  Alphabet,  in  Bib.  P.  P.  Max. 

°  At  hujus  Dorothei  nullam  mentionem  mveni  apud  Eusebium,  S.  Hieron. 
vel  Gennadiura,  aut  etiam  Joan.  Trithemium,  qui  scripserunt  de  viris  lUustribus. 
Ipsa  vero  Synopsis  plena  est  fabuhs.  Consulat  lector  quae  iste  auctor  scripsit 
in  vita  Isaiae,  Hieremiae,  Elisaei. — Praeterea  consulat  quae  scribit  in  vita  Jacobi 
Alphaei,  et  dementis,  et  in  summa  sciat,  ab  isto  numerari  inter  72,  discipulos 
Christi  omnes,  qui  ab  apostolo  Paulo  numerantur,  etiamsi  ethnici  fuennt  vel 
VOI.    III.  M 


162  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History, 

Ecclesiastical  Writers;  and  the  third  fromP  the  Annals  of 
Baron  ins. 

This  Synopsis  might  be  compared  with  some  like  books 
ascribed  to  Hippolytiis,  of  which  i  I  spoke  formerly,  and"^ 
with  some  articles  in  Epiphanius,  and  with  the  last  chapter 
of  the  second  book  of  the  Apostolical  constitutions,  and 
Cotelerius's  notes  upon  it. 

I  shall  take  notice  of  but  very  few  things  in  this  Synopsis. 

Among  Christ's  seventy  disciples  the  first  here  named  is 
James,  the  brother  of  the  Lord  :  of  whom  he  says,  that^  he 
was  stoned  by  the  Jews,  and  was  buried  in  the  temple  at 
Jerusalem,  near  the  altar. 

Here  likewise  are  absurdly  numbered  among  Christ's 
seventy  disciples  the  seven  deacons,  and  others,  mentioned 
in  the  Acts,  and  Clement,  and  Tin^othy,  and  Titus,  and 
almost  all  others,  mentioned  by  name  hi  St.  Paul's  epistles. 


CHAP.  LVI. 

ViCTORINUS,  BISHOP  OF  PETTAW. 

I.  His  history.  H.  Others  (yf  the  same  name.  HI.  His 
works,  and  extracts  ont  of  a  poem  ar/ainst  the  JMarcionites, 
ascribed  to  him.  IV.  Testimonies  to  him.  V.  His 
opinions.  VI.  His  testimony  to  the  scriptures  of  the 
Old  and  J^eiv  Testament. 

I.  VICTORINUS,  bishop  of  Pettaw,  or  Petaw  upon  the 
Drave  in  Germany,  flourished  according  to*   Cave  about 

feminae ;  et  illos  omnes  non  solum  discipulos  Domini,  sedetiam  episcopos  facere. 
Non  meminissem  libri  tam  fabulosi,  nisi  vidissem  a  multis  citari,  et  non  minimum 
fieri.     Ex  Bellarmino,  de  Scrip.  Ecc.  ap.  Bib.  P.  P.  Max.  T.  iii.  p.  421.  H. 

P  Nomina  antem  discipulorum,  qui  a  Domino  fuerunt  electi,  dum  singula 
exprimere  conati  sunt,  omnes  fere,  quonim  invenerunt  in  epislolis  Pauli  fieri 
mentioncm, — inter  discipulos  Domini  adnumerarunt. — Primus  post  Hippoly  turn, 
(quod  invenerimus,)  ejusrei  auctor  fuit  Dorotheus,  quifalso  cognomine  Tyri 
cpiscopus  inscribilui', — Hie  inquam  Dorotheus  Caesarem  quemdamunum  fuisse 
dicitex  discipulis  Domini,  &c.  Baron.  Ann.  33.  n.  40. 

<>  Vol.  ii.  ch.  XXXV.  ■"  Vid.  Epiph.  II.  20.  n.  iv.  et  H.  51.  n. 

vi.  p.  428.  ^  Jacobus,  fiater  Domini  secundum  camera,  qui  et 

Justus  vocatur,  et  primus  Hierosolyinorum  episcopus  constitutus  est.  Lapidi- 
biB  ibi  a  Judff'is,  adobrutiis  occubuit,  atque  m  templo  prope  altare  sepultus  est. 
ap.  B.  P.  P.  lb.  p.  427.  (i.  ••  Cav,  H.  L.  T.  i. 


VicTOHiNus.     A.  D.  290.  163 

the  year  290;  according  to''  Sixtiis  Senensis  about  the  year 
270.  He  had  the  honour  to  die  a  martyr  for  Christ  under 
the  persecution  of  Dioclesian ;  and,  as  is'  supposed,  in  flie 
year  303. 

St.  Jerom's  account  of  him  in  his  book  of  Illustrious  3Ien 
is  to  this  purpose:  '  Victorinus,''  bisliop  of  Pettaw,  under- 
'  stood  Greek  better  than  Latin  :  hence  Jiis  works  are  excel- 
'  lent  for  the  sense,  but  mean  as  to  the  style.  They  are  such 
'  as  these:  Commentaries  upon  Genesis,  Exodus,  Leviticus, 
'  Isaiah,  Ezekiel,  Habacuc,  Ecclesiastes,  the  Song"  of  Songs, 
'  and  the  Revelation  of  John,  Against  all  Heresies,  and  many 
•  other  works.     At  last  he  was  crowned  Avith  martyrdom.' 

Cav-e*"  thinks  that  Victorinus  was  a  Greek  by  birth,  or 
else  born  in  the  confines  of  Greece.  I  suppose  that  learned 
man  concludes  this  from  what  Jerom  says  concerning-  Vic- 
torinus's  style  in  this  and  some  other  places,  which  will  be 
taken  notice  of  hereafter.  Cave  likewise  supposeth  that 
Victorinus  professed  rhetoric,  or  oratory,  before  he  was  a 
bishop.     And  so*^  Cassiodorus  says  more  than  once. 

Tillemont  thinks  it  probable  that'  Cassiodorus  confounded 
our  Victorinus  with  A'ictorinus  of  i\frica,  (of  whom  we  shall 
speak  presently,)  because  what  Jerom  says  of  our  bishop's 
style  does  not  agree  to  one  who  had  been  a  professor  of 
rhetoric :  but  I  thing  that  cannot  be  easily  admitted :  for 
Cassiodorus  appears''  to  have  known  both  these  authors, 
and  speaks  of  them  distinctly.     It  is  not  likely  therefore 

^  Sixt.  Sen.  Bib.  S.  lib.  iv.  p.  308. 

=  Cav.  ib.  Vid.  et  Pagi  Ann.  303.  ix.  Basnag.  303.  n.  xvi. 

•*  Victorinus,  Petavionensis  episcopus,  non  aeque  Latine  ut  Graece  novil. 
Unde  opera  ejus  grandia  sensibus,  viliora  videntur  compositione  verbonim. 
Sunt  auttm  haec :  Commentarii  in  Genesim,  in  Exodum,  in  Leviticum,  in 
Isa^am,  in  Ezechiel,  in  Abacuc,  in  Ecclesiasten,  in  Cantica  Canticorani,  in 
Apocalipsin  Johannis,  Adversum  omnes  Haereses,  et  multa  alia.  Ad  extremum 
martyrio  coronatus  est.     De  V.  I.  cap.  74. 

* si  non  origine  Grsecus,  in  Graeciae  saltern  confinio  natus  videtur,  ex 

oratore  episcopus,  ut  non  uno  loco  nos  doctt  Cassiodorus.     Cav.  ib. 

^  De  quo  libro  [Ecclesiaste]  et  Victorinus,  de  oratore  episcopus,  nunnulla 
disseruit.  Cassiod.  Inst.  Div.  Lit.  c.  5.  T.  ii.  p.  512.  De  quo  [Matlhaeo]  et 
Victorinu>,  de  oratore  episcopal,  nonnulla  disseruit.     Ib.  c.  7.  p.  513. 

e  See  Saint  Victonn  de  Pettau,  in  Tillem.  Mem.  T.  v.  P.  ii.  p.  215. 

^  What  Cassiodorus  writes  of  our  Victorinus  may  be  seen  before  at  note  ', 
or  hereafter  at  s,  ',  •',  under  numb.  iii.  He  likewise  mentions  Victorinus  the 
rhetorician  several  times.  Quorum  Commenta  a  Mano  Victorino  composita, 
in  Bibliotheca  mea  vobis  reliquisse  cognoscor.  Cass,  de  Rhetorica.  T.  ii.  p. 
535.  b.  in.  Prseterea  secundum  Victorinum  Enthymematis  alteraest  definitio. 
ib.  p.  536.  m.  Modum  autem  hypotheticorum  syllogismorum  si  quis  plenius 
nosse  desiderat,  legat  librum  Marii  Victorini,  qui  inscribitur  de  Syllogismis 
Hypotheticis.  Id.  de  Dialectica,  p.  539.  Conf.  ejiisdem  Chron.  T.  i.  p.  365. 
infr.  m. 

M    2 


164  Credibiidij  of  the  Gospel  llialory. 

that  he  shouhl  confound  their  characters.  And,  notwith- 
standing' what  Jeroni  says,  Victorinus  might  be  a  man  of 
good  learning",  and  able  to  write  elegantly  in  Greek,  as  he 
himself  seems  to  allow.  Victorinus's  disadvantage,  there- 
fore, probably  was  this  :  that  whilst  he  was  well  skilled  in 
Greek,  he  wrote  chiefly  in  the  Latin  tongue,  which  was  in 
use  in  the  country  where  he  lived,  though  he  was  not  com- 
pletely master  of  the  propriety  and  elegance  of  that  language. 
I  might  add,  that'  the  style  of  Victorinus  the  African  is  not 
admired,  though  he  gained  so  much  reputation  in  his  pro- 
fessorship. 

We  must  content  ourselves  with  this  short  history  of  our 
Victorinus,  unless  some  more  particulars  should  ofl'er  them- 
selves to  us  when  we  come  to  observe  his  works,  and  the 
testimonies  g'iven  to  him. 

II.  But  it  is  fit  that  we  first  take  notice  of  some  other 
ancient  writers  of  this  name. 

Our  Victorinus  had  been  long"  supposed  bishop  of  Poictiers 
in  France,  until  John  Launoy  ^  in  the  last  century  published 
his  Dissertation  concerning  him  :  and  he  was  so  fortunate 
as  to  prove  his  point,  and  satisfy  the  learned  in  general,  that 
Victorinus,  bishop  and  martyr,  of  whom  Jerom  speaks  in  the 
forecited  chapter  of  his  Catalogue,  and  often  elsewhere, 
ought  not  to  be  numbered  among  Gallican  bishops,  but  was 
bishop  of  Petabion,  or  Petabium,  in  upper  Pannonia :  or, 
according  to  the  modern  division  of  that  country,  of  Pettaw, 
in  the  dukedom  of  .Stiria  and  circle  of  Austria. 

At  the  end  of  that  Dissertation,  Launoy  added  an  appendix 
concerning-  five  illustrious  persons  of  this  name ;  that  is,  four 
-beside  our  bishop. 

The  first  of  which  is  Victorinus,  who'  wrote  in  defence 
of  Praxeas,  and  is  mentioned  by  TertuUian. 

The  second  is  our  Victorinus,  bishop  and  martyr. 

The  third  is  Victorinus,  an  African,  who,  after  he  had  long 
taught  rhetoric  at  Rome  with  g-reat  applause,  embraced  the 
christian  religion:  he  is  mentioned  by  '"Augustine,"  Jerom, 

'  Stylus  Victoriiio  parum  felix,  praesertim  in  dogmaticis  perplexus  et  ingratus, 
et  qui  vix  ulla  adeo  decantate  eloquentiae  vestigia  retinet.     Cav.  H.  L.  in  Fab. 

M.  Victorino. Scripsit  ad  versus  Ariuni  hbros  more  dialed  ico  valde  ob- 

scuros.     Hieron.  De  V.  I.  cap.  101. 

^  Joann.  Launoii  Constantiensis.  Paris.  Theologi,  de  Victorino  Episc.  et 
Mart.  Dissertatio.  Ed.  Secund.  Paris.  1664.  '  Sed  post  hos  omnes 

etiam  Piaxeas  qiiidam  haeresim  introduxit,  quam  Victorinus  corroborare  cnravit. 
Tertull.  de  Pr.  Hacr.  cap.  53.  p.  255.  A.  ""  Confess.  I.  viii.  cap.  2. 

"  Victorinus,  natione  Afer,Roniae  sub  Constant io  principe  rhetoricam  docuit, 

et  in  extrema  senectute,  Christi  se  tradens  fidei,  scripsit. Hier.  de  V.  I.  cap. 

101.  Vid.  ejusd.  Prooem.  in  Ep.  ap.  Gal.  Vid.  et  adv.  Ruf.  I.  i.  T.  iv.  p. 
3fi7.  in. 


VicTORiNus.     A.  D.  290.  163 

aiul  "  Cassiodoriis.  According-  to  PCave,  he  flourished 
about  the  year  362,  and  died  in  370,  or  soon  after. 

The  fourth  isi  Victorinus  of  Marseilles,  likewise  professor 
of  rhetoric.     He  flourishe*!"^  about  434. 

The  fifth  is  Victorinus  Lauipadius,  of  Antioch,  who  pub- 
lished a  piece  entitled  Consular  and  Imperial  Orations,  nieii- 
tioned  by"  Photius. 

There  is  another  author  sometimes*  called  Victorinus  ;  but 
it  is  now"  generally  thought  that  his  name  is  more  properly 
Victorius  of  Aquitain.     He  flourished  about"  457. 

Beside  these,  it  is  supposed  that  there  Mere  many  others 
of  the  same  name,  m  ho  bore  a  glorious  testimony  to  Christ 
in  times  of  persecution  :  but  it  is  by  no  means  necessary 
that  I  should  give  any  particularaccount  of  them  at  present. 

III.  We  saw  just  noM,  in  Jerom,  a  catalogue  of  this 
writer's  works.  Trithemius"  makes  no  additions  :  he  only 
names  the  same  pieces  in  a  little  diflferent  order.  We  must 
now  take  some  farther  notice  of  them. 

1.  The  flrst  work  of  our  author,  mentioned  by  Jerom  in 
his  Catalogue  of  ecclesiastical  Writers,  is  a  Commentary  upon 
Genesis.  In^  another  place  Jerom  quotes  Victorinus  as 
having  commented  upon  the  history  of  Isaac's  blessing  of 
Jacob,  which  is  recorded  in  Genesis,  ch.  xxvii.  The  frag- 
ment concerning-  the  creation  of  the  world,  published >'  by 
Cave  from  the  library  of  the  archbishop  of  Canterbury  at 
Lambeth,  may  be  a  part  of  this  Commentary. 

2.  Of  the  Commentaries  upon  Exodus,  Leviticus,  Ezekiel, 
Habacuc,  the  Canticles,  we  have  nothing  remaining  :  nor  is 
there  any  farther  notice  taken  of  them,  except  in  such  cata- 
logues of  his  works  as  have  been  already  mentioned. 

3.  The  Commentary  upon  Isaiah  is  again  mentioned  by 
Jerom ^   in  the  preface  to  his  own  exposition  of  that  book  : 

"  See  before,  note  ''.  p  H.  L.  '^  Victorinus  rhetor 

Massiliensis,  &c.  Gennad.  de  V.I.  cap.  GO.  Conf.  Sidon.  Ep.  1.  v.  Ep.  21. 

'  Cav.  ubi  supra.  '  Cod.  ci.  p.  276. 

'  Vid.  Gennad.  de  V.  I.  cap.  88.  "  Vid.  Laun.  ut  supra,  p.  44. 

et  45.  ■'  Cav.  ib.  *  Vid.  Trithem.  cap.  46. 

*  Quoniam  antem  polliciti  sumus,  et  de  eo  quid  significaret  in  figura  adjun- 
gere,  Hippolyti  martyris  verba  ponamus,  a  quo  et  Victorinus  noster  non  pluri- 
muni  discrepat :  non  quod  omnia  plenius  executus  sit,  sed  quod  possit  occa- 
sionem  praebere  lectori  ad  intelligentiam  latiorem.  Hieron.  ad  Dam.  Qu.  3.  p. 
569.  in.T.  ii.  Bened.  al.  Ep.  125. 

>  Exstat  quidem  penes  me  Victorinitractatus — de  Fabrica  Mundi. — ^Videtur 
esse  hie  libellus  airoirfiariov  quoddam,  ex  Comraentariis  vel  in  Genesin  vel 
in  Apocalypsin,  decerptum  :  quod  proinde,  tum  propter  venerandam  antiqui- 
tatem,  tum  propter  celeberrimi  martyris  I'amam,  hie  subjungam.  Cav.  Hist. 
Lit.  in  Victorin.  T.  i.  p.l47,  148. 

^  Magnique  laboris  et  operis  est,  ornnem  Isaia?  hbrum  velle  edissere,  in  quo 
majorum  nostrorum  ingenia  sudaverunt,  Graecorum  dico.     Caeterum  apud 


166  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

he  speaks  there  of  Victoiiims  as  the  only  Latin  who  had 
written  upon  that  prophet ;  or,  at  least,  avIio  had  explained 
any  large  part  of  him,  whilst  several  Greek  writers  had 
bestowed  a  great  deal  of  labour  that  way.  In"  another  place 
he  mentions  a  mystical  explication,  which  Victorinus  gives 
of  a  passage  in  Isaiah,  ch.  vi.  2. 

4.  ]n  his  Commentary  upon  the  book  of  Ecclesiastes, 
Jerom  observes  Victorinus's^  explication  of  Ecc.  iv.  13,  in 
which  he  agrees  with  Origen.  1  have  put  part  of  Jerom's 
passage  in  the  margin,  as  of  some  use  to  show  our  author's 
manner  in  his  Commentaries  :  and  I  would  likewise  refer 
my  readers  to  what  there  follows.  This  Commentary  upon 
Ecclesiastes  is  expressly  mentioned  by'=  Cassiodorus :  it 
seems  by  him  that  Victorinus  had  explained  some  parts  or 
passages  only  of  this  book, 

5.  In  his  Catalogue,  Jerom  says  nothing  of  Victorinus's 
having  written  upon  St.  Matthew :  but,  in  the  preface  to  his 
own  Commentary  upon  that  evangelist,  he  mentions  '^  V  icto- 
rinus  with  other  Latin  commentators.  Cassiodorus  too  men- 
tions ^Victorinus's  explication  of  that  gospel.  The  expres- 
sions used  both  by  Jerom  and  Cassiodorus  seem  to  imply, 
that  Victorinus's  performance  was  no  large  work  ;  but  con- 
tained either  short  notes  upon  the  whole,  or  else  explications 
of  some  passages  only. 

6.  The  Commentary  upon  the  Revelation  is  also  mentioned 
by  Cassiodorus  as  well  as  Jerom.  Says  Cassiodorus:  '  Vic- 
'  torinus,*^  the  bishop,  already  mentioned  by  us  more  than 
'  once,  explained  briefly  the  most  difficult  places  in  this 
'  book.' 

There  is  still  extanf^  a  Commentary  upon  the  Revelation, 

Latinos  grande  silentiutn  est,  prseler  sanctae  memoriae  martyrum  Victorinum, 
(^ui  cum  apostolo  dicere  poterat:  Etsi  imperitus  sermone,  non  tamen  scientia. 
Ilier.  Pr.  in  Is.  p.  3. 

^  '  Sex  alae  uni,  et  sex  alae  alteri,'  Victorinus  noster  duodecim  apostolos 
interpretatus  est.     Hieron.  ad  Dam.  T.  iii.  p.  518.  Bened.  al.  Ep.  142. 

''  Origenes  et  Victorinus  non  multum  inter  se  diversa  sensenint.  Post  gene- 
ralem  illam  sententiam,  quae  omnibus  patet,  quod  melior  sit  adolescentulus 
pauper  et  sapiens,  quam  rex  senex  et  insipiens;  et,  quod  frequenter  evenit,  ut 
ille  per  sapientiam  suam  de  carcere  regis  egrediens,  imperet  pro  dominatore 
perverso  ;  et  rex  insipiens  perdat  imperium,  quod  tenebat ;  super  Christo  et 
diabolo  hunc  locum  interpretati  sunt,  quod  puerum  pauperem  et  sapientem, 
Christum  velint,  &c.     Hier.  in  Ecc.  T.  ii.  p.  741.  tin. 

•=  De  quo  libro  [Ecclesiaste]  et  Victorinus — nonnulla  disseruit.  Instr.  Div. 
Lit.  cap.  5.  *•  Legisse  me  fateor — et  Latinorum,  Hilarii,  Vic- 

torini,  Fortunatiani  opuscula.     Hier.  P.  in  Matth.  p.  3.  f. 

*  De  quo  [Matthaeo]  et  Victorinus,  ex  oratora  episcopus,  nonnulla  disseruit. 
Cassiod.  ib.  c.  vii.  '  De  quo  libro  [Apocalypsi]  et  Victorinus, 

saepe  dictus  episcopus,  difficillima  quaedam  loca  breviter  tractavit.  Id.  ib.c.  ix. 

8  Ap.  Bib.  P.  P.  T.  iii.  p.  414.  &c. 


VicTORiNus.     A.  D.  290.  167 

which  is  ;, scribed  to  Victorinus  ;  but  its  genuineness  is  not 
unquestioned.  Cave''  says,  '  it  either  is  not  his,  or  has  been 
'  greatly  interpoUited  :  for  Jerom  informs  us,  that  Victorinus 
'  held  the  niiilenarian  opinion,  which  the  author  of  this  work 

*  dislikes.'  13asnage'  rejected  this  Connnentary.  Lanipe'' 
thought  the  more  probable  opinion  to  be  that  it  is  not  his. 
Du  Pin,  after  having  observed  the  arguments  for  and  against 
the  genuineness  of  this  work,  concludes  :  '  We'  cannot  there- 

*  fore  be   positive  that  this   Commentary  is  not  a  work  of 

*  Victorinus  :  on  the  contrary,  there  is  some  probability  that 

*  it  is  his.'™  Tillemont  has"  treated  this  question  modestly 
and  carefully,  as  usual.  He  owns  thaf  there  are  some  rea- 
sons to  doubt  of  it :  but  it  seems  that  there  are  yet  more  to 
believe  it  a  genuine  remain  of  the  many  works  of  this  holy 
martyr ;  only  it  must  be  allowed  that  what  he  had  written 
in  favour  of  the  millenarian  opinion  has  been  altered  :  and 
he"  offers  some  reasons  for  thinking-  that  what  is  now  found 
in  this  Commentary  upon  that  point  is  an  interpolation,  or 
addition.  That  passage  is  at  the  end  of  the  piece,  and  it 
appears  to  be  of  a  different  style  from  the  rest  of  the  >vork. 
Moreover'!  there  is  some  reason  to  suspect  that  alterations 
have  been  made  in  divers  ancient  writers  who  held  that 
opinion  :  and  what  may  more  especially  increase  the  suspi- 
cion here,  is,  that  in  this  very  Commentary  there  still  seem 
to  be  some  traces  of  that  sentiment;  Avhere'^  it  is  said  that 
all  the  saints  shall  be  assembled  together  in  Judea  to  worship 
Christ.  Whether  it  be  Victorinus's  or  not,  it  is  supposed  to 
have  in  it  divers  marks  of  antiquity.  Tillemont^  understands 
the  author  to  speak  of  the  senate  of  Rome,  as  still  employing 
its  name  and  authority  for  persecuting  the  church.  What 
he  says  of  Nero,  that'  he  is  to  be  raised  up  to  be  antichrist, 

*■  Cav.  ubi  supr. 

'  A  Victorino  tamen  abjudicandum  esse  existimamiis.  Basnag.  Ann.  303. 
n.  xvi.  ^  Quod  eo  minus  congruum,  cum  librum  hunc  falso 

adscribi  Victorino  Pictaviensi,  seu,  ut  aliis  potius  videtur,  Petabionensi,  qui 
sub  fine  seculi  tertii  floruit,  valde  sit  probabile.  Lampe,  Proleg.  in  Joan.  I.  i.  c. 
4.  n.  xii.  p.  66.  '  Du  Pin,  Bib.  des  Aut.  Ec.  T.  i.  p.  194. 

■"  Au  contraire  il  y  a  quelque  apparence  qu'il  est  de  lui.  ibid. 

"  See  St.  Victorin  de  Pettau,  Mem.  Ec.  T.  v.  P.  ii.  p.  218,  et  note  2. 

°  lb.  p.  218.  P  lb.  note  ii.  p.  444,  et  445. 

1  See  Les  Millenaires  in  Mem.  Ec.  T.  ii.  P.  ii.  p.  251. 

•■  in  Judaea,  ubi  omnes  sancti  conventuri  sunt,  et  Dominum  suura 

adoratiiri.     Victorin.  ap.  Bib.  Patr.  T.  iii.  p.  415.  D. 

*  Et  vidi,  inquit,  mulierem  ebriam  de  sanguine  sanctorum,  decreto  senatus 
illius  consummatae  nequitiae,  et  omnem  contra  fidei  praedicationem  etiam  latam 
indulgentiam  ipse  dedit  decretum  in  univeisis  gentibus.  Id.  ib.  p.  420.  H. 

'  Unum  autem  de  capitibus  occisum  in  morte,  et  plaga  mortis  ejus  curafcj 
est,  Neronera  dicit.     Constat  enira,  dum  insequeretur  eum  equitatus  missus  a 


168  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

is  a  more  coinmon  notion  of  the  first  than  of  the  latter  ages. 
The  author,"  reckoning  up  the  epistles  of  Paul,  says  nothing- 
of  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews  :  and  in  the  time  of  our  bishop 
it  was  common  in  the  West  not  to  consider  that  as  an  epistle 
of  St.  Paul.  It  may  be  also  observed  that^  speaking  of  the 
prophet  who  is  to  come  with  Elias,  he  says  nothing  of  Enoch  ; 
but  informs  us  that  some  suppose  him  to  be  Moses,  others 
Elisha  ;  as  for  the  author  himself,  he  thinks  it  must  be 
Jeremiah,  whose  death  is  not  related  in  the  scriptures  :  these 
may  be  reckoned  marks  of  antiquity  :  and  the  style  of  the 
work  answers  very  well  to  the  character  which  Jerom  gives 
of  Victorinus's,  as  low  and  mean.  So  Tillemont:  who 
nevertheless  says,  the''  safest  way  is  not  to  be  positive  who 
is  the  author;  and  I  assent  to  him.  Though  therefore  I 
intend  to  make  extracts  out  of  this  work,  I  desire  it  may  be 
remembered  that  I  do  not  quote  it  as  certainly,  but  only 
probably,  Victorinus's.  I  am  willing-  to  allow  that  in  some 
places  it  has  been  interpolated  and  altered  ;  but  I  am  inclined 
to  think  it  genuine  in  the  main. 

To  this  Commentary,  as  we  now  have  it,  is  usually  pre- 
fixed'^  a  prologue  ascribed  to  St.  Jerom  :  but  there  is  so 
little  reason  to  think  it  is,  that  no  one,  so  far  as  I  know, 
believes  it  to  be  authentic. 

7.  Beside  these  Commentaries  Jerom  says  that  Victorinus 
Avrote  against  all  heresies.  This  book,^  or  these  books,  if 
there  were  several,  seem  to  be  referred  to  by  Optatus  in  Africa, 
who  flourished  not  long  before  the  year  370. 

8.  Jerom  concludes  in  this  manner :  Victorinus  wrote 
many  other  things.  But  we  have  no  certain  knowledge  of 
any  more  than  those  named  by  him. 

9.  Cave'  mentions  two  poems  which  have  been  published 
as  his ;  but  he  thinks  altogether  without  ground. 

10.  Tillemont  says,  '  that"  many  manuscripts  ascribe  to 

senatu,  ipsum  sibi  gulam  succidisse.  Hunc  ergo  suscitatum  Deus  mittet  regem 
digiium  digriis,  et  Christum  qualem  meruerunt  Judsei.  ib.  p.  420.  D. 

"  Id.  lb.  p.  415.  E.  "  Multi  putant  enm  Eliam  esse,  aut 

Elizseum,  aut  Moysen.  Sed  utrique  mortui  sunt.  Hieremiae  autem  mors  noa 
invenitur,  quia  omnes  veteres  nosfri  tradiderunt  ilium  esse  Hieremiam.  p.  418. 
D.  »  Ubi  supr.  p.  446.  ""  Ap.  Bib.  P.  P.  ib.  p.  414. 

y  Marcion,  Praxeas,  Sabellius,  Valentinus,  et  cseteri,  usque  ad  Cataphrygas, 
temporibus  suis  aVictorino  Petavionensi,  et  Zephyrino  Urbico,  et  a  Tertulliano 
Carthaginensi,  et  ab  aliis  adsertoribus  ecclesiaj  catholicae  superati  sunt.  Optat. 
1.  i.  cap.  9. 

^  Tnbuuntur  autem  ei  carmina  duo,  quae  habentur  in  sacrorum  poetarum 
collectione  Fabriciana.  De  Jesu  Christo  Deo  et  Homine,  unum.  Alterititulus 
ast,  Lignum  Vitae.  Sed  conjectura  plane  inceria,  et,  ut  mihi  videtur,  falsa. 
Cav.  in  Victor.  H.  L.  T.  i.  p.  147.  Oxon.  "  Mem.  E.  T.  v.  P.  ii. 

p.  218,  219.  S.  Victorin. 


VicTouiNus.    A.  D.  290.  169 

'  St.  Victoriiuis  of"  Pettaw  a  hymn  upon  the  cross,  or  upon 
'  Easter,  or  Baptism  ;  Avhicli''  is  among-  St.  Cyprian's  works. 
'  It  lias  been  observed  that  '  Bede  cites  it  as  Victorinus's.  It 
'  is  a  rine  poem,  and  perhaj)s  too  tine  for  him.  We  thence 
'  perceive  that  many  persons  pretended  to  embrace  tlie 
'  christian  religion,  who  did  not  persevere  untd  baptism.' 
This  is  but  a  short  poem  ;  I  do  not  intend  to  quote  any  thing- 
out  of  it. 

11.  Tillemont  adds,  '  that''  the  poem  against  the  Mar- 
'  cionites  among-  the  works  of  Tertullian,  may  be  ascribed 
'  to  Victorinus  :  and  this  piece  ansAvers  well  enough  to  what 
'  Jerom  says  of  Victorinus's  small  skill  in  the  Latin  tongue.' 
This  piece  is  of  some  considerable  length. 

Indeed  what  Jerom  says  of  our  author  might  dispose  us 
not  to  expect  from  him  any  Latin  poetry :  however,  Bede 
has  actually  quoted  some  verses  as  his.  And  since  it  is 
allowed  that  Victorinus  did  once  teach  rhetoric,  possibly 
he  might  think  fit  sometimes  to  exercise  his  pen  in  verse  as 
well  as  prose:  but  when  he  writes  Latin  verse,  we  are  not 
to  expect  that  his  style  should  appear  very  beautiful. 

This  poem  is  joined  with  Tertullian's  works,  but  fully 
shown,  by*^  Rigaltius  in  his  preface  to  it,  not  to  be  his  :  it 
stands  there*^  with  this  title,  Five  Books  of  an  uncertain 
Author  against  Marcion.  Pearson^  quotes  it  as  a  piece 
whose  age  is  unknown  ;  but  yet,  as  it  seems,  not  reckoning- 
it  to  have  been  written  till  after  the  middle  of  the  fifth  cen- 
tury. From''  Cave  we  understand  thatAllix  supposed  this 
work  was  not  published  till  after  the  time  of  Jerom.  Bull' 
asserted  it  to  be  a  genuine  work  of  Tertullian  ;  which  in- 
duced Tillemont  to  say,  '  that''  by  many  instances  it  may 
'  be  shown,  a  critical  skill  in  authors  was  not  Bull's  talent.' 

I  certainly  do  not  think  that  this  poem  was  written  by 
Tertullian  ;  nor  do  I  perceive  that  we  have  sufficient  evi- 
dence to  ascribe  it  to  our  Victorinus :  but  as  it  is  of  some 


"  De  Cruce  Domini,  p.  4.  App.Cypr.  Oxon.  1682. 

•^  Qua  ductus  opinione  Victorinus  Pictaviensis,  antistes  ecclesiae,  de  Golgotha 
scribens,  ita  inchoat,  &c.     Bed.  de  Locis  sanct.  c.  2.  p.  317.  Cantabr.  1722. 

•^  Tillem.  ib.  p.  219.  «  Apud  Tertullian.  p.  796.  Paris,  1634. 

'  Incerti  auctoris  ad  versus  Marcionem  Libri  quinque.  lb.  p.  797. 

•>'  Primus  inter  Latinos  qui  Pium  sue  loco  posuit,  erat  Prosper  in  Chronico  a 
Labbeo  edito.  Quem  secutus  est  Catalogus  tertius  Pseudo-TertuUianus,  cujus 
aetas  ignota  est,  lib.  iii.  Pears.  0pp.  Post.  p.  266,  267. 

''  Doctissimus  Allix  libros  adversum  Marcionem  post  Hieronymi  aeviim 
natos  arbitratur.     Cav.  in  TertuUiano,  Hist.  L.  T.  i.  p.  93.  f. 

'  Def.  Fid.  Nic.  Sect.  iii.  cap.  10.  n.  xix.  p.  217. 

■^  On  pourroit  montrer  par  divers  exemples,  que  la  critique  des  ouvrages 
n'est  pas  le  fort  de  Bullus.     Mem.  Ec.  T.  iii.  P.  i.  p.  564. 


170  Credibility  uf  the  Gospel  History. 

considerable  length,  and  I  do  not  now  think  of  a  better  place 
for  it,  I  shall  here  make  some  extracts,  and  take  notice  of 
several  things  in  it. 

1.  This  writer  has  a  catalogue  of  the  early'  bishops  of 
Rome,  among  whom  is  Clement;  who,  he  says,  was  ac- 
quainted with  the  apostles,  or  apostolical  men. 

2.  He  mentions™  Hennas,  author  of  the  Shepherd,  whom 
he  placeth  in  the  time  of  pope  Pius. 

3.  He  takes  notice  of  divers  ancient"  heretics. 

4.  Speaking  of  Isaiah  and  Jeremiah,  he  says  that"  the  for- 
mer was  sawn  asunder,  and  that  the  latter  never  died. 

5.  His  canon  of  the  Old  Testament p  seems  to  have  been 
much  the  same  with  that  of  the  Jews  and  protestants. 

6.  He  often  speaksi  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament,  and 
of  their  entire  agreement  together;  and  that  the  law  and 
the  prophets  and  the  apostles  of  Christ  say  one  and  the 
same  thing. 


'  Maxima  Roma  Linum  priraiim  considere  jussit : 

Post  quern  Cletus  et  ipse  gregem  suscepit  ovilis 

Hiijus  Anacletus  successor  sorte  locatus ; 

Quem  sequitur  Clemens :  is  apostolicis  bene  notus.     Adv.  Marcion   ' 
iii.  p.  803.  ap.  Tertullian. 
■"  Post  hunc  deinde  Pius,  Hennas  cui  germine  frater, 

Angelicas  pastor,  quia  tradita  verba  locutus.  ib.  p.  803. 
"  Haec  vobis  per  Marcionem,  Cerdone  raagistro. 

Namque  Valentino  Deus  est  insanus. 


Tantos  esse  deos  Basilidem  credere  jussit, 
Quantos  et  dies  annus  liabet. 

Marcus  per  numeros  argumentatus  acute.  1.  i.  p.  798. 
Advenit  Romam  Cerdo — 1.  iii.  p.  803. 

Sub  quo  [Aniceto]  Marcion  hie  venieos,  nova  Pontica  pestis.  ibid. 
'  Isaias,  locuples  vates, 

Quera  populus  sectum  ligno,  sine  labe  repertum, 
Immentum,  demens  crudeli  morte  peremit. 
Sanctus  Hieremias,  quem  gentibus  esse  prophetara 
JEtema  virtus  jussit 

Nulla  morte  virum  constat,  neque  caede  peremtum.  l.ii.  p.  802. 
Osea,  Amos,  et  Michaea-s  Joel,  Abdia,  Jonas, 
Atque  Naum,  Abacuc,  Sophonias,  Aggaeusque, 
Zacharias  vim  passus,  et  angelus  ipse  Malachim,  &c.  ib.  et  p.  803.  in. 
Adversum  sese  duo  Testamenta  sonare, 

Contra  prophetarum  Domini  committere  verba.  1.  ii.  in.  p.  799. 
Sic  igitur  lex,  et  miri  cecinere  prophetae 

Sic  et  apostolicae  voces  testantur  ubique. 

Nee  quidquam  veteris  non  est  novo  denicivie junctum.  1.  iv.  p.  80-1.  a.  f. 


VicTORiNus.     A.  D.  290.  171 

7.  He  distinctly  mentioDs  the  foiir"^  evangelists,  Matthew, 
Mark,  Luke,  and  John. 

8.  lie  speaks  of  the  sages  that*  came  to  Jerusalem  after 
our  Saviour's  birth ;  and  of  the  star  that  conducted  them, 
as  recorded  in  Matt,  ii ;  and  he  seems  to  have  thought  that 
they  were  priests. 

9.  He*  speaks  of  John  the  baptist,  our  Lord's  forerunner, 
and  calls  him  apostle. 

10.  He"  enumerates  many  of  our  Lord's  miracles.  I  omit 
other  references  to  the  gospels,  for  the  sake  of  brevity. 

11.  This  author  in  his  poem  expressly,  and  by  name, 
quotes  several  of  St.  Paul's  epistles,  and  plainly  refers  to 
divers  others. 

12.  He  also  often''  refers  to  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews; 
and  probably  esteemed  it  an  epistle  of  St.  Paul. 

13.  He  likewise'"  frequently  quotes  the  book  of  the  Reve- 
lation, and  calls  it  John's,  and  John's  the  disciple  or  apostle 
of  Christ. 

14.  1  need  not  take  any  thing  more  from  this  unknown 
author  of  the  five  books  against  Marcion :  from  >vhat  has 
been  transcribed,  it  may  be  reckoned  undoubted   that  he 

'  Cujus  facta,  simul  dicta  conjuncta,  fideles 

nil,  Matthaeus,  Marcus,  Lucasque,  Joannes, 

Conscripsere,  mera,  non  extera  verba  locuti, 

Spiritu  sancta  Dei,  tanto  prsesente  raagistro.  I.  ii.  p.  799.  b. 
^  Templa  sacerdotes  linquunt,  stellae  quoque  ductu 

Mirantur  Dominum,  tantum  se  cernere  partum.  1.  i.  p.  797.  a. 
'  Quem  visum  Joannes  baptismi  primus  apertor, 

Et  vatum  socius,  necnon  et  apostolus  ingens,  &c.  1.  ii.  p.  800.  a.  in. 
■  In  vinum  vertuntur  aquae,  memorabile  visu. 

Lumina  redduntur  caecis,  jussuque  trementes 

Daemones  expulsi  clamant,  Christumque  fatentur. 

Omnia  sanantur  verbo  jam  tabida  membra. 

Jam  graditur  claudus,  surdus  spem  protinus  audit. 

Dat  dextrara  mancus,  loquitur  magnalia  rautus. 

Fit  mare  tranquillura  jussu,  ventique  quiescunt.  1.  i.  p.  797.  b. 
'  Sanguine  nam  vituli  populum,  simul  omnia  vasa, 

Atque  sacerdotes,  et  scripta  volumina  legis 

Sparsit  aqua  mixto. 1.  i.  p.  804.  a.  Conf.  Hebr.  ix.  19. 

Hoc  Dominus  noster,  qui  nos  sua  morte  redemit, 

Extra  castra,  volens,  populi  vim  passus  iniqui.  ib.  Conf.  Hebr.  xiii.  12. 
et  passim. 
*  Foederis  hinc  etiam  novi  inenarrabilis  auctor 

Discipulus  Joannes  animas  pro  nomine  passas 

Testatur  tali  sese  vidisse  sub  ara, 

Clamantes  Dei  vindictam  pro  caede  potentis.  1,  iv.  p.  804.  b.  Conf. 
Apoc.  cap.  vi.  9. 

Sic  quoque  Joannes,  sic  pandit  Spiritus  illi, 

Totnumero  solio  senionbus  insuper  albis.  ib.  p.  805.  a.  Conf.  Apoc. 
cap.  iv.  4. 


172  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

received  all  the  books  of  the  New  Testament,  generally  re- 
ceived by  christians,  and  esteemed  by  them  of  authority  : 
nor  does  there  appear  any  sign  of  his  receiving  any  other 
christian  writings  in  that  manner. 

IV.  We  return  to  Yictorinus  himself;  to  whom  I  intend 
to  produce  some  more  testimonies  chiefly  taken  from  Jerom  : 
my  readers  will  not  be  displeased  to  see  them,  as  they  will 
help  them  to  some  knowledge  of  this  good  man's  character; 
which  otherwise  we  could  never  be  acquainted  with,  since 
the  loss  of  the  greatest  part  of  his  works. 

We  saw  in  the  passage  transcribed  from  Jerom's  Catalogue, 
at  the  beginning  of  this  chapter  he  said  that  '  Victorinus 
'  understood  Greek  better  than  Latin  ;  and  that  his  works, 
'  though  valuable  for  the  sense,  were  mean  as  to  the  style.' 
In  another  place  he  says, '  that  ^Victorinus,  who  was  crowned 
'  with  a  glorious  martyrdom,  was  not  able  to  express  his 
'  thoughts.'  In  that  place  Jerom  passeth  his  judgment  upon 
several  other  Latin  writers  of  the  church  ;  such  as  Tertullian, 
Cyprian,  Lactantius,  Arnobius,  and  Hilary.  In  his  letter 
to  Magnus  he  says,  '  thaty  thougli  the  writings  of  the  martyr 
'  Victorinus  are  not  learned,  they  show  a  good  will  to  learn- 
*  ing.'  In  another^  place  he  calls  Victorinus  a  martyr  of 
blessed  memory,  who  could  say  with  the  apostle  :  "  though 
I  be  rude  in  speech,  yet  not  in  knowledge :"  2  Cor.  xi.  6. 
He  also  informs  us  that*  Victorinus,  as  well  as  many  others, 
made  great  use  of  Origen's  Commentaries  upon  the  scrip- 
tures :  he  speaks  of  ^  this  again  ;  at  the  same  time  giving- 
Victorinus  the  character  of  a  man  of  renowned  integrity. 
Once  more,  Victorinus''  is  mentioned  with  divers  others,  who 
are  represented  as  very  eminent  persons,  or  pillars  of  the 

"  [nclyto  Victorinus  martyrio  coronatus,  quod  intelligit,  eloqui  non  potest. 
Ad  Paulin.  Ep.  49.  [al.  13.]  T.  iv.  P.  iii  p.  567.  m. 

y  Victorino  martyri  in  libris  suis  licet  desit  eruditio,  tamen  non  deest  erudi- 
tionis  voluntas.  Ep.  83.  [al.  84.]  ib.  p.  656.  f. 

*  Caetenmi  apud  Latinos  grande  silentium  est,  praeter  sanctae  memoriae 
martyrem  Victorinum,  qui  cum  apostolo  dicere  poterat :  Etsi  imperitus  sermone, 
non  tamen  scientia.  In  Is.  Pr.  p.  3.  f.  *  Taceo  de  Victormo  Picta- 

bionensi,  et  caeteris,  qui  Origenem  in  explanatione  duntaxat  scripturamm  se- 
quuti  sunt,  et  expresserunt.     Ad  Vigilant.  Ep.  36.  [al.  75.]  p.  279.  sub  fin. 

''  Nee  disertiores  sumus  Hilario,  nee  fideliores  Victorino,  qui  ejus  [Origenis] 
tractatus,  non  ut  interpretes,  sed  ut  auctores  proprii  operis,  transtulerunt.  Ad. 
Pam.  et  Ocean.  Ep.  41.  [al.  65.]  p.  346.  in. 

*=  Si  auctoritatem  suo  operi  praestruebat, — habuit  in  promptu  Hilarium  Con- 
fessorem, — habuit  Ambrosium,  cujus  pene  oinnes  libri  hujus  sermonibus  pleni 
sunt :  et  martyrem  Victorinum,  qui  simplicitatem  suam  in  eo  probat,  dum  nulli 
molitur  insidias.  De  his  omnibus  tacet,  et,  quasi  columnis  ecclesiae  praeter- 
missis,  me  solum  pulicem  et  nihili  hominem  consectatur.  Adv.  Ruf,  1.  i.  p. 
351. 


VicTORiNus.     A.  D.  290.  173 

churcli :  where  the  martyr  Victorimis  is  again  distinguished 
for  his  unconinion  simplicity. 

V.  I  sliall  make  another  short  article  of  this  writer's 
opinions. 

1.  He  was  a  millenarian  ;  as  Jerom  says,  in  his*^  chapter 
concerning  Papias,  and  in'  his  Commentary  upon  Ezekiel. 

2.  It  was  formerly  observed  that*^  the  author  of  the  Com- 
mentary upon  the  Revelation  supposed  that  Nero  should  be 
raised  up  from  the  dead  to  be  antichrist.  Since,  therefore, 
this  expected  antichrist  would »  be  the  Messiah  and  king  of 
the  Jews,  we  may  conclude  that  this  writer  did  not  suppose 
the  famous  antichrist  would  be  an  erroneous,  or  heretical  and 
imperious  domineering  christian ;  but  a  man  of  another 
religion,  particularly  the  Jewish  religion.  Consequently, 
since  the  author  likewise''  understood  the  man  of  sin,  and 
son  of  perdition,  in  2  Thess.  ii.  3,  to  be  the  same  as  antichrist, 
he  must  have  supposed  the  apostle  there  to  speak  of  a  man 
who  is  a  Jew  by  religion  at  least. 

Mr.  La  Roche  published  in  his  New  Memoirs  of  Litera- 
ture,' a  curious  dissertation  upon  antichrist ;  where  the 
author  argues  that  the  Jewish  people  were  antichrist ;  and 
largely  explains  2  Thess.  ii.  1 — 12.  And  there  are  in  St. 
Cyril  of  Alexandria"^  many  passages  favouring  that  sup- 
position. 

I  shall  here  insert  in  the'  margin,  for  the  sake  of  inquisi- 

^  Hie  dicitur  mille  annorum  Judaicam  edidisse  Sevrepioinv  quam  sequuti 
sunt  Iienseus, — et  caeteri  qui  post  resurrectionem  aiunt  in  came  cum  Sanctis 
Dominura  regnatumm.  TertuUianus  quoque  in  libro  de  spe  fidelium,  et  Victo- 
rinus  Petabionensis,  et  Lactantius,  hac  opinione  ducuntur.  De  V.  I.  cap.  18. 

*  Quod  et  multi  nostrorum,  et  praecipue  Tertulliani  liber,  qui  inscribitur  de 
Spe  Fidelium,  et  Lactantii  Institutionum  volumen  septimum  pollicetur,  et  Vic- 
torini  Petabionensis  episcopi  crebrae  expositiones.  Hier.  in  Ezech.  cap.  36.  T. 
iii.  p.  952.  in.  f  See  p.  167. 

8  Et  bestia,  quam  vidisti,  inquit,  de  septeni  est ;  quoniam  ante  istos  reges 
Nero  regnavit. — Hunc  ergo  suscitatum  Deus  mittet  regem  dignum  dignis,  et 
Christum  qualem  meruerunt  Judsei.  Et  quoniam  aliud  nomen  allaturus  est, 
aliam  etiam  vitam  institurus,  ut  sic  eum  tamquam  Christum  excipiant  Judaei. 
Denique  et  sanctos  non  ad  idola  colenda  revocatunis  est,  sed  ad  circumcisionem 
colendam.     Victorin.  ap.  B.  P.  P.  T.  iii.  p.  420.  D. 

''  Et  Paulus  contra  antichristum  ad  Thessalonicenses  ait :  Quern  Dominus 
interficiet  spiritu  oris  sui.     Id.  ib.  p.  415.  C.  '  Vol.  iv.  p.  176 — 200. 

"  Vid.  Cyril.  A.  Coram,  in  Zach.  T.  iii.  p.  769.  C.  D.  p.  770.  C.  D.  p. 
773.  D.  Comm.  in  Joann.  T.  iv.  p.  262.  A.  B.  Vid.  et.  T.  v.  p.  370.  E.  Et 
Conf.  Dodw.  Diss.  i.  in  Iren.  n.  xiii. 

'  Unde  ilium  quidam  deliri  credunt  esse  translatum  ac  vivum  reservatum, 
Sibylla  dicente,  matricidam  profugum  a  finibus  esse  venturum,  ut,  quia  primus 
persecutus  est,  novjssimus  persequatur,  et  antichristi  praecedat  adventum.  Lac 
tant.  vel  Caecil.  de  Mort.  Persec.  cap.  2.  Caetenim  ait  nobis, — Neronem  in 
Occidentali  plaga  regibus  subactis  decem  imperaturum. — Ab  antichristo  vero 
Orientale  imperium  esse  capiendum  :  qui  quidem  sedem  et  caput  regni  Hiero- 


174  Credibiliiij  of  the  Gospel  History. 

live  readers,  passages  of  some  other  ancient  christians  beside 
Victorinus,  who  speaks  of  Nero's  appearing-  as  antichrist,  or 
his  forerunner ;  for  they  express  themselves  differently.  The 
author  of  the  Computation  of  Easter,  of  ""  whom  I  gave  an 
account  formerly,  did  not  suppose  that"  antichrist  would 
be  a  christian. 

3.  Helvidius"  alleged  Victorinus  as  favouring  his  opinion, 
that  Mary  had  children  by  Joseph  after  the  birth  of  Jesus: 
but  Jerom  affirms  that  Victorinus  did  not  understand  by  the 
Lord's  brethren,  mentioned  in  the  gospels,  sons  of  Mary,  but 
in  general  relations  or  kindred. 

VI.  We  are  now  to  observe  Victorinus's  testimony  to  the 
scriptures,  chiefly  to  the  books  of  the  New  Testament :  and 
the  two  pieces  I  shall  make  use  of  are  the  Commentary  upon 
the  Revelation,  and  the  Fragment  published  by  Cave, 
between  both  which  there  is  a  remarkable  agreement. 

1.  In  the  Fragment,  discoursing  on  the  fourth  day's  work, 
he  observes,  beside  other  things,  that?  there  are  four  living 
creatures  before  the  throne  of  God,  four  gospels,  four  rivers 
in  paradise.  St.  John's  gospel  is  here  quoted  in  this  manner : 
'  The'5  evangelist  Jolin  thus  speaks.  "  In  the  beginning  was 
'  the  Word,  and  the  Word  was  with  God,  and  the  Word  was 
'  God."  ' 

2.  In  the  Commentary  upon  the  Revelation  he  speaks  of 
the  gospels  in  this  manner:  '  The'^  four  living  creatures 

Eolymam  esset  habiturus ;  ab  illo  urbem  et  templum  esse  reparandum.  lllius 
earn  persecutionem  futuram  esse,  ut  Christum  Dominura  cogat  negari,  se  potius 
Christum  esse  confirmans;  omnesque  secundum  legem  circumcidi  jubeat. 
Sulpic.  Sever.  Dial.  2.  cap.  ult.  Vid.  et  ejusd.  Sacr.  Hist.  1.  ii.  c.  28  et  29. 
Unde  et  muhi  nostrorum  putant  ob  saevitiae  et  turpitudinis  magnitudinem 
Neronem  antichristum  fore.  Hieron.  in  Dan.  xi.  27.  Op.  T.  iii.  p.  1129.  Con. 
Aug.  de  Siv.  Dei,  1.  xx.  c.  19.  et  Comm.  Instr.  n.  xli. 

■"  See  p.  72,  73.  "  In  quibus  diebus  ille  antichristusmagnam 

faciei  vastationem.  Et  ideo  tunc  nemo  christianorum  poterit  Deo  sacrificium 
offerre.     De  Pascha  Comput.  ap.  Cypr.  in  App.  p.  G8.  Ed.  Oxon. 

"  Sed  quoniam — Tertullianum  in  testimonium  vocat,  et  Victorini  Peta- 
bionensis  episcopi  verba  proponit:  Et  de  TertiiUiano  quidem  nihil  amplius  dico, 
quam  ecclesiae  hominem  non  fuisse.  De  Victorino  autem  id  assero,  quod  et 
de  evangelistis,  fratres  eum  dixisse  Domini,  non  filios  Marise  :  fratres  autem  eo 
sensu,  quem  superius  exposuimus,  propinquitate,  non  natura.  Adv.  Helvid. 
T.  iv.  p.  141.  1  Ecce  quatuor  animalia  ante  thronura  Dei, 

quatuor  evangelia,  quatuor  flumina  in  paradise  fluentia.  Victorin.  de  Fabrica 
Mundi,  ap.  Cav.  II.  L.  T.  i.  p.  148.  a. 

1  Joannes  evangelista  sic  dicit:  In  principio  ernt  Verbum,  et  Verbum  erat 
apud  Deum,  etDeus  erat  Verbum,  &c.  ib.  p.  149.  a. 

"■  Quatuor  animaha,  quatuor  sunt  evangelia.  Primum,  inquit,  simile  leoni, 
secundum  simile  vitulo,  tertium  simile  homini,  quailum  simile  aquilae  volanti. 
— Animalia  igitur  quod  differentia  vultibus  sunt,  lianc  habet  rationem.  Simile 
leoni  animal,  Evangelium  secundum  Marcum,  in  quo  vox  leonis  in  oremo 
nigientis  auditur :  Vox  clamantis  in  deserto,  Parate  viam  Domini.     Hominis 


ViCTORiNus.     A.  D.  290.  175 

(see  Rev.  iv.  C,  7.]  are  tlie  four  g-ospels :  "  The  first,"  says 
he,  "  was  like  a  lion,  the  second  was  like  a  calf,  the  thirri 
like  a  man,  and  the  fourth  like  a  Hying  eagle."  These  living- 
creatures  have  diflerent  faces,  which  have  a  meaning :  for 
the  living-  creature  like  a  lion  denotes  Mark,  in  whom  the 
voice  of  a  lion  roaring  in  the  wilderness  is  heard  :  "  A  voice 
crying'  in  the  w  ilderness,  Prepare  the  May  of  the  Lord." 
Matthew,  who  has  the  resemblance  of  a  man,  shows  the  family 
of  Mary,  from  whom  Christ  took  flesh  ;  and,  while  he  com- 
putes his  genealogy  from  Abraham  to  David  and  Joseph, 
he  speaks  of  him  as  a  man  ;  therefore  his  preaching  is  repre- 
sented by  the  face  of  a  man.  Luke,  who  relates  the  priest- 
hood of  Zacharias  offering  sacrifice  for  the  people,  and  the 
angel  that  appeared  to  him,  because  of  the  priesthood  and 
the  mention  of  the  sacrifice,  has  the  resemblance  of  a  calf. 
The  evangelist  John,  like  an  eagle  with  stretched-out  wings 
mounting-  on  high,  speaks  of  (he  Word  of  God.  The  evan- 
gelist Mark  commences  thus :  "  The  beginning  of  the  gospel 
of  Jesus  Christ,  as  it  is  written  in  Isaiah  the  prophet ;  the 
voice  of  one  crying  in  the  wilderness :"  this  is  the  face  of  a 
lion.  Matthew  says  :  "  The  book  of  the  generation  of  Jesus 
Christ,  the  son  of  David,  the  son  of  Abraham:"  this  is  the 
face  of  a  man.  But  Luke  says  :  "  There  was  a  priest,  named 
Zacharias,  of  the  course  of  Abia;  and  his  wife  was  of  the 
(laughters  of  Aaron  :"  this  is  the  form  of  a  calf.  John  begins 
thus  :  "  In  the  beginning  was  the  Word,  the  same  was  in 
the  beginning"  Avith  God :"  this  is  the  similitude  of  a  flying- 
eagle.' 

Thus  in  this  passage  we  have  the  four  evangelists,  and 
the  beginnings  of  their  several  gospels,  or  at  least  what  is  near 
the  beginning  of  each  of  them.  This  passage,  therefore,  if 
it  be  really  Victorinus's,  as  I  see  no  reason  to  doubt,  is  very 
valuable. 

3.  He  speaks  of  the  time  and  of  the  occasion  of  St.  John's 

autem  figura  Matthaeus  enititiir  enuntiare  nobis  genus  Mariae,  unde  caraem 
accepit  Christus.  Ergo  dum  enumerat  ab  Abraham  usque  ad  David,  et  usque 
ad  Joseph,  tamquam  de  homine  locutus  est.  Ideo  praedicatio  ejus  hominis 
effigiem  ostendit.  Lucas  sacerdotium  Zachariae  offerentis  hostiara  pro  populo, 
et  apparentem  sibi  angeUim  dum  enarrat,  propter  sacerdotium,  et  hostiae  con- 
scriptionem,  vitiiH  imaginationem  tenet.  Joannes  evangelista,  aquilae  similis, 
assumtis  pennis  ad  altiora  festinans,  de  verbo  Dei  disputat.  Marcus  evange- 
lista sic  incipit:  Initium  evangelii  Jesu  ChrLsti,  sicut  scriptum  estinlsaia  pro- 
pheta,  Vox  clamantis  in  deserto.  Haec  est  leonis  effigies.  Matthaeus :  Liber 
generationis  Jesu  Christi,  filii  David,  fihi  Abraham.  Haec  est  facies  hominis. 
Lucas  autem  dicit :  Fuit  saeerdos  nomine  Zacharias,  de  vice  Abia,  et  mulier 
e^  de  filiabus  Aaron.  Haec  est  imago  vituli.  Joannes  sic  incipit :  in  principio 
erat  Verbum,  hoc  erat  in  principio  apud  Deum.  Haec  est  similitudo  aquilae 
volantis.  Victorin.  Coinm.  in  Apoc.  ap.  Bib.  P.  P.  T.  iii.p.  416,  F.  G.  H, 


176  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

writing-  his  gospel :  it  was  written  after  he  had  been  con- 
fined in  Patnios,  and  to  confute  and  overthrow  heresies  then 
sprung  up.  '  By*  the  reed  like  unto  a  rod,  which  was  given 
to  him,  (see  Rev.  xi.  1,)  that  he  might  measure  the  temple 
of  God  and  the  altar,  and  them  that  worship  therein,  is  sig- 
iiiried  the  power,  which  when  set  at  liberty  he  exhibited  to 
the  churches;  for  he  afterwards  wrote  his  gospel.  Valenti- 
nus,  and  Cerinthus,  and  Ebion,  and  others  of  the  school  of 
Satan,  \^'ere  spread  abroad  over  the  world,  all  men  [or  all  the 
churches]  from  the  neighbouring-  provinces  came  to  him, 
and  earnestly  entreated  him  to  put  down  his  testimony  in 
writing.' 

4.  '  And'  we  read  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  how,  when 
he  was  discoursing  Avith  his  disciples,  he  was  taken  up  into 
heaven.'  See  Acts  i.  9 — 11.  Words  of  the  Acts  are"  else- 
where quoted  without  naming  the  book. 

5.  In  the  Fragment  published  by  Cave,  in  his  observa- 
tions upon  the  seventh  day,  Avhen  God  rested  from  all  his 
labours,  among  other  remarkable  instances  of  that  remark- 
able number,  he  mentions  this:  '  And^   seven  churches  in 

*  Paul.'     Cave  says,  '  Perhaps   it  should  be   in  the  Apo- 

*  calypse :'  but  the  author  means  the  seven  churches  which 
have  epistles  sent  to  them  in  the  collection  of  St.  Paul's 
epistles.  This  will  be  apparent  to  all  from  a  passage  in  the 
Commentary  upon  the  Revelation ;  where  speaking-  of  the 
seven  churches  mentioned  in  that  book,  to  which  likewise 
John  sent  epistles,  he  says  :  '  Thaf  in  the  whole  world  are 
seven  churches;  and  that  those  churches  called  seven  are 
one  catholic  church,  Paul  has  taught :  and  that  he  might 
keep  to  it,  he  did  not  exceed  the  number  of  seven  churches; 

*  Novissimam  arundinem  similevn  virgae,  ut  metiretnr  Dei  templum,  et  aram, 
et  adorantes  in  ea,  potestatem  dicit,  quam  dimisstis  postea  exhibuit  ecclesiis. 
Nam  et  evangelium  postea  scripsit.  Cum  essent  Valentinus,  et  Cerinthus,  et 
Ebion,  et  caeteri  scholae  Satanee  diifusi  per  orbem,  convenerunt  ad  ilium  de 
finitimis  provmciis  omnes,  et  eompulerunt,  ut  ipse  testimonium  conscriberet. 
In  Apoc.  ib.  p.  418.  C.  '  Et  nos  legimus  in  Actis  Apostolorum, 

quemadmodum  loquenseum  discipulis  suis,  raptus  est  in  cceIos.  ib.  p.  419.  A. 

"  Sicut  Petru-s  ad  Judaeos  exclamavit :  Dextera  Dei  exaltatus  acceptum  a 
Patre  Spiritum  etTudit,  hunc  qiiem  videtis.  (Act.  ii.  33.)  ib.  p.  415.  D. 

"  Septem  candelabra  aurea, — septem  mulieres  apud  Isaiam,  septem  ecclesiae 
apud  Paulum.  de  Fabr.  Mund.  ap.  Cav.  H.  L.  p.  149.  a. 

"  In  toto  orbe  septem  ccclesias  omnes  esse,  et  septem  nominatas  unam  esse 
catholicam,  Paulus  docuit  primo:  Quod  ut  servaret  ipse,  et  ipsum  septem 
ecclesiaioim  non  excessit  numerum.  Sed  scripsit  ad  Romanos,  ad  Corinthios, 
ad  Galatas,  ad  Ephesios,  ad  Philippenses,  ad  Colossenses,  ad  Thessalonicenses. 
Postea  singularibus  personis  scripsit,  ne  excederet  modum  septem  ecclesiarum. 
Et  in  brevi  contrahens  prasdicationem  suam,  ad  Timotheum  ait :  Ut  scias, 
qualiter  dcbeas  conversari  in  ecclesia  Dei  vivi.     In  Apoc.  p.  415.  D.  E. 


VicTORiNus.     A.  D.  290.  177 

but  wrote  to  the  Roiuans,  to  the  Coriiifhiaiis,  to  the  Galatians, 
to  the  Ephesians,  to  the  Philippians,  to  the  Colossiaus,  to  the 
Thessah>iiians.  Afterwards  he  wrote  to  particular  persons, 
that  he  might  not  exceed  tlie  measure  of  seven  churches  : 
and,  contracting  his  doctrine  into  a  litile  compass,  he  says 
to  Timothy:  "  Tliat  thou  mayest  know  liow  thou  oughtest 
to  behave  thyseltin  the  church  of  the  living  God." 

The  reader  cannot  but  recoWect  here  what  we  formerly 
saw  of  the  like  kind  in^  St.  Cyj)rian. 

Here  we  have  a  very  valuable  testimony  to  St.  Paul's 
epistles,  like  to  that  which  we  sa>v  before  to  the  gospels. 
It  may  be  hence  justly  concluded  that  he  received  thirteen 
epistles  of  the  apostle  Paul  ;  that  is,  the  second,  as  well  as 
the  first,  to  the  Corinthians,  and  to  they  Thessalonians,  and 
all  his  epistles  to  particular  persons  ;  the  first  and  second 
to  Timothy,  the  epistles  to  Titus  and  Philemon. 

6.  But  Victorinus  makes  no  mention  of  the  epistle  to  the 
Hebrews  :  and  in  what  he  says  of  the  rest  seems  entirely  to 
exclude  it  from  the  number  of  St.  Paul's  epistles.  Never- 
theless, there  are  in  the  Commentary  upon  the  Revelation 
some  passag-es  which  seem  to  contain  allusions  to  this  epistle  : 
I  think  they  deserve  to  be  taken  notice  of. 

1.  '  For'  our  prayers  ascend  to  heaven.  As  therefore 
heaven  is  denoted  by  the  golden  altar,  which  was  the  inner- 
most, (for  even  the  priests,  Avho  had  the  anointing,  entered 
only  once  in  the  year  to  the  golden  altar,  the  Holy  Ghost 
this  signifying-,  that  Christ  should  do  this  once  for  all :)  in 
like  manner,'  &c.     Compare  Hebr.  ix.  7,  8,  12. 

2.  Again  :  '  For*  Moses  himself  taking  moist  wool,  and 
the  blood  of  a  calf,  and  Avater,  sprinkled  all  the  people,  say- 
ing: This  is  the  blood  of  the  Testament,  which  God  has 
enjoined  unto  you.'  See  Hebr.  ix.  19,  20;  and  compare 
Exod.  xxiv.  8,  9. 

I  have  translated  the  former  part  of  this  passage  nearly 
according  to  the  Latin  original ;  but  I  suppose  that  to  be 

■"'  See  p.  41.  y  He  has  more  than  once  quoted  the  second  epistle 

to  the  Thesfcalonians.  Et  Paulus  contra  antichristum  ad  Thessalonicenses  ait : 
Qnem  Dominus  interficiet  spiritu  oris  sui.  [2  Thess.  ii.  8.]  in  Apoc.  p.  415. 
C  Et  Paulus  apostolus  contestatur.  Ait  enim  ad  Thessalonicenses:  Qui 
nunc  tenet,  teneat,  &c.  [2  Thess.  ii.  7.]  ib.  p.  418.  F. 

^  Utique  ad  coelum  ascendant  orationes.  Sicut  igitur  coelum  intelligitur 
araaurea,  quae  erat  interior;  (nam  et  sacerdotes  semel  in  anno  introibant,  qui 
habebant  chrisma,  ad  aram  auream,  significante  Spiritu  Sancto  Christum  hoc 
semel  facturum;)  sic  et — Victor,  in  Ap.  ib.  p.  418.  B. 

"  Nam  et  ip?e  tunc  legis  de  populo,  accepta  lana  succida,  [forte  coccinea,] 
et  sanguine  vituli,  et  aqua,  aspersit  populum  universum,  diceas :  Hie  sanguis 
testamenti  ejus,  quod  mandavit  ad  vos.  ib.  p.  417.  E. 
vol..    III.  N 


1 78  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

corrupted  :  perhaps  it  should  be  scarlet,  instead  of  moist  or 
■\vot  wool :  and  some  other  emendations  might  be  thought  of, 

3.  Presently  after  the  author  says:  '  No"^  law  is  called  a 
testament :  nor  is  any  thing  else  called  a  testament,  but  what 
men  make  who  are  about  to  die:  and  whatever  is  within  a 
testament  is  concealed  until  the  day  of  death.'  See  Hebr. 
ix.  16, 17. 

Whether  these  will  be  allowed  to  be  allusions  to  the  epis- 
tle to  the  Hebrews ;  and,  if  they  are,  w  hether  they  can  be 
sufficient,  considering-  what  he  said  before,  to  afford  an  argu- 
ment that  it  Avas  of  authority  with  this  writer;  I  cannot  say» 
We  proceed. 

7.  I  have  not  observed  in  the  remains  of  this  author  any 
quotations  of  the  epistle  of  St.  James. 

8.  Upon  those  words  "^  of  Rev.  i.  6:  '  "  And  hath  made  us 
kings  and  priests  :"  that  is,'  says  he,  '  the  whole  church  of 
the  faithful,  as  the  apostle  Peter  says  :  fYe  are]  "  a  holy 
nation,  a  royal  priesthood  :"  '  1  Pet.  ii.  9. 

9.  1  do  not  perceive  any  references  to  the  second  epistle 
of  St.  Peter,  nor  to  any  of  the  epistles  of  St.  John,  nor  to 
that  of  St.  Jude. 

10.  The  Fragment  in  Cave  concludes  in  this  manner : 

*  Tlicse"^  are  they,  who  sit  before  the  throne  of  God,  who  in 

*  the  Revelation  of  John,  the  apostle  and  evangelist,  are 
'  called  elders.'  And  in  the  Commentary  upon  the  Reve- 
lation he  several  times  ascribes  that  book  to  John.  '  The" 
opened  book,'  says  he,  '  is  the  Revelation  which  John  saw.* 
Afterwards "^  he  calls  him  apostle  :  and  soon  after  he  informs 
us  when  John  saw  and  wrote  the  Revelation.  '  Ands  be 
said  unto  me:  "  Thou  must  prophecy  again  to  people,  and 

^  Nulla  lex  testamentum  vocatur.  Nee  festamentum  aliud  dicitur,  nisi  quod 
faciunt  morituri.  Et  quodciimque  intrinsecus  testament!  est,  signatum  est, 
usque  ad  diem  mortis,  ib.  p.  417.  E.  F. 

•^  Et  fecit  nos  regnura  et  sacerdotes ;  id  est,  omnem  fidelium  ecclesiam,  sicivt 
Petrus  apostolus  dicit :  Gens  sancta,  regale  sacerdotium.  ibid.  p.  414.  H. 

^  — quos  in  Apocalypsi  Joannis  apostoli  et  evangelistse  seniores  vocat.  Ap. 
Cav.  H.  Lit.  T.  i.  p.  149.  '  Liber  apertus  Apocalypsis  est, 

quam  Joannes  vidit.  Ubi  supra,  p.  419.  E. 

'  Sed  quia  dicit,  se  scripturum  fuisre  Joannes  quanta  locuta  fuissent  tonitrua, 
id  est,  quaecumque  in  veteri  testaniento  erant  obscura  et  prsdicata,  vetatur 
scnbere,  sed  relinqusre  ea  signata,  quia  erat  apostolus,  nee  oportebat  gratiam 
sequentis  gradus  in  prinio  collocari.  ib.  F. 

K  Hoc  est,  quoniam  quando  hoc  vidit  Joannes,  erat  in  insula  Pathmo, 

in  metallum  damnatus  a  Domitiano  Cfetare.  Ibi  ergo  vidit  apocalypsin.  Et 
cum  senior  jam  pularct  se  per  passionem  acceptiirum  receptionem,  interfecto 
Domitiano,  omnia  judicia  ejus  soluta  sunt,  et  Joannes  de  metallo  dimissus.  Sic 
postea  tradidit  banc  eamdem,  quam  acceperat  a  Domino,  apocalypsin.  Hoc 
est,  Oportet  te  iterum  prophctare.  ib.  G. 


VicTORiNus.     A.  U.  290.  179 

tongues,  and  nations:"  (livv.  x.  11.)  that  is,  because  wlien 
John  SRM- tlii*  he  was  in  the  isle  ofPatnios,  having-  been  coii- 
tlenined  to  the  mines  by  the  emperor  Domitian  :  there  he 
saw  the  Revelation.  And  when,  being-  now  ohl,  he  expected 
to  be  received  up  [^to  heaven]  through  his  sutlerings,  Domi- 
tian Avas  killed,  and  all  his  acts  disannulled,  and  John  was 
set  at  liberty  from  the  mines.  Then  afterwards  he  wrote 
the  same  Revelation,  which  he  had  received  from  the 
Lord.  This  is  the  uieaning-  of  those  words :  "  Thou  must 
prophesy  again,"  '  In  another  place  he  says:  '  When''  the 
scripture  of  the  Revelation  was  published,  Domitian  was 
emperor.' 

11.  We  have  already  seen  some  forms  of  citation  :  a  par- 
ticular or  two  may  be  added.  '  The"  other  three  horses,' 
says  he,  '  signify  the  wars,  famines,  and  pestilences,  more 
plainly  spoken  of  by  the  Lord  in  the  gospel.'  '  For*^  the 
Lord  says  :  "  This  gospel  shall  be  preached  in  all  the  world, 
for  a  witness  unto  the  nations,  and  then  shall  the  end  come  :" 
Matt.  xxiv.  14.  Presently  afterwards  :  '  As'  we  read  in  the 
gospel  :  "  Nation  shall  rise  against  nation,  and  kingdom 
against  kingdom:"  '  ver.  7.  '  And™  so  the  Lord  says  in  his 
gospel :  "  Then  let  them  which  are  in  Judea  flee  to  the 
mountains:"  ver.  16*.  And  in  like  manner  often.  '  And" 
the  Jews  saying,  "  Forty  and  six  years  has  this  temple  been 
building,"  '  the  evangelist  says:  "  He  spake  of  the  temple 
of  his  body,"  John  ii.  20,  21.  Having  quoted  Matt.  xiii. 
52,  "  Therefore  every  scribe  instructed  to  the  kingdom  of 
God  is  like  unto  an  householder,  Avhich  bringeth  forth  out 
of  his  treasure  things  new  and  old,"  he  says:  '  The"  new 
things  are  the  Avords  of  the  gospel :  the  old  those  of  the  law 
and  the  prophets.'  By  "  the  Avords  of  the  gospel,"  or  evan- 
gelic words,  meaning,  as  it  seems,  the  whole  New  Testament. 
After  his  long  account  of  the  four  gospels,  and  their  symbo- 
lical representations  before  transcribed,  he  observes:  '  All? 
these,  though  four,  are  one,  because  they  proceed  from  one 
mouth.'      Explaining    some  words   in   the  Revelation,   he 

''  Intelligi  oportet  tempus,  quo  scriptura  Apocalypsis  edita  est,  quoniam  tunc 
erat  Caesar  Doinitianus — unus  exstat,  sub  quo  scnbitur  Apocalypsis,  Domi- 
tianus  scilicet,  p.  420.  C.  '  Caeteri  tres  equi,  belia,  fames,  pestes 

in  evangelio  a  Domino  prsedicata  manifestius  significanf.  p.  417.  H, 

^  Alt  enim  Dommus :  Pisdicabitur,  &c.  ib.  H. 

'  Ut  legimus  in  evangelio :  Surget  enim  gens,  &c.  ib. 

"  Sic  et  Dominus  in  evangelio  ait :  Tunc  qui  in  Judaea  sunt,  &c.  p.  419.  H. 

"  Evaugelista  inquit :  Ule  dicebat  de  temple  corporis  sui.  p.  418.  G. 

°  Nova  evangehca  verba :  vetera  legis  et  prophetarum.  ib.  p.  415.  B. 

P  Hae  praedicationes,  quamvis  quatuor  sunt,  una  est  tamen,  quia  de  uno  ore 
processit.  p.  416.  A. 

N    2 


180  CTcdibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

says:  '  Theyi  confute  those  who  say  that  one  spake  in 
the  prophets,  and  another  in  the  gospel.'  Again,  '  The' 
doctrine  of  the  Old  Testament  is  connected  with  the  New,' 
He'  often  speaks  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament. 

12.  \V^e  have  seen  then  in  Victorinus  very  valuable  testi- 
monies to  the  four  gospels,  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  thirteen 
of  St.  Paul's  epistles,  and  some  expressions  m  hich  may  be 
thought  allusive  to  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  as  also  a 
plain  quotation  of  the  first  epistle  of  St.  Peter,  beside  his 
express  testimony  to  the  author  of  the  book  of  the  Revela- 
tion, and  his  Commentary  upon  it.  And  there  might  be 
other  books  received  by  him,  as  of  authority,  though  not 
expressly  mentioned  in  his  few  remaining'  works.  Unques- 
tionably he  received  all  those  scriptures  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment, which  were  generally  received,  by  christians  in  all 
times,  and  all  over  the  world.  We  have  also  observed  him 
to  speak  distinctly  of  a  collection  of  sacred  writings,  called 
the  Gospel,  and  the  New  Testament.  Finally,  we  should 
not  forget  here  the  evidences  we  saw  at  the  beginning  of  this 
chapter  of  Victorinus's  writing  Commentaries  upon  several 
books  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  some  of  the  New  ;  proofs 
of  his  application  and  industry,  and  of  his  unfeigned  affec- 
tion and  ardent  zeal  for  the  holy  scriptures,  and  for  the 
christian  religion:  which  he  recommended  not  only  by  the 
labours  of  his  life,  but  also  by  the  patience  and  fortitude  oi 
a  violent,  but  willing,  death  for  its  sake, 

1  Arguit  qui  alium  in  prophetis,  aliura  in  evangelic  dicunt  esse  locutura.  p 
416.  D. 

■■  Conjuncta  veteris  testaraenti  prsedicatio  cum  novo.  p.  417.  F. 

'  Sic  nee  praedicatio  novi  testamenti  fidem  habet,  nisi  habeat  veteris  testa- 
nienti  praenuntiata  testimonia.  p.  417.  A 


Metiiouius.     a.  D.  290.  181 


CHAP.  LVII. 


METHODIUS,  BISHOP  OF  OLYMPUS  LN  LYCIA. 

I.  His  history.  II.  His  icorks.  111.  Testimonies  to  him. 
IV.  Select  passages  of  Methodius.  V.  His  testimony  to 
the  books  of  the  JSTew  Testament  :  and  Jirst,  oj'  the  J'ovr 
gospels:  VI.  Of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles:  VII.  Oj' 
St.  PauVs  epistles  :  VIII.  Oj'  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews, 
IX.  Of  the  catholic  epistles :  X.  Of  the  Revelation. 
XI.  F'orms  of  quoting,  general  divisions,  and  respect  for 
the  scriptures.  XII.  Texts  explained.  XIII.  The  stem 
oJ'  his  Testimony. 

I.  '  METHODIUS,=^    bishop    of  Olympus    in    Lycia,   and 

*  afterwards   of  Tyre,  a  man  of  a  neat  and   correct  style, 

*  composed  a  work  against  Porphyry  in  several  books.    He 

*  also   wrote  a  Banquet    of  ten   Virgins ;  Concerning  the 

*  Resurrection,  against    Origen,    an    excellent    book ;    and 

*  against  him  likewise  Of  the  Pythoness  ;  and  Of  liberty, 
'  [^or  free  will  y]  Commentaries  also  upon  Genesis  and  the 

*  Canticles ;  and  many  other  works,  which  are  in  the  hands 
'  of  every  body.     He  obtained  the  crown  of  martyrdom  at 

*  Chalcis  in  Greece,  at  the  end  of  the  last  persecution ;  or, 

*  as  some  say,  under  Decius  and  Valerian.' 

So  writes  Jerom  in  his  book  of  Illustrious  Men.  Euse- 
bius  makes  no  mention  of  Methodius  in  his  Ecclesiastical 
History.  The  reason  of  it  has  been  supposed  by  many 
learned  men  to  be,  that  Methodius  had  written  against  Origen, 
whom  Eusebius  greatly  admired.  Nay,  Valesius  says,  more- 
over, it''  was  out  of  envy  and  hatred  of  Methodius,  that  Euse- 
bius wrote  after  him  against  Porphyry.  But  this  last  supposi- 

*  Methodius,  Olympi  Lyciae,  et  postea  Tyri  episcopus,  nitidi  compositique 
sermonis  adversus  Porphyriiim  confecit  libros,  et  Symposium  decem  Virginum, 
de  Resurrectione  opus  egregium  contra  Origenem,  et  adversus  eumdem  de 
Pythonissa,  et  de  Autexusio.  In  Genesim  quoque,  et  in  Cantica  Canticonnn 
commentarios ;  et  multa  alia,  quae  vulgo  lectitantur.  Et  ad  extrcmum  novis- 
simae  persecutionis,  sive,  ut  alii  affirmant,  sub  Decio  et  Valeriano,  in  Chalcide 
Graeciae,  martyrio  coronatus  est.     De  V.  I.  cap.  83. 

^  Nam  cum  omnes  ecclesiasticos  scriptores  in  hoc  opere  accurate  comme- 
moraverit,  Methodium  tamen  de  industria  praetemiisit,  eo  quod  Origenem, 
quern  ipse  praecipue  mirabatur,  impugnavisset.  Hmc  etiam  est,  quod  contra 
Poqjhyrii  libros,  post  eumdem  Methodium  scripsit,  quasi  aemulatione  quadam 
et  odio  adversus  Methodium  incitatus.  Vales.  Ann.  in  Eus.  1.  vi.  c.  53.  p. 
128.  B. 


182  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

tion  appears  to  me  uncharitable:  however,  we  are  informed  by 
Jerom  that"^  Eiisebius,  in  his  Apology  for  Origen,  complained 
of  Methodius  for  Avriting-  against  Origen,  after  lie  had  more 
than  once  spoken  of  his  sentiments  without  any  censure  or 
dislike.  And  from  the  accounts  we  have  of  the  Morks  of 
Methodius,  and  some  remaining  extracts  out  of  them,  it 
appears,  that  not  only  several  of  his  pieces  were  written 
aoainst  Orioen,  but  likewise  that  he  sometimes  treated  that 
great  man  not  very  civilly. 

Socrates'^  Avrites,  that  Methodius, after  he  had  long-  opposed 
Origen,  as  if  he  recanted  what  he  had  said,  commended  him 
in  a  dialogue,  called  Zeno.  Tillemonf^  thinks  Socrates  is 
not  to  be  credited  herein  :  and^  Baronius  long-  ago  charged 
that  ecclesiastical  historian  with  being  guilty  of  a  manifest 
falsehood  in  this  account :  for  he  says  the  quite  contrary  is 
the  truth,  as  we  learn  from  Eusebius  himself:  Methodius 
first  approved  of  Origen,  and  afterwards  wrote  against  him. 
Besides,  how  should  Socrates  become  acquainted  with  this 
recantation  of  Methodius,  which  is  unknoMn  to  every  body 
else;  which  Eusebius,  Rufinus,  and  other  defenders  of 
Origen,  say  nothing-  of?  Whereas,  says  Baronius,  if  they  had 
known  it  they  would  have  transcribed  it  in  letters  of  gold, 
and  shoM'n  it  every  where.  On  the  other  hand  ^Valesius, 
''Huet,  and  'Pagi,  maintain  the  truth  of  the  relation  in 
Socrates.  But  it  seems  to  me  not  impossible  that  Socrates 
mistook  the  time  of  writing-  that  dialogue,  which  might 
be  written  before  Methodius  had  taken  a  disg-ust  ag-ainst 
Origen.  Or,  if  indeed  it  was  written  afterAvards,  as  So- 
crates supposed,  I  think  it  reasonable  to  conclude  the 
commendation  there  given  Orig-en  was  a  small  matter  of  no 
great  moment,  and  far  short  of  a  recantation.  Baronius's 
reasoning  appears  solid  :  if  Methodius  had  recanted  what  he 
had  written  against  Origen,  it  would  have  been  mentioned 
by  his  apologists.  I  suppose  the  meaning-  of  Eusebius's 
words  above  cited  by  Jerom  to  be  this:  That  Methodius  in 
his  own  writings,  in  several   places,  had  treated  of  several 

•=  Eusebius,  Caesariensis  episcopus,  cujus  supra  memini,  in  sexto  libro  airo- 
XoyuiQ  Origenis  hoc  idem  objicit  Methodio  episcopo  et  martyri,  quod  tu  in  meis 
laudibus  cnminaris,  et  diet :  Qnomodo  ausas  est  Methodius  nunc  contra  Orige- 
nem  scnbere,  qui  haec  et  haec  de  Origenis  loquutus  est  dogmatibus  ?  Hieron. 
Apol.  adv.  Ruf.  1.  1.  p.  359.  Bened, 

MtOodio^  fiiv  TToWa  Kara^pa^utv  r«  QpiyevHQ,  vffTtpov,  i}Q  K  TraXivtoSiag, 
Zaviiri^ii  Tov  avSpa  ev  t<ii  Cia\oy<[),  w  eTTtypaipe  Zevwva.  H.  E.  1.  vi.  cap.  13. 
p.  320.  A.  «  Tiliem.  St.  Methode,  Mem.  Ecc.  T.  v.  P.  iii.  p. 

139,  140.  '  Baron.  Ann.  402.  n.  xvii. 

8  Vales,  ad  Socr.  I.  vi.  c.  13.  '"  Huet  Originian.  I.  ii.  civ.  num.  ii. 

'  Pagi  Cnf.  402.  n.  iii. 


Metiiodils.     a.  D.  -290.  183 

sentiments  that  were  disliked  in  Orig-en  ;  and  that  Metho- 
dius in  those  more  early  pieces  appeared  to  be  much  of  the 
same  opinion  with  Origen  :  but  afterwards  he  wrote  against 
him  with  a  good  deal  of  bitterness  ;  of  his  conduct  Eusebius 
complained.  And  it  has  been  observed  by''  Tillemont,  that 
in  the  Banquet  of  the  ten  Virgins,  probably'  one  of  the  first 
books  published  by  our  author,  there  are  several  sentiments 
very  near  resembling*  those  called  Origen's.  Methodius, 
says  that  learned  writer,  in  one  place'"  very  nearly  follows 
the  opinion  of  Origen  uj)on  the  pre-existence  of  souls,  A^hich 
are  at  length  sent  from  heaven  into  bodies.  He"  seems  also 
to  say,  (as  Origen  Avas  accused,)  that  in  the  glory  of  heaven 
men  shall  be  changed  into  the  nature  of  angels.  These 
things,  not  to  insist  now  on  any  other,  are  found  in  that 
Banquet. 

Upon  the  whole,  as  Eusebius  was  not  unacquainted  with 
Methodius,  and  has  been  careful  to  mention  a  great  nmnber 
of  ecclesiastical  writers  in  his  history,  his  silence  about  this 
bishop  may  be  very  probably  ascribed  to  the  cause  above 
mentioned,  his  displeasure  against  him  for  writing-  against 
Origen,  and  treating  him  roughly  :  that  silence  must  also 
be  reckoned  an  argument,  that  Methodius  did  never  retract : 
for  that  would  have  been  much  for  Origen's  honour;  it  would 
have  reconciled  his  admirers  to  Methodius,  and  they  would 
have  spoken  of  it  frequently,  and  Eusebius  would  not  have 
failed  to  give  him  an  honourable  place  in  his  Ecclesiastical 
History. 

There"  are  considerable  difficulties  about  the  place  of 
which  Methodius  was  bishop.  Jerom  said  above,  that  he 
was  at  first  bishop  of  Olympus.  Socrates  too  says  expressly, 
and  at  length,  that  he?  was  bishop  of  a  city  in  Lycia,  called 
Olympus.  He^  is  now  very  commonly  called  bishop  of 
Patara,  and  at  other  times  of  Tyre.  Suidas'^  says,  Methodius 
was  bishop  of  Olympus  in  Lycia,  or  of  Patara,  and  after- 
wards of  Tyre:  in  which  words  there  is  supposed  to  be  an 
ambiguity  :  for  they  may  mean,  that  Olympus  was  sometimes 
called  Patara;  or,  that  it  is  doubtful  which  of  those  two 

•^  As  before,  p.  138.  '  lb.  p.  136. 

■"  Ty  rtTTO  T<i)v  tjjoavwv  ag  ra  awjiara   Karafiaau  ku  icara7ro/i7r^  tmv 

^vx^v.     Method.  Conv.  ap.  Combjf.  Auct.  Nov.  P.  i.  p.  74.  C. 

"  AWrt  iitTa  Ti)v  xi^f^ovratrripiSa  /i«ra|3Xj/06vroe  a-rro  ra  (TxrifiaTog  ra  ai- 
QpiairiVH  Kat  rrjg  (pOopag,  ug  ayyiKiKOv  ^eytOog  Kai  KoSXog.   lb.  p.  429.  A. 

°.Tilleni.  as  before,  p.  132,  et  surSt.  Mefhodo,  Note  1. 

P MtdoSiog,  Ttjg  fv  AvKi^  TToXewg  XtyojiivrigOXvfnrH  tTTiaKOTTog.     Socr. 

!.  vi.  c.  13.  *>  See  Till,  as  before,  note  ". 

'  MsOodiog,  OXvfiirs,  AvKiag,  Jjrot  Harapuv,  Kai  nera  ravra  Tvpn,  tirtereoTo/, 
Suid. 


184  Credibilitij  of  the  Gospel  Histury. 

places  lie  was  bishop  of;  but,  that  Patara  and  Olympus 
Avere  two  different  places  might  be  shown.  They^  are  ex- 
pressly named  by  Strabo,  as  two  of  the  six  large  cities  of 
Lycia :  and  how  he  should  be  bishop  of  both  is  not  easy  to 
conceive. 

Jerora  says  that  Methodius  was  afterwards  bishop  of  Tyre ; 
and  so  likewise  Suidas  from  him,  or  from  his  Greek  interpreter 
Sophronius  :  Avhich  yet  is  not  easy  to  be  accounted  for,  nor 
very  probable  ;  such  removals  or  translations  of  bishops  not 
being"  then  very  common.  Tillemonf^  thinks  that  if  Metho- 
dius was  bishop  of  Tyre,  he  must  have  succeeded  Tyrannio, 
a  worthy  pastor  of  that  church,  particularly  mentioned  by" 
Eusebius,  as  one  of  the  illustrious  martyrs  of  Dioclesian's 
persecution,  who  was  drowned  in  the  sea  near  Antioch. 

It  is,  however,  very  likely  that  Methodius  was  for  some 
time,  if  not  to  the  end  of  his  life,  bishop  of  Olympus  in 
Lycia  :  since  Socrates  gives  him  that  title,  as  well  as  Jerom. 
Besides,  in  one  of  his  Morks,  he^'  informs  us  of  a  wonderful 
thing  he  had  seen  upon  Olympus,  a  mountain  of  Lycia; 
which,  according  to"  Strabo,  adjoined  to  the  city  of  the  same 
name. 

In  Jerom's  days  there  M'ere  two  different  opinions  about 
the  time  of  this  person's  death  ;  for  some  thought  he  suffered 
imder  Decius  or  Valerian  :  but  this  opinion  is  inconsistent 
with  his  writing  against  Porphyry,  who  did  not  publish  his 
books  against  the  christians  till  about  the  year  270.  The 
other  is  Jerom's  own  opinion,  that  Methodius  had  the  honour 
of  martyrdom  at  the  end  of  the  last,  or  Dioclesian's  persecu- 
tion :  therefore  in  the  year  311  or  312,  as''  Tillemont  shows  ; 
not  in  the  year  302,  or  303,  as  Du  Piny  says,  if  his  numbers 
are  rightly  printed  in  my  edition.  Methodius  is  placed  by 
Cave  as  flourishing  about  the  year  290,  against  which  I  have 
no  exceptions  to  make  :  for  it  is  not  unlikely  that  he  was 
ordained  bishop  about  that  time. 

But  though  the  above-mentioned  opinion  of  Jerom  con- 
cerning- the  time  of  the  death  of  Methodius  may  be  reckoned 
very  probable,  yet  what  he  says  about  the  place  of  it  is  not 
very  easy  to  be'  received. 

In  this  uncertainty  are  we  about  several  material  things 
relating  to  Methodius  :  which  may  be  imputed  partly  to  his 

'  Sirab.  1.  ]4.  p.  665.  A.  '  As  before,  p.  133. 

"  Ei\s.  1.  viii.  cap.  13.  p.  307,  308.  ^  Vid.  Excerpt,  ex  libr. 

dc  Resurr.  ad.  Comb.  p.  331.  ap.  Phot.  Cod.  234.  p.  924. 

»  Ubi  Supra,  p.  666.  "  See  Till,  as  before,  p.  133.  and  note  2. 

y  Du  Pin  Bibl.  des  Aut.  Ecc.  T.  i.  p.  195,  a  Amst. 
•  Ti.l.  as  before,  p.  133,  and  note  3. 


Methodius.     A.  D.  290.  185 

own  modesty,  wlio  liad  said  little  of  himself  in  his  works ; 
and  partly,  and  chietly,  to  the  neglect,  or  the  resentment  and 
ill-will  of  Ensobiiis:  who,  it  is  likely,  conld  have  left  us 
gootl  jnenioirs  of  him,  if  he  had  pleased. 

Thus  much  we  may  rely  upon,  that  he  was  bishop,  and 
probably  of  Olympus  in  Lycia,  as  was  before  shown;  and 
that  the  same  bishop  suffered  death  for  the  christian  religion, 
probably  in  the  persecution  begun  under  Diodesian  :  and, 
beside  what  we  have  already  seen  from  Jerom  and  others,  it 
may  be  observed  here,  that  he  is  called  bishop  and  martyr 
by  '■"  Photius,  and  by  ^  Theodoret.  Hereafter  1  may  add  some 
more  passages  confirming-  these  particulars. 

I  shall  conclude  the  brief  history  of  this  person  with  one 
observation  :  it  is  an  obvious  thought  and  a  conjecture  likely 
to  arise  in  the  minds  of  not  a  few,  that  since  Methodius  is 
said  to  have  been  bishop  of  so  many  places,  and  there  were 
in  Jerom's  time  two  very  different  opinions  concerning-  the 
time  of  his  death,  possibly  there  were  two  of  this  name  in 
the  third  century,  both  bishops  and  martyrs  ;  one  somewhat 
obscure,  the  other  well  known,  for  his  writings  at  least. 

II.  Of  these  we  have  a  pretty  good  account  left  us :  and 
I  must  take  some  notice  of  them  before  I  proceed  to  make 
extracts. 

1.  The  first  mentioned  by  Jerom  and  his  Catalogue  is  the 
work  or  books  against  Porphyry,  which  in  another  place  he 
says"^  amounted  to  ten  thousand  lines.  St.  Jerom  has  spoken 
of  this  work  more  than  once  in  his  Commentary*^  upon  the 
book  of  Daniel,  and  '^  elsewhere.  Of  this  work  there  are  now 
nothing  remaining,  excepf^a  few  frag-ments,  which  are  but 
of  small  consec[uence.  The  three  chief  writers  against  Por- 
phyry were  3Iethodius,  Eusebius,  and  xApollinarius  :  and  = 
Philostorgius,  as  we  are  informed  by  Photius,  gave  the  pre- 
ference to  Apollinarius  above  the  other  two. 

2.  The  next  piece  mentioned  by  Jerom,  as  above,  is  the 
Banquet  of  ten  Virg-ins,  or  Of  Chastity.  Out  of  this  work, 
which  is  a  dialog-ue,  there  are  larg^e  extracts  in*"  Photius  :  and 
we  still  have  it'  entire,  answerable  to  the  quotations  made 
by  the  ancients.     Photius  indeed   censures  this  work  :  he 

'  Cod.  235.  p.  932.  •>  Dialog,  i.  p.  37. 

'^  IMethodius  lusque  ad  decern  millia  procedit  versuum.  Hieron.  Ep.  83. 
al.  84.  ^  In  Dan.  Fr.  et  cap.  xii.  v.  ult. 

^  Adv.  Ruf.  1.  2.  p.  433.  in  T.  iv.  P.  ii.  et  Ep.  30.  [al.  50.]  p.  236.  in  ib. 

'  Ap.  Combefis.  p.  442,  &C.  8   'On,  <prj(nv,  AnoWivapioc 

Kara  Tlop<pvpin  ypa-^aq  tin  ttoXv  Kpartiv  twv  ijywviffntvwv  EvasfSiif)  kut  avra, 
aXKa  KOI  Toiv  MtOoas  Kara  TrjQ  avTT]g  viroOeffiWQ  ffTTsCatrnaTwv.  PhJobt,  H. 
E.  1.  viii.  c.  14.  h  coj^  237.  p.  949,  &c. 

'  Ap.  Combf.  Auct.  p.  64,  &c 


186  Credibility  of  the  Goapel  History. 

says  there  are  in  it  Arian  and  other  enoneous  opinions,  and*^ 
therefore  suspects  it  to  have  been  interpolated  :  but  that 
suspicion  is  now  judged  groundless  by  most  of  the  learned 
'  moderns. 

2.  The  book  of  the  Resurrection,  written  against  Origen,  is 
called  by  Jeroni  an  excellent  work  :  this  too  was  a  dialogue  : 
there  are  large  extracts  out  of  it  in™  Photius :  and  Epipha- 
nius"  transcribed  a  good  part  of  it  into  his  work  against 
heresies. 

4.  Of  the  next  work  mentioned  by  Jerom,  Of  the  Pytho- 
ness, or  the  cunning  woman,  whom  Saul  consulted,  likewise 
against  Origen,  nothing  now  remains. 

5.  Nor  have  Ave  any  thing  of  his  Commentaries  upon 
Genesis,  or  the  Canticles,  that  is  considerable,  and  that  can 
be  relied  upon. 

6.  There  are  larsfe  extracts  in  Photius  out  of  the  treatise 
"Of  Free-will;  or.  Of  the  Origin  of  Evil.  TillemontP 
observes,  that  Jerom  seems  to  say,  this  Avork  also  was  Avritten 
against  Origen :  but  this  does  not  appear  by  what  Combefis 
has  given.  He  adds,  it  is  a  dialogue,  in  which  an  orthodox 
person  confutes  two  Valentinians.  Fabricius^  however 
says,  this  treatise  was  Avritten  against  the  Valentinians  and 
Origen. 

7.  Photius "^  has  also  extracts  out  of  another  v/ork  of  Me- 
thodius, entitled,  Of  the  Creatures,  not  mentioned  by  Jerom. 
This  book  was  plainly  written  against  Origen,  whom*  he 
here  more  than  once  calls  centaur;  as*  if  he  had  been  some 
compound;  some  creature,  partly  heathen,  partly  christian  ; 
or,  as  Fabricius  expresseth  it,  because"  he  mixed  things 
sacred  and  prophane,  christian  and  heathen  principles  all 
together. 

8.  We  now  plainly  perceive  that  there  were  at  least  three 
or  four  pieces  of  Methodius  written  against  Origen,  and  that 
he  sometimes  treated  that  great  man  in  an  offensive  manner ; 

*  vtvoOtvfitvoQ  iTiv'  tvpT](7EiQ  joc)  IV  avT<fi  TTa^a^t^irijiivaq  Kai  Aptiavticaff 

So^OKomag,  Kai  trepuv  Tivwv  KaKaCo'iHV-iov  fiv0o\oyi]nara.   lb.  p.  964.  t. 

'  Du  Fin,  Bibl.  T.  i.  p.  198.  Till,  as  before,  p.  138.  Basnag.  Ann.  300. 
n.  ix,  ">  Cod.  234.  p.  908,  &c. 

"  Epiph.  Haer.  64.  a  pag.  534.  ad  590.  et  ap.  Combef.  Bib.  Patr.  p.  283,  &c. 

"  A  p.  I'hot.  Cod.  236.  p.  940.  et  Combef.  Bib.  p.  347,  &c. 

p  lb.  p.  142.  1  Vid.  Fabric.  Gr.  T.  v.  p.  256. 

"■  Cod.  235.  '  'On  6  QpiytvTjQ,  bv   Ktvravpov  KctXei,  k.  \. 

Cod.  2.*35.  p.  933.  ver.  28.  UaXiv  h  av,  w  Kivravpt.  ib.  p.  936.  ver.  52. 

'  Christianam  deniqiie  fidem  llippocentaurum  facite,  nee  equum  perfectum, 
nee  hominem.     Faust.  Manich.  1.  15.  ap.  Aug.  T.  viii.  p.  571.  F. 

"  Quod  nempe  sacra  profanisatque  Christiana  Ethnicis  raiscuisset  dogmata- 
Fabr.  ib.  p.  256. 


Methodius.     A.  D.  290.  187 

and,  it"  the  homily  or  tract,  to  ho  hereafter  mcntionetl,  con- 
cerning' Simeon  and  Anna  be  his,  Ave  have  another  instance 
of  his  ill-will  to  Origen.  This  is  one  of  the  arguments  of 
Combetis  for  the  gennineness  of  that^  work,  that  the  author 
opposeth  Origen:  but  supposing  this  not  to  be  written  by 
Methodius,  we  have  nevertheless  a  good  deal  of  evidence  of 
his  aversion  to  that  eminent  person  :  and  I  think  this  must  be 
allowed  to  make  a  kind  of  Apology  for  Eusebius  ;  thoug'li  I 
heartily  Avish  he  had  not  carried  his  resentment  so  far  as  he 
seems  to  have  done.  He  had  good  reason,  we  will  su[)pose, 
to  be  displeased  Avith  Methodius,  and  he  might  w^ell  censure 
and  blame  him  for  treatino-  Oriaen  as  he  did  :  nevertheless, 
he  should  have  given  Methodius  a  place  among  other  ancient 
worthies  in  his  Ecclesiastical  History. 

9.  Theodoret"  has  quoted  a  passage  of  Methodius  out  of 
a  piece  entitled,  A  Discourse  of  3Iartyrs,  of  which  there  is 
nothing  else  remaining.  I  shall  take  notice  of  that  passage 
hereafter. 

10.  Nor  have  we  any  thing  of  the  dialogue  called  Xeno, 
which  we  before  observed  to  be  taken  notice  of  by  Socrates. 

11.  I  think  1  have  now  put  down  the  titles  of  all  the  works 
of  Methodius,  expressly  mentioned  by  the  ancients:  how- 
ever, it  is  not  improbable  that  he  wrote  more;  for  .Jerom 
says  there  were  many  other  beside  those  mentioned  by  him. 
Eusebius's  passage  above  cited  from  Jerom  seems  to  imply, 
that  Methodius  had  written  some  good  number  of  books 
before  he  became  an  enemy  to  Origen :  and  he  might  after- 
Avards  also  write  some  other,  which  we  are  not  acquainted 
Avith. 

12.  And  there  are  actually  several  other''  things  noAv 
extant  Avhich  are  ascribed  to  him  :  such  as,  a  Homily  con- 
cerning Simeon  and  Anna;  another  Homily  upon  our  Sa- 
viour's entrance  into  Jerusalem  ;  and  Revelations,  and  a 
Chronicle. 

These  tAvo  last  1  think  are  generally  rejected  as  not  genuine. 

The  second  likewise  1  suppose  is  defended  by  very  fcAv. 

But  the  first  homily,  concerning  Simeon  and  Anna,  has 
more  patrons.  Not  only>  Combetis,  and  some  others,  bvit^ 
Fabricius  likeAvise  pleads  its  genuineness.  On  the  other 
hand  Tillemont*  alloAvs,  there  is  no  good  reason  to  take  it 

'  Vid.  Method.  Combefis.  p.  427,  469.  473,  not.  42. 
"  Vid.  Theodoret.  Dial.  i.  p.  37. 

*  See  Tillem.  Mem.  Ec.  T.  v.  P.  iii.  as  before,  p.  144,  et  notes  6  et  7,  sur 
St.  Melhode.  Vid.  etiarn  Fabric,  ut  supra,  p.  2.57,  258. 

y  Vid.  Combef.  in  Method,  p.  469.  ^  Fabr.  ut  supra,  p.  257. 

*  Tillem.  as  before,  p.  136,  144,  note  vi. 


188  Credihiidij  of  the  Gospel  Hislory. 

for  a  work  of  our  Methodius.  Oudin^  strenuously  opposeth 
it,  and  thinks  it  the  composition  of  some  other  Methodius, 
later  than  ours  by  several  centuries;  as  does"^  Cave.  Du 
Pin  "^  says  that  '  it  is  not  cited  by  the  ancients,  nor  abridged 
'  byPhotius.  The  author  speaks  so  clearly  of  the  mysteries 
'  of  the  Trinity,  of  the  incarnation  and  the  divinity  of  the 
'  Word,  w\\o  he  more  than  once  says  is  consubstantial  with 
'  the  Father;  of  the  hymn  called  Trisagion,  of  the  virginity 
'  of  Mary,  even  after  her  delivery  ;  and  of  original  sin ;  that 
'  there  is  room  to  doubt  whether  somewhat  has  not  been 
'  added  to  this  homily  :  beside  that  the  style  is  more  verbose, 
'  and  fuller  of  epithets  than  that  of  Methodius.'  So  that 
learned  writer.  And  in  my  opinion  tljese  particulars  are 
sufficient  to  assure  us,  that  either  this  homily  is  not  genuine, 
(which  I  rather  think,)  or  else  it  has  been  so  interpolated  as 
to  be  very  little  worth.  Of  this  and  some  other  things 
ascribed  to  Methodius,  Grabe''  honestly  says,  they  are  either 
supposititious,  or  interpolated.  I  shall  therefore  make  no 
use  of  this  piece  ;  or,  if  1  do,  T  shall  give  notice  of  it  par- 
ticularly. 

III.  1  shall  now  put  down  a  ^aw  testimonies  to  Methodius, 
beside  those  already  observed  in  the  history  of  him,  and  in 
the  account  of  his  works  :  there  is  the  more  need  of  this  be- 
cause of  Eusebius's  silence.  Epiphanius,  who  inserted  a  large 
part  of  the  dialogue  concerning  the  resurrection  into  his  work 
Against  Heresies,  calls  ^ Methodius  a  blessed  man ;  and^  after- 
Mards  gives  him  the  character  of  a  learned  or  eloquent  man, 
and  a  zealous  defender  of  truth.  Jerom  has  given  Methodius  a 
place  in  his''  letter  to  Magnus  among- other  ancient  christian 
writers  of  note  ;  and  M'hen  he  cites  him,  in  his  Commentary 
upon  Daniel,  he  calls  him'  the  most  eloquent  martyr  Metho- 
dius. Andrew  of  Caesarea,  about  the  year  500,  in  his  Com- 
mentary upon  the  book  of  the  Revelation,  often  cites  this  writer, 
and  m(»re  than  once  calls  him''  the  great  Methodius;  a  title 
wliicli  he  giv^cs  likewise  to  Justin  Martyr,  Iraeus,  and  some 
other  ancient  writers.  He  also  calls  Methodius '  a  blessed  man : 

"  De  Script.  Ecc.  T.  i.  p.  303,  &:c.  '  Hist.  Lit.  T.  i.  p.  152. 

•*  Du  Pin,  as  before,  p.  200. 

*  Caeterum  prostat  quidem  unus  insuper  et  alter  Methodii  tractatus  e  quibus 

plura,  efique  luculeiitissiina,  pro caljiolica  trinitatis  professione  testimonia 

allf  gari  possent.  Sed  ab  iis  abstineo,  quod  tractatus  isti  aut  supposititii,  aut 
interpolati  esse  videantur.  Grab.  Annot.  ap.  Bull.  Def.  Fid.  Nic.  Sect.  ii.  cap. 
13,  in  fin.  '  'Ytto  th  fiaKapira  MtOocm.  Epiph.  Haer.  64.  c.  II. 

p.  534.  C.  8   Mi6oh<{},  avlpi  Xoyt^^j  ovri,   kui  aipo^pa   ntpi  rrjg 

a\T\BnaQ  aytuviffaufVip.  id.  ib.  c.  63.  p.  591.  A.  ''  Ep.  83.  aJ.  84. 

'   Et  f'X  parte  dipcrtissimus  vir,  martyr  Methodius,  in  Dan.  cap.  xii.  vers.  ult. 

"  'O  St  fuyac  MiOodwr.     Andr.  in  Ajxjc.  p.  63.  A.  Vid.  et  p.  66.  B.  124.  B. 

'  lb.  p.  64.  E. 


Methouils.     a.  D.  "290.  189 

quoting  him  and  Hippolytus,  he  calls  them'"  saints,  or  holy 
men.  More  testimonies  to  our  author  mny  be  seen  in  "  Leo 
Allatius,  who  is  a  great  admirer  of  Methodius,  and"  prefers 
him  to  Origen  :  but  surely  that  judgment  is  owing  to  par- 
tiality and  prejudice.  Methodius  had  wit  and  learning  as 
well  as  piety  :  so  much  ought  to  be  owne<l :  but  M'hy  he 
should  be  equalled,  and  even  preferred  to  Origen,  I  cannot 
see.  Doubtless  Socrates  would  allow  the  four  writers, 
whom  he  mentions  as  enemies  of  Origen,  (of  whom  Metho- 
dius is  the  first,)  a  good  share  of  learning.  Nevertheless, 
sensible  of  their  inferiority  to  that  eminent  person,  and  of- 
fended at  the  manner  in  which  they  had  treated  him,  he 
applies  to  them  this  observation :  '  That?  mean  and  obscure 
'  people,  who  are  unable  to  shine  by  their  own  merit,  endea- 
'  vour  to  make  themselves  considerable  by  detracting  from 
'  others.  The  first,'  says  he,  '  who  w  as  seized  with  this  dis- 
'  temper,  Avas  Methodius,  bishop  of  a  city  in  Lycia,  named 
'  Olympus.'  The  other  three  mentionetl  by  Socrates  are 
Eustathius,  Apollinarius,  and  Theophilus  of  Alexandria. 

IV.  Before  I  proceed  to  this  author's  testimony  to  the 
books  of  the  New  Testament,  I  shall  transcribe  a  few  select 
passages  :  they  will  be  agreeable  to  some  of  my  readers ; 
and  may  be  of  use  to  give  souie  idea  of  the  state  of  theology 
in  those  days. 

1.  In  his  book  Of  the  Creatures,  as  we  are  informed  by 
Photius,  he  said  thaf  the  book  of  Job  was  written  by 
Moses. 

2.  In  his  remaining  fragments  he  twice'  quotes  the  book 
of  Wisdom  as  Solomon's. 

3.  He  says  that^  God  having  made  the  world,  appointed 
angels  as  governors  and  presidents  under  himself.     "  But^ 

""   'Tmq  St  ayioig,  MeOo^i^j  /cat  iTnroKvrni,  k.  \.   p.  70.  E. 

"  Vid.  Leon.  Allat.  de  Method.  Scriptis  Diatriba.  ap.  Hippolyt.  Ed.  Fabric. 
B.  ii.  p.  76,  &c. 

°  Fuit  ingenium,  et  docfiina  maxima  Origenis.  Eam  si  cum  Methodiana 
conferas,  habet  quod  laudari  potest,  et  debeat ;  tanien  vilescere  videtur,  et  dis- 
soluta  viribus  fluere.  Contra  Methodiana  est,  quae  semper  vigens,  florens, 
pungeus,  concitans,  auditorem  velhcat  et  rapit.  Mortua  est  Origeniana  loqua- 
citas,  si  cum  Methodiana  brevitate  conferatur.  Una  Methodii  pagina  et  lumi- 
nibus  oratoriis  et  sententiis,  et  pietate,  et  eruditione  firma  ac  integra,  centum 
Origenis  paginas  exaequat.     Leon.  Allat.  ib.  num.  xvi.  p.  83. 

P  Socrat.  H.  E.  1.  vi.  c.  ]  3.  in.  i  'On  to  Iw/3  jSijiXiov,  MufftwQ 

iivai  6  ayioQ  iprjai.  Cod.  235.  p.  937.  f.  ap.  Combef.  p.  345.  A. 

■' KaOmrep  kol  t)  ao<pia  "ZoKofnovoQ  fiaprvpn.  ap.  Epiphan.  Haer.  64.  n. 

X  X.  p.  543.  A.  Vid.  ib.  n.  xxxvi.  '  Ap.  Epiphan.  ib.  n.  xxi. 

in.  et  ap.  Phot.  Cod.  234.  p.  908.  fin.  '  'O  ft  tvufipiai,  km  Trovripog 

TTtpi  Tbjv  ireTTi-tvfifviov  tyevsro  rrjv  IwiKifOiv,  tpOovov  tyKiaarfrraQ  Ka0'  ttfiwr' 
wCTrep  KM  01  iiiTU  ravra  vapKix)v  (patrdivreQ.  k.  \.  ib.  ap.  Epiphan.  p.  544.  B. 


190  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

the  devil  tell,  tlirough  envy  of  us,  and  afterwards  many 
other  angels  admitted  fleshly  desires,  and  fell  in  love  with 
the  daughters  of  men:"  vvhich  opinion  doubtless  is  founded 
upon  a  wrong-  interpretation  of  the  sixth  chapter  of  Genesis. 
Du  Pin,  through  haste,  or  some  other  cause,  has"  strangely 
misrepresented  this  passage  of  Mefhodius;  supposing  him 
to  ascribe  the  fall  of  the  devil,  as  m  ell  as  the  other  angels,  to 
this  last  temptation. 

4.  Methodius^  had  a  notion  that  the  divine  Word  was 
incarnate  in  Adam :  he  builds  this  doctrine  upon  what  St. 
Paul  writes  in  Eph.  v.  31,  32,  and  says,  that  '  ''^Adam  was 
not  only  a  type  and  tigure,  but  Christ,  forasmuch  as  the 
Word,  who  was  before  all  ages,  dwelled  in  him;  for  it  was 
fit  and  reasonable,  that  the  first-begotten  of  God,  and  the 
first  and  only-begotten,  even  Wisdom,  joining  itself  to  man, 
should  be  incarnate,  [or,  become  man,]  in  the  first-made  and 
first-born  of  men.'  This  Methodius  will  have  to  be  orthodox, 
or  the  right  interpretation  of  St.  Paul:  buf  Combefis,  in 
opposition  to  a  learned  modern  who  would  justify  this  pas- 
sage, argues,  that  it  cannot  be  reconciled  to  sound  doctrine. 
I  shall  presently  transcribe  from  Methodius  what  follows 
in  the  same  place. 

5.  Some  Avhile  ago  we  saw  the  censure  M-hich  Photius 
passed  upon  the  writings  of  Methodius ;  that  they  had  in 
them  the  Arian  doctrine,  and  therefore  were  interpolated  as 
he  suspected  :  but  learned  moderns,  not  perceiving  any 
marks  of  interpolation,  have  thought  themselves  obliged  to 
admit  that  Methodius  Arianised.  Bishop  Bully  indeed,  and 
^Grabe  after  him,  maintain  the  orthodoxy  of  this  bishop  and 
martyr.  Du  Pin''  likevvise  thinks  that  Methodius  may  be 
very  well  defended  from  the  accusation  of  erring  about  the 

"  que  le  peche  a  ele  cause  par  I'envie  du  diable,  et  que  le  diable 

meme,  qui  avoit  ete  cree  dans  la  justice  semblable  aux  aulres  anges,  est  tombe 
par  le  peche  d'onvie,  et  par  I'amour  deregle  qu'il  a  eu  pour  les  filles.  Du  Pin, 
Bib.  T.  i.  p.  198.  "  Concerning  this  matter,  see  Beausobre, 

Hist,  de  Manichee,  &c.     T.  ii.  p.  317,  318. 

"  <tepi  yap  rjjinQ  nri(JKCi^u)fiiOa  irwq  opOodoKrjc  avqyayf  top  ASafi  tic  tov 
\piroVy  a  fiovov  tvttov  avrov  rjy^^itvog  eivni  Kai  eiKoi'a,  aWa  Kai  avro  thto 
\pirov  Kai  avrov  ytyovevai,  ha  to  tov  tt/oo  aiioviov  ei^  avTov  eyKnTaffKrjtpai 
Xoyov.  'Upfio'Ct  yap  to  TrpwToyovov  th  Bsh  (cat  Trpwrov  Kai  fiovoyiviQ,  tijv 
(T0(piav,  T<i)  7rpMroTr\ar<{)  Kai  vpuiTq)  Kai  Trpwroyovf^j  rwv  avBpioTrwv  avOpMirip 
KEpacQwjav  f.vt]vQpwTrt]Ktvai.  Method.  Conv.  p.  79.  A.  B.  ap.  Combef.  Auct. 
Noviss.  "  Non  videntur  haec  sane  dicta.     Possinii  explicatio 

pia  est,  sed  violenta.  Plane  enim  distinguit  Methodius  primum  Adanaum  et 
secundum ;  vultque  utrumque  ipsum  reipsa  Christum  exlitisse,  incessente 
Verbo  ac  illabente.  &c.     Combef.  Annot.  ib.  146.  B. 

y  Def.  Fid.  Nic.  Sect.  ii.  cap.  13.  n.  ix.  x.  p.  147,  &c. 

*  Grabe  in  Annotatis,  ib.  p.  150.  *  Du  Pin,  as  before,  p.  1^8. 


Methodius.     A.  D,  290.  191 

Trinity  :  but''  Tilleiuont  says  it  is  very  difficult  to  put  a 
good  sense  upon  .some  of  his  expressions  concerning  tJie 
Word,  and  concerning-  the  procession  of  the  divine  persons: 
Basnage*-  and  ^  Beausobro  speak  to  the  like  purpose.  And 
'"Methodius  is  one  of  those  many  ancient  writers,  whom  Huet 
supposeth  to  have  thought  falsely  and  absurdly  about  the 
Trinity,  and  yet  are  not  reckoned  heretics,  but  are  counted 
amongst  the  orthodox  writers  of  the  church. 

Let  me  take  a  passage  or  two  of  our  author,  that  the  reader 
may  the  better  judge  for  himself.  In  the  work  Concerning* 
the  Creatures,  he  says:  '  There*^  are  two  creative  powers: 
one,  who  by  his  pure  will,  without  any  difficidty, creates  w'hat 
he  pleaseth  out  of  nothing;  this  is  the  Father:  the  other 
disposeth  into  order,  and  polisheth  things  already  made,  in 
imitation  of  the  former;  [or,  according  to  the  model  given 
by  the  former ;]  this  is  the  Son,  the  all-pow  erful  and  strong- 
hand  of  the  Father,  by  which  he  adorns  and  finishes  the 
matter  first  made  by  him  out  of  nothing.' 

This  passage  is  censured  by  ^Petavius.  I  see  that  bishop 
''Bull  endeavours  to  justify  it:  but'  Beausobre  says  that 
this  passage  '  savours  of  Platonism,  according  to  which  it 
'  was  thought  improper  that''  the  supreme  God  should  med- 
'  die  with  matter,  or  make  any  thing  that  is  perishable.'  He 
says,  moreover,  that  some  of  the  ancient  fathers  '  divided  the 
'  creation  between  the  Father  and  the  Son.  The  celebrated 
'  Methodius  supposed  that  the  Father's  part  lay  in  bringing- 
'  matter  out  of  nothing,  and  that  of  the  Son  in  forming  the 
'  world  after  the  plan  which  the  Father  had  shown  him. 

Let  us  in  the  next  place  take  the  sequel  of  the  passage 
above  transcribed,  relating  to  the  first  man  :  '  For,'  says 

''  Tillem.  as  above,  p.  138.  '^  Dissimulari  tamen  vix  potest, 

multa  in  Methodic  reperiri  durissima,  quseque  Ariana  vestigia  non  obscure 
exiiibeant,  &c.  Basnag.  Ann.  300.  n.  ix.  Vid.  quae  ibidem  sequuntur,  et 
num.  vii.  ^  Hist,  de  Manichee,  &c.  1.  vi.  ch.  iii.  n.  vii.  T.  ii. 

p.  317.  note  7.  *  Nam,  ut  alios  brevitatis  causa  praetermittam, 

quot  recensere  possumus,  nulla  haereseos  suspicione  aspersos,  et  de  trinitate 
tamen  falsa  et  absurda  commentos  ?  Venient  in  hunc  ordinem  Justinus  Martyr, 
— Clemens  Romanus, — Methodius,— Huet.  Origen.  I.  ii.  c.  3.  n.  vi. 

^  'On  0jj(Tiv  6  ayiog,  Svo  Se  SwafitiQ  tv  rotg  trpobtfioXoyrifievoiQ  f^a/itv  tn'ai 
TTOtriTiKag,  TTjv  tK  «K  ovTojv  yvfivtf)  Tqi  (iuXrjfJiari,  xuipig  fitKiajm,  [al.  ^fXXijer/ia,] 
afia  Til)  ^tXrjaat  avTspyaauv  6  (inXiTUL  ttouiv'  rvyxavu  Ce  o  Trarrip'  S/artpav 
Ci  KaraKorTfinaav  Kai  TroiKiXXaffav  Kara  p.ip.r](ni>  rijc  TrpoTipng  ra  rjh}  yiyovora' 
f^i  cf  0  v'lOQ,  T)  TravTOCvvaf.iog  Kai  Kparaia  ^ttp  th  Trarpog,  tv  y  fttra  to  Trouiaai 
Ti]v  v\t]v  il  8IC  ovTwv  KaTaKOffitt.  Method,  de  Great,  ap.  Phot.  Cod.  235.  p. 
937.  fin.  et.  ap.  Conibef.  p.  344.  e  Petav.  de  Trinit.  1.  i.  c. 

iv.  n.  xii.  ap.  Dogm.  Theol.  Tom.  ii.  ''  Def.  Fid.  Nic.  Sect.  ii.  cap. 

13.  n.  X.  '  Beausobre,  as  before,  1.  vi.  ch.  6.  n.  ii.  T.  ii.  p.  360. 

''  dans  lequel  on  ne  permettoit  pas  au  Dieu  supreme  de  mettre  le  mam 

a  I'oemTe,  de  toucher  a  la  matierc,  ni  de  former  rein  de  perissable.  ibid. 


192  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

'  3Iethodius,  '  that  is  Christ,  even  man  filled  with  pure  and 
perfect  deity,  and  God  contained  in  man  :  for  it  is  highly 
becoming  that  the  most  ancient  of  eeons,  and  the  chief  of 
archangels,  since  he  was  to  live  with  men,  should  inhabit 
the  most  ancient  and  first  of  men,  that  is,  Adam.' 

These  last  words  of  our  author  Basnage'"  is  much  offended 
with  :  the  most  ancient  of  ceons  he  thinks  more  becoming- 
the  mouth  of  a  Valentinian  than  a  Catholic  christian.  Grabe" 
thought  proper  to  allege  the  first  part  of  this  passage  as  a 
proof  that  Methodius  believed  Christ's  true  deity  :  but  then 
he  omitted  the  latter  part  of  the  passag-e,  being-,  I  suppose, 
too  much  in  haste  to  transcribe  it  all :  nevertheless,  if  the 
latter  part  of  the  passage  should  be  understood  to  be  ex- 
planatory of  the  former  part  of  it,  (as  possibly  it  may,)  then 
Grabe's  argument  avouIq  be  of  little  M-eight. 

I  shall  transcribe  no  more  passages  relating  to  this  matter, 
but  only  refer  to  some  places"  in  the  margin,  to  be  consulted 
by  those  mIio  are  curious,  and  have  leisure  ;  and  particularly 
to''  Beausobre's  remarks  upon  the  forecited  passages  of 
Methodius :  nor  do  I  venture  to  say  what  was  this  writer's 
real  opinion  concerning  the  Trinity  :  for  this  appears  to  me 
a  point  not  easily  decided  :  and  1  think  it  would  require  a 
nice  and  careful  disquisition  to  determine, upon  good  ground, 
what  was  his  sentiment  upon  that  head. 

6.  Methodius  is  likewise  called  a  millenarian.  Du  Pin 
having  made  his  extracts  out  of  the  Banquet  says  :  '  1''  stay 
'  not  to  observe  that  he  has  taught  in  this  treatise  the  opinion 
'  of  the  millenarians.'  Tillemont"^  too  says  that  Methodius 
here  clearly  admits  the  opinion  of  the  millenarians,  and  a 
reign  of  the  saints  upon  the  earth  for  the  space  of  a  thousand 
years  after  the  resurrection :  and'  it  must  be  owned  that  in 
the  Banquet  he  expresseth  himself  after  that  manner:  but 
in  the  Fragments  of  the  discourse  Of  the  Resurrection,  he 
affirms  that  the  earth  is  not  to  be  annihilated,  but   changed 

'  Taro  yap  eivai  rov  Xpi^ov,  avOpuirov  aKpar<^  &«or»;ri  Kai  TtKnc/,  irtTrXw- 
fir]^fvov,  /cat  ^tov  iv  av6()o)7n^  Kij^iopijfitvov'  r}v  yap  TrptTrwitTarov,  rov  npia- 
fivTurov,  ruiv  aiojvwv  Kai  Trpwrov  Tiiiv  apj^ayyeXwi',  avQpiorroig  i.u\\ovra  avvo- 
/.iiXiiv,  eif  Tov  irpea^vruTOv  kcu  ttqiotov  tojv  avOpoJKwv  iirroiKKTOrjvai,  rov  ASa/i. 
Conviv.  p.  79.  B.  '"  Minim  sane  Christi  titulum,  antiquissimum 

aeonum  et  sola  Valentini  schola  dignum.  Basn.  Ann.  300.  n.  vii. 

"  Grab.  Annot.  ad  Bull.  Def.  Fid.  Nic.  p.  150. 

"  Vid.  Excerpt,  ex  libr.  de  Creafis,  ap.  Phot.  Cod.  235.  p.  940.  Conviv. 
Decern  Virg.  ap.  Combef.  Auct.  Nov.  p.  75.  C.  p.  80.  A.  B.  p.  81.  C.  D.  p. 
82.  B.  C.  101.  D.  113.  D.  i"  Hist.  d3  Manich.  T.  i.  p.  118,  119. 

•>  Du  Pin,  as  before,  p.  198. 

'  Tillenn.  as  before,  p.  138. 

»  Con.  p.  129.  A,  B.  and  see  above,  p.  183.  note  •. 


Methodius.     A.  D,  290.  193 

and  renewed.  '  Since  therefore,'  says'  he,  '  the  earth  will 
exist  still,  doubtless  it  will  have  inhabitants,such  as  never  die 
any  more,  nor  marry,  nor  bring*  fortli  children,  but  are  as  the 
ang'els,  unchangeable  and  uncorrui)til)le,  enjoying  perpetual 
felicity.'  This  passage  is  somewhat  diHicult  to  be  reconciled 
with  that  in  the  Banquet,  Petavius  understood"  ourautiior 
to  speak  here  of  everlasting  happiness  upon  this  earth.  And 
afterwards,  in  that  discourse  or  dialogue  Coticerning  the 
Resurrection,  he  says  :  '  So''  far  we  are  to  be  like  unto  the 
angels,  that  as  the  angels  in  heaven,  so  also  we  in  paradise, 
shall  no  more  marry  or  feast,  but  shall  be  employed  in  seeing- 
God,  and  in  improving  ourselves  under  the  government  and 
conduct  of  Christ :  for  he  said  not,  they  shall  be  angels,  but 
"  as  the  angels."  '  Huef  refers  to  these  passages  as  a 
proof  that  Methodius  himself,  who  proposed  to  correct  Ori- 
gen,  did  not  always  express  himself  justly  concerning  the 
resurrection. 

7.  According  to  Methodius,  human  souls"  are  corporeal. 
This  he  argues  from  the  parable  of  the  rich  man  and  Lazarus 
in  Luke  xvi.  forasmuch  as  in  hell,  the  separate  state  of 
existence,  they  are  spoken  of  as  having  a  tongue,  a  finger, 
and  other  members.  Hey  is  also  reckoned  among  those 
fathers  who  supposed  angels  to  be  corporeal. 

8.  I  have  one  observation  to  make  here  upon  occasion  of 
the  several  errors  imputed  to  Methodius:  this  good  man, 
Avho  not  long  after  Origen's  death  bore  hard  upon  him, 
calling  him  centaur,  as  if  he  had  been  a  monster,  partly 
heathen,  partly  christian,  is  himself  liable  to  the  charge  or 
suspicion  of  heresy,  in  those  latter  times  of  greater  orthodoxy. 

'  faojievijQ  yap  km  fttra  tstov  rov  atitiva  yijo  avayKH)  Tzaaa  tataOai  Kai 

oiKijnnvTctg,  skiti  -iOvri^ojxiv>',Q,  i)  ya)xr\novTaQ  Kca  yivvi](!oi.iiVHQ,  a\X  wg 
ayyeXsg  aniTa'?po(poig  iv  a(p9apaig.  ra  api<ra  irpa^ovTag.  ap.  Epiph.  H.  64.  11. 
xxxii.  p.  555.  D. 

"  Hic  perspicue  post  judicium  homines  terram  habitaturos  asserit :  non  ut 
Chiliastae  ad  aliquot  duntaxat  t^aecula,  sic  ut  inteiira  suprema  ilia  felicitate,  hoc 
est,  aspectu  Dei,  carerent  5  verum  ut  et  perpetuo  in  hac  terra  degerent,  et  summa 
nihilominus  lUic  ac  perfecta  beatitatefruerentur.  Petav.  Animad.  inEpiph.  p.  261. 

*   IV    axTTTsp   o«   nyytXot  tv  rtfi  «pav(^  srutg  (cat  rffitiQ  tv  ri^  irapaSSeiffif), 

fir]Te  yafxoig  rj  uXmnvaig  tri  axoXai^ovTtg,  aWa  th  (SX-Sttsiv  rov  Bcov,  Kai  yiutp- 
yuv  Ti]v  ^a»/;v,  TrpvTavtvovrog  I'lfiiv  th  XptTs.  ap.  Epiph.  Haer.  64.  n.  xxxv. 
p.  558.  A.  *  Unde  ne  ipse  quidem  Origenis  ca?tigator  Metho - 

dius  sine  cespitatione  hoc  argumentumtractavit,  homines  fingens  post  resurrec- 
tionem  habitaturos  in  terra  jam  instaurata,  et  per  aerem  temperatissimura 
ambientem  in  melius  mutata,  et  in  paradisi  deliciis  beatum  aevum  acturos ; 
angelis  autem  coelestes  orbes  destinatimi  essedomicilium.  Huet.  Orig.  1.  ii.  c. 
2.  Qu.  9.  n.  vi.  p.  132.  "   Al  Se  ipvxat  ccto  th  ^///itspya  icat 

iraTpog  tijjv  6\u)v,  (jwfiara  votpa  vTrapxHOai,  k.  \.  ap.  Phot.  Cod.  234.  p.  932. 

^  Vid.  Huet.  Origen.  1.  ii.  c.  2.  Qu.  5.  n.  viii.  p.  71, 
VOL.    III.  O 


194  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

9,  In^  one  place  of  the  Banquet  are  mentioned  these  fol- 
lowing-heretics  all  together:  Sabellius,Artenias,antl  theEbio- 
niteSjMarcion,  Valentiniis.  and  the  lielcesaites.  What  he  says 
of  them  may  be  taken  into  consideration  at  some  other  time. 

I  shall  put  down  no  more  passag-es  of  this  sort  from  our 
author,  but  proceed  to  what  remains. 

V.  I  am  now  to  observe  this  writer's  testimony  to  the 
books  of  the  New  Testament. 

Methodius  says  expressly,  '  There"  have  been  four  gospels 
delivered  to  us :'  1  need  not  therefore  put  down  particular 
quotations  of  each  gospel :  indeed  he  has  not  mentioned  the 
writers  by  name :  however  no  one  can  make  any  doubt  or 
question  but  ho  meaned  our  gospels,  and  ascribed  them  to 
the  same  evangelists  that  we,  and  all  christians  in  general, 
have  always  done. 

VI.  He  speaks  of  the  baptism  of  Paul  by  Ananias,  and 
particularly  refers  to  the  history  of  it^  in  the  Acts. 

VII.  It  cannot  be  needful  that  I  should  transcribe  parti- 
cular passages  of  all  the  epistles  of  St.  Paul  cited  by  this 
author.  It  may  suffice  to  observe,  that  he  has  quoted  or 
alluded  to  these  following-  epistles  of  that  apostle ;  the  epistle 
to  the  Romans,  the  first  and  second  to  the  Corinthians,  the 
epistles  to  the  Galatians,  the  Ephesians,  the  Philippians,  the 
Colossians,  the  first  to  the  Thessalonians,  and  the  first  to 
Timothy :  words  of  most  of  these  are  cited  more  than  once, 
either  as  the  apostle's  or  as  Paul's.  I  have  observed  no  clear 
references  to  the  second  to  the  Thessalonians,  the  second  to 
Timothy,  or  to  Titus,  or  Philemon,  in  those  extracts  or  trea- 
tises which  I  make  use  of  as  unquestionably  genuine :  never- 
theless it  cannot  be  doubted  but  he  received  all  these  epistles; 
as  Origen  and  other  christians  did  about  his  time. 

VIII.  He  seems  to  have  several  passages  out  of  the  epis- 
tle to  the  Hebrews.  He  says ;  '  We  '^  restrain  evil  thoughts, 
"  lest  any  root  of  bitterness  springing-  up  should  trouble 

^   Conv.  p.  113.  D. 

*  ha  TUTO  Kai  tvayyeXia  rianapa  Tra^aliCorai,  TtTQaKiQ  tvayyiKurafievs 

T8  OcH  TTjv  av9po)TroTr]Ta,  Kai  iradayioyijuavTog  reaaapai  vofioig,  k-  X.  Conv. 
Dec.  Virg.  p.  131.     B.  Corabef.  Auct.  Nov.  P.  i. 

^  EvayytKi'Cofin'n  kqi  avaKaivi^ovroq  avrov  Avavis  ry  /SaTTTtff/iart,  KaGwg 
fv  rate  Tlnattmv  r)  i<70pta  Trtpis^^jt.  ib.  p.  83.  A. 

•^  Tliough  I  do  not  now  recollect  any  clear  indisputable  references  to  the 
second  epistle  to  the  Thessalonians,  in  the  remaining  works  of  Methodius,  yet 
I  suppose  him  to  refer  to  2  Thess.  i.  5  :  "  that  ye  may  be  counted  worthy  of 
the  kingdom  of  God,"  when  he  says  of  some  ancient  worthies,  rijc  ftamXeiag 
KaTa^iwBtvTiQ.     Conv.  p.    105.  A.  ^  'Hvv  fitv  (vravOa  raq 

jSKarag  avrriQ,  o'lov  rag  tvQvfit]<7UQ  rag  novrjpag,  avriXXofitv,  /x/j  Ttg  pi^a  TriKpiug 
avoj  dvsaa  avoxKr}(j-g.  De  Resurr.  ap.  Epiph.  Haer.  04.  n.  xxv.  p.  548.  D.  ap. 
Combef  p.  286. 


Methodius.     A.  D.  290.  195 

us:"  '  see  Heb.  xii.  15.  This  is  tiiken  from  tin;  frajrinnits 
of  the  treatise  Of  the  Resurrection.  In  the  l>aii(|uet  he 
appears  to  allude  to  it  several  times.  He  says:  '  The*^  law 
was  not  so  beautiful  as  the  gospel  ;  for  that  was  a  kind  of 
type  and  shadow  of  things  to  come  :  this  is  the  truth  and  the 
grace  of  life.'  And  a  little  before  he  had  said  :  '  For'  the 
law  is  the  type  and  shadow  of  the  image,  that  is,  of  the  gos- 
pel ;  but  the  gospel  is  the  injage  of  the  truth  itself.'  This  Is 
very  agreeable  to  m  hat  is  said,  Heb.  x.  1,  "  For  the  law  hav- 
ing a  shadow  of  good  things  to  come,  and  not  the  very  image 
of  the  things,  can  never  with  those  sacrifices  make  the  comers 
thereunto  perfect."  He  says  likewise :  '  Fors  after  the 
resurrection  the  truth  shall  be  clearly  manifested  to  us,  when 
we  "  shall  see  face  to  face,"  and  not  "  through  a  glass 
darkly"  and  "  in  part,"  the  holy  tabernacle,  the  city  in  the 
heavens,  "  whose  builder  and  maker  is  God  :"  here  he  joins 
together  words  of  1  Cor.  xiii.  12,  and  Heb.  xi.  10,  M'hich 
last  place  is  thus :  "  For  he  looked  for  a  city  which  hath 
foundations,  whose  builder  and  maker  is  God."  He  speaks'* 
of  "  Jesus  having  passed  into  the  heavens  ;"  the  very  same 
expressions  which  we  have  in  Heb.  iv.  14.  Having  made 
honourable  mention  of  Seth,  Enos,  Enoch,  Methuselah,  and 
Noah,  he  adds:  '  These'  were  the  first  lovers  of  righteous- 
ness, and  the  first  of  the  "  first-born  "  children  "  which  are 
written  in  heaven  :"  '  see  Heb.  xii.  23.  These  allusions,  and 
these  expressions,  borrowed,  as  it  seems,  from  the  epistle  to 
the  Hebrews,  afford  a  probable  argument  of  his  using  it, 
and  of  his  respect  for  it. 

Let  us  now  see  whether  Methodius  has  not  ascribed  thisepis- 
tle  to  St.  Paul :  '  Since,'  says'"  he,  '  the  law,  according  to  the 
apostle,  is  spiritual,  containing  images  of  good  things  to 
come.'  The  first  part  of  the  observation  seems  to  be  taken 
from  Rom.  vii.  14,  where  it  is  said,  that  "  the  law  is  spiritual :" 
and  the  second  from  Heb.  x.  1.  Indeed  the  writer  of  the 
epistle  to  the  Hebrews  there  says,  that  the  "  law  had  not  the 

" 6  vofiOQ'  aXV  Hx   aTWQ  r]v  wpaiog  wq  to  ivayyiKiov'  ikhvoq  yap  rvirog 

TIC  Jjv  KM  dKia  Tiiiv  fitWovTiiiv  TTpayjiaTMV'  TSTO  Si  aXrjdeia  koi  Z<^T)g  xap'C- 
Conviv.  p.  127.  A.  ap.  Corabef.  Auct.  Nov. 

^  'O  jxtv  yap  vofioQ  rrfg  eiKOVog  t^i  tvttoq  Kai  (FKia,  TOvrf^i  rs  tvayytXin'  rj  St 
iiKuiv,  TO  ivayytXiov  avTr)Q  Tr}Q  aXijOtiaQ.  Conviv.  p.  125.  C. 

B  To  yap  a\7]9tc;  fxiT  avwracnv  h]\io9>](nrai,6TraTt  Trpocnoirov  Kccravpoaonrov, 
Tt]v  ayiav  <tki]vi]V,  Tr)v  ttoXiv  TtjV  iv  apavoig,  »;<;  Ttx^i-Trig  Kai  iK^rjfiiHpyog 
Qtog,  a\X  s  ^i'  aiviyfiarwv  Koi  £/c  fitpsg  tnonrevaofitv.     Conv.  p.  96.  C. 

**  r(f)  Su\i]Kv9oTi  Tugspavag  Ijjffs.      Conv.  p.  129.  A. 

' Trpwroi  SiKaioffvvrjg  ysyovoTig  ipw^ai.,  Kai  Trpwrot  TrpwTOTOKutv  TtKVWv 

avoyiypap.fiti'wv  iv  spavoig.     Conv.  p.  105.  A. 

''  El  6  vofiog  £<rt,  Kara  rov  airo'^oXov,  rag  UKOvag  f/XTrtpit^wv  tojv  /xeXXov- 
T(ov.  ib.  p.  96.  A.  B. 

o  2 


1 96  Credibilily  of  the  Gospel  History. 

very  image  of  the  things:"  wliereas  Methodius  here  speaks 
of  the  law  containing  iniag'es  of  good  things:  but  he  useth  the 
Avord  image  loosely  :  he  means  no  more  than  what  he  had  ex- 
pressed in  the  words  before  cited  from  him,  that  the  "  law 
was  a  type  and  shadow  "  of  things  to  come,  and  as  such,  con- 
tained, or  obscurely  hinted  and  represented,  the  images  of  them. 
That  he  intends  not  to  say  any  thing  more  in  this  place,  than 
in  the  former,  is  evident  from  several  things  that  follo>v  here ; 
to  which  the  reader  is  referred,  if  he  has  any  doubt :  in  par- 
ticular he  says  presently  afterwards,  '  that'  the  Jews  had 
only  a  shadow  of  the  image,  at  the  third  remove  from  the 
truth.' 

Lastly,  there  is  in  the  Banquet  an  exhortation  to  stedfast- 
ness  in  virtue,  notwithstanding-  the  greatest  opposition  from 
the  enemy.  '  For™  ye  will  obtain  unspeakable  renown,  if 
ye  shall  overcome,  and  seize  the  seven  crowns,  for  the  sake 
of  which  the  "race"  and  combat"  is  set  before  us,"  accord- 
ing to  the  master  Paul.'  There  may  be  in  this  passage,  and 
in  Avhat  precedes,  a  reference  to  the  twelfth,  and  some  other 
verses  of  the  sixth  chapter  of  the  epistle  to  the  Ephesians  : 
but  the  latter  part  of  the  passage,  "  the  race  set  before  us," 
seems  to  be  taken  fi'om  Heb.  xii.  1  ;  and  for  that  it  is  more 
particularly  that  he  alleges  Paul's  authority. 

By  these  several  passages  I  am  induced  to  think  it  pro- 
bable that  Methodius  received  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews  as 
St.  Paul's. 

I  formerly  showed  the  reasons  why  1  do  not  esteem  the 
homily  concerning  Simeon  and  Anna  to  be  genuine.  I  am 
therefore  far  from  alleging  any  thing  out  of  it  as  a  proof  of 
the  sentiments  of  our  Methodius  :  but  if  that  piece  had  been 
genuine,  1  suppose  it  might  afford  an  undeniable  testimony 
to  this  epistle  ;  for  there  it  is  said,  that  '  °  God  "  took  on  him 
^or  laid  hold  of]  the  seed  of  Abraham,"  according-  to  the 
most  divine  Paul,  and  through  him  of  the  whole  human 
kind  :'  see  Heb.  ii.  16. 

IX.  There  is  very  little  notice  taken  of  the  seven  catholic 
epistles  in  the  remaining  pieces  of  this  writer. 

1.  He  speaks  of  Christ  as"  the  "  chief  shepherd  :"  perhaps 
he  borrows  that  character  from  1  Pet.  v.  4. 

2.  In  the  place  referred  to  a  little  while  ago  Methodius 

'  AWa  la^aioi  y.tv  rrjv  OKiav  ttjq  tiKOvoc,  rpirijv  otto  Trjg  aXifiuaq,  KaTi)y- 
yiXKavif  K.  \.    lb.  p.  96.  C.  ■"    Mvpioi'  yap  i^tre  /cXfOf,  friv 

a(piKriTt  viKrjaarrut  tuq  tir  avrs  <r«^av«f  iirra,  Si  ng  6  ayuiv  vifiiv  TrpoKiirai  Kai 
7)  iruKt],  Kara  rov  ciCatrnaXov  TlavXov.   ib.  p.  116.  B. 

" aWa  (TTTtfifjiaroQ  Afipaan  firCKaftoyLivoQ  Kara  rov  Buorurnv  IlavXov, 

Kat  Si  avTH  iravTog  th  avOpwrniH  fvXit.  De  Sim.  et  A    p.  427.  D.  Combefis. 

°  ApxtToi/x/ji'.  Conv.  p.  70.  C. 


Methodius,     A.  D.  290.  197 

says  of  the  Ebionites,  that  '  i*  they  assert  the  prophets  spoke 
of  their  own  motion.'  Possibly  our  author  has  liore  an  eye 
to  2  Pet.  i.  20,  21.  "  Knowing-  this  first,  tliat  no  prophecy 
of  the  scripture  Is  i  of  any  private  interpretation  :  for  the 
prophecy  came  not  in  ohl  time  by  the  will  of  man,  but  holy 
men  of  God"^  spake  as  they  were  moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost." 
He  says :  '  The**  Jews  look  for  a  sensible  [or  earthly  king- 
doni,  and  place  their  hopes  in  this  strange  land,  which  the 
divine  word  says  shall  pass  away.'  In  2  Pet.  iii.  10.  it  is 
said,  "  the  heavens  shall  pass  away*  with  a  great  noise:" 
perhaps  Methodius  refers  to  this  text,  perhaps  to  some  others. 
In  another  place  he  says,  '  the"  whole  world  shall  be  con- 
sumed [or  overflowed]  with  fire  ;'  though  according  to  his 
opinion  it  will  not  then  utterly  perish,  but  will  be  renewed 
and  restored  :  possibly  Methodius  here  refers  to  2  Pet.  iii. 
6,  7,  where  it  is  said  :  "  the  world  that  then  was,  being'' 
overflowed  with  water,  perished  :  but  the  heavens  and  the 

earth  which   are  now, are  kept  in  store,  reserved  unto 

fire  against  the  day  of  judgment." 

3.  He  observes,  that  "  '*^the  world  lieth  in  wickedness:" 
the  same  thing-  that  is  said  in  the  same  words  in  1  John  v. 
20. 

4.  I  transcribe  nothing-  more  here  relating-  to  these  epistles. 
Undoubtedly  Methodius  received  the  first  epistle  of  Peter, 
and  the  first  epistle  of  John  ;  for  they  were  admitted  as 
g-enuine,  without  controversy,  by  all  catholic  christians.  But 
what  was  our  author's  opinion  concerning-  the  epistle  of 
James,  the  second  of  Peter,  the  second  and  third  of  John, 
and  the  epistle  of  Jude,  does  not  clearly  appear  from  his 
remaining-  works. 

X.  The  Revelation  is  very  often  quoted  by  Methodius  as 
tlie  writing-  of  John:  '  And"  that  the  Word  who  became 
man  is  the  chief  virgin,  [or  prince  of  virgins,]  as  well  as 
the  chief  shepherd,  and  chief  prophet  of  the  church,  John, 

P d>c  'EjSiovaioi,   £?  iSiac  Kivrjmwg  thq  7rpo(pi]rag  \t\a\ijKevai  (j)i\ov(i- 

KUVTSQ.     Conv.  p.  113.  D.  ''    loiac  e-jriXvatwc  s  yiverai. 

'   aW  VTTO  Trvtv/iaTog  ayis  (ptoofiivoi  i\a\r]aav  o'l  ayioi  9£8  avBoioiroi. 

*  (SamXtiav  aiadi]Tt]v  TTpocySoKUivrtg,  kcu  tm  yqq  ravTT]g  tjjc  aWoTQiag,  tjv 
irapiXtvfftffQai  Xoyog,  riOtfitvoi  rag  tXiriCag.     Conv.  p.  90.  a. 

'   Ej/  y  oi  fipavoi  potZr}lov  TrapiXivaovTUi. 

"  'A-n-ag  6  Koff[iog  KaraKXvKontvog  wpi.  ap.  Epiph.  Hser.  64.  n.  xxxi.  p. 
553.  D.  "  vSuTi  KaraKXvaOeig. 

"  T<(j  Tov  Kofffiov  ev  T({)  TTovripiii  K£i(70ai.  De  Resiir.  ap.  Phot.  Cod.  234.  p. 
321.  et  ap.  Combef.  Bibl.  p.  922.  B. 

"  'Ore  Si  KCU  apxiTtapQtvog  6v  rpoTtov  Koi  apxt7roin7]v  Kca  ap^i7r(jo</ijjT>jc 
yiyovev  6  Xoyog  tvai'Opo)Trj]rTag,  rrjg  (KKXijmng,  icai  6  ■x^piroXrjTTTog  t}fiiv  TrapiTt)- 
aiv  iv  /3i/3Xt(jj  Tijg  ATroKaXvdiewg  I(i>avvr}Q,  Xtywv'  Kaitidov,  k.  X.  Conv.  p.  70. 
CD. 


198  Crcdibililij  of  (he  Gospel  History. 

inspired  by  Christ,  lias  shown  us  in  tlie  book  of  the  Reve- 
lation :  "  And  I  looked,  and  lo,  a  lamb  stood  on  the  mount 
Sion. — These  are  they  which  are  not  defiled  with  women, 
for  they  are  virgins :  these  are  they  which  follow  the  Lamb 
whithersoever  he  goes:"  '  Rev.  xiv.  1 — 4.  This  passage  is 
in  the  Banquet;  and  in  the  same  work:  '  Asy  also  John 
shows,  saying,  that  the  incense  in  the  vials  of  the  four  and 
twenty  elders  are  the  prayers  of  saints  :"  '  see  Rev.  v.  8. 
Again,  '  John^  relating  the  Revelation  says:  "  And  there 
appeared  a  great  Monder  in  heaven,"  '  and  what  follows : 
Avhere  Methodius  quotes  Rev.  xii.  1 — 6.  In  the  same  work 
the''  Revelation  is  quoted  as  scripture,  and  a  book  of  autho- 
rity. In  the  extracts  out  of  the  treatise  of  the  Resurrection, 
made  by  Photius,  he  quotes  this  book'  as  written''  by  the 
blessed  John.  In  the  same  extracts  are  these  words :  '  How  "^ 
then  is  Christ  celebrated  by  the  prophets  and  the  apostles 
as  the  "  first-begotten  of  the  dead  ?"  This  is  often  said  of 
Christ  in  the  New  Testament,  as  Acts  xxvi.  23;  1  Cor.  xv. 
20  ;  and  twice  almost  in  the  very  expression  of  Methodius, 
Col.  i.  18,  and  Rev.  i.  5.  If  we  could  be  certain  that  Metho- 
dius referred  to  this  place  in  the  Revelation,  then  we  should 
be  assured  that  he  supposed  the  writer  of  this  book  to  be 
the  apostle  John.  Finally,  Methodius  is  mentioned  by*^ 
Andrew  of  Csesarea  with  Irenogus  and  others,  who  had  bore 
testimony  to  the  divine  inspiration  of  this  book.  I  think  it 
is  plain  from  what  has  been  here  collected,  that  Methodius 
received  the  Revelation  as  a  book  of  authority ;  and  very 
probable  that  he  esteemed  it  a  writing-  of  John  the  apostle 
and  evangelist. 

XI.  His  forms  of  quotation,  or  general  terms  made  use 
of  in  speaking  of  these  books,  and  marks  of  respect  for  them 
are  such  as  these ;  •=  scriptures,  Hioly,  or  sacred  scriptures, 
are  s divine  scriptures.  He  speaks  of'  the  Old  Testament, 
which  implies  an  acknowledgment  of  another  that  is  new; 
both  which  are  indeed  quoted;  some  while  ago  bespeaks  of 
prophets  and  apostles,  thereby  expressing  the  two  general 

^   KaStoif  Kai  Iwavvt](;  intjpvae,  k.  X.  ib.  p.  97.  A. 

'  ri]v  AnoKaXv^iv  I)  Iioavvric  fSj/ysjUff o^  \fy£t.  ib.  p.  109.  D. 

*  yivirai  Kara  vhv  Trie  ypcKf'rjQ,  ottoti  r/  fitv  ATroKoXinpiS  apffiva   Tt]v 

iKKXrimav  EwpiCfrni  ytvvq.v.   \h.  p.  1)1.  C. 

''  'O  fxuKapioQ  lwavvr)Q.  ap.  Phot.  Cod.  234.  p.  924.  ap.  Comlsef.  p.  326.  B. 

•^  riwc  ^1  tTi  6  Xpi<?og  trpoJTOToicoQ  iivai  Ta)v  viicpwt'  inro  tojv  7rpo(pr]Tujv  Kai 
Tiov  aTToroXoiv  actrax ;  ap.  I'hot.  ib.  925.  et  ap.  ConiW.  p.  328. 

<!  VjrJ.  Aiidr.  Prolog,  in  Apoc.  p.  3.  B.  C.  "  Vid.  Method. 

Conv.  p.  125.  A.  et  passim.  ^  Tate  ayiaiQ  ypa<paig.  ib.  p.  GG.  D, 

8    A I  S^tiai  ypa^ai.  p.  99.  A.  ''   Ek  TraXaiag  vfiiv  K^yw  TrapfSo/ia* 

SiaOtjKije  iyypa(pov  Trpo(pi]Teiav.  ib.  p.  130.  C. 


Methodius.     A.  D.  290.  199 

divisions  of  tlie  scriptures  before  aiul  after  the  coming  of 
Cliribt :  lie'  quotes  these  books  by  way  of  proof  of  what  lie 
says.  lie''  afiinns,  that  '  there  is  no  contradiction  or  ab- 
surdity in  the  divine  Mords.'  The  gospels  are  cited  by  him 
after  this  manner:  'The'  Lord  declares  in  the  gospels.' 
Again:  '  As'"  also  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  directs  and  com- 
mands ill  the  gospels:  "  Let  your  lights  shine  and  your 
loins  be  girded  about,  and  be  ye  yourselves  like  men  that 
wait  for  their  lord  :"  '  Luke  xii.  35—38.  <  "  For"^  ye  are 
the  salt  of  the  earth,"  said  the  Lord  to  the  apostles  :'  see 
Matt.  V.  13.  '  Where,"  according-  to  the  true  oracles  of  the 
Lord,  they  neither  marry  nor  are  given  in  marriage  :'  see 
3Iatth.  xxii.  30.  He  quotes  St.  Paul  after  this  manner : 
saysi'  the  blessed  Paul;  'i  the  most  wise  Paul;  'Paul,  a  wise 
man,  and  most  spiritual,  or  full  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  He^ 
recommends  the  study  and  meditation  of  the  scriptures. 

XH.  In  the  remains  of  Methodius  there  are  many  inter- 
pretations of  texts  of  scripture ;  but,  in  my  opinion,  for  the 
most  part,  such  as  do  little  honour  to  the  author's  judgment : 
I  shall  put  down  two  or  three,  which  are  somewhat  remark- 
able. 

1.  He  understands*  the  words  of  Christ  in  John  v.  39,  to 
be  a  command  to  "  search  the  scriptures ;"  not  a  declaration 
M'hat  was  then  the  practice  of  the  Jews  :  accordingly,  he 
makes  use  of  this  text  as  an  argument  to  search  even  the 
most  abstruse  and  difficult  parts  of  scripture,  and  as  an 
encouragement  to  explain  them  so  far  as  we  are  able. 

2.  St.  Paul  M  rites  :  "  I  knew  a  man  in  Christ, — such  an 
one  caught  up  to  the  third  heaven.  And  I  knew  such  a 
man,— how  that  he  was  caught  up  into  paradise:"  2  Cor. 
xii.  2—4.     Methodius  is"  clearly  of  opinion  that  the  apostle 

'  OvSe  yap  a/taprupoc  o  Xoyog  ypa<pbjv.  ap.  Epiph.  p.  548.  D.  Vid.  ib.  n.  xvii. 
p.  539.  C.  ^  'On fitiSsfiia  virivnvTuoaiQ  rj  aroina  iv  roiQ^tioiQ 

\oyoiQ.  ap.  Epiphan.  ib.  Heer.  64.  p.  555.  B. 

'    Kat  6  Kv^ioQ tv  tvayyiKioiQ  iraptyyva.   Con  v.  p.  66.  D. 

■"  Kad'  ov  rpoTTOV  km  6  Kvpiog  ijfiojv  (v  tvayyiXtoig  Iijffsc  XptTog,  tuSe  vofio- 
9tTwv.     Conv.  p.  92.  B.  C.  "    Y/itig  yap  f^t  to  a\ugTr]Q  yt/g, 

6  Kvpiogt(pt]  Toig  a-rro'^oXoig.  ib.  p.  67.  D.  °   ^v9a  nn  yafisaiv 

an  yafiiaKovTm,  Kura  rag  a\l/tvStig  th  KvpiH  i^pjjiTftsct.ib.  p.  76.  C. 

^ (ptjaiv  6  ^uKupiog  UavXog.  Conv.  p.  67.  D. 

1  KaOa-TTip  (cat  o  co(po)TaTog  navXog  ^»j\oi.  ap.  Phot.  Cod.  234.  p.  924.  f. 

^  'Qg  UK  av  6  Trviv^ariKioraTog  Km  ffofog  avrjp,  rov  UavXov  Xtyu)'  Conv.  p. 
77.    A.  ^   UpioTov  roj'  wpaio%'    rtjv   TrtTtv   KTt}(Taa9<i)   Kap-Kov' 

lira  Ta  KaXXvvOpa,  Tr]V  a(TKi](nv  kul  fi(XiTi]v  roiv  ypacptov.   ib.  p.  127.  C. 

'  rifjn  h  TH  Tt]v  tirtXvffiv  avTwv  avivpaaOai  kui  enreiv,  (iti^ov  r]  KaO'  I'niag' 
onti)gToXfii]nov,  TnTitiaaaavTif)  KtXivaavTi  rag  ypafag  eptvvav.  Conv.  p.  1 10.  A. 

"  'On  Svo  aTTOKaXiJiptig  (pt]m  ytyovtvai  Tii)  ayi<iJ  UavXtx)'  Xeyti  yap,  aXX'  sSb 
o  (tTToroXog  vnonOeTai  fivai  rov  TrapaStiirov  £v  r<[)  rpirqj  Hpavij)  TOig  Xinnov 
aKpoaffOai   Xoywv  fTriTafuvoig Stio  anoKaXvxpng  fityaXag  uopaKevai  /.ojvwte. 


200  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

here  speaks  of  two  remarkable  revelations,  and  two  different 
raptures,  one  into  the  third  heaven,  the  other  into  paradise ; 
and  he  thinks  that  they  who  carefully  attend  to  the  ex- 
pressions of  the  npostle  will  perceive,  that  he  does  not  speak 
of  paradise  and  the  third  heaven  as  one  and  the  same  place, 
or  suppose  paradise  to  be  in  the  third  heaven. 

3.  Theodoi'et  has  quoted  this  passage  of  Methodius  out 
of  his  discourse  Concerning-  Martyrs :  '  For,'  says^  he, 
'  martyrdom  is  so  admirable  and  desirable  that  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ  himself,  the  Son  of  God,  was  pleased  to  be  a 
martyr,  not  esteeming  it  a  thing-  to  be  earnestly  sought,  to 
be  like  God,  that  he  might  bless  man  to  whom  he  had  de- 
scended, with  this  gift  also :'  see  Philip,  ii.  6.  This  is  the 
entire  passage  as  given  us  by  Theodofet.  Bishop  Bull'" 
understood  the  expression  of  St.  Paul  here  made  use  of  in 
the  sense  of  our  English  version,  "  thought  it  not  robbery 
to  be  equal  with  God  :"  and  he  refers  to  a  place  of  Petavius, 
where  he  also  is  supposed  to  be  of  the  same  opinion.  Never- 
theless it  seems  to  me  that,  in  this  passage  of  Methodius, 
the  expression  can  admit  of  no  other  meaning  than  that  in 
the  translation  I  have  made,  and  that  it  must  denote  a  volun- 
tary humiliation  of  Jesus  Christ.  There  is  likewise  a  passage 
in  the  Banquet  where  Methodius  refers  to  Philip,  ii.  6,  7; 
I  put  it  in  the"  margin  :  I  suppose  it  does  not  weaken  but 
confirm  the  interpretation  1  have  given  of  the  expression  in 
the  sixth  verse  ;  which  sense,  it  is  certain,  appears  frequently 
in  the  christian  writers  of  the  third  century. 

4.  St.  Paul  writes :  "  And  the  dead  in  Christ  shall 
rise  first:  then  we  which  are  alive:"  1  Thess.  iv.  16,  17. 
By  "  the  dead,"  y  Methodius  understood  our  bodies :  "  we 
which  are  alive,"  are  our  souls,  which  receive  "  the  dead," 
that  is,  our  bodies,  out  of  the  earth  :  then  "  we,"  soul  and 

dig  avaXtKpdng  £vapywc.  k.  X.  ap.  Phot.  Cod.  234.  p.  910.  ap.  Combef.  Bib. 
p.  308. 

^  OvTb>  yap  BavnaTOV  km  "TrepifTirnSarov  £<ri  to  fiaprvpiov,  on  avTOQ  o  Kvpiog 
Iriasg  Xpi-roc  o  v'log  tb  Qeb,  rt/xwi/  avro  enaprvpr^at,  8%  apnaynov  rjyriaaaivog 
TO  UVM  loa  Qiif),  iva  km  thti^  rov  avOputirov  rq)  ;^api(T)UaTt,  (ig  6v  Kare^t],  'jf^ri. 
ap.  Theodoret.  Dial.  i.  Tom.  iv.  p.  37. 

*  In  libro  de  Martynbus  apud  Theodoretum  Christum  nominat  Dominum 
et  Filium  Dei,  qui  non  rapinam  arbitratus  est,  esse  aequalem  Deo.  Quae, 
Petavio  etiam  judice,  non  nisi  in  Deum  verum  cadere  possunt.  Bull.  Def.  Nic. 
Sect.  ii.  c.  13.  n.  9.  Vid.  Petav.  Praifat.  in  Tom.  ii.  c.  4.  n.  5. 

*  Ato  Kui  ava(popav  ug  rov  vlov  avftXjj^c  th  Qen,  airo  th  TrXrjpojfxarog  rrjg 
^eoTt)Tog  UQ  Tov  /3tor  iXr)\v9oTog.  KevwOtig  yap  km  Tt]V  /iop^tjv  m  SsXa 
TrpouXa^MV,  lie  f">iv  tavrn  TtXtiortfTa  iraXiv  avtirXiipojdrj.  ic.  \.     Conv.  p.  1 15. 

A.  15.  ^ rwr'  tTtr,  avra  ri[i(ov  ravra  ra  aitifiara'  t)piig  yap 

01  l^wvTtg,  a'l  ^VXM  tafifV  oi  airoXaix^avovTig  tyipOtvrig  [al.  tytfiQtvrag\  ik  rtfg 
yr]g  viKpsg'  K.  X.  ap.  Phot.  Cod.  234.  p.  924.  in.  et  ap.  Combef.  p.  325. 


Methodius.     A.  D.  290.  201 

body,  "  are  to  be  caught  up  tog-etlier  to  meet  the  Lord." 
This  may  be  allowed  to  be  a  difKcult  text;  but  I  am  apt  to 
think  that  many  will  consider  this  paraphrase  as  an  example 
of  the  wrong  and  injudicious  interpretations  of  our  author, 
which  I  spoke  of  formerly  ;  nor  do  1  intend  to  add  any 
more. 

XIII.  We  perceive  from  the  remains  of  Methodius  that 
he  received  the  four  gospels,  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  St. 
Paul's  epistles,  and  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  as  one  of 
them.  We  have  no  plain  evidence  how  many  of  the  seven 
catholic  epistles  he  received:  undoubtedly  he  owned  the 
first  of  St.  Peter  and  first  of  St.  John,  there  never  having" 
been  any  doubt  concerning  the  genuineness  of  these.  His 
opinion  about  the  rest  Ave  are  not  acquainted  with.  He 
likewise  quotes  the  Revelation  frequently  as  a  book  of 
sacred  scripture,  written  by  John;  whom  it  is  likely  he 
supposed  to  be  John  the  apostle  and  evangelist.  We  have 
seen  in  him  clear  proofs  that  the  scriptures  of  the  New 
Testament,  generally  received  by  christians,  were  well 
known,  mucli  used,  and  highly  esteemed :  being  books  of 
authority,  and  appealed  to  in  all  points  of  dispute  and  con- 
troversy. I  have  not  observed  in  this  Greek  Avriter,  of 
the  third  century,  any  quotations  of  christian  apocryphal 
writings:  nor  do  the  works  of  this  author  afford  any  the 
least  ground  to  suppose  that  there  were  any  Avritings  of 
ancient  christian  authors  that  were  esteemed  sacred  and  of 
authority,  beside  those  Avhich  are  now  generally  received  as 
such  by  us;  namely,  the  Avritings  of  apostles  and  evangelists. 


202  Credtbility  of  the  Gospel  History. 


CHAP.  LVIII. 


LUCIAN,  PRESBYTER  OF  ANTIOCH ;  AND  HESYCHIUS, 
BISHOP  IN  EGYPT. 

I.  Lncian,  his  history,  and  testimoines  to  him.  II.  His 
edition  of  the  scriptures  of  the  Old  and  JSTeic  Testament. 
III.  Hesychiiis,  his  history,  and  his  edition  of  the  Old 
and  New  Testament.  IV.  Lucian's  icorks.  V.  His 
sentiment  upon  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity.  VI.  Con- 
c hiding  remarks. 

I.  SAYS^'  Jerom  in  his  Catalogue  of  Ecclesiastical  Writers  : 
'  Lucian,  a  most  eloquent  man,  presbyter  of  the  church  of 
'  Antioch,  was  so  laborious  in  the  study  of  the  scriptures, 
'  that  to  this  day  some  copies  of  the  scriptures  are  called 
*  Lucian's.  There  are  extant  some  discourses  for  small 
'  treatises]  of  his  concerning  the  faith,  and  some  snort  epis- 
'  ties  to  several.  He  suffered  at  Nicomedia  for  confessing- 
'  the  name  of  Christ,  in  the  reign  of  Maximin,  and  was  buried 
'  at  Helenopolis  in  Bithynia.' 

Cave  says  that  ''Lucian  was  contemporary  with  Paul  of 
Samosata,  and  flourished  chiefly  about  the  year  290.  He 
suffered  martyrdom  in  "^  311,  or  rather"^  in  312,  and  on  the 
seventh  day  of  January  in  that  year. 

It  is  now  commonly  said  by^  learned  moderns,  that  "^Lu- 

'•  Lucianus,  vir  disertissimus,  Antiochenae  ecclesiae  presbyter,  tantum  in 
scripturarum  studio  laboravit,  ut  usque  nunc  quaedam  exemplana  scriplurarum 
Lucianea  nuncupentur.  Femntur  ejus  de  Fidelibelli,  et  breves  ad  nonnullos 
epistolae.  Passiis  est  Nicomediee  ob  confessionem  Christi  sub  persecutione 
Maximini,  sepultusque  est  Helenopoli  Bithyniae.  Hier.  de  V.  I.  cap.  77. 

''  Noster  hie  Paulo  Samosateno  erat  aetate  suppar,  prsecipue  vero  claruit  circa 
an.  290.     Cav.  Hist.  L.  in  Luciano. 

«=  Baron.  Ann.  311.  n.  iii.  iv.  Fabric.  Bibl.  Gr.  T.  v.  p.  279. 

"*  Ruin.  Act.  Mart.  p.  504.  Pagi  Ann.  311.  n.  x.  et  xx.  Basnag.  312.  n. 
iv.     Tillem.  St.  Lucien.  Mem.  T.  v.  P.  iii.  p.  150,  151,  et  note  v. 

*  Lucianus,  nobili  prosapia  ortus,  patriam  ha])uit  Samosata,  urbem  Syriae 
non  incelebrem,  ejusdem  et  urbis  et  nominis  cum  famoso  illo  christianae 
religionls  derisore,  qui  Trajani  tempore  vixit.  Cav.  ubi  supr.  Conf.  Basn.  an 
312.  n.  23.  Tillem.  ubi  supr.  p.  146.  et  passim. 

<■  In  the  preceding  note  I  have  placed  Tillemont  among  those  who  say 
Lucian  was  born  at  Samosata :  for  such  are  his  words :  II  naquit  a  Samosates 
dans  la  Syrie  appellee  Euphratesienne  ubi  supr.  p.  146.  And  yet  he  was  aware 
that  this  Ls  destitute  of  foundation  ;  as  appears  from  what  he  says  in  another 
place.  II  etoit,  a  ce  qu'  on  pretend,  de  meme  pays  que  Paul  de  Samosate. 
ib.  p.  3P8.  not.  1.  sur.  S.  Lucien 


LuciAN.     A.  D.  290.  203 

cian  was  born  at  Sainosata  :  but  it  is  said,  1  think,  upon  the 
credit  only  of*?  the  Acts  of  Lucian,  and''  of  Suiihis,  who' 
copied  those  Acts  ;  which  is  no  authority  at  all.  Tillemont 
himself  says,  that''  '  those  Acts  are  certainly  a  Avork  of 
'  Metaphrastes,  and  that  they  are  mixed  with  fables,  and 
'  have  divers  faults  contrary  to  the  truth  of  history  ;  which,' 
says  he,  '  may  excuse  our  not  paying-  any  regard  to  them, 
'  when  they  differ  from  other  authors ;  and  allows  us  to  take 
'  little  notice  of  them  in  other  points.'  Bollandus  likewise 
observes  upon  those  Acts,  that'  the  Menologium  makes 
Lucian  a  native  of  Antioch. 

It  seems  to  me  that  the  author  of  tlie  Acts,  who  had  little 
regard  to  truth,  and  was  not  much  concerned  to  be  rightly 
informed,  confounds  upon  this  occasion  Lucian,  presbyter 
of  Antioch,  with  Lucian  the  famous  heathen  dialogist,  who 
lived  in  the  second  century,  and  was  of  Samosata. 

This  may  be  thought  a  trifle  not  worth  taking  notice  of: 
but  really  it  gives  one  offence  to  see  learned  men  deliver  for 
history  what  has  no  good  authority,  and  supply  their  accounts 
of  this  eminent  person  out  of  a  piece  which  is  good  for 
nothing  :  nor  is  this  particular  altogether  trifling  ;  for  when 
those  learned  writers  come  to  consider  a  difficult  question, 
concerning  Lucian's  opinion  about  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity, 
this  circumstance  of  Lucian's  being  a  native  of  the  same  city 
with  Paul,  bishop  of  Antioch,  is  almost  always""  taken  in  as 
a  thing  of  some  moment. 

I  must  add  that  it  is  to  the  honour  of  Theodoric  Ruinart, 
that  he  has  not  inserted  those  Acts  in  his  collection  of 
Genuine  and  Select  Acts  of  Martyrs :  nor  do  I  observe  that 
in  his  account  of  Lucian  he  has  borrowed  any  one  article 
from  them. 

Of  this  person,  in  his  Ecclesiastical  Histor}^  Eusebius 
writes  after  this  manner,  speaking  of  those  who  suffered  in 
the  persecution  begun  by  Dioclesian  :  '  Among*  the  presi- 
'  dents  of  the  churches  in  great  cities,  Avho  suffered  at  that 

e  Vid.  Bolland.  Act.  Sanctor.  T.  i.  p.  359. 

''  Vid.  Suid.  V,  AnKtavog.  et  Hodius  de  Bibl.  Text.  Orig.  1.  iv.  c.  iii.  p.  G26. 
et  1.  iii.  P.  i.  c.  5.  p.  303.  '  Vid.  Kuster.  ad  Suid.  ib.  not.  5. 

^  See  Mem.  Ec.  T.  v.  P.  iii.  p.  345,  346.  '  Menologium  habet 

ex  Antiothia  Syriae  ortum  fuisse  Lucianum.  Act.  Sanct.  ib.  p.  359. 

'"  Ilium  autem  familiarera  fuisse  Pauli  Samosateni,  credibile  est.  Fuit  enim 
ipse  oriundus  ex  urbe  Samosatensi,  ut  legitur  in  ejus  vita.  Et  cum  Paulus  ex 
ea  urbc  ad  Antiochensem  cpiscopatam  evectus  est,  Lucianus  quoque  ecclesiae 
Antiochcnae  presbyter  fuit.  Pagi  Ann.  311.  n.  xii.  Conf.  Vales.  Annot.  in 
Thdrt.  H.  E.  1.  i.  c.  iv.  Ex  urbe  Pauli  emt  haeretici ;  a  Paulo  ad  presbyteratum 
in  nobilissima  ecclesia  Antiochena  promotus  fuerat :  cujus  et  errorem  cum 
imbibisset,  &c.     Basnag.  Ann.  312.  n.  13. 


204  Credibilily  of  the  Gospel  History. 

*  time,  the  first  to  be  recorded  in  the  monuments  of  the 
'  pious  is  Anthimus,  bishop  of  Niconiedia,  a  witness  of  the 
'  kingdom  of  Christ,  who  was  beheaded:  and"  of  Antioch, 
'  Lucian,  a  presbyter  of  that  church,  a  man  of  an  unblemished 
'  character  throughout  his  whole  life ;  he  also  suffered  at 
'  Niconiedia,  where,  in  the  presence  of  the  emperor,  he  first 
'  apologized  for  the  heavenly  kingdom  of  Christ  in  words, 
'  and  afterwards  farther  recommended  it  by  deeds.' 

Again,  in  another  place,  the  same  ecclesiastical  historian, 
having  related  the  death  of  Peter  of  Alexandria  by  order  of 
Maximinus,  adds :  '  And  with  him  suffered  many  other 
'  bishops  of  Egypt  in  like  manner;  as  did  also  "^Lucian, 
'  presbyter  of  the  church  of  Antioch,  an  excellent  man  in 
'  all  respects,  celebrated  for  his  piety  and  his  knowledge  of 
'  the  scriptures:  he  was  carried  from  Antioch  to  Nicomedia, 
'  where  the  emperor  then  was  ;  and,  having  made  an  apology 
'  before  the  governor  for  the  doctrine  he  professed,  he  was 
'  sent  to  prison,  and  there  put  to  death.' 

At  this  place  Rufinus,  in  his  Latin  translation  of  Eusebius's 
Ecclesiastical  History,  makes  a  little  alteration ;  and  also 
inserts  a  speech  of  considerable  length,  said  to  be?  the  same 
apology  which  Lucian  made  to  the  Roman  governor. 
Whereupon,  as  i Rufinus  says,  '  the  audience  being-  much 
'  moved,  and  almost  persuaded,  Lucian  was  commanded 
'  away  to  prison,  there  to  be  put  to  death,  as  if  they  feared 
'  a  tumult  of  the  people.'  Of  this  apology  I  intend  to  take 
some  farther  notice  by  and  by. 

There  is  still  extant  a  panegyrical''  oration  or  homily  of 
St.  Chrysostom,  pronounced  on  the  seventh  day  of  January 
387,  in  honour  of  this  martyr  :  but  it  is  so  oratorical,  that 
though  St.  Chrysostom  eidargeth  upon  the  sufferings  and 
fortitude  of  Lucian,  and  upon  the  manner  of  his  death,  it  is 
very  <lifHcult  to  say  how  he  would  have  us  to  suppose  that 
the  martyrdom  of  this  presbyter,  one  of  his  predecessors 

"  T(ov  S'  £7r'  jKvTioy^eiac  ^aprvpoiv  rov  Travra  ftwv  apiTog  -K^itafivripoi;  rt]Q 
avroQi  7rapot/ci«c  AnKiavog'  iv  ry  NiKO/xjjc'ti^  km  uvtoq,  (SamXewQ  nnTrapovTog, 
TTjv  spaviov  Ts  XpiTH  /BrtfTiXtiov  Xoyffi  TrpoTtpov  Si  airoXoyiac,  etra  Se  Kai  epyoiQ, 
avaKTjpv^ac-     Kus.  H.  E.  1.  viii.  c.  xiii.  in. 

°  Ahkuivoq  te  avTjp  tci  ■Travra  apiTOQ,  /3((^  n  tyK(>ari]Q,  Kai  roig  icpoic  fiaOrj- 
fiam  (7vyKeKpoTr]Hivoc,  ri)q  Kar  Avrw^tiav  TrapoiKiag  Trpiofivrtpoq,  axBug  im 
Trie's  iKo^iTt^eo)VTro\t(i)Q,  tvQa  TrjviKuvra  (3am\fvc  dtarpiftiov  trvyx'^^'^'  Trapaaxiov 
Tt  iiri  TH  apxpvTog  rrjv  vmp  t]g  Trpo'itaro  diSaoKaXtag  airokoyiav,  5(afi(0Tt]pitiJ 
TrapaSoOttc  ktivvvtoi,  ib.  1.  ix.  c.  vi. 

1'  Turn  ille,  data  sibi  facilitate  dicendi,  hujusmodi  orationem  de  fide  nostra 
habuissc  dicitur.     Rutin.  H.  E.  1.  ix.  c.  vi. 

1  Et  cum  pene  jam  his  verbis  auditoribus  suadere  coepisset,  arripi  jubetur 
in  carcerem,  ibique  quasi  absque  tumultu  populi  necari.  ib. 

'  T.  ii.  p.  524—529. 


LuciAN.     A.  D.  290.  205 

in  the  church  of  Antioch,  was  performed  :  whether"  by 
famine,  or  by  torture,  or'  by  both  ;  and  whether  in  prison, 
or  abroad. 

Sozomen,  having"  occasion  to  speak  of  Lucian,  who,  he 
says,  snftered  martyrdom  at  Nicomedia,  gives  him  tliis  great 
character,  that**  '  he  was  likcM'isc  on  other  accounts  very 
'  eminent,  and  in  a  signal  manner  skilful  in  the  sacred 
'  scriptures.' 

Honorius  of  Autun  says,  that  ^Lucian  was  first  presbyter 
of  Antioch,  and  afterwards  bishop  of  Nicomedia  :  but  this  is 
not  said  by  Eusebius,  or  Jerom  ;  and  therefore,  probably, 
it  is  without  foundation.  The  error  may  have  arisen  from 
the  place  of  Lucian's  martyrdom,  or  from  the  near  mention 
made  of  Anthimus,  bishop  of  Nicomedia,  in  Eusebius's 
Ecclesiastical  History.  Eusebius  does  not  suppose  Lucian 
to  have  been  bishop  of  Nicomedia,  nor  to  have  had  any  office 
in  that  church  ;  for  he  reckons  Lucian  among  the  martyrs  of 
the  church  of  Antioch. 

Jerom  assured  us  that  Lucian  was  buried  at  Helenopolis 
in  Bithynia;  but  why  he  was  buried  there  does  not  certainly 
appear  from  any  good  authority.  In  his  Chronicle,  at  the 
21st  year  of  Constantine's  reign,  Jerom  says  :  '  Constantino"' 
'  repairing  Drepanum,  a  city  in  Bithynia,  in  honour  of  the 
'  martyr  Lucian,  who  was  there  buried,  called  it  Helenopo- 
'  lis  from  his  mother.'  The  same"  is  in  the  Paschal  Chro- 
nicle, with  this  addition,  that  Constantino  enacted  that  all 
the  lands  in  view  of  the  city  should  be  exempted  from 
tribute :  which  privilege,  the  author  says,  was  enjoyed  to 
his  time.  Philostorgius,  the  credulous  Arian  historian,  says, 
thaty  the  empress  Helena's  fondness  for  that  city  was  owing" 
to  this  only,  that  the  body  of  Lucian  was  brought  thither 
after  his  martyrdom  by  a  dolphin. 

In  a  church  of  this  city,  which  was  near  Nicomedia,  Con- 

*  Vid.  Tillem.  sur  S.  Lucien,  noles  6  et  7.  II  y  a  bien  de  la  difficulte  pour 
le  genre  de  la  mort  de  S.  Lucien.     Id.  ib.  p.  410. 

'  Martyrium  vero  S.  Luciani  presbyteri  Antiocheni,  qui  fame  et  cruciatibus 
multis,  ut  ait  Chiysostomus,  Christi  nonien  gloriose  confessus  est,  accidit  anno 
311,  vel  312.     Monitum  ad  Horn,  in  S.  Lucian.  p.  523. 

"  AnKuxva,  rs  ev  tiiKoiitjSeu}  fiaprvprjffavrog,  avSpog  ra  rt  aWa  tvSoKi- 

fiiorars,  (cat  rag  upag  yparfiag  tig  ukoov  rjKpiPwKOTog.  Sozom.  1.  iii.  c.  v.  p. 
503.  A.  "  Antiochense  ecciesise  presbyter,  postmodum  Nicomediae 

episcopus.     Honor,  de  Scriptor.  Ec.  c.  78.  "  Drepanum,  Bithyniae 

civitatem,  in  honorem  martyris  Luciani  ibi  conditi  Constantinus  instaurans  ex 
vocabulo  matris  suae  Helenopolim  nuncupavit.     Hier.  Chr.  1.  2.  p.  181. 

"  Chron.  Pasc.  p.  283. 

^  aanaaaaQai  St  to  x^^ptov  kut  aWo  fxtv  s^tv,  on  Se  AaKiavog  6  fiaprvg 

iKtim  Tvxoi  fiira  rov  fiaprvpiKov  SiavaTOv  vwo  dtX^ivog  iKKOfuaOtig.  Philost.  1. 
ii.  c.  xii.  p.  474. 


206  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

stantiiie,  a  little   before  his  death,  prepared   himself  for^ 
baptism. 

Jerom  has  not  only  allotted  Lncian  a  place  in  his  Book 
of  Illustrious  Men,  and  mentioned  him  in  his  Chronicle,  as 
already  seen,  but  has  likewise  named  him  in  his''  letter  to 
Magnus,  among"  other  christian  Avritcrs,  eminent  for  polite 
learning-  as  well  as  for  knowledge  in  the  divine  scriptures. 
And  there  are  some  other  passages  of  his  to  be  taken  notice  of. 

II.  Jerom  said,  in  the  place  before  cited  from  his  Cata- 
logue, that  some  copies  of  scripture  were  called  Lucian's : 
he  elsewhere'^  speaks  of  that  matter  more  largely,  where  he 
says,  that  '  the  churches  of  Eg'ypt  made  use  of  that  edition 

*  of  the  Septuagint,  which  was  put  out  by  Hesychius.    From 
'  Constantinople  to  Antioch  Lucian's  edition  was  used ;  but  the 

*  countries  lying  in  the  midst  read  the  version  of  the  Seventy, 
'  as  published  by  Pamphilus  and  Eusebius  from  Origen's 

*  copy.' 

There  is  another  passage  of  Jerom  concerning  Lucian's 
edition  of  the  Seventy,  which "^  I  transcribe  at  the  bottom  of 
the  page. 

And  in  his  preface  to  the  four  gospels  he*^  speaks  of  an 
edition  of  the  New,  as  well  as  of  the  Old  Testament,  made 
by  Lucian  and  Hesychius ;  but  he  does  not  commend  their 
copies  ;  for,  as  he  says,  they  were  interpolated  ;  that  is,  there 
were  some  things  inserted  in  them  without  good  authority, 
they  being  wanting  in  more  ancient  copies. 

Jerom  is  now  commonly  understood  to  say  in  the  first  of 
these  passages,  that  Lucian's  edition  of  the  version  of  the 
Seventy  was  generally  used  by  the  churches  from  Constan- 
tinople to  Antioch,  and   Hesychius's   by  the  churches   in 

"^  Vid.  Euseb.  de  Vit.  Const.  1.  iv.  c.  61.  p.  557.  *  nee  non 

presbyterorum  Pamphili,  Pierii,  Malchionis,  &c.  Ep.  83.  p.  656. 

''  Alexandria  et  iEgyptus  in  Septuaginta  suis  Hesychium  laudat  auctorem. 
Constantinopolis  usque  Antiochiam  Luciani  martyris  exemplaria  probat. 
Media;  inter  has  provincige  PaliEstinos  codices  legunt,  q.uos  ab  Origene  elabo- 
rates Eusebius  et  Pamphilus  vulgaverunt.  Totusque  orbis  ac  inter  se  tnfaria 
varietate  compugnat.  Hier.  Praef.  in  Paralip.  0pp.  T.  i.  p.  1023.  Eadem 
repetuntur  in  libr.  ii.  adv.  Ruf.  T.  iv.  p.  425. 

"^  In  quo  illud  breviter  admoneo,  ut  sciatis  aliam  esse  editionem,  quam 
Origenes,  et  Caesariensis  Eusebius,  omnesque  Graecise  tractatores  Koivrjv,  id  est, 
Communcm,  appellant,  atque  vulgatam,  et  a  plerisque  Auiaavog  dicitur ; 
aliam  Septuaginta  Interpretum,  quae  in  'EgoTrXotc  codicibus  reperitur,  eta  nobis 
in  Latinum  sermonem  fideliter  versa  est  et  Jerosolyma?  atque  in  Orientis  eccle- 
siis  decantatur.     Ep.  ad  Sun.  et  Fret.  [al.  Ep.  135.]  T.  ii.  p.  627. 

^  Praelermitto  codices,  quos  a  Luciano  et  Hesychio  nuncupates  paucorum 
hominum  asserit  perversa  consuetude  :  quibus  utique  nee  in  Veteri  Testamento 
post  Septuaginta  Interpretes  emendarc  quid  licuit,  nee  in  Novo  profuit  emen- 
dasse ;  quum  multarum  gentium  Unguis  scriptura  ante  translata  doceat  falsa 
esse  quae  addita  sunt.     Praef.  in  Quat.  Evang. 


LuciAN.     A.  D.  290.  207 

Egypt :  but*"  Martianay  denies  this.  He  says  that  the  edi- 
tions made  by  Lucian  and  llesy chins  were  used  in  those 
countries  by  a  few  only,  and  those  men  of  mistaken  judg- 
ment ;  and  tliat  the  edition  made  from  Origen's  Ilexapla 
generally  prevailed  everywhere:  and  it  nuist  be  owned, 
that  in  the  last  cited  passag'e  Jeroni  not  only  censures  the 
interpolations  of  those  two  critics  in  the  New  Testament,  but 
likewise  their  emendations  of  the  Old:  and  in  the  passage 
which  I  have  put  in  the  margin,  he  depreciates  Lucian's 
edition  of  the  Seventy,  in  comparison  of  Origen's,  which  last 
he  himself  folloM^ed  in  his  translation  of  the  Old  Testament 
from  the  Greek. 

Humphrey  Hody  doubted  whether*^  Lucian  and  Hesychius 
had  ever  seen  Origen's  edition  of  the  version  of  the  Seventy  : 
nor  indeed  have  M'e  any  certain  information  upon  that  head, 
very  little  being  said  of  their  editions  in  the  remaining  pieces 
of  ancient  authors :  but  as  Origen's  performance  was  much 
celebrated,  and  his  Tetrapla  and  Hexapla  had  been  formed 
a  good  while  before  Lucian  and  Hesychius  undertook  any 
thing-  of  that  kind,  it  may  be  thought  probable  that  those 
learned  men  were  acquainted  with  Origen's  Seventy ;  though 
perhaps  they  had  not  seen  that  correct  edition  which  was 
published  by  Pamphilus  and  Eusebius. 

The  author  of  the  Synopsis  Scripturee  Sacrse,  or  of  an 
addition  to  it,  callss  the  seventh  and  the  last  Greek  version 
of  the  Old  Testament  Lucian's ;  and  says  that  this  version 
was  made  from  the  Hebrew ;  and  was  found  in  the  time  of 
Constantine  the  Great  at  Nicomedia,  privately  hid  in  the 
hands  of  some  Jews :  which  is  in  the  main  agreeable  to 
what"^  is  said  in  the  Acts  of  Metaphrastes,  before  cen- 
"  Hutic  locum  male  intelligunt,  qui  putant  in  omnibus  Christi  ecclesiis  i(a 
iisurpatas  fuisse  editiones  Graecas  LXX.  interpretum,  ut  in  Alexandrinorum  et 
^gyptiorum  conventibus  publice  populo  christiano  legerentur  sacri  codice« 
juxta  emendationem  Hesychii ;  in  ecclesiis  autem  Constantmopolitanis  usque 
ad  Antiochiam,  juxta  Luciani  martyris  recognitionem.  Conlrarium  docet 
Hieronymus  multis  in  locisj  ac  primum  in  preetatione  in  quatuor  evangelia  ad 
Damasum  expresse  testatur,  has  editiones  paucis  acceptas  esse :  Praetermitto 
eos  codices,  &c.  Vides  igitur,  lector,  intra  provincias  jam  dictas  a  paucis,  qui 
etiam  perverse  contenderent,  fuisse  suscepta  Hesychii  et  Luciani  exetnplaria 
Scripturarum.  Non  idem  sentiendum  de  codicibus  elaboratis  ab  Origene. — 
Ilia  namque  editio  Celebris  adeo  fuit  apud  omnes,  ut  publice  usurparetur  in 
cunctis  christianorum  ecclesiis,  &c.  Martian.  Annot.  ad  Praef.  Hieron.  in 
Paralip.  T.  i.  p.  1023.  ^  Et  dubito  quidem  ego,  utrum  Lucianus 

et  Hesychius  editionem  Origenianam  unquam  oculis  usurparint,  necne  :  quan- 
doquidem  earn  a  Pamphilo  primum  et  Eusebio  in  lucem  fuisse  emissam  veri- 
similius  videtur.     Hod.  de  Bibl.  Text.  Orig.  1.  iv.  c.  iii.  p.  628. 

*  'E/35o/xj>  TTaXivKai  TtXtvraia  tpfitjvtia  ij  r«  ayta  AaKiava^K.  X.     Syn.  S.  S. 
Ap.  Athan.  T.  ii.  p.  203.  "  Vid.  Hod.  p.  626,  627. 


208  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

siirod :  but  this  account  is  all  false  and  mistaken.  The 
seventh  Greek  version,  as  it  is  called,  was  in  Origen's 
Hexapla,  and  was  of  a  part  only  of  the  Old  Testament : 
whereas  Lucian's  edition  contained  the  whole  Old  Testament, 
as  has  been  observed  by'  Hodyand''  MontfauQon, men  well 
skilled  in  tliis  matter  :  nor  is  there  any  good  re, son  to  think 
that  Lucian  understood  Hebrew :  and  the  finding-  the  copy 
among-  the  Jews  at  Nicomedia  ;?ppears  to  be  altogether 
fabulous,  or  mistaken;  for  it  is  likely  that'  Lucian  took 
care  to  publish  copies  of  his  work  without  delay.  Yea,  the 
author  of  the  Synopsis  himself  says,  that™  Lucian  having- 
finished  his  exact  version  delivered  it  to  his  christian  bre- 
thren ;"  and  yet  he  presently  afterwards  adds,  that  after  his 
martyrdom  it  was''  found  in  the  hands  of  some  Jews,  where 
it  had  been  lodged  fc  safety  ;  which,  in  my  opinion,  has 
not  the  appearance  of  probability :  for  the  Jews  of  those 
times  were  always  enemies  to  the  christians,  and  no  more 
to  be  confided  in  than  heathens,  especially  in  times  of  per- 
secution. 

The  late  Jeremiah  Jones  thought  that?  the  editions  of  the 
New  Testament  made  by  Lucian  and  Hesychius,  and  men- 
tioned by  Jerom,  as  above,  arei  the  apocryphal  gospels  of 
Lucian  and  Hesychius,  which  are  censured  in  the  decree  of 
Pope  Gelasius ;  and  that  Gelasius  means  not  any  distinct 

'  Ut  errant  hi  scriptores,  cum  editionem  Luciani  appellant  translationem  ; 
sic  rursus  falluntur,  cum  Septimam  dicunt  ;  nescientes  nimirum,  extitisse 
Septimam  quamdam  in  Hexaplis  Origenis.     Hod.  ib.  p.  627. 

^  Sic  ille  [auctor  Synopseos]  decantatum  illani  Luciani  martyris  editionem 
cum  Seplima  Hexaplari  confudit,  exque  duabus  unam  fecit.  Quod  commentum 
Eusebii  atque  Hieronymi  testimoniis  exploditur,  quorum  prior,  Luciano  mar- 
tyri  ffiqualis,  in  ipso  autographo  vidit  Septimam  ab  Origene  ante  annos  plus 
quinquaginta  in  Hexaplis  positam.  Ad  hsec  vero  auctoris  Synopseos  narratio 
respuitur  ex  ipsis  SeptimEe  I'ragmentis,  quae,  ut  testificantur  Eusebius  et  Hiero- 
iiymus,  in  paucis  scripturae  iibris  aderat:  contra  vero  Luciani  editio  totam 
scripturam  complectcbatur,  nihilque  aliud  erat  quam  interpretatio  twv  6  pluri- 
mis  in  locis  ab  eodem  sancto  martyre  emendata,  quae  multis  post  concinnata 
Hexajjla  aiinis  prodierat.  Hinc  vero  corrigendus  Waltonus,  qui,  ab  auctore 
Synopseos  deceptus,  opinatur  Septimam  eandem  esse,  quam  Luciani  martyris 
editionem.  Prolog,  ix.  num.  xx.  Montf.  Praelim.  in  Hex.  Orig.  cap.  8.  sect, 
ii.  p.  58,  59.  '  See  Tillem.  St.  Lucien,  not.  ii.  p.  404.  Mem.  T.  v.  P.  iii. 

"'  See  Tillem.  again,  p.  405.  who  says,  it  is  probable,  that  Lucian  published 
many  copies  of  his  edition,  and  made  it  common. 

"  Kai  SiopOwrrafitvoQ  iv  roig  ypafuv  roiroig  t^tSoro  toiq  x/'i"rt«i'0(c  aSeX^oig. 
Synops.  ubi  supr.  p.  204.  A. 

°  — Trapa  lHOaioiQ.—]h. 

P  See  his  canon  of  Scripture,  vol.  i.  p.  281,  31 1. 

1  Evangelia,  quae  falsavit  Lucianus,  apocrypha.  Evangelia,  quae  falsavit 
Hesychius,  apocrypha.     Gelas.  ap.  Labb.  T.  iv.  p.  1264. 


LuciAN.     A.  D.  290.  209 

gospels,  but  tlieir  interpolated  editions  of  our  canonical  gos- 
pels.    Hody"^  and  jMill^  speak  to  the  like  purpose. 

III.  As  Hesycliius  has  been  now  named,  anu  1  see  no  need 
to  allot  him  a  distinct  chapter,  1  shall  here  observe  that*^  he  is 
generally  supposed  to  be  the  same  Hesycliius  whom"  Eu- 
sebius  mentions  with  other  bishops  in  Egypt,  who  obtained 
the  crown  of  martyrdom  in  Dioclesian's  persecution  ;  but 
the  time  is  not  exactly  known.  Cave  says,  that  liesychius 
flourished  near  the  end  of  the  third  century,  about  the  year 
296,  and  placeth  his  martyrdom  in  311  ;  Basnage^  in  311  or 
312.  Tillemont  speaks  of  him  as  suflering  with  others,  whose 
martyrdom  he  placeth  '^  in  310. 

It  is  observable  that  there  is  no  distinct  article  for  Hesy- 
chius  in  Jerom's  Catalogue  :  nor  is  his  name  among  other 
eminent  christian  writers  in  Jerom's  letter  to  Magnus. 

Hody''  supposetli  Jerom  to  refer  to  this  person's  edition  of 
the  Seventy  in  another  place,  beside  those  formerly  taken 
notice  of  by  me. 

But  it  is  not  tit  1  should  stay  to  enlarge  farther  on  these 
matters  :  I  therefore  refer  to  Grabe  and  others,  who  have 
published  editions  of  the  Seventy,  or  written  prolegomena, 
or  dissertations  upon  that  version  ;  and  to  Fabricius,  whoy 
has  a  short  article,  with  many  good  hints  relating-  to  the 
labours  both  of  Lucian  and  Hesychius. 

However  it  should  be  here  remembered,  that  Hesychius 
put  out  an  edition  of  the  New  as  well  as  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment.    The  evidences  of  this  we  saw  just  now  in^  Jerom. 

IV.  There  is  little  if  any  thing  of  Lucian  remaining. 

1.  In  the  Paschal  Chronicle,  the  author,  having  shown  the 
fierceness  of  the  persecution  at  Nicomedia,  adds  :  '  Of'^  this 
'  innumerable  multitude  of  martyrs  the  presbyter  Lucian 
'  writing  to  the  Antiochians   speaks  in  these  words :  "  the 

*  whole  choir  of  martyrs  together  salutes  you.     I  take  this 

*  opportunity  to  certify  you,  that  Anthimus  the  bishop  has 
'  finished  the  course  of  his  martyrdom."  ' 

'  Hod.  ubi  supr.  p.  629.  '  Mill.  Proleg.  n.  728. 

*  Vid.  Cav.  Hist.  Lit.  Tillem.  St.  Pierre  d'Alexandrie.  Art.  10.  Mem.  T.  v. 
Part.  iii.  p.  124.  et  Fabr.  Bib.  Gr.  T.  v.  p.  279. 

"  *tX£ac  Tt,  Kai  liffvxtog,  km  TlaxvfiioQ,  icai  QioSwpog,  riov  afKpi  Ttfv  Aiyvirrov 
tKK\i](nwv  tTTiffKOTToi.     Hist.  Ec.  1.  viii.  cap.  13.  p.  308.  C. 

"  Basn.  Ann.  312.  n.  18.  *'  See  Tillem.  as  referred  to  before,  note'. 

"  Citatur  alibi  editio  Hesychiana  ab  Hieronymo  sub  titulo  E.\emplarium 
Alexandrinorum.     Hod.  ib.  p.  G28.  f.  Conf.  Hieron.  in  Is.  Iviii.  11.  p.  433. 

r  Vid.  Bib.  Gr.  T.  v.  p.  278,  279.  Conf.  eund.  ib.  T.  ii.  p.  358,  359. 

'  See  before,  p.  206.  note  ■*.  *  Tlepi  thth  th  mrnpH  nXtjOHc: 

T(t>v /lapTvpriaavTwv  AnKiavoc  Trptrrf^vrtpoQ  AvrioxEvai  ypa^ojv  eSr]\H'  AfnraZt- 
rai  vfiag   xojjo^  cnrag  ofiH  ^lapTupiov.      Ewi'ayyeXi^OjUat  ^e  vfjiag,  <l)g  AvOiflOQ  6 
irairag  t(^  th  fiaprvpin  dpofii^j  triXeiUjOr].  Chr.  Pasch.  p.  277.  C. 
VOL.    III.  P 


210  Credibilily  of  the  Gospel  History. 

If  this  be  genuine,  we  have  here  a  part  of  one  of  those 
short  epistles  intended  by  St.  Jeroin.  However,  it  is  now 
the  constant  opinion  of  learned  men  that  Anthimus,  bishop 
of  Nicomedia,  suffered  at  the  beginning-  of  Dioclesian's  per- 
secution in  303,  and  that  Lucian  did  not  die  before  the  year 
311  or  312.  If  therefore  this  letter  be  his,  he  must  have 
been  at  Nicomedia,  and  in  communion  with  that  church,  and 
the  martyrs  there,  when  Anthimus  suffered. 

2.  Eusebius  assures  us,  that  before  Lucian  suffered  he 
apologized  for  the  heavenly  kingdom  in  words :  and,  as 
before  shown,  Rufinus  has  inserted  a  speech,  as  delivered 
by  him  ;  which  I  see''  Huet  cjuotes  as  Lucian's :  and''  Fabri- 
cius  thinks  it  might  be  laken  by  Rufinus  from  the  Acts  of 
his  martyrdom:  but''  Tillemont  is  of  opiifion  that  it  is  a  speech 
of  Rufinns's  own  making. 

Whether  it  be  Lucian's,  or  Rufinus's,  or  in  part  only  the 
apology  of  our  martyr,  Avith  some  additions  of  the  historian, 
I  cannot  forbear  taking  some  notice  of  it  here,  it  represent- 
ing in  some  measure  the  just  sentiments  of  those  ancient 
christians  who  considered  their  religion  as  a  divine  institu- 
tion of  virtue. 

'  It  is  no  secret,'  says  he,  '  that  the  God  whom  we  chris- 
tians worship,  is  the  one  God  declared  to  us  by  Christ,  and 
by  the  Holy  Ghost  inspired  in  our  hearts.' 

'  P  own,  that  we  also  once  trusted  in  gods  of  our  own 
making. — But  Almighty  God,  commiserating  the  errors  of 
mankind,  sent  his  Avisdom  into  this  world,  clothed  in  flesh, 

''  Huet  Dem.  Ev.  Prop.  iii.  sect.  viii.  p.  30.  •=  Apologiam  ad 

Praesidem  ante  martyrium  A.  C.  311.  Nicomediae  dictam,  cujus  meminit 
Eusebius  ix.  6.  Rufinus  in  Latina  sua  versione  ex  Actis,  ut  videtur,  martyrii 
ejus, excerptam  exhibet.     Fabr.  B.  G.  T.  v.  p.  279. 

"  See  Tillem.  as  before,  p.  145,  146. 

*  — — Fateor,  erravimus  etiam  nos  aliquando,  et  simulacra,  quae  finximus, 
decs  coeli  ac  terrae  putabamus  auctores. — Verum  omnipotens  Deus, — errores 
miseratus  humanos,  Sapientiam  suam  misit  in  hunc  mundum  carne  vestitam, 
quae  nos  doceret  Deum,  qui  ccelum  fecit  et  terram,  non  in  manufactis,  sed  in 
aeternis  atquc  invisibilibus,  requirendum.  Vitae  enim  nobis  leges,  ac  disciplinae 
praecepta  con?tituit ;  servare  parsimoniani,  paupertate  gaudere,  mansuetudineni 
colere,  studcre  pati,  puritatem  cordis  complecti,  patientiam  custodire.  Sed  et 
omnia  haec,  quae  nunc  adversum  nos  geritis,  ventura  nobis  esse  praedixit ;  edu- 
cendos  nos  ad  reges,  et  ante  tribunalia  judicum  statuendos,  ac  velut  victimara 
jugulandos.  Inde  est,  denique,  quod  et  ipse  qui  erat  immortalis,  utpote  Verbum 
et  Sapientia  Dei,  morte  se  praebuit,  quo  nobis  in  corpore  positus  patientiae  prae- 
bcret  exemplum.  Sed  nee  nos  sua  morte  decepit,  quibus  post  tertium  diem 
resurrexit :  non,  ut  ista,  quae  nunc  falso  conscribuntur,  continent  Acta  Pilati ; 
sed  innoccns,  immaculatus,  et  purus,  ad  hoc  solum  mortem  suscejiit,  ut  eani 
vinceret  resurgendo.  Quae  autem  dico,  non  sunt  in  obscuro  gesta  loco,  nee 
teslibus  indigent.  Pars  pene  jam  mundi  major  huic  vcritati  adstipulatur,  urbes 
infegrae.     Eus.  H.  E.  Vers.  Ruf.  1.  ix.  c.  G.  p.  202. 


LuciAN.     A.  D.  290  211 

to  teaoli  us  tlie  knowledge  of  Cotl,  wlio  inndc  flie  heavens 
and  the  earth,  who  is  eternal  and  invisible,  lie  moreover 
gave  us  a  rule  of  life,  and  delivered  to  us  the  precepts  of 
righteousness :  he  taught  us  to  practise  sobriety,  to  rejoice 
in  poverty,  to  be  very  meek,  to  be  willing- to  sutt'er,  to  pre- 
serve the  purity  of  our  minds,  and  to  be  patient  at  all  times. 
He  likewise  foretold  the  things  which  have  since  happened 
to  us ;  that  we  should  be  brought  before  kings  and  rulers, 
and  be  slaughtered  as  victims  :  for  which  cause  also  though 
he  was  innnortal,  as  being  the  Word  and  Wisdom  of  God, 
he  yielded  himself  to  death,  that  whilst  he  was  in  the  body 
he  might  set  us  an  example  of  patience.  Nor  did  he  deceive 
us  by  dying,  but  on  the  third  (lay  rose  again  : — being  inno- 
cent, and  unspotted,  and  undergoing  death  only  that  he 
might  overcome  it  by  rising-  again.  These  things  are  well 
attested,  and  a  large  part  of  the  world  now  acknowledgeth 
the  truth  of  them.' 

3.  There  is  likewise  a  Creed,  or  Formulary  of  Faith,  con- 
cerning* the  Trinity,  Avhich  is  sometimes  called  Lucian's. 
Fabricius  reckoning-  up  our  martyr's  works  speaks  of  this 
among  the  rest.  I  shall  put  his  Avords  in  the^  margin  :  but 
I  am  by  no  means  of  opinion  that  this  is  one  of  Lucian's 
little  books,  or  discourses  concerning-  the  faith,  mentioned 
by  Jerom  in  his  Catalogue :  1  rather  think  that  Jerom 
intends  Lucian's  Apology,  made  a  little  before  his  martyr- 
dom, or  some  other  short  treatises  in  defence  of  the  christian 
religion.  Rufinus,  a  contemporary,  useth  the  same  Mord 
Avith  Jerom,  when  he  introduceth"  the  speech,  or  apology, 
which  Lucian  made  before  the  president  at  Nicomedia,  call- 
ing it,  A  Discourse  concerning  the  Faith  ;  which  was  not 
a  formulary  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  but  an  apology 
for  the  christian  religion  in  general. 

Bishop  Bull''  readily  allowed  this  Formulary  to  be  Lu- 
cian's :  but  let  us  consider  the  testimony  of  antiquity. 
Sozomcn  informs  us,  that'  '  the  Eusebians  in  a  synod  at 
'  Antioch  published  a  Formulary,  which  they  said  was 
'  Lucian's  the  martyr.'  But  Sozomen  adds,  '  he  did  not 
'  know  whether  they  spake  truth,  or  whether  they  endea- 
'  voured  to  recommend   their  own  composition  under  the 

''  Praeterea,  brevis  fidei  formula— exstat  apud  Athanasium  de  Synodis — T. 
i.  p.  892,  et  Socratem.  ii.  10,  quamque  Synodi  Antiochenae  (A.  C.  341.)  patres, 
Luciani  esse  affirmant,  apud  Sozomenum,  iii.  5.     Fabr.  Bib.  Gr.  T,  v.  p.  279. 

8  Turn  ille,  data  sibi  facilitate  dicendi,  hujusmodi  orationem  de  fide  nostra 
habuisfe  dicitur.     Rufin.  ubi  supr.  ''  Def.  Fid.  Nic.  cap.  3.  sect.  ii.  n.  6. 

'  EXeyov  Ct  ravrijv  rrjv  tti-^iv  oXoypafov  ivQTjKtvai  KsKiavn, — Trortpov  Si 
a\i]9wQ  TuvTa  i(f>a(Tav,  i]  rr/v  iSiav  ypacprjv  ai^voiroinvriQ  t(j)  a^iwjiaTi  th  fiap- 
Tvpog,  XiyHv  8K£;^w.     Sozoni.  1.  iii.  c.  5.  p.  503.  A. 

p  2 


212  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

'  authority  of  the  martyr ;'  whereas  it  seems  to  me,  that  if 
there  had  been  extant  any  such  piece  of  Lucian's,  Sozomen 
must  have  known  it.  Moreover,  the  Creed,  which  Sozomen 
is  supposed  to  refer  to,  is  at  length  in  "^  Athanasius,  ^Hilary, 
and  '"Socrates:  but  they  none  of  them  call  it  Lucian's:  nor 
do  they  say  that  it  wfis  published  as  his.  In  one  of  the  five 
Dialogues  concerning  the  Holy  Trinity,  the  age  of  which  is 
not  certainly  known,  except  that  they  could  not  be  written 
much  before  the  end  of  the  fourth  century,  the  Macedonian 
asks  theOrthodox,  if  he  believed  as  the  blessed  Lucian  did  ? 
to  which  the  Orthodox  answers,  he  believes  as  did  all  the 
martyrs  and  apostles.  The  Macedonian  asks  again,  Avhether 
he  Avould  subscribe  Lucian's  Formulary  ;  or,  whether  there 
was  in  it  any  thing  which  he  condemned'?  the  Orthodox  then 
tells  him,  that  he  dislikes"  the  addition  which  his  friends  had 
made,  and  that  he  could  prove  it  to  be  an  addition  of  theirs. 
There  does  not  then  appear  to  be  sufficient  reason  to  consider 
that  Formulary  as  Lucian's. 

V.  This  brings  us  at  length  to  a  difficult  question,  Avhich 
cannot  well  be  omitted,  relating  to  Lucian's  belief  in  the 
Trinity.  We  have  seen  divers  testimonies  very  favourable 
to  him  in  Eusebius,  Chrysostom,  Jerom,  Rufinus,  Sozomen. 
His  edition  of  the  Seventy  was  esteemed  by  man}^  His 
memory  was  honoured  by  Constantine  and  others ;  nor  is 
there  in  Jerom  or  Athanasius  any  censure  passed  upon  his 
faith.  Who  could  have  thought  that  there  should  be  any 
reason  to  doubt  Avhether  Lucian  was  orthodox  ?  and  yet  it 
is  questioned  :  for  Arius  concludes  his  letter"  to  Eusebius, 
bishop  of  Nicomedia,  calling  him  Collucianist :  the  reason 
of  which  seems  to  be  what  is  said  by  Epiphanius,  that? 
Lucian  and  Eusebius  had  lived  together  in  Nicomedia  :  and 
Arius  I  think  must  have  supposed  them  of  <me  opinion  with 
himself.  Epiphanius  in  his  Anchoret  says,  thafi  Lucian  and 
all  the  Lucianists  denied  that  the  Son  of  God  took  a  soul, 
and  taught  that  he  took  flesh  only.  Again,  in  the  same 
work,  he  speaks"^  of  the  Lucianists  and  Arians  as  one  sect : 
and  in  his  Panarium,  in  his  article  of  the  old  Lucianists,  he 

"   De  Synod.  T.  i.  p.  73,5,  73fi.  '  Hilar,  de  Synod,  p.  1168, 

1169.  Conf.  ib.not.'  p.  1168.  lid.  Buned.  '"  Socrat.  1.  ii.  c.  10. 

"  KaTtyi'ujv  rt^g  Tr(>ofTO}]Kr]c,  rig  Trpo(Tt9r]KaTt'  Kai  tx^  Sii^ai,  on  irpoetdriKaTt 
tvavTia  c(VT>}c.     Df  S.  Trin.  Dial.  iii.  ap.  Athan.  T.  ii.  p.  .507.  B.  Ed.  Bened. 

"  IIvWhkmvl-^ci,  aXi]9o)g  Evfftfiu.  ap.  Epiph.  H.  69.  p.  7.32.  A. 

P a/ia  AHKiavii)  iv  'SiicofirjSeiq.  (TVfiftt^iwic<i)g.   Epiph.  ib,  p.  730.  B, 

''  A wtiffi'oc  y"^,  Kcd  TrcivTtg  Ahkiuvi'^oi  apvHvrai  rov  viov  r«  Oia  ipvx'>iv 
uXrjipivai'  fTKpKu  fihv  /tin'ov  faniv  taxf)ictvai.  k,  \.  Epiph.  Ancor.  n.  xxxiii. 
T.  ii.  p.  .38.  C. 

'  lb.  n.  x.xxv,  p.  40.  D. 


LuciAN.     A.  D.  290.  213 

(listiiiouislKth"  between  the  ancient  Liician,  follower  of 
Alairion,  and  Luoian  who  lived,  he  says,  in  the  time  of 
Con.stantine,  whom  the  Avians  call  a  martyr,  and  who  was 
inclined  to  the  Arian  heresy.  According-  to  ^Philostorgius, 
Eusebius  of  Nicomedia,  and  others  of  the  chief  of  tlu;  Arians, 
were  disciples  of  Lucian  ;  JNlaris  of  Chalcedon,  'J'heognis  of 
Nice,  Leontius  of  Antioch,  Asterius  the  sophist,  and  others; 
which  induced  Du  Pin  to  say  that  all  the  heads  of  that 
party  Men;  Lucian's  disciples  :  and,  not  to  add  any  thing- 
more,  Alexander  in  his  letter  to  his  namesake  of  Constanti- 
nople says,  that  '  "Lucian,  succeeding-  [or  following]  Paul 
'  of  Samosata,  remained  for  a  long  tune,  during-  three  bishops, 
'  excommunicated,'  or  separated  from  the  church :  those 
three  bishops  are  supposed  to  be^  Domnus,  Timseus,  and 
Cyril  ;  which  last  was  succeeded  by'"  Tyrannus. 

Learned  men  are  not  agreed  in  their  interpretation  of  those 
words  ;  some  supposing-  them  to  mean  that''  Lucian,  follow- 
ing- the  sentiments  of  Paul  of  Samosata,  bishop  of  Antioch, 
separated  himself  from  the  conmiunion  of  the  church  :  others, 
thaty  he  was  by  three  successive  bishops  excluded  from 
communion.  It  is,  however,  the  g-eneral  opinion  of  learned 
moderns,  that  Lucian  did  not  always  continue  separated,  or 
excommunicated  :  they  agree  in  supposing-  that^  those  words 

*  AsKiavog  rig  apxaiOQ,  hk  6  vvv  iv  xQovoig  KwvTavTiVH  th  yi^ovTog  ytyovMC,, 
ov  Sr)6ev  oi  Aptiavoi  iv  [laprvrnv  £7rti//?;i^i ^oi/rai'  ?;v  yap  Kai  STog  o  AaKiavog, 
iprifii,  TTpoaavix^'^v  '^V  '"'■"'  Apuaviov  aiptaii.     Epiph.  H.  43.  n.  i.  p.  378. 

'  'On  THTS  TH  fiapTvpog  TToWag  [lev  (cat  aXXsg  fuiOijrag  avaypa(pei,  oig  Kai 
'Evatf^iov  Tov  'aiKOjujSiiag,  Km  Mapcv  tov  XaXKtSovog,  k.  \.  Philost.  1.  ii.  C.  xiv. 
p.  475.  A.  Vid.  lb.  c.  12,  13.  p.  474.  et  c.  3.  p.  470. 

"  'Ov  SiaSe^afievog  AsKiavog  anoavvayMyog  ifitivt  rpiiiiv  tmaKOiriov  TroXverng 
Xpopng.  Alex.  ap.  Thdrt.  H.  E.  1.  i.  c.  4.  p.  15.  B. 

"  Vid.  Hieron.  Chr.  p.  176,  177. 

"  Antiochiae  decimus  nonus  constituitur  episcopiis  Tyranntis.  ib.  p.  179. 

"  Causa  itaque  schismatis  Luciani  fuit  doctrina  Pauli  Samosateni,  quara 
defendebat ;  cujus  gratia  diu  separavit  se  a  Iribus  episcopis  Antiochenis, 
Domno  scilicet,  Timaeo,  ac  Cyrillo,  qui  sibi  invicem  successere.  Pagi  Ann. 
311.  n.  xi.  Cceteriim  hujus  verbi  mroavvaywyog  ifiuvs,  k.  X.  vim  non  intel- 
lexere  mterpretes,  quos  secutus  Baronias  scnl>it,  Lucianum  a  tribus  episcopis 
sibi  continue  succedentibus,  ecclesia  ejectum  fuisse.  Atqui  hoc  non  dicit 
Alexander,  sed  tantum  ait,  Lucianum  schisma  fecisse  in  Antiocliensi  ecclesia, 
et  sub  tribus  episcopis  sibi  continue  succedentibus  Collectas  seorsum  cele- 
brasse.     Id  enim  significat  vox  aTro(n<vay(i)yog.     Id.  ib.  n.  xii. 

y  Paulo  Samosateiio  succedens  Luciauu-s  ecclesiastica  societate  trium  epis- 
coporum  segregatus  plunbus  annis  permansit. — Hanc  Alexandri  esse  mentem 
nobis  persuasissimum. — ATrorrwayoiyog  i^invi,  non  actum  hominis  se  separan- 
tis,  sed  passivam  potius  ejectionem  significat,  &c.  Basnag.  Ann.  312.  n.  xxiii. 
Conf.  Tillem.  S.  Lucien,  Not.  3.  p.  405.  ^  Tandem  vero  ad 

unitatem  ecclesite  reversus  est  Lucianus,  ut  ex  Alexandro  colligitur.  Pagi 
Ann.  311.  n.  xii.  Extra  dubium  igitur  est,  Lucianum  in  errorem  incidisse, 
ex  quo  tamen,  Deo  favente,  tandem  emei-sis-se  putamus.     Basn.  ubi  supra. 


214  Credibilily  of  the  Gospel  History. 

of  Alexander  afford  reason  to  conclude  that  Lucian  returned, 
or  was  restored,  to  the  catholic  communion  before  his  death  ; 
and  probably,  in  the  beg  inning  of  the  episcopate  of  Tyran- 
nus,  who*  succeeded  Cyril  about  the  year  297,  near  the  end 
of  the  third  century,  or  however  before  Dioclesian's  perse- 
cution, which  began  in  February  303. 

That  passage  of  Alexander  would  lead  us  to  think  that 
Lucian  was  in  the  sentiments,  or  at  least  in  the  interests  of 
Paul  of  Samosata ;  and ''  that  for  some  reasons  he  greatly 
disliked  the  act  of  the  council  which  deposed  Paul.  And 
there  are  other  things  which  may  be  reckoned  of  some  mo- 
ment :  for  in  the  former  part  of  the  Creed  ascribed  to  Lucian 
there  are  some  expressions  which  seem  ov;er-orthodox  ;  inso- 
much that  bishop  Bull'^  could  not  forbear  to  say,  they  are 
stronger  than  any  used  by  the  council  of  Nice :  and,  if  so, 
others  may  be  apt  to  conclude  they  must  be  Sabellian  ; 
though  in  the  latter  part  of  the  same  Creed  "^  are  expressions 
favourable  to  Arianism ;  which  may  be  what  the  orthodox 
christian  in  the  Dialogue  before  referred  to,  calls  an  addition, 
and  says  is  contrary  to  Lucian's  Creed:  meaning,  perhaps, 
tlie  former  part''  of  it.  However,  it  may  be  thought  by 
some  that  Lucian,  in  the  speech  preserved  by  Rufinus,  speaks 
not  of  the  Word,  or  Logos,  as  a  distinct  person,  but  only  as 
the  wisdom  of  God. 

But  how  shall  >ve  reconcile  this  with  the  high  esteem  paid 
to  Lucian  by  the  Arians  of  the  fourth  century  1  For  certainly 
Paulianism,  or  Sabellianism,  and  Arianism,  are  very  differ- 
ent :  it  would  likewise  be  hard  to  conceive  how  Eusebius, 
who  was  exceedingly  averse  to  the  Sabellian  scheme,  should 
say  that  I>ucian  was  an  excellent  man  in  all  respects. 

Upon  the  whole,  it  is  very  difficult  to  reconcile  the  ac- 
counts concerning'  Lucian,  or  to  determine  where  his  fault 
lay,  if  he  was  gnilty  of  any.  As  the  Arians  in  general,  and 
many  catholics  of  the  fourth  century,  showed  a  great  regard 

»  See  TiUem.  in  St.  Lucien,  p.  149.  and  note  4.  Mem.  T.  v.  P.  iii. 

''  See  before.  Vol.  ii.  ch.  xliii. 

*=  Inao  pene  ausim  affirniare  absolutam  Filii  divinitatem  aliquatenus  in 
Lucianaeo  Symbolo  efficacius  et  significantius  exprimi,  quara  in  ipso  Nicaeno 
Quippe  vera  ilia,  Deum  ex  Deo,  totiim  ex  toto,  perfectum  ex  perfecto,  quae 
confessionis  Lucianaeae  sunt,  peifectam  Filii  divinitatem,  et  aiqualem  paternae 
naturam,  disertius  annuntiant,  quam  ista  Nicaeni  Symboli,  &c.  Def.  Fid. 
Nic.  p.  146. 

^  Twv  ovofxarmv  ax  airXwc,  n^t  apyoiv  KSifitvoi:',  aWa  ar\fiaivovr(i)v  OKpi- 
jSwf  Tr}v  iciav  tKOTH  ru)v  ovofiaZ,ontvo)v  vTrnrratriv  tc  kcu  Snhxv  Kai  rahv'  u>q 
tivai  Ty  fitv  vrro^aau  Tfua,  ry  Ct  muKpoiviq,  tv.   ap.  Socr.  1.  ii.  f.  10.  p.  88.  A. 

'  Though  I  have  argued  as  above,  1  certainly  do  not  take  any  part  of  the 
Creed  ascribed  to  Lucian  to  be  his . 


LuciAN.     A.  D.  290.  215 

to  the  name  of  Lucian,  some  may  be  apt  to  infer  there  must 
ha\'e  been  two  persons  of  that  name;  but  that  is  an  opinion 
which  does  not  seem  to  be  at  all  countenanced  by  antiquity  ; 
and  we  are,  I  think,  obliged  to  suppose  one  and  the  same 
person  to  be  intended  all  along-. 

VI.  AVhether  Lucian's  opinion  concerning^  the  Trinity, 
particularly  concerning-  the  Word,  was  the  same  with  that 
which  is  now  reckoned  orthodox,  or  not,  which  is  a  point 
not  easily  decided  ;  Ave  have  seen  other  accounts  of  him 
which  are  uiujuestioned  :  and  all  must  be  satisfied  that  he 
Avas  a  pious,  learned,  and  diligent  man  ;  that  he  believed 
Jesus  to  be  a  divine  teacher  and  the  Christ.  Lucian  made 
out  an  edition  both  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament :  Jerom 
indeed  does  not  commend  this  last,  Lucian  having  admitted 
into  his  copies  some  readings  and  passages  which  he  did 
not  reckon  genuine  :  as  this  is  the  only  fault  found  by  Jerom, 
it  may  be  concluded  that  the  Avork  Avas  unexceptionable  in 
other  respects  ;  or  at  least  that  Lucian's  canon  of  the  scrip- 
tures of  the  New  Testament  Avas  much  the  same  AvitJi  that 
of  other  christians. 

And  every  serious  reader,  I  presume,  has  Avith  joy  ob- 
served this  additional  testimony  to  the  truth  of  the  christian 
religion,  Avhich  this  presbyter  of  Antioch  asserted  and 
adorned  by  the  virtues  and  literary  labours  of  his  life,  and 
by  a  death  Avorthy  of  praise. 


216  Credibtlitrj  of  the  Gospel  Histoty, 


CHAP.  LIX. 


PAMPHILUS,  PRESBYTER  OF  CiESAREA. 

I.  His  history,  and  testimonies  to  him.  II.  Jln  account  of 
some  others  who  stiffercd  martyrdom  about  the  same 
time  with  Patnphilus.  III.  Of  the  library  erected  by 
Pamphilus  at  Ccpsarea.  IV.  An  edition  oj'  the  Seventy 
by  him  and  Eusebius  Jrom  Origen's  Hexajyla.  V.  Books 
transcribed  from  others  in  that  library,  still  remaiyiiny. 
VI.  A  school  said  to  be  set  up  by  him -at  Casarea.  VII. 
His  Apoloyy  for  Oriyen.  Vlll.  Contents  of  the  Acts 
of  the  apostles,  composed  by  Pamphilus,  or  Euthalius. 
IX.  His  character.  X.  Critical  remarks  upon  pretended 
acts  of  his  passion. 

I.  '  PAMPHILUS^  a  presbyter,  friend  of  Eusebius,  bishop 
'  of  Caesarea,  had  such  an  aifection  for  the^  divine  library, 

»  Pamphiliis  presbyter,  Eusebii  Csesariensis  episcopi  necessarius,  tanto 
bibliothecee  divinae  ainore  flagravit,  ut  maximam  partem  Origenis  voluminum 
sua  manu  desciipsent,  quae  usque  hodie  in  Caesanensi  bibliotheca  habentur. 
Sed  et  in  duodecim  prophetas  viginti  quinque  t^rjytjfftwv  volumina  manu  ejus 
exarata  repperi,  quae  tanto  amplector  et  servo  gaudio,  ut  Crcesi  opes  habere  me 
credam.  Si  enim  laetitia  est  unam  epistolam  habere  martyris,  quanto  magis 
tot  millia  versuum,  quae  mihi  videtur  sui  sanguinis  signasse  vestigiis  ?  Scripsit, 
antequam  Eusebius  scriberet,  Apologeticum  pro  Origene,  et  passus  est  Caesareae 
Palaestinae  sub  persecutione  Maximmi.     Hier.  de  V.  I.  c.  75 

•>  had  such  an  affection  for  the  divine  hbrary.]     That  is  a  literal 

translation,  but  the  meaning  is  not  very  obvious.  The  phrase  occurs  again 
in  the  chapter  of  Eusebius,  who,  as  Jerom  there  says,  was  very  studious  in 
the  scriptures,  and  with  Pamphilus  a  diligent  searcher  of  the  divine  library : 
in  scripturis  studiosissimus,  et  bibliothecae  divinae,  cum  Pamphilo  martyre, 
diligentissimus  pervestigator.  Upon  both  those  places  Fabricius  says,  that 
thereby  is  to  be  understood  the  sacred  scriptures,  and  refers  to  Martianay's 
Prolegomena  to  the  first  tome  of  St.  Jerom's  works.  Cave  understood  the 
phrase  in  the  same  manner-,  for  speaking  of  Pamphilus  he  says:  Tanto  erga 
divinas  litcras  studio  exarsit,  ut  bibliothecam  Caesareae  exstruxerit.  Hist.  Lit. 

And  Tnthemius  de  Ser.  Ec.  c.  47.     Pamphilus tantos  eo  tempore  apud 

Ca-'sareain  libros  aniore  Scripturarum  congregavit,  ut  in  omni  tempore  nulla 
bibliotheca  celebrior  extiterit.  IJonorius,  c.  76,  et  82,  copies  Jerom  exactly, 
and  therefore  is  of  no  service  to  us.  Sophronius  translates  literally,  ^eiag 
Pip\oOt]Kr]c-  Martianay,  to  whom  Fabricius  refers,  says :  Apud  veteres 
bibliothecaj  divine  nomen  obtinebant  sacra  volumina,  quae  nunc  temporis 
Biblia  vocamus.  Proleg.  i.  n.  1.  But  his  proofs  are  not  sufficient:  his  exam- 
ples are  not  very  numerous ;  one  of  them  is  that  above  concerning  Eusebius. 
I  here  take  notice  of  another  of  them :  Eodem  sensu  Hieronymus  Ep.  89.  ad 
Augustinum,  vetus  instrumentutn,  seu  volumina  ejusdem  vocat  ecclesiarum 
bibliothecas.     Vis,  inquit,  aniator  esse  vcrus  septuaginta  interpretum?  Non 


Pamphilus.     a.  D.  294.  217 

'  for  had  such  a  desire  to  form  a  well  furnished  ecclesiastical 
'  library]  that  he  wrote  out  with  his  own  hand  the  greatest 
'  part  of  Origen's  works,  wiiich  are  still  in  the  library  of 
'  Csesarea ;  and  beside  1  have  met  with  five-and-twenty 
'  volumes  of  Origen's  Commentaries  upon  the  twelve  pro- 
'  phets  in  his  hand-writing- ;  which  I  value  and  keep  as  if  I 
'  had  the  treasures  of  Croesus.  For  if  it  be  a  pleasure  to 
'  possess  one  single  epistle  of  a  martyr,  how  much  more 
'  must  it  be  to  have  so  many  thousand  lines,  which  he  seems 
'  to  me  to  have  marked  with  the  traces  of  his  blocxi  ?  lie 

*  wrote  before  Eusebius  of  Coesarea  an  Apology  for  Origen, 

legas  ea  quae  sub  asteriscis  sunt,  imo  rade  de  voluminibus,  ut  vetenim  te  fanto- 
reni  probes.  Quod  si  feceris,  omnes  ecclesiarain  bibliothecas  damnare  cogeris : 
vix  enim  unus  aut  alter  liber  invenitur,  qui  ista  non  habeat.  But  I  think  the 
phrase  ought  there  to  be  understood  in  its  own  natural  sense,  to  denote  the 
libraries  oT  the  churches,  containing  copies  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament, 
All  churches  had  copies  of  the  scriptures,  and  the  repositories  in  which  they 
were  lodged  might  be  called  libraries :  besides,  some  churches  had  large  col- 
lections of  books,  and  many  copies  of  the  scriptures;  as  the  churches  at 
Jerusalem  and  Caesarea :  which  last  library,  as  Jerom  expressly  says  in  a  passage 
to  be  cited  by  and  by,  was  dedicated  to  that  church  by  Pamphilus.  Such  a 
library  there  was  likewise  at  Hippo  in  Africa  in  Augustine's  time:  Ecclesiae 
bibliothecam,  omnesque  codices  diligenter  posteriscustodiendos  semper  jubebat. 
Possid.  in  Vit.  Aug.  c.  31.  And  the  word  is  used  of  the  repository  of  a  church 
which  could  not  have  it  in  many  books.  Posteaquam  perventum  est  in 
bibliothecam,  inventa  sunt  ibi  armaria  inania.  Act.  Purgat.  Caecil.  ap.  Du 
Pin.  Optat.  p.  168.  a.  f.  There  is  another  passage  of  Jerom,  where,  as  1  think, 
the  phrase  ought  to  be  interpreted  in  the  same  manner :  Revolve  omnium, 
quos  supra  memoravi,  commentarios,  et  ecclesiarum  bibliothecis  fruere,  et  magis 
concitato  gradu  ad  optata  coeptaque  pervenies.  Ad  Panun.  ep.  31.  [al.  52.] 
p.  244.  in.  Farther,  if  by  the  divme  library  we  understand  the  sacred  scrip- 
tures, we  shall  charge  Jerom  with  a  trifling  tautology  in  his  chapter  of  Euse- 
bius :  and  it  is  observable  that  Jerom,  commending  ancient  christian  writers, 
often  mentions  their  diligence  in  studying  the  scriptures,  or  their  skill  in  them, 
and  always  speaks  plainly  ;  but  never  useth  this  plirase,  except  in  the  chapters 
of  Pamphilus  and  Eusebius  :  probably  therefore  he  refei-s  to  their  care  in  fur- 
nishing the  library  at  Caesarea,  which  consisted  of  copies  of  the  scriptures,  and 
commentaries  upon  them,  and  other  works  of  christian  writers,  as  well  as  works 
of  profane  authors.  A  passage  of  Jerom  in  a  letter  to  Marcella,  speaking  of 
that  library,  leads  us  directly  to  this  sense.  Beatus  Pamphilus,  quum  Deme- 
trium^in  sacrae  bibliothecae  studio  vellet  aequare, — tunc  vel  maxime  Origenis 
libros  impensius  prosequutus,  Caesariensi  ecclesiae  dedicavit.  Ad  Marcell.  T. 
ii.  col.  711.  In  my  edition  of  Moreri's  Dictionary,  which  is  called  the  tenth, 
printed  in  1717,  the  article  of  Pamphilus  begins  in  this  manner:  S.  Pam- 

phile avoit   tant   'd'amour  pour    les   livres,    qu'il  recuillet  una  tresbelle 

bibliotheque.  St.  Pamphilus  was  so  great  a  lover  of  books,  that  he  collected 
a  very  handsome  library ;  which  in  short,  I  think,  is  what  Jerom  intends  to 
say;  that  '  Pamphilus  was  so  ambitious  of  making  a  numerous  collection 
'  of  authors,  and  especially  of  having  a  large  and  well  furnished  library  of 

*  christian  ecclesiastical  writings,  that  he  spared  no  cost  or  pains  to  obtain 
'  his  end,  and  even  wrote  out  with  his  own  hand  many  copies  of  such  books.' 
Therefore,  finally,  the  connexion  confirms  my  interpretation. 


218  Credibility  of  ihe  Gospel  History. 

'  and  suffered  at  Caesarea  in  Palestine  in  the  persecution  of 
'  Maximin.' 

So  writes  Jerom  in  his  Catalogue  of  Ecclesiastical  Writers. 
I  have  placed  this  at  the  beginning  as  a  summary  of  the 
life  of  this  excellent  person:  1  shall  add  more  from  him,  as 
well  as  from  other  ancient  writers,  presently. 

Pamphilus  flourished,  according  to  Cave,  about  the  year 
294;  he  was  put  into  prison  in  the  year  307,  and  accom- 
plished his  martyrdom'^  in  309.  Eusebius,  speaking  of 
Pamphilus,  and  some  others,  says  they  suffered  after  they 
had  been  imprisoned*^  two  whole  years;  but  it  is  supposed 
by  learned  moderns  that^  Pamphilus  lay  in  prison  only  a 
year  and  some  months,  from  the  latter  end  of  the  year  307 
to  the  16th  of  February,  309. 

In  the  Acts  of  Pamphilus,  in  Simeon  Metaphrastes,  which '^ 
Valesius  supposed  to  be  taken  from  Eusebius,  and  Tille- 
mont^  allows  to  be  in  the  main  right,  it  is  said  that''  Pamphi- 
lus was  a  native  of  Berytus,  and  there  received  the  first 
rudiments  of  learning :  and  in  Photius  he  is  said  to  have 
been  educated  by'  Pierius.  For  my  own  part,  I  think  that 
neither  of  these  accounts  is  to  be  relied  upon:  but,  admitting 
the  truth  of  them,  it  must  be  supposed,  1  think,  that  Pamphi- 
lus having  first  made  some  progress  in  learning  at  Berytus, 
his  native  city,  afterwards  completed  his  studies  at  Alexan- 
dria, and  then  settled  at  Csesarea,  where  he  certainly  resided 
a  great  part  of  his  life. 

From  this  person  Eusebius  received "^  the  surname  of 
Pamphilus,  or  Pamphili.  In  the  chapter  before  cited  Jerom 
calls  Pamphilus  Eusebius's  friend;  he  mentions  this  again 
in'  the  chapter  of  Eusebius  himself:  and  in  another  place 
he  says  that™  these  two  persons  seemed  to  have  but  one 
soul. 

<=  Vid.  Cav.  H.  L.  in  Pamphilo.  Ruinart,  Acta  Mart,  p,  323,  324,  325. 

"*  TuTotr  nnrrjg  tipKTr]g  iTuJV  Sviiv  oXojv  xpovov  KaTarpiipaaiv.  Eus.  de  Mart. 
Pal.  c.  11.  p.  337.  A.  «  See  TiUem.  Mem.  T.  v.  P.  iii.  S. 

Pamphile,  p.  68.  et  note  iii.  ''  Vid.  Vales.  Ann.  in  Eus.  p.  179,  180. 

*  TiUem.  ib.  p.  55.  ^  Atque  ortus  quidem  erat  ex  Beryten- 

sium  civitate,  ubi  in  prima  aetata  educatus  fuit  in  illis,  quae  illic  erant,  studiis 
literariis.  Ex  Sim.  Met.  ap.  Vales,  ib.  p.  180.  Conf.  Fabric.  Hippol.  T.  ii.  p. 
220.  m.  '  Vid.  Phot.  Cod.  1 18.  f.  et  1 19.  in.  p.  300. 

"*  'O  T(  upoQ  IIafi<piXoQ,  Kai  6  fK  avrs  \p7]fiaTiZwv  EvffifSioc-  Socr.  1.  iii.  c.  7. 
p.  1 75.  B.  Fiyovt  £e  Kai  T7]g  Ilafi^iXa  rs  upo/xapr?;pof  aperrig  SiuTrvpog  epaTtjQ' 
ii  ijv  aiTiav  (pam  tiviq  avrov  Kcurr}Q  ts  YlaiKpiXa  iTTdJVViiiaQ  [itTt(fxr)Ktvai.  Phot. 
Cod.  13.  p.  12.  m.  '  Ob  amicitiam  Pamphili  martyris  ab  eo  cogno- 

mentum  sortitus  est.    De  V.  I,  c.  81.  ""  Eusebius  et  Pamphilus  tantam 

inter  se  habuere  concordiam,  ut  unius  animae  homines  putes,  et  ab  uno  alter 
nomen  acceperit.  Hier.  de  Err.  Orig.  add.  Pamm.  et  Ocean.  Ep.  41.  [al.  65.] 
T.  iv.  p.  347.  f. 


Pamphilus.     a.  D.  294.  219 

Eusebius,  the  survivor,  has  given  many  testimonies  of 
sincere  respect  tor  the  memory  ot"  his  friend  :  and,  as  he  was 
to  the  last  an  admirer  of  his  virtues,  we  may  reasonably  think 
him  an  imitator  of  them :  he  appears  to  have  esteemed  that 
friendship  the  chief  happiness  of  his  life;  it  is  likely  he 
improvetl  by  it.  Indeed  there  are  in  Eusebius's  remaining 
works  divers  most  agreeable  and  afiecting  passages  concern- 
ing this  holy  man  ;  Avhich  therefore  I  intend  to  transcribe 
largely,  and  sonietimes  with  the  connexion. 

The  thirty-second  chapter  of  the  seventh  book  of  his  Ec- 
clesiastical History  is  entitled,  '  Of  such  ecclesiastical  men 
'  as  have  flourished  in  our  time,  and  who  of  them  lived  to 
'  the  demolition  of  the  churches;'  meaning- the  beginning 
of  Dioclesian's  persecution.  After  the  mention  of  several, 
he  says :  '  At°  Caesarea  in  Palestine,  after  Theotecnus 
'  succeeded  Agapius,  who,  as  we  well  know,  was  ex- 
'  tremely  laborious,  and  very  solicitous  for  the  welfare  of  his 
'  people,  and  bountiful  to  the  poor.     In  his  time  was  Pam- 

*  philus,  a  "man  of  good  u!iderstanding,a  philosopher  in  Mord 
'  and  deed,  presbyter  of  that  church,  with  whom  we  had  the 
'  honour  to  be  acquainted  :  but  to  write  of  him  is  a  copious 
'  subject ;  and  we  have  already  in  a  distinct  work  related  the 
'  whole  history  of  his  life  and  conversation,  [or,  and''  of  the 

*  school  erected  by  him,]  and  of  his  fortitude  in  several  con- 
'  fessions  during-  the  persecution,  and  lastly  the  martyrdom 
'  with  which  he  was  crowned :  indeed,  Pamphilus  was  the 

*  most  admirable  person  in  that  church.' 

In  another  chapter  and  book  of  the  same  work,  speaking- 
of  the  most  illustrious  martyrs  in  several  countries  in  the 
time  of  the  forementioned  persecution:  '  Amongi  these  must 
'  not  be  omitted  the  great  glory  of  the  church  of  Csesarea, 

*  the  presbyter  Pamphilus,  the  most  admirable  person  of  our 
'  time,  whose  glorious  magnanimity  and  patience  we  have 
'  represented  in  another  place.' 

In  his  itook  of  the  History  of  the  Martyrs  of  Palestine, 
relating-  many  cruel  torments  inflicted  on  the  christians  by 
the  Roman  president  at  Caesarea,  in  the  year  of  Christ  307. 
'  And  others,'  says"^  Eusebius, '  he  thrust  into  prison,  after  he 
'  had  tormented  them  in  the  most  shameful  manner:  of  this 
'  number  was  Pamphilus,  my  dearest  friend, on  account  of  his 

"  H.  E.  1.  vii.  c.  3-2.  p.  288.  C.  D.  °  Or,  a  most  eloquent 

n  an  ;  sWoyifiuraTov.     Virum  disertissimum.     Vales.  Vers. 

P  'EicaTa  St  TH  Kcir  avrov  /Bis  km  rjg  c!vvi^i](TaTo  haTpi(iTjQ.  Singulji,  quae 
ad  illius  vitam  et  ad  scholam  ab  eodem  constitutam  pertinent.     Vales.  Vers. 

1  1.  viii.  c.  13.  p.  308.  B. 

'  De  Martyr.  Palaest.  c.  7.  p.  329.  A.  B. 


220  Credibilily  of  the  Gospel  History. 

'  eminent  virtue  tlie  most  renoM'iied  martyr  of  our  age. 
'  Urbanus,  having  first  made  trial  of  bis  knowledge  by  diners 
'  questions  of  rhetoric  and  philosophy  and  polite  literature, 
'  required  him  to  sacrifice;  when  he  saw  that  Paniphilus 
'  refused  to  obey  his  orders,  and  despised  all  his  threatenings, 
'  he  commanded  that  he  should  be  tortured  in  the  severest 
'  manner  :  Avhen  he  had  again  and  again  raked  his  sides 
'  with  his  torturing  irons,  the  cruel  wretch,  being  as  it  were 
'  satiated  with  his  flesh,  though  he  had  gained  nothing  but 
'  vexation  and  dishonour,  ordered  him  to  be  had  away  tothe 
'  rest  of  the  confessors  in  prison.' 

And  afterwards :  '  But''  it  is  time  to  give  an  account  of 
'  the  most  glorious  spectacle  of  those  who  were  perfected  by 
'  martyrdom  together  with  Pamphilus,  whose  memory  must 
'  always  be  precious  to  me:  they  were  in  all  twelve,  and 
'  were  honoured  >vith  a  resemblance  of  the  prophets,  or 
'  rather  the  apostles,  both  in  grace  and  number  ;  the  chief  of 
'  whom  was  Pamphilus,  and  the  only  one  who  had  the  honour 
'  of  the  presbyter's  office  at  Cacsarea;  a  man,  who,  through- 
'  out  his  whole  life,  excelled  in  every  virtue ;  in  contempt 
'  and  renunciation  of  this  world,  in  liberality  to  the  indigent,  in 
'  disregard  of  all  earthly  honours  and  preferments  to  Avhich 
'  he  might  have  aspired,  and  in  an  abstemious  philosophical 
'  course  of  life  :  but  he  was  especially  eminent  and  remark- 
'  able  above  all  men  of  our  time  for'  an  unfeigned  zeal  for 

*  the  holy  scriptures,  and  for  unwearied  application  in  what- 

*  ever  he  undertook  ;  whether  it  were  kind  offices  to  his 
'  friends,  or  to  others  who  sought  his  aid :  but  a  fuller  ac- 
'  count  of  these,  and  his  other  virtues  and  services,  has  been 
'  already  given  by   us   in  a  distinct  work  of  three   books, 

*  comprising  the  history  of  his  life.     At  present  wc  go  on 

*  with  our  narration  concerning  the  martyrs.' 

That  work  to  our  great  grief  is  lost :  but  there  is  a  passage 
of  it  in  Jerom,  which  I  shall  here  transcribe :  '  Eusebius," 

•  lb.  cap.  xi.  p.  336.  A.  B.  C. 

'  Trj  irtpi  ra  Srtia  \oyia  yinjmoTary  ffne^y.  ib.  B. 

"  Ipse  eniiii  Eusebius  amator  et  praeco  et  contubernalis  Pamphili  tres  libros 
scripsit  olegantissimos,  vitatn  Paniphilis  continentes:  in  quibus  quum  caetera 
mJris  laudibus  prcedicaret,  humihtatem  ejus  ferret  in  coelum,  etiam  hoc  in 
tertio  libro  addidif :  Quis  studiosonim  amicus  non  fuit  Pamphili  ?  Si  quos 
videbat  ad  victum  necessariis  indigerc,  prailDtbat  large  quae  poterat,  Scripluras 
quoque  sanclas  non  ad  legcnduni  tantum,  scd  ad  habendum,  tribuebat  promp- 
tissime;  nee  solum  viris,  sed  et  t'eminis,  quas  vidisset  lectioni  dcditas.  Unde 
etmultos  codices  praeparabat,  ut,  quum  necesfitas  proposcisset,  volentibus 
largiretur.  Et  ipse  quidem  proprii  o[)eris  nihil  omnino  scripsit,  exceptis 
epistolis,  quas  ad  amicus  i'orle  niittcbat  •  in  tantum  se  humilitate  dejecerat. 
Veterum  aulem  tractafus  scriptonim  legebat  studiosissimo,  et  in  eorum  medi- 
(ationc  jugiter  versabatur.     Ilieron.  adv.  Kuf.  col.  357,  359.  T.  iv.  Ed.  Bencd. 


Pamphilus.     a.  D.  294.  221 

♦  the  friend  and  admirer  and  constant  companion  of  Panij)hi- 
'  Ins  wrote  three  excellent  books  containing"  tlie  life  of  l^ani- 
'  philns;  in  which,  as  he  greatly  commends  him  on  other 
'  acconnts,  so  lie  particularly  extols  his  humility  :  and  in  the 
'  thinl  of  those  books  he  writes  after  this  manner :  What 
'  studious  person  was  not  a  friend  of  Pamphilus  ?  if  he  saw 
'  any  in  straits,  he  gave  bountifully  as  he  was  able.  He  not 
'  only  lent  out  copies  of  the  sacred  scriptures  to  be  read,  but 
'  cheerfully  gave  them  to  be  kept;  and  that  not  oidy  to  men, 
'  but  to  women  likewise,  whom  he  found  disposetl  to  read.  For 
'  which  reason  he  took  care  to  have  by  him  many  copies  of 
'  the  scriptures,  that,  when  there  should  be  occasion,  he  might 
'  furnish  those  who  Avere  willing-  to  make  use  of  them  :  but 
'  of  his  own  he  wrote  nothing-,  except  letters  to  friends  ;  so 
'  great  was  his  humility  :  but  he  diligently  read  the  works 
'  of  ancient  authors,  and  was  continually  meditating  upon 
'  them.' 

II.  I  shall  here  insert  a  passage  or  two  concerning  some 
other  persons  who  suftered  with  Pamphilus,  or  soon  after, 
and  resembled  him  in  a  high  regard  for  the  sacred  scrip- 
tures :  our  narration  is  thereby  somewhat  interrupted,  but  it 
will  be  easily  excused. 

The  firstof  those  passages  immediately  follows  that  above 
cited,  which  concluded  with  those^  words:  '  At  present  we 
go  on  with  our  relation  concerning  the  martyrs.' 

'  The"  second  person,'  says  Eusebius,  '  and  next  after 
'  Pamphilus,  who  entered  the  combat,  w^as  Valens,  a  deacon 
'  of"  uJllia,  an  old  man  of  grey  hairs  and  venerable  aspect, 

*  exceedingly y  well  skilled  in  the  divine  scriptures:  and 
'  they  were  so  fixed  in  his  memory  that  there  was  no  dis- 
'  cernible  difference  between  his  reading  and  reciting  them 
'  by  heart,  though  it  were  whole  pages  together.' 

That  person  suffered  with  Pamphilus.  The  other  passage 
which  I  would  allege  relates  to  a  martyr  in  310,  who  suffered 
in  company  w^ithSilvanus,  bishop  of  Gaza,M'ho''  in  the  year 
307  had  the  flexures  of  his  feet  seared  with  hot  irons  at 

'  See  above,  p.  220.  "^  De  Mart.  Pal.  c.  1 1.  p.  336.  C.  D. 

"  ^lia :  that  is,  Jerusalem  ;  or  the  city  just  hy  .t,  so  called  by  Adrian.  And 
the  name  of  Jerusalem  was  now  so  lost  and  lorgotten,  that  when  one  of  these 
martyrs,  being  examined  by  the  president  of  Palestine  concerning  his  native 
place,  answered,  that  his  city  was  Jerusalem,  meaning  the  heavenly  Jerusalem  : 
the  president,  not  knowing  any  such  place,  was  thrown  into  surprise,  and  very 
solicitously  sought  to  know  where  it  lay,  thinking  it  to  be  some  city  where 
christians  were  numerous,  and  might  be  fonnidable.     See  Eus.  p.  337,  338. 

y   T(i)v  Biiiov  ypa^wv  «  Kai  rig  aWog  fiTiTriiiujv. 

*  tTTi  Ti]Q  avrrig  TVoktioQ  Tsg  afifi   '2i\(5avov — roig  fig  to  avro  x^\kh 

fjiTaWov  TTOvoig  o  avrng  ticKpivii'  Kavrripai  irrinrepov  tujv  ttoSojv  rag  ayKvkag 
avToig  TrpoTa^ac-     De  M.  P.  cap.  7.  p.  328.  C 


222  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

Caesarea,  and  was  then  with  nine-and-thirty  others,  sent"  to 
work  in  the  copper  mines  at  a  place  in  Palestine  called 
Phaeno;  Avhere  he  continued  till  he  was  beheaded.  Their 
martyrdom,  in  310,  is  related  by  Eiisebius  in  this  manner : 
'  The*^  first  of  these  was  Silvanus,  a  truly  religious  man, 
'  and  a  complete  model  of  Christianity  ;  of  whom  it  may  be 
'  said,  that,  having-   from   the   first   day   of  the  persecution 

*  signalized  himself  in  various  and  almost  continual  confes- 
'  sions  and  combats,  he  was  reserved  to  this  time  to  be  as  it 
'  were  the  seal  of  the "  combat  in  Palestine.  With  him  there 
'  were  many  others  from  Egypt ;  and  among  them  was  John, 
'  who  in  strength  of  memory  surpassed  all  men  of  our  time  : 
'  he  had  before  lost  his  eye-sight ;  nevertheless  in  the  con- 
'  fessions  he  had  made,  when  the  flexures  of  one  of  his  feet 
'  were  seared,  as''  those  of  others  were,  his  eyes  likewise, 
'  though  already  deprived  of  sight,  were  burned  with  the 

*  searing  irons  :  such  was  the  cruelty  and  inhumanity  of 
'  those  executioners !  It  is  needless  to  enlarge  upon  his 
'  virtue  and  philosophical  course  of  life.  What  was  most 
'  remarkable  in  him  was  the  strength  of  his  memory :  he 
'  had^  whole  books  of  the  divine  scriptures,  not  written  in 
'  tables  of  stone,  as  the  apostle's  expression  is,  nor  on  parch- 
'  ments  and  papers,  which  are  devoured  by  moths  and  time, 
'  but  on  the  fleshly  living  tables  of  his  heart,  even  his  pure 
'  and  enlightened  mind  :  insomuch,  that  whenever  he  pleased 
'  he  brought  out,  as  from  a  treasury  of  knowledge,  sometimes 
'  the  books  of  Moses,  at  other  times  those  of  the  prophets, 
'  or  some  sacred  history,  sometimes  the  gospels,  sometimes 
'  the  epistles  of  apostles.  I  must  own,  says  Eusebius,  that 
'  I  was  much  surprised  the  first  time  I  saw  him  :  he  was  in  the 
'  midst  of  a  large  congregation,  reciting  a  portion  of  scrip- 
'  ture  ;  whilst  I  only  heard  his  voice,  1  thought  he  was  read- 
'  ing",  as  is  common  in  our  assemblies  ;  but  when  I  came 
'  near,  and  saw  this  person,  who  had  no  other  light  but  that 
'  of  the  mind,  instructing  like  a  prophet  those  whose 
'  bodily  eyes  were  clear  and  perfect,  I  could  not  forbear  to 
'  praise  and  glorify  God.' 

^ Tdjv  ('t  tTTi  UdXca-ivr]^  [laprvpwv,  'SiXfiavoc  nriaKOTrog  tiov  a)x(pi  rr]v 

Ta^av  iKic\r)i7Uin>,  Kara  ra  tv  <Paivoi  %n\/CH  [itraWa  rrvv  trepoig  tvoi^  S»cr]  tov 
agiOfioi'  TirrrrcipaKovra,  rrjv  Kt(pa\r]v  mrorefii'tTai.   H.  l\.  1.  viii.  c.  ]'3.  p.  308.  B. 

'' tvXapfg  Ti  xprjfia   Kai   yvijaiov  inroStiyiJ-a  xP''^i-cvifffin  (jiepojv.    k.  X. 

De  Mar.  Pal.  c.  1 3.  p.  343.  D.  344.  "^   Qc  av  vTarov  ytvoiro  iravTOQ 

TH  Kara  UaXairrivrfv  ax(^voQ  nrinfpayirffia.  ib.  p.  343.  D. 

■'  That  severity  of  searing  the  sinews  of  the  lei't  foot,  or  leg,  and  searing  the 
right  eye,  was  practised  upon  great  numbers  of  confessors  by  Firmilian,  presi- 
dent of  C<Esarea,  successor  of  Urbanus,  who  put  Paniphilus  into  prison.  Vid. 
-Eus.  de  Mart.  Pal.  c.  8.  p.  330.  B.  C. 

•  oKuQ  (iiftKng  Tuv  Bhu)v  ypa^Mv.  ib.  p.  344.  A. 


Pamphilus.     a.  D.  294.  223 

III.  Pamphilus  erected  a  library  at  Ciesarea:  Eusebius 
mentions  it  in  his  Ecclesiastical  History.  He  is  speakinf^ 
of  the  time  of  several  of  Origen's  Morks,  and  of  the  places 
where  they  were  composed  :  '  But,'  says*^  he,  '  what  need  I 
'  attempt  to  give  here  an  exact  catalogue  of  the  works  of 

*  that  great  man,  when  it  has  been  already  done  in  the  life 
'  we  have  written  of  the  blessed  martyr  Pamphilus?  Where 
'  ^showing-  the  zeal  of  Pamphilus  for  the  interest  of  religion, 
'  ||or''  for  the  sacred  scriptures,]  we  gave  lists  of  the  Morks 
'  of  Origen,  and  of  other  ecclesiastical  writers  collected  by 

*  him,  and  placed  in  his  library.' 

Jerom  insinuates  that'  in  the  third  book  of  that  work 
Eusebius  inserted  a  catalogue  of  all  Origen's  works;  whereas 
Eusebius's  own  words  just  cited  seem  not  to  imply  a  com- 
plete catalogue,  but  such  Morks  only  of  Origen  as  were  in 
the  library  at''  Ciesarea. 

Jerom  has  several  times  mentioned  that  library:  beseems 
to  me  to  refer  to  it'  in  the  two  chapters  of  Pamphilus  him- 
self and  Eusebius,  when  he  speaks  of  the  divine  library. 
But  not  now  to  insist  on  those  passages,  in  his  article  of  St. 
Matthew  he  says'"  that  his  Hebrew  gospel  was  still  in  the 
library  at  Csesarea,  Avhich  Pamphilus  had  collected  with 
great  care.  In  another  place  he  speaks  of  the  gospel  ac- 
cording- to  the  Hebrews,  as"  being  in  that  library  :  in  the 
same  work,  (his  book  Of  Illustrious  Men,)  in  the  article  of 
Euzoius,  bishop  of  Csesarea,  about  366*,  he  says,  '  that" 
'  Euzoius  had  with  abundance  of  pains  repaired  the  library 

*  of  Origen  and  Pamphilus,  which  was  fallen  to  decay.'  In 
a  letter  to  Marcella,  Jerom?  commends  this  design  of  Pam- 

f  Eus.  1.  vii.  c.  32.  p.  231.  A.  B. 

^  tvy  Tr\v  TTfpi  ra  Siua  ittth^tjv  th  ria/z^iXs  oiroarj  tiq  ytyovu  TrapiTwv- 

rtf,  Tt]g  avvaxQtiariQ  avrip  rwv  re  Qptyfvac  /cat  rojv  aWiov  tKic\rj(naTi.Kwv 
ffvyypafiutv  l3i(SXioGriKT]Q  Tsc  TTivaKac,  -iraptQi^iiv.  ib.  p.  231.  B. 

*■  So  Valesius  translates :  Ubi  cum  probare  vellemus,  quantum  Pamphili 
studium  erga  divinas  literas  fuisset, 

'  Numera  indices  Iibrorum  ejus,  qui  in  tertio  volumine  Eusebii,  in  quo 
scripsit  vitam  Pamphili,  continentur :  et  non  dico  sex  millia,  sed  tcrt.am 
partem  non  invenies.     Adv.  Ruf.  1.  ii.  p.  419.  in. 

^  Compare  this  with  what  is  said  in  the  chapter  of  Origen,  Vo!.  ii.  ch. 
xxxviii.  numb.  i.  '  See  before,  p.  216.  note  ''. 

""  Porro  ipsum  Hebraicum  habetur  usque  hodie  in  Csesariensi  bibliotheca, 
quam  Pamphilus  martyr  studiosissime  confecit.     De  V.  I.  c.  3. 

"  In  Evangelio  juxta  Hebraeos,  quod  ChaldaJ'co  quidem  Syro':ue  sermone, 
sed  Hebraicis  literis  scriptum  est,  quo  utuntur  usque  hodie  Nazaiei.i,  secundum 
apostolos,  sive,  ut  plerique  autumant,  juxta  Matthaeum ;  quod  et  in  Caesariensi 
habetur  bibliotheca.     Adv.  Pelag.  1.  ui.  T.  iv.  col.  533.  m. 

° plurimo  labore  corruptara  bibliothecam  Orige.iis  et  Pamphili   in 

membranis  instaurare  conatus  est.     De  V.  I.  c.  1 13. 

V  Beatus  Pamphilus  martyr,  cujus  vitam  Eusebius  Caesariensis  tribus  ferme 


224  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

philus,  and  compares  his  library  with  the  more  ancient 
celebrated  libraries  of  Demetrius  Phalereus  and  Pisistratus. 
He  there  speaks  again  of  the  care  of  Euzoius;  and  likewise 
of  Acacius,  the  immediate  successor  of  Eusebius  in  the  see 
of  Csesarea,  iii  repairing*  this  library  :  and  he  says  that 
Pamphilus  dedicated  the  books  of  Origen,  which  he  had 
collected  at  great  expense,  to  the  church  of  Csesarea  ;  Avheuce 
perhaps  it  might  be  inferred  that  this  was  a  public  library: 
and  indeed  Ave  know,  from  Jerom  himself,  thati  he  had  the 
use  of  some  books  lodged  in  it. 

IV.  There  was  a  joint  labour  of  Pamphilus  and  Eusebius 
in  publishing  a  correct  edition  of  the  Greek  version  of  the 
Seventy  from  Origen's  Hexapla,  which  I  have  already  taken 
notice  of  in  the  chapter  of"^  Lucian.  Hiiet  is  of  opinion, 
that*  before  this  there  was  no  separate  edition  of  the  Seventy 
according  to  Origen's  emendations.  Undoubtedly,  this  was 
a  signal  service  for  the  church  of  Christ;  the  benefit  of 
Origen's  immense  labour  was  rendered  more  extensive ; 
and,  if  their  edition  was  not  the  first,  it  was  the  most  exact. 

voluminibus  explicavit,  quum  Demetrium  Phalereum  et  Pisistratum  in  sacrae 
bibliothecae  studio  vellet  aequare,  imaginesque  ingeniorum,  quae  vera  sunt  et 
aeterna  monumenta,  toto  orbe  perquireret,  tunc  vel  maxime  Origenis  libros 
impensius  prosequutus,  Caesariensi  ecclesiae  dedicavit :  quani  ex  parte  cor- 
ruptam  Acacius,  dehinc  et  Euzoius,  ejusdem  ecclesiae  sacerdotes,  in  membranis 
instaurare  conati  sunt.  Ad  Marcell.  inter  Ep.  Crit.  T.  ii.  p.  711.  in.  [al.  Ep. 
141.]  Conf.  Ruf.  ap.  Hieron.  T.  iv.  col.  426.  f.  428.  in. 

•i  Praeterea  quintam  et  sextam  et  septimam  editionem,  quas  etiam  nos  de 
ejus  bibliotheca  habernus,  miro  labore  reperit,  et  cum  caeteris  editionibus  com- 
paravit.  De  V.  I.  c.  54.  Unde  et  nobis  curae  fuit  omnes  veteris  Legis  libros, 
quos  vir  doctus  Adamantius  in  Hexapla  digesserat,  de  Caesariensi  bibliotheca 
descriptos  ex  ipsis  authenticis  emendare.  Id.  in  Ep.  ad  Tit.  cap.  iii.  T.  iv. 
P.  i.  col.  437.  Id  quod  secundo  dicitur,  non  sic,  in  Hebraeis  voluminibus  non 
habetur:  sed  nee  in  ipsis  quidem  LXX.  interpretibus.  Nam  in  exemplis 
Origenis  in  Caesariensi  bibliotheca  legens,  semel  tantum  scriptum  inveni.  In. 
Ps.  prim.  T.  ii.  P.  ii.  col.  123.  in.  Postea  vero  per  interpretationem  tuam 
qusestione  contra  Origenem  toto  orbe  commota,  in  quaerendis  exemplaribus 
diligentior  fui ;  et  in  Caesariensi  bibliotheca  Eusebii  sex  volumina  reperi  AttoXo- 
yiac  vTTcp  QpiytvHc-     Adv.  Ruf,  T.  iv.  col.  447.  f.  "■  See.  p.  207. 

'  Ajjud  multos  hanc  opinionem  percrebuisse  video,  Origenem,  quo  parabilior 
esset  emendata  a  se  editio  seniorum  Septuaginta,  edidisse  earn  seorsum,  et  ex 
ingcnti  Hexaplorum  mole  exemisse.     Probabilior  mihi  videtur  sententia  I.  B. 

Morini, editionem  illam  tojv  6  ex  Origenianis  Hexaplis  descriptam  ab  Eusebio 

et  Pamphilo,  et  primum  evulgatain  arbitrantis,  juxta  illud  Hieronymi  in  Praef. 
ad  Paralip.  ad  Chromatium : — Mediae  inter  has  provinciae  Palaestinos  codices 
legunt,  quos  ab  Origene  elaboratos  Eusebius  et  Pamphilus  vulgaverunt.  Nam, 
cum  frequenter  exscriberentur  exempla  in  ecclesiarum  doctorumque  hominum 
usum,  novis  in  dies  deformabantur  sordium  inquinamentis. — Degenerante  ergo 
magis  magLsque  hac  editione,  restituere  eam  conati  sunt  Eusebius  et  Pamphi- 
lus, ex  ipso  avToypafiii,  quod  erat  in  Caesariensi  Bibliotheca :  restituam  vero  el 
seorsum  magn&  diligentia  descriptam  publicaverunt.  Atque  ea  editio  Palaea- 
tina  dicta  est.     Huet  Orig.  1.  iii.  c.  2.  p.  261. 


Pampmilus.     a.  D.  294.  225 

V.  There  are  still  extant  in  the  curious  collections  of 
Europe  memorials  of  this  library  of  Pamphilus,  and  traces 
of  his  ami  Kusebius's  labour  in  transcribing-  or  correcting' 
coj)ies  of  the  scriptures  or  other  books. 

In  the  Jesuits'  college  at  Paris,'  is  a  beautiful  manuscript 
of  the  prophets,  supposed"  to  have  been  written  in  the 
eighth  century.  In  that  manuscript,  as  Montfau^on  assures 
us,  there  is  before  the  book  of  Ezekiel  a  note  to  this  purpose  : 
'  This^  was  taken  from  a  copy  in  such  a  place,  in  which 
'  copy  was  written  :  "  Transcribed  from  the  Ilexapla  con- 
'  taining  the  translations;  and  corrected  by  Origen's  oavii 
'  Tetrapla,  which  also  had  emendations  and  scholia  in  his 
'  own  hand-writing.  I  Eusebius  added  scholia;  Pamphilus 
'  and  Eusebius  corrected."  ' 

Huet,  speaking  of  this  same  manuscript,  in  one  place '"^ 
says,  that  note  is  at  the  end  of  Jeremiah;  in''  another,  before 
Ezekiel.     I  have  put  his  words  at  the  bottom  of  the  page. 

In  the  French  king's  library,  as  we  are  informed  by  Mont- 
faucon,  isy  a  very  ancient  manuscript,  written  in  the  fifth  or 
'  Vetustissimum,  pulchernmumque  codicem  Prophetarura.— Mont.  Praef.  in 
Hex.  Orig.  p.  4.  "  Hsec  porro  omnia  discimus  ex  NotisCodicis 

Marchaliani,  nunc  R.  R.  P.  P.  Jesuitarum  Collegii  Liidovici  Magni,  quas 
adtnlimus  supra,  p.  14.  lUe  vero  Codex  saeculo  circiter  viii.  ut  ex  characteris 
forma  existimatur,  ad  fidem  exeraplaris  Apollinarii  exscriptus  est.  Montf. 
Praelim.  in  Hex.  Orig.  cap.  11.  sect.  iv. 

"  Deinde  vero  ante  Ezechielem  haec  nota  legitur  : 

*  Desumptus  est  [Ezechiel]  ab  Exemplari  Abbatis  Apollinarii,  Coenobi- 

*  archae,  in  quo  haec  subjiciuntur :  Exscriptus  est  ab  Hexaplis  editione  com- 
'  plectentibus :  et  correctus  est  ad  fidem  Tetraplorum  Origenis,  quae  etiam  manu 

*  ejus  emendata  et  scholiis  illustrata  erant.  Ego  Eusebius  scholia  adjeci, 
'  Pamphilus  et  Eusebius  correxerunt.' 

M£r£\jj00;j  airo  twv  Kara  tuq  iK^oatiQ  t^anXojv,  Kai  hwoOcodt]  ano  tuiv 

QpiyiVHQ  avra  nrpaTrXwv,  ariva  Km  avm  x*'P'  £iojpOwTO,  Kai  iaxo\ioypa(ptTO. 
6  Evffe^wQ  tyu)  ff->(oXia  TrapsQ/jKa*  Ila/i^iXoc  sat  'EvatjSiog  SuopSuxravro. 
Montf.  in  Orig.  Hex.  c.  1.  sect.  v.  p.  14. 

"  Hujus  editionis  et  emendationis  luculentum  extat  inonumentum  in  Codice 
Renati  Marchali,  jam  saepe  laudato,  in  quo  post  Jeremiae  librum  adnotatum 
est  descriptura  eum  esse  ex  Origenis  Hexaplis,  et  emendatum  ex  Tefraplis  manu 
ipsius  exaratis,  idque  opera  Pamphili  et  Eusebii.  Huet,  Orig.l.  iii.  c.  2.  p.  262.  in. 

"  Editioni  tojv  6,  quae  erat  m  Tetraplis,  scholia  ad  linibum  aliqua  adjecisse 
Origenem  discimus  ex  memorato  Codice  Marchali,  quem  habent  Claromontani 
Patres  Societatis  Jesu.  Adnotatum  enim  est  ante  Ezechielem,  librum  hunc  ex 
Hexaplis  descriptum  esse,  correctum  vero  ad  Tetraplorum  fidem.  Postmodum 
subest :  ariva  kui  ry  avm  X"pt  hiopOuiTO,  Kai  Ecrj^oXioypa^fro"  69iv  Evcrtl^WQ 
6yw  Ta  (JxoXia  irapiBi^Ka'  Ylaii<pi\og  Kai  Ev<Tf/3toc  ciuipQwaavro.   lb.  p.  261.  m. 

y  Codex  ccii.  membranaceus,  constans  foliis  14,  complectens  partem  Epis- 
tolarum  Pauli,  inter  antiquissimos  Europae  numerandus,  saeculi  nempe  v.  vel. 
vi. — Scriptus  esse  videtur  in  Palaestina  vel  Syria,  eo  circiter  quo  diximus  aevo. 
Nam  Calligraphus,  qui  notam  infra  edendam  in  fine  posuit,  hoc  exemplar  se 
contulisse  significat  cum  Codice  ipsius  Pamphili  manu  exarato :  antequam 
videlicet  Caesarea  funditus  dirueretui',  quod  contigit  ante  raediura  seeculi  vii. 
Monf.  Bib.  Coislin.  p.  251,  252. 

VOL    III.  Q 


226  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

sixth  century,  containing"  part  of  St.  Paul's  epistles.  It 
seems,  he  says,  to  have  been  written  in  Palestine,  or  Syria : 
for  the  transcriber  says,  in  a  note  at  the  end,  that  he  had 
compared  his  copy  M'ith  another  in  the  library  at  Csesarea, 
in  the  hand-writing-  of  Pamphilus :  which  therefore  must 
•  have  been  done  before  that  library  was  qnite  destroyed,  as 
it  was  before  the  middle  of  the  seventh  centnry.  In  that 
MS.  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews  appears  as  St.  Panl's.  '  The 
'  order  is"^  this:  To  the  Romans,  the  first  and  second  to  the 

*  Corinthians,   to   the   Galatians,  to  the  Ephesians,   to  the 

*  Philippians,  to  the  Colossians ;  first  and  second  to  the 
'  Thessalonians,  to  the  Hebrews,  first  and  second  to  Timothy, 
'  to  Titus,  to  Philemon.'  That  learned  writer  has  given  us 
that  curious  note  of  the  transcriber  before  nientioned  in  the 
ancient  letters  of  the  manuscript.  I  place  it  at  the  bottom 
of  the  page  in  the  letters  now  commonly  used:  '  This^  book 
'  was  compared  with  the  copy  in  the  library  at  Coesarea,  in 
'  the  hand-writing  of  saint  Pamphilus.' 

VI.  It  is  thought  by  divers  learned  men,  as  '^Cave,  '^Va- 
lesius,  and  "*  Tillemont,  though  Du  Pin  takes  no  notice  of  it, 
that  Pamphilus  not  only  erected  a  library,  but  a  school 
likewise,  or  academy,  at  Coesarea.  This  supposition  is  chiefly 
built  upon  a  passage  of  Eusebius,  which*^  I  have  cited 
already.  Tillemont  however  brings  in^  other  passages  in 
support  of  it.  I  must  leave  this  point  undecided.  I  dare 
not  contest  the  thing-.  But  the  evidence  is  not  clear,  because 
the  passage  of  Eusebius,  where  he  is  supposed  to  mention 
the  school,  is^  obscure  ;  and  because  there  is  no  notice  taken 
of  this  school,  that  I  remember,  in  Jerom,  nor  any  other 
ancient  writer  of  credit. 

*  Ordo  Epistolarum  Pauli  in  Codice  xxix.  supra,  ad  Rom.  ad  Corinth.  1,  2> 
ad  Galat.  ad  Ephes.  ad  Philippens.  ad  Colossens.  ad  Thessalonicens.  ],  2,  ad 
Hebr.  ad  Timoth.  1,  2,  ad  Titum,  ad  Philemonem.  lb.  p.  255.  ni. 

^  AvTtfiXrjOt]  Se  r)  (3i(iXog  Trpo?  to  iv  Kaiaapeia  ctvriypa^ov  ttjq  l3i(3Xio9t]KTig, 
TH  ayiH  Tlafj.(pikii  xtipi  yeypa/i/wcj/oj/.     Ap.  Bib.  Coisl.  ib.  p.  262. 

**  Pamphili  vitani  tnbus  libris  amplexus  est — Eusebius,  quibus  integrum 
vitoe  ejus  curriculum,  quajque  ad  scholam  ab  eo  institutam  pertinent, — accu- 
ratissime  depinxit.  Cav.  H.  L.  de  Pamphilo,  ad  fin. 

*^  Vales.  Annot.  in  Euseb.  p.  IGO.  B. 

•*  Saint,  Pamphile,  ubi  supra,  p.  58.  *  Seep.  219. 

'  Vid.  Euseb.  de  M.  P.  c.  iv.  p.  323.  C.  324.  A.  B. 

K  I  shall  here  put  down  Eusebius's  words,  and  divers  Latin  versions :  iKa^a 
Se  TH  Kar  avrov  (its,  Kai  I'lg  (TuviTt^TaTO  huTfuftriQ.  1.  vii.  c.  32.  p.  288.  D. 
Verum  nos  singula,  quee  ad  illius  vitam  et  ad  scholam  ab  eodem  institutam  per- 
tinent,—  peculiari  opere  complexi  sumus.  Vales.  Omnem  ejus  vitam  institu- 
tionemque  a  puero.  Ruf.  Verum  singula  vitaj  illius,  et  in  qua  schola  instilutus 
fuent.  W.  Musculus.  Qua  ratione  institutus.  Christophorson.  Et  Conf. 
Vales.  Annot.  p.  160.  B.  And  any  one  that  pleaseth,  may  see  how  I  have 
translated  the  passage,  at  p.  2-19. 


Pamphilus.     a.  D.  294.  227 

VII.  In  the  article  above  cited  at  length  Jeroin  says,  that 
'  Pamphilus  wrote  an  Apology  for  Origen  before  Eiisebius  :' 
and  in  the  chapter  of  that  bishop  of  Coesarea  he  ascribes''  to 
him  an  Apology  for  Origen  in  six  volumes.  It  seems,  there- 
fore, that  Jerom  then  supposed  that  Pamphilus  had  m  ritten 
some  Apology  for  Origen,  distinct  from  the  six  books  of 
Eusebius  ;  and  upon  that  account  gave  Pamphilus  a  place 
in  his  Catalogue  of  Ecclesiastical  Writers,  composed  in  392 ; 
and  also  in  his  letter'  to  Magnus,  written  about  the  year 
400.  He  seems  so''  to  explain  himself  in  the  dispute  which 
he  afterwards  had  with  Rufinus  :  when  having-  found,  as  he 
says,  that  the  book  he  had  taken  for  Pamphilus's  was  the 
first  of  the  six  volumes  of  what  he  esteemed  Eusebius's 
Apology  for  Origen,  he  denied  that  Pamphilus  ever  wrote 
anything-  besides  e|)istles  to  friends;  and'  often  charged 
Rufinus  with  a  fraud  in  publishing-  the  first  book  of  that 
Apology  in  a  Latin  translation,  as  a  work  of  Pamphilus. 

Nevertheless,  whatever  Jerom  might  think  fit  to  say  after 
his  difference  Avith  Rufinus,  the  truth  seems  to  be  this:  five 
books  of  the  Apology  for  Origen  Avere  composed  jointly  by 
Pamphilus  and  Eusebius  :  the  sixth  and  last  was  written  by 
Eusebius  alone  after  the  martyrdom  of  Pamphilus :  for 
Eusebius  in  his  Ecclesiastical  History  does  expressly  and 
openly  refer  his  readers  for  a  farther  account  of  Origen  to'" 

''  AnoXoyiag  pro  Origene  sex  libros.     De  V.  I.  c.  81. 

'  Nee  non  presbyterorum,  Pampliili,  Pierii, — Ep.  83.  T.  iv.  p.  G5G. 

''  Nunc — sufficiat,  breviter  prudentem  instruxisse  lectorem,  me  istuin  librum, 
qui  sub  nomine  Pamphili  ferebatur,  vidisse  scriptum  in  codice  tuo.  Et  quia 
mihi  non  erat  curae  quid  pro  hseretico  diceretur,  sic  semper  habuisse,  quasi 
diversum  esset  opus  Pamphili  et  Eusebii:  postea  vero  quaestione  mota — per- 
spicueque  deprehendisse,  quod  primus  liber  sex  voluminum  Eusebii  ipse  esset, 
qui  unus  sub  nomine  Pamphili  a  te  editus  est. — Unde  etiani  ante  annos  fere 
decern,  quum  Dexter  amicus  meus— me  rogasset,  utauctorem  nostrae  religionis 
ei  indicem  texerem  ;  inter  caeteros  (ractatores  posui  et  hunc  librum  a  Pamphilo 
cditum,  ita  putans  esse,  ut  a  te  ettuis  discipulis  fuerat  divulgatum.  Sed  quum 
ipse  dicat  Eusebius  Pamphilum  nihil  scnpsisse,  exceptis  brevibus  epistolis  ad 
amicos ;  et  primus  liber  sex  voluminum  illius  eadem  eteisdem  verbis  continent, 
quae  sub  nomine  Pamphili  a  te  ticta  sunt :  perspicuum  est  te  idcirco  hunc 
librum  disseminare  voluisse,  ut  sub  persona  martyris  haeresim  introduceres. 
Quumque  de  hoc  ipso  libro,  quem  Pamphili  simulas,  multa  perverteris,  &c. 
Adv.  Ruf.  1.  ii.  T.  4.  p.  419. 

'  Referens  enim  dc  apologia  Pamphili  martyris,  quam  nos  Eusebii  Ariano- 
rum  principis  probavimus.  Adv.  Rut',  col.  407.  in.  Eusebius — per  sex  volu- 
mina  nihil  aliud  agit,  nisi  ut  Origenem  suae  ostendat  fidei,  id  est,  Arianae  per- 
fidiae.  ib.  f.  Conf.  eund.  p.  357,  359,  405  ;  et  Ep.  ad  Pamm.  et  Ocean,  p.  347. 
Fecerat  hoc  et  in  sancti  Pamphili  martyris  nomine,  ut  librum  primum  sex 
librorum  defensionis  Origenis,  Eusebii  Caesariensis,  quem  fuisse  Arianum  nemo 
est  qui  nesciat,  nomine  Pamphili  martyris  praenotaret.  Ep.  43.  ad  Ctesiph. 
p.  477.  in.  Conf.  eund.  in  libr.  vi.  in  Ezech.  c.  xviii.  T.  iii.  col.  821 ;  et  Prol. 
Dialog,  adv.  Pelag.  T.  iv.  p.  484.  ■"  Tavra  icai  iK  rr}q  vvrep 

Q   '2 


228  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

the  Apology  composed  by  himself  and  Pamphilus.  He 
soon  after  refers  to  the"  sixth  book  of  that  Apology  as  his 
own.  Socrates''  speaks  of  their  common  labour  in  it  as  an 
allowed  thing,  and  commends  the  work  :  yea,  he  cjuotes  it 
in  another  place  as?  Pamphilus's,  Avithout  mentioning 
Eusebius.  Photius,  though  he  is  far  from  commending  the 
performance,  says,  thati  the  first  live  books  were  written 
jointly  by  Pamphilus  and  Eusebius  in  prison,  and  the  sixth 
by  Eusebius  alone  afterwards.  It  is  needless  to  allege  any 
other""  testimonies.  Pamphilus,  as  well  as  Eusebius,  was 
remarkable  for  the  regard  he  had  for  Origen.  St.  Jerom 
knew  that  very  well,  and  owns  it  sometimes :  nor  is  it  at  all 
strange  that  they  should  have  a  high  esteem  for  Origen,  who 
continually  had  before  them,  in  their  library,  the  originals  of 
those  amazing  works,  his  Tetrapla  and  Hexapla,  and  many 
other  volumes  of  his  m  ritings,  monuments  of  a  most  capacious 
mind  and  unexampled  industry. 

This  Avork,  against  which"  Jerom  threatened  to  write, 
according  to*^  his  own  acknowledgment,  was  laboured  and 
copious.  Indeed,  it  must  have  been  a  large  work,  as  may 
be  inferred  from  the  length"  of  the  first  book,  which ^  we 
still  have  in  Rufinus's  Latin  translation;  from'"^  Eusebius's 
divers  references  to  it  for  farther  particulars  concerning 
Origen;  and  from  the  accounts  given"  by  some  ancient 
authors  of  the  contents  of  it. 

Here  I  might  make  some  extracts  out  of  that  first  book 
which  remains,  to  show  what  books  of  scripture  are  referred 
to  by  the  composers,  and  by  Origen,  in  the  ])assages  quoted 
from  him:  but  it  is  needless.  Considering  Pamphilus's 
respect  for  Origen,  and  his  intimacy  with  Eusebius,  it  may 
be  taken  for  granted,  that  his  canon  of  scripture  was  the 

avTH  iritrovrjfiiVTiq  r/^iv  re  Kai  rcf)  KaO'  i)ixaQ  Upcp  fxaprvpi  Iln^^iX^  aTroXoyiag, 

Trapf^iv  ava\ii,iaQai.  1.  vi.  c.  33.  p.  232.  " iv  t/cn^j  ti]q 

ypcKplirrtjQ   t'll^iv  ttioi  th  avcooq  airoXoyiac-  it).  C.  36.  p.  233. 

°  TsTwv  a^iOTTiTOi,  ore  UafKpiXoi:  Kai — Evcf/Sio^*  pp(pu}  yap  KOivy — iv^otoiQ 
f3i(iXwiQ  aTToXoyiav  vTrtp  avTti  iroisfiivoi,  k.  X.  Socr.  1.  iii.  cap.  7.  p.  175.  B. 

1*  Id.  i.  IV.  c.  27.  p.  244.  D.  i  uiv  oJ  fnv  ttivti  UafirpiXtf) 

TO  ?'i(JH(i)rr}piov  oikhvti,  avunupovroc  Kai  Ed(T£/3(8,  fKovriBrjciuv'  k.  X.  Phot, 
cod.  1 18.  col.  396.  vid.  et  col.  397.  f.  '  Vid.  Pradestinat.  Haer.  43. 

'  Adversus  quse  volumina,  (si  Dominus  vitae  hujus  dederit  spatium,)  alias 
respondere  conabor.     Adv.  Riif.  1.  ii.  p.  419. 

'  Sex  libros  Eusebius  CEesarionsis  episcopus,  Arianae  quondam  signifcr  fac- 
tionis,  pro  Origene  scripsit,  latissimum  et  elaboratnm  opus.  Adv.  Ruf.  1.  i.  p. 
357.  "  Rufinus  translated  the  first  book,  and  that  only,  so  far 

as  we  know.  Horura  tu  primum  librum  vertis  sub  nomine  martyris — Si  totum 
opus  PamphiH  est,  cur  reliquos  libros  non  transfers?  ib.  1.  i.  p.  357. 

'   Ap.  Hieron.  Opp.  T.  v.  p.  219.  &c.  Ed.  Bened. 

"  II.  E.  1.  vi.  c.  23,  et  33,  et  36.  "  Vid.  Socr.  1.  iii.  c.  7. 1.  iv.  c. 

27.  Phot.  cod.  1 17,  1 18.  Conf.  Tillem.  Saint  Pamphile.  T.  v.  P.  iii.  p.  60,  61. 


Pamphilus.     a.  D.  294.  229 

same,  or  much  the  same,  as  theirs.  And  what  theirs  was, 
has  been  orM'ill  be  shown  largely  in  this  work. 

VIII.  Montfauc^on  has  publislied  Contents>  of  the  Acts 
of  the  Apostles,  wliich  he  thinks  to  have  been  composed 
and  drawn  up  by  Pamphilus.  As^  the  work  is  ascribed  to 
Pamphilus  in  th<!  manuscript,  which''  is  supposed  to  be  of  the 
tenth  century,  so  for  that,  and  some  other  reasons,  he  makes 
no  scruple  to  consider  him  as  the  author.  The  same  thing- 
has  been  put  out  again**  by  Fabricius  as  a  work  of  Pamphi- 
lus. But  those  contents'  had  been  often  published  before 
Avithout  the  name  of  the  author  :  and  the  only  thing-  uncom- 
mon is**  the  short  preface  to  those  Contents;  which  too,  with 
the  Contents  themselves,  had  been  published'^  by  Zacagni, 
as  written  by  Euthalius,  who*^  flourished  about  the  year  458. 

And  indeed  it  seems  to  me  more  likely  that  Euthalius 
should  be  the  author  than  Pamphilus.  It  is  observable  that 
Euthalius  published  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  the  Catholic 
epistles,  and  St.  Paul's  epistles.  At  the  end  of  his  edition 
of  the  Catholic  epistles,  which  follow  that  of  the  Acts  of  the 
Apostles,  is  this  note  :  '  Thes  book  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apos- 
'  ties,  and  of  the  Catholic  epistles,  was  collated  with  the  exact 
'  copies  of  the  library  of  Eusebius  Pamphilus  in  Ca?sarea.' 
Mr.  VVetstein,  to  Avhom  I  refer  my  readers,  has  divers  curious 
remarks  concerning-  Euthalius.  He  is  of  opinion,  that  this'' 
note  has  been  an  occasion  of  ascribing-  to  Pamphilus,  as 
author,  what  was  really  done  by  Euthalius,  who  made  use 
of  his  library.  However,  we  have  here  another  proof  of  the 
usefulness  of  that  library  at  Cae.sarea. 

IX.  It  is  now  time  that  we  reflect  upon  what  we  have  met 

y  Praemittitur  Expositio  Capitum  Actuum  auctore  Pamphilo,  tKOeaiQ  Ktrpa- 
\ai(DV  T(i)v  TrpaKewv  m  lla/t^jXs'  quam  integram  edimus  infra.  Mont.  Bib. 
Coislin.  p.  76.  ^  Codex  xxv.  al.  cxxi.  membranaceus  decimi 

saeculi,  complectitiir  Acta  Apostolorum  et  epistolas  catholicas. — lb.  p.  75. 

"  Hanc  opellam  esse  vere  Pamphili  martyris,  non  est  quod  dubitemus.  ib. 
p.  78.  in.  ^  Vid.  Fabr.  Spic.  Patr.  sen  Hippolyti  Opera,  P.  ii. 

p.  205,  &c.  <=  Ex&tat  eadem  eKOtcng  sine  nomine  auctoris  ante 

Commentarios  CEcuraenii  in  Acta,  atque  inde  in  nielioribus  Novi  Testamenti 
editionibus;  Rob.  Stephani,  Job.  Boecleri,  et  Job.  Millii :  necnon  in  Dan. 
Heinsii  ad  Nov.  Test.  Exercitationibus.  Fabr.  ib.  p.  209. 

''  Ap.  Bibl.  Coislin.  p.  78.  *  Ap.  Laurent.  Zacagn.  Collectanea,  p.  428. 

f  Vid.  Zacagn.  Praf.  p.  61,  62.  et  Cave  H.  Lit.  T.  i.  p.  446.  Oxon.  1 740. 

s  kvTiji\r}9r]  Se  twv  Upa^iuiv  Kai  Ka9o\iKojv  stti'^oXujv  to  /3i/3\tov  irpog  ra 
UKpi^i}  avriypa^a  ti]Q  tv  KaityapeK}  j3i[iXioOT]Kt]g  Evff«/3i8  rs  IlafKpiXii.  ap. 
Zacagn.  ib.  p.  513. 

*■  Quod  praecipuura  est,  editionem  suam  cum  exemplari  Pamphili  martyris, 
in  Bibliotheca  Caesariensi  asservato,  contulit. — Inde  error  librariorum  ortus 
est,  qui  cum  legerent,  ab  Ei-thalio  Codicem  Pamphili  consultum  esse,  totum 
iaborem  Euthahi  Pamphilo,  tamquam  potior!,  adscripserunt.  Wetst.  Proleg. 
p.  76. 


230  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

with  concerning-  this  martyr  for  the  christian  religion.  There 
can  be  no  question  but  Pamphilus  >vas  an  understanding- 
and  truly  pious  man.  He  was  not  distinguished  only  by  the 
last  scene  of  life,  the  magnanimity,  fortitude,  and  patience 
of  his  confessions  and  martyrdom  ;  but  his  whole  life  was 
a  shining-  example  of  virtue.  He  must  have  been  a  person 
of  a  good  family,  and  a  large  estate;  but  he  despised  the 
world,  and  renounced  all  earthly  expectations.  He  was  a 
zealous  christian,  and  greatly  delighted  himself  in  the  scrip- 
tures: he  was  liberal  to  the  poor,  kind  to  his  acquaintance, 
and  to  all  men  who  sought  to  him  :  he  had  an  earnest  desire 
to  promote  learningand  knowledge,  especially  the  knowledge 
of  the  holy  scriptures,  in  men  of  every  condition:  and  his 
diligence  in  all  laudable  undertakings  was  extraordinary. 
The  testimonies  to  his  virtue  which  we  have  seen,  are  very 
agreeable :  but  if  the  large  history  of  his  life,  written  by 
Eusebius,  were  still  in  being-,  very  probably  it  Mould  be 
more  entertaining-,  and  inform  us  of  many  things  of  an 
edifying-  nature.  It  is  one  of  those  works  of  Eusebius,  the 
loss  of  which  is  much  lamented  by  learned  men. 

Where  can  such  a  man  as  this  be  found  in  the  heathen 
world  ?  how  rare  were  such  examples  under  the  Mosaic 
institution,  of  men,  who  employed  their  Avhole  time  in  im- 
proving- their  own  minds,  and  serving  others,  without  noise 
and  ostentation, and  without  worldly  views,  and  at  last  quietly 
resigned  their  lives  rather  than  disown  the  principles  by 
which  they  had  been  hitherto  conducted  and  supported  ! 

Nor  was  Pamphilus  alone,  though  distinguished.  There 
were  twelve  in  all,  who  at  one  and  the  same  time  bore  the 
most  signal  testimony  to  truth.  One'  of  whom  was  a  ser- 
vant of  Pamphilus,  by  name  Porphyry  ;  who,  thoug-h  he 
was  burned  at  a  stake,  bore  that  painful  death,  and  all  the 
preceding  tortures  appointed  by  the  cruel  governor,  with 
wonderful  fortitude  and  resignation,  serenity  and  patience. 
Not  to  insist  now  on  the  many  others  in  Palestine,  Egypt, 
and  other  places,  Avho  about  this  time  signalized  tliemselves 
by  divers  confessions,  and  at  last  by  dying  for  their  religion. 
Certainly  these  men,  if  tliey  were  not  the  best  speakers,  were 
the  best  livers  that  ever  the  world  saw  :  and  in  their  death 
they  arc  M'ithout  rivals.  These  holy  and  useful  men,  these 
confessors  and  martyrs,  undaunted  by  all  the  evils  which  an 
iMikind  and  mistaken  world  sometimes  brings  upon  those 
who  are  its  greatest  blessings  and  best  benefactors,  were 
formed   by  the  christian''   religion  when  the  evidences  of  it 

'  Vid.  Euseb.  de  Mart.  Pal.  c.  xi.  p.  3m,  339. 

I"  Triumphus  Dei  est  passio  martyriini,  ct  pro  Christi  nomine  cruoris  efFusio, 


Pamphilus.     a.  D.  294.  231 

were  near,  and  if  not  true,  their  weakness  might  have  been 
perceived.  They  were  advanced  by  it  to  this  eminence, 
when  it  was  considered  as  an  institution  of  virtue,  not  an 
abstruse  and  specuhitive  science;  a  doctrine  front  heaven, 
not  a  creature  of  the  state  :  and  when  Jesus,  their  Lord  and 
Master,  was  not  only  admired  as  a  divine  teacher,  but  was 
also  esteemed  an  exaniple  both  in  his  life  and  in  his  death. 

One  thing' which  frcquenfly  occurs  in  the  authentic  histo- 
ries of  these  primitive  christians  of  note  and  distinction, 
deserves  especial  regard  :  I  mean  their  affection  and  zeal  for 
the  holy  scriptures.  P'or  their  own  sake,  for  the  sake  of 
others,  and  among-  them  for  our  good,  they  were  nn'ghtily 
taken  up  in  reading,  studying-,  explaining,  and  comment- 
ing- upon,  the  scriptures  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament; 
or  in  transcribing-  them,  or  correcting-  copies  of  them,  and 
procuring-  exact  editions,  for  the  use  of  all  sorts  of  persons. 
This  is  for  our  imitation,  and  for  our  satisfaction.  It  is 
what  ought  to  be  imitated  by  us :  and  it  likewise  aftbrds  ns 
good  reason  to  think  that  the  books  of  holy  scripture,  M'hich 
contain  the  revelations  of  the  divine  will  to  mankind,  and 
are  the  rule  of  our  faith,  have  been  transmitted  to  us  in  great 
purity,  without  any  remarkable  alterations  or  deviations  from 
the  original  writing*. 

X.  Fabricius  has  published  what  he  calls'  Acts  of  the 
Passion  of  St.  Pamphilus,  taken  out  of  his  Life  written  by 
Ensebius  of  Coesarea  ;  for  which  I  might  have  selected  some 
things,  and  thereby  possibly  made  my  account  of  Pamphi- 
lus more  agreeable  to  some  :  but  I  cannot  persuade  myself 
to  make  any  use  of  that  piece,  not  being-  satisfied  of  its 
genuineness. 

Here  it  is  not  only  said  that  he  was  of  a  noble  family, 
which  is  very  likely,  but  also  that™  he  had  honourably 
discharged  civil  ofHces  in  his  country:  which,  I  think,  can- 
not be  easily  reconciled  with  Eusebius's  genuine  account ; 

et  inter  tormenta  laetitia.  Quum  enim  quis  viderit  tanta  perseverantia  stare 
martyres  atque  torqueri,  et  in  suis  cruciatibus  gloriari,  odor  notitiae  Dei  disse- 
minatur  in  Gentes,  et  subit  tacita  cogitatio,  quod,  nisi  verum  esset  evangelium, 
nunquam  sanguine  defenderetur.  Neque  enim  delicata,  et  divitiis  studens  ac 
secura  confessio  est;  sed  in  carceribus,  in  plagis,  in  persecution ibus,  in  fame,  in 
nuditate  et  siti.  Hie  triumphus  Dei  est,  apostolorumque  victoria.  Hieron. 
ad  Hedib.  n.  xi.  T.  iv.  P.  i.  p.  184. 

'  Acta  passionis  S.  Paniphili  martyris  ex  libris  Eusebii  Cajsariensis  dc  illius 
Vita,  juxta  MS.  Medicseum  Regis  Ciiristianissimi.  Ap.  Fabr.  Spic.  Patr.  sea 
Hippolyti  Opp,  T.  ii.  n.  217,  &c.  Conf.  ejusd.  Bib.  Gr.  T.  v.  p.  277,  278. 

'" CTricn]fi(i)Q  re  ruig  Kara  rrjv  TrarpiSa  TToXiTuaig  SiairptipavTog.     Act. 

Pass.  ap.  Fabr.  p.  218.  m fuissetautem  insignisin  republica  gercnda  in  patriit 

sua.     Certamen  Pamphili  ex  Metaphr.  ap.  Vales.  Ann.  in  Eus.  p.  179.  b.  in. 


232  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

who  says  that"  '  Pauiphilus  renounced  all  worldly  expecta- 
*  tions ;'  or,  as  Valesiiis  translates  the  words,  '  despised"  all 
'  secular  honours,  to  which  he  might  have  aspired.'  Euse- 
bius  does  actually  say  of  Phileas,  bishop  of  Thinuis,  that? 
he  had  with  reputation  enjoyed  all  civil  offices  and  employ- 
ments in  his  country.  Why  did  he  not  expressly  say  the 
same  of  Pamphilus,  if  true,  Avhen  he  spoke  of  his  contempt 
of  this  Morld  'I 

Again,  it  is  said  in  these  Acts,  thaf  Pamphilus  renounced, 
or  gave  away,  all  his  paternal  estate  to  the  poor,  and  that 
he  himself  lived  a  philosophical  kind  of  life,  having- nothing- 
of  his  own  :  but  Eusebius  in  his  genuine  account  only  says 
thaf^  Pamphilus  was  very  bountiful  to  the  indigent,  or  gave 
liberally  out  of  his  substance  for  the  relief  of  such  persons. 
That  particular  appears  to  me  contrary  to  all  the  ancient 
authentic  accounts  which  we  have  of  Pamphilus.  If  he  had 
renounced,  or  given  away  all  his  estate,  how  should  he  have 
erected  a  library  ?  How  could  he  have  transcribed  numerous 
copies  of  the  books  of  scripture,  and  Commentaries  upon 
them?  How  should  he  and  Eusebius  put  out  a  correct 
edition  of  the  Seventy  from  Origen's  Hexapla?  In  all  these 
works  Pamphilus  nnist  have  been  assisted  by  some  rich 
christian,  as  Origen  was  by  Ambrose,  if  he  had  nothing-  of 
his  own  :  but  nothing  of  that  kind  is  any  where  said  by 
Eusebius  or  Jerom.  On  the  contrary  it  is  all  along  supposed 
that  he  lived  upon  his  own,  and  that  from  time  to  time  he 
cheerfully  laid  out  what  he  had,  as  occasions  offered,  in 
good  works  and  useful  designs  of  various  kinds,  as  before 
seen. 

So  far  as  T  can  perceive,  these  Acts  of  Fabricius  are  much 
the  same  with  those  in  Surius,  Yalesius,  and  others,  as  taken 
from  Simeon  Mefaphrastes,  which'  were  mentioned  before  : 
and  therefore  Avhat  I  have  said,  or  may  say  concerning  either, 
ought  to  be  understood  as  relating  to  both. 

Fabricius  supposeth  these  Acts  to  have  been  taken  out  of 
the  booka  of  Eusebius  containing   the  life  of  Pamphilus. 

" KOTjAiK^v  f\7ricwv  oXiyojpia.  Eus.  de  Mart.  P.  c.  xi.  p.  336.  B. 

°  seu  saecularium  hononim,  ad  quos  adspirare  poferat,  despicientiam. 

Vales.  P  ——CiaTrptipaQ  avu]^  tcuq  Kara  T7]v  irarpi^a  TroKiriiaig 

KM  Xtimpyiaic.  H.  E.  1.  viii.p.  301.  D. 

"i aTTocofiivoQ  ytToi  Ta  tig  avrov  otto  -n-noyoiniiv  r'jKoi'ra  yi'i^ivoic,  Trrjpotg, 

Kai  TTtPTjiTiv  a—avra,  av-og  iv  uKTrijiovi  hi]yi  fti(i) — k.  X.  I'abr.  ib.  p.  220.  m. 
Renuntians  quidem  iis  quae  ad  ipsum  redibant  a  majonbus,  niidis,  niancis,  et 
pauperibus  distribuit.     Ipse  autein  degebat  in  vita  qua?  nihil  possidebat.     Ex 

Mctaphra.st.  ap.  Vales,  ib.  p.  TSO.  b.  in.  "■  ry  ti/q  aaiag  tu; 

tvSttig  Koiv<i)vi(}.  De  Mart.  Pal.  c.  xi.  p.  33G.  B. 

»  Seep.  218. 


Pamphilus.     a.  D.  294.  233 

Valesius'  thinks  that  those  Acts  in  Metaphrastes  were  taken 
from  Eusebius's  book  of  the  3Iartyrs  of  Palestine :  which 
book,  as  we  now  have  it  in  tlic  coinnton  copies,  is  imperfect, 
as  he  says,  and  may  be  made  more  complete  by  these  Acts 
ill  3Ietaphrastes. 

I  rather  think  tliese  Acts  to  be  the  invention  of  some  idle 
impostor,  who,  according-  to  his  own  fancy,  eidarged  and 
flourished  upon  Eusebius's  genuine  account  of  the  martyr- 
dom ot  i^unphilus  and  his  companions,  Aviiich  we  have  in 
the  eleventh  chapter  of  his  book  concerning  the  Martyrs  of 
Palestine.  The  whole  of  this  piece,  compared  with  that 
chapter  of  Eusebius,  has  such  an  appearance:  Eusebius 
says  of  that  company  of  martyrs,  that  '"they  resembled 

*  the  prophets  and  apostles.'     This  writer'    adds,  '  and  the 

*  patriarchs.'  Eusebius,  speaking-  of  their  last  combat, 
says,  '  it"'  was  a  most  glorious  spectacle;'  as  indeed  it  was. 
Whereupon  this  oratorical  author  says,  '  there^  might  be 

*  seen  in  it  at  once  persons  of  every  age  of  the  human  life, 
'  and  of  every  rank  in  the  church,  (meaningy  faithful  cate- 

*  chumens,  presbyters,  and  deacons,)  and  of  every  condition 

*  and  employment,  and  likewise  a  great  variety  of  sufferings, 

*  and  consequently  different  crowns  for  the  victors.'  This 
plan  the  author  proposes  at  the  beg-inning",  and  afterwards 
fills  up  as  he  sees  g-ood. 

I  think  these  considerations,  added  to  the  foregoing-,  may 
be  sufficient  to  show  that  this  piece  is  a  forgery. 

The  length  of  these  critical  remarks,!  hope  will  be  excused. 
If  we  are  not  upon  our  guard,  we  shall  have  nothing  but 
fable  instead  of  history. 

'  Vid.  Vales.  Ann.  p.  180.  "  De  M.  Pal.  c.  xi.  p.  33G.  B. 

"  Ap.  Fab.  lb.  p.  219.  m.  ap.  Vales.  Ann.  p.  179.  C. 

"  Ubi  supr.  p.  336.  A. 

^  A0poaj£  ev  avTif)  irav  uCoq  ifKiKuov  Tt  adJjiaTOQ,  /cat  \pvxi^v  ayu)yi]Q,  ftia  re 
Kai  ava-^o(t>riQ  £ia<poo>i  7rt^iti\r](pora,  ^acavuv  rt  ttoixiXoiq  iidiai,  k.  X.  ap. 
Fabr.  p.  217.  ap.  Vales.  179.  C. 

y  Ap.  Fabr.  p.  219.  in.  ap.  Vales,  p.  180.  A. 


234  Credibililij  of  the  Oospel  Hislory. 


CHAP.  LX. 

PHILEAS,  BISHOP  OF  THMUIS  IN  EGYPT ;  AND  PHILOROMUS, 
RECEIVER-GENERAL  AT  ALEXANDRIA. 

'  PHILEAS,'  says*  Jeroin,  '  of  a  city  in  Egypt  called 
'  Tlimuis,  of  a  noble  family,  and  a  large  estate,  accepted  an 
'  episcopal  charge.  He  wrote  an  excellent  book  in  praise 
'  of  the  martyrs.  After  a  long-  debate  with  the  judge,  who 
'  commanded  him  to  sacrifice,  he  was  beheaded  for  Christ 
'  under  the  same  persecutor,  by  whose  ttrders  Lucian  suf- 
'  fered  at  Nicomedia.' 

Jerom  means  the  emperor  Maximin.  But  learned  men 
arc  not  agreed  about  the  year  of  this  g-ood  man's  martyrdom. 
By  Cave"^  it  is  placed  in  311,  by'^  Basnage  in  311  or  312, 
by''  Tillemont  after  306,  and  before  the  edict  in  311  or  312. 
The  place  of  his  martyrdom  is  now,  I  think,  generally 
allowed  to  be  "^Alexandria,  though  '^Valesius  once  inclined 
to  Thcbais. 

Phileas  flourished,  as  Cave  computes,  near  the  end  of  the 
third  century,  about  the  year  296.  It  is  likely  that  Thmuis 
was  the  place  both  of  his  nativity  and  his  episcopate. 

Eusebius  in  his  Ecclesiastical  History  has  a  long-  passage 
of  a  letter  of  Phileas  to  the  christians  at  Thmuis;  which  is 
generally  reckoned  to  be  the  same  that  Jerom  calls  a  book  in 
Praise  of  the  Martyrs. 

Eusebius  at  the  same  time  o-ives  an  account  of  the  mar- 
tyrdoni  of  Philoromus.  And  there  are  still  extant^  Acts  of 
the  inart3'rdonis  of  these  two  persons,  which  are  esteemed 
genuine  and  sincere  by''  Tillemontand'  Ruinart:  and  indeed 
they  are  in  the  main  agreeable  to  Eusebius:  but  yet  it  seems 
to  mo  that  they  are  interpolated  :  at  least,  1  am  of  opinion 
that  they  are  not  to  be  relied  upon  as  sincere  and  uncorrupt  ; 
for  which  reason  I  shall  not  make  any  use  of  them.     But 

*  Phileas,  de  urbe  ^gypti,  quae  vocatur  Tlimuis,  nobili  genae,  et  noii  parvis 
opibus,  suscepto  episcopatu,  elegantissimum  hbrum  de  martyrum  laude  com- 
posuit.  Et  disputatione  actorum  habita  adversus  judicem,  qui  eum  sacrificare 
cogebat,  pro  Christo  capite  truncatur,  eodein  in  Egypto  persecutionis  auclore, 
quo  Lucianus  Nicomediae.     De  V.  I.  c.  78. 

"  H.  L.  in  Philea.  <=  Ann.  312.  n.  18. 

"*  Mem.  Ecc.  S.  Phileas,  &c.  T.  v.  P.  iii.  p  173,  et  note  5. 

'  Vid.  Basn.  ib.  n.  19.  et  fluinart.  Act.  Mart.  p.  494. 

'  Annot.  in  Euseb.  1.  viii.  c.  9.  «  Ap.  Ruin.  Act.  M.  p.  494— 49G. 

"  As  before,  p.  163,  &c.  '  Ubi  supra,  p.  493,  494. 


Phileas  and  Philoromu?.     A.  D.  296.  235 

I  shall  immediately  transcribe  Eusebius's  history  of  the 
death  both  of  Phileas  and  Philoromus,  with  a  part  of  the 
just-meiitioued  passage  of  the  letter  written  by  the  former. 
Our  ecclesiastical  historian  then,  having-  mentioned  divers 
other  instances  of  heroic  courage  and  tirnmess  of  mind  in 
the  cause  of  truth,  adds  ;  '  And"*  these  are  indeed  admirable  : 
but  yet  more  admirable  are  they  who,  distinguished  by 
their  wealth,  high  birth,  honours,  learning,  and  eloquence, 
preferred  before  all  other  things  true  religion  and  faith  in 
Jesus  Christ.  Among-  these  was  Philoromus,  who  bore  no 
ordinary  oHice,  but  was  the  emperor's  receiver-general  at 
Alexandria;  and,  as  became  his  high  station  in  the  Roman 
government,  daily  heard  causes,  attended  by  a  guard  of 
soldiers.  Phileas,  likewise,  bishop  of  the  church  at 
Thmuis,  who  had  with  reputation  discharged  all  public 
offices  in  his  own  country,  and  was  eminent  for  his  philo- 
sophical learning-,  when  many  of  their  kindred  and  other 
honourable  i'riends,  and  some  of  the  mag-istrates,  and  even 
the  judge  himself  advised  them  to  take  pity  upon  them- 
selves, and  to  consider  their  wives  and  children,  would  not 
by  all  their  entreaties  be  induced,  out  of  a  regard  to  their 
own  life,  to  transgress  the  divine  laws  concerning- denying" 
and  confessing-  our  Saviour;  but  m  ith  a  manly  and 
courageous  and  philosophic  mind,  or  rather  with  a  religious 
heart  truly  devoted  to  God,  having-  withstood  all  the 
threatenings  and  abuses  of  the  judge,  they  were  both  be- 
headed.' 

'  But,'  forasmuch  as  we  said  that  Phileas  was  eminent  for 
learning-,  let  him  be  produced  as  his  own  witness.  At  the 
same  time  he  shows  m  hat  he  himself  was,  he  will  relate  the 
martyrdoms  that  happened  in  his  time  at  Alexandria  much 
more  exactly  than  we  can  do.  Thus  then  he  writes  in  his 
epistle  to  the  people  at  Thmuis:'  "  All""  these  ensamples 
and  patterns  and  excellent  admonitions  being  set  before  us 
in  the  divine  and  sacred  scriptures,  the  blessed  martyrs 
among  us,  without  hesitation  fixing-  the  eye  of  their  soul 
upon  God  over  all,  and  willingly  embracing  death  for  the 
sake  of  religion,  stedfastly  adhered  to  their  calling:  know- 
ing- that"   our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  became  man  for  our  sake, 

^  Qai'/xamoi  fitv  sv  Kai  sroi*  i'^aioerdig  Cs  eKiivoi  SinvfiaaiojTspoi,  oi  TrXarq} 
jiiv  (Cat  ivytpttq:,  Kai  doly,  Xoy^j  ts  koi  ^tXoffo^i^t  CiarrptipavTSQ,  k.  X.  Eus.  1.  viii. 
c.  9.  p.  301.  C.  D.  302.  '  lb.  cap.  10.  p.  332.  B.  &c, 

""  Thtojv  (nravTMV  vTro^eiyjiaTUJv  ijfiiv  koi  viroypamnov,  koi  koXojv  yviopiff- 
fiarwv  tv  Tai£  Sruaig  Kaiupaig  ypuc^iaig,  k.  X.  ib.  C. 

" Toi'  fiiv  Kvpiov  rjfiwv  Irjaav  Xpt^ov  tvpovTtg  tvavQpuirrjrravTa  £i  vi^ug, 


236  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

that  he  might  destroy  all  sin,  and  afford  us  helps  for  obtain- 
ing eternal  life:  For  he  did  not  earnestly  desire  to  ap- 
pear like  God,  but  made  himself  of  no  reputation,  taking 
the  form  of  a  servant :  and  being  found  in  fashion  as  a  man, 
he  humbled  himself  unto  death,  even  the  death  of  the  cross  :" 
Philip,  ii.  6,  7.  "  Wherefore"  also  these  martyrs,  full  of 
Christ,  "  earnestly  desiringP  the  greatest  gifts,"  (1  Cor. 
xii.  31.)  endured  not  once  only,  but  some  of  them  often,  all 
kinds  of  pains  and  tortures  that  can  be  invented ;  and, 
though  the  officers  did  their  utmost  by  words  and  deeds  to 
terrify  them,  they  were  not  disheartened,  "  because  perfect 
love  casteth  out  fear :"  1  John  iv.  18. 

I  omit  the  rest  which  may  be  seen  in  Euscbius  himself, 
who,  having  finished  his  extracts,  adds  :  '  These^  are  the 
'  words  of  a  true  philosopher,  and  a  martyr  filled  with  the 
'  love  of  God  :  which,  when  in  prison,  before  the  final  sen- 
'  tence  of  the  judge,  he  sent  to  the  people  under  his  care; 
'  partly  informing  them  what  were  his  own  circumstances, 
'  partly  exhorting  them  to  hold  fast  the  faith  of  Christ,  even 
'  after  his  death,  which  was  then  near  at  hand.' 

Here  are,  I  think,  three  references  to  books  of  the  New 
Testament;  the  first  epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  and  the 
epistle  to  the  Philippians,  and  the  first  of  St.  John.  We  see 
by  this  short  passage,  what  great  regard  the  christians  of 
those  times  had  for  the  holy  scriptures :  and  how  apt  they 
are  to  clothe  their  OM'n  thoughts  in  expressions  borrowed  from 
them. 

I  suppose  likewise,  that  none  will  dispute  my  interpreta- 
tion of  that  phrase,  which  in  our  English  translation  is  ren- 
dered, '  thought  it  not  robbery  to  be  equal  with  God  ;'  for  it  is 
here  evidently  used  and  understood  by  Phileas,  as  expressive 
of  our  Lord's  humility,  not  of  his  dignity  and  greatness.  In 
the  like  manner  have  Me  already  observed  that  expression 
understood  by  several  "■  ancient  christian  writers. 

I  would  just  observe  that,  at  the  end  of  the  passage  cited 
by  Eusebius,  Phileas  quotes  some  precepts  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, as*  sacred  scripture. 

'tva  iranav  fiiv  afiaQTiav  eKKOiprj,  t<pocia  de  rrig  iiQ  Tt)v  anoviov  Z,ii]r)V  unocs  t)fjiv 
KaTCtOrjrai'  h  ynp  apTrayfinv  J/yjjffaro  to  nvai  laa  Qti^i'  aW  tavrav  iKivionE, 
lxo()<l>i]v  chXh  \nj3ojv.     lb,  p.  302.  C.  D. 

"   Aio  Kai  'Ct]\ojffavTtQ  ra  fjidZova  xapiffi^teiTa  (A  xpiro^opoi  itaprvpiQ.  ib.  D. 

P  St.  Paul  there  says,  The  best  gifts,  ra  ympinfiara  ra  KptiTTova.  But  after- 
wards, ch  xiii.  13,  he  says,  The  greatest  ot  these  is  charity,  /at^wv  Ss  mrtov  i) 
ayanr).  i  Ib.  p.  304.  B.  ■■  See  Vol.  ii.  chap,  xxxviii. 

num.  xxviii.  12.  and  ch.  xliv.^and  in  this  Vol.  p.  115,  200. 

*  —yCtaav  yap  ra  vtto  twv  'ttpw%'  ypa(pwv  y'lfiiv  TrpoopicdiVTa.   ib.  p.  304.  B. 


Peter  o/  Alexandria.     A.  D.  300.  237 

Pliileas  is  elsewhere  nicntioned  by  ^  Euscbiiis  among' other 
bishops  of  Egypt,  who  suffered  niartyrdom  in  Dioclesian's 
persecution. 


CHAP.  LXI. 

PETER,  BISHOP  OF  ALEXANDRIA,  AND  THE  MELETIANS. 

I.  Peter,  his  history  and  tcorks,  and  testimony  to  the  scrip- 
tures.    II.   The  Meletians,  their  history  and  time. 

I.  IN  the  year  of  our  Lord  300,  Peter  succeeded  Theonas  at 
Alexandria.  In  St.  Jerom's  Chronicle''  he  is  called  the 
sixteenth  bishop  of  that  church,  and  is  said  to  have  had  a 
glorious  martyrdom  in  the  ninth  year  of  the  persecution  : 
but  St.  Jerom  has  not  given  this  bishop  of  Alexandria  a 
place  in  his  Catalogue  among  otlier  eminent  writers  of  the 
church.  Nor  do  I  remember  that  he  has  any  where  quoted 
him.  However  Peter  is  now  generally  reckoned  an  author. 
Several  things  are  ascribed  to  him. 

Penitential'^  Canons,  supposed  to*^  have  been  draAvn  up 
by  him  in  the  fourth  year  of  the  persecution  mider  Diocle- 
sian,  in  the  year  of  Christ  306,  for  the  sake  of  such  as  had 
some  way  lapsed  under  the  severities  they  had  endured,  or 
through  fear  of  suffering. 

A  work  entitled"^  De  Divinitate,  quoted  in  the  councils 
of  Ephesus  and  Chalcedon. 

A  Discourse^  of  Easter,  which  is  not*^  allowed  by  all  to 
bo  his. 

Peter  is  several  times  mentioned  by  Eusebius  in  his  Ec- 
clesiastical History.  It  appears  to  me  worth  the  while  to 
transcribe  all  his  passages;  though  some  notice  has  been 

'■  L.  viii.  c.  ]  3.  p.  308.  C.  *  Alexandrinse  ecclesiae  sextusdecimus 

post  Theonam  episcopus  ordinatus  Petrus,  qui  postea  nono  persecutionis  anno 
gloriose  martyriuni  perpefravit.     Hieron.  Chr.  p.  179. 

"  Vid.  Labbei  Concil.  T.  i.  p.  955—968. 

•^  Scripsit  quarto  persecutionis  Diocletianeae  anno,  Chrisii  306,  eorum  causa, 
qui  in  praedicta  persecutions  lapsi  essent,  librum  de  Pcenitentia ;  ex  quo  super- 
sunt  hodie  canones  15,  variispcenitentium  casibus  accommodati.  Cav.  H.  L. 
in  Petro.  ''  Alium  item  librum  de  Divinitate.     Cav.  ib.  Vid. 

Labb.  Concil.  Tom.  iv.  p.  286.  C.  D.  E. 

*  Scripsit  etiam  tractatum  de  Paschate.  Testantur  id,  quae  habemus  hodie, 
hujus  operis  fragn^enta.     Cav.  ib.  p.  160. 

'  Vid.  Cav.  ut  supra.    Basnag.  Ann.  306.  n.  xiil.  f. 


238  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

already  taken  of  them  at  the  beginning  of  the  articles  of 
Theonas  and  Fieri  us. 

'  TheonaSjS  having  borne  the  episcopal  office  nineteen 
'  years,  was  succeeded  by  Peter,  who  obtained  great*^  honour 
'  during  his  episcopate,  which  he  held  twelve  years.  He 
'  governed  the  church  three  years  before  the  persecution. 
'  The  rest  of  his  time  he  passed  in  a  more  strict  and  mortified 
'  course  of  life,  but  still  without  neglecting  the  common 
'  good  of  the  churches ;  for  Avhich  reason,  in  the  ninth  year 
'  of  the  persecution,  he  was  beheaded,  and  obtained  the 
'  crown  of  martyrdom.' 

In  another  place,  giving  an  account  of  those  presidents  of 
the  churches,  who  had  demonstrated  the  sincerity  of  their 
faith  by  laying'  down  their  lives  in  the  late  persecution,  he 
says:  '  But'  of  those,  Avho  in  Alexandria,  and  throughout 
'  Egypt  and  Thebais,  gloriously  finished  their  course,  none 
'  more  fit  to  be  first  mentioned  than  Peter,  bishop  of  Alex- 
'  andria,''  a  most  excellent  teacher  of  the  christian  doctrine  : 
'  and,  among  his  presbyters,  Faustus,  Dins,  and  Ammonius, 
'  were  perfect  martyrs  of  Christ ;  as  were  also  Phileas, 
'  Hesychius,  Pachymius,  and  Theodorus,  bishops  of  divers 
'  churches  in  Egypt.' 

Once  more:  '  About'  the  same  time  also  Peter,  who  with 
'  so  much  reputation  presided  over  the  church  at  Alexandria, 
'  an™  ornament  to  the  episcopal  character,  both  for  the 
'  holiness  of  his  life  and  his  laborious  application  in  studying 
'  and  explaining'  the  sacred  scriptures,  Avithout  any  crime 
'  of  any  kind  laid  to  his  charge,  beyond  all  expectation,  on  a 
*  sudden,  for  no  other  reason  but  the  will  of  Maximin,  w  as 
'  taken  up  and  beheaded.' 

Our  bishop  is  several  times  mentioned  and  called  martyr 
by  "  St.  Athanasius.  I  shall  take  notice  of  two  places.  In 
one  of  them  he  observes  :  '  Peter"  was  bishop  here  before 
'  the  persecution,  and  in  the  persecution  Avas  also  a  martyr.' 
In  the  other  he  intimates,  that  Peter  suffered  at  the  end  of 
the  persecution,  or  even  after  it  Avas  over,  as  his  manner  of 
Avriting  may  be  thought  to  imply.  AV^hich  too  seems  to  be 
agreeable  to  Avhat  Eusebius  said  just  now  of  Peter's  having 
been  arrested  and  beheaded  on  a  sudden,  and  beyond  all 

8  Eus.  H.  E.  1,  vii.  c.  32.  p.  289,  290.  ^  sv  rote  fia\iTa 

Kui  ai'TOQ  tiatrpf^aQ  t(f  oXoiq  dvoKatCtKa  iviavroig.  ib.  p.  289.  D. 

'   Ib.  1.  viii.  c.  1.3.  p.  -308.  B.  C.  ^  ^tiov  n  X(»JA<"  SiSaaKoXcov 

rriQ  IV  XfuTf/j  ^(oaffSnaQ.  ibid.  Ib.  1.  ix.  C.  6. 

'°   ^tiov  nriTKOTrujv  xP^t^n,  fiiH  aptrrjc  re  iviica,  km  rtjQ  rtov  itpwv  \oywv 

iTvva<rKr}<TiWQ,  K.  X.  lb.  p!  .3.51.  C.  "  Apol.  contr.  Arian.  n.  xi.  p. 
133.  D.  Ep.  ad  Epii=c.  Mg.  et  Lib.  n.  2-3. 

°  Apol.  contr.  Arian.  n.  59. 


Petlti  of  Alexandria.     A.  D.  300.  239 

expectation.  The  words  of  Athaimsius  are  these:  '  ButP 
'  when  the  persecution  had  ceased,  and  the  blessed  bishop 
'  Peter  had  stiflered  martyrdom,  Antony  removed,  and  re- 
'  turned  to  his  monastery.' 

Sozomen  says  that^  Peter  fled  in  the  time  of  the  persecu- 
tion: I  suppose  he  must  mean  some  retirement,  which  was 
free  from  blame.  Sozomen  himself  does  not  pass  any  censure 
upon  it :  and  Eusebius  has  represented  Peter's  episcopate 
as  so  illustrious,  and  every  way  worthy  of  commendation, 
that  it  is  not  easy  to  admit  the  suspicion  of  any  improper 
conduct.  However,  that  expression  of  Sozomen,  and  wliat 
Eusebius  says  of  Peter's  strict  course  of  life,  though  without 
at  all  neglecting"  the  care  of  the  churches,  may  lead  us  to 
think  that,  for  a  large  part  of  the  persecution,  he  lived  \\\ 
some  private  place  unknown  to  the  instruments  of  the  per- 
secution ;  where  however  christian  people  had  access  to  him, 
and  received  his  advices  and  institutions. 

Theodoret  styles  Peter"^  a  most  excellent  person,  and  a 
victorious  combatant,  who  in  the  time  of  wicked  tyrants 
obtained  the  crown  of  martyrdom.  Again  he  calls  him* 
divine  Peter. 

I  do  jiot  intend  to  make  any  long  extracts  out  of  Peter's 
book  of  Canons,  or  Canonical  Epistle,  the  only  piece  of  his 
that  remains,  if  indeed  it  be  his.  I  woidd  however  observe, 
that  he  resolves  all  his  cases  by  the  authority  of  the  holy 
scriptures  :  and  that  here  are  cited  the  gospels  of  Matthew, 
Mark,  and  Luke;  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  very  largely; 
several  epistles  of  Paul,  particularly  that  to  the  Hebrews,  as* 
the  apostle's,  intending  Paul,  and  the  first  epistle  of  John. 
In  the  fragment  of  his  book  De  Divinitate  are  cited"  the 
beginning  of  John's  gospel,  several  epistles  of  Paul,  and  the 
first  of  Peter, 

H.  In  the  time  of  Peter  arose  the  Meletian  controversy, 
or  schism,  as  it  is  usually  called  ;  which,  as^  Tillemont 
observes,  subsisted  for  the  space  of  an  hundred  and  fifty 
years,  not  being-  extinct  in  the  time  of  Theodoret  and  So- 
crates. 

P  'Eiiruir)  St  Xoiirov  6  SiwyfioQ  eiravcraTO,  Kai  fiiiiaprvptjKev  6  (laKapirtjg  nria- 
KOTTOQ  ITfrpoc,  aT:tSrifii}aiv,  k.  X.     Vit.  S.  Anton,  n.  47. 

"I  <i)tvyovTOQ  Sia  tov  rori  Siwyfiov.      Soz.  1.  i.  c.  24. 

''  ———fiira  YltTpov  skhvov  tov  viKt]<popov  aywvi'rT]V,  6g  twt  rtvv  Svaai(3wv 
iKtivoJv  rvuavvojv  r«  fiaprvpin  Tttpai'ov  aviSr}<ja-o.   Thdrt.  1.  i.  C.  2.  p.  7. 

'  Ts  Sitio-aTii  UiTpH,  K.  \.     Id.  1.  i.  c.  9.  in. 

*  «'/"?»  wc  X£y«i  aTTOToXoc,  firCKi-KOi  S"  av  rifiag  SirjysfitvsQ  o  xpovof. 

[Hebr.  xi.  32.]  Can.  ix.  ap.  Labb.  'I',  i.  p.  962. 

"  Ap.  Labb.  Cone.  T.  iv.  p.  468.  C.  D.  E. 

"  St.  Pierre  d'Alexandrie.  art.  8.  I.  Mem.  Ec.T.  v.  P.  iii.  p.  1 11 


240  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

I  do  not  reckon  myself  obliged  to  give  a  particular  history 
of  that  affair;  but  1  beg  liberty  to  say,  that  1  cannot  easily 
assent  to  xAthanasius's  account  of  the  rise  and  occasion  of  it, 
Avhich  is  to  this  purpose  :  '  Peter"  in  a  full  synod  of  bishops 
'  deposed  31eletius,  an  Egyptian  bishop  ;  who  was  convicted 
'  of  several  crimes,  and  particularly  of  having  sacrificed. 
'  Meletius  neither  appealed  to  another  synod,  nor  took  any 
'  pains  to  vindicate  himself,  but  presently  made  a  schism. 
'  And  to  this  day^  his  followers,  instead  of  christians,  are 
'  called  Melctians.  From  that  time  Meletius  took  great 
'  liberties  in  calumniating  Peter,  and  then  Achillas.' 

There  are  several  considerations  tending  to  weaken  the 
credit  of  this  account:  1.  Athanasius  is  a  prejudiced  person. 
After  the  council  of  Nice,  if  not  before,  the  Meletiansy 
joined  interests  with  the  Arians  ;  and  certainly  they  were 
always  enemies  to  the  bishop  of  Alexandria.  2.  Athanasius 
writes  with  passion.  Meletius,  he  says,  was  convicted  of 
many  crimes  ;  but  he  does  not  name  them  :  he  only  mentions 
sacrificing.  Nor  is  it  likely  that  the  Meletians  quitted  the 
name  of  christians.  They  were  often  called  Meletians  by 
others,  and  sometimes  possibly  by  themselves  :  but  to  say 
that  instead  of  christians  they  were  called  Meletians,  is  in- 
vidious. How  unreasonable  is  this  in  Athanasius,  when 
Meletius  and  his  followers  at  first,  and  for  a  good  while,  if 
not  all  along,  agreed  with  him  in  every  point  of  doctrine  ! 
Epiphanius,^  to  \^hora*  others  assent,  expressly  says  that 
Meletius  made  a  schism,  but  attempted  not  any  innovation 
in  the  faith.  Nor  does''  Athanasius  differ  from  them.  3. 
If  Meletius  had  been  convicted  of  apostasy,  or  of  sacrificing 
to  idols  in  time  of  persecution,  the  sentence  passed  upon 
him  and  his  adherents  in  the  council  of  Nice  would  have 
been  different.  What  it  was  may  be  seen  in  several  '^  ancient 
■writers  of  ecclesiastical  history.     4.  Meletius"^  always  com- 

"  OvroQ  M(\iriov,  airo  Trjg  AiyvTTTn  XsyonivoT  nnaKOTrov,  tni  TroXAatc; 
e\iy)(9ev-a  vapavofiiaiQ,  Kai  Bvmq.,  iv  Koiv-g  avvoSii)  tojv  tTnaKorrojv  KadtiXsv, 
K  \.  Athan.  ap.  conlr.  Aiian.  n.  97.  T.  i.  p.  177. 

"  Knt  ciVTi  xptTtavoiv,  MtXiriavoi  /ifxP'  '^^*'  "'  '"'/C  SKtivs  [itpiSoc  ovofial^ovrai.. 
ibid.  y  Vid.  Socrat.  H.  E.  1.  i.  c.  G.  p.  14.  Sozom.  1.  ii.  c.  21. 

^  Y-xiaiia  tTTOitjTtv,  «  n>iv  fitraWayfievoQ  tt]v  ttitiv  ytytvvTjrai.  Epiph. 
H.  68.   n.  i.  VkI.  ib.  rt-liqua.  *   AXXn  Tmira  fiiv  ry  iKicXrfata 

ipncviov.  Theodore!.  H.  E.  1.  iv.  c.  7.  p.  239.  AXX'  ekuvoc  ^uv  aliv  tujv  tt]^ 
ivat(itiaQ  ioyfiaTwv  tKcavorofiijatv.     Id.  ib.  p.  240. 

•^  This  appears,  in  that  Athanasius  calls  the  Arians  heretics,  the  Meletians 
schismatics  only,  and  thus  distinguisheth  their  several  crimes.  AXA'  oi  niv 
TTpo  7rtvrt]Kovra  kui  Trtvrt  tTwv  ff^icr/iariKot  ytyovaaiv'  o't  Se  Trpo  rpiaicovra  ktoi 
f'S  iTojv  antdnxOriaav  a'iotnKot.  k.  X.  Ep.  ad  EpifC.  ^g.  et  Lib.  n.  22.  T.  i.  p. 
203.  <=  Vid.  Socrat.  1.  i.  c.  9.  Sozom.  1.  i.  c.  24.  Thdrt.  H.  F. 

1.  iv.  c.  7.  **  H^Kijadai  fttv  tXiyiv  eavrov,  k,  X.  Socrat.  1.  i.  c. 


TheMektians.     A.  D.  306.  241 

plained  of  injustice.  5.  And  moreover^  he  had  a  numerous 
par(y  on  his  side,  no  less  than'  eight-and-twenty  bishops, 
and  many  good  men  :  Avhich  could  not  have  been,  if  he  had 
been  known  to  have  fallen  so  greatly  in  the  time  of  the  per- 
secution. 0'.  There  are  other  accounts,  and  Athanasius  is 
almost  singular.  Socrates^  indeed  speaks  to  the  like  pur- 
pose, because  he  transcribes  Athanasius:  but,  according-  to 
Epiphanius,  Meletius''  was  a  confessor  :  and  the  controversy 
between  the  bishop  of  Lycopolis  in  Thebais  and  the  bishop 
of  Alexandria  was  owing-  to  their  different  sentiments  con- 
cerning the  manner  of  receiving"  such  as  had  lapsed  in  the 
persecution,  Peter'  being  more  mild  and  merciful  than  Me- 
letius. Sozomen  makes  the  fault  of  Meletius  to  have  been 
this;  that,''  when  Peter  had  tied,  Meletius  usurped  a  power 
of  ordaining  where  he  had  no  right :  nor  is  there  any  things 
laid  to  his  charge  by  the  council  of  Nice,  as  the  ground  and 
reason  of  their  sentence,  but'  the  rashness  and  presumplion 
of  his  ordinations,  and  the  obstinacy  and  contumacy  of  him 
and  his  adherents  in  maintaining-  them.  Theodoret  indeed 
does  in  one  place  say,  following-  Athanasius,  it  is  likely  that'" 
Meletius  was  convicted  of  some  crimes;  but  he  does  not 
seem  to  know  what  they  were,  nor  to  have  any  good  assur- 
ance of  the  facts.  And,  in  another  place,  speaking  of  Mele- 
tius, all  he  lays  to  his  charge  is  ambition,  or  love  of  dominion," 
in  ordaining-  bishops  and  other  clergy  out  of  his  own  province, 
where  he  had  no  jurisdiction. 

Upon  the  whole  T  think  there  is  not  sufficient  ground  to 
admit  the  truth  of  v.'hat  Athanasius  says  of  Meletius  sacri- 
ficing-. It  is  more  likely  that  it  is  a  story  forged  by  some 
angry  people  with  a  view  to  discredit  the  Meletian  cause: 
which  story  Athanasius  too  readily  received. 

Samuel  Basnage,  of  Flottemanville,  in  his  Exercitations 
published  in  1692,  disputes"  the  truth  of  that  account:  but 

6.  p.  14.  C.  Conf.  Thdrt.  1.  i.  c.  9.  in.  <^  Vid.  Epiph.  H.  68.  n. 

2,  3,  et  5.  f  Vid.  Athan.  ap.  coiilr.  Arian.  n.  71.  p.  187. 

K  Socr.  ubi  supr.  p.  14.  B.   Vid.  not.  **.  ^  Epiph.  ib.  n.  1,2. 

'  '0  £e  ayiujraToc  Uerpog  tvoTrXayxvoQ  (ov,  k.  X.  Epiph.  lb.  n.  3.  in. 

llerpa  (pivyovrog  Sia   rov  Siuiyfiov,  Tag  diarptpaaac  avT(f  x«ipo- 

ToviaQ  v(t)i]QTa(yf.     Sozom.  1.  i.  c.  24.  '   EXftTrtro  Ei  to  kutu  ttjv 

TrpoTTtTtiav  MfXiris,  kui  twv  vn    avrs  x^'P'^'o*''?^*'''''^*'*  ^P-  Socr.  1.  i.  c.  9.  p. 

28. Xoyt^o/jfv?;  TO  irpoTrtrcg  kul  tToijiov  iiq  \iipoToviav  MtXirts,  Kai  twv  -a 

avra  (j>poviiVTwv.  Sozom.  ubi  supra.  Vid.  et  Thdrt.  1.  i.  c.  9. 

""  £7rt  Ti(Ji  TrapavofiMiQ  SuXtyxdut;,  k.  X.     Thdrt.  1.  i.  c.  9.  in. 

"  MfXf  rioc  Tig  iTTiGKOTTOQ  KUTa  Tttq  A\i^avcpn  TH  niyaXn  Tumaaac  iiyefiotioQ, 
iroWaiQ  TToXem  Kai  fn-ifficoTrsc  ix^i^ooTovtjiye,  icai  TrpirFfSvTipug,  Kai — a  Kaii'rjg 
aiptfibjg  TTOoaraTiVdtv,  aXXa  ravra  fiiv  Ty  iKKXtimqi  (ppovwv,  to  Si  tt^q  <piXap\iaQ 
iinStKaiin'og  TraOng.  Ib.  H.  Fab.  1.  iv.  C.  7. 

°  Hoc  affirraat  Athanasius — tantique  testis  auctoritas  apud  me  plunmum 
VOL.    III.  R 


242  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

ill  his  annals,  published  in  1706,  he  writesP  as  if  he  had  quite 
forgot  what  he  had  once  said  ;  Avhich  needs  not,  however, 
to  be  reckoned  very  strange  iu  an  author  who  writes  a  great 
deal. 

In  composing"  the  argument  here  offered,  I  have  had  no 
regard  to  that  in  Basnage's  Exercitations,  vvhich  1  did  not 
observe  till  afterwards.  These  thoughts  arose  in  my  mind 
in  reading  Athanasius,  and  comparing'  him  >vith  other 
ancient  writers. 

It  is  disputed  among  learned  men  when  this  schism  began. 
-Baroniusi  placeth  it  in  306  ;  Basnage"^  in  his  Annals,  before 
cited,  contends  for  the  same  date :  Pagi  is  altogether^  for 
301,  or  302:  Tiilemont'  careftdly  examines  the  merits  of 
each  opinion  Avithout  determining  the  point. 

It  seems  to  me  that  all  the  accounts  and  testimonies  above 
cited,  which  speak  of  this  controversy,  as  arising  in  the  time 
of  Peter,  and  after  the  begiiming  of  the  persecution,  should 
lead  us  to  pitch  upon  the  year  306,  or  thereabout :  Avhen 
Peter,  as  is  supposed,  put  out  his  Canons,  and,  as  is  likely, 
began  to  live  more  retired  than  he  had  done  ;  tlien,  probably, 
Meletius  began  to  ordain  bishops,  and  other  clergy,  where 
he  should  not. 

The  only  thing  that  leads  to  the  year  300,  or  301,  or  302, 
is  a  passage  of  Athanasius  in  a  piece  supposed  to  have  been 
written  in"  356  ;  where  he  says  that'  the  Meletianshad  been 
schismatics  above  five-and-fifty  years.  Upon  which  I 
would  observe,  that  possibly  the  numbers  in  Athanasius 
have  been  altered ;  or  he  might  Avrite  in  haste,  and  mistake 
through  forgetfulness:  or,  finally,  it  is  not  impossible  that, 
for  some  reason  or  other  affecting  his  mind  at  that  time,  he 
miffht  choose  to  ascribe  a  verv  earlv  date  to  that  schism,  I 
add,  that  in  the  same  place  Athanasius  says,  '  It'*'  was  six- 
valet. — Verumtamen  nonnullas  de  Meletii  idololatria  diibitandi  caiisassuggerunt 
Theodoretus,  Epiphanius,  Nicaena  Synodus. — Haec  sunt  quae  de  Meletiana  ido- 
lolatria suspensum  detinent. — Basn.  Exercit.  p.  ,307,  308.  Ultraj.  1692. 

P  Yera  prsedicasseSocratem,  testis  est  omni  cxceptione  major  Athanasius.- 
At  falso  contaminari  Epiphanii  narrationem  extra  duldum  est.     Cum  enmi 
Epiphanio  antiquior,  et  rerum  iEgypti,  ubi  srhisma  Mtletianum  exortum  est, 
longe  peritior  Athanasius  scriptum  reliquit,  Meletium   idolis  sacrificasse,  fide 
quoque  dignior  est.,   Basn.  Ann.  Pol.  Ec.  A.  206.  n.  14.  Uoterod.  1706. 

1  Baron.  Ann.  306.  n.  44.  '  Basn.  Ann.  306.  n.  15. 

'  Ann.  .306.  n.  29,  30. 
Mem.  Ec.  S.  Pierre  d'A.  art.  8.  et  not.  8.  T.  v.  P.  iii.  p.  1 1 1,  et  301 

"  Vid.  Athanas.  0pp.  Ed.  Bened.  T.  i.  p.  177.  not.  ".  et  p.  269. 

"  Of  yun  oXi-yoc  £Ttv  6  ^poi'o*;*  aW  ('i  /iiv  irpo  ■KivrrjKovTa  km  itivti  trwv 
a-)(va(iaTUcoi  ytyovaaiv'  o\  Ct  Trpo  rpiaKOvra  km  t^  trwv  a7r£C£i;^0?j(Tav  aipiTixot, 
Kai  rriQ  iKKXrjaiat;  aTn^\r]Qr](Tav  (K  KpitrtioQ  iraatjc  rriz  oiKHfj.tviKi]Q  avvo^n.  Ep. 
?j\.  Episc.  .*:g.  et  Lib.  n.  22.  p.  293.  *  See  note  \ 


j^nswer  to  Mr.  Jackson.     On  the  time  of  Sabellianism.       243 

'  aml-tliirty  years  since  Aiians  ncre  declared  heretics,  and 
'  cast  out  (jf  the  church  by  the  judgment  of  an  oecumenical 
'  council.'  AVhich  might  mduce  us  to  think  that  piece  must 
have  been  written  in  the  year  3(51  or  3(v2,  that  is,  six-and- 
thirty  years  after  the  council  of  Nice,  m  hen  the  Arians  were 
condenmed  ;  if  there  were  not  some  cogent  reasons  showing 
that  epistle  to  have  been  written  in  356  :  and"  notwithstand- 
inff  what  the  Benedictine  editors  say,  it  is  more  reasonable 
to  carry  on  the  number,  thirty-six,  through  the  whole  sen- 
tence, than  to  confine  it  to  the  first  part  of  it,  '  declared 
'  heretics,'  and  to  understand  thereby  some  declaration,  dif- 
ferent from  that  of  the  council  there  spoken  of.  I  do  not 
therefore  see  any  good  reason  why  this  passage  of  Athanasius 
should  oblige  us  to  think  the  Meletian  controversy  arose 
before  the  year  306. 


AN  ANSWER  TO  MR.  JACKSON'S  REMARKS  UPON 

THE  FIFTH  VOLUME  OF  THE  FIRST 

EDITION  OF  THIS  WORK. 

SEE  THE  BELIEF  OF  A  FUTURE  STATE  PROVED  TO  BE  A 

FUNDAMENTAL  ARTICLE  OF  THE  RELIGION 

OF  THE  HEBREWS,  p.  120,  &C. 

I,  The  time  of  Sabellianism.  II.  The  name  of  the  presbyter 
of  Rome,  rival  oj'  Cornelius  :  ichether  N^ovatus  or  j\rova- 
tianiis. 

I.  MR.  JACKSON  is  not  a  little  displeased  at  my  placing- 
the  rise  of  Sabellianism  so  late  as  only  two  or  three  years 
before  A.  D.  257,  when  Dionysius  of  Alexandria  wrote  to  pope 
Xystus  upon  that  subject :  though  I  am  not  therein  singular, 
but  only  maintain  the  general  opinion  of  learned  men  about 
it,  as  I  showed.  Vol.  ii.  ch.  xliii.  To  authors  there  mentioned 
I  shall  add  one  cr  two  more:  Heeresis  Sabelliana  erupit 
circa  A.  C.  257.  J.  A.  Fabr.  Annot.  ad  Philast.  cap.  liv.de 
Sabellio.  Sabellius,  Eusebio  teste  lib.  7.  Histor.  cap.  vi. 
errores  Ptolemaide  in  urbe  Pentapoleos  circiter  annum  257, 

"  Verum  hunc  locum  par  est  ita  distinguere,  ut  verbum,  amceixOtji^av,  sunt 
declarati,  ad  Alexandrum  Alexandriaum  referantur,  qui  nimirum  in  Synodo 
Alexandrina  Arium  haereticum  primus  declaravit ;  caetera  autem  quae  sequuntur, 
Nicaenae  attnbuantur  Synodo.     Ubi  supra,  p.  269.  n.  4. 

R    2 


244  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  llislorrj. 

spargere  ccepit.  Benedictin.  not.  ad  Ainbros.  Tom.  ii.  p. 
445.  Scribit  Eiisebius  libr.  Ecc.  Hist.  7.  Sabellii  liseresim 
sub  tenipora  Decii— andiri  coepisse,  cum  Romanse  sedi 
praeesset  Stephanus,  aut  Sixtus :  hoc  est,  circa  aniunn 
Cliiisti  cclvii.  &c.  Petav.  Dogin.  Tlieol.  Tom.  ii.  i.  c.  6. 
sect.  iii. 

I  do  not  think  myself  obliged  to  say  a  great  deal  more 
here  in  vindication  of  that  date:  I  can  rely  upon  my  argu- 
ment from  Dionysius,  exhibited,  Vol.  ii.  ch.  xliii.  and  1  per- 
suade myself  that  they,  who  will  read  it  and  carefully  attend 
to  it,  will  not  think  that  3Ir.  Jackson  has  weakened  it  by 
what  he  has  said,  but  has  left  it  still  in  full  force. 

Mr.  Jackson  says,  p.  121,  that  '  Dionysius  in  his  letter  to 
'  Xystus,  gives  no  account  of  the  rise  of  Sabellianism,  but 
'  only  of  its  being  greatly  spread.'  But  my  argument  does 
not  depend  upon  that,  but  rather  upon  Dionysius's  not 
having  sooner  sent  an  account  of  that  affair  to  his  corres- 
pondents at  Rome;  which  he  would  have  done  if  the  con- 
troversy had  been  on  foot  a  good  while  before:  nevertheless, 
it  happens  that  there  are  expressions  in  that  letter  of  Dio- 
nysius which  imply  that  it  was  then  but  newly  moved, 
advanced,    or  agitated.     Ilepi  n/ap    t«    wi-    kivijOcvtoi  ev    -r-q 

TlToXe/iia'ici  Trj<s    YlevTairokew^    Bo'^^iaio's,    Ap.    Euseb.    H.    E.   1. 

vii.  c.  6. 

Besides,  what  avails  it  for  Mr.  Jackson  to  insist  so  much 
upon  it,  that  Dionysius  gives  Xystus  an  account  of  the 
increase,  not  of  the  rise  of  Sabellianism,  when  the  increase 
supposes  the  rise  ?  And  it  is  the  spreading  of  a  doctrine  that 
induces  men  to  take  notice  of  it,  and  send  accounts  of  it  to 
their  friends.  If  Sabellianism  had  not  spread  in  the  country 
near  him,  Dionysius  would  not  have  thought  it  needful  to 
make  any  mention  of  it  in  a  letter  to  one  at  a  distance:  this 
therefore  was  what  he  was  naturally  led  to  speak  of  in  his 
letter  to  Xyslus'. 

Farther,  Mr.  Jackson  says,  p.  122,  123,  '  Sabellius  him- 
'  self  Mas  undoubtedly  noted  many  years  before:  and,  upon 

*  the  death   of  his  master  Noetus,  about  A.  D.  220,  spread 

*  his  doctrine  in  several  parts  of  Asia:  p.  24=  Sabellius  was 
'  the  most  noted — the  most  famous  disciple  of  Noetus.' 

These  things' are  said  with  a  oood  deal  of  positiveness  : 
but  upon  what  grounds?  where  is  the  evidence  ?  Tillemont, 
Mem.  Ec.  T.  iv.  Les  Sabelliens,  observes:   '  Philaster  and 

*  Augustine  say  that  Sabellius  was  a  disciple  of  Noetus, 
'  which  is  not  impossible,  though  the  Greeks  say  nothing  of 
'  it.'  Philaster's  words  are:  Sabellius  post  ilium  [Noetum] 
de  Lihyii  discipulus  ejus  similitudinem  sui  doctoris  itidem 


Answer  to  Mr.  Jacksoit.     On  the  time  of  Sabellianism.       245 

secutus  est  et  errorem.  Augustine's  words  are  ;  Sabelliaiii 
ab  illo  Noeto,quein supra mcinoraviinuSjdeHuxisse  dicuutur. 
Nam  et  discipuluni  ejus  qiiidain  ptrliibcnt  f'uisse  Sabclliiiin  : 
so  that  he  speaks  doubtfully  about  it.  Many  might  eall 
Sabellius  a  disciple  of  Noetus,  as  he  canu;  not  very  long- 
after  him,  and  because  of  the  resemblance  of  their  opinions  : 
but  if  it  was  a  thing-  well  known  that  Nabellius  was  a  scholar 
of  Noetus,  why  sliould  the  (irceksomit  to  mention  it?  A«id 
if  they  write  nothing  about  it,  how  should  the  Latins  know 
it  ?  The  silence  of  Greek  authors  is  of  much  more  importance 
than  the  sayings  and  reports  of  a  few  Latin  writers.  Had 
not  Epiphanius  and  Theodoret,  who  write  of  heresies,  and 
particularly  of  Noetianism  and  Sabellianism,  an  opportcniity 
to  say  where  Sabellius  learned  his  doctrine  if  they  knew  it  '(■ 
Theodoret,  H.  F.  1.  iii.  c.  8,  mentions  some  predecessors  of 
Noetus,  and  says  that  Callistus  upheld  his  opinion  after  him  : 

TuvTrji  ficrn  tov  ^orpov  v7rc(>rj(T7riae  KaWtffro^,     But  says  nouiing' 

here  or  elsewhere,  that  I  remendjer,  of  Sabellius  being- 
a  disciple  of  Noetus.     Epiphanius,  H.  62.   n.  1.  says,  that 

*  Sabellius's  doctrine  was  the  same  with  that  of  the  Noetians, 

*  excepting-  only  a  few  things.'  Why  does  he  not  add  that 
Sabellius  learned  his  doctrine  from  Noetus,  if  he  knew  that 
also  to  be  true. 

Mr.  Jackson   says,   j).    121,  '  there  is   no  evidence   that 

*  Sabellianism  had  its  rise  in  Ptolemais  in  Egypt.'  Where 
then  had  it  its  rise?  It  is  generally  concluded  by  learned 
men,  from  Eusebius's  account  of  Dionysius's  letter  to  Xystus, 
that  it  had  its  rise  in  Ptolemais.  Sabellius  himself  is  conti- 
nually spoken  of  by  the  ancients,  who  give  an  account  of 
liim  and  his  doctrine  as  a  Libyan  or  African:  so  Philaster 
before  cited  :  and  so  Theodoret,  IJ.  F.  1.  ii.  c.  9.  Sa/JeWto? 
Se  0  AifSvi  h  UevTa7ro\n7]v.  If  Sabellianism  had  its  rise  in  Asia 
Minor,  at  Ephesus,  or  Smyrna,  or  thereabout,  why  have  we 
no  account  of  any  writers  of  that  country  opposing-  it? 
Athanasius  says  that  in  the  time  of  Dionysius,  some  of  the 
bishops  of  Pentapolis  held  the  doctrine  of  Sabellius,  Avhich 
occasioned  his  looking-  into   the  matter.     Ev  YlevTOTroXei  Trjt 

avtt)  Aifivrjv  TijviKama  Tiucf  twv  cTTifTKOTrtuv  e(ppovrjaav  Ta  2a/36X.X,t«. 

De  Sent.  Dionys.  n.  5.  p.  24().  And  Theodoret,  in  his 
article  of  Sabellius,  takes  particular  notice  that  Dionysius 
of  Alexandria  wrote  against  him.  If  this  principle  had 
been  first  taught  by  Sabellius  in  some  other  parts  before 
it  Mas  known  in  Egypt,  why  does  not  Dionysius  himself; 
why  did  not  Eusebius,  nor  Athanasius,  nor  Epiphanius,  nor 
Theodoret,  give  any  hint  of  it? 

Mr.  Jackson,  p.  125,  still  insists  upon  '  the  authority  of  two 


246  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

'  ancient  chronologers,  Isidore  Hispalensis,  and  Ado  Vien- 
'  nensis,who  in  their  chronicles  agree  toplace  Sabelliiis  about 
'  A.  D.  220.'  And  indeed  he  had  need  to  cnll  them  '  ancient.' 
Nevertheless  Mr.  Jackson  does  not  deny  the  fruth  of  what  I 
said,  p.  108,  that  they  are  Latin  authors;  'and  that  they 
'  Avrote,  one  of"  them  ui  Spain  in  the  seventh,  the  other  in 
'  Gaul,  in  the  ninth  century  :'  that  is,  the  earliest  of  them 
several  hundred  years  after  the  supposed  time  of  Sabellius. 
The  authority  of  such  chroniclers  undoubtedly  is  very  great. 
I  likewise  argued  from  several  considerations,  to  which  the 
reader  is  referred,  that  they  confounded  Noetus  and  Sabel- 
lius. 

But  Mr.  Jackson's  strongest  argument  seems  to  be,  that 
his  author  could  not  Avrite  his  '  excelfent '  book  on  the 
Trinity,  p.  126,  his  '  incomparable  and  invaluable'  book, 
p.  132,  after  his  schism;  which  yet  he  must  have  done  if 
Sabellianism  had  not  its  rise  till  after  251.  Nee,  quantum 
cogito,  verisimile  est,  ilium  condidisse  tarn  egregium 
librum, — postquam  in  schisma  detestandum  se  demersisset. 
Prsef.  p.  18.  But  the  force  of  this  argument  depends  upon 
a  degree  of  uncharitableness  in  a  man's  mind,  for  which  I 
can  see  no  ground  :  a  heretic,  or  schismatic,  we  may  suppose, 
cannot  write  a  good  book  in  favour  of  his  errors,  or  wrong 
conduct:  but  if  he  hold  any  truths  in  common  with  other 
men,  I  do  not  see  why  he  may  not  be  able  to  write  well  in 
defence  of  them  :  and  I  readily  assent  to  Nicephorus  in  what 
he  says  of  Eusebius,  the  famous  bishop  of  Caesarea  :  that 
he  left  many  writings  useful  for  the  church,  though  he  often 

favours  Arianism.  K««  aWa  ctafpopa  (TV^/^jpafif^icna  KaiaXeXoiTre, 
TToWrjv  ovrjcrtv  rn  cKicXi^aia  eia(f)epovTa'  ttXijv  to(8to9  wv  ev  TroWot? 
(fyaivejai  -ra    apein  irpeaficvwv.      Nic.  H.  E.  I.   vi.   C.  37.  p.  446.  C. 

I  have  here  added  thus  much  concerning  the  time  of 
Sabellius,  to  please  Mr.  Jackson  ;  though  I  am  of  opinion 
that  what  I  said  formerly  was  sufficient. 

II.  I  must  take  some  notice  of  what  Mr.  Jackson  says 
concerning  the  name  of  Novatus, otherwise  called  Novatianus. 

I  offered  five  arguments;  the  first  of  which  Mas,  that 
'  this  presbyter  of  Kome  is  generally  called  Novatus  by  the 
'  Greek  writers.'  This  argument  I  did  not  much  labour, 
because  I  supposed  it  to  be  allowed  by  learned  moderns, 
that  the  Greek  authors  do  generally  so  write  his  name. 
However,  Mr.  Jackson  affirms,  p.  131,  that  '  my  opinion  is 
'  contrary  to  the  testimony  of  the  most  ancient  Greek,  as 
*  well  as  Latin  writers.'  Let  us  then  see  how  Mr.  Jackson 
shows  this. 

He  allows,  p.  126,  that  '  Eusebius  generally  calls  him 


A}iswer  to  Mr.  Jackson.     On  the  J^'ame  of  Xovatus.  247 

*  Novatus;  and  the  historian  Socrates  likewise  after  Euse- 
'  bins.'  But  why  does  he  say  '  after  Eusebiiis?'  Doubtless 
Socrates  had  read  Etisebius:  but  Mas  he  not  also  well  ac- 
quainted with  many  of  the  Novatians  at  Constantino])le  ? 
And  had  they  not  there  divers  learned  men, who  could  inform 
him  in  the  history  of  their  founder? 

At  p.  126,  Mr. . Jackson  says  that  '  though  Eusebius  him- 

*  self  calls  him  Novatus,  he  has  preserved   his  true  name  in 

*  the  seventh  book  of  his  Ecclesiastical  History,  and  eighth 

*  chapter;  where  he  is  called  Novatian  in  the  letter  which 
'  his  contemporary,  Dionysius  bishoj)  of  Alexandria,  wrote 

*  concerning-  his  schism  to  his  namesake  of  Rome.'  But  I 
should  think  that  Mr.  Jackson  might  be  reasonably  led  to 
conclude  that  must  be  a  wrong*  reading',  even  though  it 
should  be  allowed  to  be  ancient.  For  the  title  of  that 
chapter  is,  '  Of  the  Heresy  of  Novatus:'  and  at  the  end  of 
the  preceding-  chapter  Eusebius,  introducing-  that  letter  to 
Dionysius  of  Rome,  says  that  '  in  it  Dionysius  of  Alexandria 

*  writes  concerning-  Novatus  after  this  manner.'     Tpatpei  Se 

avTW    fxeO      erf/JO,   rwi^    tcara    tov    ^onarov    f.ivrj/tiouevwv    cv    rnT0i9, 

And  in  the  4-id  chapter  of  the  sixth  book  of  his  Ecclesiasti- 
cal History,  giving-  an  account  of  the  affair  at  Rome,  both 
Eusebius  and  Cornelius  himself,  in  his  letter  to  Fabius,  often 
mention  the  Roman  presbyter  by  the  name  Novatus  :  it  must 
therefore  be  probable  that  in  one  place  an  error  has  crept  in 
contrary  to  the  original  reading-:  accordingly,  in  the  Latin 
translation  of  Eusebius's  Ecclesiastical  History,  printed  at 
Basil  in  1611,  or  1012,  is  Novatus  ;  the  translator,  1  suppose, 
taking-  it  for  j>-ranted  that  the  other  was  a  wrono-  readino- ; 
Novato  quidem  meritosuccensemus.  Moreover,  in  the  45th 
chapter  of  the  same  sixth  book  of  Eusebius's  Ecclesiastical 
History,  is  a  letter  of  Dionysius  to  the  presbyter  of  Rome 
himself,  where  he  calls  him  Novatus:  Aiowato^  'Sonajw  no 
ace\(pw  x^'P^'v.  Indeed  as  that  letter  is  g-iven  by  Niceph.  1. 
vi.  c.  4,  it  has  Novatianus  :  but  surely  Eusebius's  authority  is 
better  than  that  of  so  late  a  writer,  if  indeed  we  have  his 
authority  for  it ;  but  probably  that  reading-  did  not  come  from 
Niccphorus  himself;  for  he  too  as  well  as  other  Greek 
authors,  m  rites  his  name  Novatus.  Vid.  Niceph.  1.  vi.  c.  3. 
T.  i.  p.  397.  A.  cap.  5.  p.  394.  c.  0.  p.  395,  et  396.  c.  7.  p. 

397.  B.  &C.  et  cap.  35.  p.  436.  C.  Kav  'EwKparijv  o  ck  fiavarn. — 

And,  even  introducing-  Dionysius's  letter  to  Novatus,  where 
we  now  have  Novatian,    Nicephorus  says,  '  that  letter  was 

*  written  to  Novatus.'  'Ottoiu  Se  koi  avTiv  cKeivtv  Navmw  ri]v  eu 
'ViVfiTj    cKKKffaiav    htaaaKevovTi    '^e>^pa(J)e,     TrapaOeaOai    BiKaiov,    Ln 

6.  c' 4.  p.  393.  D.     Insomuch   that,  tltough  in  the  Greek 


248  Credibiiity  of  the  Goxpel  Histortj. 

copies  of  Nicephorus  is  fiavaTtavtv,  the  Latin  translator,  sen- 
sible it  must  be  a  wrong-  reading-,  puts  Novatus :  Dionysius 
Novate  fratri  salutem  :  and  so  it  is  likewise  in  Rufinus's 
ancient  Latin  translation  of  Eusebius's  Ecclesiastical  History, 
as  was  shown  formerly,  see  ch.  xlvii. 

I  hope  I  have  now  at  once  shown  that  Dionysius  of  Alex- 
andria, and  Nicephorus,  as  well  as  Eusebius,  write  the  name 
of  the  presbyter  of  Rome,  Novatus. 

Still  Mr.  Jackson  says,  p.  127,  that  '  in  the  Chronography 
'  of  Georgius  Syncellus,  p.  374,  Dionysius  calls  the  Roman 
'  presbyter  to  whom  he  Avrote  Novatian.'  But  then  in  the 
margin  is  put  Novatus,  as  a  various  reading-,  or  a  correction 
of  the  text,  as  supposed  to  be  corrupt,  and  with  good  reason  ; 
for  elsewhere  very  often,  perhaps  forty  or  fifty  times,  that 
author  writes  Novatus. 

Mr.  Jackson  says,  p.  127,  '  And  Sozomen  in  his  Ecclesi- 
'  astical  History,  1.  iii.  c.  8,  calls  the  Roman  presbyter  No- 

'  vatian,  and  so  is  expressly  against  Mr.  L ,  though  he 

'  has  alleged  him  on  his  side.'  But  let  any  attentive  person 
judge  whether  Mv.  Jackson  has  reason  for  what  he  says  here  : 
in  that  place  indeed  Sozomen  has  Novatian  :  but  in  another 

Novatus.       MaOtvv  o/(ip,  Mn/ce^oi'fos  Tfe9    7r\e/89    ev6aSe   Ta   NawaTa 

fjipovciv.  K.  X.  I.  iv.  c.  21.  p.  571.  D.  And  in  another  place 
he  expressly  says  that  the  name  of  the  leader  of  the  sect  was 

Novatus.     NawdTO?  fiev  "lap,  os-  ap-^t]^/o<i  cyei'eTo  T(ys  alpeffeW9.  k.  X. 

I.  vi.  c.  24.  p.  670.  A.  It  is  likely  therefore  that,  in  the 
place  referred  to  by  Mr.  Jackson,  we  have  a  MTong-  reading- ; 
for  it  is  not  reasonable  to  think  that  in  that  one  place  Sozo- 
men intended  to  contradict  hjmself,  or  that  he  used  a  different 
writing-  of  the  name  from  Eusebius  and  Socrates:  but, 
however  that  be,  should  not  the  other  places  have  been  taken 
notice  of  by  Mr.  Jackson  ?  Was  Mr.  Jackson  in  the  right 
to  conceal  them  from  his  readers  ?  And  Avas  not  I  in  the 
right  to  reckon  Sozomen  on  my  side,  when  he  has  left  at 
least  two  places  to  one  for  me  ? 

At  p.  122,  I  mentioned  Athanasius  among-  other  Greek 
authors  writing-  Novatus.  And  certainly  he  is  an  ancient 
author :  nor  does  Mr.  Jackson  attempt  to  weaken  his  testi- 
mony :  I  referred  to  but  one  passage  in  Athanasius;  but  I 
might  have  referred  to  others;  and  he  is  a  good  witness,  hav- 
ing- lived  some  while  in  the  West :  and  that  he  means  the  pres- 
byter of  Rome  is  apparent.  Vid.  Ap.  cont.  Arian,  n.  25.  p. 
144.  E.  F.  Vid.  et  Ep.  iv.  ad  Scrap,  n.  13.  p.  704.  E.  The 
author  of  the  Paschal  Chronicl«>,  giving  the  history  of  Dio- 
nysius  of  Alexandria  ami   the  Roman  presbyter,  calls  him 

Novatus  several  times.       Ei^  oj<?  apOci^  V7rcpr)(pavcia  NavoTO?  T1JS 


Answer  to  Mr.  Jackson.      On  the  J^ame  of  Novatus.  249 

'Vwfuaiujv  CKKKijaiwi  irpca^VTepo<i  e\e<^ep,  k.  \.  p.  2/1.  C.  VKI,  lb, 

J),  et  p.  272.  A.  Theodoret  expressly  makes  Novatus  pres- 
byter of  Rome  ailtlior  of  the  sect.      'O  Be  "Savajo^  'Vwuatu)!'  tj;s 

cKK\ij(Tia<i  TTfjefTiSuTcpu^-  7ji'.  If.  Fub.  I.  iii.  Cap.  5,  nnd  1  jnight 
allege  Philostorgiiis,  Epiplianius,  Zonaras,  and  other  Greek 
authors,  Mriting"  the  name  after  the  same  manner:  but  I 
iorbear.  If  I  have  set  Mr.  Jackson's  readers  right  as  to 
Dionysius  of  Alexandria,  and  Sozomen,  I  have  performed 
all  that  was  needful  for  repairing  my  first  argument. 

My  second  argument,  p.  122, 123,  was,  '  that  there  are  still 
'  remaining'  in  Latin  authors  traces  of  their  agreement  with 
'  the  Greek  Avriters  upon  this  head.'  I  allow  that  some 
ancient  writers  did,  though  corruptly,  write  the  Roman 
presbyter's  name  Novatian  :  but  1  think  that  many  others 
write  it  Novatus  :  of  which  we  still  have  traces  in  the  works 
of  divers  of  them:  but  1  am  of  opinion  that  in  several  pas- 
sages the  rioht  readino-  has  been  altered  :  which  has  been 
owing-  to  a  notion,  prevailing"  of  late  among  moderns,  that 
his  name  was  Novatian. 

Under  ihat  argument  I  produced  passages  of  divers  ancient 
Latin  authors :  one  of  those  passages  is  from  Hilary,  at  p. 
123,  which  Mr.  Jackson  does  not  contest,  because,  as  I  sup- 
pose, he  is  sensible  the  Roman  presbyter  must  be  meant: 
other  passages  are  from  Jeroni,  Philaster,  Augustine :  these 
Mr.  Jackson  disputes  ;  for  he  says  those  writers  do  not 
mean  the  presbyter  of  Rome,  but  the  presbyter  of  Carthage. 
1  argued  that  by  Novatus  Jerom  must  mean  the  Roman 
presbyter  in  several  places  of  his  works,  because  he  speaks 
of  him  as  an  author,  whereas  Novatus  of  Carthage  never  Avas 
reckoned  an  author.  In  answer  to  this,  Mr.  Jackson  says, 
p.  129,  that  '  Jerom  certaiidy  meant  Novatus  of  Carthage 
'  in  all  the  places  referred  to  by  me ;  and  that  this  Novatus 
'  he  supposes  to  have  been  a  writer  in  his  56th  epistle  to 
*  Tranrjuilinus,  p.  589.'  But  I  am  apt  to  think  that  most 
readers,  who  look  upon  these  passages  of  Jerom,  will  be  of 
a  different  mind,  and  think  that  probably  Jerom  means  the 
Roman  presbyter.  Mr.  Jackson  has  no  reason  for  saying, 
that  he  '  certainly  meant  the  presbyter  of  Carthage  :'  nor 
can  1  see  that  Jerom,  in  the  epistle  referred  to  by  Mr. 
Jackson,  supposes  Novatus  to  have  been  an  author:  I  think 
he  means  the  Roman  presbyter,  Mr.  Jackson's  author.  The 
words  are:  Ego  Origenem  propter  eruditionem  sic  interdum 
legendum  arbitror,  quomodo  Tertullianum,  Novatum,  Arno- 
bium.  —  Rut  who  ever  heard  of  the  writings  or  the  learning 
of  Novatus  of  Carthage  ? 

Some  may  make  a  doubt  Avhether  Philaster  and  Angus- 


250  Credibility  of  the  Guspel  History. 

tine,  when  they  say  the  No vatians  were  so  called  from  Novatus, 
mean  the  presbyter  of  Carthage  or  him  of  Rome :  but  it 
seems  to  me  most  likely  that  they  mean  the  latter,  who  was 
by  much  the  more  famous  man  :  nor  can  there  be  any  good 
reason  assigned  why  they  should  not  there  mean  the  same 
person,  even  the  presbyter  of  Rome,  to  whom  their  brethren, 
the  Greek  writers,  contnujally  ascribe  tiie  unmerciful  doctrine 
of  rejecting-  penitents;  to  whom  likewise  the  Latins  them- 
selves ascribe  it  very  frequently  ;  and  1  suppose  it  to  be  a 
common  opinion,  among  learned  and  judicious  moderns,  that 
the  party  wasnot denominated  from  the  presbyterof  Carthage, 
but  from  the  presbyter  of  Rome.  Nefandoe  seditioni  tamen 
Novatianus,  non  Novatus  nomen  imposuit.  Basnag-.  An.  251. 
n.  vi.  Indeed  Jerom  says  :  Hujus  auctor  Novatus  Cypriani 
presbyter  fuit :  which  1  have  translated  :  '  The  first  author 
'  of  this  rigid  principle  Mas  Novatus,  Cyprian's  presbyter,' 
p.  78.  And  Mr.  Jackson,  p.  128,  translates  it  after  this 
manner:  'The  author  of  this  sect  was  Novatus,  one  of 
'  Cyprian's  presbyters.'  But  I  think  that  we  have  neither 
of  us  translated  happily;  for  that  sense  does  not  agree  with 
the  preceding  words,  Avhere  Jerom  expressly  says  that  Nova- 
tian,  or  Novatus  of  Rome,  formed  or  constituted  the  sect  of 
the  Novatians.  Novatianus  Roman.ie  urbis  presbyter,  adver- 
sus  Cornel ium  cathedram  sacerdotalem  conatus  invadere 
Novatianum — dogma  constituit,  nolens  apostatas  suscipere 
poBuitentes.  Hujus  auctor  Novatus  Cypriani  presbyter  fuit. 
It  seems  to  me  therefore  that  in  these  words  Jerom  intends 
to  say,  '  his  adviser  was  Novatus,  one  of  Cyprian's  presby- 
'  ters :'  for,  having  before  said  that  '  the  presbyter  of  Rome 
'  formed  the  sect  of  the  Novatians,'  he  cannot  be  disposed 
to  say,  presently  afterwards,  that  Novatus  of  Carthage  was 
the  author  of  the  same  sect.  The  most,  I  think,  that  he  can 
mean  is,  that  the  presbyter  of  Carthage  helped  and  concurred 
with  him  at  Rome:  and  this  too  it  is  likely  is  said  by  him 
upon  the  authority  of  St.  Cyprian  only.  Moreover,  it  is 
observable  that  Novatus,  the  presbyter  of  Carthage,  so  long" 
at  least  as  he  was  in  Africa,  was  of  a  quite  contrary  principle 
from  that  which  distinguished  the  Novatian  sect :  he  was  for 
receiving  those  who  had  lapsed  upon  very  easy  terms;  and 
though  he  may  afterwards  have  embraced  the  rigid  principle 
of  that  sect,  yet  it  is  not  likely  that  he  should  have  been  the 
first  author  and  proposer  of  it.  I  shall  represent  this  in  the 
words  of  some  others,  that  it  may  not  be  suspected  I  state 
the  case  wrong'.  Secundum  Raronii  arginnentnm  pariter 
infirmum,  (piod  nempe  cum  <liirr  essent  inter  se  contrarian 
sectae   schismaticorum,   Felicissimus   ille   sententiee   Novati 


.Answer  to  Mr.  Jackson.     On  the  Name  of  Jv'ovatus.         251 

adversarius  erat,  quod  diceret,  lapsus  omnes  absque  poeni- 
tentias  mora  recipiendos.  Nam  hsec  nihil  probant.  Qwippe 
Novatns,  quaiiidiu  in  Africa  I'liit,  .semper  se  ejusdem  ciini 
Felicissimo  seiitentine  de  lapsis  recipiendis  professus  est. 
Cum  autem  Romam  veiiisset,  et  se  Novatiano  adjuiixisset, 
ut  Roinaiuim  scliisma  promoveret,  illius  sententiam  amplexus 
esse  videbatur,  sive  serio,  sivc  ficte,  ut  et  i|)so  Novatianus 
sententiam  .siiam  jam  mutaverat,  ut  Cornelio  fortius  oontra- 
dicet.  Pagi  in  Baron.  A.  D.  250.  n.  xiv.  Vid.  et  Basnag*. 
Ann.  P.  E.  371.  n.  v.  Qua  quidem  in  re  a  nonnullis  in  duo 
peccatum  est  extrema.  Nam,  Cartliagine,  Felicissinnis,  cui 
Novatus  se  adjnnxit,  lapsos  omnts  absque  ulla  mora  rcci- 
piendos  dixit.  Contra,  Rom?e,  Novatianus,  ad  quern  et 
postea  Novatus,  mutatis  partibus,  accessit,  lapsos  nunquam 
recipi  voluit.  Turretin,  Hist.  Ec.  Compend.  p.23.  Novatus 
Carthagine,  absente  Cypriano,  cum  lapsis  communicaverat — 
Paullo  post  Romam  veniens  Novatus  simile  inter  Cornelium 
episcopiim  et  Novatianum  dissidium  invenit,  ex  niinia  Cor- 
nelii  in  lapsos  indidgentia  natum,  et  eo  usque  exerescens, 
ut  Novatianus  a  factiosis  episcopus  crearetur.  Hie  Novatum 
in  aliud  extremum  pertraxit,  suisque  partibus  jimxit,  quoe 
Catharorum,  sen  purorum  superbivere  nomine.  Lampe 
Synops.  Hist.  Ec.  p.  120.  And  here  I  think  it  would  not 
be  amiss  for  my  reiders  to  recollect  Avhat  I  said  formerly, 
p.  dQ^  showing-  that  Cyprian  beyond  measure  magnified  the 
influence  of  his  presbyter  Novatus  in  the  disturbances  at 
Rome,  and  that  Cyprian  has  been  too  much  relied  on  by 
some. 

My  third  arg'ument  was,  '  The  common  appellation  of 
'  this  people  shows  that  the  name  of  their  leader  was  Nova~ 
'  tus,  not  Novatianus.'  For  they  are  generally  called  Nova- 
tians.  If  the  name  of  their  leader  had  been  Novatianus, 
they  woull  have  been  called  Novatianenses,  or  somewhat 
like  it;  Avhereas  there  is  but  one  instance  of  this,  which  is 
in  Cyprian,  and  is  cited  from  him  by  Augustine.  I  took 
notice  of  it,  p.  125,  nor  has  ]Mr.  Jackson  produced  any 
other  instance  :  he  has  therefore  left  this  argument  in  its  full 
force. 

My  fourth  argument  was,  '  That  there  never  was,  that  we 
'  know  of,  any  one  in  any  age,  called  Novatian,  uidess  the 
'  person  in  dispute  was  so  named,'  This  argument  Mr. 
Jackson  has  not  touched,  having"  no  instance  to  allege; 
Avhilst  Novatus  is  no  uncommon  name,  as  I  showed.  This 
argument  must  be  of  considerable  weight  in  a  point  of  this 
kind  ;  for  it  is  not  likely  that  this  famous  presbyter  of  Rome 
should  be  called  by  a  name  which  no  other  man  ever  had, 


252  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

neither  before  him  nor  after  him.  Indeed  this  argument 
alone  appears  to  me  decisive,  unless  there  is  some  clear 
evidence  of  another  kind  against  it,  which  there  is  not. 

In  the  fifth  place  I  observed  that  some  '  learned  moderns 
*  seem  to  havesupposed  the  nanieof  this  person  to  beNovatus.' 
And  I  referred  to  some,  p.  126,  To  them  ought  to  be  added 
the  author  of  the  Roman  edition  of  St.  Ambrose's  M'orks, 
spoken  of,  p.  123.  The  learned  lawyer,  Fr.  Balduinus, 
likewise  was  of  the  same  opinion  :  Ecclesice  Romanse  pres- 
byter Novatus,et  Antiochense  episcopus  Paul  us  Samosatenus, 
magnas  paulo  ante  turbas  dederant.  De  Leg-.  C.  M.  1.  i.  p. 
48.  Vid.  et  ib.  p.  65.  m. 

I  accounted  for  Cyprian's  manner  of  writing-  this  person's 
name,  p.  127,  and  shall  add  nothing-  more  here. 

Upon  the  Avhole  it  still  appears  to  me  highly  probable 
that  Novatus  was  the  name  of  the  presbyter  of  Rome,  Cor- 
nelius's rival,  and  that  Novatianus,  or  Novatian,  is  the 
denomination  of  his  followers. 

1  am  sorry  to  have  spent  so  much  time  upon  this  point : 
and  if,  for  the  sake  of  brevity,  I  have  omitted  to  take  parti- 
cular notice  of  any  difficulty  in  3Ir.  Jackson,  I  hope  the 
reader  will  find  it  obviated  in  the  Note  upon  chap,  xlvii.  p. 
122-127. 


CHAP.  LXII. 

ARCHELAUS,  BISHOP  IN  MESOPOTAMIA. 

I.  T/ie  In  story  and  ant^qukii  of  a  irork  ascribed  to  ArcJie- 
hnis.  If.  Extracts  out  of  it,  and  the  author^  s  testimony  to 
the  hooks  of  the  New  Testament, 

I.  SAYS  Jerom  :  '  Archelaus,''  a  bishop  of  Mesopotamia, 
'  Avrote  in  the  Syriac  lang-jiage  a  book  of  his  Conference 
'  [or  dispute]  with  JManichee  at  his  coming-  out  of  Persia, 
'  which  has  been  translated  into  Greek.  He  flourished  under 
*  the  emperor  Probus,  who  succeeded  Aurelianand  Tacitus.' 

*  Archelaijs,  episcopus  Mesopotamia?,  liljium  disputationis  sua;,  qiiam  habuit 
adversum  Manichseum,  exeunlum  ex  Perside,  Syro  sermone  composuit,  qui 
translatus  in  Graecum  habetur  a  multis.  Claruit  sub  Imperatore  Probo,  qui 
Aureliano  et  Tacito  successerat.     De  V.  I.  c.  72. 


Archblaus,  Bishop  in  Mesopotamia.  253 

This  piece,  as  we  now  have  it,  contains  two  conferences 
with  Mani,  one  at  Cascliar,  or  Carchar,  a  city  in  the  Konian 
part  of  Mesopotamia,  and  another  at  Diodoris,  a  villaoe,  or  a 
small  town,  in  the  same  country:  Mithan  historical  account 
of  the  life  and  death  of  Mani,  and  some  other  thini>s. 

The  greatest  part  of  it  is  now  only  in  a  Latin  translation, 
not  made  from  the  supposed  Syriac  original,  but  from'' 
Greek.  A\'hen  this  Latin  translation  Mas  made  is  not  certain. 
Zacagni,  the  editor,  supposeth  thaf  it  was  not  in  being  in 
Jerom's  time,  but  that  however  it  was  made  before  the 
seventh  century.  Another  learned  writer  argues,  that*^ 
this  translation  was  not  made  sooner  than  the  sixth,  or  the 
latter  part  of  the  fifth  century  ;  because  the  conference  itself 
was  unknown  to  Augustine,  and  likewise  to  pope  Leo,  who 
died  in  461. 

It  is  thought  thaf^  this  piece  is  not  now  entire  and  complete. 

Archelaus  is  placed  by  Cave,  and  many  others,  as  flourish- 
ing" about  the  year  278.  Beausobre's  opinion  of  this  book, 
entitled  '  The  Acts  of  the  Disputation  of  Archelaus  with 
'  Mani,  or  Manichee,'  is,  '  that*^  it  is,  in  general,  a  romance, 
'  published  by  some  Greek,  about  the  year  of  our  Lord  330, 
'  fifty  or  sixty  years  after  Mani's  death.'  '  There  are  in  it,' 
hes  says,  '  some  truths,  but  not  many;  and  those  disguised 
'  and  mixed  with  manifest  falsehoods.'  Again  :  '  It'^  is  a 
'  fiction  of  some  Greek,  who,  having-  got  some  memoirs 
'  concerning"  the  life  and  opinions  of  3Iani,  resolved  to  write 
'  a  history  of  him,  and  confute  his  errors.' 

I  fear  that  account  of  this  book  is  too  just,  and  that  a 
large  part  of  it  is  fiction :  of  which  I  may  say  more  in  the 
next'  chapter.  At  present  I  would  chiefly  consider  the 
author  and  the  time  of  this  work. 

''  Porro   Graecam  versionem,   non  voro   Syriacum  toxturn,  prae  manibus 

Latinum  interpretem  habuisse satis  superque  demonstratur.     Zacagn.  Praef. 

sect.  V.  in.  <=  lb.  n.  iv.  f. 

"*  See  Beausobr.  Hist,  de  Manich.  T.  i.  Diss.  Prelim,  p.  6. 

*  Illud  tamen  dissimulate  non  possum.  Acta  ista  disputationis  Archelai  cum 
Manete,  quae  ex  Vaticano  Casinensis  codicis  apographo  primi  edimus,  integra 
nequaquam  videri,  sed  pluribus  in  locis  a  librario  mutitata.    Zac.  ib.  n.  14.  in. 

'  En  general  toute  cette  piece,  qu'  on  nomme  las  Actes  de  la  Dispute 
d'Archelaii^,  n'est  qu'un  roman  fabrique  par  un  Grec,  el  publie  depuis  I'an 
330,  soixante  ans,  on  environ,  apres  la  mort  de  Manichee.     Beaus.  ib.  p.  6. 

8  II  y  a  quelque  verites,  mais  en  petit  nombre ;  et  le  peu  qu'il  y  en  a,  est 
altere,  confus,  mele  de  fables  manifestes. — id.  ib. 

•^  Dcs  que  j'eus  lu  cette  piece,  que  feu  M.  Zacagni,  bibliothecaire  du  Vatican, 
publia  le  premier  toute  entibre,  j'eus  un  grand  soup^on,  que  la  Dispute  de 
Cascar  n'etoit  qu'  une  fiction  de  quelque  Grec,  qui,  ayant  eu  des  memoires 
touchant  la  vie  et  les  dogmes  de  Manichee,  voulut  ecrire  son  histoire,  et  refuter 
ses  erreurs.  L'examen  changea  mes  soupgons  en  certitude.  Id.  in  Preface.  T. 
i.  p.  vi.  '  See  the  first  section  in  the  next  chapter,  numb.  i.  2 


254  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

As  for  the  author  of  the  book,  Jerom  supposed  it  to  have 
been  written  in  Syriac  by  Archelaus  himself,  and  then  trans- 
lated into  Greek  :  but  lie  does  not  name  the  translator. 
Epiphanius''  likewise,  and  Cyril'  of  Jerusalem,  and'"  So- 
crates, ascribe  the  book  to  Archelaus  :  but  by  Photius  we 
are  informed  that"  Heraclean,  bishop  of  Chalcedon,  in  his 
book  against  the  Manichees,  said,  Hegemonius  wrote  the 
Dispute  of  Archelaus.  This  has  induced"  Cave,  and  others, 
to  look  upon  Hegemonius  as  the  translator.  Zacagni  says 
thatP  Hegemonius  not  only  translated  the  Syriac,  but  made 
additions  of  his  own.  To  the  like  purpose''  Asseman.  Both 
which  last  writers  ascribe  some  additions  and  alterations  to 
Heg-emonius,  an  author  whose  age  is  unknown,  as  must 
greatly  lessen  the  authority  of  this  work  :  more,  perhaps, 
than  they  imagined. 

But  Beausobre  says  that  this  piece  was  originally  written 
in  Greek,  and  that  Hegemonius  was  the  author,  and  that  it 
was  not  written  before  the  year  330.  He  argues  in  this"^ 
manner:  '  Eusebius  published  his  Ecclesiastical  History 
'  about  fifty  years  after  the  death  of  Mani.  He  there  speaks 
'  of  this  heresiarch,  and  his  heresy :  but  he  says  not  one  word 
'  of  his  excursion  into  the  Roman  Mesopotamia, nor  of  his  dis- 
'  putes  with  Archelaus.  Since  Eusebius  says  nothing  of 
'  these  matters,  it  may  be  concluded  that  he  was  entirely 

*  ignorant  of  them :  but  it  is  not  to  be  supposed  that  he 
'  should   be  ignorant  of  so  public  an  event  that  had  hap- 

*  pened  half  a  century  before:  nor  that  he  should  omit  to 
'  relate  so  memorable  a  thing-  if  he  knew  it.'  Beausobre 
thinks  that  Archelaus  must  have  been  entirely  unknown 
to  Eusebius  :  and  therefore  he  concludes  that  these  Acts 
of  Archelaus  did  not  appear  until  after  Eusebius  had  pub- 
lished his  Ecclesiastical  History  ;  that  is,  in  the  space  of 
time  between  the  year  326  or  330,  and  the  year  348  or  350, 

^  Atto  rw  Apxi^an  (iipXin-  Epiph.  II.  66.  n.  32.  in.  Vid.  et.  n.  21. 
Cat.  6.  n.  27.  p.  104.  '"  H.  E.  1.  i.  c.  22.  p.  56.  D. 

"  'Hyc/ioviov  Tt  Tov  [rag]  Apxi^aa  Trpoc  nvTov  avriXoyiag  avaypatpavra. 
Phot.  Cod.  85.  p.  204.  °  Unde  conceptis  pene  verbis  jurare 

ausim,  non  alium  hujusce  versionis  auctorem  fuisse  quam  Hegemonium 
nostrum,  nee  aliam  earn,  quam  qua  Cyrillas,  Epiphanius,  aliique  olim  usi 
sunt.  Cav.  De  Hegemonic,  in  Diss,  de  Scriptor.  incert.  aet. 

1  Hegemonium  veto,  quae  ab  Archelao  jam  cdita  fuerant,  meliori  non 

solum  ordine  digessisse  verum  etiam  exordio,  epiiogo,  aliisque  nonnullis  locu- 
pletasse,  ut  omnibus  numeris  absoluta  celeberrimse  illius  disputationis  acta  ad 
posteros  transmitferentur.     Zac.  Praef.  cap.  4.  p.  iv. 

'I  Qua;  quuni  ita  sint,  ab  eodem  Hegemonic  videntur  quaedam  ex  illis  Actis 
mutilafa,  quzedam  etiam  addita.  Assem.  Bib.  or  T.  3.  P.  2.  p.  47.  in.  Vid,  quae 
ibidem  praeeunt  et  sequuntur. 

'  B.  Hist,  de  Manich.  T.  i.  p.  5,  6.  p.  145,  146. 


Archelaus,  Bishop  in  Mesopotamia.  255 

when  Cyril  of  Jerusalem  wrote  his  Catechetical  Discourses, 
who  is  the  lirst  author  that  has  quoted  this  piece.  Nor  does 
it  appear  that"  St.  Eplirom,  who  was  of  31esopotauna,  and 
died  in  'S7o,  has  any  where  taken  r)otice  of  this  Disputation, 
though  he  often  speaks  of  Mani.  Moreover  there  is  a  parti- 
cular in  the  book  itself,  mIucIj  leads  him  to  conclude  it  was 
composed  between  the  years  330  and  340.  This  tiuje,  says 
Beausobre,  is  distinctly  marked  in  some  words,  which  the 
writer  puts  into  the  mouth  of  Archelaus,  for  convincing- 
Mani  that  he  could  not  be  the  promised  Paraclete.  '  AVhen*^ 
'  you  say  you  are  the  Paraclete,  perhaps  you  little  think  that 
'  you  charge  Christ  with  falsehood  :  who,  though  he  promised 
'  to  send  him  soon  after  his  resurrection,  has  not  sent  him  till 
'  above  three  hundred  years  afterwards.'  These  threehundred 
years  come  out  in  the  year  of  our  Lord  333  or  334.  Zacagni 
says  this"  dropped  from  Archelaus  in  the  heat  of  dispute:  be- 
cause from  the  death  of  Christ,  to  the  conference  at  Caschar, 
there  were  not  more  than  249  years :  but,  says^  Beausobre,  I 
think  otherwise.  Nothing  is  more  common  than  for  impostors, 
w  ho  make  another  speak,  not  to  remember  every  thing  that 
is  ag'reeable  to  the  character  they  have  introduced,  and  to 
thrust  in  themselves  without  thinking  of  it.  Hegemonius, 
who  in  fact  lived  more  than  three  hundred  years  after  our 
Saviour's  resurrection,  thought  of  the  time  when  he  himself 
lived,  not  that  of  Archelaus,  who  was  speaking'.  So  that 
learned  author. 

I  must  be  here  indulged  the  liberty  of  making-  some 
remarks.  1  readily  own  I  am  inclined  to  think  with  Beau- 
sobre that  this  work  was  orig-inally  written  in  Greek,  not  in 
Syriac. 

The  argument  from  the  silence  of  Eusebius  is  specious  ; 
and  yet,  possibly,  not  conclusive.  It  is  indeed  strange  that 
he  should  never  mention  the  name  of  Archelaus.  Nor  do  I 
pretend  to  confute  this  arg'ument  of  Beausobre;  for  it  is 
almost  inconceivable,  that  Eusebius  should  be  ignorant  of 
Archelaus  if  these  disputes  Avere  real.  However,  I  would 
not  omit  my  thoughts  Avhich  offer,  and  may  tend  to  bring- 
truth  to  light;  and  therefore  I  observe,  that  though  Arche- 

'  lb.  p.  146.  '  dicens  se  esse  paracletum,  qui  ab  Jesu 

praesignatus  est  mitti,  in  quo  mendacem  ignorans  fortasse  asserit  Jesum :  qui 
enim  dixerat  se  non  multo  post  missurum  esse  paracletum,  invenitur  post 
trecentos,  et  eo  amplius  annos  misisse  hunc.  Arch.  c.  27.  p.  46. 

"  Contentionis  aestu  actus  videtur  hie  dixisse  Archelaiis,  post  trecentos  ct 
amplius  annos  a  Christi  morte  Manetem  emersisse :  nam  a  Christi  raorte  usque 
ad  habitae  cum  Manete  disputationis  tempus,  anni  circiter  249  interccdunt. 
Zacag.  in  not.  ad  Arch.  p.  46.  "  Beaus.  ubi  supr.  p.  153. 


256  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

laus,  and  these  conferences  in  Mesopotamia  are  never  men- 
tioned by  Eusebius,  some  may  suspect  that  he  had  seen  this 
book  called  the  Acts  of  Archelaus  :  for  in  his  Ecclesiastical 
History,  M'hen  he  speaks  of  Mani,  and  so  particularly  insists'" 
upon  the  barbarism  of  his  language  and  manners,  he  may  be 
thought  to  refer  to  passages  in  the  Acts,  which"  resemble 
his  account.  And  in  his^  Chronicle  the  appearance  of  Mani 
is  placed  in  the  reign  of  Probus,  agreeably  to  these^  Acts. 
Indeed  I  do  not  lay  much  stress  upon  this  last  particular, 
because  T  think  the  article  concerning  Mani,  in  tiie  Chronicle, 
may  be  entirely  Jerom's,  and  not  Eusebius's  :  but  with 
Beausobre  it  should  have  some  weight,  because  he  allows 
that''  whole  paragraph  to  be  Eusebius's. 

As  for  the  space  of  three  hundred  years,  mentioned  in  the 
Acts,  it  deserves  little  consideration.  Arguments  from  num- 
bers are  oftentimes  of  small  moment.  Some  mistakes  are 
made  by  transcribers.  Writers  themselves  are  not  seldom 
mistaken  in  their  computations.  St.  Chrysostom'^  reckoned 
it  to  have  been  five  hundred  years  from  the  destruction  of 
Jerusalem  to  his  own  time,  though  it  was  not  much  above 
three  hundred  years.  It  was  to  the  purpose  of  the  person, 
who  managed  the  supposed  dispute  against  Mani,  to  enhance 
the  time.  Moreover  people  delight  in  round  numbers.  And 
just  before  the  time  is  said  to  be''  almost  three  hundred 
years.  It  is  the  less  likely  that  the  writer  should  forget 
himself,  and  put  his  own  time  instead  of  that  of  the  speaker's, 
because  he  presently  afterwards  mentions  the  reign  of* 
Probus. 

Having- given  these  sentiments  of  others,  and  made  remarks 
upon  them,  I  now  proceed  to  observe,  that  the  antiquity  of 
this  piece  is  manifest  from  the  use  made  of  it  by  Cyril  and 
Epiphanius  in  the  fourth  century,  and  from  the  notice  taken 
of  it  by  .jerom  in  his  Catalogue,  before  the  end  of  the  same 
century. 

There  are  other  arguments  of  its  early  age:  I  shall  men- 
tion several  things,  though  not  all  of  equal  importance. 

"    Bapfjapog  Sr)Ta  tov  fliov  avrq)  \oy<^i  Kai  rpoTTff). — H.  E.  1.  7.  C.  31. 

"  Persa  barbare,non  Grajcorum  linguae,  non  iEgyptiorum.non  Romanorum, 
non  ulliiis  alferius  linguae  scicnfiam  habere  potuisti,  sed  Chaldaeorum  solum, 
quae  ne  in  numerum  quidem  aliquem  ducitur.  Act.  Arch.  c.  36.  p.  G3.  Et 
confer  c.  12.  p.  23.  >  Secundo  anao  Probi— insana  Manichseorum 

haercsis  in  commune  humani  generis  malum  exorta.     Eus.  Chr.  p.  177. 

^  C.  27.  p.  46.  =>  B.  ib.  p.  122. 

'  TlevTaKomoTOV  yap  Xonrov  £?  iKtiva  t<7iv  eroQ  fJt'XQic  r/fiwu.  Chrys.  adv. 
.lud.  Mom.  a.  T.  i  p.  65 1.  B. 

"^ eum  (|ui  jjost  trecentos  fere  annos  venerit.     Arch.  n.  27.  p.  45. 

** sub  Probo  demum  Romano  mipcraton  misisti.  ib.  p.  46. 


AucHELAUS,  Bishop  171  Mesopotamia.  257 

A  rclielaiis,  or  whoever  is  the  writer,  naming"  several  heretics, 
mentions  none  below*^  Sabellius:  nor  do  there  any  where 
appear  in  this  book  any  traces  of  that  remarkable  period 
in  the  church,  the  council  of  Nice.  Moreover,  the  author 
allots  but^  one  year  to  Christ's  ministry,  or  at  least  to  the 
most  pul)lic  part  of  it,  after  he  had  called  his  disciples  to 
attend  him.  He  allows  that"  men  might  attain  to  virtue  by 
the  light  of  nature,  though  a  few  only.  He  does  not  extol 
affected  voluntary  poverty,  as  some  have  done  ;  but''  allows 
him  who  well  useth  a  good  estate,  to  be  equally  virtuous 
with  him  who  gives  away  all  he  has.  Tillemont  says:  '  In 
'  this  work  we  meet  with  some  opinions  more  common  in 
'  the'  primitive  times  than  they  have  been  since  the  history 
'  and  the  doctrine  of  the  church  have  been  cleared  up.  The 
'  author  seems  not  to  understand  the  union  of  the  two  natures 
'  in  Christ.'  Beausobre  has  an  observation  of  the  like  kind, 
and  says,  that''  '  the  author  speaks  more  like  an  unitarian 
'  than  a  catholic'  I  add,  that  he  seems  to  have  condemned 
all  war  as  unlawful;  for,'  relating- that  some  Roman  soldiers, 
charmed  with  the  piety  and  generosity  of  Marcellus,  were 
induced  to  embrace  the  christian  religion,  he  says  that  they 
immediately  forsook  the  profession  of  arms. 

These  particulars  may  be  reckoned  evidences  of  great 
antiquity :  but  when  the  book  was  composed,  I  cannot 
certainly  say ;  whether  near  the  end  of  the  third  or  at  the 
beginning  of  the  fourth  century  :  nor  am  I  able  to  determine 
M'ho  is  the  author. 

n.  My  extracts  out  of  it  will  contain  chiefly  the  author's 
testimony  to  the  books  of  the  New  Testament. 

1.  But  I  would  just  observe,  that"^^  he  speaks  of  divers 
of  our  Lord's  miracles,  and  other  historical  facts,  recorded 
in  the  gospels. 

2.  We  do  not  find  all  the  books  of  the  New  Testament 

*  Vid.  cap.  37,  et  38.  '  Nee  in  aliquo  remoratus  Dominus 

noster  Jesus  intra  unius  anni  spatiiim  languentium  multitudines  reddidit 
sanitati,  mortuos  luci.  ib.  c.  34.  p.  58.  Cum  discipuli  ejus  per  annum  integrum, 
manserunt  cum  eo.  ib.  c.  50.  p.  93.  m.  b  Verum  quia  pauci  per 

hunc  modum  poterant  ad  justitiae  culmen  adscendere,  id  est,  per  parentum 
traditiones,  nulla  in  Uteris  lege  conscripta.  c.  28.  p.  48. 

*"  Bonum,  inquam,  his  qui  possunt :  sed  abuti  diviliis  ad  opus  justitiae  atque 
misericordiae  parem  gratiam  tribuit,  [Jesus,]  ac  si  universis  pariter  renuntietur. 
c.  42.  p.  75.  '  Mem.  Ec.  T.  4.  P.  2.  Les  Manicheens.  Art.  12. 

p.  796.  ^  Beaus.  ib.  p.  116. 

'  At  illi  [milites]  admirati,  et  amplexi  tam  immensam  viri  pietatem,  munifi- 
centiamque, — commoventur,  ut  plurimi  ex  ipsis  adderentur  ad  fidem  Domini 
nostri  Jesu  Christi,  derelicto  milifiae  cingulo.  Arch.  cap.  1.  p.  2.  Vid.  ib. 
Sacagn.  not.  [3.]  et  conf.  Beaus.  Hist.  Manich.  T.  2.  p.  797., 

■"  Vid.  cap.  34.  p.  58.  c.  36.  p.  63. 
VOL.    III.  S 


258  CrecliLilitij  nf  llif  Guspcl  ILslnrrj. 

quoted  iti  this  piece  :  it  is  likely  that  there  was  no  particular 
occasion  for  it. 

3.  He  mentions"  the  New  Testament,  the  gospels,  and  the 
apostle  Paul's  epistles:  for  which  not  only  he,  but  Mani 
likewise,  had  a  great  regard. 

4.  Quoting  St.  Matthew's  gospel,  he  calls  him"  an  evan- 
gelist of  the  Spirit. 

5.  A  passage  of  St.  Mark's  gospel  is  cited  p  as  the  word 
of  God. 

6.  Quoting  John  i.  16,  he  callsi  him  '  Saint  John  the 
greatest  of  the  evangelists;'  if  that  is  not  the  style  of  the 
Latin  translator. 

7.  Here  is  mention  made  of  "^  the  book  of  the  gospels. 

8.  The  book  of  the  Acts  is  quoted  and  called^  scripture. 

9.  Divers  of  St.  Paul's  epistles  are  expressly  quoted.  That 
to  the  Romans  is  called*  his  first  epistle,  because,  as  1  sup- 
pose, it  was  placed  first  in  the  collection. 

10.  There  seems  to  be  an  expression,  borrowed  from  the 
epistle  to  the  Hebrews,in  Mani's"  letter  to  Marcel  1  us, inserted 
in  these  Acts :  and  there  appears  to  be  a  reference  to  Heb. 
iii.  3,5,6,  in  some  words  of"  Archelaus. 

11.  1  do  not  see  any  of  the  Catholic  epistles  quoted,  except 
the  first  epistle  of  St.  John.  Mani  himself  is  here  brought 
in  arofuino-  from'"  1  John  v.  19;  "  The  whole  world  lies  in 

OCT 

wickedness,"  or  in  the  wicked  one,  as  he  understands  it. 

12.  Antichrist  is  here  often"  spoken  of:  but  there  is  scarce 
any  clear  reference  to  the  book  of  the  Revelation.  Hom- 
ever,  it  should  be  observed  by  us,  that  in  the  Revelation,  ch. 

"  Sunt  etiam  alia  miilta,  quae  dici  possent  et  de  apostolo  Paulo,  et  de  Evan- 
geliis,  ex  quibus  ostendere  possumu*,  veterem  legem  non  esse  alterius,  quam 
Domini,  cujus  est  novum  Testamentum.  Arch.  c.  45.  p.  82.  Vid.  etiam  cap. 
40.  p.  69.  ni.  °  Sed  et  Spintus  Evangelista  Matthaeus  [cap.  xxiv.] 

diligenter  significavit  Domini  nosfri  Jesu  Christi  sennonem.  Act.  Arch.  c.  35. 
p.  61.  P  Quid  enim  ait  senno  divinus  ?  Quis  en im  potest 

introire  in  domum  fortis,  et  diripere  vasa  ejus,  nisi  illo  sit  fortior  ?  [Mar.  iii.  27.] 
ib.  c.  16.  p.  30.  '•  Sed  et  sanctus  Joannes,  raaximus  Evan- 

gelistarum,  ait,  gratiam  gratia  praestare,  &c.  ib.  c.  45.  p.  82. 

■■  sicut  scriptum  est  in  Evangeliorum  libro.  c.  13.  p.  24. 

*  Quid  enim  dicit  scriptura  ?  Quia  unusquisque  propria  sua  lingua  audiebat 
per  Paracletum  spiritum  loquentes  apostolos  ?  ib.  c.  36.  p.  63.  Vid.  et  cap.  34. 
p.  59.  '  Ipse  quoque  in  prima  epistolil  sua  posuit,  dicens, 
ib.  c.  34.  p.  .59.  "  Apx'H^  7^9'  '''"■  '"f^''^,  kui  tov  thtwv  irartpa 
Twv  KuKoiv  tin  TO  Qiov  ava<pipsffiv,  o)v  to  tiXoq  Kctrapac  tyyvg.  ib.  c.  5.  p.  7. 
Vid.  Hebr.  vi.  8.  "  Ita  ot  si  Dominus  mens  Jesus  Christus 
prsecellit  in  gloria  Moysen,  tamquam  dominus  famulum,  non  propterea  respu- 
enda  est  gloria  Moysi.     Arch.  c.  43.  p.  77. 

*  Malum  vero  esse  tam  mundum  hunc,  quam  omnia  quae  in  eo  sunt,— 
sicut  ait  Joannes,  Totiis  mundus  in  maligno  est  positus,  et  non  in  Deo.  cap. 
14.  p.  26.  "  Vid.  c.  36.  p.  62,  63. 


The  Manichces.     Sect.  I.  259 

xii.  9,  Satan  is  represented  b}'  tlic  character  of  the  '  great 
dragon.'  And  in  this  dispute  he  is  spoken  of  y  as  '  the 
dragon,  our  perpetual  enemy.' 

13.  The  Avriter's  respect  for  the  scriptures  now  commonly 
received,  is  manifest  from  his  very  numerous  and  frequent 
quotations  of  them  as  decisive,  and  of  authority  in  all  dis- 
puted points  of  religion. 


CHAP.  LXIII. 

MANI,  AND  HIS  FOLLOWERS. 

Sect.  I.     Jl  tjerieral  history  of  the  Manichees, 

I.  Passages  oj^  ancient  writers  concerning  them.  1.  Euse- 
bins  oj'  Ccesarea  ;  2.  Socrates  ;  3.  Lihanius,  II.  Authors 
tcho  ic rote  against  them;  I.  Heracleati;  2.  Alexander 
of  LijcopoUs ;  3.  Augnstine ;  4.  Serapion ;  5.  Titus  of 
Bostra  ;  6.  Didijmus  ;  7.  Authors  omitted  by  Fabricius  ; 
8.  Syrian  authors  against  them.  III.  Though  they  were 
in  many  places,  they  icere  no  where  numerous.  IV. 
Eminent  men  among  the  Manichees;  1.  Alexander  of 
Lycopolis  ;  2.  Augustine  ;  3.  Adimantus  ;  4.  Agapius  ; 
5.  Apthonius  ;  6.  Faustus  ;  7.  Hierax  ;  8.  Sebastian  ;  9. 
Sccundinns.  V.  Their  ecclesiastical  constitution.  VI. 
Their  manners  vindicated  from  aspersions.  VII.  A 
brief  account  of  the  persecutions  tchich  they  suffered. 

I  CHOOSE  to  begin  this  chapter  Avith  a  general  history  of 
Mani,  and  the  sect  called  after  his  name. 

I.  In  the  first  place  I  would  allege  some  passages  ©f 
ancient  writers  who  have  mentioned  them. 

1.  Eusebius's  article  concerning  them  in  his  Ecclesiastical 
History  is  to  this  purpose  :  '  About  =*  the  same  time  that 
*  madman,  fitly  named  Manes,  formed  the  wild  heresy  called 
'  after  his  name,  being  set  up  for  the  ruin  of  many  by  Satan 
'  the  adversary  of  God.     This  person''  was  a  barbarian  in 

>'  Credo,  quod  habeat  adjutorem  draconem  ilium,  qui  nobis  semper  inimicus 
est.  c.  40.  p.  69.  *   Ev  tht<{J  koi  o  fiavm;  Tag  fpevac  tTtdivvfioQ 

Ti  Ti}Q  tmiioviojffiK;  aiptffewg. — Eus.  H.  E.  1.  7.  C.  31. 

"  B((p/3npo(;  ^/jra  tov  piov  avr({j  Xoyij)  kcu  rpoTrr^j,  rrjv  ti  (pviriv  ^aifioviKng  rjf 
Oil'  Km  navioiCifc.    AkoXhBu  tutoic;  eyxtip''>v,  XpiTOV avrov  fiorxtia'CtirOai  tTTtipaTo, 

s  2 


260  Credibilily  of  lite  Gospel  History. 

'  every  respect,  both  in  his  speech,  and  in  his  manners.  As 
'  for  his*^  disposition,  it  was  diabolical  and  furious;  for  he 
'  made  an  appearance  of  being  Christ  himself.  Sometimes 
'  he  gave  out  that  he  was  the  Comforter,  and  the  Holy  Ghost 
'  himself.  To  madness  he  added  excessive  pride;  and,  as  if 
'  he  had  been  Christ,  he  chose  twelve  to  be  companions  with 
'  him  in  his  innovation.  His  scheme  was  patched  up  of 
'  many  false  and  impious  heresies,  long'  since  extinct.  This 
'  venomous  principle  Avas  brouglit  into  our  world,  the  Roman 
'  empire,  from  Persia.  From  that  time  the  impious  doctrine 
'  of  the  3Ianichees  has  infected  many.  Such  was  the  rise 
'  of  that  science  falsely  so  called.' 

In  this  place  Eusebius  appears  much' out  of  humour  :  he 
is  scarce  master  of  himself:  whether  his  expressions  are  just 
may  perhaps  be  considered  hereafter. 

In''  his,  or  Jerom's  Chronicle,  the  rise  of  this  sect  is  with 
much  particularity  distinctly  fixed  at  the  second  year  of  the 
emperor  Probus,  which  is  the  year  of  Christ  277. 

This  would  be  a  proper  place  for  me  to  consider  the  time 
of  the  rise  of  3Ianichoeism :  but  being  unwilling-  to  render 
this  article,  the  general  history  of  Manichaeism,  too  prolix,  I 
shall  defer  it  until  I  come  to  give  a  succinct  history  of  Mani 
himself. 

However  I  would  here  observe,  that  I  do  not  remember 
the  3Ianichees  to  be  any  M'here  else  mentioned  by  Eusebius ; 
M'hich  may  be  reckoned  somewhat  strange,  if  in  his  time 
they  Avere  numerous  in  any  parts  of  the  Roman  empire :  in 
his  Commentaries  upon  the  Psalms  and  Isaiah, and  elsewhere, 
he  might  have  had  frequent  occasions  to  confute  them.  A 
great  number  of  heresies  of  various  kinds,  some "^  resembling" 
the  Manichfean  principle,  are  censured  in  the  Apology  for 
Origen,  written  jointly  by  Pamphilusand  Eusebius.  If  the 
Manichees  had  been  well  known  in  the  Roman  empire,  at  the 
begitming  of  the  fourth  century,  we  might  have  expected 
to  see  them  there  particularly  named,  which  they  are  not. 

Since  writing  this,  I  have  observed  these  words  in  Tille- 

roTi  fi(v  Tov  irapaKXriTOV,  Kai  avro  to  Ttvtvfia  to  ayiov  avroQ  cavrov  avoKTjpvr- 
Tuiv'  K.  \.  ib.  *=  Beausobre  thinks  that  here  Eusebius  has  done 

wrong  to  Mani,  and  that  his  picture  of  Mani  has  Httle  resemblance.  Hist,  de 
Manich.  T.  i.  p.  108.  ^  Secundo  anno  Probi,  juxta  Antiochenos 

cccxxv.anno  juxta Tyrios  ccccii. — insana  Manichaeorum  hseresis  in  commune 
humani  generis  makim  exorta.     Euseb.  Chron.  p.  177. 

*  vel  secundum  eos,  qui  Deum  quidem  fatentur,  non  tamen  hominem 

assumsisse,  id  est,  animam  corpusque  terrenum,  qui  sub  specie  quasi  amphoris 
glorise  Jesu  Domino  deferendae,  omnia  quae  ab  eo  gesta  sunt  phantastice  magis 
quam  vere  gesta  esse  testantur.  Pro  Orig.  Ap.  ap.  Hieron.  Opp.  T.  5.  p. 
22G.  m. 


The  Manichces.     Sect.  I.  261 

iiiont,  whom  notliino;'  escapes.  The  article  concerning  the 
JNIaiiichees  in  the  Chronicle  he  considers  as  Jerorn's :  it  is 
only  the  passage  in  the  History  which  he  reckons  Eusebitis's ; 
wherenpon  he'  says:  '  Eusebius,  who  speaks  little  of  this 
'  heresy,  does  not  precisely  mark  the  time  of  it :  he  seems 
'  willing  however  to  have  it  thought  that«  it  began  in  the 

*  time  of  pope  Felix,  who  governed  the  church  according  to 
'  him  from  276  to  281.' 

2.  In  the  next  place  I  intend  to  transcribe  a  long  passage 
of  Socrates,  the  ecclesiastical  historian,  who  flourished  about 
the  year  of  Christ  440. 

'  But''  it  is  an  usual  thing  for  cockle  to  grow  up  among- 
'  good  grain.  It  is  agreeable  to  envy  to  lay  snares  for  the 
'  rio-hteous.  Not  lono-  before  the  rei<>n  of  Constantine  there 
'  sprang  up  a  kind  of  heathenish  Christianity,  which  mingled 

*  itself  with  the  true  christian  religion:  as  heretofore  false 

*  prophets  arose  together  with  the  prophets,  and  false  apos- 
'  ties  with  the  apostles.  For  in  those  days  the  doctrine  of 
'  Empedocles,  a  heathen  philosopher,  was  clandestinely 
'  introduced  into  Christianity :  of  this  Eusebius  Pamphilus 
'  has  made  mention  in  the  seventh  book  of  his  Ecclesiastical 
'  History,  but  without  any  particularity;  for  which  reason 
'  I  have  judged  it  not  improper  to  supply  his  omissions; 
'  thereby  it  may  be  known  who  this  Manichee  Avas,  and 
'  whence  he  came,  who  made  this  audacious  attempt.  One 
'  Scythian,  a  Saracen,  married  a  captive  woman,  native  of 

*  the  Upper  Thebais  ;  upon  her  account  he  lived  in  Egypt. 
'  Having  been  instructed  in  the  learning  of  the  Egyptians, 

*  he  introduced  the  doctrine  of  Empedocles  and  Pythagoras 

*  into  Christianity  ;  asserting'  two  natures,  one  good,  the 
'  other  evil,  as  Empedocles  did  ;  and  calling  the  evil  nature 
'  Discord,  the  good  nature  Friendship.  Buddas,  formerly 
'  named  Terebinthus,  became  a  disciple  of  that  Scythian  : 
'  he  travelled  into  the  country  of  Babylonia,  which  is  in- 
'  habited  by  the  Persians,  where  he  told  a  great  many  strange 
'  stories  of  himself;  as  that  he  was  born  of  a  virgin,  and 
'  brought  up  in  the  mountains :  afterwards  he  wrote  four 
'  books,  one  of  M'hich  was  entitled,  Of  3Iysteries,  another, 
'  The  Gospel,  a  third,  The  Treasure,  and  the  fourth.  Heads, 
'  for  Chapters.]     While  he  was  performing  some   of  his 

*  pretended   sacred   rites  he  was  thrown  down  by  a  spirit 

*  and  died.     The  woman  at  whose  house  he  dwelled  buried 

f  Note  V.  sur  les  Manich.  T.  .v,  P.  2.  p.  956.  s  Vid.  Eus.  1.  7. 

cap.  30,  31.  p.  283.  C.  "  Socrat.  H.  E.  1.  i.  c.  22,  55—57. 

'  Alio  <pv<Tei<;  httwv,  ayaOtjv  ts  kcu  TTovr]pav,  wq  kui  E/xTrtc^oicXjjc,  viiKOS  ovo- 
fiat^wv  Ti)v  wovrjpav,  ^iXiav  ^t  ttiii  ayaOijv.   ib.  p.  55.  C. 


262  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History, 

'  liim:  she,  coining  to  the  possession  of  his  money,  bouglit  a 
'  boy  seven  years  of  age,  named  •'  Cubricus ;  this  boy  she 
'  made  free,  and  gave  him  a  good  education.  Some  time 
'  after  this'  she  died,  leaving  the  boy  all  the  estate  she  had 
'  by  Terebinthus,  and  the  books  he  had  written,  according 
'  to  the  instructions  received  from  Scythian.  Cubricus  now 
'  free,  and  thus  enriched,  went  into  Persia  :  where  he  changed 
'  his  name,  calling  himself  Manes;  there  he  distributed  among 
'  his  seduced  followers  the  books  of  Buddas,  or  Terebinthus, 
'  as  his  own.  The  contents  of  these  books  are  in  expression 
'  christian,  in  sentiment  heathenish  ;  for  the  impious  Manichee 
'  directs  the  worship  of  many  gods,  and  teaches  that  the  sun 
'ought  to  be  adored:  he  likewise  introduces™  fate,  and 
'  destroys  man's  free-will.  He  openly  teaches  transmigra- 
'  tion  ;  following  herein  the  sentiment  of  Empedocles,  Py- 

*  thagoras,  and  the  Egyptians.  He  denies  that"  Christ  had 
'  real  flesh,  making  him  a  mere  phantom.  He  rejects  the  law 
'  and  the  prophets,  and  calls  himself  the  Paraclete :  all  which 

*  things  are  contrary  to  the  sense  of  the  orthodox  church. 
'  Moreover,  in"*  his  epistles  he  had  the  presumption  to  style 
'  himself  apostle  :  at  length  he  met  with  the  deserved  punish- 
'  ment  of  such  an  impostor  upon  this  occasion.  The  son  of 
'  the  king  of  Persia  happened  to  fall  sick  ;  the  father,  as  the 
'  saying  is,  left  no  stone  unturned,  being  extremely  desirous 
'  to  save  his  son's  life  :   having  heard  of  Manichee,?   and 

■^  Named  Cubricus.]  He  is  generally  so  called.  Cyril  and  Epiphanius 
write  the  name  KsljpiKOQ,  as  well  as  Socrates.  But  in  the  Acts  of  Archelaiis 
his  name  is  written  Corbicius.  Quae  cum  sola  esset,  habere  aliquem  ad  minis- 
ter! um  voluit,  et  comparavit  sibi  puerum  annorura  ferme  septem,  Corbicium 
nomine,  quem  statim  manumisit,  ac  Uteris  erudivit.  Act.  Arch.  c.  53.  p.  97. 
In  the  Historia  Haereseos  Manichaeorum,  published  by  PfatT,  at  the  end  of 

Lactantii  Epitome,  p.  183,  the  name  is  a  little  different Puerum  sibi  pro 

senectutis  solatio  comparavit,'nomine  Curbitius,  quem  et  Uteris  non  mediocribus 
erudivit.  In  former  editions  of  Augustine,  Mani's  first  name  is  said  to  have 
been  Urbicus.  But  in  the  Benedictine  edition  that  paragraph,  at  the  beginning 
of  Augustine's  article  of  the  Manichees,  [De  Haer.  c.  46.]  is  left  out  upon  the 
authority  of  manuscripts.  Beausobre  says,  none  of  these  names  have  an 
Oriental  air.  And  he  suspects  that  the  right  name  is  Carcubius.  See  Beaus. 
T.  i.  p.  G7.  '  When  that  widow  died,  Cubricus  is  said  to  have 

been  twelve  years  of  age.  Quique  cum  duodecim  annorum  esset  efFectus,  anus 
ilia  diem  obiit,  &c.  ap.  Arch.  c.  53.  p.  97. 

"'   Kai  Huapfiivtjv  uaayu,  cat  to  t(f  i/fiiv  avaiQti.  Socr.  ib.  p.  56.  A. 

"  K«t  Tov  Hpi'TOV  IV  aapKt  yfyovevcn  ov  ftn\iTai,  (pnvTarr^a  avTOV  \tywv 
uvea'  Kcu  vojMV  Kcu  ■^TQofijTOQ  aOiTH'  Kui  tavTov  ovoixct^ei  TrapaK\i}Tov'  ib.  p. 
56.  B.  °  Ev  St  raig  tmroXatg  km  awoToXov  iavrov  ovofia^uv 

tToKfirjntv.   iliid. 

■'  MaO(j)v  re  TTipi  th  Mavixais,  km  rac,  rfparttnt;  avrn  vofiiaac  iivia  aXrjOeig, 
iir:  «7roToXoj'  fitTcnrtnTTtTai,  TnTfvrrag  ('t'  avTov  noiOiintcrOai  tov  v'lov'  6  ?e  TTcipa- 
yii'OfitvoQ  fiira  ra  iTrnrXaTu  ax^nciTOQ  tyxupi^CtTai  tov  th  (iaaiXuoQ  viov'  6  Se 
PaaiXtuQ  IwpaKojg  on  b  naiQ  tv  raig  ;)^£()(Ttv  tTi9vT)Kei,  k.  X.  ib.  p.  56.  C. 


Tke  Manichces.     Sect.  I.  263 

'  supposing"  llie  straijoc  tilings  lie  had  lienrd  of  iiiiii  to  be 
'  true,  he  scuds  for  him  as  an  nj)ost!e,  hoping  that  by  Iiiin 
'  he  might  save  his  son  :  Avheii  he  was   come  he  pretended 

*  to  undertake  the  cure  of  the  king's  son.     But  when  the 

*  king  saw  that  his  son  died  in  his  liands,  he  shut  him  up  in 

*  prison,  intending  to  put  him  to  death  ;  but  he  made  his 
'  escape,  and  came  into  IMesopotamia.  The  king  of  Persia 
'  hearing  that  he  was  in  those  parts,  sent  after  him,  got  him 

*  apprehended,  and  Hayed  liim  alive:  after  which  his  skin 
'  was  filled  with  chaff  and  hung  up  at  the  gate  of  the  city. 
'  This  account  is  no  forgery  of  ours  ;  it  is  collected  out  of 
'  the  book  of  Archelaus,  bishop  of  Caschar,  a  city  in  Meso- 

*  potamia,  which  we  have  met  with  and  read  :  for  Arclielaus 
'  himself  says  he  had  disputed  with  him  in  person;  and  he 
'  there  relates  the  several  particulars  which  I  have  written 
'  concerning"  him.' 

Thus  I  have  given  the  history  of  Mani,  and  his  principles, 
in  the  words  of  this  ancient  writer,  which  will  serve  for  a 
text  to  be  commented  upon.  Once  I  was  somewhat  desirous 
to  set  before  my  readers  in  this  place  Augustine's  article  of 
the  Manichees  in  his  book  Of  Heresies  ;  but  it  is  too  abstruse 
and  dogmatical  ;  therefore  I  thought  this  historical  account 
preferable.  There  is  another  reason  which  discouraged  the 
design  of  translating  Augustine,  and  may  be  soon  perceived 
by  those  w  ho  look  into  him  :  but  though  1  do  not  here,  nor 
any  w  here  else,  translate  that  article  of  Augustine  entire,  I 
shall  make  good  use  of  it,  and  frequently  quote  it. 

In  this  passage  of  Socrates  we  see  a  proof  of  the  truth  of 
Beausobre's  observation,  thati  from  the  book  called  The  Acts 
of  Archelaus,  the  ancient  christian  writers  took  the  history 
of  Mani,  and  of  the  origin  of  Manichteism,  which  they  have 
given  us.  Cyril  of  Jerusalem,  Epiphanius,  Socrates,  the 
Greeks  in  general,  have  all  drawn  from  this  source;  as  is 
acknowledged  too  by"^  Petavius  and*  Tillemont. 

We  have  seen  the  account  which  Soci*ates  gives  of  the 
death  of  Mani,  taken  from  the  forementioned  book  :  but 
Socrates  flourishes  when  he  says  that  '  the  king  of  Persia 
'  having  heard  of  the  strange  things  said  to  be  done  by  Mani, 
'  and  believing  them  to  be  true,  sent  for  him  as  an  apostle.' 

1  Beaus.  Hist,  de  Manich.  p.  6.  T.  i.  '  Ex  hac  Archelai 

relatione  cpeteri  deinceps  hauserunt  omnes,  qui  hteretici  istiiis  historian;  et 
dogmata  scriptis  tradiderunt.     Petav.  Aaimadv.  ad  Epiph.  p.  289. 

*  Les  petites  differences,  qui  se  rccontrent  entr'  eux,  (savoir  Epiphane, 
Cyrille,  Socrate,)  n'empechent  pas  cju'  on  ne  voye  qu'  ils  ont  tous  puise  dans 
la  meme  source.  TiUem.  Mem.  Ec.  T.  4.  p.  2.  Art.  12.  p.  794. 


264  CredibiliUj  of  the  Gospel  Hidory, 

There  is  nothing-  like  this  in  Archelaus,  wliose^  wcids  1 
transcribe  at  the  bottom  of  the  page. 

That  Mani  was  put  to  death  needs  not  to  be  contested. 
It  is  mentioned  by"  Alexander  of  Lycopolis  :  the  memory 
of  it  was  celebrated^  by  the  followers  in  an  annual  festivity, 
observed  by  them  with  a  good  deal  of  pomp  and  splendour : 
and,  as'"  Beausobre  says,  '  It  is  not  impossible  but  the  death 
'  of  the  young-  prince  may  have  brought  upon  him  the  dis- 
'  pleasure  of  the  king  :  but  it  is  certain  that  the  eastern 
'  writers  do  ascribe  this  disgrace  to  his  opinions  in  religion  ; 
'  and,  if  1  may  say  it,  to  his  Christianity,  which  seems  to  be 
'  better  proved.' 

Indeed  the  author  of  the  dispute  seems  himself  to  have 
been  aware  of  something-  of  this  kind  ;  for  he  says  thaf 
Mani,  whilst  in  prison,  sent  out  his  disciples  to  spread  abroad 
his  opinions.  The  king,  before  informed  of  this,  sends  orders 
for  putting-  him  to  death  ;  but  as  he  says,  Mani  bribing  his 
keepers  with  a  large  sum  of  money,  got  out  of  prison,  and 
thus  escaped  for  the  present. 

Beausobre  has  a  large  number  of  exceptions  to  the  history 
of  Mani  in  the  Acts  of  Archelaus's  Dispute,  to  whom  I  refer 
the  reader.  I  shall  put  down  here  some  observations  which 
I  have  myself  made  in  reading-  those  Acts. 

Mani  was  a  Persian  :  but  the  writer  of  the  dispute  seems 
little  acquainted  with  Persian  affairs.  He  supposeth  that 
Probus  Mas  the  Roman  emperor  at  the  time  in  which  he 
placeth  the  conference;  but  the  king  of  Persia,  so  often 
mentioned  by  that  title,  is  never  named.  Some  may  be  apt 
to  suspect  he  did  not  certaiidy  know  who  was  king  of  Persia 
when  Probus  was  emperor,  and  therefore  feared  to  put  down 

*  Cum  ergo  illi  essent  profecti,  regis  filius  aegritudine  quadam  arreptus  est, 
quem  rex  curari  desiderans,  edictum  proposuit  in  vita,  [f.  invitans]  si  quis  eum 
curare  possit,  accipere  praemium,  multo  proposito.  Tumiste — praesentiam 
suam  Manes  exhibet,  dicens  se  esse  puerum  curaturum,  quse  cum  audisset  rex, 
suscepit  eum  cum  obsequio,  ac  libenter  habuit.  Verum — mortuus  est  puer  in 
manibus  eyus,  vel  potius  extinctus.     Arch.  c.  53.  p.  98. 

"  avTpciTivffai  Tt  SaTTWjO'^  rw  JJepffy'  ir^ocKrjpntravTa  Se  n  rsry  rtJroXw- 

Xivai.     Alex.  Lye.  p.  4.  in. 

* cum  vastrum  bema,  id  est,  diem  quo  Manichaeus  occisus  est,  qumque 

gradibus  instructo  tribunali  et  pretiosis  linteis  adornato, — magnis  hononbus 
prosequamini.     Aug.  contr.  Ep.  Fund.  c.  8.  "  B.  ib.  p.  82,  85,  86. 

"  liis  ergo  tam  scelerate  composilis,  mittit  et  discipulos  suos  pradicaturos 
intrcpide  fictos  simulatosque  crrores,  et  novas,  falsasque  voces  annuntiaturos 
jjcr  loca  singula.  Quod  cum  rex  Persarum  cognovisset,  dignis  eum  suppliciis 
subdere  parat.  Quo  Manes  agnito,  admonitus  in  somnis,  elapsus  de  carcere, 
in  fugam  versus  est,  auro  plurimo  custodibus  corruptis,  et  raansit  in  castello 
Arabionis.     Arch.  c.  59.  p.  69. 


The  Munichees.     Sect.  I,  265 

any  name,  lest  it  would  be  a  mistake,  which  might  afterwards 
be  detected  and  exposed  :  tlien  the  history  of"  Mani  is  here 
related,  as  if  the  whole  course  of  his  aflhirs  happened  under 
one  prince  only  :  whereas  learned  moderns  are  now  clearly 
of  opinion  that^  those  transactions  were  in  the  time  of  three 
or  four  reigns  of  several  kings  of  Persia.  Moreover,  this 
M  riter  supposeth,  that  Mani,  or  his  teachers  and  predecessors, 
learned  the  doctrine  of  two  natures,  or  two  principles,  from 
Empedocles,  and  other  Greeks ;  whereas  it  is  much  more 
likely  that  he  had  it  from  the^  Persians. 

There  are  many  improbabilities  in  the  historical  part  of  that 
dispute.  Mani  is  said  to  have  been  imprisoned;  but  if  the 
king  of  Persia  had  been  displeased  with  him  on  account  of 
the  death  of  his  son,  I  think  he  would  not  have  sent  him  to 
prison,  but  would  have  put  him  to  death  presently. 

Supposing  Mani  to  have  been  imprisoned  by  the  king  of 
Persia,  it  is  not  easy  to  conceive  how  he  could  escape,  and 
get  to  Caschar,  or  Carchar,  said  to  be  a  city  in  the  Roman 
Mesopotamia. 

The  writer  of  the  Dispute  says,  in  that  city  lived  a  chris- 
tian, of  great  note  for  wealth  and  liberality:  Mani  in  Persia 
heard  of  his  fame,  and  was  very  desirous,  as*  is  related,  to 
make  a  convert  of  him,  hoping  he  might  by  him  gain  the 
whole  province ;  but  not  choosing  to  come  to  him  without 
some  previous  notice,  he  deputes  one  of  his  disciples,  by 
name  Turbo,  whom  he  sends  with  a  letter  to  that  eminent 
christian:  this  letter  is  fully  inscribed:  '  Manichee''  to 
'  Marcellus.'  But  could  that  be  safely  or  prudently  done 
by  a  man  who  had  escaped  out  of  prison,  and  every  where 
sought  by  his  sovereign  ? 

y  Sharistani  in  libro  de  Religionibus  Orientis  de  eo  refert:  Mani  apparuit 
tempore  Shabur  filii  Ardeshir,  et  occidit  eum  Behram  filiiis  Hormiiz,  filii 
Shabur.  Hyde,  de  Relig.  V.  Pei-s.  cap.  p.  282.  Conf.  Herbelot  Bib.  Orient. 
V.  Mani. 

Mais  voici  une  ignorance,  une  en-eur,  qu'  on  ne  sauroit  excuser.  C'est 
d'avoir  mis  sous  un  meme  regne  le  cours  entier  d'une  affaire,  qui  commen^a 
sous  I'ayeul,  ou  le  bisayeui,et  qui  ne  s'acheva  que  sous  le  petit-fils,  ou  I'arriere- 
petit-fils.     Beaus.  T.  i.  p.  128. 

Car  Sapor,  qui  regnoit  depuis  240,  ou  241,  mourut  vets  271.  Homiisdas 
son  fils  en  272,  et  Vararane  filsd'Hormisdas  en  276.  Ainsi  ce  sera  Vararane  II. 
fils  de  celuibi,  qui  aura  fait  mourir  Manichee  en  277,  ou  278.  Till.  Mem. 
Eg.  les  Manicheens,  Art.  vii.  in  fin. 

^  Gnecis  Budda  Empedoclis  opinionem  emplexus  dicitur,  duo  rerum  pug- 
nantia  inter  se  principia  statuentis. — Verum  rectius  a  Persarum  magis  accepisse 
videtur.  Hyde,  ib.  p.  285. — Verum  rectius  a  Persis,  sen  Persarum  magis,  id 
accepisse  videtur,  qui  ayaOov  Satfiova,  Km  kokov  daiiiovn, — statuebant,  ut  est 
apud  Lai-rtiiun  in  Prooemio,  &c.     Toll.  Insign.  Ital.  p.  126,  in  not. 

''  Arch.  c.  4.  p.  5.  ''  Arch.  p.  6.  cap.  5. 


266  Crcdihilitxj  of  the  Gospel  History. 

The"  messenger  who  carries  back  an  answer  from  Marcel- 
lus,  finds  Mani  in  a  castle  named''  Arabion,  a  Persian  fortress, 
as  it  seems,  and  upon  the  frontier:  Mani  thereupon  comes  in 
great  haste  to  Marcellus  at  Caschar;  and  he'  has  in  his 
company  two-and-twenty,  or,  in  another  copy,  twelve  young- 
men  and  virgins;  that  is,  so*^  many  men  who  professed  vir- 
ginal chastity;  and  he  is  himself  dressed  very  politely  after 
the  Persian  manner.  How  can  it  be  thought  that  a  person 
under  his  prince's  displeasure  should  travel  with  such  at- 
tendants ? 

Moreover,  when  the  disputations  in  the  Roman  part  of 
Mesopotamia  were  over,  aiid  he  Mas  disagreeable  to  the 
people  of  Caschar  and  Diodoris,  where  tlie  conferences  were 
held,  he^  returns  to  Arabion,  Avhere  he  is  taken  up  by  the 
king's  soldiers  :  but  would  any  man  of  common  sense  act 
in  this  manner,  mIio  was  liable  to  capital  punishment  for 
such  an  offence  as  is  here  supposed  ? 

It  is  also  remarkable  that  Maui's  letter  to  Marcellus, 
brought  by  Turbo,  begins  in  this  manner:  '  Manichee,*' 
*  apostle  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  all  the  saints  and  virgins  with 
'  me,  send  peace  to  Mracellus.' 

Upon  all  which  therefore  I   again  observe,  that  Mani  Is 
said  to  have  been  imprisoned  on  account  of  the  death  of  the 
king-  of  Persia's  son  :  but  all  the  following  particulars  of 
his  history  represent  him  not  a  prisoner,  but  at  full  liberty; 
for'  his  three  chief  disciples,  who  had  been  sent  out  into 

*=  Marcellus  vero,  accito  uno  ex  piieris  siiis,  Callisto  nomine,  praecipit 
proficisci,  qui,  nihil  moratus,  illico  proficiscitur ;  et  post  triduum  pervenit  ad 
Manem,  quern  in  castello  quodam  Arabionis  reperit,  atque  epistolan>  tradidit. 
Arch.  c.  6.  p.  9. 

•^  Concerning  Arabion  see  Tilkm.  as  before,  art.  8.  at  the  end. 

*^  Eadem  autem  ipsa  die  adventavit  Manes,  adducens  secum  juvenes  et 
virgines  electos  ad  viginti  duo  simul— et  primo — ad  Marcellum  ingreditur 
salutandum.  Quo  ille  viso  admiratus  est  primo  habitus  indumenta.  Habebat 
enim  calceamenti  genus,  cjuod  quadrisole  vulgo  appellari  solet ;  pallium  autem 
varium,  tanquam  airina  specie  •,  in  manu  vero  validissimum  baculum  tenebat  ex 
ligno  ebelino.  Babylonium  vero  librum  portabat  sub  sinistra  ala.  Crura  etiam 
braccis  obtexerat  colore  diverso,  quarum  una  rul'a,  alia  velut  prasini  coloris 
erat.  Vultus  vero,  ut  senis  Pcrsae  artilicis,  et  bellorum  ducis  videbatur.  Arch. 
c.  12.  p.  23. 

'  M.  de  Tillemont  a  pris  ces  vierges  pour  des  filles. — Je  ne  sai  si  ceux  de 
ses  disciples,  qui  Taccompagnnient,  etoient  de  jeunes  honimcs ;  mais  je  suis 
bien  asMjre  (|u'  il  n'y  avoit  ponit  de  jeunes  hiles  avec  cux. — Ces  vierges  et  ces 
Kiints  sont  Ics  memes  personnes.  Aussi  Irouvj-t-on  dans  un  endroit  de  la 
version  Latine  virgines  electos,  ce  qui  marque  que  ce  sont  des  honmies.  Beaus. 
T.  i.  p.  93.  K  Sed  ille  vias,  quibus  venerat,  repetens,  transito 

fluvio  ad  Arabionis  castellum  rediit,  ubi  post ca  com prehcnsus,  oblatus  est  regi. 
Arch.  c.  45.  p.  100.  ^  Ap.  Arch.  c.  5.  p.  (>. 

'  For  the  several  following  particulars  see  Arch.  c.  53,  54. 


The  Manichces.     SECT.  I.  267 

several  parts,  return  to  him,  and  find  liiin  in  prison,  as  is 
pretended:  from  thence  he  sends  them  out  again,  an<l  tliey 
return  :  after  which  they  are  again  sent  abroad  by  him  to 
propagate  his  principles.  Soon  after  this  he  sends  the 
before-mentioned  letter  to  Marcellus  by  Turbo:  which  was, 
as  already  observed,  fidly  inscribed  ;  and  divers  people  his 
followers,  called  saints,  join  with  him  in  the  wish  of  peace: 
to  this  letter  he  receives  an  answer  from  Marcellus,  whose 
messenger  has  no  directions  of  privacy,  nor  apprehensions  of 
danger  from  carrying  and  delivering  a  letter  to  Mani:  soon 
after  this  he  comes  to  3Iarcellus  with  a  numerous  attendance, 
and  is  himself  properly  and  richly  habited  like  a  Persian 
high  priest  or  bishop.  Was  this  man  a  prisoner?  Arc 
these  things  marks  of  chains  and  confinement?  Finally, 
when  the  disputes  in  Mesopotamia  are  over,  Mani  returns 
to  Arabion,  a  Persian  fortress :  that  is,  he  makes  the  best  of 
his  way  back  again  to  Persia;  which  shows  tiiat  before  he 
made  the  excursion  into  Mesopotamia  (if  ever  he  made  any) 
he  was  at  full  liberty  :  for  he  leaves  the  angry  and  offended 
christians  in  Roman  Mesopotamia,  and  returns  to  Persia,  his 
own  country,  as  a  place  of  safety.  Since,  therefore,  we  are 
well  assured  that  Mani  was  put  to  death,  we  may  reckon  it 
probable,  that  in  some  short  time  after  his  return  home,  he 
fell  under  his  prince's  displeasure,  and  was  condemned  by 
him,  for  some  cause  or  other:  nor  does  any  cause  of  offence 
appear  more  likely,  than  his  zeal  in  propagating  some  spe- 
culative opinions. 

The  history  of  Turbo  is  likewise  improbable:  this  man 
was  a  disciple  of  Mani,  and  had  been''  instructed  by  Addas, 
one  of  Mani's  chief  disciples  :  nor  is  it  reasonable  to  think, 
that  a  man  should  be  employed  in  such  an  affair  who  might 
not  be  confided  in  :  but,  having  delivered  his  master's  letter 
into  the  hands  of  Marcellus,  when  he  is  desired  to  go  back 
with  an  answer,  he  excuseth  himself;  and  a  servant  of  Mar- 
cellus having  been  despatched  with  the  answer.  Turbo  pre- 
sently' gives  Marcellus,  and  Archelaus,  bishop  of  that  city, 
an  odious,  and  perhaps  false  account,  of  Mani's  doctrine. 

Archelaus  likewise,  at  the  end  of  the  disputes,  appears  to 
have  with  him  one"'  Sisinnius,  who  is  supposed  to  give  him 

^  Accitum  unum  ex  discipulis,  Turbonem  nomine,  qui  per  Addam  fuerat 
instructus,  tradita  epistola,  abire  jubet,  ac  perferre  Marcello.     Arch.  c.  4.  p.  5. 

'  Vid.  Arch.  c.  6,  7,  et  seqq.  p.  9,  &c. 

'"  Sed  nunc  paucissinie  dicere  volentem  deprecor,  ut  cum  silentio  audiatis, 
ut  agnoscatis,  qui  sit,  et  unde,  et  qualis  sit  iste,  qui  advenit ;  sicut  Sisinnius 
quidam,  unus  ex  comitibus  ejus,  indicavit  mihi,  quem  etiam  ad  testimonium 
eoruni,  quae  a  me  dicentur,  si  placet,  vocare  paratus  sum.  Sed  ne  ipse  quidem 
dicere  recusavit  eadem  quae  nos  dicimus,  praesente   Mane.     Credidit  enim 


268  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

particular  information  concerning  Mani :  but  Sisinnius, 
according"  to"  Photius,  and°  Peter  of"  Sicily,  was  a  chief 
disciple  of  Mani,  and  sat  in  his  chair  after  him  as  his  suc- 
cessor. However,  whether  those  authors  are  to  be  relied 
upon  as  to  that  particular  or  not,  it  is  not  reasonable  to  think 
that  Archelaus,  a  catholic  bishop  of  the  Roman  Mesopotamia, 
should  have  Avith  him  at  one  and  the  same  time  two  disciples 
and  intimates  of  Mani,  and  both  deserters. 

Sisinnius  is  a  Greek  name  :  I  shovdd  be  glad  to  know  more 
of  him  :  if  ever  there  was  a  Manichee  of  this  name,  it  might 
perhaps  afford  some  light  for  clearing  up  the  time  of  this 
piece  which  we  have  been  examining. 

3.  Valesius,  in  his  notes  upon  Socrates,  transcribes  a 
passage  out  of  a  letter  of  Libanius  to  Priscian,  president  of 
Palestine  :  which  letter  he  supposeth  to  relate  to  the  Mani- 
cbees  in  that  province,  though  they  are  not  named  :  '  TheseP 
'  men  worship  the  sun,  but  without  bloody  sacrifices,  and 
'  honour  him  as  a  deity  in  a  secondary  sense  only.  They 
'  pinch  their  belly  to  a  great  degree,  and  look  upon  the  day 
'  of  their  death  as  the  day  of  their  deliverance.  They  are  in 
'  many  places  of  the  world,  but  every  where  a  few  only  :  they 
*  injure  no  man,  but  some  there  are  who  give  them  trouble.' 

II.  That  suits  the  Manichees ;  they  are  in  many  places, 
but  no  Avhere  numerous.  That  they  w^ere  in  many  parts  of 
the  world  may  be  concluded  from  the  many  books  published 
against  them.  Fabricius"^!  has  a  catalogue  of  ancient  authors, 
who  have  mentioned  the  Manichees,  or  written  against  them, 
amounting-  to  more  than  forty  in  number;  and  yet  that  cata- 
logue might  be  greatly  enlarged. 

Epiphanius,  in  his  article  of  the  Manichees,  written  about 
the  year  376,  speaking  of  authors  who  had  written  against 
them,  nameth"^  Eusebius  of  Ctesarea,  Eusebius  of  Emesa, 
Serapion  of  Thmuis,  Athanasius  of  Alexandria,  George  of 
Laodicea,  Apollinarius  ofthesame  place,and  Titus ofBostra  ; 
and  he  says  there  were  other  authors  besides  these  >vho  had 
Mritton  agaitist  them. 

1.  Photius,  giving  an  account  of  Heraclean,  bishop   of 

docfrinBe  nostrae  supradictus,  sicuit  et  apud  me  alius  Turbo  nomine.  Arch.  c. 
•51.  p.  94.  "   2((Ttvi'toe,  o  KniTo  atio>iia  uvth  ttiq  SvaatjiiiQ  Si^aa- 

KijiXiag  avaSt^antvog.     Phot,  contr.  Manich.  1.  i.  c.  14.  p.  59. 

°  Sisinnius,  qui  Maneti  successit.  Pet.  Sic.  Hist.  Manich.  ap.  B.  Patr.  T. 
6.  p.  7/38.  A.  P   Ot  Tov  riXiov  htoi  BipmrtvtivTtg  avev  a'ljjiaTOQ, 

Kai  nixuvTic  ^eov  Trpoaiiyopig.  Sivrsp^.  Kwt  ttjv  ya<?5pa  KoKa'CovTeg,  Kai  (v  Kip^ei 
TTOihftivot  Ttiv  Tr]Q  TiKiVTi]Q  iintpciv.  \loWayH  fJ^tv  uui  rr]C  y»JC>  Travrax^  ^f 
oXiyoi'  Km  aciKHm  /jiiv  sStva,  Xmrnvrai  ft  tW  iviwv.  Annot.  in  Socr.  1.  i.  c. 
22.' p.  13.  1  Bib.  (ir.  T.  V.  p.  289—293. 

■•  Haer.  6G.  n.  21.  p.  G38. 


Vie  Manichees.     Sect.  I.  269 

Chalcedoii,  whose  works  he  much  commends,  (whose  time 
however  is  not  now  certainly  known,)  says,  that,  speaking- 
of  others  who  had  opposed  the  same  sect  before  him,  he 
names'*  Hegemoniiis,  who  wrote  the  disputations  of  Arche- 
laus  with  Mani;  Titus,  George  of  Laodicea,  Serapion  of 
Thnuiis,  and  Diodorus,  whose  work  against  the  Manichees 
consisted  of  five-and-twenty  books:  this  work  of  Diodorus 
of  Tarsus  is  in  Ebedjesu's'  Catalogue,  and  therefore  must 
liave  been  translated  into  Syriac.  And  Photius  in  his  own 
work  against  the  Manichees,  or  Paulicians,  mentions"  Cyril 
bishop  of  Jerusalem,  Epiphanius,  Titus  of  Bostra,  Serapion 
of  Thmuis,  Alexander  of  Lycopolis,  the  twenty  books  of 
Heraclean  bishop  of  Chalcedon,  upon  whom  he  again 
bestows  great  commendations  :  but  we  have  now  nothing'  of 
that  work  remaining  beside  the  extracts  made  by  Photius. 

2.  The  piece  of  Alexander  just  mentioned,  written  in 
Greek,  who  was  of  Lycus,  a  city  of  Thebais  in  Egypt,  is 
still  in^  being".  Fabricius  supposeth  that'"  he  was  at  first 
a  heathen  and  Manichee,  afterwards  a  catholic  christian. 
CavC  thinks  he  was  originally  a  heathen,  next  a  Manichee, 
in  the  end  a  catholic  :  he  says  that  he  is  a  very  ancient 
writer,  probably  of  the  fourth  century.  Photius,  as  before 
cited,  calls  himy  archbishop  of  Cyropolis:  but  Beausobre 
argues  that^  he  was  a  mere  heathen  or  pagan  philosopher, 
as  he  calls  him.  Tillemont  likewise  says,  that  '  by''  his 
'  book  he  appears  to  have  been  a  pagan  philosopher,  who, 
'  observing  that  some  of  his  fellow  disciples  emlDraced  the 
*  opinion  of  the  Manichees,  wrote  this  piece  to  confute  it  by 
'  natural  and  philosophical  reasons.  He  speaks  with  some 
'  respect  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  prefers  the  doctrine  of  the 
'  churches  [thej  are  his  own  words]  to  that  of  Mani :  but 
'  it  may  be  perceived  by  those  very  places  that  he  is  by 
'  no  means  a  christian.'  I  do  not  choose  to  enter  at  present 
into  any  debate  about  the  character  of  this  writer :  the  reader, 
if  he  pleaseth,  may  consult  the  work  itself,  and  the  modern 
to  Avhom  I  have  referred  :  I  shall  only  say  that  the  Mani- 
chees were  christians.     If  ever  Alexander  was  a  Manichee 

»  Cod.  85.  p.  204.  '  Vid.  Assem.  Bib.  Or.  T.  3.  P.  i.  p.  29. 

"  Ph.  contr.  Manich.  1.  i.  cap.  xi.  "  Ap.  Combefis.  Auct.  Nov. 

"  Alexandri  Lycopolitae  ex  Ethnico  Manichaei,  atque  inde  ad  ecclesiam 
reducti,  liber. — Videtur  scripsisse  saeculo  quarto.     Fabr.  Bib.  Gr.  T.  v.  p.  290. 

"  Erat  quidem  primum  cultu  Gentilis,  deinde  ad  Manichaeos,  in  Egyptum 
recens  delates,  se  contulit.  Tandem  ejurata  haeresi,  ad  catholicorum  castra 
transiit.     Cav.  Diss,  de  Scriptor.  incertaa  .Sltatis. 

y  Phot,  contr.  Manich.  ubi  supra. 

^  Beaus.  Hist,  de  Manich.  T,  i.  p.  236. 

=  Tiilem.  T,  iv.  Les  Manicheens,  Art.  16.  fin. 


270  Credihilily  of  the  Gospel  History. 

he  must  have  been  a  christian   at  that  time  ;  what  he  was 
afterwards,  Avhen  he  wrote  against  them,  is  another  question. 

3.  1  do  not  think  it  needful  to  say  any  thing-  here  parti- 
cularly of  Augustine,  whose  books  however  against  the 
Manichecs  are  numerous  and  still  extant,  and  will  be  of 
great  use  to  us,  as  Mill  appear  hereafter.  Cassiodorius  com- 
mends Augustin's  writings^  against  the  Manichees,  as  if 
they  were  superior  to  what  he  had  written  against  other 
heretics. 

4.  But  there  are  two  catholic  writers  against  the  Mani- 
chees, Serapion  and  Titus,  of  M'liom  I  shall  here  give  a 
distinct  account.  Their  books  against  the  Manichees  being 
their  only  remaining- works,  I  shall  write-their  history  in  this 
place,  and  observe  their  testimony  to  the  books  of  the  New 
Testament. 

Serapion, mentioned  by "^  Epiphanius  and  "^Heraclean  among- 
authors  who  before  them  had  written  against  the  Manichees, 
is  placed  by  Jerom  in  his  Catalogue  of  Ecclesiastical 
Writers ;  where  he  speaks  of  him  to  this  purpose :  '  Sera- 
'  pion,  *=  bishop  of  Thmuis,  who  for  his  great  capacity  was 
'  called  Scholasticus,  and  wns  much  esteemed  by  the  monk 
*  Antonius,  published  an  excellent  book  against  the  3Iani- 
'  chees,  another  upon  the  Titles  of  the  Psalms,  and  useful 
'  epistles  to  divers  persons ;  and  under  the  emperor  Con- 
'  stantius  he  was  famous  as  a  confessor.' 

Cave*^  speaks  of  Serapion  at  the  year  347,  about  which 
time  he  is  supposed  to  have  been  made  bishop  of  Thmuis 
by  Athanasius.  Basnage,  editor  of  Serapion's^  book  against 
the  Manichees,  placeth  him  at  340 ;  Cave  says  he  died  about 
the  year  358  ;  Valesius''  says  he  died  before  the  year  359: 
but  Tillemont,  who  thinks'  he  was  made  bishop  about  349, 
makes  a  question  whether''  he  was  not  alive  in  the  year  369  ; 
Socrates'  says  that  about  the  year  373  Athanasius  sent  five 
bishops,  and  among- them  Serapion  of  Thmuis,  to  wait  upon 
the  emperor  Constantius  in  the  West. 

^  Contra  quos  ita  fervore  pietatis  incanduit,  ut  diligentius  atque  vivacius 
adversus  eos  dixerit,  quam  contra  haereses  alias  disseruit.  Cass,  de  Institu.  D. 
L.  c.  i.  p.510.  T.  2.  <=H.  66.  c.  21. 

^  Ap.  Phot.  cod.  85.  p.  204. 

*  SerapionThmueos  episcopus,  qui  ob  elegantiam  ingenii  cognomen  Scho- 
lastici  meruit,  carus  Antonii  monachi,  edidit  adveisus  Manichseum  egregium 
librum,  et  de  Psalmorum  titulis  alium,  et  ad  diversos  utiles  epistolas.  Et  sub 
Constantio  principe  etiam  in  confessione  inclytus  luit.     De  V.  i.  cap.  99. 

f  Cav   H.  L.  e  Ap.  Can  is.  Antiq.  Lect.  T.  i. 

''  Annot.  in  libr.  iv.  c.  23.     Socr.  p.  54.  h. 

'  Saint  Athanas.  Art.  66.     Mem.  Ec.  T.  8.  P.  i.  p.  241. 

"  lb.  p.  243.  '  Socrat.  H.  E.  1.  4.  c.  9.  p.  547.  C. 


The  Manichees.     Sect.  I.  271 

It  lias  bccii  observed  by  learned  men  that  Tlimuis  in  the 
Egyptian  language  signifies  a  goat ;  the  city  was  so  called 
because  that  animal  was  the  great  object  of  its  M'orship  ; 
Jerom  says  as  much'"  in  the  Commentary  upon  the  forty- 
sixth  chapter  of  Isaiah. 

It  is  commonly  said  that  Serapion  M'as  a  great  ascetic, 
and  for  a  good  Avhile  lived  a  mortified  course  of  life  in  the 
deserts  of  Thebais.  Cave"  goes  into  this  supposition  ;  but 
Tillemont  disputes  it  :  for  he  says  that"  the  attaiimients  of 
learning  and  eloquence,  ascribed  to  Serapion  by  Jerom  and 
Sozomen,  are  not  the  thing's  for  which  hermits  are  wont  to  be 
commended  ;  nor  do  those  writers  any  where  say  that  he 
ever  lived  such  a  course  of  life,  though  they  have  mentioned 
him  several  times. 

Antonius's  respect  for  tliis  bishop  of  Thmuis  is  taken 
notice  of  byP  Athanasius,  who  also  himself  had  a  great 
regard  for  him,  and  addressed''  several  of  his  v/orks  to  him 
in  epistles. 

In  Sozomen,  Serapion  has  the  character  "■  of  a  man  of 
admirable  piety  and  eloquence;  and  his  name  is  in*  Jerom's 
letter  to  Magnus.  Socrates  has  preserved  a  memorable 
saying'  of  our  author,  taken  from  Euagrius  of  Pontus : 
'  The*^  angel  of  the  church  of  Thmuis  said  :  "  The  soul  that 
'  has  drunk  in  spiritual  knowledge  is  completely  cleansed  ; 
'  the  parts  of  the  soul  fretted  with  anger  are  cured  by  love, 
'  and  other  evil  affections  are  cured  by  temperance."  ' 

No  work  of  Serapion  remains  beside  his  book  against  the 
Manichees,  which  is  not  very  large. 

As  for  his  testimony  to  the  books  of  the  New  Testament, 
I  observe  briefly,  that  he  has  quoted  the  gospels,  the"  Acts 
of  the  Apostles,  and  divers  of  St.  Paul's  epistles,  particularly 
fhat"^  to  the  Hebrews,  as  his;  he  quotes  the  epistle  to  the 
Romans'"  as  an  oracle,  and"  in  like  manner  other  parts  of 
scripture. 

■"  0/t8ic  lingua  jEgyptia  ab  hirco.     In.  Is.  T.  3.  p.  343.  m. 

"  Vitae  instituto  aaKiTrjc,  inter  arctioris  disciplinse  cultores  din  deserta  The- 
baidos  habitavit.     Cav.  ubi  supr.  °  Note  70,  sur  S.  Athan.  ubi 

supr.  T.  8.  p.  1179.  p  De  Vit.  S.  Anton,  p.  856.  n.  82.  p.  864. 

n.  91.  1  Vid.  Athan.  0pp.  p.  340,  &c.  p.  647,  &c. 

■"  Avr,p  iQ  Ta  ^laXi^a  rov  (iiov  Bea-n-eaiog,  kcu  Xiytiv  Suvog,  Sozom.  1.  4.  C. 
9.  p.  547.  ^  et  Serapionis  confussoris.  Hier.  Ep,  83. 

* on  o  VHQ  iiiVKiTTioKdjQ  TTvivfiaTiKi^v  yvwuiv  TiXiitog  KaOaipiTai'  cryciTrri 

ct  Ta  (pXiyfiaivovTci  fionia  ts  ^vjih  Srepcnrivu,  TTOvripac  St  tiriOv^iaQ  aTTippisnaQ 
(Tjjcriv  tyKpaxfia.  ap.  Socr.  1.  4.  c.  23.  p.  237.  C. 

"  Serap.  contr.  Manich.  p.  47.  f.  '   'Otuv  \tyg  IlawXoc*  Yli^tt 

PaajS  y'l  Tropvjj  b  avvairoAtTO  toiq  (nrtiBriaam.  p.  45.  m. 

"   Ta  (If  Xoyia  j3owvra  (cat  Xeyovra.  p.  47.  supr.  m. 

"   Kai  jioojaiv  ol  Xoyoi.  p.  47.  infr.  m. 


272  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

The  reader  may  perhaps  here  recollect,  thaty  we  formerly 
saw  the  history  of  another  bishop  of  this  place,  named  Phi- 
leas,  who  suffered  martyrdom  in  the  persecution  begun  by 
Diocletian. 

5.  I  shall  be  obliged  to  cite  Titus  of  Bostra  several  times ;  I 
therefore  here  write  likewise  his  history  :  says  Jerom,'  Titus, ^ 
'  bishop  of  Bostra.  in  t!ip  time  of  Julian  and  .Jovian,  wrote 
'  with  great  strength  of  argument  against  the  Manichees, 
'and  some  other  volumes:  he  died  under  Valens.'  This 
last-mentioned  emperor  reigned  from  364  to  378 :  Titus  is 
remembered  again  by  Jerom  in  his  letter  to  Magnus. 

According  to  Cave,  Titus  flourished  about  362,  and  died 
about  371 ;  in  Basnage's  edition  he  is'  placed  as  writing 
about  the  year  360:  Tillemont  thinks  that*  he  published 
his  books  against  the  Manichees  in  the  reign  of  Valens. 

Titus  fell  under  the  displeasure  of  Julian,  of  which  Sozo- 
men  has  left  the  following  account:  '  Julian''  ordered  the 
'  people  of  Bostra  to  expel  the  bishop  of  that  church  by  a 
'  public  decree,  and  threatened  them,  that  if  any  disturbance 
'  happened  there,  he  should  impute  it  to  the  bishop  and 
'  clergy.  Titus  thereupon  sent  a  letter  to  the  emperor,  assur- 
'  ing  him  that  the  christians  were  equal  in  number  to  the 

*  Greeks  [or  Gentiles];  that  they  were  very  quiet;  and  that, 

*  paying  a  regard  to  his  admonitions,  they  had  no  thought 
'  of  making  any  disturbance.  From  those  Avords  Julian 
'  took  occasion  to  write  a  letter  to  the  people  of  Bostra,  in 
'  order  to  incense  them  against  Titus,  as  having  accused 
'  them,  saying  :  "  it  was  not  owing  to  their  own  good  temper, 
'  but  to  his  exhortations,  that  they  were  kept  from  sedition."  ' 
The  letter,  or  rescript  of  Julian,  still *=  extant,  confirms 
Sozomen's  account. 

The  books  of  Titus  against  the  Manichees  are  taken  notice 
of  by  many  ancient  authors;  as  "^Epiphanius,  ^Theodoret, 
•^Heraclean,  f-' Stephen  Gobar,  ''Photius;  as  also  by  'Trithe- 
mius  ;  beside  Jerom  above  transcribed. 

We  still  have  three  of  those  books,  with  the  contents  of  all 
four  :  but  the  fourth  and  last  seems  to  be  irrecoverably  lost : 
and   there  may  be  reason   to   think   that  the  three   books 

y  See  p.  235.  ^  Titus,  Bostrenus  episcopus,  sub  Juliano  el 

Joviano  principibus  fortes  adversum  Manichseos  scripsit  libros,  et  nonnulla 
volumina  alia.     Moritur  autera  sub  Valentc.  De  V.  I.  c.  102. 

»  Persecution  de  Julien,  Art.  2.5.  Mem.  T.  7.  p.  669. 

^  Sozom.  1.  5.  c.  15.  p.  616.  B.  C.  D,  "  Vid.  Julian.  0pp.  T. 

i.  p.  435.  Ep.  52.  "  Hser.  66.  c.  21. 

*  IlaDf.  Fab.  1.  i.  c.  26.  sub  fin.  '  Ap.  Phot.  cod.  85. 

e  Ap.  eund.  cod.  232.  p.  896.  "  Contr.  Manich.  1.  i.  cap.  xi. 

'  De  Script.  Ec.  cap.  72. 


The  M(tnichccs.     Sect.  I.  273 

^vliieli  wc  have  are  not  complete,  or  tljat  some  parts  of  them 
are  out  of  place.  It  seems  to  me  that  some  words  of'  Bas- 
nag-e,  to  whom  Me  are  indebted  for  tlie  publication  of  Titus 
in  Greek,  attord  oround  for  such  a  suspicion,  though  he  lias 
taken  laudable  pains  to  set  all  right. 

Some  ascribe  to  Titus  a  Commentary  upon  St.  Luke, 
though  it  is  not  distinctly  mentioned  among  his  works  by  any 
ancient  author;  learned  men  therefore  are  divided  in  their 
sentiments  about  it.  Basnage  thinks  that'  Titus  wrote  such 
a  commentary,  and  tliat  there  are  fragments  of  it  remaining  : 
Fabricius  is  of  opinion,  that™  the  Commentary  upon  St. 
Luke  is  the  work  of  some  other  Titus,  of  the  sixth  century, 
or  later :  Tillemont,  beside  other  material  things,  observes 
that"  no  ancient  author  makes  particular  mention  of  any 
work  of  Titus,  but  that  against  the  Manichees :  and  that  the 
Commentary  upon  St.  Luke,  which  bears  his  name,  has  divers 
marks  of  a  late  age. 

I  shall  add  here  some  censures  of  learned  moderns  upon 
Titus  ;  particularly  upon  that  work  of  his  which  we  have,  and 
is  universally,  received  as  genuine.  Those  censures  may  be 
of  use  to  assist  my  readers  in  forming  a  right  j  udgment  of 
ancient  christian  writers. 

Says"  Tillemont :  '  He  seems  to  have  followed  the  dan- 
'  gerous  error  ascribed  to  Origen,  that  the  pains  of  the 
'  damned,  and  even  those  of  the  dtemons  themselves,  will  not 
'  be  eternal.' 

Du  PinP  says  :  *  It  is  surprising  that  Titus  had  not  re- 
'  course  to  original  sin  for  explaining  all  the  flifficulties  of 
'  the  Manichees :  it  might  have  served  him  for  a  general 
'  solution  of  almost  all  their  objections  :  for  there  is  no  longer 
■  any  difficulty  to  comprehend,  why  man  is  carried  to  evil, 
'  why  he  suffers,  why  he  is  subject  to  hunger,  pain,  diseases, 
'  death,  when  once  original  sin  is  admitted  :  nevertheless  he 
'  has  made  no  use  of  this  doctrine  to  explain  these  questions, 

''  Quinimo  plurima  inverse  ordine  turbata  intricatissima  invenimus.  Prima 
fronte  periisse  librum  tertium  autumabam. — Sed  perlegendo  Grseca,  apparuit 
nobis  ille  liber  tertius  integer,  quern  primo  libro  inseruerat  amanuensis.  Deinde 
truncatus  multis  in  locis  videbatur  primus  liber.  Sed  discerpta  resarcire,  et  in 
genuinura  ordinem  restituere  conati  sumus,  non  modo  argumentorum  seriera 
secuti,  sed  etiam  proposito  Serapionis  scopo,  quern  ipse  delineaverat,  sequentes. 
Basnag.  Animadv.  ap.  Canis.  Lect.  T.  i.  p.  58. 

'  Observandum  est  igitur,  periisse  Commentarios  Titi  in  Lucam,  sed  frag- 
menta  tantum,  sive  Catenam  Graecorum  Patrum  sub  ejus  nomine  protrudi. 
Basn.  ib.  p.  57.  ■"  Commentarius  in  Lucam  sub  Titi  nomine 

editus — non  est  hujus  Titi,  sed  scriptoris  Cyrillo  Alexandrino,  ac  fortasse 
saeculo  sexto,  junioiis,  &c.     Fabr.  Bib.  Or.  T.  8.  p.  413. 

"  Vid.  Tillem.  ubi  supra,  p.  670.  "  Tillem.  ubi  supr.  p.  671. 

P  Du  Pm,  Bibl.  des  Aut.  Ec.  T.  2.  p.  128.  a  Amsterdam. 
VOL,    III.  T 


274  Credibility  of  (he  Gospel  History. 

'  but  examines  them  like  a  philosopher.  He  has  not  so 
'  much  as  mentioned  the  grace  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  he  seems 
'  to  have  supposed  that  man  can  of  himself  do  good  as  well 
'  as  evil.' 

James  Basnage,  the  first  editor  of  Titus  in  Greek  and 
Latin,  speaks'i  to  the  like  purpose.  And  indeed  it  is  com- 
monly said  that'  Augustine  himself,  in  his  book  against  the 
Manichees,  spoke  of  man's  free-will  just  as  Titus  and  Didy- 
mus,  and  other  Greeks  did. 

I  ought  now  briefly  to  observe  this  writer's  testimony  to 
the  books  of  the  New  Testament.  He  frequently  quotes  the 
gospels,  and  the  epistles  of  St.  Paul,  particularly  that  to  the 
Hebrews :  he  quotes'  the  first  words  of  the  epistle,  and  after- 
wards, in  another  place,  a  ^  large  part  of  the  first  chapter, 
expressly  as  Paul's. 

in  one"  short  paragraph  he  quotes  the  beginning-  of  St. 
Matthew's  and  St.  Mark's  gospels,  and  the  sixth  and  seventh 
verses  of  the  first  chapter  of  St.  John,  and  cites  all  those 
several  evangelists  by  name. 

Titus  likewise  quotes^  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles.  I  shall 
have  occasion  to  take  particular  notice  of  the  passage  here- 
after. 

He  has  little  or  nothing  out  of  the  catholic  epistles  or  the 
Apocalypse. 

1  have  observed  in  this  author  these  general  divisions  of 
scripture;  '  the"^  law  and  the  prophets:'  'the''  law,  the 
'  gospel,  and  Paul:'  and  presently  afterwards,  '  the>  law, 
'  our  Saviour,  and  the  apostle,'  often,  '  law  ^  and  gospel ' 
for  Old  and  New  Testament. 

His  respect  for  the  scriptures  of  the  Old  and  New  Testa- 
ment is  manifest;  I  need  not  allege  particular  passag;es. 
At  the  beginning  of  his  work  he  says:  '  We''  learn  the  way 

1  Non  modo  siluit  de  peccato  original!,  quo  facile  necessitatcm  et  aequitatem 
pcenariim  fiimare  poterat ;  sed  virtutem  a  ralionis  exercitatione  hominisque 
electione  pendere  absque  ulla  Christi  gratia  affimiabat.  Basn.  ap.  Canis.  Lect. 
T.  i.  p.  57.  '  Libertatem  arbitrii  tarn  ad  bonum  quam  ab  malum 

hommi  lapso  tribuit  [Didymus  :]  nee  mirum,  omnes  enira  ad  versus  Manichaeos 
dL'jputantes,  ne  Augustine  quidem  excepto,  banc  sententiam  propugnaverunt. 
Id.  lb.   p.  199.  '    Kai  6  UavXog  oiCi — ypaipwv  fiiv  'E^paiotc 

ovTwg  Xeyii,  TloXv^inwg  kui  TToXvrpOTrwg,  k.  X.  Tit.  contr.  Manich.  1.  3.  ap. 
Cams.  Lect.  T.  i.  p.  'l42.  '  lb.  p.  153. 

"  lb.  p.  141.  "   lb.  p.  155.  "   ToffavTtjv  yni> 

iTnyiiKuuv  TH  vojih  kui  tojv  TrpotptjTojv  TrtiToir]Tai  o  aujTijp,  k.  \.  1.  3.  p.   140. 

"    EiTTtvo  vofioQ — iiTTt  TO  ivciyjiKiov — ipotiTiv  o  VlavXog. — ib.  p.  153.  in. 

^'   KcavtvoriTcn — €k  vo/ih,  kcu  aojrtfpog,  km  airoroXa.  ib.  p.  153. 

'  Vid.  lb.  p.  154.  in. 

*  AXX'  avTT]v  Tr)c,  ctXriOuaQ  ttjv  iiSov,  ek  rt  nov  aytuv  ypa<pwv,  Kcii  tidv  koivmv 
ivvoiwv  txovTfc.  1.  i.  p.  GO. 


The  Manichces.     Sect.  I.  275 

'  of  truth  from  tlie  holy  scripture,  and  the  common  prin- 
'  ciples  of  reason.' 

G.  This  is  not  a  proper  time  or  place  for  me  to  give  a 
distinct  account  of  JJidyinus  of  Alexandria,  wlio  flourished 
about  the  year  370,  though  we  still  have''  a  tract  ag-ainst 
the  Manichees,  and  in  its  original  Greek  lang-uage,  which  is 
generally  allowed  to  be'^^  his. 

I  shall  only  say  that  here  are  no  hard  names.  Didymus 
must  have  been  naturally  of  a  mild  temper;  or  the  principles 
of  reason  and  relig-ion  had  softened  him,  and  produced  in 
him  g-entleness  and  long-suffering":  npon  this  account,  as 
well  as  others,  this  piece  deserves  to  be  commended.  This 
character  belongs  to  so  few  writings  in  the  Manichcean  con- 
troversy,  that  one  cannot  forbear  taking  notice  of  it.  Most 
other  authors  with  their  arguments  have  mingled  bitter 
invectives  and  the  harshest  expressions  that  can  be  thouoht 
of.  In  such  kind  of  language  none  have  exceeded  that 
polite  and  orthodox  M'riter  Photius,  patriarch  of  Constanti- 
nople: and  honest  Serapion,  at  the  begiiming  of  his  work, 
naming-  Valentinus,  and  Marcion,  and  some  other  ancient 
heretics,  affirms  that  '  the"^  Manichsean  wickedness  and 
'  absurdity  had  so  far  outgone  all  other  things  of  the  kind, 
'  as  to  make  them  appear  almost  innocent.'  Epiphanius® 
calls  this  the  most  venomous  of  all  heresies;  and  to  the  like 
purpose  speaks^  Cyril.  However  it  must  be  owned  that 
hard  names  have  been  given  to  all  sorts  of  heretics ;  nor  is  it 
easy  to  say  which  is  the  worst  heresy :  perhaps  men  are  apt 
to  think  that  so  which  they  are  opposing.  Athnnasius^ 
represents  Arianism  as  the  most  impious  of  all  heresies,  not 
excepting-  the  Manichees ;  for  they  and  the  Valentinians  are 
expressly  named  by  him  just  before. 

7.  All  these  before-mentioned  writers  and  others  are  in 
Fabricius.  But  I  think  it  not  amiss  to  take  notice  here  of 
some  authors  omitted  in  his  Catalogue. 

1.  The  anonymous  author  of  A  History  of  the  Heresy  of 
the  Manichees;  a  small  piece  published  by  Mr.  Pfaff"  with 
the  Epitome  of  Lactantius. 

**  Ap.  Basnag.  Canis.  Lect.  p.  204,  &c. 

^  Vid.  Cav.  Hist.  Lit.  in  Didymo.  Basnag.  ap.  Canis.  lect.  p.  203.     Tillem. 
Mem.  Ec.  T.  x.  Didyme,  Art.  iv.  in  fin.  Fabr.  Bib.  Gr.  T.8.  p.  353. 

^   TeXivraiov  Si  f/crpw/ia  ttiq  Trovijfjinc  vaffac  rag  aXKag  irovtipiag  Efvripag 
mrocuKaaa,  >j  rs  Manxain  7rpo/jX0s  ^avia-  k.  \.  Scrap,  contr.  Manich.  p.  44.  m. 

^   Mtro  r/jv  yiox^Tipav  TavTr)v,  Kai  oifioXov  vTnp  iraaav  cuoiaiv  Kai  tpTrtrioStj 
rs  Mavi,—Srt]pio^o\uiv. — H.  97.  n.  1.  ^  Vid.  Cyr.  Cat.  16. 

n.  9.  p.  247.  B   Ot  ^£  Apuavoi  tujv  fitv  aXXwv  wpttrnov  tiai 

To\fii]poTtpoi,  Kai  jUKpoTipag  iaVTwv  aSe\<png  mrtSti^av  SKUvac,  TrXtov  avTwv 
aat^Hvrtg)     Ath.  Hist.  Arian.  ad  Mon.  T.  i.  p.  384.  A. 

r  2 


276  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

2.  The  anonymous  author  De  Vera  Circumcisione,  in  the 
appendix  of  Jerom's  Morks,  more  than  once  opposeth  the 
Manichees.''  A  distinct  account  of  this  piece  >vas  given" 
formerly. 

3.  Arius  deserved  a  place  in  that  Catalogue,  if  upon  no 
other  account,  for  the  sake  of  the  early  mention  of  the  Mani- 
chsean  doctrine  concerning''  the  Son,  in  a  letter  written 
before  the  council  of  Nice. 

4.  Nor  has  Fabricius  got  Chrysostom,  though  that  great 
orator  often  touches  upon  this  point.  Montfau^on  thought 
it  somewhat  remarkable  that  he  did  so  frequently  oppose 
this  error ;  and  therefore  takes  particular  notice  of  it  in' 
his  prefaces  to  several  of  the  volumes  of  St.  Chrysostom's 
works. 

5.  St.  Jerom  likewise  frequently  mentions  and  argues 
against  the  Manichees.  I  shall  often  quote  him  in  writing 
their  history. 

6.  Pelagius,  in  his  Commentaries  upon  St.  Paul's  epistles, 
confutes  them  several ""  times. 

7.  Rufinus,  upon  the  Creed,  distinctly  censures  the  Mani- 
chees, together  with  divers  others  called  heretics. 

8.  To  all  these  and  others,  might  be  added,  from  Asseman, 
divers  Syrian  authors. 

1.  The"  Edessen  Chronicle. 

2.  Ephrem,  placed  by  Cave  at  the  year  370,  who  in  his 
work  Against  all  Heresies"  particularly  attacked  the  Mani- 
chees. 

3.  Asseman  mentions  several  others,  whose?  names  are  in 
the  margin. 

III.  All  these  names  of  eminent  writers  upon  this  point 
are  sufficient  to  assure  us  that  there  were  Manichees  in  many 

^  quam  [vitam]  ManicliEei  non  videntes  in  carne,  Ariani  non  intelli- 

gentes  in  spiritu. — ap.  Hieron.  opp.  T.  v.  p.  154,  et  passim. 

'   See  p.  1 1 0,  1 1 1 .  ^   sS'  wc  Mavi^atoc  f-^pog  oiioamov  ts 

Tlarpog  to  ytvifia  Hcsr]yr\(jaTO.  Ap.  Epiph.  H.  69.  c.  7. 

'  Anomoeorum  impiefatem  saepe  oppugnat  et  insectatiir  Chrj-sostomus. — 
Sed,  quod  fortasse  miretur  quispiam,  saepius  in  Manichseos  invehiter. — Licet 
enim  hasc  haeresis  non  tantas  turbas  daret,  quanta^  hand  ita  pridem  dederant 
Anomcei,  attamen  magno  illi  numero  erant,  malumque  serpebat  in  dies  latius. 
Proef.  ad  Chrys.  T.  7.  n.  iii. 

*"  Verum  totus  hie  locus  contra  Manichseos  facit,  ubi  dicit,  quod  evangelium 
ante  sit  promissum — et  quod  Christus  secundum  carnem  ex  Da%'id  stirpe. 
Pelag.  in  Ep.  ad  Rom.  c.  i.  ver.  1,  2.  ap.  Hieron.  opp.  T.  v.  p.  926.  Vid.  et 
p.  928,  et  951.  "  Ap.  Asseman.  Bib.  Or.  T.  i.  p.  393. 

°  Refellit  S.  Doctor  omnes  generatim  hsereses  ;  speciatim  autem  Bardesanis, 
Marcionis,  et  Manichaei.     Assem.  ib.  p.  118.  Conf.  T.  3.  P.  i.  p.  63. 

p  Hinc  adversus  earn  sectam,  praeter  Graecos  et  Latinos  patres,  Syri  complures 
scripsere ;  Ephraem,  Paulonas,  Daniel  Rhesinae,  Natanael,  et  Bud  Periodeutes, 
de  quibus  Sobensis  in  hoc  catalogo.  Ib.  T.  3.  P.  i.  p.  220. 


The  Manichces.     Sect,   I.  277 

parts  of  the  world  ;  but  it  does  not  appear  that  they  were 
any  Avhere  numerous:  this  may  be  perceived  from  St. 
Augustine,  who  had  occasion  to  be  well  acquainted  with 
them.  He  says  to  them  :  '  You'i  are  a  very  few,  and  almost 
'  none  at  all :'  and  adds,  that  though  good  men  were  scarce, 
there  were  vastly  more  truly  good  men  among  the  catholics 
than  all  the  Manichces,  whether  good  or  bad.  They  some- 
times argued  that  they  were  the  few  whom  our  Lord  speaks 
of,as  walking  in  the  narrow  way  that  leads  to  life  :  but  Augus- 
tine cautions  them"^  against  being  deceived  by  such  an  argu- 
ment, however  specious  it  might  appear.  In  another  place 
he  magnifies^  the  number  of  the  catholics  above  the  small 
number  of  their  sect.  He  says  that  'Fortunatus,  a  Mani- 
choean  presbyter,  seduced  people  enough  at  Hippo  to  induce 
him  to  live  there  a  good  while;  which,  however,  I  think, 
does  not  lead  us  to  suppose  that  the  number  of  his  converts 
was  very  great.  I  need  not  insist  on  any  more  passages  of 
Augustine  where"  he  speaks  of  their  small  number. 

IV.  Fabricius  has  likewise  a  catalogue''  of  the  names  of 
Manichees  mentioned  by  ancient  writers.  I  shall  take  notice 
of  a  few  only. 

1.  Here  again  occurs  Alexander  of  Lycopolis;  of  whom 
I  need  not  say  any  thing  more  than  I  have  done. 

2.  Augustine,  a  wit  of  the  first  order,  and  a  principal 
glory  of  the  country  of  Africa,  who  was  entangled  in  this 
opinion,  and  for  about  nine  years  was  among  the  auditors  of 
the  Manichees,  from  the  nineteenth  to  the  twenty-eighth  or 
twenty-ninth  year  of  his  age;  at  which  time  suspicions  con- 
cerning the  truth  of  their  doctrine  arose  in  his  mind,  and  in- 
creased, until  he  quite  forsook  them.  Afterwards  he  wrote 
against  them  at  several  times  with  great  applause  and  success. 

I  have  expressed  myself  with  no  greater  exactness  con- 

1  Quid  autem  ?  inter  vos,  in  tam  exiguo  et  pene  nullo  numero  vestro,  nonne 

plerique  sunt  tales ?  Quae  tamen  paucitas  sanctorum  et  fidelium — perse 

ipsam  tantam  massam  frumenti  facit,  ut  omnes  probos  et  reprobos  vestros,  quos 
pariter  Veritas  reprobat,  incompambili  multitudine  superat.  Contr.  Faust.  I.  20. 
c.  23.  ■■  Fuge  ista,  obsecro  ;  non  te  decipiat  species  paucitatis, 

quoniam  ipse  Dominus  dixit,  angustam  viain  esse  paucorum.  Contr.  Secundin. 

cap.  2C.  * velilisque  intelligi   in  tanta  vestra  paucitate 

latere  nescio  quos,  qui  sua  praecepta  custodiunt,  et  in  tanta  catholica  multi- 
tudine non  velitis  ?  De  Mor.  Manich.  cap.  ult.  fin. 

'  Eodem  tempore  presbyterii  mei,  contra  Fortunatum  quemdam,  Mani- 
chaeorum  presbyterum,  disputavi,  qui  plurimum  temporis  apud  Hipponem 
vixerat,  seduxeratque  tam  multos  ut  propter  illos  ibi  eura  delectaret  habitare. 
Retr.  1.  2.  c.  14.  "  Cum  in  ista  paucitate  magnas  patiamini 

angustias,  dum  a  vobis  exigitur  vel  unus  ex  iis  quos  electos  vocatis,  qui  prae- 
cepta ilia  custodiat.     De  Mor.  Ec.  Cath.  c.  34. 

'  Ap.  Bib.  Gr.  T.  v,  p.  287—289. 


278  Credibilily  of  the  Gospel  History. 

cernino:  the  time  of  Auoustine's  beino-  in  the  Manichaean 
scheme,  because  he  himself  speaks  differently :  sometimes  his 
expression  is  that  he  was  with  them^*"  almost  nine  years,  at 
another  time^  full  nine  years  :  sometimes  he  says  that  when 
the  difficulties  of  their  scheme  perplexed  him,  he  wasy  in 
the  twenty-eighth,  at  other  times ^  in  the  twenty-ninth  year 
of  his  age ;  nay,  he  speaks  of  his  beings  in  the  thirtieth  year 
of  his  age,  or  almost  thirty  years  old,  before  his  eyes  were 
opened. 

The  reason  of  this  different  way  of  speaking-  seems  to  be 
that  his  change  was  gradual:  for  the  space  of  nine  years, 
or  very  near  it,  from  the  nineteenth  year  of  his  life,  he  was 
entirely*^  theirs;  in  the  twenty-eighth  or  twenty-ninth  year 
of  his  ag-e  doubts  arose  in  his  mind  ;  about  the  end  of  which 
last  year"^  he  seems  to  have  determined  to  be  no  longer  a 
Manichee ;  in  the  next  year,  the  thirtieth  of  his  life,  when 
his  mother  came  to  him  at  Milan,  he  was  only'^  not  a  Mani- 
chee ;  nay,  in  his  thirty-first  year  he  had  not  a*"  clear  notion 
of  the  origin  of  natural  and  moral  evil ;  and  it  was  not  till 
the  thirty-third  year  of  his  age  that  he  was  baptized. 

^'  Nam  novem  ferme  anni  seculi  sunt,  quibus  ego  in  illo  limo  profundi  ac 
tenebris  falsitatis, — volutatus  sum.  Confess.  1.  3.  c.  xi.  n.  20.  Et  per  annos 
ferme  novem,  quibus  eos  animo  vagabundus  audivi,  nimis  extento  desiderio 
expectabam  istum  Faustum.  ib.  1.  5.  c.  vi.  n.  10.  Quid  enim  me  aliud  coge- 
bat,  annos  fere  novem, — homines  lUos  sequi  ac  diligenter  audire —  ?  De  Util. 
Cred.  cap.  i.  n.  2.  "  Novem  annos  totos  magna  cura  et  diligentia 

vos  audivi.  De  Mor.  Manich.  c.  19.  n.  68. 

y  Per  idem  tempus  annorum  novem,  ab  undevicesimo  anno  setatis  meae, 
usque  ad  duodetricesimum  seducebamur  et  seducebamus.     Confess.  1.  4.  c.  i. 

'^  Proloquar  in  conspectu  Dei  mci  annum  ilium  undetrigesimum  aetatis  meae. 
Jam  venerat  Carthaginem  quidam  Manichaeorum  episcopus,  Faustus  nomine, 
&c.  Confess.  1.  5.  c.  3. 

*  Et  ecce  jam  tricenarium  setatem  gerebam,  in  eodem  luto  haesitans,— dum 
dico,  Cras  inveniam.  Ecce  manifestum  apparebit,  et  tenebo.  Ecce  Faustus 
veniet,  et  exponet  omnia.  Confess.  1.  6.  c.  xi.  n.  18. 

*•  Audite  doctos  ecclesiae  catholicae  viros  tania  pace  animi,  et  eo  voto  quo 
ego  vos  audivi-.  nihil  0])us  erit  novem  annis,  quibus  me  ludificastis.  Longe 
omnino,  longe  breviore  tempore,  ()uid  intersit  inter  veritatem  vanitatemque, 
cernetis.  De  M.  E.  C.  cap   18.  n.  34. 

•^  Dubitans  de  omnibus,  atque  inter  omnia  fluctuans,  Manichaeos  quidem 
relinqucndos  esse  decrevi ;  non  arbitrans  eo  tempore  dubitationis  meae  in  ilia 

secta  mihi  permanendum  esse Statui  ergo  tamdiu  esse  catechumenus  in  catho- 

lica  ecclesia,  mihi  a  parentibus  commendata,  donee  aliquid  certi  eluceret,  quo 
cursum  dirigerem.     Confess.  1.  5.  c.  ult.  n.  25. 

^  Et  invenit  me  periclitantem  quidem  graviter  desperatione  indagandae 
verilatis.  Sed  tamen  cum  ei  indicassem,  non  me  ([uidem  jam  esse  Manichaeum, 
sed  neque  catholicum  christianum. — Ih.  1.  6.  c.  i.  n.  1. 

"  Etmtendebam  ut  ccrnerem  quod  audiebam,  libcrum  voluntatis  arbitrium 
caasam  csseut  male  faceremus,  et  rectum  judicium  tuum  ut  paterenuir,  et  earn 
liquide  cernere  non  valebam.  lb.  I.  7.  c.  3.  n.  5. 


The  Manichces.     Sect.  I.  279 

Whilst  Augustine  was  among-  the  Manichees  he  promoted 
their  interest  considerably,  and'  brought  over  divers  to  the 
same  opinion  ;  men  of  good  condition,  and  briglst  parts,  and 
some  of  them  addicted  to  a  studious  course  of  life:  as  »Aly- 
pius,  ^'Romanianus,  and  'Honoratus. 

3.  Adimantus,  said  to  have  been  a  disciple  of  Mani,  wrote'' 
a  book  against  the  law  and  the  prophets,  endeavouring  to 
show  that  the  gospels  and  epistles  were  contrary  to  them  ; 
or,  in  other  words,  the  disagreement  between  the  Old  and 
New  Testament,  and  that  consequently  the  former  could  not 
be  of  God.  This  book  Augustine  confuted  In  a  distinct 
piece,  still  extant :  and  he'  elsewhere  occasionally  confutes 
this  writer's  objections  against  the  Old  Testament. 

In  another  place  he  says  that'"  Adimantus  was  that  disci- 
ple of  Manichee  who  was  also  called  Addas.  Beausobre" 
thinks  this  a  mistake  of  Augustine,  because  the  Greek 
writers  distinguish  between  Addas  and  Adimantus:  but 
perhaps  Augustine  had  good  reason  for  what  he  said. 
Toutee,  the  Benedictine  editor  of  St.  Cyril,  assents"  to  Au- 
gustine ;  as  doesi'  Tillemont,  without  hesitation.  Cave 
supposed*!  Addas  and  Adimantus  to  have  been  two  different 
persons:  T  put  his  words  at  the  bottom  of  the  page.  I  shall 
hereafter  take  some  farther  notice  of  the  names  of  those  who 
are  said  to  have  been  disciples  of  Mani. 

f seducebainur  et  seducebamus — et  sectabar  ista,  atque  faciebam  cum 

amicis  meis,  per  me  ac  mecum  deccptis.  Confess.  1.  4.  cap.  i.  Vid.  ib.  cap.  4. 
n.  7.  s  Et  audire  me  rursus  incipiens,  ilia  mcciim  super- 

stitione  involutus  est,  amans  in  Manichaeis  ostentationem  continentiae,  quam 
verani  et  germanam  putabat.  Conf.  1.  6.  c.  7.  n.  12.  vid.  ib.  1.  1 1. 

^  Ipsa  me  penitus  ab  ilia  superstitione,  in  quam  te  mecum  prsecipitem 
dederam,  liberavit.  Contr.  Academicos,  ad  Roman.  1.  1.  c.  i.  n.  3. 

'  Tu  nondum  christianus,  qui  hortatu  meo,  cum  eos  vehementer  exsecra- 
reris,  vix  adductus  es,  ut  audiendi  tibi  atque  explorandi  videreritur. — De  Util. 
Cred.  cap.  i.  n.  2. 

^  Eodem  tempore  venerunt  in  manus  meas  quaedam  disputationes  Adimanli, 
qui  fuerat  Manichaei  discipulus,  quas  conscripsit  adversus  legem  et  prophetas, 
velut  contraria  eis  evangelica  et  apostolica  scripta  demonstrare  conatus.     Huic 
^o  respondi.  Aug,  Retract.  1.  i.  c.  22. 
'  Vid.  Aug.  in  Psalm.  Serm.  12.  cap.  i. 

•"  Jam  illud  aliud  quod  in  eodem  codice  scribi  coeperat,  Adimanli  opus  est, 
illius  discipuli  Manichaei,  qui  prtenomine  Addas  dictus  est ;  ubi  de  ntroque 
Testamento  velut  inter  se  contraria  testimonia  proferuntur  versipelli  dolositate. 
Aug.  Contr.  Adv.  Leg.  et  Proph.  1.  2.  cap.  ult.  n.  4 1. 

"  Beaus.  ib.T.  i.  p.  432.  not.  (G.)  "  Vid.  Cyril.  Cat.  vi.  c.  13. 

cioL  (t)  P  Mem.  T.  iv.  Les  Manich.  Art.  14.  in. 

■i  Diversus  ab  Adda  nostro  erat  Adimantus  ille,  cujus  toties  apud  Augusti- 
num  occurrit  mentio,  quemque  ipse  peculiari  opere  refutavit.  In  catalogo  enini 
discipulorum  Manelis,  tum  apud  IVtrum  Sicukim,  turn  apud  formulae  Cotele- 
rianas  et  Tollianae  auctorem  distincle  recensentur,  etsi  in  alia  sententia  me  olim 
fu;sse  fateor,  et  mecum  ipse  Augustiaus.  Cav.  H.  L.  T.  i.  p.  145. 


280  Credibdiiy  of  (he  Gospd  History. 

Adimantus  is  niiicli  admired  by  "^  FausUis  ;  he  is  next  in 
liis  esteem  to  JMani  himself,  which  Augustine*  fails  not  to 
observe:  Beausobre  therefore  concludes  that'  Adimantus 
was  the  apostle  of  Mani,  who  planted  Manichi^eism  in  Africa  : 
but  to  me  this  appears  a  conjecture  without  foundation. 
Augustine  has"  often  mentioned  this  man,  but  says  nothing 
of  that  kind  of  him.  He  says  he^  was  a  disciple  of  Mani, 
and  much  extolled,  as  having  been  an  eminent  teacher  of 
that  sect;  and"  that  it  was  commonly  said  he  Avas  a  follower 
of  Mani  in  his  lifetime;  but  he  nowhere  intimates  that  they 
gave  out  that  Africa  was  indebted  to  Adimantus  for  his  pre- 
sence or  personal  instructions. 

If  Adimantus  and  Addas  be  two  names  of  one  and  the 
same  person,  as  Augustine  supposed,  it  may  be  reckoned 
very  probable  that  he  was  a  disciple  of  Mani  in  his  lifetime, 
or  however,  one  of  the  most  early  abettors  of  his  principles 
afterwards  :  for  according  to  the  Dispute  ascribed  to  Arche- 
laus,  the  three  chief  disciples  of  Mani  were''  Thomas,  Addas, 
and  Hermas :  in  Cyrils  their  names  are  Thomas,  Baddas, 
and  Hermas;  in  Epiphanius'  Thomas,  Hermias,  Addas;  in 
Thcodoref  Aldas,  (by  mistake  of  transcribers  probably  for 
Addas,)  Thomas,  and  Hermas.  I  need  not  add  any  more 
authors. 

Whether  Adimantus  be  the  same  person  as  Addas  or  not, 
it  is  fit  I  should  take  notice  of  what  Photius  writes  in  his 
extracts  out  of  p[eraclean.  '  That''  author  said  that  Diodo- 
rus  of  Tarsus,  in  his  first  seven  books,  really  argued  against 
a  work  of  Addas,  called  Modion,  whilst  he  thought  he  had 
been  overthrowing  the  living  gospel  of  Manichee  himself.' 
That  title  is  supposed  to  have  been  taken  from  Mark  iv.  21. 

Here  then  is  a  book  of  Addas  ;  was  it  the  same  Avith  that 
of  Adimantus,  confuted  by  Augustine?  We  cannot  be  ab- 

■"  a  doctispimo  scilicet,  et  solo  nobis  post  beatum  patrem  nostrum 

Manichaeum  studendo  [al.  stupendo]  Adimanto.  Faust.  1.  i.  c.  2.  ap.  August. 
T.  8.  *  Faustus  sic  niiratur  Adimantum,  ut  ei  solum  piaeferat 

Manichaeum.  Contr.  Faust.  1.  C.  c.  6.  '  Beaus.  ib.  T.  i.  p.  433. 

"  Confr.  Adimanf.  c.  12.  n.  2.  c.  13.  n.  1,  et  4,  et  passim. 

^  Quid  (juod  etiam  iiisultare  ausus  est  populo  Israel  Adimantus,  unus  ex 
discipulis  Manichaei,  quern  magnum  doctorem  illius  sectse  fuisse  comme- 
morant.  Conlr.  Adim,  c.  12.  n.  2.  "  Si  autem  recenseatis  quae 

contra  Faustum  Manicha-um  scripsimus,  et  contra  Adimantum,  qui  Manichaei 
sectator  cum  ille  viveret  fuisse  jactatur.  Contr.  Adv.  Leg.  et  Pr.  c.  12. 

"  Acquisivit  etiam  discipulos  tres,  quorum  nomina  sunt  \\xc,  Thomas, 
Addas,  et  Hermas.  Arch.  Disp.  c.  53.  p.  98.  ^  Cat.  vi.  c.  31.  p.  107. 

'•  Hder.  G.5.  c.  v.  et  xii.  *  Haer.  Fab.  1.  i.  c.  2G.  p.  214.  C. 

''  'Of  Sia  fiiv  rwv  irpwroiV  /3i/3\twv  tVTa  to  th  M«v(x«'«  ^wv  ivayyiKwv 
iivnTptnti'  H  Tvy)(uvii  St  ekhvh,  aWa  avuTpntu  to  vno  ASSa  yiypaft^evot',  6 
ticikuTca  Moliov.  Cod.  85.  p.  204. 


Tlic  Manichecs.     Sect.  I.  281 

solutely  certain;  but  possibly  it  was.  The  book  used  iu 
ACriea  might  be  a  J^atiii  transhuion  of  the  Greek  original  ; 
and  Addas  might  ))e  more  generally  called  Adiuiantus  by 
the  Latins,  as  Mani  himself,  who  for  the  most  part  is  called 
Manes  by  the  Greeks,  is  generally  called  Manchseus  by  the 
Latins.  .We  saw  before  that  Adimantus  and  his  book  Mere 
much  esteemed  by  the  Manichces  in  Africa.  If  what  Hera- 
clean  says  of  Diodorus  of  Tarsus  be  true,  we  have  also  proof 
of  the  great  regard  paid  to  the  book  of  Addas  in  Asia  ;  it  must 
have  been  conmion  there,  and  in  high  esteem ;  otherwise 
Diodorus  had  not  allotted  his  first  seven  books  to  the  con- 
futation of  it,  and  that  upon  the  supposition  of  its  being 
Mani's  gospel. 

Hcraclean  ascribes  a  like  mistake  to*^  Titus  of  Bostra.  I 
rather  think  that  Titus  was  not  mistaken  :  he  knew  well 
enough  whom  he  argued  against;  but  he  reckoned  it  to  bo 
one  and  the  same  thino*  to  confute  the  master  or  a  chief  dis- 
ciple.  The  objections  he  answered  were  sometimes  taken 
from  Mani  himself,  sometimes  from  Addas  ;  but  he  did  not 
Judge  it  needful  expressly  to  distinguish  his  authors.  Titus 
has  himself  more  than  once  intimated,  that<^  he  argued 
against  somebody  beside  Mani  himself,  though  he  does  not 
name  the  author.  However  here  is  another  proof  of  the 
commonness  of  the  book  of  Addas,  and  of  the  esteem  it 
was  in. 

Possibly  this  book  was  not  always  fully  titled,  or  in- 
scribed, exactly  in  the  same  manner  :  and  Augustine,  a  Latin 
in  Africa,  might  mean,  and  have  before  him,  the  same  book 
that  was  used  by  Diodorus  and  Titus ;  though  he  does  not 
call  it  the  Modion  of  Addas,  but  Dissertations  of  Adimantus. 

Upon  the  whole,  I  think  it  probable  that  Addas  and  Adi- 
mantus are  only  two  names  of  one  and  the  same  person  ;  and 
that  the  book  of  Adimantus,  which  (as  appears  from  Faustus 
and  Augustine)  was  famous  in  Africa,  is  the  same  with  that 
of  Addas,  which  was  used  by  the  Manichees  in  Asia.  In 
short,  this  book  was  every  where  considered  by  that  sect 
as  one  of  the  best  books  they  had ;  and  I  wish  we  had  it 
too. 

4.  We  are  indebted  to  Photius  for  the  knowledge  of 
another  Manichcean  writer  named  Agapius ;  but  his  age  is 
uncertain.     Photius  says  that"   Agapius  seems  to  oppose 

■^   Phot.  Cod.  85.  **   il)Q  yt  ra  m  Movivtoq  (njyypaipojv 

^Tjaiv.  Tit.  contr.  Manich.  1.  i.  p.  71.  infr.  m. —  ^tjm  St  ttqoc  Xe^iv  cKtivog,  t} 
tTipogriQ  riov  an  tKtn'H,  tTriypa>l/ag  to  KttpaXaiov  Trtpi  rrfg  av9pwTrivi]Q  TTQioro- 
TrXn-rtac.   lb.  1.  3.  p.  137. 

*   Map^tffOat  ^£  ^OK£i  Trpoc  rtjv  Evvofiis  KaKoSo^iav.  Cod.  179.  p.  405. 


282  Credibility  of  ihe  Gospel  Uislury. 

the  error  of  Eunoiiiiiis,  who  flourished  about  the  year  300. 
But  those  words  need  not  be  understood  to  mean  any  more 
than'  that  his  sentiments  were  different  from  those  of  Euno- 
mius,  insomuch  that  he  seemed  to  oppose  them:  as  indeed 
it  is  allowed  that  the  Manichrean  doctrine  concernino-  the 
Trinity  was  different  from  that  of  the  Arians. 

However,  what  Photius  says=  of  this  writers  confessing' 
a  consubstantial  Trinity,  and  agreeing  mightily  in  expres- 
sion with  tlie  orthodox  christians,  may  be  an  argument  for 
his  liaving-  lived  and  written  after  the  Nicene  council ;  for- 
asmuch as  it  is  very  common  with  Photius  to  find  in  eccle- 
siastical authors,  who  lived  before  that  council,  many  forms 
of  expression  different  from  those  in  use  afterwards. 

Photius  speaks  of  a  piece,  or,  as  he  is  generally  under- 
stood, of  two  pieces  of'  Agapius  ;  one  a  work  of  three-and- 
twenty  books,  another  consisting  of  a  hundred-and-two 
chapters,  inscribed  to  a  woman  of  the  same  sect,  named 
Urania  :  but  j)erhaps  that  is  a  fictitious  name  and  character. 
If  those  books  were  extant  they  would  be  very  curious.  It 
may  be  collected  from  the  account  which  Photius  gives 
of  them,  that  they  would  have  furnished  us  with  a  good 
knowledge  of  the  Manichsean  scheme;  for  most,  if  not  all 
their  princij)les,  seem  to  have  been  there  treated. 

In  anotherwork  Photius, reckoning*  up  the  twelve  disciples 
of  Mani,  mentions'  Agapius,  author  of  the  Heptalogus,  as 
does  likewise''  Peter  of  Sicily:  this  book  is  also  in  the' 
Anathemas  against  the  Manichees,  or  Form  of  abjuring 
Manichaeisin.  Timothy,  presbyter  of  Constantinople,  men- 
tions, perhaps  by  mistake,  the'"  Heptalogus  of  Alogius:  it 
is  generally  supposed  that"  this  is  another  book  of  the  same 
Agapius,  who  wrote  the  other  two  beforementioned  ;  if  so, 
Agapius  wrote  three  books  in  defence  of  the  Manichocan 
principles.  Whether  this  computation  be  right  I  cannot 
tell  ;  but  I  can  by  no  means  allow  that  the  placing*  Agapius 
among  the  twelve  disciples  of  Mani  affords  any  help  for 
settling  this  age:  because  I  do  not  admit  the  authority  of 

f  Vid.  Cav.  Diss,  de  Scriplor.  incert.  IE\.  et  Beaus.  Hist,  de  Manich.  T.  i.  p. 
434.  6   Kai  T^iaCia  £e  bfionaiov  o  KarapciTog  Xfyti  fxtv  vfioXoyiiv. 

Cod.  170.  p.  404.  in.   Tac  jxtv  tojv  tvatpiov  Xi^eiQ  avvofioKoyMv.  ib.  iiifr.  p.  7. 

*" Ay«7n«  /3i/3Xtoj/,  Xoyotijiia  TTtpitxov  rpia  icai  tiKooi,  icai  irtQa  Ki<pa\aia 

<;;;0f)'  Svo  KOI  Ikutoi'.  Cod.  17D.  p.  40).  '  — — koi  AyainoQ,  6 

Ttjv'ETTTaXoyov  KaXHi^i.nn)v  avvTcilac,.  I'hot.  contr.  Manich.  1.  i.  c.  14. 

"  Pet.  S.c.  de  Manich.  ap.  B.  K  P.  T.  IG.  p.  758.  B. 

'  Ap.  Fabr.  Ilippolyt.  T.  2.  p.  203.  et  Cotel.  not.  ad  Recogn.  Clcni.  1.  4. 
c.  27,  et  Toil.  Insign.  Ital.  p.  142.  '"  Vid.  Timoth.  m  Fabr. 

Cod.  Apocr.  N.  T.  T.  i.  p.  138,  139,  et  Meursii  Var.  Divin.  p.  1 17. 

"  Vid.  Cav.  et  Beaus.  iibi  supra. 


The  Munichccs.     Sect.  I.  283 

the  Catalogues  in  Photius  and  Peter,  and  the  Anathemas  just 
quoted  ;  the  reasons  will  be  assi<>ned  hereafter. 

5.  Philostorgius  tells  a  story  of"  Apthonius  at  Alexandria, 
whom  he  speaks  of  as  a  bisho|)  of  the  Manichees,  and  a  man 
in  great  reputation  for  knowledge  and  eloquence.  iEtius, 
he  says,  had  a  public  disputation  with  Apthonius,  and  so 
entirely  overcame  him  that  he  died  of  grief  seven  days  after. 
In  the  Catalogues  of  Photius  and  Peter  of  Sicily,  and  like- 
wise in  the  Form  of  abjuring  Manichseism,  before  referred 
to,  is  the  name  of  Apthonius  ;  and  he  is  spoken  of  as  one  of 
Mani's  commentators. 

6.  Faustus  of  Milevi,^  in  Africa,  published  a  volume  in 
defence  of  Manichoeism,  which  St.  Augustine  answered*!  in 
a  large  work  of  three-and-thirty  books,  always  prefixing 
at  the  beginning  of  each  book  a  passage  or  section  of  Faustus 
himself.  Beausobre"^  commends  this  author's  manner  of 
Avriting,  and  supposeth  that  we  have  his  work  entire  in 
Augustine ;  so  does^  Cave:  but  I  do  not  perceive  that  clearly: 
we  have  the'  introduction,  but  I  do  not  see  any  conclusion, 
Augustine  did  not  consider  every  thing'  in  the  book  of  Adi- 
mantus,  but  left  a  part  of  it  near  the  end  answered,  as  he 
acknowledges"  in  a  work  written  long  afterwards.  Augus- 
tine wrote  a  book  against  3Iani's  epistle  of  the  Foundation; 
but  he  therein  confuted  only  the  beginning  of  that  epistle, 
as  he  informs  us  in  his^  Retractations.  In  like  manner  he 
may  have  been  obliged,  by  the  multitude  of  affairs  upon  his 
hands,  to  break  off  his  answer  to  Faustus  before  he  had 
confuted  the  whole  of  his  book.  It  seems  to  me  that  Augus- 
tine, having  followed  Faustus  step  by  step  a  great  way, 
until  he  had  produced  and  confuted"'  his  furious  passages 
concerning  the  gospels,  supposed  he  might  then  put  an  end 

°  AfpOovioq  TiQ  rriQ  Mavixatwv  Xvaffijg  TrposTiog,  Kca  fiiya\r]v  irapa  woXkoiQ 
tTTi  ao<piq.  KM  hn>OTi]Ti  Xoywv  (p^puv  tj}v  to^av.  Philost.  1.  3.  c.  15.  p.  487,  488. 

p  Faustus  quidam  tuit,  gente  Afer,  civitate  Milevitanus,  eloquio  suavis, 
ingenio  callidus,  secta  Manichseus,  ac  per  hoc  nefando  errore  perversus.  Nove- 
ram  ipse  hominem.  Aug.  contr.  Faust.  1.  i.  c.  7. 

■i  Contra  Faustuni  Manichaeum — scripsi  giande  opus,  verbis  ejus  propositis 
reddens  responsiones  meas.  Triginta  et  tres  disputationes  sunt,  quas  etiam 
hbros  cur  non  dixerim  ?  Retract.  1.  2.  c.  7.  ""  Hist,  de  Manich. 

T.  i.  p.  224.  '  In  quibus  Faustuni  Kara  Trodag  sequitur,  inte- 

grumque  ejus  libnim  in  suum  opus  transcripsit.     Hist.  Lit.  T.  i.  p.  344.  Oxon. 

*  Vid.  Faust,  lib.  i.  ap.  Aug.  T.  8. 

"  Quamvis  quaedam  sint  perpauca  in  fine  ipsius  operis  Adimanti,  quibus 
non  respondi ;  nescio  quibus  enim,  ut  fieri  solet,  incurrentibus,  quae  magis 
videbantur  urgere,  ilia  interrupta  sic  remanserunt.  Contr.  Adv.  Leg.  et  Pr.  !. 
2.  c.  12.  n.  4L  fin.  "  Liber  contra  epistolam  Manichsei,  quam 

vocant  Fundamenti,  principia  ejus  sola  redarguit.     Retr.  1.  2.  c.  2. 

"  Vid.  Faust.  I.  32,  et  33.  ap.  Aug. 


284  Credibility  of  titp  Gospel  llislory. 

to  his  labours:  I  think  that  at  the  conclusion  Augustine 
intimates  lie  had  considered  some  chapters  only  of"  Faustus. 

Of  this  writer  Beausobre  speaks  farther  to  this  purpose  : 
'  We>  might  expect  in  this  work  of  Faustus  pure  and  genuine 
'  Manichceism  :  but  beside  that  the  African  sect  was  one  of 
'  the  most  absurd  and  heretical  among  them,  Faustus  treats 
'  but  a  small  number  of  questions.'  But,  as  before  said, 
perhaps  we  have  not  his  piece  entire :  and  here  again  our 
desires  may  be  raised  for  thoAvorks  of  Agapius,  MJiich  seem 
to  have  been  more  full  and  copious.  However,  I  shall  be 
able  to  make  good  use  of  the  work  of  Faustus,  for  showing 
the  Manichaean  sentiments  concerning  the  scriptures,  and 
other  matters. 

Augustine  insinuates  that^  Faustus  was  at  first  very  poor, 
but  that  he  lived  well,  and  somewhat  delicately,  among  the 
Manichees;  notwithstanding  the  strict  rules  by  which  all 
the  elect  are  bound  to  govern  themselves.  Augustine  calls 
him'^  bishop  :  he  speaks  of  the  great  esteem  which  Faustus 
was  in  among  that  people ;  but  says  that,'*  excepting 
his  eloquence,  there  Avas  little  in  him  extraordinary;  and 
that  he  was  no  more  able,  than  their  other  teachers,  to  remove 
the  difticulties  in  the  Manichaean  scheme,  which  he  then 
began  to  be  sensible  of.  However,  Augustine''  has  often 
commended  Faustus's  manner  of  speaking;  and*"  owns  that 
he  was  well  qualified  to  make  converts,  and  that  he  seduced 
many.  He  must  have  excelled  in  the  art  of  speaking,  or 
Augustine^  had  not  given  him  the  preference  in  that  respect 
to  Ambrose,  the  famous  bishop  of  Milan,  who  had  more 
learning,  and  was  a  good  speaker   likewise.     Faustus  and 

"  Quapropter,  post  omnes  Fausti  calumnias  refutatas,  duntaxat  horum  ejus 
capitulorum,  quibus  hoc  opere  quantum  Dominus  adjuvare  dignalus  est, 
sufficienter,  ut  arbitror,  prolixeque  respond!,  &c.  Aug.  conlr.  Faust.  1.  33.  c.  9. 

y  lb.  p.  224.  ^  Et  quia  in  mattis  dormiunt,  mattarii  appel- 

lantur :  a  (juorum  stratis  longe  dissimiles  fuerant  plumtB  Fausti,  et  caprinse 
lodices ;  (lua  deliciarum  atfluentia  non  solum  mattarios  fastidiebat,  sed  etiam 
domum  patris  sui  hominis  pauperis  Milevitani.     Contr.  Faust.  1.  v.  c.  5. 

*  Jam  vencrat  Carthaginem  quidam  Manichaeorum  episcopus,  Faustiis 
nomine,  magnus  laqueus  diaboli ;  et  mulfi  implicabantur  in  eo  per  illecebrara 
suaviloquentiae,  quam  ego  tametsi  laudabam,  &c.  Confess.  1. 5.  c.  3.  n.  3. 

^  quffi  mihi  cunctatio  in  dies  major  ol)oriebatur,  ex  quo  ilium  homi- 

nem,  cujus  nobis  adventus,  ut  nosti,  ad  expiicanda  omnia,  (jufE  nns  movebant, 
quasi  de  calo  promittebatur,  audivi,  eumque  excepta  quadam  eloquentia  talem, 
qualem  CEeteros  cognovi.     De  Util.  Cred.  c.  8.  n.  20. 

«=  Ergo  ubi  venit,  exp-ertus  sum  hominem  gratum  et  jucundum  verbis,  et  ea 
quae  ilia  solent  dicere  miilto  suavius  garrientem.     Confess.  1.  5.  c.  G.  n.  10. 

<*  Vid.  supr.  not.  *  '^  Et  delectabar  suavilate  scrmonis, 

qiiamquam  eruditionis  minus  famcn  hilarescentis  alqiie  mulcentis  quam  Fausti 
cral,  (|uod  adtinet  ad  dicendi  modum  :  ca^terum  rerum  ipsarum  nulla  compara- 
tio.     Confess.  1.  5.  c.  13.  n.  23. 


The  Manichces.     Sect.   I.  285 

other  Manichees'  were  banished  into  some  island  by  the 
Roman  proconsul ;  but  it  was  not  long'  before  they  were 
released.  Tillemont"  supposeth  this  to  have  happened  in 
the  year  38G. 

I  cannot  tell  how  it  came  to  pass,  that  in  Fabricius  it  is 
said,''  Augustine  heard  Faustus  nine  years;  when  Augustine, 
in  the  place  referred  to,  and  elseAvhere,  assures  us,  that  it  was 
not  till  the  ninth  year  of  his  being  in  the  Manichaean  senti- 
ments that  Faustus  came  to  Carthage. 

Faustus  is  spoken  of  by'  Cave  as  flourishing  at  the  year 
400;  but  that  is  placing  him  too  late.  Augustine  forsook 
the  Manichees  before  he  was  quite  thirty  years  of  age  ;  he 
became  acquainted  with  Faustus  in  his  twenty-eighth  or 
twenty-ninth  year:  at  which  time  he  speaks  of  Faustus  as 
a  bishop,  and  very  famous  in  his  party.  If  Augustine  was 
born  in  354,  Faustus  must  have  come  to  Carthage,  and  their 
acquaintance  must  have  begun  in  382  or''  383.  Augustine's 
book  against  Faustus  seems  not  to  have  been  written  till 
about  the  year  400;  but  the  book  of  Faustus  might  be 
written  a  good  while  before,  and  he  himself  dead  ;  as  indeed 
I  suspect  he  was,  from  Augustine's  manner  of  writing'  at 
the  beginning"  of  his  work,  and  elsewhere.  However,  I 
willingly  place  Faustus  at  the  year  384  ;  though,  according 
to  the  preceding  argument,  that  is  rather  too  late. 

7.  Hierax  is  reckoned  among-  Manichaean  writers  by*" 
Fabricius  and  Beausobre.  This  last  writer  speaks  of  him 
in  this  manner:  '  he"  was  an  Egyptian,  a  native  of  Leon- 
'  topolis,  M'ell  skilled  in  the  learning  of  the  Greeks  and 
'  Egyptians:  he  was  not  one  of  those  extravagant  Manichees 
'  that  reviled  the  law  and  the  prophets ;'  and  a  great  deal 
more,  which  I  need  not  transcribe. 

But,  with  submission,  I  see  no  reason  to  call  Hierax,  or 
Hieracas,  a  Manichee  :  that  supposition  depends  upon  the 
authority"  of  Photius,  and  Peter  of  Sicily,  and  the  Anathe- 
mas, or  Form  of  abjuring  Manichfeism,  before  taken  notice 

'  Faustus  autera,  convictus  vel  confessus  quod  ManichcBus  esset,  cum  aliis 
nonnullis  secum  ad  judicium  proconsulare  perductis, — in  insulam  relegafus 
est.  Contr.  Faust  1.  5.  c.  8.  ^  St.  Augustin.  Art.  18.  Mem.  T.  13.  p.  43. 

''  et  novem  annos  a  se  auditum  testatur.  Conf.  1.  5.  c.  6.  Fabric.  Bib. 

Gr.  T.  V.  p.  288.  '  Hist.  Lit.  T.  i.  p.  344. 

^  Nam  annum  aetatis  vica«imum  nonum  egit  Carthagine  cum  Fausto.  Libro 
enim  6  Confessionum  cap.  xi.  scribit :  Et  ecce  jam  tricenariam  aetatem  gere- 
bam. — Erat  tunc  annus  Christi  tricentesimus  octogesimus  tertius.  Pagi  in  Baron. 
Ann.  377.  n.  iii.  '  Faustus  quidem  fuit  gente  Afer. — Noveram  ipse 

homincm,  quemadmodum  cum  commemoravi  in  libris  Confessionem  mearum. 
Contr.  Faust.  1.  i.  c.  1.  ■"  B<b.  Gr.  T.  5.  p.  288. 

"  Hist,  de  Manich.  T.  i.  p.  430,  431.  °  See  Beaus.  p.  430.  not,  (6.) 


286  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

of;  where  Hierax  is  named  among  the  disciples  and  com- 
mentators of  Mani.  But  tisey  are  all  so  late,  that  their  testi- 
mony is  of  no  weight  against  other  evidence  ;  for  Photius  and 
Peter  are  writers  of  the  ninth  century:  and  in  their  writings 
against  the  Manichees  they  so  agree  that  it  is?  reckoned  one 
copied  the  other;  but  which  is  the  original  is  hard  to  say  ; 
and  the  Anathemas,  as  given  us  by  Cotelerius  and  Tollius, 
plainly  appear  not  to  be  of  an  earlier  age.  The  composer 
of  that  Form  was  acquainted  Avith  the  Paulicians,  and  must 
have  borrowed  from  Photius,  or  Peter,  or  both  :  in  Tollius 
it  is  entitled,  '  A''  Form  of  receiving  those  who  are  converted 
'  from  the  Heresy  of  the  Manichees  and  Paulicians  to  the 

*  true  Faith.'  Beausobre  himself  has  someAvhere  well  ob- 
served, upon  another  occasion,  that  things  are  not  to  be  re- 
ceived upon  the  credit  of  pieces  of  so  late  age. 

Hierax  has  a  great  character  in"^  Epiphanius  for  learning 
and  piety  :  nevertheless  he  had,  it  seems,  some  errors  which 
induced  Epiphanius  to  consider  him  as  an  heretic  ;  but  he 
does  not  call  him  a  follower  of  Mani:  he  makes  a  distinct 
heresy  of  his   opinions:  and   in   like   manner^   Augustine, 

*  John  Damascenus,  and  "  Prsedestinatus  :  nor  do  any  of  them 
insinuate  that  he  borrowed  any  thing  from  Mani :  and  all 
of  them,  except  Augustine,  (who  has  entirely  omitted  their 
sentiments  concerning-  the  scriptures,)  expressly  say  that  the 
Hieracites  received  the  Old  and  New  Testament ;  particu- 
larly Epiphanius,  briefly  in  liis^  Synopsis,  and  more  largely 
in  his'"  Panarium.  The  only  ancient  author,  thnt  I  know 
of,  who  says  the  Hieracites  rejected  the  Old  Testament,  is 
the  anonymous  author^  against  all  heresies,  among  the 
works  of  Athanasius  :  nor  are  they  any  where  charged  with 
holding  two  principles.  Philaster  and  Theodoret  have 
nothing  about  them. 

Hierax,  it  is  true,  is  said  to  have  denied  the  resurrection 
of  the  body,  andy  to  have  expected  only  a  spiritual  resur- 
rection :  but  it  does  not  appear  that  he  took  that  opinion 
from    Mani.      Epiphanius    expressly    says    he    supposeth 

P  Quae  dura  memoro,  non  possum  non  significare  dubilationem,  quam  in 
notis  professus  sum,  et  in  qua  me  adhuc  h;crere  fafeor,  uter  scilicet  horum 
alterum  in  scribendo  imitatus  videatur.  Wolf.  Praef.  ad  Phot,  contr.  Manich. 
p.  6.  '1  Ap.Toll.  Insign.  Ital.  p.  126. 

■■  Haer.  67.  n.  1.  '  De  Haer.  c.  47. 

'  XpM^uvoi  oe  TTaXatqt  km  vtq,  haQi)Ky  Dam.  de  Ha;res.  n.  67.  ap.  Cot. 
Monum.  Gr.  T.  i.  p.  297.  "  Praedest.  i.  n.  47. 

"  Vid.  Epiph.  T,  i.  p.  605.  T.  ii.  p.  147. 

"  Haer.  67.  n.  1. 

"  Ap.  Athan.  T.  2.  p.  235.  D.  Ed.  Bened. 

^'  Tn'ivfiaTiicrjv  ci  rrfv  avwraaiv  tpacKu.  k.  X.   Epiph.  H.  67.  n.  1. 


The  Manichees.     SECT.  I.  287 

tliat  Hierax  learned  it  of  Origcn,  or  formed  it  out  of  liis  own^ 
head. 

In  the  letter  of  Arias  to  Alexandria,  as  we  have  it  in 
^Epiphanius  and  ''Athanasius  in  Greek,  and  in  '^Hilary  in 
Latin,  divers  opinions  concerning-  the  Son  are  represented  ; 
that  of  Mani,  Sabellius,  and  Hierax,  all  as  different  from 
each  other. 

If  Hierax  had  been  a  Manichee,  it  would  be  very  strange 
that'^  great  numbers  of  the  Egyptian  monks,  or  ascetics, 
should  admire  and  follow  him,  as  Epiphanius  says  they  did. 

Finally,  there  is  no  notice  taken  of  Hierax  as  a  disciple  of 
Mani,  in  the  Disputation  of  Archelaus,  nor  in  St.  Cyril  of 
Jerusalem,  no  niore  than  in  Epiphanius. 

I  conclude  therefore  there  is  no  reason  to  think  that 
Hierax,  whose  opinions  make  a  distinct  heresy  in  Epiphanius, 
was  a  Manichee.  If  Photius,  or  Peter  of  Sicily,  knew  any 
one  of  that  name  who  was  a  Manichee,  he  must  have  been 
different  from  him  mentioned  by  Epiphanius,  and  other 
ancient  writers;  and  probably  he  was  no  very  early  or 
ancient  follower  of  Mani :  but  I  rather  think  that  they  knew 
not  any  such  person,  but  have  mistaken  the  character  of 
Hierax,  of  whom  Epiphanius  writes. 

Let  it  not  be  thought  to  no  purpose  that  T  have  said  so 
much  to  show  that  Hierax  was  not  a  Manichee.  Beausobre 
in  several  parts  of  his  work  has  divers  arguments,  built  upon 
the  supposition  (hat  Hierax  was  in  the  Manichsean  scheme  ; 
all  which  reasonings  therefore  now  fall  to  the  ground  ;  nor 
can  we  in  any  case  judge  of  the  Manichdean  sentiments  by 

'  Beausobre  is  pleased  to  ?ay,  (T.  i.  p.  431,)  '  What  we  know  of  his  senti 
'  ments  is,  that  he  denied  the  resurrection  of  the  body ;  that  he  did  not  beheve, 
'  that  Jesus  had  a  true  human  body  ;  and  that  he  admitted  three  principles  of 
'  all  things,  God,  Matter,  and  Malice.'  But  these  things  are  not  in  Epipha- 
nius. Beausobre  here  builds  upon  a  passage  of  a  writer  of  the  seventh  or 
eighth  century  ;  De  Hieracitis  locus  insignis  Joannis  Carpathi  episcopi,  ex  MS. 
opere  de  Anachoretis,  productus  a  Cangio  in  Appendice  ad  Glossarium  Grae- 
cum  : — o'lTiveg  Xtyaai,  fir]  avOpwTrivov  ffw/ta  aviC\i]<ptvai  tov  2wr?jpa,  fii]re 
tytiptaOai  to  rjjiiTipov  mofia  o  TrepiKtiixiOa  Kot  on  rptig  umv  apx;ai,  S'toc.  kcu 
vXr),  Km  KOKia.  ap.  Fabric.  Bib.  Gr.  T.  8.  p.  333.  I  need  to  say  no  more 
than  that  this  is  not  an  authentic  account  of  the  principles  of  Hierax  the 
Egyptian,  mentioned  by  Epiphanius,  and  other  ancient  writers.  If  there  ever 
were  people  called  Hieracites,  who  held  these  notions,  there  is  no  reason  to 
think  they  borrowed  them  from  him. 

^  Hrer.  69.  n.  7.  p.  732.  D. 

b  Ath.  de  Synod.  T.  i.  p.  729.  E. 

=  — nee,  sicut  IManichaeus,  partem  unius  substantise  Patris  natum  exposuit ; 
nee  sicut  Sabellius, — nee  sicut  Hieracas,  lucernam  de  lucerna,  vel  lainpadem 
in  duas  partes.  Hilar,  de  Trin.  1.  4.  p.  833.  Vid.  et  1.  6.  p.  881,  et  p.  885. 
D.   E.  ''   Av-iKa   TToXAoi   Tiov  ac!Ki]Tix)v  Tuv  AiyvTTuoJV  avrij} 

cvva'7rt]xOr]aav.     Hjer.  67.  c.  i.  p.  710.  A. 


288  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

those  of  Hierax,  for  he  was  not  of  that  sect,  nor  had  he  any 
concern  with  it. 

Hierax  is  placed  by^  Cave  at  302,  wlio  takes  his  account 
from  Epiphanius,  and  says  nothing-  of  his  being  a  Manichee. 
Tilleniontf  has  written  A  History  of  the  Hieracites.  He 
says  that  this  heresy  arose  after  that  of  the  Manichees,  about 
the  year  290  or  300 ;  but  he  does  not  charge  the  author  of 
it  with  holding-  the  Manichtean  doctrine. 

According"  to  Epiphanius,  Hierax,  notwithstanding  his 
errors,  was  a  very  extraordinary  person :  he  was  skilful'  in 
medicine,  was  a  man  of'  great  acuteness,  and'  of  a  strict 
and  unblemished  life,  for  which  he  whs  much  respected. 
He''  had  the  scriptures  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament  by 
heart,  and  Avrote  commentaries  npon  them  ;  in  particular, 
A'  Dissertation  upon  the  Creation  of  the  World  in  six  Days  : 
he  likewise  composed"'  hymns  :  he  was"  acquainted  with 
the  Greek  and  Egyptian  learning-,  and"  wrote  in  both  lan- 
g-uages.  He  lived  to  a  great  age,  being,  as?  some  say, 
upwards  of  ninety  years  old  when  he  died  :  he  retained  his 
eye-sight  to  the  last,  usin<^  no  amanuensis,  but  writing  out 
his  own  works,  and  transcribing  likewise  the  works  of  others 
in  a  fair  hand. 

Such  a  character  of  this  Egyptian  christian  may  well 
induce  us  to  form  a  wish  for  some  of  his  works  :  though,  as 
may  be  collected  from  Epiphanius,  hisi  interpretations  of 
scripture  were  somewhat  allegorical. 

As  all  ancient  writers  in  general,  who  make  mention  of 
Hierax,  say  he  received  the  scriptures  of  the  Old  and  New 
Testament,  it  may  be  concluded  that  his  canon  was  much 
the  same  with  that  of  other  christians  in  the  place  where  he 
lived  :  in  particular,  we  plainly  perceive  from  Epiphanius 
that"^  he  received  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews  as  the  apostle 

«  His-t.  Lit.  T.  i.  p.  IGl.  f  Mem.  T,  iv.  P.  2.  p.  817,  &c. 

8  tarpoaotpi^iKy  TE  KCHToig  aWoir.  Epiph.  Haer.  67.  cap.  i. 

*■ o'£,vQ  Kara  iravTa  rpoirov.   lb.  p.  709.  D. 

'   i]v  St  o  avijc)  iKTr\r]KTOQ  Ttj  avTH  a(SKi](!ii.   lb.  p.  710.  A. — 6  ct  'ItpaKaq 

avTog  Tif>  fifv  ovTi  noXXriv  £tx«  rr/v  a(TKri<nv.  ib.  n.  3.  p.  712.  C. 

''  OvTog  HIV  yap  TraXaiav  km  Kaivi)v  cuiOtjkijv  antfjwg  htthv  (tTTOTTjft^wv, 
xni  «!£  avTfi  t^t]y7j<Tafitvoc.   lb.  n.  i.  p.  709.  D. 

'  ^vvtypaxparo  ct  'E\X7]vtK0jg  Tt  Kcti  Aiyvn-ruiKuJC  ili)yr)nap.(voc,  kui  (TVVTa'iac 
Tr]Q  i^ariHcps  ixvdnc  rivag  TrXaaai.itvoc.  k.  X.  lb.  n.  3.  p.  712.  B. 

™   "^aXfiHQ  Tt  TToXXsg  vtmTtpiKHg  tirXaaaro.   ib. 

'■  Toir  rwv  AiyvTTTiwv  Kai  'EXXi]i-mv  fiaOijfiami'  ciKpifiiog  «7rt<r«c"  'b.  n.  i.  p. 
709.  C.'Vid.  el  B.  "  Vid.  supra  not.  '.  v  (pam  ce 

TivtQ  TTfpi  avTs,  on  virip  ivvivi]KOVTa  itt]  ftiwaac,  twQ  Ttjg  t'lfiiQag  /'/c  tnXivrn:, 
iKaXXiypa<j)lC  ticaXXiyQarpog  yap  i]v'  tpuvt  yap  avm  avvf^ojc  6  OipOaXfing.  Haer. 
G7.  C.  3.    p.  712.  C.  '1    Kfn  (TvvraKag  rrjc  t^nijiiipH  ^v^hc  rivag  TrXaaa- 

fitvog,  KHi  KOfiirwdtig  aXXtjyopiag.  ib.  B.  '  Vid.  Epiph.  ib.  n.  2,  3,  G,  7. 


The  Manichecs.     Sect.  I.  289 

Paul's:  and,  if  Epiphaniiis  be  not  mistaken,  he*  likewise 
made  use  of  a  book  entitled,  The  Anabaticon,  or  Ascension 
of  Isaias. 

8.  Sebastian,  a  Manichee,  then  a  young-  man,  was  g-eneral 
in  Egypt  in  the  reign  of  Constantius,  about  the  year  356, 
and  afterwards  was  in  high  offices  under  several  emperors. 
Athanasius'  complains  of  him  more  than  once:  he  is  men- 
tioned several  times  by"  Zosimus,  and''  Ammianus  Marcel- 
linus.  A  note^"  of  Valesius  upon  the  last-mentioned  Avriter 
contains  a  brief  history  and  character  of  Sebastian,  and  shows 
particularly  his  acquaintance  with  Libanius. 

9.  Secundinus,  an"  auditor  among-  the  Manichees,  wrote 
a  letter  to  Aug-ustine,  which  we  still  have  in  that  ancient 
Avriter's  works,  together  with  his  own  answer. 

Cave  placeth  Secundinus  at  the  year  390 :  he^  conjec- 
tures that  he  Mas  of  Africa,  and  speaks  of  his  being-  an  old 
friend  and  intimate  acquaintance  of  Augustine.  But  herein 
that  learned  and  laborious  writer  has  made  several  mistakes  ; 
for  Secundinus  was  a  perfect  stranger.  Augustine^  had  not 
any  personal  knowledge  of  him;  nor  was  Secundinus  an 
African,  but"  a  Roman,  as  he  himself  plainly  intimates.  If 
he  had  been  an  African  he  would  not  have  reproached  Augus- 
tine*' with  the  faithlessness  of  that  country  in  deserting  the 

'  lb.   n.  3.   p.  712.  *  ■Kapo^vvii  rov  TparriXartiv 

2f/3a?-tavov,  Mavixaiov  ovra.  k.  X.  Ath.  Ap.  pro  Fuga  sua.  n.  6.  p.  323.  C. 
ExoJTfg  dt  iiTTspysf  tig  r-qv  Trovrjpiav  rov  SsKa  ^efSaTiavov,  Mavixaiov  ovra,  Kai 
aatXyri  vnuTtoov.  Id.  in  Histor.  Arian.  ad  Monach.  p.  379.  f.  Vid.  eund.  ib.  p. 
381.  C.  387.  A.  B.  C.  "  Zosim.  Hist.  1.  3.  p.  714. 1.  4.  749. 

*  Iringinta  millia — commisit  Procopio,  juncto  ad  parilem  potestatem 

Sebastiano  comite  ex  duce  iEgypti.  Amm.  Marcell.  1.  23.  c.  3.  p.  385.  Vid. 
eund.  1.  31.  c.  13.  f.  et  passim. 

*  Is  est  igitur  Sebastianus  dux  .Egypti,  secta  Manichaeus. — Erat  -autem  filius 
Antiphili,  a  quo  in  disciplinam  traditus  Libanio,  mox  relicto  eloquentiae  studio 
ad  militiam  se  contulit,  temetsi  excellenti  ingenio  prseditus  :  ut  docet  Libanius 
in  epistolis  duabus  ad  Antiphilum,  quibus  et  aliam  subjungit  ad  Sebastianum, 
exhortans  ut  redeat.  Exstant  in  editione  CracoWeusi  Lat.  Libanius,  308,  340, 
494.  epistolasad  eum  scribit.  Vales,  not.  *•  p.  385. 

"  Secundinus  quidam,  non  ex  eis  quos  Manichsei  electos,  sed  ex  eis  quos 
auditores  vocant,  quern  nee  facie  quidem  noveram,  scripsit  ad  me  velut  amicus, 
honorifice  objurgans,  quod  oppugnarem  Uteris  illam  haeresim,  et  admonens  ne 
facerem.     Aug.  Retr.  1.  2.  c.  x. 

y  Secundinus  natione,  ni  fallo,  Afer,  secta  Manichseus,  claruit  circa  ann. 
390,  certe  post  Augustini  ad  ecclesiam  reditum. — Magna  illi  cum  Augustino 
intercesserat  familiaritas,  dum  uterque  in  hseresi  Manichaica  versaretur. — Objicit 
Punicae  gentis  perfidiam.     Cav.  Hist.  Lit.  T.  i.  p.  286. 

*  Vid.  not.  * 

*  Legit  enim  aliquanta  exile  meum,  et  qualecunque  Romani  hominis  inge- 
nium,  reverendae  tuae  dignationis  scripta,  in  quibus  sic  irasceris  veritati,  ut 
philosophise  Hortensius.     Secund.  ad  Aug.  n.  3. 

''  Muta  quEEso  scntentiam,  depone  Punicaj  gentis  perfidiam,  &c.  ib.  n.  2. 
VOL    III.  U 


290  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

Maiiichees.  Tillemont'^  mentions  divers  other  reasons  for 
thinking-  that  Secundinus  lived  at  Rome,  or  somewhere  in 
Italy.  Nor  Avas  this  letter  written  so  soon  as  the  year  390; 
it  is  probable  that  Augustine  would  not  so  long  delay  to 
answer  it;  but  in  his  Retractations  he  speaks  of  his  answer 
after  his  books  against  Faustus,  and  after  the  disputes  held 
with  Felix  in  the  year  404,  and  after  another  book  against 
the  Manichees,  entitled  De  Natura  Boni.  The  character  too 
which  Augustine  himself  gives  of  his  answer,  as*^  the  best 
of  all  his  books  against  the  Manichees,  leads  us  to  suppose 
it  was  one  of  his  last  works  written  in  that  controversy.  In 
a  word,  the  order  in  which  this  book  is  placed,  and  the 
manner  in  which  Augustine  speaks  of  it,  may  induce  us  to 
think  it  was  not  written  before  405  or  406. 

V.  '  The^  Manichcean  sect,  or  church,'  as  Augustine's 
phrase  is,  '  consisted  of  two  parts,  elect  and  auditors.'  He 
afterwards  says:  '  As*^  Mani  had  twelve  disciples,  in  imita- 
'  tion  of  the  twelve  apostles,  that  number  is  still  respected 
'  by  the  Manichees :  for  there  are  twelve  of  their  elect,  whom 
'  they  call  masters;  and  there  is  a  thirteenth  who  is  their 
'  president :  they  have  seventy-two  bishops  ordained  by  the 
'  masters,  and  presbyters  ordained  by  bishops.  Their 
'  bishops  likewise  have  deacons:  the  rest  are  called  elect  only : 
'  but  when  they  are  judged  fit,  they  also  are  sent  abroad, 
'  either  for  upholding  and  spreading  their  error  where  it  is 
'  already,  or  for  planting  it  where  it  is  not.' 

That  we  may  the  better  judge  of  this  division  of  the  Mani- 
chees into  elect  and  auditors,  it  is  needful  to  take  notice  of 
some  passages  of  divers  authors. 

Epiphanius  calls  their  auditors^  catechumens  ;  and  in  The 
Acts  of  Archelaus  the  second  order  of  the  Manichees  is'' 
twice  spoken  of  by  the  name  of  catechumens. 

<=  St.  Augustin,  Art.  168.  Mem.  T.  13.  p.  450.  a  Paris. 

^  Hiijus  aulem  mei  voluminis  titiilus  est,  Contra  Secundinum  Manichseum  ; 
quod,  mea  sentcntia,  omnibus  quae  adversus  illam  pestem  scnbere  potui,  facile 
prfiepono.  Retr.  1.  2.  cap.  x. 

^  Nam  in  his  diiabus  professionibus,  hoc  est,  Eleclorum  et  Auditorum, 
ecclesiam  suam  constare  voluerunt.  Aug.  de  Haer.  cap.  46. 

'  Propter  quod  etiam  ipse  Manichaeus  duodecim  discipulos  habuit,  ad  instar 
apostolici  numeri,  quern  numerum  Manichai  etiam  hodie  custodiunt.  Nam 
ex  electis  suis  habent  duodecim,  quos  appellant  magistros,  et  lertium-decimum 
principem  eorum  :  episcopos  autera  septuaginla  duos,  qui  ordinantur  a  magis- 
tris ;  et  presbyteros,  qui  ordinantur  ab  episcopis.  Ilabent  etiam  episcopi 
diaconos.  Jam  caeteri  tantummodo  Elecli  vocantur  -.  sed  mittuntur  etiam  ipsi 
qui  videntur  idonei  ad  hunc  errorem,  vel  ubi  est,  sustenfandum  et  augendum, 
vel,  ubi  non  est,  etiam  seminandum.     Id.  ibid. 

^  TlafuiKiXtvovrai.  sv  roig  avrwv  kottix'^I^ii'oic  Tpicfieiv  avrtic  daxpiXwg'  o'l  Se 
■jrav  oTi  HV  avayKawv  TrpoatptpHTi  roig  ixXtKroig  lavTwv.  Epiph.  H.  66.  c.  53. 
p.  665.  B.  '' fiiTovonaTfiVTai 


Tlie  Manichccs.     Sect.  I.  291 

Faustus  cxprcsseth  liimself  as  if'  by  elect  were  meant 
clergy,  and  by  auditors  secidars,  or  the  laity  :  Augustine*^ 
in  his  argument  takes  notice  of  this  without  directly  allow- 
ing it,  that  I  perceive. 

By  the  Manichaean  rule,  a  very  different  course  of  life  was 
prescribed  to  the  elect  from  that  of  the  auditors.  These 
last'  might  eat  flesh,  drink  wine,  bathe,  marry,  trafHc,  pos- 
sess estates,  bear  magistracy,  and  the  like  ;  all  which  things 
were  forbidden  the  elect,  as  appears  from  divers  passages  of 
Augustine.  The  elect'"  might  eat  grapes,  but  they  were 
not  to  drink  wine,  though  ever  so  new :  the  elect  also  ate" 
apples,  pears,  melons,  and  all  sorts  of  fruit  and  herbage, 
and"  common  bread  ;  but  forbore,  as  it  seems,  notP  only 
flesh,  but  also  eggs,  and  milk,  and^'  fish.  In  this  respect, 
as  Augustine  says,  the"^  elect  and  auditors  looked  like  men 
of  two  different  religions.  He  elseM'here  speaks  of  the  elect 
as'  persons  who  pretended  to  greater  perfection,  and  were 

tig  KaTi]-)(imtvwv  aiofiara.  Arch.  C.  9.  p.  16.  m.  \iyei  t(ji  Kar^xsynvii}.  ib.  p.  17. 

'  Idcircoque  Christo  jam  credere  non  poterant  [Judaei]  indifterentiam 
docenti  ciborum,  et  a  suis  quidera  discipulis  omnia  penitus  removenti,  saecu- 
lanbus  vero  vulgo  consedenti  omnia  quae  possentedi.  Faust.  1.  16.  c.  6.  Neque 
enim  justa  haec  nunc  vestra  sententia  est,  ut  nos  quidem,  qui  solum  in  plebe 
sacerdotale  hominum  genus  censeamus,  a  carnibus  abstinere  debere,  daemonio- 
rum  doctrinae  videamur  vobis  assectatores.     Id.  1.  30.  cap.  1. 

^  Auditonbus  autem  vestris,  quos  tamquam  distinctos  a  genere  sacerdotum 
dixisti,  secundum  veniam  haec  edenda  conceditis,     Contr.  Faust.  1.  30.  c.  5. 

'  Auditores  autem  qui  appellantur  apud  eos,  et  carnibus  vescuntur,  et  agros 
colunt,  et,  si  voluerint,  uxores  habent :  quorum  nihil  faciunt  qui  vocantur 
Electi.  Aug.  ad  Deuter.  Ep.  236.  al.  74.  Nisi  forte  quod  non  vescimini 
carnibus,  et  vinum  non  bibitis,  De  Mor.  Manich.  c.  13.  n.  27.  Quan- 
doquidem  auditores  vestri,  quorum  apud  vos  secundus  gradus  est,  ducere  atque 
habere  uxores  non  prohibeantur.  ib.  c.  18.  n.  G5. 

*"  Nam  et  vinum  non  bibunt,  dicentes  fel  esse  tenebrarum,  cum  vescantur 
uvis :  nee  musti  aliquid,  vel  recentissimi,  sorbent.  De  Haer.  c.  46.  jam  vero 
quae  tanta  perversio  est,  vinum  putare  fel  principum  tenebrarum,  et  uvis  come- 
dendis  non  parcere  ?  De  Mor.  Manich.  c.  xvi.  n.  44. 

"  Vid.  de  M.  Manich.  cap.  xiii.  et  xiv. 

°  Sicut  enim  in  ipso  errore  vestro,  cum  eo  pane  vescamini  quo  cteteri  ho- 
mines, et  fructibus  vivatis  et  fontibus,  lana  et  lino  similiter  texto  amiciamini, 
&c.  Contr.  Faust.  1.  20.  c.  23.  p  Nee  vescuntur  saltem  carnibus. — Nee 

ova  saltem  sumunt, — sed  nee  alimonia  lactis  utuntur.  De  Haer.  cap.  46. 

1 cur  ita  eum  vos  noxium  pra;dicatis,  ut  si  alia  esca  non  occurrat,  prius 

fame  coasumamini,  quam  pisce  vescamini  ?  Contr.  Faust.  1.  16.  c.  9. 

■■ non  intuentes,  non  considerantes,  in  eisdem  habendis  agendisque 

rebus  tantum  ad  di\'ersam  vitam  valere,  si  diversa  sit  fides,  ut  cum  auditores 
vestri  ut  uxores  habeant,  et  filios  quamvis  inviti  suscipiant,  eisque  patrimonia 
congerant  vel  custodiant,  carne  vescantur,  vinum  bibant,  lavent,  metant,  vin- 
demient,  negotientur,  honores  publicos  administrent,  vobiscum  eos  tamen,  non 
cum  gentibus  computetis,  cum  facta  eorum  gentibus  videantur  similiora  quam 
\'obis.  Contr.  Faust.  1.  20.  c.  23. 

^ quam  purgare  putant  Electis  suis  eo  genere  vitae,  quam  vivunt  Electi 

u  2 


292  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History, 

supposed  to  be  in  the  highest  rank  for  virtue,  and  more  holy 
than  others:  and  he  sometimes  pleasantly  calls  the  elect' 
their  g-randees  or  quality  ;  unless  he  is  to  be  understood  to 
mean  only  some  of  the  chief  even  of  them. 

For  what  reason  the  elect  were  required  to  forbear  flesh 
and  wine,  is  not  clear.  The  catholic  christians  often  say, 
that"  Paul  prophesied  of  them  in  1  Tim.  iv.  1 — 4.  And 
Augusthie  charges  them  with'  thinking-  such  meats  to  be 
evil  in  their  own  nature ;  and  Faustus  himself  says  that,''' 
in  his  opinion,  all  flesh  is  impure  ;  possibly,  however,  for  no 
other  reason,  but  because  flesh  was  supposed  to  be  a  g-reat 
fuel  of  concupiscence,  which  therefore  they,  who  are  obliged 
to  continence,  ought  to  avoid  :  somewhat  of  this  kind  is  inti- 
mated in  The  Acts  of"  Archelaus.  If  so,  the  Manichoean 
elect  forbore  those  things  for  the  like  reasons  that  the  catho- 
lics, as  Augustine  says,  practised ^  certain  abstinences,  to 
humble  the  body  and  strengthen  the  mind.^  But  that  this 
was  the  only  reason  and  foundation  of  this  forbearance,  I  do 
not  affirm. 

The  auditors*  were  obliged  to  maintain  the  elect.  They'' 
kneeled  down  to  the  elect  to  ask  their  blessing*.     This  cere- 

Manichaeonim,  velut  sanctius  et  excellentius  Audit oribus  suis.  De  Haer.  cap. 
46.  Nostis,  fratres, — quasi  justos  eminentiores,  in  se  tenentes  primum  gradum 
justitise,  Electos  vocari  apud  Manichseos.     Enar.  in  Ps.  140.  n.  10. 

'  Nam  etiam  de  quodam  dicente,  nullam  subitantiam  malum  esse,  unus  de 
primatibus  hujus  haeresis,  quera  familiarius  crebriusque  audiebamus,  dicebat.  De 
M.  Manich.  cap.  8.  n.  ]  1. — cum  ad  ipsos  primates  detulissemus,— ib.  c.  19.  n.  70. 

"  Veruntamen  quod  apostolus  PauUis — futuram  praevnderit  in  talibus,  qualis 
Manichaeus  fuit,  quales  et  estis  vos. — Spintus  autem  manifeste  dicit,  quia  in 
novissimis  temponbus  quidem  recedent  a  fide, — prohibentes  nubere,  abstinere 
a  cibis,  quos  Deus  creavit,  &c.  Act.  cum  Felic.  1.  i.  c.  7. 

'  Vos  autem  ipsam  creaturam  negatis  bonam,  et  immundam  dicitis,  quod 
cames  diabolus  operetur  faeculentiore  materia  mali. — Hoc  animo,  hac  voluntate, 
hac  opinione  ab  escis  hujusmodi  temperatis,  quod  non  significatione,  sed  natura 
malae  et  immundae  sint.  Contr.  Faust.  1.  30.  c.  5. 

"  Ego  quidem,  quia  omnem  carnem  immundam  existimem.  Faust.  1.  6.  c.  i. 

"  Cum  quis  vestrum  carnalibus,  aliisque  cibis  fuerit  satiatus,  tunc  ei  concu- 
piscentiae  oboritur  invitatio.  Manes,  ap.  Arch.  cap.  14.  p.  17. 

>  Et  christiani,  non  haeretici,  sed  catholici,  edomandi  corporis  causa,  propter 
animam  in  orationibus  amplius  humiliandum,  non  quod  ilia  immunda  esse 
credant,  non  solum  a  carnibus,  verum  etiam  a  quibusdam  terrse  fructibus,  ab- 
stinent. Contr.  F.  1.  .30.  c.  5.  ^  See  Beaus.  T.  2.  p.  767,  &c. 

*  Suisque  Auditoribus  ideo  haec  arbitrantur  ignosci,  quia  praebent  inde 
alimenta  Electis  suis. — Itaque  ipsi  Electi,  nihil  in  agris  operantes,  nee  poma 
carpentes,  nee  sallem  folia  ulla  vellentes,  exspectant  haec  afterri  usibus  suis  ab 
Auditoribus  suis. — Aug.  de  Haer.  cap.  46.  Iliac  autem  purgare  nos  ab  istis 
sordibus  expetentes  cum  eis  qui  appellarcntur  electi  et  sancti,  afferremus  escas. 
Confess.  1.  4.  c.  i.  in.  Vid.  et  Epiph.  H.  66.  c.  53.  p.  665.  B. 

''  Sed  ipsi  Auditores  ante  Electos,  genua  figunt,  ut  eis  manus  supplicibus 
imponantur,  non  a  solis  presbyteris  vel  episcopis  aut  diaconis  eorum,  sed  a 
quibuslibet  electis.  Aug.  ad  Deut.  Ep.  236.  [al.  74.]  n.  2. 


The  Mankhecs.     Sect.   I.  293 

inony  was  performed  by  the  auditors  before  all  the  elect,  and 
not  only  before  bishops,  presbyters,  and  deacons. 

From  all  these  passages  we  may  be  able  to  form  some 
judgment  concerning  this  distinction  in  the  Manichaean  sect. 
Archelaus  and  Epiphanius  denoting  the  second  order  by  the 
name  of  catechumens,  we  might  have  been  induced  to  think 
that  elect  and  auditors,  among  the  Manichees,  answered  to 
faithful  and  catechumens  among  the  catholics.  But  when 
we  consider  what  Faustus  said,  and  that  the  elect,  when 
qualified,  were  employed  in  spreading-  their  principles,  and 
that  the  auditors  maintained  the  elect,  and  asked  a  blessing 
from  them  upon  their  knees,  we  are  rather  led  to  another 
notion. 

Beausobre  gives  this  account  of  the  matter:  '  The<=  elect 
'  were  their  doctors,  their  bishops,  their  presbyters,  their 
'  ecclesiastical  ministers  :  but  this  title  does  not  properly 
'  denote  the  episcopate,  or  any  other  office ;  it  denotes  a 
'  particular  kind  of  life,  or  the  observation  of  some  counsels, 
'  called  evangelic;  such  rules  as  Mani  had  prescribed  to 
'  those  who  aimed  at  perfection,  and  particularly  to  the 
'  ministers  of  his  sect.  Thus  the  Manichfiean  elect  were  the 
'  ministers  of  their  church,  and  in  general  who  made  profes- 
'  sion  of  celibacy,  virginity,  poverty,  and  practised  certain 
'  abstinences  and  austerities,  which  were  judged  proper  for 
'them;  for  which  reason  they  are    called''    the  perfect  by 

*  Theodoret.'  Beausobre  farther  observes,  that''  among  the 
catholics,  catechumens  Avere  such  as  had  not  been  initiated 
by  baptism  ;  whereas  among  the  Manichspan  auditors  there 
were  many  who  had  been  baptized,  though  perhaps  not  all. 

According  to  this  account,  as  the  same  learned  writer 
expresseth  himself  in  another '^  place,  '  the  elect  were  eccle- 
'  siastics,  and  in  general  all  such  as  made  profession  of 
'  observing-  certain   counsels,   called   evangelic ;    as    if  we 

*  should  say  the  clergy  and  the  monks.  The  auditors  were 
'  laity.' 

Whether  this  account  be  quite  right  I  cannot  certainly 
say  ;  for  Augustine  seems  to  intimate  that°  the  reason  why 
he  was  not  present  at  their  eucharist  was,  that  he  was  only 
an  auditor. 

But,  however  that  be,  I  would  observe  that  the  word  elect, 

<^  Hist,  de  Manich.  T.  2.  p.  763,  764.     See  likewise  T.  i.  p.  17.  n.  8. 

^   Ol  KaXsjievoi  rtXtiai  Trap  avTOiQ.  H.  Fab.  1.  1.  c.  26.  p.  214.  A. 

«  lb.  p.  763.  f  lb.  T.  i.  p.  17.  note  8. 

E  Quid  autem  inter  vos  agatis,  qui  Electi  estis,  ego  scire  non  possum.  Nam 
et  Eucharistiam  audivi  a  vobis  saepe  quod  accipiatis :  tempas  autem  accipiendi 
cum  me  lateret,  quid  accipiatis,  unde  nosse  potui  ?  Disput.  contr.  Fort.  i. 
n.  2. 


294  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

denoting  the  higher  order  so  often  found  in  Augustine,  is 
also  used  in  the  like  manner''  by  Gregory  Nazianzen  ;  and 
that'  some  Manichees,  who  were  only  in  the  rank  of  auditors, 
appear  to  have  practised  much  strictness  and  abstemiousness, 
resembling  that  required  of  their  elect. 

Beausobre  thinks  that''  the  auditors  were  so  called,  be- 
cause they  heard  in  the  church  whilst  others  taught  and 
instructed. 

I  do  not  remember  to  have  seen  in  him,  or  any  one  else,  a 
reason  assigned  for  the  use  of  the  word  elect,  denoting  all 
those  of  the  sect  which  were  not  auditors  ;  but  perhaps  they 
borrowed  it  from  those  texts  of  the  gospels  and  epistles 
where  the  word  is  used  for  christians,  or  God's  peculiar 
people  ;  as  Matt.  xxiv.  22,  24,  31 ;  Luke  xviii.  7 ;  Rom.  viii. 
33;  Col.  iii,  12,  and  other  places:  Augustine'  has  a  passage 
which  may  lead  us  to  this  thought. 

Photius,  in  his  first  book  against  the  Paulicians,  usually 
reckoned  a  branch  of  the  Manichees,  relates  a  singularity 
of  theirs:  they''^  reduced  all  their  sect,  or  the  professors  of 
their  principles,  to  six  churches;  the  first  was  called  Mace- 
donia, the  second  Achaia,  the  third  was  called  the  church 
of  the  Philippians,  the  fourth  that  of  the  Laodiceans,  the 
fifth  that  of  the  Ephesians,  the  sixth  that  of  the  Colossians  ; 
themselv^es"  they  called  christians;  the  catholics  they  named 
Romans,  as''  if  they  had  been  mere  heathens.  This  fancy  of 
reducing"  their  sect  to  six  churches  is  also  taken  notice  of 
by  P  Peter  of  Sicily,  and  the  author  of  The  Form  of  abjuring 
Manichgeism,  as  it  is  in*!  Cotelerius,  and"^  Tollius. 

Moreover,  it  was  a  common  thing  among  them,  their 
leaders  especially,  to  change  the  name  by  which  they  were 
first  called  for  that  of  some  apostolical  man.  Photius' 
produced  several  instances :  Simeon,  who  changed  his  name 

'' ojffTTfQ  01  Mavty^aioi  roig  iKKsKroiQ  XsyofXivoiQ,  oXjjv  rrjv  vooov  avroiQ 

fKKoXvnTovTtQ.  Gfeg.  N.  Or.  52.  p.  746.  C. 

'  Nam  (juiJam  vester  auditor,  in  ilia  memorabili  abstinentia  nihilo  electis 
cedens.  De  M.  Manich.  c.  20.  n.  74.  in.  ^  T.  2.  p.  763. 

'  Electi  c|uidem  Dei  sunt  omnes  sancti,  et  habemus  hoc  in  scripluris :  sed 
usurparimt  sibi  illud  nomen,  et  quasi  i'amiliarius  sibi  applicaverunt,  ut  tan- 
quam  proprie  jam  Electi  appellentur.  Enarr.  in  Ps.  140.  n.  10. 

'"  'E|  ^£  avT(t)v  avoficXoysmv  (KK\i]mac,  wc  '''V'"  F^  MoKtSoviav  koKhsiv, 
K.  \.  Phot.  1.  i.  cap.   V.  in.  "   Km  thq  luv  aXriQwQ  ovrag 

XpiziavyQ  'P(jj[icitHg  oi  r(ti(Ta\iTr]pioi  ovo/^iaZnoiVy  HinToig  St  Tt)v  KXrjcriv,  rig 
uWoT^iioi  TravrtXojg  KaOf^riKacn,  tujv  j^piTiavwi'  Tri^tunrTsmv,  Phot.  lb.  I.  I. 
cap.  6.  °  Seipsos — christianos  nunciipant ;  nos  autem — Ro- 

manes, ethnico  nomine  proprium  pcrmutare  conati,  appellant.  Pet.  Sic.  ap. 
Bib.  Petr.  T.  16.  p.  756.  B.  i'  Vid.  supr.  not." 

1  Ap.  B,ecof^Mit.  Clem.  1.  4.c.  27.  "■  Insign.  Ital,  p.  144. 

*  Phot.  ib.  1.  i.  c.  iv. 


The  Mamchccs.     Sect.  I.  295 

to  Titus;  Joseph,  who,  leaving-  his  own  name,  took  that  of 
Epaphroditus  ;  Gegncsius,  who  altered  his  name  to  Timothy  ; 
and  Sergiiis,  who  called  himself  Tychicus :  insomuch  that 
Mr.  Wolff,  the  learned  editor  of  Photius,  could  not  forbear 
remarking-  that*^  these  people  mightily  affected  apostolical 
things. 

VI.  The  Manichees  are  sometimes  spoken  of  as  an  impious, 
dissolute  sort  of  people :  their  eucharist  particularly  is  re- 
presented as  an  abominable  rite,  not  fit  to  be  described ; 
as  maybe  seen  in"  Cyril  of  Jerusalem,  and  ^  Augustine. 
Beausobre''  speaks  largely  to  this  infamous  story  of  their 
eucharist,  to  whom  1  refer:  however  I  shall  here  mention 
some  of  his  arguments  and  observations. 

The  thing  is  altogether  incredible, especially  when  related^ 
of  people  who  by  profession  were  christians;  who  believed 
that  Jesus  Christ  was  a  perfect  model  of  all  virtues  ;  who 
acknowledged  the  reasonableness  and  excellence  of  the 
precepts  of  the  gospel,  and  that  the  essence  of  religion  lies 
in  obeying  them. 

The  Manichees  always  denied  their  practising  the  abomi- 
nable rites  laid  to  their  charge  :  so^  Augustine  himself  says. 
And  in  the  year  392,  when  he  had  been  several  years  a  catho- 
lic, and  Mas  now  presbyter,  he  had  a  public  conference  with 
Fortunatus,  a  Manichcean  presbyter.  Before  they  enter  into 
dispute  upon  matters  of  belief,  Fortunatus  openly  calls  upon 
Augustine,  who  for  several  years  was  one  of  them,  to  tell''  if 
he  knew  any  of  the  crimes  with  which  they  were  reproached. 
This  confidence  of  Fortunatus,  says*  Beausobre,  is  a  strong 

'  Adeo  in  omnibus  apostolici  3evi  speciem  affectarunt,  ut,  quemadmodiim 
virorum  apostolicorum,  ita  et  ecclesiarum  veteris  memoriae  noniina  adoptarent, 
ad  exempliim  factionis  istius,  quae  apostolicorum  nomine  apud  veteres  nomi- 
natur.  Ap.  Phot.  p.  15.  "  Cat.  vi.  c.  33. 

"  Qua  occasione,  vel  potius  exsecrabilis  superstitionis  quadam  necessitate, 
coguntur  Electi  eorum  velut  eucharistiam  conspersam  cum  semine  humano 
sumere.  Sed  hoc  se  facere  negant,  et  ahos  nescio  quos  sub  nomine  Mani- 
chaeorum  id  facere  affirmant.  Detecti  tamen  sunt  in  ecclesia,  sicut  scis,  apud 
Carthaginem, — ubi  puella,  nomine  Margarita,  istam  nefariam  turpitudinera 
prodidit,  quae,  cum  esset  annorum  nondum  duodecim,  propter  hoc  scelestum 
mysterium  se  dicebat  esse  vitiatam.  Tunc  Eusebiam  quamdam  Manichaeam 
quasi  sanctimonialem,  idipsum  propter  hoc  ipsum  passam,  vix  compulit  con 
fiteri — quae  totum  illud  turpissimum  scelus,  ubi  ad  excipiendum  et  commis 
cendum  concumbentium  semen  farina  substernitur — simihter  indicavit.  Aug. 
de  Haeres.  cap.  40.  *  Beaus.  Hist,  de  Manich.  1.  9.  ch.  7,  8, 

9.  'T.  2.  p.  720,  &c.  "  Beaus.  ib.  p.  732. 

y  Sed  hoc  se  facere  negant.  Vid.  supr.  not." 

^  Ex  te  ergo  praesentes  audiant  boni  viri,  utnim  sint  vera  super  quibus  crimi- 
namur  et  appetimur,  an  sint  falsa. — Purgare  me  prius  volo  penes  conscientiam 
vestram — si  ea,  quse  jactantur,  vidit  in  nobis,  vel  consecutus  est.  Act.  contr. 
Fortunat.  in.  *  Ibid.  p.  737.  m. 


296  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

presumption  of  the  innocence  of  the  sect.  Augustine''  puts 
by  that  question.  When  he  is  still  pressed  by  Fortunatus, 
who  insists  upon  an  answer,  Augustine  is  not  able  to  produce 
any  thing-  material  against  them  of  his  own  knowledge  ;  but 
excuseth*^  himself  because  he  was  not  one  of  the  elect,  but 
only  an  auditor. 

In  the  year  391  or  392,  Augustine  wrote  a  book  for  the 
sake  of  his  friend  Honoratus,  whom''  of  a  heathen  he  had 
persuaded  lo  become  a  Manichee  ;  who  also  still  adhered  to 
that  sect  M  hen  he  had  himself  left  it.  Augustine  is  allowed 
to  argue  here  for  the  most  part  very  well :  but,  says*^  Beau- 
sobre,  Why  does  he  not  in  this  book,  for  the  sake  of  his  dear 
and  illustrious  friend,  make  use  of  that  decisive  argument, 
their  abominable  mysteries?  No  good  reason,  he  thinks,  can 
be  assigned  for  this  omission  ;  but  that  there  was  no  ground 
for  the  accusation. 

The  general  silence  of  ancient  authors  is  another  argument 
of  the  falsehood  of  this  story.  Cyril  of  Jerusalem  published 
his  Catechetical  Discourses  about  the  year  347, seventy  years, 
as  is  supposed,  after  the  death  of  Mani :  but,  as*^  Beausobre 
says,  he  is  the  first  who  has  spoken  of  this  matter:  andi'' 
from  Cyril  to  Augustine  he  does  not  find  any  author,  chris- 
tian or  heathen,  who  has  reproached  the  Manichees  with 
these  obscene  mysteries.  There''  is  no  mention  made  of 
them  in  the  Dispute  of  Archelaus ;  Serapion,  bishop  of 
Thmuis,  contemporary  with  Cyril,  says  not  a  word  of  them  ; 
nor  has  he  perceived  this  accusation  in  any  works  of  Ephrem ; 
Theodoret,  Titus  of  Bostra,  and  Abulpharagius,  in  his 
Dynasties  are  also  silent  upon  this  head.  And,  as  Beausobre 
goes  on,  if  to  these  fathers  we  add  the  two  pagan  philoso- 
phers, Alexander  of  Dicopolis,  and  Simplicius,  who  both 
wrote  against  these  people,  and  are  profoinidly  silent  about 
the  crimes  they  are  reproached  with,  the  number  of  witnesses 
to  their  innocence  in  this  respect  will  greatly  surpass  that  of 
their  accusers. 

I  shall  say  nothing  more  concerning  that  point :  but  as' 
Suidas,  without  any  particular  regard  to  their  eucharist,  up- 
braids the  Manichees  with  nocturnal  assemblies  and  obscene 

•*  Interfui.  Sed  alia  quasstio  est  de  fide,  alia  de  moribus ;  ego  de  fide  pro- 
posui.  Act.  Fortun.  n.  2.  "^  Nostis  autem  me  non  Eleclum 

vestrum,  sod  Auditorem  fiiisse. — Quid  autem  inter  vos  agatis,  qui  electi  estis, 
ego  scire  non  possum,  et  rehqua.  ib.  n.  3. 

"^  Tu  nondum  christiunus,  qui  hortatu  meo,  cum  eos  vehementer  exsecraris, 
&c.  De  Util.  Cred.  c.  i.  n.  2.  '^  lb.  p.  741.- 

<■  p.  725.  e  p.  728.  "  lb.  p.  734,  735. 

'  Kai  KaraCvatiq  rivng  tvayiig  kui  vvKupivag,  Kai  irapavofiag  iii^tig.  k.  X. 
Suid.  V.  MuvT]<;. 


The  Manichees.     Sect.  I.  297 

mixtures,  and  others''  often  speak  of  them  as  an  impious 
.set  of  men,  I  shall  add  some  thing-s  vvliich  perhaps  may  be 
of  use  to  set  the  character  of  this  people  in  a  proper  liglit. 

About  the  year  388,  some  time  after  he  was  returned  to 
the  catholics,  Augustine  wrote  two  books;  one  entitled,  Of 
the  Manners  of  the  catholic  church,  the  other,  Of  the  Manners 
of  the  Manichees;  and  they  were  occasioned  by  the  Mani- 
chees' boasting"  of  their  own  strict  course  of  life,  and™  by 
their  cesisures  of  the  loose  behaviour  of  the  catholics. 

At  the  beoinnino-  of  the  first  of  those  two  books  Auffus- 
tine  owns  that"  the  Manichees  ensnared  many  by  the  specious 
appearance  of  chastity  and  temperance.  This  was  the  very 
thing-  that"  brought  his  friend  Alypius  into  their  nets. 

Aug^ustine  himself  seems  to  have  acquitted  them.  Whilst 
he  Avas  among  them  he  lived  a  sensual  course  of  life,  and 
his  head  was  filled  with  ambitious  schemes  :  but  he  owns 
that'*  this  was  not  owing  to  their  doctrine  ;  for  they  earnestly 
exhorted  men,  he  says,  to  mind  better  things.  So  he  writes 
at  the  beginning-  of  his  book  addressed  to  his  friend  Hono- 
ratus:  and  at  the  end  of  it  he  speaks  of  the  pale  covuitenances 
of  these '1  men. 

It  is  a  saying-  of  Ephrem  the  Syrian,  that"^  the  devil  gave 
Mani  a  pale  complexion,  the  better  to  deceive  the  simple 
and  unwary. 

^  In  Moreri's  article  of  Manes  are  these  words  :  *  He  condemned  maniage, 
*  still  allowing  his  followers  to  plunge  themselves  in  all  manner  of  sensuality  ; 


-'  et  condamnoit  le  marriage,  permettant  portant  a  ses  disciples  de  se 

plonger  dans  toutes  sortes  de  voluptes  brutales.     Docens, illicitas  esse 

nuptias,  licitos  concubitus  promiscuos.  Lamp.  Synops.  H.  E.  1.  2.  c.  2. 
p.  125.      How  could  any  man  believe  that  ?  '  Jam  bap- 

tizatus  autem  cum  Romae  essem,  nee  ferretacitus  possemManichsorum  jactan- 
tiam  de  falsa  et  faliaci  continentia  et  abstinentia, — scripsi  duos  libros,  unum 
de  Monbus  Ecclesiae  Calholicae,  alteram  de  Monbus  ManichgeoRim.  Retr.  1. 
i.  c.  7.  •"  Nolite  consectari  turbas  imperitorum,  qui  vel  in 

ipsa  vera  religione  superstitiosi  sunt,  vel  ita  libidinibus  dediti,  ut  obliti  sint 
quid  promiserint  Deo.     De  Mor.  Ec.  Cath.  c.  34.  n.  75. 

"  Sed  quoniam  duse  maximoe  sunt  illecebrae  Manichseorum,  quibus  decipi- 

untur  incauti, altera,  cum  vitae  castae  et  memorabilis  continentiae  imaginem 

prajferunt.     De  Mor.  Ec.  Ca.  cap.  i.  n.  2. 

"  ^amans  in  Manichaeis  ostentationem  continentiae,  quamveram  et  gei- 

manam  putabat.  Confess.  1.  6.  c.  7.  n.  12. 

P  Cum  vitoe  hujus  mundi  eram  implicatus,  tenebrosam  spera  gerens,  de 
pulchritudine  uxoris,  de  pompa  divitiarum,  de  inanitate  honorum,  caeterisque 
noxiis  et  j)erniciosis  voluptatibus.  Haec  enim  omnia,  quod  te  non  latet,  cum 
studiose  illos  audirem  cupere  et  sperare  non  desistebam.  Neque  hoc  eorum 
doctrinae  tribuo.  Fateor  enim  et  illos  sedulo  monere,  ut  ista  caveantur.  De 
utii.  Cred.  ad  Honorat.  c.  i.  n.  3. 

1 quo  illi  homines  exsangues  corporibus,  sed  crassLs  mentibus,  adspirare 

non  possunt.  ib.   cap.  ult.  ■■  Quare  sic   interpretor :  Pallore 

Manetem  diabolus  tinxif,  ut  incautos  fallerct.     Assem.  Bib.  Or.  T.  i.  p.  119. 


298  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

St.  Chrysostom  observes  of  the  Manichees,  that'  they  had 
an  appearance  of  modesty,  but  they  hid  the  wolf  under 
sheep's  clothing. 

It  appears,  from  divers  things  said  by  St.  Jerom,  that  the* 
Man icli€es  were  great  fasters,  and  that  they  had  among  them 
many  virgins,  persons  who  professed  to  live  a  chaste  and 
single  life.  The  gay  ladies  of  his  time  endeavoured  many 
ways  to  put  a  good  face  upon  their  luxurious  course  of  life  : 
sometimes  they"  said:  "  To  the  pure  all  things  are  pure." 
And  if  at  any  time  they  met  a  woman  who  looked  pale  and 
sad,  they  would  say  :  '  Ah  child,  thou  art  a  nun,  or  a 
'  miserable  Manichee,  I  suppose.' 

Jerom,  commenting  upon  Amos  iii.  15,  "  And  I  will  smite 
the  Avinter-house  Avitli  the  summer-house,"  says,  that  '  by 
'  the"  winter-house  may  be  understood  those  heretics  that 
'  mortified  themselves  with  fasting  and  abstinence,  who  fared 
'  hard  and  lodged  hard,  such  as  Tatian,  and  Mani,  and  their 
'  followers  :  the  summer-house  may  denote  the  Nicolaitanes 
'  and  other  heretics,  who  indulged  their  appetites,  and  lived 
'  in  all  manner  of  excess.'  And  upon  Joel  i.  14,  "  Sanctify 
'  ye  a  fast,"  he  has  these  words  :  '  Mani"  and  Tatian,  and 
'  many  other  heretics  fast,  but  their  fasting  is  worse  than 
'  gluttony  and  drunkenness.'  Once  more  the  same  ancient 
and  learned  writer  declares  :  '  Virgins,  such''  as  are  said  to 
'  be  among  divers  heretics,  and  even  among  the  impure 
'  Manichees,  are  to  be  esteemed  whores,  not  virgins.'  Such 
is  the  unhappiness  of  heresy  which  turns  virtues  into  vices! 
It  is  true,  however,  that  the  Manichees  fasted  and  lived 
chastely  ;  but  their  great  abstinence  and  virginal  chastity 
were  of  no  value. 

Chrysostom  expresseth  hmiself  in   the  like  manner.     He 

*  Kai  yap  oi  Mavixaioi — to  ffxVf*«  /''f  iiriStiKvvvrai  tTruiKiag, — /cat  Kara- 
KpvTTTHai  TT]  Sopu  Ts  TTpofiaTH  Tov  XwKOv.  Ill  Gen.  SeriTi.  7.  p.  680.  B.  ed. 
Buned.  '  Attjue  utinain  oinni  tempore  jujimare  possimiis, — 

Ncc  tamen  Manichsene  haereseos  accusandi  sunt,  r|uuni  carnalis  cibus  prieferri 
non  debuerit  spirituali.     Ad  Lucin.  Ep.  52.  [al.  28.]  T.  4.  p.  579. 

"  Istae  sunt,  qua;  solent  diceie :  Omnia  munda  raundis. — Et  quam  viderint 
pallentem  atque  tristem,  miseram  monacham,  et  Manichaeam  vocaat.  De 
Custod.  Virt,^  Ep.  18.  [al.  22,]  p.  32.  f. 

'  Et  percutiet  domum  hiemalem  ;  eos  haereticos,  qui  laborant  continentia 
et  jejuniis,  xerophagiis,  chamteeuniis,  e  quibus  Tatianus  et  Manichaeus.  Et 
domum  !e>tivam,  ut  Nicolaitas, — qui,  propter  ventris  ingluviem,  omnem  reci- 
piunt  voluptatem.  In  Amos  1.  i.  T.  3.  p.  139G.  in. 

*  Jejunat  Manichaeus,  et  multi  haeretici,  maximeque  Encratitae,  quorum 
princeps  Tatianus.  Sed  hoc  jejunium  saturitate  et  ebrietate  deterius  est.  In 
Joel.  cap.  i.  ib.  p.  1345.  f.  "  Caeterum  virgines,  quales  apud 

diversas  haereses,  et  quales  apud  impurissimum  Manichajum  esse  dicuntur, 
scorta  sunt  aestimandao,  non  virgines.     De  Custod.  Virg  Ep.  18.  T.  4.  p.  47. 


The  Munichees.     Sect.  I.  299 

says  hey  dares  not  call  tlie  virgins  of  lieretics  virgins;  and 
artinns  that'  the  sobriety  of  heretics  is  worse  than  the  greatest 
dissoluteness. 

1  suppose  the  reason  of  these  hard  sentences  may  be,  what 
is  somewhere  observed  by  Aug'ustine,  that''  actions  are 
qualified  by  the  views  and  ends  with  which  they  are  per- 
formed. 

I  presume  that  all  these  passages  of  ancient  writers  may 
be  sufficient  to  render  it  probable,  that  the  Manichees  had  no 
doctrines  which  countenanced  a  licentious  course  of  life. 
Some  of  their  elect,  it  is  likely,  failed  ^  in  observing  the  strict 
rules  by  which  they  were  bound  ;  but  so  it  was  with  the 
catholics:  there  were  bad  livers  likewise  among  them  ;  some*^ 
who  pretended  to  much  sanctity  and  devotion  were  guilty  of 
great  enormities.  Augustine's  complaint  of  the  Manichees 
is  verified  in  all  parties;  men**  say,  and  do  not;  they  com- 
mend and  teach  what  they  do  not  perform. 

VII.  The  Manichees  seldom  had  the  protection  of  the 
Roman  laws.  Tillemont,  in  his  history  of  this  people,  has 
an  entire  article  concerning  the  laws  of  the  emperors  against 
them.  In  Augustine's  Morks  against  the  Manichees  we  find 
frequent  notice  of  the  difliculties  they  lay  under.  Faustus® 
glories  in  the  persecutions  they  endured,  as  a  proof  of  their 
being  good  christians:  this  was  a  common  subject  of  boast- 
ing among'  them  :  and   they  argued  that*^  they  were  not  of 

y  TaQ  yap  twv  alpEriKuv  hk  nv  tnroifjii  irort  TrapOevng  fyw.  Chr.  De  Virgin. 
T.  i.  p.  268.  B.  '    Kai  yap  afftXytiag  aTra<Jr)Q  rj  rtiiv  a'lptriKWV 

ffw<j>poavvi]  x"P'^^  *""'•  ^b-  P-  271.  E.  Vid.  et.  A.  B.  C.  ib. 

*  Nisi  forte  quod  non  vescimini  carnibus,  et  vinutn  non  bibitis, — Quod 
quaero  a  vobis,  quo  fine  faciatis  ?  Finis  enim  quo  referuntur  ea  quae  facimus, — 
si  non  solum  inculpabilis,  sed  etiam  laudabilis  fuerit,  tunc  demum  etiam  facta 
nostra  laude  aliqua  digna  sunt.  De  ?^Ior.  Manich.  1.  2.  cap.  13.  n.  27. — Sed 
tamen  significantes,  vanem  esse  continentiam  istam,  nisi  ad  aliquem  rectissimum 
finem,  certa  ratione  feratur.  ib.  n.  28.  Si  ergo  parcimoniae  gratia  et  coercendee 
libidinis,  qua  escis  talibus  et  potu  delectamur  et  capimur,  audio  et  probo.  Sed 
non  ita  est.  ibid.     Vid.  et  eund.  contr.  Faust.  1.  v.  c.  5. 

''  Vid.  Aug.  de  Mor.  Manicli.  cap.  18,  19,  20. 

'  Novi  multos  esse  sepulcronim  et  picturarum  adoratores.  Novi  multos 
esse,  qui  luxuriosissime  super  mortuos  bibant,  et  epulas  cadaveribus  exhibentes, 
super  sepultos  se  ipsos  sepeliant,  et  voracitates,  ebrietatesque  suas  deputent 
religioni,  &c.     De  Mor.  Ec.  Ca.  c.  34.  n.  74. 

^  Cum  autem  laudatis  et  docetis  ista,  nee  facitis,  quid  vobis  fallacius — dici 
aut  inveniri  potest  ?  De  Mor.  Manich.  c.  19.  n.  68. 

^  Vides  pauperem,— esurientem,  sitientem,  persecutiones  et  odia  sustinentem 
propter  justitiam.     Et  dubitas,  utrvim  accipiani  evangelium  ?  Faust.  1.  5.  c.  1. 

f  Ubi  est  ergo  quod  perfjetuam  sibi  persecutionem  in  hoc  raundo  futuram 
praedicant,  eoque  se  commendaliores  haberi  volunt,  hinc  interpretantes,  quod 
hie  mundus  eos  oderit.  De  M.  Manich.  c.  19.  n.  69. — aut  definite  vos  inde 
jactare,  quod  multis  detestabiles  sitis.     Contr.  Faust.  1.  6.  c.  8. 


300  Credibilky  of  the  Gospel  History. 

the  world,  aiul  must  needs  be  sincere  lovers  of  truth,  because 
the  world  hated  them,  and  they  were  always  under  perse- 
cution. 

It  appears  by  Augustine's  second  day's  conference  with 
Felix,  at  Hippo,  in  the  year  404,  that  the  Manichaean  books, 
or  papers  of  Felix,  had  been  taken  from  him,  and  were  in 
the  custody  of  a  public  officer.  Felix ^  desired  to  have  them 
restored  to  him  for  his  assistance  in  the  debate:  Augustine 
at  length  allows  that  any  thing-  he  pointed  to  might  be 
recited  out  of  those  writings.  Among-  them  was  a  letter  of 
Mani,  called  The  Epistle  of  the  Foundation.  And,  in  the 
first  day's  conference,  Felix  several  'times  intimates''  the 
difficulty  he  lay  under  in  disputing  against  the  imperial 
laws. 

When  Augustine"  speaks  of  the  banishment  of  Faustus 
and  others  into  an  island,  I  think  he  intimates  that  by  law 
they  might  have  been  punished  more  severely  :  for  he  says 
that  moderate  sentence  was  obtained  by  the  intercession  of 
those  very  christians  who  prosecuted  Faustus  and  his  Mani- 
chscan  friends  in  the  proconsul's  court.  And,  in  the  same 
context,  a  little  before,  he  speaks  of  the"*  advantage  the 
Manichees  had  from  the  mildness  of  the  catholics,  which 
was  such  that  their  sufferings  were  few  and  almost  none  at 
all.  But  then  it  should  be  observed  that'  Augustine  com- 
putes banishment  into  a  desert  island  to  be  a  mere  trifle,  and 
little  more  than  retirement,  which  gave  men  an  opportunity 
for  meditation  :  moreover,  as  he  assures  us,  the  banishment 
of  the  Manichees  before  mentioned  Mas  of  short  duration; 
they  were  all  soon  released  by  public  authority. 

And  it  may  be  collected  from  some  things  said  by  Augus- 

8  Et  quia  nullam  scripturam  inter  manes  habui,  quia  non  mihi  sunt  redditae, 
unde  me  instruere  possem.  Nullus  enini  ad  certamen  exit,  nisi  prius  munitus 
fuerit :  tt  nullus  litigator  potest  sine  suis  chartis  litigare.  Similiter  et  ego  sine 
mea  scriptura  respondere  non  possum. — Modo  peto,  codices  reddantur  raihi. — 
Aug.  dixit :  Sed  quia  codices  tuos  repetis,  qui  sub  sigillo  publico  custodiuntur. 
— 'I'olle  autem  codices  tuos,  et  die  quid  inde  velis  proferri. — Felix  dixit: 
Omnes  scnpturas,  quae  mihi  sublatoe  sunt.  Istaenira  Epistola  Fundamenti  est, 
&c.     Act.  cum  Fel.  1.  2.  c. 

^  Non  tantum  ego  possum  contra  tuam  virtutem,  deinde  contra  leges  Impe- 
ratonim. — Act.  cum  Fel.  1.  1.  c.  12.  Vid.  ib.  infra,  et  cap.  6. 

'  Faustus  autem,  convictus  vel  confessus  quod  Manichaeus  esset,  cum  aliis 
nonnullis  secum  ad  judicium  proconsulare  perductis,  eis  ipsis  christianis  a 
quibus  perducti  sunt  intercedentibus,  levissima  poena,  si  tamen  ilia  poena 
dicenda  est,  in  insulam  relegatus  est ;  quod  sua  sponte  quotidic  fervi  Dei 
faciunt,  se  aturbulento  strepitu  populorum  removere  cupientes  ; — Denique  non 
multo  post  inde  omnes  eadem  sollemni  sorte  dimissi  sunt.  Contr.  Faust.  1.  6. 
c.  8.  ^  Pro  qua  impia  perversitate,  propter  christianorum 

temporum  mansuetudinem,  quam  parva  et  prope  nulla  patiamini,  cur  non 
cogitatis  ?  lb.  '  Vid.  not.  '. 


The  Manichecs.     Sect.  I.  301 

tine,  upon  anotlier  occasion,  that""  though  their  assemblies 
were  prohibited  by  law  at  Carthage,  they"  found  opportu- 
nities to  meet  together  for  divine  worship  :  such  was  the 
zeal  of  these  unhappy  people,  or  such  was  the  moderation 
of  those  who  were  intrusted  with  the  execution  of  the  laws 
against  them. 

Not  long  after  the  year  440,  pope  Leo°  made  strict  inquiry 
after  the  Manichecs  at  Rome  and  in  other  places,  and 
destroyed  great  numbers  of  their  books  ;  so  writes  Prosper: 
and  from  Leo  himself,  in  a  letter  to  the  bishops  of  Italy,  we 
learn  thatP  he  detected  many  of  this  people  at  Rome  :  some 
he  converted;  the  rest,  who  were  unmoved  by  his  argu- 
ments, were  condemned  to  perpetual  banishment  as  the  laws 
directed. 

Photius  says  that^  though  many  emperors  had  punished 
those  apostates  even  with  death,  the  progress  of  their  im- 
piety had  not  been  stopped. 

They  who  are  desirous  of  knowing  more  of  this  matter, 
may  consult  the  Codes''  of  Justinian  and''  Theodosius; 
Avhere  are  divers  laws  against  these  men,  which  cannot  be 
denied  to  have  an  appearance  of  much  severity. 

In  Baronius*  may  be  seen  such  a  rescript  of  Dioclesian 
and  Maximian,  said  to  be  given  at  Alexandria  in  the  year 
290,  occasioned  by  an  account  received  from  Julian,  pro- 
consul of  Africa,  of  the  great  disturbances  occasioned  by 
the  Manichecs  in  that  country.  This  rescript  is,  1  think, 
generally  allowed  to  be"  genuine:  but  Samuel  Basnage'' 
offers  divers  weighty  arguments  against  that  supposition  : 

■"  quod  eo  tempore,  quo  conveaticula,  eorum  lege  publica  pro- 

hiberentur.     De  Mor.  Man.  c.  19.  n.  69. 

"  Non  eranf  hi  [Electi]  ex  una  domo  ;  seJ,  diverse  prorsus  habitantes,  ex 
60  loco  ubi  conventus  omnium  factus  erat,  pariter  forte  descenderant.  ib.  n.  68. 

"  Hoc  tempore  plurimos  Manichaeos  intra  Urbem  latere  diligentise  Papae 
Leonis  innotuit,  qui  eos  de  secretis  suis  erutos,  et  oculis  totius  ecclesiae  publi- 
catos,  omnes  dogmatis  sui  turpitudines  et  damnare  fecit  et  prodere,  incensis 
eorum  codicibus,  quorum  magnac  moles  erant  interceptae,  &c.  Prosper.  Chr. 
Integr.  ap.  Canis.  et  Basnag.  Lection.  T.  i.  p.  304. 

p  Plurimos  impietatis  Manichaeae  sequaces  et  doctores  in  Urbe  investigatio 

nostra  reperit. Aliquanti  vero,  qui  ita  se  demerserant,  ut  nullum  his  auxili- 

antis  posset  remedium  subvenire,  subditi  legibus,  secundum  christianorum 
principuni  constituta,  ne  sanctum  gregem  sua  contagione  poUuerent,  per  pub- 
licos  judiccsperpetuo  sunt  exilio  relegati.     Leo.  Ep.  2.  ad  onm.  Ep.  Ital. 

'^   TToWoiv  Et  ivaEJSwv  jicwiKiiov  ^i(pii  rrjv  Sikijv  thq  mro'^aTac  eiffwpar- 

rofievwv,  Kai  /itjj5'  srio  TtfQ  auefinQ  (poQag  irafitvtjc-  Phot.  Contr.  Man.  1.  i.  "c. 
IG.  p.  6i.  *■  Just.  cod.  i.  i.  Tit.  v.  De  Haereticis,  et  Manichaeis, 

et  Samaratis.  *  Cod.  Theod.  1.  16.  Tit.  v.  De  Haereticis. 

»  Baron.  Ann.  287.  n.  i.  ii.  kc.  Vid.  et  Coteler.  Men.  Gr.  T.  i.  p.  778,  779. 

"  Vid.  TiUem.  Les  Manichcens,  Art.  17.  et  Diocleticn.  sect.  14. 

*  Basn.  Ann.  287.  n.  iv. 


302  Crcdibiliiy  of  the  Gospel  History. 

one  of  them  is,  that  there  is  no  mention  of  this  hiw  in  Euse- 
bius,  Cyril,  or  Augustine  :  he  has  many  other  reasons  wliich 
are  very  considerable,  and  may  be  seen  in  his  own  work. 

Indeed  it  seems  to  me  altogether  unlikely  that  Maniclijeism 
should  so  soon  have  gained  footing-,  and  made  such  progress 
in  Africa,  as  is  here  supposed,  so  as  to  cause  disturbances 
to  divers  people  and^"  cities,  and"  be  received  by  men  of 
high  rank  as  well  as  others. 

It  appears  to  me  also  very  probable  that,  if  Dioclesian 
had  made  such  a  law  as  this,  the  Manichees  would  have 
been  expressly  named  in  Constantino's  edicts  against  here- 
tics ;  whereas,  it  does  not  appear  from'Eusebius,  that^  they 
were  so  named  in  any  such  laws  of  that  christian  emperor. 

It  must  be  owned  AmmianusMarcellinus  says  that  '  Con- 
'  stantine,^  desirous  to  get  exact  information  concerning-  the 
'  opinions  of  divers  sects,  the  Manichees  and  the  like,  em- 
'  ployed  Strategius  for  that  purpose  ;  who  acquitted  himself 
'  so  well  in  the  office  assigned  him,  that  the  emperor  order- 
'  ed  he  should  for  the  future  be  called  Mjisonianus.'  But 
perhaps  Ammianus  accommodates  his  way  of  speaking-  to 
the  state  of  things  in  his  own  time,  when  the  Manichees  were 
well  known,  as  well  as  greatly  disliked.  Ammianus  men- 
tions no  other  sect  distinctly  beside  the  Manichees,  as  if  they 
were  the  principal  subject  of  inquiry  ;  which  can  hardly  be 
allowed,  when  we  perceive  from  our  ecclesiastical  historians 
that  there  were  other  sects  at  that  time  which  made  much 
more  noise  in  the  Roman  empire  :  however,  the  inquiry  here 
spoken  of  is  no  proof  that  the  Manichees  were  named  in  any 
of  Constantino's  laws  against  heretics. 

Beausobre''  admits  the  genuineness  of  this  law:  but  then 
he  says  Dioclesian''  and  his  ministers  must  have  been  very 
little  acquainted  with  the  true  principles  of  the  Manichees; 
which  I  think  shoidd  have  led  him  to  suspect  the  reputed 
orig-inal  of  this  rescript,  and  ascribe  it  rather  to  some  igno- 
rant and  designing-  impostor. 

*  et  multa  facinora  ibi  committere :  populos  namque  quietos  per- 

turbare,  nee  non  civitatibus  maxima  detrimenta  inferre.  ap.  Baron,  ib.  n.  3. 

"  Si  qui  sane  eliam  honorati,  aut  cujuslibet  dignitatis,  vel  majoris  personae, 
ad  banc  inauditam,  turpemque  sectani, — se  transtulerunt.  ib.  n.  4. 

y  Vid.  Eus.  de  Vit.  Constant.  1.  .3.  cap.  63,  G4. 

^  Constantinns  enim  cum  limatius  superstitionum  qusereret  sectas,  Mani- 
chaeorum  et  similium,  nee  interpres  inveniretur  iJoneus,  hunc  sibi  commenda- 
tUhi  ut  sufficientem  elegit ;  quem,  officio  t'unctnm  perite,  Musonianum  voluit 
appellari,  ante  Stratogium  dictitatum.     Amm.  M.  1.  15.  c.  13. 

^  See  B.  Hist,  de  Man.  T.  i.  p.  183.  T.  2.  p.  799. 

*>  Diocletien  et  ses  ministies  connoissoient  fort  mal  ces  heretiques,  s'ils  les 
croyoient  capablcs  d'approuver  les  incestes,  eux  qui  toleroient  a  peine  le 
manage,  ib.  T.  i.  p.  284. 


The  Manickecs.     Sect.  If.  303 

Before  1  conclude  the  remarks  upon  this  rescript,  1  shouUl 
acknowledge  that  it  is  mentioned  in'  the  Commentaries  upon 
St.  Paul's  thirteen  epistles,  usually  joined  with  the  works 
of  St.  Ambrose  :  but,  as  the  Benedictine  editors  say,  those'' 
Commentaries  have  been  interpolated  in  many  places  ;  and 
they  may  have  been  so  here.  However,  the  age  of  that 
work  is  not  certainly  known:  I  formerly*^  took  some  notice 
of  it. 


SECT.  II. 

THE  HISTORY  OF  MANI. 


I.  His  name,  country,  parents,  qualifications.     II.   The  time 
of  the  rise  oj"  Manicha^ism, 

I.  MANI,  always*  so  called  by  the  Persians  and  Arabians, 
usually  called  Manes,  or  Manichee,  by  the  Greeks  and 
Romans,  was^  a  Persian,  or  at  least  lived  in  the  territories 
of  the  king-  of  Persia;  as  is  allowed*^  by  all  authors  who 
speak  of  him. 

Beausobre''  says  it  is  certain  he  was  a  Persian,  if  thereby 
he  meant  that  he  was  a  native  subject  of  the  kinffs  of  Persia : 
but  if  thereby  he  meant  that  he  was  of  the  province  of  Fars, 
or  Persia,  it  is  doubtful.     Ephrem  says*^  he  was  a  Baby- 

'  Quippe  cum  Diocletianus  imperator  constitutione  sua  designet,  dicens : 
Sordidam  banc  et  impuram  hceresim,  quae  nuper,  inquit,  egressa  est  de  Perside. 
Ambrosiast.  in  2  Tim.  c.  iii.  p.  310.  C. 

^  Illud  insuper  adjiciendum  est,  eosdem  bbrarios  magna  bcentia  saltern  in 
tres  priores  epistolas  abusos  esse :  quandoquidem  ab  eis  non  raro  longa  frag- 
menta  ibidem  inserta  fuisse  probabile  est,  quaa  in  vetustioribus  manuscriptis 
non  inveniuntur,  &c.  Admon.  p.  21.  f.  ^  See  before,  p.  26. 

^  Manes  Persa,  in  eorum  libris  dictus  Mani  pictor,  nam  talis  fuit  professione 
sua. — Cum  itaque  in  omnibus  Arabum  et  Persaruni  libris  constanter  vocetur 
Mani,  hoc  verum  ejus  nomen  Persicum  fiiisse  tuto  credainus.     Hinc  Graecis  et 
aliis  vulgo  audit  Mari/c-    Hyde  de  Relig.  Vet  Pers.  c.  21.  p.  280,  281.    Vid 
et  Moshem.  de  Reb.  Christian,  ante  Constantin.  m.  p.  734. 

*"   Maj/j/c  ^f-  uToq  atro  rrtQ  tmv  irtpaajv  opfiaro  yr]Q.  Epiph.  Haer.  66.  n.  1. 

Manichaei  a  quodam  Persa  extiterunt,  qui  vocabatur  Manes.  Augustin.  de 
Haer.  c.  46.  in. 

Persa,  qucm  accusasti,  nonaderit.     Secundin.  Ep.  ad  Aug.  c.  3. 

'^  Manetem  genera  Persam  omnes  veteres  faciunt.  Assem.  B.  Or.  T.  i.  p. 
122.  d  T.  i.  p.  66. 

®  Babylonium  fuisse  docet  [Ephraem]  infra  hymno  xiv.  Assem.  ib. 


304  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

Ionian;  that  is,  of  the  province  of  Babylon,  or  else  of  Chaldsea, 
which  '  is  often  confounded  with  that  of  Babylon  :  this  seems 
to  be  confirmed  by  The  Acts  of  Archelaus,  wheres  that 
bishop  reproaches  Mani  with  understanding-  no  language 
but  his  Chaldee ;  which  implies  that  he  was  a  Chaldean. 

It  is  not  a  little  disagreeable  to  observe  the  poor  thoughts 
of  divers  ancient  Greek  writers,  occasioned  by  the  name 
of  this  man.  The  thing  is  taken  notice  of  by  several 
moderns  :  I  quote  two  of  them  in  the  margin,''  Cave  and' 
Toll  ins. 

They  speak  as  if  his  name  had  been  derived  from  the 
Greek  noun  mania,  signifying  madnes's,  or  from  the  verb 
mainomai ;  and  as  if  his  name  were  the  same  as  maneis,  that 
is,  mad  or  furious ;  whereas  the  name  is  certainly  Persic  or 
Chaldaic.  Eusebins,  formerly  quoted,  is  pleased  to  allude 
to  this  imaginary  signification  of  the  word.  Cyril  of  Jeru- 
salem says,  '  he"^  changed  his  name  from  Cubricus  to  Manes, 
'  thinking  thereby  to  gain  honour  among-  the  Persians  ;  but 
'  divine  Providence  so  ordered  that  he  thereby  aftixed  to 
'  himself  among  the  Greeks  the  character  of  madness.' 
Epiphanius'  has  somewhat  to  the  like  purpose.  Titus  of 
Bostra,  M'ho  writes  the  name  Maneis,  instead  of  Manes,  has 
also  condescended'"  to  adopt  this  slight  thing;  for  so  I 
must  call  it,  though  it  is  also  found  in  so  fine  a  writer  as" 
Photius. 

The  poor  people  were  so  often  tcazed  with  this  silly  fancy, 
that,  as  Augustine  says,  for  that  reason  they"  prolonged  the 

f  Vid.  Cellar.  Orb.  T.  2.  p.  755. 

s  Persa  barbare,  non  Graecorum  linguse, — non  iillius  alterius  linguee  scien- 
tiam  habere  potuisti,  sed  Chaldaeorum  solum,  &c.     Arch.  n.  36.  p.  63. 

■^  Gra;ci  vero,  quo  aptiorem  irridendi  occasionem  arriperent,  illud  a  fiavia 
deducere  sclent.     Cav.  H.  L  T.  i.  p.  140.  f.  Oxon. 

'  Quia  vero,  Grsecis,  aut  Graeca  intelligentibus  adversariis,  vox  ilia  Mar^jc 
uberiorem  irridendi  ansam  praebebat,  quasi  a  Graeco  fiavia,  insania,  seu 
/laivofiot,  insnnio,  derivata  esjiet,  et  sic  nonien  et  omen  insaniae  Maneti  obti- 
gisset ;  turn  quod  et  eadem  vox  Mavjjc  stupidum  significaret,  ut  apud  Arisfo- 
]jhanem,  lYUyaivtroc  &  o  ^avrjc.  Manichaei  Manichatos  se  vocari  volebant, 
quasi  derivato  nomine  a  nuuialuith  requies.  Nee  apud  Judaeos  iidem  con- 
tumelia  caruerunt,  qui  omnes  impios  Manetes  appellarunt,  &c.  Toll.  not.  ap. 
insign.  Ital.  p.  126.  "^   H  ^s  r«  06h  oiKovoju/a  K-ai  a/covra  avrov 

iavTH  (carr/yo()ov  fTroift  ytvioBai'  \va  tv  Uipaih  vo^uaaQ  tavro7>  Tifiav,  Trap' 
EXX»;(Ti  fiaviag  nroivvfiov  iavTov  KarayyfWy.   Cyr.  Cat.  6.  n.  24. 

•  Hffir.  66.  n.  i.  p.  617.  CD. 

*"  O  ^£  MavHQ  IK  ^apPapwv,  km  rtji;  fiavinQ  avrtjc  nrwvvfioc.  k.  \.  1  itus 
contr.  Manich.  1.  i.  in.  p.  60. 

>■•  Vid.  Phot,  contr.  Man.  1.  i.  c.  12.  p.  45—47. 

°  Manichaei  a  quodam  Persa  exstiterunt,  qui  vocabatur  Manes :  quamvis  et 
ipsum,  cum  ejus  insana  doctrina  coepisset  in  Graecia  pra'dicari,  Manichaeum 
discipuli  ejus  appellare  maluerunt,  devitantes  nomen  insaniac.     Unde  quidam 


Vic  ManicJiees.     Sect.  II.  305 

name,  and  called  their  master  jManicliee,  to  avoid  tlie  reproach 
of  that  odious  derivation;  and  some  of  them  pretended  that 
the  true  May  of  writing-  the  name  was  Mannichee,  denoting- 
one  that  poured  down  the  heavenly  bread  manna.  I  have 
transcribed  at  the  bottom  of  the  page  two  passages  of  Au- 
gustine, Avhere  he  speaks  of  this  matter.  James  Basnage, 
in  his  notes  npon  Titus,i'  has  judiciously  censured  both  sides 
for  these  trifles.  One  might  be  apt  to  think  thati  Mani,  or 
Mane,  or  Manes,  should  be  the  name  of  the  man,  and  "^Mani- 
chtens  denoteafollower  of  him.  But  the  Greeks  and  Latins 
do  often  iise^  this  last  for  hin^self,  as  Avell  as  the  former.  I 
put  ill  the  margin*  a  few  other  observations,  though  of  no 

eorum  quasi  doctiores,  et  eo  ipso  mendaciores,  geminata  ii  litera,  Mannichaeum 
vocant,  quasi  manna  fundentem.     Aug.  de  Hser.  c.  4G.  in. 

Et  per  dominum  vestrum  Manicheeum,  qui  Manes  lingua  patria  vocabatur. 
Scd  vos,  ut  apud  Graecos  nomen  insanias  vitaretis,  velutdeclinato  et  piolongato 
nomine,  quasi  fusionem  addidistis,  ubi  amplius  laberemini.  Sic  enim  raihi 
quidam  vestrum  exposuit,  cur  appellatus  sit  Mannichaeus,  scilicet  in  Grseca 
lingua  tamquam  manna  fuudere  videretur,  quia  Graece  fundi  x'f'i'  dicitur,  &c. 
Conlr.  Faust.  1.  19.  c.  22. 

P  Ut  averterent  omen  Manetis  discipuli  apud  Graecos   Manichaeum 

ilium  appellabant,  eumque  velut  angelum  e  ccelis  fiawa  xtovra,  panem 
cceiestem,  manna  scilicet,  effundentem  referebant.  Sic  ab  utraque  parte  lude- 
batur  circa  nominisetymologiam.  Sed  futiles  admodum  sunt  illae  observationes, 
quas  quisque  ad  suae  partis  gloriam  trahere  conatur.     Basn.  ad  Tit.  B.  p.  60. 

'^  Manichaei  post  hos  de  Perside  a  Mane  homine — ita  dicto  surrexerunt. 
Philast.  de  H.  c.  61.  in. 

^  Notabis  Manichaeum  dici  a  Leone,    quem  Manem   potius  vocare 

debebat.  Mavijc  est  haeresiarcha  ipse,  Mavt^aioc,  qui  ejus  sectae  est,  et  Mavt- 
Xaiov  Soyna.  Tamen  nunquam  aliter  a  veteribus  patribus  vocatur,  quem 
Manichaeus,  ut  Hieronymo,  et  aliis  primae  notae  scriptoribus :  quod  perinde 
est,  ac  si  Marcionista  pro  Marcione  diceretur,  Valentinianus  pro  Valentino, 
Photinianus  pro  Photino.  Neque  semel  Mavixmog  et  Maftjg  pro  eodem  apud 
Epiphanium.     Jos.  Seal.  Animadv.  in  Eus.  Chron.  p.  240.  f. 

*  Even  in  the  Acts  of  Archelaus,  Mani's  name  is  written  both  ways ;  that 
is,  sometimes  he  is  called  Manes,  at  other  times  Manichaeus.  I  shall  refer  to 
some  examples :  Et  post  triduo  venit  ad  Manem.  Arch.  c.  6  p.  9.  Nullum 
ex  nobis,  6  Manes,  Galatam  facies.  ib.  c.  36.  p.  62.  His  auditis,  turbae  vole- 
bant  comprehendere  Manem.  c.  55.  p.  100.  Die  mihi  illud  etiam,  6  Mani- 
chaee.  c.  49.  p.  90.  His  letter  to  Marcellus  is  there  thus  inscribed  :  ]s\avixaioc, 
K.  X.  c.  5.  p.  6.  In  like  manner  Epiphanius  useth  both  ways  of  writing 
Mani's  name. 

'  Suidas  says :  Mav»jc>  ovofia  TStptrs — KXivtrai  MavtvTOQ.  Which  might 
almost  induce  one  to  suppose,  that  he  wrote  the  name  Mavug,  for  y]avr]Q,  the 
proper  name  of  a  slave  is,  I  ihink,  generally  declined  Mava.  In  Titus,  this 
name  is  always  written  Mavug,  and  he  declines  as  Suidas  directs:  oi  x'^^^^'^s 
vpoq  Ts  NaiEVTOQ  rjTTaTijiifvoi.  Tit.  B.  contr.  Man.  1.  i.  p.  64.  m.  The  same 
way  of  declining  is  used  in  the  Form  of  abjuring  Manichaeism.  Ava^t^art^w 
Tov  y.tfpai^t]  Mm'erroc  fivOop.  ap.  Toll.  p.  130.  \va9snaTi<^(o  tov  TrariQa 
MaviVTOQ  UuTiKiov.  ib.  p.  144.  Epiphanius  declines  otherwise  :  iK  Maj/;; 
TivoQ.  H.  66.  n.  i,  p.  617.  C.  io)Q  r«  lYiov?;.  ib.  c.  20.  p.  637.  D.  fiaOi)Tti 
ovTt  m  Ts^nvti.  ib.  c.  12.  p.  629.  P.  1  add  some  other  examples  from  other  au- 
VOL.    I II.  X 


306  Credibility  of  (he  Gospel  nislory. 

great  importance,  concerning  the  different  ways  of  writing 
this  name  in  several  authors.  1  hope  1  need  not  make  any 
apology  for  generally  writing  his  name  Mani"  after  the 
people  of  the  east,  where  he  lived:  and  Epiphanius  says 
that"^  Mane  was  the  name  he  took  instead  of  Cubricus. 

It  is  not  amono-  the  Greeks  that  we  must  seek  for  the 
original  of  this  name  ;  for  Archelaus  himself  says  that"' 
Corbicius  changed  his  name  after  the  death  of  the  widow, 
his  patroness,  at  the  court  of  Persia;  and  all  the  Greek 
writers  in  general  say  that  in  taking  the  name  Manes  he 
intended  to  secure  himself  honour  among  the  Persians. 

But  though  the  name  Mani  be  Persic  or  Chaldaic,  learned 
moderns,  skilled  in  the  oriental  languages,  are  not  agreed 
about  the  original  of  it.  However,  it  may  be  observed  that 
Cyril  of  Jerusalem  says,  Manes''  in  the  Persian  language 
signifies  discourse  or  eloquence  ;  and  that  he  changed  his 
name  from  Cubricus  to  Manes,  partly  to  obliterate  the 
memory  of  his  servitude,  partly  for  the  sake  of  gaining'  the 
reputation  of  a  good  speaker:  this  is  taken  up  byy  Photius 
and  others.  Epiphanius  says  that^  Mane,  in  the  Babylonian 
language,  signifies  vessel  or  instrument :  Ephrem  the 
Syrian*  seems  to  refer  to  this  notion  of  the  word  ;  which  is 

thors. — tiQ  Tov  Mavjjra.  Thdrt.  H.  F.  1.  i.  c.  2C.  p.  213.  D.  Cyril  of  Jerusalem 
always  writes  Manes,  never  Manichee.  And  he  declines,  as  Epiphanius — avn 
TuV^sPpiKuMavriv  tavTov  (.TTiiivofiaaiv.  Cat.  6.  n.  24.  KarfKa\ai(Tt  rovMavqv 
6  Ap^^tXao^.  ib.  n.  30. — aXX'  tvoQ  tuv  KaKujv  rpuov  ra  Mavri  fiuQrjrwv.  ib.  n. 
31.  How  Philaster  decUned  Manes,  appears  from  the  beginning  of  his  article. 
See  note  '^.  In  the  Acts  of  Archelaus,  where  the  name  is  written  Manes  in 
the  nominative,  and  not  Manichseus,  it  is  not  prolonged  in  the  genitive :  et 
quomodo  de  Perside  venientem  Manem. — Arch.  n.  35.  p.  61.  His  auditis, 
turbae  volebant  Manem  comprehensum  tradere. — c.  55.  p.  100. — non  ex  Mane 
originem  mali  hujus  manasse.  ib.  p.  101.     And  see  before,  note  ^ 

"  Les  Persans  et  les  Arabes  appellent  notre  heresiarque  Mani. — Beaus.  Hist. 
Manich.  T.  i.  p.  73.  m.  and  see  note  S  p.  116. 

''  KsjSpiKoc  litv  TO  TTpwTOV  KoXHfiiVOQ,  iKOVonaffag  Se  tavTii)  Mavr]  ovofia. 
H.  66.  n.  i.  in.  *  Tunc  ergo  Corbicius,  sepulta  domina,  bonis 

sibi  derelictis  omnibus  uti  ccEpit,  et  migravit  ad  medium  civilatis  locum,  in 
quo  manebat  Rex  Persarum,  et  comniulato  sibi  nomine  Manem  semetipsum 
pro  Corbicio  appellavit.     Arch.  n.  53.  p.  98. 

"  Eira,  iva  fir)  ro  TrjQ  SsXunc  ovofia  fjrorei^i'rov  t],  avn  th  Ks/SpiKS  Mapt]v 
iavTOv  STTUJvofinaiv,  ontp  Kara  rriv  lltpaojv  diaXtKTOv  rr]v  ofiiXiav  (^j/Xof  tTrn^?] 
yap  Sia\tKTiicn(;  tCoKtirtQ  tipai,  Mavqv  tavrov  fTraivo/jiaan',  o'lovti  ofiiXijrrfv  nva 
apirrov.  k.  X.     Cyr.  Cat.  G.  n.  24.  ■>'   At/Xoi  St  ruro  UfpmSi 

y\(o(TfTy  TOV  o'lov  6ixi\r]TiK0V,  Kai  wpog  SiaXi'^iv  SpaTtiptov.  I'h.  contr.  Man.  1.  i. 
C.  12.  p.  45.  '■   To  yap  Mavt]  airo  TrjQ  BajivXoJviaQ  tig  ti)v  'KXXrjm^a 

fitTailxponivov  (TKtvog  airoipaLvii  r   nvofia.  H.  66.  n.  i.p.  617.  C.  D. 

■•  Manes,  Chaldaicum  nomen,  vas,  vcslem,  instrumcntum  quodlibet  signi- 
ficat.  Hue  spectat  quod  S.  Epliraem  hoc  loco  scribit :  Manelem  diabolus 
tamquam  propria  induit  veste,  ut  eo,  vdut  insfrumenlo  suo  abuteretur,  suaque 
per  ipsum  promeret  oracula.     Asscm.  B<b.  Or.  T.  i.  p.  119. 


The  Munichccs.     Sect.  II.  307 

also  approved  by  Asseman  ;  ami  it  may  be  supposed  to  be 
alluded  to  in''  The  Acts  of'Arolielaus  ;  nor  does  Hyde  deny 
tliaf^^  Man,  or  Mana,  in  Assyrian  and  Chaldee,  signifies 
vessel. 

I  shall  not  concern  myself  about  other  derivations  or  sig-- 
nifications  of  this  name;  but  only  refer  to  some''  authors, 
where  they  may  be  seen  by  those  who  are  curious. 

Whatever  was  the  meaning-  of  the  name,  as^  Beausobre 
observes,  it  certainly  was  very  honourable  ;  and,  if  it  signi- 
fied any  thing,  there  is  reason  to  think  it  denoted  some 
advantageous  quality;  for'  divers  kings  of  Edessa  Mere 
named  Manes,  or  Maancs ;  and  Asseman  says  that«  it  was  a 
common  name  of  the  princes  of  Syria  and  Arabia. 

It  is  said  that  Mani's  father's  name  was  Patitius,  or  Pate- 
cius,  and  his  mother's  name  Carossa  :  their  names  are  in  The'' 
Form  of  abjuring  Manicheeism,  and  in'  Hyde.  Cave''  has 
Patricius,  by  mistake  probably  ;  but  the  thing  is  of  no 
importance. 

The  Greek  writers  continually  represent  Mani  as  a  slave, 
purchased  by  a  widow,  and  afterwards  set  at  liberty.  This 
we  have  already  seen  in  Socrates,  with  whom  others  agree. 
This  is  one  thing  with'  which  Cyril  upbraids  him  ;  though 
he  at  the  same  time  owns  that  it  is  no  real  scandal.  If  he 
was  once  poor  and  a  slave,  he  obtained  his  liberty,  and  came 
to  the  possession  of  a  great  estate  by  that  time  he  was  twelve 
years  of  age.     According  to'"    Archelaus  and"  Cyril,  the 

**  Vas  es  Antichristi,  et  neqiie  bonum  vas,  sed  sordidum  et  indigiuiin. 
Arch.  c.  36.  p.  62.  "  Verum  quideni  est,  quod  in  lingua  Assy- 

rlaca  et  Chaldaica  Man  seu  Mana  sit  Vas.     De  Rel.  V.  Persp.  p.  281.  in. 

•>  Vid.  Fabr.  Bib.  Gr.  T.  v.  p.  281,  282.  Hyde  de  Rel.  Vet.  Pers.  p.  281. 
Le  Moyne  Var.  Sacr.  p.  634.  Joseph.  Seal  Animadv.  in  Eus.  Chron.  p.  240, 
241.  "Touttee  ad  Cyr.  Cat.  6.  n.  24.  Beausobr.  Hist,  de  Manich.  T.  i.  p.  70 
—74.     Jac.  Basn.  ad  Tit.  Bostr.  1.  i.  p.  60.  ^  T.  i.  p.  73. 

f  Vid.  Chron.  Edess.  ap.  Asseman.  Bib.  Or.  T.  i.  p.  418,  419,  &c. 

8  Maanes,  nomen  turn  Syris  turn  Araljibus  principibus  familiare.  Assem. 
ib.  p.  418.  **   AvaGifiuTiKoj  TOP  TTartpa   Mavtvrog  UartKiov, 

Kai  Ti]v  avTH  iit^Ttpa  Kaporraav.  ap.  Toll.  Insiga.  p.  144. 

'  Hie apud  Shahristanium  vocatiir   Manes  ibn  Phaten  doctus  sai 

Philosophus.  At  pro  Phaten  legenduin  Phatec.  Nam  pater  fuit  UuTiKioct 
et  mater  Kapoffcta.  Hyde  ib.  p.  280. 

^  patre  Patricio,  matre  Carossa  natus.     H.  L.  T.  i.  p.  140.  b. 

'   ra  TTioi  avTH  -KafnToWa  Kaxa,  /.ufivrffTO  Trpwrov  r/jv  /3\a(T^»jjutnv* 

SevTipov,  T}]v  cnXiiav'  ax  on  aiaxovi]  V  fsXtin.  k.  \.  Cat.  6.  n.  26. 

•"  coniparavit  sibi  pueruni  annoruin  fere  septeni,  Corbicium  nomine, 

quern  statim  manumisit,  ac  literis  erudivit :  quique  cum  duodecim  annorum 
esset  effectus,  anus  ilia  diem  obiit,  ipsique  universa  bona  sua  Iradidit.  Arch. 
n.  53.  p.  97. 

''  Kai  rsTOV  iig  vhOtmav  Xafinaa,  iTraiSivne  roig  Tlipawv  fiaBtJuaffiv  i)g  v'lov 
— KM  KupQiKog  6  KUKOg  oiKerr]g  eig  fjieaov  <pL\orTO(piov  ■t]K(iaaC  km  TiXivTr^crarrrjC 
'■'JC  Y'/C«C  (KXijpovouriac  Koi  ra  j8t/3Xia  km  tu  ;^p>;juara.     Cat.  6.  n.  24. 

X  2 


308  Credibdilij  of  the  Gospel  History. 

widow  that  purchased  him  tor  a  slave  soon  set  him  at  liberty, 
adopted  him  for  her  son,  gave  him  a  good  education,  and  in 
the  end  made  him  her  heir. 

But  I  think  it  may  be  questioned  w  hether  Mani  ever  was 
a  slave ;  for  there  is  no  notice  taken  of  it  in  the  eastern 
writers  ;  and  even  the  Greek  authors  speak  of  him  as  rich, 
learned,  educated  among  philosophers,  and  at  the  court  of 
Persia  in  his  early  age.  Manes  among  the  Greeks  was  a 
common  name  for"  slaves :  and  one  may  be  almost  apt  to 
think  that  this  gave  occasion  for  the  common  opinion  of  the 
Greek  writers  concerning  Mani's  servitude. 

The  eastern  authors,  cited  byP  Hyde  andi  Herbelot,  say 
that  Mani  was  a  painter  and  engraver  by  profession  :  what 
use  he  is  said  to  have  made  of  his  skill  in  painting-  will  be 
seen  hereafter. 

It  is  said  by  the  same  writers,  quoted  both  by""  Hyde  and* 
Herbelot,  that  he  had  so  fine  a  hand  as  to  draw  lines  and 
make  circles  without  rule  or  compass  :  and  he  made  a  ter- 
restrial globe  with  all  its  circles  and  divisions. 

It  may  be  argued  that  Mani  was  skilful  in  the  science  of 
astronomy,  because  Epiphanius  says  he*^  wrote  a  book  of 
astrology,  and  that  his  followers  boasted  of  their  under- 
standing in  astronomy. 

Augustine  too  says,  that"  the  Manichaean  writings  were 
filled  with  a  fabulous  philosophy  about  the  heavens  and  the 

"  Maj//;^  yap  f^i  duXoc-  Aristoph.  Av.  ver.  1329.  et  passim.  r«Xotov  f^?/, 
ti  MavrjQ  jxiv  x^ptc  ^loytvug  Zy  Aioyfvr}i  is  X*^?'?  MavH  oo  SvvaTai.  Diog. 
Laert.  1.  6.  n.  55.  Vid.  Maneg.  in  locum,  et  in.  1.  5.  n.  55.  Conf.  Senec. 
de  Tranq.  Anim.  c.  8.  Vid.  et  Suid.  V.  Mavrjc,  cum  Kusteri  notis,  et  Fabr. 
Bib.  Gr.  T.  V.  p.  281,  282. 

P  Manes  Perea,  in  corum  libris  dictus  Mani  pictor.  Nam  tails  fuit  profes- 
sione  sua.     Hyde  ubi  supra,  c.  21.  p.  280.  ''  Mani.     Manes — 

etoit  peintre  et  gravcur  de  sa  profession.     Herbelot.  Bib.  Orient. 

"■  Orientales  aiunt,  quod  ex  pictoriae  artis,  qua  excellebat,  superbia  clatus, 
se  prophetam  venditaret.  Ferunt  eum  potuisse  ad  20  ulnarum  longitudinem 
duccre  lineam,  in  qua  applicando  normam  nulla  curvitas  deprehendi  potuit. 
Hyde  ib.  p.  282.  m. 

*  Ce  Manes  savoit  faire  quelques  prestiges,  et  avoit  la  main  si  juste,  qu'il 
tiroit  des  lignes,  et  decrivoit  des  cercles  sans  r^gle  et  sans  compas.  11  fit  aussi 
un  globe  terrestre  avec  tons  ses  cercles  et  ses  divisions.     Herbelot.  ib. 

'  a\X}]v  Se   rr}V  mpi  ct^poKoyiaQ'  h   yap  aTToStsui  ttjq  roiavTtjQ  vepitp- 

•yiaf,  aWa  fiaWov  avrotg  ev  izpo-^^upi^  Kavxtiiiarog  TrpoKiirai  aTpovOftut. 
llxT.  66.  n.  13.  p.  629.  D. 

"  Libri  quoque  eorum  pleni  sunt  longissimis  fabulis,  de  coelo  et  sideribus  et 
sole  et  luna: — quae  tamen  ubi  consideranda  et  discuticnda  protuli,  modeste 
sane  ille  nee  ausus  est  subire  ipsam  sarcinam.  I^overat  enim  ?e  ista  non  nosse, 
nee  eum  puduit  confiteri.  Non  erat  de  talibus,  quales  multos  loquaces  passus 
eram,  conantes  earn  docere,  et  dicentes  nihil.  Iste  vero  cor  habebat,  etsi  non 
rectum  ad  te,  nee  tamen  nimis  incautum  ad  seipsum.     Conf.  I.  5.  c.  7.  n.  12 


The  Manichces.     Sect.  1 1.  309 

stars,  and  the  sun  and  moon.  Faustus,  however,  the  Mani- 
cheean  bishop,  did  not  concern  himself"  with  those  specula- 
tions; which,  1  think,  is  to  his  honour,  and  seems  to  show 
that  as  among-  other  sects,  so  among-  them  likewise,  there  were 
doctrines  maintained  by  some,  which  the  Aviser  and  more 
understanding-  did  not  consider  as  essential  parts  of  their 
scheme,  or  at  all  belong-ing  to  it. 

Beausobre^  has  shown  it  to  be  probable  that  Mani  believed 
our  earth  to  have  two  hemispheres,  an  upper  and  a  lower, 
both  iidiabited  ;  and  consequently  that  there  are  antipodes. 
He  collects  as  much  from  some  thing-s  said  in  The^*"  Acts  of 
Archelaus;  and  he  refers  to  a  passage  of  Cosmas  Indi- 
copleustes,  who  says  that"  the  3Ianichees  are  of  much  the 
same  opinion  with  the  Greeks,  and  believe  as  they  do  that 
the  heaven  is  spherical. 

Sharistani,  an  Arabian  author  in  Hyde,  calls  Maniy  a 
learned  man,  aiul  a  philosopher;  and  another  author  of  the 
same  country  says'  that  Mani  Avrote  a  system  of  philosophy, 
and  invented  a  musical  instrument,  called  by  the  Arabians 
Oud. 

Beausobre  argues  that*  Mani  Was  skilled  in  medicine  ; 
but  he  has  no  direct  evidence:  it  is  not  expressly  said  by 
the  Greek  or  eastern  writers.  And  Beausobre  does  not  give 
credit  to  the  story  of  his  attempt  to  cure  the  king-  of  Persia's 
son.     I  therefore  leave  that  a  doubtful  point. 

But  Mani  was  learned.  This  appears  from  all  the  parti- 
culars just  mentioned,  and  from  what  is  said  by  the  Greek 
writers  of  the  literary  and  philosophical''  education  bestowed 
upon  him  by  the  good  widow,  into  whose  hands  he  came. 
And  in  The  Acts  of  Archelaus  he  is  spoken  of  as*^  if  he  was 
equal  to  the  most  knowing-  among  the  Persians,  or  was  the 
first  man  of  his  time  among  them  for  learning-. 

I  shall  now  translate  a  long  article  in  Herbelot,  taken  from 
eastern  authors,  who  say  that  '  Mani,^  having-  gained  some 

*■  Hist,  de  Manich.  T.  2.  p.  374—376. 

*  Km  iraXiv  iimv  frtpot  KorTfioi  Tti'tg,  roiv  <pu)'7ripuv  Svvovtwv  otto  tsth  th 
Koayis,  t%  wv  avartXXain.  Arch.  c.  9.  p.  17.  Kai  ol  av6po)Troi  iravTig  jnCaQ 
£X«fft.  Karw  avvhOiiQ  toiq  avto.  ib.  c.  8.  p.  14.     Conf.  Lactant.  Instit.  1.  3.  c.  24. 

"  Mavix«(ot,  TTapmrXTima  toiq  "EXX?;(7i  (ppovavrtc,  tov  re  upavov  Kai  avrot 
OipaiponSi]  vofiiZ,ovrtg,  k.  X.  Cosm.  1.  6.  p.  271.  B. 

y  Apud  Shahristanium — Mants  ibn  Phaten  docfus,  seu  Philosophus.  Ilyde, 
p.  280.  '  Ibn  Shahna  dicit  Manet  em  scripsisse  pliilosopliiam, 

quam  vertit  in  linguam  Persicara:  eiunque  extitisse  auctorem  instrumenti 
musici,  dicti  Arabibus  Oiid,  id  est,  Testudo,  Chelys.  ib.  p.  280. 

"  T.  i.  p.  81,  82.  '' tig  ufaov  (jtiXoaotpwv  riKfiaZi-  Cyr. 

Cat.  6.  n.  24.  '^  cniditiis  secundum  doctrinam   quaj  in 

locis  illis  est,  et  pene  dixerim  super  oninem  hominem.  Arch.  n.  53.  p.  98. 

<»  Vid.  Ilcrbelof.  Bib.  Or.  v.  Mani. 


310  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

*  esteem,   began  to  gather  together   a  number  of  people, 

*  in  the  character  of  disciples,  who  opposed  the  worship 
'  and  ceremonies  of  the  religion  of  Zoroaster,  which  the 
'  Persians  professed  at  that  time.  This  novelty  having 
'  occasioned  some  disturbances,  Sapor  would  have  had  him 
'  punished  ;  but  Mani,  perceiving  that  he  was  sought  for, 
'  tied,  and  retired  into  Turkestan  :  here  he  had  full  scope  to 
'  spread  his  notions  among  an  ignorant  sort  of  people,  and 
'  make  himself  pass  among  them  for  a  wonderful  man,  or 

*  oven  a  god.  Having*  found  a  cave  where  M^as  a  tine  spring, 
'  he  got  some  provisions,  sufficient  for  a  year,  to  be  lodged 
'  there  :  and  then  he  told  his  disciples  that  he  was  about  to 
'  take  a  journey  to  heaven,  and  that  they  would  be  a  whole 
'  year  without  seeing  him ;  after  which  time  he  would  come 

*  down   again  from   heaven,  and  appear  in   a  certain   cave 

*  which  he  told  them  of. 

'  At  the  end  of  the  year  they  failed  not  to  look  for  him, 

*  and  found  him  at  the  appointed  place.  Then  he  showed 
'  them  that  wonderful  book,  filled  with  uncommon  images 
'  and  figures,  and  called  Ergenk  and  Estenk,  which  he  said 
'  he  had  brought  from  heaven.  This  new  imposture  greatly 
'  increased  the  number  of  his  followers,  who  all  went  from 
'  Turkestan  into  Persia  upon  the  death  of  Sapor. 

'  Hormisdas,  having  succeeded  his    father  Sapor,  used 

*  Mani  very  kindly  :  he  even  embraced  his  sect,  and  built 
'  him  a  castle  for  his  security. 

'  Baharam,  or  Varanes,  succeeding  his  father  Hormisdas, 
'  appeared  in  the  beginning  of  his  reign  to  favour  Mani: 
'  but,  having  got  him  out  of  his  castle  under  a  pretence  of 
'  disputing  with  the  doctors  of  the  Zoroastrian  sect,  he  soon 
'  after  flayed  him  alive,  filled  his  skin  with  chaff,  and  had  it 
'  hung  up  in  a  conspicuous  place  to  terrify  those  of  his  sect ; 
'  whereupon  the  gTeatest  part  of  his  followers  fled  into  India, 
'  and  some  even  to  China,  All  that  staid  in  Persia  lost  their 
'  liberty,  and  M'ere  reduced  to  servitude.' 

The  same  story  is  told  in'   Hyde  from  the  same  historian 

"  Persariim  hisloricus  Chondemir  narrat,  quod  Manes,  Saducajus,  fuit 
egregius  pictor  et  sculptor:  qui  postquam  audierat  quod  Jesus  se  missurum 
paraclutum  declaras-et,  diabolus  lapide;L'  cordis  ejus  tabular  insculpsit  sugges- 
tionem,  ipsum  esse  dictum  jjaracletum.  Quod  teirnx)re  Shabur  filii  Ardestiar 
Babecam  prophetiam  jactabat :  cumque  Shabar  eum  interficere  quaereret, 
aufugit  in  Turkistan,  ubi  multos  seduxit.  Postea  ibi  inveniens  speluncam,  ubi 
optima  aqune  fons  erat,  ibi  clanculiun  reposuit  annonam  ad  unius  anni  spatium 
duraturam,  et  asseclis  suis  pra;tendebat,  se  ad  cfelum  ascensuruni,  et  post  unius 
anni  spatium  se  rursus  ad  eos  descerisurum.  Quocirca  seipsum  ab  eis  subdu- 
ccns,  in  dictam  speluncam  abiit,  ibiquc  ad  pracstitutum  tempus  permansit.  Et 
deinde  rursus  comparens,  produxit  tabulas  cgregie  pictas,  quas  Ertengh-Mani 


The  Munichccs.     Sect.  H.  311 

CtriidcMiir,  or  Khomlcinir,  with  only  some  few  variations.  As 
J ly tie's  book  is  not  very  coiunion,  1  have  transcribed  liis 
M'ords  at  the  bottom  of  the  page. 

1  think  it  may  be  best  to  make  here  a  few  remarks,  omitting 
others,  which  might  be  n)entioned,  and  possibly  may  be 
remembered  at  another  time. 

1.  The  eastern  authors,  (jiioted  in  Hyde's  and  Iferbelot's 
collections,  are  not  ancient,  but  rather  modern  :  for  they  are 
either  Mahometans,  or  christians  of  late  times. 

2.  The  eastern  writers  declare  Mani  to  have  been  a  chris- 
tian. It  seems  to  be  implied  in  Khondemir's  account,  as  it 
stands  in  Herbelot :  but  it  is  plainly  intimated  at  the  begin- 
ning of  his  article  in  Hyde:  and  Sharistani,  cited  by  Hyde, 
says  that^  Mani  received  the  prophecy  or  religion  of  Jesus, 
but  not  that  of  Moses. 

3.  The  eastern  M-riters  agree  with  the  Greeks  in  repre- 
senting- Mani  as  an  impostor,  or  one  that  pretended  to  pro- 
phesy and  inspiration. 

4.  If  these  writers  are  to  be  relied  upon,  Mani  improved 
his  skill  in  painting  for  gaining,  or  supporting  the  reputation 
of  his  being-  a  prophet,  or  some  extraordinary  person.  This 
is  more  than  once  taken  notice  of^'  by  Hyde,  who  likewise 
speaks  particularly''  of  the  painted,  finely-figured  book  of 
his  Revelations,  called  Ertengh. 

5.  According  to  the  eastern,  as  well  as  the  Greek  writers, 
Mani  was  put  to  death  by  a  king  of  Persia  ;  so  Khondemir, 
before  transcribed;  and'  so  likewise  Sharistani;  but  the 
Persian  and  Arabian  authors  make  Mani's  death  owing-  to 
his  zeal  for  religious  principles,  or  the  disturbances  occa- 

vocant,  affirmans  se  eas  a  ccelo  accepisse :  unde  plurimi  ei  fidem  adhibuere. 
Deinde  in  Persidem  festinans  Regem  Behrem  ad  snam  religionem  invitavit. 
Et  quidem  Rex  fiiit  ex  primis  qui  ejus  dictis  fidem  adhibuit.  Et  cum  asseclae 
ejus  multi  evaderent,  Magorum  doctoribus  praecipit,  ut  cum  eo  disputarent. 
At  tandem  omnes  qui  seivitio  ejus  addicti  erant,  Regis  Behrem  jussu  occisi 
sunt,  et  fervor  ejus  ignis  hoc  modo  extinctus.  Hyde  de  Rel.  V.  Pers.  cap.  21. 

p.  282,  283.  ^  Ille  amplexus  est  religionem  inter 

Magismum  et  christianismum,  asserens  prophetiam  Clirieti,  sed  non  asserens 
prophetiam  Mosis.  Apud  Ilvde,  p.  282. 

8  Orientales  aiunt  quod  ex  pictoriae  artis,  qua  excellebat,  superbia  elatus, 
se  prophelani  vendiluvit.  ib.  p.  282. 

''  Utcuncjue  tamen  fuerit,  impius  iste  Mani,  cum  esset  professione  pictor, 
impiorum  suoram  dogmatum  librum,ut  speciosior  appareret  ocuUs,eteo  nomine 
multo  gratior  esset,  eleganter  qua  ])otuit  pinxit,  et  varii  generis  picturis  ornavit 

et  decoravit,  et  Persice  ilhim  \ocavit  Ertengh,  vel  abbreviate  Tengh ibi 

inteUigendum  est  Manctis  E\angelium  pictum,  scu  Ertengh  sc.  picturarum 
liber,  in  quo  doginata  sua  et  revelationes  scripsit.  ib.  p.  281,  282. 

'  Shahristani  in  libro  de  Religionibus  Orientis  de  eo  refert :  Mani  apparuit 
tempore  Shabur  iWii  Ardeshir,  ct  occidit  eiuii  Behram  fiUus  Ilormuz  filii 
Shabur.  ib.  p.  282. 


312  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

sioned  thereby.  Thus  Kliondemir,  as  we  have  seen.  And 
Hyde  says  it*^  is  certain  that  Varanes  put  to  death  the 
dualists,  or  those  who  maintained  two  principles,  and  hung 
up  3Iani  at  the  gate  of  the  city.  Tliese  writers  say  nothing 
of  Maui's  having-  occasioned  the  death  of  the  k  ing  of  Persia's 
son  :  they  seem  not  to  have  had  any  the  least  knowledge  of 
that  matter. 

6.  I  must  take  notice  of  a  mistake  of  these  writers ;  for 
according  to  them  the  place  of  Mani's  retirement  was  China ; 
where  likewise  they  say  he  had  several  churches  finely 
painted.  But'  Hyde  says  they  must  or  should  mean 
Turkestan ;  for  Mani  never  was  in  Chiiia.  This  we  should 
not  have  been  able  to  perceive  from  Herbelot,  who  seems  to 
have  concealed  and  disguised  this  mistake  of  his  authors. 
He  declares  indeed  that  they  speak  of  Mani's  followers  going 
into  India  and  China  after  his  death  ;  but  as  for  the  place 
of  his  retirement,  when  he  fled  from  Sapor,  one  would  have 
thought  that  they  had  called  it  Turkestan,  whereas  it  seems 
they  name  China.  This  may  be  collected  from  Hyde,  and 
must  lessen  the  credit  and  authority  of  those  writers. 

Perhaps  some  may  suspect  that  by  China  those  writers 
mean  what  we  call  Turkestan.  To  which  I  answer;  if  so, 
this  remark  is  of  no  value:  but  I  am  confirmed  in  the  per- 
suasion of  its  solidity  by  a  passage  of  Abulphi^ragius,  who 
says  that  Mani™  sent  his  twelve  disciples  into  all  the  coun- 
tries of  the  east,  even  as  far  as  India  and  China  ;  where  by 
China  he  must,  I  think,  mean  the  same  country  that  we  call 
by  that  name  ;  but  if  he  does,  very  probably  it  is  a  mistake. 

Turkestan"  is  said  to  be  a  country  containing  several 
provinces,  or  small  kingdoms:  it  is  situated  on  the  east  of 
the  Caspian  sea,  and  borders  upon  Sog-diana, 

H.  I  now  proceed  to  what  I  formerly  proposed  to  do  in 
this  space:  which  is  to  settle  the  time  of  the  rise  of  the 
Manichnean  sect ;  or,  if  that  cannot  be  done,  to  show  at  least 
the  sentiments  of  ancients  and  moderns  about  it. 

''  Sic  ille ;  nam  Rex  Behram  interfecit  dualistas,  et  Manetem  in  porta  urbis 
crucifixit.  p.  283. 

'  Apud  Rustemi  epitoniatorem  legitur. — Tchigil  est  picturarum  doraus 
Chinensis,  scil.  illud  delubnim,  quod  in  regno  Chinae  Manes  magister  pinxit. 
Quod  autem  dicunt  de  China,  intelligenduin  est  de  Turkistan,  ubi  Manes  coni- 
moratus  est.  Et  ibidem  est  alia  ecclesia  dicta  CJhalbila,  quam  Manes  picturis 
ornavit.  Et  ibi  est  urbs  Tchigil.  Ille  enim  nunquam  i'uit  in  China.  Hyde, 
p.  281.  ■"  .Deinde  a  fide  descissens,  seipsum  Messiam  nomi- 

navit,  et  duodecim  discipulos  sibi  adscitos  in  omnes  Orientis  regionas,  Indiam 
as(jue  et  Sinam  misit,  qui  in  ipsis  doctrinam  Thanawiorum  seminarent;  sc. 
duos  esse  in  mundo  deos. — Abulph.  Dynast,  p.  82. 

"  See  Beausobre,T.  i.  p.  187.  See  likewise  the  article  of  Turkestan,  in  Her- 
belot's  Bibliotheque  Orientale. 


The  Manichces.     Sect.  H.  313 

We  have  already  seen  the  sentinients  of  two  learned  an- 
cients. Eusebius,"  or  Jeroni,  said  that  Maiiichrcism  rose  in 
the  second  year  of  Probus,  the  year  of  Clirist  277  ;  Socrates^ 
not  louji-  before  the  reiiiii  of  Constantine.  1  shall  now  show 
the  sentiments  of  divers  others. 

Jerom  elsewhere  says  iti  is  certain  that  the  Manichees 
appeared  before  the  council  of  Nice. 

Augustine,  that"^  this  sect  did  not  arise  until  after  Tertul- 
lian,  and  even  after  Cyprian.  In  another  place  he  says  that^ 
Cyprian  obtained  the  crown  of  martyrdom  before  Mani- 
chfeism  was  at  all  known  in  the  Roman  empire.  It  is  likely 
that  Augustine  thought  that  he  spoke  Avithin  compass. 
However,  if  we  should  not  be  able  to  be  more  exact  than 
this  with  full  certainty,  it  is  of  importance  to  be  assured, 
that  as  this  sect  evidently  appeared  in  the  Roman  empire 
before  the  council  of  Nice,  so  it  did  not  arise  in  the  world 
until  after  Cyprian,  who  was  ordained  bishop  about  the 
year  of  Christ  248,  and  obtained  the  crown  of  martyrdom  in 
258. 

In  The  Acts  of  Archelaus*  the  reign  of  Probus  is  several 
times  mentioned  at  the  time  of  Mani's  appearing,  or  the  time 
of  the  dispute  with  him  ;  soon  after  which  he  was  put  to 
death. 

Cyril  of  Jerusalem,  who  vvrote  his  Catechetical  Lectures 
about  the  year  347,  observes,  that"  the  Manich?ean  heresy 
arose  not  very  long-  ago,  about  seventy  years,  and  that  there 
were  then  men  living  who  had  seen  Mani.  In  another  place 
he  speaks"^  of  Mani's  not  appearing  till  the  apostles  had  been 
dead  two  hundred  years.  Toutee  supposes  Cyril  to  mean 
the  year  of  Christ  277,  which  was  the  second  of  Probus; 

o  p.  260.  P  P.  261. 

•I  Alioqui  hoc  argmiiento, — nee  Marcion,  nee  Cataphryges  nee  Maniehaeus 
damnari  debent ;  quia  Synodus  Nica?na  eos  non  nominat ;  quos  certe  ante 
Synodum  fuisse  non  diibium  est.  Hieron.  ad  Pamm.  et  Ocean.  Ep.  41.  [al. 
65.]  p.  344.  in.  ^  Nam  constat,  non  sokmi  post  Tertullianum, 

verum  etiam  post  Cyprianum,  banc  haeresim  exortam.  Aug.  contr.  Faust.  1. 
13.  e.  4.  in.  Ecce  praedicatissimus  tractator  divinonim  eloquiorum  [Cypri- 
anus]  antequam  terras  nostras  vel  tenuissimus  odor  Manichaeae  pestilentiae 
tetigisset.  Id.  contr.  duas  Ep.  Pelag.  1.  4.  c.  8.  n.  24. 

^ numquid    et   gloriosissiniae   coronae  Cyprianus  dicetur   ab 

aliquo,  non  solum  fuisse,  sed  vel  esse  potuisse  Maniehaeus,  cum  prius  iste  sit 
passus,  quam  ilia  in  orbe  Romano  pestis  appaniit  ?  De  Nuptiis  et  Concup.  1. 

2.  e.  29.  n.  51.  ' sub  Probo  demum  Romano 

imperatore. — Arch.  n.  27.  p.  46.     Vid.  n.  28.  init. 

"   roi'  Trpoijji'  f  TTt  Upofts  (iam\io)g  apKa/itvov'  vpo  yap  oXoii'  e/3^0)u?)- 

KOVTa  STwv  i)  liKaviy  km  etryi  l^i-fXP'-  ''**  vvv  arGncoTroi  avTOiQ  ofdaXfiaic  Otiopr)- 
ffavTtQ  tKfivov-  Cat.  6.  n.  20.  *   Kpa  ol  TtXivTrfaavrtQ  airo'^oKoi 

ano  SiaKocriwv  iTwv  f^tSexovTO  Mavr]v' — Cat.  16.  n.  9. 


314  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

and  that  he  computed  the  apostolic  age  to  have  ended  about 
the  year  of  Christ  77.  It  may  be  also  supposed  that  Cyril 
took  his  date  of  Manichieisni  from  The  Acts  of  Archelaus, 
M  here  Mani's  coming  is  placed  under  the  emperor  Probus. 

Epiphanius  is  not  consistent  with  himself,  placing-  Mani 
earlier  at  one  time  than  another.  In  one  of  his  works  he 
says  that''  Mani  came  from  Persia,  and  disputed  with  Arche- 
laus in  the  ninth  of  Valerian  and  Gallienus  ;  that  is,  in  the 
year  of  our  Lord  261  or  262  ;  Avhich  date  is  also  in"  Pliotius. 
But,  in  his  work  Against  Heresies,  Epiphanius  sometimes 
mentions  >  the  fourth  of  Aurelian;  that  is,  the  year  273  or 
274;  at  other  times^  the  reigns  of  Aurelian  and  Probus; 
that  is,  about  the  year  276.  Moreover,  Epiphanius,  who 
wrote  about  the  year  376,  says  hc^  had  conversed  with  per- 
sons who  were  acquainted  with  llermias,  disciple  of  Mani. 

Pope  Leo*^  placeth  the  rise  of  Manichneism  in  the  consulate 
of  Probus  and  Paulinus,  or  the  year  277. 

In  the  Edessen  Chronicle,'^  published  by  Asseman,  Mam's 
birth  is  placed  at  the  year  of  our  Lord  240,  a  thing  not 
mentioned,  that  we  know  of,  any  where^'  else. 

Alexander  of  Lycopolis  mentions  it  as  a  common  report 
thaf^  Mani  lived  in  the  tinie  of  the  emperor  Valerian,  who 
was  taken  captive  by  the  Persians  in*^  the  year  259 ;  that  he 
went  to  the  wars  with  Sapor  king  of  Persia  ;  and,  having  by 
some  means  displeased  the  king,  was  put  to  death  by  him. 

Having'  put  down  so  many  accounts  from  ancient  authors, 
1  shall  now  mention  the  opinions  of  moderns. 

The  general   opinion,  as  Asseman  owns,  is,  thats  Mani 

"   IV  T([)  ivvariff  BV  ith  ttjq  thtiov  ftamXeiag  tvifir]   Mavi^g  otto  r>]g 

nipntcog,  K.  X.  De  Mens,  et  Pond.  c.  20.  p.  176.  A. 

"  Contr.  Manich.  1.  I.e.  15.  in. 

y   Ilfpi  iTog  TiTuprov  Tt]g  avra  [Avp;?Xtav8]  Paffikeiag.  Haer.  66.  C.  i.  in. 

^  "Eojg  Ts  xpovH  rs  TrpoStjXioOevTOQ  AvprjKiav^  ti  kcu  IJpops,  iv  (fi  HTog  6 
MavTjg  tyvwpiitTO.  k.  X.  lb.  c.  19.  f.  vid.  etn.  20.  p.  6-37.  D.  Upo(3og  fs  r]v6 
KciT  iKtivn  Kaipa  fiaciKivg,  km  Avp)]\iavog  6  vpo  avra,  ots  utoqo  Mavt]Q  tveSt]- 
fill.  lb.   n.    77.  in.  *  Odk  «ti  yap  apY«i2«<^«  V  aiptmg,  icai  oi 

(TvvTiTvxt]KTiQ  Tif>   Trpofipjj/itvy  'Ep^£(^,  jiaBtjTy  ovTi   TH  MavT],  rijifv  ra  kot 
avTov  cirjyrjfTcivTo.^.  66.  n.  12. 

^  Manicheeas  ergo,  magister  falsitatis  diabolica;,  et  conditor  siiperstitionis 
obsccenae,  eo  tempore  damnandus  innotuit. — Probo  Imperatore  Paulinoque 
Consulibus.     Leo.  Horn.  2.  de  Pentec.  cap.  7. 

'^  Anno  quingentesimo  qiiinquagesimo  prime  natiis  est  Manes.  Chr.  Ed. 
ap.  As.sem.  Bib.  Orient.  T.  i.  p.  393. 

<*  natusenim  fiiit  juxta  Chroiiicon  nostrum  anno  Gntoorum  5.51, 

Christi  240,  quod  ncmini  hactenus  de  ejus  natali  observatum.     A.^.<:em.  ib.  in 
notis.  *   AvTOg  £7rt  OvaXepiava  fiiv  yeyovsvai  Xtytrai,  atnpa- 

Ttvjca  Tt   Sa^ojpw   rw  Ulnar]'   TrporrKpnaavTa  St  ri  thti^  aTToku>\ivca'   Alex, 
lye.  p.  4.  A.  '       '        f  Vid.  Pagi  Crit.  in   Bar.  250.  n.  7,  et  seqq. 

Basnag.  Ann.  259.  n.  3.  s  Deinde  commiinior  fert  scriptcnun 


The  Manichees.     Sect.  II.  315 

disputed  with  Archelans  in  the  year  277,  and  died  in  278. 
To  the  like  purpose''  Tillcnioiit,  and'  Basnnge,  and  others. 
And  Zacag'tii  observes,  tlmt''  >vherens  Epi|)haiiius,  in  the 
work  first  quoted  above,  placed  the  dispute  of  Archehtus 
and  Maui  in  the  ninth  of  Valerian  and  Gallienus,  lie  after- 
wards followed  a  later  date  in  his  work  Against  All  Heresies, 
having-  then  obtained  better  information.  But  Asseinan' 
prefers  the  first  account  of  Epiphanius,  followed  by  Photius 
and  others;  though  then,  if  Mani  was  born  in  240,  he  must 
have  finished  his  course  when  he  was  little  more  than  twenty 
years  of  age  ;  which,  surely,  must  appear  improbable  to 
most  persons. 

Tillemont  never  saw  the  Edessen  Chronicle:  but  having" 
taken  notice  of  what  Alexander  says  of  Mani's  living  in  the 
time  of  Valerian,  he  adds,  that'"  in  order  to  reconcile  him 
with  Jerom's  Chronicle,  we  may  suppose  Mani  to  have 
been  in  an  advanced  age  in  277,  when  he  was  put  to  death  ; 
and  then  he  may  easily  have  gained  reputation  in  Persia 
before  the  year  260. 

Beausobre  does  not  disallow  it  to  be  probable  that"  Mani- 
cheieism  began  to  be  kno^ln  in  the  Roman  empire  about  the 
year  277,  the  time  fixed  in  Jerom's  Chronicle  ;  but  it  may 
have  arisen"  eight  or  ten  years  sooner  in  Persia.  Nor  is  it, 
he  says,  very  improbable  that?  Mani  might  be  author  of  a 

opinio,  cam  disputationem  anno  Christi  277,  Manetis  interitura  anno  278, 
accidisse.     Bib.  Or.  T.  3.  P.  2.  p.  45. 

"  Mem.  Ec.  T.  4.  Les  Manicheens,  art.  7,  et  12,  et  note  v. 

•  Ann.  277.  n.  3.  etc.  Vid.  Fabr.  Bib.  Gr.  T.  v.  p.  262,  281. 

''  Dicenduni  itaque  est,  Epiphanium  in  libro  de  Mensuris  et  Ponderibus 
errasse,  et  multo  certiora  de  Manichteorum  haeresis  e.\ortu  in  libiis  adversus 
haereses  nobis  tradidisse,  licet  in  eisdem  quoque  libris  iterum  sibi  non  constare 
deprehendatur.  Zacagn.  Pr.  n.  8.  p.  9. 

'  Hujus  haereseos  initiura  accurate  describitur  a  S.  Epiphanio  lib.  de  Mensuris 
et  Ponderibus.  Assem.  Bib.  Or.  T.  i.  p.  393.  not.  2.  Atqui  ex  Epiphanio, 
Photio,  et  Petro  Siculo,  Manes  ex  Persarum  carccribus  in  Mesopotamiam  anno 
Gallieni  nono,  id  est  Christi  261,  aufugit.  Anno  igilur  sequenti,  vel  ad  suni- 
mum  anno  263,  dignas  impietatis  suaj  poenas  persolvit ;  idque  anno  aetatis  suae 
circiter  vigesimo  tertio,  si  auctori  Chronici  Edesseni  credendum,  qui  ilium,  ut 
supra  dixi,  natum  scribit  anno  Chiisti  240.  Assem.  ib.  T.  3.  P.  2.  p.  45. 

""  Les  Manicheens,  Note  v.  fin.  "  See  Beans.  Vol.  i.  p.  121,  122. 

"  J'explique  tous  ces  passages,  non  du  terns  de  la  naissance  da  Manicheisrae, 
qui  avoit  commence  en  Perse  environ  dix  ans  auparavant,  mais  du  terns,  ou 
cette  heresie  commenqade  faire  du  bruit  dans  I'empire.     Beaus.  T.  i.  p.  123. 

P  Je  ne  vois  point  de  raison  assez  forle,  pour  rejctter  le  temoignage  de  la 
Chronique  d'Edesse,  sur  le  tems  de  la  naissance  de  Manees. — Or  ce  prince 
[Sapor]  etant  mort  en  I'annee  271  ou  en  272,  il  ne  pouvoit  avoir  alors  que 
trente  deux,  ou  trente  trois  ans.  II  est  vrai  encore,  que  Ton  peut  etre  surpris 
que  Manes  soit  devenu  chef  de  secte,  etant  encore  si  jeune.  Mais  ces  raisons 
ne  sauroient  balancer  le  temoignage  d'un  auteur  Syrien,  ou  Mesopotamien,  qui 
paioit  bien  instruit  des  faits,  qui  se  sont  passes  en  Orient.  Beaus.  T.  i.  p.  65. 


316  Credibilily  of  the  Gospel  History. 

new  sect  by  that  time  be  was  tbirty  years  of  age :  for  more 
be  could  not  be,  admitting-  tbe  autbority  of  the  Edessen 
Cbronicle  concerning  tbe  time  of  bis  birtb,  as  Beausobre 
does :  nay,  be  supposetb  tbati  Mani  migbt  make  a  figure  in 
267. 

Toutee  observes  tbat,"^  since  Cyril  says  in  bis  time  tbere 
were  persons  living  wbo  bad  seen  Mani,  we  cannot  reason- 
ably place  tbe  dispute  witli  bim  before  tbe  year  277,  at 
wbicb  time  bis  beresy  was  first  brougbt  into  tbe  Roman 
empire,  and  in  tbe  following  year  be  was  put  to  deatb  : 
wbicb,  I  tbink,  cannot  be  denied  by  tbose  who  bave  any 
regard  for  tbe  Acts  of  ^  Arcbelaus. 

Cave  tberefore  is  somevvbat  singular  wben  he  says  that*^ 
Mani  began  to  spread  his  notions  in  277,  and"  lived  to 
near  the  end  of  that  century  ;  and  yet  be  may  be  thought 
to  have  some  reason  for  that  supposition,  wben  it  is  recol- 
lected that  in  Cyril's  time  there  were  some  who  had  seen 
Mani ;  in  Epipbanius's,  some  wbo  had  conversed  with  bis 
disciple  Hermias  ;  provided  tbose  authors  may  be  depended 
upon. 

Pagi  approves^  of  tbe  date  in  Jcrom's  Cbronicle,  but  says 
that,  according  to  the  success  and  progress  of  this  doctrine 
in  several  places,  authors  bave  spoken  differently  concerning 
tbe  time  of  it. 

For  my  own  part,  I  tbink  it  very  dilricult  to  determine 
exactly  the  time  of  tbe  rise  of  Manicbreism  in  Persia,  or  of 
its  first  appearance  in  tbe  Roman  empire  :  and  T  am  apt  to 
think  that  most  considerate  persons  may  be  in  suspense  here. 
It  is  evident  from  tbe  letter  of  Arius,  and  tbe  testimonies  of 
Jerom  and  Augustine,  that  Manicboeism  was  known  in  tbe 

•J  J'en  ai  marqud  le  tcms  a  I'annee  deux  cens  soixante  sept,  en  quoi  j'ai 
suivi  Abulpharage,  qui  temoigne,  quelle  parilt  sous  Aurelien.  lb.  p.  186.  in. 

■■  Is  est  annus  277  a  Chrisfi  nativitatc.  Non  esse  in  anteriora  tcmpora  refra- 
henduni  Manetis  exortum  arguniento  est  id  quod  Cyrillus  subjicit,  fuisseadhuc 
suo  tempore  superstites,  qui  Manetem  ipsi  suis  oculis  conspcxissent.  Quod 
autem  sub  Probo  innotuit  Manes,  intelligendum  de  ejus  in  Mesopotamiam  et 
Romanoriim  iinpenuui  adventu,  qui  uno  tantuni  anno  ejus  necem  antecessit. 
Tout,  ad  Cyr.  Cat.  G.  p.  99.  not.  3. 

•  Vid.  Arch.  n.  55.  p.  100.  '  Haeresin  suam  disseminare  coepit 

circa  ann.  277.  Probi  imperatorisanno  secundo.  H.  L.  T.  i.  p.  139,  in  Manefe. 

"  Insani*  suse  virus  non  ante  annum  277  proj^inare  coepit  Manes,  et  plures 
poatea  annos  in  vivis  erat,  ac  proinde,  ad  exitum  vergente  hoc  saculo,  Agapium 
sibi  fliscipulum  adscivit.  Cav.  Diss,  de  Script,  incertae  act.  sub.  in. 

"  In  Annalibus  origo  ha^rcseos  Manich«orum  anno  praecedenti  consignatur ; 
scd  earn  ad  praesentem  retrahendam  esse  evincit  Eusebius  in  Chronico.  Pagi 
Ann.  277.  n.  vi.  Verum  est,  varias  sub  idem  fero  tempus  eruptiones  monstri 
illius  fuisse,  et  insignibus  alicujus  facinoris  notis  celebratas.  Quae  causa  fuit, 
cur  non  iisdem  Imperatoribus  hseresis  istius  origo  raandata  fuerit.  lb.  n.  vii. 


The  Manichces.     Sect.  IH.  317 

Roman  empire  before  tlie  council  of  Nice,  and  not  till  after 
the  time  of  Cyprian.  As  for  the  edict  of  Dioclesian,  1  am 
not  satisfied  about  its  g<'nuineness.  \\  hat  ground  Euscbius, 
or  rather  Jerom,  in  the  Chronicle,  had  for  fixing  Manichfcism 
at  the  second  year  of  Probus,  we  cannot  now  certainly  say  : 
excepting  only  the  authority  of  The  Acts  of  Archelaus, 
which  tiiere  is  much  reason  to  think  that  Eusel)ius  was 
acquainted  with.  It  appears  to  me  remarkable  that  Alex- 
ander of  Lycopolis,  who,  as  is  said,  once  was  a  Manichee, 
and  afterwards  wrote  against  them,  speaks  not  with  assur- 
ance about  Maui's  time.  The  little  notice  taken  of  Mani- 
choeism  by  EusebiuH  is  another  thing  that  deserves  observa- 
tion ;  as  do  likewise  the  words  of  Cyril  and  Epiphanius, 
where  they  speak  of  Mani  or  Hermias  having  been  person- 
ally known  to  some  of  their  times:  insomuch  that,  upon 
the  whole,  I  am  doubtfid  whether  Manichffiism  was  known 
in  the  Roman  empire  before  the  very  end  of  the  third  century, 
or  the  beginning-  of  the  fourth.  If  it  was  kno^vn  there 
sooner,  I  think  its  progress  must  have  been  very  inconsi- 
derable. 


SECT.  in. 


MANX'S  PREDECESSORS  AND  WORKS. 


I.  His  predecessors;    1.  Scytkinn ;  2.   Terehmthus, 

II.  His  works. 

IT  will  be  proper,  in  the  next  place,  to  give  an  account  of 
Maui's  works. 

I.  But  it  is  requisite  that  1  beforehand  take  notice  of  two 
persons  spoken  of  as  Maui's  predecessors,  and^  sometimes 
called  his  masters,  Scythian  and  Terebinthus  ;  both  ex- 
pressly named  in  the  long"  passage  of  Socrates,  transcribed 
at  the  beginning- of  this  chapter. . 

1.  It  has  been  the  prevailing-  opinion  of  learned  men  that 
Scythian  lived  in  the  apostolic  age,  or  near  it.    Epiphanius'' 

^  rug  MavsvTog  SiSaaKoXac-     Vid.  Analhem.  ap.  Coteler.  Clem. 

Recogn.  1.  4.  c.  27.  in. 

**  TTtpi  THQ  xpovsQ  Titiv  aTTOToXwv.     H.  66.  n.  3.  p.  620.  A. 


318  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

placeth  him  near  the  times  of  the  apostles;  which "^  Cave 
thinks  may  be  understood  with  so  great  latitude  as  to  leave 
room  to  suppose  that  Scythian  lived  to  near  the  end  of  the 
second  century. 

In  The  Acts  of  Archelaus,  Scythian  is  said "^  to  have  lived 
in  the  time  of  the  apostles  ;  but  that  seems  not  very  consist- 
ent Avith  what  follows,  where*^  it  is  said  that  Terebinthus 
was  a  disciple  of  Scythian,  and  intimate  with  him :  and 
Maui,  who  appeared  not  in  the  world  till  after  the  middle  of 
the  third  century,  is  said  to  have  been  the  slave  and  adopted 
son  of  the  woman  at  whose  house  Terebinthus  died. 

Indeed  there  is  reason  to  believe  that  Scythian  was  con- 
temporary with  Mani,  as*^  some  learned  hien  have  perceived  ; 
fors  in  Photius  is  express  mention  made  of  a''  letter  of  Mani 
to  Scythian. 

Archelaus  in  one  place  says  that'  Scythian  was  of  the 
country  of  Scythia:  but  afterwards  he  says  he''  was  a  Sara- 
cen or  Arabian  ;  which  is  also  said  by'  Cyril  and™  Epi- 
phanius.  Photius  too  says,  not  very  differently  from" 
Archelaus,  that  Scythian"  was  descended  from  the  Saracens, 
but  chose  to  live  in  Egypt,  and  particularly  at  Alexandria. 

2.  Terebinthus,  reckoned  another  predecessor  of  Mani,  is 
said  byf  Epiphanius  to  have  been  a  learned  man  as  well  as 
Scythian.     The  common  account  of  this  man  in  '•Archelaus, 

•^  Tradit  Epiphanius  ipsum  Hierosolyma  profectum  -n-epi  tsq  xpovsc  riuv 
aTTOToXoiv.  [H.  66.  n.  3.  p.  620.  A.]  Quod  laxiore  quidem  sensu  de  saeculo 
aevum  apostolicum  proxiine  secuto  intelligendum  est ;  adeo  ut  vergente  ad 
exitum  saeculo  secundo  diem  fatalem  obiisse  censeri  potest.  Cav.  H.  1.  T.  i.  p. 
140.  Oxon.  1740.  •*  Scythianus  nomine  apostolomm  tempore  fuit 

sectae  hujus  auctor  et  princeps. — Arch.  n.  5].  p.  95. 

*  Discipulum  habuit  quemdam  nomine  Terebinthum.  Arch.  n.  52.  p. 
96. — quia  ergo  aliqiiantuUim  temporis  socum  isti  ambo  dccreverunt  soH  habi- 
lare; — Ille  vero  discipulus,  qui  cum  eo  fuerat  couversatus, — ib. 

^  riunc  Scythianum  Manetis  adhuc  setate  vixisse  non  dubito,  licet  aetate  ac 
senio  eum  praeccssit. — Certe  ex  Manetis  epistola  ad  Scythianum  fragmentum 
a  me  infra  afferetur.  Fabr.  Bib.  Gr.  T.  v.  p.  280.  Vid.  et  Beausobre  Hist,  des 
Manich.  T.  i.  p.  26,  et  63.  s  Kat  firjv  /era  6  Mavixaiog  irpog 

'S.KvOiavov  tTTi'rtXKajv — ap.  Phot,  in  Eulogio  cod.  230.  p.  849. 

''  See  a  French  translation  of  the  fragment  of  that  letter  in  B.  T.  i.  p.  45. 

'  quidam  ex  Scythia,  Scythianus  nomine.     Arch.  n.  51.  p.  95. 

^  Ciiif|ue  Scythianus  ipse  ex  genere  Saracenorum  fuit,  et  captivam  quamdam 
accepit  uxorem  de  superiore  Thebaide,  quae  eum  suasit  habitare  in  Mgypio, 
magis  quam  in  deserfis.  ib.  n.  52.  p.  96. 

'  'EapaKtjvog  to  ytvog.      Cat.  6.  n.  22.  '"   (Itto  tijc 

^apciKtjviat:  i)r)nuifi(VH.     II.  66.  u.  1.  "  See  before,  not.  ^. 

"  '2i:vOuiroQ  rtg  tt]v  TrarpiSa  AiyvTrrwg,  to  St  tS  av9p(OTrojv  ytvog  "^.ttpuKt^vog 
T7]v  AXt^avSpiav  ipKsi.     Ph.  contr.  Manich.  1.  1.  c.  12.  in. 

^   Hv  yap  Kui  nTog  iv  ypafifiaaiv  nri^iXiTaTa  TTiTzaidivjitvog.      II.  66.  n.  3. 

p.  620.  L).  'I et  Babylonian!  j^ctiit,  fjuae  nunc  provincia 

habetur  a  Persis, — quo  cumvenisset,  talem  de  sefamem  pervulgavit  ipse  Tore- 


The  Alantchces.     Sect.  11  F.  319 

'Cyril,  ^Epiplianius,  and  others,  is,  thnt  after  the  death  of 
his  master  Scythian,  he  went  into  Persia,  or  the  country  of 
Babylon,  where  he  changed  his  name  from  Terebinthus  to 
iJuddas;  and  gave  out  that  he  was  born  of  a  virgin,  and 
brought  up  by  an  angel  in  the  mountains  ;  and  that  at  last 
he  was  thrown  off  the  top  of  a  house  by'  an  angel,  or  some 
other  spirit,  where  he  had  gone  up  very  early  one  morning 
to  perforin  some  sacred  rites. 

As  for  his  changing  his  name,  in  all  probability  there  was 
no  bad  design  in  that,  Buddas''  being  in  the  Babylonian 
language  equivalent  to  Terebinthus,  w  hich  in  Greek  signifies 
a  certain  tree. 

What  is  said  of  his  pretending  to  have  been  born  of  a 
virgin,  and  educated  in  the  mountains,  must  needs  be  a 
fiction  ;  because,''  Beausobre  observes,  the  Manichees  uni- 
versally denied  the  possibility  of  such  a  birth,  and  always 
supposed  that'*^  Mani  himself  was  born  in  the  ordinary  way. 

As  for  the  manner  of  his  death,  there  is  no  reason  to  receive 
the  account  of  it  as  true,  from  those  who  have  sufl'ered 
themselves  to  be  imposed  upon  in  so  many  particulars  :  but 
it  is  not  improbable  that  Terebinthus  often  went  to  the 
upper  part  of  the  house  to  perform  his  devotions  there  ;  the 
Manichees  being  frequent  in  prayer,  and  the  top  of  the  house" 
being-  a  place  u.uch  used  for  that  purpose  by  the  eastern 
people.  Whether  Terebinthus  died  suddeidy  in  such  a 
place  I  do  not  know. 

Finally,  whereas  it  is  said  that  Terebinthus  outlived 
Scythian,  and  that  having  died  himself  at  the  house  of  a 
widow,  who,  couiing  to  the  possession  of  his  estate,  pur- 
chased the  boy  Cubricus  or  Mani,  then  seven  years  of  age, 
it  must  be  all  without  foundation  ;  for  Scythian  himself  was 

binthus,  dicens — se — vocari  non  jam  Terebinthiim,  sed  alium  Buddam  nomine, 
— ex  quadam  autem  virgine  natum  se  esse,  simul  et  ab  angelo  in  montibus 
enutrituni. — Tunc  deinde  mane  primo  ascendit  solarium  quoddam  excelsum, 
ubi  nomina  quaedam  coepit  invocare. — Hffic  eo  cogitante,  justissimus  Deus 
sub  terras  eum  detrudi  per  spiritum  jubet,  et  continue  de  sumnio  dejectvis, 
exanime  corpus  deorsum  pnccipitatum  est,  quod  anus  ilia  misorta  coUectum 
locis  solitis  sepeliit.     Arch.  c.  52.  p.  97. 

'  Cyr.  Cat.  vi.  n.  23.  '  Ilaer.  66.  n.  3. 

'   VTTO  ayytXB  KaruxStie  Karnttas.     Epiph.  ib.  p.  621.  A. 

"  Qui  in  Persiam  concedens,  ut  melius  celaretur,  transtulit  nomen  suum  in 
Buddam,  (rectius  Bntm,  seu  Budm,)  Terebinthum  significans.  Hyde,  p.  280. 
Conf.  Beaus.  Hist,  de  Manich.  T.  i.  p.  53—55.  "  T.  i.  p.  56. 

"  cur  hominem  susceplum  a  Spiritu   Sancto,  ManiclvdDum,   non 

putatis  turpe,  natum  ex  utroque  sexu  praedicare  ?  Aug.  contr.  Ep.  Fund.  c.  7. 
n.  8.  Cum  enim  vos  non  timeatis  viscera  et  sanguinem  Manichsei  de  humano 
concubito  venientem,  id.  ib.  Vid.  et  Alex.  Lye.  p.  14.  D. 

*  See  Beausobre,  T.  i.  p.  60. 


320  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  Historu. 

contemporary  with  Main",  and  alive  after  that  Mani  had  pub- 
lished his  peculiar  opinions, as  has  been  shown.  Moreover, 
Terebinthus,  or  Buddas,  or  Addas,  was  a  disciple  of  Mani : 
his  name  is  in  all  catalogues  of  the  first  disciples  of  that 
Persian  master,  and  he  wrote  in  defence  of  his  scheme.  And 
by  Scythian  may  then  be  meant  Mani,  who,  as>  Theodoret 
says,  was  sometimes  so  called  ;  possibly,  because  he  was 
awhile  in  that  country. 

Let  this  suffice  for  showing  that  the  common  accounts 
concerning'  these  two  predecessors  of  Mani,  are  not  to  be 
relied  upon,  but  are  really  idle  fictions. 

I  have  ilready  several  times  quoted  Beausobre.^  I  here 
again  refer  to  his  History  of  the  ManicKees. 

II.  We  come  now  to  Mani's  works,  of  which  1  shall  give 
the  best  account  I  can. 

Socrates,  in  the  passage  formerly  cited,  speaks  of  four 
books  written  by  Terebinthus  or  Buddas,  entitled  Mysteries, 
The  Gospel,  The  Treasure,  and  Chapters.  By^  Cyril, and'' 
Epihanius,  and*^  Photius,  they  are  ascribed  to  Scythian,  as 
they  are  also  in  The''  Acts  of  Archelaus.  But  there  being- 
an  ambiguity  in  one  place  of  that  work®  where  they  are 
mentioned,  it  is  likely  that  thereby  Socrates  was  induced  to 
call  them  Tcrcbinthus's,  as  has  been  hinted  by  "^  some  learned 
men. 

Socrates  says  that  Mani,  coming  to  the  possession  of  those 
books,  distributed  them  among'  his  followers  as  his  own. 
Archelaus^'  speaks  to  the  like  purpose;  only  he  says  that 
Mani  first  made  additions  to  them.  It  seems  tome  probable 
that  they  are  really  Mani's;  and  I  shall  consider  them  as 
such.     Beausobre  does  the  same. 

The  four  books,  mentioned  by  Socrates,  arc  differently 
placed  by  the  authors  just  cited.     I  choose  to  speak  of  thenni 

y  'StcvdiavoQ  Se  SaXtvuiv  TrpoatjyoptvcTo.  Haer.  Fab.  1.  i.  c.  26.  in. 

"  T.  1.  p.  53—64.  ^  Cat.  6.  n.  22. 

*>  Haer.  66  n.  2.  ■=  Ph.  contr.  Manich.  I.  i.  c.  12. 

^  etiam  quatiior  illos  libellos,  quos  Scythianus  scripserat,  non 

inultorum  versuum  singulos.     Arch.  n.  53.  p.  97. 

*  Discipuhim  autem  habuit  [Scythianus]  quemdam  nomine  Terebinthum, 
(jiii  scripsit  ei  quatuor  hbros,  ex  quibiis  uniini  quidam  appellavit  Mysteriorum, 
ahum  vero  Capitulorum,  tertium  autem  Evangelium,  et  novissimum  omnium 
Thesaurum  appellavit.     Arch.  n.  52,  p.  96. 

f  Scythianus — discipuhim  habuit  Terebinthum,  qui  alio  nomine  Buddam 
se  vocavit,  scrifjsitque  ei  (hoc  est  ab  eo  dictates)  quatuor  hbros.  Fabr.  Bib. 
Gr.  T.  V.  p.  280.  Vid.  et  Toutee  in  Cyr.  not.  2.  p.  101.  et  confer.  Beaus.  T. 
i.  p.  46.  m.  8  Tunc  assumit  illos  libeilos,  et  transfert  eos,  ita 

ut  multa  alia  a  semetipso  insereret  eis — nomen  vero  libellis  proprium  adscribit, 
prions  nomine  deleto,  taiiquam  si  eos  solus  ex  semetipso  conscripserit.  Arch. 
n.  53.  p.  98. 


Tlie  Manichecs.     Sect.  IH.  321 

in  the  order  in  wliich  they  are  named  by  Archelaus  and 
Epiphanins:  Mysteries,  Chapters,  Gosjiel,  Treasnry.  After- 
wards 1  sliall  pnt  (h)nn  the  titles  of  other  things  ascribed 
to  him. 

1.  The  first  is  The  Mysteries.  '  It  appears,'  says''  Beau- 
sobre,  '  by  comparing-  Titus  of  Bostra  and  Epiphanins,  that 
'  it  began  with  these  Avords  :  "  God'  and  matter  existed, 
'  light  and  darkness,  good  and  evil  :  they  Avere  entirely 
'  separate  and  contrary  to  each  other."  This  book  was 
'  divided  into*^  two  and  twenty  sections,  according  to  the 
'  number  of  the  letters  of  the  .Syriac  alphabet.     As  for  the 

*  subject  of  the  book,  Photius'  says  the  author  there  blas- 

*  phemed  the  law  and  the  prophets.  But  that  was  not  the 
'  principal  design  of  this  pernicious  work  :  it  is  the  doctrine 
'  of  two  principles  that  Mani  there  endeavoured  to  prove  by 
'  a  demonstration  a  posteriori :   I  mean  from  the  mixture  of 

*  good  and  evil  which  there  is  in  the  world.  All  his  rea- 
'  soning  is  founded  upon  this  maxim,  that  if  there  were 
'  one  sole  cause,  who  is  most  simple,  most  perfect,  most 
'  good,  all  effects  would  be  answerable  to  the  nature  and  will 

*  of  that  cause;  the  Avhole  would  show  his  simplicity,  his 
'  perfection,  his  goodness;  and  every  thing  would  be  im- 
'  mortal,  holy,  happy,  like  himself.  We  may  with  assur- 
'  ance  conclude  what  were  the  contents  of  this  book.  The 
'  Mysteries,  from  the  confutation  of  it  by  Titus  of  Bostra  ; 
'  who  follows  his  adversary  very  closely,  though  he  does 
'  not  concern  himself  minutely  with  every '^^  thing.' 

Some  learned  men,  as"  Cave,  and"  Fabricius,  thought  that 
Mani  wrote  a  book  Concerning  the  Faith.  They  suppose 
it  to  be  quoted  by  Epiphanius.  But  Beausobre  Avell  argues 
thatP  the  passage  in  Epiphanius  is  taken  out  of  the  book  of 
the  Mysteries,  as  appears  by  comparing  him  with  Titus  of 
Bostra.  I  think  Epiphanius  does  not  intend  a  book  differ- 
ent from  others  there  named,  but  says  that  in  the  books 
mentioned  by  him,  particularly  that  of  The  Mysteries,  Mani 
shows  what  was  his  faith  or  doctrine. 

I  therefore  shall  not  speak   of  this  as  a  distinct  book   of 
Mani,  as  some  have  done. 

2.  The  second   book   is  that  called  Chapters  or  Heads: 

^  B.  T.  i.  p.  46,  47.  '   Bv  5eoc  icai  vXjj"  fwc,  km  (tkotoq' 

ayaQov,  kul  kukov'  tv  toiq  irnaiv  cncpojc  tvavrta.  Tit.  contr.  Manich.  1.  i.  p.  63. 
in.  et  ap.  Epiph.  II.  66.  n.  14.  in.  ^  Epiph.  H.  66.  n.  1-3.  p.  629.  C.  D. 

'  Ph.  contr.  Manich.  1.  i.  c.  12.  p.  40. 

""  What  Beausobre  says  farther  of  this  book  may  be  seen  T.  i.  p.  427 

"  H.  1.  T.  i.  p.  139.  °  Bib.  Gr.  T.  v.  p.  282. 

P  T.  i.  p.  426,  427. 
vol,.    III.  Y 


32 2  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

summarily  representing,  it  is  likely,  the  fiindamenlal,  prin- 
cipal articles  of  the  Manichaean  doctrine.  Beausobrei  puts 
the  question,  whether  this  be  not  The  Epistle  of  the  Foun- 
(hition.  As  I  see  no  reason  for  such  a  supposition,  1  shall 
speak  of  that  afterwards  among'  Mani's  epistles. 

3.  The  third  book  was  entitled  The  Gospel ;  which,  as 
Cyril  says,  did"^  not  contain  the  history  of  the  life  of  Christ, 
but  resembled  the  gospels  in  name  only.  We  might  be  apt 
to  conclude  from  those  words  of  Cyril  that  he  had  seen  the 
book  ;  but  perhaps  he  speaks  only  by  way  of  conjecture  ; 
as^  Photius  seems  to  have  done  Avhen  he  says  that'  therein 
were  related  things  derogatory  to  the  honour  of  Christ  our 
Saviour.  I  suppose  this  to  be  the  same  Jbook  which  is  some- 
times called"  The  Living  Gospel.  Beausobre  says^'  it  was 
a  collection  of  Mani's  meditations  and  pretended  revelations. 
But  1  cannot  see  how  he  should  know  this,  when  he  adds 
that  it  was  written  in  Persic,  and  probably  was  never  trans- 
lated into  Greek  :  and  in  another  place  he  says  that"*  he  has 
not  observed  any  fragments  of  it  in  the  authors  that  have 
confuted  Mani.  I  suppose  that  conjectural  conclusion  is 
built  upon  the  story  of  Mani's  journey  to  heaven,  spoken  of 
by  eastern  authors,  for  which  I  see  no  good  foundation. 
For  my  own  part  I  cannot  say  what  was  in  the  book  ;  I 
know  nothing  of  it  beside  the  title. 

4.  The  fourth  is  called  The  Treasure,  and''  Treasure  of 
Life,  andy  The  Treasures  in  the  plural  number,  as  if  there 
were  more  than  one  :  a  greater,  perhaps,  and  a  less.  Epi- 
phaniiis  speaks  of  a  book  called  The  little  Treasury,  as  dis- 
tinct from  that  called  The  Treasure:'  perhaps  it  was  an 
abridgment  of  the  former  ;  but  we  cannot  be  certain.  The 
Treasure  was  one  of  the  books  which  were  confuted  by'' 
Heraclean.  Beausobre  thinks  that*"  the  pompous  title  of 
The  Treasure,  or  Treasure  of  Life,  might  be  an  allusion  to 
some  words  of  Christ,  where  he  compares  his  doctrine  to 

'^  lb.  p.  48.  in. 

'   ivayytKwv,   a  Xpi'rs  vpaJiuQ  Trfptfj^serai',  aXX'  aTrXwg  /lovov  tt}v 

Trporrrtyopiav.     Cyr.  Cat.  6.  n.  22.  ^  Vit.  Toutee  not.  ^.  in  Cyr.  p.  101. 

'  Phot,  contr.  Manich.l.  i.  c.  12.  p.  40. 

"  To  Tu)v  Mavixai-ov  ^(nv  tvayytXiov.  Ap.  Phot.  Cod.  85.  p.  204.  f.  Conf. 
Timoth.  Const,  ap.  Meurs.  Varia  Divina.  p.  11 7.  et  Form.  Recip.  Manich.  ap. 
Toll,  P.  142.  et  Cotd.  Clem.  Recogn.  1.  4.  c.  27. 

"  T.  i.  p.  48.  ™  lb.  p.  426.  not.  2. 

*  Srt]rTavpo(:  Kiorig.  ap.  Phot.  contr.  Manich.  1.  i.  p.  40.  BtjaavfioQ  ri)g  ?wj;c. 
ap.  Meurs.  Van  Div.  p.  117.  et  Toll.  p.  142.  et  Cotel.  ubi  supr. 

^  Kai  Tsg  BrirjavpHQ  KUTtXiyti.  Phot.  Cod.  85.  p.  204. 

'  'Erepa  St  Brfffavpog'  koi  aWag  Et]  /3e/3X8c  KUTTvaag  fpavTu^trm,  rov  ^iKpov 
^T)  Brfrravpov  HTw  KaXufiivov.     Epiph.  H.  66.  n.  13.  p.  629.  D. 

»  Phot.  Cod.  85.  "  Beaus.  T.  i.  p.  49. 


The  Manicheci.     Sect.  III.  323 

a  treasure  hid  in  a  field  :  See  Mattli.  xii.  44.  Augustine'^ 
and  the  author''  De  Fide,  joined  with  Augustine's  works, 
allege  a  passage  as  taken  out  of  The  Treasure  :  but''  Beauso- 
bre  says  it  is  not  genuine,  and  oiiers  very  weighty  arguments 
against  it.  As  I  do  not  intend  to  examine  all  the  notions 
of  the  Manichees,  I  shall  have  no  occasion  to  consider  that 
passage. 

5.  By  Epiphanius,  Mani  is  said  to  have  Avritten*^  a  book 
about  astrology  :  it  is  likely  he  means  astronomy. 

6.  In  Photius  is  a  book  entitled^  The  Gigantic  Book  :  it 
is  one  of  the  three  books  of  Mani  which  were  confuted  by 
Heraclean  :  the  other  two  are  The  Gospel  arid  the  Treasures. 
Timothy  of  Constantinople  mentions  a  Manicheean  book, 
entitled''  The  Giant's  Enterprize  :  very  probably  he  means 
the  same  with  that  just  taken  notice  of. 

7.  Mani's  epistles:  of  Avhich  there  was  a'  book  or''  col- 
lection made  by  soinebod3% 

(1.)  The  lirst  to  be  observed  by  us  is  The  Epistle  of  the 
Foundation :  this  was  confuted  by  Augustine,who  transcribed 
the  beoinnino-  of  it  into  his  own'  works.  There  is  a  large 
fragment  of  it  in  another  book  of'"  Augustine  :  there  are 
fragments  of  it  also  in  the*^  treatise  De  Fide,  joined  with 
Augustine's  works.  It  was  publicly  read  by  the  Manichees 
in  their"  assemblies.  Possibly  it  was  a  long  epistle;  for 
AngustineP  calls  it  a  book,  and  says  it  contained  almost  their 
whole  scheme. 

There  is  an  epistle  to  Patricius,  cited  byi  Julian  the 
Pelagian,  in  the  Opus  Imperfectum  of  Augustine.  Tille- 
monf^   considers   this  as  different  from  the  Epistle  of  the 

•^  Aug.  de  Natiira  Eoni.  cap.  44.  Vid.  et  Act.  cum  Felice.  1.  2.  c.  7.  et 
Contr.  Faust.  1.  20.  c.  6. 

^  Cap.  14,  &c.  ^  Vid.  Hist,  de  Manich.  T.  i.  p.  49,  426.  T.  ii.  p. 

387,  &c.  '  AWrjv  £t  rrjv  Trtpt  a^^poXo-j-iaf   H.  66.  n.  13.  p.  619.  L). 

^  Avarpfiru  St  to  Trapa  rote  Mari^aioic  icaXs/ifvov  evayyeXwv,  Kai  ti]V 
yiyavTuov  jiifiXov,  km  thq  S/ijaavpsg.  Phot,  Cod.  85.  p.  204. 

'■    'H  Twv  yiyavrcov  TrpayfiuTua.   ap.  Meurs.  Var.  Div.  p.  117. 

'  Kai  TO  T(x)v  f  TTiToXwv  avTH  /3i|3Xeov.  ap.  Coteler.  ubi  supr.  et  Toll.  p.  152. 

^  jj  T(i)v  tiriToXoiv  byLOQ.  ap.  Meurs.  ib.  p.  117. 

1  Vid.  Aug.  contr.  Ep.  Manichai.  ■"  Vid.  De  Natura  Boni. 

cap.  46.  T.  8.  "  De  Fide.  cap.  v.  xi.  xxviii. 

"  Ipsa  enim  nobis  illo  tempore  miseris  quando  lecta  est,  illuminati  dice- 
bamur  a  vobis.     Aug.  contr.  Ep.  Man.  cap.  v.  n.  6. 

p  Et  potissimum  ilium  considerenius  librum,  quem  Fundamenti  epistolam 
dicitis,  ubi  totum  pene  quod  creditis  continetur. — Aug.  Ibid. 

•*  Sic  etiam  in  lUa  ad  Patritium  epistola.  ap.  Aug.  Op.  Imp.  1.  3.  c.  186. — 
Dixit  hoc  idem  et  Manichaeus  m  epistola  ad  Patntium.  Dixit  et  in  epistola, 
quam  scripsit  ad  filiam  Menoch.  ib.  1.  4.  c.  102. 

■■  Mem.  Ec.  T.  iv.  Les  Manicheens,  AtL  1 3. 

V  2 


324  Credibditij  of  the  Gvspei  History. 

Foundation,  though  he  allows  that  also  to  have  beeiusent  to 
some  particular  person.  But  to  nie  it  seems  probable  that 
they  are  one  and  the  same  epistle;  for  according-  to  the 
reading*  in  the  Benedictine  edition  of  Augustine's  Answer, 
The  Epistle  of  the  Foundation  appears  to  be  sent  to  Patri- 
cius.  Which  is  the  right  reading,  that  in  the  Opus  linper- 
fectuni  of  Augustine,  or  that  in  his  Answer  to  The  Epistle 
of  the  Foundation,  I  do  not  determine:  but  it  seems  likely 
that  hereby  is  meant  the  same  name  with  tlmt  of  Mani's  father: 
and  if  Patec,  or  Phatec,  was  the  name  of  his  father,  and  of  his 
friend,  or  disciple,  to  whom  The  Epistle  of  the  Foundation 
was  sent,  it  may  afford  ground  to  think  that  this  was  a  com- 
mon name  among  the  Persians  or  Chald'eans. 

2.  A  letter  to'  Menoch,  a  Manichsean  woman,  found  at" 
Constantinople,  and''  often  quoted  by  Julian  the  Pelagian. 
I  think  the  genuineness  of  this  letter  is  not  disputed  ;  but''' 
Augustine  did  not  know  any  thing  of  it  till  it  was  quoted 
against  him  by  Julian. 

3.  A  letter  to  Marcel  1  us,  found  in  The"  Acts  of  Archc- 
laus,  and  in^  Epiphanius.  Beausobre*^  allows  this  letter  to 
be  genuine:  but  1  think  that  if  those  Acts  are  fictitious,  and 
the  history  of  Mani  there  recorded  is  for  the  most  part  im- 
probable, and  without  ground,  it  will  be  difficult  to  maintain 
this  letter.  Again,  if  genuine,  it  must  have  been  written  in 
Greek,  as  Beausobre  grants.  That  learned  writer  has  indeed 
some  arguments  to  prove  that  Mani  understood  Greek  ;  but 
perhaps  they  are  of  no  great  moment :  the  contents  of  the 
letter  may  increase  the  suspicion  of  its  genuineness.  It  may 
be  doubted  whether  in  writing  to  a  stranger  Mani  would 
take  upon  him  his  apostolical  character,  as  he  here  does, 
unless  indeed  he  means  nothing  extraordinary  by  it ;  and 
whether  he  would  call  one  who  was  not  of  his  opinion  his'' 
dear  son.  It  seems  to  me  likewise  improbable  that  Mani 
should   reveal   his  sentiments  so  clearly  to  one,  who  as  yet 

'  De  eo  igitur,  fratcr  dilectissime  Pattici,  de  quo  significasti,  &c.  ap.  Aug. 
contr.  Ep.  Manich.  c.  12.  n.  14,  '  ubi  subjicitur  in  imapagina  hoc  monitum.' 
Editi,  *  dilectissime  audisti.'  Vetus  codex  Corbeiensis,  ante  mille  annos  scrip- 
tus,  loco  *  audisti,'  habet  '  Pattici  :'  forte  nomen  illius,  cui  cpistolam  dedit 
ManichiEus.  '  See  before,  note  i. 

"  Sed  quia  post  editionem  lUoruni, — apud  Constantinopolim  Manichaei 
epistola  inventa  est,  atque  ad  has  directa  partes,  opera  est  aliqua  ejus  inserere. 
ap.  Aug.  Op.  Imp.  1.  3.  c.  166. 

'  Ap.  Augiistin.  ib.  c.  172,  174,  175,  176,  187,  et  passim. 

"  Si  dicaiii  tilji,  istani  Manichaei  epistolam  me  omnino  nescire ;  quaravis 
vcTum  dicam,  nou  credes.     Aug.  Op.  Imp..!.  3.  c.  172. 

"  Arch.  c.  V,  p.  6.  7.  '       y  H.  66.  c.  6. 

•  T.  i.  p.  94,  95. 

°  TiKvn)  ayuTTrjTif).  ap.  Arch.  p.  6. 


The  Manichees.     Sect.  III.  325 

had  no  knowledge  of  liirn  ;  for  lie  declares  openly  the  doc- 
trine of  two  principles,  and  his  opinion  concerning'  the  l)ir(h 
of  Christ :  and,  in  speaking  of  this  last,  he''  useth  broad 
and  oflensive  expressions,  i  might  add  other  observations; 
but  1  forbear. 

(4.)  A  letter  to  Scythian,  cited  by  Eulogiusin"^  Photius. 
The  passage  may  be  likewise  seen  among  some  other  frag- 
ments of  31ani's  writings  in''  Fabricius. 

(5.)  An  epistle  to  Zebenna,  of  which  there  are  two  frag- 
ments in"  Fabricius. 

(6.)  A  letter  to  Cudarus,  of  which  Fabricius  has  also  a*^ 
fragment. 

(7.)  A  letter  to  Odas:  [or  perhaps  Addas,  or  Buddas  :] 
Fabricius^  has  likewise  obliged  us  M'ith  a  fran-ment  of  this 
epistle. 

(8.)  Augustine''  speaks  of  an  epistle  of  Mani,  containing 
the  strict  rules  by  which  the  elect  ought  to  govern  tiiem- 
selves.  By  his  maiuier  of  speaking  it  appears  to  have  been 
well  known  at  Rome  and  in  Africa.  Whether  it  was  The 
Epistle  of  the  Foundation,  or  some  other,  I  cannot  say ;  but 
I  suppose  it  was  not  improper  just  to  mention  here  this  par- 
ticular. 

8.  In  some  late  Avriters  mention  is  made  of  a  book  entitled ' 
Memoirs,  or  Memorable  Sayings  and  Actions,  of  Mani;  the 
loss  of  which  is  much  regretted  by"^  Beausobre. 

9.  Alexander  of  Lycopolis  mentions'  a  book  of  Mani 
concerning  our  Saviour's  crucifixion.  But  it  may  be  ques- 
tioned whether  he  means  a  distinct  book,  or  only  that  in  some 
book  Mani  had  treated  of  that  subject. 

10.  An  eastern  author,  cited  by  Hyde,  speaks  of  a"^  book 
of  philosophy  written  by  Mani. 

11.  In°  Photius  is  quoted  a  passage  as  Mani's;  it  is  to 
this  purpose  :  '  I  am  not  so  merciful  as  Christ,  who  declared, 
'  "  Him  that  denies  me  before  men,  him  also  will  I  deny." 
*  As  for  me,  I  say  on  the  other  hand  :  "  him  that  denies  me 

XptTO)',  Mapiac  tivoq  yvvaiKog  tXeyov  iivai  viov   iK   aifiaTog  km  ffapKog, 
KM  TT]Q  aWt]g  CvuioSiag  riov  yvvaiKojv  ytyEvrjadai.   ib.  p.  8. 

<^  Cod.  280.  p.  849.  m.  <!  Bib.  Gr.  T.  v.  p.  284. 

*  Ibid.  f  Ib.  p.  285.  «  Ibid. 

''  Proposita  est   vivendi   regula   de  Manichaei   epistola.     Aug.   de   Mor. 
Manich.  c.   20.  n.   74.  '   Kai  rt^v  r<uv   aTrofivTjfxovtvfiariov. 

(sive  Manetis  dictorum  factorumquememorabilium  Commentarium.)  ap. 'I'ollii 
Insign.  p.  142.  et  Cotel.  ubi  supra.  ''  T.  i.  p.  430. 

'Oirtp  avTOQ  6  Mavixaiog  SiairQamTai  Xoyr^j  Trtpt  rsTs  SiSuffKiov.     Alex. 
Lye.  p.  19.  B.  '"  IImi  Shahna  dicit  Manetem  scripsisse  piiilo. 

sophiam,  quam  vertit  in  linguam  Persicam.     Hyde,  p.  283. 

"  Ph.  contr.  Manich.  I.  i.  c.  8. 


326  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

'  before  men,  and  by  lying  secures  himself",  I  will  receive 
'  with  joy  as  if  he  had  not  denied  me;  and  his  lie  and 
'  apostasy  1  will  consider  as  a  service  to  my  interest." 
This  saying-,  with  some  difference,  and  not  quite  so  absurd 
and  impudent,  is  in  The  Form  of  abjuring  Manichoeism,  as 
we  have  it  in°  Cotelerius,  and?  Tollius.  1  think  thati 
Beausobre  is  in  the  right  to  dispute  the  genuineness  of  this 
passage  found  only  in  late  authors,  without  naming  the  work 
^^  hence  it  is  taken.  I  am  sure  it  is  contrary  to  the  noble 
saying  of  3iani,  to  be  alleged  by  and  by"^  from  The  Acts 
of  Archelaus,  m  here  he  professes  willingness  to  suffer,  and 
to  fear  God  more  than  men  :  it  is  also  contrary  to  the  prac- 
tice of  his  followers,  who  are  generally  ifi  suffering  circum- 
stances for  their  principles,  and  yet  persevered,  and  showed 
as  much  constancy  as  the  men  of  any  other  sect.  Beausobre* 
has  fjuoted  a  passage  of  Secundinus,  showing  that  the 
Manichees  did  not  approve  of  dissimulation,  nor  of  denying 
the  Lord  Jesus.  Augustine  assures  us,  that"  the  Manichees 
alleged  as  genuine  Mords  of  Christ  what  is  recorded  Luke 
xviii.  29,  30;  "  There  is  no  man  that  has  left  house,  or 
parents,  or  wife,  or  children,  for  the  kingdom  of  God's  sake, 
who  shall  not  receive  manifold." 

Perhaps  this  impudent  saying  was  in  The  Memoirs,  or 
Memorable  Acts  and  Sayings,  of  Mani :  if  so,  Beausobre  had 
no  reason  to  set  any  great  value  upon  that  piece.  Indeed 
T  suspect  the  collection  with  that  name  to  have  been  a  late 
thing;  and  I  apprehend  it  not  unlikely  to  have  been  made 
by  Mani's  enemies,  and  to  have  been  injurious  to  him  in 
some  respects,  though  there  may  have  been  in  it  some  of  his 
genuine  sayings  and  observations. 

12.  Titus  of  Bostra  intimates  that^  Mani's  books,  at 
least  the  book  he  answered,  was  written  in  Syriac.  Au- 
gustine however  supposeth  that"  they  had  books  Mritten 
in  Persic. 

°  Ubi  supra.  p  Toll,  ubi  supr.  p.  148. 

1  T.  ii.  p.  796.  '■  See  next  section,  near  the  beginning. 

'  lb.  p.  796,  797.  '  Ipse  enim  non  ignoras,  quam  pessimus 

sit,  (juanique  malignus,  quique  etiam  lanta  calliditate  adversus  fideles  et 
summos  viros  miiitat,  ut  et  Petrum  coegerit  sub  una  nocte  tertio  Dominum 
uegare.     Secundm.  ad  August,  c.  4. 

"  quid  si  alius  dicat  illud  esse  immissum,  et  falsum,  quod  ipsi  proferunt 

dicente  Domino :  Omnis  qui  reliquerit  domum,  aut  u.xorera,  aut  parentes,  aut 
filios  propter  regnuni  coelorum,  &c.  Aug.  contr.  Adimant.  c.  3.  n.  2. 

'Orra   /ifv  uv   irfpa,  ynaog  Ciktjv   fivdoXoyet    Kat   ypa(pH  ry  2j/paiv   <pwvy 
Xpofxivoc-     Tit.  1.  i.  p.  69.  H). 

"  Itane  Persicis  libris  me  jubes  credere,  qui  Hebi-aeis  me  dixisti  non  cre- 
dere ?  Aug.  contr.  Faust.  1.  1-3.  c.  17. 


The  Manichees.     Sect.  III.  327 

13.  From  Augustine  we  learn  that  the''  Manichees  had 
many  and  large  books,  adorned  at  great  expense.  Periiaps 
the  bulk  of  the  volumes  Avas  owing  to  the  largeness  of"  the 
letters  in  which >  they  were  written  throughout;  such  as 
were  otherwise  generally  used  only  at  the  beginnings  of 
books  or  chapters. 

14.  I  have  now  finished  my  account  of  Mani's  works ;  I 
wish  we  had  more  of  them,  or  at  least  The  Epistle  of  the 
Foundation  entire,  that  we  might  judge  for  ourselves.  Per- 
haps it  might  please  the  curious  if  some  learned  man  would 
publish  a  collection  of  all  Mani's  fragments. 

"  conspuuntur  [al.  conspiciuntur]  tarn  raulti  et  tam  grandes  et  tam 

pretiosi  codices  vestri :  et  multum  dolentur  labores  antiquariorum,  et  sacelli 
miserorum,  et  panis  deceptorum.  Contr.  Faust.  1.  13.  c.  6.  Incendite  omnes 
illas  membranas,  elegantesque  tecturas  decoris  pellibiis  exquisitas,  ut  nee  res 
superflua  vos  oneret.  ib.  cap.  18. — cum  te  ilU  sonarent  mihi  frequenter  et 
muitipliciter  voce  sola,  et  libris  multis  et  ingentibus.  Confess.  1.  3.  c.  6.  n. 
10.  Vid.  et  c.  12. 

y  Habeant,  qui  volant,  veteres  libros,  vel  in  membranis  purpureis  auro 
argentoque  descriptos,  vel  initialibus,  ut  vulgo  aiunt,  literis,  oncra  magis 
exarata,  quam  codices :  dummodo  mihi,  meisque  permittant  pauperes  habere 
schedulas,  et  non  tam  pulchros  codices  quam  emendates.  Hier.  Pr.  in  Job.  T. 
i-  p.  798. 


328  CredibUUtj  of  the  Gospel  History. 


SECT.  IV. 


THE   SENTIMENTS  OF  THE  MANICHEES  CONCERNING 
DIVERS  POINTS. 


1.  3Icmi  was  a  christitm.     II.  Divers  particulars  in  which 
the  Mariichees  agreed  with  other  christians.     III.   Whe- 
ther 3Iani  was  an  impostor  1   The  question  proposed,  and 
the  opinions  oj'  several  about  it.     IV.  Reasons J'or  think- 
ing he  teas  an  impostor,  with  an  examination  of  those 
reasons.     V.  Additional  observations.     VI.   The  Jlani- 
chcean    sentiments    concerning    the    divine     perfections. 
Whether   they   believed  tivo  gods  ?    They  believed  God 
creator,  and  a  Trinity.     Whether  they  icorshipped  the 
sun?     VII.    They  held  tico  eternal  principles.       VIII. 
Their  account  oJ' the  creation  of  the  world.     IX.   Of  the 
formation  of  man.     X.   That  man  has  two  souls.     XI. 
'Of  the   fall    of  man.     XII.    Of  marriac/e.     XIII.  Of 
free  will.     XIV.   Of  fate.     XV.   Of  the' lawfulness  of 
war.     XVI.    They   held    the   transmigration    of   souls. 
XVII.   They  denied  the  resurrection  of  the  body .     XVIII. 
Of  the  future  judgment,  and  the  eternity  of  hell  tor- 
ments.     XIX.     Of    the   end  of  the    world.      XX.    The 
grounds   and  reasons   of  their  faith    in    Christ.     XXI. 
They  believed  Christ  to   be   God,  but  not  man.     XXII. 
Their   opinion  of  Christ's  crucijixion,  deaths  and  resur- 
rection.    XXIII.    Whether    they  thought    the   death    of 
Christ  to  be  a  propitiatory  sacrijice  ? 

f.  THE  first  thing  I  observe  for  showing-  Mani's  sentiments 
is,  that  he  was  a  christian. 

Entering  into  the  debate  with  Archelaus,  he  is  made  to 
say  :  '  I,  bretliren,  am'^  a  disciple  r;nd  an  apostle  of  Jesus 
'  Christ.'  His  letter  to  Marcel  1  us,  inserted  in  the  work 
ascribed  to  Archelaus,  is  thus  inscribed:  '  Mani,  an  "^  apostle 
*  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  all  the  saints  with  me,  unto  Marcellus 
'  my  dear  son,  grace,  mercy,  and  peace  from  God  the  Father, 
'  and  from  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ.'     In  that  letter  he  com- 

*  Ego,  viri  fmtrcs  Christ  i  quideni  sum  discipulu?,  apostolus  vero  Jesu. 
Arch.  n.  13,  p.  24.  in. 

''    JiUtrixcuoQ  airo-^oXoQ  Itjun  Xpi'^s- X^P'S'  '^'"f,  (ipi]vtj  «to  Siis 

narpoQ  Kcii  Kvnin  jj/iwv  I»jt8   Xf)t?«.  k.  X.  n.  5.   p.  6. 


The  Mankhees.     Sect.  IV.  329 

plains  that  '  some,*^  even  christi'ins,  did  not  believe  the  things 
'  said  in  the  gospel  of  our  Lord  and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ.' 
At  the  village  Diodoris,  Mani  is  represented  speaking-  to 
Archelaus  in  this  honest,  and  resolute,  and  truly  christian 
manner :  '  If**  you  have  a  mind  to  persecute  me,  I  submit : 
'  if  you  would  inflict  punishments  upon  me,  1  do  not  decline 
'  them;  if  you  would  kill  me,  I  am  not  afraid.  For  we 
'  ought  to  fear  him  alone,  who  is  able  to  destroy  both  soul 
'  and  body  in  hell :'  see  Matt.  x.  28. 

Faustus  in  his  book  usually  proposeth  difficulties  and 
objections  against  their  scheme  in  the  way  of  cjuestion : 
'  Do*'  you  receive  the  gospel  ?  Yes  certainly.'  Afterwards: 
'  Do*^  you  receive  the  g'ospel  ;  and  do  you  ask  me  whether 
'  I  receive  the  gospel,  when  in  fact  it  appears  that  I  receive 
'  it  by  doing  what  it  commands'?'  which  he  there  proceeds 
to  show  in  a  variety  of  particulars.  Hes  speaks  '  of  the 
'  wholesome,  or  saving  words  of  the  Lord,  and  his  divine 
'  discourses.'  And,  according  to  him,  Christ''  is  light  and 
truth  itself,  and'  a  teacher  and  model  of  all  virtue. 

Faustus  readily  professeth  himself  and  the  rest  of  the 
JManichees''  to  be  disciples  of  Christ  and  his  apostles:  nor' 
will  they  be  prevailed  upon  by  any  to  forsake  Jesus,  the  son 
of  God,  their  master.  Our"'  Lord,  and  our  Saviour,  are 
characters  and  titles  by  which  they  continually  speak  of 
Jesus  Christ. 

Titus  of  Bostra  owns  that"  they  honoured  the  nanie  of 

*^  Owrt  yap  toiq  (tpr)fiEvotQ  iv  ivayyiKioiQ  Trap'  avrs  m  ffwTTjpoQ  rjfxwv  rai 
KvpiH  Irjas  XpiTS  Tri^tvuaiv.      ib.  p.  7. 

**  Si  persequi  volueris,  paratus  sum  :  et  si  inferre  supplicia,  non  refugiam. 
Si  etiam  interficere  me  vis,  non  reformido.  &c.  Arch.  n.  47.  p.  84. 

'  Accipis  evangelium  ?  Et  maxime.  Faust.  1.  2.  c.  i. 

^  Accipis  evangelium  ?  Tu  me  interrogas,  utrum  accipiam  evangelium,  in 
quo  id  ipsum  accipere  appavet,  quia  quae  jubet  observo — ?  Ego  patrem 
dimisi — ,  et  interrogas,  utrum  accipiam  evangelium  ?  Nisi  adhuc  nescis,  quid 
sit  quod  evangelium  nuncupatur.  1.  5.  c.  i. 

B credimus, — tum  prsecepta  salutaria  ejus,  tum  parabolus,  cunctum- 

que  sermonem  deificum.  Id.  1.  32.  c.  7.  ^  Christum  lumen, 

sanctimonium,  divina  omnia  petentem.  1.  14.  c.  i.  f. — veritatis  auctori.  1.  16. 
c.  2.  '  Quid  vero  et  de  magistro  ipso  dicemus  ac  sanctimonii 
totius  auctore  Jesu ?  1.  30.  3.  4. 

^  ut  lere  Christo  placet  et  ejusapostolis,  et  nobis  profecto.  1.  24.  c. 

i.  med. — neque  id  temere  aut  praesumtive,  sed  a  Christo  discentes  et  ejus  apos- 
tolis,  &c.  eod.  cap.  ad  fin.  '  Nos  vero  quamvis  de  hac  sententia 

nemo  prorsus  dejiciat,  ex  Deo  accipiendi  filium  Dei.  1.  23.  c.  3.  in. 

■"  Et  merito  dixisse  Dominum  nostrum.  Fortunat.  Disp.  i.  c.  14.  Evasi- 
mus  igitur,  quia  spiritalem  secuti  sumus  salvatorem.  Nam  illius  tantum  erupit 
audacia,  ut  si  noster  Dominus  carnalis  foret,  omnis  nostra  fuisset  spes  amputata. 

Secundin.  ad  Aug.  c.  4.  "  a\K'  tirnSt}  Tirturjmt  to 

ovofia  TH  \t](TH, Tit.  1.  3.  in.  p.  139. 


330  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  Uisturij. 

Christ.  Augustine  observes,  that"  they  would  not  say  the 
doctrine  of  the  apostles  of  Christ  was  in  any  respect  false 
and  mistaken. 

By  all  which  we  may  perceive  how  much  the  late  inge- 
nious Stephen  Nye  was  mistaken,  when  he  said  that?  the 
Manichees  never  ^vere  accounted  a  sect  of  christians. 

I  shall  add  but  little  more  here. 

Fortnnatus,  the  Manicluean  presbyter,  in  the  dispute  with 
Augustine,  says,  the^  soul  cannot  be  reconciled  to  God  but 
by  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ :  that"^  Christ  our  Saviour  has 
taught  us  what  good  we  ought  to  do,  and  what  evil  we  ought 
to  avoid,  in  order  to  please  God  :  that*  the  doctrine  of  Christ 
is  sound  doctrine,  by  which  the  soul  may  be  purified  from 
its  defilements,  and  brought  back  to  the  kingdom  of  God. 

II.  Mani  then  and  his  followers  were  christians.  It  will 
appear  farther  from  great  numbers  of  things  to  be  taken 
notice  of  as  Ave  go  along.  However,  I  would  here  add  u 
few  passages  showing,  in  some  measure,  what  opinions  they 
held  in  common  with  other  christians. 

They  believed  a  God  and  a  Trinity,  and  that  God  made 
the  world  ;  so  Augustine*  says.  Nevertheless  we  may  here- 
after observe  some  differences  between  them  and  other  chris- 
tians upon  these  heads. 

They  required  and  encouraged  repentance,  as  Augustine 
likewise  assures"  us. 

And  he  observes  that^  he  and  the  Manichees  agree  in 

"  Nam  ilia  vox  altera  Paganorum  est,  qui  dicunt,  Apostolos  Christi  noii 
recta  docuisse.     Contr.  Faust.  1.  32.  c.  IG.  in. 

P  Nye's  Def.  of  the  Canon  of  the  New  Test.  p.  87,  &c. 

•i ^et  animara  aliter  non  posse  reconciliari  Deo,  nisi  per  magis- 

trum,  qui  est  Jesus  Christus.  Aug.  et  Fortu.  Disp.  i.  n.  17. 

■■  auctore  Salvatore  nostro,  qui  nos  docet  et  bona  exercere,  et 

mala  fugere.     Disp.  2.  n.  20.  f. 

'  si  post  admonitionem  Salvatoris  nostri,  et  sanam  doctrinara 

ejus,  a  contraria  et  inimica  sui  stirpe  se  segregaverit  anima ; — Unde  patet  recte 
esse  pcenitentiam  datam  post  adventum  Salvatoris,  et  post  hanc  scientiam  rerum, 
qua  possit  anima,  acsi  divino  fonte  lota,  de  sordibus  et  vitiis  tam  mundi  totius, 
quam  corporum  in  quibus  eadem  anima  versatur,  regno  Dei,  unde  progressa  est, 
reprsesentari.  Fort.  Disp.  2.  c.  21. 

*  Numquid  propterea  dicere  non  debemus,  quod  bonus  Deus  fecerit  mun- 
dum ;  quia  hoc  dicit  etiam  Manichaeus  ? — Item  si  interrogemur,  utrum  sit 
Deus  ?  et  nos  et  Manichaei  respondemus  :  Est  Deus. — De  ipsa  quoque  Trini- 
tate  interrogati,  utrique  dicimus,  Patrem  et  Filium  et  Spiritum  Sanctum 
ejusdem  esse  naturae.  Aug.  Op.  Imp.  1.  v.  c.  30. 

"  Nam  ut  inter  omnes  sanos  constat,  et  quod  ipsi  Manichaei  non  solum 
fatentur,  sed  et  praecipiunt,  utile  est  poenitere  peccati.  Aug.  de  duab.  Anim. 
c.  14.  n.  22.  m. 

"  Atque  in  his  duobus  convenit  mihi  cum  Manichaeis,  id  est,  ut  Deura  et 
proximum  diligamus :  sed  hoc  veteri  testamento  negant  contineri.  De  Mor.  Ec. 
Cath.  c.  28.  n.  57. 


The  Manichecs.     Sect.  IV.  331 

saying-  that  we  ought  to  love  God  and  our  neighbour.    But 
they  denied  that  (his  was  taught  in  the  Old  Testament. 

Let  me  here  add  the  confession  of  faith  made  by  Fortu- 
natus  at  the  beginning- oi  tlie  dispute  with  Augustine  in  the 
year  392 ;  though  some  expressions  there  used  are  not 
altogether  agreeable  to  tlie  catholic  doctrine. 

'  Our  belief,'  says'"^  Fortunatus,  '  is  this,  that  God  is 
incorruptible,  glorious,  inaccessible,  incomprehensible, 
impassible,  dwelling  in  his  own  eternal  light:  that  he  pro- 
duceth  nothing-  from  himself  that  is  corruptible,  not  dark- 
ness, not  dtemons,  not  Satan  :  that  he  has  sent  a  Saviour 
like  himself,  the  Word,  born  before  the  foundation  of  the 
world  ;  who  after  the  world  M'as  made,  came  among  men 
to  save  the  souls  worthy  of  his  holy  favour,  sanctified  by 
his  heavenly  precepts,  through  faith  and  reason  endowed 
with  the  knowledge  of  heavenly  things :  and  that  under 
his  conduct  those  souls  shall  again  return  to  the  kingdom 
of  God,  according-  to  his  holy  promise,  M'ho  said  :  "  J  am 
the  way,  the  truth,  and  the  door:  and  no  man  cometh  unto 
the  Father  but  by  me,"  John  xiv.  6.  These  things  we 
believe, forasmuch  as  souls  cannot  otherwise,  that  is,  through 
any  other  mediator,  return  to  the  kingdom  of  God  :  for  he 
himself  says,  "  He  that  hath  seen  me  hath  seen  the  Father 
also,"  ver.  9:  and,  "  He  that  believeth  on  me  shall  not 
taste  death,  but  passeth  from  death  to  life,  and  cometh  not 
into  condemnation,"  chap.  V.  24.  Thesethings  we  believe, 
and  this  is  the  ground  of  our  faith  ;  as  also,  that  with  all 
the  powers  of  our  mind  we  are  to  obey  his  holy  command- 
ments, holding  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  the  Father,  the 
Son,  and  the  Holy  Ghost.' 

'  Et  nostra  professio  ipsa  est,  quod  incorruptibilis  sit  Deus,  quod  lucidus, 
quod  inadibilis,  quod  intenibilis,  impassibilis  setemam  lucem  et  propriam 
inhabitet :  quod  nihil  ex  sese  corruptibile  proferat,  nee  tenebras,  nee  daemo- 
nes,  nee  Satanam ;  nee  aliquid  adversum  in  regno  ejus  reperiri  possit :  Sui 
autem  similem  Salvatorem  direxisse,  Verbum  natum  a  constitutione  mundi, 
cum  mundum  fabricaret,  post  mundi  fabricam  inter  homines  venisse,  dignas 
sibi  animas  elegisse  sanctaB  suae  voluntati,  mandatis  suis  ccelestibus  sanctifi- 
catas,  fide  ac  ratione  imbutas  coelestium  rerum ;  ipso  ductore  hinc  iteruin 
easdem  animas  ad  regnum  Dei  reversuras  esse,  secundum  sanctam  ipsius 
polhcitationem,  qui  dixit :  Ego  sum  via,  Veritas,  et  janua  ?  et  nemo  potest  ad 
Patrem  pervenire  nisi  per  me.  His  rebus  nos  credimus,  quia  aUas  animae,  id 
est,  alio  mediante  non  poterunt  ad  regnum  Dei  reverti,  nisi  ipsum  repererint, 
viam,  veritatem,  et  januam.  Ipse  enim  dixit :  qui  me  vidit,  vidit  et  patrem 
meum  ;  et,  qui  in  me  crediderit,  mortem  non  gustabit  in  aeternum,  sed  transi- 
tum  facit  de  morte  ad  vitam,  et  in  judicium  non  venit.  His  rebus  credimus; 
et  haecest  ratio  fidei  nostrae,  et  pro  viribus  animi  nostri  mandatis  ejus  obtem- 
perare,  unam  fidem  sectantes  hujus  Trinitatis,  Patris  et  Filii  et  Spiritus  Sancti. 
Fortunat.  Disp.  i.  n.  3. 


332  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  Ilislonj. 

Thus  Fortuuatus;  who  likewise  just  before  had  professed 
his  belief  and  expectation''  of  the  future  judgment  of  the 
just  judge  Jesus  Christ:  and  Secundiiius,  in  his  letter  to 
Augustine,  remindsy  him  of  the  just  tribunal  of  the  Great 
Judge;  and  asks  him  if^  it  be  not  true  which  Paul  says, 
"  that  every  one  must  give  an  account  of  his  works'?"  Rom. 
xiv.  12. 

III.  Before  we  proceed  to  a  more  particular  examination 
of  Maui's  principles,  it  may  be  proper  to  consider  what  were 
his  pretensions,  or  upon  what  grounds  he  recommended  his 
peculiar  doctrines;  whether  upon  the  foot  of  reason  only,  or 
of  a  peculiar  revelation. 

We  have  already  seen  how  Eusebiu^  and  some  other  ca- 
tholic writers  express  themselves.  Eusebius  in  particular 
•says,  '  he^  made  an  appearance  of  being"  Christ,  and  some- 
'  times  said  he  was  the  Comforter,  and  the  Holy  Ghost 
'  himself;  and  that  like  Christ  he  chose  himself  twelve 
'  apostles.'  Epiphanius  says  that*^  he  presumed  sometimes 
to  say  he  Avas  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  at  other  times  that  he 
was  an  apostle  of  Jesus  Christ.  According  to  Cyril,  Mani*^ 
said  he  m  as  the  Comforter,  and  the  defender  of  truth :  and 
in  another  place  that*^  he  said  he  was  the  Holy  Spirit. 

In  the  Acts  of  Archelaus,  at  the  beginning  of  the  con- 
ference at  Caschar,  he  is  made  to  say  :  '  I,^  brethren,  am  a 
'  disciple  and  apostle  of  Jesus  Christ.  I  am  the  comforter, 
'  promised  to  be  sent  by  Jesus,  "  to  convince  the  world  of 
'  sin,  and  of  righteousness,"  John  xvi.  8;  as  also  Paul  sent 
'  before  me  said,  "  We  know  in  part,  and  prophecy  in 
'  part;"  1  Cor.  xiii.  9,  10;  reserving  to  me  that  which  is 
'  perfect,  that  I  might  "  do  away  that  which  is  in  part:" 
'  receive  therefore  this  third  testimony  by  me,  and  own  me 

"  et  in  fiitura  justi  judicis  Christi  examinatione. — ib.  n.  3. 

>  Quis  igitur  tibi  patronus  erit  ante  justum  tribunal  judicis,  cum  et  de 
sermone  et  opere  cceperis  te  teste  convinci.     Secund.  ad  Aug.  n.  3. 

^  An  fahum  in  Paulo  est,  quod  operura  singuli  suorum  non  erunt  reddituri 
rationem  ?  ib.  ^  See  before,  p.  2G0. 

''  EXfyt  £(  kavrov  6  Mrtv?jc  "vat  to  irvivjia  to  -rta^aKKriTov,  Kai  iroTe  fiiv 
airo'^oXov  (paffKu  iavTov  Xpcra,  ttote  Is  Tn/ivfia  irapaKKr]TOV.     Epiph.  H.  66. 

n.  12.  p.  629.  B.  Conf.  n.  19.  p.  635.  C.  *= 6  yap  Xtyoiv  iavTov 

TraoaKKrjTov,  Kai  ttjq  aXriOtiac  ayojwrjjv.  k.  X.   Cyr.  Cat.  6.  n.  26. 

''    Mrtv//c  ^>  tavTOv  HTTioi'  TO  TTVtvfia  TO  ayiov.      Cat.  16.  n.  X.  p.  248.   D. 

*  Ego,  viri  tratres,  Christi  quidem  sum  discipulus,  apostolus  vero  Jesu. — Sum 
qiiidem  ego  Paracletus,  qui  ab  Jesu  mitti  praedictus  sum,  ad  argucndum  mun^ 
duin  de  peccato,  et  de  injustitia,  sicut  et  qui  ante  me  missus  est  Paulus,  ex  parte 
scire  et  ex  parte  prophetare  se  dixit ;  mihi  rescrvans  quod  perfectum  est,  ut  hoc 
quod  ex  parte  est  destruam.  Tertium  ergo  testimonium  accipitc,  apostoluni 
me  esse  Christi  electum.  Et  si  vultis  mea  verba  accipere,  invenietis  salutem  j. 
nolentes  autem,  vos  aeternus  ignis  absumere  habet.     Arch.  n.  13.  p.  24. 


The  Manichces.     Sect.  IV.  333 

'  as  a  chosen  apostle  of  Jesus  Christ.  If  you  will  receive 
'  my  M'ords,  you  will  obtain  salvation  :  if  uot,  }ou  Will  be 
'  consumed  by  everlastino-  fiie.' 

Theodoret  says  that'  JMani  gave  out  he  was  the  Christ, 
and  called  himself  the  Holy  Ghost. 

And,  as  Jerom  cxpresseth  it,  some"  pretended  that  Mani 
Mas  the  Comforter  himself.  And  to  the  like  purpose'' 
Rutinus. 

It  is  not  easy  to  conceive  how  any  man  should  say  all  these 
thing-s  of  himself;  that  lie  is  the  Christ,  and  an  apostle  of 
Christ,  and  the  Holy  Ghost  himself.  HoMever,  to  reconcile 
these  accounts,  if  possible,  it  may  be  observed,  that  perhaps 
some  of  these  writers  use  words  in  a  different  sense  from 
that  in  which  they  are  now  generally  understood  by  us  :  and 
when  it  is  said  that  Mani  pretended  to  be  Christ,  the  meaning- 
may  be  that  he  acted  like  Christ  in  choosing-  for  himself 
twelve  companions ;  or,  by  Christ  may  be  meant  the  Holy 
Ghost,  with  whom  Christ  Mas  anointed,  and  whom  Mani 
pretended  to  have  received.  So  the  Mord  Christ  is  used 
in  some  ancient'  Mritings,  particularly  in''  The  Acts  of 
Arclielaus. 

As  for  his  calling-  himself  the  Comforter,  or  the  Holy 
Ghost,  and  an  apostle  of  Christ,  possibly  the  meaning-  is, 
that  he  said  he  had  received  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  was  an 
apostle  of  Christ,  eminently  furnished  M'ith  spiritual  gifts. 

That  must  be  the  highest  pretension  he  made.  This  is 
Augustine's  sutnrnary  account  of  the  matter  in  his  book  Of 
Heresies.  '  They'  say  that  Our  Lord's  promise  of  sending- 
'  the  Comforter,  the  Holy  Ghost,  has  been  fullllled  in  their 
'  master  Mani :  and  in  his  epistle  he  styles  himself  apostle 
'  of  Jesus  Christ,  forasmuch  as  Christ  had  promised  him, 
'  and  in  him  had  sent  the  Holy  Ghost.  Accordingly  he  had 
'  himself  twelve  disciples,  in  imitation  of  the  number  of  the 

^  (ToXfiriaev  tavrov  6  TrajiiTOVripoc   tcai   Xfit^ov    Trpoffayopsvacu,    kcu 

nvevfia  ayiov  ovofiacrai.     Thdrt.  H.  F.  1.  i.  c.  26.  p.  214. 

B  Sicut  aliae  haereses  Paracletum  in  Montanum  venisse  contendunt,  et  Mani- 
chaeum  ipsum  dicunt  esse  Paracletum.  Ad  Vigilant.  T.  4.  P.  2.  p.  285.  in. 

''  Consilium  namque  vanitatis  est,  quod  doctt  ]Manichoeu> :  primo,  quod 
seipsum  Paracletum  nominavit.     Ruf.  m  Symb.  ap.  Hieron.  T.  v.  p.  142. 

'  See  Beaus.  T.  i.  p.  115,  and  255. 

''  Hie  est  Christus  Dei,  qui  descendit  super  eum,  qui  ex  Maria  est.  Arch. 
n.  50.  p.  93.  in.  Vid.  ib.  n.  34.  p.  59,  60. 

'  Promissionem  Domini  Jesu  Chrisfi  de  Paracleto  Spiritu  Sancto  in  suo 
haeresiarcha  Manichaeo  dicunt  esse  completam.  Unde  ?e  in  suis  Uteris  Jesu 
Christi  apostolum  dicit,  eo  quod  Jesus  Christus  se  missurum  esse  promiserit, 
atque  in  illo  miserit  Spiritum  Sanctum.  Propter  quod  etiam  ipse  Manichseus 
discipulos  habuit,  ad  instar  apostolici  numcri ;  queni  numerum  Manicha?i 
hodieque  custodiunt.     Aug.  de  Har.  c.  46. 


334  Credibility  of  the  Uospcl  History. 

*  apostles,  which  number  is  still  kept  up  by  the  Manichees.' 
Again,  Augustine  says,  '  the'"  Manichees  pretended  that 
'  Christ's  promise  of  sending  the  Holy  Ghost  had  been  ful- 
'  filled  in  their  leader.'  And  in  another  place,  '  they  said 
'  that"  the  Holy  Ghost,  whom  the  Lord  had  promised  to  send 
'  to  his  disciples,  had  come  to  them  by  him.'  Once  more 
Augustine  says,  that  '  Mani"  endeavoured  to  persuade  men, 
'  that  the  Holy  Ghost  did  personally  dwell  in  him  with 
'  full  authority.' 

That  this  is  all  which  Mani  can  be  supposed  to  have  pre- 
tended to,  is  evident  from  the  arguments  made  use  of  in 
confuting-  him.  The  ancient  writers,  in  their  answers,  show 
that  the  promise  of  sending  the  Holy  Ghost  had  been  ful- 
filled in  the  apostles  soon  after  our  Lord's  ascension  :  whereas 
Mani  did  not  appear  until  long-  after  the  death  of  all  the 
apostles,  in  the  time  of  Probus,  or  Aurelian.  This  is  largely 
argued  byP  Archelaus,''  Epiphanius,  and  others.  And  in 
the  dispute  itself  Mani  is  represented  explaining  his  claim 
in  this  manner,  '  that"^  the  Spirit  came  upon  him.'  And 
Archelaus  argues,  that*  the  Holy  Ghost  was  to  descend  upon 
and  dwell  in  none  but  Christ,  and  Paul,  and  the  other  apos- 
tles ;  that  is,  in  the  most  eminent  and  extraordinary  manner. 

All  therefore  that  Mani  could  say  is,  that  he  >vas  an  apos- 
tle of  Christ,  and  had  the  Spirit  as  an  apostle. 

But  whether  he  said  so  much  may  be  questioned.  God- 
frey* Arnold,  a  learned  German,  who  wrote  a  history  of 
heresies  in  his  own  language,  denies  that  Mani  took  upon 
him  any  extraordinary  character:  but  Beausobre,  though  a 
man  of  great  candour,  thinks  Arnold  was  mistaken  herein. 
'  Arnold"  was  in  the  right  to  say  that  Mani  never  pretended 
'  to  be  the  Comforter  ;  but  he  was  in  the  wrong-  to  deny  that 

"'  Mira  coecitate  asserentes  eandein  Domini  promissionem  in  suo  haere- 

siarcha  Manichaeo  esse  completam.     Aug.  ad  Ceret.  Ep.  237.  [al.  253.]  n.  2. 

"  Nosti  enim,  quod,  auctoris  sui  Manichsi  personam  in  apostolornm  nume- 
njm  inducere  molientes,  dicunt  Spiritum  Sanctum,  quem  Dominus  se  missurum 
esse  promisit,  per  ipsum  ad  nos  venisse.     De  Util.  Cred.  c.  3.  n.  7. 

"  Non  enim  parvi  existimari  se  voluit,  sed  Spiritum  Sanctum  conso'afc  r  m 
et  ditatorem  fidelium  lucrum,  auctoritate  plenaria  personaliter  in  se  c- se 
persuadere  conatus  est.     Confess.  1.  5.  cap.  5.  n.  8. 

P  Vid.  Arch.  n.  27,  28.  i  Ep.  H.  66.  n.  20,  21. 

'  Spiritum  enim  venisse  super  te  dixisti,  quem  promiserat  Jesus  esse  missu- 
nim.     Arch.  n.  50.  p.  92.  m.  *  Et  sicut  non  super  omnes 

homines  Spiritus  habitare  poterat,  nisi  super  eum  qui  de  Maria  natus  est,  ita  et 
in  nullum  aUum  Spiritus  Paracletus  venire  poterat,  nisi  super  apostolos,  et 
super  beatum  FauUim.     Arcli.  n.  34.  p.  59.  m. 

'  Germanice  illam  epistolam  [Fundementi,]  exhibet  Gothofredus  ArnoMiis 
in  Histona  sive  Apologia  Haeresium.  T.  iv.  Fabr.  Bib.  Gr.  T.  v.  p.  283. 

"  Hist,  de  Manich.  T.  i.  p.  239,  240. 


The  Munichees.     Sect.  IV.  335 

'  he  aimed  to  pass  for  the  prophet  of  the  Comforter ;  or  a 
'  man  extraordinarily  sent  to  reveal  to  the  christian  church 
'  some  truths  which  Jesus  Christ  had  not  made  known  to 
'  his  disciples.  The  Manichees  themselves  had  this  opinion 
*  of  their  patriarch.'     So  Beausobre. 

I  beg'  leave  to  consider  this  point  distinctly.  I  have  not 
had  the  advantage  of  seeing  Arnold's  work.  1  can  only 
represent  the  case  as  it  appears  to  me. 

IV,  In  the  first  place  1  shall  mention  divers  reasons  and 
arguments  for  thinking'  that  Mani  was  an  impostor,  and 
examine  them.  After  which  I  shall  mention  some  additional 
observations. 

The  reasons  and  arguments  are  such  as  these:  1.  The 
ancient  Greek  and  Roman  christian  authors  represent  his 
pretensions  as  very  extraordinary  ;  2.  As  do  likewise  the 
eastern  writers.  3.  Mani  imitated  Christ  in  choosing-  and 
sending"  out  twelve  apostles.  4.  He  called  himself  apostle. 
5.  Divers  other  of  his  expressions  show  him  to  have  pre- 
tended to  a  divine  commission.  6.  His  followers  conceived 
of  him  as  an  apostle,  or  an  inspired  teacher.  7.  They 
rejected  the  book  of  the  Acts,  because  of  the  evidence  it 
afforded,  that  the  promise  of  sending  the  Spirit  had  been  ful- 
filled in  the  apostles,  and  therefore  could  not  belong  to  Mani. 

1.  The  ancient  Greek  and  Roman  christian  writers  repre- 
sent Mani's  pretensions  as  very  extraordinary. 

1  answer,  that  we  have  shown  them  to  be  mistaken  in 
several  things.  In  particular,  divers  of  them  say  that  Mani 
called  himself  the  Comforter,  which  is  not  true.  We  must 
therefore  look  for  some  other  evidence  of  his  imposture 
beside  their  word.  Mani  published  several  new  notions  as 
doctrines  of  religion  :  some  might  therefore  say  :  '  A  man  that 
does  this  had  need  to  be  inspired.'  And  thence  some  might 
be  led  to  conclude,  that  he  actually  pretended  to  be  inspired 
in  an  extraordinary  manner,  and  sent  by  Christ  to  reveal 
new  truths.  Some  might  speak  of  him  to  this  purpose; 
and  others  might  take  up  this  account  without  much  exa- 
mination. 

2.  The  eastern  writers,  whether  Persians  or  Arabians, 
whose  account  was  formerly^  taken,  speak  of  him  in  the  like 
manner. 

I  answer,  that  those  writers  are  not  very  ancient.  Their 
account  of  Mani's  imposture,  particularly  his  journey  to 
heaven,  is  taken  from  the  history  of  Mahomet,  who  is  much 
later  than  the  person  whose  aflfairs  we  are  examining.  There- 
fore probably  that  story  is  a  fiction,  without  any  real  foun- 

»  Seep.  311. 


336  Ci  edibility  of  the  Gospel  Histoi'ij. 

dation.  I  formerly'''  observed  a  mistake  of  these  writers 
(some  of  them  at  least)  concerning-  the  place  of  Mani's 
retirement.  It  is  also  very  improbable,  which  is  said  by 
the  eastern  historians,  as  quoted  by  Herbelot,  that  numerous 
followers  have  been  gained  in  China,  or  Turkestan  ;  they  all 
went  into  Persia  upon  the  death  of  Sapor.  Nor  did  Mani 
attempt  to  pass  for  a  god.  Once  more,  the  eastern  writers 
are  not  agreed  about  the  time  in  which  Mani  lived,  some" 
placing-  him  much  later  than  others.  The  testimony  of  these 
authors  therefore  is  not  to  be  relied  upon. 

3.  The  third  argument  is,  that  Mani  imitated  Christ  in 
choosing-  and  sending  out  twelve  disciples. 

In  answer  to  which  I  would  say  :  supposing  that  he  had 
twelve  disciples,  and  sent  them  abroad  to  propagate  his 
principles,  it  does  not  follow  that  he  was  an  impostor ;  for 
we  have  been  informed  byy  Augustine,  that  this  was  the 
ecclesiastical  constitution  of  the  Manichaan  sect.  There 
were  twelve  of  the  elect  called  masters,  and  a  thirteenth, 
who  Avas  their  chief  or  principal.  If  this  was  an  institution 
of  Mani  himself,  and  put  in  practice  in  his  own  time,  he  must 
have  been  the  principal  ;  and  perhaps  only  by  way  of  an 
innocent,  or  at  the  worst  an  afl'ected,  imitation  of  the  state 
of  tilings  at  the  first  rise  of  the  christian  religion  in  the  time 
of  Christ  and  his  apostles  :  which,  1  suppose,  is  all  that  can 
be  thought  of  their  keeping-  up  the  same  form  in  Aug-u  - 
tine's  time. 

But  it  may  be  questioned  whether  Mani  had  twelve  dis- 
ciples disting-uished  from  the  rest.  It  is  true  Eusebius 
intimates  as  much  ;  but  what  ground  he  had  for  it  we 
cannot  say.  However,  Augustine^  says  it  expressly,  as  does^ 
Theodoret,  about  the  year  420.  But  this  is  not  to  be  found 
in  more  ancient  authors,  excepting-  Eusebius  only,  who  has 
been  just  named  ;  and  there  are  two  reasons  to  doubt  of  it. 
First,  several  ancient  writers  are  silent  about  this  particular, 
who  would  have  mentioned  it  if  true.  In''  The  Acts  of  the 
Dispute  with  Archelaus  there  are  but  three  of  Mani's  disci- 
ples named,  whom  likewise  he  is  there  said  to  have  sent 
abroad  to  spread  his  opinions;  one  into  tlie  east,  another  into 
Syria,  and    the   third    into   Egypt ;    Thomas,   Addas,  and 

"  Seep.  312.  "  L'  auteur  duTarikh  Khozidek  le  fait  plus  moderne, 

&c.     See  Herbelot  Bib.  Orient,  in  Mani.  y  See  before,  p.  290. 

^  Propter  quod  etiam  ipse  Manichaeus  duodecim  discipulos  habuit,  ad  instar 
apostolic!  Humeri.  Aug.  de  Hder.  c.  46.  *  Oiiroc  SvoKui^tKa  iiaQ)]TCQ  Kara 

Tov  KvpidKcv  TroirjTHiitvn^  TVTTov.   HsEr.  Fab.  1.  i..  p.  214.  C.  *■   TavTTjv 

li  trartuv  rrjv  hcaaKuKiav  iraptSwKS  toiq  rpiaiv  avrs  liaOtjraig,  Kt\iv(Tag  ikutov 
fif  KXifinra  vCivdv.  k.  X.  Aroh.  c.  xi.  p.  22.  Acquisivit  etiam  discipulos  tres, 
quorum  nomina  sunt  haec,  Thomas,  Addas,  et  Hermas.  ib.  c.  53.  p.  98. 


The  yianichces.     Sect.  IV.  337 

lieniuis:  tlio  same  three  that  are  inentioiKKl  by*"  Cyril 
and''  Epiphaiiiiis.  Secondly,  if  31ani  had  twelve  disciples, 
Avhoiiihe  called  apostles,  or  employed  as  such,  it  is  likely 
that  their  names  would  have  been  transmitted  to  us  by 
some  ancient  authors  :  but  there  is  no  such  catalog-ue  any 
where  to  be  found,  except  in  the  fore-mentioned  authors, 
Photius,  Peter,  and  The  Form  of  abjuring-  ManichaEism  :  all 
Avhich  arc  too  late  to  be  of  any  authority,  as  was  observed 
formerly.  That  catalogue  too  is  itself  liable  to  several 
exceptions.  In*  Photius  their  names  staiul  thus,  Sisinnius, 
said  to  have  succeeded  JMani  in  his*^  chair;  Thomas,  Budas, 
Hermas,  Adamantus,  and  Adimantus;  Hierax,  Hieraclides, 
and  Apthonius,  called^  commentators  upon  Mani ;  Agapius, 
author  of  the  Heptalogus,  Zarvas  and  Gaurialius :  and  to  the 
like  purpose  in  the  two  other''  writers.  But  it  is  plain  that  this 
catalogue  is  of  no  value.  In  the  Acts  of  Archelaus'  Sisinnius 
is  said  to  have  deserted  Mani,  and  to  have  been  a  convert  to 
the  catholic  church.  Then  there  are  two  or  three  different 
names,  which  are  but  one  and  the  same  person  ;  Budas,  Ada- 
mantus, and  Adimantus  ;  that  is,  Addas,  otherwise  called  also 
Buddasand  Baddas.  Apthonius  lived  in  the  fourth  century, 
as  was''  formerly  shown.  Hierax  was  no'  Manichee.  Toutee 
has  a  good  note  upon  Cyril  relating  to  this  matter,  which 
might  be  consulted.     I  put  down  a  small  part  of'"  it. 

4.  The  fourth  argument  is  that  Mani  called  himself  an 
apostle  of  Jesus  Christ.  Augustine  assures  us  that"  all  his 
letters  began  in  that  manner;  particularly  that"  called  The 
Epistle  of  the  Foundation  :  '  Mani,  apostle  of  Jesus  Christ 
'  by  the  providence  of  God  the  Father:'  in  like  manner'' 

"  Tare  jxaStjrai  Tptig  yiyovaai,  Qw/iaCj  "^oi  Baccag,  kui  'Epfiag.  Cyr.  Cat. 
vi.  11.31.  ^  Epiph.  H.  66.  n.  v.  etxii. 

"^  Phot,  contr.  Manich.  1.  i.  n.  14.  '  ^imvvtos  6  km  to 

a'iuofia  avTB  ttjq  Ivaoifisq  diSaaKoXiag  avactKa^ivog.  ib. 

6   E^;;y;jrat,  St  avra  Kai  o'lov  virofivrjfiari'^ai.  ib. 

■^  Porro  discipuli  Maneti  antichristo  fuere  duodecim  :  Sisinnius,  qui  Maneti 
successit ;  Thomas,  qui  Evangelium  Manichaei  novum  cond.dit :  Euddas,  et 
Hermas,  Adamantus  et  Adimantus,  quern  in  diversas  orbis  partes  erroiis  prae- 
conem  amandavil.  Manetis  interpretes  et  explanatores  erant  Hierax,  et  Hiera- 
clides, atque  Apthonius.  Adjuncti  his  et  alii  terni  hujus  sectatores,  Agapius, 
qui  Heptalogura  commentus  est,  Zarvas,  et  Gabrialius.  Bet.  Sic.  de  Man.  ap. 
Bib.  P.  P.  T.  16.  p.  758.  A.  *  Arch.  n.  51.  p.  94. 

"  See  p.  283.  '  See  before,  p.  286,  &c. 

•"  Quod  quamvis  antiqua  sit  ilia  de  duodecim  Manetis  discipulis  opinio, 
ab  Augustino  in  libro  de  Hseresibus,  et  Theodorelocommemoiafa,  non  tameii 
apud  antiquiores  legatur.  Non  id  refert  Archelaus,  non  Epiphaniu-.  In  Cyril. 
Cat.  p.  107.  "  Omnes  tamen  ejus  epistolae  sic  exordiuntur  : 

Manichaeus  apostolus  Jesu  Christi.     Contr.  Faust.  1.  13.  c.  4. 

°  Certe  sic  incipit  :  Manichaeus,  apostolus  Jesu  Christi,  providentia  Dei 
Patris.     Contr.  Ep.  Manich.  c.  5.  n.  6.  p  Arch.  cap.  v. 

VOL    III.  Z 


338  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  Uistorii. 

The  Epistle  to  Marcellus,  in  The  Acts  of  Archehuis  ;  and 
The'!  Epistle  to  Menoch,  cited  by  Julian  the  Pelagian. 

Answer:  If"  this  title  must  be  here  understood  in  the 
highest  and  strongest  sense,  of  a  person  commissioned  by 
Christ,  and  inspired  as  an  apostle,  the  argument  is  complete 
and  unanswerable.  But  possibly  Mani  meaned  no  more  than 
a  disciple  of  Christ,  and  a  teacher  of  his  religion.  This  may 
be  argued  from  the  passage  already  cited  from  Augustine, 
where  bespeaks  of  the  ecclesiastical  constitution  of  the  sect. 
The  word  may  be  supposed  to  be  so  used  in  The  Dispute 
of  Archelaus.  That  bishop  having-  given  hard  words,  Mani 
tells  him  that"^  apostles  are  patient  and  long-suffering" ; 
thereby,  perhaps,  intending  to  show  what  Archelaus  should 
be,  as  well  as  what  he  himself  was,  according"  to  his  own 
profession.  Turbo,  when  asked  who  he  was,  answered,  that* 
he  came  from  Persia,  and  was  sent  by  Mani,  a  master  of  the 
christians;  the  very  title,  which,  as  Augustine  informs  us, 
was'  given  to  twelve  of  the  Manicha-an  elect  in  his  own 
time,  who  yet,  1  presume,  were  not  reckoned  inspired  apos- 
tles :  and  masters  is  a  word  made  use  of  in"  The  Acts  of 
Archelaus  to  denote  ministers  of  the  catholic  church.  I 
might  add  that  the  eastern  people  are  very  apt  to  use  a  lofty 
style.  They  give  and  take  high  titles  without  incurring* 
the  suspicion  or  charge  of  blasphemy. 

5.  It  is  argued  that  Mani's  iniposture  may  be  proved  by 
other  high  expressions  made  use  of  by  him  beside  that  of 
apostle.  In  the  Epistle  to  Marcellus  he  not  only  styles 
himself  apostle  of  Jesus  Christ,  but  says  also  that^  he  was 
sent  for  the  amendment  and  reformation  of  men.  Several 
passages  have  been  already  cited"  from  the  Dispute  of 
Archelaus,  containing"  high  pretensions,  which  should  be 
recollected  here ;  particularly  that  passage  where  he  says  : 
'  If  you  receive  my  words,  you  will  obtain  salvation  :  if  not, 

•i  Manes,  apostolus  Jesu  Christi,  filiae  Menoch.  ap.  Aug.  Op.  Imp.  1.  3.  c. 
1 72.  Sed  nisi  Menoch  filiam,  et  Manichaeum,  qui  se  Christi  apostolum 
nominat,  titulus  iadicaret,  te  omnino  suum  poUicerentur  auctorem.  Julian, 
ib.  c.  187.  ■■  Tu  quoque,  Archelae,  bene  me  de  Deo  seutien- 

fem,  dignamque  opinionem  de  Christo  retinentem,  verbis  molestissimis  obtun- 
dis,  licet  tale  sit  apostolorum  genus,  patiens  et  ferens  omnia,  etiamsi  eos 
conviciis  quis  aut  maledictis  obtrectet.     Arch.  c.  47.  in. 

'  De  Perside  autem  venio,  a  Manichseo,  magistro  christianorum,  missus,  ib. 
c.  4.  '  Nam  ex  electis  suis  habent  duodecim,  quos  appellant 

Magistros.     Aug.  de  Haer.  c.  46.  "  Cui  enim  oportet  credi  ? 

magistris  lUis  vestris,  qui  carmbus  vescuntur,  et  affluentissimis  deliciis  per- 
fruuntur —  ?  Manes  ap.  Arch.  c.  13.  p.  24. 

*  '09(v  Trpof  iiravo()0(i)(nv  th  tiov  avG()io7ru)v  ycvH^  ano'^aXng.  Ap.  Aich. 
C.  5.  "   b'ee  belore,  p.  'XU. 


The  Munichees.     Sect.  IV.  339 

'  you  will  be  consuiiiod  with  everlasting  fire.'  But  then  it 
should  be  renienibcred  likewise,  that  in  that  piece  are  many 
misrepresentations  of  things. 

There  are  also  strong  expressions  at  the  beginning  of  The 
Epistle  of  the  Foundation.  After  having  called  himself 
apostle,  he  adds :  '  That^  the  words  he  is  going  to  deliver  are 
wholesome  words,  proceeding  from  the  living  fountain.  He 
that  hears,  and  believes,  and  keeps,  them  shall  never  die,  but 
shall  obtain  a  glorious  and  eternal  life.'  These  expressions 
ought  to  be  considered.  If  they  relate  to  any  doctrines  not 
founded  on  scripture,  they  contain  a  bold  claim  :  but  if  he  in- 
tends to  reconmiend  only  scriptural  doctrines,  the  interpreta- 
tion may  be  softened.  And  it  is  observable  that  Augustine, 
having  cited  those  words,  does  not,  in  his  remarks  upon  them, 
censure  them  as  wicked,  or  antichristian,  or  the  like;  but  oidy 
says  thats'  here  is  indeed  a  promise  of  teaching  the  truth,  but 
without  good  assurance:  and  that  any  body  might  say  as  much 
to  draw  in  simple  people.  Augustine  then  cites  the  words 
next  following  in  that  epistle;  '  The^  peace  of  the  invisible 
'  God,  and  the  knowledge  of  the  truth,  be  with  the  dear  and 
'  holy  brethren,  who  both  believe  and  keep  the  heavenly 
'  commands:'  which  Augustine  does  not  blame  at  all,  but 
says  he  readily  Joins  in  the  same  wish  :  and  if  Mani  never 
spoke  otherwise  he  might  be  read  and  followed  by  every 
body.  Nay,  he  seems  to  declare  himself  well  satisfied''  with 
every  thing  at  the  beginning  of  that  epistle. 

6.  Still  it  is  argued  that  his  followers  conceived  of  him 
as  an  apostle  and  messenger  of  Christ,  and  honoured  him 
accordingly.  Some  of  their  expressions  have  been  men- 
tioned already,  to  which  others  may  be  now  added. 

Faustus,  considering  that  text,  Matt.  v.  17 :  "  I  came  not 
to  destroy  the  law,  but  to  fulfil,"  says:  '  He''  must  be  for 

"  Hsec  sunt,  inquit,  salubria  verba  ex  perenni  ac  vivo  fonte,  qus  qui  audierit, 
et  eisdem  primum  crediderit,  deinde  quae  insinuant  custodierit,  nunquam  erit 
morti  obnoxius,  verum  aeterna  et  glor.osa  vita  fruetur.  ap.  Aug.  contr.  Ep. 
Manich.  c.  xi.  n.  12.  '  Et  haec,  ut  videtis,  poUicitatio  est, 

nondum  exhibitio  veritatis ;  et  vos  quoque  animadvertere  facillime  potestis, 
isto  velamine  quoslibet  enores  fucari  posse,  ut  imperitorum  animis  per  ornatam 
januarn  latenter  irrepant.     August,  ibid. 

^  Pax,  inquit,  Dei  invisibilis,  et  veritati.s  notitia  sit  cum  fratribus  Sanctis  et 
carissimis,  qui  mandatis  ccelestibus  credunt  pariter  atque  deserviunt.  Ita  sit, 
ut  dicit.  Nam  et  ista  benigna  et  acceptissima  optatio  est.  Tantum  memine- 
rimus  haec  et  a  bonis  doctoribus  et  a  deceptoribus  dici  posse.  Itaque  si  nulla 
nisi  talia  diceiet,  omnibus  legendum  et  amplectendum  esse  concederem.  ibid. 
n.  13.  ■''  Et  omnino,  quidquid  in  hujus  epistolae  initio  scriptum 

est,  donee  veniatur  ad  causam,  nolo  reprehendere.  ibid. 

*■  Quare  indeficientes  ego  praeceptori  meo  refero  gratias,  qui  me  similiter 
labentem  retinuit,  ut  essem  hodie  christianus.     Faust.  1.  19.  c.  ^ 

■r    '^ 


340  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History, 

•  ever  thankful  to  his  master,'  meaning-  Mani,  '  for  helping 
'  liini  here;  for  otherwise  he  had  been  a  Jew,  not  a  chris- 
'  tian.'  However,  he  might  speak  thus  of  Mani,  though  he 
considered  him  only  as  a  good  interpreter,  and  no  inspired 
prophet  or  apostle.  In  another  place  Mani  is  called •= 
their  divine.  What  can  be  inferred  from  this  1  do  not  know  ; 
I  do  not  perceive  any  uncommon  honour  to  be  here  given. 
Faustus  also  calls  Mani*^  their  blessed  father.  But  perhaps 
no  more  is  meant  thereby  than  what  the  catholics  often  said 
of  saints  and  martyrs.  Faustus  in  another  place  speaks*  as 
if  by  the  Spirit,  whom  they  had  received,  they  were  enabled 
to  discern  what  texts  of  the  New  Testament  are  genuine, 
what  not.  But  afterwards '^  he  retracts  in  some  measure 
those  bold  expressions. 

Farther,  the  Manichees  celebrated  the  day  of  their  mas- 
ter's death  :  but  so  did  the  catholics  that  of  many  martyrs. 
Mani's  Epistle  of  the  Foundation  was  read  in  the  assemblies 
(»f  his  followers;  and  so  likewise  were  some  writings  pub- 
licly read  among  the  catholics,  which  they  never  esteemed 
canonical  scripture,  or  a  part  of  the  ride  of  their  faith.  Nay, 
I  do  not  know  but  here  may  offer  a  thought,  which  may 
afford  a  good  argument  that  the  Manichees  did  not  esteem 
their  leader  an  apostle:  for  if  they  had  so  done  they  would 
have  had  more  of  his  writings,  and  have  publicly  read  them  : 
whereas  it  seems  that  the  Manichees  in  Africa  had  tew  of 
them.  Augustine,  who  was  nine  years  among-  them,  and 
afterM'ards  wrote  many  volumes  in  the  controversy,  has 
quoted  very  few,  and  does  not  speak  of  any  other  book,  or 
letter  of  his  being-  read  in  their  assemblies,  but  the  epistle 
above  named. 

And  upon  all  these  things,  beside  what  has  been  already 
hinted,!  observe  in  general,  that  some  or  all  of  these  honours 
were  paid  by  catholics  to  men  who  had  not  the  character  of 
apostles:  that  it  is  no  uncommon  thing  for  honours  to  be 
g-iven  to  men  after  their  death,  by  some  people,  which  they 
never  expected  or  desired  ;  and  that  we  should  interpret 
expressions  as  they  are  intended  to  be  understood.  The 
catholic  christians  often  speakf^'  of  men's  receiving-  the  Holy 
Ghost  in  baptism.     In  The  Dispute  of  Archelaus  it  is  spoken 

"  Sic  enim  mali  principiiim  ac  natiiram  fheologus  noster  appellat.     Faust. 

I.  20.  <i.  3.  "^  a  doctissimo  ?cilicel,  et  solo  nobis  post 

beatdin  patrern  nostrum  Manichseum  stupendo,  Adimanto.     Faust.  I.  i.  c.  2. 

®  Et  nobis  Paracletus  ex  novo  testamento  promissus  perinde  docet,  quid 
accipere  ex  eodem  debeamus,  ot  r|uid  rcpudiarc.     Id.  I.  32.  c.  6. 

lb.  C.  7.  K   kq(  yiipdi)  ^H(t(^  a-jTrjXavaaQ  xupiroQf^aTrTil^O}t.ivog, 

Kca  TrvfVfiarnc  fiiTt(Jxi<:,  H  Kai  /<?;  TTfiof;  ra  rrrjuna  nuuiv.  Chryst.  De  Com- 
punct.  ad  Dcm.  1.  i.  T.  i.  p.  13G.  D.  Ed.  Buncd, 


TTie  Manichees.     Sect.  IV.  341 

as  an  incontestable  thing-  that''  tlie  Spirit  was  still  given  to 
men.  And  Ej)ij)hanius  says  that'  God,  according-  to  his 
promise,  bestowed  gifts  <»(' the  Spirit  largely  upon  the  pres- 
byter at  Diodoris,  to  enable  him  to  confute  Mani :  quoting- 
also  Matt.  x.  IJ).  But  yet  no  one  thinks  that  apostolical 
inspiration  is  here  intended. 

7.  In  the  seventh  place  it  is  argued  that  they  rejected  the 
Acts  of  the  Apostles,  because  of  the  evidence  it  afforded, 
that  the  promise  of  seiuling-  the  Spirit  had  been  fultilled  in 
the  apostles  of  Christ,  and  therefore  coidd  not  belong  to 
Mani.     Augustine"^  says  as  much. 

I  answer,  first,  whether  the  Manichees  always  and  imi- 
versally  rejected  the  book  of  the  Acts  will  be  considered 
hereafter.  Secondly,  they  were  not  obliged  to  reject  the 
Acts  for  the  reason  here  supposed.  They  might  give  the 
highest  character  to  Mani,  under  Christ,  and  not  receive  that 
book.  The  Montanists,  as'  Augustine  observes,  spoke  of 
Montanus,  as  these  people  did  of  Mani:  yet'"  they  readily 
received  the  Acts  of  (he  Apostles.  The  Manichees  could 
not  deny  that  the  Holy  Chost  was  poured  out  upon  Christ's 
apostles.  It  is  evident  from  St.  Paul's  epistles,  which  they 
received.  Besides,  we  know,  that"  they  acknowledged  the 
divine  illumination  of  the  apostles,  and  admitted  their 
authority  in  every  thing- said  by  then),  when  so  illuminated. 
'  This,'  says"  Faustus,  '  is  the  doctrine  of  Christ  and  his 

''  Spiritus  enim  secundum  rectam  rationcm  habitat  in  homine,  et  descenclit, 
et  permanet ;  et  conipetenter  hoc  et  factum  est,  et  fit  semper,  sicut  tu  teipsum 
anie  hoc  tempus  prohtebaris  esse  Paracletum  Dei.  Arch.  c.  50.  p.  92.  m. 

'  'O  Otog  yap  an  roic  £7r'  avrov  iKmC^fyiv  iroifia^ti  rag  sk  irvivfiaruQ  ayin 
Suptac  t7ri-)(optjynfievoQ,  wq  kui  tTnjyyuXaro,  u\l/ivSi]g  lov.    H.  66.  n.  xi. 

•^  Nosti  autem,  quod,  auctoris  sui  Manichoei  personam  in  apostolorum 
numerum  inducere  moUentes,  dicunt  Spintum  Sanctum,  quern  Dominus  disci- 
pulis  se  missurum  esse  promisit,  per  ipsum  ad  nos  venisse.  Itaque  si  illos 
Actus  Apostolorum  acciperent,  in  quibus  adventus  Sancti  Spiritus  predicatur, 
non  invenirent,  quomodo  id  immissumasse  dicerent.   De  Util.  Cred.  c.  2.  n.  7. 

'  Nam  quidam  Manichsei  canonicum  librum,  cujus  titulus  est,  Actus  Apos- 
tolorum, repudiant.  Timent  enim  evidentissimam  veritatem,  ubi  apparet 
Sanctus  Spiritus  missus,  qui  est  a  Domino  Jesu  Christo  in  evangelica  verifcite 
promissus.  Sub  ejus  quippe  Spiritus  nomine,  a  quo  pcnitus  alieni  sunt, 
mdocta  hominum  corda  decipiunt,  mira  coecitate  asserentes  eandem  Domini 
promissionem  in  suo  haeresiarcha  Manichaeo  esse  completam.  Quod  et  illi 
haeretici  faciunt,  qui  vocantur  Cataphryges,  dicentes,  per  nescio  quos  insanos, 
Montanum  scilicet  et  Priscillam,  quos  et  proprios  suos  prophetas  habent, 
venisse  Spiritum  Sanctum,  quern  Dominus  missurum  se  esse  promisit.  Aug. 
Ep.  237,  [al.  253  ]  n.  2.  "'  See  Tertullian  in  this  work.  Vol.  ii.  p.  279. 

"  Et  nos  de  Testamento  novo  sola  accipientes  ea,  quae  in  honorem  et  laudeni 
Filii  majestatis  vel  ab  ipso  dicta  comperimus,  vel  ab  ejus  apostolis,  sed  jam 

jxrfectis  et  fidelibus.     Faust.  1.  3-2.  c.  7.  °  ut  lerc  Christo 

placet,  ct  ejus  apostolis,  et  nobis  profecto. — Faust.  I.  24.  c.  1. 


342  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

'  apostles,  and,  for  certain,  ours  likewise.'  Again,  says 
Faustiis,  '  This''  Me  believe  not  without  ground,  but  upon 
'  the  authority  of  Christ  and  his  apostles,  who  first  taught 
'  this  doctrine.'  They  did  not  deny  that  the  Holy  Ghost 
M'as  given  to  the  apostles:  all  that  they  could  be  led  to  say 
is,  that  some  farther  discoveries  were  made  by  Mani.  But 
1  dispute  their  saying  so  much  as  that.  Thirdly,  they  might 
have  other  reasons  for  rejecting  the  Acts,  different  from  that 
assigned  by  Augustine.  According  to  their  notions,  they 
could  not  approve  of  the  death  of  Ananias  and  Sapphira, 
nor  the  blindness  of  Elymas.  They  could  not  like  any  text 
where  Jesus  is  called  a  man,  as  Acts  ii.  22.  And  they  dis- 
liked all  references  therein  to  the  books  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. Finally,  they  never  told  Augustine  that  they  rejected 
the  Acts  for  the  reason  mentioned  by  him.  It  does  not  appear 
that  he  had  any  hint  of  it  from  them  ;  but  it  is  a  conjec- 
tural reason  of  his  own  invention,  after  he  had  left  them,  as 
is  evident^  from  M'hat  precedes  the  passage  above""  quoted  : 
and  therefore  he  entreats  Honoratus  candidly  to  weigh  and 
examine  the  reason  proposed  by  hini,  and  judge  whether  it 
is  not  right.  For  he  says  he  had  often  wondered  at  their 
conduct  in  rejecting  that  book,  without  being  able  to  find 
out  what  ground  they  went  upon  in  so  doing. 

V.  I  have  now  considered  the  most  material  reasons  and 
arguments  for  thinking  that  Mani  was  an  impostor,  and 
pretended  to  apostolical  inspiration.  I  beg  leave  to  add 
some  farther  observations. 

1.  It  is  not  a  pleasing  thing,  unless  there  be  very  cogent 
reasons,  to  fix  the  charge  of  imposture  on  a  christian,  and  a 
man  of  great  knowledge  and  understanding,  as  Mani  was. 
All  must  be  sensible  that  he  is  treated  roughly  enough  in 
the  Acts  of  Archelaus.  Yet  even  there  he  is  sometimes 
represented  speaking  honestly,  and  like  a  good  christian, 
and  with  a  due  regard  to  the  authority  of  Jesus  Christ. 
Moreover,  we  suppose  that  he  suffered  a  violent  death,  which 
was  commemorated  by  his  followers  in  a  solemn  manner: 
and  there  is  reason  to  believe  that  the  occasion  of  it  was 
innocent,  if  not  honourable.  If  he  attempted  to  cure  the 
king's  son  and  did  not  succeed,  no  reasonable  person  can 

p  Neque  id  temcre  aut  praesumtive,  sed  a  Christo  discentes  et  ejus  apostolis, 
qui  primi  eadeni  in  niundo  docuisse  probantur.     Id.  1.  24.  c.  i.  fin. 

1  Hoc  enim  de  iilo  libro  fecerunt,  qui  Actus  Apostolorum  inscribitur.    Quod 

eorum  consilium  cum  mecum  ipse  perfracto,  nequeo  satis  mirari. Sed 

nimirum  illud  est  quod  mihi  videtur,  quod  peto  placidissimo  et  serenissimo 
judicio  mecum  consideres.  Nosti  enim  quod  auctoris  sui,  &c.  De  Util.  Cred. 
c.  2.  n.  7.  '  See  note  ^ 


The  Mavichecs.     Sect.  IV.  343 

think  lie  failed  designedly.  But  there  is  a  great  deal  of 
reason  to  suppose  that  all  that  story  is  fictitious.  It  is  more 
probable  that  he  died  a  martyr  to  some  principles,  philoso- 
phical, or  religious,  or  both. 

2.  The  accounts  of  his  pretension  to  inspiration  are  not 
easily  reconciled  with  other  accounts,  given  by  the  same 
writers,  of  his  borrowing  his  peculiar  principles  from  other 
men  ;  from  Scythian,  and  Terebinthus,  and  l*ythagoras,  and 
Einpedoclcs,  and  1  know  not  how  many  more.  Eusebius, 
and  others,  say  his  system  was  patched  up  out  of  ancient 
heresies.  Archelaiis,  or  whoever  composed  the  Dispute 
under  his  name,  particularly  desires  the  by-standers  and 
hearers  to  take  notice  that*  the  doctrine  taught  by  Mani  was 
not  his  own  invention.  Cyril  says*  that  he  collected  every 
thing"  bad  in  former  heresies  ;  and  for  that  reason  he  calls 
him  a"  thief,  appropriating  to  himself  what  were  other  men's 
things,  though  they  were  very  bad.  Augustine  expressly 
affirms  that,*^  in  the  doctrine  about  two  principles  and 
natures,  Mani  followed  more  ancient  heretics.  The  ancients 
therefore  were  sensible  that  Mani's  doctrine  was  not  ncM'. 
Learned  moderns  are  of  the  same  opinion,  and  allow  that  in 
the  main  his  principles  had  been  taught  before  by  divers 
heathen  philosophers  and  christian  sects.  Mr.  WolflT  of 
Hamburgh  Miote  a  learned  work,  entitled'''  Manichseism 
before  Mani,  where  this  is  largely  shown.  And  Beausobre 
likewise"  deserves  to  be  consulted  upon  this  point. 

3.  Though  Mani,  at  the  beginning  of  his  epistles,  called 
himself  apostle  of  Christ,  we  do  not  plainly  perceive,  from 
any  remaining  fragments  of  his  works,  that  he  professed  to 
teach  in  the  name  of  Christ,  and  by  special  authority  under 
him,  or  to  deliver  dictates  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 

4.  If  Augustine  had  found  such  expressions  in  any  of 
Mani's  Morks  which  he  met  with,  where  he  pretends  to 
speak  by  inspiration,  it  is  likely  that  he  would  not  have 
insisted  so  much  as  he  does  upony  that  single  appellation 
of  Apostle  of  Christ.     Moreover,  Augustine  having  cited  a 

*  Addidit  etiam  hoc  Archelaiis  dicens,  Viri  fratres,  ne  quis  vestrum  incre- 
dulus  sit  his,  qua  a  me  dicta  sunt,  id  est,  quod  non  ipse  primus  auctor  scelerati 
hujus  dogmatis  extiterit  Manes  ;  sed  tantum,  quod  per  ipsum  aUquibus  terrae 
partibus  manifestatum  sit.  Arch.  n.  55.  p.  100. 

■■  Svaatftf^aroQ  Mav^c>  "  ^a  twv  aiptanov  Tzaaiov  KOKa  (tvviiKr](pt))Q — 

ra  TTavTwi'  avWt^aQ  6fin  tu)v  a'i(>eTiKu)v.  Cat.  16.  n.  9.  p.  247.  D. 

"  KXe-TTTTig  yap  t<^iv  aXKoTpiaiv  kukwv,  tKi^ioiroiHfiivog  ra  koku.  Id.  Cat.  G. 
n.  21.  p.  100.  *  Iste  duo  principia  inter  se  diversa, — duasque 

naturas  atque  substantias, — sequens  alios  haereticos,  opinatus  est.  De  Haer.  c. 
46.  in.  "  Manichaeismus  ante  Manichaeos,  et  in  christianismo 

redivivus.     Hamb.  1707.  "  See  him,  T.  i.  p.  29 — 41. 

y  Vid.  Aug.  contr.  Ep.  Manich.  cap.  vi.  vii.  viii. 


344  Crcdlbilii])  of  the  Gospel  History. 

part  of  The  Epistle  of  the  Foimdation,  where  Mani  delivers 
some  of  his  notions  about  two  principles,  he  adds  :  '  How'- 
'  will  he  prove  these  things  to  me'l  how  came  he  to  know 
'  them  himself?  '  If  JMani  had  any  where  declared  that  these 
things  had  been  communicated  to  him  by  special  revelation, 
Augustine  would  have  taken  notice  of  it  here.  Nay,  it  seems 
to  me  that^  from  the  following  words  of  Augustine  it  may 
be  strongly  argued,  and  even  concluded,  that  Mani  did  not 
make  use  of  such  expressions,  to  recommend  his  uncertain 
disputed  doctrines,  or  to  assure  the  truth  of  them,  and  that 
it  Mas  not  his  manner  of  teaching-. 

5.  The  leading  principles  of  Mani's  scheme,  wherein  he 
differed  from  other  christians,  are  of  a  philosophical  nature. 
Such  principles  may  be  recommended  without  pretending' 
to  inspiration.  Felix,  in  the  dispute  with  Augustine,  boasts 
that  '  Mani''  had  taught  them  the  beginning,  middle,  and 
'  end :  who  made  the  world,  why,  and  out  of  what ;  the  course 
'  of  the  sun  and  moon,  and  other  things.'  Augustine*' 
answers  that  Christ  promised  to  send  the  Spirit,  to  teach  us 
all  truth,  meaning  religious  truth  :  not  to  make  us  mathe- 
maticians and  philosophers,  but  christians. 

6.  Mani  and  his  followers  were  great  reason ers.  So  he  is 
represented  in  many  places''  of  the  Acts  of  Archelaus.  Such 
an  one  was  Faustus  :  he  openly  professeth  thaf  the  doctrine 
of  Mani  taught  him  not  to  receive  every  thing  recommended, 

^  Haec  mihi  unde  probaturiis  est?  aut  haec  ipse  unde  cognovit  ?  ib.  c.  13. 
n.  17.  *  Et  quoniam  qusesivi  unde  ipse  probet,  nunc  quaero 

unde  ipse  cognoverlt  ?  Si  dicit  sibi  esse  revelatum  a  Spiritu  Sancto,  suamque 
nientem  divinitus  illustratam,  ut  ea,  quee  dicit,  certaet  manifesta  cognosceret; 
ipse  significat,  quod  intersit  inter  cognoscere  et  credere. — Debuit  ergo  non 
nobis  polliceri  scientiam,  neque  manit'c^tam  cognitionem  ; — sed  dicere  potius 
sibi  ista  esse  monstrata,  illos  autem,  quibus  naiTantur,  credere  sibi  debere  quae 
nesciunt.  ib.  n.  18.  ^  Et  quia  venit  Maniclifeus,  et  per  suam 

praedicationem  docuit  nos  initium,  medium,  et^neni:  docuit  nos  de  fabrica 
mundi,  quare  facta  est,  et  unde  facta  est,  et  qui  fecerunt :  docuit  nos,  quare 
d;es,  et  quare  nox :  docuit  nos  de  cursu  solis  et  lunae.  Act.  cum.  Pel.  1.  i. 
c.  9.  "^  Non  legitur  in  Evangelio  Dominum  dixisse,  Mitto 

vobis  Paracletum,  qui  vos  doceat  de  cursu  solis  et  luuaj.  Christianos  enim 
facere  volebat,  non  mathematicos.     Aug.  ib.  c.  10. 

•*  Pro  niniia  autem  humanitate  Marcelli  adesse  festinavi,  ut  qualiter  obser- 
vare  modum  divinie  religionis  eum  edoceam  :  ne,  sicut  muta  animalia,  quae 

intellectu  carent,  nee  quid  agunt  advertunt,  ita  etiam  Marcellus, ap.  Arch. 

n.  13.  p.  24.  Vid.  ib.  p.  7,  8,  25,  et  passim. 

*  Et  tamen  me  quidam  ad  versus  capituli  hujus  necessitudinem  Manichaea 
fides  reddidit  tutum,  quae  principio  mihi  non  cunctis,  quae  ex  Salvatoris 
nomine  scripta  leguntur  passim,  credere  persuasit,  sed  probare,  si  sint  cadem 
vera,  si  sana,  si  incorru]jta. — Tu  vero,  qui  temere  credis,  qui  naturae  beneficium 
rationem  ex  hominibus  damnas,  cui  inter  verum  falsumque  judicare  religio 
est,  cuique  bonum  a  contrario  separare,  non  minus  formidini  est,  quam  inian- 
tibus  manise,  &c.  Faust.  I.  18.  c.  .3. 


The  Mtinicliees.     Sect.  IV.  345 

as  said  by  our  Saviour,  hut  first  to  examine  aiitl  consider 
wlicther  it  be  true,  sound,  right,  genuine :  >vhilst  the  catho- 
lics, he  says,  swaUowed  every  thing",  and  acted  as  if  they 
despised  the  benefit  of  lunnan  reason,  and  were  afraid  to 
examine  and  distinguisli  between  truth  and  falsehood.  He 
insinuates  elsewhere  that'  the  catholics  esteemed  that  a  faith 
not  worth  naming,  which  depended  upon  reasons.  The 
christian  religion,  they  said,  is  a  plain  and  simple;  thing,  and 
curious  inquiries  are  needless  and  insignificant.  I  put  in 
the  margin^  another  like  reflection  of  his.  They  were  not 
pretensions  to  inspiration,  but  specious  and  alluring  promises 
of  rational  discoveries,  by  which  Augustine  M'as  deluded,  as 
he''  particularly  says  in  his  letter  to  his  friend  Honoratus. 
His  words  are  strong  and  remarkable;  and  therefore  I 
transcribe  them  largely  at  the  bottom  of  the  page.  Augus- 
tine almost  continually  represents  this  as  the  characteristic 
of  the  sect,  and  the  main  pretence  by  which  they  sc<luced' 
men.  They''  ridiculed  the  frightful  authority  of  the  church: 
they'  bantered  the  catholic  credulity,  and"'  promised  men 
science  and  demonstration.     Upon  this"  point  turns  A ugus- 

^  Sed  tamen  hoc  encrvis  fidei  confessio  est,  in  Christum  sine  teste  et  argu- 
mento  non  credere.  Nenipe  ipsi  vos  docere  soletis,  idcirco  nihil  esse  curiosius 
exquirendum,  quia  simplex  sit  et  absoluta  Christiana  credulitas.  Id.  1.  12.  c. 
i,  in.  8  At,  inquis,  beatiores  appellat,  qui   non  videnint  et 

crediderunt.  Hoc  si  ideo  dictum  putas,  ut  sineratione  et  judicio  quidque  crc- 
damus ;  esto  tu  beatior  sine  sensu,  ego  mihi  contentus  ero  cum  ratione  beatus 
audisse.  Id.  1.  16.  c.  8.  fin. 

''  Noiti  enim,  Honorate,  non  aliam  ob  cau=am  nos  in  tales  homines  incidisse, 
nisi  quod  se  dicebant  ternbili  aucloritate  separata,  mera  et  simpllci  ratione  cos 
qui  se  audire  vellent  introductnros  in  Deum,  et  errore  omni  liberaluros.  Quid 
enim  me  aliud  cogebat,  annos  fere  novem,  spreta  religione  quae  mihi  puerulo 
a  parentibus  insita  erat,  homines  illos  sequi  ac  diligenter  audire,  nisi  quod  nos 
superstitione  teneri,  et  fidem  nobis  ante  rationem  imperari  dicerent,  se  aufem 
nullum  premere  ad  fidem,  nisi  prius  discussa  et  enodata  veritate  ? — Tu — qua, 
quaeso,  alia  re  delectatus  es,  recordare  obsecro  te,  nisi  magna  quadam  presum- 
tione  ac  pollicitatione  rationum  ?  De  Util.  Cred.  c.  i.  n.  2. 

'  Nonnulli  autem  haeretici,  quia  non  decipiunt,  nisi  cum  scientiam  quam  noa 
exhibent,  pollicentur, — De  Diversis  Quaest.  83.  Qu.  68.  n.  1.  T.  6. 

''  See  just  before,  note  **. 

'  Est  igitur  mihi  propositum,  iit  probem  tibi,  si  possim,  quod  Manichaei 
sacrilege  ac  temere  invehantur  in  eos,  qui,  catholicse  fidei  auctoritatem  sequentes, 
ante  quam  illud  verum  quod  pura  mente  conspicitur  intueri  queant,  credendo 
prsemuniuntur.  De  Ut.  Cred.  n.  2.  in.  vid.  et  not.  ".  Vos  aiim  nostis, 
temere  credentibus  quam  vehementer  insultare  soleatis.  Contr.  Ep.  Manich.  c. 
13.  n.  17.  ■"  Quid  infelicius  ista  superstitione  inveniri  potest, 

quae  non  modo  non  exhibet  scientiam  quam  promittit  et  ventatem,  sed  ea  dicit, 
quae  vehementer  sunt  scientiae  veritatique  contraria  ?  Contr.  Ep.  Manich.  c. 
15.  n,  19.  "  Jam  vero — scripsi  librum  de  utilitate  credendi,  ad  ami- 

cum  meum,  quem,  deceptum  a  Manichaiis,  adhuc  eo  errore  noveram  detineri,  et 
irridere  in  catholicae  fidei  disciplina  quod  juberentur  homines  credere,  noii 
autem,  quid  esset  verum,  certis.siinri  ratione  docerentiir.     Relr.  1.  i.  c.  14. 


346  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

tine's  book  to  his  friend  Honoratus,  still  a  Manichee,  which 
also  is  entitled,  Of  the  Usefulness  of  believing.  In  another 
place  Aug-ustine  complains  of  them,  that  they  °  set  up  reason 
above  authority  or  scripture. 

7.  Mani  made  no  pretensions  to  miraculous  powers:  this 
is  particularly  insisted  upon  ini'  The  Acts  of  Archelaus. 
If  it  should  be  here  said,  that  his  attempt  to  cure  the  king 
of  Persia's  son  was  pretending-  to  do  a  miracle,  1  might 
answer,  that  story  is  not  credibly  related.  But,  setting  aside 
that  consideration  for  the  present,  I  think  that  what  is  said 
in  the  fore-mentioned  Acts,  about  his  doing  no  miracles, ought 
to  induce  us  to  suppose  Mani  did  not  pretend  to  a  miracu- 
lous cure.  Nor  do  the  Acts,  in  the  relation  of  that  attempt, 
sny  so:  but  that  heT  took  upon  him  to  cure  the  king's  son, 
and  killed  him:  which  leads  us  to  think  he  made  use  of 
some  external  means  that  proved  hurtful.  Epiphaniussays 
he''  had  recourse  to  medicines,  but  his  hopes  of  cure  failed 
him:  Cyril,  that"  he  promised  to  cure  the  young  prince  by 
prayer.  Nor  was  i*,  I  think,  unbecoming  a  pious  man,  and 
a  teacher  of  religion,  if  called  upon  occasion  of  sickness,  to 
make  use  of  prayer.  However,  it  must  be  owned  that '  Cyril 
likewise  speaks  of  3Iani's  killing  the  king's  son;  which,  as 
already  observed,  seems  to  imply  some  external  applications 
that  were  prejudicial;  provided  there  is  any  foundation  at 
all  for  this  story. 

8.  T  do  not  recollect  that  Mani  or  his  followers  were  ever 
famous  for  visions  and  revelations,  as  some  others  have  been. 
It  is  indeed  said,  in  the  Acts  of  Archelaus,  that"  Mani  was 
admonished  in  a  dream  of  the  king's  design  to  put  him  to 
death.  But  surely  every  one  perceives  that  to  be  ridicu- 
lous.    Does  a  man,  imprisoned  by  order  of  his  prince,  need 

"  Undc  igilur  exordiar  >  ab  auctnritate,  an  ratione  ?  Naturae  quidem  ordo  ita 
se  habet,  ut,  cum  aliquid  discimus,  rationem  prsecedat  auctoritas.— Sed,  quo- 
niam  cum  iLs  nobis  res  est,  qui  omnia  contra  ordinem  et  sentiunt,  et  loquuntur, 
et  gerunf,  nihilque  aliud  maxime  dicunt,  nisi  rationem  prius  esse  reddendam, 
morem  illis  geram.     De  Mor.  E.  C.  c.  2.  n.  3. 

P  Et  post  ista  omnia  mandata,  iste  nee  signum  quidem  aliqnod,  aut  prodi- 
gium  ullum  ostendens.  Arch.c.  35.  p.  61.  f.  Et  haec  quidem  non  in  explorata 
proloquor  ;  sed  ex  eo  quod  nullum  te  video  facere  virtutem,  ita  de  le  sentio, 

&c.  ib.  c.  .36.  p.  63.  i  prajsentiam  suam  Manes  exhibet 

apud  regem,  dicens  se  esse  puerum  curaturum. — Verum,  ne  multa  narrando 
quEe  gessit,  taediiim  auditoribus  inferam,  mortuus  est  puer  in  manibus  ejus,  vel 

potius  extinctus.   ib.  c.  53.  p.  98.  '   nva  nSt)  <papfiaKtvriK7]c 

TrpoiveyKUQ  rqt  vo<fri\ivofitvi^  TraiSirs  jSrtffiXtw:;.   H.  66.  n.  4. 

'  AXX.'  6  Mavtic  tTTj/yyeXXero  Sia  irpomvxric,  loaavn  tvmftrfc,  KaropOioativ. 
Cat.  6.  n.  25.  *  r^  iratloq  Tov<t)ovov.  lb.  n.  26. 

"  Quod  cum  rex  Persarum  cognovisset,  dignis  eum  suppliciis  suVjdere  parat. 
Quo  Manes  agnito,  admonitus  in  somniis,  elapsus  de  carcere,  in  fugam  versus 
est,  auro  plurimo  custodibus  corruptis.     Arch.  c.  54.  p.  99. 


Vie  Munichees.     Sect.  IV.  347 

a  revelation  to  let  him  know  he  liad  best  escape  if  he  can  ? 
It  may  also,  jx'rhaps,  be  worth  m  hile  to  observe  here,  that 
3Iani's  deliverance  is  not  ascriltetl  to  magic,  or  any  such 
like  thing,  but  to'  a  large  sum  of  money,  by  which  he  bribed 
his  keepers.  As  for  the  journey  to  heaven,  mentioned  by 
some  eastern  wrtters,  I  suppose  that  no  one  can  think  it 
worthy  of  any  regard.  In  a  word,  the  Manichees,  as  it  seems, 
M'ere  rather  a  sect  of  reasoners  and  pliilosophers,  than  vision- 
aries and  enthusiasts. 

It  is  observable,  that  Gregory  Nazianzen,  mentionitig- 
altogether  the"  Montanists,  Manichees,  Novatians,  and  Sabel- 
lians,  distinguishes  the  first  by  their  pretence  of  inspiration, 
without  imputing-  any  such  thing  to  any  of  the  rest.  And 
in  like  manner  in  another''  place,  where,  beside  the  fore- 
named,  are  also  mentioned  Valentinus,  Marcion,  and  some 
others. 

Not  that  the  Manichees  were  silent  about  the  Spirit.  No, 
for  certain  they,  as  well  as  other  christians,  claimed  an  interest 
in  the  promise  of  the  Spirit  made  by  Christ :  but,  whereas 
Aug"ustine  says  theyy  pretended  that  the  S[)irit  came  to  us 
by  Mani,  I  am  not  fully  satisfied  about  the  justness  of  his 
expression.  One  might  be  rather  apt  to  conclude  from^ 
words  of  Faustus,  and  even  from  those  words  of  Augustine 
just  cited,  '  came  to  us,'  that  they  considered  the  gift  of 
the  Spirit  as  a  blessing  common  to  believers  under  the  gos- 
pel dispensation. 

If  they  had  gone  upon  the  ground  of  a  particular  inspira- 
tion in  Mani,  it  might  be  expected  that  the  traces  of  that 
high  notion  concerning  their  master  should  appear  more 
distinctly  than  they  do,  in  the  discourses  of  the  Manichees, 
with  whom  Augustine  disputed.  Fortunatus  seems  to  use 
strong  expressions  to  the  contrary,  when  he  says :  *  He* 
'  knows  that  he  cannot  by  any  means  show  his  faith  to  be 
'  right,  unless  he  proves  it  by  the  authority  of  the  scrip- 
*  tures.' 

*  See   the  preceding  note  ".  "  Movravn  Si  re  vovtjpov 
irvtv^a,  Kai  ts  ^\avH  okotoq,  k.  X.   Greg.  Or.  25.  p.  414.  C. 

*  MovravH  to  irovijpov  irvtvixa,  Kai  yvvaiKiiov'   l\Iav«   rrjv  v\r]v  fitra  ra 
atOTHQ'  Naiiar«  r>jv  aXal^ovuav,  k.  X.  Or.  25.  p.  441.  B. 

y  dicunt  Spiriium  Sanctum,  quern  Dominus  dL<;cipulis  se  missurum 

esse  promisit,  per  ipsum  [Manichseum]  ad  nos  venisse.  De  Util.  Cred.  c.  3. 
n.  7.  ^  et  nobis  Paracletus  ex  Novo  Testamento  pro- 

missus  perinde  docet — dc  quo  ultro  Jesus,  cum  eum  promitteret,  dicit  in 
Evangelio,  Ipse  vos  inducet  in  omnem  veritatem,  et  ipse  vobis  annuntiabit 
omnia,  et  commemorabit  omnia.  Faust,  ap.  Aug.  i.  32.  cap.  6. 

*  Et  quia  nullo  genere  recte  me  credere  ostendere  possum,  nisi  eamdem 
fidem  scripturarum  auctoritate  finnaverim.     Disp.  Fortun.  1.  2.  n.  20 


348  CredibiUixj  of  the  Gospel  History. 

Upon  the  whole,  I  do  not  choose  to  deny  that  Mani  was 
an  impostor;  but  I  do  not  discern  evident  proofs  of  it.  1 
plainly  see  that  he  was  an  arrogant  philosopher,  and  a  great 
scheinist :  but  whether  he  was  an  nnpostor,  1  cainiut  cer- 
tainly say.  He  was  abundantly  too  fond  of  philosophical 
notions,  which  he  endeavoured  to  bring  into  religion  :  for  this 
he  is  to  be  blamed.  But  every  bold  dogmatizer  is  not  an 
impostor. 

J  put  down  Beausobre's  judgment  upon  this  point,  >vhen 
1  entered  upon  the  consideration  of  this  question.  I  must 
here  take  notice  of  several  other  of  his  places,  where  he 
delivers  his  opinion  concerning-  this  matter.  I  do  it  for  the 
sake  of  my  readers,  as  well  as  myself,  that  none,  who  are 
desirous  of  information  and  judging  rightly,  may  be  destitute 
of  any  helps  that  can  be  obtained  for  these  purposes. 

He  says,  in  the  preface  to  his  work,  that  '  Mani''  took  the 
'  character  of  an  apostle  of  Christ,  and  a  prophet  immedi- 
'  ately  inspired  by  the  Paraclete,  to  reveal  to  the  world 
'  truths,  in  which  our  Lord  thought  not  proper  to  instruct 
'  his  first  disciples.  This  was  his  imposture  or  fanaticism. 
'  For  whatever  the  ancients  may  say,  there  are  no  evident 
'  proofs  that  he  ever  endeavoured  to  pass  for  the  Paraclete, 
'  or  the  Spirit.'  He  elsewhere  speaks  of  Maui's  pretending" 
to  a  divine  vocation.  However,  he  likewise  expresseth  him- 
self after  this  manner,  speaking  at  the  same  time  both  of 
Mani,  and  some  others  called  heretics:  '  In*^  what  then  con- 
'  sisted  their  error?  These  heretics  were  philosophers,  who, 
'  having  formed  certain  systems,  accommodated  revelation 
'  to  them  ;  which  was  the  servant  of  their  reason,  not  the 
'  mistress.  Mani  in  particular,  boasted  of  having  a  perfect 
'  knowledge  of  all  things,  of  having-  banished  mysteries,  and 
'  g-iven  a  true  account  of  every  thing;  which  the  Manichees 
'  called  the  knowledge  of  the  beginning-,  middle,  and  end  of 
'  all  thing's.  St.  Augustine  confcsseth,  that  what  seduceil 
'  him  in  his  youth  was  the  hope  of  understanding  every 
'  thing  by  <lemonstratio\i,  and  of  knowing  God  by  the  sole 
*  light  of  reason,  without  the  help  of  faith.'  Again  says  the 
same  learned  author:  '  As^  for  his  heresy  in  general,  it  was, 
'  properly  speaking,  a  philosophical  system,  the  grounds  of 
'  which  he  found  in  the  phil<)so|)liy  of  the  magi,  and  which 
'  he  accouunodatcd,  as  well  as  Ik;  could,  to  the  revelation  of 
'  Jesus  Christ.  Herein  he  did  nothing  hut  what  had  been  done 
'  before  by  many  Greeks,  and  l)oth  Greeks  and  Latins  had 
'  been  doing  almost  ever  since.     In  all  times  have  been  seeu 

"  T.  i.  Pr.  p.  X.  xi.  '^  T.  i.  p.  179,  180. 

«•  B.  Hisf.  de  Munich.  T.  i.  p.  94.  "  lb.  p.  179. 


The  Manichecs.     Sec'1'.  1\  .  349 

'  j)liilosoj>lic'is,  whose  miiuls  wore  (illed  with  the  idoa.s  and 
'  notions  of  Phito  ;tnd  Aristollf  ;  which,  under  slight  pretexts, 
'  they  have  mingled  witli  christian  truths,  and  erected  into 
'  articles  of"  faith.' 

So  lleansobre.'  I  readily  assent  to  him  in  M'hat  lie  says 
of  the  jdiiKjsoj)hical  nature  of  Mani's  system.  Wlietlier  he 
pretended  to  divine  ins[)iration,  1  cannot  say.  However, 
1  h^ave  every  one  to  judge  as  he  sees  good.  But  I  own  I 
ha<l  rather  vindicate  a  christian  from  the  charge  of  impos- 
ture, than  pronounce  liim  guilty,  unless  the  evidence  against 
him  be  clear  and  full. 

We  now  proceed  to  a  more  distinct  examination  of  the 
Maniclij^an  principles. 

\  J.  Maui  had  honourable  sentiments  of  the  Deity,  as  self- 
existent,  eternal,  completely  happy,  and  perfect  in  goodness. 
So  much  is  evident  from  the  passage  of  Fortunatus  above 
quoted,  and  from  a  passage  of  Maui  himself,  to  be  taken 
notice  of  presently. 

They  owned  God  to  be  almighty  :  both  ^Fortunatus  and 
''Faustus  ascribe  to  God  that  attribute,  indeed  they  did 
not  believe  this  world  of  ours  to  be  made  out  of  nothing. 
However,  perhaps  that  was  not  from  a  supposition  of  th(* 
want  of  such  power  in  God,  but  because  they  imagined' 
things  woidd  have  been  better  than  they  are,  perfectly  good, 
without  any  mixture  of  evil,  if  tin;  matter  of  which  they 
consisted  had  been  of  divine  original. 

But  Mani  and  his  followers  did  not  believe  the  divine 
inunensity,  or''  that,  as  to  his  nature,  he  >vas  in  all  places. 
For  part  of  space,  according  to  them,  was  occupied  by  Hyle, 
the  evil  principle,  matter.  But  though  they  limited  the 
divine  essence  in  point  of  space,  they  did  not  limit  God  in 
point'  of  power  and  knowledge.  This  appears  from  Augus- 
tine, who  owns  the'"   Manichees  taught  that  God  had  pre- 

'  See  liim  also,  T.  i.  p.  426,  note  4.  and  T.  2.  p.  253. 

8  a  Deo  omnipotente.  Fortun.  ap.  Aug.  Disp.  i.  n.  17. 

^  quia  et  omnipotentem  Deiim  colani.  Faust.  1.  20.  c.  4. 

'  Quoinodo  autem  et  condere   potuit  creaturas,   non    subsistenle 

materia?  Si  enini  de  non  extantibus,  consequetur  has  visibiles  creaturas  nieli- 
ores  esse,  et  omnibus  virtutibus  plenas.     Manes,  ap.  Arch.  n.  14.  p.  27. 

''  Ego  duas  naturas  esse  dico,  unam  bonam,  et  alteram  malain,  et  earn 
quidem,  quae  bona  est,  in  quibusdam  partibus  habitare. — Si  enim  dicimus 
monarchiani  unius  naturae,  et  omnia  Deum  replere,  et  nullum  esse  extra  eunt 
locum,  quis  erit  creaturoe  susceptor  ?  ubi  gehenna  ignis  ?  ubi  tenebrae  exte  ■ 
riores?  ubi  flietus  ?  Manes,  ap.  Arch.  n.  14.  p.  2G. 

'  See  Beaus.  T,  i.  p.  505,  506. 

■"  Ipsi  enim  dicunt,  Deum  genti  tenebrarum  aeternum  carcerera  praeparare, 
quam  dicunt  esse  inimicam  Deo.     Contr.  Adim.  c.  7.  n.  1. 


350  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

pared  an  eternal  prison  for  the  nation  of  darkness.  There- 
fore God's  dominion  must  be  over  all. 

Upon  account  of  their  doctrine  of  two  principles,  to  be 
taken  notice  of  hereafter,  the  Manichees  are  often  charged 
with  believing-  two  gods.  So  Turbo,  in  the  Acts  of  Arche- 
laus,  expressly  says  of  Mani  :  '  He"  worships  two  g^ods, 
'  self-existent,  eternal,  opposite  to  each  other,  one  good,  the 
'  other  bad.'  And  Socrates  said,  that"  Mani  taught  his 
disciples  to  worship  many  gods. 

Faustus  particularly  considers  this  point.  '  IsP  there  one 
'  God  ;  or  are  there  two  gods  ?  For  certain,  one.  Why 
'  then  do  you  say  there  are  two  gods  1  That  is  no  doctrine 
'  of  ours.  Why  do  you  suspect  it  to  be  so?  Because  you 
'  believe  two  principles,  one  good,  the  other  bad.  It  is  true, 
'  we  believe  two  principles:  but  one  of  these  we  call  God,  the 
'  other  Hyle;  or  sometimes,  in  common  discourse,  the  devil.' 
However,  he  adds  afterwards :  '  I  own  thati  we  sometimes 
'  call  the  adverse  nature  god :  not  that  it  is  so  esteemed  by 
'  us,  but  by  those  who  worship  it,  even  as  the  apostle  speaks 
'  of  the  "  god  of  this  world  blinding  the  eyes  of  them  that 
'  believe  not."  '  See  2  Cor.  ivc  4. 

They  likewise  considered  God  as  the  creator  of  the  heavens 
and  the  earth,  and  u\l  things  that  are  therein,  as"^  Augustine 
Essures  us  ;  which  is  very  difterent  from  what  is  said  of 
them  by  ^Athanasius  and  *Rufinus.  Forasmuch  therefore 
as  some  writers  deny  that  the  Ma))ichees  ascribed  the  crea- 
tion of  the  world  to  the  good  principle,  and  some  other 

"  OvroQ  Svo  (Tij3u  Bisq  ayivvtirag,  avTO(pveig,  aiding,  iva  Tcp  tvi  avTiKtifitvov, 
Kai  Tov  fitv  ayaQov,  rov  St  Trovrj^ov  tttrr/yttrat.  ap.  Arch.  n.  7.  p.  9. 

"   noXX8c  Sfsc  ffs/^fiv  o  Mavixaiog  TrporptTrtrat.     Socr.  1.  i.  c.  22. 

P  Unus  Deus  est,  an  duo  ?  Plane  imus.  Quomocio  ergo  vos  duos  asserifis  ? 
Nunquam  in  nostris  quidem  assertionihus  duorum  deoruni  audituni  est  nomen. 
Sed  tu  unde  hoc  suspicaris,  cupio  scire.  Quia  bonorum  et  malorum  duo 
principia  traditis.  Est  quidem  quod  duo  principia  confitemur ;  std  unum 
ex  his  Deum  vocamus,  aherum  Hylen,  aut,  ut  communiter  et  usitate  dixerini, 
daemonem.     Faust.  1.  21.  in. 

•i  Nam  nee  diffiteor,  etiam  interdum  nos  adversam  naf uram  nuncupare  deum, 
sed  non  hoc  secundum  nostram  fidem,  verum  juxta  prapsumtum  jam  in  eam 
nomen  acultonbus  suis,  qui  earn  imprudenferexistimantdeum,  &c.  ib.  ad  fin. 

■■  Vos  autem  fatemini  universum  istum  mundum,  qui  nomine  cceh  et  terrae 
significatur,  habere  auctorem  et  fabricatorem  Deum,  et  Deum  bonum.  De 
Mor.  Manioh.  c.  x.  n.  16. 

*  Km  ya^  KifKtivoi  [Mavixaioi]  /xovov  axQiQ  ovoyLUTOQ  ayaOup  Sriov  ovojia^aai, 
Kui  tpyov  niv  avTU  ovre  ftXiTrojitvov  ovTt  aopoTOV  dtiKvuetv  SwavraC  rov  Se 
aXijOivov  Kai  ovtwq  ovru  Siiov  rov  Trotrjrr^v  apavH  kui  yrjg,  /cai  Travrwv  rwv 
ao()aTo)V,  upyHfitvoi,  TravTiXoiQ  iim  fivOoXnyoi.  Ath.  Ep.  Enc.  ad  Ep.  JE^. 
et  Lib.  n.  16.  T.  i.  p.  285.  '  Tum  dcinde  quod  mundum  a 

malo  iactum  dicit,  Deum  crcatorem  negat.  Ruf.  in  Symb.  Ap.  Hicron.  0pp. 
T.  5.  p.  142. 


The  Mankhces.     Sect.  IV.  351 

heretics  also  are  said  to  have  disowned  God  as  creator,  [ 
shall  put  down  a  passag'e  or  two  more  from"  Augustine, 
and'  the  author  De  Fide,  where  they  allow  that  the  Mani- 
chees  spoke  of  God  as  the  maker  of  the  world.  And  Titus 
of  Bostra,  giving-  an  account  of  their  notion  upon  this  head, 
says  that"  the  universe,  according  to  them,  consisted  indeed 
of  a  mixture  of  good  and  bad,  but  was  formed  by  the  good 
principle,  that  is,  God.  For  the  evil  principle  knew  nothing 
beforehand  of  the  formation  of  the  world.  Besides,  I  remem- 
ber that  I  alleged  a  passage  to  this  purpose"  before,  when 
1  showed  their  agreement  with  other  christians.  And  Beau- 
sobrey  might  be  consulted  upon  this  head. 

The  Manichees  believed  a  consubstantial  Trinity,  or  three 
persons  of  the  same  substance.  F'  have  already  taken  some 
notice  of  this.  1  observe  here  a  few  niore  particulars  as 
proofs  of  this,  though  I  do  not  design  to  examine  their 
opinion  nicely. 

Augustine  says  the*  Manichees  never  dared  to  deny  that 
the  Father  and  the  Son  are  consubstantial. 

Secundinus  begins  his  letter  to  Augustine  in  this  manner  : 
'  I'*  give  thanks  to  the  ineffable  and  most  sacred  IMajesty, 
'  and  to  Jesus  Christ,  his  first-begotten,  king  of  all  lights. 
'  I  also  humbly  give  thanks  to  the  Holy  Spirit.' 

Faustus  has  a  remarkable  passage  where  he  says:  '  We'= 

"  Proinde  munduni  a  natura  boni,  hoc  est  a  natura  Dei  factum  confiteritur 
quidem,  sed  de  commixtione  boni  et  mali,  quae  facta  est,  quando  inter  se 
utraque  natura  pugnavit.  Aug.  de  Haer.  cap.  46. 

Iste  autem,  cujus  nomen  in  eodem  hbro  non  comperi,  detestatur  Deum 
mundi  fabricatorem ;  cum  Manichsei,  quamquam  libruni  Gene?eos  non  acci- 
piant,  atque  blasphement,  Deum  tamen  bonum  fabricasse  mundum,  etsi  ex 
aliena  natura  atque  materia,  confiteantur.  Contr.  adv.  Leg.  et  Proph.  1.  i. 
c.  i.  *  Manichaeus  enim  duas  dicit  esse  naturas,  unam  bonam, 

et  alteram  malam ;  bonam,  quae  fecit  mundum,  malam,  de  qua  factus  est 
mundus.     De  Fid.  c.  49.  in. 

"  Ttyovt  Toivvv  //tStt,'  Kai  KpaffiQ,  tbtov  fijai  rov  rpoTrov,  rrjg  ts  KaTairoBtiariQ 
Svva/ieojQ  78  ayaOa,  Kai  rrjc  Karairin(TT)c  iiXjjf  kui  nrwQ  eK  afi<poiv  tStjfiiHpyrjdt] 
TO  £f  Trav,  vTTO  TH  ayaOa  Sr]\a£r]'  h  yap  av  Trpoivoijaiv  t)  KaKia  Koafis  yivtaeuig. 
Tit.  1.  i.  p.  68.  m.  "  See  before,  p.  330.  note  \ 

y  See  B.  T.  2.  p.  360,  361.  ^  See  p.  330. 

*  Quia  et  nunquam  dicere  ausi  sunt,  Patrem  et  Filium  nisi  unius  esse 

substantiae.     Aug.  Serm.  xii.  in  PS.  cap.  x.  n.  xi. 

''  Habeo  et  ago  gratias  inefifabili  et  sacratissimae  Majestati,  ejusque  primo- 
genito  omnium  luminum  regi  Jesu  Christo.  Habeo  gratias,  et  supplex  sancto 
relero  Spiritui,     Secund.  ad  Aug.  Ep.  in. 

"=  Igitur  nos  Patris  quidem  Dei  omnipotentis,  et  Christi  filii  ejus,  et  Spiritus 
Sancti  unum  idemque  sub  triplici  appellatione  colimus  numen :  sed  Patrem 
quidem  ipsum  lucem  incolere  credimus  sumniam  ac  principalem,  quam  Paulus 
alias  inaccessibilem  vocat :  Filium  vero  in  hac  secunda  ac  visibili  luce  consis- 
tere ;  qui  quoniam  sit  et  ipse  geminus,  ut  eum  apostolus  novit,  Christum 
dicens  esse  Dei  virtutem  et  Dei  sapientiam ;  virtulem  quidem  ejus  in  sole 


352  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

'  worship  one  deity  of  God  the  Father  Almighty,  and  Christ 
'  his  Son,  and  the  Holy  Ghost,  under  a  threefold  appellation. 
'  But  the  Father  we  believe  to  inhabit  the  supreme  and  most 
'  sublime  light,  w  hich  Paul  calls  inaccesible.  [1  Tim.  vi.  16,] 
'  The  Son  we  think  dwells  by  his  power  in  the  sun,  by  his 
'  wisdom  in  the  moon :  the  Holy  Spirit,  the  third  Majesty, 
'  has  the  air  for  his  residence.' 

Here  therefore  1  observe  that  the  Manichees  are  said  to 
worship  tb.e  sun.  So*^  Socrates  expressly.  Libanius  too 
owned  that*  they  worshipped  the  sun  in  a  secondary  sense  : 
and  it  is  very  likely  that  they  paid  some  respect  both  totiie 
siui  and  the  moon  on*^  account  of  the  residence  of  the  Son 
of  God  therein,  as  just  mentioned  by  Faustus. 

However,  let  us  likewise  see  what  others  say.  We  find 
Augustine  himself  charging  them  with«  the  worship  of  the 
sun  and  the  moon.  But  in  the  dispute  with  Fortunatus, 
when  called  upon  to  declare  if  he  had  seen  any  thing' 
criminal  in  their  worship,  he  owned  that''  he  had  observed 
nothing-  amiss  in  the  prayers,  at  which  he  was  present,  except 
that  they  turned  themselves  toward  the  sun.  In  another 
place  he  informs  us,  that'  when  they  prayed  they  looked 
toward  the  sun  in  the  day  time,  and  toward  the  moon  in  the 
uight.  In  another  place  he  speaks  of^  their  kneeling  to  the 
sun,  or  toward  it.  Alexander  of  Lycopol  is  says  they'  honour 
the  sun  and  moon  above  all  things,  not  as  gods,  but  as  the 
way  by  which  we  are  to  go  to  God.  Titus  of  Bostra  ascribes 
their  respect  to  the  sun  to  their  supposition  that"'  it  was  com- 
posed of  parts  of  light  entirely  j)ure,  and  unsullied  with  a 
mixture  of  evil.     And"  Augustine  seems  to  speak  to  the 

habitare  credimiis,  sapientiam  vero  in  liina :  nee  non  et  Spiritus  Sancti,  qui  est 
majestas  tertia,  aeris  hunc  omnem  ambitiini  sedem  fateniur  ac  diversorium. 
Faust.  1.  20.  c.  2. 

^     (Cat  rou  t'fKiov  TrpooKwuv  cioiwkh.  Socr.  1.  i.  c.  22.  p.  56.  A. 

*  See  before,  p.  268. 

f  quod  vel  tu,  vel  qnilibet  alius  rogatus,  ubinam  Deum  suum  credat 

habitare,  respondere  non  dubitabit,  in  lumine:  ex  quo  cultus  hie  meus  omnium 
pene  lestimonio  confirmatur.     Faust,  ib.  1.  20.  c.  2.  f. 

8  Solem  etiam  et  lunam  cum  eis  adorant  et  orant.  Aug.  T.  2.  Ep.  236. 
al.  74.  ''  Ego  autem  in  oratione,  qua  interfui,  nihil  turpe 

fieri  vidi :  sed  solum  eontra  fidem  animadverti — quod  contra  solem  facitis 
orationem.     Adv.  Fortun.  Disp.  i.  n.  3. 

'  Orationes  faciunt  ad  solem  per  diem,  quaquaversum  circuit  -.  ad  lunam 
per  noctem,  si  apparet ;  si  autem  non  apparet,  ad  aquiloniam  partem,  qua  sol 
cum  Occident,  ad  orientcm  revertitur,  stant  orantes.     De  Haer.  c.  46. 

^  Sol  iste,  cui  genu  flectitis,  &c.     De  Mor.  Manich.  cap.  8.  n.  1.3. 

'  TifxajTi  t£  /laXiTa  rjXiov  Kat  aiXrjvtjv,  «%  wc  -^fuC)  o.\X'  wc  o^oj'  £i'  r)c  c^iv 
TTfioc  Qlov  arpiKinOai.     Alex.  L.  p.  5.  D. 

""  ETTiiCt)  ct  riXiov  <jffivvpt.i,  Kat  ctfiiyri  tivai,  log  vTriiXr)^c,  th  kokh  hciQiZirai. 
Tit.  contr.  Manich.  1.  2.  p.  128.  in.  "  Et  idco  istum  solem — isli 


The  Manichces.     Sect.  IV.  353 

like  purpose,  or  at  least  tliat  tlioy  esteemed  it  a  portion  of 
light  which  God  inhabits.  Siinplicius  says  they"  thought 
the  sun  and  moon  to  consist  of  parts  of  the  good  substance, 
and  therefore  honoured  them. 

Upon  the  whole,  1  believe  we  need  not  surmise  any  great 
harm  in  the  respect  they  showed  the  sun,  considering  that 
Faustus  assures  us  they  believed  one  God  only  under  a  three- 
fold appellation,  and  considering-  what  Augustine  says  of  the 
prayers  af  which  he  was  present.  But  it  seems  that  when 
they  prayed  to  God,  for  some  reason  or  other  they  turned 
their  faces  toward  the  sun  or  the  moon. 

VII.  '  The  3Ianichees,'  to  use  Augustine's  p  words,  '  held 
'  two  principles, different  and  opposite, eternal  and  co-eternal : 
'  and  two  natures  and  substances,  one  good,  the  other  evil, 
'  following  herein  other  ancient  heretics.' 

In  this''  notion,  as  the  same  learned  father  says,  they 
triumphed  to  a  great  degree,  supposing*  it  to  afford  the  best 
account  of  the  orisfin  of  evil. 

And  Epiphanius  says  that""  by  this  scheme  Mani  endea- 
voured to  free  God  from  the  charge  of  being  the  author  of 
evil.  To  the  like  purpose  speaks^  Jerom,  and'  Titus  of 
Bostra,  and"  Simplicius. 

Indeed  this  difficult  question,  of  the  origin  of  evil,  was 
the  ruin  of  these  men,  and  of  many  others.  They  perplexed 
and  confounded  themselves,  and  they  endeavoured  to  puzzle 
and  confound  all  other  people.  Augustine"^^  intimates  as 
much. 

sic  coluat,  ut  particulam  dicant  esse  lucis  illius  in  qua  habitat  Deus.  De  Gen. 
contr.  Man.  1.  i.  c.  3.  n.  6.  °   Uotrr]  St  kui  ri  Trepi  tsto  aXXoKoria, 

TO  £K  iravTiov  T(i)V  Ev  Ti^  upavqj  fioi'HC  TSQ  tvo  (pw^ttpog  Tifiav,  Trig  TH  ayaO» 
fioipag  XtyovTag  avTag.  k.  \.  In  Epictet.  c.  34.  p.  167. 

V  Ib-te  duo  principia  inter  se  cliversa  et  adversa,  eademqiie  aeterna  et  coaetema, 
hoc  est,  semper  fuisse,  composuit :  duasque  naturas  atque  substantias,  boni 
scilicet  et  mali,  sequens  alios  antiques  haereticos,  opinatus  est  Aug.  de  Haer. 
c.  46.  "^  Hie  fortasse  quis  dicat,  Unde  ipsa  peccata,  et  omnino 

unde  malum  ?  Si  ab  homine,  unde  homo  ?  Si  ab  angelo,  unde  angelus  ? 
Quos  ex  Deo  esse  cum  dicitur,  quamvis  recte  vereque  dicatur,  videntur  tamen 
imperitis  et  minus  valentibus  acriter  res  abditas  intueri,  qua'^i  per  quamdam 
catenara  ad  Deum  mala  et  peccata  connecti.  Hac  quaestione  regnare  se 
putant,  De  Duab.  Anim.  c.  8.  n.  10.  ■"  Mavijg,  (inXoiiivog  KUKiag 

virt^aiptiv  Tov  Oeov,  k.  X.  Epiph.  H.  66.  n.  16.  p.  632.  Vid.  et  n.  15.  in. 

*  Inde  Manichaeus,  ut  Deum  a  conditione  malorum  liberet,  alterum  mali 
inducit  auctorem.     Hier.  in  Naum.  cap.  3.  T.  3.  p.  1588.  in. 

'  KoKiag  yap  avatriov  airolu^ai  rov  Qtov  (inXriBag,  k.  X.  Tit.  contr.  Manich. 
1.  i.  p.  60.  in.  ap.  Basnag.  et  Canis.  Lect.  Ant.  T.  i. 

"   Kai  TO  Bavfia'^ov,  on  iravTa  Tcivra  avtnkaaav,  Sia  ^totji(ir\  SrjOiv 

iv\a(3eiav'  fit]  PaXofiivoi  yap  ainov  th  /ca/ca  tov  Qtov  tnreiv,  apxV"  vntTT]- 
aavTo  ihav  th  icaKs,  k.  X.     Simpl.  in  Epict.  Enchir.  c.  .34.  p.  168. 
•    ^  Qui,  dum  nimis  quaerunt,  unde  sit  malum,  nihil  reperiunt  nisi  malum. 
De  Ut.  Cred.  c.  18.  n.  36. 

VOL.    III.  2   A 


354  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

Theodoret's  account  is  to  this  purpose:  *  Manr"  taught 
'  two  eternal  beings,  God  and  matter.  God  he  called  light, 
'  matter  darkness :  and  the  light  good,  matter  evil.  He 
'  called  them  also  by  other  names.  Light  is  a  good  tree, 
'  full  of  good  fruits  :  matter  an  evil  tree,  bearing-  fruits 
'  agreeable  to  its  root.' 

Photius,  observing-  the  contents  of  a  vt'ork  of  Agapius,  a 
Manichaean  writer,  says:  '  He^  advanceth  a  bad  principle, 
'  self-existent  and  opposite  to  God  ;  which  he  sometimes 
'  calls  nature,  sometimes  matter,  sometimes  Satan,  and  the 
'  devil,  and  the  prince  and  god  of  this  world,  and  the  like.' 

Their  opinion  is  laid  down  byy  Fortunatus  at  the  begin- 
ning of  his  second  dispute  with  Augustine. 

Jerom'  often  takes  notice  of  this  doctrine  of  the  Mani- 
chees. 

This  doctrine  Mani  teaches  in  his  letter  to  Marcellus. 
He*  wonders  how  many  christians  can  think  that  God  made 
Satan  and  other  evil  things.  This  notion  and  the  conse- 
quences of  it,  are  much  discoursed  of  in  The  Dispute  of^ 
Archelaus. 

After  all  this,  it  may  be  still  proper  to  put  down,  in  the  mar- 
gin at  least,  the  words  of  Mani  himself,  near  the  beginning 
of  his  Epistle  of  the  Foundation,  which  was  so  much  admired 
by  his  followers,  and  is  largely  cited  by  Augustine.  '  There'= 
'  were,'  says  he,  '  in  the  beginning,  two  substances,  divided 
'  from  each  other.  The  kingdom  of  light  is  held  by  God 
'  the  Father,  unchangeable,  all-powerful,  true  in  his  nature, 
'  eternal,  having  in  himself  wisdom  and  vital  powers. — His 
'  most  splendid  kingdom  is  founded  upon  light  and  blessed 

"  OvTOQ  Svo  ayivvTjTHC  Kai  diSiHQ  Kprjatv  iivai,  Qiov  Kai  vXrjv'  /cat  irpofftj- 
yopivfft  Tov  fttv  Qtov  (pijiQ,  TTjv  5t  vKr]v  okotoq.  k.  X.  Thdrt.  H.  F.  1.  i.  c.  26. 
p.  212.  B.  C.  "    Apxv^  TTovripav   uvQvirozarov  avravi<?t]tfiv 

iK  a'iSin  rt{)  Oeq),  rjv  Trori  [iiv  cpvaiv,  aWori  vKtjv,  Kai  aWoTi  Si  "Saravav,  Kat 
AiaftoXov,  Kai  apj^ovra  ra  Korrfin,  Kai  Olov  th  aicovac  tuth.  k.  \.  Ph.  COd.  179. 
p.  404.  in.  -^  Disp.  2.  sub  in. 

^  Ut  non  juxla  Manichaeum,  et  caeteras  haereses,  (quae  factorem  et  materiam 
ponunt,)  aliquid,  unde  creatnrae  factae  sint,  antecesserit  creaturas,  sed  omnia  ex 
nihilo  substiterint.  Hier.  in  Ep.  ad  Gal.  cap.  i.  T.  4.  P.  i.  p.  435.  in.  Vid.  eimd. 
ad  Ctes.  E.p.  43.  T.  4.  P.  2.  p.  480.  infr.  m.  ft  Prol.  Dial.  adv.  Pelag.  ib.  p. 
485.  in.  "   Kai  ttmq  tov  Oeov  th  'SaTava,  kui  twv  (catcwv  avm 

Trpay/iaTuv  Xeysiv  ToXfiuxn  TroirjTtjv  Kai  Sriniapyov,  ^avuaKnv  fioi  nripxtTai. 
ap.  Arch.  c.  5.  p.  7.  f.  ''  Ego  duas  naturas  esse  dico,  unam 

bonam,  ct  alteram  nialam.  ib.  c.  14.  p.  2G. 

*^  llae  quidcm  in  exordio  fuerunt  duae  substautiae  asese  divisa3.  Et  luminis 
quidem  impcrium  tenebat  Deus  Pater,  in  sua  sancta  stirpe  perpetuus,  in  virtute 
magnificus,  natura  ips^  verus,  ajternitate  propria  semper  exsultans,  continens 
apud  se  sapientiam  et  sensus  vitalcs. — Ita  autem  fundata  sunt  ejusdem  splendi- 
dissima  regna  super  lucidam  et  beatam  terram,  ut  a  nullo  iinquam  aut  moveri 
autconcuti  possint.  Ap.  Aug.  contr.  Ep.  Manich.  c.  13.  n.  IG. 


77»e  Munidiees.     Sect.  IV.  355 

'  land,  not  to  be  shaken  or  moved  by  any.'  But  liowever, 
as  be  goes  on,  '  On*^  one  side  of  his  illustrious  and  holy 
'  territories  was  the  land  of  darkness,  deep  and  wide,  where 
'  dwelt  fiery  bodies,  and  all  sorts  of  pestiferous  things  : 
'  beyond  which  are  muddy  waters,  boisterous  winds,  dark 
'  smoke  ;  and  at  the  centre  the  dreadful  prince  and  universal 
'  governor,  having-  with  him  innumerable  princes  of  which 
'  he  is  the  soul  and  source.  And  these  are  the  five  natures 
'  [or  elements]  of  the  pestiferous  country.' 

These  five  elements,  as  Augustine  observes  in  plainer 
words,  are'^  darkness,  water,  wind,  fire,  smoke.  Darkness 
is  the  otitmost,  within  that  water,  within  that  wind,  next  fire, 
and  the  inmost  smoke  ;  all  which  regions  have  their  several 
inhabitants.  In  another  place*^  Augustine  mentions  again 
these  five  elements,  but  in  a  different  order. 

There  were  as  many  elements  in  the^  kingdom  of  light; 
air,  light,  fire,  water,  wind:  which  at  the  formation  of  the 
world,  were  mixed  with  the  bad  elements. 

Hence  it  appears  that''  Mani  ascribed  to  matter,  the  evil 
substance,  the  land  of  darkness,  not  only  eternal  existence, 
but  likewise  motion  and  life,  animal  passions,  and,  as  one 
would  think,  reason  or  intelligence.  If  the  inhabitants  of 
those  regions  had  not  reason  originally,  they  seem  to  have 
gained  it  afterwards. 

Upon  this  point  I  shall  mention  a  thought'  of  Beausobre, 
which  is  to  this  purpose.     '  Titus  of  Bostra  observes  this 

^  Jiixta  unam  vero  partem  ac  latus  illustris  illius  ac  sanctse  terrae  erat  tene- 
brarum  terra,  profunda  et  immensa  magnitudine,  in  qua  habitabaiit  ignea 
corpora,  genera  scilicet  pestifera.  Hie  inlinilae  tenebrae,  ex  eadem  manantes 
natura  inaestimabiles  cum  propriis  fetibus :  ultra  quas  erant  aquae  ccenosae  ac 
turbidae  cum  suis  inhabitatoribus,  quarum  interius  venti  horribiles  ac  vehe- 
mentes  cum  suo  principe  et  genitonbus.  Rursus  regio  ignea  et  corruptibilis 
cum  suis  ducibus  et  rationibus.  Pari  modo  introrsum  gens  caliginis  ac  fumi 
plena,  in  qua  morabatur  immanis  princeps  omnium  et  dux,  habens  circa  se 
innumerabiles  principes,  quorum  omnium  ipse  erat  mens  et  origo.  Haecque 
fuerunt  naturae  quinque  terrae  pestiferae.  ap.  Aug.  ib.  c.  14,  n.  19. 

«  Animadvertimus  quinque  naturas,  quasi  partes  unms  naturae,  quam  vocat 
terrann  pestiferam.  Ha  sunt  autem,  tenebrae,  aquae,  venti,  ignis,  fumus  ;  quas 
quinque  naturas  sic  ordinal,  ut  exteriores  caeteris  sint  tenebrae,  a  quibus  nume- 
rare  iucipit.  Intra  tenebras,  aquas  constituit,  intra  aquas  ventos,  intra  ventos 
ignem,  intra  ignem  fumum.  Et  habebant  istae  quinque  naturae  sua  quaeque 
genera  inhabitatorum.     Contr.  Ep.  Manich.  c.  28.  n.  31. 

f  eaque  elementa  his  nominibus  nuncupant,  fumum,  tenebras,  ignem, 

aquam,  ventum.     Aug.  De  Haer.  c.  46. 

s  His  quinque  elementis  malls  debellandis  alia  quinque  elementa  de  regno 
et  substantia  Dei  missa  esse,  et  in  ilia  pngna  fuisse  permixta :  fumo  aera,  tene- 
bris  lucem,  igni  malo  ignem  bonum,  aquae  malee  aquam  bonam,  vento  malo 
ventum  bonum.     Id.  ibid.  ''  Ap'  hv  tKanpov  nov  irapa  rtfi 

MavtvTi  voful^onevuv  tvavruov,  saia  ^oxra  rt  km  ayevvtirog  ovofia^trai.  Tit. 
I.  i.  p.  65.  *  See  Beaus.  Hist,  de  Manich.  T.  2.  p.  410,  4 11. 

2  A  2 


356  CredibiliUj  of  the  Gospel  History, 

'  absurdity  in  the  Maiiichftan  scheme,  that''  they  ascribe  an 
'  unreasonable  life  only  to  daemons:  and  yet  those  daemons 
'  are  represented  showing  great  art  and  skill.  But,'  says 
Beausobre,  '  Titus  did  not  consider  that  the  iManichees  do 
*  not  ascribe  such  ability  to  the  daemons  till  after  they 
'  had  seized  on  the  parts  of  light  which  Mere  devoured  by 
'  them,  and  became  incorporated  with  them.'  Whether  this 
be  right  I  cannot  say  :  1  shall  mention  an  observation  con- 
cerning this  matter  by  and  by. 

'  As  for  the  devil,'  to  take  the  words  of  Beausobre, '  Mani 
'  did  not  believe  him  to  be  properly  eternal,  forasmuch  as 
'  he  gave  him  a  father:  which  supposition  he  built  upon  the 
'  words  of  our  Saviour  in  John  viii.  44.  According  to  him 
'  the  father  of  the  devil  was  matter  agitated  in  a  violent, 
'  irregular,  and  tumultuous  manner.' 

That  learned  writer  does  not  refer  to  the  proper  vouchers 
for  proof  of  this  account.  I  shall  therefore  add  a  few  refer- 
ences in  the  margin,  taken  from  The  Dispute  of  Archelaus, 
where™  Mani  is  represented  quoting  the  text  of  St.  John's 
gospel  in  this  manner,  '  the  father  of  the  devil  is  a  liar  and 
'a  murderer:'  where  likewise  he  speaks"  of  the  devil  as 
having  no  former  or  creator  but  his  own  malice,  whence  he 
sprang. 

This  notion  of  the  origin  of  Satan  may  seem  strange  :  and 
yet  perhaps  it  is  not  much  stranger  than  the  opinion  of  those 
Mho  tliouyht  tiiat"  plants  grew  up  where  no  seeds  hnd  been 
sown  :  and  that  animals  in  water  and  on  the  lanti,  having 
sexeSjSprung  upout  of  the  genial  virtue  of  the  elements  alone, 
descended  from  no  parents.  There  is  this  difference  only, 
that  these  persons,  it  is  likely,  ascribed  their  genial  virtue 

'09iv  TTKpevyaffi  irpoffofioKoysiv  avry  Xoyiir/iov  rt  km  yviomv.  Tit.  I.  i.  p. 
70.  sub  in.  '  B.  T.  i.  p   ]  79,  and  see  him  again,  'i".  2.  p.  263. 

"•  Et  alio  in  loco,  patrem  diaboli  mendacem  et  homicidam  esse  confirmat 
[Salvator  Christus].  Manes,  ap.  Arch.  c.  13.  p.  24. — Cum  loquitur  menda- 
cium,  de  suis  propriis  loquitur,  quoniam  mendax  est,  sicut  et  pater  ejus.  ib. 
n.  29.  p.  48.  Conf.  Beaus.  T.  2.  p.  263. 

"  Si  vcro  consideretis,  quomodo  generentur  filii  homimim,  invenietis  non 
esse  Dominum  hominis  creatorem,  sed  alium,  qui  et  ipse  ingenitae  est  naturae, 
cujus  conditor  nullus,  nee  creator,  nee  factor  est,  sed  sola  malitia  sua  talem 
fcum  protulit.  ap.  Arch.  n.  14.  p.  27. 

°  quia,  nisi  talis  aliqua  vis  esset  in  istis  elementis,  non  plerumque 

nascerentur  ex  terra  quae  ibi  seminata  non  essent :  nee  aninialia  tam  mulla, 
nulla  marium  feminarumque  commixtione  praecedente,  sive  in  terra,  sive  in 
aqua,  quae  tamen  crescunt,  et  coeundo  alia  pariunt,  cum  ilia  nullis  coeuntibus 
parentibus  orta  sinf.  Aug.  de  Trin.  1.  3.  cap.  8.  n.  13,  Quod  si  animalia 
quaedam  vento  et  aura  concipere  solere,  omnibus  notum  est. — Lact.  Inst.  1.  4. 
c.  12.  sub  in.  Nee  tamen  commoveat  aliquem,  quod  animalia  quaedam  de 
terrjt  nasci  videntur.  Haec  enim  non  terra  per  se  gignit,  sed  spiritus  Dei,  sine 
quo  nihil  gignitur.  1.  2.  c.  8.  p.  183.     Vid.  Id.  ib.  1.  i.  c.  8.  p.  43. 


The  Manichees.     Sect.  IV.  357 

of  the  elements  to  an  intelligent  and  powerful  cause,  even'' 
God. 

Here,  therefore,  I  insert  the  observation  deferred  before, 
which  is  this :  since  Beausobre  allows  that,  according*  to 
the  Manichees,  the  devil,  who  M'as  not  properly  eternal,  was 
formed  by  the  violent  and  irregular  motion  of  eternal  matter ; 
and  since  Augustine  expressly  says,  that  the  elements  in  the 
kingdom  of  darkness''  begot  their  several  princes;  in  like 
manner,  perhaps  the  land  of  darkness,  once  irrational,  gained 
reason,  or  cunning  and  skill,  by  some  violent  and  tumultuous 
agitations.  Or,  possibly,  they  never  ascribed  reason  to 
daemons,  though  they  allowed  them  to  have  a  great  deal  of 
cunning. 

I  beg-  leave  to  observe  farther, that '^  Augustine  often  speaks 
of  mind  in  matter,  according  to  the  Manichean  scheme  :  as 
does*  Mani  himself  in  his  Epistle  of  the  Foundation.  And 
Augustine  thinks  he  has  a  great  advantage,  in  his  argument 
with  them,  when  he  observes*  how  many  good  things  they 
placed  in  the  evil  nature;  such  as  life,  power,  memory, 
intellect,  proportion,  and  order. 

Their  doctrine  of  two  principles  the  Manichees  endea- 
voured to  support  by  texts  of  the  New  Testament.  They 
often  argued  from"  those  words  of  our  Saviour,  Matt.  vii. 

P  Beausobre  has  exactly  the  hke  thought,  though  I  was  not  aware  of  it  when 
I  wrote  what  is  above.  However  I  here  transcribe  his  words.  11  ne  faut 
pourtant  pas  s'imaginer,  qu'il  crut  le  Demon  eternel.  Sans  doute  il  le  faisoit 
nSitre  du  mouvement  deregle  de  la  matiere,  comme  d'anciens  philosophes 
croyoient  que  les  animaux  e'toient  nes  de  la  corruption  de  la  terre.  C  etoit 
le  sentiment  des  Manicheens,  qu'on  attribue  aussi  aux  Priscillianistes.  Nee 
natura  ejus  [Diaboli]  opificium  Dei  sit,  sed  eum  ex  chao  et  tenebris  emersisse. 
Leo  Ep.  XV.  N°.  5.  p.  452.  Beaus.  T.  i.  p.  388. 

'i  Quinque  enim  elenienta,  quae  genuerunt  principes  proprios,  genti  tribuunt 
tenebrarum.     De  Haer.  cap.  46.  sub  in. 

*■  Hinc  enim  et  mali  substantiam  quamdani  credebam  esse  talem,  et  habere 
suam  molem  terram,  sive  crassam  et  delbrmem,  sive  tenuem  et  subtilem,  sicut 
est  aeris  corpus,  quam  malignam  mentem  per  illam  terram  repentem  imaginan- 
tur.  Confess.  1.  5.  c.  x.  n.  20.  Haec  dixi,  ut,  si  fieri  potest,  tandem  dicere 
desinatis,  malum  esse  terram  per  inunensum  profundam  et  longam  ;  malum 
esse  mentem  per  terram  vagantem  ;  malum  esse  quinque  antra  elemenforum — 
malum  esse  animalia  in  iliis  nata  dementis.     De  M.  Manich.  c.  9,  n.  14. 

^  in  qua  morabatur  immanis  princeps  omnium  et  dux,  habens  circa 

se  innumerabiles  principes,  quorum  omnium  ipse  eiat  mens  atque  origo.  ap. 
Aug.  contr.  Epist.  Manich.  c.  15.  n.  19. 

'  ita  errantes,  ita  delirantes, — ut  non  videanl,  et  in  eo  quod  dicunt 

naturam  surami  mali,  ponere  se  tanta  bona,  ubi  ponunt  vitam,  potentiam, — 
memoriam,  intellectuin,  teinperiem, — mensuras,  numeros,— ordinem.  De 
Nat.  Boni.  cap.  41.  "  Cui  enim  opoilet  credi  ?  magistris 

vestris  istis, — aut  Salvatori  Christo  dicenti,  sicut  scriptum  est  in  evangel-iorum 
hbro,  Non  potest  arbor  bona  malosfructus  facere — ?  ap.  Arch.  n.  13.  p.  24. 
Vid.  et  n.  5.  p.  7. 


358  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

18,  "  A  good  tree  cannot  bring  forth  evil  fruit;  neither  can 
a  corrupt  tree  bring  forth  good  fruit :"  and'  from  the  seventh 
chapter  of  the  epistle  to  the  Romans,  where  the  apostle 
speaks  of  two  laws,  or  two  powers ;  one  the  understanding 
or  reason,  the  other  the  fleshor  themembers  of  the  fleshly  body, 
which  are  in  perpetual  opposition:  and  from'"  1  John  v.  19, 
"  The  w  hole  world  lies  in  wickedness,"  or  the  evil  one ;  and 
from  other  texts  which  need  not  to  be  particularly  mentioned. 

VIII.  According  to  the  Manichees,  the  formation  of  this 
world  was  occasional,  owing  to  an  attempt  of  the  kingdom 
of  darkness  upon  the  kingdom  of  light.  Augustine  ex- 
presseth  himself  briefly  in  his  summary' account  of  Mani- 
chffiism :  '  They^  own,  indeed,  that  the  world  was  made  by 
'  the  good  nature,  that  is,  the  nature  of  God,  but  out  of  a 
'  mixture  of  good  and  evil,  which  happened  when  the  two 
'  natures  fought  together.' 

There  is  somewhat  about  this  fight  in>  the  fragments  of 
Mani's  letter  Of  the  Foundation.  But  there  must  have  been 
more  said  of  it  in  that  part  of  the  letter  w  hich  Augustine 
did  not  answer,  and  therefore  did  not  quote.  For  want  of 
Avhich  1  shall  be  oblioed  to  take  the  account  of  this  matter 
from  other  authors. 

Theodoret  says,  '  There ^  being  a  prodigious  tumult  and 
'  intestine  war  in  the  kingdom  of  Hyle,  as  they  contended 
'  and  fought  w  ith  each  other,  they  exceeded  the  bounds  of 

*  their  own  territories,  and  came  to  the  confines  of  light : 
'  at  the  sight  of  which  they  were  greatly  surprised  and  de- 
'  lighted,  and  did  all  they  could  to  lay  hold  of  and  mix  the 
'  light  with  themselves.' 

Titus  of  Bostra  says,  that  '*  matter  having  made  the  inroad 

*  before  mentioned,  the  good  being  sent  out  a  power  or  spirit, 

*  to  which  the  Manichees  give  what  name  they  please,  to 

'  See  Beausobre,  T.  2.  p.  253.  "  Ego  duas  naturas  esse  dico, 

unam  bonam,  alteram  malam, — sicut  ait  Joannes  :  Totus  mundus  in  maligno 
positus  est,  non  in  Deo.  ap.  Arch.  n.  14.  p.  2G. 

"  Proinde  mundum  a  natura  boni,  hoc  est,  a  natura  Dei  factum,  confitentur 
quidem,  sed  de  commixtione  boni  et  mah,quae  facta  est,  quando  inter  se  utra- 
que  natura  pugnavit.     De  Ha?r.  c.  46. 

y  Unde  si  tibi  videtur,  inquit,  ausculta  prius  quEe  fuerint  ante  constitutionem 
mundi,  et  quo  pacto  prceUum  sit  agitatum,  ut  possis  luminis  sejungere  naturam 
ac  tenebrarum.  ap.  Aug.  contra  Ep.  Manich.  c.  12.  n.  15.  Vid,  et  libr.  De 
Fid.  contr.  Manich.  cap.  xi. 

"   uiwm  ^t  TToWoi^  XK'tpov  liuTaffiaffai  vpog  eavrtjv  ttjv  v\t]v,   Kai 

THC  TavrriQ  KapTrac  irpoc  aXKtjXec'  m  li  noXf/xn  av^avroQ,  kcu  tmv  fiiv  ciwkov- 

TOJV,  T(OV   Cl    SuoKOfliVWV,  flCXP^  '"•^'^  OpUJV  TH  (pOiTOQ  UVTSQ  a<piKt(70ai'    tlTU   TO  <pit)g 

^iaoanivH^,  ii<jQr]vcu  rt  tn  avTijt,  Kai  ^avfiaaai  (cat  ftyiK-qO-qvai  vaaavbu  kot 
avTH  TpaTivcrai,  km  apTraaai,  Kai  Ktpavai  r^  (pain  to  iSiov  OKOToq.  Thdrt.  T. 
iv.  p.  212.  C.  »  Tit.  contr.  Manich.  1.  2.  p.  C8. 


77ie  Maiiicliees.     Sect.  IV.  359 

*  reduce  matter  to  better  order,  which  was  in  some  measure 
'  effected;  for  matter  was  greatly  delighted  at  the  sight  of 

*  that  power,  and  devoured  it,  and  thereby  was  rendered 
'  more  tame.' 

In  the  Acts  of  Archelaus  this  affair  is  related  after  this 
manner:  '  Darkness,''  exceeding  its  limits,  fought  with  light. 
'  AVhen  the  good  Father  [that  is,  God]  perceived  that  dark- 

*  ness  was  come  into  his  country,  he  detached  from  him  a 

*  power  called  the  Mother  of  Life.  This  power  formed  the 
'  first  man,  and  invested  him  with  the  five  elements,  wind, 
'  light,  water,  fire,  air.  Thus  equipped  he  went  down  to 
'  fight  with  darkness:  but*^  the  princes  of  darkness  fighting- 
'  against  him  devoured  part  of  his  armour,  which  is  the 
'  soul.'  '  The  first  man,'  as  it  follows  in  those  Acts,  '  being 
'  overpowered,  looked  up  to  God,  who  taking  pity  upon  him 
'  sent  to  his''  relief  another  power  called  the  Living-  Spirit; 
'  who  descending  reached  out  his  hand  to  him  and  rescued 
'  him  :  but  he  left  the  soul  below.^ — Then  the  Living  Spirit 
'  created  the  world.  He  created  the  lights  out  of  the  souls 
'  that  remained,  and  appointed  the  firmament  to  revolve. 
'  At  length  he  created  the  earth.' 

Who  is  meant  by  the  Living  Spirit  is  not  certain;  whether 
the  Word,  or  the  Holy  Spirit,  or  some  other  intelligent  being : 
but  it  seems  to  be  rather  more  probable,  that*  hereby  is 
meant  some  spirit  inferior  to  the  divine  persons;  and  that 
Mani  was  of  the  same  opinion  with  divers  others  in  former 
times,  who,  judging  the  creation  of  this  visible  \vorld  un- 
Avorthy  of  God,  ascribed  that  work  to  some  inferior  intel- 
ligence. 

'  And,'  as  Beausobre  says,  '  if  ^  we  reduce  to  simple  ideas 
'  all  which  is  said  concerning  the  first  man,  his  descent,  his 

*  armour,  his  combats,  apart  of  his  armour  taken  from  him, 
'  and  devoured  by  the  princes  of  darkness,  the  meaning-  may 
'  amount  to  this  :  that  the  sou!  is  a  celestial  substance,  which 
'  God  has  thought  fit  to  mix  with  matter  for  making-   the 

*  world  ;  and  that  this  was  occasioned  by  an  enterprise  of 

-FvovTa  li  TOP  ayaOov  Trarepa  to  okotoc  (v  ttq  yy  a vth  iTTiStSt]- 


fiTjKog,  TTjOo/SaXXfiv  t?  avTH  Svva^iv,  Xiyofievrjv  fiijTtpa  Trig  2w/JC,  (cat  avTt]v 
irpofSffiXijKevai  tov  npuTov  avOpojTTOv,  k.  X.  ap.  Arcli.  n.  7.  p.  10. 

■^  Oi  h  Tn  (T/corsc  ap^oiTf  f,->  avTiKoXifinvrtg  avrif),  Kpayov  iK  Ti]g  iravoirXuis 
avTS,  6  £<rtv  r)  ipvxri-  ib. 

^   (cai  STTfTiiXtv   fTipav  Svvafiiv  irpoftXtjBiiffav  inr    avTH,  Xtyo/ievifv 

?a>v  irvtvua (ktoti  hv  KaTtXtn^t  kutu  rijv  i//iix»)i'- — Tot£  ?wv  irviv^ia  iKTiat 

TOV  KOfTfiov. — Tors  iraXiv  to  ^wv  irviv^a  iKTiat  thq  (jxu^tjpac,  a  £<rt  Tt]g  ^vxiS 
Xu\(/ai'a,  Kai  ovTwg  iwoitjat  to  '^tpewfia  kvkXivom'  koi  TraXiv  iKTiai  Tt}v  yijv. 
ib.  p.  10,  11.  "  See  Beaus.  T.  2.  p.  359. 

f  Ib.  T.  2.  p.  390. 


360  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

'  matter,  which  God  foresaw,  but  did  not  think  fit  to  hinder.' 
Or,  as  he  expresseth  it  in  another  place:  '  They*^  supposed 
'  that  the  first  man  descended  from  heaven  to  combat  the 
'  powers  of  darkness  :  and  that  he  was  armed  with  five 
'  celestial  elements,  air,  wind,  water,  fire,  and  light.  Matter 
'  devoured  a  part  of  his  armour,  which  is  the  soul.  In  gene- 
'  ral  God  permitted  that  the  celestial  substance  should  be 
'  mingled  with  the  terrestrial,  or  bad  substance,  which  occa- 
'  sioned  the  creation  of  the  Avorld/ 

The  same  learned  and  judicious  author  has  some  other 
observations''  relating-  to  this  matter,  taken  from  the  obscure 
and  figurative  style  of  the  eastern  people,  and  the  language 
hi  which  Mani's  works  were  written,  which  might  not  be 
well  understood  by  the  Greeks  and  Romans. 

And  I  shall  add  here  a  passage  of  Fortnnatns,  who,  dis- 
puting with  Augustine,  says  :  '  Hence'  evidently  appears 
'  our  ancient  original,  that  before  the  formation  of  the  world 
'  souls  were  sent  against  the  contrary  nature  to  subdue  it  by 

*  theirvirtueand  patience, that  the  victory  and  glory  might  be 

*  given   to  God.     For,  as  the  apostle  says :  (Eph.  vi.  12.) 

*  "  We  wrestle  not  only  against  flesh  and  blood,  but  also 

*  against  principalities  and  powers,  against  spiritual  wicked- 

*  nesses,  and  the  rulers  of  darkness."  ' 

To  proceed  :  The''  first  work  of  the  Creator  was  to  separate 
the  parts  of  the  celestial  substance,  which,  though  mingled 
with  matter,  had  preserved  their  purity,  and  to  make  of 
them  the  sun  and  the  moon  ;  which  is  agreeable  to  the  words 
of  Augustine:  '  The'  Manichees  say,  that  those  vessels,  the 

*  sun  and   the  moon,  were  made  of  the  pure  substance  of 
'  God;  or  of  that  substance  of  God  which  had  preserved  its 

*  purity.'  He  presently  afterwards  explains  what  is  meant 
by  the  substance  of  God,  saying-,  that  '  the  moon  was  made 

*  of  the  good  water,  the  sun  of  the  good  fire  ;'  that  is,  accord- 
ing to  the  Manichrean  sentiment. 

But  it  should  be  observed,  that  whereas  Augustine  here 
and  elsewhere  often  useth  the  phrase,  "  the  substance  of 
God,"  it  seems  likely,  that™  thereby  the  Manichees  (if  they 

B  lb.  p.  555.  "  As  before,  p.  390—392. 

'  Hinc  ergo  apparet  antiquitas  temporum  nostrorum,  quam  repetimus,  et 
annorum  nostrorum,  ante  mundi  constitiitionem  hoc  more  missas  esse  aniraas 
contra  contrariam  naturam,  ut  eandem  sua  passione  subjicientes,  victoria  Deo 
redderetur.  Nam  dixit  idem  apostolus,  &c.  Fortun.  Disp.  2.  n.  22.  fin.  ap. 
Aug.  T.  8.  "  See  B.  T.  2.  p.  361,  362. 

'  Quas  itidem  naves  de  substantia  Dei  pura  perhibent  fabricatas. — Naves 
autem  illas,  id  est,  duo  coeli  Inminaria,  ita  distinguunt,  ut  lunam  dicant  factam 
ex  bona  aqua,  solem  vero  (.'X  igne  bono.     Aug.  De  11.  c.  46. 

"■  Beausobre  has  spoken  largely  to  this  point.  See  him,  T.  i.  p.  227 — ^234. 
p.  592,  593,  529,  &c.  and  T.  2.  p.  339,  &c. 


The  Manichees.     Sect.  IV.  361 

also  used  the  same  phrase)  did  not  mean  tlie  divine  substance, 
or  nature,  which  they  always  reckoned  incorruptible,  invio- 
lable, immutable,  but  only  the  substance  from  (jlod,  the 
celestial  substance,  the"  substance  ot  his  kingdom  or  empire. 
I  suppose  that  every  one  will  perceive  as  much  from  what 
will  be  hereafter  said  of  their  denying-  the  humanity  of  Christ, 
and  the  incarnation  of  the  Word,  and  all  union  of  the  divine 
nature  with  the  human.  And  it  might  be  collected  from 
M'hat  has  been  already  produced  concerning-  their  sentiments 
of  the  divine  perfections. 

In  a  word,  not  to  be  too  minute,  the°  Creator  formed  the 
sun  ajid  moon  out  of  those  parts  of  light  which  had  preserved 
their  original  purity.  The  visible  or  inferior  heavens,  (for 
now  we  do  not  speak  of  the  supreme  heaven,)  and  the  rest 
of  the  planets,  were  formed  of  those  parts  of  light  which 
were  but  little  corrupted  by  matter.  The  rest  he  left  in  our 
world,  which  are  no  other  than  those  parts  of  light  which 
had  suffered  most  by  the  contag-ion  of  matter. 

TheP  Creator  formed  not  the  earth  until  after  he  had  made 
the  heavens  and  the  stars.  This  appears  from  the  account 
before  taken  out  of  the  Acts  of  Archelaus. 

And  that  we  may  the  better  conceive  of  all  this,  we  may 
observe  and  rectify  a  wrong  account  of  Augustine.  '  Mani,' 
saysi  he,  '  teaches  not  only  that  man,  but  that  the  whole 
'  world,  was  formed  by  the  mixture  of  two  co-eternal  natures, 
'  one  good,  the  other  bad,  in  such  a  manner  however  as  to 
'  ascribe  the  formation  of  the  world  to  the  good  God.'  This, 
says'  Beausobre,  is  not  just.  Do  not  the  sun  and  moon, 
which  were  made  out  of  the  pure  celestial  substance,  belong- 
to  the  world  ?  It  is  our  earth  properly,  with  its  atmosphere, 
and  its  heavens,  which  were  composed  of  two  substances  : 
which  is  the  occasion  that  life  and  death,  good  and  evil, 
reign  here.  The  Manichees,  certainly,  as  that  learned  writer 
goes  on,  were  not  orthodox  upon  the  article  of  the  creation 
of  the  world  :  but  setting  aside  their  particular  error,  they 
had  noble  ideas  of  the  manner  in  which  God  made  the  world. 
The  disorders  that  are  in  the  world,  says*  Fortunatus,  sufK- 

"  His  quinque  elementis  debellandis  alia  quinque  elementa  de  regno  et 
substantia  Dei  missa  esse,  et  in  ilia  pugna  fuisse  permixta.  Aug.  de  Heer. 
cap.  46.  °  See  B.  ib.  p.  364. 

p  Ib.  p.  367, 

1  Manichfeus  ex  commixtione  duarum  naturarum  coaeternarum,  boni  scilicet 
et  mall,  non  solum  horainem,  sed  universum  nnmdum,  constare  dicit,  et  ad 
eum  omnia  pertinentia :  ita  sane,  ut  ipsam  fabricam  mundi,  quamvis  ex  com- 
mixtione boni  et  mall,  Deo  bono  et  artifici  tribuat.     Op.  Imp.  1.  3.  c.  186. 

'  As  before,  p.  367,  368. 

^  Facta  consonant ;  sed,  quia  inconvenientia  sibi  sunt,  ac  per  hoc  ergo 


362  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

ciently  show  that  it  Mas  made  out  of  two  substances ;  at  the 
same  time  things  have  not  come  into  that  form  and  propor- 
tion which  constitutes  the  world,  but  by  the  authority  and 
command  of  one  only.     So  my  author. 

IX.  The  Manichjean  notion  of  the  creation  of  man  may  be 
seen  in'  Beausobre,  taken  from  Mani  himself,  Archelaus, 
Augustine,  Titus  of  Bostra,  Theodoret,  and  others. 

A  succinct  account  of  what  he  says  at  large  is  to  this 
purpose  :  The*"  daemons,  foreseeing  that  God  would  insen- 
sibly withdraw  the  light,  or  the  reasonable  soul  which  he 
had  sent  into  matter,  and  leave  them  to  themselves,  or  punish 
them  for  their  late  attempt,  thought  of  -a  method  to  detain 
it.  They  had  seen  the  first  man,  who  came  to  fight  them  ; 
and  they  still  discerned  his  form  in  the  sun,  or  the  heavens. 
Upon  this  model  they  formed  the  human  body,  thereby  to 
attract  souls  ;  Avho,  not  perceiving  the  snare  which  the  devil 
had  laid  for  them,  entered  the  body,  and  were  touched  with 
the  pleasure  afforded  by  the  organs  of  the  senses,  and  espe- 
cially that  of  concupiscence.  Pleasure  seduces  and  transports 
them,  and  they  become  delighted  with  their  new  habitation. 
Hereby  they  are  led  to  propag'ate,  and  thus  they  forge  their 
own  chains  and  build  their  own  prisons. 

Some  passages  of  Mani's  Epistle  of  the  Foundation,  con- 
cerning- the  formation  of  man,  may  be  seen  in^  Augustine. 

I  think  it  is  past  dispute  that  Mani  did  ascribe  the  forma- 
tion of  the  human  body  to  matter,  or  the  devil,  or  the  evi! 
principle.  I  refer  for  this  purpose  to  some  passag-es  in  the 
Acts'*'  of  Archelaus  and^  Epiphanius ;  and  shall  transcribe 
in  the  margin  some  passages  of  Mani,y  in  his  letter  to  Menoch, 
Avhere  he  speaks  of  Satan  being'  the  author  of  bodies,  as 
God  is  of  souls.  Augustine's  article  upon  this  point  in^  his 
summary  account  of  Man ich seism,  as  likewise  what  he  says* 
elsewhere,  deserves  our  attention. 

constat  non  esse  unam  substantiam,  licet  ex  unius  jussione  eadera  ad  compo- 
sitionem  mundi  hujus  etfaciem  venerint.     Fortunat.  Disp.  i.  n,  13. 

'  Hist,  de  Manich.  T.  2.  p.  399—418.  "  lb.  p.  410. 

"  dicens,  nosse  te  ciipeie  cujiismodi  sit  nativitas  Adae  et  Evae,  utrum 

verbo  sint  iidern  prolati,  an  primogeniti  ex  corpore.  Man.  ap.  Aug.  contr. 
Ep.  Manich.  c.  12.  n.  14.  Vid.  et  Aug.  de  Natura  Boni.  cap.  46. 

"  Vid.  Arch.  n.  10.  p.  19,  20.  n.  14.  p.  27.  "  H.  66.  n.  30. 

>  Sicut  ergo  auctor  animarum  Deus  est,  ita  corporum  auctor  per  concupis- 
centiam  diabolus  est,  &c.  ap.  Aug.  op.  Imp.  1.  3.  c.  174.  vid.  et.  c.  176,  176. 

^  Adam  et  Evam  ex  parentibus  principibus  fumi  asserunt  natos,  cum  pater 
eorum  nomine  Saclas  sociorum  suorum  fetus  omnium  devorasset,  et  quidquid 
inde  commixtum  divinae  substantiee  ceperat,  cum  uxore  concumbens  in  came, 
prolis  tamquani  tenacissimo  vmculo  coUigasset.     De  H.  c.  46. 

^  ita  sane,  ut  ipsam  fabricam  mundi,  quamvis  ex  commixtione  boni 

et  maU,  Deo  bono  et  artifici  tribuat ;  animalia  vero,  et  cuncta  quae  nascuntur 


Tlie  Manichees.     Sect.  IV.  363 

Alexander  of  Lycopolis  speaks  to  this  purpose:  '  Matter** 
'  [or  Hyle]  perceiving-  in  the  sun  a  human  form,  became 
'  ambitious  to  make  a  man  out  of  his  own  substance.  For 
'  this  purpose  he  placed  in  him  the  utmost  of  his  own  powers, 
'  together  with  as  much  soul  as  he  could  obtain.  By  which 
'  means  man  became  superior  to  all  animals,  who  are  mortal 
'  like  him,  and  partook  largely  of  the  divine  power;  for  he 
*  is  an  image  of  the  divine  power.' 

What  1  have  here  transcribed  from  Alexander  may  be 
compared  with*^  the  Acts  of  Archelaus,  and"^  Epiphanius. 

And  Mani,  in  a  passage  of  the  Letter  of  the  Foundation, 
preserved "^  in  Augustine,  speaks  of  man  as  being  a  whole 
little  world,  uniting  in  himself  the  image  of  all  powers,  both 
celestial  and  terrestrial.  JNIoreover,  the  Manichees,  as 
Augustine  says, believed  that  in'  Adam  was  a  large  portion 
of  light,  that  is,  of  the  heavenly  substance. 

Some  passages  of  Faustus  likewise  may  confirm  the  sup- 
position of  the  Manichees  not  ascribing  the  formation  of  the 
human  body  to  God.  '  It  is  true,'  says^  he,  '  God  is  not  the 
'  author  of  that  birth  which  brings  us  into  the  world,  men 
'  and  women,  males  and  females.'  Again,  says'*  Faustus, 
'  there  are  two  times  of  our  nativity  :  one,  when  nature 
'  brings  us  into  this  world  under  the  chains  of  carnal  affec- 

e  terra,  et  ipsum  hominem,  opera  esse  dicat  malignse  mentis,  quam  genti 
adhibuit  tenebrarum.  Hinc  est,  quod  animam  primam  dicit  a  Deo  lucis 
manasse,  et  accepisse  illam  fabricatn  corporis,  ut  earn  fraeno  suo  regeret.  Non 
enim  hoc  de  homine,  sed  de  anima  bona  dicit,  quam  Dei  partem  atque 
naturam  universa  mundo,  et  omnibus  quse  in  eo  sunt,  opinaturesse  permixtam, 
in  homine  autem  per  concupiscentiam  decipi.  Quam  concupiscentiam,  quod 
saepe  inculcandum  est,  non  vitium  substantiae  bonae,  sed  malam  vult  esse 
substantiam.     Aug.  Op.  Imp.  1.  3.  cap.  186. 

**  K«(  HKOva  Ss  tv  >j\i<ji)  fwpaaOai  rouivrrjv,  oiov  tTi  to  ra  avOpujTTH  ttSog,  Kctt 
avrKpiXoTifiijfrairQai  thjv  'YXr/v  Troijjffai  tov  avOptoTTOv  (.'£,  avTtjc,  Kara  Tr)v  ha 
TraarjQ  avTrjQ  Tr\Q  Svvafiaog  jj-i^iv,  ixovTct  km  avrov  n  tijq  ipvxriCt  noXv  ixtvroi 
ffVfi^tf^XijtrOai  TO  (iSog,  (ig  to  TrXeioi'  n  napa  Ta  aWa  SrvijTa  ?wa  Ttjg  Svvafito)g 
TTjg  ^siag  tov  avOpuTrov  yLiTaaytiv'  vsrapxiiv  yap  avTov  Bfiag  Suvaiiiwg  tiKova. 
Alex.  p.  5.  B.  C.  "=  Ap.  Arch.  n.  7.  p.  12. 

"»  H.  66.  n.  26.  et  30. 

*  In  eadem  enim  construebantur  et  contexebantur  omnium  imagines,  coeles- 
tium  ac  terrenarum  virtutum  ;  ut  pleni  videlicet  orbis,  id  quod  formabatur, 
similitudinem  obtineret.     Man.  ap.  Aug.  de  Nat.  Bon.  c.  46. 

^  Mala  non  vacuum  fuisse  dicit  Adam,  sed  ejus  minus  habuisse,  multoque 
plus  lucis.     Aug.  Op.  Imp.  I.  3.  c.  186. 

e  Magis  ac  magis  ostendit,  nativitatcm  hanc,  quae  nos  mares  fecit  ac  femi- 
nas, — non  earn  es-e  in  qua  Deus  operatur,  cum  hominem  format.  Faust.  I. 
24.  sub  fin.  ''  Quoniam  c[uidem  et  nativitatis  nostrae  tempora 

duo  sunt,  unum  illud,  quo  nos  irretitos  carnalibus  vinculis  in  lucem  hanc 
natura  produxit,  alterum  vero,  cum  Veritas  nos  ex  errore  conversos  ad  se 
regeneravit  initiates  ad  fidem.  Quod  tempussecundae  nativitatis  in  Evangelic 
Jesus  significans  dixit,  &c.  Faust.  1.  24.  sub  in. 


364  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

'  tious;  the  other  when  Ave  are  born  again,  and  are  converted 
'  from  error  to  truth,  of  whicli  Christ  speaks  in  the  gospel, 
'  in  his  conference  with  Nicodemus,  saying',  "  Unless  a  man 
'  be  born  aoain  he  cannot  see  the  kino-dom  of  God."  '  Which 
doctrine  P'aiistus  endeavours  to  support  by  long*  quotations 
from  several  of  St.  Paul's  epistles. 

As  Beausobre  says,  they"  pretended  it  was  impossible 
that  a  holy  and  good  God  should  join  a  pure  and  celestial 
soul  with  a  terrestrial,  sensitive,  animal  soul,  whose  affections 
resist  reason,  and  carry  the  man  to  actions  he  disapproves. 
And  they  argued,  that  the  ordinary  way  in  which  men  come 
into  the  world  showed  it  was  not  God  who  formed  them  at 
first.  This  argument  of  theirs  is  largely  represented  in  the'' 
Acts  of  Archelaus. 

X.  Moreover,  the  Manichees  supposed  that  there  were  in 
man  two  souls.  Augustine  wrote'  a  book  on  purpose 
against  this  opinion  :  but  it  was  a  necessary  consequence  of 
their  sentiment  about  two  principles.  There  are,  according™ 
to  them,  two  eternal  natures,  both  living  and  animated  :  and 
both  enter  into  the  composition  of  man.  I  place  in  the  mar- 
gin" a  passage  of  Augustine  of  some  considerable  length, 
taken  from  his  summary  account  of  Manichseism  in  his  book 
Of  Heresies. 

This  was  in  ancient  times  a  common  opinion  of  many 
people,  and  was  held  by  the  Manichees.  They"  supposed 
that  it  Mas  evidently  taught  by  St.  Paul  in  all  those  places 
Avhere  he  opposes  the  flesh  and  the  spirit,  the  old  man,  and 
the  new  man,  the  law  of  the  mind  and  the  law  of  the  mem- 
bers. These  two  men,  these  two  laws,  these  two  principles, 
are  in  man  :  and  they  are  always  contrary  to  each  other  : 
the  spirit  opposeth  the  desires  of  the  flesh,  and  the  flesh 
those  of  the  spirit :  but  contrary  desires  and  wills  cannot  pro- 
ceed from  one  and  the  same  cause  purely  spiritual.  There  are 

'  T.  2.  p.  416.  ^  Si  vero  consideretis,  quomodo  generentur 

filii  hominum,  invenietis,  non  esse  Dominum  hominis  creatorem,  sed  alium. 

Est  igitur  vobis  hotninibiis  commixtio  cum  uxoribus  vestrisdehujiisinodi 

occasione  descendens.  Ciiin  quis  vestrum  carnalibus  aliisque  cibis  fuerit 
satiatus,  tunc  ei  concupiscentiae  oritur  incitatio,  &c.  ap.  Arch.  c.  14.  p.  27. 

'  De  duabus  Animabus  ;  contra  Manichieos.  0pp.  T.  8. 

■"  See  Beaus.  T.  2.  p.  420. 

"  Carnalem  concupiscentiam,  qua  caro  concupiscit  adversus  spiritum,  non 
ex  vitiata  in  prirao  homine  natura  nobis  inesse  infirmitatem  ;  sed  substantiam 
volnnt  esse  contrariam,  sic  nobis  adhaerentem,  ut  quando  liberamur  atque 
purgamur,  separetur  a  nobis,  et  in  sua  natura  etiam  ipsa  iminortaliter  vivat : 
easque  duas  animas,  vel  duas  mentes,  unara  bonam,  alteram  malam,  in  uno 
homine  inter  se  habere  conflictum,  quando  caro  concupiscit  adversus  spiritum, 
et  spiritas  adversus  camcm.     De  Haer.  c.  4G.  sub  fin 

»  See  Beaus.  T.  2.  p.  421 


7/te  Manichees.     Sect.  IV.  365 

therefore  two  souls  in  man,  two  active  principles ;  one  the 
source  and  cause  of  vicious  passions,  deriving-  its  origin 
from  matter,  the  other  the  cause  of  the  ideas  of  just  and 
right,  and  of  inclinations  to  follow  those  ideas,  deriving  its 
original  from  Ciod. 

XI.  Though  the  Manichees  did  not  receive  the  Old  Tes- 
tament, nor  admit  the  Mosaic  account  of  the  creation,  they 
supposed  the  world  to  have  had  a  beginning,  as  we  have  seen 
already;  and  Adam  and  Eve  to  have  been  the  first  pair, 
and  the  parents  of  mankind.  This  appears  from  the  very 
beginning!'  of  the  famous  Epistle  of  the  Foundation. 

The  Manichees,  as  Augustine  says,  believed  that  in  Adam 
was  a  large  portion  of  light;  that  is,  of  the  celestial  sub- 
stance. Again,  we  learn  from  him  that''  '  they  said  Adam 
'  and  Eve  were  made  by  the  princes  of  darkness;  but  Adam 
'  had  in  him  a  great  abundance  of  the  particles  of  light,  Avith 
'  but  few  particles  of  darkness:  for  that  reason  he  lived 
'  holily  a  good  while.  At  length  the  adverse  part  in  him 
'  prevailed,  and  he  knew  Eve.'  So  then  conjugal  commerce 
was  the  first  sin  of  these  parents  of  mankind. 

And,  in  The  Acts  of  Archelaus,  it  is  said  thaf^  the  princes, 
having-  made  Adam  after  the  form  of  the  first  man  whom 
they  had  seen,  made  Eve  likewise,  giving-  her  some  of  their 
own  concupiscence,  that  she  might  deceive  Adam. 

XII.  Hence  we  may  be  led  to  conclude  that  the  Mani- 
chees must  condenm  marriage ;  and  indeed  those  words  of 
St.  Paul,  1  Tim.  iv.  3,  are  often  applied  to  them.  Mani 
himself  says  that^  "  concupiscence  is  the  root  of  all  evil," 
quoting  in  that  sense  1  Tim.  vi.  10.  It  may  be  thought 
that'   condemning-  all   manner  of  concupiscence,  however 

P  De  eo  igitur, de  quo  mihi  significasti,  dicens,  nosse  te  cupere,  cujus- 

modi  sit  nativitas  Adae  et  Evse,  &c.  ap.  Aug.  Contr.  Ep.  Manich.  c.  12.  n.  14. 

•i  Talis  est  namque  apud  vos  opinio  de  Adanio  et  Eva.  Longa  fabula  est, 
sedex  ea  adtingam  quod  in  praesentia  satis  est.  Adam  dicitis  sic  a  parentibus 
suis  genitum,  abortivis  illis  principibus  tenebrarnin,  ut  maximana  partem  lucis 
haberet  in  anima,  et  perexiguam  gentis  adversae.  Qui  cum  sancte  viverent 
propter  exsuperantem  copiam  boni,  commotam  tanien  in  eo  fuisse  adversam 
illam  partem,  ut  ad  concnbitum  declinaretur  ;  ita  eum  lapsum  esse  et  peccasse, 
sed  vixisse  postea  sanctiorem.     De  Mor.  Manich.  c.  19.  n.  73. 

'  Tijv  St  Euav  ojjiOKjjg  tKTKJav,  dovTtg  avry  ik  rtjg  ETTiOvfuag  avro)v,  npog  to 
(Kmrarrjaai  tov  ASafi.  ap.  Arch.  n.  10.  p.  20. 

^  Toile  denique  malignae  hujus  stirpis  radicem,  etstatim  teipsum  spiritalem 
contemplaris.  Radix  enim,  ait  scriptura,  omnium  malorum  concupiscentia. 
Ap.  Aug.  Op.  Imp.  1.  3.  c.  175.  Vid.  et  c.  176,  186,  187. 

'  Modus  quoque  nascendi  duplex  est,  unus  ille  furoris  et  intemperantiae 
proprius,  quo  sumus  a  generatoribus  turpiter  et  per  libidinem  sati ;  alius  vero 
honestatis  et  sanctimoniae,  quo  in  Christo  Jesu  per  Spiritum  Sanctum  sub 
bonorum  doctrinis  disciplinati  sumus  ad  fidem,  &c.   Faust.  1.  24.  c.  1. 


366  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  Histori^'. 

regulated,  appears  iu  some  words  of  Faustus,  which  I  put 
in  the  margin  :  where  he  speaks  of  the  first  or  natural  birth, 
and  of  the  second  or  spiritual  birth. 

This  notion  is  handsomely  confuted  by"  Titu-s  of  Bostra, 
in  a  passag-e  which  may  be  seen  translated  by^  Beausobre: 
but  I  presume  I  need  not  transcribe  it  here. 

Faustus  has  particularly  considered  the  charge  brought 
against  them,  of  teaching  what  the  apostle  calls  "  doctrines 
of  devils,"  1  Tim.  iv.  1.  And,  if  Faustus  may  be  relied 
upon,  their  doctrine  upon'"^  the  article  of  marriage  and  vir- 
ginity was  much  the  same  m  ith  that  of  the  catholics,  or 
orthodox  christians  of  that  time.  The  churches  of  the 
catholics,  he  says,  had  in  them  almosf  as  many  professed 
virgins  as  married  women.  If  the"  catholics  made  virgins, 
Avithout  being  liable  to  the  charge  of  forbidding  to  marry, 
the  same  Mas  true  of  them  :  they  did  not  compel,  they  only 
exhorte<l.  And  he  boldly  says,  that  text  of  St.  Paul  is  no 
more  against  them  than  against  the  catholics.  This  defence 
of  Faustus  is  the  fuller,  if  by  their  elect,  who  alone  were 
forbidden  to  marry,  and  were  required  to  forbear  eating- 
flesh  and  drinking  wine,  be  understood  priests  or  eccle- 
siastics, asy  Faustus  intimates. 

More  may  be  seen  concerning  this  point  in^  the  author,  to 
whom  I  have  already  often  referred. 

Upon  the  whole,  considering  what  has  been  observed 
above  concerning  the  origin  of  mankind,  it  may  be  reckoned 
more  probable,  that  they  rather  tolerated  marriage  as  an 
imperfect  state,  in  regard  to  human  weakness,  than  approved 
it.     Perhaps  we  may  apply  to  this  case  what''   Augustine 

"  Tit.  contr.  Manich.  ].  2.  p.  130,  131.  *  T.  2.  p.  468,469. 

"  nee  videtis  hinc,  et  virgines  vestras  dEemoniorum  doctrina  captas 

notari,  et  vos  esse  antistites  daemoniorum,  qui  certatim  semper  ad  banc  eas 
incitetis  professionem  suasionibus  vestris,  ut  pene  jam  major  in  ecclesiis 
omnibus  virginum  apud  vos  quam  mulierum  numeiositas  habeatur  ?  Faust.  1. 
30.  cap.  4.  "  Non  ergo  est  interim,  quod  vos  existimetis  solis 

hortamentis  virgines  facere,  et  non  prohibitione  nubendi.  Nobis  enim  quoque 
hoc  insitum  est. — Quapropter  et  nos  hortamur  quidem  volentes  ut  permaneant, 
non  tamen  cogimus  invitas  ut  accedaut. — Si  igitur  hoc  modo  virgines  facere 
sine  crimine  est,  extra  culpam  sunius  et  nos:  sin  quoquo  genere  virgines 
facere  crimen  est,  rei  estis  et  vos.  Jam  qua  mente  aut  consilio  hoc  adversum 
nos  capitulum  proferatis,  ego  non  video,  ibid. 

'  Neque  enim  justa  haec  nunc  vestra  sententia  est,  ut  nos  quidem,  qui  solum 
in  plebe  sacerdotale  hominum  genus  censeamus  a  camibus  abstinere  debere, 
daemoniorum  doctrinae  videamui-  vobis  assectatores.  ib.  c.  I. 

*  See  Beaus.  T.  2.  p.  470,  &c. 

*  Auditoribus  autem  vestris — secundum  veniam  haec  edenda  conceditis. — 
Neque  enim  conceditur  secundum  veniam,  nisi  peccatum.  Hoc  vos  de  omni 
carnium  cibo  sentitis,  hoc  et  ipsi  vestros  auditores  docetis :  sed  illis  quod 


Tfie  Mank-hees.     Sect.  IV.  367 

says  of  the  Maiuchaean  auditors  eating-  flesh.  They  were 
indulged  it,  but  yet  it  was  a  fault,  he  says,  and  to  be  forgiven 
oidy  because  they  maintained  the  elect. 

And  I  question  whether  Faustus  be  sincere,  and  may  be 
relied  upon  iti  what  he  says  of  this  matter.  My  doubts  are 
owing-  to  the  very  disadvantageous  expressions  he  makes 
use  of  in  speaking  of  the  natural  birth,  in  the  twenty-fourth 
book  of  liis  work  :  several  of  which  passages  1  have  tran- 
scribed, or  referred  to;  and  to  a  passage  in  his  thirtieth 
book,  M  here  he  is  professedly  treating  on  the  point  of  mar- 
riage. For,  having  said,  as  before  shown,  that  they  did  not 
compel,  but  only  commended  and  exhorted  to  virginity,  as 
the  catholics,  he  adds  :  '  And''  indeed  it  would  be  no  less 
'  than  madness,  for  private  persons  to  forbid  what  is  allowed 
'  by  public  authority.'  It  seems  therefore  that,  following 
their  doctrine,  they  might  have  been  disposed  to  prohibit 
marriage,  if  it  had  been  in  their  power. 

It  is  said  that"^  the  Manichees  were  severely  treated  by  a 
king  of  Persia  for  discourag'ing  marriage. 

I  may  mention  another  thought  relating  to  this  point,  when 
I  come  to  speak  of  their  notion  concerning  the  transmigra- 
tion of  souls. 

If  the  Manichees  did  not  approve  of  marriage,  they  must 
have  condemned  fornication, and  all  such  like  irregularities. 
This  is  evident  from  the  Acts  of  Archelaus,  where  Mani 
himself  is  made  to  say  that**  adultery,  fornication,  covetous- 
ness,  and  other  things,  are  fruits  of  the  evil  root.  Nor  is 
marriaoe  here  mentioned  amono-  evil  thinos. 

Augustine  indeed  charges  fhem  with  allowing  wicked 
sensual  gratifications  rather  than  marriage.  But  then,  as* 
Beausobre  observes,  he  presently  adds  :  '  P  doubt  not  but 

sit  ignoscenduru,  propter  quod  vobis  necessaria  ministrant,  ut  dixi,  conceditis, 
non  dicentes  non  esse  peccatum,  sed  peccantibus  veniam  largientes.  Aug. 
contr.  Faust.  1.  30.  c.  5.  ''  Etdemens  profecto  ille,  non  tanturn 

stultus,  putandiis  est,  qui  id  existimet  lege  privata  prohiberi  posse,  quod  sit 
publica  concessum  -.  dico  autem  hoc  ipsum  nubere.  ib.  c.  4. 

•=  Rex  vero  Persarum,  cum  vidisset  tani  catholicos  et  episcopos,  quam 
Manichaeos  Manctis  sectarios,  a  nupliis  abstinere ;  in  Manichseos  quidem  sen- 
tentiam  mortis  tulit.  Ad  christianos  vero  idem  edictum  manavit. — Quum 
igitur  christiani  ad  regem  confugissent,  jussit  ille  discrimen,  quale  inter  utrosque 
esset,  sibi  exponi.  ap.  Asseni.  Bib.  Or.  T.  3.  p.  220. 

**  fructus  autem  fomicationes,  adulteria,  homicidia,  avaritia,  et  omnes 

mali  actus  malse  istius  radicis.  ap.  Arch.  c.  17.  p.  30. 

'  T.  2.  p.  473.  '  Non  enim  concubitum,  sed,  ut  longe  ante 

ab  apostolo  dictum  est,  vere  nuptias  prohibetis,  quae  talis  operis  una  est  defen- 
sio.  Hic  non  dubito  vos  esse  clamaturos,  invidiamque  facturos  dicendo,  casti- 
tatem  perfectam  vos  vehementer  commendare  atque  laudare,  non  tamen  nuptias 
prohibere ;  quandoquidem  auditores  vestri,  quorum  apud  vos  secmidus  est 


368  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

'  you,  at  hearing-  this,  will  exclaim  against  it  as  injustice 
'  and  calumny.  You  will  say  that  you  praise  and  recom- 
'  mend   perfect  chastity,  but  you  do  not  forbid  marriage; 

*  forasmuch  as  you  do  not  hinder  your  auditors,  the  second 
'  order  among  you,  from  marrying',  and  having  wives.'  It 
is  not  easy  to  conceive  that  e  they,  who  severely  censured  the 
polygamy  of  the  patriarchs,  should  approve  of  worse  things 
in  christians. 

XIII.  It  is  a  difficult  question  whether  the  Manichees 
believed  free-will.  It  is  generally  denied  ;  but  Beausobre 
does  not  concur  in  that  sentence.  He  has  discoursed  largely 
upon  this  point,  and  I  refer  to''  him.  I  shall  however  cite 
a  part  of  what  he  says. 

'If'   by  free-will  be  meant  a  power  of  doing-  good,  and 

*  resisting- evil,  it  is  certain  that  the  Manichees  ascribed  it  to 
'  the  soul,  which  was  sent  into  matter.  For,  first,  when  we 
'  showed  the  opinion  of  these  men  concerning  the  creation 
'  of  the  world,  we  saw  that,  among-  the  souls  which  God 
'  sent  to  combat  matter,  there  were  some  that  preserved  their 
'  purity  entire  ;  others  that  were  but  little  affected  with  the 
'  contagion  of  matter ;  and  others  that  were  so  corrupted, 
'  that  they  were  left  in  this  lower  stage  of  the  world.  The 
'  Creator  placed  them  according  to  their  merits.  Secondly, 
'  when  Augustine  asks  Fortunatus  why  God  sent  souls  into 
'  matter,  that  Manichee  answers,  to''  tame  it,  and  reduce  it 
'  to  order.  They  must  therefore  have  had  the  power  of  so 
'  doing.  Finally,  what  suffers  me  not  to  doubt  that  Mani 
'  acknowledged  the  soul's  liberty  in  its  state  of  innocence, 

*  is  a  passage  in  his  letter  to  Henoch  ;  "  the'  first  soul  that 
'  came  from  the  God  of  light  received  the  machine  of  the 
'  body  to  govern  it  with  a  rein."  ' 

And,  after  a  long  discussion,  that  learned  writer  sums  up 
all  these  three""  propositions  :  '  1.  The  Manichees  allowed 
'  the  soul  to  be  free  in  its  origin,  and  in  its  state  of  innocence. 

gradiis,  diicere  atque  habere  non  prohibentur  uxores.  De  Mor.  Manich.  c.  18. 
n.  05.  8  Nee  quod  Jacob,  filius  ejus,  inter  Rachel  et  Liam 

duas  germanas  sorores,  earumque  singulas  famulas,  quatuor  uxorum  maritus, 
tamquam  hircus  erraverit ;  ut  esset  quotidie  inter  quatuor  scorta  certamen,  quae- 
nam  eum  venientem  de  agro  prior  ad  conc:ubituiii  raperet.  Faust.  1.  22.  cap.  5. 

h  T.  2.  p.  433—448.  '  lb.  p.  438. 

•t  et  in  contraria  natura  esse  animam  diximus,  idco  ut  contrariae 

naturaa  modum  imponeret  -.  modo  imposito  contrariae  naturae,  sumit  eandem 
Deus.  Fort.  Disp.  2.  n.  33.  vid.  et.  n.  34. 

'  Operae,  inquit,  pretium  est  advertere,  quia  prima  anima,  quae  a  Deo  lumi- 
nis  manavit,  accepit  fabricam  istam  corporis,  ut  earn  frseno  suo  regeret.  Man. 
ap.  Aug.  Op.  Imp.  1.  3.  c.  186. 

">  lb.  p.  447. 


The  Ma7iichees.     Sect.  IV.  369 

'  For  It  had  power  to  resist  evil,  and  to  overcome  it.  2. 
'  After  its  fall  it  had  not  absolutely  lost  that  power,  but  it 
'  had  lost  the  use,  because  it  was  ignorant  of  its  nature, 
'  and  its  origin,  and  its  true  interests ;  and  because  concu- 
'  piscence,  which  has  its  seat  in  the  flesh,  carries  it  away  by 
'  an  invincible  force  to  do  or  allow  that  which  it  condemns ; 
'  [^or,  in  other  words,  the"  soul  has  not  lost  its  liberty,  but 
'  ignorance  on  the  one  hand,  and  violence  of  passion  on  the 
'  other,  hinder  it  from  making-  use  of  its  power.]  3.  The 
'  gospel  of  Jesus  Christ  delivers  the  soul  from  that  servi- 
'  tude,  and  gives  it  suflicient  power  to  subdue  sin,  and  to 
'  obey  the  law  of  God,  provided  it  make  use  of  the  helps 
'  therein  afforded.' 

After  all  which,  Beausobre  makes  divers  observations 
upon  the  controversy  with  the  Mauichees,  as  managed  by 
ancient  christian  authors,  and  then  concludes  in  this  man- 
ner :  Finally,  '  1°  allow  that  those  ancient  writers  in  general 
'  say  the  Manichees  denied  free-will.  The  reason  is,  that 
'  the  fathers  believed  and  maintained  against  the  Marcionites 
'  and  Manichees,  that  whatever  state  man  is  in,  he  has  the 
'  command  over  his  own  actions,  and  has  equally  power  to 
'  do  good  and  evil.  Augustine  himself  reasoned  upon  this 
'  principle,  as  well  as  other  catholics  his  predecessors,  so 
'  long  as  he  had  to  do  with  the  Manichees.  But  when  he 
'  came  to  dispute  with  the  Pelagians  he  changed  his  system. 
'  Then  he  denied  that  kind  of  freedom  which  before  he  had 
'  defended  :  and,  so  far  as  I  am  able  to  judge,  his  sentiment 
'  no  longer  diflTered  from  theirs  concerning  the  servitude  of 
'  the  will.  He  ascribed  that  servitude  to  the  corruption 
'  which  original  sin  brought  into  our  nature  :  whereas  the 
*  Manichees  ascribed  it  to  an  evil  quality,  eternally  inherent 
'  inP  matter.' 

XIV.  Socrates  said  thafi  the  Manichees  held  the  doctrine 
of  fate.  Whether,  and  how  far,  they  did  so  may  be  seen 
in'  Beausobre;  for  I  do  not  choose  to  stay  upon  this  point. 

XV.  It  is  thought  by  some  that'  the  Manichees  denied 
the  lawfulness  of  war. 

XVI.  Socates  informed  us,  that'  the  Manichees  held  the 
transmigration  of  souls  ;  which  is  very  true.  It  is  taken 
notice  of  in  "the  Acts  of  Archelaus,  ^in  Epiphanius,  '" The- 
odore t,  and  other  authors. 

»  lb.  p.  448.  °  The  same. 

P  More  observations  upon  Augustine  may  be  seen  in  the  same  author,  p. 

435—438.  1  See  before,  261.                    '  T.  2.  p.  424—432. 

»  See  Beaus.  T.  2.  p.  797,  and  the  authors  quoted  by  him, 

'  Seep.  261.  "  Arch.  c.  9.  p.  15. 

'  H.  66.  n.  28.  "  H.  Fab.  1.  1.  c.  26.  p.  214.  A. 

VOL.    III.  2   B 


370  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

Agapius,  as  abridged  by  Photius,  says  that"  '  souls, 
'  which  have  arrived  at  the  perfection  of  virtue,  return  to 
'  God  :  they  that  have  been  very  wicked  are  assigned  to  fire 
'  and  darkness;  but  others  of"  a  middle  rank,  which  have 
'  behaved  but  indifferently,  and  are  neither  very  good  nor 
'  very  bad,  pass  into  other  bodies.'  That  is  only  a  summary 
account:  if  we  had  Agapius  himself  we  should  see  more 
particulars. 

A  passage  of  Augustine  may  induce  us  to  think  it  was 
their  opinion,  that^  their  elect  needed  no  purification  after 
this  life :  and  likewise  that  their  auditors  in  general,  who 
were  allowed  to  marry,  trade,  bear  offices,  and  the  like, 
passed  into  other  bodies  for  purification,  and  farther  trial. 

The  passage  1  have  referred  to  is  in  Augustine's  summary 
account  of  the  Manichaean  sect.  There  is  another  like  pas- 
sage^ in  his  work  against  P'austus,  which  I  also  put  into  the 
margin. 

And  perhaps  this  may  afford  an  argument,  that  marriage, 
and  other  things  practised  by  the  auditors,  were  rather 
tolerated  than  approved  in  the  Manichsean  scheme:  for 
M'hich  reason  they  who  lived  in  that  state  would  usually 
need  to  be  purified,  and  to  be  put  upon  another  trial  in  some 
other  body. 

XVII.  It  is  easy  to  conclude,  from  what  has  been  already 
said,  that  the  Manichees  did  not  believe  the  resurrection  of 
the  body.  As  Theodoret  says,  '  they*  derided  the  rej^ur- 
'  rection  of  bodies.  No  part  of  matter,  they  said,  could  be 
'  worthy  of  salvation.' 

According  to  them,  Christ  came  to  save  souls.  So  their  opi- 
nion is  represented''  in  the  Acts  of  Archelaus.     Augustine's 

"  Kparvvsi  Se  Kai  Tag  jUf rt/t^l'i'xwTf  tC'  ''**£  l^^v  tig  aKpov  apirtjg  f\r)\aKorag  eig 
Otov  avakviuv'  rag  Se  iig  uk^ov  Kaiciag  nvpi  5i5sg  icai  OKOTtp'  rs^  St  fitaiog  Truig 
TToKiTtvaa^ivsg  iraXiv  tig  croj/ttara  ayojv.  Phot.  cod.  179.  p.  105. 

y  Animas  auditorum  suorum  in  electos  revolvi  arbitrantiir,  aut  feliciore  com- 
pendio  in  escas  electorum  suorum,  ut  jam  mde  purgatae  in  nulla  corpora  rever- 
lantur.  Cseteras  aufem  animas  et  in  pecora  redire  putant,  et  in  omnia  quae 
radicibus  fixa  sunt,  atque  aluntur  in  terra.     De  H.  c.  46. 

'  Quid  autem  fallitis  auditores  vestros,  qui,  cum  suis  uxoribus,  et  filiis,  et 
familiis,  et  domibus,  et  agris,  vobis  serviunt,  si  quisquis  ista  omnia  non  dimi- 
serit,  non  accipit  evangelium  ?  sed  quia  eis  non  resurrectionem,  sed  revolu- 
tionem  ad  istam  mortalitatem  promittitis,  ut  rursus  nascantur,  et  vita  electorum 

vestrorum  vivant, aut  si  melioros  meriti  sunt,  in  melones  et  cucumeres,  vel 

in  alios  aliquos  cibos  veniant,  quos  vos  manducaturi  estis,  ut  vestris  ructatibus 
cito  purgentur,  &c.  Contr.  Faust.  1.  5.  c.  x. 

"  T»jv  dt  aojfiarwv  avwramv,  ihg  fivOov,  tK^aWnmv'  uStv  yap  Trjg  iiXtjg 
^opiov  a^iov  v-n-eiXtifpam  (Twrripiag.     Theod.  H.  F.  1.  i.  cap.  ult.  p.  2 1 4.  A. 

'  ETTinxl/t  rov  'Yiov  avm  rov  tiyarrtjutvov  tig  (rwTrjpiav  4'vx'^Q-  -^P*  Arch, 
n.  8.  p.  12. 


77ic'  Manichees.     Sect.  IV.  371 

account  in  his  book  Of  Heresies  is,  '  they*^  sny  that  Christ 
'  came  to  save  souls,  not  bodies.'  Says  Fortunatiis,  '  We'' 
'  believe  that  Christ  came  to  deliver  the  soul  from  death, 
'  and  bring-  it  tack  to  eternal  glory,  and  restore  it  to  the 
'  Father.'  Again,  says  the  same  Manichee,  '  mo''  believe 
'  that  our  Saviour  Christ  came  from  heaven  to  fulfil  the  will 
'of  the  Father:  whose  will  is,  that  he  should  deliver  our 
'  souls  from  the  enmity  by  slaying-  it.' 

Their  notion  about  matter  led  them  into  this  opinion  :  and 
they  argued  from "^  several  texts  of  scripture,  particularly 
from  1  Cor.  xv.  50;  "Flesh  and  blood  cannot  inherit  the 
kingdom  of  God." 

They  allowed  a  resurrection  of  the  soul  now  ;  wlien,^' 
being-  enlightened  by  the  gospel,  ft  purified  itself  from 
carnal  affections.  And  they  might  speak  of  the  resurrection 
or'^  ascent  of  the  soul,  when  it  should  return  to  God;  but 
they  absolutely  denied  the  resurrection  of  bodies. 

Souls,  when  they  have  finished  their  purification  here, 
return  to  the  world  of  light,  whence  they  came.  But, 
which  is  somewhat  strange,  they  pass  by  the  way  of  the 
moon  and  the  sun  ;  which'  by  the  Manichees  were  considered 
as  ships  or  vessels  of  passage,  by  which  souls  return,  and 
are  conveyed  to  heaven. 

According-  to  them,  the  increase  of  the  moon  is  caused 
by  souls,  or  parts  of  light,  ascending-  thither  from  the  earth  ; 
and  its  decrease  by  the  departure  of  souls,  M'hich  are  thence 
transmitted  to  the  sun.     This  appears  absurd,  and  might  be 

=  eumque  Christum  novissimis  temporibus  venisse  ad  animas,  non 

ad  corpora  liberanda.     Aug.  de  H.  c.  46. 

••  ut  eandem  de  morte  liberaret,  et  perduceret  earn  ad  aeternam  gloriam, 

et  restitueret  Patri.  Fortunat.  Disp.  i.  n.  11. 

*  Quemadmodum  et  Salvatorera  Christum  credimus  de  coelo  venisse,  volun- 
tatem  Patris  complere.  Quae  vokintas  Patris  h?ec  erat,  animas  nostras  de 
eadem  inimicitia  hberare,  interfecta  eadem  inimicitia.  Fortun.  Disp.  i.  n.  17. 
Vid.  et  Disp.  2.  n.  24. 

^  Vid.  Epiph.  Haer.  6.  c.  86,  87.  et  Aug.  contr.  Adim.  c.  12.  n.  4.et  contr. 
Faust.  1.  xi.  c.  3. 

8  qui  dicitis  nunc  ese  resurrectionem  tantummodo  animarum,  per 

praedicationem  veritatis :  corporum  autcm,  quam  prasdicavenmt  apostoli, 
futuram  negetis.     Aug.  contr.  Faust.  1.  4.  c.  2. 

^  Vid.  Fortunat.  Disp.  i.  n.  7.  ii.  n.  .33. 

'  Quicquid  vero  undique  purgatur  luminis,  per  quasdam  naves,  quas  esse 
lunam  et  solem  volunt,  regno  Dei,  tanquam  propriis  sedibus  reddi.  Aug.  de 
Haer.  c.  46.  sub  in. — quod  dehra  imperitia  Manichaei  opinantes,  repleri  earn 
dicunt,  sicut  repletur  navis,  ex  fugativa  Dei  parte. — Hmc  ergo  impleri  lunam 
dicunt,  cum  eadem  pars  Dei  magnis  laboribus  ob  inquinamento  purgatur,  de 
toto  mundo — fugiens,  redditur  Deo — repleri  vero  per  mensem  dimidium,  et 
alio  dimidio  in  solem  refund),  velut  in  aliam  navem.  Aug.  Epist.  55.  [al.  1 1 9.] 
cap.  4.  n.  7. 

2  B  2 


372  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

incredible,  if  it  was  not  affirmed  by''  Augustine,  '  Archelaus, 
"'Titus  of  Bostra,  and"  others. 

XVIII.  The  Manichees  expected  a  future  judgment,  as° 
before  shown  ;  and  more  passages  might  be  alleged :  Mani? 
professeth  it  in  the  Acts  of  Archelaus. 

But  it  is  doubtful  whether  they  believed  the  eternity  of 
hell  torments. 

Mani,  in  the  dispute  with  Archelaus,  says  that  '  all*)  sorts 
'  of  souls  will  be  saved,  and  the  lost  sheep  will  be  brought 
'  back  to  the  fold.'  A  passage  of  the  Epistle  of  the  Founda- 
tion, preserved  by  the  author  De  Fide,  seems  to  speak "^  of 
some  souls  as  lost,  which  shall  be  for'ever  excluded  from 
the  holy  land,  and  the  regions  of  light  and  happiness.  They 
are  such  as  have  been  enemies  to  the  light,  and  have  per- 
secuted the  church,  and  the  elect  therein. 

Augustine  seems  to  have  supposed  it  to  be  their  opinion 
that^  some  souls  would  finally  perish.  And,  in  his  arguments 
Avith  them,  he  often  insists  upon  it  as  an  undeniable  thing, 
that'  all  the  light  that  was  mixed  with  darkness,  or  all  the 

''  See  the  preceding  note. 

'  nXoin  yap>  T}Toi  Tvo^Qfiua  uvai  Xeyti  tsq  dvo  tpwaTi]QaQ'  ura,  tav  yi/xiiyQi} 
j;  aikxfvri,  ixirairopOfitvti  eig  a7rr}\i(i)rr}v,  k.  X.  Ap.  Arch.  n.  8.  p.  13. 

■"  Tit.  1.  i.  p.  69.  in.  ■  "  Epiph.  H.  66.  n.  9.  p.  626.  B.  C. 

Thdit.  T.  4.  p.  213.  C.  "  See  p.  331. 

!•  Dicat  tamen  ipse,  si  est  judicium  pioruni  et  impiorum.  Manes  dixit  ; 
E;^t  judicium.     Ap.  Arch.  n.  32.  p.  54. 

1  Et  salvabitur  omne  animarum  genus,  ac  restituetur,  quod  perierat,  proprio 
suo  gregi.     Ap.  Arch.  c.  25.  p.  41,  42. 

'  Item  in  Epistola  Fundamenti  sic  dicit  de  illis  animabus,  quae  mundi  amore 
errare  se  a  priore  lucida  sua  natura  passae  sunt, — infesta  etiam  perseciitione 
sua  sanctam  ecclesiam  atque  electos  in  eadem  constitutes  coelestium  praecepto- 
rum  observatores  afflixerunt,  a  beatitudine  et  gloria  sanctse  terrae  arcentur.  Et 
quia  a  malo  se  superari  passae  sunt,  in  eadem  mala  stirpe  perseverabunt, 
pacifica  ilia  terra  et  regionibus  iinmortalibus  sibimet  interdictis.  De  Fide, 
cap.  5.  ap.  Aug.  T.  8. 

*  Ipsi  enim  dicunt,  Deum  genti  tenebrarum  aeternum  carcerem  praeparare, 
quam  dicunt  esse  inimicam  Deo.  Et  parum  est ;  sed  etiam  sua  membra  simul 
cum  ipsa  gente  poniturum  esse  non  dubitant  dicere.  Contr.  Adim.  c.  vii.  n. 
1.  Dicunt  enim  etiam  nonnullas  animas,  quas  volunt  esse  de  substantia  Dei, 
et  ejusdem  omnino  naturae,  quae  non  sponte  peccaverunt,  sed  a  gente  tene- 
brarum, quam  mali  naturam  dicunt,  ad  quam  debellandam  non  ultro,  sed 
Patris  imperio  descenderunt,  superatae  et  oppressae  sint,  affigi  in  aeternum 
globo  horribili  tenebrarum.     De  Nat.  Boni.  c.  42. 

'  Quarum  inter  se  pugnam  et  commixtionem,  et  boni  a  malo  purgationem, 
et  boni  quod  purgari  non  poterit  in  aeternum  damnationem,  secundum  sua 
dogmata  asseverantes,  &c.  Aug.  de  Ha;r.  c.  46.  sub  in.  Deum  denique  bonuni 
et  verum  dicunt  cum  tenebrarum  gente  pugnasse,  et  partem  suam  tenebrarum 
principibus  miscuisse,  eamque  toto  mundo  inquinatam  et  ligatam  per  cibos 
Electorum  suorum,  ac  per  solem  et  lunam  purgari  asseverant.  Et  quod 
purgari  de  ipsa  parte  Dei  non  poterit,  in  fine  saeculi  aeterno  ac  pcenali  vinculo 
colligaii. — Aug.  Ep.  236.  al.  74.     Natura  vero  Dei  captiva  ducta  est,  iniqua 


The  Manichees.     Sect.  IV,  373 

good  or  celestial  substance  that  was  sent  into  matter  at  the 
formation  of  the  world,  would  never  be  again  entirely  sepa- 
rated from  it;  which  he  considers  as  a  great  objection 
against  their  scheme. 

Simplicius  likewise  argues  with  them  upon  the  sup|)osi- 
tion  that"  some  parts  of  the  good  substance,  or  some  souls, 
are  for  ever  lost,  and  never  again  separated  from  the  evil 
substance. 

In  his  summary  account,  Augustine  represents  it  to  be 
their  opinion,  that"  the  daemons  shall  in  the  end  be  buried 
alive  in  the  hideous  mass  of  darkness,  and  that  sonn*  souls 
will  be  appointed  to  keep  them  fast  shut  up,  and  watch 
them  as  guards,  and  cover  the  kingdom  of  light  from  all 
attempts  of  the  princes  of  darkness.  He  speaks  to  the  like 
purpose"'  elsewhere.  Nor  is  this  disagreeable  to  a  passage 
of  Mani's  Epistle  of  the  Foundation,  as''  cited  by  the  author 
De  Fide. 

All  which,  however,  as  Beausobrey  says,  means  no  more 
than  a  privation  of  happiness,  or  a  labour  and  task,  rather 
than  a  punishment.     Indeed,  it  is  reasonable  to  think  the'' 

facia  est,  nee  potest  tota  purgari,  cogitur  in  fine  damnari.  Contr.  Secund.  c. 
20.  sub  fin.  Nunc  vero  infciices  audent  adliuc  dicere,  nee  totain  posse  pur- 
gari, et  ipsam  partem,  quae  purgari  non  potuerit,  prolicere  ad  vinculum, — et 
atfigatur  in  aeternuni  carcere  tenebrarum.  De  Agon.  Chris-tian.  cap.  iv.  0pp. 
T.  6.  "    kvTca  nv  «l?6  eTTiTQe^uai,  in  ^amv,  tic   to  ayaOov, 

aXku  fitvsai  ry  KaK(i)  avyKiKoXKrjfievai.  In  Epict.  c.  34.  p.  165. — Sta  to  tivoq, 
bjQ  Trporepov fixvtjtrOtjv,  •i//i;\;«t'  fiiviiv  tear  avrnQ  tv  r(^j  KaK'p  m  Xoitth  tov 
ainipov  aiojva.      lb.  p.  166. 

*  Sed  a  nobis  sejunctam  atque  seclusam  substantiam  istam  mali,  et  finite 
isto  sseculo  post  conflagrationem  mundi  in  globo  quodam,  tanquam  in  car- 
cere  sempiterno,  esse  victuram.  Cui  globo  affirmant  accessurum  semper  et 
adhaesurum  quasi  coopertorium  atque  tectorium  ex  animabus,  natura  quidem 
bonis,  sed  tanien  quae  non  potuerint  a  naturae  raalae  contagione  mundari. 
De  Haer.  c.  46.  in.  fin. 

"  Dicat  quod  vult,  includat  in  globo,  tanquam  in  carcere,  gentt^m  tene- 
brarum, et  forinsecus  affigat  naturam  lucis, — ecce  pejor  est  poena  iucis  quam 
tenebrarum,  pejor  est  poena  divinae  naturae  quam  gentis  adversae.  Ilia  quippe, 
etsi  in  tenebris  mtus  est,  ad  naturam  ejus  pertinet  in  tenebris  habitare.    Animae 

autem  quas  hoc  sunt  quod  Deus, a  vita  ac  libertate  sanctas  lucis  aliena- 

buntur,  et  configentur  in  praedicto  hornbili  globo.  De  Nat.  Bon.  c.  42.  sub 
fin. — suamque  naturam  bonam  malo  coercendo  superandoque  miscuisse,  quam 

turpissime  pollutam labore  magno  vix  mundet  ac  liberet,  non  totam 

tamen  :  sed  quod  ejus  non  potuerit  ab  ilia  inquinatione  purgari,  tegmen  ac 
vinculum  futuruni  hostis  victi  et  inclusi.     DeCiv.  Dei,  1.  xi.  c.  22. 

"  Non  igitur  poterunt  recipi  in  regna  pacifica,  sed  configentur  in  praedicto 
horribili  globo,  cui  etiam  necesse  est  custodiam  adhiberi.  Ap.  libr.  de  Fide, 
c.  5.     Conf.  Aug.  contr.  Faust.  1.  21.  c.  16.  et  de  Nat.  Boni,  cap.  42. 

y  Ainsi  la  peine  de  ces  ames  n'est  proprement  qu'une  privation  de  felicite, 
et  un  travail  plutat,  qu'un  supplice.     Beaus.  T.  2.  p.  574. 

"  C  est  un  fait  constant.  Les  Manicheens  n'ont  point  cru  la  parte  eternelle 
d'aucuneame.     lb.  p.  572.  in. 


374  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

Manichees  should  allow  but  very  few,  if  any,  soulss  to  be 
lost  and  perish  for  ever.  That  could  not  be  reckoned 
honourable  to  the  Deity,  considering-  how  souls  M'ere  sent 
into  matter.  The  doctrine  of  transmigration  may  have  been 
contrived  for  this  purpose.  The  Manichees  M^ere  very  gene- 
rous in  this  respect ;  they  allowed  souls  no  less  than  five* 
bodies  for  trial. 

XIX.  The  Manichees  believed  that  after  a  certain  period 
this''  visible  world  would  be  consumed  by  fire.  But,  as*" 
Turbo  says  in  the  Acts  of  Archelaus,  he  had  not  been 
informed  how  long  it  would  be  before  that  happened.  How- 
ever, Ebed-Jesu,  quoted  by*^  Beausobre,  says,  thaf^  accord- 
ing to  the  Manichees  the  world  would  come  to  an  end  when 
it  had  subsisted  nine  thousand  years. 

XX.  The  Manichees  were  christians,  as  was  particularly*^ 
shown  above.  But  they  rejected  the  Old  Testament,  and 
pretended  they"  could  there  see  no  prophecies  about  Christ, 
neither  in  Moses,  nor  in  the  other  prophets.  They  therefore 
wanted  that  argument  of  faith  in  Jesus.  As  ''Faustus  says, 
'  being  Gentiles  by  nature,  and  not  .Jews,  they  came  directly 
'  to  Christ,  excited  by  the  fame  of  his  virtues  and  wisdom.' 
He  farther  says,  that  '  they'  were  induced  to  believe  in  Jesus 
'  for  the  sake  of  the  voice  of  God,  not  speaking  by  a  prophet 
'  or  interpreter,  but  saying  himself,  when  he  sent  his  Son  from 
'  heaven  :  "  This  is  my  beloved  Son,  hear  him."  '  '  We^ 
'  also  believe  his  own  word,  Avho  said  :  "  I  came  forth  from 
*  the  Father,  and  came  into  the  world  :"  and  much  more  to 

*  Epu)  St  vfiiv  (cat  mro,  ttcoq  inrayyiZirai  ij  i/'V^JJ  «f  Trtvre  (Twjuara.  Ap. 
Arch.  n.  9.  in.  Vid.  et  Epiph.  H.  66.  c.  28.  in.  ''  Vid.  supr.  not.  \ 

'^  ayptC  ctv  TO  TTvp   KaTcivaXdicry   tov  Koafiov  okov,  tv   iroooiq  Trors 

iTiaiv,  cjv  sK  cfiaOov  ti]v  TrpoffoTijra.     Ap.  Arch.  c.  xi.  p.  22. 

''  T.  2.  p.  580.  '^  IManichaei,  resurrectionem  abnegantes, 

conti-a  christianos  jejunium  luctumquein  die  dominico  faciunt,  alentes,  in  ipso 
die  fore  ut  hoc  seculum  subeat  interitum  dissokitionemque  omnem  post  circu- 
lum  novem  milhuni  annorum.  Ap.  Assem.  Bib.  Or.  Gr.  T.  3.  P.  2.  p.  361. 

'  See  p.  328.  ^  Ahoquin  nihil  eos  de  Christo  prophelasse, 

abunde  jam  parentum  hbris  ostensum  est.     Faust.  1.  12.  Conf.  1.  13.  in. 

Quia  omnem,  ut  dixi,  Moyseos  scripturam  scrutatus,  nullas  ibi  de  Christo 
prophetias  inveni.     Id.  1.  16.  c.  3. 

^  Quomodo  Christum  colitis,  prophetas  repudiantes,  quorum  ex  presagiis 
accipitur  fuisse  venturura  ? — Porro  autem  nos  natura  Gentiles  sumus — non 
ante  effecti  Judaei,  ut  merito  Hebi-aeorum  sequeremur  fidem,  euntes  ad  chris- 
tianismum  ;  scd  sola  exciti  fama,  et  virtutum  opmione,  atque  sapientia  libera- 
toris  nostri  Christi  Jesu.     Id.  1.  13. 

'  quis  fidelior  vobis  esse  testis  debet,  quam  Deus  ipse  de  Filio  suo, 

qui  non  per  vatem,  nee  per  interpretem,  sed  ultro  coelitus  erupta  voce,  cum  eum 
mitteret  ad  terram,  dixit:  Hie  est  Filius  meus  delectissimus:  credite  illi.  Id. 
1.  12.  ^  Nee  non  et  ipse  de  se  :  A  Patre  raeo  process!,  et  veni 

in  hunc  mundum ;  atque  multa  alia  hujusmodi.     lb. 


Tlie  Manicliees.     Sect.  IV.  375 

'  the  like  purpose.'     *  Moreover'  lie  appeals  to  liis  works: 

*  "  If  ye  believe  not  me,  beli(?ve  the  works:"  (John  x.  -ib.) 
'  He  does  not  say,  believe  the  prophets.'  For  such  reasons 
then  they  believed  in  Jesus  Christ,  and  received  him  as  the 
Son  of  God,  and  their  Lord  and  Saviour. 

XXI.  The  Manichees  believed  Jesus  Christ  to  be  God, 
but  not  man.  They  believed  him  to  be  God  truly,  man  in 
appearance  only. 

Turbo,  once  disciple  of  Mani,  in  the  Acts  of  Archclans, 
represents  his  master's  opinion  upon  that  head  in  this  man- 
ner: '  The""  Son  of  God  came  and  took  the  form  of  a  man. 
'  He  appeared  to  men  as  a  man,  though  he  was  not  a  man, 

*  and  they  took  him  for  a  man  born.' 

In  the  same  work  Mani  is  brought  in  saying",  that  '  "Jesus 
'  appeared  indeed  in  the  form  of  a  man,  but  yet  was  not  a 
'  man.' 

Ancient  catholic  authors  often  take  notice  of  this  opinion 
of  theirs,  and  represent  it  after  this  manner. 

Augustine  in  his  summary  account  of  their  principles 
says,  '  they"  deny  the  real  flesh  of  Christ,  and  afHrm  that 
'  he  had  only  the  appearance  of  flesh  :  and  that  neither  his 
'  death  nor  his  resurrection  was  real.'  In  another  place,  that 
'  theyi'  believed  not  a  real,  but  only  a  seeming-,  imagitiary 
'  death  of  Christ,  and  no  nativity  at  all,  not  so  much  as  in 
'  appearance.' 

In  another  place  Augustine  says,  '  they*!  do  not  deny  our 
'  Lord  Jesus  Christ  to  be  God,  but  they  pretend  that  he 
'  appeared  to  men  without  taking  the  human  nature.' 

Theodoret's  account  is,  '  they  "^  say  that  Christ  took  neither 
'  soul  nor  body,  but  appeared   as  a  man,  though   he   had 

'  Ad  haec  et  opera  ipsa  sua  sibi  in  testimonium  vocat :  Si  mihi  non  creditis, 
dicens,  operibus  credite.  Non  dixit,  si  niihi  non  creditis,  prophetis  credite. 
Ibid.  '"    Kat  t\9wv  6  vlog  ^tTtcTxTiftaTiatv  iavrov  iic  avSoioTn* 

eiSog,  Kai  t(paivtro  toic  avGowTroic  ojq  avOputTrog,  yn)  wv  av9pu)Trog'  Kat  ot  avOput- 
TToi  vniXanfiavov  avrov  ytyfvvTjaOai.     Ap.  Arch.  c.  8.  p.  12. 

"  Sicut  vos  Jesus  ostendit,  ejus  qui  apparuit  quidem  in  hominis  specie,  nee 
tamen  fuit  homo.     Ap.  Arch.  n.  47.  p.  85. 

"  Nee  fuisse  in  came  vera,  sed  simulatam  speciem  camis  ludificandis 
humanis  sensibus  prsebuisse,  ubi  non  solum  mortem,  verum  etiam  resurrec- 
tionem  simihter  mentiretur.     De  H.  c.  46. 

p  Cur  ipsi  mortem  non  veram,  sed  iniaginariam  Christi  affirmant;  nativi- 
tatera  autem  non  saltern  talem,  sed  prorsus  nullam  delegerunt  ?  Contr.  Faust. 

1.  29.   c.    3.  "^  cum   ipsi  Dommum  nostrum  Jasum 

Christum  Deum  esse  non  negent,  et  sine  assumfione  humani  corporis  eum 
hominibus  apparuisse  confingant.     Aug.  Serm.  12.  [al.  de  diversis  16.]  cap.  8. 

''  Tov  St  Kvpiov  ovTi  xpvxrjv  aveiXt](ptva  (jiaaiv,  srs  ffw/ia,  aWa  !pavi]vai  oig 
avGpojTTov,  Kai  siiv  avQponrivov  ixovra'  Kai  tov  <7avpov  Se,  Kai  to  ttoOoc,  kcu 
Tov  QavciTov,  ^avraauf  ytvtaQai.     Tht.  H.  F.  T.  4.  p.  213,  214. 


376  Credibilihj  of  the  Gospel  History. 

'  nothing'  human  ;  and  that   his  cross,  passion,  and  death, 
'  were  in  appearance  only.' 

Athanasius  says  the^  Manichees  deny  that  the  Word  was 
made  flesh.  Again,  they'  do  not  believe  our  Lord's  incar- 
nation and  humanity. 

Ambrose  says  they"  did  not  believe  that  Christ  came  in 
the  flesh. 

Jerom  speaks  of'  their  allowing  the  salvation  of  the  soul 
only,  and  saying  that  both  the  birth  and  the  resurrection  of 
Christ  were  in  appearance  only  :  and  therefore  we  cannot 
form  an  arsfument  for  the  resurrection  of  our  bodies  from  his 
resurrection,  because  he  rose  in  appearance  only. 

So  say  the  catholics.  Let  us  now  observe  the  Manichees 
themselves,  that  we  may  judge  whether  they  have  been 
misrepresented. 

It  is  plain  that,  according  to  them,  Jesus  was  pure  deity. 
The  catholics  argued  that  Christ  had  been  foretold  in  the 
books  of  Moses,  particularly  in  Deut.  xviii.  18 ;  "  I  will  raise 
them  up  a  prophet  from  among  their  brethren,  like  unto  thee : 
him  shall  ye  hear."  How  does  Faustus  answer  that  argu- 
ment? It  is  in  this  manner:  '  Thaf*  this  does  not  belong  to 
'  Christ,  any  one  may  see:  for  Christ  is  not  a  prophet,  nor 
'  a  prophet  like  luito  Moses.  Moses  was  a  man,  Christ  is 
'  God.  He  was  a  sinner,  Christ  holy.  He  Avas  born  in  the 
'  ordinary  way;  Christ,  according  to  you,  was  born  of  a 
'  virgin,  according  to  me,  not  at  all. — How  then  can  he  be  a 
'  prophet  like  unto  Moses?' 

f^austus  often  denies  Christ's''  nativity  :  and  again  and 
again  insists  upon  the  impropriety  that>  God,  and  the  God 
of  the  christians  too,  should  be  born. 

'*     ajjvsvrai  to,  6  Xoyog  aap%.  tyivsro.     Ath.  Or.  i.  contr.  Arian.  p. 

457.  D.  '   OvTtf)  Si  MartT^rttof  aTriTtjaag  ry  aapKuaii  Kai  tvav- 

OpojTrrjan  th  KvpiH.     Contr.  Apoll.  1.  i.  p.  939.  D. 

"  Ciiin  Manichaeus  adoraverit,  quetn  ia  came  venisse  non  credidit. 

Ambr.  de  Fid.  1.  5.  c.  14.  T.  2.  p.  583.  E. 

"  Haereticos  vero,  in  quorum  parte  sunt  Marcion,  Apelles,  Valentinus, 
Mano-s,  nomen  insaniee,  penituset  carnis  et  corporis  resurrectionern  negare,  et 
salutfm  tantum  tribuere  animse;  frustraque  nos  dicere  ad  exemplum  Domini 
resurrecturos,  quum  ipse  quoque  Dominus  in  phantasmate  resurrexerit ;  et  non 
solum  resurrectio  ejus,  sed  et  ipsa  nativitas  to  Sokhv,  id  est,  putative,  visa  magis 
sit  quam  fucrit.     Hier.  ad  Pamm.  Ep.  38.  [al.  61.]  T.  4.  p.  320.  m. 

* Sed  hoc  quidem  ad  Chri.stum  minime  spectare,  nee  Judaeum  latet,  nee 

nobis  sic  credere  conducibile  est :  quia  non  prcpheta  Christus,  nee  Moysi 
similis  propheta  :  siquidem  ille  fuerit  homo,  hie  Deus  ;  ille  peccator,  hie  sanc- 
tus;  lUeex  coitu  natus,  hie  secundum  te  ex  virgine,  secundum  me  vero  nee  ex 
virgine.     Faust.  1.  IG.  c.  4. 

*  Accipis  evangel ium  ?  Et  maxime.  Proinde  ergo  et  natum  accipis  Chris- 
tum ?  Non  ita  est.  Neque  enim  sequitur,  ut,  si  evangelium  accipio,  idcirco  et 
natum  accipiam  Christum.     Faust.  1.  2.  in.  '  Accipis  ergo  genera- 


77te  Manichees.     Sect.  IV.  377 

They  pretended  that  it  was  dishonourable  for  Christ  to  be 
born  of  a  woman.  This  argument  is  taken  notice  of  in  the 
Acts  of'  Archelaus. 

It  is  easy  to  suj)|)Ose  that  the  catholic  christians  put  these 
people  in  mind  of  those  texts  of  the  New  Testament,  where' 
Jesus  is  said  to  be  the  son  of  David,  of  the  seed  of  David, 
according-  to  the  flesh,  and  the  like:  to  which,  however,  they 
gave  answers,  such  as  they  are. 

The  Manichees  arg-ued  from  the  first  chapter  of  St.  John's 
gospel,  ver.  5,  "  And  the  light  shineth  in  darkness,  and  the 
darkness  comprehended  it  not."  The  light  is  the  Word,  or 
the  divine  nature  :  the  darkness,  according-  to  tljem,  is  the 
flesh,  or  matter,  the  evil  substance.  The  light  sliined  in  the 
darkness,  but  the  darkness  could  not  touch,  seize,  lay  hold 
of  the  light:  nor  indeed  would  the  light  touch  the  darkness, 
or  suffer  itself  to  be  touched  by  it.  This  thought  is  in  a 
fragment  of  one  of  Mani's''  letters. 

And  this  leads  us  to  think  thfit  this  notion  was  chiefly 
owing-  to  their  doctrine  of  two  principles.  Believing  matter, 
of  which  the  body  is  formed,  to  be  evil  in  itself,  they  could 
not  allow  a  divine  person  to  be  united  to  the  human  nature; 
and'  therefore  they  pretended  that  our  Lord  had  only  the 
appearance  of  flesh  without  the  reality. 

They  said  that'^  Christ  came  directly  from  heaven.  They 
argued  this  from  all  those  texts  where *"  our  Lord  speaks  of 

tionem  ?  Equidera  conatus  diu  sum  hoc  ipsum,  qualecunque  est,  persuadere 
mihi,  quia  sit  natus  Deus.— Quamvis  nee  sic  quidem  dignum  erit  ex  utero 
natum  credere  Deum,  et  Deum  christianorum.     Id.  1.  3.  in.  et  fin. 

Sed  non,  inquit,  accipere  evangelium  hoc  solum  est,  si  quod  prajcepit  facias: 
sed  ut  etiain  credas  omnibus  quae  in  eodem  scripta  sunt,  quorum  primum 
est  illud,  quia  sit  natus  Deus.     Id.  1.  5.  c.  2. 

^  Ergo  non  putas,  eum  ex  Maria  virgine  esse?  Manes  dixit:  Absit,  ut 
Dominum  nostrum  Jesum  Christum  per  naturalia  pudenda  muUeris  descendisse 
confitear,  ap.  Arch.  c.  47.  p.  85.  Vid.  et  cap.  5.  p.  8. 

*  Apostolum  accipis  ?  Et  maxime.  Cur  ergo  non  credis  Fihum  Dei,  ex 
semine  David,  natum  secundum  carnem  ? — Faust.  1.  xi.  in. 

''  Mia  Ts  tpujTOQ  fTCv  uifKr)  Kai  a\i]Qi]Q  r)  (pvmc,  /cm  fxia  avm  y)  tvinyna'  ro 
^wQ  yap  IV  T?j  aKOTia  <paivH,  Kai  i)  OKorta  avro  hk  iXajStv'  «  yap  sma^  rfi^aro 
aapKog,  aXX'  bfioiixtfiaTi  Kai  (T^rJitart  aapKog  laKiaoQr],  iva  fit)  Kpar»;0y  dia  rrjg 
aapKOQ,  Kai  ttuO^,  koi  (jtGapOy,  Ti)q  tTKOuag  <p6tipn(T}jg  avTs  tt]V  tvipytiav  r/jv 
<pu)Ttivi]v.     Manet.  Ep.  Zeben.  ap.  Fabric.  E.  Or.  T.  v.  p.  284. 

<^  See  Beaus.  T.  i.  p.  378. 

^  Mihi  enim  pium  videtur  dicere,  quod  nihil  eguerit  filius  Dei,  in  eo  quod 
adventus  ejus  procuratur  ad  terras,  neque  opus  habuerit  columba,  neqiie  bap- 
tismate,  neque  matre,  neque  fratribus,  fortasse  neque  patre,  qui  ei  secundum 
te  fuit  Josephus ;  sed  totus  ille  ipse  descendens,  &c.  Manes,  ap.  Arch.  c.  50. 
p.  91. 

®  Ipse  enim  testimonium  dat,  quia  de  sinibus  Patris  descendit.  Et,  *  qui 
me  recipit,  recepit  eum  qui  me  misit.'  Et,  '  non  veni  facere  voluntatem  meam, 
sed  ejus  qui  misit  me.'     Et,  '  non  sum  missus  nisi  ad  eves  perditas  Israel.' 


378  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

bis  coming  from  the  Father,  being  sent  by  the  Father,  and 
the  like. 

They  argued  likewise  that  our  Lord  was  not  born  of  a 
woman,  because'  M'lien  some  weak  people,  as  they  call  them, 
told  hiia  his  mother  and  his  brethren  stood  without,  he 
answered,  "  Who  is  my  mother?  and  who  are  my  brethren  V 
Matth.  xii.  47,48.  This  text  was  often  insisted  on  by  them 
and  their  argument  is  handsomely  answered  bys  Jerom. 
Indeed,  any  men,  not  under  the  bias  of  some  prejudice, 
might  perceive  that  our  Lord  does  not  here  disown  any 
earthly  relations  ;  but,  preserving  a  due  affection  for  them,  he 
declares  that  he  considered  every  truly  gt)od  man  and  woman 
as  his  mother,  his  brother,  and  sister;  that  is,  all  such  were 
dear  to  him.  And  he  teaches  us  not  to  suffer  ourselves  to 
be  diverted  from  any  important  service  by  the  unseasonable 
importunities  of  earthly  friends  and  relatives.  Augustine 
observes  they''  might  as  well  argue  that  the  disciples  had 
no  earthly  fathers,  because  Christ  says  to  them:  "  Call  no 
man  yoiu'  father  upon  earth,  for  one  is  your  Father  whicli  is 
in  heaven,"  Matt,  xxiii.  9.  ^ 

As  they  were  greatly  pressed  by  the  catholic  argument 
from  the  genealogies  in  Matthew  and  Luke,  they  endeavoured 
to  evade  it  many  ways.  Sometimes  they  disputed'  the 
genuineness  of  those  genealogies,  and''  they  insisted  upon  the 
ditierences  and  seeming  contrarieties  in  them,  as  recorded 
by  those  two  evangelists.  They  likewise  argued  that'  they 
were  contrary  to  all  those  declarations  of  Christ,  where  he 
disowned  all  earthly  kindred,  and  said  he  came  from  heaven, 
and  was  not  of  this  world. 

Sunt  et  alia  innumera  (estimonia  hujuscemodi,  quse  indicant  eum  venisse,  non 
natum  esse.  ap.  Arch.  c.  47.  p.  85. 

'  Manes  dixit:  Similis  fui  quidam  cum  ei  aliqiiando  dixisset,  Maria  mater 
tua,  et  fratres  tui  I'oris  •  stant,'  non  libenter  accipiens  eum  qui  dixerat,  incre- 
pavit,  dicens :  Quae  est  mater  mea,  aut  qui  sunt  fratres  mei  ?  et  ostendit  eos,  qui 
facerent  voluntatem  suam,  et  matres  sibi  esseet  fratres.  ap.  Arch.  ib.  p.  85. 

K  Non  ergo  juxta  Marcionem  et  ManichvBum  matrem  negavit,  ut  natus  de 
phanta«rnate  j^utaretur;  sed  apostolos  cognationi  praetulit,  ut  et  nos  in  com- 
paratione  dilectioniscarni  spirifum  praeferamus.     In  Matt.  T.  4.  p.  52.  f. 

''  Cujus  rei  exemplum  pncbuit  prior  ipse  dicendo  :  Quae  mihi  mater,  aut 
qui  fratres  ?  Unde  volunt  qnidani  perniciosissimi  hteretici  asserere,  non  eum 
habuisse  matrem.  Nee  vidcnt  esse  consequens,  si  hsec  verba  attendant,  ut  nee 
discipuli  ejus  patres  habuerint:  quia  sicut  if>e  dixit,  Qu.c  milii  mater  est;  sic 
illos  docuit,  cum  ait:  Nolite  vobis  dicere  patrem  in  terris.  Enarr.  in  Ps.  ix. 
n.  31.  T.  4.  '  Vid.  Faust.  1.  2.  et  7.  "  Vid.  eund.  1.  3. 

'  Quarc  non  credis  in  genealogiam  Jesu  ?  MuKae  quidem  sunt  causae.  Sed 
palmaris  ilia,  quia  nee  ipse  ore  suo  usquam  se  fatetur  patrem  habere,  aut  genus 
in  terra,  sed,  e  contra,  quia  non  sitde  hoc  mundo,  quia  a  Patre  Deo  processent, 
quia  descenderit  de  coelo,  quia  non  sibi  sint  mater  et  fratres,  nisi  qui  fecerint 
voluntatem  Patris  sui  qui  in  ccclis  est.   Faust.  1.  7. 


Vie  Manichecs.     Sect.  IV.  379 

They  argued  from  Christ's  escape  from  the  Jews,  when 
they  would  have  stoned  him  :  see  John  viii.  59.  This 
arg'ument  is  in  Mani  himself:  '  T>y'"  that  escape,'  he  says, 
'  Christ  showed  his  essence,  and  that  he  was  tlie  Son  of  the 
'  true  light:  he  went  away  from  them  without  being  seen. 
'  The  immaterial  form  was  not  visible  nor  tangible,  though 
'  there  was  tlie  appearance  of  llcsh.  For  what  is  material 
'  can  have  no  communion  with  an  immaterial  substance, 
'  though  this  appear  in  the  form  of  flesh.'  It  is  likely  that" 
here  is  a  reference  to  those  words  of  St.  Paul,  2  Cor.  vi.  14 : 
"  ^V^hat  communion  hath  liohtwith  darkness?" 

They  argued  from  our  Lord's  transfiguration.  JMani 
himself  in  a  fragment  says,  '  The"  Son  of  the  eternal  light 
'  manifested  his  nature  on  the  mount.' 

In  another  fragment'*  Mani  banters  the  Galileans,  as  he 
calls  them,  for  believing'  two  natures  in  Christ,  not  consi- 
derinff  that  the  nature  of  liffht  cannot  be  mixed  with  matter: 
'  For  it  is  simple  and  uncompounded,  and  cannot  be  joined 
'  to  matter.  The  supreme  light,  being  among'  material 
'  things,  showed  a  body,  whilst  still  it  was  one  nature  only.' 
These,  and  such  like  arguments,  had  great  influence  upon 
Augustine's  mind  for  a  long  time,  as''  he  humbly  owns. 

Farther,  we  find  Faustus  arg'ued  from''  our  Saviour's 
escape  at  Nazareth,  when  the  people  would  have  cast  him 
down  from  the  brow  of  the  hill ;  or,  as  he  says,  when  they 
did  so,  and  yet  he  escaped. 

And  to  prove  that  Jesus  was  man  in  appearance  only,  they' 

""  IhCukov  jin\ofitv(i>v  TTOTt  XiGaoai  rov  'Hqi'^ov, — ilii^t  aaipwg  rriv  avm  naiav 
6  TH  ai'wTctTn  (pioTOc  vioQ,  Kai  fiiaoQ  avTOJV  SiiKQiov  ax  ijQciTO'  r;  yap  vlvXoc  fio[i<pt] 
<Tvaxt}IJ-nTi(Tafiivr]  to  ticog  Tt]g  aapKOQ,  oparri  fitv  sk  r)v,  ii\/t)\a(puTO  Se  HOafjiioc, 
Sta  TO  ftr)5tfiiav  t^ti-v  KOivwviav  ttjv  v\t}v  Trpof  to  avXov,  tiKai  aapKoq  wparo 
fiop(pr].     Man.  Ep.  ad.  Cudar.  ap.  Fabr.  ib.  p.  285. 

"  See  Beans.  T.  2.  p.  530. 

°  'O  St  TH  diSis  <l>(oTog  vlos  Trjv  tSiav  saiav  tv  ry  opti  e^aviptoffsv.  ap.  Fcibr. 
B.  Gr.  T.  5.  p.  285. 

P  Twv  TaXiXaMov  dvo  ipvauq  avo}iaZ,ovT(>>v  ix^iv  rov  Xpi<rov,  tfKaTvv  KOTaff- 
XiOfiiv  yiXwTa — TO  dt  avwTarov  <pwg  rotf  iavrn  avvamnfifvov  iSti^iv  iavTip  tv 
Totg  vXiKoiQ  (Tiij[ia(n  aw)ia,  fiia  wv  civtoq  i^nifHQ  to  Trav.  ap.  Fabr.  ib. 

■<  Ipsum  quoqiie  Sal  valorem  nostrum  unigenitum  tuum,  tan(]uam  de  ma.'^.^a 
lucidis-simae  molis  tuae  porrectum  ad  nostram  .'salutem,  ita  piitabam. — Talem 
itaque  naturam  ejus  nasci  non  posse  de  Maria  virgine  arbitrabar,  nisi  canii 
concernereUir.  Concerni  enim  et  non  inquinari  non  videbam,  quod  mihi  tale 
figurabam.  Metuebam  itaque  credere  in  came  natum,  ne  credere  cogerer  e.K 
came  inquinatum.     Confess.  1.  5.  c.  x.  n.  20. 

■■  Legitur  id  quoque,  quod  de  supercilio  montis  jactatus  aliquando  a  Judseis, 
illaesus  abierit,  &c.     Faust.  1.  26.  c.  2. 

*  Sed  totus  ille  ipse  descendens  semetipsum,  in  quocunque  voluit  transforma- 
vit  in  hominem,  eo  pacto  quo  Paulus  dicit,  qviia  habitu  repertus  est  iit  homo. 
ap.  Arch.  n.  50.  p.  91. 


380  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

referred  to  those  words  in  Philip,  ii.  8,  "  And  was  found  in 
fashion  as  a  man." 

^Vhereas  it  was  objected  to  them  that*  if  Jesus  had  not 
been  born,  and  had  not  an  human  body,  he  could  not  have 
been  seen  or  heard  by  men  :  they  answered  that  angels  had 
been  seen,  and  had  conversed  with  men,  though  they  had 
not  human  bodies. 

XXII.  As  the  Manichees  did  not  believe  that  Christ  was 
born,  or  had  a  true  body,  so  neither  did  they  believe  that  he 
Mas  really  crucified,  or  that  he  died.  They  did  not  deny" 
that  he  was  apprehended  by  the  Jews,  and  so  far  as  in  them 
lay,  fastened  to  the  cross,  and  that  he  seemed  to  die:  but 
they  did  not  allow  that  he  really  died. 

So  Faustus  says  without  any  hesitation  or  ambig-uity  : 
'  We"  own  that  he  suffered  in  appearance,  but  he  did  not 
'  really  die.'  Again :  '  It'"  is  our  opinion  that  Jesus  did  not 
*  die.'  He  likewise  says:  '  As''  from  the  beginning-,  having- 
'  taken  the  likeness  of  man,  he  appeared  to  have  all  the 
'  infirmities  of  the  human  state;  so,  at  the  conclusion  of  his 
'  transaction  here,  it  was  not  improper  that  he  should  seem 
'  to  die.' 

Mani  himself  in  his  fragment  says:  '  A^  simple  nature 
'  does  not  die,  nor  is  an  appearance  of  flesh  crucified.'  And^ 
more  to  the  like  purpose. 

Augustine^  passeth  a  just  censure  upon  their  notion  of  a 
seeming-  death,  and  an  imag-inary,  deceitful  resurrection. 

Nevertheless  they  often  speak''  of  Christ's  being-  made 

*  Nam  illud  quidem,  quod  saepe  affirmare  soletis,  necessario  eum  esse 
uatum,  quia  alias  hominibus  videri  aut  loqui  non  posset,  ridiculum  est ;  cum 
multoties,  ut  jam  probatum  a  nostris  est,  angeli,  et  visi  hominibus  et  locuti 
esse  monstrentur.     Faust.  1.  29.  c.  i.  f. 

"  See  Beaus.  T.  i.  p.  228,  229.  "  Denique  nos  specie  tenus 

passum  confitemur,  nee  vere  mortuum,     Faust.  1.  29.  c.  i. 

"  Alioquin  nobis  nee  Jesus  mortuus  est,  nee  est  immortalis  Elias.  Id. 
1.  26.  c.  2.  f. 

*  Ut  enim  ab  initio,  sumtahominis  similitudine,  omnes  humanaeconditionis 
simulavit  affectus,  sic  ab  re  non  erat,  si  in  fine  quoque  consignandae  CEConomiae 
gratia,  fuisset  visus  et  mori.     lb.  1.  26.  c.  i.  f. 

y  'AttXjj  ^vaiQ  «K  aTro9vi](TKH,  Kai  (TKin  (TapKOQ  8  <^avpnTai.  Manes,  ap. 
Fabr.  T.  5.  p.  284,  '■   Uiog  hv  nraOe,  fir]Tt  tijq  KUKiag  Kpars- 

fiivr}Ct  HV"^  '"'7C  ivtpyuaq  uvth  aKOTinBtiaric-   Id.  ibid. 

'■  Sed  illud  est,  (juod  niagiae  simile  dicmiini  asseiere,  quod  passionem  mor- 
temque  ejus  specie  tenus  factam,  et  fallaciter  dicitis  adumbratam,  ut  mori 
videnfur,  qui  non  moriebatur.  Ex  quo  fit,  ut  ejus  quoque  resurrectionem 
umljraticam,  imaginariam,  fallacemque  dicatis :  neijue  enim  ejus,  qui  non  vere 
mortuus  est,  vera  resurrectio  esse  potest. — Ita  fit,  ut  et  cicatrices  discipulis 
diUjitantibus  falsas  ostenderit,  &c.  Aug.  contr.  Faust.  1.  29.  c.  2. 

''  Hoc  ergo  sentimus  de  nobis,  quod  et  de  Chri4o,  qui,  cum  in  forma  Dei 
esset  coQstitutus,  factus  est  subditus  usque  ad  mortem,  ut  similitudinem  anima- 


Vie  Manichccs.     Sect.  IV.  381 

subject  to  death,  buried,  and  raised  from  the  dead  by  the 
power  of  the  Father.  Tliey  believed  that'  for  our  salvation 
Christ  hung-  upon  the  cross.  And  therefore  Faustus  pre- 
tends to  be  excessively  angry  with  Moses  for  that  saying  : 
"  Cursed  is  every  one  that  hangeth  on  a  tree:"  Deut.  xxi. 
23.  They  likewise  speak''  of  our  Lord's  showing  the  marks 
of  his  wounds  for  curing  the  unbelief  of  Thomas. 

As  the  JManichees  did  not  believe  Christ  to  have  been 
born,  nor  to  have  a  real  body,  they  denied  his  baptism,  and 
some  other  facts  related  in  the  gospels.  For  proof  of  this, 
and  likewise  for  farther  showing'  their  opinion  concerning 
our  Lord's  crucifixion,  I  shall  here  produce  part  of  a  passage 
of  Faustus,  which  must  be  alleged  hereafter  upon  another 
account  more  at  laro'e. 

<  \yge  reject  divers  other  things  which  have  been  since 
'  added  to  the  history  of  Christ ;  as  that  he  was  born  of  a 
'  woman,  circumcised  like  a  Jew,  that  he  sacrificed  like 
'  a  heathen,  that  he  debased  himself  so  unworthily  as  to  be 
'  baptized,  and  was  then  carried  into  the  wilderness,  and 
'  miserably  tempted  of  the  devil.  Excepting  these  things, 
'  and  the  quotations  of  the  Old  Testament,  which  have  been 
'  clandestinely  inserted,  we  believe  all  the  rest,  and  espe- 
'  cially  his  mystic  crucifixion,  by  which  he  discovers  to  us 
'  the  wounds  of  our  soul.' 

These  things  need  no  answer.  It  would  be  waste  of  time 
to  stay  to  confute  what  any  one  may  presently  perceive  to 
be  weak  and  absurd.  I  shall  however  add  a  word  or  two  by 
way  of  explication. 

In  what  is  said  of  Christ's  sacrificing,  perhaps  he  refers 
to  our  Lord's  keeping  the  passover,  and  to  the  oflering*  made 
by  Mary  for  her  purification  :  see  Luke  ii.  24. 

As  they  paid  no  regard  to  the  institutions  of  Moses,  and 
denied  our  Lord  to  be  born,  or  to  have  real  flesh,  it  is  no 

rum  nostrariim  ostenderet.  Et  quemadmodum  in  se  mortis  similitudinein 
ostendit,  et  se  a  Patre  esse  de  medio  mortuorum  resuscitatum  ;  eo  modo  sen- 
timus  et  de  animis  nostris  futiirum,  quod  per  ipsum  poterimus  ab  hac  morte 
liberari.     Fortun.  Disp.  i.  n.  7. 

•=  Quapropter  et  nos  Moysen, — plus  tamen  hinc  exsecramur,  quod  Christum 
filium  Dei,  qui  nostrae  salutis  causa  pependit  in  ligno  diro  devotionis,  convicio 

lacessivit. Ait  enim  maledictum  esse  omnem  qui  pendet  in  ligno.     Faust. 

1.  14.  c.  i.  in.  •*   cum  Christus   Thomam   apostolum 

dubitantem  de  se  aspernatus  non  sit,  sed  quo  animi  ejus  vulnenbus  medere- 
tur,  corporis  sui  cicatrices  ostendit.     Faust.  1.  IG.  c.  8. 

*  Dico  autem  hoc,  ipsum  natum  ex  femina  turpiter,  circumcisum  judaice, 
sacrificasse  gentihter,  baptizatum  humihfer,  circumductum  a  diabolo  per 
deserla,  et  ab  eo  lentatum  quam  miserrime.  His  igitur  exceptis,  et — credimiis 
caetera,  praecipue  crucis  ejus  mysticam  fixionem,  qua  nostrae  animae  passionis 
monstrantur  vulnera.     Faust.  1.  32.  c.  7. 


332  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

wonder  that  they  excepted  against  the  things  jus-t  nieiitioneci, 
and  to  his  circumcision. 

In  the  Acts  of  Archelaus,  Mani  is  represented*^  excepting- 
against  the  account  of  Christ's  baptism,  because  that  ordi- 
nance signitied  remission  of  sins,  whereas  Jesus  was  free 
from  sin.  But  there  is  no  just  ground  for  that  exception 
in  the  history  of  our  Lord's  baptism,  as  recorded  by  the 
evangelists. 

As  for  their  denying  Christ's  temptation,  undoubtedly 
that  is  a  consequence  of  their  supposition  that  Ciirist  was 
God  and  not  man. 

As  for  the  mystic,  figurative  crucifixion,  it  is  likely  that 
the  passages  above  transcribed  may  be  of  use  to  enable  the 
reader  to  form  some  notion  of  their  meaning.  1  likewise 
refers  to  Beausobre. 

Faustus  does  elsewhere  speak  of'^  a  passible  Jesus.  And' 
Secundinus  has  somewhat  to  the  like  purpose:  but  the 
meaning"  is  not  obvious.  I  apprehend  that  if  we  had  Aga- 
pius,  or  more  of  Mani's  works,  we  might  understand  this, 
and  some  other  things,  better  than  we  do. 

Before  1  quit  this  article,  I  choose  to  put  down  some 
observations  of  Beausobre,  which  may  afford  useful  illustra- 
tions. 

'  The  grace  of  the  Saviour,'  says'*  he  briefly,  '  consists  in 
'  enabling  the  soul  to  understand  its  nature,  its  origin,  its 
'  duties,  its  hopes,  and  in  giving  it  necessary  assistances  for 
'  breaking  the  chains  of  carnal  passions.'  In  other  places 
more  largely :  '  The'  grace  of  Jesus  Christ  has  several 
'  branches :  but  the  principal  is  the  giving  the  soul  the 
'  knowledge  of  its  nature  and  origin,  which  it  had  in  a 
'  manner  lost  since  its  union  with  matter.  Another  branch 
*  is  discovering  to  the  soul  the  snares  of  the  devil,  the  means 
'  of  escaping-  them,  and  of  returning  to  its  heavenly  country. 
'  This  is  what  Fortunatus  says  to  Augustine:  "  As"'  we  sin 

'  Manes  dixit :  Ergo  baptisma  propter  remi&sionem  peccatorum  datur  ? 
Archelans  dixit :  Etiam.  Manes  dixit :  Ergo  peccavit  Christus,  quia  bap- 
tizatus  est  >  Archelaiis  dixit :  Absit.  ap.  Arch.  c.  50.  p.  94. 

8  See  him,  T.  2.  p.  546. 

''  Necnon  et  Spiritus  Sancti — aeris  hunc  omnem  ambitum  sedem  fatemur  ac 
diversorium ;  cujus  ex  viribus  ac  spirituali  profusione,  terram  quoque  conci- 
pientem,  gignere  patibilem  Jesum,  qui  est  vita  ac  salus  horainum,  onini 
suspensus  ex  ligno.     Faust.  1.  20.  c.  2. 

'  noli  esse  crroris  lancea,  qua  latus  percutitur  Salvatoris.    Vides  enim 

ilium  et  in  omni  mundo  et  in  omni  anima  crucifixum,  quae  anima  nunquam 
habuit  succensendi  naturam.     Secundin.  ad  Aug.  n.  3. 

"  Beaus.  T.  i.  p.  569.  in.  '  T.  2.  p.  548,  549.     See  also  p.  546,  547. 

"^  Nam  quia  inviti  peccamus,  et  cogimur  a  contrana  et  inimica  nobis  sub- 
stantia, idcirco  sequimur  scientiam  rerum.     Qua  scientia  admonita  anima,  et 


The  Manichccs.     Sect.  IV.  383 

*  unwillingly,  and  are  compelled  by  the  substance  which  is 
'  adverse  and  contrary  to  us,  we  endeavour  to  gain  tlie 
'  knowledge  of  things.  By  this  knowledge  the  soul,  rc- 
'  covering  its  tirst  ideas,  conies  to  understand  its  original, 
'  and  its  present  misery.  Then  correcting  its  past  faults, 
'  and   practising  good  works,  it  obtains  reconciliation  with 

*  God,  under  the  conduct  of  our  Saviour,  who  teaches  both 

*  what  good  things  we  should  do,  and  what  evil  things  we 
'  should  avoid."  And,  as  Fortunatus  afterwards  adds : 
'  "  It"   is  clear  therefore,  that  repentance  is  given   the  soul 

*  since  the  coming  of  the  Saviour,  and  since  this  knowledge 
'  of  things;  by  which,  being*  washed,  as  in  a  divine  fountain, 
'  and  purified  from  the  vices  and  defilements  of  the  world, 
'  which  it  had  contracted  in  the  body,  it  may  be  restored  to 

*  the  kingdom  of  God  whence  it  came."  ' 

XXII 1.  And  now,  since  the  Manichees  denied  that  Christ 
really  suflTered,  we  are  led  to  observe  still  more  distinctly 
whether  they  thought  his  death  to  have  the  nature  of  a  sacri- 
fice, or  what  ends  and  uses  his  seeming  death  answered. 
Beausobre,  who  has  written  their  history  with  great  care, 
and  nicely  examined  their  opinions,  speaks  to  this  point 
more  than  once  ;  and  his  words  are  very  remarkable. 

'  The  Manichees,'  says*'   he,  '  had  no  temples,  for  they 

*  had  no  idols. — Nor  had  they  any  altars,  because  they  had 
'  no  sacrifice,  no,  not  that  which  the  ancient  church  called 
'  the  sacrifice  of  commemoration.  For  they  did  not  believe 
'  that  Jesus  Christ  really  suffered,  nor  consequently  that  his 
'  death  was  a  true  sncrifice.  The  eucharist  with  them  was 
'  only  a  ceremony  of  thanksgiving  in  memory  of  the  mystic 
'  crucifixion  of  our  Saviour.  That  crucifixion,  according 
'  to  them,  had  only  moral  views.' 

Again  :  '  TheP  Manichees,  as  they  ascribed  little  to  faith, 
'  ascribed  a  great  deal  to  good  works,  which  they  considered 
'  as  an  essential  and  absolutely  necessary  condition  of  sal  va- 
'  tion.  They  had  not  the  same  notion  of  the  death  of  Christ 
'  that  we  have.  According  to  us,  it  is  an  offering-  made  to 
'  God  for  the  expiation  of  the  sins  of  men  :  according  to 

memoriae  pristinse  reddita,  recognoscit  ex  quo  originem  trahat,  in  quo  malo 
versetur,  quibus  bonis  iterum  emendans  quod  nolens  peccavit,  possit  per 
emendafionem  delictorum  suorum,  bonorum  operum  gratia,  meritum  sibi 
reconciliationis  apud  Deum  coUocare,  auctore  Salvatore  nostra,  qui  nos  docet 
et  bona  exercere,  et  mala  fugere.     Fortunat.  Disp.  2.  n.  20. 

"  Unde  patet  recte  esse  poenitentiam  datam  post  adventum  salvatoris,  et 
post  banc  scientiam  rerum,  qua  possit  anima,  acsi  divino  fonte  lota,  de  sor- 
dibus  et  vitiis  tarn  mundi  totius,  quam  corponim  in  quibus  eadem  anima  ver- 
satur,  regno  Dei.  unde  progressa  est,  repi-aesentari.  ib.  n.  21. 

»  T.  2.  p.  703,  704.  p  Ibid.  p.  794.  m. 


384  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

'  them,  it  is  only  an  act  of  sublime  virtue,  the  end  ofi  which 
'  is,  on  the  one  hand,  to  teach  men  not  to  fear  death,  and  to 
'  crucify  the  flesh  ;  and  on  the  other  hand  to  assure  them 
'  of  the  immortality,  of  which  Christ  has  given  them  a  pat- 
'  tern  in  his  resurrection.' 

And,  after  quoting-  the  passages  of  Fortunatus  transcribed 
above,'  the  same  learned  author  says  :  '  It^  hence  appears 
'  that  the  Manichees  ascribed  the  salvation  of  the  soul  to 
'  the  doctrine  of  the  Saviour.  They  could  not  ascribe  it  in 
'  any  manner  to  the  virtue  of  his  blood,  or  of  his  sacrifice; 
'  furasiuuch  as  they  did  not  believe  that  he  had  blood,  or 
'  that  he  made  himself  a  sacrifice.  All  the  eflicacy  of  the  mi- 
'  nistry  of  Christ  consisted  in  the  power  of  his  doctrine,  sup- 
'  ported  by  his  miracles.'  He  then  adds,  '  he  cannot  certainly 
'  say  how  they  explained  those  texts  of  scripture  which  speak 
'  of  our  being-  redeemed  by  the  blood  of  Christ :  but  perhaps 
'  they  thereby  meant  his  doctrine,  an  explication  which  he 
'  has  met  with  in  so  ancient  and  venerable  a  writer  as* 
'  Clement  of  Alexandria.' 


SECT.  V. 


THEIR  WORSHIP. 


I,  Its  simplicity.  II.  Their  public  worship ;  prayers, 
reading  the  scriptvres,  with  discoifrses.  HI.  Their  bap- 
tism and  eucharist.  IV.  They  observed  the  Lord's-day, 
V.  Jlnd  Easter,  and  Pentecost,  and  the  anniversary  of 
Manias  martyrdom.     VI.  Their  discipline. 

I.  IT  is  now  proper  to  take  some  notice  of  their  worship. 

Here  a  fine  passage  of  Faustus  offers  itself.  He  is  showing 
the  difference  between  his  sect  and  heathens:  *  They*  think 

1  See  more  to  the  same  purpose,  ib.  p.  546. 

■■  See  notes  "■  and  "  p.  383.  •  Beaus.  T.  2.  p.  549. 

^  '  Et  sanguis  filii  ejus  mundat  nos.'  Doctrina  quippe  Domini,  quae  valde 
fortis  est,  sanguis  ejus  appellala  est.  Clem.  Admnbr.  in  Ep.  i.  Joan.  p.  1009. 
ed.  Pott.  Ayopa^fi  ^t  tj/ia^KvptoQ  rifiui)  (t'lfiuTi,  SimroTwv  TraXai  rov  ttikqcov 
airaWaaauiv  cifiapriojv.  Si  ag  ra  Trvtvua-iica  rr/g  Troi'jjpiat,-  tKvpitvrfv  rjjMov. 
Id.  in  Eel.  p.  994.  n.  20. 

*  Item  Pagani  aris,  delubris,  simulachris,  victimis,  atque  incenso,  Deum 


Tlic.  Manichccs.     Sect.  v.  385 

*  that  God  is  to  be  worsliipjjcd  with  altars,  victims,  chapels, 
'  iiiiage.s,  incense.     1,  if  1  niiiiht  l)e  worthy,  woukl  esteem 

*  myself  a  reasonable  temple  of  God.  Christ,  his  .Son,  1 
'  receive  as  a  living-  image  of  the  living-  God.     Mis  altar  is 

*  my  mind,  cultivated  with  care,  and  endowed  with  know- 
'  ledge  and  just  sentiments.  The  honours  and  sacrifices 
'  which  I  present  to  the  Deity,  are  prayers,  and  those  pure 
'  and  simple.' 

So  Faustus.  And  Beausobre  supposeth  that'*  their  wor- 
ship was  generally  simple  and  plain,  like  that  of  a  sect  that 
arose  and  separated  from  the  catholics  in  the  third  century, 
and  was  always  persecuted. 

II.  They  had  public  worship  where*^  prayers  were  per- 
formed, at  which  all  were  present,  auditors  as  well  as  elect: 
for  Augustine,  who  never  entered  into  the  higher  order,  was 
present  at  them. 

Prayer  was  a  religious  exercise,  in  which  they  were 
often  engaged,  either  publicly  or  privately,  both  by  night 
and  by  day.  This  may  be  argued  from  what  Augnstiiie*^ 
said  of  the  different  points  of  the  heavens,  to  which  they 
turned  themselves  in  praying,  whether  in  the  day  time  or 
night  season :  not  now  to  mention  any  other  proofs  of 
this. 

They  read  the  scriptures  in  their  public  assemblies.  I 
suppose  this  may  be  inferred  from  a  passage  of  Augustine, 
where'"  he  speaks  of  their  admiring  and  reading  the  epistles 
of  the  apostles:  and  from  another  place,  where*^  he  speaks 
of  their  reading,  commending,  and  respecting  the  epistles  of 
the  apostle  Paul  ;  of  which  they  gave  wrong  interpretations, 
and  thereby  deceived  many. 

colendum  putant.  Ego  ab  his  in  hoc  quoque  multum  divei-sus  incedo,  qui 
ipsum  me,  si  modo  sim  dignus,  rationabile  Dei  templum  puto.  Vivum  vivce 
majestatis  simulacrum  Christum  Filium  ejas  accipio  :  aram,  mentem  bonis 
artibus  et  discipHnis  imbutam.  Honores  quoque  divinos  ac  sacrificia  in  soUs 
orationibus,  et  ipsis  puris  ac  simpUcibus,  pono.     Faust.  1.  20.  c.  3. 

^  A  regard  de  la  pompe,  je  ne  suis  point  surpris  qu'il  n'y  en  eut  pas  dans 
la  fete  d'  une  secte  separee  de  Teglise  des  le  iii.  siecle,  lorsque  le  culte  etoit 
encore  assez  simple,  et  qui  etoit  persccutee  par-tout.  T.  2.  p.  7il.  in.  See 
him  also,  p.  700—705. 

"  Nosti  autem  me  non  Electum  vestrum,  sed  Auditorem  fuisse.  Itaque, 
quamvis  et  orationi  vestrae  interfuerim,  et  interrogastis,  &c.  Disp.  contr. 
Foilun.  i.  n.  3. 

•>  See  before,  p.  352. 

«  Et  tamen  epistoks  apostolorum,  quibus  haec  omnia  contestantur,  tenetis, 
legitis,  praedicatis.     Aug.  contr.  Faust.  1.  12.  c.  24. 

'  Certe  et  ipsi  Manichaei  legunt  apostolum  Paulum,  et  laudant  et  honorant, 
et  ejus  epistolas  male  interpretando  multos  decipiunt.  Id.  de  Genesi,  1.  i.  c.  2 
n.  3. 

voT.  in.  2  c 


386  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  Uislorij. 

Mani's  epistle  of  the  Foundations  was  read  in  their  as- 
semblies,'' as  divers  pieces,  beside  canonical  scripture,  were 
often  read  among-  other  ancient  christians. 

It  is  likely  that  they  also  had  discourses,  explaining*  the 
principles  of  religion,  and  exhorting  to  the  practice  of 
virtue.  For  whilst  Augustine  was  among  them,  he  observed 
that'  they  earnestly  warned  men  against  sensuality,  ambition, 
and  such  other  fiinlts. 

III.  They  observed  the  christian  appointments  of  baptism 
and  the  eucharist.  Felix,  in  his  dispute  with  Augustine, 
mentions''  both  these  ordinances,  as  usual  among  them. 

They  practised  infant  baptism.  This  appears  both  from 
'  Faustus  and  ™Mani  himself.  They  both  speak  of  it  as 
common  among  christians;  and  they  show  their  approbation 
of  it. 

They  baptized  into  the  name  of  the  Father,  the  Son,  and 
the  Holy  Ghost,  as  we  learn  from"  Athanasius. 

Jerom"  speaks  of  the  Manichaean  baptism. 

I  only  add,  Augustine  says  that?  the  Manichees,  in  that 
respect  differing  from  the  Pelagians,  say  infants  have  need 
of  a  Saviour  on  account  of  the  corruption  which  the  sin  of 
the  first  man  transmits  upon  them. 

They  had  the  eucharist  frequently,  as'i  Augustine  knew 
very  well,  though  he  never  was  present  at  it. 

They  communicated  in  both  kinds.  As  much  may  be 
inferred  from  the  infamous  story  of  their  eucharist,  formerly 

»  Ipsa  enira  nobis  illo  tempore  miseris  quando  lecta  est,  illurainati  diceba- 
mur  a  vobis.     Contr.  Ep.  Fund.  c.  v.  n.  6. 

*■  See  Vol.  ii.  of  this  work,  p.  32,  33,  58. 

'  Neque  hoc  eorum  doctringe  tribuo :  fateor  enim  et  illos  sedulo  monere, 
ut  ista  caveantur.     De  Ut.  Cred.  c.  i.  n.  3. 

''.  Si  adversarius  niillus  contra  Deum  est,  ut  quid  baptizati  surnus  ?  ut  quid 
(  ucharistia  ?  ut  quid  christianitas,  si  contra  Deuni  nihil  est  ?  Act.  cum.  Fel.  c. 
]  9.  ap.  Aug.  T.  8.  '  Unde  etiam  omnis  religio,  et  maxime 

Christiana,  ad  sacramentura  rudes  infantes  appellat  ?  Faust.  1.  24.  c.  i. 

*"  Qui  his  verbis  mihi  interrogandi  sunt :  Si  omne  malum  actuale  est, 
antequam  malum  quispiam  agat,  quare  accipit  purificationem  aquae,  cum 
nullum  malum  egerit  per  se  ?  Aut  si  nee  dum  egit,  et  purificandus  est,  licet 
[al.  liquet,]  eos  naturaliter  malae  stirpis  pullulationem  ostendere.  Manet.  Ep. 
ap.  Aug.  op.  Imp.  1.  3.  c.  187. 

"  OijT(x)  MaT't;^atoi,  Kai  ^(JvyiQ,  Kai  o'l  th  ^anoffareiog  [ia9t]rai,  ra  ovofiara 
XiyovTtc,  aSiv  t/TTov  fiaiv  ai^itriKoi.     Or.  2.  contr.  Ar.  n.  43.  p.  510.  E. 

".Diaconus.erat, et  a  Manichasis  baptizatos  recipiebas.     Hier.  contr. 

Lucifer.  T.  4.  P.  2.  p.  305.  m. 

P  quod  non  vult  Manichaeus  ;  ut  tamen  propter  vitium,  quod  in  eos 

per  peccatuin  primi  honiinis  pertransiit,  fateatur  et  parvulis  necessarium  salva- 
toreni,  quod  non  vult  Pelagius.     Contr.  duas  Ep.  Pclag.  c.  4.  n.  3.  T.  10. 

•I  Nam  et  eucharistiam  audivi  a  vobis  saepe  quod  accipiatis.  Tempus  autem 
CI  m  melateret,  quid  accipiatis,  unde  nOsse  potui  ?  Contr.  Fort.  Disp.  i.  n.  3. 


The  Manichecs.     Sect.  V.  387 

taken  notice  of  But,  as  the  elect  might  nut  drink  wine/  it  is 
doubtful  what  liquor  tluy  made  use  of;  whether  pure 
water,  or  water  «  ilh  raisins,  or  somewhat  else,  steeped  in 
it.  Beausobre  is  inclined  to  think  that'  they  made  use  of 
pure  water;  therein  following-  the  example  of  some  other 
sects  more  ancient  than  themselves.  So  it  may  be  ;  I  do 
not  deny  it.  But  I  almost  Monder  that  Beausobre  did  not 
here  recollect  what  Augustine  writes  of  the  diet  of  the 
elect,  which  he  himself  also  has  given  a  distinct  account 
of  elsewhere.  For,  if  Augustine  may  be  relied  upon,  and 
has  been  guilty  of  no  misrepresentation,  the  elect,"  though 
forbidden  the  use  of  wine,  did  sometimes  drink  beer,  cyder, 
and  a  sort  of  boiled  wine,  or  liquor  resembling  wine. 

In  the  time  of  pope  Leo,  called  the  Great,  the  people  of 
this  sect  at  Rome,  the  better  to  conceal  themselves  and 
avoid  the  severity  of  the  laws,  communicated  with  the 
catholics.  They^  received  the  bread,  but  they  avoided  the 
cup  as  much  as  possible;  because,  as  I  suppose,  they 
scrupled  to  taste  wine. 

IX.  The  Manichees  observed  the  Lord's  day,  but  fasted 
upon  it,  auditors  as  well  as  elect.  This  is  taken  notice  of 
by^*  Augustine,  "Ambrose,  >Leo,  just  quoted.  Ebedjesu, 
cited  by  Asseman,  gives  this  reason  of  that  practice  :  '  They^ 
'  expected  the  coming  of  Christ  on  that  day.'  Which  leads 
Beausobre  to  say,  they*  then  meditated  upon  the  last  com- 
ing of  Christ,  at  the  end  of  this  inferior  world  which  we 

'  B.  T.  2.  p.  721.  ^  lb.  p.  723.  '  lb.  p.  774,  775. 

"  bibat  auteru  mulsum,  caroenum  passum,  et  nounullorum  pomorum 

expresses  succos,  vini  speciem  satis  imitantes. — De  Mor.  Manich.  c.  13.  n. 
29.  Hordei  quidara  succo  vinum  imitantur,  quod  movendo  fit  optimum. 
Sane,  quod  rninime  praetereundum  est,  hoc  genus  potus  citissime  mebriat. 
Nee  famen  unquam  succum  hordei  fel  principum  esse  dixistis.  ib.  cap.  16. 
n.  46. — et  caroenum,  quod  bibitis,  nihil  aliud  quam  coctuni  vinum  esse 
videamus.  ib.  n.  47.  Conf.  c.  13.  n.  30. 

"  Cumquead  tegendam  infidelitatem  suam  nostris  audent  interesse  mysteriis, 
ifa  in  sacramentorum  communione  se  temperant,  ut  interdum  tutius  lateant. 
Ore  indigno  corpus  Christ!  accipiunt,  sanguinem  autem  redemtioois  nostrae 
haurire  onmino  declinant.     Leo.  Serm.  4.  de  Quadragesima. 

"  Die  autera  dominico  jejunare  scandalum  est  magnum,  maxima  postea- 

quam  innotuit  detestabilis haeresis  Mauichaeorum,  qui  suis  auditoribus 

ad  jejunandum  istum  tanquam  constituerunt  legitimam  diem.  Augustin.  Ep. 
ad  Casulan.  36.  [al.  86.]  n.  27.  Vid.  ib.  n.  29.  Die  quoque  dominico 
cum  illis  jejunant,  *  auditors  scilicet.'     Ep.  236.  [al.  74.]  n.  ^. 

"  Dominica  autem  jejunare  non  possumus,  quia  Manichaeos  etiam  ob  istins 
diei  jejunium  damnamus.     Ambr.  Ep.  23.  T.  2.  p.  883.  n.  xi. 

y  Vid.  1^0.  Serm.  iv.  de  Quadrag.  et  passim. 

'  Manichaei,  resurrect ionem  abnegantes,  contra  christianos  jejunium  luc- 
tumque  in  die  dominico  faciunt,  aientes,  in  isto  die  fore  ut  hoc  seculum 
subeat  interitum  dissolutionemque  omnem  post  cnculum  novem  miliium 
annorum.  ap.  Assem.  Bib.  Or.  T.  4.  p.  361.  »  B.  T.  2.  p.  709. 

2  c  2 


388  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

inhabit.  Supposing-  that  the  conflagration  and  dissolution 
of  our  earth  would  happen  on  a  Lord's-day,  and  not  know- 
ing which,  they  ever  passed  that  day  in  fasting  and  prayer, 
that  the  Lord,  when  he  came,  might  find  them  in  the  exer- 
cise of  humiliation  and  repentance. 

V.  The  Manichees,  or  however  those  of  Africa,  kept 
Easter,  as  we  learn  from''  Augustine  ;  who  only  blames  them 
that  they  did  not  keep  it  with  sufiicient  solemnity. 

Beausobre  supposes  that"  there  is  no  good  reason  to  doubt 
of  their  keeping  the  feast  of  Pentecost. 

In  the  month'*  of  March,  and  therefore  usually  about  the 
time  of  Easter,  they  celebrated  the  anniversary  of  the  mar- 
tyrdom of  Mani,  which  was  called  Bema,  or  the  master's 
chair. 

VI.  Their  ecclesiastical  constitution' we "^  saw  formerly, 
in  the  passage  of  Augustine  concerning  their  elect  and 
auditors. 

It  is  likely  they  had  also  some  ecclesiastical  discipline, 
and  that  censures  of  their  church  were  pronounced  upon 
bad  livers.  This  is  supposed  in  a  story  told  by  Augustine 
of  an  indecency  committed  by  some  of  the  elect,  whilst  he 
was  of  that  sect.  He  says,  that*^  he  and  others  were  oflTended, 
and  expected  that  the  men  should  have  been  excommuni- 
cated, or  at  least  sharply  reproved  ;  but,  as  it  seems,  little 
notice  was  taken  of  the  matter.  The  excuse  they  made 
was,  that  their  assemblies  were  then  prohibited  by  the  laws, 
and  therefore  some  inconvenience  might  happen,  if  their  prin- 
cipal men  were  disobliged.  He  argues  with  them,  ass  if  an 
elect  would  be  degraded  for  eating  the  smallest  bit  of  flesh. 

''  Cum  saepe  a  vobis  quaBrerein,  illo  tempore  quo  vos  audiebam,  quae  causa 
esset,  quod  Pascha  Domini  plerumqiie  nulla,  interdum  a  paucis  tepidissima 

festivitate  frequentaretur, cum  vestrum  Bema,  id  est,  dieni  quo  Mani- 

chaeus  occisus  est,  quinque  gradibus  instructo  tribunali,  et  pretiosis  Imteis 

adornato, magnis  honoribus  prosequamini  ?  Contr.  Ep.  Manich.  c.  8. 

n.  9.  <"  SeeT.  2.  p.  71].n.  xi. 

^  Illo  enim  mense  (Martio)  Bema  vestrum  cum  magna  festivitate  celebratis. 
Contr.  Faust.  1.  18.  c.  5.  Vid.  not.  \  ^  See  before,  p.  290,  291 . 

* vidimus  ergo  in  quadrivio  Carthaginis, — non  unum,  sed  phires  quam 

tros  electos  simul,  post  transeuntes  nescio  quas  feminas  tam  petulanti  gestu 
adhinnirc. — Nos  autem  graviter  commoti,  graviter  etiam  questi  sumus.  Quis 
tandem  hoc  vindicandum,  non  dicam  separatione  ab  ecclesia,  sed  pro  mag- 
nitudine  flagitii  vehemcnti  saltem  objurgatione  arbitratus  est?  Et  htec  erat 
omnis  excusatio  impunitatis  illorum,  quod  eo  tempore  quo  conventicula 
eorum  lege  prohiberentur,  ne  quid  laesi  proderent,  metuebatur.  De  Mor. 
Manich.  cap.  19.  n.  68,  09.  ^  Quae  ergo  ratio  est,  vel  potius 

amentia,  de  numero  electorum  hominem  pellere,  qui  forte  carnem  valetudinis 

causa,  nulla  cupiditate  gustaverit ?   Ita  fit  ut  in  electis  vestris  esse  non 

possit,  qui  proditus  fuerit,  non  concupiscendo,  sed  medendo,  partem  aliquam 
ccenasse  gallinae.     Dc  Mor.  Manich.  cap.  16.  n.  51. 


The  Manichces.     SliCT.  VF,  ;^8f) 

SECT.  VI. 

THE  MANICH/EAN  DOCTRINE  CONCERNING  THE  SCRIITURES. 

I.  M  sianmary  account  of  their  scheme.  II.  They  rejected 
the  Old  Testament.  III.  Their  notion  of  John  Baptist. 
IV.  What  hooks  of  the  JWixc  Testament  they  received.  1. 
They  received  the  Neic  Testament  in  general,  or  the  yos- 
pels  and  the  epistles  of  St.  Paul.  2.  What  they  said  of 
St.  Matthew's  yospel.  3.  Whether  they  received  the 
Acts  of  the  Apostles  ?  4.  They  received  St.  PauVs  epis- 
tles :  5.  Particularly  that  to  the  Hehreivs.  6.  Of  their 
receiving  an  epistle  to  the  Laodiceans.  7.  Whether  they 
received  the  catholic  epistles  ?  8.  And  the  Revelation  ? 
9.  Probably,  they  received  all  the  canonical  scriptures  of 
the  New  Testament.  V.  ProoJ's  of  their  respect  for  the 
scriptures  of  the  Neiv  Testament.  VI.  Of  their  pretence 
that  the  books  of  the  JVew  Testament  had  been  corrupted 
and  interpolated.  1.  Passages  of  ancient  catholic  authors 
concerning  tliat  matter.  2.  Passages  of  F'austus  concern- 
ing the  same.  VII.  Remarks  upon  the  passages  of  Faustus. 
VIII.  The  Manichees  vindicated  from  the  charges  of 
forging  and  interpolating  scripture.  1.  They  did  not 
forge  a  letter  ascribed  to  Christ.  2.  That  they  did  not 
interpolate  the  books  of  the  JVew  Testament.  IX.  Of 
the  apocryphal  books  used  by  them.  1.  Augustine\<i 
definition  of  such  books.  2.  Proofs  of  their  using  apo- 
cryphal scriptures,  and  what.  3.  An  account  of  Leucius, 
a  great  icriter  of  apocryphal  books.  1.  His  tvorks.  2. 
His  opinions.  3.  His  time.  4.  Remarks  upon  the  uwrks 
of  Leucius,  and  the  apocryphal  books  used  by  the  Mani- 
chees. 

WE  are  now  come  to  the  principal  point,  and  perhaps  as 
difficult  as  any,  to  show  what  books  of  scripture  the  Mani- 
chees received,  and  what  regard  they  had  for  them. 

I.  Augustine's  general  account  is  to  this  effect :  '  They'' 

*  Deum,  qui  legem  per  Moysen  dedit,  et  in  Hebraeis  prophetis  locutus  est, 
non  esse  verum  Deum,  sed  unum  ex  principibus  tentbrarum.  Ipsiusque 
Testamenti  Novi  scripturas,  tanquam  infalsatas,  ita  legunt,  ut  quod  volunt  ipsi 
accipiant,  quod  nolunt  rejiciant ;  eisque,  tanquam  lotum  verum  habentes, 
nonnullas  apocryphas  anteiwnunt.  Aug.  de  Hasr.  c.  4G. 


390  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

'  say  that  the  God  who  delivered  the  law  by  Moses,  and 
'  spake  in  the  Hebrew  prophets,  is  not  the  true  God,  but 
'  one  of  the  princes  of  darkness.  The  scriptures  oftiieNew 
'  Testament  they  receive,  but  say  they  are  interpolated,  tak- 
'  ing-  what  they  like,  and  rejecting-  the  rest,  and  preferring 
'  to  them  some  apocryphal  scriptures  as  containing  the  whole 
'  truth.' 

Here  are  therefore  four  things  to  be  observed  by  us,- — their 
rejecting-  the  Old  Testament;  >vhat  books  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment they  received  ;  then  in  what  manner  they  received 
them,  or  what  regard  they  had  for  them  ;  and  lastly,  what 
apocryphal  books  they  made  use  of. 

J  I.  Concerning  the  Old  Testament. 

That  the  Manichees  universally,  and,  all  along,  rejected 
the  books  of  the  Old  Testament,  or  the  Jewish  scriptures,  is 
evident  from  the  testimonies  of  almost  all  writers,  who  have 
taken  any  notice  of  this  people. 

It  is  intimated  by*^  Serapion. 

The  design  of  the*^  third  book  of  Titus  of  Bostra  was  to 
vindicate  the  Old  Testament  against  their  objections. 

In  the  Acts  of  Archelaus  it  is  represented  as  one  article 
of  Mani's  doctrine,  that''  the  Jewish  prophets  were  deceived 
by  the  princes  of  darkness :  thaf^  the  princes  of  darkness 
spake  with  Moses,  and  the  Jewish  priests  and  prophets. 
Mani'  himself  is  there  made  to  speak  to  the  same  purpose, 
and  to  say  that  there  are  some  things  true  and  right  inserted 
in  the  Jewish  scriptures,  tliat  the  wrong  might  be  received, 
but  that  nothing  before  John  the  Baptist  ought  to  be  admitted 
as  of  authority. 

Faustus,  we  may  be  sure,  does^  not  speak  with  greater 
reverence  of  the  God  of  the  Jews,  than  other  Manichees. 

He  says,  moreover,  that''  the  moral  precepts  of  the  law  of 

'' fitiTi  Tov  vofiov  TiiiwvTtg.     Sciap.  ap.  Canis.  Ant.  Lect.  T.  i.  p.  47 

f.  Conf.  p.  54.  sub  fin. 

■^  'O  rpiroc  VTrep  th  vojua  /cat  twv  7rpo^»;rwr  irouiTai  Xoyov,  wt;  ■Jrapa  t«  Bm 
Tcaarjq  Trjr  TroKautg  SiaOrjictjg  SoQtwrtg.     Tit.  ]).  59.  ap.  Canis. 

^  rff()i  c^£  Tiov  Trap'  rjfitv  7rpo0j;raiv  utojc  Xtyft  -KViVfia  uvea  aaiftiiaQ,  Tjrni 
avouiag  th  ckothc,  k.  X.  Ap.  Arch.  c.  10.  ]).  18. 

"  Tov  6t  XaXijaavra  fitra  Mojitewc,  km  tujv  IsSaitov,  Kui  tojv  'tepeoiv,  tov 
apxov'<^i  Xeyii  eivai  th  okothq.  lb.  cap.  xi.  p.  20. 

'  Sed  et  ea,  quae  in  prophetis  et  in  lege  scripta  sunt,  ipsi  [Satanae]  adscri- 

l)enda  sunt.     Ipse  est  enini,  qui  in  proplidis  tunc  locutus  est et  scnbere 

pauca  quiidarn  vera,  ut  per  hiec  etiani  cetera,  qufc  sunt  falsa,  ciederentur. 
Undebonum  nobis  est  ex  omnibus  quas  usque  ad  Joannem  scripta  suni,  nihil 
omnino  suscipere.  Ap.  Arch.  c.  13.  p.  25.  Vid.  et  p.  26. 

8  Placet  ad  ingluvieni  Judaeorum  daemonis,  (neque  enim  Dei,)  tunc  tauros, 

nunc  arietes,  cuhris  sternere?  Faust.  1.  18.  c.  2.  ^ difTamatae 

in  gentibus,  id  est,  ex  quo  mundi  liujus  creatura  cxistit.  Id.  1.  22.  c.  2. 


The  Manichees.     Sect.  VI.  391 

Moses  were  not  revealed  by  him;  for  they  are  as  old  as  ihe 
world,  and  are  of  perpetual  oblioatioii.  They'  were  taiigiit 
Enoch,  Seth,  and  the  other  anci<'nt  j)atriarchs  by  angels,  (or 
the  good  government  of'the  world.  These  laws  Moses  inserted 
in  his  two  tables. 

Epiphaniiis  in  his  Synopsis  briefly  says,  they''  l)lasphenie 
the  Old  Testament,  and  the  God  that  speaks  therein.  And 
in  his  long-  argument  with  them  ho  often  takes  notice  of  their 
disadvantageous  notion  of  the  Old  Testament. 

Hilary'"  speaks  of  their  enmity  to  the  law  and  the  pro- 
phets. 

Cyril  of  Jerusalem"  takes  notice  of  the  same  thing. 

In  Jerom,"  Mani  is  frequently  joined  with  Marcion,  and 
others,  who  rejected  the  Old  Testament. 

Augustine  had  frequent  occasion  to  speak  of  this  matter, 
and  sometimes  says  theyi'  presumed  to  afiirm  that  '  the  law 
*  given  by  Moses  was  not  from  God,  but  from  one  of  the 
'  princes  of  darkness.'  And  he  informs  us  thati  this  was 
one  of  those  arguments  in  which  they  triumphed  ;  and  that 
they  had  too  much  success  in  deceiving"  weak  people  by  the 
objections  they  brought  against  the  Old  Testament.  Arche- 
laus  too  intimates  that  Masii  argued  upon  this  point  with 
much  confidence,  and  in  a  specious  manner,  when  he  says 
he"^  thought  the  devil  helped   him.     Indeed   it  is  thought 

'  Haec  auterti  erant  antiquitus  in  nationibus,  iit  est  in  piomtu  probare,  olim 
promulgata  per  Enoch,  et  Seth,  et  caeteros  eorum  similes  jiistos  quibus  eadeni 
illustres  tradiderint  angeli  femperandae  in  hominibus  gratia  fentatis.  lb.  1.  19. 
C.  3.  ''   HaXaiav  diaOijKrjv  (i\aa(pr]HHVTiq,  km  tov   tv  avry 

\a\j](Tavra  Qtov.     Epiph.  T.  i.  p.  60.5. 

'  Id.  Haer.  66.  c.  43.  p.  656.  c.  70.  p.  691.  et  pas.^im. 

'"  Manichffius  enim  abrupti  in  improbanda  lege  et  prophetis  fiirori'.  Hil. 
de  Trin.  1.  6.  n.  10.  p.  884.  "  Cat.  6.  c.  27.  p.  104. 

°  Et  contrario  hasretici,  Marcion  et  Manichseus,  et  omnes  qui  veterem  legem 
rabido  ore  dilaniant.  Hieron.  in  Ecc.  T.  2  p.  778.  in.  Non  quo  legem  juxfa 
Manichaum  et  Marcionern  destriiaraus.  Id.  ad  Aug.  Ep.  74.  [al.  89.]  p.  624. 
m.  Audiant  Marcion  et  Manichaeus,  et  cseteri  haeretici,  qui  vetus  laniant 
instrumentuni.  Id.  in  Matt.  c.  x.  T.  4.  P.  i.  p.  33.  m.  Audi  Marcion,  audi 
Manichaee;  bon;K  margaritae  sunt  lex  et  prophetse,  et  notitia  VetensTestanienti. 
Id.  in.  Matt.  c.  13.  p.  59.  f.  Aliud  est  daninare  legem,  quod  Manichtens  facit, 
aliud  legi  praferre  evangelium,  quae  apostolica  doctrina  est.  Id.  in  Dial.  i. 
adv.  Pelag.  T.  4.  p.  503.  in. 

p  Patriarchas  pro|)hetasque  blasphemant.  Legem  per  famuliim  Dei  Moysen 
datam,  non  a  vero  Deo  dicunt,  sed  a  principe  tenebrarum.  Aug.  Ep.  236.  al.  74. 

1  Nam  bene  nosti,  quod  reprehendenles  Manichaei  cathol.cam  fidem,  et 
maxinie  Vetus  Testamentum  discerpentes  et  dilaniantes,  commovent  impcri- 
tos.     Id.  de  Util.  Cred.  c.  2.  n.  4.  T.  8. 

■"  Deinde  ccepit  dicere  plurima  ex  Lege,  multa  etiam  de  Evangelio,  et 
apostolo  Paulo,  quae  sibi  videntur  esse  contraria;  quae  etiam  cum  fiducia 
dicens,  nihil  pertimescit.  Credo,  quod  habeat  adjutorem  draconem  ilium, 
qui  nobis  semper  inimicus  est.     Aich.  cap.  40.  n.  69. 


392  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

by  some  that*  the  ancient  christians  were  not  able  to  defend 
the  Old  Testament  so  well  as  we  have  done  in  late  times. 

It  would  be  tedious  to  mention  all  the  3Ianicliaean  ob- 
jections;  I  shall  however  take  notice  of  some  of  them. 

They  pretended  to  take  ofl'ence  at  the  representations* 
given  of  God  in  the  Old  Testament,  as  if  he  had  bodily  parts 
and  human  passions;  as  if  he  was  ignorant  of  some  things, 
and  envious,  and  cruel,  and  passionate. 

Their  objections  against  the  first  three  chapters  of  the  book 
of  Genesis  may  be  seen  in  "Faustus,  and  in  a  work  of^  Au- 
gustine, purposely  written  in  defence  of  the  beginning  of  that 
book. 

Faustus  argues,  that'"  they  were  not  Jews,butGentiles:  that 
they  came  directly  to  Christ,  and  not  by  the  way  of  Judaism. 
If  therefore  there  had  been,  as  possibly  there  were,  Gentile 
prophets,  they  would  be  more  profitable  to  them  than  the 
Jewish. 

They  said  that,''  whilst  they  were  Gentiles  and  before  they 
believed,  the  scriptures  of  the  Old  Testament  were  useless, 
because  they  could  then  be  of  no  authority  with  them;  and 
Avhen  the  gospel  was  embraced,  they  were  altogether  needless. 

They  said  theyJ'  were  satisfied  with  the  New  Testament, 
which  the  Jews  rejected,  and  that  very  much,  out  of  too 
great  a  regard  for  the  Old. 

They  found  fault  with^  the  Israelites  spoiling  the  Egyp- 
tians by  the  order  of  Moses. 

'  See  Beaus.  T.  i.  p.  283,  &c. 

'  nunc  ignarum  fiituri, — nunc  ut  improvidum — nunc  ut  invidura 

et  tiraentem,  ne,  si  gustaret  homo  sous  de  ligno  vitfe,  in  Eeternum  viveret : 
nunc  alias  et  appetentem  sanguinis  atque  adipis  ex  omni  genere  sacrificio- 
rum — nunc  irascentem  in  alienos,  nunc  in  suos,  nunc  perimentem  miliia 
hominum  ob  levia  quidem  aut  nulla  commissa;  nunc  etiam  comminantem, 
venturum  se  fore  cum  gladio,  et  parciturum  nemini,  non  jui-to,  non  peccalori. 
Faust.  1.  22.  c.  4.  "  Ibid. 

^  Aug.  de  Genesi  contra  Manichaeos.  libr.  iii.  Tom.  i. 

"  Porro  autem  nos  natura  Gentiles  sumu<, — sub  alia  nati  lege, — non  ante 
effecti  Judsi,  ut  merito  Hebraicorum  sequeremur  fidem,  euntes  ad  christia- 

nismum Ita  nihil,  utdixi,  ecclesiae  christianae  Hebraeonim  tesfimonia  confe- 

runt,  quae  raagis  constat  ex  Gentibus  quam  ex  Judaeis.  Sane  si  sunt  aliqua, 
ut  fama  est,  Sibyllse  de  Cliristo  prsesagia,  aut  Hermetis,  quern  dicunt  Trisme- 
gistum,  aut  Orphei,  aliorumque  in  Gentilitate  vatum ;  h;cc  nosaliquanto  ad 
fidem  juvare  potuerunt,  qui  ex  Gentibus  cfficimur  christiani,  &c.  Faust.  1.  13. 
c.  i.  ^  Hebraeorum  vero  testimonia  nobis,  etiam  si  sint  vera, 

ante  fidem  inutilia  sunt,  post  fidem  supervacua;  quia  ante  fidem  eis  crede  e 
non  poteramus,  nee  vero  ex  superfluo  credimus.  Faust.  1.  13.  c.  i. 

■>■  Quare  non  accipis  Testamentum  Vetus  ?  Quia  et  omne  vas  plenum  super- 
fusa  non  recipit,  sed  effundit, — Proinde  et  Judaei  ex  praeoccupatione  Muyseos 
Testamento  Veteri  satiati,  respuerunt  Novum.  Id.  1.  1.5.  cap.  i.  in. 

'  Ibi  vero  Moses  argentum  et  aurum  ab  .ffigyptiis  sumens,  cum  pnpukis 


7746  Manichees.     Sect.  VI.  393 

The  appointment  of  sacrifices,  such  as  those  in  the  law  of 
Moses,  they  pretentled  was  unworthy  of  God,  and  therefore 
was  not  from  him,  but  from  some  evil  beings.  This  way  of 
arguing-  is  ascribed  to  Mani '  in  the  Acts  of  Archelaus,  and 
is  also  made  use  of  by**  Faustus. 

It  is  easy  to  think  they''  did  not  fail  to  expose  the  ordinance 
of  circunicision,  as  much  as  they  were  able. 

They  pretended  that''  the  law  and  the  gospel  were  con- 
trary to  each  other,  and  therefore  they  were  not  both  from 
one  aiul  the  same  being-.  In  the  Old  Testament  men  are  en- 
couraged by  the  hopesof  riches, and  other  temporal  blessings. 
But  Jesus  Christ  blesseth  the  poor,  and  declareth  that  no 
man  can  be  his  disciple  who  forsaketh  not  all  that  he  hath. 
This  argument  is  put  into  the  mouth  of''  3Iani  in  the  Acts 
of  Archelaus:  and  it  is  with  the  utmost  disdain  thnt^  Faustus 
speaks  of  the  blessings  promised  in  the  Old  Testament ;  such 
as  riches,  plenty,  long-  life,  a  numerous  progeny,  a  land 
flowing-  with  milk  and  honey.  He  is  fully  satisfied  with 
the  spiritual  blessings  of  the  gospel.  Nor  would  he  accept 
of  such  good  things  as  the  law  promiseth,  if  ofl^ered  him. 
Again,  says  Faustus : '  Our^  church  is  poor  indeed,  but  she  is 

fugisset  ex  ^gypto.  Jesus  autem  nihil  proximi  desiderandum  praecepit.  Ap. 
Arch.  c.  40.  p.  G9.  *  Ipse  [Satanas]  est  enim,  qui  in  prophetis 

tunc  locutus  est,  plurimas  eis  de  Deo  ignorantias  suggerens,  et  tentationes,  et 
concupiscentias.  Sed  et  devoratorem  euin  sanguinis  et  carnis  ostendunt.  Qu3s 
omnia  ad  eum  pertinent  Satanain,  et  ad  prophetas  ejus.  Ap.  Arch.  c.  13.  p.  25. 

''  Placet  ad  ingluviem  Judaeorum  dsemonis — nunc  tauros,  nunc  arietes, 
nunc  efiam  hircos,  ut  non  et  homines  dicam,  cultris  sternere ;  ac  propter  quod 
idola  sumus  exosi,  id  nunc  exercere  crudelius  sub  prophetis  ac  lege  ?  Faust.  1. 
18.  c.  2.  Vid.  supr.  not.  ». 

'  Nam  peritomen  ege,  ut  pudendam,  despui,  ac,  si  non  fallor,  et  tu.  Id.  1. 
6.  c.  i.  Placet  ciicumcidi,  id  est,  pudendis  insignire  pudenda,  et  Deum  cre- 
dere sacramentis  talibus  delectari  ?  Id.  1.  18.  c.  2. 

^  Legem  Moysi,  ut  breviter  dicam,  dicebat  hie  non  esse  Dei  boni,  sed 
maligni  principis,  nee  habere  earn  quidquam  cognationis  ad  novam  legem 
Christi ;  sed  esse  contrariam  et  inimicam,  alteram  alteri  obsistentem.  Arch. 
c.  40.  p.  69. 

^  Dicebat  ergo,  quod  ibi  dixerit  Deus,  Ego  divilem  et  pauperem  facie. 
Hie  vero  Jesus  beatos  dicebat  pauperes.  Addebat  etiam,  quod  nemo  possit 
ejus  esse  discipulus  nisi  renunciaret  omnibus  quae  haberet.     Id.  ib. 

'  Cur  non  accipis  Testamentum  Vetus?  Quia  et  ab  ipso  hoc,  et  ex  Novo 
didicimus,  aliena  non  concupiscere. — Divitias  promittit,  et  ventris  saturitatem, 

et  filios  et  nepotes,  vitamque  longam,  et  Chananitidis  regnum. Judaeis  bona 

sua  habere,  libens  volensque  permisi,  solo  scilicet  evangelic,  et  regni  coelorum 
splendida  haereditate  contentus.  Faust.  1.  x.  c.  1.  Secunda  vero  causa  est, 
quod  t.am  etiam  misera  ejus,  et  corporalis,  ac  longe  ab  animae  commodis 
haereditas  est,  ut  post  beatam  illam  Novi  Testament!  poUicitationem,  quae 
ccelorum  mihi  regnum,  et  vitam  perpetuam  repromittit,  etiam  si  gratis  earn 
mihi  testator  suus  ingereret,  fastidirem.  Id.  1.  4.  c.  i. 

s  Et  quia  ecclesia  nostra,  sponsa  Christi,  pauperior  quidem  ei  nupta,  sed 
diviti,  contenta  sit  bonis  mariti  sui,  humilium  amatomm  dedignatur  opes. 


394  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

'  married  to  Christ,  who  is  rich;  and  she  is  contented  with 
'  the  estate  of  her  husband  :  nor  will  she  hold  any  strange 
'  correspondence,  or  receive  either  presents  or  letters  from 
'  another.' 

The  Manichees''  took  great  liberties  in  reviling  the  patri- 
archs and  the  kings  of  Israel  for  the  practice  of  polygamy  : 
and  they  unmercifully  aggravated  the  faults,  which  some 
good  men  of  the  Old  Testament  were  surprised  into,  and 
misrepresented  some  other  things.  Faustus  is  very  copious 
in  his  declamations  upon  these  points.' 

And  Augustine  tells  us  that"^  when  he  Avas  young  they 
Mould  come  to  him,  and  ask,  '  if  he  thought  they  were 
'  righteous  men  who  had  more  than  one  wife  at  a  time!' 

Jerom  informs  us  that'  they  alleged-  those  words  of  our 
Lord  in  John  x.  8,  "  All  that  ever  came  before  me  are 
thieves  and  robbers."  And  in  fact  the  Manicheean  bishop 
and  author,  so  often  quoted  already,  fails  not  to  insist  upon'" 
this  text,  and  to  apply  it  particularly  to  Moses. 

Jerom  represents  the  Manichees  arguing"  that"  it  was 
allowed  the  law  of  Moses  was  abolished,  and  therefore  we 
ought  to  receive  the  New  Testament  only. 

The  catholic  christians  maintained  the  authority  of  the  Old 
Testament,  and  put  the  Manichees  in  mind  of  divers  things 
contained  in  the  New;  as  those  words  of  our  Lord  himself, 
Matth.  V.  17:  "1  came  not  to  destroy  the  law,  but  to 
fulfil." 

This  is  in  the"  Acts  of  Archelaus,  where  Mam  by  way  of 

Sordent  ei  Testamenti  Veteris  et  ejus  auctoris  miinera ;  famaeque  suae  ciistos 
diligentissima,  nisi  sponsi  sui  non  accipit  literas.  Faust.  1.  15.  c.  i. 

^  soceros  dormire  cum  nuribus,  tanquam  Judas  ;  patres  cum  filia- 

bus,  f anquam  Loth  ;  prophetas  cum  fornicatricibus,  tanquam  Osee ;  maritos 
uxonim  suarum  noctes  amatoribus  vendere,  tanquam  Abraham ;  duabus 
germanis  sororibus  unum  miseri  maritum,  tanquam  Jacob ;  rectores  populi, 
et  quos  maxime  entheos  credas,  millenis  etcentenis  volutari  cum  scortis,  tan- 
quam David  et  Solomon.  Faust.  1.  32.  c.  4.  Vid.  et  1.  22.  c.  3.  5. 1.  12.  c.  1. 

' ac  per  hoc  et  Judaeorum  patres,  Abraham  scihcet  et  Isaac  et  Jacob 

— quanquam  fuerunt  ipsi  flagitiosissimi ;  ut  fere  Moses  indicat  eorum  prone- 
pos,  sive  quis  alius  historiae  ejusconditor  est,  quae  dicitur  Geneseos,  qui  eorum 
vitas  nobis  odio  onmi  fastidioque  dignissimas  scripsit.  Faust.  1.  -33.  c.  1. 

■^  cum  a  me  qusrerent, et  utrum  justi  existimandi  essent,  qui 

haberent  uxores  multas  simul.  Confess.  1.  3.  c.  7.  n.  12. 

'  detrahens  prophet  is  ejus,  quasi  auctoritate  testimonii  evangellci,  in 

quo  salvator  ait :  Omnes,  qui  veneruiit  ante  me,  fures  fuerunt  et  latrones.  Hier. 
in  Is.  T.  3.  p.  171.  ""  Quippe  cum  et  ipsum  dicentem  audirem, 

fures  fuisse  et  latrones  omnes,  qui  venerunt  ante  se.  Qua  sententia  primum 
omnium  video  feriri  Moysen.  Faust.  1.  16.  c.  2. 

"  Manichffius  nobis  consurgit  repente,  qui  legem  dicit  abolitam,  et  solos 
Novi  Testamenti  legendoslibros.     Adv.  Pelag.  1.  2.  T.  4.  p.  510.  m. 

°  Ego,  audiens,  dicebam  eis  sermonem  evangclicum,  quomodo  dixit  Domi- 
nus  noster  Jesus  Christus,  Non  veni  solvere  legem,  sed  adimplere.     lUe  vero 


The  Manichees.     Sect.  VI.  395 

answer  says  :  '  Christ  nover  spake  those  words,  for  it  is  not 

*  true  that  he  fulfilled  the  law,  but  that  he  destroyed  it.' 

Faustus  in  his  work  likewise  proposes  this  catholic  ob- 
jection, to  which  he  gives  a  variety  of  answers,  weak  and 
trifling-. 

They  are  such  as  these:  '  Thisi'  is  related  by  Matthew 
'  only,  and  as  spoken  by  Christ  in  his  sermon  on  the  mount, 
'  when  he  was  not  present,  but  only  the  first  four  disciples, 

*  Avho  attended  on  him  before  Matthew  Mas  called.  Of  those 
'  disciples  who  were  present  at  that  sermon  none  have 
'  written  a  gospel  but  John,  who  says  nothing-  of  this  matter. 

*  It  may  therefore  be  questioned  whether  Jesus  ever  spoke 
'  these  words.'  He  also  says  that  Matthew  himself  did  not 
write  this,  which  will  be  considered  another  time. 

Then  he  adds,  that*i  all  in  general  are  agreed  that  Christ 
came  not  to  fulfil  the  law,  but  to  destroy  it. 

After  which "^  he  comes  ag-ain  to  the  ^lanicluean  principle, 
of  examining-  and  judging-  what  is  right,  m  hat  not,  in  the 
scriptures,  and  rejecting-  what  does  not  appear  agreeable  to 
truth.  And  he  pretends  that^  if  the  catholics  will  maintain 
the  genuineness  of  this  text,  they  ought  to  obey  all  the  laws 
of  Moses,  and  be  no  long-er  christians,  but  Jews. 

Finally  he  says,  let'  us  consider  what  law  is  here  spoken 
of,  for  there  are  several  laws.  There  is  the  law  of  Moses,  the 
law  of  nature,  and  of  truth.     Which  last,  he  says,  is  spoken 

ait,  nequaquain  euni  hunc  dixisse  sermonem :  Cum  cnini  ipsam  inveuianuis 
eum  resolvisse  legem,  necesse  est  nos  hoc  potius  intelligere  quod  fecit.  Arch. 
c.  40.  p.  69. 

P  Cur  Legem  non  accipitis  et  Prophetas,  cum  Christus  eos  non  se  venisse 
solvere  dixent,  sed  adimplere  ?  qu's  hoc  festatur  dixisse  Jesum  ?  Matlhaeus. 
Ubi  dixisse  ?  In  monte.  Quibus  praesentibus  >  Petro,  Andrea,  Jacobo,  et 
Joanne,  quatuor  his  tantum:  cateros  enim  necdum  elegerat,  nee  ipsum  Mat- 
thaeum.  Ex  his  ergo  quatuor  unus,  id  est,  Joannes,  evangelium  scripsit?  Ita. 
Alicubi  hoc  ipse  commemorat  ?  Nusquam.  Quomodo  ergo,  quod  Joannes 
non  testatur,  qui  fuit  in  monte.  Matthseus  hoc  scripsit,  qui  longo  intervallo, 
postquam  Jesus  de  monte  descend  it,  secutus  est  eum  ?  Ac  per  hoc  de  hoc  ipso 
prirao  ambigitur,  utrum  Jesus  tale  aliquid  dixerit,  quia  testis  idoneus  tacet, 
loquitur  autem  minas  idoneas;  ut  interim  permiserimus  nobis  injuriam  fecisse 
Matthaeum,  donee  et  ipsum  probemus  haec  non  scripsisse. — Faust.  1.  17.  c.  i. 

*>  Uterqne  enim  nostrum  sub  hac  notione  christianus  est,  quia  Chnstum  in 
destructionem  legis  et  prophetarum  venisse  putavimus.  1.  18.  c.  1. 

■■  Et  tamen  nie  quidem  jam  adversus  capituli  hujus  necessitudinem  Mani- 
chaea  fides  reddidit  lutum, lb,  c.  3.  in. 

'  Nempe  cogeris  aut  vanae  superstitioni  succumbere,  aut  capitulum  profiteri 
falsum,  aut  te  Christi  negare  discipulum.  1.  18.  c.  3.  '. 

'  Ecce  jam  consentio  dictum. — Sunt  autem  legum  genera  tria:  unum  qui- 
dem Hebreeorum,  quod  peccati  et  mortis  Paulus  appellat ;  aliud  vero  Gentium, 
quod  naturale  vocat.  Tertium  vero  genus  legis  est  Veritas,  quod  perinde  sig- 
nificans  apostolus  dicit.  Lex  enim  spiritus  vitae  in  Christo  Jesu  liberavit  me  a 
lege  peccati  et  mortis.  Id.  1.  19.  c.  1,2. 


396  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

of  by  the  apostle,  Rom.  viii.  2,  calling-  it  "  the  law  of  the 
spirit  of  life."  And"  there  are  other  prophets,  beside  those 
of  the  Jews:  and  thaf  our  Saviour  does  not  here  speak  of 
their  law,  appears  from  the  things  he  discourseth  of;  which 
are  not  the  peculiar  ordinances  of  the  Mosaic  law,  but  those 
precepts  which  are  of  eternal  obligation. 

The  catholics  put  them  in  mind  likewise  of  John  v.  4() : 
*'  Had  ye  believed  Moses,  ye  would  have  believed  me:  for 
he  wrote  of  me." 

To  which  Faustus  makes  divers  answers:  as^  that,  upon 
searching  the  Mritings  of  JMoses,  he  coidd  not  find  any  pro- 
phecies concerning  Christ.  Therefore  our  Lord  never  spoke 
in  this  manner,  for  all  his  words  are  true.  And  he  himself 
elsewhere  declares,  "All  who  were  before  him  were  thieves 
and  robbers,"  particularly  striking  at  Moses.  Moreover, 
upon  divers  occasions,  when  he  might  have  referred  the  Jews 
to  Moses  and  the  prophets,  he  only  directs  them  to  consider 
his  miracles,  and  the  testimony  given  to  him  from  heaven 
by  God  the  Father. 

For  all  which  reasons  he  pretends  he  may  conclude  that 
this  paragraph  is  not  genuine,  but  has  been  inserted  by  the 
corrupters  of  scripture,  ^^ho  have  here  said  what  is  not  true. 

This  may  suffice  for  showing*  the  opinion  and  the  argu- 
ments of  the  Manichees  concerning  the  Old  Testament. 

III.  I  shall  only  add  a  word  or  two  for  showing  what  they 
thought  of  John  the  Baptist. 

Didymus  of  Alexandria  intimates  that"  they  did  not  admit 
his  authority,  reckoning  him  one  of  the  Old  Testament.  And 
Photius  says  of  Agapius,  the  Manichee,  that^  he  reviled 
not  only  Moses  and  the  prophets,  but  the  forerunner  like- 
M'ise.     But,  in  the  Acts  of  Archelaus,  Mani  is  said^  to  have 

"  Item  Prophetee,  alii  sunt  Judaeorum,  alii  Gentium,  alii  veritatis.  lb.  c.  2- 

"  Lege  ergo  tripartita,  et  Iripartitis  Prophetis,  de  quonam  eorum  Jesus 
dixerit,  non  satis  liquet.     Est  tamen  conjicere  ex  consequentibus,  &c.  ib.  c.  3. 

"  Quare  Moysen  non  accipitis,  cum  Christus  dicat :  Moyses  de  me  scripsit ; 
et  si  crederetis  Moysi,  crederetis  mihi —  ?  Nam  ego  quidem  scripturas  ejus 
perscnitatus, — nuUas  ibidem  de  Christo  prophetias  inveni. — Unde  in  ingenti 
positus  aDstu,  ratione  cogebar  in  allerum  e  duobus ;  ut  aut  falsum  pronuntiarem 
capitulum  hoc,  aut  mendacem  Jesum.  Sed  id  quidem  alienum  pietatis  erat, 
Deum  existimare  mentitum.  Rectius  ergo  visum  est,  scriptoribus  adscribere 
falsitatem,  quam  veritatis  auctori  mendacium,  &c,  id.  I.  16".  c.  i.  ii. 

"  Oir  yap  Cf)(pvTai  tqv  ftcnmriiv,  lujavvriv,  TVyxnvoi'Ta  ti'ti  rrjc  Tra^iuag 
ypa(pT]c-  Didym.  contr.  Manich.  p.  214. 

^  T?;v  ce  TTaXaiav  y()a(pr]v  Koyfiudei,  Mwata  Kai  avrov,  Kai  r«c  7rpO(pr]Tac,  Kai 
TOP  irpocnofiov.     Phot.  cod.  179.  p.  404. 

*  Aiebat  autem,  Joannem  regnum  coelorum  prccdicare  ;  nam  et  per  abscis- 
sionem  capitis  ejus  hoc  esse  indicatum,  quod,  omnibus  prioribus  et  superioribus 
ejus  abscissis,  posteriora  sola  servanda  sint.  Arch.  cap.  40.  p.  70.  Vid.  ib.  c. 
13.  p.  2.5,  26. 


The  Manichees.     Sect.  VI.  397 

spoken  of  John  the  l^nptist  as  n  preacher  of  the  kingdom  of 
heaven.  Beausobre  therefore  coneliKles  that'  the  Manichees 
received  Jolin's  testimony  to  the  divine  mission  of  our  Sa- 
viour. And  indeed  Di«l}  nuis  himself  intimates,  in  tlie  place 
before  referred  to,  tliat''  they  were  Avilling-  t(»  argue  from 
some  things  said  by  John  the  Baptist.  Perhaps  they  were 
not  all  of  the  same  opinion  about  him.  Nor  is  it  any  great 
wonder  that  men  should  differ  upon  the  question,  whether 
John  the  Baptist  belonged  to  the  Old  Testament  or  to  the 
New. 

IV.  In  the  next  place  we  are  to  consider  what  books  of 
the  New  Testament  were  received  by  the  Manichees.  I 
shall  observe  the  testimonies  of  divers  authors. 

1.  Serapion,  having-  said  he  would  not  insist  upon  matters 
in  the  Old  Testament,  adds  :  '  Since*^  they  respect  the  gos- 
'  pels,  my  proofs  shall  be  taken  from  them.'  What  books 
of  the  New  Testament  he  c|uoted  in  his  work  against  the 
Manichees  was  shown ^  formerly. 

Titus  of  Bostra  expressly  says,  '  they^  receive  the  gospel.' 
Several  of  his  passages  will  be  more  particularly  cited 
hereafter,  Avhen  we  come  to  observe  what  they  said  of  the 
interpolation  of  the  scriptures.  But  when  Titus  here  says, 
'  they  received  the  gospel,'  he  means,  I  think,  the  New 
Testament  in  general,  because  the  gospel  is  there  opposed 
to  the  law  and  the  prophets. 

Epiphanius  says  they*^  pretended  tliat  the  two  Testaments 
were  contrary  to  each  other.  He  likewise  says  '  when«  they 
'  reject  the  Old  Testament,  many  things  may  be  alleged  from 
'  the  g-ospels  and  from  the  apostles  to  confute  them.'  They 
acknowledged  the  New  Testament  therefore,  both  the  gos- 
pels, and  the  epistles  of  the  apostles,  as  of  authority. 

St.  Jerom's  account,  in  the  place  above  referred  to,  is, 
they^  say  the  law  is  abolished,  and  that  the  books  of  the 
New  Testament  only  are  to  be  attended  to  by  us. 

'  Beaus.  T.  i.  p.  289.  ''  Et  Si  kc^kuvo   Trpo<pipovTo,   to 

\txQtv  viro  TH  /3a7rri<78  Iwavvs aKHtrtaaav,  on  a  Svvavrai  Trpofipuv 

a(f  ijv  fiTj  irapacixovrai.     Did.  ib.  p.  213,  214. 

'^  Errtidri  yap  Ta  fvayytXia  jutjUtXfr/jrai  avroiQ,  tn  riov  evayytXiwv  Tcpor\vix^il 
6  tkiyxoQ-     Scrap,  ap.  Canis.  T.  i.  p.  54.  iiifr.  in.  "*  See  p.  271. 

®  To  tvayyiKiov  irapa^ixofiivoi  rov  vofiov  s  irapaCixovTai.  Tit.  1.  3.  p. 
140.  f.  '  ^aoKH  yap  rug  Svo  CiaOtjKaQ  evavriaf;  TrpoQ  aXXr]\aQ. 

Haer.  66.  c.  42.  in. 

8    Krtt  TTOffrt  £TU'  eineiv  Sia  twv  ivayyi\iti)v,  Kai  twv  mroaroXiov,  etc  tXeyxov 

TTjg  TH  Navr]  fiaviag T«  'SwTTjpog  b^o\oynvTog  Ttjv  iraXaiav  £iaOi]Kt}v, 

a  fiovov,  aXXa  Kai  avToi  airoToXoi.  k.  X.  Id.  H.  66.  c.  43.  m. 

''  Manichaeus  nobis  consurgit  repente,  qiii  legem  dicit  abolitam,  et 

solos  Novi  Testamenti  legendos  libros.  Adv.  Pelag.  1.  2.  T.  4.  p.  510. 


398  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

Faustus  often  says  that'  he  receives  tlie  gospel ;  meaning 
thereby  the  doctrine  taught  by  Jesus  Christ. 

He  says  that''  he,  as  well  as  the  catholics,  own  Jesus  to 
be  the  author  of  the  New  Testament  or  covenant. 

He  mentions'  the  four  evangelists,  Matthew,  Mark,  Luke, 
and  John,  without  hinting  that  there  were  any  other  authen- 
tic historians  of  Jesus  Christ. 

He  seems  to  allow  that  John  wrote  the  gospel  under  his 
name.  For,™  mentioning  Peter  and  Andrew,  James  and 
John,  as  the  first  and  most  early  disciples  of  Jesus,  he  says : 
'  of  all  tliese  four  John  only  wrote  a  gospel.' 

In  the  Acts  of  Archelaus  it  is  expressly  said  that  '  Mani" 
'  argued  from  the  gospel,  and  the  apostle  Paul  ;'  that  is, 
from  the  gospels,  and  from  the  epistles  of  that  apostle. 

Phot i us,  in  his  extracts  from  Agapius,  says  that  '  he° 
'  quoted  many  passages  of  the  divine  gospel,  and  the  epistles 
'  of  the  divine  Paul.' 

Augustine  speaks  ofp  their  using  the  four  gospels,  and 
the  epistles  of  Paul  ;  and  frequently  of  theiri  approving  or"" 
admitting-  the  authority  of  the  gospel  and  the  apostle. 

2.  With  regard  to  St.  Matthew's  gospel,  Faustus  has 
disputed  its  genuineness.  He  is  answering  the  catholic 
argument  for  the  authority  of  the  Old  Testament,  taken  from 
the  words  of  our  Lord  in  Matt.  v.  17 :  and,  among  other 

'  Accipis  evangelium  ?  Et  maxime.  Faust.  1.  2.  c.  ] .  Accipis  evangelium  ? 
Tu  me  interrogas,  utrum  accipiam,  in  quo  idipsum  apparet,  quia  quae  jubet 
observe. — Nisi  adhuc  nescis,  quid  sit  quod  evangelium  nuncupatur.  Est 
enim  nihil  aliud,  quam  pr  cdicatio  et  mandatum  Christi.  Id.  1.  5.  c.  1. 

''  Quod  Novum  Testamentum  Jesum  condidisse  utrique  fatemur.  id.  1.  18. 
c.  1.  '  Sed  otlensus  duorum  evangelistarum  maxime  dissen- 

sions, qui  genealogiam  ejus  scribunt,  Lucae  et  Matthaei,  haesi  insertus  quemnara 

potissimum  sequerer. — Infinita  ergo  eorum  prcetemiissa  lite, ad  Joannem 

Marcumque  me  contuli ;  nee  impariter  a  duobus  ad  duos,  et  ab  evangelistis 
ad  ejusdem  nominis  professores.  Faust.  1.  3.  c.  i. 

"  Quibus  praesentibus  ?  Petro,  Andrea,  Jacobo,  et  Joanne. — Ex  his  qua- 
tuor  onus,  id  est,  Joannes,  evangelium  scripsit  ?  Ita.  Faust.  1.  17.  c.  i. 

"  Deinde  ccepit  dicere  plurima  ex  lege,  multa  etiam  de  evangelic,  et 
apostolo  Paulo,  quae  sibi  videntur  esse  contraria.  Arch.  c.  40.  p.  69. 

°   aTToaTTaoaaffiov  Se  pTjra  riva  tu  Otis  tvayyiKis,  Kai  tni'^oXwv  tu 

Oita  IlavXn,  TTtipa-ai  TptfiXsv  avra,  Kai  vpoQ  Tr]v  oiKitav  Svacrefieiav  tXKiiv. 
Ph.  Cod.  179.  p.  405. 

p  Aut  si  talis  oratio  impudens  est,  sicuti  est,  cur  in  Pauli  epistolis, 

cur  in  quatuor  evangelii  libris  ea  valere  aliquid  putant —  ?  De  Util.  Cred. 
cap.  3.  n.  7. 

1  Nam  quaero  ab  eis,  utrum  bonum  sit  delectari  lectione  apostoli, — et  utrum 
bonum  sit  evang»?lium  disserere  ?  Respondebunt  ad  singula :  Bonum  est. 
Conf.  1.  8.  c.  x.  p.  24. 

"■  Videamus,  quemadmodum  ipse  Dominus  in  evangelio  nobis  praeceperit 
esse  vivendum ;  quomodo  etiam  Paulus  apostolus.  Has  enim  scripturas  illi 
condemnare  non  audent.  De  M.  E.  C.  c.  7.  n.  13.  in. 


The  Mankhecs.     Sect.  VI.  399 

things,  he  says  that'  Matthew  did  not  write  this:  and  that 
he  is  not  the  author  of"  the  gospel  under  his  name  may  be 
concluded  froni  what  is  said,  Matt.  ix.  9,  "  And  as  Jesus 
passed  forth  tVoni  thence  he  saw  a  man  named  Matlhew, 
sitting-  at  the  receipt  of  custom  ;  and  he  saith  unto  him, 
Follow  me.  And  he  arose  and  followed  him."  Faustus 
arg-ues,  that  if  Matthew  were  the  writer  he  would  have  said  ; 
'  Jesus  saw  me  and  called  me,  and  I  arose  and  followed  him.' 
But  certainly  this  argument  is  unworthy  of  a  man  of  learning- 
and  consideration.  The  weakness  of  it  is  evident  from  many 
texts  of  the  gospels  not  disputed  by  the  Manichees.  In 
John  iii.  IG,  our  Lord  himself  says  :  "  God  so  loved  the 
world,  that  he  gave  his  only-begotten  Son,  that  whosoever 
believeth  on  him  might  not  perish."  John  the  evangelist 
speaks  of  himself  in  the  third  person  several  times :  see  John 
xix.  2(3 ;  XX.  2  ;  xxi.  7,  20.  It  is  a  common  thing  for  Jose- 
phus,  the  Jewish  historian,  to'  speak  of  himself  after  the  like 
manner.  And  does  not  every  one  perceive  that  Matthew 
out  of  modesty  might  decline  to  speak  of  himself  in  the 
first  person  upon  that  occasion?  Augustine  has  fully  an- 
swered" this  objection:  and  I  have  transcribed  a  part  of 
what  he  says  in  the  margin,  for  the  satisfaction  of  inquisitive 
readers. 

Not  to  add,  what  is  also  well  observed  by  Augustine 
elsewhere,  that"  it  is  a  vain  imag-ination  to  think  by  such 
trifling-  objections  to  overthrow  the  authority  of  a  gospel  so 
fully  established  as  that  of  St.  Matthew. 

3.  Augustine  often  intimates  that  the  Manichees  rejected 
the  Acts  of  the  Apostles.  He  sometimes  speaks  as  if  their 
aversion  to  that  book  was  very  great,  and  they  could  scarce 
endure  the  mention  of  it.     I  have  already  cited  several  of  his 

« ut  interim  permiserimus  nobis  injuriam  fecisse  Matthasum,  donee 

et  ipsum  probemus  haec  non  scripsisse,  sed  aliura  nescio  quern,  sub  nomine 
ejus:  quod  docet  et  ipsa  lectionis  ejusdem  Matthaei  obliqua  narratio.  Quid 
enim  dicit  ?  Et  cum  transiret  Jesus,  vidit  hominem  sedentem  ad  telonium, 
nomine  Malthaeum,  et  vocavit  eum.  At  ille  confestim  surgens,  secutus  est 
eum.  Et  quis  ergo  de  seipso  scribens,  dicat,  Vidit  hominem,  et  vocavit  eum, 
et  secutus  est  eum  :  ac  non  potius  dicat,  Vidit  me,  et  secutus  sunri :  nisi  quia 
constat  heec  Matthseum  non  scripsisse,  sed  alium  nescio  quem  sub  ejus  nomine  ? 
&c.  Id.  1.  17.  c.  1. 

'  Vid.  Joseph,  de  B.  J.  1.  2.  c.  20.  n.  4,  5,  et  passim. 

"  Sed  non  usque  adeo  imperitum  putaverim,  ut  nee  legerit,  nee  audierit, 
solere  scriptores  rerum  gestarum,  cum  in  suam  personam  venerint,  ita  se  con- 
texere  tanquam  de  aHo  narrant,  quod  de  se  narrant.  Conlr.  Faust.  1.  17.  c.  4. 

»   -qui  etiam  de  evangehco  [al.  evangeho,]  tantae  auctorilatis 

culmine  omnibus  noto,  mentiri  sic  audet,  ut  non  Matthaeum,  ne  apostohci 
nominis  pondere  comprimatur,  sed  nescio  quem  ahum  sub  Matthaei  nomine, 
veht  putari  scripsisse  de  Christo,  quod  non  vult  credere,  et  quod  calumniosa 
versutia  refutare  conatur.  Aug.  contr.  Faust.  1.  23.  c.  6, 


400  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

passages  relating-  to  this  matter.  To  them'"  the  reader  is 
referred,  and  I  entreat  him  to  cast  an  eye  upon  them,  though 
I  add  here''  one  or  two  more. 

In  one  place  he  may  be  understood  to  say  thaty  some  of 
the  Manichees  reject  this  book.  Perhaps  others  may  inter- 
pret the  place  differently.  But  I  have  accidentally  observed 
that^  the  composer  of  the  general  index  in  the  Benedictine 
edition  of  Augustine's  works  did  not  understand  him  to 
say  '  certain  people  called  Manichees,'  but  '  some  of  the 
'  Manichees.' 

And  indeed  I  question  whether  the  Manichees  did  all, 
and  always,  reject  the  book  of  the  Acts  as  they  did  the 
scriptures  of  the  Old  Testament. 

For,  first,  I  do  not  see  any  reason  they  had  to  reject  the 
Acts  any  more  than  the  gospels,  or  other  books  of  the  New 
Testament.  Augustine  himself  says  that"  in  other  books 
of  the  New  Testament  there  are  like  things  to  those  in  the 
Acts :  and  that  as  they  pretended  other  books  of  the  New 
Testament  were  interpolated,  they  might  have  said  the  same 
of  this  likewise.  That  indeed,  as  he  observes,  Avould  have 
been  a  groundless  and  impudent  assertion  :  but  if  that  had 
been  what  they  chose  to  say  of  this  book,  it  would  have  been 
no  more  unreasonable  than  their  saying  it  of  the  rest ;  for 
there  were  not  here  more  things  contrary  to  their  opinions, 
than  in  the  other  books  which  they  did  receive. 

Secondly,  J  have  observed  that  several  Greek  writers  of 
the  fourth  century,  or  thereabouts,  in  their  disputes  with 
the  Manichees,  cite  this  book  as  if  it  was  received  by  them. 

"  See  before,  p.  341. 

"  Qua  potestate  Petrus  apostolus  ususest  in  eo  libro  quern  isti  non  accipiunt, 
quoniam  manifeste  continet  Paracleti  adventum,  id  est,  consolatoris  Sancti 
Spiritus.— Contr.  Adim.  c.  17.  n.  5.  Quod  non  solum  in  Actibus  Apostolorum 
canonicis,  quos  isti  non  accipiunt,  ne  de  adventu  veri  Paracleti,  quern  promisit 
Dominus,  convincantur,  evidenterapparet.  Contr.  Faust.  1.  19.  c.  31.  Deinde 
Paracletum  sicut  promissum  legimus  in  iis  libris,  quorum  non  omnia  vultis 
accipere ;  ita  et  missum  legimus  in  eo  libro,  quern  nominare  etiam  formidatis. 
In  Actibus  quippe  Apostolorum — apertissime  legitur  missus  die  Pentecostes 
Spiritus  Sanctus.  ib.  i.  32.  c.  15. 

y  Nam  quidam  ManichaBi  canonicum  librum,  cujus  titulus  est  Actus  Apos- 
lorum,  repudiant.  Aug.  ad  Ceret.  Ep.  237.  [al.  253.]  n,  7.  Vid.  supr.  341. 
not.  *.  ^  See  the  General  Index  in  the  word  Manichsei — ex  eis 

quidam  Actus  Apostolorum  repudiant.  2  Tom.  Ep.  237. 

*  Hoc  enimdeillo  libro  fecerunt,  qui  Actus  Apostolorum  inscribitur.  Quod 
eorum  consilium  cum  mecum  ipse  pertracto,  nequeo  satis  mirari. — Tanta  enim 
liber  iste  habet,  quae  similia  sunt  his  quae  accipiunt,  ut  magnae  stultitiae  mihi 
videatur,  non  et  hunc  accipere,  et,  si  quid  ibi  eos  ofFendit,  falsum  atque  im- 
missum  dicere.  Aut  si  talis  oratio  impudens  est,  sicuti  est,  cur  in  Pauli  epis- 
tolis,  cur  in  ([uatuor  evangelii  libris,  ea  valere  aliquid  putant,  in  quibus  baud 
scio  an  muUo  plura  sint  proportione,  quam  in  il!o  libro  esse  potuerunt,  quae  a 
corruptoribus  interjecta  credi  volunt  ?  De  Ut.  Cred.  c.  3.  n.  7. 


The  Manicliecs.     Sect.  VI.  401 

The  Acts  are  quoted  in  the  Dispute  of'  Arclielaus. 

Serapion  having'  alleged  the  history  in  2  Kings  xiii.  21, 
adds:  '  Buf  if  they  pay  no  regard  to  these  things-,  and 
'  despise  the  law,  let  them  however  hearken  to  what  is  said 
'  of"  sick  people  being  healed  by  the  very  shadow  of  Peter's 
'  body,  and  let  that  iill  them  with  confusion  :'  where  he 
plainly  refers  to  Acts  v.  15. 

Titus  of  Bostra  argues  with  them  out  of  the  Acts.  The 
Manichees  pretended  that  the  dispensation  of  the  law  Avas 
cruel  and  unmerciful.  They  excepfe<l  against  Elisha's 
cursing*  the  children,  which  presently  afterwards  were 
devoured  by  two  bears:  and  against  Elijah's  calling  for 
fire  from  heaven  to  consume  the  captains  with  their  men, 
sent  to  him  from  the  king-  of  Israel.  Whereupon  Titus 
answers:  '  If'*  they  condemn  these  actions  as  evil,  what 
'  will  they  say  of  Paul,  when  observing  that  Barjesus,  who 

*  was  with  the  proconsul  Sergius  Paulus, strove  to  turn  him 
'  from  the  truth,  he  deprived  him  of  eyesight,  and  said  :  "  O 

*  full  of  all  subtilty?"  '  and  what  follows,  Acts  xiii.  10. 
He  likewise  adds:  '  And*^  what  will  they  say  of  Peter,  who, 
'  M'hen  Ananias  and   Sapphira  brought  a  part  only  of  the 

*  price  of  what  they  had  sold,  and  he  had  convicted  them 
'  of  lying-,  struck  Ananias  dead,  and  afterwards  delivered 

*  Sapphira  to  the  same  grave?'  Upon  these  instances  Titus 
proceeds  to  argue  a  great  deal,  without  any  suspicion  of 
their  contesting  the  credit  and  authority  of  the  book  whence 
they  are  taken. 

Epiphanius,f  in  his  argument  with  the  Manichees,  quotes 
the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  several  times. 

Didymus  of  Alexandria  likewise,  in  his  short  tract  against 
them,  expressly  quotes^  the  same  book  for  a  part  of  the 
history  of  St.  Stephen. 

All  this  seems  sufficient  to  render  it  probable  that  the 
Manichees  did  not  always,  and  every  where,  reject  the  Acts 
of  the  Apostles  :  if  they  had  so  done,  Archelaus,  or  Sera- 

"  Vid.  Arch.  c.  34.  p.  59.  c.  .36.  p.  63. 

^   El  St  Mavixaiot  Trpo^  avTOV  nifiijvoTtg,  /cat  to  Xoyiov  £ia(3a\\nm. 

firire  rov  vo^ov  Tiiiuvrtq,  kc^v  en  ts  TrnpaXXjjXa  SvaunrsirrGwffav,  ic(^iv  >/  eina 
[liTps  ri)v  yi'Uifit)v  tKeivuiv  aiffyvi'tTw.  k.  X.  Serap.  p.  47.  f. 

^   Kai  firiiSt]  roiavrag  aiTiaq  Kai  roiavrag  tiriQv(iiaQ  iv  Tai,u  ttovtjqmc  Kai 
KOKtag  TiQivTUi,    TupHtjt  TTtpi  TlavXn  ;  6<r«c  ""ort  tov  Xtyofitvov  fia^tr^asv,  rov 

fiayov, £7r£Tt/x»j(T£,  <^(pT](nv  twv  (xpdaXfuov  tipyaaaro.  Tit.  contr.  Manich. 

1.  3.  p.  155.  ^  Ti  Enpuci  Trepi  rn  Uirpa — rov  fitv  kvuviav 

viKpov  iSid,i,  rrfv  S(  'S.airipapav  riji  avrtij  fivrifiaTKi)  iraQaSeOitiKtv  ;  Id.  lb. 

'  Vid.  H.  66.  c.  61.  p.  674.  B.  c.  62.  p.  675.  B.  et  C. 

<5   ibontp  Kai  tv  raiQ  Tl^a'^imv  tojv  uTroroXwv  'ST((pavog,  k.  X.  Didym. 

contr.  Manich.  p.  208. 

VOL.    III.  2   D 


402  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

pion,  or  Titus,  or  Epiplianius,  or  Duly  miis,  must  have  known 
It,  and  would  have  taken  some  notice  of" it. 

We  have  therefore  Augustine's  single  testimony  alone 
against  them  upon  this  head  ;  which  can  affect  only  the  Mani- 
chees  of  his  time  in  ^Africa,  if  it  be  valid  so  far, 

I  do  not  recollect  that  Faustus  has  any  thing  which  can 
afford  us  much  light.  He  has  C{uoted''  the  tenth  of  the  Acts : 
but  it  is  not  in  such  a  manner  as  to  decide  the  question. 
He  may  be  supposed  likewise  to  refer  to'  the  Hfteenth 
chapter. 

Upon  the  whole,  1  somewhat  doubt  whether  the  Mani- 
chees  were  so  much  offended  at  this  book  as  Augustine 
insinuates. 

Jf  the  reader  thinks  it  may  be  of  any  use  for  finding  out 
the  Manichaean  sentiment  concerning-  the  book  of  the  Acts, 
he  may  observe  the  testimony  of  the  Paulicians  to  the  New 
Testament,  which  will  be  taken  notice  of  hereafter.  They 
are  commonly  reckoned  a  branch  of  this  sect;  and  it  is  said 
that  some  of  them  did  not  receive  the  Acts. 

Beausobre,  considering-  this  matter, says:  '  Nevertheless,'^ 
'  Augustine  has  well  observed  that'  the  Manichees  might 
'  have  received  the  book  of  the  Acts,  and  yet  avoid  the 
'  difficulties  they  would  then  have  been  urged  with,  by  only 
'  making"  the  like  exceptions,  Avhich  they  did  to  evade  the 
'  testimony  of  the  gospels.  V/hich.'  as  that  learned  author 
adds,  '  has  made  me  to  think  that  the  true  reason  why  the 
'  Manichees  excluded  the  history  of  the  apostles  from  their 
'  canon,  was,  that  it  had  not  in  the  eastern  churches,  from 
'  the  beginning,  the  same  authority  with  the  gospels  and 
'  epistles.'  After  which  he  refers  to  a  well  known  passage 
of  St.  Chrysostoni. 

But  1  am  rather  of  opinion  that  this  book  was  not  always 
rejected  by  the  Manichees  :  and  1  rely  upon  the  reasons  just 
fussigned,  without  adding- any  thing  farther. 

Nor  can  I  allow  that  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  was  not  of 
authority  from  the  beginning  in  the  eastern  churches  :  for 
It  was  received  by  Clement  of  Alexandria,  Origen,  Diony- 
sius  of  Alexandria,  and  other  christians  in  the  east,  as  has 
been  already  shown  in  this  work. 

4.  I  next  observe  what  epistles  of  apostles  they  admitted. 

•^  r|iiemadmodum  et  illud,  quod  de  Petro  soletis  adferre,  taaquam 

idem  viderit  aliquando  de  coelo  demissurn  vas,  in  quo  essent  omnia  genera 
animalium,  et  serpentes.     Faust.  1.  31.  c.  3. 

'  De  mandate  vero  abstinendi  a  cibis  communibus,  visum  vobis  est  et  vehe- 
menter  crerlitum,  morticina  quidem  et  immolataesse  saneimmunda.1.  32.  c.  3. 

"  B.  T.  i.  p.  293.  '  De  Util.  Cred.  cap.  3. 


The  Manichecs.     Sect.  VI.  403 

Augustine  speaks  of  it  as  an  undoubted  and  well  known 
tliinfj-,  that  the'"  Manichees  read,  admired,  and  commended 
St.  Paul's  epistles. 

In  another  place  he  speaks"  of  their  having",  reading-, 
and  commending,  or  commenting-  upon,  the  epistles  of  the 
apostles. 

He  also  speaks"  of  their  receiving  the  g-ospel,  and  the 
canonical  epistles:  meaning  by  this  last  expression,  as  I 
apprehend,  the  epistles  conunonly  received  by  other  cfiris- 
tians  as  a  part  of  their  canon  ;  not  those  sometimes  called 
catholic,  as''  Reausobre  thought.  The  first  sense  is  agree- 
able to  Augustine's  use  of  the  word  in  other''  places. 

I  suppose  there  is  no  doubt  but  they  received  thirteen 
epistles  of  the  apostle  Paul. 

Photius,  speaking  of  Agapius,  in  the"^  passage  above  cited, 
says,  he  quotes  passages  of  the  divine  gospel,  and  of  the 
epistles  of  the  divine  Paul. 

Faustus*  readily  says,  '  he  receives  the  apostle  ;'  thereby 
meaning-  Paul,  or  the  epistles  of  that  apostle.  And  in  his 
yet  remaining  work  he  quotes  expressly,  and  by  name,  many 
of  them:  as  well  as  frequently  without  naming  them:  as' 
the  epistle  to  the  Romans,  the"  first  and'  second  to  the 
Corinthians,  to'''  the  Galatians,  to''  the  Ephesians,  toy  the 
Coiossians,  to^  Titus. 

5.  Let  us  now  consider  whether  the  Manichees  received 
the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews.  There  is  some  reason  to  think 
they  did:  for  there  are  references  to  it  in*  the  Acts  of 
Archelaus.     Serapion  in  his  book^  Against  the  Manichees, 

""  Certe  et  ipsi  Manichaei  legunt  apostolum  Paulum,  et  laudant  et  honorant  •, 
et  ejus  epistolas  male  interpretando  multos  decipiunt.  De  Gen.  contr.  Manich. 
1.  i.  c.  2.  n.  3.  "  Et  tamen  epistolis  apostolorum,  quibiis  haec  omnia 

constantur,  tenetis,  legitis,  prsedicatis.     Contr.  Faust.  1.  12.  c.  24. 

°  ut  quidquid  est  in  evangelic  vel  epistolis  canonicis,  quo  adjuvari 

haeresim  suam  putent,  id  esse  a  Christo  et  apostolis  dictum  teneant  atque  suade- 
ant.     Contr.  Faust.  1.  22.  c.  15.  p  T.  i.  p.  292. 

•i  Qui  etiam  in  scripturis  canonicis  Testamenti  Novi,  hoc  est  in  veris  evan- 
gelicis  et  apostolicis  Uteris,  non  accipiunt  omnia,— ad  Ceret.  Ep.  237.  [al. 
253.]  et  passim.  >■  See  p.  398.  note  °. 

'  Apostolum  accipis  ?  Et  maxime.     Faust.  1.  xi.  c.  i. 

'  Aut  si  vobis  secundum  quod  ad  Romanes  scribit,  credere  cordi  est.  1.  xi. 
c.  1.  "  '  Quapropter  idem  rursum'  apostolus  ad  Corinthios  dicit. 

— 1.  24.  c.  1.  fin.  "  Scnbensque  ad  Corinthios.  1.  xi.  c.  1.  et  passim. 

*  Quippe  Paulus  inde  Galatas  arguit.  1.  8.  c.  i.  Et  ad  Galatas  de  semet- 
ipso.  1.  24.  c.  1.  "  Dicit  ad  Ephesios.  Id.  1.  24.  c.  1. 

y  Necnon  et  ad  ipsos  Colossenses  idipsum  denuo  dicit.  ibid. 

^  De  Gentium  [lege]  vero  si  quis  ambigit,  audiat  Paulum  qui,  scribens  ad 
Titum  de  Cretensibus,  dicit.  Id.  1.  19.  c.  2. 

»  Arch.  c.  5.  p.  7.  c.  43.  p.  77. 

•*  Scrap,  p.  46.  m.  and  see  before,  p.  271. 

2  D  2 


404  -  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

quotes  this  cpi.stlo,  as  does"  Titus  of  Bostra,  and''  Didymus 
of  Alexandria.  Epiplianius,  in  his  argument  ^vith  these 
people,  quotes  this  epistle*"  several  times.  Augustine,  in 
bis  book  against  Adimantus,  quotes  it*^  together  with  the 
epistle  to  the  Romans.  He  also  quotes  it°  in  his  answer  to 
Faust  us. 

6.  Timothy  of  Constantinople  says  the''  Manichees  re- 
ceived an  epistle  to  the  Laodiceans  :  but  possibly  he  means 
the  Paulicians.  However,  I  think  this'  testimony  can  be  of 
but  little  value  here, 

7.  As  for  the  catholic  epistles,  we  cannot  say  any  thing- 
very  particularly  about  them. 

However  Epiplianius,  in  his  confutation  of  them,  has 
quoted,  beside  most  other  books  of  the  New  Testament,  the ** 
first  and'  second  epistles  of  Peter.  Aitgustine,  in  his  books 
against  Faustus,  again  and  again'"  quotes  the  first  epistle  of 
Peter,  as  received  by  them.  In  another  work  against  the 
Manichees  he  openly  quotes"  the  second  epistle  of  Peter. 
And  in  his  answer  to  Faustus  he  cites"  the  first  epistle  of 
.John,  w  hich  is  also  quoted  by  Mani  himself  p  in  the  Acts  of 
Archelaus. 

8.  Augustine,  in  his Mork  against  Faustus,  quotes^  words 
of  the  Revelation  with  others  of  the  first  epistle  to  the 
Corinthians,  as  if  they  received  the  former  as  well  as  the 
latter,  w  hich  may  lead  us  to  think  that  the  Manichees,  those 
in  Africa  at  least,  did  not  reject  the  book  of  the  Revelation. 

9.  In  a  word,  Augustine,  Epiphanius,  and  other  ancient 
catholic  authors,  who  wrote  against  the  Manichees,  do  so 

•■  Tit.  1.  3.  p.  142,  153.     See  before,  p.  274.  ^  Did.  p.  209. 

'  Epiph.  H.  66.  c.  63.  in  fin.  c.  74.  p.  695.  B.  c.  79.  p.  701.  D. 

'  Interpretatus  apostolus  sabbatum  ad  Hebraeos,  cum  dicit,  '  remanet  igitur 
sabbatismus  populo  Dei.' — Apostolicam  itaque  interpretationetn  spiritaliter 
teneo.     Contr.  Adim.  cap.  16.  n.  3. 

e   Contr.  Faust.  1.  6.  c.  9.  ''   'H  TrevreKaihKari]  rrpog  Aciccikhq 

tTTiroXT}.     Tim.  ap.  Meurs.  Var.  Div.  p.  117. 

'  Le  temoignage  du  Pretre  Timothee,  ou  de  ceux  qui  ont  interpole  ?on 
ouvrage,  n'est  d'  aucun  poids.  Beaus.  T.  i.  p.  366.  Le  Decrot  de  Gekse, 
et  la  Formule  de  Timothee,  ont  ete  fort  interpoles.     Id.  p.  396,  367.  not.  '. 

"  Haer.  66.  c.  7.3.  p.  693.  D.  '  lb.  c.  64.  p.  678.  B.  et  C. 

""  Contr.  F.l.  22.  c.  14,  et20. 

"  Quia  vero  et  ipsi  inali  angeli  non  a  Deo  mali  sunt  conditi,  sed  peccando 
facti  sunt  mali,  sic  Petrus  in  epistola  sua  dicit :  Si  enim  Deus  angelis  peccan- 
tibus  non  pepercit, [2  Pet.  ii.  4.]  De  Nat.  Boni,  cap.  33. 

"  Quod  etiam  Joannes  dicit ;  Filii  Dei  sumus ;  et  non  apparuit,  quid 
erimus.  [1  John  iii.  2.]  Contr.  Faust.  1.  32.  c.  18. 

p  Ap.  Arch.  c.  14.  p.  26.  Vid.  loc  citat.  supra,  p.  15. 

■I  Non  solum  enim  in  Vetere  Testamento  scriptum  est,  '  Quem  enim  diligit 
Deus,  corripit' — sed  etiam  in  Novo, '  Ego,  quem  amo,  argue  et  castigc'  Apoc. 
iii.  19.     Contr.  F.  1.  22.  c.  14. 


The  Manichees.     Sect.  VI.  405 

quote  all  the  books  of  the  New  Testament,  that  one  is  induced 
to  think  they  received  all  the  evangelical  scriptures  which 
other  christians  did  ;  for  if  they  had  not,  those  authors  would 
have  taken  notice  of  it.  They  infot  ni  us  distinctly,  that  the 
Manichees  did  not  receive  the  Old  Testament.  If  they  had 
rejected  any  books  of  the  New  Testament  generally  received, 
they  would  have  mentioned  it.  Augustine  indeed  says, 
they  did  not  receive  the  book  of  the  Acts:  but  as  he  does 
not  speak  of  their  entirely  disliking-  any  of  the  rest,  it  may 
be  hence  inferred,  that  in  other  respects  their  canon  of  the 
New  Testament  was  much  the  same  with  that  of  the  catho- 
lics. 

Augustine  once'  speaks  of  their  not  only  rejecting-  some 
passages  of  the  New  Testament,  but  also  of  fheir  choosing- 
what  books  they  pleased  ;  but  the  only  instance  he  producetii 
is  that  of  the  Acts  :  which  confirms  what  has  been  just  now 
said,  that  the  Manichees  did  not  reject  any  book  of  the  New 
Testament,  received  by  other  christians,  except  the  book  of 
the  Acts,  if  indeed  they  rejected  that.  Augustine,  who  so 
often  speaks  of  their  not  liking-  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles, 
must  some  time  have  joined  with  it  other  books,  if  tlwre  had 
been  any  other  disowned  by  them. 

V.  We  have  therefore  now  seen  what  books  of  the  New 
Testament  were  generally  received  by  the  Manichees.  Under 
the  next  particular  Ave  shall  observe  what  they  said  of  the 
scriptures  of  the  New  Testament  being-  interpolated  ;  where, 
it  is  likely,  we  shall  more  distinctly  perceive  what  regard 
they  had  for  them.  Nevertheless  1  would  add  here  some 
things  for  showing-  the  credit  and  authority  which  these 
scriptures  had  with  them. 

And  it  seems  evident  that  they  ascribed  a  good  degree  of 
authority  to  the  books  of  the  New  Testament  before  men- 
tioned. This  appears  from  passages  of  Serapion,aiid  others 
above  cited,  and  from  the  constant  method  of  arguing-  with 
them  by  Serapion,  Titus,  Epiphanius,  an«l  all  authors  in 
general  who  wrote  against  them.  To  add  here  only  one 
instance  from  Serapion,  who  supposeth  that  he  fully  confutes 
and  overthrows  a  sentiment  of  theirs  by  arguing-  from  the 
New  Testament  in  this  manner:  '  The*  gospel  says,  publi- 
'  cans  and   harlots  go  into  the  kingdom  of  heaven  before 

*■  Qui  non  accipiunt  omnia,  sed  quod  volunt,  et  libros  eligunt  quos  accipi- 
ant,  aliis  improbatis.  Sed  lu  singulis  quibusque  libiis  loca  distinguunt,  quae 
putant  suis  erronbus  convenire.  Caetera  in  eis  pro  falsis  habent.  Nam  quidam 
Manichaei  canonicum  librum,  cujus  titulus  est  Actus  Apostoloriim,  repudiant. 
Aug.  Ep.  237.  [al.  253.]  T.  2.  *  'Orav  av  Xsyy  to  «j;ayytXtov 

— oTav  Xtyy  HavXog. — Scrap,  p.  46.  infr.  m. 


406  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History . 

'  you.     And  Paul  says,  that  Raab  the  harlot  perished  not 
'  with  them  that  believed  not.' 

Augustine,  at  the  beginning  of  one  of  his  books  against 
these  men,  says:  '  I  will'  observe  this  method,  to  quote  no 
'  texts  but  such  as  they  cannot  except  against ;  that  is,  out  of 
'  the  New  Testament  oidy  ;  and  out  of  that  too  none  of  those 
'  texts  which  they,  when  hardly  pressed,  are  wont  to  call 
'  interpolations  :  but  I  shall  allege  such  things  oidy  as  they 
'  both  approve  and  commend.' 

Every  one,  I  presume,  has  observed  in  the  history  which 
has  been  given  of  their  opinions,  that  they  endeavoured  to 
justify  their  doctrine  of  two  principles,  their  notion  of  the 
person  of  Christ,  and  all  their  peculiar  sentiments,  by  texts 
of  the  New  Testament.  Particularly,  when  tliey  reject 
the  Old  Testament,  one  of  their  strongest  arguments  is 
taken  from  its  contrariety  to  the  New.  Therefore  this  last 
was  received,  and  M'as  of  authority  with  them.  The"  design 
of  the  book  written  by  Adimantus,  the  old  disciple  of 
Mani,  as  Augustine  informs  us,  was  to  overthrow  the  Old 
Testament,  by  showing  it  to  be  contrary  to  the  evangelical 
and  apostolical  scriptures. 

Mani,  in  his  letter  to  Marcellus,^  complains  '  that  men, 
'  even  christians,  did  not  believe  the  gospels.'  And  in  that 
same  short  letter  lie  has  words  of  the  gospels  of  Matthew 
and  John,  of  the  first  epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  and  of  the 
epistle  to  the  Hebrews.  And  in  the^"^  dispute  with  Arche- 
laus  he  quoted  and  argued  from  many  passages  of  the  gos- 
pels and  Paul's  epistles.  And  there  are  large  and  numerous 
quotations  of  the  books  of  the  New  Testament  in  his  letter 
to^  Menoch,  if  it  be  genuine. 

Fortunatus,  the  Manichrean  presbyter,  in  his  dispute  with 
Augustine,  quotes  Philip,  ii.  5.  in  this  manner:  '  Wey 
'  think,'  as  the  apostle  directs  :  and  says,  '  he^  knows  very 
'  well,  that  he  cannot  prove  his  faith  to  be  right,  unless  he 
'  shows  it  to  be  agreeable  to  the  scriptures.' 

'  Et  ea  de  scripturis  assumam  testimonia,  qu;bus  eos  necesse  est  credere,  de 
Novo  scilicet  Testamento.  De  quo  tamen  nihil  proferam  eorum  quae  solent 
immissa  esse  d^cere,  cum  magnis  angustiis  coarctantur  ;  sed  ea  dicam,  qute  it 
approbare  et  laudare  coguntur.  De  M.  Ec.  Cath.  c.  i.  n.  2. 

"  Eodem  tempore  veuerunt  in  manus  meas  quaedam  disputationes  Adiraanti, 
— quas  conscripsit  contra  legem  et  prophetas,  velut  contraria  e;s  evangelica  et 
apostolica  scripta  demonstrare  conatus.  Aug.  Retr.  1.  i.  c.  22.  in. 

"  Ap.  Arch.  cap.  v.  p.  6,  7,  8.  "  lb.  c.  13.  p.  24,  25,  et  passim. 

"  Ap.  Augustin.Op.  Imperf.  1.  3.  c.  177,  180,  lafj,  186. 

J'  Hoc  sentimus,  quod  nos  instruit  beatus  I'aulus,  qui  dixit :  Fortunat.  Di-p. 
i.  n.  7.  '■  Et  quia  nullo  geuere  recte  nie  credere  ostendere 

possum,  nisi  eandem  fidem  scnpturarum  auctorilate  firmaverim.  Id.  in 
Disp.  ii.  n.  20. 


The  ManicJtees.     Sect.  VI.  407 

Seciimliiuis,  in  his  letter  to  Augustine,  tiiougli  of  no  great 
length,  quotes  the  gospels  of  Matthew,  Mark,  Luke,  and 
John,  and  the  epistles  to  the  Romans,  the  Ephesians,  and 
first  to  Timothy.  And  in  a  short  compass  he  owns"  a  great 
number  of  facts  recorded  in  the  gospels  ;  as  IVter's  thrice 
denying  his  Lord;  the  final  apostasy  of  Judas ;  the  unbelief 
of  Thomas  after  our  Lord's  resurrection;  Christ's  cruci- 
fixion ;  the  Jews'  preferring  Barabbas  to  Jesus  at  the  insti- 
gation of  the  scribes  and  pharisees  ;  that  Jesus  was  crowned 
with  thorns,  and  ha<l  vinegar  given  him  to  drink  ;  that  his 
s  de  was  pierced,  and  that  he  was  crucified  between  two 
thieves,  by  one  of  whom  he  was  reviled.  He  refers  also  to 
Hymeneus  and  Alexander,  and  other  things  spoken  of  by 
Paul,  1  Tim.  i. 

Indeed  a  large  part  of  the  New  Testament  may  be  found 
quoted  by  Faustus,  and  other  Manichees  with  whom  Augus- 
tine was  concerned,  and  according  to  our  copies. 

Notwithstanding- what  is  said  of  their  char<>ino-  the  catho- 
lie  christians  Avith  having  interpolated  the  gospels,  which 
Avill  be  considered  hereafter,  Faustus  readily  says,  '  They'' 
'  believe  Christ's  mystic  crucifixion,  his  saving-  or  wholesome 
'  precepts,  his  parables,  and  his  divine  discourses, as  related 
'  in  the  gospels.' 

And  in  Faustus  alone  we  find  these  following,  and  many 
other  thing's;  our*^  Lord's  gathering  disciples  gradually, 
and  not  completing  at  once  the  number  of  his  apostles  ;  ''  his 
conference  with  Nicodemus  ;  tlie*^  imprisonment  of  John  the 
Baptist,  his^  message  to  Jesus,  and  the  answer  sent  back  to 
him  ;  Peter's?  confession,  that  Jesus  was  the  Christ  the  Son 
of  God  ;  that''  unclean  spirits  crying-  out  owned  Jesus  to  be 
the  son  of  God  ;  many'  miracles  of  our  Lord,  his  curing-  a 

*  ut  et  Petrum  coegerit  sub  una  nocte  tertio  Dominum  negare,  et 

eidem  resurgenti  Thoinam  non  permiserit  credere — et  tanto  pastori  Iscrciotem 
rapuerit;  et  ut  ad  ultimuni  crucis  supplicium  veniretur,  in  pemiciem  ipsius 
scribas  pharisaeosque  accenderit,  ut  Barabbam  dimitti  clamarent,  et  Jesuin 
crucifigi. — Et  tamen  ne  ip^o  quidem  crucis  opprobrio  potuit  satiari.  Quin 
inio  insaniens  hinc  coegit  spinis  coronari,  illinc  acefo  potari :  hinc  milifum 
lancea  percuti, illinc  sinistri  latronis  ore  blasphemari,  &c.  Secundin.  ad  Aug. 
cap.  4.  **  His  igitur  exceptis, — crediinus  csetera,   prajcipue 

crucis  ejus  mysticam  fixionem, — turn  praecepta  salutaria  ejus  turn  parabolas, 
cunctumque  sermonem  deificiim.     Faust.  1.  3-2.  c.  7. 

"  Quis  hoc  tcvtatur  dixisse  Je~nai  ?  Matthasu-;.  Ubi  dixisse  ?  In  monte. 
Quibus  praeseiitibus  ?  Petro,  Andrea,  Jacobo,  et  Joanne,  quatuor  his  tantuin. 
Caeterosenim  necdum  elegerat,  nee  ipsum  Matthaeum.  Id.  1.  17.  cap.  1. 

■*  L.  24.  c.  i.  '  Nam  et  in  ipso  Matthaeo,  post  inclusum 

Joannem  in  carcerem,  tunc  legitur  Jesuni  coepisse  praedicare  evangelium  regni 
Dei.  1.  2.  c.  i.  ^  L.  5.  c.  i.  «  L.  5.  c,  3. 

"^  quia  nee  spiritibus  immundis,  cum  iidem  Jesum  esse  filium  Dei 

cxserte  indissimulanterque  confiterentur,  profuit.  1.  16.  c.  i.  '  Nam  et 


408  Credibiliti/  of  the  Gospel  History. 

man  blind  from  his  birth,  raising  the  dead,  the  woman  healed 
upon  touching'  Christ's  garment;  the**  history  of  the  centurion, 
whose  servant  Clirist  healed  ;  the'  escape  of  Barabbas  at  the 
petition  of  the  Jews  ;  and  the  penitent  thief,  and  Christ's 
acceptance  of  him;  Thomas's™  unbelief,  and  Christ's  show- 
ing him  the  marks  of  his  wounds  ;  and  many  other  things. 

Augustine  having  quoted  the  histories  of  the  doemoniacs 
at  the  tombs,  and  of  the  barren  fig-tree,  vvhich  withered  at 
Christ's  word,  particularly  observes,  that"  these  were  things 
w  hich  they  had  never  pretended  to  be  interpolations. 

Faustus,  quoting  the  gospel,  calls  \t°  scripture. 

I  shall  here''  in  the  margin  put  down  a  number  of  passages, 
showing  the  respect  which  the  Manichees  had  for  the  apos- 
tles of  Jesus,  though  1  have  before  taken  notice  of  some  of 
them.  That'i  the  apostle  Paul  should  Contradict  himself,  or 
teach  different  doctrine  at  one  time,  or  in  one  epistle,  from 
what  he  had  taught  in  another,  is  a  thought  which  Faustus 
rejects  Avith  indignation. 

VI.  What  comes  to  be  considered  by  us  in  the  next  place, 
is,  their  pretence  that  the  scriptures  of  the  New  Testament 
were  corrupted,  having-  been  interpolated  by  the  catholics; 
and  therefore,  as  Augustine  said  in  his  summary  account, 
'  they  took  what  they  liked,  and  rejected  the  rest.'  What 
has  been  already  said   may  be  of  some  use  to   help  us   in 

ccECum  a  nativitafe  lumen  videre  natura  non  sinit,  quod  tamen  Jesus  po- 
tenter  operatus  videtur  erga  hujus  generis  coecos — ?  manum  aridam  sanasse, 
vocem  ac  verbum  privatis  his  per  naturam  redonasse ;  mortuis  et  in  fabem 
jam  resolut  scorporibus  compagereddita,  vitalem  redintegrasse  spiritum,  quem 
non  ad  stuporem  addiicat —  ?  Quae  tamen  omnia  nos  communiter  facta  ab 
eodem  credimus  christiani.  1.  26.  c.  2.  ^  L.  33.  c.  2. 

'  An  Barabbas,  latro  ille  insignis,  qui  non  solum  in  ligno  suspensus  minime 
est,  sed  etiam  Judteorum  rogatu  omissus  e  carcere,  magis  fuit  benedictus,  quara 
ille  qui  cum  Clinsto  de  cruce  adscendit  in  ccelum  ?  1.  14.  c.  i. 

*"   L.    16.  c.  8.  "  Sed   quoniam  privilegio  quodam  vos 

tucmini,  ut  de  scripturis  opprimi  nequeatis,  dicendo  eas  esse  falsatas  ;  quanquam 
ea  quae  commemoravi  de  arbore,  et  de  grege  porcomm,  nunquam  a  corrupton- 
bus  iiniiussa  esse  dixistis.  De  Mor.  Manich.  c.  17.  n.  .55. 

"  ut  scriptura  testatur.     Nam  pannum,   inquit,  novum  nemo  assuit 

vesfimento  veteri,  &c.  1.  8.  c.  i. 

P  Ut  fere  Christo  placet,  et  ejus  apostolis,  et  nobis  profecto.  Faust.  1.  24. 
cap.  1. 

Neque  id  temere  aut  praesumtive,  sed  a  Christo  discentes  et  ejus  apostolis. 
ibid,  in  fin. 

Sed  quaerendum  potius  est,  quid  ipse  de  se,  quidve  apostoli  sui  de  eodem 
praedicarint.  Id.  1.  19.  c.  1. 

Ecce  cjuid  apostolus  dixit,  ecce  quid  evangelista.  Fel.  Act.  1.  2.  c.  2.  ap. 
Aug.  T.  8. 

1  Non  equidein  crcdiderim  apostolum  Dei  contraria  sibi  scribere  potuisse, 
ef  modo  banc,  modo  iliam  de  Domino nostro  habuisse  sententiam. — Alioquin, 
absit  apostolum   Dei,  quod  aedificavit,  unquam  destruere.     Faust.  1.  xi.  c.  i. 


The  Mankhees.     Sect.  VI.  409 

understanding'  this  notion  of  theirs.  Nevertheless,  divers 
passages  of  ancient  authors  should  be  observed  by  us,  that 
>ve  may  the  more  distinctly  perceive  how  far  they  carried 
this  principle. 

1.  Some  might  comphiin  if  I  did  not  largely  transcribe  so 
ancient  a  writer  in  this  controversy  as  Titus  of  Bosira,  wijo, 
1  think,  has  used  the  strongest  expressions  of  any  of  their 
adversaries  in  speaking  of  this  matter.  They  are  such  as 
these : 

'  Mani,  and  his  followers,'  he  says,  '  for""  supporting-  their 

*  doctrines,  quote  some  texts  of  scripture,  and  wrest  them 
'  from  their  right  meaning.' 

The"  Old  Testament,  even  the  law  and  the  prophets,  he 
ascribes  to  what  he  calls  the  evil  principle.  '  The  gospels, 
'  and  other  parts  of  the  New  Testament,'  he  says,  '  are  from 

*  the  good  principle  ;  but  are  not  uncorrupt :  for  many 
'  thingsof  Hyle,  or  the  bad  principle,  are  mixed  with  them. 
'  For  which  reason  we  are  to  make  a  distinction,  and  are  to 
'  follow,  and  make  use  of  those  parts  only  which  belong  to 
'  what  is  called  the  good  principle.'  He  adds,  '  that'  Mani 
'  pretends  to  correct  the  holy  scriptures,  and,  acting  here 
'  the  assumed  character  of  the  Paraclete,  he  takes  away  a 
'  large  part  of  the  New  Testament,  and  leaves  in  it  a  i\iw 
'  things  only,  so  spoiling-  all  its  harmony.' 

Titus  says  farther:  '  Because"  they  honour  the  name  of 
'  Christ,  they  pretend  to  honour  also  the  gospels.  But  if 
'  they  did  really  honour  the  gospels,  they  would  neither 
'  take  away  from  them,  nor  add  to  them. — — Whereas  they 

*  have  added  to  the  gospels  what  they  pleased,  and  have 
'  taken  away  from  them  what  they  thought  fit:  still  calling- 

^  'PTjatiQ  -wag  toiv  ayiwv  yprt^wv  iK^ia^oiitvoq  trpoQrriv  avm  ipivSoXoyiav. 
Tit.  I.  3.  p.  135.  f. 

*  Ttjjv  fs  ypa(ptov  rag  jitv  TraXaiorepag  avaTiOrjm  ry  Trpog  avm  Xtyojuvij 
KnKia,  vojiov  rt  Kai  TrpofijTai;'  to.  It  ivayyi\ia,  Kai  ra  \onra  rrjg  Kaivijg  SiaOrj- 
Ktjc  fiaQr^jiara,  izapa  (iiv  m  ayaOn,  wg  ourai,  dtdoaOai,  (piiffiv'  nSt  ravra  fii)v  6 
Tijg  fiXacrcptintag  ivpenjg  SwrxvpiZtTai  di  oXh  KaOapevav,  r«,  wg  0j;(T«v,  tvavTis 
9in'  tiwTTapxi'v  ^e  kcu  THTOig  uxjTvip  Kara  Tii'a  jui^if,  TroXXa  rrj  _  viz  uvth  kuXh- 
(iivi]g  iiXjjg'  Kcii  xpijrai  ravru  mpuXovra  [lova  KaO'  iavra,  KaTciXimiv  a  ry  th 
ayaOa  fiepui.   lb.  p.  136. 

'  OvTb)  Tfjv  ayi(i)v  ypa(p<jjv  ti]v  ^lopQwaiv,  (hg  otfTffi,  raff  iavTOV  fitTaxdpiZo- 
fiivog,  Kai  ^la  thto  naXira  roXjiujv  TrapaKXi]Tog  uvai  Soksiv,  ra  p.tv  nXuova 
■7npiypa(pn,  /3p«xf«  St  KaraXnron',  Kai  ri}g  Kaivrig  uaB)]Ki]g  iroOnvra  rojv  avy- 
yivwv  \oywv  tijv  <TVfi(p(ovtav'  lb.  p.  136. 

"  AW  nriiSi]  TiTijxrjrai  to  ovojxa  Iijfra,  TrpocTroiavTai'  tStiyap  avrag,  tiyt 
ra  ivayyiXia  tTifiujv,  fir]  irtpiTifivtiv  Tu  tvayytXia,  lit}  fitprf  twv  ivayyiXuDV 

ttv(pfX(iv,  i-ii]  irtpa  TvpoaQrivai TrpoffytypafijKacyi  ysvona  Pej3sXt]i'rai,  Kai 

(Kv(piiXavTo  uca  KtKpiKaaC   Kai  Xonrov  ovofiaTi KaXaai  to  ivayyiXiov,  fit] 

TtTTjpiJKOTlg  TO   (TW/ia.        Tit.  1.    3.    p.    139. 


410  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

'  it  the  gospel,  however,  when  it  is  not;  for  they  have  not 
'  the  body  [or  substance]  of  the  gospel.' 

Presently  afterwards  he  says  that  '  they^  had  treated  the 
'  scriptures  worse  than  the  heathens  :  for  they  otdy  rejected 
'  them,  whereas  these  men,  pretending"  to  receive  the  gospels, 
'  have  abused,  perverted,  and  adulterated  them.' 

More  to  the  like  purpose  may  be  seen  in"  Titus.  But  I 
suppose  1  have  transcribed  enough  to  satisfy  every  one  con- 
cerning- the  nature  of  the  charge  which  he  brings  against 
this  people. 

And  there  is  reason  to  think  that  he  ag-gravates  and  exag- 
gerates beyond  the  truth.  Therefore  Mill  "^  saysjudiciously, 
'  they  did  not  alter  the  gospels ;  they  only  said  of  those  pas- 
'  sages,  which  they  did  not  like,  that  they  were  additions, 
'  made  long  ago  by  some  corrupters  of  the  scriptures.'  And 
Beausobre>  has  shown  largely,  that  Titus  has  in  part  misre- 
presented the  case. 

Jerom  intimates  either^  that  the  Manichees  curtailed  the 
copies  of  the  New  Testament,  or  did  not  receive  and  admit 
the  authority  of  every  thing  found  in  the  copies  generally 
used  by  the  catholics. 

What  Photius  says  of  Agapius  was  observed*  formerly. 
He  does  not  expressly  charge  Agapius  with  pretending  that 
the  books  of  the  New  Testament  were  interpolated. 

Augustine  often  speaks  of  this  matter.  Divers  of  his 
passages  must  be  produced. 

The  general  account  which  he  gives  in  his  Retractations 
of  what  he  wrote  against  Faustus,  is  this  :  '  P  wrote  a  large 
'  work  against  Faustus,  blaspheming  the  law  and  the  pro- 
'  phets,  and  their  God,  and   the  incarnation  of  Christ,  and 


^  01  Ss  si\r]^(vai  Soksvtsq,  ivt^OTtvaav,  ivtxopivaav,  ivtKaTrr)Ktvaav 

ToiQ  yoaiiiiam-  ib.  p.  139.  "  Id.  ib.  p.  )40,  141. 

*  Noil  quidem  palam  rejecti  istis  capitulis,  sed  dissimulatis,  seu  ita  apud 
p.nimum  repudiatis ;  ut  nihilominus,  cum  ab  eis  premerentur,  hand  necesse 
haberent,  cum  Marcionitis,  reformare  codices  sues,  sive  ex  ipsis  tollere  quae 
sibi  minus  probata  fuermt ;  sed  sufficeret  dixisse,  loca  ilia  jam  olim  a  corrup- 
loribus  S.  textus  fuisse  inserta. — Mill.  Proleg.  n.  726.  Gemina  istis,  ipsiusque 
textCis  depravationem  objicit  Manicha;is  Titus.  Dicit  eos  circumcidisse  evan- 
gelia. — Verum  crimiiiatio  haec  quousque  valeat,  et  quomodo  interprelanda  sit, 
ex  supra  dictis  liquet — non  mutilantes  quidem  scripturas,  lextumve  ipsum 
quovis  modo  mutantes.     Id.  n.  7G1. 

y  Hist,  de  Manich.  T.  i.  p.  302—309. 

^  Marcion  et  Manichaeus  hunc  locum,  in  quo  dicit  apostolus.  Quae  quidem 
sunt  allegorica,  et  caetera  quae  sequuritur,  [Gal.  iv.  24.]  de  codice  sue  tollere 
noluerunt,  putantes  adversum  nos  relinqui.     Ilier.  in  Gal.  T.  4.  p.  281.  f. 

*  See  before,  p.  398.  ''  Contra  Faustum  Manichaum, 
blasphemantem  l^em  et  prophetas,  et  eoruni  Deum,  ot  incarnationem  Christi ; 
scripturas  autem  Novi  Testamenti,  qmbus  convincitur,  falsatas  esse  dicentem, 
$cripsi  grande  opus.     Retr.  1.  2.  c.  7. 


The  Manichees.     Sect.  VI.  411 

'  saying-  tliat  the  scriptures  of  the  New  Testament,  by  which 
'  he  is  confuted,  are  interpohited.' 

He  frequently  speaks  to  this  purpose  :  '  Wlien'=  any  text  is 
'  alleged  against  them  from  the  gospels  M-hich  they  cannot 
'  answer,  they  say  it  is  interpohited.'     Again,  '  When''  they 

*  are  greatly  pressed  with  the  authority  of  the  scrij>tures, 
'  they  cry  out :  "  That  passage  was  inserted  in  the  gospel 
'  by  the  corrupters  of  scripture."  '  '  When*^  the  words  of 
'  scripture  are  clearly  against  them,  so  that  they  can  find  no 
'  way  to  pervert  them,  they  betake  themselves  to  their  com- 
'  inon  answer,  and  say  the  passage  is  an  interpolation.' 

In  an  epistle  to  Ceretius,  having  represented  their  opinion 
concerning-  the   Old    Testament,   he   adds:  '  And^    in   the 

*  canonical  scriptures  of  the  New  Testament,  that  is,  the 
'  genuine  evangelical  and  apostolical  Avritings,  they  do  not 
'  receive  all,  but  what  they  like. — In  every  book  they  mark 
'  the  places,  taking-  such  as  they  think  favourable  to  their 
'  errors,  and  setting  aside  the  rest  as  interpolations.' 

He  somewhere  calls  this^  a  certain  privilege  of  theirs,  by 
which  they  endeavoured  to  defend  themselves  against  argu- 
ments brought  from  a  text  of  scripture. 

In  another  place  he  says:  'This'^  is  their  principle — 
'  Whatever  is  found  in  the  gospels,  or  in  the  epistles,  by 
'  which  they  imagine  their  error  may  be  supported,  that  they 
'  alloAv  and  maintain  to  have  been  said  by  Christ  and  his 
'  apostles :  whatever  appears  contrary  to  them  in  the  same 

•^  Quod  si  dicunt,  hoc  capif  ulum  falsum  esse,  et  a  corruptoribus  scripturarum 
esse  additum  ;  (nam  hoc  sclent,  quando  non  inveniunt  quid  respondeant, 
dicere :)   Contr.  Adiin.  cap.  3.  n.  2. 

^  An  forte  dicturi  sunt,  sicut  solent  dicere,  cum  scripturarum  eos  urget 
auctoritas,  hoc  capitulum  a  corruptoribus  scripturarum  insertum  esse  evan- 
gelic ?  Contr.  Adim.  c.  15.  n.  1.  m. 

*  Hoc  est  quod  paulo  ante  dixi,  quia,  ubi  sic  raanifesta  veritate  isti  prae- 
focantur,  ut,  obsessi  dilucidis  verbis  sanctarum  scripturarum,  exitum,  in  eis 
fallacise  suae  reperire  non  pcssint,  id  testimonium,  quod  prolatum  est,  falsura 
esse  respondent.     Contr.  Faust.  1.  xi.  c.  2. 

'  Qui  etiam  in  scripturis  canonicis  Testamenti  Novi,  hoc  est,  in  veris  evan- 
gelicis  et  apcstolicis  literis,  non  accipiunt  omnia,  sed  quod  volunt — Sed  et  in 
singulis  quibusquc  libris  Icca  distingnunt,  quae  putant  suis  erronbus  convenire, 
caefera  in  eis  pro  falsis  habent.     Ad.  Ceret.  Ep.  237.  al.  253. 

8  Sed  quoniam  priviiegio  quodam  vos  tuenuni,  ut  de  scripturis  opprimi 
nequeatis,  dicendc  eas  esse  falsatas.     De  M.  Manich.  c.  17.  n.  55. 

'■  An  forte,  quae  de  Novo  Testamento  prolulimus,  ipsa  qucque  audent 
dicere  falsa  esse  atque  perversa,  priviiegio  sue  diabolico,  ut,  quidquid  est  in 
evangelic  vel  epistolis  canonicis,  quo  adjuvari  haeresim  suam  putent.  id  esse  a 
Christo  et  apostolis  dictum  teneant  atque  suadeant,  quidquid  autem  ex  iisdem 
codicibus  adversus  eos  sonuent,  immissum  ab  infalsatoribus,  ore  impudenti  ac 
sacrilege  non  dubitent  dicere  ?  Cui  furori  eorum,  auctoritalem  omnium  librc- 
runi  exstinguere  atque  abolere  conanti,  jam  supra— ncHi  pauca  respondi.  Contr. 
Faust.  1.  22.  c.  15. 


412  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  Histor II . 

'  books,  they  make  no  scruple  to  say,  without  shame,  has 
'  been  inserted  by  some  corrupters  of  scripture.  By  M'hich 
'  diabolical  privilege  of  theirs  they  think  themselves  secure 
'  against  every  thing  that  can  be  alleged  from  scripture.' 

Hence  we  learn  that,  according  to  them,  the  apostolical 
epistles,  as  well  as  the  gospels,  had  been  corrupted. 

He  elsewhere  says  that  '  they'  receive  and  approve  some 
'  things  in  the  books  of  the  New  Testament  :  and  that  when 
'  asked,  why  they  rejected  and  found  fault  with  other  things 
'  in  the  same  books,  they  answered,  because  those  passages 
'  had  been  inserted  by  corrupters  of  the  scripture.' 

Augustine  intimates  that''  this  principle  was  taught  by 
Mani  himself,  '  to  accept  whatever  favoured  him  in  the  New 
'  Testament,  and  reject  what  did  not.' 

It  is  found  in  the  Acts  of  Archelaus.  That'  bisliop  argued 
in  favour  of  the  Old  Testament  from  those  words  of  Christ, 
Matt.  V.  17:  "1  came  not  to  destroy,  but  to  fulfil."  To 
which  Mani  answers,  that  '  Christ  never  spoke  those  words. 
'  For  since  in  fact  he  destroyed  the  law,  we  ought  to  con- 
'  elude  his  discourses  agreed  therewith.' 

The  same  thing-  is  implied  in  some  charges™  of  Archelaus 
against  Mani. 

And  Faustus  speaks  of  it"  as  the  common  Manicheean 
doctrine,  and°  taught  them  by  their  inaster. 

2.  There  is  a  long  paragraph  of  Faustus  upon  this  point, 
which  I  shall  transcribe  largely.  I  need  not  insert  it  all 
here,  because  there  are  in  it  many  tautologies  :  but  1  shall 

'  Vos  scripturasNovi  Testament!,  lanquam  falsatas  corruptasqiie,  pulsatis, — 
Vo.^  autem  omnia,  quae  in  libris  Novi  Testamenti  non  accipitis,  omnino  repre- 
henditis,  nee  a  Christo,  nee  ab  apostolis  ejus,  dicta  vel  conscripta  asseveratis, 

Cum  itaque  a  vobis  quseritur,  quare  non  omnia  in  libris  Novi  Testamenti 

accipitis,  sed  in  eis  libris,  in  quibus  approbatis  aliqua,  multa  respuitis,  repre- 
henditis,  accusatis,  a  corruptoribus  inserta  esse  contenditis.  Conlr.  Faust.  1. 
32.  c.  8.  ''  Nam  sicut  te  Manichffius  impiam  docuit  perversita- 

tem,  ut  ex  evangelic  quod  haeresim  tuam  non  impedit  accipias,  quod  autem 
imped  it  non  accipias.     Contr.  Faust.  1.  18.  c.  7. 

'  Ego  audiens  dicebam  eis  sermonem  evangelicum,  quomodo  dixit  Dominus 
noster  Jesus  Christus,  '  Non  veni  solvere  legem,  sed  implere.'  Ille  vero  ait, 
netiuaquam  eum  hoc  dixisse  sermonem.  Cum  enim  ipsam  inveniamus  eum 
resolvisse  legem,  necesse  est  nos  hoc  potius  intelligere  quod  fecit.  Arch.  c.  40. 
p.  69. 

■"  et  in  nostris  libris,  sicut  etiam  adversus  me  disputans  fecit,  asser- 

tionem  suam  proferre,  qu-LLdam  in  his  accusans,  quoedam  permutans,  soio 
Christi  nomine  adjecto.     Arch.  cap.  54.  p.  99. 

"  Et  tamen  me  quidam  jam  adversus  cajjituli  hujas  necessitudinem  Mani- 
chaea  fides  reddidit  tutum,  (june  principio  niihi  non  cuncla  qua  ex  Salvatoris 
nomine  scri|:)ta  leguntur,  passim  credere  persuasit.     Faust.  1.  18.  c.  3. 

"  Quare  indeficientes  ego  praeoeptori  meo  refero  gratias,  qui  me  similiter 
labentem  retinuit,  &c.  Id.  1.  19.  c.  5.  in. 


The  Munichees.     Sect.  \'I.  413 

cudoavour  to  represent  the  whole  of  his  arguinciit  in  his  own 
words. 

Says  this  Maniclitiean  bishop  :  '  If  i'  yon  receive  the  gos- 
'  pel,  yon  onglit  to  receive  all  tliinys  Avritten  therein.  And 
'  do  yon,  who  receive  also  the  Old  Testament,  believe  every 
'  thing-  written  therein?  Excej)ting'  the  prophecies  concern- 
'  ing-  the  king  of  the  Jews,  who  was  to  come,  whom  you 
'  take  to  be  Jesns,  and  some  niural  precepts,  you  wo  more 
'  value  it  than  Paul  does,  who  considers  it  as  dung\  Why 
'  then  may  not  I  do  the  like  with  the  New  Testament — take 
'  what  is  right  and  conducive;  to  n)y  salvation,  and  rejc^ct 
'  those  things  ^^  hich  have  been  fraudulently  foisted  in  by 
'  your  ancestors,  and  disfigure  it,  and  spoil  its  beauty  and 
'  excellence  1 

'  And'i  how  mnch  more  allowable  is  it  for  us  to  take  this 
'  method,  since  it  is  certain  that  the  New  Testament  was  nut 
'  written  by  Christ  himself,  nor  by  his  apostles,  but  a  long* 
'  while  after  their  time  by  some  unknown  persons;  who,  lest 
'  they  should  not  be  credited  when  they  wrote  of  affairs  they 
'  were  little  acquainted  with,  affixed  to  their  works  the  n.inies 
'  of  apostles,  or  of  such  as  were  supj)osed  to  have  been  their 
'  companions,  and  saying  they  were  written  by  them  ? 
'  Whereby,  in  my  opinion,  they  have  greatly  injured  the 
'  disciples  of  Christ,  making  them  the  authors  of  books  in 
'  which  there  are  many  errors  and  contradictions.     For  is 

P  Si  accipis  evangelium,  credere  omnia  debes,  quas  in  eodem  scripla  sunt. 
Quid  enim  tii,  quia  Vetus  accipis  Tcstamentum,  idcirconecredis  omnia  passim, 
quae  in  eodem  scripta  sunt  ?  Nempe  solas  indidem  excerpentes  propiietias, 
quae  regem  Judaeis  venturum  significabant,  quia  ipsum  pulatis  esse  Jesum  ;  et 
pauca  quaedam  disciplinae  civilis  praecepta  communia,  ut  est,  non  occides,  non 
mocchaberis,  caetera  praetennittitis,  et  arbitramini,  esse  non  minus  atque  eadem 
quae  Paul  us  putavit  stercora.  Quid  ergo  percgrinum  hoc,  aut  quid  mirum  est, 
si  ego  de  Testamento  Novo  puris>ima  quaeque  legens  et  meae  saluti  convenientia, 
praetermitto  quae  a  vestris  majoribus  inducta  fallaciter,  et  majestatem  ipsius  et 
gratiam  decolorant  ?  Faust.  1.  32.  c.  i. 

1  prtesertim  quod  nee  ab  ipso  scriplum  constat,  nee  ab  ejus  aposto- 

lis,  sed  longo  post  tempore  a  quibusdam  incerti  nominis  viiis,  qui,  ne  sibi  non 
haberetur  fides,  scribentibus  quae  nescirent,  partim  apostolorum,  partim  eorum 
qui  apostolos  secuti  viderentur,  nomina  scripforum  suorum  fronfibus  indiderunt, 
asseveranfes  secundum  eos  se  scripsis'^e  quae  scripserunt.  Quo  magis  mihi 
videnlur  injuria  gravi  aftecisse  discipulos  Christi:  quia  qure  dissona  iidem  et 
repugnantia  sibi  scnberent,  ea  referrentad  ipso?,  et  secundum  eos  haec  scribere 
se  profitentur  evangelia,  quae  tantis  sint  referta  erroribus,  tantis  contrarietatibus 
narrationum  simul  ac  sententiarum,  ut  nee  silji  prorsus,  nee  inter  se  ipsa  con- 
veniant.  Quid  ergo  aliud  e^f,  quam  calumniari  bonos,  et  Christi  discipulonim 
concordem  coetum  in  crimen  devocaro  discordicE  ?  Quae  quia  nos  legentes 
aoimadverlimus,  cordis  obtutu  sanissimo  aequissimum  judicavimus  utilibus 
acceptis  ex  iisdem,  id  est,  iis  quie  et  fidem  nostram  aedificent,  et  Christi  Domini 
atque  ejus  Patris  omnipotentis  Dei  propagent  gloriam,  caetera  repudiare,  quae 
nee  ipsorum  majestati,  nee  fidei  nostrae  conveniant.  ib.  c.  2. 


414  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

'  not  this  to  abuse  the  disciples  of  Jesus,  who  certainly 
'  agreed,  and  were  all  of  one  mind  ?  We,  perceiving  this, 
'  have  taken  the  only  reasonable  method  ;  which  is,  to  ex- 
'  amine  every  thing-  according  to  the  rules  of  sound  reason 
'  and  judgment,  accepting  those  things  which  are  useful 
'  for  establishing  our  faith,  and  are  honourable  to  the  Lord 
'  Jesus  Christ  and  Almighty  God  his  Father,  and  rejecting 
'  all  other  things  which  are  not  for  his  honour  nor  our  benefit. 

'  Whether'  the  prophets  prophesied  of  Jesus  will  be  con- 
'  sidered  hereafter.  In  the  mean  time  I  say,  if  Jesus,  foretold 
'  in  the  Old  Testament,  teaches  that  some  things  in  it  are  to 
'  be  received,  and  many  others  rejected,  in  like  manner  the 
'  Comforter,  promised  in  the  New  Testament,  teaches  us  what 
'  of  it  we  ought  (o  receive  and  what  to  reject.  Of  whom 
'  Jesus,  when  he  promised  him,  says  in  the  gospel  :  "  He 
'  shall  lead  you  into  all  truth,  and  teach  you  all  things,  and 
'bring  all  things  to  your  remembrance:"  John  xvi.  13. 
'  Why  therefore  n)ay  not  we  do  the  same  with  the  New 
'  Testament,  through  the  Comforter,  that  yon  do  with  the 
'  Old  by  Jesus? — especially,  since,  as  before  said,  it  M'as  not 
'  written  by  Christ,  nor  by  his  apostles. 

'  To"  conclude,  therefore,  as  you  in  the  Old  take  only  the 
'  prophecies  and  moral  precepts;  and  have  rejected  circuin- 
'  cision,  and  sacritices,  and  the  sabbath,  and   its  rest,  and 

■■  Sed  an  prophetfe  Jesum  praesagiverint,  postea  videbimus.     Interim  ad 

haec  me  respondere  oportet,  quia  si  Jesus,  per  Testamentum  Velus  annuntiatns, 
nunc  dijudicat  et  carminat,  docetque  pauca  ejus  accipienda  esse,  repudianda 
vero  qnam  plurima ;  et  nobis  Paracletus  ex  Novo  Teslamento  promissus  perinde 
docet,  quid  accipere  ex  eodem  debeamus,  et  quid  repudiare :  de  quo  ultro 
Jesus,  cum  eum  promitteret,  dicit  in  evangelic:  Ipse  vos  inducet  in  omnera 
veritatem,  et  ipse  vobis  annuntiabit  omnia,  et  commemorabit  vos.  Quapropter 
liceat  tantum  et  nobis  Testamento  Novo  per  Paracletum,  quantum  vobis  in  Vetere 
licere  oslenditis  per  Jesum : — prsesertim  quod  nee  a  Christo  scriptum  constat, 
ut  diximus,  nee  ab  ejus  apostolis.  ib.  c.  6. 

*  Quapropter  ut  vos  ex  Vetere  Testamento  solas  admittitis  prophetias,  et  ilia 
quae  superius  diximus  civilia  atque  ad  disciplinam  vitae  communis  pertinentia 
praecepta ;  supersedistis  vero  peritomen,  et  sacrificia,  et  sabbatum,  et  observa- 
tionem  ejus,  et  azyma ;  quid  ab  re  est,  si  et  nos  de  Testamento  Novo  sola 
accipientes  ea,  qua;  in  honoreni  et  laudem  filii  majestatis  vel  ab  ipso  dicta 
comperimus,  vel  ab  ejus  apostolis,  sed  jam  perfectis  ac  fidelibus,  dissimulavi- 
mus  csetera,  quae  aut  simpliciter  tunc  et  ignoranter  a  rudibus  dicta,  aut  oblique 
et  maligne  ab  inimicis  objecta,  aut  impudenter  a  scriptoribus  afHrmata,  et 
posteris  tradita  ?  dico  autem  hoc,  ipsum  natum  ex  feminaturpiter,  circumcisum 
judai'ce,  Facrificasse  gentiliter,  baptizatum  humiliter,  circumductum  a  diabolo 
per  deserta,  et  ab  eo  tentatum  quam  miserrime.  His  igitur  exceptis,  et  si  quid 
ei  ab  scriptoribus  ex  Testamento  Vetere  falsa  sub  testificatione  injectum  est, 
credimus  caetera;  praecipue  crucis  ejus  mysticam  f.xionem,  qua  nostras  animae 
passionis  monstrantur  vulnera ;  tum  pnecepta  salutaria  ejus,  tum  parabolas, 
cunctumque  sermonem  deiticum,  qui  maxime  duarum  praeferens  naturarum 
discretionem,  ipsius  esse  non  venit  in  dubium.  ib.  c.  7. 


The  Manichees.     Sect.  \' I.  41") 

*  unleavened  bread  ;  what  absurdity  is  there,  if  we  also 
'  receive  in  the  New  those  thinos  only  which  we  find  to  the 
'  honour  of  the  Son,  and  said  by  himself  or  his  apostles,  but 
'  perfect  and  fully  instructed  ;  and  njcct  other  things  said 
'  by  them  [that  is,  the  apostles]  in  their  ignorance,  or  falsely 
'  and  impudently  as(  ribed  to  them,  and  since  handed  about 
'  as  theirs?  I  mean  that  Jesus  was  born  of  a  woman,  circum- 
'  cised  like  a  Jew  ;  that  he  sacrificed  like  a  heathen,  was 
'  meanly  baptized,  led  about  in  the  wilderness,  and  ujisera- 
'  bly  tempted  by  the  devil.  Excepting^  these,  and  the 
'  quotations  of  the  Old  Testament,  fraudulently  inserted 
'  by  those  writers,  we  receive  all   the  rest;  especially   his 

*  mystical  crucifixion,  in  which  are  manifested  the  wounds 
'  of  our  own  souls;  as  also  his  salutary  precepts,  and  his 

*  parables,  and  all  his  divine  discourses,  teaching  the  differ- 
'  ence  of  two  natures,  of  which  there  can  be  no  doubt  but 
'  they  are  his.' 

1  put  in  the  margin*^  another  passage  of  Faustus,  without 
translating  it  exactly,  where  he  pretends  that  '  there  are 
'  many  ditferences  and  contrarieties  in  the  gospels;  and  that 
'  the  ancestors  of  the  catholics  had  inserted  many  things, 
'  minolino-  their  own  words  with  the  oracles  of  the  Lord, 
'  which  did  not  agree  with  the  doctrine  taught  by  him;  and 
'  that  the  gospels  were  not  written  by  Christ,  nor  his  apos- 
'  ties,  but  a  long  while  after  them  by  some  unknown  men, 
'  half-Jews,  who  were  not  well  informed,  but  put  down  any 
'  uncertain  traditions  which  they  met  with  ;  and  then  aflixed 
'  to  their  own  erroneous  accounts  the  names  of  Christ's 
'  apostles,  or  their  companions.'  From  all  which  he  con- 
cludes, that  '  men  ought  never  to  hear  or  read  the  gospels 
'  without  caution,  trying"  all  things  by  their  own  reason  and 
'judgment,  and  admitting-  nothing-  but  what,  after  strict 
'  examination,  is  found  to  be  right.' 

Such  is  the  substance  of  a  paragraph  in  the  thirty-third 
and  last  book  of  this  work  of  Faustus,  and  so  far  at  least  as 
it  is  given  us  by  Augustine. 

*  Nee  immerito  nos  ad  hujusmodi  scripturas  tam  inconsonantes  et  varias, 
nimquam  sane  sine  judicio  ac  ratione  auies  afferimus :  sed,  contemplantes 
omnia,  et  cum  aliis  alia  conferentes,  perpendimus  utrum  eorum  quidque  a 
Christo  dici  potuerit,  necne.  Multa  enim  a  majoribus  veslris  eloquiis  Domini 
nostri  inserta  verba  sunt,  quae  nomine  signata  ipsius  cum  ejus  fide  non  con- 
gruant ;  praeseitim,  quia,  ut  jam  ssepe  probatum  a  nobis  est,  nee  ab  ipso  hDec 
sunt,  nee  ab  ejus  apostolis  scripta ;  sed,  multo  post  eorum  assumtioneni,  a 
nescio  quibus,  et  ipsis  inter  se  non  concordantibus,  semi-judaeLs,  per  famas 
opinionesque  comperta  sunt  •,  qui  tamen  omnia  eadem  in  apostolorum  Domini 
conferentes  nomina,  vel  eorum  qui  secuti  apostolos  viderentur,  errores  ac 
mendacia  sua  secundum  eos  se  scripsisse  mentiti  sunt.  Id.  1.  33.  c.  3. 


416  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

I  refer  likewise"  in  the  margin  to  a  place  or  two  more, 
where  lie  speaks  somewhat  distinctly  of  this  matter. 

VII.  It  is  fit  Me  should  now  make  some  remarks  npoii 
these  passages. 

1.  It  appears  hence,  that  Augustine's  account  upon  this 
head  is  just  and  riglit.  The  3Iauichees,  or  however  those 
of  Africa,  took  what  they  liked  in  the  New  Testament,  and 
rejected  what  did  not  suit  them.     So  Faustus  evidently. 

2.  As  for  what  Faustus  says  of  the  catholics  not  receiving- 
every  thing  in  the  Old  Testament,  Augustine  well  answers, 
that*  they  received  every  thing  therein  as  of  divine  original 
and  appointment;  and  allowed  all  things  to  be  right  for  the 
time;  those  which  they  did  not  now  follow,  as  well  as  the 
laws  of  true  and  real  righteousness,  by  which  they  were 
still  obliged.  I  hav^e  transcribed  several  passages  of  Au- 
gustine at  the  bottom  of  the  page,  supposing-  that  they  will 
not  be  disagreeable  to  the  reader. 

3.  The  Manichees,  or  however  Faustus  and  his  friends, 
denied  that  the  gospels  were  written  by  the  apostles  and 
evangelists  whose  names  they  bear.  Mr.  Nye'"  gives  a 
different  account  of  the  sentiments  of  our  Manichoean  author. 
But  it  is  manifest  that  Faustus  speaks  of  the  books  of  the 
New  Testament  commonly  received  by  catholic  christians, 
or  at  least  of  the  gospels.  Eeausobre"  is  sensible  of  it,  and 
speaking-  of  the  subject  says,  '  they  denied  the  g-ospels  to 
'  have  been  written  by  the  sacred  authors  whose  names  they 
'  bear ;  and  denied  it  with  surprising-  rashness  and  assurance.' 

4.  Hence  we  perceive  what  in  the  gospels  the  Manichees 
received,  and  what  not.    They  received  our  Lord's  discourses 

-  Vid.  Faust.  1.  18.  c.  3.  1.  19.  c.  5. 

*  Nos  Veteris  Testamenti  scripturas  omiies,  utdigniim  est,  veras  divinasque 
laudamu-. — Nos  ea  quae  nunc  de  libris  Testamenti  Veteris  non  observamus, 
congruenter  tamen  illo  tempore  atque  illi  populo  fuisse  prsecepta — ostendimus 
et  docemus.     Aug.  contr.  Faust.  1.  32.  c.  8.  in. 

Quoecunque  scripfa  sunt  in  illis  libris  Veteris  Testamenti,  omnia  verissime 
atque  utilissime  pro  aeterna  vita  scripta  esse  laudamus,  accipimus,  approbamus  : 
Sed  quae  in  ins  mandata  corporali  operatione  non  observamus,  et  rectissime 
tunc  mandata  intelligimus,  et  umbras  futurorum  esse  didicimus,  et  nunc 
impleri  cognoscimus.     Id.  ib.  c.  14. 

Hoc  enim  aliqua  verisimili  ratione  diceretur,  si  essetaliquid  in  Veteris  Testa- 
menti libris,  quod  nos  diceremus  non  recte  dictum,  non  divinitus  jussum,  non 
veraciter  scriptum.  Nihil  horum  dicimus;  sed  accipimus  omnia,  sive  quae 
observ^amus,  ut  recte  vivamus ;  sive  quae  non  observamus,  ut  tamen  et  ipsa  tunc 
in  prophetia  jussa  et  observata  nunc  jam  compleri  videamus.  Id.  ib.  c.  15. 

"  See  Steph.  Nye's  Defence  of  the  Canon  of  the  New  Testament,  p. 
94—100. 

"  Nos  heretiques  ayant  suppose  que  les  evangiles  n'  avoint  ete  ecrits 
par  des  Apotres,  ni  par  des  disciples  des  Apotres,  mais  par  des  inconnus  a 
demi-juifs,  &c.  Beaus.  Hist,  de  Manicli.  T.  i.  p.  299.  See  also  p.  296. 


Tlie  Manichees.     Sect.  VL  417 

and  parables ;  the  history  of  his  preaching",  mir.icles,  cru- 
cifixion, and  every  thing-  else,  excepting-  some  few  things 
most  evidently  contrary  to  their  notions;  as  our  Lord's 
nativity,  cirGunicision,  and  the  quotations  from  the  Old 
Testament.  Some  might  be  apt  to  think  they  must  have  set 
aside  a  very  large  part  of  the  New  Testament,  as  interpo- 
lated:  but  from  this  passage  of  Faustus  himself,  and  from 
many  things  already  alleged,  it  may  be  perceived  >  that 
would  be  a  wrong-  conclusion. 

5.  We  see  the  ground  and  occasion  of  the  liberty  they 
took  in  censuring"  the  New  Testament,  particularly  the  gos- 
pels. They  had  certain  philosophical  principles  of  which 
they  were  too  fond;  and  therefore  they  would  rather  say 
any  thing  than  give  them  up.  They  would  not  give  up 
their  particular  notions.  Nor  did  they  dare  to  deny  the 
authority  of  Christ  or  his  apostles.  The  only  refuge  left 
them  therefore  Mas  to  say  that  the  books  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment were  not  written  by  apostles,  or  that  they  were  inter- 
polated. Perhaps  it  might  have  been  sufficient  to  say  this 
last :  possibly  that  is  all  that  was  said  by  some  of  the  sect. 
But  Faustus  is  pleased  to  say  both,  rather  than  presume  to 
contradict  Christ  or  his  apostles,  or  insinuate  that  their 
doctrine  was  in  any  thing  wrong".  Augustine  has  a^  remark 
to  the  same  purpose  handsomely  expressed. 

6.  The  Manichauan  scheme,as  here  represented  by  Faustus, 
is  inconsistent,  and  overthrows  itself.  The  gospels  in  some 
things  are  good  authority,  in  others  not.  The  gospels,  he 
says,  were  not  written  by  Christ,  nor  his  apostles,  nor  apos- 
tolical men  :  but  by  some  unknown  people  a  good  while 
after  their  times.  Nor  Avere  those  writers  well  acquainted 
with  the  affairs  of  which  they  had  written.  And  yet  they 
are,  it  seems,  good  witnesses  to  Christ's  miracles,  parables, 
divine  discourses,  and  mystical  crucifixion.  Faustus  too 
claims  an  interest  in  the  promise  of  the  Spirit,  made  by 
Christ;  though  he  knows  nothing  of  that  promise  but  from 
the  gospels.  Augustine  has  well  shown  the  inconsistency 
of  this  scheme.     '  If*  the  books  of  the  New  Testament  are 

^  His  autem  exceptis,  et  testimoniis  ex  Veteri  Testamenfo,  quae  illis  inserta 
sunt  literis,  csetera  vos,  secundum  id  quod  Faustus  loquitur,  fatemini  accipere. 
Aug.  Contr.  Faust.  1.  32.  e.  19. 

^  Vos  ergo  jam  dicite,  quare  non  accipiatis  omnia  ex  libris  Novi  Testamenti  ? 
utrum  quia  non  sunt  apostolorum  Christi,  an  quia  pravi  aliquid  docuerunt 
apostoli  Christi  ?  Respondebunt,  quia  non  sunt  apostolorum  Christi.  Nam 
ilia  vox  altera  paganorum  est,  qui  dicunt  apostolos  Christi  non  recta  docuisse. 
Contr.  Faust.  1.  32.  c.  16.  in. 

"  Ita  ergo  aut  cogimini  veraces  illos  codices  confiteri,  et  continue  everteiit 
haeresim  vestram .-  aut  si  fallaces  eos  dixeritis,  eadera  auctoritate  Paracletum 
VOL.    III.  2  E 


418  Credibilitij  of  the  Gospel  History. 


genuine  and  riglit,'  says  lie,  '  your  doctrine  is  overthrown  : 
and  if  they  are  not  so,  but  spurious  and   fallacious,  your 
'  principle  is  in  like  manner  overthrown.     For  you  have  no 
•  other  authority  to  go  upon.' 

Some  may  think  their  principle  led  them  to  pay  little 
regard  to  scripture.  And  they  may  be  apprehensive  that 
there  was  nothing  in  the  New  Testament  they  relied  upon  as 
certainly  genuine  and  said  by  Christ,  or  written  by  his 
apostles.  But  if  that  be  the  consecjuence  of  their  principle, 
they  did  not  see  it.  We  must  rather  say,  therefore,  that 
they  were  absurd  and  inconsistent.  For  that  the  scriptures 
of  the  New  Testament  were  in  esteem  and  authority  with 
them,  must  be  apparent  to  all  who  have  read  the  preceding- 
part  of  this  history.  And  it  is  as  evident  that  they  were 
Mell  satisfied  of  the  genuineness  of  some  parts  of  the  New 
Testament,  though  they  affirmed  other  things  to  be  interpo- 
lations. Otherwise  those  books  could  have  been  of  no  use. 
Moreover  we  just  now  observed  Faustus  to  say  of  our  Lord's 
divine  discourses  and  parables  :  '  There  can  be  no  doubt  but 
'  they  are  his.'  They  received  therefore  many  things  in  the 
New  Testament,  yea,  the  main  part  of  it,  as  unquestionably 
genuine.  These  are  words  of  Secundinus  to  Augustine: 
'  And**  is  that  saying  blotted  out  of  the  gospel,  "  Broad  is 
'  the  way  that  leads  to  destruction  T'  or  is  not  that  text  in 
'  Paul  genuine,  "  that  every  one  must  give  an  account  of 
'  himself?"  ' 

And  Augustine  supposes  that  he  argues  very  cogently 
when  he  reminds  them  that,*^  so  far  as  they  weaken  the  credit 
of  the  scriptures,  they  weaken  the  proofs  of  their  own  parti- 
cular principles  built  thereon.  They"*  likewise  hazarded 
even  their  Christianity.  They  Aveaken,  he  tells  them,  and  in 
a  mamier  overthrow,  the  grounds  and  evidences  upon  which 
they  believe  in  Jesus,  or  would  persuade  others  to  believe 

non  poferitis  asserere,  et  vos  evertitis  hseresim  vestram.  Confr.  Faust.  1.  32. 
c.  16.  in.  ''  An  emendatum  in  evangelic  est,  quod  spatiosa  via 

not  ducat  in  interitum  ?  An  falsum  in  Paulo  est,  quod  operum  singuli  suorum 
crunt  reddituri  rationem  ?  Secundin.  ad  Aug.  c.  3. 

'^  Unde  asseritis  personam  vestri  auctoris,  vel  potius  deceptoris  >  Respondetis, 
Ex  cvangelio  vos  prubare.  Ex  quo  evangelio  ?  quod  non  totum  accipitis, 
quod  falsatum  esse  vos  dicitis.  Quis  ergo  testem  suuni  prius  ipse  dicat  falsitate 
esse  comiptum,  el  tunc  producat  ad  testimonium  ?  Contr.  Faust.  I.  32.  c.  16. 
Vid.  ib.  1.  13.  c.  4,  5. 

•*  Vocem  Patris  de  ccelo  non  audistis ;  opera  Christi,  quibus  de  seipso  testi- 
ficabatur,  non  vidistis  ;  codices  in  quibus  heec  scripta  sunt,  ut  specie  Christiana 
fallatis,  velut  accipitis ;  ne  tamen  contra  vos  legantur,  infalsatos  dicitis.  ib.  1. 
13.  c.  5.  Sed  tamen  si  paganus  in  Novo  Testamento  taba  reprehendcret, 
qualia  isti  reprehendunt  in  Vetere,  nonne  et  ipsi  ea  defendenda  susciperent  > 
kc.  ib.  I.  22.  c.  14. 


Tlie  Manichccs.     Sect.  VI.  .  A\\) 

ill  liiin :  such  ns  tlio  liistory  of  his  words  and  works,  and 
tht'  tlivinc  appearaiicos  in  his  favour,  recorded  in  the  gos- 
pels. 

7.  The  arguments  they  make  use  of  for  showing-  that  the 
gospels  Avere  not  written  by  apostles  or  are  interpolated,  are 
iiisufHcieiit. 

They  are  sucli  as  these:  That  there  are  in  the  gospels 
many  things  which  are  absurd  and  contrary  to  reason. 
But  that  is  false:  every  thing"  in  the  gospels  is  right  and 
reasonable. 

Again,  they  say  that  the  evangelists  disagree,  and  that 
there  are  contrarieties  in  th<>  accounts  of  things  contained  in 
the  gospels  :  which  too  is  false,  as  Augustine  well  observes. 
If^"  they  cannot  reconcile  these  several  accounts,  it  is  for 
want  of  skill  and  attention,  or  it  is  owing-  to  prejudice. 
Again,  says  Augustine:  '  Let'  them  study  the  gospels  more, 

*  and  let  them  come  with  a  pious  disposition,  and  judge  with 
'  the  candour  required  in  reading  and  comparing-  other 
'  historians  who  have  severally  written  of  like  matters,  and 

*  all  will  be  easy.' 

As  for  any  pretensions  to  the  Spirit,  they  gave  no  proofs 
of  their  having  a  greater  interest  in  him  than  other  chris- 
tians had.  Therefore,  if  their  reason  and  judgment  failed 
them,  as  they  evidently  did  in  this  matter,  their  whole  argu- 
ment is  desperate,  and  of  no  value.  Augustine  has  spoken  ^ 
to  this  particular  likewise. 

8.  Their  principle  was  arbitrary.  They  said  the  scrip- 
tures used  by  the  catholics  were  corrupted.  They''  should 
then,  as  Augustine  well  observes,  produce  other  copies  more 

"  Vos  ergo  quid  dicitis?  Unde  ostenditis  scripturas  illas  non  ab  apostolis 
niinistratas  ?  Respondetis,  quia  multa  sunt  in  eis  et  inter  se  et  sibi  contraria. 
Omnino  falsissimum  est;  vos  non  intelligitis. — Quis  enim  ferat  lectorem,  vel 
auditorem,  scripturam  tantse  auctoritatis  facilius  quam  vitium  suae  tarditatis 
audere  culpare  ?  Contr.  Faust.  1.  32.  c.  16. 

■'  Sed  contraria,  inquit,  inter  se  scripta  eorum  reperiuntur.  Maligni  inalo 
studio  legitis,  stulti  non  intelligitis,  coeci  non  videtis.  Quid  enim  magnum 
erat  ista  diligenter  inspicere,  et  eorundem  scriptorum  magnam  et  salubrem 
invenire  congruentiam,  si  vos  contentio  non  perverleret,  et  si  pietas  adjuvaret  ? 
Quis  enim  unqiiam,  duos  historicos  legens  de  una  re  scribentes,  utrumque  vel 
utrumlibet  eorum  aut  fallere  aut  falli  arbitratus  est,  si  unus  eorum  dixit  quod 
alius  praetermisit ;  aut  si  alter  aliquid  brevius  complexus  est,  &c.  Contr.  Faust. 
1.  33.  c.  7.  K  An  hoc  dicitis  vos  Paracletum  docuisse,  scrip- 

turas istas  apostolorum  non  esse,  sed  sub  eorum  nominibus  ab  aliis  esse  con- 
scriptas?  Hoc  saltem  docete,  ipsum  Paracletum  esse,  a  quo  didicistis  haec 
apostolorum  non  esse.     Contr.  Faust.  1.  32.  c.  16. 

''  Proferendus  est  namque  tibi  alius  codex  eadem  continens  et  tamen  incor 
ruptus  et  verior,  ubi  sola  desint  ea  quae  hie  immissa  esse  criminaris.     Ut  si, 
verbi  causa,  Pauli  epistolam,  quae  ad  Romanos  est,  comiptam  esse  consentis, 
aham  proferas  incorruptam,  vel  alium  codicem  potius,  in  quo  ejusdem  apostoli 

2  E  2 


420  CredihiliUj  of  the  Gospel  History. 

correct,  M'here  were  the  things  they  allowed  and  contended 
for  as  right ;  whilst  the  f)ther  things,  insisted  on  by  the 
catholics  in  arguing  against  them,  were  wanting.  But  they 
produced  no  such  copies,  nor  ever  pretended  to  have  any 
different  from  those  commonly  used. 

Augustine  has  very  agreeably  and  thoroughly  exposed 
them  upon  this  head  in  a'  passage  which  1  transcribe  in  his 
own  words  at  the  bottom  of  the  page. 

9.  That  the  several  books  of  the  New  Testament  were 
written  by  apostles,  or  apostolical  men,  that  is,  by  the  persons 
whose  names  they  bear,  is  evident  from  the  testimony  of  all 
christians  in  general,  who  lived  before  the  time  of  Faustus 
and  Mani. 

10.  The  charge  against  the  catholics -is  false  and  ground- 
less. Neither  they,  nor  their  ancestors,  had  corrupted  and 
interpolated  the  scriptures  uf  the  New  Testament.  Some 
faults  may  have  crept  into  them  :  and  lesser  differences  there 
will  be  in  copies  of  books  often  transcribed  :  but  no  consi- 
derable alterations  could  be  made  in  writinos  so  much 
valued,  so  well  known,  in  ihe  hands  of  so  many  persons, 
preserved  in  their  original  language,  and  translated  like- 
wise into  many  other  languages. 

On  these  two  last  observations,  which  contain  the  main 
answer  to  all  the  Manichrean  pretences  and  objections 
relating  to  the  books  of  the  New  Testament,  Augustine  has 
insisted  largely,  and  admirably,  in  his  confutations  of  the 
Manichees,  and  elsewhere.  I  am  sure  my  readers  will  be 
pleased  to  see  what  he  has  said  ;  and  therefore  I  mean  to 
transcribe  several  of  his  passages. 

1.  In  a  letter  to  Jerom,  Augustine  writes  to  this  purpose  ; 
'  The*^  Manichees  pretend  that  many  passages  of  the  divine 

eadem  epistola  sincera  et  incorrupta  sit.  Non  faciam,  iiiquis,  ne  ipse  corrupisse 
credar.  Hoc  enim  soletis  dicere.  Et  verum  dicitis,  &c.  De  Mor.  Ec.  Cath. 
cap.  29.  n.  61. 

'  Aliud  est  ergo  auctoritate  aliquorum  vel  librorum  vel  hominiim  non  teneri, 
et  aliud  est  dicere,  Iste  quidem  vir  sanctus  omnia  vera  scripsit,  et  ista  epistola 
ipsius  est ;  sed  in  ea  ipsa  hoc  non  est  ejus.  Ubi  cum  ex  adverso  audieris, 
Proba ;  non  confugies  ad  exempla  veriora,  vel  plurium  codicum,  vel  anti- 
quorum,  vel  linguae  prsecedentis,  unde  hoc  in  aliam  linguam  interpretatum 
est :  sed  dicas,  Inde  probo  hoc  illius  esse  illud  non  esse,  quia  hoc  pro  me  sonat, 
illud  contra  me.     Tu  es  ergo  regula  verilatis?  ike.  Contr.  Faust.  1.  xi.  c.  2. 

''  ManichiBi  plurima  divitiarum  scripturarum,  quibus  eoriim  nefarius  error 
clarissima  sententianim  perspicuitate  convincitur,  quia  in  alium  sensum  defor- 
quere  non  possunt,  falsa  esse  coutcndunt ;  ita  tamen  ut  earn  falsitatoni  non 
scribentibus  apostolis  tribuant,  sed  nescio  quibus  codicum  corruptoribus. 
Quod  tamen  quia  nee  pluribus,  necantiquioribus  exemplaribus,  nee  prsecedentis 
lingua;  auctoritate,  unde  Latini  libri  interpretati  sunt,  probare  aliquando  po- 
tuerunt,  noti^sima  omnibus  veritate  superati  confusique  discedunt.  Aug. 
Ep.  82.  ffil   19.1  n.  G. 


The  Manichees.     Sect.  VI.  421 

*  scriptures,  by  which  their  impious  opinions  are  clearly 
'  confuted,  and  Avliich  therefore  tliey  cannot  nrest  to  their 
'  purpose,  are  not  riglit :  which  wrong-  things  however  they 
'  do  not  ascribe  to  the  apostles,  but  to  some  unknown  cor- 
'  rupters  of  the  same  scriptures.  13nt  since  they  cannot 
'justify  themselves  by  the  more  numerous,  or  more  ancient 
'  copies,  nor  by  the  authority  of  the  original  language,  from 
'  which  the  Latin  copies  have  been  translated,  their  foolish 
'  assertion  is  easily  confuted.' 

(2)  In  his  book  to  his  friend  Ilonoratus,  Augustine 
observes:  '  Their'  opinion  is,  that  some  unknown  men,  who 
'  were  desirous  to  mix  the  law  with  the  gospel,  had  inter- 
'  polated  the  scriptures  of  the  New  Testament  before  the 
'  time  of  Mani.  But,'  says  he,  '  this  opinion  of  theirs  always 
'  appeared    to  be  extremely  absurd  and   unreasonable.     It 

*  appeared  so  to  me  when  I  was  among  them  :  and  not  to  me 
'  only,  but  to  you,  and  to  others  also  who  had  any  good 
'  degree  of  understanding.  But  I  am  now  still  more  per- 
'  suaded  of  the  egregious  folly  of  such  an  opinion,  since 
'  they  cannot  make  it  out  by  the  difference  of  the  copies  of 
'  scripture.' 

(3)  In   another  place   Augustine  says,  '  the*"   books  of 

*  scripture  could  not  be  corrupted.     If  such  an  attempt  had 

*  been  made  by  any  one,  his  design  would  have  been  pre- 
'  vented  and  defeated.  His  alterations  would  have  been 
'  immediately  detected  by  many  and  more  ancient  copies. 
'  The  difficulty  of  succeeding  in  such  an  attempt  is  apparent 

*  hence,  that  the  scriptures  were  early  translated  into  divers 
'  languages,  and  copies  of  them  were  numerous.  The 
'  alterations,  which  any  one  attempted  to  make,  would  have 
'  been  soon  perceived  :  just  even  as  now,'  says  he,  '  in  fact 

'  Voliint  enim  nescio  quos  corruptores  divinorum  librorum  ante  ipsius 
Manichaei  tcmpora  fuisse  :  corrupisse  autem  illos,  qui  Judffiorum  legem  evan- 
gelio  miscere  cupiebant.  De  Ut.  Cred.  c.  3.  n.  7.  sub  f.  Quse  vox  mihi 
semper  quidem,  etiam  cum  eos  audirem,  invalidissima  visa  est ;  nee  mihi  soli, 
sed  etiam  tibi,  (nam  bene  memini,)  ct  nobis  omnibus,  qui  paulo  majorcra 
diligentiam  in  judicando  habere  conabamur,  quam  turba  credentium.  Nunc 
vero — nihil  mihi  videtur  ab  eis  impudentius  dici,  vel,  ut  mitius  loquar,  incuri- 
osius  et  imbecillius,  quam  scriptur':is  divinas  esse  conuplas ;  cum  id  nullrs  in 
tam  recenti  memoria  exstantibus  exemplaribus  possint  convincere.  ib.  n.  7.  in. 

'"  quid  faceretis,  dicite  mihi,  nisi  clamarctis,  nullo  modo  vospotuisse 

falsare  codices,  qui  jam  in  manibus  essent  omnium  chrislianorum  ?  quia  mox, 
ut  facere  coepissctis,  vetustiorum  exemplarium  veritatcconvinceremini.  Qua 
igifur  causa  a  vobis  corrumpi  non  possent,  hac  causa  a  neminc  potuerunt. 
Quisquis  cnim  hoc  primitus  ausus  esset,  raultorum  codicum  vetustiorum  colla- 
tione  confutaretur ;  maxime,  quia  non  una  lingua  sed  multis  eadem  scriptura 
contineretur.  Nam  etiamnum  nonnullae  codicum  mendositates  vel  de  antiqui- 
oribus,  vel  de  lingua  praecedente,  emendantur.  Contr.  Faust.  1.  32.  c.  16.  f. 


422  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  Uistonj. 

'  lesser  faults  in  some  copies  are  amended  by  comparing" 
'  ancient  copies,  or  those  of  the  original  langiutge.' 

(4)  And  soon  afterwards  he  says:  '  According"  to  your 
'  way  of  proceeding",  the  authority  of  scripture  is  quite 
'  destroyed  ;  and  every  one's  fancy  is  to  determine  what  in 
'  the  scriptures  ought  to  be  received,  what  not.  He  does  not 
'  admit  it  because  it  is  found  in  writings  of  so  great  credit 
'  and  authority  ;  but  it  is  rightly  written  because  it  is  agree- 
'  able  to  his  judgment.  Into  w  hat  confusion  and  uncertainty 
'  must  men  be  brought  by  such  a  principle !' 

(5)  In  a  passage,  which"  I  place  at  the  bottom  of  the  page, 
Augustine  shows  admirably  that  by  their  way  of  reasoning" 
the  credit  of  all  sorts  of  writings,  the  most  authentic,  the 
best  attested,  the  most  generally  received,  is  weakened,  and 
CA'en  reduced  to  nothino-. 

(6)  Again :  '  If,'  saysi"  he,  '  you  receive  abundance  of 
'  fabulous  things  upon  the  authority  of  3Iani,  because  found 
'  in  his  writings,  though  there  is  no  demonstration  of  the 
*  truth,  and  his  authority  is  very  obscure;  is  it  not  much 
'  more  reasonable  to  believe  the  things  contained  in  the 
'  scriptures  of  the  New  Testament,  >vhich  are  so  w  ell  known, 
'  and  have  been  transmitted  down  from  the  time  of  the  apos- 
'  ties  with  an  universal,  uninterrupted  tradition?  And  if 
'  the  things  therein  delivered  are  contrary  to  your  sentiments, 

"  Videtis  ergo  id  vos  agere,  ut  omnis  de  medio  Sciipturarum  auferatur  auc- 
toritas,  ct  suus  cuique  anirau?  auctorsit,  quid  in  qiiaque  Sciiptura  probet,  quid 
improbet,  id  est,  ut  non  auctoritati  Scripturarum  subjiciatur  ad  fidem,  sed 
sibi  Scripturas  ipse  subjiciat;  non  ut  ideo  illi  placeat  aliquid,  quia  hoc  in 
sublimi  auctoritate  scriptum  legitur ;  sed  ideo  recte  scriptum  videatur,  quia 
hoc  illi  placuit.  Quo  te  committis,  anima  misera —  ?  Contr.  Faust.  1.  32. 
c.  19. 

"  Quid  hoc  loco  potest  dicere  impudentissima  pertinacia  ?  Non  hoc  Christum 
dixisse ?  At  in  evangelio  verba  ejus  ista  conscripta  sunt.  Falsum  esse  scriptum  ? 
Quod  hoc  sacrilegio  magis  impium  reperiri  potest  ?  quid  ista  voce  impuden- 
tius  ?  quid  audacius  ?  quid  sceleratius  ?  Simulacrorum  cuitores,  qui  Christ! 
etiam  nomen  oderunt,  nunquam  hoc  advei^us  Scripturas  illas  ausi  sunt  dicere. 
Consequetur  namque  omnium  literanim  summa  perversio,  et  omnium,  qui 
memoriae  mandati  sunt,  libromm  abolitio;  si  quod  tanta  populorum  religione 
roboratum  est,  tanta  hominum  et  temporum  consensione  firmatum,  in  hanc 
dubitationem  inducitur,  ut  ne  historia  quidem  vulgaris  fidem  possit  gravitatem- 
que  obtinere.     De  Mor.  Ecc.  Cath.  c.  29.  n.  60. 

P  Plane,  inquis,  Manichaeus  me  docuit.  Sed  infelix,  credidisti,  neque  enim 
vidisti.     Si  ergo  ad  millia  fabulosorum  phantasmatum,  quibus  turpiter  gravi- 

dafus  es,  te  auctoritati  ignotissimae subdidisti,  ut  ideo  haec  omnia  crederes, 

quia  in  illis  conscripta  sunt  libris,  quibus  miserabili  errore  credendum  esse 
consuisti,  cum  tibi  nulla  demonstrantur ;  cur  non  potius  evangelicae  auctoritati, 
tam  fundatae,  tam  stabilitae,  tanta  gloria  ditfamatae,  atque  ab  apostolorum 
temporibus  usque  ad  nostra  tempora  per  successiones  certissimas  commendatae, 
non  te  subdis,  ut  credas,  ut  videas,  ut  discas  etiam  omnia  quae  le  oiTendunt, 
ex  vana  ct  perversa  opinione  te  offcndere.  Contr.  Faust.  1.  32.  c.  19. 


The  Mauichees.     Sect.  VI,  423 

*  you  should  conclude  your  sentiuients  to  be  wrong',  and 

*  should  correct  them  by  the  scriptures.' 

(7)  Augustine  argues  likeAvise  in  this  manner;  '  If''  you 
'  here  ask  us,  how  we  know  these  to  be  the  writings  of  the 
'  apostles;  in  brief  we  answer.  In  the  same  way  thatyou  knoM' 
'  the  epistles,  or  any  other  writings  of  Mani,  to  be  his  :  for  if 
'  any  one  should  be  pleased  to  dispute  with  you,  and  offer 
'  to  deny  the  epistles  ascribed  to  Mani  to  be  his,  what  would 
'  you  do  ?  Would  you  not  laugh  at  the  assurance  of  the  man 
'  who  denied  the  genuineness  of  writings  generally  allowed  ? 
'  As  therefore  it  is  certain  those  books  are  Mani's,  and  he 
'  would  be  ridiculous  who  should  now  dispute  it;  so  certain 

*  is  it  that  the  iNIanichees  deserve  to  be  laughed  at,  or  rather 
'  ought  to  be  pitied,  who  dispute  the  truth  and  genuineness 
'  of  those  writings  of  the  apostles,  which  have  been  handed 

*  down  as  theirs  from  their  time  to  this  through  an  uninter- 

*  rupted  succession  of  well-known  witnesses.' 

(8)  Augustine  says  farther,  that,  '  following'^  their  prin- 

1  Hie  jam  si  quaeratis  a  nobis,  nos  unde  sciamus  apostolorum  esse  istas 
literas  :  breviter  vobis  respondemus,  inde  nos  scire,  unde  el  vos  scitis  illas 
literas  esse  Manichaei,  quas  miserabiliter  huic  auctoritati  prseponitis.  Si  enim 
et  hinc  vobis  aliquis  moveat  quaestionem,  et  scrupulum  contradictionis 
impingat,  dicens,  libros  quos  profertis  Manichaei,  non  esse  Manichaei,  quid 
facturi  estis  ?  Nonne  potius  ejus  deliramenta  ridebitis,  qui  contra  rem  tanta 
connexionis  et  successionis  serie  confirmalam,  impudentiam  hujus  vocis 
emittat  ?  Sicut  ergo  certum  est,  illos  libros  esse  Manichaei,  et  omnino  ridendus 
est,  qui  ex  transverso  veniens  tanto  post  natus  litem  vobis  hujus  contradictionis 
intenderit ;  ita  certum  est,  Manichaeum,  vel  Manichaeosesse  ridendos,  autetiam 
dolendos,  qui  tarn  fundatae  auctoritati,  a  temporibus  apostolorum  usque  ad  haec 
tempora  certis  successionibus  custoditae  atque  perductae,  audeant  tale  aliquid 
dicere.     lb.  cap.  21. 

■■  Infelices  inimici  animae  vestrae,  quae  unquam  literas  uUum  habebunt  pondas 
auctoritatis,  si  evangelicae,  si  apostolicae  non  habebunt  ?  De  quo  libro  certum 
erit  cujus  sit,  si  literae,  quas  apostolorum  dicit  et  tenet  ecclesia  ab  ipsis  apostolLs 
propagata  et  per  omnes  gentes  tanta  eminentia  declarata,  utrura  apostolorum 

sint,  incertuni  est ?  Quasi  vero  et  in  literis  saecularibus  non  fuerunt 

certissimi  auctores,  sub  quorum  nominibus  postea  multa  prolata  sunt,  et  ideo 
repudiata,  quia  vel  his,  quae  ipsorum  esse  constaret,  minime  congruerunt,  vel 
eo  tempore  quo  illi  scripserint,  nequaquam  innotescere,  et  per  ipsos  vel  fami- 
liarissimos  eorum  in  posteros  prodi  commendarique  meruerunt. — Hos  autem 
libros,  quibus  illi  qui  de  transverso  proferuntur  comparati  respuuntur,  unde 

constat  esse  Hippocratis  ? nisi  quia  sic  eos  ab  ipso  Hippocratis  tempore 

usque  ad  hoc  tempus  et  deinceps  successionis  series  commendavit,  ut  hinc 
dubitare  dementis  sit  ?  Platonis,  Aristotelis,  Ciceronis,  Varronis,  aliorumque 
ejusmodi  auctorum  libros,  unde  noverunt  homines,  quod  ipsorum  sint,  nisi 
eadem  temporum  sibi  succedentium  contestatione  continua  ?  Multi  multa  do 
literis  ecclesiasticis  conscripserunt,  non  quidem  auctoritate  canonica,  sc-d  aliquo 
adjuvandi  studio,  sive  dicendi.  Unde  constat  quid  cujus  sit,  nisi  quia  his 
temporibus  quibus  ea  quisque  scripsit,  quibus  potuit  insinuavit  atque  edidit,  et 
inde  in  alios  atque  alios  continuata  notitia  latiusque  firmata  ad  posteros,  otiam 
usque  ad  nostra  tempora  perveaerunt,  ita  ut  iiiterrogati  cujus  quisque  liber  sit, 


424  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

ciple,  there  must  be  an  end  to  all  authority  and  certainty  in 
all  writings  whatever.  For  im)  writings  ever  had  a  better 
testimony  afforded  them  than  tliose  of  the  apostles  and 
evangelists.  Nor  does  it  weaken  the  credit  and  authority 
of  books,  received  by  the  church  of  Christ  from  the  begin- 
ning-, that  some  other  writings  have  been  without  ground, 
and  falsely  ascribed  to  the  apostles.  For  the  like  has 
happened,  for  instance,  to  Hippocrates  ;  but  yet  his  genuine 
works  are  distinguished  from  others  which  have  been  pub- 
lished under  his  name.  We  know  the  writings  of  the 
apostles  as  we  know  the  words  of  Plato,  Aristotle,  Cicero, 
Varro,  and  others,  to  be  theirs,  and  as  we  know  the 
writings  of  divers  ecclesiastical  authors  ;  forasmuch  as  they 
have  the  testimony  of  contemporaries,  and  of  those  who 
have  lived  in  succeeding-  times.  I  might  moreover,  by 
way  of  illustration,  produce  for  examples  these  now  in 
hand.  Suppose  some  one  in  time  to  come  should  deny 
those  to  be  the  works  of  Faustus,  or  these  to  be  mine  ;  how 
should  he  be  satisfied  but  by  the  testimony  of  those  of  this 
time  who  knew  both,  and  have  transmitted  their  accounts 
to  others?  And  shall  not,  then,  the  testimony  of  the  churches, 
and  christian  brethren,  be  valid  here;  especially  when  they 
are  so  numerous, and  so  harmonious, and  the  tradition  iswith 
so  much  ease  and  certainty  traced  down  from  the  apostles 
to  our  time?  I  say,  shall  any  be  so  foolish  and  unreason- 
able as  to  deny  or  dispute  the  credibility  of  such  a  testi- 
mony to  the  scriptures,  Avhich  would  be  allowed  in  behalf 
of  any  writings  whatever,  whether  heathen  or  ecclesiastical  V 
So  writes  Augustine  with  respect  both  to  the  genuineness 

and  the  integrity  of  the  scriptures  of  the  New  Testament,  in 

his  thirty-third  and  last  book  against  Faustus. 

(9)  I  shall  only  add   one  short  passage  concerning-  this 

last  particular,  the  integrity  of  the  text,  from  another  book 

of  the  same  work. 

Augustine,  arguing  for  our  Lord's  humanity  from  these 

words,  Rom.  i.  3,  "  Of  the  seed  of  David  according  to  the 

non  haesiteraus  quid  respondere  debeamus?  Sed  quid  pergam  in  longe  prae- 
lerita?  Ecce  istas  litcras  quas  habenius  in  manibus,  si  post  aliquantum 
fempus  vitae  hujus  nostrae,  vel  illas  quisquam  Fausti  esse,  vel  has  neget  esse 
meas,  unde  convincitur,  nisi  quia  illi  qui  nunc  ista  noverunt,  notitiam  suam 
ad  longe  etiam  post  futures  continuatis  posferorum  successionibus  trajiciunt  ? 

Quse  cum  ita  sint,  quis  tandem  tanto  furore  coecatur, qui  dicat   hoc 

niereri  non  potuisse  apostolorum  ecclesiam,  tarn  fidem,  tarn  numerosam  fratrum 
concordiam,  ut  eorum  scripta  fideliter  ad  posteros  trajicerent,  cum  eorum 
cathedras  usque  ad  praesentes  episcopos  certissima  successione  servaverint  ^; 
cum  hoc  quaHumcumque  hominum  scriptis,  sive  extra  ecclesiam,  sive  in  ipsa 
ccclesia,  tanta  facilitate  proveniat?  Contr.  Faust.  1.  33.  cap.  6. 


The  Manichees.     Sect.  VI.  425 

flesh,"  says,  '  thc^  clause  is  in  all  copies  ancient  and 
'  modern.  All  cluuches  and  languages  agree  with  one 
'  consent  in  owning-  if.' 

(10)  liy  all  which  we  perceive  how  solidly  and  rationally 
Augustine  defended  the  authority  of  the  scriptures;  and 
how  weak  are  all  the  objections  M'hich  the  JManichccs  brousht 
aganist  the  antiquity,  genuineness,  or  purity,  of  the  books  of 
the  New  Testament. 

VIII.  Augustine,  in  the  passage  of  his  Summary  above 
cited,  said  that  '  the  JManichees  made  use  of  apocryphal 
'  books.'     We  shall  have  full  proof  of  it  presently. 

But  let  us  first  of  all  examine  a  charge  or  two  brought 
against  these  people. 

1.  There  is  a  passage  in'  Augustine,  which  might  load 
some  persons  to  suspect  that  the  JManichees  pretended  to 
have  some  letter  of  Christ.  Mr.  Jones,"  in  his  table  of 
apocryphal  ])ieces  not  extant,  reckons  this  as  one  :  '  An 
'  Epistle  of  Christ  produced  by  the  Manichees.'  '  But,' 
says^  Beausobre,  '  no  ancient  author  having  ever  accused 
'  them  of  forging'  such  a  letter,  and  no  man  having  ever 
'  seen  this  pretended  letter,  it  is  reasonable  to  consider  what 
'  Augustine  says  only  as  a  supposition,  which  makes  a  part 
'  of  an  argument,  otherwise  also  perplexed  enough.'  Fabri- 
cius"  speaks  to  the  like  purpose.  Moreover  Faustus  acknow- 
ledgeth  thaf  Christ  did  not  write  the  New  Testament.  If 
the  sect  had  any  letter  ascribed  to  our  Saviour,  Faustus 
would  have  mentioned  it:  and  Augustine  in  his  answer 
would  not  only  have  made  a  supposition  of  such  a  thing,  but 
would  have  taken  particular  notice  of  it. 

2.  The  Manichees  are  sometimes  charged  with  interpolat- 
ing", or  endeavouring  to  interpolate  and  alter,  the  books  of 
the  New  Testament,  in  order  to  render  the  words  of  it  agree- 
able to  their  sentiments. 

"  Hoc  autem  quod  adversus  impiefatem  vestram  ex  apostoli  Pauli  epistola 
profertur,  Filium  Dei  ex  semine  David  esse  secundum  carnem,  omnes  codices 
et  novi  et  veteres  habent,  omnes  ecclesiae  legnnl,  omnes  linguae  consentiunt. 
Contr.  Faust.  1.  xi.  c.  3. 

'  Si  enim  prolatse  fuerint  aliquae  literse,  quae  nullo  alio  narrante  ipsius  pro- 
prie  Christi  esse  dicantur  ;  unde  fieri  poterat,  ut,  si  vera  ipsius  assent,  non  lega- 
rentur,  non  acciperentur,  non  praecipuo  culmine  auctoritatis  eminerent  in  ejus 

ecclesia ?  Quis  ergo  tam  demens,  qui  hodie  credat  esse  epistolam  Christi, 

quam  protulerit  ManicheEus,  et  non  credat  facta,  vel  dicta  esse  Christi,  quae 
scripsit  MatlhiEUs?  Aug.  Contr.  F.  1.  28.  c.  4. 

"  Jones's  Can.  of  the  N.  T.  Vol.  i.  p.  145,  146. 

"  Hist.  Manich.  T.  i.  p.  338,  339.  "  Ex  hoc  loco  non 

satis  firmiter  probatur,  Manichaeos  revera  epistolam  quandam  singularem 
sub  nomine  Christi  jactasse,  &c.     Fabr.  Cod.  Ps.  N.  T.  T.  i.  p.  306.  note  '. 

"  Preesertim  quod  nee  ab  ipso  scriptum  constat.     Faust.  1.  32.  cap.  2. 


426  Credibility  of  the  Vospel  liistonj. 

The  passages  of  Titus  above  cited  imply  as  much.  Pope 
Leo  >  seems  to  say  it  expressly. 

But  they  may  be  acquitted  here  likewise.  I  have  former- 
ly^ said  what  is  sufficient  for  answering  Titus.  And  Fabri- 
cius"  has  helped  us  to  a  good  solution  for  Leo.  '  All  that  is 
'  to  be  understood  by  his  complaint  against  the  Manichees, 
'  is,  that  they  made  use  of  some  apocryphal  books,  in  which 
'  Christ  was  brought  in  speaking  what  he  never  said:  but 
'  they  did  not  make  any  alterations  in  the  words  of  thegos- 
'  pels  of  Matthew,  Mark,  Luke,  or  John,  or  any  other  of  the 
'  canonical  books  of  the  New  Testament  received  by  them, 
'  but  only  endeavoured  to  pervert  them  by  false  interpreta- 
'  tions.' 

That  they  really  did  not  make  any  siich  alterations  may 
be  well  argued  from  the  testimony  given  by  Photius  to  the 
Paulicians  of  his  time,  whom  he  always  considers  as  Mani- 
chees. He  says,  '  they''  do  not  make  any  material  altera- 
'  tions  in  the  scriptures,  as  Marcion  and  Valentinus  did.' 
And  presently  afterwards  he  says,  '  they  do  not  corrupt  the 
*  gospel  by  any  insertions  or  additions.' 

Mr.  Wolff,  in  his  notes  upon  that  passage  of  Photius,  says 
he  does  not  see  how  this  can  be  reconciled  with  the  accounts 
given  by  Titus  and  Archelaus.  As  for  Titus,  what  was 
formerly  said  may  suffice.  Nor  is  there,  perhaps,  any  greater 
difficulty  in  the  words  of  Archelaus.  We  have  indeed  seen 
that'^  Mani  pretended  the  scriptures  of  the  New  Testament 
had  been  altered  by  others.  And  in  the  place  referred  to  by 
Mr.  Wolff,  Archelaus  says  that  '  when''  Mani  had  ourscrip- 

y  Ipsasque  evaogelicas  et  apostolicas  paginas,  quaedam  auferendo,et  qua^dam 
inserendo,  violaverunt ;  confingentes  sibi,  sub  apostolorum  nominibus,  et  sub 
verbis  ipsis  Salvatoris,  multa  volumina  falsitatis,  quibus  erroris  sui  commenta 
muniront,  et  decipiendorum  mentibus  mortiferum  virus  eifunderent.  Leo, 
Semi.  4.  in  Epiph.  cap.  4.  ^  See  p.  410. 

*  Haec  Leonis  verba  accipienda  sunt  de  libris  apocryphis  a  nescio  quibus 
sutoribus  fabularum  sub  apostolorum  nomine  scriptis,  quos  a  Manichaeis  lectos 
notat  Augustinus,  1.  22.  c.  79.  Contra  Faustum,  et  Timothaeus  presbyter  in 
loco  supra,  p.  178,  et  seq.  adducto.  In  his  Salvator  subinde  loquens  induce- 
batur.  Caeterum  in  evangeliis  Matthaei,  Marci,  Lucae,  et  Joannis,  atque  in 
epistolis  Pauli, — nihil  vel  inserendo  vel  auferendo  violasse  haereticos  istos,  sed 
tantum  prava  interpretatione  scripta  ilia  divina  pervertisse,  lestatur  Photius 
MS.  contr.  Manichaeos,  lib.  i.  Fabr.  ib.  p.  30G,  337. 

''     roiQ  piifiitTi  fiiv  Kai  ovofiaaiv  sStv  fiiyct  TrapaXKaTTiov,  sSe   Kara- 

KtpSr)\tvo)v  r«  Xoy«  to  (f^i]f.ia — Kai  ra  f.nv  prjra — SiSwai  Kanx^'-v  ''**  '"'  tvay- 
yiKiH,  fiiiTs  iTaptvdi}Kui<2  nrfTt  TrpocrGrjKiUQ  aviStjv  Xvfiaivonivog.  Ph.  conlr. 
Manich.  1.  i.  p.  9.  10. 

•=  Seebeiore,  p.  410,  411. 

^  Et,  ut  ne  multa  dicam,  comparant  universos  libros  Scripturarum  nostra- 
runi, — quibus  ille  acceptis,  homo  astutus  coepit  in  nostris  libris  occasiones 
inquirere  dualitatis  suae — et  in  nostris  libris,  sicut  etiam  adversus  me  disputans 


TJte  Manichees.     Sect.  \'I.  427 

'  tares  he  endeavoured  to  find  in  them  his  doctrine  of  the 
'  two  principles:  and  that  when  he  disputed  with  liini,  he 
'  strove  to  support  his  opinions  by  the  same  ;  censuring"  some 
'  things,  and  changing-  others  : '  that  is,  I  think,  perverting" 
them.  In  a  word,  Mani  perverted  some  texts  of  scripture  ; 
and  some  others,  that  were  too  hard  for  him,  he  censured,  as 
additions,  but  did  not  alter  the  text  of  the  New  Testament 
himself. 

Aug'ustine  may  be  reckoned  a  g-ood  witness  for  them  here : 
'  For,'  says'^  he,  '  if  any  one  should  charge  you  with  having" 
'  interpolated  some  texts  alleged  by  you,  as  favourable  to 
'  your  cause,  what  would  you  say?  Would  you  not  imme- 
'  diately  answer  that  it  is  impossible  for  you  to  do  such  a 
'  thing-  in  books  read  by  all  christians  1  And  that  if  any 
'  such  attempt  had  been  made  by  you,  it  would  have  been 
'  presently  discerned  and  defeated  by  comparing"  the  ancient 
'  copies?  Well  then,'  says  Augustine,  '  for  the  same  reason 
'  that  the  scriptures  cannot  be  corrupted  by  you,  neither 
'  could  they  be  corrupted  by  any  other  people.' 

The  scriptures  therefore  were  not  corrupted  ;  for  it  was 
impossible:  nor  had  the  Manichees  attempted  it. 

Nor  has  Augustine,  that  I  remember,  any  where  charged 
them  with  such  an  attempt :  though,  if  there  had  been  reason 
for  it,  there  were  many  occasions  to  mention  it.  He  often 
speaks  of  their  charge  against  the  catholics.  Certainly 
therefore  he  Mould  have  returned  it,  if  there  had  been  any 
ground  for  it. 

Moreover,  it  is  evident  from  Augustine  that  the  Manichees 
had  no  copies  of  the  books  of  the  New  Testament,  different 
from  those  used  by  the  catholics  :  they  often  said,  that  the 
catholic  copies  were  corrupted  :  but*^  when  called  upon  to 

fecit,  assertionem  suam  proferre,  qusedam  in  his  accusans,  quaedam  permutans. 
Arch.  cap.  54.  p.  99. 

^  Tamen  cum  ea  de  iis  codicibus  proferritis,  quos  dicitis  falsatos,  hoc  ipsum 
illic  immissum  esse  diceremus,  quod  illic  de  Manichaeo  sic  dictum  legeretur, 
ut  de  alio  intelligere  non  possemus :  quid  faceretis,  dicite  mihi,  nisi  clamaretis, 
nullo  modo  vos  potuisse  falsare  codices,  qui  jam  in  manibus  essent  omnium 
christianorum  ?  quia  mox  ut  facere  ccepissetis,  vetustiorum  exemplarium  ventate 
convinceremini.  Qua  igitur  causa  a  vobis  corrumpi  non  possent,  hac  causa 
a  nemine  potuenint.  Aug.  contr.  F.  1.  32.  c.  16.  Vid.  et  supra,  p.  373. 
note  ''. 

^  Proferendus  est  namque  tibi  alius  codex  eadem  continens,  sed  tamen 
incorruptus  et  verior,  ubi  sola  desint  ea  quee  hie  immissa  esse  criminaris.  Ut 
si,  verbi  causa,  Pauli  epistolam,  quae  ad  Romanes  scripta  est,  corruptam  esse 
contendis,  aliam  proferas  incorruptam,  vel  alium  codicem  potius,  in  quo  ejus- 
dem  apostoli  eadem  epistola  sincera  et  incorrupta  conscripta  sit.  Non  faciam, 
inquis.  ne  ipse  corrupisse  crcdar :  hoc  eiiim  soletis  dicere.  De  Mor.  Ec. 
Cath.  cap.  29.  n.  61. 


428  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

produce  others,  more  sincere  and  uncorrnpt,  they  always 
declined  it. 

It  is  also  very  remarkable,  >vliich  Augustine  says,  that 
when  he  was  with  them,  ands  in  their  private  discourses 
they  insinuated  that  the  scriptures  of  the  New  Testament 
had  been  corrupted  by  some  men,  who  were  desirous  to  mix 
Judaism  with  Christianity,  they  produced  not  any  copies 
different  from  those  commonly  received. 

Beausobre  has  vindicated  the  Manichees  from''  the  cliarae 
or  suspicion  of  being  the  authors  of  several  passages  found 
in  some  copies  of  the  New  Testament.  I  refer  to  him  :  but 
I  do  not  think  it  needful  forme  now  to  enter  into  particulars 
of  that  kind  ;  I  have  said  what  is  sufficient  to  render  men 
easy  upon  this  head. 

IX.  Augustine,  in  his  Summary,  said  '  that  the  Mani- 
'  chees  made  use  of  apocryphal  books,  which  they  prefer  to 
'  the  canonical  scriptures.'  That  they  used  such  books  is 
unquestionable :  but  what  regard  they  had  for  them  is  not 
easily  perceived  by  us  now. 

1.  As  we  are  now  entering  upon  this  inquiry,  and  are  to 
observe  the  proofs  of  the  Manichees  using  apocryphal 
Avritings,  and  what  they  were,  it  may  not  be  improper  to 
take  notice  here  of  Augustine's  definition  of  such  books. 
'  Apocrypha!  books,'  he'  says,  '  are  not  such  as  are  of 
'  authority,  [or  received  by  the  church,]  and  are  kept  secret : 
'  but  they  are  books  whose  original  is  obscure,  and  which 
'  are  destitute  of  proper  testimonials  ;  their  authors  being 
'  unknown,  and  their  character  either  heretical,  or  suspected.' 
That  passage  is  taken  out  of  Augustine's  answer  to  Faustus. 
A  like  description  of  such  l)ooks  may  be  seen''  in  his  Avork, 
entitled.  Of  the  City  of  God. 

2.  Let  us  now  observe  some  farther  proofs  of  the  Mani- 

s  Quam  [responsionem]  quidem  non  facile  palam  promebant,  sed  nobis 
secretins,  cum  dicerent  scripturas  Novi  Testamenti  falsatas  fuisse  a  nescio  quibus, 
qui  Judseorum  legem  inserere  christianae  fidei  voluerunt,  atqiie  ipsi  incorrupta 
cxcmplaria  nulla  proferrenl.     Confess.  1.  5.  c.  xi.  n.  21. 

"   Hist,  de  Manich.  T.  i.  p.  342—344. 

'  Aiiud  est  ipsos  libros  non  accipere,  et  nullo  vinculo  detineri,  quod  Pagani 
de  omnibus  libris  nostris,  quod  Judsei  de  Novo  Testamento  faciunt,  quod 
denique  nos  ipsi  de  vestris  et  aliorum  htsreticorum,  si  qiios  suos  et  proprios 
habenf,  vel  de  iis  qui  appellantur  apocryphi:  non  quod  habendi  sint  in  aliqua 
auctontate  secreta,  sed  quia  nulla  testificationis  luce  declarati,  de  nescio  quo 
secreto,  nescio  quorum  praesumtione  prolati  sunt.  Contr.  Faust.  1.  xi.  c.  2. 

^  Omittamus  igitur  eamm  scripturarum  fabulas,  quae  apocryphae  niincu- 
pantur,  eo  quod  earum  occulta  origo  non  claruit  patribus,  a  quibus  usque  ad 
nos  auctoritas  veracium  Scripturarum  certissima  et  notissiuia  successione  per- 
venit.  In  his  autem  apocryphis  etsi  invenitur  aliqua  verita«,  tamen,  propter 
niulta  falsa,  nulla  est  canonica  auctoritas.     De  Civ.  Dei.  1.  15.  c.  23.  n.  4. 


Tlie  Manichees.     Sect.  VI.  429 

chees  using-  apocryphal  scriptures  :  at  the  same  time  we 
shall  perceive,  in  good  measure,  what  they  were. 

Photius  says  of  Agapius,  a  celebrated  Man ichtean  writer, 
that'  he  makes  use  of  the  Acts  of  the  twelve  apostles,  espe- 
cially those  of  Andrew. 

Philaster  says  that"*  the  Manichees,  and  divers  other 
heretics,  make  use  of  apocryphal  scriptures.  He  says  par- 
ticularly, that  they  have  Acts  of  Andrew,  John,  and  Peter. 

St.  Cyril  of  Jerusalem,  having  named  the  three  disciples 
of  Mani,  Thomas,  Buddas,  and  liermas,  adds  :  '  Let"  no  man 
'  read  the  gospel  according  to  Thomas:  for  it  is  not  a  work  of 
*  one  of  the  twelve  apostles  of  Christ,  but  of  one  of  the  three 
'  naughty  disciples  of  Mani.'  And  in  another  place  he  says, 
'  The"  Manichees  have  written  a  gospel,  entitled.  According 
'  to  Thomas,  by  which  the  minds  of  the  simple  are  cor- 
'  rupted.' 

FaustusP  speaks  as  if  he  l)ad  some  writings  or  histories 
of  the  apostles  Peter,  and  Andrew,  and  Thomns,  and  John, 
which  were  not  in  the  catholic  canon. 

He  certaiidy  Cjuotesi  the  Acts  of  Paul  and  Thecla  with  a 

'  Km  rciiQ\tyonfvaiQ  le  Jlpn^em  nov  Cw?tica  aTroToXwv,  Km  fiaXira  AvSpsa,  a 
fiovov  ffvPTi9iTai,a\\a  KaKsiOtv  £%"  to  <ppovrinaypi.isvov.  Phot.  Cod.  179.  p. 405. 

™  e  quibus  sunt  maxime  Manichaei,  Gaostici,  Nicolaitae,  Valenti- 

niani,  et  alii  quam  plurimi,  qui  apocrypha  prophetarum  et  apostolorum,  id 
est  Actus  separatos  habentes,  canonicas  Icgere  scriptLiras  contemnunt. — Nam 
Manichtei  apocrypha  beati  Andreae  apostoh,  id  est.  Actus,  quos  fecit  veniens 
de  Ponto  in  Grsciam,  quos  conscripserunt  tunc  discipuli  sequentes  apostolum. 
Unde  et  habent  Manichaei  et  ahi  tales  Andreae  beati,  et  Joannis  Actus  evange- 
listae  beati,  et  Petri  similiter  apostoli ;  in  quibus  quia  signa  fecerunt  magna  et 
prodigia,  ut  pecudes  et  canes  et  bestia;  loquerentur,  &c.  Philast.  Haer.  88. 

"  MtjCHQ  avayivii)(TKiT(i)  to  Kara  Qdijiav  avayytXiov'  s  yap  £?■»/  tvoQ  roiv 
cuidsKa  arroToXiov,  aX\'  evoQ  ruv  KaKoiv  tciiwv  tb  Mavr]  fiaOrjTtijp.  Cyr.  Cat. 
6.  n.  31.  "   Bypa-'pav  Kai  'Marixaioi  Kara  Qojfiav  ivayyeXiov, 

OTTio  tvijjCia  rr]Q  ivayy(\tKr}Q  TTapuivvfiiaQ  tTriKty^puidfiiVOv,  SuKpOnpsi  rag  i//u%ag 
rwv  airXsTipiov.     Id.  Cat.  4.  n.  36. 

P  Mitto  enim  caeteros  ejusdem  Domini  nostri  apostolos,  Petrum  et  Andream, 
Thomam,  tt  ilium  inexpertem  Veneris  inter  caeteros  beatum  Joannem,  qui  per 
diversa  professionem  [al.  possessionem]  boni  istius  inter  virgines  ac  pueros 
divino  prseconio  cecinerimt,  formam  nobis  atque  adeo  vobis  ipsis  faciendarum 
virginum  relinquentes.  Sed  hos  quidem,  ut  dixi,  prastereo :  quia  eos  exclu- 
sistis  de  canone  :  &c.  Faust.  1.  30.  c.  4. 

1  Si  vero  favere  huic  quoque  proposito  et  non  reluclari  volenti,  id  qnoquo 
doctrinara  putatis  esse  dsemoniorum,  taceo  nunc  vestrum  pericukim,  ipsi  jam 
timeo  apostolo,  ne  daemoniorum  doctrinam  intulisse  Iconium  videatur,  cum 
Theclam  oppigneratam  jam  thalamo,  in  amorem  sermone  suo  perpetuae  vir- 
ginitatis  incendit. — Num  igitur  et  de  Christo  eadem  dicere  poteritis,  aut  de 
apostolo  Paulo,  quem  similiter  ubique  constat,  et  verbo  semper  praetulisse 
nuptis  innuptas,  et  id  opere  quoque  ostendisse  erga  sanctissimam  Theclam. 
Quod  si  haec  daemoniorum  doctrina  non  fuit,  quam  el  Theclae  Paulus,  et 
caeteri  caeferis  annuntiaverunt  apostoli.  Faust.  1.  30.  c.  4 


430  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  Ilistori/. 

good  deal  of  respect,  as  if  he  thought  it  a  true  history.  Of 
this  book  1  have  said  something'^  aheady. 

Faustiis  says,'  The^  Virgin  Mary  was  not  of  the  tribe  of 
'  Judah,  but  of  Levi:  forasnuich  as  her  father  was  a  priest, 
'  named  Joachim.'  Augustine,*^  in  his  answer,  calls  the  book, 
whence  that  particular  was  taken,  an  apocryphal  piece  of  no 
authority.  Beausobre  makes  no  doubt  but"  that  it  was  some 
book  of  Leucius. 

Augustine  often  speaks  of  the  Manichees  using  apocryphal 
scriptures.  In  his  book  against  Adimantus  he  Cjuotes  one 
of  those  books,  containing^  a  history  of  the  apostle  Thomas. 
In  the  same  work  he  relates'^  another  history  of  the  apostle 
Peter,  taken  from  their  apocryphal  scriptures,  and  probably 
from  the  same  Mork  where  was  the  fore-cited  history  con- 
cerning Thomas  :  and  in  tiie  twenty-second  book  of  his  work 
against  Faustus  he  relates  the^  same  account  of  Thomas 

■■  See  Vol.  ii.  p.  305,  and  p.  331—333;  andBeaus.  Hist,  de  Manich.  T,  i, 

p.  423.  '  sed  ex  tribu  Levi,  unde  sacerdotes :  quod 

ipsum  palam  est,  quia  eadem  patrem  habuit  sacerdotem  quendam  nomine 
Joachim,  cujus  tamen  in  hac  generatione  nulla  usquam  habita  mentio  est. 
Faust.  1.  23.  c.  4. 

'  Ac  per  hoc  illud  quod  de  generatione  Mariae  Faustus  posuit, quia 

canonicum  non  est,  me  non  constringit. — Hoc  ergo  potius,  vel  tale  aliquid 
crederem,  si  illius  apocrypha  scripturse,  ubi  Joachim  pater  Mariae  legitur, 
auctoritate  detinerer.     Aug.  contr.  Faust.  1.  23.  n.  9. 

"  Cela  se  trouvoit,  sansdoute,  avec  d'autres  erreurs,  dans  le  livre  de  Seleucus, 
qui  avoit  ecrit  I'histoire  de  la  Vierge.  Beaus.  T.  i.  p.  354. 

^  Ipsi  auteni  legunt  scripturas  apocryphas,  quas  etiam  incorruptissimas 
dicunt,  ubi  scriptum  est,  apostolum  Thomam  maledixisse  homini,  a  quo  per 
imprudentiam  palma  percussus  est,  ignorante  quis  esset,  maledictumque  illud 
continuo  venisse  ad  eifectum.  Nam  cum  ille  homo,  quoniani  minister  convi- 
vii  erat,  ut  apportaret  aquam,  exisset  ad  fontem,  a  leone  occisus  et  dilaniatus 
est. — Sic  etenim  in  ilia  scriptura  legitur,  quod  deprecatus  fuerit  apostolus  pro 
illo  in  quem  temporaliter  vindicatum  est,  ut  ei  parceretur  in  futuro  judicio. 
Aug.  contr.  Adim.  c.  17.  n.  2.  T.  8. 

"  In  illo  ergo  libro, legimus  ad  sententiam  Petri  cecidisse  homines, 

et  mortuos  esse  virum  et  uxorem. Quod  isti  magna  ccecitate  vituperant, 

cum  in  apocryphis  pro  magno  legant,  et  illud  quod  de  apostolo  Thoma  com- 
niemoravi,  et  ipsius  Petri  filiam  paralyticam  lactam  precibus  patris,  et  hortulani 
filiam  ad  precem  ipsius  Petri  esse  mortuam.  ib.  c.  17.  n.  5. 

"  Legunt  scripturas  apocryphas  Manichaei,  a  nescio  quibus  sutoribus  fabu- 
larum  sub  apostolorum  nominibus  scriptas. — Ibi  tamen  legunt  apostolum 
Tiiomam,  cum  esset  in  quodam  nuptiarum  convivio  peregrinus  et  prorsus 
incognitus,  a  quodam  ministro  palma  percussum,  imprecatum  fuisse  homini 
continuara  saevamque  vindictam.  Nam  cum  egressus  esset  ad  fontem,  unde 
aquam  convivantibus  ministraret,  ei;m  leo  irruens  interemit,  manumque  ejus, 
qua  caput  aposfoli  levi  ictii  percusserat,  a  corpore  avulsam,  secundum  verbum 
ejusdem  apostoli  id  optantis  atque  imprecantis,  canisintulit  mensis,  in  quibus 
ipse  discumbobat  apostolus. — Utrum  ilia  vera  sit  aut  conficta  narrafio,  nihil 
mea  nunc  interest.  Certe  enim  Manichici,  a  quibus  \\\x  scriptura?,  quas  canon 
ecclesiasticus  respuit,  tanquam  veiae  ac sincerae  acceptantur,  saltern  hinccogun- 
tur  fateri,  &c.     Contr.  Faust.  1.  22.  c.  79. 


77k?  Manichees.     Sect.  VI.  431 

from  the  apocryphal  scriptures  used  by  the  Manichees, 
which,  he  tlicre  says,  \vcrc  composed  by  some  unknown 
fabulous  authors  under  the  names  of  apostles. 

In  his  answer  to  an  anonymous  author,  whom  he  styles  an 
adversary  of  the  law  and  the  prophets,  he  observes,  that^ 
author  alleged  passages  out  of  apocryphal  writings  imder 
the  names  of  the  apostles  Andrew  and  John  :  which,  he  says, 
if  they  were  really  theirs,  would  have  been  received  by  the 
church,  which  has  subsisted  with  an  uninterrupted  succes- 
sion of  bishops,  from  the  times  of  the  apostles  to  our  own. 

In  the  disputes  with  Felix  the  Manichee,  Augustine  puts 
him  in  raind^  of  a  passage  of  the  Acts  of  Leucius,  called 
Acts  of  the  Apostles,  one  of  the  apocryphal  scriptures,  not 
received  by  the  catholic  church,  but  much  esteemed  by  the 
Manichees,  as  he  says. 

The  same  passage  is  also  quoted,  as  from  Leutius  or 
Leucius,  by"  the  author  De  Fide  against  the  Manichees: 
who  also  afterwards  quotes  the*^  same  books  of  Leucius, 
entitled  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  and  relates  thence  a  story 
concerning  the  apostle  Andrew. 

3.  As  we  have  now  had  sufficient  proofs  of  the  Manichees 
using-  apocryphal  scrij)tures,  and  Leucius  has  been  named, 
I  shall  next  give  some  account  of  this  man,  who  is  usually 
esteemed  a  great  forger  of  such  books. 

In  the  first  place  I  shall  take  notice  of  his  works,  and  the 
ancient  authors  who  have  mentioned  him ;  secondly,  his 
opinions;  thirdly,  his  time;  after  which  1  intend  to  add 
some  remarks  upon  the  apocryphal  scriptures  made  use  of 
by  the  Manichees. 

(1)1  would  give  some  account  of  the  books  ascribed  to 
Leucius,  and  show  the  places  of  ancient  authors  who  have 

y  Sane  de  apocryphis  iste  posuit  testimonia,  quae  sub  nominibus  apostolonim 
Andreae  Joannisque  conscripta  sunt.  Quae  si  lUorum  essent,  recepta  essent  ab 
ecclesia,  quae  ab  illorum  temporibus  per  episcoporum  successiones  cerlissimas, 
usque  ad  nostra  et  deinceps  tempora  perseveiat.  Contr.  Adv.  L.  et  P.  1.  i.  c.  20.  in. 

^  Habetis  etiam  hoc  in  scripluris  apocryphis,  quas  canon  quidem  catholicus 
non  admittit ;  vobis  autem  tanto  graviores  sunt,  quanto  a  cathohco  canone 
secluduntur.  Ahquid  etiam  inde  commemoreni,  cujus  ego  auctoritate  non 
teneor,  sed  tu  convinceris.  In  Actibus  scriptis  a  Leucio,  quos  tanquam  Actus 
Apostolorum  scribit,  babes  ita  positum  :  Etenim  speciosa  figmenla,  &c.  Act. 
cum  Fel.  1.  2.  c.  6. 

*  In  Actibus  etiam  conscriptis  a  Leucio,  quos  ipsi  accipiunt,  sic  scriptum 
est;  Etenim  speciosa  figmenta,  &c.     De  Fid.  c.  5.  ap.  Aug.  T.  8.  in  App. 

^  Attendite  in  Actibus  Leucii,  quos  sub  nomine  apostolorum  scribit,  qualia 
sint  quae  accipitis  de  Maximilla  uxore  Egetis: — Ibi  etiam  scriptum  est,  quod 
cum  eadem  Maximilla  et  Iphidamia  simul  essent  ad  audieudum  apostolum 
Andream,  puerulus  quidam  speciosus,  quern  vult  Leucius  vel  Deum  vel  certe 
angelum  intelligi,  commendaverit  eos  Andreae  apostolo.  De  Fid.  cap.  38. 


432  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

mentioned  liini  :  but  I  must  be  allowed  to  be  brief.  They 
who  are  desirous  of"  fuller  satisfaction  may  look  into  "^  Fabri- 
cius,  ** Jones,  '^Beausobre,  and  others:  and  possibly  I  may 
some  time  have  another  opportunity  to  take  farther  notice 
of  him. 

Leucius  is  expressly  named  in*^  two  or  three  passages 
just  cited  from  Augustine,  and  the  author  De  Fide:  and 
possibly  he  is  the  author  of  all  the  other  apocryphal  pieces 
before  taken  notice  of  from  Faustus  and  Augustine,  though 
he  is  not  there  named. 

Photiuss  gives  an  account  of  the  book  entitled,  '  I'lie 
'  Travels  of  the  Apostles  :  in  which  are  contained  Acts  of 
'  Peter,  John,  Andrew,  Thomas,  Paul.  The  author  is  Leu- 
'  cius  Charinus,  as  the  book  itself  shows.' 

He  is  mentioned  by  name  in  the  Decree  of*^  Gelasius, 
All  his  books  are  declared  to  be  apocryphal. 

He  is  mentioned  in  like  manner  by'  pope  Innocent  the 
first  in  one  of  his  epistles. 

A  large  fragment  of  his  Travels  of  the  Apostles  is  cited* 
ill  the  second  council  of  Nice. 

He  is  mentioned'  in  the  supposititious  letter  of  Jerom  to 
Chromatius  and  Heliodorus,  and  called  Seleucus. 

(2)  In  the  next  place  I  shall  speak  a  word  or  two  of  the 
opinions  of  Leucius.  The  account  which  Photius  gives  of 
them,  who  had  read  his  work  above  mentioned,  is  this  :  '  He'" 

*•  Cod.  Apocr.  N.  T.  '^  Of  the  Canon  of  Scripture,  Vol.  i. 

«  Hist,  de  Manich.  T.  i.  p.  348,  &c. 

f  Act.  cum  Fel.  1.  2.  c.  G.     De  Fide,  c.  5,  et  38. 

^  AvtyvuioOri  f3i[i\wv,  cd  Xtyofiivai  tojv  kizo^oKuiv  IlepioSoi'  iv  a'lq  Tripitixovro 
TTpu^iig  JlsTps,  Iwuvvn,  Av5pE8,  Qojixa,  IlauXs.  Tpafti  Se  avTog,  wg  SrjXoi 
TO  avTo  ftiiiXiov,  AivKwg  Xnpn'og.     Phot.  Cod.  114.  p.  292. 

''  Libri  oiunes,  quos  fecit  Leucius  discipulus  diaboli,  apocryphi.  Gelas. 
ap.  Labb.  Cone.  T.  4.  p.  1264. 

'  Caetera  autem,  quae  vel  sub  nomine  Matthise,  sive  Jacobi  minoris,  vel  sub 
nomine  Petri  ct  Joannis,  quae  a  quodam  Leucio  scripta  sunt,  vel  sub  nomine 
Andreae,  quae  a  Henocharide  et  Leonida  philosophis ;  vel  sub  nomine  Thoma?, 
et  si  qua  sunt  alia,  non  solum  repudianda,  verum  etiam  noveris  esse  damnanda. 
Inn.  ad  Exup.  Ep.  3.  ap.  Cone.  ib.  T.  2.  p.  1256. 

^  Ek  rwv  yjjevSiTTiypaipujv  UtpioSiov  ro)v  ayiwv  mroToXwv.  ap.  Labb.  Conc. 
T.  7.  p.  357,  &c.  and  see  Btaus.  Hist,  de  Man.  T.  i.  p.  388,  389,  &c. 

'  Sed  factum  est,  lit  a  Manichsei  discipulo  nomine  Seleuco,  qui  ctiam  Apos- 
lolorum  Gesta  falso  sermone  conscripsit,  hie  liber  editus,  &c.  Ap.  Hieron. 
T.  v.  p.  445. 

"*  $jjffi  yap  oXXov  Hvai  tov  to)v  Isccuojv  Qtov  Kai  kokov — oXXov  St  rov 
XptTov,  uv  ijiriTiv  ciyaOov — Kui  KciXfi  avrov  Kai  TraTipa  kcii  v'lov'  Xeyii  ?e  fii]d' 
tvavQpwttt](Tai  «X/j0wr,  «XXa  So^ai'  km  iroXXa  iroXXaKig  ^avrjvai  Toig  fiaOrjraig, 
vtov  Kai   TTpta^vniv  ttciXiv,   km  ttuXiv  Traida,  /cat  jxeiiova,  kui  tXarrova,  Kai 

fityi'^ov,  <Ii^£   Tr)v  Kopv(pT)v  CiTjKtiv  eaO'  ore  jUfYp'C  upavH Kai  tov  XpiTOV 

HI)  '7avpio9rji'ui,  aXX'  irspov  uvr  avrs.  —  VajiHg  It  vojUjiag  aQtTfi,  Kai  iranav 
ytvtaiv  TTOvripaz'  Tt   kui  th  novyipn'  Kai  TrXa'rriv  twv  Satjjiovojv  aXXov  tic/oXrjpoi 


The  Maaichecs.      Sect.  VI.  433 

'  teaches  that  the  God  of  (lie  Jews  is  evil ;  that  the  God 
'  preached  by  Jesus  Christ  is  good.  He  speaks  of  God  by 
'  the  names  of  Father  and  Son  :  he  says  that  Christ  was 
'  not  really  man,  though  he  appeared  to  be  so;  that  he  ap- 
'  peared  to  the  disciples  differently,  sometimes  young,  sonie- 
'  times  old,  and  less  at  one  time  than  another,  and  sometimes 

*  so  high  as  to  touch  the  heavens  with  his  head  :  he  says  that 
'  Christ  Avas  not  crucified,  but  another  in  his  room  ;  that 
'  marriage  is  evil  in  itself,  and  of  the  evil  one ;  that  God  is 

*  not  the  creator  of  daemons.  In  the  Acts  of  John  beseems 
'  to  argue  against  images.' 

From  this  account,  though  possibly  Photius  is  not  exact, 
and  may  have  misrepresented  some  things,  it  may  be  con- 
cluded that"  Leucius  agreed  in  divers  respects  with  the 
Manichees,  or  rather  they  with  him.  For  we  may  hence 
argue  that,  as  he  said  the  God  of  the  Jews  was  evil,  he  did 
not  receive  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament.  We  likewise 
perceive  that  he  was  one  of  them  who  are  called  Docetae,  and 
that  he  did  not  believe  Christ  to  be  man  really,  but  in  ap- 
pearance only  :  he  likewise  had  a  disadvantageous  opinion 
of  marriage,  and  highly  extolled  perpetual  virginity  :  he 
denied  that  dcemons  were  made  by  God,  and  condemned 
the  use  of  pictures  and  images.  Beausobre**  has  carefully 
examined  the  fore-cited  extract  of  Photius,  and  made  just 
remarks  upon  it,  for  discovering*  the  real  sentiments  of 
Leucius. 

(3)  I  am  to  consider  the  time  of  Leucius.  Mr.  Jones  was 
positive  thatP  Leucius  was  a  Manichee,  and  that  he  did  not 
live  before  the  latter  part  of  the  third,  or  the  beg-inning  of 
the  fourth  century  after  Christ :  and  many  others  undoubt- 
edly are  of  the  same  opinion.  Buti  Grabe  placeth  him  in 
the  second  century,  as  does'"  Mill,  who  supposeth  that  he 
flourished  about  the  year  of  Christ,  140,  and  has  a  great 
many  just  observations  upon  this  man  and  his  works,  to 
whom  I  refer  the  reader ;  not  judging-  it  needful  to  tran- 
scribe a  modern  author  who  is,  or  ought  to  be,  in  every  body's 
hands.  Beausobre  is  exactly  of  the  same  mind  with  the  two 
last-mentioned  writers :  and  says  that,^  unless  by  a  Mani- 

SoKH  Ss  (car'  hkovujv  roig  eiKovo[iaxoic  tv  raiQ  lixtavva  wpaSffrt  Soyfia- 

Tiluv.  Phot.  Cod.  114.  p.  292. 

"  Concerning  the  opinions  of  Leucius,  see  Beaus.  T.  i.  p.  384 — 390. 

"  lb.  p.  384—390.  p  lb.  Vol.  i.  p.  303,  &c. 

1  figmentum  Leucii  haeretici,  seculo  secundo  plura  ejusmodi  cuden- 

tis.  Grabe,  Spic.  T.  i.  p.  58.— Leucius,  sive  Lucius,  Marcionis  successor. 
Sec.  ii.  ib.  p.  78. — quae  Lucium  seculi  ii.  haereticum  auctorem  habere  videntur. 
ib.  p.  324.  ■■  Proleg.  n.  333—340. 

*  Hist,  de  Man.  T.  i.  p.  349,  350. 
VOL.    Ill,  2  F 


434  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

chee  be  meant  one  who  held  the  same  or  like  opinions  with 
them,  it  is  certain  that  Leiicius  was  not  a  Manichee,  he  having- 
lived  more  than  a  hundred  years  before  Mani  was  born.  He 
then  proceeds  to  mention^  divers  arguments  for  that  suppo- 
sition, which  appears  to  me  very  considerable :  but  I  may 
not  now  stay  to  transcribe  or  abridge  them. 

(4.)  Lastly,  1  am  to  mention  some  observations  upon  the 
works  of  Leucius,  and  tiie  apocryphal  writings  made  use  of 
by  the  Manichees. 

(1)  It  seems  to  me  not  improbable  that  all  the  preceding- 
quotations  of  apocryphal  books  in  Augustine  are  taken  out 
of  one  and  the  same  book,  called  Acts  or  Travels  of  the 
Apostles,  and  composed  by  Leucius. 

(2)  So  much  I  said  formerly.  I  now  add :  It  seems  to 
me  that  the  Apocryphal  Acts  of  Andrew,  Thomas,  Peter, 
John,  and  even  Paul,  were  not  distinct  books,  but  parts  of 
one  and  the  same  work  called  Acts  of  the  Apostles.  Pho- 
tius,  as  before  quoted,  calls  the  work  of  Leucius,  Travels 
of  the  Apostles.  That  very  title  might  lead  us  to  suppose 
there  was  somewhat  in  that  piece  concerning  all,  or  most  of 
the  apostles.  In  his  article  of  Agapius  he  says,  '  that  Mani- 
'  choean  author  makes  use  of  the  Acts  of  the  twelve  Apostles, 
'  especially  those  of  Andrew.'  It  does  not  follow  that  the 
Acts  of  Andrew  or  Thomas,  or  the  like,  were  distinct  works, 
because  they  are  sometimes  quoted  severally  and  alone.  We 
have  a  proof  of  this  in  the  article  of  Leucius,  just  now  tran- 
scribed from  Photius,  where  at  the  end  he  mentions  the  Acts 
of  John  distinctly  :  whilst  yet,  unquestionably,  they  were  a 
part  only  of  the  work  before  described  by  the  general  title  of 
the  Travels  of  the  Apostles:  which  also  he  expressly  said 
contained  the  Acts  of  Peter,  John,  Andrew,  Thomas,  Paul. 
Mill  likewise"  allows  it  to  be  one  work  which  contained 
Acts  of  several  apostles. 

(3)  Another  observation  to  be  mentioned  here  is,  that 
there  is  no  good  reason  to  think,  as  some  have  done,  that  the 
apocryphal  scriptures,  made  use  of  by  the  Manichees,  were 
forged  by  them.  No,  they  had  no  occasion  to  forge  books  of 
that  sort :  for  they  found  most  of  their  sentiments  encouraged 
by  apocryphal  books,  composed  by  authors  of  earlier  anti- 
(uiity.  Those''  books  favoured  their  sentiments  concerning 
tlie  seeming  humanity  of  Jesus,  the  merit  of  virginity  or 

*  lb.  p.  350,  351.  "  Consarcinati  quoque  erant  ab  eodem 

Charino,  teste,  qui  librum  ipsum  diligenter  perlu^lrarat,  Pliotio,  UepioSoi  Apos- 

tolorum. Complectebatur  autem  istud  volunion    1.  Acta  Petri. 2. 

Acta  Joannis. —3.  Acta  Andrese. 4.  Acta  Thomae.- 

Mill,  Proleg.  n.  337,  338.  "  Beaus.  T.  i.  p.  424. 


The  Manichccs.     Sect.  VI.  435 

celibacy,  and  tlu;  iiuporfoction  of  the  luarriage-atatt'.  They 
therefore  took  the  advantage  of  tliose  writings,  and  some- 
times quoted  or  appealed  to  them. 

Cyril,  above  quoted,  says  the  gospel  of  Thomas  >vas 
written  by  a  disciple  of  Mani,  so  called.  But^  Beausobre 
M'ell  argues  that  this  gospel  was  not  forged  by  the  Mani- 
chees ;  forasmuch  as  it  was  in  being*  before  the  rise  of 
Manichteism;  and  is  mentioned  among  spurious  writings, 
not  only  by"  Eusebius,  but  also  byy  Origen,  in  the  preface 
to  his  Commentary  upon  St.  Luke's  Gospel.  He  adds,  that 
the  gospel  of  Thomas  is  placed  among  apocryphal  books  in 
the  Synopsis,  which  is  in'  the  works  of  Athanasius,  without 
imputing  it  to  the  Manichees.  Gelasius  likewise  contents 
himself  with  saying  of  this  gospel,  that  it  was  used  by  the 
Manichees,  without  adding  that''  it  was  forged  by  them. 

The  same  may  be  shown  to  be  jjrobable  with  regard  to 
other  books  made  use  of  by  the  Manichees. 

Eusebius  among  spurious  books  written  by  heretics, 
reckons*"  Acts  of  Andrew,  John,  and  other  apostles.  Epi- 
phanius  says  that''  the  Acts  of  Andrew,  John,  and  Thomas, 
were  used  by  the  Encratites :  the**  Acts  of  Andrew  and 
Thomas  by  the  apostolics :  The*"  Acts  of  Andrew  and 
other  apostles  by  the  Origenists  :  all  three  sects,  which  are 
supposed  to  be  older  than  the*^  Manichees. 

Augustine  particularly  observes  of^  a  hymn  used  by  the 
Priscillianists,  that  it  was  among  the  apocryphal  scriptures: 
and  then  adds,  '  Not  that  these  apocryphal  scriptures  are 
'  peculiarly  theirs;  for  there  are  several  sects  of  very  diff'er- 
'  ent  opinions  from  each  other,  who  delight  in  those  books, 
'  as  fetching  thence  some  support  for  some  of  their  notions.' 

(4)  I  add  but  one  observation  more,  which  is,  that  these 
apocryphal  books  confirm  the  history  of  the  genuine  and 
authentic  scriptures  of  the  New  Testament.  They  do  not 
directly    contradict    them;    they    indirectly     confirm    and 

*  lb.  p.  345.  "^  Hist.  Ec.  I.  3.  c.  25.  p.  97.  D. 

y  The  passage  of  Origeii,  with  remarks  upon  it,  may  be  seen  in  Vol.  ii.  cli. 
xxxviii.  num.  xxiv.  1.  ^  Athan.  T.  2.  p.  202. 

*  Evangehum  nomine  Thomse,  utuntur  Manichaei,  apocryphum.  Gelas. 
ap.  Labb.  Cone.  T.  4.  p.  1264.  "^  H.  E.  1.  3.  c".  25.  p.  97.  D. 

^  Epiph.  H.  47.  n.  2.  ^  H.  61.  n.  1. 

^  H.  63.  n.  2.  'See  before,  ch.  xli. 

B  Hymnussane,  quern  dicunt  esse  Domini  nostri  Jesu  Christi, — in  scriptnris 
solet  apocryphis  inveniri.  Quse  non  proprie  PriscilHanistarum  sunt,  sed  alii 
quoque  haeretici  eis  nonnullarum  sectarum  impietate  vanitatis  utuntur,  inter  se 
quidem  diversa  sentientes,  unde  suas  quisque  varias  haereses  sunt  secuti.  Sed 
scripturas  istas  habent  in  sua  diversitate  communes,  easque  illi  prsecipue  fre- 
quentare  assolcnt,  qui  legem  veterem  et  prophetas  canonicos  non  accipiunt. 
Ep.  237.  [al.  25.3.]  n.  2. 

2  F  2 


436  CredibilUij  of  the  Gospel  History. 

establish  them.  For  they  are  composed  and  written  in  tlie 
names  of  such  as  our  authentic  scriptures  say  were  apostles, 
or  companions  of"  apostles.  They  all  suppose  the  dignity 
of  our  Lord's  person,  and  the  power  of  working  miracles, 
together  with  a  high  degree  of  authority,  to  have  been  con- 
veyed by  him  to  his  apostles. 


SECT.  VII. 


Various  readings,  and  select  passages,  in  Fanstus  the 

Manichee. 

I  SHALL  here  take  some  notice  of  various  readings  in  the 
New  Testament,  or  the  texts  of  scripture  made  use  of  by  the 
Manichees,  and  likewise  some  select  passages,  or  observa- 
tions, in  Faustus  the  Manichee. 

1.  The  catholics,  as'  Faustus  observes,  asserted  the  in- 
tegrity of  the  books  of  the  New  Testament,  and  could  not 
endure  the  supposition  that  they  had  been  corrupted  and 
interpolated. 

2.  Faustus  says  that''  the  gospel  of  Jesus  Christ  is  nothing 
but  the  preaching,  or  the  doctrine  and  commandments  of 
Christ.  Beausobre  assents'^  to  this  explication  as  right,  and 
prefers  it  to  Augustine's :  though  that  great  writer  did  not 
forget  to  allege'^  2  Tim.  ii.  8. 

'  Sed  quia  vobis  ita  placet,  qui  nuuquam  sine  stomacho  auditis  aliquid  esse 
in  apostolo  cauponatum,  ne  hoc  quidem  nobis  sciatis  esse  contrarium.  Faust. 
1.  xi.  c.  1. 

''  et  interrogas,  utrum  accipiam  evangelium  ?  nisi  adhuc  nescis,  quid 

sit  quod  evangelium  nuncupatur.  Est  enim  nihil  aliud,  quam  praedicatio  et 
mandatum  Christi.  Faust.  1.  5.  c.  1.  Vides  in  me  Christi  beatudines  illas, 
quae  evangelium  faciunt,  et  interrogas,  utrum  accipiam  ?  Ibid. — Quia  evange- 
lium quidem  a  praedicatione  Christi  et  esse  coepit  et  nominari.  Id.  1.  2.  c.  1. 
Scias  me,  ut  dixi,  accipere  evangelium,  id  est,  praedicationera  Christi.  ib. 

*=  Cependant  je  dois  rendre  justice  a  Fauste.  II  n'explique  pas  mal,  et  si  je 
I'ose  dire,  il  explique  mieux  que  S.  Augustin,  ce  que  veut  dire  le  mot  d'  Evan- 
gile.     II  entend  par  la,  non  1'  histoire  de  la  naissance,  et  des  actions  de  J. 

Christ,  mais  la  doctrine  que  Jesus  Christ  a  prechee. Et  quoique  S.  Augustin 

eiit  raison  dans  le  fond,  il  ne'en  avoit  pas  neanmoins  de  soutenir,  comme  il 
faisoit,  que  I'histoire  de  la  naissance  de  J.  Christ  est  comprise  dans  I'idee  de 
ces  mots,  Evangile  de  J.  Christ,  qui  ne  signifioit  autre  chose,  que  la  doctrine 
prechee  par  Jesus  Christ.  Beaus.  Hist,  de  Manich.  T.  i.  p.  298,  299. 

^ -banc  scilicet  causam  subjiciens,  quia  generatio  Christi  non 

pertinet  ad  evangelium.     Quid   ergo  respondebis  apostolo  dicenti,   Memor 


The  Manicncts.     Sect.  VII.  437 

3.  We  evidently  perceive,  from  the  work  of  Faustus, 
that*^  both  the  catholic  and  the  Manichtean  copies  of  the  New 
Testament  had  the  two  genealogies  in  St.  Matthew  and  St. 
Luke. 

4.  It  looks  as  if*^  Faustus  understood  the  beatitude, 
Matt.  V.  3,  of  worldly  poverty,  and  the  mourning"  in  ver.  4, 
of  afflictions  in  this  life;  and  ver.  G,  of  bodily  hunger  and 
thirst  for  the  sake  of  righteousness  :  though,  as  it  seems, 
this  last-mentioned  te.xt,  which  we  render  "  hunger  and 
thirst  after  righteousness,"  we  reads  as  it  is  now  in  our 
present  copies. 

5.  Faustus  had  Matt,  xxviii.  19,  in  his'^  copies. 

6.  lie  likewise  quotes'  the  beginning  of  St.  Mark's  and 
St.  John's  g'ospels. 

7.  There  is  some  reason  to  think  that  Faustus  read  Luke 
xxiii.  43,  as''  Origen  did  :  '  This'  day  shalt  thou  be  with 
'  me  in  the  paradise  of  God,'  or  '  of  my  Father.' 

8.  Faustus*"  has  the  history  of  a  woman  taken  in  adul- 
tery, which  is  at  the  beginning  of  the  eighth  chapter  of  St. 
John's  gospel. 

9.  Mani,  in  the  Dispute  with  Archelaus,  understands  our 
Lord  to  say"  in  John  viii.  44,  that  '  the  devil  is  a  liar,  as  is 

esto  Christum  Jesum  resurrexisse  a  mortuis,  ex  semine  David  secundum 
evangelium  meum  ?  Aug.  contr.  Faust.  1.  2.  c.  2. 

*  Quid  enim  scripsit  ?  Liber  generationis  Jesu  Christi  filii  David,  &c. 
Faust.  1. 2.  c.  1.  Sed  offensus  duorum  maxime  evangelistarum  dissensione,  qui 
genealogiam  ejus  scribunt,  Lucee  et  Matthaei,  haesi,  &c.  1.  3.  c.  1.  Vid.  et  1, 
7.  c.  Let  I.  23.  c.  1,  2. 

^  Vides  pauperem,  vides  raitem, — lugentem,  esurientem,  sitientera,  perse- 
cutiones  et  odia  sustinentem  propter  justitiam.  1.  5-  c.  L — beati  qui  lugent, 
beati  qui  esununt,  beati  qui  persecutionem  patiuntur  propter  justitiam.  ib.  c.  3. 

8  quomodo   esurientem  et   sitientem  justitiam,   quara  Faustus  in 

scriptis  suis  non  addidit.     Aug.  Contr.  Faust.  1.  5.  c.  7. 

^  Et  alibi  ad  discipulos :  Ite,  docete  omnes  gentes,  baptizantes  eos  in 
nomine  Patris,  Filii,  et  Spiritus  Sancti, — F.  1.  5.  c.  3. 

'  At  denique  Marcus, — vide  quam  sit  competenter  exorsus :  Evangelium, 
inquit,  Jesu  Christi  Filii  Dei.  Faust.  1.  2.  c.  i.  Sed  Joannes  quidem  in 
principio  fuisse  Verbum  dicit,  et  Verbum  fuisse  apud  Deuin,  et  Deum  fuisse 
Verbum.  Marcus  vero,  Evangelium,  inquit,  Jesu  Chiisti,  Filii  Dei.  1.  3.  c.  L 
Cur  ergo  credunt  Joanni  dicenti,  In  principio  erat  Verbum  ?  Aug.  C.  Faust. 
1.  7.  c.  2.  ^  See  before,  Vol.  ii.  ch.  xxxviii.  num.  xxvii. 

'  Cum  latronem  Christus  de  ligno  secum  introduxerit  in  paradisum 

Patris  sui.  Faust.  1.  14.  c.  1. — et  ipso  eodera  die  secum  futurum  dixit  eum  in 
paradise  patris  sui.  Id.  1.  33.  c.  1. 

•"  In  injustitia  namque  et  in  adulterio  deprehensam  mulierem  quandara 
Judaeis  accusantibus  absolvit,  ipse  praecipiens  ei  ut  jam  peccare  desineret. 
Faust.  1.  33.  c.  1. 

"  cum   loquitur  mendacium,  de  suis  propriis  loquitur ;  quoniara 

mendax  est,  sicutet  pater  ejus.  ap.  Arch.  c.  29.  p.  48.  Conf.  c.  33.  p.  5Q,  et 
c,  13.  p.  24.  f. 


438  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

also  his  father.'     Upon  this  text  the  curious  may  consult" 
Mill,  andi'  Beausobre. 

10.  Augustine  in  his  work  against  Faustus,  says,  that, 
in  some  Latin ^'  copies,  they  had,  Rom.  i.  3,  '  Which  was 
born  of  the  seed  of  David  ;'  instead  of  made,  which  is  in  the 
Greek. 

11.  Faustus"^  and  ^Secundinus  quote  St.  Paul's  epistle  to 
the  Ephesians  by  that  title. 

12.  I  put  in  the  margin  the  definitions  which'  Faustus 
gives  of  schism  and  heresy. 


SECT.  VIIl. 


THE  COiMCLUSION  OF  THE  HISTORY  OF  THE  MANICHEES. 


IN  composing  this  chapter  I  have  made  much  use  of  Beau- 
sobre's  History  of  Manichee  and  Manichseism ;  and  1  have 
often  quoted  him  as  1  have  gone  along.  Nevertheless  it  was 
fit  to  make  this  renewed  and  final  acknowledgment  of  my 
obligations.  Sometimes,  however,  I  have  differed  from  him  ; 
M'hether  with  reason  or  not,  others  have  a  right  to  judge. 
That  work  of  Beausobre  contains  not  only  a  laboured  history 
of  the  Manichees,  but  likewise  several  entertaining-  and 
useful  digressions  concerning-  the  opinions  of  the  heathen 
philosophers,  and  the  most  early  christian  sects.  I  wish  some 
learned  man  might  have  sufficient  leisure  and  encouragement 
to  give  us  a  handsome  edition  of  it  *  in  English. 

°  Ad.  Job.  viii.  44,  et  Proleg.  79.3. 

I'  Hist,  de  Manich.  T.  i.  p.  105,  388.  T.  p.  263. 

■i  Etsi  enim  in  quibusdam  Latinis  exemplaribus  non  legitur  fnctus,  sed, 
natus  ex  simine  David,  cum  Gx^cdifactus  habeant,  &c.  Contr.  Faust.  1.  xi. 
c.  4.  ■■  Dicit  ad  Ephesios.  Faust.  1.  24.  c.  1. 

^  Contra  quos  so  apostolus  in  Ephesiorum  epistola  certamen  subiisse  fatetur. 
Secundin.  ad  Aug.  c.  ]. 

'  Schisma,  nisi  fallor,  est  eodem  opinantem  atque  eodem  ritu  colentem  quo 
caileri,  solo  congregation  is  delectari  discidio.  Secta  vero  est  longe  alia 
opinantetn  quam  caeteri,  alio  etiam  sibi  ac  longe  dissimiliritu  divinitatis  insti- 
tuisse  culturam.  Faust.  1.  20.  c.  3.  Porro  auteni  secfas  si  (jua^ras,  non  plus 
erunt  quam  duaj,  id  est,  Gentium  et  nostra,  qui  ei^  longe  diversa  sentimus.  ib. 
c.  4.  in  fin. 

"  What  is  to  be  expected  of  Beausobre,  may  be  concluded  from  what  he 
says  of  himself,  when  he  enters  upon  the  examination  of  the  scandalous  story 


The  Manichees.     Sect.  VIII.  439 

It  may  be  thought  by  some  that,  in  writing-  the  history  of 
this  people,  1  have  taken  a  great  deal  of"  liberty  with  the 
ancient  writers  of  the  christian  church.  Nevertheless,  I 
know  that  1  liave  not  designed  to  disparage  them:  and  1 
humbly  hope  that  1  have  not  lessened  their  just  credit  and 
authority.  No  men  are  infallible.  In  controversial  writings, 
especially  where  the  difterence  of  opinion  is  very  great,  it 
is  difficult  for  the  best  of  men  to  kee|)  themselves  entirely 
free  from  the  iuHuence  of  prejudice  and  passion.  Moreover, 
Manichteism  is  in  itself  an  abstruse  and  intricate  subject; 
and  had  its  rise  in  Persia,  a  country  remote  from  most  of 
those  ecclesiastical  writers  who  have  come  down  to  us; 
which  makes  a  good  apology  for  them,  though  they  should 
be  supposed  to  have  made  some  mistakes,  and  to  have  been 
guilty  of  some  misrepresentations.  It  is  acknowledged  by 
such  as  have  looked  into  this  matter,''  that  the  history  of 
Mani  and  his  followers  has  long  Iain  in  great  obscurity  and 
uncertainty.  This  may  be  allowed  to  be  a  good  reason  why 
I  should  take  some  more  than  ordinary  pains  about  it,  and 
endeavour  to  avoid  and  correct  the  errors  which  others  seem 
to  have  fallen  into. 

It  may  be  easily  supposed  that  for  several  reasons  I  could 
wish  this  history  had  been  shorter.  However  I  presume  it 
will  be  found  upon  trial  that  the  length  of  it  is  not  alto- 
gether unproHtable.  And  I  persuade  myself  it  will  afford 
my  readers  divers  usefid  and  agreeable  reflections.  I  pro- 
pose to  mention  some,  not  doubting-  but  that  others  of  taste 
and  judgment  will  think  of  more. 

1.  The  rise  of  Manicha^ism  in  Persia  is  a  proof  of  the  early 
planting-  the  gospel  in  that  country.  If  Christianity  had  not 
been  there  before,  Mani  could  not  have  formed  a  new  sect 
of  christians.     '  Heresies  and  schisms,'  as'=  Augustine  says, 

of  the  Manichaean  eucharist :  *  As  for  me,  says  he,  *  whom  heaven  has  pre- 
«  served  from  the  spirit  of  the  church,  who  know  no  greater  good  than  freedom 

•  of  thought,  nor  any  more  dehghtful  employment  than  the  search  of  truth, 

•  nor  greater  pleasure  than  that  of  finding  and  speaking  it,  I  have  studied 

•  ecclesiastical  history  with  as  little  prejudice  as  possible.'  Pour  moi,  que  le 
ciel  a  preserve  de  I'esprit  de  Teglise,  qui  ne  connois  point  de  plus  grand  bien 
que  la  liberie  de  penser,  de  plus  douce  occupation  que  la  recherche  de  la  verite, 
ni  de  plus  grand  plaisir  que  la  celui  de  trouver  et  de  la  dire,  &c.  Hist,  de 
Manichee  et  du  Manicheisme.     T.  2.  p.  730. 

^  Haec  nos  compendio,  et  pro  more  nostro,  de  Manete,  ej  usque  scriptis. 
Cum  vero  Manetis  historiam  mire  turbaverint  tum  veterum,  tum  recentiorum 
plures,  neque  ea  adhuc  satis  dilucide  exposita  sit,  non  abs  re  erit  illam  pauUo 
accuratius  et  explicatius  enarrare.  Cav.  H.  L.  in  Manete.  T.  i.  p.  140. 
Oxon. 

"^  Disruptis  retibus,  haereses  et  schisniata  facta  sunt.  Retia  quidem  omnes 
concludunt.     Sed  impatientes  pisces, — ubi  possunt,  impingunt  se,  et  rumpunt. 


440  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

*  break  the  gospel-nets.    Some  in  one  place,  some  in  another  ; 

*  the  Donatists  in  Africa,  the  Arians  in  Eg-ypt, — the  Mani- 
'  chees  in  Persia.'  According-  to  Abulpliaragius,  Mani'' 
was  at  first  a  cliristian  priest,  and  he  preached  and  explained 
the  scriptures,  and  disputed  against  the  Jews,  the  Magi,  and 
the  heathens.  Beausobre*^  has  an  article  on  purpose  con- 
cerning the  planting  the  gospel  in  Persia. 

2.  We  cannot  avoid  recollecting,  in  the  next  place,  the  just 
observation  of  Socrates,  taken  notice  of  by  us  at  our  entrance 
into  this  field  :  '  It  is  no  unusual  thing  for  cockle  to  grow  up 
'  amongst  good  grain.'  It  is  no  other  than  what  our  Lord  fore- 
saw and  likcAvise  forewarned  the  disciples  of,  that  they  might 
not  be  too  much  surprised  at  the  event.  "  The  kingdom  of 
heaven,"  he  said,  "  is  likened  unto  a  mail  which  sowed  good 
seed  in  his  field  :  but  while  men  slept  his  enemy  came,  and 
sowed  tares  among  the  wheat,  and  went  his  way." — Matt, 
xiii.  24 — 30.  Again  :  "  The  kingdom  of  heaven  is  like  unto 
a  net  that  was  cast  into  the  sea,  and  gathered  of  every 
kind:"  ver.  47.  "Then  said  he  unto  the  disciples.  It  is 
impossible  but  offences  will  come  ;  but  woe  unto  him  by 
whom  they  come:"  Luke  xvii.  1.  And  St.  Paul  says  to  the 
Corinthians  :  "  There  must  be  also  heresies  among  you,  that 
they  which  are  approved  may  be  made  manifest  among 
you  :"  1  Cor.  xi.  19.  Indeed  before  the  apostles  left  this 
world  they  saw  divers  corruptions  getting  into  the  churches, 
or  actually  brought  into  them. 

3.  There  were  early  two  very  diflferent  opinions  concern- 
ing Christ.  '  Some,'  as*^  Augustine  observes,  '  believed 
'  Christ  to  be  God,  and  denied  him  to  be  man.  Others 
'  believed  he  was  a  man,  and  denied  him  to  be  God.'  Of 
this  opinion?  was  Augustine  for  a  while,  at  his  first  getting 

et  exeunt. — Et  retia  quidem  ilia  per  totum  expandunf  iir.  Qui  rumpunt  autem, 
per  loca  rumpunt.  Donatistse  ruperunt  in  Africa,  Ariani  ruperunt  in  iEgypto, 
Photiniani  ruperunt  in  Pannonia,  Cataphryges  ruperunt  in  Phrygia,  Manichsei 
ruperunt  in  Persidc.  Aug.  Senn.  252.  n.  4.  T.  v.  al.  in  Dieb.  Pasch.  Serm.  23. 

^  Hie  primo  christianipmum  prae  se  tulit,  et  sacerdos  factus  est  Ehwazi, 
docuitque  et  interpretatus  est  libros  [sacros],  et  cum  Judaeis,  Magis,  et  ethnicis 
disputavit.     Gregor.  Abulph.  Dynast,  p.  82.  *  T.  i.  p.  180— 19G. 

'  Sic  enim  quidam  Deum  credendo  Christum,  et  hominera  negando  errave- 
runt.  El  rursus  quidam  hominem  putando,  et  Deum  negando,  aut  contem- 
.serunt,  aut  in  homine  spem  suam  ponentes,  in  ilUid  maledictum  inciderunt. 
Contr.  Faust.  1.  13.  c.  8.  Ait  enim,  Christus  Deus  est  tantum,  omnino 
hominis  nihil  hal)cns.  Hoc  Manicha?i  dicunt.  Photiniani,  homo  tantum  ; 
Manichaei,  Deus  tantum.  llli  nihil  divinum  in  Domino  confitentur ;  isti  quasi 
totum  divinum.     Serm.  37.  c.  12. 

«  Mgo  vcnj  uliud  putabam,  tantumque  sentiebam  de  Domino  Christo  meo, 
quantum  de  excellentis  sapientiae  viro,  cui  nullus  posset  aequari :  praesertim 
quia  mirabiliter  natus  ex  virgine,  ad  exemplum  contemnendornm  temporalium 


Tlie  Mamchees.    Sect.  VIII.  441 

out  of  Maniclioeism,  as  lie  says,  till''  lie  became  acfjuaiiited 
with  some  Plaionic  writers.  And  it  has  been  thought  by 
some  that  this  last  was  likewise  the  notion  which'  the  .lews 
of  old  had  of  their  expected  Messiah.  Therefore  Athana- 
sius  says  that  the''  '  apostles  of  Christ,  well  knowing-  the 
'  Jewish  prejudices  upon  this  head,  with  great  wisdom  first 
'  instructed  them  in  our  Saviour's  humanity.'  The  former 
was  the  opinion  of  the  JNIanichees,  and  of  many  others  before 
them.  Jerom  says,  that  '  whilst'  the  apostles  were  still 
'  living,  and  when  the  blood  of  Christ  was  scarce  cold  in 
'  Judea,  there  were  men  who  taught  that  his  body  ^as  no 

*  more  than  a  phantom.'  This  opinion  is  more  than  once 
censured  by""  Ignatius  in  his  epistles,  written  soon  after  the 

pro  adipiscenda  immortalitate,  divina  pro  nobis  cura  tanlam  auctoritatem 
magisteni  meruisse  videbatur.  Quid  autem  sacramenti  haberet,  Verbum  caro 
factum  est,  ne  suspicari  qiiidem  poteram.  Confess.  1.  7.  c.  19.  n.  25. 

''  Et  primo  volens  ostendere  mihi, — quod  Verbum  tuum  caro  factum  est,  et 
habitavit  inter  homines,  procurasti  mihi  per  quendam  hominem — Platonicoruui 
hbros  ex  Graeca  Ungua  in  Latinam  versos.  Et  ibi  legi,  non  quidem  his  verbis, 
sed  hoc  idem  omnino  multis  et  multiplicibus  suaderi  rationibus,  quod  in  prin- 
cipio  erat  Verbum,  &c.  Confess.  1.  7.  c.  9.  n.  1-3,  et  14.  Vid.  ib.  1.  8.  c.  2.  n.  -3. 

'  Beausobre's  account  of  that  matter  is  to  this  purpose :  *  At  the  beginning 

*  of  Christianity,  there  arose  two  opposite  errors  concerning  the  person  of  our 

*  Saviour.  The  first  obtained  among  the  christians  that  came  out  of  Judaism. 
'  Many  persuaded  themselves  that  the  Christ  was  but  a  mere  man,  distinguished 
'  from  others  by  the  abundance  of  divine  gifts  conferred  upon  him,  and  by 
'  his  incomparable  virtues.  "  In  the  time  of  the  apostles,"  says  Athanasius, 
'  "  the  Jews  were  in  this  error,  and  drew  the  Gentiles  into  it :  that  the  Christ 
'  is  only  a  mere  man,  that  he  is  not  God,  and  that  the  Word  was  not  made 
'  flesh."  De  Sent.  Dionys.  p.  m.  432.  These  Jews  were  not  the  unbelieving 
'  Jev\s,  but  such  as  made  profession  of  Christianity.      But  though  they  agreed 

*  so  far,  they  were  not  all  of  the  same  mind  concerning  the  nativity  of  our 
'  Saviour.  Some  believed  that  he  was  the  Son  of  Joseph  and  Mary. — Others 
'  acknowledged  that  he  was  born  of  a  virgin,  and  conceived  by  the  sole  opera- 
'  tion  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  Neither  the  one  nor  the  other  refused  him  the  title 
'  of  the  Son  of  God ;  but  they  imagined  that  it  was  given  him  on  account  of 
'  the  eminence  of  his  office,  the  excellence  of  his  gifts,  his  glorious  resurrection, 
'  the  sovereign  authority  and  dominion  to  which  he  was  advanced  by  the 
'  Father :  to  all  which,  these  last  added  his  miraculous  nativity.  These  kept 
'  the  name  of  Nazarenes  which  had  been  given  to  the  first  believei-s.     The 

*  others  were  called  Ebionites.  These  two  are  the  most  ancient  heresies  of 
'  Christianity.     Antiquissima  haeresis  ista  fuit,  et  ab  ipso  religionis  christianae 

*  exordio  grassari  coepit.  Petav.  Dogm.  Th.  T.  v.  De  Incarn.  1.  1,  2.  sect.  3. 

*  In  a  short  time  arose  another  quite  opposite  but  not  less  pernicious  than  the 

*  former.'     Hist.  Manich.  T.  2.  p.  517. 

''  'EirtiSr)  yap  o'l  rort  Is^aioi — ivo^i^ov  tov  Xpi'^ovipiXov  avOpioTrov  fiovov, 
tK  (TinpfiaTOQ  Aa(5i5  tpxEffOai — thts  fvsKa  fttru  TroXX/jr;  rt}Q  /rvvtatwc  o'l  nuKupioi 
a-TTO'^oXoi  Ta  avOpuTTiva  rn  'ScorripoQ  -rrpwrov  i^TjyavTo  roig  laSawig.  Athan.  de 
Sent.  Dion.  T.  i.  p.  248.  C.  '  Apostolis  adhuc  in  seculo  super- 

stitibus,  adhuc  apud  Judaeam  Christi  sanguine  recenti,  phantasma  Domini 
corpus  asserebatur.  Hier.  adv.  Lucif.  T.  4.  p.  304.  in. 

"'  Et  ^£  uffTTip  nvig  aOioi  ovrig,  THrfriv  aTri^oi,  Xeyaaiv,  to  doKtiv  TTiitoV' 
Qivai  avTov,  k.  X.  Ign.  ad  Trail,  c,  x.  et  passim. 


442  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  Historjf. 

beginning   of  the  second   century;    which,  as"    Cotelerius 
observes,  plainly  shows  the  early  rise  of  this  false  doctrine. 

4.  We  may  now  discern  the  true  character  of  the  Mani- 
chees.  I  formerly  said  they  were  rather  a  sect  of  reasoners 
and  philosophers  than  enthusiasts.  But  they  were  very 
indifferent  critics;  otherwise  they  would  not  have  treated 
the  iSew  Testament  as  they  did  ;  nor  have  pretended  that 
those  books  were  falsely  inscribed,  and  greatly  interpolated, 
which  had  such  evidences  of  genuineness  and  integrity. 
Faustus,  so  celebrated  a  teacher  among  them,  does  not  ap- 
pear to  have  been  a  man  of  much  reading.  He  had  a  plau- 
sible way  of  speaking-,  and  an  agreeable  manner  of  setting" 
off  his  opinions;  and  that  is  all.  Though  the  Manichees 
made  high  pretensions  to"  truth,  reason^  science,  they  did  not 
escape  superstition.  AVith  all  their  boastings  of  that  kind, 
and  the  contempt  they  expressed  for  the  credulity  of  the 
catholics  and  their  numerous  rites,  there  was  not  a  sect  that 
rendered  themselves  more  miserable  by  affected  austerities 
than  the  Manichees.  The  restraints  laid  on  all  the  higher 
order,  the  elect,  Avith  regard  to  marriage,  diet,  and  secular 
business,  must,  I  think,  have  more  than  equalled  all  the 
superstitious  usages  of  the  catholics  at  that  time.  And  when 
it  is  considered  whatP  difficulty  the  Manicheean  auditors  must 
have  had  to  maintain  their  elect,  and  with  how  little  hopes 
of  getting  to  heaven  at  last;  1  mean  directly,  without  the 
fatigue  of  I  know  not  how  many  transmigrations,  as  it  might 
happen ;  this  people  must  appear  ridiculous  and  contemp- 
tible. 

5.  The  subsistence  of  the  christian  religion  to  our  time, 
notwithstanding  the  many  dangers  it  has  been  exposed  to, 
affords  us  reason  to  hope  it  shall  maintain  itself,  and  be 
upheld  to  the  end  of  time,  whatever  oppositions  maybe  yet 
made  against  it.  It  cannot  encounter  worse  enemies  than  it 
has  already  experienced  and  withstood  :  nor  can  there  arise 
more  absurd,  or  more  different  opinions  in  the  church,  and 
among  christians,  than  there  were  in  former  times.  Some 
there  have  been  who  have  handed  down  to  us,  in  the  main, 

"  Solem  negaret  meridie  lucere,  qui  Docetas  seu  phantasiastas  haereticos  tem- 
j.oribus  apostolorum  inficiaretureriipisse.  Cotel.  ad.  Ign.  Ep.  ad.  Trail,  c.  x. 

"  Incidi  in  homines  siiperbe  delirantes. — Et  dicebant.  Veritas,  et  Veritas. 
Et  multum  earn  dicebant  mihi.  Aug.  Conf.  1.  3.  cap.  6.  sub  in. — ut  a  vobis, 

magnis  omnino  pollicitatoribus  rationis  atque  v-eritatis,  quaram De  M. 

Manich.  c.  17.  n.  55. 

P  Quid   autem  failitis  auditores  vestros,  qui  cum  suis  uxoribus,  et  filiis,  et 

familiis,  et  domibus,  et  agris  vobis  serviunt, eis  non  resurrectionem,  sed 

revokuionem  ad  istam  mortal itatein  promittitis,  ut  rursus  nascaatur, Contr. 

Faust,  1.  5.  cap.  x.  Vid.  supra,  p.  370.  not.  '. 


The  Manicliees.     Sect.  VIII.  44'S 

the  genuuie  principles  of  the  christian  religion.  And  by 
the  events  of  past  ages  we  are  encouraged  to  trust  in  Provi- 
dence, and  do  our  best  to  serve  the  cause  and  interests  of 
truth  and  liberty. 

6.  It  is  not  unlikely  that  differences  of  opinion,  and  the 
disputes  they  occasion,  are  some  way  of  use  for  advancing* 
the  interest  of  truth.  The  great  Augustine  was  plainly  of 
this  opinion.  He  says  that''  objections  against  scripture, 
and  false  interpretations,  excite  our  zeal  and  industry,  and 
induce  to  study,  until  we  have  learned  the  right  sense. 
AugHistine  has  upon  several  occasions  spoken"'  of  the  ad- 
vantage which  the  catholic  interest  receives  from  heresies. 

7.  The  Manichees  have  not  weakened  but  confirmed  the 
evidence  of  the  christian  relig-ion.  They  agree  with  other 
christians  in  acknowledg'ing-  the  dignity  of  Christ's  person, 
his  high  authority,  and  the  authority  of  his  apostles,  and 
other  things  which  were  formerly  insisted  on  by  us,  and 
need  not  to  be  repeated  here.  And  they  received  all,  or 
well  nigh  all,  the  same  books  of  the  New  Testament  which 
were  received  by  other  christians.  They  said,  indeed,  that 
those  scriptures  had  been  interpolated  in  some  time  past : 
but  they  never  corrupted  or  interpolated  them,  nor  attempted 
it.  Nor  could  they  or  any  others  corrupt  them,  if  they 
would,  as^  Augustine  observes.  And  the  controversy  with 
them  has  occasioned  the  writing  of  many  books,  containing" 

1  Sed  ideo  divina  providentia  multos  diversi  erroris  haereticos  esse  permittit, 
ut,  cum  insiiltant  nobis,  et  interrogant  nos  ea  quae  nescimus,  vel  sic  excutiamus 
pigritiam,  et  divinas  scripturas  nosse  cupiamus.  Propterea  et  apostolus  dicit : 
Oportet  hoereses  esse,  ut  probati  mamfesti  fiant  inter  vos.  Illi  eniin  Deo 
probati  sunt,  qui  bene  possunt  docere.  Sed  manifesti  hominibus  esse  non 
possunt,  nisi  eum  docent :  docere  autem  nolunt,  nisi  eos  qui  doceri  qujerunt. 
Sed  multi  ad  quaerendum  pigri  sunt,  nisi  per  inolestias  et  insultationes  haereti- 
corum  quasi  de  sorano  excitentur,  et  de  ilia  imperitia  sua  periclitari  se  sentiant. 
Qui  omines,  si  bonae  sint  fidei,  non  cedunt  haereticis,  sed,  quid  eis  respon- 
deant,  diligentius  inquirunt.  Nee  eos  deserit  Deus,  ut  petentes  accipiant,  et 
quaerentes  inveniant,  et  pulsantibus  aperiatur.  Aug.  de  Genesi  contr.  Manich. 
1.  i.  c.  i.  n.  2.  Didicimus  enim,  singulas  quasque  haereses  intulisse  ecclesiae 
proprias  qusestiones,  contra  quas  diligentius  defenderetur  scriptura  divina,  quam 
si  nulla  necessitas  cogeret.  Id.  de  Dono  Persever.  c.  20.  n.  23.  Tom.  10. 

"■  Utitur  enim  [ecclesia  catholica]  gentibus  ad  materiam  operationis  suae, 
haereticis  ad  probationem  doctrinae  suae.  De  Vera  Relig.  cap.  6.  n.  10.  Torn, 
i.  Sed  quoniam  verissime  dictum  est,  oportet  multas  haer^es  esse, — utamur 
etiam  isto  divinae  providentiae  beneficio.  Ex  his  enim  hominibus  haerehci 
fiunt,  qui,  etiamsi  essent  in  ecclesia,  nihilominus  errarent.  Cum  aufem  foris 
sunt,  pliirimum  prosunt,  non  verum  docendo,  quod  nesciunt,  sed  ad  verum 
quaerendum  carnales,  et  ad  verum  aperiendum  spiritales  cathohcos  excitando. 

Quapropter  multi,  ut  diem  Dei  videant  et  gaudeant,   per  haereticos 

de  somno  excitantur.     lb.  cap.  8.  n.  18. 

'  Qua  igitur  causa  a  vobis  corrumpi  non  possent,  hac  de  causa  a  nemine 
potuerunt.  Contr.  Faust.  1.  32.  c.  IG. 


444  Credibility  of  tlie  Gospel  History. 

numerous  quotations  of  the  scriptures,  and  excellent  vindi- 
cations of  their  genuineness  and  integrity. 

8.  We  are  very  much  indebted  to  Augustine,  and  many 
other  learned  chris;tians  of  former  times,  who  asserted  and 
maintained  the  authority  of  the  Old,  and  the  genuineness 
and  integrity  of  the  New  Testament ;  and  gave  a  better 
account  of  the  creation  of  the  Morld,  of  human  liberty, 
and"  the  nature  and  origin  of  evil,  than  was  taught  by  these 
people. 

9.  We  may  hence  learn  to  exercise  moderation  toward 
men  of  difterent  sentiments,  and  to  keep  our  temper  in  dis- 
puting with  them.  In  all  probability  we  shall  never  meet 
wMth  any  men,  christians  at  least,  M'ho  differ  more  from  us  than 
the  Manichees  did  from  the  catholics.  Those  unreasonable 
men  rejected  all  the  scriptures  of  the  Old  Testament  in  the 
lump.  They  asserted  that  the  books  of  the  New  Testament 
had  been  long  ago  interpolated,  and  that  they  were  not  all 
written  by  those  whose  names  they  bear.  They  held  two 
eternal  principles,  and  denied  the  humanity  of  Christ  and  the 
resurrection  of  the  body.  And  yet  Augustine  professeth 
much  mildness  and  moderation  toward  them.  And,  entering 
into  an  argument  with  them,  he  offers  to  God  a  fervent 
prayer  that^  he  may  be  enabled  to  govern  his  passions,  and 
seek  their  conversion,  not  their  destruction.  Possibly  he 
did  not  always  fully  observe  the  rules,  which  in  the  time  of 
sedate  judgment  he  prescribed  to  himself  as  just  and  rea- 
sonable.    But  the  passage,  which  1  chiefly  refer  to,  is  so 

'  E<ri  fiiv  sv  i)  KUKia  avsmoQ,  km  avvTro^aroQ'  Trpa^ig  fiaXXov  i)  aaia  saa, 
KM  Trpa^ig  EK  TrpoMpicTto)^  avfi^mvsaa.  k.  X.  Serap.  contr.  Manich.  p.  44.  fin. 

"  Peccatorum  originem  non  libero  arbitrio  voluntatis,  sed  substantiae  tri- 
buunt  gentis  adversae ;  quam  dogmatizantes  esse  hominibus  mixtam,  omnem 
carnem  non  Dei,  sed  malae  mentis  perhibent  esse  opificium,  quse  a  contrario 
principio  Deo  coaeteriia  est.     De  Haer.  cap.  AG.  sub  fin. 

Quam  concupiscentiam,  quod  ssepe  inculcandum  est,  non  vitium  substan- 
tiae bonae,  sed  malam  vult  esse  substantiam.     Op.  Imp.  1.  3.  c.  lOG. 

Vos  autem  asseritis  quandam  naturam  atque  substantiam  malum  esse.  De 
M.  Manich.  cap.  2.  n.  2. 

Veritas  autcm  dicit,  omnia  ista  quae  videmus,  et  quae  non  videmus,  qiaae 
naluralifersubsistunt,  a  Deo  facta  esse;  in  quibus  rationalem  creaturam,  etiam 
ipsam  factani,  sive  in  angelis,  sive  in  hominibus,  accipisse  liberum  arbitrium  ; 
quo  libero  arbitrio  si  Deo  servire  vellet  secundum  voluntatem  ac  legem  Dei, 
haberetapud  cum  aefernam  folicitatem. — Ecce  autem  liberum  arbitrium,  atque 
inde  peccare  quemque  si  velit,  non  peccare  si  nolit,  &c,  Aug.  ap.  Act.  cum 
Fehc.  1.  2.  c.  3. 

"  Unum  verum  Deum  omnipotentem — et  rogavi,  et  rogo,  ut  in  refellenda 
et  revincecida  haeresi  vestra,  Manichaei,  cui  et  vos  fortasse  imprudentius  quam 
mahtiosius  adhajsistis,  det  mihi  mentem  pacatam  atque  tranquillam,  et  magis 
de  vestra  corrcctionc,  quam  de  subvcrsione  cogitantom.  Contr.  Ep.  Fund, 
cap.  i.  in. 


Tlic  Manichees.     Sect.  VIII.  445 

beautiful  and  empliatical,  tliat  I  have  transcribed  it  largely 
at  the  bottom  of  the'"^  P^S^-  And  I  would  translate  it  too, 
l)ut  that  I  am  not  able  to  reaeh  the  energy  of  his  expressions. 
In  the  general  he  says:  '  Let  them  be  severe  against  you, 
'  who  know  not  with  what  labour  truth  is  discovered,  and 

*  how  difficultly  error  is  avoided.  Let  them  be  severe  against 
'  you,  who  know  not  how  hardly  the  diseases  of  the  mind 
'  are  cured,  and  the  eye  of  the  understanding  strengthened 
'  to  bear  the  light.  Let  them  be  severe  against  you,  who 
'  are  insensible  how  little  we  can  know  of  God  after  our  best 
'  endeavours  to  understand  his  perfections.  Let  them  treat 
'  you  Avith  rigour,  who  never  were  entangled  in  a  like  error. 

*  As  for  me,  I  can  by  no  means  treat  you  in  that  manner ; 

*  but  must  exercise  toward  you  that  patience  and  long-- 
'  suffering  which  I  once  wanted,  and  which  my  friends 
'  showed  me,  when  with  a  blind  and  furious  zeal  I  not 
'  only  maintained,  but  propagated  to  the  utmost  of  my  power, 
'  the  principle  in  which  you  are  still  engaged.' 

It  will  be  one  good  use  of  all  this  long  history,  if  Me 
learn  to  form  charitable  sentiments  of  other  men,  and  to 
practise  moderation  toward  them ;  no  longer  debating  with 
those  who  differ  from  us,  as  if  we  were  infallible,  but  as 
inquirers  after  truth,  even  as  we  desire  they  should  do  : 
which"  also  is  particularly  recommended  by  the  same  re- 
nowned writer. 

*  llli  in  V03  sseviant,  qui  nesciunt  cum  quo  labore  verum  inveniatur,  et 
quam  difficile  caveantur  errores.  llli  in  vos  saeviant,  qui  nesciunt  quam  rarum 
et  arcluum  sit  carnalia  phantasmata  piae  mentis  serenitate  superare.  llli  in  vos 
saeviant,  qui  nesciunt  cum  quanta  difficultate  sanetur  oculus  interioris  hominis. 

llli  in  vos  saeviant,  qui  nesciunt  quibus  suspiriis  et  gemitibus  fiat,  utex 

quantulacumque  parte  possit  intelligi  Deus.  Postremo  in  vos  saeviant,  qui 
nunquam  tali  enore  decepti  sunt,  quali  vos  deceptos  vident.     Ego  autem, 

qui,  diu  multumque  jactatus,  tandem  respicere  potui, qui  denique  ilia 

figmenfa,  quae  vos  diuturna  consuetudine  implicates  et  constrictos  tenent,  et 
quaesivi  curiose,  et  atlente  audivi,  et  temere  credidi,  et  mstanter,  quibus  potui, 

persuasi, saevire  in  vos  non  possum,  quos,  sicut  me  ipsum  illo  tempore, 

ita  nunc  debeo  sustinere,  et  tanta  patientia  vobiscum  agere,  quanta  mecum 
egere  proximi  mei,  cum  in  vestro  dogmate  rabiosus  et  coecus  errarem.  ibid, 
cap.  2.  n.  2,  3. 

*  illud  quovis  judice  impetrare  me  a  vobis  oporlet,  ut  in  utraque 

parte  omnis  arrogantia  deponatur.  Nemo  nostrijm  dicat,  se  jam  invenisse 
veritatem.  Sic  eam  quaeramus,  quasi  ab  utrisque  nesciatur.  Ita  enim  diligen- 
ter  et  concorditer  quaeri  poterit,  si  nulla  temeraria  praesumtione  inventa  et  cog- 
nitaesse  credatur.     Id.  ib.  n.  4. 


446  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History, 


SECT.  IX. 


THE  PAULICIANS. 


I.  Their  history/.     II.  Their  testimony  to  the  scriptures, 

I.  I  TAKE  this  opportunity  to  give  a  brief  account  of  the 
Paulicians,  who  were  mentioned*  before,  and  are  usually 
reckoned  a  branch  of  the  Manichees.  But  Beausobre  says 
that''  though  they  are  sometimes  confounded  with  the  Mani- 
chees, they  agreed  but  little  with  them.  And  indeed  Peter 
of  Sicily  intimates  that*"  they  did  not  own  themselves  to  be 
Manichees. 

They  are  generally  supposed  to  have  first  appeared  in 
the  seventh  century,  in  the  country  of  Armenia,  and  to  have 
been  so  called  from''  Paul,  son  of  Callinice,  a  Manichaean 
woman,  Avho  had  another  son  named  John,  who  also  was 
a  zealous  preacher  of  this  doctrine,  called  revived  Mani- 
cha'ism. 

Photius  says  they®  hold  two  principles,  as  the  Manichees 
do;  he^  calls  Mani  their  master:  he  continually  considers 
their  sects  as  a  branch  of  Manichaeism. 

I  formerly''  mentioned  a  particularity  of  theirs.  Photius 
likewise  says  that'  they  did  not  choose  to  have  their 
ministers  called  priests,  but  scribes  or  secretaries,  or  "  com- 
panions in  travel,"  the  word  used  in  Acts  xix.  29;  and  2 
Cor.  viii.  1.9. 

II.  I  now  proceed  to  observe  their  testimony  to  the  scrip- 
tures. 

»  See  p.  294.  "  B.  T.  2.  p.  765. 

'  Qui  tametsi  se  a  Manichaeoram  impuiitatibus  alienos  dictitant,  sunttamen 
dogmatum  ipsoruni  vigilantissimi  custodcs  et  propugnatores.  Pet.  Sic.  ap. 
Bib.  P.  P.  Max.  T.  10.  p.  754.  B. 

"*    El'  Tavry  yvvq  tiq,  ovofian  TCaXXii'iKjj — Svo  riKTd  TTuiSag, — Ek  Sartpa 

TOIVVV     TWV     Hpi)jUV(x)V,     OTIjJ     UcivXoQ    7]V    OVOjla UavXlKiaVlOV    kXtJOIV     01    TT}S 

uTToramac:  cQwrcii  neriWa'^avro.  Ph.  contr.  Manich.  1.  i.  c.  2.  p.  4,  5.  Vid. 
et  Petr.  Sic.  ib.  p.  759.  A. 

"  Avo  fiiv  apxuQ  ofioKoysaiv,  ijQ  o't  Mrtvt;;^aioi'  Phot.  ib.  1.  i.  c.  C.  in. 

^  Kai  Toiyt  TH  SiSaaicnXs  avTMV  MavtVTOQ,  k.  X.  ib.  c.  8.  p.  24. 

K   Ai  TH  ^'[avivTOQ  TTapufvaStc-  ib.  1.  4.  c.  1.  in.  et  passim. 

'■   See  p.  294.  '   T>ic  Hivroi  Trap'  avToig'uptwv  ra'^ivsTrexovrai^ 

UK  tptir,  aXXa  avvfx^rifii'.Q  kox  voraping  fTrovojua^acri.  h  i.  C.  9.  p.  31.  Conl. 
c.  25.  p.  134.  et  Wolf.  not.  in.  loc. 


Tfic  Manichecs.     Sect.  IX.  447 

1.  Pliotius  says  tlioy''  reject  the  holy  prophets  and  all  the 
Old  Testament,  and  the  ancient  saints  in  general,  calling" 
them  thieves  and  robbers. 

2.  '  As  for  the  scriptures  of  the  New  Testament,'  Pliotius 
says,  '  they'  receive  the  gospel,  and  the  apostle,  [meaning- 

*  the  gospels,  and  the  epistles  of  the  apostle  Paul  at  least,] 
'  which  the  christian  church  receives  and  honours,  and  has 
'  delivered  to  them.  These  they  receive  without  altering- 
'  or  corrupting-  them  in  any  material  things,  as  Valentinus 
'  and  some  otiiers  have  done.  But  they  pervert  them  from 
'  their  true  meaning  to  support  their  apostasy.' 

3.  Afterwards,  having  quoted  2  Pet.  iii.  15,  16,  and 
having-  applied  to  them  what  St.  Peter  says  of  some  who 
wrested  the  scriptures  to  their  own  destruction,  he  says  : 
'  As'"  for  the  oracles  of  the  Lord  and  the  apostles  and  the 
'  other  scriptures,  (by  which  last  I  mean  the  Acts  of  the 
'  Apostles,  and  the  epistles  called  catholic,)  excepting- 
'  those  of  the  chief  apostle,  they  receive  them  :  for  those 
'  ascribed  to  him  they  do  not  receive  at  all.  And  concern- 
'  ing-  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  and  the  catholic  epistles, 
'  they  are  not  all  of  the  same  opinion  :  for  some  reject  them, 

♦  whilst  others  join  them  with  the  other  scriptures  received 
'  by  all.' 

4.  Photius  does  also  elsewhere  expressly  say  they"  re- 
jected Peter,  because  he  denied  his  Lord  and  Master.  Mr. 
Wolff  therefore  says,  that"  perhaps  these  are  the  only  chris- 
tians that  ever  rejected  both  of  St.  Peter's  epistles. 

5.  In  another  place,  '  theyP  admit,  as  the  rule  of  their 

''  AXXm  yap  Kai  tuq  ttoHg  7rpo0jjrac,  Kai  Tvaaav  t7]v  TraKaiuv  ypa(pr)V,  km 
THQ  aXXsc;  aTTOTpe^ovrat  ayiag,  X^t«s  Km  KXnrrag  aTTOKaXavTig.  ib.  1.  i.  c.  8. 
p.  23.  '    To  fievTOi  tvayyiXiov,  Kai  tov  airoToXov,  a    kcii  to 

Srnov  Tdiv  ■)(pi'?iaviov  TrepnrrvirfftTni  kcu  Tifi<f.  (Twrayna,  syypa^wc  TSTOtg 
irapiOero,  toiq  prjfiacri  \iiv  Kai  ovofiaaiv  aSiv  (Hya.  TrapaXKarTiov  rs  Xoys  to 
ffj^?;/ia,  K.  X.  1.  1.  c.  3.  p.  9.     Vid.  et  p.  10,  11. 

"'  Ol  avra  Tt  Ta  KvpiuKa  \oyia,  kui  tu  axo^oXiKa,  Kai  tuq  aWaq  ypafag, 
(pilfii  Sr)  Tag  Te  IlpaS,itg  t(ijv  AttotoXcov,  kui  tuq  KaOoXticaQ  Xtyoiiivag,  ttXi]V  twv 
ava<ptpoi^itviov  lig  tov  Kopv(paiov,  (Ktivag  yap  net  TOig  pijfjiaaiv  irapactxovTai- — 
Kat  Tag  Wpa'itig  St  twv  Atto'^oXoiv,  Kai  Tag  KaQoXiKag  a  izavTig  avTwv  avvap- 
fioZatri  TOig  aXXoig,  H<n  de  oi,  Kai  avvTaTTsm.  Id.  1.  i.  C.  8.  p.  27. 

■   ^aXira  St   tov  Kopv^aiov  tuiv  airo';oX(i)v   YltTpov  Svn^rjuHTtv,  oti 

yiyovtv  i^apvog,  i/jrtfTt,  Tiig  tig  tov  oiSaffKaXov  kui  XpiTOv  m^suig.  ib.  c.  8.  p.  24. 

"  Hi  igitur  forte  soli  ex  omni  cliristianorum  aiitiquitate  utramque  Petri 
epistolam  adversati  sunt,  cum  Eusebius,  lib.  iii.  c.  3.  H.  E.  testetur  priorem  ab 
omnibus,  posteriorem  ab  antiquioribus  non  receptam  fuisse.  At  hi  quidem  id 
fecerunt,  oborta,  an  Petri  ea  sit,  dubitatione  ;  illi  vero,  ex  temerario  quodani 
in  Petrum  odio.     Wolff,  'b.  p.  27. 

P  Ev  oig  TaTt  KvpuiKa  avaytypavTai  Xoyia,  Kai  th  fityaXa  aTro^oXn  HavXn 
«i  £7rt<roXat,  koi  Trap'  tviotg  twv  AttotoXwv  at  npat,fig,  Kai  twv  KaOoXiKoiv  brrat 
irnpa  Tag  ts  Kopv<paiH  Tvyxavscw.  ib.  1.  i.  c.  13.  p.  56,  57. 


448  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

'  faitli,  the  oracles  of  the  Lord,  and  the  epistles  of  the  great 
'  apostle  Paul,  and  some  of  them  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles, 
'  and  the  catholic  epistles,  except  those  of  the  chief  apostle.' 

6.  Again,  '  they  "*  endeavoured  to  confirm  their  doctrines 
'  by  the  scriptures  of  the  gospel,  and  the  divine  apostle  Paul.' 

7.  He  quotes  to  them'^  the  divine  Luke  in  the  Acts,  though, 
as  he  adds,  many  of  the  sect  do  not  receive  that  book. 

8.  He  quotes  to  them  expressly^  Paul's  epistle  to  the 
Hebrews,  or  Jews,  as  his  word  is. 

9.  What  regard  the  Paulicians  had  for  the  book  of  the 
Revelation  I  cannot  particularly  say ;  Photius  not  quoting 
it  in  his  argument  with  them. 

10.  1  add  one  thing  more.  These'  people  greatly 
respected  the  scriptures  of  the  New 'Testament,  and  ap- 
proved that  all  people,  the  laity,  and  even  women,  should 
read,  study,  and  understand  them.  This  appears  from  a 
story  told  by  Photius,  of  a  conversation  between  a  Mani- 
cheean  woman  and  Sergius,  who  afterwards  became  a  zealous 
promoter  of  the  sect. 

11.1  have  almost  entirely  confined  myself  to  Photius,  not 
thinking  it  needful  to  be  more  particular  at  present,  or  to 
copy  much  from  Peter,  or  any  other  author,  concerning  so 
late  a  sect.  However,  I  shall  briefly  observe,  that  Peter  of 
Sicily  in  the  main  agrees  with  Photius,  often  saying  that  the 
Paulicians  rejected  the  Old  Testament,  and  used  only  the 
gospels  and  the  apostle.  In  particular  he  says  :  '  They" 
'  receive  the  four  gospels,  and  the  fourteen  epistles  of  Paul, 
'  and  the  catholic  epistle  of  James,  and  the  three  epistles  of 
'  John,  and  the  catholic  epistle  of  Jude,  and  the  Acts  of  the 
*  Apostles,  without  making  any  alterations  in  them.  But 
'  they  admit  not  the  two  epistles  of  the  chief  of  the  apostles.' 

''  O'lQ  Ti  rag  ivayyEKiKug  ypa<paQ  rifKfv  Krxvpi^ovrat,  Km  otc  rov  airoroXov 
Kut  6tO(popov  llavXov  th  oikiih  (pgovrjiiaroQ  loyfiaTi'^riv  Kai  li^aoKoXov  Kura- 
xl/evSovrat.  1.  4.  c.  6.  p.  133. 

■"  Ta  irra  Si  kov  raig  llpaKi(Tiv  u  Btiog  \nKng,  u  /cat  ro  vXtirov  tijc  aTTO^affiag 
avrwv  rag  tKtivs  tiMvag  a  TrpoauTcu.   I.  2.  c.  6.  p.  187. 

'^  Tf^  2a»r//j)i  yap  rifiuv  6  HavXog  Trpog  laSamg  ypatpwv,  tijv  irarpiKr/v  apfio^u 
<l>wvr}v,  K.  X.  I.  2.  c.  X.  p.  185. 

'  'H  TrpotiprjfiivTj  Mavt^^ata  yvvq,  r)viKa  to  TrpuiTov  iig  OfiiXiav  avr({)  Karcry, 
iva  Ti,  (ptjfyiv,  iiTTi  fioi,  ra  Bna  hk  avayivwrJKug  tvnyyiXia  ;  'O  St — fit}  i^iivai 
<pi)(yag  Tt]v  T(ov  Xa'iicwv  nXf^psj'Ti  ra^iv  avtCi}v  UTiog  ti)v  twv  (ppiKriov  Xoyiojv 
TToitinQai  avayvu)niv,  avtirrOat  yap  rnig  itnivaiv  to  fpyoi'.    1.  i.  C.  20.  p.  100. 

"  Quod  veteris  instrumenti  tabulas  non  admittant,  prophetasque  pianos  et 
latrones  appellent, — aiit  sola  dunlaxat  sacra  quatuor  evangelia,  et  S.  Pauli 
apostoli  denas  quaternas  cpistolas  recipiant,  Jacobi  item  catholicam,  ternas 
Joannis,  catholicam  Judse,  cum  Actis  Apo.^tolorum,  iisdem  quibus  apud  nos 
sunt  verbis. — Binas  catholicas  niagni  et  imniobilisecclesiaefundamenti, — prin- 
cipis  apostolorum,  non  admittunt.     Pefr.  ubi  supr.  p.  756.  E. 


Remarlis  on  Mr.  Buicefs  Account  of  the  Manichees.  449 

12.  Upon  the  wliole,  the  Pauliciaiis,  according'  to  these 
accounts,  received  the  books  (»f  the  New  Testament  as  they 
were  received  by  other  christians,  excepting  the  two  epistles 
of  Peter,  which  they  entirely  rejected,  if  these  authors  say 
right.  But  what  was  their  sentiment  concerning  the  Reve- 
lation we  cannot  say. 


REMARKS 


UPON 


MR.  BOWER'S  ACCOUNT  OF  THE  MANICHEES, 


IN  THE  SECOND  VOLUME  OF  HIS  HISTORY  OF  THE  POPES. 


NONE  of  my  learned  friends,  who  have  read  Mr.  Bower's 
History  of  the  Popes,  (and  I  suppose  they  have  all  read  it,) 
could  forbear  observing  the  diftereisce  between  his  account 
of  the  Manichees,  and  that  given  in  the  sixth  volume  of  the 
first  edition  of  this  work.  And  some  of  them  have  intimated 
that  I  could  not  decline  taking-  public  notice  of  it,  unless  1 
\vould  be  understood  to  allow  that  the  account  given  by  me 
of  the  same  people  was  wrong ;  for  which  I  see  no  reason. 
Indeed  I  cannot  but  wish  tliat  Mr.  Bower  had  read  that 
volume,  or  the  late  Mr.  Beausobre's  History  of  the  Manichees, 
from  which  I  received  a  great  deal  of  light ;  I  think  he 
would  then  have  expressed  himself  very  differently  from 
what  he  has  done:  as  it  is,  1  think  myself  obliged  to  make 
a  few  remarks. 

In  the  history  of  Manes,  or  Mani,  (as  the  Persians  his 
countrymen  call  him,)  which  is  at  the  beginning  of  note 
(D)  p.  19,  20,  of  Mr.  Bower's  second  volume,  there  are,  in 
my  opinion,  several  mistakes:  as  may  appear  from  the 
account  given  of  Mani,  and  his  works,  and  predecessors,  in 
the  fore  mentioned  volume  :  to  which  they  are  referred  who 
are  pleased  to  look  into  it. 

In  the  latter  part  of  the  same  note,  p.  21,  22,  Mr.  Bower 
proceeds  to  the  tenets  of  this  sect,  which  I  considered  for- 

voi .    HI.  2  G 


450  Credibility  uf  the  Gospel  History. 

nierly,  so  tar  as  1  judged  needful.  1  therefore  take  notice 
of  a  very  few  tilings  only  in  Mr.  Bower  upon  this  article. 

In  that  note,  p.  21,  says  Mr.  Bower  :  '  Thus  was  gluttony 
'  with  them  a  cardinal  virtue,  and  eating  to  excess  highly 
'  meritorious.'  1  do  not  conceive  how  that  can  be  truly  said 
of  the  Manichees,when  their  elect,  tlie  most  distinguished  part 
of  them,  comprehending  their  ecclesiastics,  and  some  others, 
were  obliged  to  abstain  from  meat,  and  wine,  and  eggs,  and 
fish.  And  Mr.  Bower  says,  p.  23,  that  '  their  auditors,  as 
'  well  as  their  elect,  kept  two  fasts  in  the  week,  the  one  on 
'  Sunday,  the  other  on  Monday.'  That  the  Manichees  were 
great  fasters  was  shown,  p.  298  :  that  they  were  by  principle, 
and  frequent  practice,  a  teniperate,  abstemious  sort  of  people, 
appears,  I  think,  from  a  passage  which  1  have  not  yet 
alleged  at  all.  It  is  near  the  conclusion  of  a  work  generally 
ascribed  to  Marius  V^ictorinus  Afer,  in  the  fourth  century; 
which  is  a  letter  to  Justin,  a  Manichee,  a  learned  men,  and 
the  author's  friend.  '  In^  vain,'  says  he,  '  do  you  now 
'  macerate  your  body,  and  mortify  it  with  continual  fasting 
'  and  watching  ;  if,  after  all,  it  has  no  other  lot  than  to  return 
'  to  the  devil,  who,  you  say,  is  its  creator. 

But,  undoubtedly,  Mr.  Bower  has  son^e  reason  for  saying 
what  he  does,  which  therefore  ought  to  be  considered.  '  The 
'  particles  of  the  good  nature  were,  according  to  them,  in 
'  all  beings  of  this  universe,  mixed  with,  and  chained  to  the 
'  particles  of  the  evil  nature.  Such,  however,  as  happened  to 
'  be  in  the  food  which  they  used,  were,  in  being  used  by 
'  them,  delivered  for  ever  from  so  painful  a  bondage.  Thus 
'  was  gluttony  with  them  a  cardinal  virtue,  and  eating  to 
'  excess  highly  meritorious:'  p.  21,  note  (D).  This  there- 
fore is  only  a  consequence  deduced  from  the  just  mentioned 
supposed  principle  of  theirs.  But  it  does  not  appear  that 
they  discerned  this  consequence;  for,  so  far  as  we  can  find, 
they  did  not,  by  principle,  eat  to  excess,  but  were,  and  upon 
principle,  great  fasters  and  very  abstemious.  Augustine 
imputed  to  them  the  same  principle,  whether  justly  or  not  I  do 
not  now  inquire.  Nevertheless  he  does  not  upon  that  account 
charge  them  with  excess  in  eating;  because  I  suppose  he 
knew  they  were  not  guilty  of  it.  But  he  ridicules  their 
fasting :  '  Your'*  fasting,'  says  he,  '  is  cruel  ;  you  ought  to 

'■  Et  cassum  nunc  usque  jugi  inedia,  inimicae,  ut  ais,  carnis  membra  tenuasti, 
censens  ipse  animae  officere  merilis,  ac  naturae  passi  corporis  succos,  ac  pin- 
gucdinis  distentae  grassamina  atque  ipsorum  abdominum  mole  praegravari  :  si 
post  hunc  jejuniorum  laborem  ad  creatorem  iuuin,  <iueni  ais,  aut  diabolum, 
aut  exteriores  tenebras  reverteris.  T.  M.  Victorin.  adv.  Manich.  Ap.  B.  PP. 
Lugd.  T.  4.  p.  292.  D.  E. 

^  Nee  ipsa  jejunia  vobis  competunt,     Non  enim  oportet  vacare  fornacem. 


Remarks  on  Mr.  Bower's  Account  of  the  Manichees,  45 1 

'  be  always  eating;  whilst  you  cease  to  eat,  you  forbear  to 
'  deliver  the  particles  of  the  good  nature  from  their  chains.' 

Farther,  p.  21  :  '  They  rejected  the  Old  Testament,  and 
'  some  parts  of  the  New,  especially  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles.' 
That  the  Mnnichees  rejected  the  Old  Testament  is  un- 
doubted ;  whether  they  rejected  any  books  of  the  New  Tes- 
tament, and  particularly  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  has  been 
carefully  examined,  p.  397 — 405. 

In  the  latter  part  of  that  note,  p.  23,  Mr.  Bower  gives  a 
shocking  account  of  their  eucharist,  taken  from  ancient  eccle- 
siastical writers.  And  afterwards,  at  p.  25,  he  tells  the  same, 
or  like  story,  from  pope  Leo,  commonly  called  the  great :  this 
was  also  examined.  Nee  particularly  my  reference  to  Beauso- 
bre,  with  his  arguments  and  observations,  p.  295  ;  in  which,  if 
I  am  not  mistaken,  there  is  a  sufficient  vindication  of  the 
Manichees  from  the  charge  of  lewd  and  abominable  rites 
and  mysteries. 

Nevertheless,  as  1  did  not  then  distinctly  speak  of  po|)o 
Leo,  upon  whom  Mr.  Bower  chiefly  insists,  I  shall  now 
consider  what  is  alleged  from  him.  '  He  spared  no  pains,' 
says  Mr.  B.  p.  25,  '  to  find  them  out ;  and  being  informed 

*  by  some,  whom  they  had  attempted  to  seduce,  where  they 
'  assembled,  he  caused  great  numbers  of  them  to  be  seized, 
'  in  virtue  of  the  imperial  edicts,  and  among-  the  rest  their 
'  bishop,  and  some  of  their  teachers.  Flaving  them  thus  in 
'  his  power,  his  first  care  was  to  learn  of  them  their  true 
'  tenets,  antl  the  secret  practices  of  their  sect;  which  he  had 
'  no  sooner  done,  than  he  assembled  the  neighbouring 
'  bishops,  ;uid  those  who  happened  to  be  then  at  Rome,  with 

*  a  great  number  of  presbyters ;  inviting-  to  the  assembly 
'  even   the   laymen  of  any   rank,  the  great  officers  of  the 

'  empire,   and   the    senate. Being  all   met  and  in  great 

'  expectation,  Leo  ordered  the  elect  of  the  Manichees,  that 
'  is,  their  teachers  and  chief  men  among  them,  to  be  brought 
'  forth.  Great  Mas  their  confusion  when  they  appeared 
'  before  so  grand  an  assembly  ;  but  being  encouraged  by 
'  Leo,  they  first  owned  their  impious  tenets,  and  their  super- 

*  stitious  practices,  and  discovered  a  crime,  which  modesty,' 
says  pope  Leo,  *  would  not  allow  him  to  name :  but  it  was  so 
'  fully  proved,'  adds  he,  '  that  the  uiost  incredulous  were 
'  thoroughly  satisfied  it  was  true,  for  all  those  who  were  con- 
in  qua  spiritale  aurum  de  stercoris  commixtionc  piirgatur,  et  a  miserandis 
nexibus  divina  membra  solvuntur.  Quaproptcr  ille  est  misericordior  inter 
vos,  qui  se  potuerit  ita  excrcere,  iit  nihil  ejus  valetudini  obsit,  saepe  crudos 
cibos  sumere,  et  multa  consumere.  Vos  autem — a  membrorum  divinonira 
purgatione  cessando  crudeliter  jejiinatis.  Contr.  Faust.  1.  6.  c.  4.  T.  8. 

2  c  2 


452  Credibilitii  tifthe  Gospel  History. 

*  cerned  in  that  abominable  act  were  present :  viz.  a  g-irl  of 
'  twelveyearsoldjthetwowoinemvljohad  brouglither  up, and 
'  prepared  her  for  the  crime,  the  youth  who  had  debauched 
'  her,  and  the  bishop  who  presided  at  that  detestable  cere- 
'  monv,  and  had  directed  it. — It  appeared  from  the  confession 
'  which  their  bisliop  made  opeidy,  and  gave  in  writing,  that 
'  they  committed  these  abominations  chiefly  on  their  festivals.' 
1  think  it  may  be  worth  our  while  to  see  pope  Leo's  own 
words;  which  therefore  1  transcribe""  below. 

With  regard  then  to  pope  Leo  1  would  observe,  first,  that 
we  have  not  remaining-  any  copy  of  the  proceedings  ag'ainst 
these  people  to  whicli  Leo  refers.  Secondly,  though  the 
confessions  mentioned  by  Leo  seem  a  specious  argument  for 
the  truth  of  these  charges,  yet  1  apprehend  that,  when  duly 
weighed,  they  are  of  little  value.  By  menaces,  and  promises, 
and  good  management,  an  artful  and  powerful  ecclesiastic, 
like  Leo,  is  able  to  ol)tain  such  confessions  as  he  wants, 
whenever  there  are  any  people,  who  have  fallen  under  his 
displeasure,  and  he  has  determined  to  harass  them  with  fines, 
or  imprisonment,  or  banishment.  Says  Afhenagoras,  in  his 
Apology  for  the  christians  of  his  time,  '  fhat*^  our  enemies 
'  may  seem  not  to  hate  us  without  reason,  they  accuse  us  of 

*  abominable  feasts,  and  incestuous  mixtures  in  our  assein- 
'  blies.'  It  has  been  the  way  of  all  persecutors  in  general. 
They  will  make  those  appear  criminal  whom  they  intend  to 
destroy,  and  will  do  tlieir  utuiost  to  expose  them  to  g-eneral 
scorn  and  aversion.  Thirdly,  after  all  these  examinations 
and  confessions,  Leo  did  not  know  when  this  abominable 
rite,  with  which  he  charged  them,  was  performed.  First  he 
says,  '  in  their  worship  :  de  sacris  tamen  eorum,'  &c.  then 

•^  De  sacris  famen  eorum,  quae  apud  illos  tarn  obscoena  sunt,  quam  nefanda, 
quod  inquisition!  nostrae  Doiuinus  manife^tare  voluit,  non  tacemus,  ne  quis- 
quam  putet  nos  de  hac  re  dubiae  famae  et  incertis  opinionibus  credidisse. 
Residentibus  itaque  mecum  episcopis  et  presbyteris,  ac  in  eundem  confessum 
cliristianis  viris  ac  nobilibus  congregatis,  electos  et  electas  eorum  jussimus 
praesentari.  Qui  cum  et  perversitate  dogmatis  sui,  et  de  festivitatum  suarum 
consuetudine  multa  reserarent,  illud  quoque  scelus,  quod  eloqui  verecundum 
est,  prodiderunt;  quod  tanta  diligentia  investigatum  est,  ut  nihil  minus 
credulis,  niliil  obtrectatoribus,  relinqueretur  ambiguum.  Aderant  enim  omnes 
personae,  per  quos  infandum  facmus  fuerat  perpetratuni,  puerula  scilicet  ut 
mulfum  decennis,  et  duae  mulieres  quae  ipsam  nutnerant,  et  huic  sceleri  prae- 
paraverant.  Praeslo  erat  etiam  adolescentulus  vitiator  puellae,  et  episcopus 
ipsorum  detestandi  criininis  ordinator.  Omninuni  par  fuit  horum  et  una 
confessio,  el  patefactum  est  exsecratum,  quod  aures  nobtrae  vix  ferre  potuerunt. 
De  quo  ne  apertius  loquentes,  castos  offendanius  audifus,  gestorun.  docunienta 
sufficiunt. — Leon.  Serm.  15.  c.  4.  p.  64.  edit.  Lugd.  1700.  Conf.  Ep.  15.  [al. 
93.]  c.  16.  p.  230,  231.  et  Ep.  8.  al.  2. 

En  Ct   Kai   T(io<paQ  kui  (xi^hq  \0y07r01nmv  aOfnQ  Ka(f   iifiMV,  iva   re  fiiativ 
rofii'^ouv  ]itTa  Xoya.  k.  \.     Leguf.  pro.  Chr.  p.  34.  D. 


Remarks  on  Mr.  Bower's  J^ccount  of  the  Manidiees.         453 

'  in  their  festivals:  de  feslivifatnni  eorum  coiisiietiuliiie.'  In 
another  phue''  it  is  '  in  their  mysteries.'  Once  more,  *  in' 
•  the  |)rinei|»ai  feast  of  their  .seet.'  If  good  evidence  of  this 
fact  had  been  prodnced,  he  wonhl  have  expressed  himself 
more  clearly  and  unitbrndy.  As  pope  Li-o  says  that  this 
Mas  done  '  in  the  principal  feast  of  their  sect,'  Beansohres 
understood  him  to  mean  their  Bema,  an  annual  festival, 
celebrated  in  honour  of  Mani  with  great''  solemnity. 
'  ^Vhich,'  he  says,  •  atlbrds  a  manifest  proof  of  the  falsehood 
'  of  tiie  deposition  of  the  witnesses  before  Leo:  for  that  feast 
'  was  not  profaned  with  any  sacrifices  of  unchastity.  Augus- 
'  tine,  who,  when  a  iManichee,  was  present  at  it,  has  described 
'  it,  and  discerned  nothing  impure  in  it.'  Fourthly,  it  appears 
from  pope  Leo,  that  the  Manichees  celebrated  the  eucharist 
in  the  like  manner  with  other  christians  :  for  he  has  informed 
us  that  '  the'  better  to  conceal  themselves,  and  avoid  the 
'  sufferings  which  by  law  they  were  exposed  to,  they  Mould 
'  come  to  church  and  communicate  m  ith  the  catholics;  M'hen 
'  they  partook  of  the  bread,  but  refused  the  cup.'  The 
reason  is  manifest:  accordino'  to  the  Manichfean  rule,  the 
elect,  who  alone  had  a  right  to  communicate  at  the  Lord's 
table,  were  forbidden  Avine,  which  was  used  by  the  catholics. 
If,  instead  of  wine,  water  had  been  proposed  to  them,  or 
some  other  li(}uor  not  prohibited,  they  would  have  received 
it.  I  think  that  what  Leo  says  teaches  us  tMO  things.  The 
first  of  which  is,  that  the  Maniciiees  observed  the  eucharist 
in  the  same  manner  with  the  catholics,  except  that  they  used 
some  other  licjuor  instead  of  Mine.  And  certainly  the  testi- 
mony of  Leo  in  this  point  is  very  remarkable.  The  other 
thing  M'hicli  we  learn  from  hence  is,  that  the  Manichees  were 
scrupulous  and  conscientious  men.  Who  can  believe  that 
they  who  refused  to  taste  wine,  though  it  were  to  secure 
themselves  from  heavy  sufferings,  admitted  into  their  religious 
rites  abominable  filthiness,  which  no  reasona])le  creature 
can  bear  to  think  of?  Fifthly,  the  Manichees  at  Rome, 
in  the  time  of  pope    Leo,  were  a  sober  and  modest  peo- 

*  In  exsecrabilibus  autem  mysteriis  eorum.  Ep.  15.  [al.  23.]  c.  16.  p.  230. 

'  in  ipso  praecipuo  observantise  suae  festo,  sicut  proxima  confessione 

patefactum  est,  ut  animi,  i(a  et  corporis  pollutione  laelantur.  Serm.  23.  c.  4. 
p.  76.  al.  Serm.  4.  De  Nativitate  Domini. 

8  Hist,  de  Manich.  T.  2.  p.  754. 

''  A  brief  account  of  that  festival  may  be  seen,  p.  246,  and  388. 

'  Cumque  ad  tegendam  infidelitatcm  suam  nostris  audeant  interesse  mysteriis, 
ita  in  sacramentorum  communione  se  temperant,  ut  interdum,  ne  penitus 
latere  non  possint,  ore  indigno  Christi  corpus  accipiant,  sanguinem  autem 
redemtionis  nostrae  haurire  omnino  declinent.  Serm.  41.  c.  5.  p.  106.  al.  de 
Quadragesima,  iv. 


454  Credibilitij  of  the  Gospel  History. 

pie.  For  he  fomul  himself  obliged  frequently  to  caution 
his  own  people  and  hearers  against  being**  seduced  '  by 
'  their  fastings,  abstinence  from  certain  meats,  mean  dress, 
'  pale  countenances,'  and  other  marks  of  a  sober  and  abste- 
mious course  of  life.  Which  is  agreeable  to  Augustine,  who 
says,  that  '  by'  an  appearance  of  chastity  and  temperance 
'  they  ensnared  many  people.'  Sixthly,  pope  Leo's  abusive 
manner  of  speaking  of  the  Manichees  invalidates  all  his  ac- 
cusations against  them.     For  he  says,  '  they"^  were  the  worst 

*  of  all  heretics,  Avho  had  nothing-  in  them  that  was  tolerable  : 
'  whose  law  is  a  lie,  whose  religion  is  the  devil,  and  whose 
'  sacrifice  is  filthiness  and  the  like.'  Is  any  regard  to  be 
had  to  a  man  who  talks  at  that  rate  ?  He  who  should  take  his 
notion  of  the  Manichoean  worship  from  pope  Leo,  I  believe, 
would  suffer  himself  to  be  grossly  imposed  upon.  It  might 
be  better  to  take  it  from  Faustus,  one  of  their  own  bishops, 
as  cited  in°  Augustine,  and  also  in  this  volume,  at  p.  386. 

I  must  now  return  to  the  note  before  cited  at  p.  23. 
'  The  great  and  chief  mystery  of  their  sect  was  the  eucharist. 

*  And   it  was  in  celebrating  the  eucharist  that  they  com- 

*  mitted  the  abominations  Avith  which  the  fathers  have  re- 
'  proached  them.     We  might  indeed  suspect  the  testimony 

*  of  the  fathers,  it  being  well  known  that  in  declaiming' 
'  against  heretics  they  are  apt  to  exag'gerate,  and  did  not 
'  always  scrupulously  adhere  to  truth.  But  that  the  Mani- 
'  chees  abandoned   themselves,  in  the   celebration  of  their 

*  eucharist,  to  the  most  impure  and  infamous  practices,  is 
'  not  only  attested  by  them,  but  has  been  often  proved   by 

*  unexceptionable  witnesses,  nay,  and  owned  by  themselves, 
'  before  the  civil  magistrates,  in  Italy,  in  Gaul,  in  Paphla- 
'  gonia,  and  Africa.' 

''  Neminem  fallant  discrctionibus  ciborura,  sordibus  vestium,  vultuuraque 
palloribus.  Non  sunt  casta  jejunia,  quae  non  de  ratione  veniunt  continenfiae, 
sed  de  arte  fallaciae.     Serm.  33.  c.  v.  p.  93. 

Non  vos  seducant  deceptoriis  artibus  ficta  et  simnlata  jejunia,  quse  non  ad 
purificationem  proficiunt  animarum.  Speciem  quidem  sibi  pietatis  et  castitatis 
assumunt,  sed  hoc  dolo  actuum  suorum  obsccEna  circumtegunt,  &c.  Serm.  23. 
c.  6.  p.  76.  '  Duae  maxime  sunt  illecebrae  Manichseorum,  quibus 

decipiuntur  incauti altera,  cum  vitae  castae,  et  meniorabilis  continentiae, 

imaginera  praeferunt.     De  Mor.  Cath.  Ec.  1.  1.  c.  1.  T.  1. 

""  quibus  plenissime  docetur,  nullam  in  hac  secta  pudicitiam,  nullatn 

honestatem,  nuilam  penitus  repeiiri  castitatem :  in  qua  lex  est  mendacium, 
diabolus  reiigio,  sacrificium  turpitude.     Serm.  15.  c.  4.  p.  64. 

Aliae  haereses,  dilectissimi,  licet  merito  omnes  in  sua  perversitate  damnandae 

sint,  habeiit   tamen  singulae  in  aliqua  sui  parte  quod  verum  est, In 

Manichseorum  autem  scelestissimo  dogmafe  prorsus  nihil  est,  quod  ex  ulla 
parte  possit  tolerabile  judicari.  Serm.  23.  c.  5.  p.  76.  al.  de  Nativitate 
Domini,  iv.  "  Contr.  Faust.  1.  20.  c.  3.  T.  8. 


RanarJiS  on  Mr.  Bower's  Account  uf  the  Manichees.         4o5 

But  is  not  that  a  new  charge?  Is  nut  this  different  from 
Avhat  we  have  been  considerin"- '/  '  The  iManichees  abandoned 
'  themselves,  in  the  celebration  of  the  eucharist,  to  tlic  most 
'  impure  and  infamous  practices.'  Tiiose  expressions  seem 
to  me  to  imply  promiscuous  lewdness,  or  the  general  practice 
of  impurity  at  their  eucharist.  But  j)opc  Leo,  as  we  have 
seen,  speaks  only  of  '  one  girl  debauched  by  a  youth,'  for 
a  certain  j)urpose.  And  in  a  like  manner  August,  de  Hier. 
cap.  4(1.  T.  bi. 

But  Mr.  Bower  luxs  some  other  evidence  beside  that  of  the 
fathers,  and  says,  '  it  has  been  proved  by  unexceptionable 
'  witnesses,  and  has  been  owned  by  themselves.'  1  suppose 
Mr.  B.  may  have  an  eye  to  a  passage  in  Augustine,  which  is 
to  this  purj)ose:  '  it"  is  said  that  some  of  them  have  con- 
'  fessed  it  before  magistrates,  not  only  in  Paphlagonia,  but 
'  likewise  in  Gaul.  This  I  heard  at  Rome  from  a  catholic 
'  christian.'  Upon  which  I  would  observe,  first,  that 
Augustine  does  not  there  speak  of  '  the  31anichees  aban- 
'  doning  themselves  to  impure  practices,'  but  of  a  particular 

fact,  like  to  that  mentioned  by  Leo.     Secondly,  Mr.  B 's 

expressions  are  too  strong  and  positive.  Augustine  only 
says  that  he  had  heard  such  a  thing  from  a  catholic  at  Rome. 
Thirdly,  this  fact,  or  these  facts,  are  laid  at  reniote  places. 
If  Augustine  bad  had  proofs  of  them  at  home,  or  near  at 
hand,  he  needed  not  to  have  gone  so  far  as  Paphlagonia  and 
Gaul  in  quest  of  them.  Fourthly,  Mr.  B.  speaks  of  its  being" 
'  proved  and  owned  by  themselves  before  civil  magistrates 
'  in  Italy  and  xAfrica.'  Which  I  do  not  see  in  Augustine,  but 
only  Gaul  and  Paphlagonia;  unless  some  other  passage  be 
also  referred  to. 

Mr.  B.  concludes  the  note  upon  which  I  have  made  these 
animadversions,  saying  :  '  The  Waldenses,  who  sprung-  up 
'  in  the  twelfth  century,  were  stigmatized  by  their  enemies 
'  with  the  odious  name  of  Manichees,  but  that  then*  doctrine 
*  was  difl^erent  from  that  of  the  Manichees,  nay,  that  it  was 
'  altogether  orthodox,  1  will  show  in  a  more  proper  place.' 

When  Mr.  B.  comes  to  that  part  of  his  work,  I  suppose 
he  will  have  the  task  of  showing,  not  only  (hat  the  Wal- 
denses were  unjustly  stigmatized  with  the  Manichaean  doc- 
trine, but  likewise,  that  they  were  not  guilty  of  the  impure 
and  infimous  practices  generally  imputed  to  the  ^Manichees. 
And  perhaps  he  may  also  discern  at  length,  that  those  crimes 
were  unjustly  charged  upon  the  real  Manichees,  or  such  as 

"  Hoc  se  facere  quidam  confess!  esse  in  publico  judicio  peihibentur,  non 
tantum  in  PaphlagoniA,  sed  etiam  in  Gallia,  sicut  a  quodam  Romse  christiano 
catholico  audivi.     De  Natura  Boni.  c.  47.  T.  8. 


456  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

owned  themselves  disciples  of  Mani.  But  bowever  that 
may  be,  1  have  taken  tbe  liberty  to  make  these  remarks  for 
siij)porting- what  I  had  said  formerly,  and  which  I  still  think 
to  be  righ't :  not  with  a  design  to  detract  from  the  merit  of 
Mr.  Bower's  laborious  and  useful  work,  which  I  heartily 
wish  he  may  carry  on  with  continued  and  increasing  accept- 
ance and  esteem. 


CHAP.  LXIV. 


ARNOBIUS. 


I.  His  history,  and  tcork,  caul  time.  II.  His  character. 
III.  Select  passac/cs :  1.  The  sum  and  design  of  the 
christian  religiov.  2.  Arr/nments  for  the  truth  of  the 
christian  rclir/ion.  3.  Objections  ar/ainst  it.  4.  His 
notion  concerning  the  divinity  of  Christ,  and  the  Spirit. 
5.  Whether  he  icas  a  Manichee  ?  6.  Miracles  in  his 
time.  7.  Ends  of  Christ's  death.  8.  Of  Free-icill.  9. 
Heathens  offended  at  Cicero's  works.  10.  An  argument 
for  free  inquiry.  IV.  His  testimony  to  the  scriptures. 
V.  Extracts  oiit  of  another  Arnohius's  Commentary  upon 
lhe  Psalms. 

SAYS  Jerom  in  his  Catalogue  :  '  Arnobius  in^  the  time  of 
'  the  emperor  Dioclesian,  taught  rhetoric  at  Sicca  in  Africa, 
'  with  great  reputation,  and  wrote  those  volumes  against  the 
'  Gentiles,  which  are  well  known.^ 

In  his  letter  to  Magnus,  showing  the  merit  of  christian 
writers,  and  particularly  their  Latin  authors,  he  says  :  '  Ar- 
'  nobius*"  published  seven  volumes  against  the  Gentiles,  and 
'  his  scholar  Lactantius  as  many  :  avIio  also  wrote  two  other 
'  volumes.  Of  the  Wrath,  and  the  Workmanship  of  God  : 

»  Amobius  sub  Diocletiano  principe  Siccae  apud  Africara  florentissime 
rhetoricam  docuit,  scripsitque  adversus  Gentes  quae  vulgo  extant  volumina. 
De  V.  1.  c.  79. 

*>  Septem  libros  adversiis  Gentes  Arnobius  edidit,  totidemque  discipulus 
ejus  Lactantius,  qui  de  Ira  quoque  et  Opific  o  Dei  duo  volumina  condidit ; 
quos  si  legere  volueris,  dialogorum  Ciceronis  in  eis  itnTOfiip'  reperies.  Ep.  83. 


Arnobius.     a.  D.  306.  457 

'  whicli  if  you  read,  yon  will  find  in  them  an  epitome  of  what 
'  is  valuable  in  the  Dialojiues  of  Cicero.' 

In  another  place  Jerom  passeth  a  severe  and  ill-natured 
censure  upon  Arnobius's  performance,  saying-,  that*^  he  is 
unequal  and  prolix,  and  for  want  of  divisions  of  his  work,** 
confused. 

Arnobius  is  likewise  mentioned  by  Jerom^  with  some 
other  learned  ecclesiastical  writers,  who,  he  says,  ought  to 
be  read  with  discretion,  taking  what  is  good  in  them,  and 
rejecting  what  is  bad. 

In  Jerom 's  Chronicle  at  the  twentieth  year  of  Constantine, 
or  the  year  of  Christ  326,  are  these  words  :  '  Arnobius '^  a 
'  rhetorician  is  famous  in  Africa,  who  while  he  taught  the 
'  youth  rhetoric  at  Sicca,  and  was  yet  a  heathen,  was  ad- 
'  monished  in  his  dreams  to  embrace  Christianity.  But 
'  when  he  applied  to  the  bishop  of  the  place  for  baptism,  he 
'  rejected  him,  because  he  had  been  wont  to  oppose  the 
'  christian  doctrine.  Whereupon  he  composed  an  excellent 
'  work  against  his  old  religion;  and  thus  at  length,  as  by 
'  hostages  of  his  piety,  he  obtained  the  seal  of  the  covenant.' 

According  to  this  account,  Arnobius's  work  against  the 
Gentiles  was  composed  by  him  whilst  a  catechumen  only, 
and  before  he  Avas  a  complete  christian.  Nay,  Tillemont 
from  this  passage  argues,  that°  Arnobius  was  not  baptized, 
nor  so  much  as  a  catechumen.  And  Cave  too,  without 
hesitation  says,  that''  '  he  was  not  then  so  much  as  a  catechu- 
'  men,  instructed  in  the  first  rudiments  of  the  faith.' 

*=  Arnobius  inacqualis  et  nimiiis,  et  absque  operis  sui  partitione  confusus. 
Ad  Paulin.  Ep.  49.  [al.  13.]  T.  4.  p.  567. 

^  Cave,  in  his  English  lifeof  Arnobius,  at  the  end  of  his  second  volume  of  The 
Lives  of  the  Fathers,  says :  '  His  style,  though  censured  by  Jerom,  is  yet  sutfici- 
'  ently  elegant.— =-Nor  is  his  work  so  confused  and  immethodical,  as  that  father 
*  seems  to  insinuate ;  as  is  evident  to  any  that  will  be  at  the  pains  attentively 
'  to  read  it,  and  observe  how  his  design  is  laid,  his  argument  prosecuted,  and 
'  how  the  several  parts  of  it  do  naturally  enough  one  depend  upon  another.' 
So  Cave. 

*  Ego  Origenem  propter  eruditionera  sic  interdum  legendum  arbitror,  quo- 
modo  Tertullianum,  Novatum,  Arnobium,  et  nonnullos  ecclesiasticos  scriptores 
Gi-aecos  pariter  et  Latinos :  ut  bona  eorum  eligamus,  vitemusque  contraria. 
Hier.  Ep.  56.  [al.  76.]  T.  4.  p.  589. 

'  Arnobius  rhetor  clarus  in  Africa  habetur  ;  qui  quum  in  civitate  Siccse  ad 
declamandum  juvenes  erudiret,  et  hue  ethuicus  ad  ciedulitatem  somniis  com- 
pelleretur,  neque  ab  episcopo  obtineret  fidem,  quam  semper  oppugnaverat, 
elucubravit  adversus  pristinam  religionem  luculentissimos  libros,  et  tandem, 
velut  quibusdam  obsidibus  pietatis,  foedus  impetravit.  Chr.  1.  ii.  p.  181. 

K  puisque  c'est  la  production  d'un  homme  qui  n'etoit  baptise,  ou  qui 

meme  n'  etoit  pas  encore  catecumene.  Tillem.  Arnobe,  Mem.  Ec.  T.  4.  P.  2. 
p.  1209. 

^  See  Cave's  life  of  Arnobius  in  English,  as  above,  note  **. 


458  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

But  each  of  those  suppositions  appears  to  me  inconsistent 
M'ith  Arnobius's  ordinary  style,  M'ho  continually  speaks  of 
himself  as  a  christian,  and  reckons  himself  one  of  them. 
3Iany  such  passages  might  be  alleged  ;  and  I  put'  a  few  in 
the  margin  :   but  it  is  the  whole  strain  of  the  Mork. 

It  may  be  argued  likewise,  that  he  was  not  barely  a  cate- 
chumen at  that  time,  from''  the  description  he  gives  of  the 
christian  worship  in  their  assemblies  :  not  only  discourses, 
but  prayers  likewise;  at  which  last,  as  is  generally  said, 
catechumens  were  not  allowed  to  be  present. 

Indeed  I  do  not  see  how  Arnobius  could  so  confidently 
assert  the  innocence  and  usefulness  of  every  part  of  christian 
worship,  as  he  does,  if  he  was  not  fully  acquainted  with  it. 
Not  to  add,  that  it  would  seem  a  very  extraordinary  step,  for 
a  man  to  undertake  the  public  defence  of  a  religion,  who  did 
not  understand  the  rudiments  of  it. 

I  must  there  take  the  liberty  to  say,  that  I  cannot  but 
question  the  genuineness  of  that  passage. 

That  Arnobius  was  once  a  blind  and  zealous  idolater,  is 
fully  owned  and  confessed  by'  himself.  And  he  professeth 
to  have  been  taught  by  Christ,  or  that  Christ  was  his  master. 
But  I  do  not  perceive  him  any  where  to  ascribe  his  conver- 
sion to  dreams  by  which  he  had  been  admonished  whilst  a 
heathen.  Nor  does  Jerom  elsewhere  mention,  or  hint  at  that 
matter.  It  is  also  observable,  that  in  Jerom's  Catalogue, 
Arnobius  is  said  to  have  flourished  in  the  time  of  Diodesian  ; 
whereas  in  the  passage  in  the  Chronicle,  he  is  placed  at  the 
twentieth  year  of  Constantine.  And  if  Arnobius  had  been 
in  the  circumstances  intimated  in  that  passage,  he  must  have 

'  Nihil  sumus  aliud  christian!,  1.  i.  p.  41.  f.     Nationibus  enim  suniiis  in 

cunctis,  p.  10.  tn.  Audetis  nos  ridere !  1.  ii.  p.  51.     Non  ergo,  quod 

sequimur,  novum  est,  sed  nossero  addidicimus,  ib.  p.  95,  et  passim. 

■^  Nam  nostra  quidem  scripta  cur  igiiibus  meruerunt  dari  ?  cur  immaniter 
conventicula  dirui  ?  in  quibus  summus  oratur  Deu?,  pax  cunctis  et  venia  postu- 
latur  magistratibus,  exercitibus,  regibus,  familianbus,  inimicis,  adhuc  vitam 
degentibus,  et  resolutis  corporuin  vinctione ;  in  quibus  aliud  auditur  nihil, 
nisi  quod  humanos  faciat,  nisi  quod  mites,  verecundos,  pudicos,  castos,  fami- 
liaris  communicatores  rei,  et  cum  omnibus  consolidte  germanitatis  necessitudine 
copulatos.  Arnob.  1.  iv.  p.  152.  Lugdun.  Bat.  1651.  Vid.  et  lib.  1.  p.  14.  f. 
15.  in. 

'  Venerabar,  o  caecitas !  nuper  simulacra  modo  ex  fornacibus  prompta,  in 
incudibus  deos,  et  malleis  fabricatos :  elephantorum  ossa,  picturatas  veternosis 
in  arboribus  tsnias  si  quando  conspexeram,  lubricatum  lapidem  et  ex  olivi 
unguine  sordidatum,  tanquam  inesset  vis  priEsens,  adulabar,  atlabar,  et  beneficia 

poscebam  nihil  sentiente  de  trunco. Nunc  doctore  tanto  in  vias  veritatis 

inductus,  omnia  ista,  quae  sinf,  scio  :  digna  de  dignis  sentio,  contumeliam 
nomini  nullum  facio  divino  ;  et  quid  cuique  debcatur,  vel  persona?,  vel  capiti, 
jnconfusis  gradibus  atque  auctoritatibus,  tribuo.  Id.  1.  i.  p.  22,  23. 


Arnobius.     a.  D.  306.  459 

been  intent  upon  despatcli.  Rut  it  is  manifest  from  (he  work 
itself,  that  it  is  no  liasty  performance,  but  a  laboured  com- 
position, rit  to  see  the  light:  and  many  authors,  both  Greek 
and  Latin,  are  here'"  quoted.  Nor  has  Arnobius  any  where 
hinted,  that  he  was  under  a»iy  s^ort  of  compulsion  or  neces- 
sity toengage  in  this  work,  liutat  the  begimiing-  he  speaks 
of  his  luidertakingas  perfectly  free  and  voluntary  ;  and  says, 
that"  some  injurious  reproaches  cast  upon  the  christians 
induced  him  to  write  in  their  defence. 

Add  these  considerations  to  that  before  mentioned,  that 
Arnobius  writes  as  a  christian ;  and  it  must,  I  think,  appear 
somewhat  probable,  that  Jerom  was  not  the  author  of  that 
article  in  the  Chronicle  ;  and  (hat  it  was  inserted  after  his 
time  by  some  credulous  person,  not  thoroughly  acquainted 
with  Arnobius's  history  or  work. 

According-  to  Cave,  Arnobius  flourished  about  the  year 
303.  However,  it  is  not  easy  to  settle  exactly  (he  time  of 
the  work  he  has  left  us. 

Tillemont  is  inclined  to  the  year"  297,  or  sooner:  whomf 
Beausobre  follows,  supposing  Arnobius  to  have  written 
in  295.     Basnage''  thinks  the  year  303,  or  304,  more  likely. 

The  article  in  Jerom's  Chronicle,  whether  his  or  not,  seems 
to  deserve  but  little  reg-ard.  Arnobius  must  be  there  wrong- 
placed,  at  the  year  of  Christ  325  or  32G ;  for  in  his  Cata- 
logue Jerom  says,  that  Arnobius  flourished  under  Dioclesian, 
and  that  Lactantius,  Arnobius's  scholar,  was  appointed  pro- 
fessor of  rhetoric  at  Nicomedia  under  the  same  emperor  : 
which  must  be  understood  to  have  been  done  before  the  perse- 
cution which  began  in  302  or  303.  For  after  that  it  cannot 
be  supposed,  that  Dioclesian  would  invite  a  christian  to  come 
and  settle  in  the  city,  where  his  palace  was. 

There  are  some  notes  of  time  in  the  work  itself.  For 
Arnobius  says,  that"^  it  was  then  three  hundred  years,  more 
or  less,  since  the  rise  of  Christianity.  And  heathens  are 
brought  in  objecting,  that^  the  christian  religion  had  not  a 
being-  four  hundred  years  ago.     And  soon  after  it  is  said 

""  Catalogues  of  authors  quoted  by  Arnobius  may  be  seen  in  Fabr.  Bib.  Lat. 
Vol.  ill.  p.  391,  &c.     Nourry  Apparat.  Tom.  ii.  n.  537,  &c. 

"  Quoniam,  comperi  nonnuUos — statui  pro  captu  et  mediocritate  sermonii 
contraire  invidine,  et  calumniosas  dissolvere  criminationes.  1.  i.  in. 

0  Mem.  Ec.  T.  iv.  P.  -3.  p.  1210,  et  1374. 
P  Hist.  deManich.  T.  ii.  p.  412.  Note  (7.) 

1  Anna!.  303.  n.  24. 

■■  Trecenti  sunt  anni,  minus  vel  plus  aliquid,  ex  quo  coepimusesse  christian), 
et  terrarum  in  orbe  censi,  1.  i.  p.  9.  in. 

*  Ante  quadringentos  annos  religio,  inquit,  vestra  non  fuit,  1.  ii.  p. 
94.  in. 


460  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

to  be'  a  thousand   and   fifty  years  since  the  foundation  of 
Rome,  or  thereabout. 

Following"  the  ordinary  computation  of  that  epoch,  Arno- 
bius  must  have  written  m  the  year  of  our  Lord  297,  or  298. 
And"  Pagi  was  once  of  opinion,  that  Arnobius's  books  were 
published  in  the  year  of  Christ  298,  or  299,  at  the  latest. 
But  afterwards  observing,  that  Arnobius  useth  words  denot- 
ing- such  sufferings  as  followed  Dioclesian's  edict  for  a  general 
persecution,  he  was  induced  to  alter  his  mind,  and  to  con- 
clude, that  he  did  not  write  till  alter  the  year  302.  And 
from  hence  he  Mas  led  to  infer,  that  Arnobius  followed 
another,  and  very  uncommon  computation  of  the  Roman  eera, 
which  placeth  the  foundation  of  the  city  thirteen  years  later 
than  the  Varronian  account.  Consequently  Arnobius  wrote 
in  the  year  of  Christ  310,  which,  according  to  the  last-men- 
tioned computation,  is  in  the  1050th  year  of  Rome. 

1  think,  that  if  the  demolition  of  the  churches,  and  tlie 
burning-  of  the  christian  scriptures,  and  other  afflictions  of 
christians  for  the  sake  of  their  principles,  which"  Arnobius 
speaks  of,  relate  to  the  persecution  under  Dioclesian;  Arnobius 
could  not  write  till  the  year  303,  or  after.  Nevertheless,  as 
he  speaks  in  a  loose  and  general  manner,  both  of  the  time  of 
the  rise  of  Christianity,  and  of  the  foundation  of  the  city,  1 
see  no  reason  to  conclude  that  he  made  use  of  a  different 
computation  from  the  common.  For  though  it  were  then 
1050  or  1057  years  from  the  foundation  of  Rome,  (according- 
to  the  common  computation,  and  that  too  followed  by  him,) 
he  might  express  himself  as  he  has  done,  or  say,  it  was  about 
1050  years. 

It  may  be  reckoned  somewhat  strange,  that  Lactantius, 
when^"  he  mentions  the  Latin  christian  apologists,  Minucius, 
Tertullian,  and  Cyprian, should  take  no  notice  of  Arnobius; 
if  he  was  his  master,  as  Jerom  says  in  his  Catalogue,  and  if 
he  wrote  before  him. 

With  regard  to  this  difHculty,  I  would  say,  Lactantius 
appears  to  be  so  honest  and  generous  a  man,  that  I  cannot 
impute  his  silence  to  envy,  or  any  other  bad  principle. 
Indeed,  according-  to  the  whole  strain  of  Arnobius's  work, 
he  wrote  when  Christianity  was  under  discouragements,  and 
therefore  before  the  sunshine  of  Constantine's  reign :  Avhereas 
it  is  a  common  opinion,  that  the  Institutions  of  Lactantius, 
M'ritten  against  the  Gentiles,  were  not  published,  as  we  now 

'  iEtatis  urbs  Roma  cujus  esse  in  annalibus  indicitnr  ?  Annos  ducit  quin- 
quaginta  etmille,  aut  non  multumab  his  minus.  1.  ii.  p.  94.  infr.  m. 
"  Pagi  in  Baron.  Ann.  302.  n.  14,  15,  16. 
"  See  before,  note  "  p.  458.  *  Inst.  1.  v.  c.  1.  p.  459. 


Aknouius.     a.  D.  3,U6.  461 

have  llieiii,  before  tlie  yenr  319,  or  320,  or  321.  But  how- 
ever that  may  be,  1  think  it  |)robal)Ie,  that  the;  main  part  of 
the  Institutions  was  written  during-  the  time  of  Dioclesian's 
persecution,  when  Lactantius  might  be  entirely  ignorant  of 
Avhat  Arnobius  had  done  or  was  doing  in  Africa,  at  a  great 
distance  from  him.  For  they  miglit  be  both  writing  at  one 
and  the  same  time,  without  any  comnuinication  of  their 
several  designs  to  eacli  other,  and  without  a  possibility  of 
it.  Arnobius  was  a  heatlien  a  good  while.  His  work  is  the 
Mork  of  a  man  of  vast  readijig,  and  of  a  mature  age  at  least. 
Nor  have  we  any  account  of  any  thing  clone  by  him  after- 
wards: possibly  he  was  then  far  advanced  in  life,  and  died 
soon  after.  And  if  his  books  were  not  composed  before  the 
year  of  our  Lord  305,  or  30(>,  Lactantius  probably  would  be 
entirely  unacquainted  with  them,  when  he  wrote  his  Institu- 
tions. Moreover,supposingthepersecution  tohavebeen begun 
before  Arnobius's  work  was  composed,  there  might  be  no 
fair  opportunity  to  make  it  public,  till  that  affliction  ceased. 

Cave^  and  some  others  say,  that  Arnobius  did  not  write 
till  after  the  beginning  of  Dioclesian's  persecution.  And  it 
is  certain,  that  he  not  only  often  speaks  of  the  afflictior.s 
endured  by  christians,  but  as  if  they  suffered  at  the  very 
time  :  for  he  prays  to  God^  to  forgive  those  that  persecuted 
his  servants  ;  and  he  sometimes  speaks  of  their  sufferings  in 
the  present^  tense.  If  the  persecution  was  begun  before  he 
was  converted,  and  set  about  his  work,  it  must  have  raged 
for  some  good  while,  before  his  Apology  was  finished. 
Consequently,  it  could  not  be  written,  much  less  published, 
quite  so  soon  as  some  have  thought. 

Upon  the  whole  1  am  inclined  to  think,  without  being- 
positive,  that  Arnobius  did  not  write  till  some  time  after  the 
beginning  of  the  persecution  ordered  by  Dioclesian,  possibly 
about  the  year  305,  or  30G. 

Were  we  inquiriisgat  what  time  Arnobius  flourished  as  a 
rhetorician,!  should  make  no  scruple  to  say, that  he  flourished 
about  the  year  290,  or  sooner.  But  as  our  inquiry  is,  when 
he  wrote  for  the  christians,  we  place  him  somewhat  lower. 

Though  Arnobius  has  quoted  a  large  number  of  Greek  and 
Romnn  authors,  he  has  not  mentioned  any  christian  writers. 
Some  think  that^*  he  made  great  use  of  Clement  of  Alexan- 
dria :  but  he  has  not  named  him. 

*  Scripti  enim  sunt  hi  libri  anno  303,  vel  non  diu  post,  exorta  jam  pcrse- 
cutlone.  Cav.  H.  L.  in  Arnobio. 

y  Da  veniam,  Rex  summe,  tuos  persequeatibus  servos,  &c.  1.  i.  p.  18.  m. 

'■  Vid.  I.  ii.  p.  44,  45.  ^  Vid.  Nourry,  Diss,  in  Arnob.  in  App. 

T.  ii.  p.  430.  C.  481,  482,  487.  C.  D.  491.  D.  E.  et  492. 


462  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

It  is  supposed  that*^  this  work  is  not  come  down  to  us 
complete;  but  tliat  somewhat  is  wauting-  at  the  end,  if  not 
also  at  the  beginning-. 

Arnobius's  books  against  the  Gentiles  have  never  yet  been 
divided  into  chapters  or  smaller  sections:  though,  as*" 
Nourry  says,  it  might  be  easily  done,  and  would  remove  the 
seeminar  confusion  which  there  is  in  the  method,  and  render 
the  reading  of  this  author  more  agreeable.  However,  as  yet 
we  have  only  the  original  division  of  this  work  into  seven 
books. 

There  is  another  of  this  name,  author  of  Brief  Commen- 
taries upon  the  150  Psalms,  formerly  supposed  the  same  with 
our  Arnobius,  but  now  universally  allowed  by  learned  men 
to  be  a  different  person,  and  to  have  lived  in  the  fifth  century, 
about ''  the  year  461. 

I  design  at  the  end  of  this  chapter  to  insert  a  brief  account 
of  his  testimony  to  the  scriptures. 

II.  Having  given  a  general  account  of  Arnobius,  and  his 
work,  1  shall  add  somethings  to  illustrate  his  character. 

It  has  been  often  said  of  Arnobius  and  Lactantius,  that^ 
they  undertook  the  defence  of  Christianity  before  they  under- 
stood it.  In  answer  to  which,  it  is  observed  by  a  learned  and 
judicious  writer,  '  That*^  this  must  be  understood  of  the 
'  christian  system,  as  to  doctrines  and  precepts:  which  it  is 
'  not  to  be  wondered  if  he  was  not  perfectly  acquainted  with, 
'  since  he  wrote  his  books  before  he  was  admitted  by  bap- 
'  tism  into  the  church,  and  fully  instructed  in  those  points. 
'  But  as  to  the  general  evidence  of  Christianity,  that  he  under- 
'  stood  very  well,  and  by  his  knowledge  and  serious  consi- 
'  deration  of  it,  embraced  the  faith  in  that  discouraging 
'  season  the  reign  of  Dioclesian.' 

I  wish  that  vindication  of  our  christian  apologist  had  been 
more  complete.  For  in  order  to  judge  of  the  evidence  of  a 
religion,  it  seems  requisite,  that  a  man  understand  its  doc- 
trines ;  or  what  it  teaches,  and  consists  of.  Nor  do  I  perceive 
how  Arnobius  could  be  acquainted  with  our  Lord's  works 
or  miracles,  and  not  also  know  hiss  words,  or  the  doctrines 
and  precepts  of  the  christian  religion. 

"  Id.  ib.  p.  287.  D.  E. 

■^  Quapropter  si  quis  in  nova  aliqua  horum  librorum  editione,  eos,  quod  noa 
ita  difficile  est,  in  capita  aut  sectiones  distribuat ;  is  sane  ct  huic  confusioni 
niedebitur,  et  taediiini  laboremque  lectoris  plnrimiim  sublevabit.  Id.  ib.  p. 
287.  C.  ••  Cav.  Hist.  L.  in  Arnobio  Juniore. 

"  See  Mr.  Warburton's  Divine  Legation,  Vol.  i.  p.  3, 
See  Dr.  Chapman's  Eusebius,  Vol.  i.  p.  272. 

»  Neque  enim  qiialita.s  el  deformitas  mortis  dicta  ejus  immiitat  aut  facta, 
I.   i.  p.  23.  m.  Vid.  et  p.  G.  in. 


Arnobius.     a.  D.  30G.  463 

1  observe  (lien,  that  Ariioln'ns  knew  and  believed  tli(« 
several  following-  things:  1.  lie''  believed  in  one  God 
Almighty,  the  creator  of  all  things.  2.  He  believed,  that' 
Jesus  Christ  came  from  God,  and  that  he  proved  his  divine 
commission.  3.  He  was  acquainted  with''  the  sublime 
morality  taught  by  our  Saviour  on  the  mount  and  elsewhere. 

4.  He  believed,  that'  Jesus  Christ  came  to  save  lost  sinners: 

5.  And  that'"  he  promised  eternal  life,  and  gave  full  assur- 
ance of  his  being'  able  to  perform  what  he  promised.  6.  He 
likewise"  believed  and  expected  the  resurrection  of  the  dead. 
7.  He  knew  that"  the  gospel  of  Christ,  or  the  christian 
religion,  did  not  make  promises  of  temporal,  earthly  bless- 
ings; but  taught  men  to  bear  afflictions,  and  even  death 
itself,  with  meekness,  patience,  and  fortitude.  8.  And  finally, 
he  was  so  fully  persuaded  of  the  real  excellence  and  manifest 
certainty  of  the  christian  religion,  as  to  say,  that?  it  needed 
not  any  apology,  but  stood  firm  upon  the  foundation  of  its 
own  truth  and  reasonableness,  though  all  the  M'orld  should 
gainsay  it.  He  had  therefore  considered  the  internal,  as 
well  as  the  external,  evidence  of  Christianity. 

A  man   avIio  knew  all  these  things,  and  was  acquainted 

^  Audetis  ridere  nos,  quod  Patrein  rerum  et  Dciim  veneramur  et  colimus, 
quodque  illi  dedamus  et  permittamus  spes  nostras?  1.  ii.  p.  51.  m.  et  alibi 

passim.  '  rei  maximae  causa  a  siimmo  Rege  ad  nos  missus. 

1.  i.  p.  24,  et  passim.  ''  lb.  p.  5,  et  6. 

'  Sed  si,  inquiunt,  Christus  in  hoc  missus  a  Deo  est,  ut  infelices  animas  ab 
interitionis  exitio  liberaret.  1.  ii.  p.  87. 

"'  Ut  enim  dii  certi  certas  apud  vos  habent  tutelas,  licentias,  potestates, — 
ita  unius  pontificium  Ciiristi  est,  dare  animis  salutem,  et  spiritum  perpetuitatis 
apponere.  1.  ii.  p.  89. 

Si  nobis  ha?c  gaudia,  hoc  est,  viam  fugiendae  mortis,  Plato  in  Phaedo 
promisisset,  aliusve  ex  hoc  choro,  possetque  earn  praestare,  atque  ad  finem 
pollicitationis  adducere  ;  consentaneum  fuerat  ejus  suscipere  nos  cultus,  a  quo 
tantum  doni  expectaremus  et  muneris.  Nunc  cum  eam  Christus  noii  tantuni 
proniiscrit,  verum  etiam  virtutibus  tantis  manifestaverit  posse  compleri ;  quid 
alienum  faciinus,  aut  stultitiec  crimen  quibus  rationibus  sustinemu?,  si  ejus 
nomini,  majestatique  substernimur,  a  quo  speramus  utrumque,  et  mortem 
cruciabilem  tugere,  et  vitaeaeternitate  donari?  1.  ii.  p.  66.  67. 

"  Audetis  ndere  nos,  quod  mortuoruin  dicamus  resurrectionem  futuram  ? 
1.  ii.  p.  51. 

°  Nihil  enim  est  nobis  promissum  ad  banc  vitam,  nee  in  carunculae  hujus 
folliculo  constitutis  opis  aliquid  sponsum  est  auxiliique  decretum.  Quiniino 
edocfi  sumus  minas  omnes,  quaecnmque  sunt,  parvi  ducere  atque  aest  mare 
fortunae.  Ac  si  quando  ingruerit  vis  quaepiam  gravior,  qua  finem  necesse  sit 
consequi  vitae,  eam  nee  timere,  nee  fugere. — 1.  ii.  p.  98. 

P  Neque  enim  res  stare  sine  assertonbus  non  potest  et  religio  Christiana  :  aut 
eo  esse  comprobabitur  vera,  si  adstipulatores  habuerit  plurimos,  et  auctoritatem 
ab  hominibus  sumserit.  Suis  ilia  contenta  est  viribus,  ct  veritatis  propriae 
fundaminibus  nititur.  Nee  spoliatur  vi  sua,  etiamsi  nullum  habeat  vindicem  : 
immo  si  linguae  omnes  contra  faciant,  contraque  nitantur,  et  ad  fidem  illius 
abrogandam  consensionis  units  animositafe  conspirent,  1.  iii.  in.  p.  100. 


464  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

with  the  history  of  our  Lord's  life,  death,  and  resurrection, 
and  his  apostles'  miracles,  I  think  may  be  esteemed  suffi- 
ciently qualified  to  write  a  defence  of  the  christian  religion. 
Indeed,  the  faith  of  the  ancient  apologists,  and  other  primi- 
tive christians,  was  in  some  respects  more  plain  and  simple 
than  ours:  but  it  was  a  faith,  thati  produced  good  works, 
that  taught  them  self-denial,  and  made  martyrs.  Nor  was 
it,  possibly,  because  of  its  plainness  and  simplicity,  the  less 
conformable  to  the  christian  doctrine  contained  in  the  New 
Testament,  which  is  summarily  set  forth  by  St.  Paul  in  these 
words  :  "  For  the  grace  of  God  that  bringeth  salvation,"  or 
the  salutary,  saving  grace  of  God,  "  has  appeared  unto  all 
men,  teaching  us,that  denying  ungodliness  and  worldly  lusts, 
we  should  live  soberly,  righteously  and  godly  in  this  present 
world  :  looking  for  the  blessed  hope,  and  the  appearance  of 
the  glory  of  the  great  God,  and  of  our  Saviour  Jesus  Christ : 
who  gave  himself  for  us,  that  he  might  redeem  us  from  all 
iniquity,  and  purify  unto  himself  a  peculiar  people  zealous 
of  good  works."  Tit.  ii.  11 — 14.     But  to  proceed: 

Another  learned  modern  speaks  of  Arnobius  after  this 
manner:  '  He"^  was  very  shy  of  determining  abstruse  and 
'  difficult  points  of  a  speculative  nature.     He  supposed  the 

*  christian  relioion  to  consist  in  the  clear  and  certain  doctrine 
'  of  our  Saviour,  omitting  whatever  is  not  plainly  taught  by 
'  him.  Far  from  being  curious  and  dogmatical,  he  was 
'  timorous  and  reserved  :  which,  perhaps,  is  no  great  fault ; 

*  for  it  is  the  deciding,  positive  temper,  that  produceth  sects 

*  and  schisms.' 

Arnobius  was  learned  and  pious  ;  as  every  one  must  per- 
ceive, who  looks  into  him.     And  though  his  style  is  gene- 

^  Ov  yap  IV  Xoyoif,  aXX'  tv  ipyoiq  ra  Tr)Q  iifitTipaQ  Bioatfitiag  npayfiara. 
Just.  M.  ad  Gr.  Coh.  p.  33.  B.  Ov  yap  tv  fieXtry  Xoywv,  oXX'  firidtiKii  (cat 
StSa(TKa\t(}  fpywv,  ra  ri}xiTipa.  Athenag.  leg.  p.  37.  B.  vid.  ib.  p.  12.  A.  Nos 
non  habitu  sapientiam,  seel  iriente,  prsefeiinius.  Non  eloquimur  magna,  sed 
vivimus.  Min.  Fel.  cap.   38.     Nos  autem,  — qui  philosophi  non  verbis  sed 

factis  sumus,  nee  vestitu  sapientiam,  sed  veritate,  praeferimus, qui  non 

loquimur  magna,  sed  vivimus.  Cypr.  de  Bono  Sap.  sub  init.  Nostio  autem 
populo,  quid  horum  potest  objici,  cujiis  omnis  religio  est,  sine  scelere,  et  sine 
macula  vivere  ?  Lact.  Inst.  1.  5.  cap.  9.  sub  fin. 

'  Tout  cela,  selon  lui,  sent  des  questions  vaines  et  curieuses,  qu'il  est  impos- 
sible de  determiner,  parceque  la  raison  humaine  manque  de  lumieres  suffisantcs 
pour  cela,  et  que  le  Fils  de  Dieu  ne  s'est  point  explique  la-dessus.  Arnobe 
faisoit  consister  la  religion  chretienne  dans  la  doctrine  claire  et  certaine  du 
Sauvcur,  et  en  rctranchoit  tout  ce  qu'il  n'a  pas  enseigne  avec  evidence.  On 
peut  bien  croirc  que  je  n'approve  pas  les  hypotheses  d'Arnobe.  Mais  pour- 
quoi  faut  il,  que  les  anciens  ayent  ete  anime  d'un  esprit  aussi  curieux  et  aussi 
decisif  que  celui  du  savant  Arnobe  etoit  timide  et  reserve'  ?  C'est  cet  esprit 
decisif,  qui  a  fait  naitre  tant  de  sectes  et  schismes.  Beaus.  Hist,  de  Manich. 
T.  ii.  p.  415. 


Arnobius.     a.  D.  306.  465 

rally  reckoned  rough  and  unpolished,  and  hath  in  it  some 
uncoutli  and  obsolete  words:  it  is  strong  and  nervous,  and* 
there  are  in  him  shining  and  beautiful  passages,  which  must 
highly  please  attentive  readers  of  good  taste.  It  is  very 
much  to  the  honour  of  this  rhetorician,  learned  in  all*  the 
learning  of  Greece  and  Rome,  that  he  endjraced  the  christian 
religion  when  under  persecution  :  and  that,  like  Moses,  "  he 
chose  rather  to  suffer  alHiction  with  the  people  of  God,  than 
to  enjoy  the  pleasures  of  sin  for  a  season:  esteeming  the 
reproach  of  Christ  greater  riches  than  the  treasures  "  of  all 
the  world.     Heb.  xi.  25,  26.     And  see  Acts  vii.  22. 

III.  I  shall  now  make  some  extracts  out  of  Arnobius.  1. 
He  represents  the  sum  of  the  christian  religion  in  this  man- 
ner: '  We"  christians  are  men  that  worship  the  great  Lord 
'  and  governor  of  the  Morld,  according  to  the  direction  of 
'  Jesus  Christ.  If  you  examine  it,  you  will  find  nothing  else 
'  in  this  reliffion  :  this  is  the  sum  of  the  whole  af!"air :  this  is 
'  the  scope  and  design  of  all  our  religious  offices:  to  this 
'  supreme  Lord  we  all  bow  down  :  him  we  worship  with 
'  united  prayers  :  to  him  we  present  holy,  and  innocent,  and 
'  honourable  requests,  fit  to  be  heard  by  him.' 

I  place ^  another  like  passage  at  the  bottom  of  the  page, 
without  translating  it,  but  referring  it  to  the  consideration 
of  my  readers. 

2.  It  is  worth  while  to  observe,  what  arguments  Arnobius 
makes  use  of  to  prove  the  truth  and  divine  original  of  the 
christian  religion. 

(1.)  One  argument  insisted  on  by  him  is  its  excellence. 
For  this  I  would  refer  to  what  was  before  said"^  concerning 

*  Negari  tamen  non  potest,  plurima  passim  occiirrere  apte,  polite,  eleganter, 
et  rhetonce  dicta,  ac  gravissimis  ornata  illusfrataque  verbis  et  sententiis.  Nourry 
Diss,  in  Amob.  cap.  ii.  p.  287.  A.  B. 

'  Quem  quidem  locum  plena  jamdudum  homines  pectoris  vivi  tam  Romanis 
literis  explicavere  qiiam  Graecis.  1.  iii.  p.  103. 

"  Nihil  siunus  aliiid  christian!,  nisi,  magistro  Christo,  summi  regis  et  principis 
veneratores.  Nihil,  si  consideres,  aliud  invenies  in  isti  religione  versari.  Haec 
totius  summa  est  actionis.  Hie  propositus  terminus  divinorum  officiorum,  hie 
finis.  Huic  omnes  ex  more  prosternimur  ;  hunc  coUatis  precibus  adoramus. 
Ab  hoc  justa,  et  honesta,  etaudituejuscondignadeposcimus.  1.  i.  p.  14,  et  15. 

"  Qui  [Christus]  si  dignus  non  esset,  cui  auscultare  deberetis,  aut  credere  ; 
vel   hoc  ipso  fuerat  non  aspernandus  a  vobis,  ostenderet  quod  vias  vobis  ad 

ccelum  et  vota  immortalitatis  optaret, qui  hominibus  caecis,  et  revera  in 

impietate  degentibus,  pietatis  aperuit  januas,  et  cui  se  submitterent  indicavit. 
An  ulla  est  religio  verior,  officiosior,  potenlior,  justior,  quam  Deuni  principem 
nosse,  scire  Deo  principi  siipplicare,  qui  bonorum  omnium  solus  caput  et  fons 
est,  perpetuarum  pariter  fundator  et  conditor  rerum,  a  quo  omnia  terrena, 

cunctaque  coelestia  animantur, et  qui  si  non  esset,  nulla  profecto  res 

esset,  quae  aliquod  nomen,  substantiamque  portaret  ?  1.  ii.  p.  42,  43.  Vid.  et 
p.  13.  f.  "  See  p.  463,  464. 

vol..    III.  2  H 


466  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

Aruobins's  knowledge  of  the  christian  religion  and  its  evi- 
dences,  and  to  his  passages  just  alleged,  containing  his  sum- 
mary accounts  of  the  great  design  of  if.  I  might  also  refer 
to  other  passages,  where''  he  insists  upon  those  laws  of 
Christ,  which  teach  men  to  bear  injuries,  and  not  to  return 
evil  for  evil  :  as  likew  ise  to  some  other  places  vvhere>  he 
puts  the  heathens  in  mind  of  the  innocence  of  Christ  himself, 
and  of  his  w  hole  undertaking  :  which,  as  he  tells  them,  is 
alone  sufficient  to  show  how  unreasonable  their  fierce  oppo- 
sition against  him  was.  And  there  are  in  him  many  other 
passages  to  the  same  purpose,  which  will  offer  themselves 
to  an  attentive  reader. 

(2.)  He  insists^  upon  the  virtues  of  our  Lord's  life,  and 
the  perfection  and  amiableness  of  his  conduct  upon  all 
occasions. 

(3,)  Another  argument  is  taken  from  our  Lord's  miracles. 
Several  of  the  passages  where  Arnobius  speaks  of  them,  will 
be  produced  hereafter,  in  the  article  of  his  testimony  to  the 
scriptures.  He  observes  particularly,  that^'  our  Lord's  great 
works  were  very  numerous,  and  were  performed  without  the 
use  of  any  external  means,  and  were  healing  and  beneficial  : 
that'^  they  were  performed  without  show  and  ostentation,  in 
order  to  convince,  if  possible,  a  hard-hearted  and  unbelieving 
race  of  men,  of  the  truth  of  the  doctrine  taught  by  him.  He 
likewise  observes,  thaf   Christ  discovered  a  knowledge  of 

"  Nam  cum  hominum  vis  tanta  magisteriis  ejus  acceperimiis  ac  legibus, 
malum  malo  rependi  non  oportere;  injuriam  perpeti  quam  irrogare  praestan- 
tius.  1.  i.  p.  6.  m. 

'  quid  causae  est,  quod  tam  gravibus  iosectemini  Christum  bellis  ? 

Numqnid  regiam  sibi  vindicans  potestatem,  lerrarum  orbem  cunctum  legioni- 
bus  infestissimis  occupavit  ?  Numquid  ardoribus  avaritiae  flagrans  universas 
opes  illas,  quibus  se  genus  humanum  studiose  contendit  impleii,  possessionis 
su<3e  mancipio  vindicavit  ?  Numquid — 1.  ii.  p.  42. 

'  Ipse  denique  non  lenis,  non  placidus,  non  accessu  facilis,  non  familiaris 
affatu,  non  humanas  miserias  indolescens,  omnes  omnino  crucibus  et  corpora- 
libus  affectos  malis  unica  ilia  benignitatemiseratus  reddidit  et  restituit  sanitati  ? 

Quid  ergo  vossubigit,  quid  hortatur,  maledicere quem  redarguere,  quem 

tenere,  nemo  hominum  possit  ullius  facinoris  in  reatu  ?  1.  i.  p.  39. 

'  Potestis  aliquem  nobis  designare,  monstrare  ex  omnibus  illis  magis,  qui 
unquam  fuere  per  saecula,  consimile  aliquid  Christo  millesima  ex  parte  qui 

fecerit  ?  qui  sine  ulla  vi  carminum,  sineherbarum  et  graminum  succis ? 

Atqui  constitit  Christum  sine  ullis  adminicuhsrerum,  sine  ullius  ritias  observa- 
tione  vel  lege,  omnia  ilia  quae  fecit,  nominis  sui  possibilitate  fecisse  :  et  quod 
proprium,  consentaneum,  dignum  Deo  fuerat  vero,  nihil  nocens,  aut  noxium, 
sed  opilorum,  std  salutare,  sed  auxiliaribus  plenum  bonis,  potestatis  munificae 
liberal itate  donasse.  1.  i.  p.  25.  ^  Quaequidem  ab  eo  gcsfa  sunt, 

et  factitata,  non  ut  se  vana  ostentatione  jactaret,  sed  ut  homines  duri  atque 
increduli  scirent,  non  esse  quod  spondebatur  falsum.  1.  i.  p.  27. 

^  Unus  fuit  e  nobis,  qui  quia  singuli  volverent,  quid  sub  obscuris  cogita- 
tionibus  continerant,  tacitorum  in  cordibus  pervidebat  ?  p.  27.  in. 


Arnobius.     a.  D.  30G.  467 

men's  inward  lliouglits  :  diat''  after  lie  had  been  put  to  death, 
he  rose  again,  and  showed  himself  to  many.  lie  farther'^ 
insists  largely  upon  our  Saviour's  conferring  a  l,*ke  power 
of  doing-  miracles,  equal  to  all  those  which  had  been  done 
by  himself,  upon  his  disciples,  who  were  poor  fjshennen,  or 
of  other  low  occupations,  ignorant,  illiterate,  and  unskilful: 
a  full  proof,  he  says,  that  those  works  were  not  the  effect  of 
magic,  or  any  human  art;  but  of  the  power  of  God.  And 
whereas  some  might  be  apt  to  insinuate,  that  the  writers  of 
our  Lord's  history  had  uiagriiHed  his  works  beyond  the 
reality;  he  answers,  that^  they  had  related  but  a  small  part 
of  them.  And  he  wisheth  they  had  recorded  them  all,  if  it 
had  been  possible,  and  likewise  all  the  miracles  of  his  disci- 
ples, the  more  to  increase  the  astonishment  and  wonder  of 
such  incredulous  men.  He  particularly  asserts,  that?  the 
miracles  done  by  Christ  himself,  and  by  his  apostles,  Avhom 
he  sent  forth  to  preach  in  his  name,  are  a  just  foundation 
of  faith  in  him,  as  a  divine  messenger.  And  he  says,  that'' 
those  great  works  had  excited  the  attention  of  all  mankind, 
and  induced  distant  nations,  and  people  of  very  different 
manners  and  customs,  to  unite  in  respect  for  his  high  cha- 
racter. 

^  Unus  fuit  e  nobis,  qui,  deposito  corpore,  innumeris  se  hominum  promptA 
in  luce  detexit  ?  p.  27. 

^  Quid  quod  istas  virtutes,  quae  sunt  a  nobis  summatim,  non  ut  rei  poscebat 
niagnitudo,  depromptae,  non  fantum  ipse  perfecit  vi  sua,  varum,  quod  erat  sub- 
limius,  multos  alios  experiri,  et  facere  sui  nominis  cum  atfectione  pernusit. 
Nam  cum  videret  fuluros  vos  essegestarum  ab  se  rerum,  divinique  operis  abro- 
gatores,  ne  qua  sube^-set  suspicio,  magicis  se  artibiis  munera  ilia  beneficiaque 
largitum,  ex  immensa  ilia  populi  multitudine,  quae  suam  gratiam  sectabatur 
admirans,  piscatores,  opifices,  rusticanos,  atque  id  genus  elegit  imperitormii, 
qui  per  varias  gentes  missi  cuncta  ilia  miracula  sine  ullis  fucis  atque  adminiculis 
perpetrarent. — Neque  quicquam  est  ab  illo  gestum  per  admirationem  stupen- 
tibus  cunctis,  quod  non  oinne  donaverit  parvulis  illis  et  rusticis,  et  eorum  sub- 
jecerit  potestati.  p.  30.  Vid.  et  p.  32. 

'  Sed  conscriptores  nostri  mendaciter  ista  promserunt,  extulere  in  immensum 
exigua  gesta,  et  angustas  res  satis  ambitioso  dilalavere  prseconio.  Atqui  utinam 
cuncta  referri  in  scripta  potuissent,  vel  quae  ab  ipso  gesta  sunt,  vel  quae  ab  ejus 
praeconibus  pari  jure  et  potentia  terminata.  Magis  vos  incredulos  faceret  vis 
tanta  virtutum.  1.  i.  p.  33. 

s  Atque  si  causas  causis,  partes  partibus  voluerimus  sequare,  magis  nos 
valemus  ostendcre,  quid  in  Christo  fuerimus  secuti,  quam  in  philosophis  quid 
vos.  Ac  nos  quidem  in  illo  secuti  haec  sumus  :  opera  ilia  magnifica,  pofen- 
tissimasque  virtutes,  quas  variis  edidit  exhibuitque  miraculis,  quibus  quivis 
posset  ad  necessitatem  credulitatis  adduci,  et  judicare  fideliter,  non  esse  quae 
fierent  hominis,  sed  divinae  alicujus  atque  incognitas  virtutis.  Vos  in  philoso- 
phis virtutes  secuti  quas  esfis ?  1.  ii.  p.  49. 

**  Virtutes  sub  oculis  positae,  et  inaudita  ilia  vis  rerum,  vel  qure  ab  ipso 
fiebat  palam,  vel  ab  ejus  praeconibus,  cekbratur  in  orbe  toto :  ea  subdidit 
appetitionum  flammas,  et  ad  unius  credulitatis  assensum  mcnte  una  conciurere 
gentes  et  populos  fecit,  et  moribus  dissimillimas  nationes.  ib.  p.  50. 

2  I!  2 


4(J8  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

I  presume  it  Avill  be  allowed,  that  Aniobiiis  has  done 
justice  to  this  argumeut,  and  treated  it  in  a  handsome 
manner. 

(4.)  He  argues'  from  the  great  effect  of  the  christian 
religion  upon  men  in  softening  their  tempers,  amending  their 
manners,  sov.iiig  the  seeds  and  principles  of  benevolence, 
peace,  and  friendship,  among  men.  Which  advantages,  he 
says,  would  have  been  greater,  and  more  general,  provided 
all,  who  made  an  appearance  of  being  men,  would  have 
exercised  their  rational  powers  and  faculties,  and  would 
have  laid  aside  their  prejudices,  and  their  pride,  and  would 
have  candidly  attended  to  the  doctrine  of  Christ.  Then 
wars  and  disturbances  might  have  ceased  in  the  earth. 

He  observes  particularly,  and  with  much  thankfulness, 
that''  Christ  had  delivered  men  from, great  errors :  he  had 
brought  them  from  idolatry  to  the  knowledge  of  the  true 
God,  and  taught  them  how  to  worshij),  and  pray  to  him. 

(5.)  Another  argument  insisted  on  by  him  is'  the  great 
progress  of  the  christian  doctrine,  and  the  vast  numbers  of 
people  that  had  embraced  it  in  mraiy  and  remote  kingdoms 
of  the  earth,  in  a  very  short  thnc.  lie  says,  that  there  were 
then  christians  in  all  countries:  he  particularly  mentions 
Syria,  Persia,  Scythia,  Africa,  Spain,  Gaul,  and  divers  other 

'  Habet  a  Christo  beneficiiim  jamdudnm  orbis  ingratus,  per  quern  feritatis 
mollita  est  rabies,  atque  hostiles  manus  cohibere  a  sanguine  cognati  animantis 
occcepit.  Quod  si  omnes  omnino,  qui  homines  se  esse  non  specie  corporum, 
sed  rationis  intelligunt  potestale,  salutanbus  ejus  pacificisque  decretis  aurem 

vellent  commodare  paulisper,  et  non  fastu  et  supercilio  luminis universus 

jamdudum  orbis  mitiora  in  opera  conversis  usibus  ferri,  tranquilitate  in  mol- 
lissima  degeret,  et  in  concordiam  salutarem  incorruptis  foedenim  sanctionibus 
conveniret.  1.  i.  p.  6. 

^  honoribus  quantis  afficiendus  est  nobis,  qui  ab  erroribus  nos  niagnis 

msinuata  veritate  traduxit  ?  qui  velut  caecos  passim,  ac  sine  uUo  rectore  gradi- 
entes,  ab  deruptis,  ab  deviis,  locis  planioribus  reddidit !  qui,  quod  frugiferum 
primo  atque  humano  generi  salutare,  Deus  monstravit  quid  sit,  quis,  quantus, 
qualis ; — qui,  quod  omnia  superavit,  et  transgressum  est  munera,  ab  religioni- 
bus  nos  falsis  religionem  traduxit  ad  verum  ;  qui  ab  signis  inertibus,  atque  ex 
vilissimo  foimatis  luto,  ad  sidera  sublevarit  et  coelum,  et  cum  Domino  rerum 
Deo  supplicationum  fecit  verba  atque  orationem  colloquia  miscere.  1.  i.  p. 
21,  22. 

■  Si  Alamannos,  Persas,  Scythas,  idcirco  voluerunt  devinci,  quod  habitarent 
in  eorum  gentibus  christiani ;  quemadniodum  Romanis  tnbuere  victoriam, 
cum  haliitarent  et  degerent  in  eorum  quoque  gentibus  christiani  ?  Si  in  Asia, 
Syria, — fjuod  ratione  consimih  habitarent  in  eorum  gentibus  christiani  ?  in 
Hispania,  Galha,  cur  eodem  tempore  horura  nihil  natum  est,  cum  innumeri 
viverent  in  his  quoque  provinciis  christiani  ?  Si  apud  Gaetulos,  Tinguitano  , 
huj us  rei  causa  siccitateni  satis  ariditatemque  niiscrunt ;  eo  anno  cur  messes 
amphssimas  Mauris,  Nomadibusque  tribuerunt,  cum  rehgio  simiHs  his  quo- 
que in  regionibus  verteretur  ? nation ibus  en im  sumus  in  cunctis.   I.  i. 

p.  9,  10. 


Akxobiu^.     a.  D.  306.  469 

people  and  countries  ;  some  uuiler  the  Roman  government, 
others  ojit  of  it. 

The  (li<>i)ity  of  onr  Lord's  person,  he"*  says,  and  the 
<livine  original  of  his  religion,  must  be  hence  manifest,  that 
in  so  short  a  timehe  filled  the  whole  world  with  that  doctrine. 

(6.)  This  argument  is  confirmed,  forasmuch"  as  this  reli- 
gion had  been  endjraced  under  the  greatest  difKculties  and 
discouragements  by  men  of  all  raidis  ;  by  orators,  gramma- 
rians, rhetoricians,  lawyers,  physicians,  philosophers,  and 
the  greatest  wits,  as  well  as  by  men  of  low  condition,  and 
smaller  attainments.  Nor  could  the  heaviest  sufferinos 
induce  men  to  renounce  it.  Yea,  this  doctrine  continued  to 
spread,  and  make  converts,  at  the  very  time  that  the  profes- 
sors of  it  endured  a  cruel  persecution. 

(7.)  He  argues,  that"  it  would  be  altogether  absurd  to 
suppose,  that  so  many  people  should  on  a  sudden,  without 
any  good  ground  and  reason,  change  their  former  opinions 
and  customs,  and  forsake  the  religion  of  their  ancestors. 
They  had  therefore  good  proof  and  evidence  of  the  great 
works  said  to  be  done  by  Christ. 

It  is  still  the  more  unreasonable,  as  he  argues,  to  suppose, 
thati'  men  should  act  here  without  good  evidence;  when  it 

"  Unus  fuit  e  nobis,  qui  cum  officia  religionis  certae  suis  sectatoribus  traderet, 
mundum  lotum  repente  complebat,  quantusque,  et  qui  esset,  revelata  nominis 
immensitate  monstrabat  ?  1.  i.  p.  27.  in. 

"  Nonne  vel  haec  sallem  fidem  vobis  faciunt  argumenta  credendi,  quod  jam 
per  omnes  terras,  in  tarn  brevi  temporis  spatio,  immensi  nominis  hujus  sacra- 
menta  diffusa  sunt  ?  quod  nulla  jam  natio  est  lam  barbari  moris,  et  man?uetu- 
dinem  nesciens,  quae  non  ejusamore  versa  moUiveret  asperitatem,  et  in  placidos 
sensus  assumta  tranquil litate  migravit?  quod  lam  magnis  ingeniis  praedili 
oratores,  grammatici,  rhetores,  consulti  juris,  ac  medici,  philosophiae  etiam 
secreta  rimantes,  magisteria  hsec  expetant,  spretis  quibus  pauIo  ante  sidebant  ? 
quod  ab  dominis  se  servi  cruciatibus  affici,  quibus  statuerint,  malunt,  solvi 
conjuges  matrimoniis,  exhsridari  a  parentibus  liberi,  quam  fidem  rumpere 
christianam,  et  salutaris  niilitiae  sacramenta  deponere  ?  quod  cum  genera 
poenarum  tanta  sint  a  vobis  proposita  religionis  hujus  sequentibus  leges,  au- 
geatur  res  magis,  et  contra  onmes  minas  atque  interdicta  formidinum  animosius 
populosobnitatur,  et  ad  credendi  studium  prohibitionis  ipsius  stimulisexcitetur? 
Numquid  haec  fieri  passim  et  inaniter  creditis  ?  fortuitis  cursibus  adsumi  has 
mentes  ?  Itane  istud  non  divinum  et  sacrum  est,  aut  sine  Deo,  eoruin  tantas 
animorum  fieri  conversiones,  ut,  cum  carnifices  unci,  aliique  innunx-ri  cru- 
ciatus,  quemadmodum  diximus,  impendeant  credituris,  veluti  quadam  dulce- 
dine  atque  omnium  virtutum  amore  correpti,  cognitas  accipiant  rationes,  atque 
raundi  omnibus  rebus  praeponant  amicitias  Christi  ?   1.  ii.  p.  44,  45. 

°  Nulla  major  est  comprobatio,  quam  gestarum  ab  eo  fides  rerum,  quam 
virtutum  novitas,  quam  omnia  victa  decreta,  dissolutaque  fatalia,  qu3e  populi 
gentesque  suo  geri  sub  lumine  nuUo  dissentiente  videre  :  quae  nee  ipsi  audent 
falsitatis  aiguere,  quorum  antiquas  seu  patrias  leges  vanitatis  esse  plenissiraas 
atque  inanissimae  superstitionis  ostendit.  1.  i.  p.  24,  25. 

Quod  si  falsa,  ut  dicitis,  historia  ilia  rerum  est,  unde  tam  brevi  tempore 


470  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

is  considered,  that  by  change  of"  sentiment,  and  embracing 
this  doctrine,  they  exposed  themselves  to  the  greatest  dan- 
gers, and  the  heaviest  sufferings. 

(8.)  Finally,  he  argues,  that''  the  things  said  of  Christ 
must  be  true;  forasmuch  as  they  nho  first  reported  or  re- 
corded them,  h.ad  no  interest  to  induce  them  to  falsify,  and 
by  only  not  bearing-  testimony  to  him,  they  might  have 
avoided  many  sufferings,  and  have  lived  quietly  and  com- 
fortably among-  their  neighbours.  Would  men  in  such  a 
circumstance,  pretend  to  have  seen  what  they  never  saw? 
and  assert  facts  they  had  no  knowlege  of?  Would  men 
bring-  upon  themselves  enmity  and  hatred,  and  expose  them- 
selves to  universal  infamy,  for  no  reason  at  all?  They  Mere 
therefore  fully  persuaded  of  the  things  they  related,  and 
knew  them  to  be  true. 

1  have  allowed  myself  to  enlarge  in  these  extracts ;  for  1 
think  no  one  can  be  displeased  to  see,  how  solidly  this  chris- 
tian rhetorician  and  apologist  argued  above  a  thousand, 
almost  fifteen  hundred  years  ago,  in  behalf  of  the  religion  of 
Jesus,  whose  disciples  we  profess  ourselves  to  be. 

3.  Let  us  now  attend  to  the  objections,  or  at  least  some 
of  the  objections  against  the  christian  religion,  which  we 
find  to  be  taken  notice  of  and  considered  by  this  writer. 

(1.)  I  have  not  observed  any  notice  taken  by  Arnobius  of 
those  scandalous  imputations  upon  the  christians,  of  sacri- 
ficing young  children,  and  practising  promiscuous  lewdness 
in  their  religious  assemblies.  It  is  likely,  therefore,  that  the 
christians  had  so  fully  confuted  those  stories,  and  all  men 
were  so  fully  satisfied  of  their  falsehood,  that  they  were  no 
longer  mentioned  by  the  enemies  of  the  christian  religion. 
Our  author  indeed  speaks"^  of  their  being  called  impious, 

totus  mundus  ista  religione  completus  est  ?  aut  in  unam  coire  qui  potuerunt 
menteiu  gentes  religiouibus  cUssitae,  ventis,  coeli  convexionibus  dimotae  ? 
Asseverationibus  illectae  sunt  nudis,  inductas  in  spes  cassas,  et  in  pericula 
capitis  immittere  se  sponte  temeraria  desperatione  voluemnt,  cum  nihil  tale 
vidissent,  quod  eas  in  hos  cultus  novitatis  suae  possit  excitaie  miraculo  ?  Imo 
quia  haec  omnia  et  ab  ipso  cernebant  geri  et  ab  ejus  praeconibus,  qui  per  orbem 
nussi  beneficia  patris  et  munera  sanandis  anunis  hominibusque  portabant, 
veritatis  ipsius  vi  victae,  et  dederunt  se  Deo,  nee  in  magnis  posuere  dispendiis 
membra  vobis  projicerc,  et  viscera  sua  lanianda  praebere.  1.  i.  p.  33. 

'■  An  numquid  dicenius,  illius  temporis  homines  usque  adeo  fuisse  vanos, 
mendaces,  stolidos  brutos,  ut,  quae  nunquam  viderant,  vidisse  se  fingerent  ?  et 
quae  facta  omnino  non  erant  falsis  proderent  testimoniis,  aut  puerili  assertione 
firmarent  >  cumque  possent  vobiscum  et  unanimitcr  vivere,  ut  inoffensas  ducere 
conjunctjonos,  gratuita  susciperent  odia,  et  execrabili  haberentur  in  nomine  ? 
p.  33.  sub  in.  ■■  Quantumlibet  nos  impios,  irreligiosos  vocetis, 

aut  atheos,  nunquam  fidem  facietis  esse  amorum  deos,  &c.  1.  iii.  p.  116.  f. 
Trophonius  nos  impios,  Dodonaeus  aut  Jupiter  nominat, — 1.  i.  p.  14.— ut  coa- 
vicio  utamur  vcstro,  infausti  et  athei  nuncupamur.  ib.  p.  16. 


AuNOBius.     A.  D.  306.  471 


irreligious,  atheistical.  But  that  is  another  tiling-,  and  relates 
only  to  tlieir  disowning-  the  litatiien  deities,  and  abandoning" 
their  Morship,  together  with  ail  their  rites  and  ceremonies. 

(2.)  But  his  book  begins  Avith  that  |)o|)uIar  he.ithen  com- 
plaint and  calumny  against  the  christians,  that"  they  were 
the  occasion  of  all  the  calamities  that  betell  mankind.  This 
complaint,  taken  up'  long-  before,  was  continued  a  good 
while  after  tiiis,  and  is  finely  answered  by"  our  Arnobius, 
as  well  as  by  later^  christian  writers.  That  absurd  and 
ridiculous  charge  seems  to  have  been  the  immediate  occasion 
of  Arnobius's  resolving-  to  write  an  apology  for  the  cliris- 
tians. 

(3.)  Another  objection  against  the  christians  was,  th;it" 
their  religion  was  new.  To  which  good  answers  may  be 
seen  in  Arnobius,  to''  whom  1  refer. 

(4.)  Another  was,  thaty  Christ  came  no  sooner.  To  which 
Arnobius  makes  several'-  answers,  and  among-  the  rest  this: 
that  there^  may  be  good  reasons,  well  known  to  God,  though 
men  be  unacquainted  with  them  ;  and  that  this  is  a  sufficient 
answer. 

(5.)  They  objected:  '  If'  Christ  came  to  save  men,  why 
*  are  not  all  saved  ?' 

'  Quoniam  comperi  nonnullos,  qui  se  plurimum  sapere  suis  persuasionibus 
credunt,  insanire,  bacchari,  et  velut  quiddam  proniturn  ex  oraculo  dicere : 
postqiiam  esse  in  mundo  Christiana  gens  ccepit,  terrarum  orbem  periisse  multi- 
ibrmibus  malis  affectum  esse  genus  humanum :  ipsos  etiam  coelites  derelictis 
curis  solennibus,  quibus  quondam  solebant  invisere  res  nostras,  terrarum  ab 
regionibus  exterminatos :  statui  pro  captu  ac  niediocritate  sermonis  contraire 
invidiee,  et  calumniosas  dissolvere  criminationes;  ne  aut  illi  sibi  videantur, 
popularia  dum  verba  depromunt,  magnum  aliquid  dicere ;  aut  nos,  &c.  1.  i. 
p.  1.  '  Vid.  Tertul.  Ap.  c.  40. 

"  P.  258,  &c. 

"  Vid.  P.  Oros.  Hist,  et  August.  Retr,  1.  ii.  c.  43. 

*  Religiones,  inquiunt,  impias,  atque  inauditos  cultus  terrarum  in  orbem 
trahitis.  1.  i.  p.  13.  Neque  quod  nobis  objectare  consuestis,  novellam  esse 
religionem  nostram,  et  ante  dies  natam  propemodum  paucos,  neque  vos  potuisse 
antiquam  et  patriam  relinquere,  et  in  barbaros  ritus  peregrinosque  reduci, 
ratione  istud  intenditur  nulla.  1.  ii.  p.  90,  et  passim. 

"  Non  ergo,  quod  sequimur,  novum  est ;  scd  nos  sero  didicimus,  &c.  1.  ii. 
p.   95,   &c.  >'  Et  quid,  inquit,  est  visum    Deo   regi   atque 

principi,  ut  ante  horas,  quemadmodum  dicitur,  pauculas,  sospitator  ad  vos 
Christus  coeli  ex  arcibus  mitteretur  ?  1.  ii.  p.  96. 

'  Vid.  p.  87,  90,  96,  97. 

"  Quaenam  igitur  ratio  est?  Non  imus  inficias,  nescire  nos.  Neque  enim 
promtum  est  cuiquam  Dei  mentem  videre,  aut  quibus  modis  ordinaverit  res 
suas.  Homo,  animal  caecum,  et  ipsum  se  nesciens,  nullis  potest  rationibus 
consequi,  quid  oporteat  fieri,  quando,  vel  quo  genere.  Ipse  rerum  cunctarum 
pater,  moderator,  et  dominus  scit  id  solus,  &c.  p.  96,  97. 

^  Sed  si  generis  Christus  humani,  ut  inquitis,  conservator  advenit,  quare 
omnino  non  omnes  aequali  munificentia  liberat  ?  1.  ii.  p.  88. 


472  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

(6.)  They  excepted^  against  Christ's  birth  as  a  man. 

(7.)  And  we  may  be  assured,  they*^  did  not  fail  to  make 
exceptions  to  his  death  :  the  death  too  of  criminals,  and  mean 
persons.  Arnobius  answers,  thaf  neither  his  death,  nor  the 
manner  of  it,  makes  any  alteration  in  his  words, or  his  Morks, 
or  any  way  weakens  his  authority.  Besides,  he*^  rose  again 
from  the  dead  in  a  short  time.  Nors  did  his  divinity  die 
and  suffer,  but  only  his  iiumanity. 

4.  Bull  supposeth,  that''  Arnobius  asserts  the  true  divinity 
of  the  Son.  But  it  seems  to  me,  that  this  is  far  from  being- 
clear.  Arnobius  indeed  calls  Christ  God,  and  true  God  : 
but  1  think  he  means  no  more,  than  that  he  is  a  God,  and 
truly  God.  For  he  so  dieting uishelh  Christ  from  God,  the 
Lord  and  Sovereign  of  all,  tliat  I  do  not  see  how  he  could 
think  him  one  God  with  the  Father.  -For  proof  of  this,  I 
place  at  the  bottom  of  the  page'  two  of  those  passages, 
which  Bull  allegeth  as  most  to  his  purpose.  And  I  shall 
add''  several  others,  where  also  Arnobius,  in  like  manner  as 

'  Sed  non,  inquit,  idcirco  dii  vobis  infesti  sunt,  quod  omnipotentem  colatis 
Deuni ;  sed  quod  hominem  natum,  et,  quod  personis  infame  est  vilibus,  crucis 
si'.pplicio  interemtum,  et  Deum  fuisse  contenditis,  et  superesse  adhuc  creditis, 
&c.  1.  i.  p.  19,  20.     Natum  hominem  colitis,  p.  24.  m.  et  passim. 

•^  V.d.  not.  *".  ^  Sed  patibulo  aifixus  mteriit.     Quid  illud 

ad  causam  ?  Neque  enim  qualitas  et  deformitas  mortis  dicta  ejus  immutat  aut 
lacta,  aut  eo  minus  videbitur  disciplinarum  ejus  auctoritas,  quia  vinculis  cor- 
poris non  naturali  dissolutione  digressus  est,  sed  vi  illata  discessit.  I.  i.  p.  23.  m. 

'  Unus  fuit  e  nobis,  qui,  dtposito  corpore,  innumeris  se  hominum  promta 
in  luce  detexit  ?  1.  i.  p.  27.  in. 

"  Sed  more  est  hominis  interemtus.  Non  ipse.  Neque  enim  cadere  divinas 
in  res  potest  mortis  occasus :  nee  interitionis  dissolutione  dilabi  id,  quod  est 
unum  ac  simplex,  nee  uUarum  partium  congregatione  compactum.  Quis  est 
ergo  visus  in  partibulo  pendere  ?  quis  mortuus  est  ?  Homo,  quem  induerat,  et 
secum  ipse  portabat.  1.  i.  p.  37,  et  38. 

'^  In  eo  opere  verani  ille  Filii  divinitatem  saepius  atque  apertissimis  verbis 
confitetur.     Def.  Fid.  Nic.  p.  151.  al.  168. 

'  Ergone,  inquiet  aliquis  furens,  iratus,  et  percitus,  Deus  ille  est  Christus  ? 
Deus,  respondebimus,  et  interiorum  potentiarum  Deus ;  et,  quod  magis  infidos 
acerbissimis  dolonbus  torqueat,  rei  maximae  causa  a  sumrao  Rege  ad  nos 
missus.  Arnob.  1.  i.  p.  24.  Deus  ille  sublimis  fuit,  Deus  radice  ab  intima, 
Deus  ab  incognitis  regnis,  et  ab  omnium  Principe  Deus  sospitator  est  missus. 

ib.  p.  32.  ^  Omnipotens  et  primus  Deus — Nonne  solus 

mgenitus,  immortalis,  et  perpetuus  solus  est?  1.  ii.  p.  95. 

Potest  ergo  fieri,  ut  tam  demum  emiserit  Christum  Deus  Omnipotens,  Deus 
solus. — p.  97. 

propter  quas  in  mundum  venerat  faciendas,  summi  Regis  imperio  et 

dispositione  servatis.  1.  i.  p.  37.  m. 

cum  animas  renuamus  Dei  esse  Principis  prolem.  1.  ii.  p.  76. 

visum  estDeoregi  atque  principi.   p.  96.  m. 

unum  solum  posuisse  contenti,  nihil  a  Deo  principe  quod  sit  nocens 

— proficisci.  p.  8  ] . 

Deus,  inquam,  Christus — Dei  principis  jussione  loqueus  sub  hominis 

forma— p.  85.  f. 


Arnobius.     a.  D.  306.  473 

ill  those  alleged  by  Bull,  remarkably  distinguishes  Christ 
from  the  one  God  Almighty,  from  the  Supreme  King,  the 
first  and  thief  God.  liy  true  God  he  seems  to  mean  no 
more  than  truly'  so,  in  some  sense,  in  opposition  to  such  as 
are  esteemed  anil  (ailed  gods,  but  are  not  so  at  all,  and  have 
no  right  to  that  title. 

Nor  does  Hull  say,  whether  this  author  (houglit  rightly  of 
the  .Spirit.  Indeed  1  am  not  certain,  that  Arnctbius  has  once 
mentioned  the  Holy  Ghost.  However,  1  shall'"  put  in  the 
margin  a  passage,  to  be  considered  by  my  readers. 

I  shall  add  here  a  few  more  select  passages. 

5.  Beausobre  once  had  suspicions,  that"  Arnobius  held 
the  Manicheean  principle  concerning  the  origin  of  the  human 
soul  ;  but  upon  farther  consideration  he  acquitted  him.  I 
cannot  believe,  that  Arnobius  was  at  all  acquainted  wi(h 
the  Manichees.  And  Beausobre's  opinion,  that  Manichoeism 
had  spread  in  Africa  before  the  end  of  the  third  century, 
appears  to  me  without  good  foundation. 

(y.  Arnobius  seems  to  speak  of  some"  extraordinary  works 
done  in  the  name  of  Christ  in  his  own  time. 

7.  He  supposeth  Christ  to  have  died,  thati'  thereby,  and 
by  his  resurrection  afterwards,  he  might  confirm  the  truth 
of  his  doctrine,  and  give  his  followers  full  assurance  of  im- 
mortality. 

8.  In  his  answer  to  the  fore-mentioned  objection,  If  Christ 
came  to  save  men,  why  are  not  all  saved  ?  he  strongly  asserts 
human  power  and  freedom.     For  he  says,  that'i    the  kind 

in  Deo  rerutn  capite, — Dei  principis  notioni. — p.  86. 

Nonne  dignus  a  nobis  est  tantorum  ob  munerum  gratiam  Deus  dici, 

Deusque  sentiri  ?  1.  i.  p.  21. 

'  Cum  enim  Dii  omnes,  vel  quicumque  sunt  veri,  vel  qui  esse  rumore  atque 
opinione  dicuntur,  immortales  et  perpetui  voluntate  ejussinf.  1.  ii.  p.  87. 

■"  Ita  unius  pontificium  Christi  est,  dare  animis  salutem,  et  spiritum  perpe- 
tuitatis  apponere.  1.  ii.  p.  89.  sub  fin.  And  compare  Beaus.  Hist,  de  Manich. 
T.  ii.  p.  413.  "  See  Beaus.  Hist,  de  Manich.  T.  ii.  p.  413,  &c. 

See  him  likewise,  p.  145,  146,  and  p.  330,  331,  and  398, 399. 

°  qui  justissimis  viris  etiam  nunc  impoUutis,  ac  dihgenlibus  sese,  non 

per  vana  insomnia,  sed  per  purJE  speciem  simpHcitatis  apparet?  cujus  nomen 
auditum  fugat  noxios  spiritus,  imponit  silenfium  vatibus,  haruspices  inconsultos 
reddit,  arrogantium  magorum  Irustrari  efficit  actiones,  non  horrore,  ut  dicitis, 
nominis,  sedmajorislicentia  potestatis.  1.  i.  p.  27. 

P  Cumque  novitas  rerum,  et  inaudita  premissio  audientium  turbaret  mentes, 
et  creduhtatem  faceret  haesitare,  virtutum  omnium  dominus,  atque  ipsius  mortis 
extinctor,  hominem  suum  permiserit  interfici,  ut  ex  rebus  consequent ibus  scirent 
in  tuto  esse  spes  suas,  quas  jamdudum  acceperant  de  animarum  salute,  nee 
periculum  mortis  alia  se  posse  ratione  vitare.  1.  i.  p.  41. 

1  Non  aequaliter  liberat,  qui  aequaliter  omnes  vocat? — Si  tibi  fastidiuni 
tantum  est,  ut  oblati  respuas  beneficium  muneris — quid  invitans  in  te  pcccat, 
cujus  solae  sunt  hoe  partes,  ut  sub  tui  juris  arbitrio  fructum  suaj  benignitatis 


47-4  Credibility  of  tlie  Gospel  History. 

proposal  of  gospel  is  made  to  all  ;  if  any  refuse  it,  it  is 
their  own  fault.  It  is  not  to  be  expected,  that  God  should 
force  their  consent :  it  is  not  the  method  of  his  dealings  with 
men. 

9.  Arnobius  informs  ns,  tliat"^  not  a  few  heathens  of  his 
time  were  much  oflended  at  Cicero,  for  the  freedom  he  had 
taken  in  exposing  some  of  their  absurd  sentiments  concern- 
ing their  deities  ;  and  that  his  writings  were  so  serviceable  to 
the  christian  cause,  that  some  people  were  for  having  his 
works,  or  some  of  them  at  least,  destroyed  or  prohibited  by 
order  of  the  senate. 

10.  Upon  occasion  of  which,  Arnobius  declares  it  to  be 
his  opinion,  that'^  reading"  and  inquiry  ought  not  to  be  dis- 
couraoed,  and  that  so  doino  is  a  sion  of  a  bad  cause. 

iMr.  Bayle  observed  this  passage  of -our  author:  I  choose 
to  place  his  words  at  the  bottom  of  the'  page. 

IV.  I  come  now  to  observe  this  writer's  testimony  to  the 
scriptures  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament. 

1.  Arnobius  has  not  expressly  quoted  any  books  either  of 
the  Old  or  the  New  Testament.  It  is  likely,  that  he  did  not 
judge  it  proper  to  allege  the  scriptures,  as  books  of  authority, 
in  an  argument  with  heathens,  and  was  of  the  same  opinion 
upon  this  head  with  Lactantius,  who"  did  not  scruple  to 
censure  St.  Cyprian  for  so  doing. 

exponat  ? — Vis  sumere  quod  offertiir,  atque  in  tuos  usus  convertere  ?  Consu- 
lueris  tu  tibi — Nulli  Deus  infert  necessitatem — Immo,  inquit,  si  Deiis  est  potens, 
misericors,  conservator,  convertat  nobis  mentes,  et  invitos  faciat  suis  pollicita- 
tionibus  credere.  Vis  ergo  est  ista,  non  gratia :  nee  Dei  liberalitas  principis, 
sed  ad  vincendi  studium,  puerilis  atque  animi  contentio.  1.  ii.  p.  88,  et  89. 

■■  Adduci  enim  primum  hoc  ut  credamus,  non  possumus,  immortalem  illam 
— naturam  divinam  esse  per  sexus — Quern  quidem  locum  plene  jamduduni 
homines  pectoris  vivi, — explicavere — et  ante  omnes  TulUus  Romani  disertissi- 
mus  generis — Sed  quid  aucupia  verbornm,  splendoremque  sermonis  peti  ab 
hoc  edicam,  cum  sciani  esse  non  paucos,  qui  aversentur,  refugiant,  hbros  cle 
hoc  ejus,  nee  in  aurem  vehnt  admittere  lectionem  opinionum  suarum  praesurata 
vincenfem  :  cumque  alios  audiam  mussitare  indignanfer,  et  dicere  :  Oportere 
statui  per  senatum,  aboleantur  uthsec  scripta,  quibus  religio  Christiana  compro- 
betur,  et  vetustatis  opprimatur  auctoritas.  Quinimo,  si  fiditis  exploratum  vos 
dicere  quidquam  de  diis  vestris,  erroris  convincite  Ciceronem  :  tenieraria  et 
impia  dictitantem  refellitote,  redarguite,  comprobate.  Nam  intercipere  scripta, 
et  publicatam  velle  submovere  lectionem,  non  est  deos  defendere,  sed  veritatis 
testificationem  timere.  1.  iii.  p.  103,  104.  ^  Vid.  not.  ■" 

'■ il  auroit  pu  se  moquer  de  ces  sectaires,  s'ils  fussent  venus  lui  alleguer 

les  reHexions  que  faisoit  Arnobe,  sur  ce  que  les  idolatres  demandoient  que  le 
senat  abolit  par  ses  arrets  quelques  livres  de  Ciceron,  ou  la  vanite  des  faux 
dieux  est  demontree.  Refutez  les,  leur  disoit  Arnobe,  s'ils  contiennent  des 
impietes.  Car  d'en  interdire  la  lecture,  ce  n'est  pas  soutenir  la  cause  des 
dieux  ;  c'est  craindre  le  temoignage  de  la  verite.  Bayle,  Diet.  V.  iv.  p.  2840. 
b.  edit.  3.     Volkelius,  Note  (A). 

"  qua  materia  non  est  usus,  ut  debuit.    Non  enim  scripturae  testimoniis. 


Arnobius.     a.  D.  306.  475 

2.  We  can  perceive,  however,  that  Arnobius  was  acquainted 
with  the  Jewish  scriptures.  For  whereas*^  some  heathens 
objected,  tliat  those  scriptures  sj)ake  of  God,  as  having- 
bodily  parts,  and  human  passions;  he  recommends  it  to  them, 
to  study  the  style  of  those  books  with  greater  care,  and  then, 
he  says,  they  will  better  know  their  true  meaning. 

Nevertheless  it  must  be  owned,  that  at  the  end  of  his  sixth 
book,  and  in  the  seventh  book  almost  throughout,  Arno- 
bius" so  argues  against  all  manner  of  sacrifices,  and  parti- 
cularly bloody  sacrifices  of  animals  :  that  we  may  be  ix\)t  to 
suspect,  he  was  not  well  acquainted  with  the  Mosaic  insti- 
tution, or  else  had  but  little  regard  for  it.  And  it  is 
not  unlikely,  that  about  this  time  Gentile  people  became 
first  accjnainted  with  christians  and  their  scriptures:  and 
they  might  be  converted  some  while,  before  they  were  weU 
acquainted  with  the  Jewish  scriptures,  and  the  ancient 
constitution  of  that  people. 

3.  Arnobius,  for  certain,  was  well  acquainted  with  the 
books  of  the  New  Testament,  though  he  did  not  think  fit  to 
quote  them  expressly  in  his  books  against  the  Gentiles. 

4.  He  says,"  the  world  has  this  benefit  from  Christ,  that 
there  is  already  a  vast  multitude  of  men,  who  have  been 
taught  by  his  laws,  precepts,  and  institutions,  "  not  to  return 
evil  for  evil,"  and  rather  to  suA'cr  wrong  than  do  any. 

5.  Herein  he  may  be  thought  to  refer  to  the  whole  tenor 
of  the  christian  doctrine,  as  contained  in  the  New  Testament. 
However,  it  must  be  also  reckoned  probable,  that  he  has 
some  particular  regard  to  that  part  of  our  Lord's  doctrine, 

quani  ille  [Demetrianus]  utique  vanam,  fictam,  commentitiamque  putabat ;  sed 
arguinentis  et  ratione,  fiierat  refellendus.  Nam,  cum  ageret  contra  hominem 
veritatis  ignariim,  dilatis  paulisper  divinis  lectionibus,  formarehunc  a  principio 
tanquam  rudem  debuit,  atque  paulatim  lucis  principia  monstiare.  Lact.  Inst. 
1.  V.  c.  4. 

"  Nunc  ad  speciem  veniamus  et  formas,  quibus  e5se  descriptos  deos  superos 
creditis— Neque  quisquam  judaicas  in  hoc  loco  nobis  opponat,  et  sadducaei 
generis  fabulas,  tanquam  formas  tnbuant  atque  os  Deo.  Hoc  enim  putatur 
in  eorum  Uteris  dici,  et  ut  vel  re  certa,  atque  auctoritate  firmari :  quae  aut  nihil 
ad  nos  attinent — aut,  si  sunt,  ut  creditur,  sociae,  quaerendi  sunt  nobis  altioris 
intelligentiae  doctoras,  per  quos  possitis  addiscere  quibus  modis  conveniat 
hterarum  illarum  nubes  atque  involucra  relaxare.  1.  iii.  p.  106,  107. 

*  Ergone,  o  Jupiter,  aut  quis  ahus  Deus  es,  humanum  est  istud  et  rectum, — 
ut,  cum  ahus  peccaverit,  ego  occidar,  et  de  meo  sanguine  fieri  tibi  patiaris 
satis,  qui  nunquam  te  laeserim?  &c.  1.  vii.  p.  216. — quod  est  istud  honoris 
genus,  vervecum,  arietem,  taurum,  dei  sub  ore  connectare,  conspectuque  in 
ejus  occidere?  Quod  est  honorum  genus  deum  invitare  ad  sanguinem,  quem 
cum  canibus  sadeas  eum  sumere,  atque  habere  communem  ?  ib.  p.  222. 

*  Nam  cum  hominum  vis  tanta  magisteriis  ejus  acceperimus  ac  legibus, 
malum  malo  rependi  non  oportere  ;  injuriam  perpeti,  quam  irrogare,  esse  proe- 
stantius, — habet  a  Christo  beneficium  jamdudum  orbis  ingratus.  1.  i.  p.  5,  6 


476  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

Avhich  is  recorded  in  the  fiftli  clinpter  of  St.  31altljew's 
gospel,  especially  from  ver.  38,  to  the  end  ;  and  perhaps  to 
some  other  texts,  where  "  recompensing,"  or  "  rendering- 
evil  for  evil,"  is  forbidden,  in  terms  much  resembling  those 
of  Arnobius.  See  Kom.  xii.  17 ;  1  Thess.  v.  16  ;  1  Pet.  iii.  9. 
C.  He  has  enumerated  the  miracles  of  otir  Saviour  in  such 
a  manner  as  shows  him  to  have  been  mcH  acc{uaiiited  with 
our  gospels;  and  that  he  gave  full  credit  to  them,  and  paid 
them  great  deference.  '  He>  speaks  of  our  Lord's  healing 
'  fevers,  dropsies,  lunacies,  leprosies,  and  all  manner  of  dis- 
'  eases  and  torments,  to  which  the  hnmaii  frame  is  subject ; 
'  and  relieving  great  numbers  of  those  deplorable  cases  on 
'  the  sudden,  by  his  word  and  command  oidy,  without  any 

*  external  means,  and  Mithout  charms  and  incantations :  and 
'  some  obtained  relief  by  only  a  slight  touch  of  his  garment. 

*  He  strengthened  the  lame  to  walk,  and  to  carry  their  beds, 

*  who  before  were  carried  themselves  upon  men's  shoulders: 
'  he  enabled  the  deaf  to  hear,  and  the  dumb  to  speak  :  he 
'  ofave  sioht  to  the  blind,  to  some  that  were  blind  from  their 
'  birth  :  he  calmed  the  boisterous  winds,  and  the  stormy  seas, 
'  and  himself  walked  safely  upon  them  :  he  fed  five  thousand 
'  people  at  once  with  five  loaves,  of  Avliich  also  there  re- 
'  nuiined,  after  all  were  satisfied,  such  an  abundance,  that 
'twelve  baskets  were  filled  with  the  fragments :  a  sure 
'  proof,'  he  says,  '  that  there  was  no  deceit:  he  raised  the 
'  dead,  and  some  that  had  been  buried.' 

y  Ergo  ille  morfalis,  aut  unus  fuit  e  nobis,  cujus  imperium,  ciijus  vocem, 
populanbus  et  quotidianis  verbis  missam,  valetudines,  morbi,  febres,  atquealia 
corporum  cruciaraenfa  fugiebant?  Unus  fuit  e  nobis,  cujus  praesentium,  cujus 
visum  gens  ilia  nequibat  tierre  mersorum  in  visceribus  daemon  urn,  conterritaque 
vi  nova,  membrorum  possessione  cedebat  ?  Unus  fuit  e  nobis,  cujus  fcedae 
vitiligines  jussioni  obtemperabant  pulsae  statim,  et  concordiam  colorum  com- 
maculatis  visceribus  relinquebant  ?  Unus  fuit  e  nobis,  cujus  ex  levi  tactu 
stabant  profluvia  sanguinis,  et  immoderatos  cohibebant  fluores  ?  Unus  fuit  e 

nobis,  cujus  manus  intercutes  et  veternosae  fugiebant  undae ?  Unus  fuit  e 

nobis,  qui  claudos  currere  praecipiebat  ?  Etiam  operis  res  erat  porrigere  mancos 
manus,  et  articuli  immobiiitates  jam  ingenitas  explicabant:  captos  membris 
assurgere.  Etiam  suos  referebant  lectos  alienis  paulo  ante  cervicibus  lati : 
viduatos  videre  luminibus,  etiam  coelum  diemque  nullis  cum  oculis  procreatis. 
Unus,  inquam,  fuit  e  nobis,  qui  debilitatibus  variis,  morbisque  vexatos  centum, 
aut  hoc  amplius,  semel  una  intercessione  sanabat  ?  cujus  vocem  ad  simplicem 
furibunda  et  insana  explicabant  se  maria,  procellarum  turbines  tempestatesque 
sidebant  >  qui  per  altissimos  gurgites  pedem  ferebat  inlutum  ?  calcabat  ponti 
terga  undis  ipsis  stupentibus,  in  famulatum  subeunte  natura?  qui  sequentium 
se  millia  quinque  saturavit  e  panibus;  ac,  ne  esse  praestigiae  incredulis  liiis 
viderentur  et  duris,  his  senarum  sportarum  fragnnnibus  aggerebat  ?  Unus  fuit  e 
nobis,  qui  redire  in  corpora  jamdudum  animas  praecipiebat  afflatas,  prodire  ab 
aggeribus  conditos  ?  et  post  diem  funeris  tertium  pollinctorum  volumiuibus- 
expediri  ?  1.  i.  p.  26. 


Aknobius.     a.  D.  30G.  477 

7.  He  observes  also,  agreeably  to  our  gospels,  tliat^  some- 
times Christ  by  touching  the  afflicted  with  liis  hands,  at  other 
times  by  liissole  command,  opened  tlie  ears  of  the  deaf,  and 
the  eyes  of  the  blind,  and  unloosed  the  tongues  of  the  dumb, 
or  gave  feet  to  the  lame,  and  performed  other  like  works. 

8.  Retakes  notice^  of  the  uncommon  darkness,  anri  other 
surprising  events,  at  the  time  of  our  Lord's  passion  and 
death;  which  he  describes  in  a  very  rhetorical  manner. 

i).  Arnobius,  as  before  said,  does  not  expressly  quote  any 
books  of  scripture:  but  it  is  likely  that  he,  in  the  places 
just  cited,  refers  to  our  evangelists,  and  their  histories.  It 
is  plain,  he  does  not  take  his  accounts  of  our  Lord's  miracles 
from  oral  tradition  oidy.  For,  as  he  goes  along*  in  his 
argimient,  he  refers  to''  writers,  and*^  writings,  which  also 
he  calls  ours. 

10.  VVe  may  be  confirmed  in  the  supposition,  that  he  means 
our  evangelists,  and  their  gospels,  from  the  character  he 
gives  the  historians  of  our  Lord's  miracles,  which  he  speaks 
of.  For*^  he  insists,  that  they  are  credible  witnesses  of  the 
things  they  relate,  because  they  had  seen  them,  and  were 
present  at  the  doing  them ;  and  they  M'rite  with  evident 
marks  of  truth  and  credibility.  He  likewise  owns,  tliat*^ 
they  were  unlearned  and  mean  men,  and  that  their  style  is 
destitute  of  ornaments.  But  then  he  says,  that  their  accounts 
are  not  for  those  reasons  the  less  credible. 

\l.  He  seems  to  refer*^  to  John  xiv.  6,  and  perhaps  to  some 
other  texts  in  that  gospel. 

^  Christus  enira  scitur,  aut  admota  partibus  debilitatis  manu,  aut  vocis 
simplicis  ju^ione,  aures  aperuisse  surdorum,  exturbasse  ab  oculisccEcilates, 
orationem  dedisse  inutis,  articulorum  vincula  relaxasse,  ambulatutn  dedisse 
coutractis,  &c.  ib.  p.  28. 

*  Exulus  at  corpore,  quod  in  exigua  sui  circumferebat  parte,  postquam, 
videri  se  passus  est,  cujus  esset  aut  magnitiidinis  sciri,  novitate  rerum  exterrita 
imiversa  mundi  sunt  elemenfa  turbata  ;  tell  us  mota  contremuit ;  mare  funditus 
refusum  est :  aer  globis  involutus  est  tenebrarum ;  igneus  orbis  solis  tepefacto 
ardor  diriguit.  p.  32.  ^  Conscriptores  nostri.  1.  i.  p.  33.     Quic- 

quid  dicere  de  nostris  conscriptoribus  intendentis.  p.  34. 

•^   Non  creditis  scriptis  nostris?  p.  34. quae  in  nostris  consignata  sunt 

literis,  confiteamini  necesse  est  esse  vera.  ib. 

^  Sed  non  creditis  gestahaec.  Sed  qui  ea  conspicati  sunt  fieri,  et  sub  oculis 
suis  viderunt  agi,  testes  optimi,  certissimique  auctores,  et  credidevunt  haec  ipsi, 
et  credenda  posteris  nobis,  baud  exilibus  cum  approbationibus,  tradiderunt. 
p.  32.  f.  Vid.  et  p.  33. 

^  Sed  ab  indoctis  hominibus,  et  rudibus,  scripta  sunt ;  et  idcirco  non  sunt 
tacili  auditione  credenda.  Vide  ne  magis  base  Ibrtior  causa  sit,  cur  ilia  nullis 
coinquinata  mendaciis,  mente  simplici  tradita,  et  ignara  lenociniis  amphare. 
Trivialis  et  sordidus  sermo  est.  Nunquam  enim  ventas  sectata  est  fucum  ■,  nee 
quod  exploratum  et  certumest,  circumduci  se  patitur  per  ambitum  longiorem. 
1.  i.  p.  34,  35.  '  Et  hoc  necesse  a  nobis  est  ut  debeatisaccipere. 


478  Credibilitij  of  tlie  Gospel  History. 

12.  He  seems  likewise  to  refer  to  the  book  of  the  Acts  of 
the  Apostles,  when  he  says,  that^  Christ  gave  to  those  little 
ones,  tisherinen,  and  other  niean  persons,  his  disciples,  the 
power  of  performing-  the  same  great  works  that  he  did  :  and'> 
when  he  speaks  of  their  exerting  that  power  all  over  the 
world,  in  obedience  to  the  commission  they  had  received. 
And  he  may  be  thought  to  refer  to  the  great  miracle  of 
speaking  with  divers  tongues,  recorded,  Acts  ii.  when  lie 
expresseth  himself  after  this  manner:  '  Was'  he  one  of  us, 
who,  when  he  spake  one  language,  was  thought  by  divers 
people,  using  different  languages,  to  speak  words  they 
Avere  well  acquainted  with,  and  in  their  own  language  V 
He  may  be  thought  likewise  to  allude  to''  Acts  xvii.  25, 
and  28. 

13.  In  the  accounts  he  gives'  of  our  Lord's  resurrection, 
and  the  many  proofs  and  incontestable  evidences  which  were 
afforded  of  it,  it  is  somewhat  doubtful,  whether  he  refers 
only  to  the  histories  of  that  important  event  at  the  end  of 
the  gospels,  or  whether  he  intends  likewise  the  beginning  of 
the  book  of  the  Acts. 

14.  He  has  the  words  of"'  1  Cor.  iii.  19,  but  without  any 
intitnation  of  his  borrowing  from  any  particular  book. 

15.  St.  Paul  says,  1  Cor.  xv.  6,  that  our  Lord,  after  he 
was  risen,  "  was  seen  of  above  five  hundred  brethren  at 
once."  It  is  not  easy  to  say,  whether  Arnobius  has  any 
particular  reference  to  that  text,  Avhen  he  observes,  that" 
Christ,  in  a  short  time  after  he  had  died,  showed  himself  to 
innumerable  people. 

a  nuUo  animas  posse  vim  vitae  atque  incolumitatis,  accipere,  nisi  ab  eo,  quem 
Rex  summus  huic  muneri  officioque  praefecit.  Hanc  Omnipotens  Imperator 
esse  voluit  salutis  viam,  hanc  vitae,  ut  ita  dixerin),  jaiiuam.  Per  hunc  solum 
est  ingr^ssus  ad  lucem,  &c.  1.  ii.  p.  89,  90. 

8  Neque  quicquam  est  ab  illogestum  peradmirationem  stupenfibus  cunctis, 
quod  non  onine  donaverit  faciendum  parvulis  istis  et  rusticis,  et  eorum  subje- 
cerit  potestati.  1.  i.  p.  30.  f.  ''  Imo  quia  hsec  omnia  et  ab  ipso 

cernebant  geri,  et  ab  ejus  praeconibus,  qui  per  orbem  totum  missi  beneficia 
patris  et  munera  sanandis  animis  hominibusque  portabant,  &c.   1.  i.  p.  33.  m. 

'  Unus  fuit  e  nobis,  qui,  cum  unam  emitteret  voceti),  ab  diversis  populis,  et 
dissona  oratione  loquentibus,  familiaribus  veH)orum  sonis,  et  suo  cuique  utens 
existimabatur  eloquio  ?  p.  27. 

"^  Nonne  huic  omnes  debemus  hoc  ipsum  primum,  quod  sumus  ? Non, 

quod  incedimus,  quod  spiramus  et  vivimus,  ab  eo  ad  nos  venit,  vique  ipsa 
Vivendi  efficit  nos  esse,  ut  animaliagitatione  motari  ?  1.  i.  p.  16. 

'  Unus  lint  e  nobis,  qui  deposito  corpore  innumens  se  hominum  promta  in 
luce  detexit  ?  qui  sermonem  dedit,  atque  accepit,  docuit,  castigavit,  admonuit  ? 
qui,  ne  illi  se  falsos  vanis  imaginibus  existimarent,  semel,  iterum,  saspius, 
fariiiliari  coUocutione  mon&tiavit.  1.  i.  p.  37. 

■"  Nunquam  ilhid  vulgatum  per^frinxit  aurcs  vesfras,  sapientiam  hominis 
stultitiam  esse  apud  Deum  ?  i.  ii.  p.  AG.  in.  "  See  before,  note  '. 


Arnobius.     a.  D.  4G0.  479 

16.  The  author  of"  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews  s|)eaks 
much  of  Christ's  priesthood  :  Arnobius  also  has  the  ex- 
pression of"  Christ's  hi<>h-priesthoo(l.  In  Ileb.  ix.  0,  are 
the  words  "  eternal  spirit :"  Arnobius  has  a  like  expression. 
I  refer  to  a  passage,  which"  may  be  consulted  for  both 
these  particulars.  But  I  somewhat  question,  whether  any 
will  think  our  author  h;:d  an  eye  to  the  epistle  to  the 
Hebrews. 

17.  It  may  be  proper  to  observe  here,  thatP  in  one  place 
Arnobius  speaks  of  the  burning-  of  the  christian  scriptures, 
and  complains  of  it  as  a  most  unreasonable  thing. 

18.  This  is  all  which  we  have  to  produce  from  this  writer 
upon  this  head.  We  have  seen  good  evidence  of  his  being- 
well  acquainted  with  the  gospels.  And  it  is  likely  that  he 
had  read,  and  highly  respected,  the  other  books  of  the  New 
Testament,  generally  received  by  christians.  But  he  did 
not  judge  it  proper  to  quote  expressly,  and  as  of  authority, 
any  books  of  scripture,  in  an  argument  with  heathens. 

V.  I  shall  now,  as  formerly  proposed,  make  some  extracts 
out  of  the  other  Arnobius's  Commentaries  upon  the  Psalms. 
But  a  few  particulars  will  sufKce  out  of  so  late  a  writer, 
who  flourished  not  till  about  the  year  460.  I  shall  take  it 
for  granted,  that  he  received  the  Old  Testament,  and  those 
books  of  the  New,  which  were  always  received  by  all  chris- 
tians in  g'eneral.  I  shall  only  observe  some  passages,  relat- 
ing" to  such  books,  or  parts  of  books,  of  the  New  Testament, 
which  have  been  denied,  or  disputed  by  some,  together  with 
a  few  other  remarkable  things. 

1.  There  are  in  these  Commentaries  some  indications, 
that  1'  there  still  were  heathens,  who  practised  their  idolatrous 
rites  and  ceremonies. 

2.  He  magnifies  the  speedy  progress  of  the  gospel  in  this 
manner:  '  For"^  many  ages  God  was  known  in  Judea  only. 
But  upon  the  coming  of  Christ,  the  word  of  the  Lord  ran 
swiftly  from  the  east  to  the  west,  from  the  Indies  to  Britain.' 

°  That  passage  is  quoted  already,  p.  473.  note  "'. 

p  Nam  nostra  quidem  scripta  cur  ignibus  meruerunt  dari  ?  cur  iinmauiter 
conventicula  dirui  ?  1.  iv.  p.  152.  f. 

1  Usque  hodie  gentes  fremunt  adversus  Christum,  qui  idohs  fiiiem  imposuit. 
Arnob.  in  Ps.  ii.  p.  3.  Basil.  1560.  In  Libano  sacrificantes  usque  hodie  tur- 
pissimae  Veneri,  vitulorum  virilia  aniputant,  et  in  ejus  sacrificio  hujusmodi 
incensa  supponunt :  mercedem  quam  oportuit  erroris  sui,  dese  suas  exhibent 
meretrici.     In  Ps.  xxviii.  p.  64.     Vid.  et  in  Ps.  ix.  p.  17. 

'  Et  tam  velociter  currit  sermo  ejus,  ut,  cum  per  tot  iriillia  annorum  in  sola 
Judaea  notus  fuerit  Deus,  nunc,  intra  paucos  annos,  nee  ipsos  Indos  lateat  a 
parte  Orientis,  nee  ipsos  Britones  a  parte  occidentis :  ubique  cucurrit  velociter 
sermo  ejus.  In  Ps.  cxlvii.  p.  443.  Sicut  enim  ecclcsiae  in  toto  mundo  pos.te 
civitates  sanctorum  sunt.     In  Ps.  ix.  p.  17. 


480  Credibilitij  of  the  Gospel  Histonj. 

3.  This  writer  mentions  divers  of  those  christians,  which 
are  called  heretics,  as**  the  Novatians,  the  '3Ianichees,  and 
"Photinus,  and'  some  others. 

4.  This  author  cites"  our  Lord's  genealogy  in  the  first 
chapter  of  St.  Matthew's  gospel. 

5.  He  takes  notice  of  several  things  in  the  second  chapter 
of  the  same  gospel,  as^  the  coming  of  the  wise  men  to  Jeru- 
salem, the  star  that  conducted  them,  and  the  slaughter  of 
the  infants  at  Bethlehem. 

6.  He  also  mentions  several  things,  which  are  in^  the  first 
and  second  chapters  of  St.  Luke's  gospel. 

7.  He  has  several  things  out  of  the  book  of'  the  Acts. 

8.  He  has  twice  quoted  Philip,  ii.  G,  and  in  one  of  those 
places  seems  to  understand*  the  words  rendered  by  us, 
"  thought  it  not  robbery  to  be  equal  w-ith  God,"  as  express- 
ing our  Lord's  free  and  voluntary  humiliation. 

9.  He  received '^  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  as  St.  Paul's. 

10.  He  quotes'^  the  epistle  of  James,  as  written  by  James 
the  apostle. 

11.  He  quotes'^  the  book  of  the  Revelation,  and  ascribes 
it  to  John  the  apostle. 

12.  He  recommends*  the  frequent  readingof  the  scriptures. 

'  laPs.  cv.  p.  195.  in  Ps.  cxxxviii.  p.  406,  et  407. 

^  In  Ps.  ex.  p.  319.  in  Ps.  cxxxviii.  p.  409. 

"  Non  ergo,  sicut  damnabilis  Photinus  credit,  ex  Mariae  partu  sunisit  exor- 
dium, sed  ante  luciferum  est  ex  patris  ore  progenitus.     In  Ps.  cix.  p.  317. 

"  Hunc  enim  eundemque  Deum  Marcion  negat,  similiter  Apelles  et  Valen- 
tinus  et  Manichseus,  infideles  et  miseri.     In  Ps.  cxliii.  p.  430. 

"  Sic  enim  legis  evangelii  caput :  liber  generationis  Jesu  Christi,  filii  David, 
filii  Abraham.     In  Ps.  ciii.  p.  277. 

"  Sic  autem  proprium  locum  relinquentes  niagis  stellae  indicio,  &c.  in  Ps. 
xviii.  [al.  xix.]  p.  40.  Herodes  turbatur,  pastores  terrentur,  magi  fugiunf,  infantes 
occiduntur,  angeli  psallunt  dicenfes  :  Gloria  Deo  in  excelsis,  &c.  In  Ps.  xlvi. 
p.  118.  Vid.  et  in  Ps.  xlvii.  p.  120. 

y  In  Ps.  xviii.  [al.  xix.]  p.  41.  in  Ps.  Ixxi.  p.  185.  Vid.  et  supr.  not.  ". 

'  Hi  autem,  qui  cum  apostolis  terfia  diei  bora  ebrii  sunt  Spiritu  Sancio, 
Isetentur,  &c.  In  Prologo.p.  ]. — ita  ut  universaruni  gentium  loquaces  dicerent 
de  eis  :  Nonne  hi  viri  Galilffii  sunt,  &c.  in  Ps.  xviii.  [al.  xix.]  p.  41.  Unde  et 
Petrus  mendicant!  infirmo  :  Argentum  et  aurum  non  habeo,  kc.  In  Ps.  Ixviii. 
p.  178.  '  Ille,  cum  dominus  coeli  et  terras  esset,  non  rapinam 

arbitratus  est  esse  se  aequalem  Deo,  sed  semetipsum  exinanivit,  &c.  In  Ps. 
cxxx.  p.  383.  Cum  in  forma  Dei  esset,  essetqueaequalis  Deo  patri,  exinanivit 
seipsum,  &c.     In  Ps.  cxliii.  p.  429. 

''  Sine  fide  autem,  ut  ait  apostolus,  impossibile  est  placere  Deo.  In  Ps. 
I.xxvii.  p.  207.  Ad  haec  Paulus  clamat,  Hebraeus  ex  Hebrseis,  impossibile  est 
nientiri  Deum,  [Ilcbr.  vi.  18.]     In  Ps.  civ.  p.  287. 

"^  Unde  et  Jacobus  apostolus :  Omne,  inquit,  gaudium  exislimate,  fratres, 
cum  in  tenfationil)iis  variis  incidcritis.  [Cap.  i.  2.]  In  Ps.  xxxii.  p.  73,  et  74. 

^  Sicut  Ezechicl  s  prophelia,  et  Joannis  Apocalypsis  loquitur.  In  Ps.  xx. 
p.  45.  Si  vis  videre  divitem  et  mendicum,  sancti  apostoli  Joannis  lege  Apo- 
calypsin.     In  Ps,  cii.  p.  274.  '  Deus  enim  sciri  vult  omnia 


Lactantius.     a.  D.  306.  481 


CHAP.  LXV. 


LACTANTIUS. 


I.  His  history.  II.  His  works.  \\\.  Select  passages  :  1. 
The  desifpi  of  the  christian  relif/ion.  2.  Its  cjffect.t.  3. 
His  interpolation  of  (roi.vi.-i.  A.  Free-u-ill.  5.  Chris- 
tian vriters  mentioned  In/  him.  (),  7.  Writers  against  the 
christian  religion.  8.  Unsteadg  christians  in  his  time.  0. 
Calumnies  against  the  christians.  10.  The  innocence  oj' 
christian  peo])le.  11.  Miracles  in  his  time.  \2.  Ajittwe 
state  proveahle  by  reason.  13.  He  did  not  deny  the 
eternity  of  hell-torments,  14.  The  value  of  repentance. 
15.  The  etids  oJ'  ChrisVs  coming  and  death.  IG.  The 
great  progress  of  the  christian  religion.  17.  Christian 
J'ortitude.  18.  The  right  oJ'  private  judgment.  19. 
Arguments  against  persecution.  20.  Christians  did  not 
persecute.  IV.  Errors  ascribed  to  him  :  1.  Manich(vism. 
2.  He  denied  antipodes.  3.  Of  the  Jail  of  angels.  4. 
Held  a  millennium.  5.  Denied  the  personality  of  the 
Spirit.  6.  Of  the  origin  of  the  soul.  7.  Of  Christ's 
priestly  office.  V.  His  character.  VI.  His  testimony  to 
the  scriptures :  1 .  Of  the  Old  Testament.  2.  Of  the 
^N'eio  Testament,  particularly  the  gospels.  3.  The  Acts 
of  the  Apostles.  4.  St.  Paul's  epistles.  5.  The  catholic 
epistles.  6.  The  Revelation.  7.  Respect  for  the  scrip- 
tures. A''! I.  Whether  he  quotes  any  other  writings  as  of 
authority.  VIII.  The  sum  of  his  testimony  to  the  scrip- 
tures. IX.  Extracts  from  the  book  of  the  deaths  of 
persecutors. 

ST.  JEROM'S  history  of  Lactantius,  in  his  Catalogue  of 
Ecclesiastical   Writers,   is    to   this    purpose :   '  Firmianus," 

suarum  mysteria  literarum Beatus  enim  perfectus  esse  non  poteris,  nisi 

scrutatus  fueris  testimonia  ejus. Tu  quid  facis,  christiane?  Si  militas 

homini,  scrutatis  legem  ejus ;   quia  si  quid,  licet  jam  ignarus,   incurreris, 

morieris.     Nescire  enim  legem  nemini  licet. Servus  Christi  es  ?  Scrutare 

testimonia  ejus.     In  Ps.  cxviii.  [al.  cxix.]  p.  338,  339. 

'  Firmianus,  qui  et  Lactantius,  Arnobii  discipulus,  sub  Diocletiano  principe 
accitus  cum  Flavio  Grammatico,  cujus  de  Medicinalibus  versu  compositi  extant 
libri,  Nicomediae  rhetoricam  docuit ;  et  penuria  discipulorum,  ob  Gr?ecain  vide- 
licet civitatem,  ad  scribendum  se  contulit.  Habcmus  ejus  Symposium,  quod 
adolescentulus  scripsit  j  OSomopiKov  de  Africa  usque  ad  Nicomediam,  hexa- 
VOL.    111.  2  1 


482  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History . 

'  called  also  Lactantius,  scholar  of  Aniobius,  being  sent  for 
'  in  the  time  of  the  emperor  Dioclesian,  together  with  Flavins 
'  Grammaticus,  whose  books  of  medicines,  v,ritten  in  verse, 
'  are  still  extant,  taught  rhetoric  at  Nicomedia :  but  not 
'  having'  many  scholars  there,  it  being  a  Greek  city,  he  be- 
'  took  himself  to  writing-.  We  have  his  Banquet,  which  he 
'  wrote  when  very  young  :  an  Itinerary  from  Africa  to 
Nicomedia,  in''  hexameter  verses :  and  another  book,  en- 
'  titled  Grammaticus  :  and  an  excellent  book  of  the  Wrath 
'  of  God  ;  and  seven  books  of  Divine  Institutions  against  the 
'  Gentiles  :  and  an  Epitome  of  the  same  work  in  one  book, 
'the  beginning  of  which  is  wanting;  and  two  books  to 
'  Asclepiades  :  Of  the  Persecution,  one  book  :  four  books  of 
'  Epistles  to  Probus  :  two  books  of  Epistles  to  Severus : 
'  two  books  of  Epistles  to  Demetrian^  his  scholar:  and  to 
'  the  same,  one  book  of  the  Workmanship  of  God,  or  the 
'  Formation  of  Man.  In  his  old  age  he  Mas  preceptor  to 
'  Crispus  Ccesar,  son  of  Constantine,  in  Gaul,  who  was  after- 
'  wards  put  to  death  by  his  father.' 

Eusebius  in  his  Chronicle,  or  rather  Jerom,  (who*^  in  his 
translation  of  that  work  of  Eusebius  inserted  divers  things 
of  his  own,  especially  relating'  to  the  Roman  history  and 
Latin  authors,)  says,  '  that"*  Crispus  was  instructed  in  Latin 
'  by  Lactantius,  the  most  learned  man  of  his  time,  but  so  poor 
'  in  this  world,  that  for  the  most  part  he  wanted  necessaries.' 

Cave  says,  that*^  Lactantius  flourisiied  chiefly  in  the  year 
303,  and  onwards;  which  is  not  much  amiss:  for  though 
Lactantius  lived  partly  in  the  third,  and  partly  in  the  fourth 

metris  scriptum  versibus;  et  aliiim  librum,  qui  inscribitiir  Grammaticus;  et 
pulcherrimum  De  Ir&  Dei ;  et  Institutionum  Divinarum  adversum  Gentes 
libros  septem  ;  et  ETrtro/xjjv  ejusdem  operis  in  libro  uno  acephalo  ;  et  ad  Ascle- 
piadem  libros  duos;  de  Persecutione  librum  unum  ;  ad  Probuni  Epistolarum 
libros  quatuor  ;  ad  Severum  Epistolarum  libros  duos;  ad  Demetrianum,  audi- 
torem  suuai,  Epistolarum  libros  duos  ;  ad  eundem  de  Opificio  Dei,  vel  Forma- 
tionehominis,  librum  unum.  Hie  extrema  senectute  magister  CaesarisCrispi, filii 
Constantini,  in  Gallia  fuit,  tjui  postea  a  patre  interfectus.  De  Vir.  111.  cap.  80. 

**  I  shall  here  place  an  ingenious  conjecture  of  Dr.  Heumann  :  Scilicet  apud 
Hieronymum  pro  hexamdris  scriptwn  versibus  conjiciebam  scriptum  fuisse 
hexamctris  utrumcjiie  versibus  :  Utrumque,  id  est,  tum  Symposium,  turn 
Odceporicum  Lactantii.     Vid.  Sympos.  Lact.  in  Prsef.  n.  xix. 

'^  Sciendum  etenim,  me  esse  et  interpretis  et  scriptoris  ex  parte  officio 
usum,  quia  et  Graeca  fidelissime  expressi,  et  nonnulla,  quae  interniissa  vide- 
bantur,  adjeci,  in  Romana  maxime  histona,  quam  Eusebius,  hujus  conditor 
libri,  non  tarn  ignorasse,  utpote  erudilissimus,  quam  Grace  scribens  parum 
suis  necessarian!  perstrinxisso,  mihi  videtur.  Hier.  Prsef.  in  Chr.  p.  4.  f. 

•^  Quorum  Crispum  Lactantius  Latinis  literis  erudivit,  vir  omnium  sue 
tempore  eruditissimus,  sed  adeo  in  hac  vita  pauper,  ut  plerumquc  etiam  neces- 
sariis  indiguerit.     Chron.  p.  180.  f. 

*  claruit  praecipue  ann.  303,  et  deinceps.     H.  L.  T.  i.  p.  161. 


Lactantius.     a.  D.  306.  483 

century  of  the  christinn  oera,  and  must  have  been  a  man 
of  note  for  polite  literature  before  the  year  300;  yet  it  is 
likely,  that  most  of  his  remaining-  pieces,  particularly  the 
Divine  Institutions,  his  principal  work,  were  not  written  till 
after  the  year  303. 

This  author's  name  is  now  generally  written  Lucius 
Coelius,  or  Ctecilius  Firmianus  Lactantius.  But  whether 
the  names  Lucius  and  Coelius,  or  Coecilius,  belong-  to  him, 
may  be  questioned  ;  they  not  being' given  him  by  any  of  the 
ancient  writers  who  lived  near  his  time  :  and  they  are  gene- 
rally wanting-  in  the  manuscript  copies  of  his  works,  and^  in 
the  most  early  printed  editions.  In  this  manner  divers 
learned  men^  argue  upon  this  point:  whilst  some  others 
contend,  that''  his  name  is  rightly  written  as  above. 

The  native  country  of  Lactantius  is  not  certainly  known. 
Some  have  conjectured,  that'  he  was  born  at  Firmum,  now 
Fermo,  in  Italy,  and  that  from  thence  he  was  called  Fir- 
mianus. But  it  is  more  generally  reckoned,  that"^  he  was  an 
African  :  his  education  under  Arnobius,  who  taught  rhetoric 
at  Sicca  in  Africa,  is  an  argument  of  some  weight:  and  it 
is  confirmed  by  the  Itinerary  of  Lactantius  from  Africa  to 
Nicomedia,  which,  probably,  contained  a  description  of  his 
own  journey  from  Africa  to  Nicomedia,  when  he  was  sent 
for  by  Dioclesian. 

The  original  of  the  names'   Firmianus  and""  Lactantius, 

f  Vid.  Montf.  Diar.  Ital.  p.  256. 

e  Vid.  Chr.  M.  Pfaff.  Diss.  Praelim.  ad  Epit.  Inst.  Div.  Sect.  12,  et  13. 

*■  Vid.  Heunian.  Pr.  ad  Lact.  Symp.  sect.  16.  p.  xxviii.  et  sect.  22.  p.  xxxv. 

'  Patriam  habuit  Italiam,  forsan  Firmio,  quod  agri  Piceni  oppidum  est  ad 
oram  maris  Hadriatici,  oriundus.  Cav.  ubi  supra,  p.  161.  Firmianus  cogno- 
minatur  a  Firmo,  agri  Piceni  oppido.  Cellar.  Excerpt,  de  Vit.  Lact. 

''  Vid.  Bahiz.  Annot.  ad  Lact.  de  M.  P.  Tillem.  Mem.  Eb.  Lactance, 
T.  6.  P.  i.  p.  340.  et  note  1.  Vid.  et  Heuman.  Pr.  ad  Symp.  sect.  18,  et  19. 
p.  xxix. xxxi. 

'  Caeterum  vulgata  est  opinio,  Lactantium  cognomen  Firmiani  accepisse  a 
patria  Firmo,  agri  Piceni  oppido.  Sed  hie  quidem  error  facile  confutatur. 
Primum  enim  ostendemusinferius.Firmianumfuisse  proprium  Lactantii  nomen, 
neque  adeo  a  patria  inditum.  Heuin.  ib.  sect.  18.  p.  xxx. — Unde  igitur, 
inquies,  Firmiani  nomen  ?  Fuisse  hoc  proprium  virorura  nomen  illo  aevo  non 
infrequens,  facile  sibi  persuadebit,  qui  consideravit,  plura  voteribus  nomina 
fuisse  propria  ajirmo  deducta.  Non  enim  solum  ipsum  nomen  Firmus  factum 
est  nomen  proprium,  sed  etiam  Firmius,  Firmicus,  Firminus,  Firmilianus, 
Firmianus,  &c.  Id.  ib.  sect.  20.  p.  xxxii. 

■"  Superest  Lactantii  nomen,  quod  communiter  creditur  ei  inditum  fuisse  a 
lacteo  flumine  eloquentiae.  Sed  et  haec  sententia,  et  simul  altera  ilia  de  patria 
ejus  Firmo,  satis  refellilur  silentio  Hieronymi.  Is  enim,  cum  in  catalogo  sue, 
tum  alibi,  ubi  Lactantii  mentionem  facit,  perspicue  ostendit,  utrumque  nomen 
et  Lactantii  et  Firmiani,  ipsius  fuisse  proprium  ;  ut  multum  errent,  qui  ea  pro 
cognominibus  habent  a  patria  et  eloquentia  impositis — Quomodo  enim  a 
lactans  derivatum  est  nomen  Lactantii,  sic  a  prudens,  vincens,  constans, — 

2  I  2 


484  Credibility  of  iJie  Gospel  History. 

has  been   largely  considered   by  Dr.  Heumann,  to  whom  I 
refer. 

A  good  part  of  the  history  of  our  author,  before  taken 
from  Jerom,  may  be  confirmed  from  himself.  For  he  speaks 
of"  his  being  invited  to  Nicomedia,  and  of  his  teaching- 
rhetoric  there,  when  the  church  of  the  christians  in  that  city 
"was  destroyed,  at  the  beginning"  of  the  persecution,  He 
also  intimates"  his  having"  been  long  employed  as  a  professor 
of  rhetoric,  and  his  great  diligence  in  the  j)ursuit  of  elo- 
quence:  which  he  did  not  repent  of,  because  he  hoped  it 
might  be  of  use  in  the  defence  of  true  religion. 

In  his  later  Morks  he  refers  to  the  more  early.  In  his 
Divine  Institutions  he  refers  toi'  the  Workmanship  of  God, 
inscribed  to  his  scholar  Demetrian,  and  written  not  long- 
before.  In  his  book  of  the  Wrath  of  God,  he  several  times 
makes  mention  of  i  the  Divine  Institutions.  I  need  not  add, 
that  these  last  are  also  taken  notice  of  in  the  Epitome,  or 
abridgment  of  them.  And  whereas  Jerom,  among  the  works 
of  Lactantius,  reckons  two  books  to  Asclepiades,  we  find"^ 
Asclepiades  mentioned  by  Lactantius  in  his  Institutions. 
And  we  perceive,  that  Asclepiades  had  dedicated  to  him  a 
book,  which  he  commends.  In  his  Institutions  Lactantius 
also  declares  his  intention^  to  Mrite  a  distinct  treatise  upon 
the  subject.  Of  the  Wrath  of  God  :  which  he  afterwards  did, 
as  has  been  seen. 

He  also  seems*  to  intimate  his  poverty,  unless  the  Avords 
are  capable  of  another  sense,  and  mean  only  his  many  em- 
ployments, by  which  he  was  fully  engaged  ;  or  rather  the 
difficulties  of  the  time  in  which  he  lived,  by  reason  of  the 
persecution  of  cruel  tyrants,  as"  Nourry  understands  the 
expression. 

habemus  nomina  vulgo  nota  Prudentii,  Vincentii,  Conslantii,  Fulgentii,  Inno- 
centii,  Vigilantii.  Id.  ib.  sect.  21.  p.  xxxiii. 

"  Ego  cum  in  Bithynia  oratorias  literas  accitus  docerem,  contigissetque,  ut 
eodem  tempore  Dei  templum  everteretur.  —  Inst.  1.  v.  c.  2.  sub  in. 

°  Multum  tamen  exercitatio  ilia  fictarum  litium  contulit,  ut  nunc  majori 
copia  et  facultate  dicendi  causam  ventatis  peroremus.  Ib.  1.  i.  c.  1.  p.  5. 

P  rjuam  [materiam]  ego  nunc  idcirco  praetereo,  quia nuper  propiium 

de  ea  lihrum  ad  Demetriadem  auditorem  meum  scripsi.  Inst.  1.  ii.  c.  10.  p.  199. 

1  Sed  iinj)eritiam  horum  jam  coargulmus  in  secundo  Divinarum  Institu- 
tionum  libro.  Dc  Ira  Dei,  cap.  2.  p.  766.  Vid.  ib.  p.  767.  et  cap.  11.  p.  793. 
et  cap.  17.  p.  809. 

'  Optime  igitur  Asclepiades  noster  de  Providentia  summi  Dei  disserens  in 
eo  libro,  quern  scripsit  ad  me.  Inst.  1.  vii.  c.  4.  p.  660. 

•  Seponatur  interim  locus  hie  nobis  De  Ira  Dei  disserendi  -,  quod  et  uberior 
est  materia,  et  opere  j)roprio  latius  exsequenda.  Inst.  1.  ii.  c.  17.  sub  fin. 

'  Quam  minime  sim  quietus,  etiam  in  summis  neccssitatibus,  ex  hoc  libello 
poteris  existimarfe.     De  Ira  Dei,  cap.  1.  in. 

"  Summarum  autem  difficultatum  nomine  designare  videtur  horrendam 


Lactantius.     a.  D.  30G.  485 

That  c'xtreiiic  poverty  of  our  autlior,  wliicli  St.  Jeroin 
inciitions,  if  Lactantius  does  not,  may  be  thought  to  be  a 
reflection  upon  Constantino,  tliat  he  should  have  made  no 
better  ])r()vision  for  his  eldest  son's  preceptor.  But  Du 
Pin  and  Tillemoiit  are  of  opinion,  that  it^  was  a  voluntary 
poverty.  AVhat  Jerom  therefore  writes  of  that  matter  is  to 
be  esteemed  a  grand  and  magnificent  commendation.  '  A" 
'  man  must  be  virtuous  in  a  high  degree,  to  live  miserably 
'  at  court,  want  necessaries  in  the  midst  of  abundance,  and 
'  taste  no  pleasures  in  the  company  of  such  as  wallow  in 
'  them.' 

But  I  see  no  proof,  that  Lactantius  was  destitute  of  neces- 
saries, whilst  he  was  employed  in  teaching  Crispus;  though 
it  happens,  that  Jerom  has  mentioned  those  two  things  toge- 
ther. And  what  he  says  is,  that  for  the  most  part  Lactan- 
tius was  poor.  Therefore  he  Mas  not  always  so;  there  was 
a  time,  when  he  had  enough,  and  perhaps  abundance :  and 
he  might  enjoy  it  too  with  moderation.  That  time,  we  may 
suppose  to  Imve  been,  when  he  was  in  the  service  of  Con- 
stantine  ;  the  rest  of  his  life  he  lived  in  mean  circumstances. 

Jerom  has  informed  us,  that  Lactantius  had  not  many 
scholars,  whilst  he  taught  rhetoric  at  Nicomedia;  for  which 
cause  he  betook  himself  to  writing-,  which,  likewise,  is  no 
very  profitable  employment. 

When  we  observe  from  his  works,  that  Lactantius  was  a 
great  reader ;  and  consider,  that  books  in  manuscript  must 
have  been  very  costly  ;  we  can  easily  conceive,  how  the 
furniture  of  his  library  might  keep  him  low  for  the  most  part. 

Lactantius  then  may  be  reckoned  to  have  been  poor,  and 
sometimes  almost  destitute,  until  he  was  invited  to  Constan- 
tine's  court.  And  since  his  pupil  Crispus  was  put  to  death 
by  his  father,  it  is  likely,  he  was  not  much  taken  notice  of 
afterwards.  This,  if  I  mistake  not,  is  agreeable  to  St.  Jerom's 
account,  that  Lactantius  plerumque,  for  the  most  part,  the 
greatest  part  of  his  life,  wasso  poor,as  to  wanteven  necessaries. 
But  those  expressions,  in  my  opinion,  give  no  countenance  at 
all  to  the  suj)position  of  a  chosen  and  voluntary  poverty.  Tri- 
themius  seems  to  hav^e  understood^  the  case  as  I  have  re- 
presented it.     And  Nourry  is  clearly  of  opinion,  that>  what 

tyrannorum  crudtlitatem,  qua  in  christianos  incredibilem  plane  in  modum 
sasviebant.     Nourr.  App.  T.  2.  p.  582.  B. 

"  Du  Pm.  Bibl.  T.  i.  p.  205.  Tillem.  Mem.  T.  6.  P.  i.  p.  345,  346. 

*  Du  Pin,  as  before. 

"  Rhetoricam  priinum  Niconiediae,  deinde  Romae,  sub  Diocletiano,  ab  eo 
vocatus,  gloriose  docuit ;  ubi  cum  penuria  discipulorum  ad  paupertatein 
devenisset,  ad  extremum  Ca;saris  CrL^pi  filii  Consfantini  prseceptor,  jam  senex, 
in  Gallia  factus  est.     Trithem.  de  Scr.  Ec.  cap.  56.  ^  Sed  hanc 


486  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History . 

is  said  by  Jeroiii  of  our  author's  poverty,  does  not  relate  to 
the  time  when  he  had  Crispus  under  his  care. 

We  are  not  acquainted  with  the  circumstances  of  this 
Avriter's  family.  The  Epitome  is  inscribed  to  his  brother'^ 
Pentadius:  but  in  what  sense  Pentadius  was  his  brother, 
does  not  clearly  "appear.  Nor  do  we  know  any  thing-  more 
of  the  life  of  Lactantius,  tlian  the  particulars  already  men- 
tioned; his  education  under  Arnobius,  his  teaching-  rhetoric 
at  Nicomedia,  (where  he  certainly  was  at  the  beginning-  of 
the  persecution  under  Dioclesian  :  where  likewise,  or  in  its 
neighbourhood,  he''  seems  to  have  stayed  some  while  after 
that  persecution  was  begun,)  his  writing-  the  books  above 
mentioned,  his  instructing-  Crispus  in  the  Latin  tongue  in 
Gaul,  his  being-  generally  poor,  and  living-  to  a  great  age, 
and'  that  he  never  pleaded  as  an  advocate  at  the  bar.  But 
we  are  not  informed,  how  he  passed  through  that  long-  and 
dreadful  persecution.  Nor  can  the  time  of  his  leaving- 
Nicomedia,  or  of  his  coming-  into  Gaul,  or  of  his  death,  be 
exactly  determined  at  present.  If  indeed  the  book  of  the 
Deaths  of  Persecutors  be  his,it  may  be  thought,  as'^  is  argued 
by  Baluze,  that  Lactantius  became  acquainted  with  Con- 
stantine,  and  left  Nicomedia  about  the  year  314,  and  soon 
after  came  into  Gaul  by  order  of  that  emperor. 

It  has  been  supposed  by  some,  that  Lactantius  was  at  first 
a  heathen.  Gallceus*^  speaks  of  this  as  a  point  not  to  be 
disputed  :  Tillemont*  in  a  manner  takes  it  for  granted  :  and 
it  was  the  opinion  likewise  of»  Du  Pin,  that  Lactantius  was 
converted  in  his  youth.  ButCellarius''  was  in  suspense  about 
it.     Du  Pin  refers  to  two  passages'  of  our  author's  works ; 

paupertatem  aliis  baud  dubie  temporibus  passus  est,  qiiam  cum  Crispiim,  Con- 
btantini  M.  filhini,  discipulum  habuit.     Nourr.  ib.  p.  382.  B. 

^  tamen  horum  tibi  epitomen  fieri,  Pentadi  frater,  desideras.     Lact. 

Ep.  cap.  1.  ^  Vid.  ib.  Pfaff.  Annot. 

^  Vidi  ergo  in  Bilhynia  prKsidein  gaudio  mirabiliter  elatiim, — quod  unus, 
qui  ]X'T  bieniiii  m  magna  virtute  restiterat,  postremo  cedere  visus  esset.  1.  v. 
c.  11.  p.  491. 

•^  Equidem  tametsi  operam  dederim,  ut  quantulamcumque  dicendi  assequerer 
facultatem  propter  studium  docendi ;  tamen  eloquens  nunquam  fui,  quippe 
qui  forum  ne  attigerim  quidem.     Inst.  1.  iii.  c.  13.  p.  275. 

''  Vid.  Baluz.  Annot.  ad  libr.  deM.  P.  p.  5.  edit.  Ultraj. 

=  Gall,  de  Vit.  Lact.  f  Tillem.  as  before,  p.  34. 

8  Du  Pin,  as  before,  p.  205. 

^  Primum  ingcnii  monimentum,  Symposium,  in  Africa  adolescens  edidit ; 
utrum  tum  christianus,  non  omnino  certum  est.    Cellar.  Excerpt,  de  Vit.  Lact. 

'  Superest,  ut  exhortemur  omnes, — ut,  contemtis  terrestnbus  et  abjectis 
erroribus,  quibus  antea  tenebamur — ad  coelestis  thesauri  praemia  dirigamur — 
Div.  Inst.  1.  vii.  cap.  ult.  p.  730.  In  hoc  statu  cum  essent  humanae  res, 
misertus  est  nostri  Deus — revelavit  se  nobis,— ut  errore  prioris  vita  abjecto, — 
legem  divinam,  tradente  ipso  Domino,  sumercmus ;  qua  lege  universi,  quibus 


Lactantius.     a.  D.  306.  487 

where,  as  he  says,  Lactantius  seems  to  reckon  himself  with 
those,  who,having'seen  their  error, embraced  the  true  religion. 
But  those  expressions  appear  to  me  ambiguous:  and  as  I 
apprehend,  they  rather  relate  to  the  state  of  mankind  in 
general,  than  to  that  of  Lactantius  himself,  or  of  any  other 
particular  person  ;  he  is  there  speaking-  of  the  great  desig^n 
of  the  christian  religion  in  general,  to  deliver  men  from  the 
errors  and  superstitions  in  M'hich  they  had  been  long'  in- 
volved. So  Arnobius  says  :  '  It''  is  now  about  three  hundred 
'  years  since  we  began  to  be  christians.' 

FJeside  these  two  passages,  Gallteus  refers  to'  a  third. 
But  the  same  answer  will  suffice  for  that  likewise. 

His  being-  sent  for  by  Dioclesian,  to  teach  rhetoric  at  Nico- 
media,  is  no  proof  that  he  Avas  then  a  heathen.  Dioclesian, 
who"^  was  intent  upon  adorning-  that  city,  would  be  glad  of 
any  man  of  fine  parts,  who  would  come  and  take  up  his 
residence,  and  display  them  there.  It  is  well  known,  that 
before  the  persecution  there"  were  many  christians  in  the 
imperial  court  and  armies :  and  it  is  past  dt)ubt,  that  Lac- 
tantius was  a  christian,  when  the  persecution  began  at  Nico- 
media.  Nor  does  his  great  and  long- diligence  in  the  pursuit 
of  eloquence,  and  the  study  of  polite  literature,  afford  any 
argument  for  his  heathenism  at  that  time.  It  can  hardly  be 
suspected,  that  Lactantius  was  not  a  christian  when  he  wrote 
the  epistles,  mentioned  by  St.  Jerom.  Yet  pope  Damasus 
writes  to  him,  that"  he  did  not  read  them  with  pleasure, 
because,  though  many  of  them  were  very  long",  they  had 
little  about  the  christian  doctrine,  but  chiefly  related  to 
measures,  and  the  situation  of  countries,  and  philosophical 
questions.  Nay,  that  observation  of  Damasus  does  at  once 
afford  a  proof  of  our  author's  Christianity  at  that  time,  and 
of  his  extensive  learning-.  Nor  does  the  Symposium,  sup- 
posing- it  to  be  a  genuine  work  of  Lactantius,  demonstrate 

irretiti  fuimus  errores,  cum  vanis  et  impiis  superstitionibus,  tollerentur.  Epit. 
cap.  iii.  p.  739.  Leyd.  cap.  Ix.p.  129.  ed.  PfafF. 

•^  Trecenti  sunt  anni,  minus  vel  plusaliquid,  ex  quo  coepiniusesse  christiani, 
et  terrarum  in  orbe  censeri.     Arnob.  1.  i.  p.  9.  in. 

'  cognosceie  ministrum  ejus,  ac  nuntium  quern  legavit  in  terram  ; 

quo  dicente  liberati  ab  errore,  quo  implicati  tenebamur,  formatique  ad  veri  Dei 
cultum,  justitiam  disceremus.     De  Ira  Dei,  cap.  2.  p.  766. 

■"  Ita  semper  denientabat,  Nicomediam  studens  urbi  Romae  coaeqnare.  De 
M.  Pers.  cap.  7.         "  Vid.  Eus.  H.  E.  1.  viii.  cap.  6.  et  libr.  de  M.  P.  cap.  15. 

"  Fateor  quippe  tibi,  eos,  quos  niihi  jam  pridem  Laclantii  dederas  libros, 
ideo  non  libenter  lego,  quia  et  plurimse  epistolae  ejus  usque  ad  mille  spatia 
versuum  tenduntur,  et  raro  de  nostro  dogmate  disputant ;  quo  fit,  utet  legenti 
fastidium  generet  longitudo:  et  si  qua  brevia  sunt,  scholasticis  niagis  sint  apta, 
quum  nobis,  de  metris  et  regionum  situ,  et  philosophis  disputantibus,  [aliter 
disputantia].     Daraas.  Pap.  ad  Hier.  T.  ii.  p.  561.  Ed.  Bened. 


488  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

his  heathenism.  It  was  composed  indeed  during?  the 
holidays  of  Saturn.  But  yet  there  is  no  heathenism  in  any 
part  ot"  the  work,  as  isi  well  observed  by  the  learned  editor. 
Finally  therefore,  since"^  there  are  no  clear  intimations  of  his 
heathenism,  or  of  his  conversion  to  Christianity,  in  his  own 
works,  nor  in  any  ancient  writers  who  have  mentioned  him  ; 
I  rather  think,  (though  without  being  positive,)  that  he  was 
from  the  beginning  educated  in  the  christian  religion. 
Nourry*  was  of  the  same  opinion  :  and  herein  I  thought  1 
had  the  honour  to  agree  likewise  with  Dr.  Heumann,  who 
lias'  lately  given  us  a  very  valuable  edition  of  Lactantius,and 
had  been"  long  before  acquainted  with  his  works.  But  in 
his  preface''  to  that  edition,  he  has  let  fall  some  expressions 
on  the  other  side;  as  if  he  had  altered  his  opinion, or  forgot 
what  he  had  well  and  largely  argued™  formerly. 

II.  We  have  seen  in  Jerom  a  catalogue  of  the  works  of 
Lactantius:  the  catalogues  in  Honorius  of  Autun  and  Tri- 
themius  are  very  little  different. 

1.  The  last-mentioned  writer  adds,  that''  beside  the  books 
enumerated  by  him,  it  was  said,  that  Lactantius  had  written 
not  a  few  more,  but  he  had  not  seen  them. 

2.  Lactantius  himself  in  his^  Institutions,  and  in  ^  his  book, 
Of  the  Wrath  of  God,  mentions  a  design  to  write  against  all 

p  Hoc  quoque  Symposium  lusi  de  carmine  inepto. 
Sic  me  Sicca  docet.  Sicca  deliro  magistra. 
Annua  Saturni  dum  temporafesta  redirent. 
Symp.  Prol. 

"i  Nee  enim    quidquam   in  ejus  senigmatibus   inest,    quod   sapiat 

ethnicismum  :  tantum  abest,  ut  probet  ethnicismum.     Heunian.  Praef.  ad  Lact. 
Symp.  Sect.  14.  p.  xxv. 

'  Nam  SI  Lactantius  ex  ethnicis  tenebris  ad  lucem  christianae  sapientiae 
emersisset,  videtur  summum  hoc  Numinis  beneficium  alicubi  librorum  suorum 
commemoraturus  fuisse  praedicaturusque — pristinse  religionis,  si  diversatn  a 
christianis  prius  habuisset,  memoriam,  tot  invitantibus  occasionibus,  nee  debuit 
supprimere,  nee,  quae  pietasejus  fuit,  voluit.     Heuman.  ib.  p.  xxiv.  et  xxv. 

*  Nourr.  Diss,  in  Lact.  cap.  i.  p.  578.  '  Gottingae.  mdccxxxvi. 

"  The  Symposium  of  Lactantius,  with  a  long  preface,  was  published  by 
Dr.  Heumann,  at  Hanover,  in  the  year  ]  722. 

"  Cum  enim  nee  philosophus  esset,  nee  diu  sacris  versatus  in  literis,  (a  puero 
enim  sacra  coluerat  lUa  cum  suis  parentibus,  quae  postea  exsecrabatur,  illata 
menti  suae  luce  divinse  sapientiae :)  ne  satis  quidem  perceperat  ecclesiae  doc- 
trinas,  &e.     Heuman.  Praef  ad  opp.  Lactant.  p.  ante  f.  quart. 

"  Several  of  his  passages  are  alleged  above  at  note  i  and  ^ 

"  Alia  insuper  non  pauca  scripsisse  dieitur.  Sed  in  manus  nostras  non 
venerunt.     Trithem.  cap.  56. 

y  Postea  plenius  et  uberius  contra  omnes  mendaciorum  sectas  proprio 
separatoque  opere  pugnabimus.     Inst.  1.  iv.  c.  ult.  in  fin. 

^  et  refutabimus  postea  diligentius,  cum  respondere  ad  omnes  sectas 

ccEperiraus,  quae  veritatem,  dum  disputant,  perdiderunt.     De  Ira  Dei,  c.  2. 
1).  767. 


Lactantius.     a.  D.  306.  489 

heresies  ;  nhicli  we  do  not  know  that  he  ever  did,  being- 
perhaps  prevented  by  death.  1  thonght  it  proper,  however, 
to  take  notice  of  it  in  this  phice,  as  a  proof  of  onr  author's 
zeal  for  truth,  with  m  hich  lie  was  greatly  enamoured,  (as 
some  other  expressions  also  of  his  elsewhere*  show,)  and  his 
readiness  to  employ  his  time  in  the  defence  of  it. 

3.  .And  at  the  beginning  of  the  seventh  book  of  his  Insti- 
tutions, he  promises''  somewhat  against  the  Jews,  which  we 
have  not,  unless  it  be  in  the  latter  part  of  that  very  book. 

4.  Two  of  the  three  books  first  mentioned  by  Jerom,  the 
Itinerary  and  Grammaticus,  seem  to  be  irrecoverably  lost. 
And  it  has  been  generally  thought,  that  the  third,  the  Sym- 
posium, or  Banquet,  was  lost  likewise.  But  Dr.  Ileumann, 
who  not  very  long  since  published  an  edition  of  a  work  with 
that  title,  asserts  its  genuineness.  It  is  a  collection  of  a 
hundred  tristich  epigrams,  with  a  prologue.  I  do  not  dispute 
the  favourable  Judgment  which  the  learned  editor  forms 
of  this  work.  But  I  shall  have  no  occasion  to  quote  it  at 
present. 

5.  All  our  author's  books  of  epistles  are  entirely  lost. 
Pope  Damasus,  as''  before  shown,  did  not  read  them  with 
pleasure,  and  seems  to  have  set  but  little  value  upon  them  ; 
nevertheless  some  learned  Jiioderns''  regret  the  loss  of  them. 

According  to  the  passage  before  cited  from  Jerom's  Cata- 
logue, there  were  only  two  books  of  epistles  to  Demetrian. 
Nevertheless,  in''  anotlier  place  Jerom  quotes  the  eighth  book 
of  Lactantius's  epistles  to  Demetrian.  I  faiicy  the  reason  is 
this  ;  there  were  in  all  eight  books  of  epistles,  and  those  to 
Demetrian  were  placed  last  in  the  collection.  Quoting 
therefore  the  second  book  to  Demetrian,  he  calls  it  the 
eighth  to  him  :  meaning,  however,  no  more  than  the  eighth 
book  of  this  writer's  epistles,  which  book  was  to  Deme- 
trian. 

6.  We  still  have  the  treatise,  Of  the  Workmanship  of  God, 
addressed  to  Demetrian,  whom*^  he  had  taught  rhetoric. 
Demetrian"  seems  to  have  been  a  man  of  fortune,  and   to 

'  Nullus  enim  suavior  animo  cibus  est,  quam  cognitio  veritatis,  cujus  asse- 
rendae  atque  illustrandaj,  septem  voluinina  destinaviiiius.  1.  i.  c.  I.  p.  9. 

^  Sed  ent  nobis  contra  Judaeos  separata  materia,  in  qua  illos  erroris  et  sceleris 
revincemus.  Inst.  1.  vii.  c.  1.  ad  fin.  '^  See  p.  487. 

•^  Utinam  eas  epistolas  tenipus  reriim  edax  nobis  non  invidisset.  Nos 
libenter  legeremus.     Basn.  Ann.  320.  n.  iv. 

«  quod  et  Firmianus  in  octavo  ad  Demetrianum  epistolarum  libro 

facit.     In  Galat.  c.  iv.  p.  268. 

'  Nam,  si  te  in  Uteris  nihil  aliud  quam  linguam  instruentibus  auditorem 
satis  strenuum  praebuisti ;  quanto  magis  in  his  veris,  et  ad  vitam  pertinentibus, 
docihor  esse  debebis  ?  De  Op.  Dei,  c.  i.  p.  829. 

8  Nam,  licet  te  publicse  rei  necessitas  a  veris  et  justis  operibus  avertat ; 


490  Credibilitij  of  the  Gospel  History. 

have  bad  then  some  public  employment.  Lactantius  com- 
mends him:  but  he  likewise  admonisheth  him  to''  be  upon 
his  g-uard  against  the  snares  of  his  prosperous  condition. 
And  yet  it  must  have  been  a  time  of  persecution.  For  with 
regard  to  himself,  he  speaks  of  the  difficulty  both  of  his 
own'  circumstances,  and  of  the  times  :  and  he  says,  that''  the 
devil  then  acted  as  a  roaring*  lion.  Tillemont  thinks,  that' 
this  was  the  first  of  our  author's  public  labours  in  the  ser- 
vice of  religion,  because  he  here  expresseth  a  resolution  to 
employ  his  time  for  the  future  in  the  defence  of  truth.  But 
that  argument  is  but  barely  probable,  since  Lactantius 
expresseth  himself  much  after  the  same  manner  again  in  the 
introduction  to  his  Divine  Institutions. 

7.  As  those  Institutions  against  the  Gentiles,  in  seven 
books,  are  the  principal  work  of  Lactantius,  we  should  be 
glad  to  settle  the  time  of  writing  and  publishing-  them.  As 
we  now  have  them,  they  are  inscribed  to  Constantine.  And 
it  is  thought  that  he  refers  to  the  Licinian  persecution, 
which  began  in  the  year  319.  They  were  not  therefore  pub- 
lished before  the  year  320.  So  say  '"Basnage  and  "Pagi, 
whose  arguments  I  have  briefly  placed  in  the  margin,  for 
the  sake  of  such  readers  as  may  not  have  their  works  at  hand. 
Du  Pin  says,  that"  Lactantius  wrote  his  Institutions  in  the 
time  of  Licinius's  persecution,  which  began  in  320,  and 
that!"  he  imdertook  that  work  about  the  year  of  Christ,  320, 
if  his  numbers  are  rightly  printed,  which  I  think  cannot  be 
properly  said.     For  it  is  not  a  work  which  could  be  com- 

tamen  fieri  non  potest,  quin  subinde  in  ccelum  aspiciat  mens  sibi  conscia  recti, 
ibid. 

'■  Ego  quidein  laetor,  omnia  tibi,  quae  pro  bonis  habentur,  prospere  fluere  : 
vereor  enim — Ideoque  te  moneo,  repetens  iterumque  monebo,  ne  oblectamenta 
ista  terrse  pro  magnis  aut  veris  boms  habere  te  credas.   ibid. 

'  Apud  quern  nunc  profiteor,  nulla  me  necessitate  vel  rei  vcl  temporis 
impediri,  quo  minus  aliquid  excudam.     De  Op.  Dei,  cap.  i.  p.  829. 

"  Nam  et  ille  colluctator  et  adversarius  noster,  scis,  quam  sit  astutus,  et  idem 
ipse  violentus,  sicuti  nunc  videmus.  ib.  p.  830. 

'  See  Tillem.  as  before,  p.  349,  and  Lact.  de  Op.  Dei,  cap.  ult. 

"'  quern  hoc  anno  [320.]  Divinarum  Institutionum  libros  Constantino 

nuncupasse  existimamus.  Ardente  quidem  Liciniana  persecutione  editos  esse, 
verbis  monemur  auctoris:  [Inst.  1.  i.  cap.  1.]  Nam  mails  qui  adversus  justos  in 
aliis  terrarum  partibus  sseviunt,  quanto  serius,  tanto  vehementius  idem  Omni- 
potens  mercedem  sceleris  exsolvet,  &c.     Basn.  Ann.  320.  n.  iv. 

"  Sscviebat  itaque  tunc  Licinii  persecutio,  quando  Lactantius  opus  illud 
Constantino  dicavit,  ideoque  non  anno  31 G,  ut  credidit  Baronius,  sed  post 
annum  319,  in  lucem  emissum.  Pag.  in  Bar.  Ann.  315.  n.  vii.  vid.  et  316.  n.  vi. 

°  il  a  done  ecrit  du  temps  de  la  persecution  de  1'  empereur  Licinius, 

qui  a  commence  en  320.     Du  Pin.  Bib.  T.  i.  p.  202. 

p  II  entrepit  ensuite  les  sept  livres  des  Institutions  vers  I'an  320  de  Jesus 
Christ.     Id.  ib.  p.  205. 


Lactantu's.     a.  D.  30G,  491 

posed  ill  a  sliort  tiiiio;  and  we  have  proofs  ot'liis  desioiiing- 
it'i  at  the  very  beginning  of  Dioelesian's  persecution,  fille- 
inont  says,  that""  in  the  condition  we  now  have  it,  it  seems 
not  to  have  been  pn])lished  before  the  year  321  ;  and  there- 
fore it  uiight  be  the  fruit  of  the  time  that  Lactantius  spent 
with  Crispus  in  Gaul.  Nourry's'  opinion  concerning  the 
time  of  this  work  is  very  little  difierent  from  theirs  :  (though 
in  one  place  he  says,  that'  the  Institutions  were  composed  a 
little  after  the  year  311.)  lie  observes,  that"  Lactantius 
seems  not  to  have  been  in  Bithynia,  when  he  composed  this 
work  ;  therefore  he  might  be  in  Gaul  with  Crispus,  who  was 
not  placed  under  his  tuition,  before  the  year  318.  He  too 
supposeth,  that'  Lactantius  in  this  work  speaks  of  the 
Licinian  persecution.  Lie  does  not  insist  upon  the  passage 
in  the  iiiscription  of  the  Institutions  to  Constantine,  which  is 
wanting  in  some  manuscripts,  but  upon  some  other  passages 
in  other  parts  of  that  work  :  where,  however,  I  must  own,  I 
cannot  yet  discern  a  reference  to  any  persecution,  different 
from  that  of  Dioclesian. 

Cave  was  rather  of  opinion  that"  Lactantius  composed  the 
Institutions  in  the  time  of  this  last-mentioned  persecution. 
And  I  beg  leave  to  enlarge  in  support  of  his  opinion.  This 
Avork  was  occasioned '^  by  the  writings  of  two  heathens  of 

1  Vid.  Inst.  1.  V.  cap.  2.  p.  460.  et  c.  4.  p.  470. 

■■  Tillem.  T.  6.  P.  i.  p.  349. 

°  Lactantius  igitur  non  ante  hunc  annunti  319,  Divinarum  Institutionum 
libros  edidit.  Nonne  autem  roboris  ac  firmamenti  aliquid  huic  posteriori 
opinioni  inde  accedit,  quod  Lactantius  significare  videtur  se  ex  Bithynia — prius 
tecessisse,  quam — hos  libros  einisisset  in  luceii)  ?  Non  enini  prorsus  inepte 
colligi  inde  potest  eos  ab  illo  composites,  postquam  se  contulisset  in  Gallias, 
atque  ibi  Crispus  in  ejus  traditus  fuisset  disciplinam.  At  id  anno  318,  aut 
paulo  post  contigit.     Nourry,  App.  T.  ii.  p.  632.  A.  B. 

'■  Si  verior  sit  secunda  opinio,  certe  Lactantius,  qui  paulo  post  annum  311, 
Divinas  Institutiones  composuit.  ib.  p.  628.  B. 

"  Inst.  1.  V.  c.  xi.  p.  490.     The  words  will  be  cited  below  at  note  *■. 

*  Et  certe  Lactantius  Diocletiani  in  christianos  ssevientis  immanera  crude- 
litatem — depinxit.  Lib.  v.  Inst.  cap.  xi.  p.  490.  et  seqq.  Ast  alia  his  plane 
similia  aut  prorsus  eadem,  adhuc  cum  hos  libros  exararet,  inflicta  sic  alibi 
memorat:  Cultores  Deisummi,  hoc  est,  justos  homines,  tortjuent,  interficiunt, 
&a  ib.  cap.  i.  p.  456.  Vid.  et  cap.  12.  p.  493. 1.  vi.  c.  17.  p.  603.  Nourry, 
ubi  supr.  p.  63 1 . 

*  Script!  sunt  hi  libri  sub  Diocletiani  persecutione,  quod  ipse  Lactantius, 
1.  V.  c.  2,  4,  satis  aperte  testatur  :  non,  quod  multi  volunt,  sub  Liciniana.  In- 
scriptiones  enim  ad  Constantinum  M.  quae  in  librorum  1,  2,  4,  ct  5,  fronte 
comparent,  nee  antiquiores  editiones,  nee  melioris  notse  codices  MSS.  agnos- 
cunt ;  ideoque  ab  aliena  manu  fluxisse  censendae  sunt.  Aliter  a  stylo  Lactan- 
tiano  non  multum  abhorrent.     Cav.  H.  L.  T.  i.  p.  162. 

*  Ego  cum  in  Bithynia  oratorias  literas  accitus  docerem,  contigissetqiie,  iit 
eodem  tempore  Dei  templum  everterctur,  duo  exstiterunt  ibidem,  qui  jacenti 
atque  abjectne  veritati,  nescio  utrum  superbius  an  importunius,   insultarent. 


49'2  Credihility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

note,  who  published  their  pieces  ag-ainst  the  christians  at  the 
very  beginning-  of  the  persecution  under  Dioclesian,  as 
Lactantius  expressly  assures  us.  It  seems  not  reasonable 
to  think,  that  a  design,  formed  by  him  in  302,  or  303,  should 
not  be  executed  before  320.  And  in  several  passages  of  his 
Institutions,  he  speaks  as^  if  the  christians  then  suffered 
under  a  general  persecution,  all  over  the  world  ;  whereas 
the  Licinian  persecution  was  in  the  east  only. 

Lactantius  does  indeed  j^peak  of  some  sufferings  in  the 
persecution  of  Dioclesian  as'  past.  Which,  however,  1  think 
is  not  strange:  for  though  he  formed  the  design  of  this 
work  at  the  beginning  of  that  persecution,  and  carried  it  on 
as  he  had  opportunity  in  those  ditticult  times  ;  the  persecu- 
tion might  be  coming  to  an  end,  or  be  quite  concluded  before 
his  work  was  finished  and  published.  By  which  means  he 
certainly  would  be  able  to  reflect  upon,  and  take  notice  of 
divers  events  in  several  parts  of  the  world,  during  that  long- 
scene  of  affliction  and  distress. 

And  when  I  read  the  Institutions,  I  am  disposed  to  con- 
sider them  as  a  work  composed,  for  the  most  part  at  least, 
under^  the  persecution  of  Dioclesian  ;  though  perhaps  they 
M-ere  not  published  till  after  it  was  over.  It  is  likely,  that 
others,  in  reading  this  work,  experience  the  like  sentiments. 
For  some  have  supposed,  tliat'^  there  were  two  editions  of  this 

Inst.  1.  V.  c.  2.  p.  460.  li  ergo,  de  quibus  dixi,  cum,  prsesente  me  ac  dolente, 
sacrilegas  suas  literas  explicassent ;  et  illorum  superba  impietate  stimulatus, — 
suscepi  hoc  munus. — ib.  c.  4.  p.  470. 

y  Haec  enim  popukis  noster  patitur  omnia,  errantium  pravitate.  Ecce  in  eo 
est  errore  civitas,  vel  potius  oibis  ipse  totiis,  ut  bonos  et  justos  viros,  tanquam 
malos  et  impios,  persequatur,  excruciet,  damnet,  occidat.  ib.  1.  v.  c.  12.  p.  493. 
Spectare  sunt  enim,  spectanturque  adhuc  per  orbem,  pcenae  cultoriim  Dei,  in 
quibus  excruciandis  nova  et  iiiusitata  tormenta  excogitata  sunt.  1.  vi.  c.  17. 
p.  603.  ^  Quae  autem  per  totum  orbem  singuli  gesserint,  enarrare 

impossibile  est.  Quis  enim  voluminum  numerus  capiet  tam  infinita,  tam  varia 
genera  crudelitatis?  Accepta  enim  potestate,  pro  suis  viribus  quisque  saevivit. 
Ib.  1.  v.  c.  11.  p.  490. 

*  Si  vobis  sapientes  videmur,  imitamini :  si  stulti,  contemnite,  aut  eliam 
ridete,  s-  libet. — Quid  lacerafis  ?  quid  affligitis?  1.  v.  c.  12.  sub  in.  Cur  enim 
tam  crudeliter  sseviant,  nisi  quia  mefuunt,  ne,  in  dies  invalescente  justitia,  cum 
diis  suis  araneosis  relinquantur?  cod.  cap.  sub  fin. 

''  Dici  etiam  potest,  Lactantium  his  tioc  opus  edidisse,  (quod  idem  Terful- 
liani  Apologetico  factum  esse  constat,)  prius  ante  regnum  Constantini,  iterum 
eo  rerum  potito.     Heuman.  ad  Inst.  1.  i.  c.  1.  p.  6. 

Sane  Lactantius  hbros  Divinarumlnstitutionum  scripsit  furenle  persecutione, 
in  ipsis  ejus  initiis,  ut  ex  capita  secundo  et  quarto  libri  quinti  colligitur  :  scd 
non  emisit,  impeditus  videhcet  et  rei  et  temporis  necessitate. — At,  quum  data 

esset  pax llaque  tum  Lactantius  Divinarum   Institutionum   hbros,   in 

quibus  loca  quajdam  sparsira  repcriuntur,  quae  manifesto  constat  scripta  esse 
post  belkim  sedatum  atque  cxtinctum,  recensuit,  pleraque  addidit,  in  primis 
vero  ea  quaj  in  initiis  hbrorum  et  in  epilogo  dicuntur  ad  Constantinum,  quae 


Lactantius.     a.  D.  306.  493 

work  ;  tbat  is,  one  before  that  which  we  now  have,  with  the 
inscriptions  to  Constantino:  and  others,  supported  by  the 
authority  of  a  j^ood  number  of  manuscript  copies,  think 
those*^  inscriptions  not  geiuiine. 

Before  1  proceed,  1  would  observe  one  tiling"  more;  that 
it  is  not  likely  the  long  argument  against  ])ersecution,  in  the 
fifth  book  of  the  Institutions,  should  be  written  after  Diocle- 
sian's  persecution  «  as  over.  And  the  last  chapter  of  that 
book  seems  to  show,  that''  as  yet  there  was  no  christian 
emperor:  that  the  persecuting-  princes  were  still  living,  and 
that  their  persecutions  were  not  yet  couie  to  an  end.  And 
in  the  Epitome  of  the  same  work  there  are  expressions, 
intimating-,  that'  some  of  those  persecuting- princes,  or  chief 
instruments  in  Dioclesian's  persecution,  had  died  miserably, 
Avhilst  one  or  more  of  them  still  survived  :  which  might  lead 
us  to  think,  that  the  Epitome  itself  was  composed  not  later 
than  the  year  311,  312,  or  313. 

As  for  the  mention  which  is  made  of  the  Arians  in  one^ 
place,  it  was  an  easy  addition.  But  it  is  difficult  to  defend 
the  genuineness  of  that  cause  upons  any  supposition  con- 
cerm'ng-  the  date  of  the  Institutions. 

perperara  nonnulli  judicant  notha  esse  et  suppositltia.- Sed  baud  dubie 

duae  antiquitus  fiiere  Divinarum  Tnstitutionum  editiones. — Qui  vero  priore 
editione  usi  sunt,  ea  profeclo  non  habuerunt  quae  postea  de  Constantino  addita 
sunt.  Baluz.  annot.  ad  Lb.  de  M.  P.  sub  in.  Et  conf.  Tillem.  ubi  supr. 
p.  349,  et  4G6,  &c.  Vid.  et  Tliomas.  not.  ad  Inst.  1.  i.  c.  ].  p.  G.  edit. 
Heumanni. 

«=  Inclusa  de  Constantino  ad  num.  17,  absunt  a  pluribus  MSS.  quinque 
Vaticanis,  et  duobus  Bononiensibus,  Mich.  Thomasio  teste :  ab  Anglicanis 
aliquot,  et  primo  Lipsiensi.  Habent  Gothanus,  reliqui  Lipsienses,  alii  codices. 
Damnat  Josephus  Iseeus  non  una  ratione,  quasi  non  congruentia  temporibus. 
Tuetur  Sfephanus  Baluzius — et  tristibus  temporibus  scriptas  Institutiones  putat, 
laetioiibus  autem  emendatas,  auctas,  et  Constantino  dedicatas.  Cellar,  ad 
eund.  loc.  ap.  Heuman.  ed.  p.  6. 

^  Quicquid  vcro  adversum  nos  mali  principes  moliuntur,  fieri  ipse  permittit. 
Et  tamen  injustissimi  persecutores,  quibus  Dei  nomen  contumelise  ac  ludibrio 
fuit,  non  se  putent  impune  laturos,  quia  indignationis  adversus  nos  ejus  quasi 
ministri  fuerunt.  Punientur  enim  judicio  Dei,  qui  accepta  potentate  supra 
humanum  modum  fuerint  abusi. — Quapropter  non  sperent  sacrilegae  anima?, 
contemtos  et  inultos  fore,  quos  sic  obterunt.     Inst.  1.  v.  c.  23. 

e  nee  re  nee  verbo  pugnamus  ;  sed  mites  et  taciti,  et  patientes  per- 

ferimus  omnia Habemus  enim  fiduciam  in  Deo,  a  quo  expectamus 

secuturam  protinus  ultionern.  Nee  est  inanis  ista  fiducia;  siquidem  eorum 
omnium,  qui  hoc  facinus  ausi  sunt,  mistrabiles  exitus  partim  cognovimus, 
partim  videmus.     Epit.  c.  53.  p.  150.  ed.  Davids. 

'  Cum  enim  Phryges,  aut— Marcionitae  aut  Anthropiani,  aut  Ariani,  seu 
quilibet  alii  nominantur.     Inst.  1.  iv.  c.  30.  p.  449. 

s  Mais  en  quelque  temps  qu  on  dise  qu'  a  ecrit  Lactance,  il  est  bien  difficile 
de  croire  qu'il  ait  pu  parler  des  Ariens  comme  d'heretiques  declares ;  ce  qu'on 
ne  pent  presque  pas  dire  avoir  ete  avant  le  concile  de  Nicee,  et  apres  loutes  les 
persecutions.     11  seroit  meme  assez  aise  de  montrer  par  la  lettre  de  Constantin 


494  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

After  all,  how  inucli  soever  1  liave  desired  it,  1  do  not 
imagine  that  I  have  clearly  fixed  the  time  of  writing-  and 
publishing-  this  work;  but  yet  I  was  willing-  to  set  before 
my  readers  a  state  of  the  question.  And  1  persuade  myself, 
that  in  the  year  306,  Lactantius  had  begun  the  work,  the 
design  of  which  was  formed  in  303.  I  therefore  choose  to 
consider  him  as  flourishing-  in  the  quality  of  a  christian 
writer  about  the  year  306. 

This  work  Lactantius  intended  not  only  as  an  answer  to 
the  two  authors  before  taken  notice  of,  but'"  as  a  general 
answer,  and  full  confutation  of  all  others,  who  already  had, 
or  hereafter  might  oppose  the  christian  doctrine. 

It  is  a  noble  work,  and  has  received  just  praises  from' 
Jerom.  I  put  in  the  margin  a  passj^ge  of'  Lactantius, 
which  that  author  refers  to.  Nevertheless,  perhaps  this  work 
would  have  been  more  curious  and  entertaiuing  to  us  now, 
if  he  had  inserted  more  particularly  the  objections  of  those 
two  writers,  that  were  the  first  occasion  of  it.  But  Lactan- 
tius despised  them  too  much  to  do  them  that  honour.  And, 
as  before  observed,  he  intended  his  work  should  contain  a 
general  confutation  of  all  objectors  and  adversaries  M'hat- 
ever. 

8.  We  have  also  the  Epitome  of  the  Divine  Institutions, 
inscribed   by  Lactantius   to  his  brother   Pentadius;  Avhich 
was   imperfect  at  the  beginning-   in   St.  Jerom's  copy,  and 
was  so  likewise  in  ours,  until  it  was  found  in  the  library  of 
the  king-  of  Sardinia,  at  Turin,  by  Dr.  Christopher  Matthew 

a  S.  Alexandre  et  a  Arius,  que  jusqu'  a  la  fin  de  Tann.  223.  1'  heresie  d'Arius 
n'  avoit  encore  fait  que  peu  ou  point  de  bruit  dans  I'Occident.  De  sorte  que 
pour  soutenir  que  le  mot  d'  Ariani  est  veritablement  de  Lactance, — il  faudoit 
rapporter  ce  qu'il  dit  de  la  persecution  qui  duroit  encore  alors  en  quelques  en- 
droits,  non  a  celle  de  Licinius,  mais  a  celle  de  Sapor,  &c.  TilJem.  note  iv.  sur 
Lactance.  Mem.  T.  6.  P.  i.  p.  469.  So  Tilleuiont.  However  they  who  are 
desirous  of  seeing  somewhat  on  the  other  side  may  consult  Dr.  Heumaun's 
note  upon  the  passage  of  Lactantius,  where  the  Arians  are  mentioned. 

h  suscepi  hoc  opus,   ut  omniltus  ingenii  mei  viribus  accusatores 

justitiae  vindicarem :  non  ut  contra  hos  scriberem,  qui  paucis  verbis  obteri 
poterant ;  sed  ut  omnes,  qui  ubique  idem  operis  efficiunt  aut  effecerunt,  uno 
simul  impetu  profiigarem.     Inst.  I.  v.  c.  4.  p.  470. 

'  Firmianus  quoque  nosier,  in  praeclaro  Institutionurn  suarum  opere,  Y  literae 
meminit ;  et  de  dextris  ac  sinistris,  hoc  est,  de  virtutibus  et  vitiis  plenissime 
disputat.  Hieron.  Coram,  in  Ecc.  cap.  x.  T.  2.  p.  770.  Quis  mihi  inlerdicere 
potest,  ne  Icgam  Institutionurn  ejus  libros,  quibus  contra  gentes  scripsit  fortis- 
sime  ?  Id.  ad  Pamm.  et  Oc.  Ep.  41.  [al.  05.]  T.  4.  p.  345. 

^  Omnis  hfec  de  duabus  viis  dispul.itio  ad  frugalitatem  ac  luxuriam  spectat. 
Dicunt  enim  humanai  vit;E  cursum  Y  liters  esse  similein,  quod  unusquisque 
hominum,  cum  primum  adolescentiaj  limen  attigerit,  et  in  eum  locum  venerit, 
"  partes  ubi  se  via  findit  in  ambas  ■,"  haereat  nutabundus,  ac  nesciat  in  quam 
Fe  partem  inclinet.  Si  ducem  nactus  fuerit,  qui  dirigat  ad  meliora  titubantera, 
&c.     Inst.  1.  vi.  c.  3.  p.  550,551. 


Lactantius.     a.  D.  306.  495 

PfafT,  and  published  by  him  entire,  or  nearly  so,  at  Paris,  in 
1712,  to  the  great  joy  of  the  learned  world.  A  curious 
account  of  the  manuscript,  and  the  fortunate  discovery  of  it, 
may  be  read  in  Dr.  Pfaff's  Preliminary  Dissertation,  and  in 
Mr.  La  Roche's'  JMemoirs  of  Literature.  Tliis  abrid<>nietit 
IS  an  useful  book,  containing-  in  it  some  things  not  to  be 
found  in  the  Institutions  themselves. 

i).  The  book  of  the  Wrath  or  Anger  of  God,  is  likewise 
still  extant.  It  is  particularly  conmiended  by'"  Jerom,  as 
a  learned  and  elegant  piece,  and  a  complete  treatise  upon 
the  subject. 

10.  Beside  these  there  is  a  well  known  book  of  the  Deaths 
of  Persecutors,  which  was  first  published  by  Stephen  Baluze 
in  the  second  volume  of  his  Miscellanea,  in  the  year  1G79. 
But  this  has  not  been  so  universally  reckoned  genuine,  as 
the  beginning-  of  the  Epitome  published  by  Dr.  Pfaff. 

It  is  however  a  very  valuable  work,  containing*  a  short 
account  of  the  sufierings  of  christians  under  several  of  the 
Roman  emperors,  from  the  death  and  resurrection  of  Christ 
to  Dioclesian  :  and  then  a  particular  history  of  the  persecu- 
tion raised  by  that  emperor,  and  the  causes  and  spring's  of 
it ;  as  likewise  the  miserable  deaths  of  the  chief  instruments 
therein.  Here  we  learn  divers  remarkable  facts,  recorded 
no  where  else. 

It  would  be  tedious  to  observe  particularly  all  that  might 
be  said  relating-  to  the  dispute  concerning  the  author  of  this 
work.  1  therefore  refer  to  "Baluze,  "Fabricins,  I'lleumann, 
and'i  some  others,  for  the  arguments,  that  it  is  a  work  of 
Lactantius,  and  to  ^  Nourry  on  the  other  side. 

Fabricius,  in  particular,  thinks  Nourry's  reasons  for  rob- 
bing' Lactantius  of  this  piece  to  be  of  little  weight ;  far  from 
being  sufficient  ground  for  introducing-  a  new  author,  named 
Lucius  Cecilius,  unknown  to  all  antiquity.  However,  as  I 
am  obliged  to  deliver  my  opinion,  I  shall  support  it  with 
a  few  observations,  referring-  to  Nourry  for  the  rest. 

'  Vol.  V.  p.  184,  and  395,  &c,  in  the  second  edition. 

■"  Firmianus  noster  libium  De  Ira  Dei  docto  pariter  et  eloquenti  sermone 
conscripsit,  quern  qui  legerit,  puto  ei  ad  irse  intellectum  satis  abundeque  posse 
sufficere.     Hieron.  Comm.  in  Ephes.  cap.  iv.  vcr.  26.  p.  373. 

"  Baluz.  Miscell.  1.  ii.  p.  351,  352,  et  in  not.  ad  libr.  de  M.  P.  p.  7,  8,  &c. 
edit.  Ultraj.  1693. 

°  Fabric,  not.  ''  et  s  ad  Hieron.  de  V.  I.  cap.  80.  in  Biblioth.  Ecc.  p.  165, 
166.  Vid.  et  ejusd.  Bibl.  Lact.  Vol.  iii.  p.  403,  404. 

P  Vid.  Heumann.  App.  i.  ad  Symp.  Lact.  et  ejus.  Praef.  ad  Lactant.  Opp. 

''  Dan  Maichclli  Iiitroduct.  ad  Hist  Lit.  p.  187,  &c.  Cantabr.  1721,  et 
Journal  Literaire.     Tom.  7.  P.  i.  p.  1 — 29,  a  la  Haye,  1715. 

'  Diss,  in  L.  Cecil,  de  M.  P.  Paris,  1710,  et  in  App.  ad  Bib.  P.  P.  p.  1642, 
&c. 


496  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

The  book,  published  by  Baliize,  is  ascribed*  in  the  Col- 
bertine  manuscript,  the  only  one  of  it  in  being',  to  Lucius 
Cecilius.  It  is  not  easy  to  conceive,  why  the  transcriber  of 
this  book  should  not  have  added  Firmianus  Lactantius,  if  it 
is  his.  And  the  forenames,  Lucius  Coelius,  or  Coecilius,  are 
very  rarely  g-iven  to  Lactantius.  Fabricius*  mentions  only 
one  author,  Barnardinus  de  Bustis,  of  the  fifteenth  century, 
and  two  manuscripts;  one  of  the  books  commonly  ascribed 
to  Lactantius,  the  other  of  his  book,  Of  the  Workmanship 
of  God ;  in  which  Lactantius  is  called  at  length  Lucius 
Coelius,  or  Crecilius  Firmianus  Lactantius.  Methinks,  this"* 
is  not  sufficient  g-round  for  giving-  those  two  names  to  this 
learned  ancient;  when  he  is  called  only  Firmianus  Lactan- 
tius, or  Firmianus,  or  Lactantius  singly,  by  Jerom,  Euche- 
rius,"^  Augustine,'''  Apollinaris  Sidonius,  Honorius  of  Autun, 
Trithemius.  Not  to  say  any  thing'  of  Freculph's  and  Ado's 
Chronicles,  though  they  also  use  the  same  way  of  writing-. 
And  moreover,  in  almost  all  the  manuscript  copies  of  his 
works,  or  of  some  part  of  them,  (as  is  owned,)  he  is  called 
only  Firmianus  Lactantius. 

Then  the  title  of  the  book,  published  by  Baluze,  is  differ- 
ent from  that  of  Lactantius  in  Jerom.  It  is  entitled,  Of  the 
Deaths  of  Persecutors  :  but  that  mentioned  by  Jerom  is.  Of 
the  Persecution  :  so  likewise  in  Honorius  and  Trithemius, 
without  any  variation.  This  appears  to  me  considerable.  If 
Lactantius's  book  had  been  entitled.  Of  the  Deaths  of  Per- 
secutors, it  would  have  been  so  described  by  Jerom.  If 
it  had  obtained  that  title,  and  had  been  ever  so  called  in  a 
few  ages  after,  either  in  manuscripts,  or  in  learned  writers 
who  quoted  it ;  it  is  reasonable  to  suppose  that  so  late  writers 
as  Honorius  and  Trithemius,  one  of  the  twelfth,  the  other  of 

"  Lucii  Caecilii.  Incipit  liber  ad  Donatum  Confessorem  de  Mortibus 
Persecutorum. 

'  licet  in  Sermonibus  Bamardini  de  Bustis  nominatus  Lucius  Caeci- 

lius  Firmianus,  teste  Bernardo  Moneto.  T.  4.  Menagiorum,  p.  85.  Fabr.  ubi 
supr.  in  Bib.  Ecc.  p.  165.  Cum  denique  Lactantium  et  in  Sermonibus  Ber- 
nard! ni  de  Bustis,  quos  pauIo  ante  memorabam,  et  in  Codice  Colbertino  507, 
et  Codice  Taurinensi  libri  de  Opificio  Dei,  quern  inspexit  Pfaffius,  Lucium 
Coelium  Lactantium  appellari,  non  possit  negari.  Id.  ib.  p.  166.  Conf. 
Baluz.  Misc.  T.  ii.  p.  352. 

"  Ausirn  et  hoc  dicere,  Firmianum  Lactantium  Lucii  Caecilii  nomine  nun- 
quam  appellatum  fuisse,  quod  nulla  quidem  probatione  indigere  videtur,  utpote 
nulla  antiquioris  MS.  codicis  auctoritate  nixum.  Pfaff.  Diss.  Prael.  sect.  12. 
p.  IG.  Quid  si  dixerim,  nee  Lucium  Calium  nomen  esse  ad  F.  Lactantium 
pertinens  ;  scd  a  recentioribus  solum  librariis,  nimis  saepius,  ut  par  est,  sapien- 
tibus,  additum  ?  Id.  ib.  sect.  13.  p.  17. 

"  De  Civ.  Dei.  1.  xviii.  c.  23- 

"  instruit  ut  Hieronymus,  destruitut  Lactantius  Sidon.  lib.  iv.  Ep.  3. 

p.  92. 


Lactantius,     a.  D.  306.  497 

the  fifteenth  century,  would  have  mentioned  it  by  that  title 
alone;  or  else  would  have  mentioned  the  two  titles  together. 

This  book,  Of  the  Deaths  of  Persecutors,  is  inscribed  to" 
Donatus,  a  confessor,  who  had  suffered  six  years'  imprison- 
ment, and  other  hardships,  for  the  sake  of  Christianity,  in 
Dioclesian's  persecution.  And  the  book  of  Lactantius  con- 
cerning the  Wrath  of  God,  is  dedicated  to  one  Donatus,  a 
friend  of  his.  This  tiicrefore  has  been  reckoned  an  argument, 
that  Lactantius  must  be  the  author  of  the  book,  of  which  we 
are  speaking.  But  1  should  rather  think  it  an  argument  on 
the  other  side:  foras^  Tillemont  observes,  (though  he  makes 
no  doubt  of  its  being  a  genuine  work  of  Lactantius,)  the 
book,  Of  the  Wrath  of  God,  was  written  after  the  Institu- 
tions, and  cojisequently  after  the  persecution.  But  yet 
Lactantius  does  not  there  call  Donatus  an  illustrious  con- 
fessor. He'  even  speaks  to  him,  as  to  a  novice,  '  who 
'  needed  to  be  instructed  and  fortified,  lest  he  should  be 
'  misled  by  the  authority  of  the  wise  men  of  the  world.' 

Finally,  not  to  mention  other  things,  the  style  of  this 
book  appears  to  me  far  from  equalling  that  of  Lactantius. 
Nevertheless  ^'Baluze  and  others  are  of  a  diflx;rent  opinion. 
Every  one  must  judge  for  himself:  but  for  my  own  part,  [ 
cannot  here  discern  the  style  of  Lactantius;  nor  does  ^  Pfaff", 
nof  yet  Dr.  Heumann,  though  he  maintains  the  genuineness 
of  the  book. 

As  for  the  words  and  phrases  found  both  in  this  book,  and 
in  the  undisputed  writings  of  Lactantius,  which  have  been 
observed   by  Columbus  in  his  notes  upon  this  book,  and 

""  Novies  enim  tormentis  cniciatibusque  variis  subjectus,  novies  adversarium 
gloriosa  confessione  vicisti,  &c.  de  M.  P.  c.  16.  Tunc  apertis  carceribus. 
Donate  carissime,  cum  cseteris  confessonbus  e  custodia  liberatus  es,  cum  tibi 
career  sex  annis  pro  domicilio  fuerit.  ib.  c.  35.  Vid.  et  cap.  i. 

>•  Mem.  Ec.  T.  6.  P.  i.  p.  352 

^  Quorum  error,  quia  maximus  est,  et  ad  evertendum  vitae  humana?  statum 
spectat,  coarguendus  est  a  nobis,  ne  ipsefallarLs,  impulsus  auctoritate  hominum, 
qui  se  putant  esse  sapientes.     Lact.  De  Ira  Dei,  cap.  i.  p.  764. 

^  Nam  et  stylus  oranino  Lactantianus  est,  ut  facile  periti  istarum  rerum 
agnoscent.     Baluz.  Misc.  ib.  p.  315. 

*>  Non  hie  earn  eloquentiae  dicendique  vim,  non  eum  orationis  florem, 
verborumque  copiam  inveneris,  quae  passim  in  Epitome  apparet ;  eum  e 
contrario  Lucii  Caecilii  stylus  sit  inaequalis,  lentus,  et  mediocris.  PfafF.  ib. 
sect.  xi.  p.  15. 

<^  lUud  ad  ultimum  eelare  meos  leetores  nolo,  nondum  videri  mihi  librum 

hunc  satis  emendavisse  et  exaseiasse  Lactantium Ac  banc  ipsam  esse 

causam  existimo,  cur  hujus  libri  stylus  non  ubique  aequet  elegantiam  cceterorum 
Lactantii  librorum. — Nee  ex  oratione  solum  negligentiore  apparet,  primam 
quasi  dclineationem  libri,  non  librum  satis  perpolitum,  nos  habere  ;  sed  ex  ipsa 
quoque  tractatione,  quse  passim  multum  obscuritatis  habet,  &c.  Heuman.  in 
Praef.  ad  Lact. 

\o\..    HI,  2  K 


498  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

have  been  since  put  tog-ether,  and  insisted  on  by  La  Croze, 
the  author  of  a  Dissertation,  or  Letter,  printed  in  the*^ 
Literary  Journal  at  the  Hague,  to  prove  the  genuineness 
of  this  piece;  1  think  that  argument  more  specious  than 
solid.  For  it  is  not  at  all  strange,  that  the  words  and 
phrases  should  occur  in  two  different  authors  of  the  same 
age,  and  even  contemporaries:  especially  when  one  of  them 
was  a  celebrated  master  of  rhetoric,  and  the  politest  writer, 
and  the  most  learned  man  of  his  time,  among  the  Latins. 
Many  might  imitate,  though  they  did  not  equal  him.  Add 
to  all  this,  that  the  subjects  of  Lactantius  and  of  this  author 
often  coincide  :  they  are  both  zealous  christians,  and  engaged 
in  the  defence  of  their  religion  ;  they  have  both  occasion  to 
speak  of  the  death  and  resurrection  ^nd  ascension  of  Jesus, 
and  of  the  affairs  of  christians  from  their  first  original  in  the 
world,  and  particularly  of  the  persecution  that  happened  in 
their  own  time,  and  the  chief  agents  in  it.  But  though  both 
use  some  of  the  same  words  and  phrases,  the  style  of  the 
author  of  the  Deaths  of  Persecutors  is  not  the  style  of 
Lactantius,  but  much  inferior  to  it,  so  far  as  I  am  able  to 
judge. 

Nourry  is  not  the  only  person  who  has  denied,  or  doubted, 
of  the  genuineness  of  this  book.  The  famous  Christopher 
Cellarius*'  speaks  doubtfully  of  the  matter,  in  his  Brief 
Account  of  the  Life  of  Lactantius,  prefixed  to  the  edition  of 
his  works,  published  in  1698,  and  therefore  long  before 
Nourry  wrote  his  Dissertation,  which  was  first  printed  at 
Paris  in  the  year  1710,  and  since  in  his  Apparatus,  in  1715. 
I  learn  also  from  Dr.  Heumann,  that*^  Mr.  Walch,  another 
learned  German  editor  of  Lactantius,  does  not  without 
hesitation  ascribe  this  work  to  his  author.  The  editors  of 
cardinal  Noris's  works  think,  the^  author  of  this  book  a 
different  writer  from  Lactantius,  though  certainly  contem- 

■*  Journal  Literaire,  T.  7.  P.  i.  p.  25,  k.c.  a  la  Haye.  1715. 

*  De  Morttbus  Pei-secutorum  liber,  niiper  repertus,  si  Lactantii  est,  ut  fere 
viri  doctissimi  consentiunt.     Cellar.  Exc.  de  Vita  Lact. 

'  Adjungo, CI.  Walchium,  qui  et  ipse  in  suisad  novissimam  Lactantii 

operum  editionem  Prolegomenis,  cap.  v.  p.  38,  dubitavit,  an  liber  ille  sit 
genuinus  Lactantii  fetus.  Heuman.  in  App.  i.  ad  Lact.  Symp.  sect.  4.  p.  215. 

8  Libri  autetn  inscriptio,  de  Mortibus  Persecutorum,  diversum  opus  indicat 
ab  illo,  quod  ab  Hieronymo  Lactantio  tribuitur  cum  titulo  De  Persecutione. 
Etcnim  Lactantius  historiam  supplicioruin,  quae  christiani  a  persecutoribus  passi 
sunt,  concinnasse  videtur  :  Lucius  autem  Caecilius  contexuit  historiam  suppli- 
ciorum,  quibus  ipsi  christianorum  persecutores  mulctati  sunt. — Hae  conjecta- 
tiones,  tametsi  non  omnino  demonstrent,  con"incunt  tamen  probabilius  alium 

a  Lactantio  esse  L.  Ccccilium  hujus  libelli  auctorem Sed  quicumque  sit 

hujus  libri  scriptor,  dum  constet  cum  fuisse  Lactantio  supparem,  parum 
interest.     Ap.  Noris.  0pp.  T.  iv.  p.  36,  37. 


Lactantius.    a.  D.  306.  499 

porary  with  Iiini.  And  they  have  proposed  some  very  good 
observations  in  favour  of  their  opinion.  Dr.  Pfaff,  in  his 
Preliminary  Dissertation  to  the  Epitome  of  Lactantius,'' 
exj)resses  his  approbat-ion  of  Nourry's  arguments.  Le  Clerc 
too  was  fully  satisfied  with'  Nourry's  reasons.  The  writer 
of  Miscelhuieous  Observations  upon  Autliors,  ancient  and 
modern,  published  at  London,  in  1732,  says,  that''  '  he  is 
'  inclined  to  agree  with  those  who  think,  that  the  autlior  of 
'  this  book  is  not  Lactantius.'  Signor  Maftei,  referring-  to 
this  book,  does  not  quote  it  as'  certainly  written  by  Lactan- 
tius. The  late  learned  John  Davis,  who  published  an  edition 
of  our  author's  Epitome,  does'"  not  positively  assert  him  to 
be  the  writer  of  the  book  Of  the  Deaths  of  Persecutors. 
The  same  may  be  observed  of"  Mr.  Turretin.  However, 
such  a  thing  as  this  is  not  to  be  decided  by  authorities ;  nor 
do  I  think  the  reasons  that  have  been  alleged  by  me  to  be 
conclusive  and  demonstrative  :  but  they  appear  to  be  of  some 
weight ;  and  therefore  1  choose  not  to  quote  this  as  a  work 
of  Lactantius,  until  I  am  better  satisfied  about  it. 

11.  I  need  not  say  any  thing  particularly  of  the  poems 
de  Phosnice,  de  Pascha,  de  Passione  Domini,  which  have 
been  thought  by  some  to  belong  to  our  author,  and  are 
joined  with  his  Morks  iti  most  editions.  They  are  not  men- 
tioned by  Jerom,  and  are  now  generally  supposed  to  have 
been  without  good  reason  ascribed  to  Lactantius. 

12.  The  editions  of  Lactantius  are  very  numerous.  Du 
Pin  has  referred  to  a  good  many  of  them :  but  a  more  full 
and  copious  catalogue  may  be  seen  in  "  Fabricius:  Nourry 
likewise  has  an  article''  of  the  editions  of  Lactantius.  And 
Dr.  Heumann  has  inserted  an  account  of  them  in  the  preface 
to  his  own  edition,  formerly  mentioned  :  which  appears  to  me 
very  valuable  for  the  correctness  of  it,  as  well  as  on  other 
accounts.  But  I  wish  that  learned  man  had  put  out  our 
author  in  a  quarto  volume  :  he  might  then  have  made  use  of 
a  larger  letter,  and  might  have  added  some  things,  M-hich 
are  omitted  for  want  of  room. 

"  Vid.  Pfaff.  Diss.  n.  xii.  p.  16. 

'  marques  certaines,  comme  il  me  semble,  aussi  bieu  qu'  au  P.  Le 

Nourry,  que  cat  ouvrage  n'est  point  de  Lactance.  Bib.  A.  et  M.  T.  iii.  p.  438. 

^  See  those  Observations,  Vol.  ii.  p.  232. 

' e  deir  altre  buona  ragione  si  puo  dedurre  de  Lattanzio,  se  di  lui  e  il 

libro  Delle  Morte  de'  Persecutori.     Maff.  Veron.  Illustrat.  P.  i.  p.  149. 

™  Hanc  rem  fuse  monstravit  aut  noster,  aut  quisquis  est  auctor  Ubri  de  Mor- 
tibus  Persecutorum,  &c.  Davis.  Annot.  in  Epit.  cap.  53.  p.  150. 

"^  Lactantius,  vel  quisquis  alius  est  auctor  libri  non  pridem  emissi,  de  M. 
Persecutorum.  Turret.  Com  p.  Hist.  Ec.  p.  29. 

"  Bib.  Lat.  V.  iii.  p.  394,  &c.  Hamb.  1722. 

p  Vid.  Ap.  T.  ii.  p.  65  l,&c. 

2  K  2 


500  Credibilitij  of  the  Gospel  History. 

13.  I  somewhat  wonder,  that  no  learned  editor  of  Lactan- 
tius  has  published  his  works  according  to  the  order  of  time, 
the  present  order  being'  manifestly  preposterous.  The  Sympo- 
sium should  come  first,  if  its  genuineness  can  be  admitted; 
otherwise  it  must  be  placed  at  the  end  :  then  the  book,  Of 
the  Workmanship  of  God;  next  the  Institutions,  and  their 
Epitome;  after  that  the  book,  Of  the  Wrath,  or  Anger  of 
God.  The  book,  of  the  Deaths  of  Persecutors,  should  by  all 
means  stand  last,  because  its  genuineness  is  not  universally 
acknowledged,  and  because  it  is  a  thing  of  cjuite  a  different 
nature  from  all  the  other  remaining  works  of  Lactantius. 
They  (excepting  the  Banquet  of  Symposium)  are  all  argu- 
mentative, this  historical. 

Nor  do  I  Avell  know,  why  in  all  lat^e  editions  there  are  no 
summaries,  or  brief  contents  of  the  several  chapters.  There 
are  such  things  in  the  edition  of  Sebastian  Gryphius,  at 
Lyons,  in  1541,  and  in  an  edition "^  at  Geneva,  above  an 
hundred  years  since.  When  they  began  to  be  omitted,  or 
ior  what  reasons,  1  cannot  tell. 

1  have  mentioned  these  things,  leaving  it  to  the  learned  to 
judge  of  them,  as  they  think  fit.  But  though  there  have 
been  so  many  editions  of  Lactantius,  Le  Clerc  said  in  1719, 
that"^  he  did  not  know  of  one  good  edition  of  this  writer,  the 
most  elegant  of  all  the  Latin  fathers. 

III.  Before  1  proceed  to  his  testimony  to  the  scriptures,  I 
shall  set  before  my  readers  some  remarkable  things,  which 
I  have  observed  in  the  writings  of  this  author. 

1.  Lactantius  often  speaks  of  the  nature  and  desig'nof  the 
christian  revelation,  as*  suited  to  promote  the  general  good 
of  all,  of  every  age,  sex,  and  condition:  so  that  all  may 
attain  to  just  sentiments  of  God,  and  be  directed  and  assisted 
in  the  way  of  holiness,  and  obtain  everlasting  happiness. 
And  he  asserts  it  to  be  in  the  poAver  of  the*^  meanest  and 
poorest  of  men  to  attain  to  righteousness. 

2.  He  sometimes  glories"  in  the  great  and  happy  eflfects 

'1  Genevse.  ap.  Joann.  De  Fournes,  1630. 

■■  — de  sorte  qu'on  peut  dire,  que  jusqu'  a  present  nous  n'avons  point  de 
bonne  ed;tion  de  plus  elegant  de  tousles  Peres  Latins.  Bib.  A,  et  M.  T.  xi.  p.  20] . 

'  Nobis  autern,  qui  sacramentum  verae  religionis  accepiinus,  cum  sit  Veritas 
revelata  divinitus ;  cum  doctorem  sapientiae  ducemque  veritatis  Deum  sequa- 
mur ;  universos,  sine  ullo  discrimine  vel  sexus  vel  setatis,  ad  ccEleste  pabulum 
convocamus.  Inst.  1.  i.  c.  1 .  p.  8,  et  9.  Nos  autem  omnis  sexiis  et  generis  et 
setatis  in  hoc  cceleste  iter  inducimus,  quia  Deus,  qui  ejus  vise  dux  est,  immor- 
talitatem  nulli  homini  nato  negat.  1.  vi.  c.  3.  p.  552. 

'  Quasi  vero  in  judicibus  solis  atque  in  potestate  aliqua  constitutis  justitia 
esse  debeat,  et  non  in  omnibus.  Atqui  nullus  est  hominum,  ne  infirmorum 
quidem  ac  mendicorum,  in  quern  justitia  cadere  non  possit.     Epit.  cap.  55. 

^  Dei  autem  praecepta,  quia  et  simplicia  et  vera  sunt,  quantum  valeant  in 


Lactantius.     a.  D.  306,  501 

of  Hie  christian  doctriiie  upon  the  minds  and  lives  of  men  : 
rcnflering-  the  proud  hund>hs  the  hasty  and  passionate  meek 
and  mihl,  the  lewd  chaste,  the  covetous  liberal,  and  convert- 
ing- the  unrighteous  and  cruel  to  justice  and  mercy.  For 
M'hich  reason  he  recommends  this  divine  religion,  as^  the 
medicine  of  the  soul,  effectual  for  healing'  all  its  diseases. 

3.  Lactantius  understood  the  words  in  Gen.  vi.  3  :  "  Yet 
his  days  shall  ho  an  hinidrcd  and  twenty  years,"  of  the''*'  ap- 
pointed term  of  human  life  after  the  flood. 

4.  This  Latin  christian  "  asserts  the  freedom  of  man's  will, 
or  his  power  to  do  good  or  evil. 

5.  Lactantius  has  not  quoted  many  christian  authors.  He 
has  however  mentioned >  Minucius  Felix,  Tertullian,  and 
Cyprian,  and  ^Theophilus,  bishop  of  Antioch  in  the  second 
century. 

6.  Lactantius  has  made  very  particular  mention  of  ^  two 

animis  hominum,  quotidiana  experimenta  demonstrant.  Da  mihi  virum,  qui 
sit  iracundus,  maledicus,  eftrenatus  :  paucissirais  Dei  verbis  tam  placidum  quain 
ovem  reddam.  Da  cupidiim,  avaiimi,  tenacem  :  jam  tibi  euin  liberalem  dabo, 
et  pecuniam  suam  plenis  manibus  largientem — Da  libidinosum,  adulterum, 
ganeonem :  jam  sobrium,  castum,  continentem  videbis.  Da  crudelem,  et 
sanguinis  appetenlem :  jam  in  veram  clementiam  furor  iste  mutabitur.  Da 
injustum,  insipientem,  peccatorem  :  continue  et  aequus,  et  prudens,  et  inno- 
cens  erit. — Gratis  ista  fiunt,  facile,  cito. — Nemo  vercatur.  Nos  aquam  non 
\endimus,  nee  solem  mercede  praestamus.  1.  iii.  c.  26.  p.  328,  329. 

"  quibus  [vulneribus]  nemo  alius  mederi  potest,  nisi  solus  ille,  qui 

gressum  claudis,  visum  cjecis  reddidit, — mortuos  e.xcitavit.  llle  ardorem  cupi- 
ditatis  exstinguet,  exstirpabit  libidini-s,  invidiam  distrahet,  iram  mitigabit.  llle 
reddet  veram  ct  perpetuam  sanitatem.  Appetenda  est  hsec  omnibus  mcdicina, 
quoniam  majori  periculo  vexatur  anima,  quam  corpus,  &c.  1.  vi.  c.  24.  p.  G3G. 

*   paulatim  per  singulas  progenies  diminuit  hominis  setatem,  usque  in 

centum  et  xx.  annis  metam  collocavit,  quam  transgredi  non  liceret.  Inst. 
I.  ii.  c.  13.  in.  Vid.  et  cap.  12.  ad  fin.  Nam  post  diluvium  paulatim  vita 
hominum  breviata,  et  ad  annos  centum  viginti  redacta  est.     Epit.  cap.  27. 

'^  sed  sola  est  virtus,  sola  justitia,  quse  potest  verumbonum — ^judi- 

cari ;  quia  nee  datur  cuiquam,  nee  aufertur.     Inst.  1.  iv.  c.  16.  p.  401. 

Duae  vitae  homini  attributaj  sunt,  una  temporalis, — altera  sempiterna — lliam 
primam  nescientes  accepimus,  banc  secundam  scientes.  Virtuti  enim,  non 
naturaa  datur, Idcirco  banc  praBsentem  dedit,  ut  illam  veram  et  perpe- 
tuam aut  vitiis  amittamus,  aut  virtute  mereamur. In  ilia  vero  spiritali, 

quam    per   nos   ipsi   acquirimus,   sumnium  bonum   continetur. Nam 

nihil  interesset  inter  justum  et  injustum,  siquidem  omnis  homo  natus  immortalis 
fieret.  Ergo  immortalitas  non  sequela  naturae,  sed  inerces  praemiumque  virtutis 
est.     Inst.  1.  vii.  c.  5.  p.  663,  664. 

Idcirco  nobis  Deus  virtutem  justitiamquc  proponit,  ut  aeternum  illud  prae- 
mium  nostris  laboribus  assequamur.     Epit.  cap.  35. 

y  Vid.  Inst.  1.  V.  c.  1,  et  4.  '^  Theophilus  in  libro  de  tem- 

poribus  ad  Autolicum  scripto  ait.  I.  i.  c.  23.  sub  in. 

^  Ego  cum  in  Bithynia  oratorias  literas  accitus  docerem,  et  eodem  tempore 
Dei  templum  everteretur;  duo  extiterunt  ibidem, — Quorum  alter  antistitem  se 
philosophioB  profitebatur. — Alius  eandem  materiam  mordacius  scripsit,  qui  erat 
lum  e  numero  judicum.  I.  v.  c.  2.  vid.  et  cap.  3.  et  cap.  4.  init. 


502  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

persons,  who  in  his  own  time  wrote  against  the  christian 
religion.  And  he  supposeth,  there  might  be  others  who** 
did  the  like  about  the  same  time,  as  well  as*^  in  former 
times. 

7.  He  also  mentions  one*^  Domitius,  supposed*^  to  be  the 
famous  lawyer  Domitianus  Ulpianus,  who  made  a  collec- 
tion of  the  Imperial  Edicts  that  had  been  published  against 
the  christians. 

8.  He  intimates,  that^  there  were  in  his  time  many  chris- 
tians, especially  such  as  had  a  smattering  of  learning,  who 
wavered  in  the  profession  of  Christianity. 

9.  We  do  not  observe  in  Lactantius  any  notice  taken  of 
those  scandalous  reflections  upon  the  christians,  which  we 
can  find  by  our  writings  were  common  in  the  second  century. 
By  the  continued  purity  of  their  lives,  and  the  force  of  their 
Apologies,  it  is  likely  they  had  confuted  and  obliterated 
those  calumnies. 

But  they  were  still  reckoned  a  silly?  and  contemptible 
people,  partly  for*'  following  a  crucified  master  and  leader, 
partly'  for  suflTering  so  many  evils  which  they  might  have 
avoided.     Moreover,  they  were  still  called''    impious  and 

^  non  ut  contra  hos  scriberera,  qui  paucis  verbis  obteri  poterant ; 

sed  ut  omnes,  qui  ubique  idem  operis  efficiunt  aut  effecerunt,  uno  semel  impetu 
profliga.rera.  Non  dubito  enim,  quin  et  alii  plurimi,  et  multis  in  locis,  et  non 
modo  Grsecis,  sed  etiam  Latinis  literis,  monimentuni  injustitiae  suae  struxerint. 
1.  V.  c.  4.  in.  '^  Omitto  eos,  qui  prioribus  earn  teraponbus 

necquicquam  lacessierunt.  1.  v.  c.  2.  sub  iu. 

^  Domitius,  de  OfEcio  Proconsulis  libro  septimo,  Rescripta  Principum  nefaria 
collegit,  ut  doceret  quibus  poenis  affici  oporteret  eos,  qui  se  cultores  Dei  con- 
fitcrentur.  1.  v.  c.  11.  fin.  '^  Vid.  Heuman.  Annot.  in  loc. 

^  Nam  si  lucrari  hos  a  morte,  ad  quam  concitatissime  tendunt,  non  potueri- 

mus  ; nostros  tamen  confirmabimus,  quorum  non  est  stabilis  ac  solidis 

radicibus  fundata  et  fixa  sententia.  Nutant  enim  plurimi,  ac  maxime,  qui 
liferarum  aliquid  attigerunt.  1.  v.  c.  1.  p.  457. 

B  Si  vobis  sapientes  videmur,  imitamini;  si  stnlti,  contemnite,  aut  etiara 
ridete,  si  libet :  nobis  enim  stultitia  nostra  prodest.  1.  v.  c.  12.  p.  492. 
Suam — sibi  habeant  sapientiam  prudentes.  Relinquant  nobis  stultitiam  nos- 
tram.  ib.  p.  493. 

^  Venio  nunc  ad  ipsam  passionem,  quae  velut  opprobrium  nobis  objectari 
solet,  quod  et  hominem,  et  ab  hominibus  insigni  supplicio  affectum  et  excru- 
ciatum,  colimus.  1.  iv.  c.  16.  in. 

'  Docui,  ut  opinor,  cur  populus  noster  apud  stultos  habeatur.  Nam  cru- 
ciari  atque  interifici  malle,  quam  thura  tribus  digitis  comprehensa  in  focum 
jactare,  tam  ineptum  videtur,  quam,  in  periculo  vitae,  alterius  animam  magis 
curare,  quam  suam.  1.  v.  c.  18.  p.  515. 

''  Impios  enim  vocant,  ipsi  scilicet  pii,  et  ab  humano  sanguine  abhorrentes. 
1.  V.  c.  9.  p.  483. — nee  maledictis  abstinent,  sed  quantis  possunt  verborum 
contumeliis  insectantur.  Epit.  c.  52.  Sed  soli  ex  omnibus  impii  judicantur, 
qui  Deum,  qui  veritatem  sequuntur.  Quae  cum  sit  eadem  justitia,  eadem 
sapientia,  banc  isti  vel  impietatis  vel  stultitiae  crimine  infamant,  &c.  ib.  c.  55. 


Lactantius.     a.  D.  306.  503 

profane  for  deriding-  the  common  deities,  and  not  complying- 
with  the  established  snperstition :  and  desperadoes'  on 
account  of  their  uncoimnon  resolution  and  steadiness  in  the 
profession  of  their  own  peculiar  principles,  which  they 
believed  to  be  true. 

10.  Lactantius  opeidy  asserts  the  innocence  of  christian"* 
people,  all  whose  religion,  he  says,  consists  in  good  works, 
or  a  care  to  live  unblamably  and  inoffensively.  And"  the 
criminals,  who  fell  under  the  sentence  of  the  magistrate  for 
robbery  and  other  offences,  he  observes,  were  not  christians, 
but  of  the  san)e  religion  with  their  enemies. 

11.  Lactantius  expresseth  himself,  as  if  in  his  time  chris- 
tians" performed  miracles  in  dispossessing-  daemons.  The 
author  Of  the  Deaths  of  Persecutors,  has  somewhat''  to  the 
like  purpose. 

12.  Our  author  was  of  opinion,  that  another  life,  or  a 
future  state  of  happiness  for  good  men,  may  be  proved  by 
reason. 

(1.)  Entering-  upon  this  subject  at  the  beginning"  of  the 
seventh  and  last  book  of  the  Institutions,  he  says,  he''  intends 
to  prove  a  future  state  by  testimonies  of  scripture,  and  by 
arguments  from  reason. 

'  Qui  autem  magni  aestimaverint  fidem,  cultoresque  Dei  se  non  abnegave- 
rint,  in  eos  vero  totis  carnificinze  suaB  viribus  veluti  sanguinem  sitiant,  incum- 
bunt,  et  desperates  vocant,  quia  corpori  suo  minime  parcunt.  1.  v.  c.  9. 
p.  483. — et  banc  adversus  innocentes  carnificinam  exercentes,  pios  utique  se 
et  justos  et  religiosos  putant — illos  vero  impios  et  desperates  nuncupant. 
Epit.  c.  54. 

■"  Nostro  autem  populo  quid  horum  potest  objici?  cujus  omnis  religio  est, 
sine  scelerc  ac  sine  macula  vivere.  1.  v.  c.  9,  p.  485. 

Dicet  hie  aliquis :  Quae  ergo,  aut  ubi,  aut  qualis  est  pietas  ?  Nimirum  apud 
eos,  qui  bella  nesciunt,  qui  concordiam  cum  hominibus  servant,  qui  amici 
sunt  etiam  inimicis,  qui  omnes  homines  pro  fratribus  diligunt. — 1.  v.  c.  iO. 
p.  487. 

Et  quoniam  communiter  cum  deorum  cultoribus  loquiraur,  hceat  per  vos 
benefacere  vobiscum.  Hsec  est  enim  lex  nostra,  hoc  opus  religio.  1.  v.  c.  12. 
sub  in. 

"  Non  enim  de  nostro,  sed  ex  illorum  numero  semper  existunt,  qui  vias 
obsideaut  armati,  maria  pra?dentur,  &c.  1.  v.  c.  9.  p.  483,  484. 

"  Justos  autem,  id  est,  cultores  Dei,  metuunt ;  cujus  nomine  adjurati  de 
corporibus  excedunt ;  quorum  verbis,  tanquam  flagris,  verberati,  non  modo 
djemonas  se  esse  confitentur,  sed  etiam  nomina  sua  edunt,  ilia  quae  in  templis 
adorantur. — Itaque  maximis  saepe  ululatibus  editis,  verberari  se,  et  ardere,  et 
jam  jamque  exire,  proclamant.  Inst.  1.  ii.  c.  15.  p.  220.  Vid.  et  1.  iv.  c.  27. 
p.  439—441.  et  1.  v.  c.  21.  in.  et  c.  22.  sub  fm.  et  Epit.  c.  51. 

P  Tum  quidam  ministrorum  scicntes  Dominum,  cum  assisterent  immolanti, 
imposuerunt  frontibus  suis  immortale  signum.  Quo  facto,  fugatis  daemonibus, 
sacra  turbata  sunt.  Trepidabant  auspices,  nee  solitas  in  extis  notas  videbant, 
et,  quasi  non  litassent,  saepius  immolabant,  &c.     De  M.  P.  c.  10.  in. 

'i  Satis  et  huic  parti  faciamus,cum  testimoniis  divinarum  literarum,  tum  etiam 
probabilibus  argumentis.  1.  vii,  c.  1. 


504  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History, 

(2.)  The'  expectation  of  a  better,  and  a  more  durable  life, 
he  says,  is  agreeable  to  philosophy,  or  natural  reason,  as  well 
as  revelation. 

(3.)  Since^  man  is  capable  of  virtue,  there  must  be  another 
anu  endless  life.  For'  in  this  world  virtue  often  proves  to 
the  prejudice  and  detriment  of  men.  But  forasmuch  as 
virtue  is  excellent,  and  it  is  allowed  that  they  act  wisely, 
■who  now  deny  themselves  sensual  gratifications,  and  endure 
pain,  and  even  death  itself,  rather  than  not  perform  their 
duty ;  there  must  be  a  future  recompence  for  such  persons, 
consisting  of  better  things  than  those  they  have  resigned. 
But  what  recompence,  excepting"  immortality,  can  be  g"iven 
to  those,  one  great  part  of  whose  virtue  consists  in  dying- 
well  ? 

(4.)  In  this  manner  Lactantius  frequently  argues.  If" 
there  is  no  future  state,  he  acts  most  discreetly  who  consults 
his  present  interest.  But  if  there  is  another  life  after  this, 
he  who  suffers  greatly  here  may  act  wisely,  because  immor- 
tality will  be  a  full  recompence. 

(5.)  He  observes,  that^  in  fact  it  is  seen,  that  good  men 
arc  here  despised  and  ill  treated  for  virtue  itself,  or  for 
righteousness'  sake ;  therefore  they  must  be  happy  in  another 
state. 

(6.)  There "^  is  not  any  thing,  he  says,  so  reasonable,  fit, 

"■  Si  autem  superest  homini  vita  melior  et  longior,  (quod  et  philosophorum 
magnorum  argumentis,  et  vatum  responsis,  et  prophetarum  divinis  vocibus 
discimus:)  I.  v.  c.  18.  sub  in. 

*  Virtus  quoque  soli  homini  data  magno  argumento  est,  immortales  esse 
aninias  ;  quae  non  erit  secundum  naturam,  si  anima  exstinguitur.  Huic  enim 
pnBsenti  vitae  nocet,  &c.  1.  vii.  c.  9.  p.  677. 

*  Si  autcm  virtus  malum  non  est,  facitque  honeste,  quod  voluptates  vitiosas 
turpesque  contemnit,  et  fortiter,  quod  nee  dolorem  nee  mortem  timet,  ut  officiura 
servet  J  ergo  majus  aliquod  bonum  assequatur  necesse  est,  quam  sunt  ilia,  quae 
spernit.  At  vero,  morte  suscepta,  quod  ulterius  bonum  sperari  potest,  nisi 
seternitatis  ?  1.  vii.  c.  9.  ad  fin. 

Virtus  autem  nunquam,  nisi  raorte,  finitur :  quoniam  et  in  morte  suscipieudi 
summum  ejus  officium  est.  Ergo  praemium  virtutis  post  mortem  est.  1.  vii. 
c.  10.  p.  679. 

Quod  si  virtus,  quae  bona  omnia  terrena  contemnit,  mala  universa  sapientis- 
sime  perfert,  ipsamque  mortem  pro  officio  suscipit,  sine  praemio  esse  non  potest ; 
quid  superest,  nisi  ut  merces  ejus  immortalitas  sola  sit?  Epit.  c.  -35.  in. 

"  Si  enim  post  mortem  nihil  sumus,  profecto  stultissimi  est  hominis,  non 
huic  vitae  consulere,  ut  sit  quam  diutina  et  omnibus  bonis  plena.  Quod  qui 
faciet,  a  justitiae  regula  discedat  necesse  est, — Si  autem  superest  homini  vita 
melior  et  longior, — hanc  praesentem  cum  suis  bonis  contemnore  sapientis  est, 
cuius  omnis  jactura  immortalitate  pensatur.  1.  v.  c.  18.  sub  in. 

*  Deinde  rjui  justitiam  sequentes,  in  hac  vita  miseri  fuerint  et  contemti  et 
ipopes,  et  ob  ipsam  justitiam  contumeliis  et  injuriis  saepe  vexati,  (quia  nee 
aliter  virtus  tencri  potest,)  semper  beati  sunt  futuri.  1.  vii.  c.  11.  p.  680. 

*  Perdetne  suum  praemium  virtus  ?  aut  potius  peribit  ipsa  ?  Minime.     Sed 


Lactantius,     a.  D.  306.  505 

and  excellent  in  itself"  as  virtue  ;  but  yet,  if  there  is  no  other 
life,  there  is  nothing-  more  foolish  and  insignificant.  God 
therefore,  for  certain,  has  appointed  for  it  a  great  reward  in 
another  state. 

(7.)  He  argues  likewise,  and,  as  seems  to  me,  excellently, 
that^  virtue  is  in  its  own  nature  perpetual,  and  always  pro- 
gressive. It  is  not  reasonable  therefore  to  suppose,  that 
this  principle,  once  begun  and  formed  in  the  mind  of  man, 
should  be  cut  oil",  and  be  for  ever  destroyed  by  providence. 

(8.)  He  argues  strongly,  that>'  there  can  be  no  religion,  if 
God  does  not  reward  and  punish  men  according  to  their 
actions. 

(9.)  Truly,  he''  says,  an  excellent  being  ought  to  be 
honoured  :  but  to  Avhat  purpose,  if  he  takes  no  notice  of  it. 

(10.)  He  more  than  once  argues  to  this  purpose.  Take-^ 
away  the  hope  of  eternal  happiness  ;  and  the  pursuit  of  truth, 
and  zeal  for  religion  and  virtue,  are  without  support  and 
encouragement. 

(11.)  It  is,  he  thinks,  agreeable''  to  the  divine  beneficence, 
and  other  perfections,  to  reward  virtue. 

(12.)  Again  :  The*^  sum,  says  he,  of  all  we  have  said,  is 

etmercedem  Deo  judice  accipiet,  et  vivet,  et  semper  vigebit.  Quae  si  tollas, 
nihil  potest  in  vita  hominum  tarn  inutile,  tam  stultuni  videri  esse,  quam  virtus : 
cujus  naturalis  bonitas  et  honestas  docere  nos  potest,  animam  non  esse  morta- 
lem,  divinumque  illi  aDeo  praemium  constitutum.  1.  v.  c.  18.  p.  515. 

"  Virtus  autem  sine  ulla  intermissione  perpetua  est,  nee  discedere  ab  ca 
potest,  qui  earn  semel  cepit. — Ipsa  ergo  virtutis  perpetuitas  indicat,  humanum 
animum,  si  virtutem  ceperit,  permanere. — Ergo  praemium  virtuti  post  mortem. 
1.  vii.  c.  10.  Justitia  vero  et  beneficentia  tam  immortales,  quam  mens  et 
anima,  quae  bonis  operibus  similitudinem  Dei  assequitur,  &c.  De  Ira  Dei, 
cap.  ult.  sub  fin. 

y  In  eo  enim  summa  omnis  et  cardo  religionis  pietatisque  versatur.  Neque 
honor  uUus  deberi  potest  Deo,  si  nihil  praestat  colenti ;  nee  ullus  metus,  si 
non  irascitur  non  colenti.  De  Ira  Dei,  c.  6.  Sive  igitur  gratiam  Deo,  sive 
irain,  sive  utrumque  detraxeris,  religionem  tolli  necesse  est,  &c.  ib.  c.  8.  p.  780. 

'  Si  enim  Deus  nihil  cuiquam  boni  tribuit ;  si  colentis  obsequio  nullam 
gratiam  refert ;  quid  tam  vanum,  tam  stultum,  quam  templa  aedificare  ? — At 
enim  naturam  exccUentem  honorari  oportet.  Quis  honos  deberi  potest  nihil 
curanti  et  ingrato  ?  De  Ir.  Dei,  c.  8.  Vid.  et  cap.  5.  et  not.  ', 

^  Nam  quid  prodest,  aut  falsis  religionibus  liberari,  aut  intelligere  veram  ? 
quid,  aut  vanitatem  falsae  sapientiae  pervidere,  aut  quae  sit  vera  cognoscere  ? 
quid,  inquam,  prodest  coelestem  illam  justitiam  defendere  ?  quid,  cum  magnis 
dfficultatibus  cultum  Dei  tcnere,  quae  est  summa  virtus,  nisi  eum  divinum 
praemium  beatitudinis  perpctuae  subsequatur  ?  1.  vii.  c.  1.  in. 

^  Item  plurimi,  quibus  persuasum  est  Deo  placere  justitiam, — eum  vene- 

rantur Ergo  est,  propter  quod  Deus  et  debeat  gratificari.     Nam  si  nihil 

est  tam  conveniens  Deo,  quam  beneficentia,  nihil  autem  tam  alienum,  quam 
ut  sit  ingratus,  necesse  est,  ut  officiis  optimorum  sancteque  viventium  praestet 
aliquid,  et  vicem  reddat,  ne  subcat  ingrati  culpam,  quae  est  etiam  homini  cri- 
minosa.     De  Ira  Dei,  c.  16.  p.  805. 

*^  Nunc  totam  orationem  brevi  circumscriptione  signemus.     Idcirco  mundus 


506  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

this :  the  world  was  therefore  made,  that  we  might  be  born. 
We  therefore  are  born,  that  we  might  serve  God  our  creator, 
and  the  creator  of  the  Avhole  world.  We  therefore  know 
him,  that  we  might  worship  him.  We  therefore  worship 
him,  that  we  may  obtain  immortality,  as  a  recompence  for 
all  the  labours  and  fatigues  of  religion  and  virtue  in  this 
world.  And  we  therefore  obtain  the  reward  of  immortality, 
that  being  made  like  unto  the  angels,  we  may  for  ever  serve 
the  God  and  Father  of  all.  And  if  there  are  no  rewards  and 
punishments  hereafter,  man  and  the  whole  world  would  have 
been  made  in  vain. 

(13.)  Finally.  '  Immortality,'  he'^  says,  '  is  the  chief 
*  good.  For  obtaining  this  we  were  originally  made.  This 
'  human  nature  desires,  and  reaches  after.  And  virtue 
'  advanceth  us  to  it.' 

13.  Lactantius*"  did  not  deny  the  eternity  of  hell-torments. 

14.  He  often  asserts  the  great  value  of  repentance. 

(1.)  He  maintains,  that^  whenever  sinners  repent,  they 
are  pardoned. 

(2.)  Sincere^  piety,  repentance,  humility,  and  confession 
of  sins,  he  says,  are  propitiatory  sacrifices,  with  which  God 

factus  est,  ut  nascamur.  Ideo  nascimur,  ut  agnoscaraus  factorem  niuadi  ac 
nostri.  Ideo  agnoscimus,  ut  colamus.  Ideo  colimus,  ut  immoilalitatem  pro 
laborum  raercede  capiamus,  quoniam  maximis  labonbus  cultus  Dei  constat. 
Ideo  praemio  immortalitatis  afficimur,  ut  similes  angelis  effecti  summo  Patri  ac 

Domino  in  perpetuura  serviamus,  et  simus  seternum  Dei  regnum. Si  nihil 

post  mortem  sumus,  quid  potest  esse  tam  supervacuum,  tam  inane,  tam  vanum, 
quam  humana  res  est,  quam  mundus  ipse  ?  1.  vii.  c.  G.  in. 

^  Unum  est  igitur  summum  bonum  imraortalitas  ;  ad  quam  capiendam  et 
formati  a  principio  et  nati  sumus.  Et  banc  ad  tendimus :  banc  spectat 
humana  natura :  ad  banc  nos  provebit  virtus.  1.  vii.  c.  8.  in. 

^  Si  autem  corpus  vicerit  animam, sit  in  tenebris  sempiternis 

et  in  morte.  Cujus  non  ea  vis  est,  ut  injustas  animas  extinguat  omnino,  sed 
ut  puniat  in  seternum.     Eam  pcenam  secundam  mortem  nominarnus,  quae  est 

et  ipsa  perpetua,  sicut  et  immortalitas.     Primam  sicdefinimus : Mors  est 

corporis  animaeque  seductio.  Secunda  vero  sic  :  Mors  est  seterni  doloris  per- 
pessio.  Vel  ita  :  Mors  est  animanim  pro  meritis  ad  aeterna  supplicia  damnatio. 
1.  ii.  c.  12.  p.  206,  207.  Vid.  et  1.  vii.  c.  10.  p.  679. 

^  Nee  patitur  conditio   fragiHtatis,  esse   quemquam  sine  macula. 

Ultimum  ergo  remedium  illud  est,  ut  confugiamus  ad  pcpnitentiam:  quae  non 
minimum  locum  inter  virtutes  habet,  quia  sui  correctio  est :  ut  cum  re  aut  verbo 
lapsi  fuerimus,  statim  resipiscamus,  ac  nos  deliquisse  fateamur,  oremusque  a 
Deo  veniam,  quam  pro  sua  misericordia  non  negabit  nisi  permanentibus  in 
errore,  kc.     Epit.  cap.  67.  in. 

K  Humilitas  enim  cara  et  amabilis  Deo  est,  qui  cum  magis  suscipiat  pecca- 
torem  confitentcm,  quam  justumsuperbum,  quanto  magis  justumsuscipietcon- 
fitentem,  eumque  in  regnis  coelestibus  faciei  pro  humilitate  sublimem :  HcEC 
sunt,  quae  debet  cultor  Dei  exhibere  :  hse  sunt  victimae,  hoc  sacrificium  placa- 
bile,  hie  veais  est  cultus. — Summa  ilia  majestas  hoc  cultore  laetatur  :  bunc,  ut 
filium,  suscipit,  eique  donum  immortalitatis  impertit.  Ibid. 


Lactantius.     a.  D.  306.  507 

7S  well  pleased.  Such  worshippers  God  receives  as  his 
children,  and  Avill  bestow  upon  them  eternal  life. 

(3.)  He  thinks  it  altogether  strang-e,  that''  God  should  be 
disposed  to  punish,  and  not  to  pardon  and  reward. 

(4.)  Inferior  judges,  he'  says,  may  not  be  always  able  to 
pardon,  when  they  are  inclined  to  it.  But  it  is  the  prerogative 
of  the  supreme  Judge,  to  pardon,  whenever  he  sees  cause. 

(5.)  If  we,  as  he  farther  argues,  are''  reconciled  to  our 
rebellions  children,  with  whom  we  had  been  greatly  offend- 
ed, upon  their  amendment ;  why  should  we  make  any  doubt, 
whether  God  our  Father  may  be  appeased  by  repentance  ? 

(6.)  The'  divine  displeasure  against  men,  he  thinks,  ceases 
immediately  upon  their  repentance  and  amendment. 

(7.)  This'^'  doctrine,  he  says,  is  taught  by  the  holy  and 
inspired  prophets  of  God,  though  he  forbears  to  allege  them 
particularly.  However,  in  another  place,  arguing-  upon  this 
subject,  he  manifestly  refers  to  Ezek.  xxxiii.  12 — 10,  and 
says,  that"  repentance  entirely  obliterates  the  iniquity,  or 
g-uilt,  of  hinj  who  had  sinned. 

(8.)  All  which  arguments  and  reasonings  of  Lactantius 
seem  to  be  founded  upon  the  supposition,  that,  as  he  says, 
true"  virtue  alone  recommends  men  to  the  divine  acceptance : 

''  Primum  illud  nemo  de  Deo  dixit  unquam,  irasci  eum  tantummodo,  et 
gratia  non  moveri.     De  Ira  Dei,  c.  3.  Vid.  et  c.  2.  sub  fin.  et  Inst.  1.  2.  c.  17. 

'  Judex  peccati  veniam  dare  non  potest,  quia  voluntati  servit  alienae  :  Deus 
autem  potest,  quia  est  legis  suse  ipse  discept-ator  et  judex  ;  quam  cum  poneret, 
non  utique  ademit  sibi  omnem  potestatem,  sed  habet  ignoscendi  licentiam. 
De  Ira  Dei,  c.  19.  ad  fin. 

•^  Licet  plane.  Nam  si  liberos  nostros,  cam  delictorum  suorum  cernimus 
poenitere,  correctos  esse  arbitramur,  et  abdicates  rejectosque  rursos  tamen 
siiscipimus,  fovemus,  amplectimur;  cur  desperemus  clementiam  Dei  Patris 
pcenitendo  posse  placari  ?  Inst.  1.  vi.  cap.  24.  sub  in. 

'  Nam  si  proreus  immortalis  fuisset  ira  ejus,  non  esset  satisfactionis 

aut  gratiae  post  delictum  locus. Deus  itaque  non  thure,  non  hostia,  non 

pretiosis  muneribus,— sed  morum  emendatione  placatur :  et,  qui  peccare  desinit, 
iram  Dei  mortalem  facit.     De  Ira  Dei,  c.  21.  in  fin. 

■"  Prophetse  universi,  Divino  Spiritu  pleni,  nihil  aliud,  quam  de  gratia  Dei 
erga  justos,  et  de  ira  ejus  adversus  impios,  loquuntur.     lb.  c.  22. 

"^  Sicutenim  nihil  prodest  male  viventi  ante  actae  vitae  probitas, i(a 

nihil  officiunt  peccata  vetera  correcto,  quia  superveniens  justitia  labem  vitae 
prioris  abolevit.  1.  vi.  c.  24.  p.  631. 

"  Nihil  enim  sancta  et  singularis  ilia  majestas  aliud  ab  homine  desiderat, 
quam  solam  innocentiam  :  quam  si  quis  obtulerit  Deo,  satis  religiose  litavit. 
1.  vi.  c.  1 .  p.  539. 

Sit  humilis,  misericors,  beneficus,  mitis,  humanus Ille  homo  sanus, 

ille  Justus,  ille  perfcctus  est. Hie  cultorest  veri  Dei.  ib.  c.  24.  p.  636. 

Nulla  igitur  alia  religio  est  vera,  nisi  quae  virtute  ac  justitia  constat,  ib.  c.  25. 
p.  639. 

Quod  si  Deo  Patri  ac  Domino  hac  assiduitate,  hoc  obsequio,  hac  devotione 
servierit,  consummata  et  perfecta  justitia  est ;  quam  qui  tenuerit,  hie,  ut  ante 


508  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  Historij. 

and  that  God  desires  nothing  of  men,  but  sincere  virtue,  or 
true  holiness.  Indeed,  our  author  vvasf  a  great  admirer 
of  virtue,  and  hasi  most  earnestly  recommended  the  practice 
of  it  to  christians. 

15.  I  think,  we  should  not  omit  to  take  some  notice  of 
Avhat  Lactantius  says  of  the  ends  and  views  of  Christ's  com- 
ing, and  particularly  of  his  death. 

(1.)  God  sent  his  son,  he  says,  to""  call  the  Gentiles:  how- 
ever, without  excluding  the  Jews.  For  he  was  first  sent  to 
them;  and  they  rejecting  him,  he  brought  in  the  Gentiles  to 
the  privileges  of  the  church  of  God.  Again,  Christ^  was 
sent  to  teach  all  nations  under  heaven  the  knowledge  and 
worship  of  the  one  only  true  God  ;  to*  convert  men  from  vain 
and  impious  superstitions,  to  the  knowledge  and  worship  of 
the  true  God,  and  also  from  folly  to  wisdom,  from  sin  to 
holiness. 

(2.)  Righteousness"  being  in  a  manner  lost  in  the  earth, 
God  sent  this  oreat  messenoer  to  instruct  mortal  men  in  the 
rules  of  riohteousness  :  that  he  might  be  as  a  livino-  law,  to 
raise  up  a  new  name  and  temple,  and  spread  true  religion 
all  over  the  world  by  his  doctrine  and  example. 

(3.)  Christ^  came  to  be  a  teacher  and  a  pattern  of  virtue  ; 

testati  sumus,  Deo  pamit ;  hie  religioni  atque  suo  officio  satisfecit.  ib.  c.  25. 
in  fin.  p  Nee  enim  potest  aliquid  in  rebus  terrenis  esse  vene- 

rabile,  coeloque  dignum :  sed  sola  est  virtus,  sola  justitia,  quae  potest  verum 
bonum,  et  cceleste,  etperpetuuni  judieari,  quia  nee  datur  euiquam,  nee  aufertur. 
1.  iv.  c.  16.  p.  401. 

Ut  appareat,  solam  esse  justitiam,  quae  vitam  homini  pariat  seternam ;  et 
solum  Deura,  qui  aeternae  vitae  praemium  largiatur.  1.  vii.  c.  14.  p.  692. 

"i  Nos  tantummodo  laboremus,  ut  ab  hominibus  nihil  in  nobis,  nisi  sola 
justitia  puniatur.  Demus  operam  totis  viribus,  ut  meieamur  a  Deo  simul  et 
ultionem  passionis  et  praemium.  1.  v.  c.  23.  fin.  Vid.  et  De  Ira  Dei,  cap.  ult. 
prop,  fin. 

■■  Nee  adjecit  ulterius  prophefas  mittere  ad  populum  eontumacem,  sed  filium 
suum  misit,  ut  gentes  universas  ad  gratiara  Dei  convocaret.  Nee  illos  tamen 
ab  spe  salutis  exclusit.  Epit.  c.  43.  Sed  ilium  filium  suum  primogenitum 
delabi  jussit  e  ecelis,  ut  religionem  sanctam  Dei  transferret  ad  gentes,  doceret- 
que  justitiam.     Inst.  1.  iv.  c.  11.  p.  380. 

*  Idcireo  enim  missus  est  a  Deo  patre,  ut  universis  gentibus,  quae  sub  ceelo 
sunt,  singularis  et  veri  Dei  sanctum  mysterium  revelaret.  1.  iv.  c.  12.  p.  385. 

'  Filinm  suum  legavit  ad  homines,  ut  eos  converteret  ab  impiis  et  vanis 
cultibus  ad  cognoscendum  et  colendura  verum  Deum ;  item,  ut  eorum  mentes 
a  slultitia  ad  sapientiam,  ab  iniquitate  ad  justitiae  jura,  tradueeret.  1.  iv.  c.  14. 
p.  395.  "  Nam,  cum  justitia  nulla  esset  in  terra,  doctorem 

misit,  quasi  vivam  legem,  ut  nomen  ac  templum  novum  conderet,  ut  verum 
ac  pium  cultum  per  omnem  terram  verbis  et  exemplo  seminaret.  1.  iv.  c.  25. 
sub  in. 

'  Summus  igitur  Deus,  ac  parens  omnium,  cum  religionem  transferre 
voluisset,  doctorem  justitix  misit  e  ccelo,  ut  novis  cultoribus  novam  legem  in 
eo,  vel  per  cum,  darct.     Inst.  1.  iv.  c.  13.  in. 


Lactantius.     a.  D.  306.  509 

to  teach  righteousness  and  patience,  not  only  by  words,  but 
also  by  deeds. 

(4.)  Christ  died  and  rose  again,  to'*'  assist  man  in  over- 
coming death,  and  give  tliem  also  hopes  of  rising  again,  and 
obtaining  the  reward  of  immortality. 

(5.)  When"  God  determined  to  save  man,  he  sent  his  Son, 
as  a  master  of  virtue,  to  teach  the  doctrine  of  righteousness, 
and  to  be  an  example  of  it,  that  men  following  him  might 
obtain  eternal  life.  He  was  also  to  deliver  men  from  an 
excessive  fear  of  death,  and  enable  them  to  endure  it  with 
courage  and  patience.  Christ  lived  in  a  mean  condition, 
and  underwent  the  ignominious  death  of  the  cross,  that  he 
might  be  a  complete  example  of  virtue,  and  of  patience 
under  sufferings  :  and  that  he  might  more  easily  lead  and 
encourage  such  as  are  poor  and  mean  in  thisy  world. 

(6.)  In  a  word,  Christ  came,  and  was  made  like  unto 

Jussit  igitur  eum  Summus  Paler  descendere  in  terrain,  et  humanum  corpus 
induere  ;  ut,  subjectus  passionibus  carnis,  virtutem  ac  patientiam  non  solum 
verbis,  sed  etiam  factis,  doceret.     Epit.  c.  43. 

Exemplis  igitur  opus  est,  ut  ea,  quae  pi'aecipiuntur,  habeant  firmitatem 

Christus  itaque,  cum  doctor  virlutis  ad  homines  mitteretur,  utique  ut  doctrina 
ejus  peifocta  esset,  et  docere  et  facere  debuerat.  ib.  c.  50. 

Ergo,  (ut  cceperam  dicere,)  cum  slatuisset  Deus  doctorcm  virtutis  mittere 
ad  homines,  renasci  eum  denuo  in  came  praecepit,  et  ipsi  homini  similem  fieri, 
cui  dux,  et  comes,  et  magister  esset  futurus.  Inst.  I.  iv.  c.  11.  p.  382.  Vid. 
ib.  cap.  24. 

"  ut   esset  necesse,   appropinquante  saeculi  termino,   Dei    filium 

descendere  in  terram  : veruntamen  non  in  virtute  augeli, sed   in 

figura  hominis,  et  conditione  mortali,  ut,  cum  magisterio  functus  fuisset,  tra- 
deretur  in  manus  impiorum,  mortemque  suscipcret,  ut  ea  quoque  per  virlutem 

domita  resurgeret,  et  homini,  quem  induerat, et  spem  vincendae  mortis 

afFerret,  et  ad  praemia  immortalitatis  admittcret.  1.  iv.  c.  10.  sub  in. 

"  Deus  namque,  sicut  superius  exposui,  cum  statuisset  hominem  liberare, 
magistrum  virtutis  legavit  in  terram :  qui  et  pracceptis  salutaribus  formaret 
homines  ad  innocentiam,  et  operibus  factisque  praesentibus  justitia  vim 
[f.  viam]  panderet,  qua  gradiens  homo,  et  doctorem  suura  sequens,  ad  vitara 
aeternam  perveniret.  Is  igitur  corporatus  est,  et  vcitc  carnis  indutus,  ut  homini, 
ad  quem  docendum  venerat,  virtutis  et  exempla  et  incitamenta  praeberet. 
Sed,  cum  in  omnibus  vitae  officiis  justitiae  specimen  praebuisset,  ut  doloris 
quoque  patientiam,  mortisque  contemtum,  quibus  perfecta  et  consummata  sit 
virtus,  tradoiet  homini,  venit  in  manus  impiae  nationis — sustinuit  ergo  crucia- 
tus,  et  verbera,  et  spinas.  Postrcmo  etiam  mortem  suscipere  non  recu- 
savit,  ut  homo  illo  duce  catenatam  mortem  cum  suis  terroribus  triumpharet — 
cur  potissimum  cruce  ?  cur  infami  genere  supphcii,  quod  etiam  homine  hbero, 
quaravis  nocenfe,  videatur  indignum  ?  Primum,  quod  is,  qui  humiUs  advenerat, 
ut  humihbus  et  infimis  opem  ferret,  et  omnibus  spem  salutis  ostenderet,  co 
genere  afficiendus  fuit,  quo  humiles  et  infimi  solent :  ne  quis  esset  omnino, 
qui  eum  non  posset  imitari.  1.  iv.  c.  26.  p.  4'35,  436. 

>  Nam,  cum  ad  hoc  missus  esset,  ut  humiliimis  quibusque  viam  panderet  ad 
salutem,  se  ipse  humilem  fecit,  ut  eos  hberaret.  Suscepit  ergo  id  genus  mortis, 
quod  solet  humihbus  iiTOgari,  ut  omnibus  faciiltas  daretur  imitandi.  Epit. 
cap.  51. 


510  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  Uistonj. 

man,  lived,  and  died,  and  rose  again,  that  he  might  clearly 
teach  the  precepts  of  virtue,  and  afford  ^  the  best  motives  to 
the  practice  of  it,  and  effectually  help  frail  man^  to  conquer 
the  desires  of  the  flesh,  and  the  fears  of  present  evil,  and  to 
overcome  all  the  temptations  of  this  life,  and  thus  obtain  a 
happy  immortality. 
So  Lactantius. 

16.  As  Christ  came  to  spread  true  religion  all  over  the 
world,  so  Lactantius  does''  often  bear  testimony  to  the  great 
progress  which  the  christian  doctrine  had  then  made. 

And  he  particularly  says,  thaf^  there  had  been,  and  then 
were,  many  Jews,  who  believed  in  Jesus. 

17.  He  has  very  agreeably  represented"^  the  fortitude  and 
constancy  of  christian  people,  not  only  of  men,  but  of  wo- 
men and  children  likewise,  under  the  greatest  sufferings  for 
their  religion. 

18.  Laclantius    has   strenuously  asserted    the  right    of'^ 

*  Ut  homini  virtutis  et  exempla  et  incitamenta  pi-aeberet.  Vid.  not.  ". 

*  Ideo  came  seinduit,  ut,  desideriiscarnisedomitis,  doceret,  non  necessitatis 
esse  peccare,  sed  propositi  ac  voluntatis.  Una  enim  nobis  et  magna  et  prae- 
cipua  cum  came  luctatio  est,  cujus  infinitoe  cupiditates  premunt  animam — 
quihus  [illecebris]  ut  repugnare  possemus,  Deus  nobis  viam  superandae  carnis 
et  aperuit  et  ostendit.  Quae  virtus  perfecta  et  omnibus  numeris  absoluta 
coronam  vincentibus,  et  mercedem  nobis  immortalitatis,  impertit.  1.  iv.  cap. 
25.  in  fin. 

^  Denique  nulla  gens  tam  inhumana  est,  nulla  regio  tam  remota,  cui  aut 
passio  ejus  aut  sublimitas  majestatis  ignota  sit.  1.  iv.  c.  26.  p.  437. 

cum  omnes  gentes  et  omnes  linguae  nomen  ejus  venerantur,  majes- 

latem  confitentur,  doctrinam  sequuntur,  virtutem  imitantur.  1.  iv.  c.  12. 
sub  fin. 

Cum  vero  ab  ortu  solis  usque  ad  occasum  lex  divina  suscepta  sit,  et  omnis 
sexus,  omnis  aetas,  et  gens,  et  regio  unis  ac  paribus  animis  Deo  serviant.  1.  v. 
c.  13.  p.  494. 

Decet  eos  suscipere  defensionem  deorum  suorum,  ne,  si  nostra  invaluerint, 
(ut  quotidie  invalescunt)  cum  delubris  ac  ludibriis  suis  deserantur.  1.  v.  c.  19. 
p.  518,  et  passim. 

•^  Sed  tamen ad  eos  ipsos  eum  misit, — ut, — et  daret  illis  liberam 

fecultatem  sequendi  Deum, — quod  plurimi  eorum  faciunt  atque  fecerunt.  1.  iv. 
c.  11.  sub  fin. 

^  Latroneset  robusti  corporis  viri  ejusmodi  lacerationes  perferre  nequeunt- 
cxclamant,  et  gemitus  edunt.  Vincuntur  enim  dolore,  quia  deest  illis  inspirata 
patientia.  Nostri  autem,  ut  de  viris  taceam,  pueri  et  mulierculae  tortores  suos 
taciti  vincunt ;  et  exprimere  illis  gemitum  nee  ignis  potest.  Eant  Romani,  et 
Mutio  glorientur  aut  Regulo  : — Ecce  sexus  infirmus,  et  fragilis  aetas,  dilacerari 
sc  toto  corporc  utiquc  perpetitur,  non  necessitate,  quia  licet  vitare,  si  vellent : 
sed  voUintatc,  quia  confidunt  Deo.    Haec  est  vera  virtus.  1.  v.  c.  13.  p.  495,  496. 

^  Quare  oportet  in  ea  re  maxime,  in  qua  vitae  ratio  versatur,  sibi  quemque 
confidere,  suoque  judicio,  ac  propriis  sensibus  niti  ad  investigandam  et  per- 
pendendam  veritatem,  quam  credentem  alienis  erroribus,  decipi,  tanquam 
ipsum  rationis  cxpertcm.  Dedit  omnibus  Deus  pro  virili  portione  sapientiam, 
ut  et  inaudita  investigate  possent,  et  audita  perpendere.  Nee  quia  nos  illi 
tempore  autecesserunt,   sapientia    quoque   antecesserunt :    quae   si   omnibus 


Lactantius.     a.  D.  306,  511 

f)rivatc  jiul*^inent  for  every  man  in  things  of  religion.  And 
le  openly  calls  upon  all  men  to  exert  their  intellectual 
powers  in  the  search  of  truth,  and  to  use  their  own  reason 
about  a  matter  of  so  great  importance  as  religion,  without 
relying  upon  the  wisdom  and  understanding  of  other  men, 
as  if  they  had  no  reason  of  their  own. 

Mr,  Mosheim^  has  quoted  that  passage  of  our  author 
with  approbation,  and  thereby,  as  well  as  on  many  other  ac- 
counts, entitled  himself  to  the  respect  and  esteem  of  all 
lovers  of  liberty  and  good  sense.  This  is  very  different  from 
the  sentiment  of  another  celebrated  modern,  who"  forbids 
men  the  use  of  their  reason  in  things  of  religion,  and  re- 
quires them  to  acquiesce  in  the  church,  and  take  her 
interpretations  of  scripture  as  divine:  and  censures  Eusebius 
of  Ccesarca  in  particular,  for  explaining-  scripture  according 
to  the  best  of  his  own  judgment.  Such  is  the  precious  liberty 
of  a  certain  church !  such  her  goodness,  to  rob  us  of  our 
understandings,  or  at  least  to  deny  us  the  use  of  them  !  For 
if  Eusebius,  a  bishop  within  three  hundred  years  after  our 
Lord's  ascension,  may  not  judge  for  himself,  how  vain  must 
be  all  our  pretensions  to  such  a  privilege!  But  why  cannot 
we  understand  the  scriptures  as  readily  as  the  decisions  of 
the  church  ?  And  how  came  she  to  engross  reason  to  herself, 
which,  as  Lactantius  says,  is  given  to  every  man  for  his 
direction  and  assistance,  and  is  no  more  to  be  monopolized 
than  the  light  of  the  sun?  However,  for  certain,  we  have 

pequalifer  datiir,  occupari  ab  antecedentibus  non  potest.  Illibabil.s  eat,  tanquam 
lux  et  claritas  solis :  quia,  ut  sol  oculorum,  sic  sapientia  lumen  est  cordis 
humani.  Quaie,  cum  sapere,  id  est,  veritatem  quaerere,  omnibus  sit  innatum, 
sapientiam  sibi  adimunt,  qui  sine  ullo  judicio  inventa  majorum  probant,  et  ab 
aliis  pccudum  more  ducuntur.  Sed  hoc  eos  faliit,  quod  majorum  nomine 
posito,  non  putant  fieri  posse,  aut  ut  ipsi  plus  sapiant,  quia  minores  vocantur, 
aut  illi  desipuerint,  quia  majores  nominantur.  Inst.  1.  ii.  c.  7.  init. 

'  Abjicienda  igitur  triplex  hsec  servitus,  mensque  prorsus  in  libertatem 
vindicanda.  Cesset  hominura  studium,  quos,  licet  sanctos,  eximiosque, 
homines  tamcn  fuisse  recordemur  erronbus  obnoxios.  Pulchre  et  prorsus  ad 
hanc  rem  accommodate  Lactantius  Divinarum  Institutionum,  1.  ii.  c.  7. 
Dedit  omnibus  Deus,  &c.  Jo.  Laurent.  Mosh.  Institut.  Hist.  Christ.  Majores  in 
Pnepar.  v.  20.  p.  23.  Helmstad.  1739. 

e  Cum  quis  eo  devenit,  ut  fidei  dogmata  ex  sui  judicii  arbitrio  dcfiniat, — 
nihil  mirum,  si  frequenter  aberrct :  omnia  quippe  sunt  incerta,  cum  semel  ab 
ecclcsiae  statutis  discessum  est.  Nam  cum  arcana  Deitatis  et  religionis,  ab 
humane  sensu  remotissima,  Numen  Tpsiim  tradidcrit,  nonnisi  ejusdem  numinis 
ope  et  afflatu  ea  possunt  explicari  ac  recte  percipi.  Ac  cum  uni  ecclesise 
earundem  rerum  arbitrium  Deus  permiserit,  ipsi  soli  eadem  explananti  se 
adfuturum  pollicitus  esset.  Nihil  itaque  insolens  est,  si  Eusebius,  qui  plerumque 
scripturam  et  ecclcsia?  dogmata  ex  sensu  et  opinione  sua  aestimare  ausus  est,  in 
raultis  lapsus  sit.  Montfauc.  Praelim.  in  Euseb.  Comm.  in  Psalm,  cap.  7. 
p.  29. 


512  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

seen,  that  tins  doctrine  of  the  church  was  unknown  to  Euse- 
bius  and  Lactantius,  the  most  learned  men  of  their  times, 
one  among-  the  Greeks,  the  other  among-  the  Latins. 

19.  Lactantius  argues  excellently  against  persecution. 

(L)  He  esteems  it  the  greatest  absurdity  that  can  be  con- 
ceived, for''  any  to  impose  on  others  a  worship  contrary  to 
their  conscience,  or  to  deny  men  the  liberty  to  choose  their 
own  religion. 

(2.)  It  is  not,  he  says,  zeal '  for  religion,  but  a  love  of 
power,  that  makes  men  persecutors.  For  religion  is  the 
freest  thing  in  the  world :  nor  can  it  be  promoted  by  force 
and  violence.  Compulsion  may  make  men  hypocrites,  but 
it  cannot  make  them  religious. 

Tertullian  had  before  spoken  in  the  like''  manner. 

(3.)  Such  is  the  nature  of  religion,  that'  it  can  be  upheld 
by  reason  and  persuasion  only,  not  by  power  and  authority. 
If  you  introduce  force  and  violence,  religion  is  destroyed; 
for,  without  the  free  consent  of  the  mind  there  can  be  no 
religion.  By""  attempting-  to  secure  religion  by  force,  you 
make  what  should  be  a  school  of  virtue,  a  butchery,  or  place 
of  execution.  Truth  and  compulsion,  religion  and  cruelty, 
are  incompatible,  and  can  have  no  fellovvship  with  each  other. 
The"  heathens  therefore  he  argues,  as  they  were  mistaken 
in  religion  itself,  so  likewise  in  the  manner  of  defending  it. 

(4.)  It  is,  he  says,  a  °  sign  of  a  bad  cause,  to  defend  it  by 

''  Quis  enim  tam  insolens,  tam  elatiis  est,  qui  me  vetet  oculos  in  coeluni 
tollere  ?  Quis  imponat  mihi  necessitatem  vel  colendi  quod  nolim,  vel  quod 
velim  non  colendi  ?  Quid  jam  nobis  ulterius  relinquetur,  si  etiam  hoc,  quod 
vohmtate  fieri  oportet,  libido  extorget  aliena  ?  Inst.  1.  v.  c.  13.  p.  496.  f. 

'  Sed  quis  audiet  ?  cum  homines  furiosi  et  impotentes  minui  dominationem 
suam  putent,  si  sit,  aliquid  in  rebus  humanis  liberum.  Atqui  religio  sola  est, 
in  qua  libertas  domicilium  collocavit.  Res  est  enim  praeter  caeteras  voluntaria. 
Nee  imponi  cuiquam  necessitas  potest,  ut  colat  quod  non  vult.  Potest  aliquis 
forsan  simulare,  non  potest  velle.     Epit.  cap.  54.  Vid.  ib.  c.55. 

''  Nemo  se  ab  invito  coli  volet,  ne  homo  quidem.  Apol.  c.  24.  Sed  nee 
religionis  est  cogere  religionem,  quae  sponte  suscipi  debeat,  non  vi.  Ad  Scap. 
cap.  2.  '  Non  est  opus  vi  et  injuria,  quia  religio  cogi  non 

potest.  Verbis  potius,  quam  verberibus,  res  agenda  est,  ut  sit  voluntas.  Inst. 
1  V.  c.  19.  p.  518,  &c. 

*"  Longe  diversa  sunt  carnificina  et  pietas.  Nee  potest  aut  Veritas  cum  vi, 
aut  justitia  cum  crudelitate,  conjungi.  1.  v.  c.  18.  p.  519. 

"  Sed,  ut  in  ipsa  religione,  sic  in  defensionis  genere,  falluntur.  Defendenda 
enim  religio  est,  non  occidendo,  sed  moriendo :  non  ssevitia,  sed  patientia: 
non  scelere,  sed  fide:  nam,  si  sanguine,  si  tormentis,  si  malo  religionem 
defendere  velis,  jam  non  defendetur  ilia,  sed  poUuetur,  atque  violabitur. 
Nihil  est  enim  tam  voluntarium,  quam  religio:  in  qua  si  animus  sacrificantis 
aversus  est,  jam  sublata,  jam  nulla  est.  1.  v.  cap.  20.  p.  520. 

°  Defendenda  enim  religio  est,  non  occidendo,  sed  moriendo non 

sffivitia  sed  patientia.  Ilia  enim  malorum  sunt,  haec  bonorum.  Etnecesseast 
bonum  in  religione  versari,  non  malum.     Inst.  1.  v.  c.  19.  p.  520.     Ex  quo 


Lactantius.     a.  D.  306.  513 

violence.  Itit  were  «>o(k1  in  itself",  reason  and  mihlncss  wonM 
be  the  best  means  to  secure  it. 

(5.)  If  the''  gods  are  able,  let  tlieni  defend  themselves. 
Methods  of  cruelty  are  unreasonable  in  all  respects;  they'' 
cannot  be  acceptable  to  the  Deity,  if  ho  has  any  excellence. 
If'  such  methods  are  approved  by  the  gods,  that  alone  is  a 
sufticient  reason,  why  they  should  not  be  worshipped.  And** 
they  must  be  disagreeable  and  offensive  to  those,  on  whom 
they  are  practised  with  pretence  of  good-will.  For  how  can 
I  esteem  it  a  kindness  to  be  forced  out  of  an  opinion,  which 
]  took  upon  reason  aiul  choice? 

(().)  Lactantius  likewise  maintains,  that*^  it  is  no  just 
reason,  why  men  should  be  persecuted,  because  they  desert 
or  oppose  ancient  and  established  religions.  For  there  can 
be  no  prescription  against  truth ;  and  every  man  has  an 
unalienable  right  to  search  after  truth,  and  to  profess  it, 
when  he  has  acquired  the  knowledge  of  it. 

(7.)  He  vindicates  christians  against  the  charge  of  obsti- 
nacy, as  by  other  considerations,  so"  likewise  by  retorting- 

intelligi  datiir,  quam  non  sit  bonuni  deoscolerc;  qiioniam  bono  potiiis  addu- 
cendi  homines  ad  bonum  fuerant,  non  malo  :  sed  quia  illud  malum  est,  etiam 
officium  ejus  bono  caret.     lb.  cap.  20.  p.  525.  Vid.  et  Epit.  cap.  53. 

P  Sed  haec  se  facere  dicunt,  ut  decs  suos  defendant.  Primum,  si  dii  sunt,  et 
habent  aliquid  potestatis  et  numinis,  defensione  hominis  patrocinioque  non 
indigent,  sed  seipsos  utique  defendunt.     Epit.  c.  53.  in. 

''  Vel!em  scire,  cum  invitos  adigunt  ad  sacrificium,  quid  secum  liabcant 
rationis,  aut  cui  praestent,  quod  faciunt.  Si  diis,  non  est  ille  cultus,  ncc  accep- 
tabile  sacrificium,  quod  sit  ingratis.     Ep.  c.  53. 

'  Libet  igitur  ex  his  quaerere,  cui  potissimam  praestare  se  putent,  cogendo 

invitos  ad  sacrificium,  Ipsisne  quos  cogunt  ? Cur  ergo  tam  crudeliter 

vexant,  cruciant,  debihtant,  si  salvos  volunt  ? An  vero  diis  pra?stant  ? 

At  non  est  sacrificium,  quod  exprimitur  invito. Si  dii  sunt  isti,  qui  sic 

coluntur,  vel  propter  hoc  solum  colendi  non  sunt,  quod  sic  coli  volunt:  digni 
scilicet  detestatione  hominum,  quibus  lacrymis,  cum  gemitu,  cum  sanguine  dc 
membris  omnibus  fluente,  libalur.     Inst.  1.  v.  cap.  20.  p.  524. 

*  Si  autem  ipsis,  quos  cogunt :  cur  malo  invitas? — Quae  stultitia  est  consu- 
lere  velle  nclenti  ?  Cur  pro  beneficio  imputes,  quod  mihi  maleficium  est  ? — 
Non  est  [bonum]  quod  velis  errori  meo  succurrere,  quem  judicio  ac  voluntate 
suscepi.     Epit.  cap.  53.  sub  fin.  Et  vid.  supr.  not.  %  init. 

'  Sed  recte  ac  merito  puniri  eos  aiunt,  qui  publicas  religiones  a  majoribus 
traditas  exsecratur.  Quid,  si  majores  illi  stulti  fuerunt  in  suscipiendis 
rcligionibus  vanis, — pracscrilx'tur  nobis,  quo  minus  vera  et  meliora  sectemur  > 
Cur  nobis  auferimus  libertatem,  et  quasi  addicti  alienis  servimus  erroribus  ? 
Liceat  sapere,  liceat  inquirere  veritatem.  Epit.  cap.  55.  init.  At  enim  puniendi 
sunt,  qui  destruunt  religiones,  &c.     Inst.  1.  v.  c.  20.  p.  525. 

"  Sed,  inhaerentes  persuasioni  vulgari,  libentcr  errant,  et  stultitiae  suae  favent. 
A  quibus  si  persuasionis  ejus  rationem  requiras,  nullam  possunt  reddere,  sed  ad 
majorum  judicia  confugiant,  quod  illi  sapientes  fuerint,  illi  probaverint,  illi 
scierint,  quid  est  optimum. — O  mira  et  cecca  dementia !  In  iis  putatur  mala 
mens  esse,  qui  fidem  servare  conantur,  in  carnificibus  autem  bona.  In 
iisne  mala  mens  esset,  qui  contra  fas  omne  lacerantur  >  an  potius  in  iis,  qui 
ea  faciunt  in  corponbus  innocentum,  quic  nee  sxvissimi  latrones,  nee  iratissimi 

VOL.    III.  2    L 


514  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

upon  their  heathen  adversaries  and  persecutors  a  charge  of 
credulity  and  ignorance,  cruelty  and  inhumanity. 

(8.)  Though  I  have  already  transcribed  from  this  author 
so  much  relating  to  this  point,  1  know  not  how  to  forbear 
referring  in  the  margin  to  a  tine  passage  of  his,  concerning 
the  universal  equality  of'  mankind. 

(9.)  He  imputes  the  heathen  persecutions  not  only  to  a 
love  of  power,  as  before  seen,  but  likewise  to  the'"^  appre- 
hensions for  the  downfall  of  their  own  religion,  occasioned 
by  the  vast  and  continual  increase  and  progress  of  Chris- 
tianity. 

(10.)  But  Avhatever  they  designed,  Lactantius  affirms, that'' 
the  christians  never  were  diminished  by  persecution  ;  and 
thaty  the  persecutions  they  endured  did  many  ways  contri- 
bute to  their  increase.  Many  there  were  who  could  not  but 
dislike  that  religion  which  inspired  cruelty:  some  began  to 
suspect  that  there  must  be  somewhat  wrong  in  those  sacri- 
fices, to  which  men  could  not  be  compelled.  And  they  were 
induced  to  inquire  into  those  principles,  for  which  great 
numbers  of  persons  of  all  nations,  of  each  sex,  of  every 
age  and  condition,  cheerfully  underwent  such  grievous 
sufferings. 

(11.)  Thus  has  Lactantius  shown,  that  compulsion  is  not 
acceptable,  nor  honourable  to  the  Deity :   that  it  is  not  a 

hostes,  nee  immanissimi  barbari,  aliquando  fecerunt.  Inst.  I.  v.  c.  19. 
p.  517.  "  iEquitatem  dico, — se  cum  caeteris  coaequandi,  quam  Cicero 

Bequabilitatem  vocat.  Deus  enim,  qui  homines  general  et  inspirat,  omnes 
aequos,  id  est,  pares,  esse  voluit ;  eandem  conditionem  vivendi  omnibus 
posuit  ?  omnes  ad  sapientiam  genuit ;  omnibus  immortalitatem  spopondit. — 
Nemo  apud  Deum  servusest,  nemo  dominus.  1.  v.  c.  14.  p.  .501. 

"  Cur  enim  tam  crudeliter  saeviant,  nisi  quia  metuunt,  ne,  in  dies  invales- 
cente  justitia,  cum  diis  suis  araneosis  [al.  cariosis.  Vid.  Heum.  in  loc]  relin- 
quantur  ?  Inst.  I.  v.  c.  12.  sub  fin. 

"  Cum  autem  noster  numerus  semper  deorum  cultoribus  augeatur,  nunquam 
vero  ne  in  ipsa  quidem  persecutione  minuatur,  ih.  c.  13.  init.  Et  quoniam 
vi  nihil  possunt,  (augetur  enim  religio  Dei,  quanto  magis  premitur,)  ratione 
potius  et  hortamentis  agant.  1.  v.  c.  19.  p.  518. 

y  Nee,  cum  videat  vulgus  dilacerari  homines  variis  tormentorum  generibus, 
et  inter  fatigatos  carnifices  invictam  tenere  patientiam,  existimant,  id  quod  res 
est,  nee  consensuin  tam  multorum,  nee  perseverantiam  morientium  vanam 
esse,  1.  V.  c.  13.  p.  495.  Et  aha  causa  est,  cur  adversum  nos  persecutiones 
fieri  sinat  :  ut  populus  Dei  augeatur.  Nee  est  difficile  monstrare,  curaut  quo- 
modo  id  fiat.  Primum,  fugantur  a  deorum  cultibus  pluiimi,  odio  crudelitatis. 
Qui  enim  talia  sacrificia  non  horreant  ?  Deinde  placet  quibusdam  virtus  ac 
fides  ipsa.  Nonnulli  suspicantur,  deorum  cultum  non  sine  causa  malum 
putari  a  tam  multis  hominibus,  ut  emori  malint,  quam  id  facere,  quod  alii 
faciunt,  ut  vivant.  Aliqui  cupiunt  scire,  quidnam  sit  illud  bonum,  quod  ad 
mortem  usque  defenditur ;  quod  omnibus,  quce  in  hac  vita  jucunda  sunt,  et 
cara,  praefertur. — Hae  tot  causae  in  unum  collatae  magnam  Deo  multitudinem 
acquirunt.  1.  v.  c.  22.  ad  fin. 


Lactantius.     a.  D.  306.  51j 

real  kindness  to  those  on  whom  it  is  exercised :  that  it  is  a 
sig-n  of  a  bad  cause,  and  contrary  to  the  nature  of  religion, 
which  is  above  all  things  free,  and  must  be  a  man's  own 
choice:  and  that  it  is  i]np()S8il)le,  that  true  religion  should  be 
served  and  advanced  by  force  and  violence.  He  likewise 
maintains,  that  antiquity  and  human  authority  can  never 
lunountto  prescription  against  truth  and  freedom  of  inquiry. 

(12.)  Indeed  Lactantius  has  in  his  remaining  works, 
particularly  his  Institutions  and  their  Epitome,  fully  con- 
futed every  pretence  for  persecution.  And  if  his  book,  Of 
Persecution,  mentioned  by  Jerotn,  were  still  in  being,  I  per- 
suade myself,  we  should  liave  had  some  more  fine  thoughts 
upon  this  subject,  w  hich  we  now  want. 

20.  Our  author  does  likewise  disclaim  all  persecution  in 
the  name  of  all  christians  in  general,  as  unworthy  the  good- 
ness of  tkeir  cause. 

(1.)  ^Ve^  do  not  desire  that  men  should  worship  our  God, 
unless  they  are  willing-,  though  he  be  the  Creator  of  the 
whole  world.  We  teach,  says'^  he,  we  argue,  we  demon- 
strate;  but  we  do  not  allure  by  worldly  considerations:  yet 
none  leave  us,  being-  retained  by  the  bands  of  truth  and  love. 
It**  is  not  by  huma!i  authority  that  things  are  decided  among 
us,  but  by  the  word  of  God  alone. 

(2.)  This  is  glorious,  when  it  can  be  truly  said  of  the 
professors  of  any  religion  :  and  it  ought  by  all  means  to  be 
truly  said  of  the  professors  of  the  true  religion.  It  is  likely 
it  may  be  said  of  those  who  hold  religion  in  its  perfection  and 
purity  :  for  it  may  be  argued,  that  wherever  there  is  perse- 
cution, there  some  things  are  maintained,  which  are  contrary 
to  reason,  and  are  no  parts  of  true  religion.  Where  therefore 
persecution  is  at  a  great  height,  there,  very  probably,  re- 
ligion is  in  a  losv  estate. 

IV.  I  must  take  some  particular  notice  of  errors  ascribed 
to  Lactantius.  They  are  very*^  numerous.  Gallaeus  has 
placed  a  large  catalogue  of  them  at  the  end  of  his  edition. 

^  At  nos  contra  non  expetimus,  ut  Deum  nostrum,  qui  est  omnium  Creator, 
velit,  nolit,  colat  aliquis  invitus  :  nee  si  non  coluerit,  irascimur.  1.  v.  c.  20. 
p.  524. 

^  Imitentur  nos,  ut  rationem  rei  totius  exponant.  Non  enim  allicimus,  ut 
ipsi  objectant,  sed  docemus,  probamus,  ostendimus.  Itaque  nemo  a  nobis 
retinetur  invitus.  Inutilis  est  enim  Deo,  qui  devotione  ac  fide  caret.  Et 
tamen  nemo  discedit,  ipsa  veritate  retinente.  1.  v.  cap.  19.  p.  519. 

*"  Quae  omnia  non  asseveratione  propria,  (nee  enim  valet  quicquam  morla- 
lis  hominis  auctoritas,)  sed  divinis  aliquibus  testimoniis,  confirraent,  sicuti  nos 
facimus.  ib.  p.  518. 

"=  Tantus  vero  est  eorum  numerus,  ut  vix  unquam  alius  scriptor  tarn  saepe 
in  paucis  libris  errasse  videatur.     Aliqui  enim  centum  et  septuaginta  illius 

2  L  2 


516  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  Uislory. 

(1.)  Some  have  charged  Lactautius  with  Manichteism. 
Several  passages  in  his  works  are  suspected  of  this  error: 
some  learned  men  are  of  opinion,  that  those  passages  are  not 
genuine.  For  which  reason,  in  late  editions,  they  are 
generally  placed  at  the  bottom  of  the  pages  among  the  notes. 
In  the  edition  of  Gryphius,  before  mentioned,  those  passages 
stand  iu  the  text;  but  they  are  marked  with  a  small  star 
before  and  after  them.  The  learned  Dr.  Heumann,  in  his 
notes  upon  one  of  those  passages,  declares  himself  in  favour 
of  their*^  genuineness.  And  I  readily  acquiesce  in  his  judg- 
ment upon  them  :  but  I  do  not  discern  Manichoeism  in  those 
passages,  nor  in  any  other  part  of  Lactantius. 

Dr.  Heumann,  the  last  editor  of  Lactantius,  has  renewed 
the  charge  of  Manichaeism  against  our  author,  which  I 
wonder  at.  But  the  authority  of  so  learned  a  writer  will 
oblige  me  to  speak  to  a  point  which  1  once  hoped  to  pass 
over  with  little  or  no  notice. 

Dr.  Heumann  says,  that*^  Manichseism  spread  in  Africa, 
the  native  country  of  Lactantius,  and  Augustine  was  once 
in  that  sentiment. 

But  Lactantius  is  almost  a  hundred  years  older  than 
Augustine.  It  is  likely,  that  Lactantius  left  Africa,  before 
Manichfeism  had  got  any  footing  there.  It  cannot  be  shown, 
that  Manichocism  was  at  all  known  in  the  Roman  empire 
till  near  the  end  of  the  third  century  :  and  then,  it  is  pro- 
bable, for  some  good  while  had  i'ew  followers.  Lactantius, 
I  apprehend,  must  have  formed  his  sentiments,  both  in  phi- 
losophy and  divinity,  before  he  coidd  possibly  be  acquainted 
with  that  doctrine  from  Persia,  if  ever  he  was  at  all  ac- 
quainted with  it:  which  I  very  much  question,  for  I  cannot 
perceive  in  all  his  works  any  traces  of  such  knowledge. 

Moreover  Lactantius  expresseth  himself  differently  upon 

errata  olim  numerabant;  alii  ea  postmodum  ad  quatuor  supra  nonaginta,  alii 
vero  ad  minorcm  numerum  redegerunt.  Nourr.  App.  T.  2.  p.  643.  A. 

•*  Additamentum  a  Cellario  hie  subjectum  in  nullo  bonorum  codicum 
reperiri  scribit  Thomasius.  Nee  in  ullis  veterum  mearum  editionum  id  offendi. 
Tamen  credo,  Lactantium  ejus  esse  auetorem.  Nee  assentior  Thomasio,  qui 
profecturn  esse  id  putat  a  Maniehaeo  quopiam.  Nam  primo  nihil  in  hoc 
additamento  doeetur,  quod  non  idem  in  superioribus  doeuerit  Lactantius. — 
Apparet  hinc,  castrationem,  quam  vocant,  scriptorum  ecclesiastieoruni  non 
esse  rem  novam ;  sed  jam  olim  fuisse,  qui,  quae  deteriora  tenebrisque  digna 
ipsis  videbantur,  mde  rescindisse.  Heuman.  not.  ad  Inst.  1.  vii.  c.  5.  p.  627. 
Vid.  ejusdem  not.  ad  cap.  19.  De  Opif.  Dei,  p.  828. 

"^  Quo  minus  jam  abhorreo  a  credendo,  militasse  Lactantium  aliquando  in 
castris  Manetis  sive  Manichaei,  I'rustraque  consumsisse  omncm  operam  Tho- 
niasium  ilium  Hispanum  in  abstergetida  ei  liac  labc.  Vigebat  scilicet  eo 
tempore  hoec  ha^resis  in  Africa,  Lactantii  patria ;  et  Augustinus  quoque  ibi 
aliquid  hauserat  ex  hac  disciplina.     Ileum,  in  Proef.  ad  Lactant. 


Lactantius.     a,  D.  306.  5\7 

all  the  j)ociilian'tic.s  of  that  sect.  lie  asscrts*^  creation  out 
ot"»  nothing,  and''  that  God  made  matter  itself :  which  every 
one  knows  to  be  diflerent  from  the  Manichees,  Avho  held  the 
eternity  of  matter.  And  he  says  that'  it  is  God  alone,  who  is 
not  made,  or  is  eternal.  His  account  likewise  of ''  the  forrjia- 
tion  of  man,  particularly' the  sexes,  is  entirely  different  from 
that  of  the  31anichees.  He  scruples  not  to  atKrm,  that'"  their 
strong-  propensities, and  ardent  affection  for  each  other,  are  thf 
constitution  of  Divine  Providence.  And  he  says  that"  God 
niade  soul  and  l)o<]y,  and  that  all  we  have  is  from  him. 
Lactantius  also  says  that "  God  made  the  <levil :  who  was  at 
first  good,  but  fell  from  perfection.  The  Manichees  always 
and  entirely  rejected  the  Jewish  scriptures  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. But  Lactantius  heartily  received  them,  and  quotes 
them  frequently,  as  will  be  seen  hereafter.     He  calls  them'' 

'  At  si  concipiat  animo,  quanta  sit  divini  hujus  operis  iinmensitas,  cum 
antea  nihil  esset,  tamen  virtute  et  consilio  Dei  ex  nihilo  esse  conflatam.  In.-t. 
1.  i.  c.  3.  p.  14.  Nemo  quderet,  ex  quibus  ista  materiis  tarn  magna,  tani 
rairifica  opera  Deus  fecerit.     Omnia  enim  fecit  ex  nihilo.     Nee  audiendi  sunt 

poetae,  qui  aiunt  chaos  in  principio  fuisse. Quibus  facile  est  responderc, 

potestatem  Dei  non  intelligentibus,  quem  credunt  nihil  efficere  posse  nisi  ex 
materia  subjacente  ac  parata ;  in  quo  errore  etiam  philosophi  fuerunt.  1.  ii. 
c.  8.  p.  179,  180.  s  Lactantius  is  reckoned  by  Beausobie 

among  those  early  christian  writers,  who  taught  creation  out  of  nothing.  See 
Hist,  de  Manich.  T.  2.  p.  165,  and  234. 

^  Deus  vcro  facit  sibi  ipse  niateriam,  quia  potest. Quid  vero  minim, 

si,  facturus  mundum,  Deus,  prius  matenam,  de  qua  faceret,  prajparavit,  et 
praeparavit  ex  eo,  quod  non  erat  ?  1.  ii.  c.  8.  p.  182.  Materia  vero  semper 
fuisse  non  potest,  quia  mutationem  caperet,  si  fiiisset,  &c.  ib.  p.  184.  in. 

'  Solus  igitur  Deus  est,  qui  faclus  non  est.  I.  ii.  c.  8.  p.  184. 

^  Hominem  finxit  ex  ipsa  terra,  quam  illi  a  principio  in  habitaculura  pr  e- 
paravit ;  id  est,spiritum  suum  terreno  corporeinduit  et  involvit.  1.  vii.  c.  5.  p.  6G3. 

'  Cum  ergo  raarem  ad  similitudinem  suam  primum  finxisset,  turn  etiam 
feminam  configuravit  ad  ipsius  hominis  effigiem,  ut  duo  inter  se  permisti 
sexus  propagare  sobolem  possent,  et  omnem  terrain  multitudine  opplere.  1.  ii. 
c.  12.  in.  Vid.  et  cap.  10.  ib.  et  de  Opif.  Dei,  cap.  10. 

■"  Cum  excogitasset  Deus  duorum  sexuum  rationem,  attnbuit  iis,  ut  se 

invicem  appeterent,  et  conjunctione  gauderenf. Quaa  cupiditaset  appe- 

tentia  in   homine  vehementior  et  acrior  invenitur.  1.  vi.  c.  23.  p.  625.     Sed 

divina  lex  ita  duos  in  matrimonium pari  jure  conjungit. Nee 

aliam  ob  causam  Deus,  cum  caeteras  animantes  suscepto  fetu  maribus  repug- 
nare  voluisset,  solam  omnium  mulierem  patientem  viri  fecit;  scilicet,  ne, 
feminis  repugnantibus,  libido  cogeret  viros  aliud  appetere.  ib.  p.  628.  Ut 
libidinem  producendtc  sobolis gratia  dedit.     Delia  Dei,  cap.  18.  p.  813. 

"  Deus  ergo  veri  patris  ofhcio  functus  est.  Ipse  corpus  affinxit,  ipse  animam, 
qua  spiramus,  infudit.  Illius  est  totum,  quicquid  sumus.  Inst.  1.  ii,  cap.  11. 
sub  fin.  "  Deinde  fecit  alteram,  in  quo  indoles  divinse  stirpis 

permansit suoque  arbitrio,  quod  a  Deo  illi  liberum  datum  fuerat,  con- 

trarium  sibi  nomen  abscivit. Hunc  ergo,  ex  bono  perse  malum  efTectum, 

Graeci  Aia^oXov  appellant.     Inst.  1.  ii.  c.  8.  p.  1 78. 

P  Salomonem,  patremque  ejus  David,  potentissimos  reges  fuisse — etiam  iis 
fortasse  sit  notum,  qui  divinas  literas  non  attigerunt.  1.  iv.  c.  8.  p.  372. 


518  Credibility  of  tlie  Gospel  History. 

sacred  and  divine:  lie  considers  their''  prophets  as  men  in- 
spired by  the  one  true  God.  He  speaks  of  idolatry  prevail- 
ing every  where,  except^  Avith  the  Hebrews  ;  among-  whom 
alone,  he  says,  true  religion  was  upheld  for  a  long  time. 
He  calls  the  Jewish  religion*  divine.  The  Jews*  he  con- 
siders as  the  ancestors  of  the  christians :  and  he  believes 
that"  the  Jewish  prophets  spake  of  Christ,  and  foretold  many 
things  concerning  him.  He''  lays  avast  stress  upon  the 
predictions  of  the  prophets  relating  to  Jesus.  He  also  be- 
lieves, that"  Jesus  Christ  was  clotlied  in  flesh,  and  that"  he 
was  born  and>  died  :  of  Christ's  humanity,  and  his'  having 
all  the  sinless  infirmities  of  the  human  nature,  Lactantius 
speaks  in  the  most  expressive  terms  that  can  be  used.  All 
which  things  are  contrary  to  the  Manichsean  doctrine;  as 
is  well  known  to  the  learned,  and  ma^  be  perceived  from 
the  accounts  formerly  given  of  it. 

Indeed,  one  can  scarce  forbear  to  suspect,  that  some 
learned  men,  who  charge  Lactantius  Avith  Manicha^ism,  have 

^  Prophetae unum  Deum  praedicant,  qiiippe  qui  unAis  Dei  spiritu 

pleni.     Inst.  1.  i.  c.  4.  p.  17.  Vid.  et  1.  iv.  c.  5.  et  c.  11.  in.  et  passim. 

■■  Nam  cum  primum  scelerati  atque  impii  Deorum  cultus — irrepserunt,  turn 
penes  solos  Hebraeos  religio  Dei  mansit.     Epit.  c.  4.3.  p.  111.  edit.  Davis. 

*  Ipsius  autem posteri  Hebraei  dicti,  penes  quos  religio  Dei  resedit. 

1.  ii.  c.  1.3.p.214.    Cum  saepeJudcei — a  divina  lege  desciscerent.  l.iA'.c.  11. in. 

^  Majores  nostri,  qui  erant  principes  Hebraeomm,  &c.  1.  iv.  c.  10.  p.  374. 
Nam,  cum  posset  populo  suo  et  opes  et  regna  largiri,  sicut  dederat  ante  Judsis, 
quorum  nos  successores  ac  posteri  sumus ; — idcirco  eum  voluit  sub  aliena 

ditione   atque   imperio    degere,   ne — in  luxuriam  laberetur, sicut    illi 

majores  nostri.   1.  v.  c.  22.  p.  522. 

"  Hanc  ergo  dispensationem  ne  quis  ignoret,  docebimus,  praedicta  esse 
omnia,  quae  in  Christo  videmus  completa. — Quae  omnia  cum  probavero  eorum 
ipsorum  Uteris,  qui  Deum  suum  mortal i  corpore  utentem  viola verunt.  1.  iv. 
c.  10.  p.  374.  "  Fecit  miracula.     Magum  putassemus,  ut 

et  vos  nuncupatis,  et  Judasi  tunc  putaverunt,  sinon  ilia  ipsa  facturum  Christum 
prophetae  oranes  uno  spiritu  praedicassent.  1.  v.  c.  3.  p.  469.  Vid.  et  Epit.  c.  45. 

*  Is  igitur  corporatus  est,  et  veste  carnis  indutus.  1.  iv.  c.  26.  p.  435.  f. 

"^  renasci  eum  in  came  praecepit,  et  ipsi  homini  similem  fieri.  1.  iv. 

c.  11.  p.  382.  In  primis  enim  testiticamur,  ilium  bis  esse  natum,  primum  in 
spiritu,  postea  in  came.  1.  iv.  c.  8.  in.  Descendens  itaque  de  ccelo  sanctus 
ille  spiritus  Dei  sanctam  virginem,  cujus  utero  se  insinuaret,  elegit.  At  ilia 
divino  spiritu  hausto  repleta,  concepit,  et,  sine  ullo  attactu  viri,  repente  vir- 
ginalis  uterus  intumuit.  1.  iv.  c.  12.  p.  383.  Vid.  Epit.  c.  43.  in.  et  f.  et  c.  44. 

y  Veruntamen  non  in  virtute  angeli, sed  in  figura  hominis  et  con- 

ditione  mortali;  ut,  cutu  magisterio  functus  fuisset,  traderetur  in  manus 
impiorum,  mortemque  susciperet.  1.  iv.  c.  10.  in.     Discant  igitur  homines  et 

intelligant,  quare  Deus  summus,  cum  legatum  suum  mitteret, morlali 

voluent  eum  came  indui,  et  cruciatu  atfici,  et  morte  mulctari.  1.  iv.  c.  25, 
Vid.  et  Epit.  cap.  50,  et  pa^^sim. 

^  Sed,  si  corpus  hominis  non   induisset,   non  potuisset  facere  qute 

docebat,  id  est,  non  irasci,  non  cupere  divitias,  non  hbidine  inflammari, 
dolorem  non  timere,  mortem  contemnere.     Epit.  cap.  50. 


Lactantius.     a.  D.  3U(3.  519 

not  Uioroiiglily  iiifonned  tliemselves  about  tlie  principles  of 
that  sect.  For  instance,  some  have  it)  tlieir  remarks  upon 
one  of  the  fore-mentioned  suspected  passages  in  Lactantius, 
that*  the  writer  teaches  Manichceism,  because  he  makes  God 
to  be  the  author  both  of  good  and  evil.  But  aUowing-  the 
M'riter  not  to  have  expressed  himself  exactly  and  properly 
upon  that  head,  I  presume,  here  is  no  Manichneism :  for 
they  held  two  eternal  principles,  one  g"ood,  the  other  evil. 
And  Lactantius  always  maintains,  that''  tiiere  is  one  cause 
and  origin  of  all  things,  even  (iod  :  and  opposes*^  the  doc- 
trine of  two  eternal  principles.  I  think,  that''  Dr.  Pfaf}"  has 
well  answered  that  objection. 

Galleeus  acquits  Lactantius  of  this''  error;  partly,  because 
Jerom,  and  other  ancient  writers,  never  say  any  thing-  of  it ; 
M'hich  appears  to  me  a  good  reason  :  partly,  because  he 
thinks  the  passages  before  taken  notice  of  to  be  spurious. 

2.  It  is  well  known,  that*^  Lactantius  did  not  believe  that 
there  are  antipodes.  We  of  this  time  cannot  but  wonder  he 
should  be  so  positive  upon  that  head,  and  ridicule  an  opinion 
which  is  now  universally  received,  and  was  then  known  and 
proposed  by  some.  Otherwise  there  had  been  no  occasion 
to  argue  against  it. 

*  Neque  etiara  ullo  modo  adraittenda,  quippe  quae  miiltos  errores  continet. 
Primo  docet  Manichaeum  errorem,  nempe  Deiim  creasse  duo  principia,  unum 
boni,  alteram  mali.  Vid.  Gallsei  not.  in  Lact.  Inst.  1.  ii.  c.  8.  p.  179.  Eadeni 
fuit  opinio  Isaei,  qui  in  notis  suis  observat  impium  illud  dogma  nunquam  alibi 
clarius  adstrui. — In  eo  auteni  niortiferum  aliquod  Manichaeorum  virus  versute 
et  subtiliter  insinuari,  inde  colligi  potest,  quod  illius  auctor  aperte  pronuntiat 
Deum  fecisse  bonum  et  malum.     Nourr.  App.  T.  ii.  p.  638.  E. 

**  Unus  igitur  est  princepset  origo  rerum,  Deus.     De  Ira  Dei,  c.  xi.  p.  794. 

"^  Dua  igitur  constituuntur  aetcrna,  et  quidem  inter  se  contraria :  quod  fieri 
sine  discordia  et  pernicie  non  potest. — Ergo  fieri  non  potest,  quin  aeterna 
natura  sit  simplex ;  ut  inde  omnia,  velut  ex  fonte,  descenderint,  Inst.  1.  ii. 
c.  8.  p.  182,  183. 

^  Quae  cum  ita  sint,  non  tamen  vetustissimis  haereticis  Manichaeis,  qui  paulo 
ante  tempora  Lactantii  nati  sunt,  annumerandus  est  Lactantius.  Hi  enim  duo 
principia  coaeterna  statiiere,  bonum  et  malum.  Lactantius  vero  malum  ab 
aeterno  non  fuisse  asserit,  sed  originem  sumsisse  in  tempore  confirmat.  Pfalf. 
Diss.  Prael.  n.  21.  p.  27.  *  Fuere,  qui  Manichaeismi  quoque 

Lactantium  accusare  non  dubitarunt.  Sed  quia  nee  Hieronymus,  nee  quisquam 
alius  veterum,  hunc  in  Lactantio  errorem  animadvertit:  quia  item  vetusti 
codices  non  habent  ea,  &c.     Gall.  ap.  Lact.  p.  901.  m. 

'  Quid  illi,  qui  esse  contrarios  vestigiis  nostris  antipodas  putant  ?  Num 
aliquid  loquuntur  ?  Aut  est  quisquam  tam  ineptus,  qui  credat,  esse  homines 
quorum  vestigia  sint  superiora,  quam  capita  ?  aut  ibi,  quae  apud  nos  jacent, 
inversa  pendere  ?  fruges  et  arbores  deorsum  versus  crescere  ?  pluvias  et  nives 
et  grandmes  sursum  versus  cadere  in  terram.  Inst.  1.  iii.  c.  24.  in.  De  anti- 
podis  quoque  sine  risu  nee  audiri  nee  dici  potest.  Asseritur  tamen,  quasi 
aliquid  serium,  ut  credamus  esse  homines,  qui  vestigiis  nostris  habent  adversa 
vestigia.     Epit.  cap.  39. 


520  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  Uistonj. 

3.  He  went  into  the  common  notion  of  that  time,  concern- 
ing the  fall  of  many  of  tlie^  angels. 

4.  It  is  also  well  known,  that''  Lactantius  expected  a  ter- 
restrial reig-n  of  Christ  for  a  thousand  years  before  the 
general  judgment.  Jerom  has  ridiculed'  his  Millenarian 
notions,  which  are  chiefly  enlarged  upon  in  the  seventh  and 
last  book  of  the  Divine  Institutions.  Jerom  took  the  same 
freedom  with  Irenteus,  TertuUian,  Victorinus,  and  other 
christian  writers,  who  had  the  like  sentiment. 

This  happy  period  our  author  thought  to  be  very  near, 
and  that  it  could  not  be  deferred''  more  than  two  hundred 
years. 

5.  Jerom  has  more  than  once  remarked  upon  Lactantius, 
that'  in  his  epistles,  especially  those  to  Demetrian,  he  denies 
the  personality  of  the  Holy  Ghost :  referring  him,  as  the 
Jew  s  erroneously  do,  to  the  Father  or  the  Son.  Jerom  says, 
that*^^  in  his  time  this  was  a  common  opinion  with  many,  who 
did  not  understand  the  scriptures. 

6.  In  other  places  Jerom  vindicates  Lactantius"  from  an 

^  Vid.  Inst.  1.  ii.  c.  14.  Epit.  c.  27. 

^  Non  quod  ille  regnuni  hoc  terrenum  fuerit  adeptus,  cujiis  capiendi 
nondiim  tenipus  advenit,  sed  quod  cceleste  et  sempiternum.  Inst.  1.  iv.  c.  7. 
sub  fin. 

Nam  cum  ita  sit  a  Deo  constitutum,  ut  idem  Christus  hisadveniat  in  terram  ; 
semel,  ut  unum  Deum  gentibus  nuntiet,  deinde,  rursus,  ut  regnet.  1.  iv.  c,  12. 
p.  385. 

Necesse  est,  ut  in  fine  sexti  millesimi  anni  malitia  omnis  aboleatur  e  terra, 
et  regnet  per  annos  mille  justitia,  sitque  tranquillitas,  et  requies  a  laboribus, 
1.  vii.  c.  14.  p.  695.     Vid.  quae  ibidem sequuntur,  etc.  15,  16,  &c. 

'  Neque  enim  juxt.i  judaicas   fabulas — gemmatam   et   auream  de  coelo 

expectamus  Jerusalem Quod  et  multi  nostrorum,  etprsecipue  Tertulliani 

liber — de  SpeFidelium, — et  Lactantii  Institutionum  volumen  septimum  polli- 
cetur,  et  Victorini  Pitabionensis  epistoli  crebrae  expositiones.  Hieron.  in  Ezek. 
cap.  36.  T.  iii.  p.  952. 

^  Jam  superius  ostendi,  completis  annorum  sex  millibus  mulationem  isfam 
fieri  oportere,  et  jam  propinquare  summum  ilium  conclusionis  diem. — Quando 
tamen  compleatur  haec  summa,  docent  ii,  qui  detemporibus  scripserunt. — Qui 
licet  varient,  et  aiiquantum  numefi  eorum  summa  dissentiat,  omnis  tamen 
expectatio  non  amplius  quam  ducentorum  videtur  annorum.  1.  vii.  c.  25.  p.  726. 

'  Lactantius  in  epistolis  suis,  et  maxime  in  epistolis  ad  Demetrianum,  Spiritiis 
Sancti  negat  substantiam ;  et  errore  judaico  dicit  eum  vel  ad  Patrem  referri, 
ve!  ad  Filium,  et  sanctificationem  utriusque  personae  sub  ejus  nomine  demon- 
strari.     Hieron.  ad  Pamm.  et  Oc.  ep.  41.  [al.  65.]  T.  iv.  p.  345. 

•"  Hoc  ideo,  quia  multi  per  imperitiam  scripturarum  (quod  et  Firtnianus  in 
octavo  ad  Demetrianum  epistolarum  libro  i'acit)  asserunt,  S])iri1um  Sanctum 
saepe  Patrem  saepe  Filium,  nomiuari.  Et,  cum  perspicue  inTrinitate  credamus, 
tertiam  personam  auferentes,  non  substantiam  ejus  voUint  esse,  sed  nomen.  In 
Galat.  c.  iv.  v.  6.  p.  268. 

"  Quantum  memoria  suggerit,  nisi  tamen  fallor,  nescio  me  legisse  Lactan- 
tium  avanitponiviiv  animam  dicere,  &c.  Adv.  Ri.f.  1.  ii.  T.  4.  p.  399.  Conf, 
1.  ii.p.  395.  etl.  ]ii.  p.  465. 


Lactantius.     a.  D.  306.  521 

opinion  conccinini>  tho  origin  of  the  soul,  imputed  to  him  hy 
some. 

7.  Galloeus  observes,  that"  Lactantius  says  little  or  nothing- 
of  Christ's  jjriestly  oflice.  1  do  not  remember,  that  Jerom 
has  any  where  taken  notice  of  this  :  but  it  is  likely  enough 
to  be  true;  and  that  Lactantius  did  not  consider  Christ's 
death,  in  the  modern  May,  as  a  propitiatory  sacrifice  for  sin, 
or  a  satisfaction  made  to  divine  justice  for  the  sins  of  the  hu- 
man race.  This  may  be  arg^ued  from  his  passages  before  tran- 
scribed, concerning-  the  value  of  repentance,  and  the  ends  of 
Christ's  death. 

But  then  many  other  ancient  christians  will  come  in  for 
their  share  in  this  charge.  For  according-  to  Matthias 
Flacius  lllyricus,  in  the  preface  to  his  Clavis  Scripturce, 
or  Key  to  the  Scriptures,  '  Thei'  christian  writers,  mIio 
'  lived  soon  after  Christ  and  his  apostles,  discoursed  like 
'  philosophers,  of  the  law  and  its  moral  precepts,  and  of  the 
'  nature  of  virtue  and  vice:  but  they  Avere  totally  ignorant 
'  of  man's  natural  corruption,  and  the  mysteries  of  the  g'os- 
'  pel  and  Christ's  benefits.'  '  His  countryman,  St.  Jerom,'  he 
says,  '  was  well''  skilled  in  the  languages,  and  endeavoured 
*  to  explain  the  scriptures  by  versions  and  commentaries. 
'  But  after  all  he  was  able  to  do  very  little,  being-  ignorant 
'  of  the  human  disease,  and  of  Christ  the  physician  :  and 
'  wanting  both  the  key  of  scripture,  and  the  lamb  of  God  to 
'  open  to  him.' 

The  same  Flacius,  or  sonic  other  learned  writer  of  his 
time,  in  the  preface  to  the  Centurice  Magdeburg-enses, 
observes  of  Eusebius  bishop  of  Caesarea  :  '  That"^  it  is  a  very 

"  Quod  de  praecipiio  Chrisfi  incarnati  officio,  sacerdofali  nimirmn,  facuit : 

et  ideo  tantum  Christum  hunianam  naturam  assiimsisse  contendit, ut 

univei-sis  gentibus,  quae  sub  ccelo  sunt,  singularis  et  veri  Dei  sanctum  mysterium 

revelaret,  et  unum  illis  Deum  nunciaret deniquc  ut  exempla  virtutis 

homini  praeberc  posset.  Qua^  omnia  quam  sint  frigida,  principe  incarnationis 
Christi  fine  omisso,  nemo  non  videt.     Gall.  Synth.  Doct.  Lact.  p.  899. 

I'  Olim,  mox  post  apostolos,  pleriqne  scriptores  ad  philosophicas  de  lege  ac 
pneceptis  moralibus,  et  virtutibus  vitiisque,  disputationes  proruerunt ;  ignari 
prorsus  nativee  corrujitionis  hominis,  et  evangelii  mysteriorum,  et  bcncficiorum 
Christi.     M.  Fl.  111.  m  I'r.  ad  Clav.  Scr.  S.  p.  7.  f. 

1  Unus  popnlaris  nicus  Hicronymus  linguarum  cgregie  peritus  fuit ;  cona- 
tusque  est  sacras  literas  turn  versionibus  turn  explicationibus  illustrare.  Sed 
revera  et  morbi  human  i,  et  medici  Christi  ignarus,  destitutusque  turn  clave 
scripturarum  aperiente,  nempediscrimine  Icgis  et  evangelii,  tum  etiam  apertore 
aut  janitore  ejus  agno  Dei,  parum  praestare  potuit.     Id.  ib.  p.  8.  in. 

■■  Ut  enim  de  aliis  nihil  dicamus,  Eusebius  certe  christianum  hominem,  1.  i. 
c.  4.  ita  definit,  ut,  si  absit  cognitio  Christi,  quam  ei  tamen,  sed  obscure, 

tribuit,  prorsus  videatur  ethnico  more  virum  honestum describere.     Ait 

enim,  christianum  esse  virum,  qui  per  Christi  cognitionem  ac  doctrinatn, 
animi  moderatione,  et  justitia,  continentiaque  vitte,  et  virtutis  fortitudine,  ac 


522  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

'  low  and  imperfect  description  wliicli  lie  gives  of  a  cbris- 
'  tian  ;  making  him  only  a  man,  m  ho,  by  the  knowledge  of 
'  Christ  and  his  doctrine,  is  brought  to  the  worship  of  the 
'  one  true  God,  and  the  practice  of  sobriety,  righteousness, 
'  patience,  and  other  virtues.  But  he  has  not  a  word  about 
'  regeneration,  or  imputed  righteousness.' 

Poor,  ignorant,  primitive  christians  !  I  wonder  how  they 
could  find  the  way  to  heaven!  They  lived  near  the  times  of 
Christ  and  his  apostles.  They  highly  valued,  and  diligently 
read,  the  holy  scriptures,  and  some  wrote  commentaries  upon 
them  ;  but  yet,  it  seems,  they  knew  little  or  nothing  of  their 
religion  ;  though  they  embraced  and  professed  it  with  the 
manifest  hazard  of  all  earthly  good  things,  and  many  of  them 
laid  down  their  lives  rather  than  renounce  it.  Truly  we  of 
these  times  are  very  happy  in  our  ortjiodoxy  ;  but  1  wish 
that  we  did  more  excel  in  those  virtues  which  they,  and  the 
scriptures  likewise,  I  think,  recommend,  as  the  distinguish- 
ing properties  of  a  chrislian.  And  I  am  not  a  little  appre- 
hensive, that  many  things,  M'hich  now  make  a  fair  show 
among  us,  and  in  which  we  mightily  pride  ourselves,  will 
in  the  end  prove  weeds  only,  on  which  the  owner  of  the 
ground  sets  no  value. 

The  early  christians,  after  the  apostles,  were  not  infallible. 
T  do  not  represent  them  as  such.  They  had  their  errors ; 
but  we  should  be  sensible,  that  we  also  are  liable  to  err. 
And  possibly,  they  had  in  some  respects  a  juster  notion  of 
true  religion  than  we  have.  Grotius,  in  his  notes  upon^  Ron), 
vii.  19,  expresseth  himself  very  differeiitly  from  Flacius  con- 
cerning the  christians  of  the  first  three  centuries. 

V.  We  saw  in  the  preceding  chapter  one  of  St.  Jerom's 
commendations  of  the  works  of  Lactantius.  And  here,  as 
we  have  gone  along-,  we  have  observed  his  judgment  upon 
several  pieces  in  particular.  In  another  place,  that  learned 
ancient  speaks  of  our  author  in  this  manner:  '  Lactantius*^ 
'  fiows  like  a  river  of  Tullian  eloquence.  I  wish  he  had 
'  been  as  able  to  defend  our  religion,  as  to  confute  others.' 

pietatis  confessione  erga  verum  ac  solum  omnium  Deum  excellit.  Ista  primum 
nimis  generaliter  dicuntur.  Deinde  nihil  de  regeneratione. — Neque  obscure 
significat,  ad  id  tali  homini  notitiamChristiejusque  doctrinam  solum  prodesse, 
ut  virtutibus  possit  excellere.  Nihil  de  remissione  peccatorum,  atque  jmputata 
justitia  per  fidem  in  Christum  dicit,  quae  est  quasi  ipsissima  christiani  hominis 
forma.     In  Praef.  ad  Hist.  Eccl.  Magdeb.  p.  i. 

*  Deo  laus  sit,  quod  optimi,  id  est,  trium  primorum  sa?culorum  christiani, 
hunc  locum  sic  ut  oporlet  inteilexerint ;  dictante  illo  spiritu,  per  quem  vita 
ipsorum  dirigebatur.     Grot,  ad  Rom.  vii.  19.  '  See  p.  456,  457. 

"  Lactantius,  quasi  quidam  fluvius  eloquentiaeTullianne,  utinam  tarn  nostra 
affirmare  potuisset,  quam  facile  aliena  destruxit.     Ad  Paulin.  Ep.  4'!.  a'.  13. 


Lactantius.     a.  D.  306.  523 

Apollinaris  .Sitloiiius  likewise  allows  Lactnntius^'  to  have 
had  an  excellent  talent  at  confuting-  error.  For  certain,  the 
former  is  the  more  ditKcnlt  of  the  two:  and  it  is  agreeable 
to  a  well  known  saying  of  Cicero  himself,  who  had  so  great 
strength  and  capacity  of  mind  :  '  1  "  wish,'  says  he,  '  1  conid 
'  as  easily  find  out  truth,  as  confute  error.' 

Trithemius  says,  that^  Lactantius  was  well  skilled  in 
secular  learning,  and  not  a  little  conversant  in  the  divine 
scriptures,  and  next  to  Cicero  the  m(»st  eloquent  of  all  men. 

It  may  not  be  amiss  to  take  some  notice  likewise  of  the 
judgments  of  moderns  upon  this  writer. 

Dr.  Heumann,  in  his  preface  to  his  edition  of  the  works 
of  Lactantius,  gives  his  character  at  large.  IIe>  was  pious, 
learned,  and  eloquent.  But  there  are  observable  in  him 
several  faults  and  defects.  He  was  no  critic,  nor  philosopher, 
and  but  a  poor  divine. 

His  want  of  critical  skill  is  supposed  to  be'^  apparent  from 
his  quoting  the  Sibylline  oracles,  and  works  of  Hydaspes, 
and  Hermes  Trismegistus,  as  genuine  and  authentic. 

That  he  was  a  poor  reasoner,  and  but  an  indiflferent  philo- 
sopher, is''  inferred  from  his  arguments  against  antipodes, 
and  from  his  reasonings  upon  some  other  occasions. 

Lastly,  he''  was  a  miserable  divine.  For  he  speaks  differ- 
ently from  the  sound  doctrine  of  the  church  concerning  the 
Trinity,  and  several  other  points. 

Bull  says,  that''  sometimes  Lactantius  speaks  orthodoxly 
of  the  Son.  This  matter  has  been  carefully  examined  by'' 
Petavius  and  ''Nourry,  to  M'hom  I  refer. 

"  Instruit  ut  Hieronymus,  destruit  lit  Lactantius,  adstruit  ut  Aiigustinus, 
Sidon.  Ep.  1.  iv.  ep.  3.  p.  9.  "*  Nota  Ciceronis  vox  est :  Utinam 

tarn  facile  vera  invenire  possem,  quam  falsa  convincere.  1.  ii.  c.  3.  sub  fin. 

"  Vir  in  secularibus  Uteris  abundanter  doctus,  et  in  divinis  scripturis 

notabiliter  institutus,  ita  ut  in  arte  dicendi  post  Ciceronem  facile  obtinuerrt  prin- 
cipatiim.     De  Scr.  Ec.  cap.  56. 

y  Virtutes  ipsius  tres  cognovi,  pietatem,  variam  doctrinam,  eloquentiam  : 
quarum  prima  vel  sola  commendare  valet  horum  librorum  lectionem.  Appare^ 
bit  certe  cuivis  lectori  bono  vere  pium,  christianaque  virtute  non  tinctum,  sed 
imbutum,  fuis?e  Lactantium.     Ileum.  Pr.  sub  fin. 

^  Tria  item  animadverti  ejus  vitia.  Primum  scilicet  caruil  facultale  critica, 
acerrime  ob  id  notatus  a  Thoma  Reinesio  in  libro  de  Sibyllinis  Oraculis.  id.  ib. 

*  Deinde  permediocris  fuit  noster  Lactantius  philosophus.  Ecquis  hodie 
non  rideat  ejus  de  antipodibus  disputationem — ?  ibid. 

''  Postremo  fatenduni  ingenue,  fuisse  Lactantium  perminutum  theologum.-^ 
Ne  satis  quidem  perceperat  ecclesiae  doctrinas ;  recteque  sibi  de  Christo,  de 
Trinitate,  deque  aliis  rebus  docere  videbatur,  cum  multa  traderet  a  sensu  verae 
ecclesiae  alienissima.  ibid. 

<=  Nam  Filium  Dei  unius  esse  cum  Patre  substanHae,  iinumqueDeum  totum 
Patris  continere  et  capere,  clare  affirmat.  En  loca  diserta.  Def.  Fid.  Nic. 
Sect.  ii.  c.  14.  n.  4.  p.  152.  al.  170. 

"1  V;d.  Petav.  Dogm.  I.  i.  c.  v.  n.  6,  7.  «  App.  T.  ii.  p.  779,  &c. 


524  Credihilily  of  the  Gospel  llistorxj. 

However,  Bull  says,  that^  Lactantius  had  very  little  know- 
ledge of  the  christian  doctrine.  And  it  is  very  common  for 
learned  moderns  to  speaks  in  that  manner  of  this  writer  and 
Arnobius.  Mr.  Warburton  says,  '  tliat'*  though  Lactantius 
'  knew  little  of  Christianity,  yet  he  was  exquisitely  well 
'  skilled  in  the  strong  and  weak  side  of  philosophy.' 

Lactantius  had  very  different  thoughts  of  himself;  and 
reckoned,  that  he  was  able  to  defend  truth,  and  particu- 
larly the'  true  christian  religion,  in  such  a  manner  as  to 
recommend  it  to  learned  and  iiidearned,  and  remove  the 
difficulties  and  objections  of  both:  as  he  intimates  at  the 
beg-inning-  of  his  Divine  Institutions.  And  he  intended  that 
Avork,  as*^  a  full  and  general  answer  to  all,  who  already  had, 
or  ever  should,  oppose  the  christian  doctrine. 

Nor  does  it  appear,  that  he  was  conceited  of  himself:  but 
his'  confidence  was  founded  in  the  g-oodness  of  his  cause, 
which  he  thought  to  have  such  evidence  of  truth,  that  he  could 
not  but  succeed  in  the  defence  of  it.  And  when  he  wrote  his 
book.  Of  the  Workmanship  of  God,  one  of  his  first  perform- 
ances in  the  service  of  religion,  he  supposed  himself  capable''* 
to  instruct  other  christians. 

Mr.  Warburton  thinks,  thaf'Lactantius,  when  he  confutes 
the  established  heathen  religion,  spares  the  priests;  but  in 

^  Erat  scriptor  ille  pene  rudis  disciplinae  christianse,  et  in  rbetorica  melius 
quam  in  theologia  versatus.  lb.  p.  152.  al.  170.  Rhetor  ille  erat,  non  theolo- 
gus ;  neque  inter  ecclesias  doctores  locum  unquam  obtinuit.  ib.  p.  218.  al.  247. 

8  See  Mr.  Warburton's  Divine  Legation,  Vol.  i.  p.  3. 

''  As  before,  p.  394.  Again  :  *  Lactantius  having  set  up  for  a  defender  of 
Christianity,'  p.  393. 

' eaque  [veritas]  vel  contemtui  doctis  est,  quia  idoneis  assertoribus 

eget;  vel  odio  indoctis,  ob  insitam  sibi  austeritatem — succurrendum  esse  his 
erroribus  credidi ;  ut  et  docti  ad  veram  sapientiam  dirigantur,  et  indocti  ad 
veram  religionem.  1.  i.  c.  1.  p.  4. 

^  Suscepi  hoc  opus, — non  ut  contra  hos  scriberem,  qui  paucis  verbis  obteri 
poterant, — sed  ut  omnes  qui  ubique  idem  operis  efficiunt,  aut  effecerunt,  uno 
semel  impetu  profligarem.  1.  v.  c.  4.  p.  470.  Vid.  et  1.  vi.  c.  1.  et  1.  vji.  c.  1. 

'  Verum  ego  non  eloquentia,  sed  veritatis  fiducia  suscepi  hoc  opus  fortasse 
majus  quam  ut  possit  meis  viribus  sustineri ;  quod  tamen,  etiamsi  ego  dcfcccrim, 
Deo,  cujus  est  hoc  munus,  adjuvante,  veritas  ipsa  complebit,  &c.  1.  iii.  c.  1. 
p.  234.  Quod  erat  officiurn  suscepti  muneris,  divino  spiritu  instruente,  ac 
suffraganfe  ipsa  verilate  complevimus.  1.  vi.  c.  1.  in. 

'"  — apud  quern  [Demetrianum]  nunc  profiteor,  nulla  me  necessitate,  vel 
rei  vel  temporis,  impediri,  quo  minus  aliquid  excudam,  quo  philosophi  nostraa 
sectae,  quam  tuemur,  instructiores,  doctioresque  in  posterum  fianf.  De  Op. 
Dei,  c.  1.  sub  in.  "  '  The  eloquent  Ap(jlogist — giving,  in  his 

•  Divine  Institutions,  the  last  stroke  to  expiring  paganism,  where  he  confutes 

*  the  national  religion,  spares,  as  much  as  possible,  the  priests :  but  in  exposing 

♦  tiieir  philosophy,  is  not  so  tender  of  their  sophists.  For  these  last  havmg  no 
'  public  character,  the  state  was  not  concerned  to  have  Ihem  managed.' 
Dedication  of  Div.  Leg.  V.  i.  p.  30. 


Lactantius.     a.  D.  306.  525 

exposing  their  philosophy,  he  is  not  so  tentler  of  the  sophists, 
Nevcrllieless,  I  do  not  perceive,  that  Lactantius  had  any  re- 
gard for  heathen  priests.  And  1  apprehend  he  so  concludes 
his  second  book,  as  to  show  that  the"  philosophers  of  his 
time  were  reputed  by  him  the  most  formidable  adversaries  ; 
so  far  as  they  were  respected,  and  were  in  the  wrong-.  This 
seems  to  be  the  reason  why  he  argued  so  much  against  them. 
For  a  like  reason  Augustine,  as  he  himself  assures  us,  chiefly 
argued  against  the''  Platonists. 

Du  Pin  says,  '  that''  Lactantius  is  Justly  esteemed  the 
'  christian  Cicero  for  his  style,  and  greatly  surpasscth  him 
'  in  his  thouohts.'  For  certain,  so  it  ouiiht  to  be:  this  is 
honourable  to  the  christian  religion.  And  J  presiune,  that 
those  learned  moderns,  who  are  pleased  to  depreciate  Lactan- 
tius, as  if  it  had  little  knowledge  of  the  christian  religion, 
will  allow  as  much.  1  shall  here  refer  to  a  passage  of  our 
author,  correcting  a  moral  sentiment  of  Cicero  ;  where  that 
great  heathen  moralist  and  philosopher  seems  to  say,  '  We^ 
'  should  relieve  deserving  persons.  And,  says  Lactantius, 
'  undeserving  likewise. 

Some  have  said,  that  Lactantius  took  delight  in  opposing 
Cicero.  However,  it  was  not  because  he  had  not  a  high 
esteem  for  Cicero,  as  is  manifest;  but  rather,  it  is  likely, 
because  there  was  no  other  person  so  considerable  :  and  *'  if 
he  was  mistaken,  it  was  not  to  be  expected  that  any  other 
heathen  should  have  better  notions. 

Certainly  Lactantius  is  to  be  respected  upon  many  ac- 
counts. The  tiuie  in  which  he  lived  secures  him  a  kind  of 
veneration.  He  saw  the  C(uiet  and  peaceful  state  of  the 
church,  before  Dioclesian's  persecution  ;  he  was  also  witness 
of  that  dreadful  scene,  and  afterwards  saw  the  flourishing- 
condition  of  christians  under  Constantine.  His  eminent 
abilities  recommended  him  to  the  esteem  of  two  great  em- 
perors of  different  religions.     His  uncommon  honesty  and 

"  Peracta  est  igitur,  ni  fallor,  magna  ct  difficilis  suscepti  operis  portio. — 
Nunc  vcro  major  nobis  ac  difficilior  cum  philosophis  proposita  luctalio  est. 
1.  ii.  c.  19.  ^  Ideo  quippc  hos  potissimum  elegi,  quorum  de  uno 

Deo  qui  fecit  coelum  et  terram,  cjuanto  melius  senserunt,  tanto  caeteiis  gloriosi- 
ores  et  illustriores  habentur.  De  Civ.  Dei,  1.  viii.  c.  12,  Elegimus  enim 
Platonicos,  omnium  philosophorum  merito  nobilissimos.     lb.  1.  x.  c.  1.  n.  1. 

1  II  merite  a  bon  droit  le  nom  de  Ciceron  cliretien. — Quoiqu'  il  en  soit,  il 
est  certain,  que  Lactance  surpasse  de  beaucoup  Ciceron  pour  les  pensees,  par- 
ceque  les  matieres  de  la  religion  dont  il  traile  sont  infiniment  au  dessus  des 
maximes  de  la  doctrine  des  philosophes.     Bib.  T.  i.  p.  208. 

■■  Et  sa;pe  idoneis  hominibus  egentibusde  re  familiari  impertiendum.  Quid 
est  idoneis  ? — Non  enim  idoneis  hominibus  largiendum  est,  sed,  quantum 
potest,  non  idoneis,  &c.  I.  vi.  c.  1 1.  p.  582.  *  Eodem  ductus 

errore  Seneca.     Quisenim  veram  viamteneret,  errante  Cicerone  ?  1.  iii.  c.  15. 


526  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

simplicity,  and  earnest  zeal  for  the  christian  religion,  and 
all  truth  in  general,  appear  in  his  works:  where  also  his 
learning-  is  very  conspicuous.  But  we  had  seen  more  proofs 
of  this,  if  his  epistles,  and  other  works  now  lost,  had  come 
down  to  us.  He  had,  as  it  seems,  a  certain  vehemence  and 
impetuosity  of  natural  temper,  not  uncommon  in  Africans, 
which  lipon  some  occasions  hindered  his  considering-  and 
weighing-  what  might  be  said  on  both  sides  of  a  question. 
At  the  same  time,  possibly,  we  are  indebted  to  that  fire,  which 
supported  him  in  the  fatigues  of  acquiring-  knowledge,  and 
then  communicating-  it  to  others. 

I  have  allowed  myself  to  enlarge  in  the  article  of  Lactan- 
tius,  who,  I  think,  must  have  been  an  honour  and  ornament 
to  the  christian  profession  in  his  day  ;  who  employed  his  fine 
parts  and  extensive  learning  in  the  service  of  religion,  with- 
out worldly  views  of  any  kind;  whose^  works  have  had  so 
many  readers,  and  of  which  there  have  been  so  many  editions, 
since  the  first  discovery  of  the  art  of  printing-.  It  may  be 
supposed,  that  a  part  of  this  writer's  reputation  is  owing  to 
the  charms  and  beauties  of  his  style  :  but  the  matter  of  his 
works  is  also  a  just  recommendation.  And  indeed  if  authors 
desire  to  be  read,  they  should  aim  at  perspicuity  at  least,  if 
not  also  at  some  neatness  and  elegance  of  expression  ;  and  not 
rely  altogether  on  the  importance  of  their  argument.  Cicero 
himself,  with  all  his  fine  sentiments,  upon  things  of  great 
consequence,  and  notwithstanding-  his  high  station  in  the 
Roman  commonwealth,  would  scarce  have  been  universally 
read  and  admired,  if  his  style  had  been  rough,  obscure,  and 
perplexed. 

VI.  Lactantius,  as  formerly*  seen,  blamed  Cyprian  for 
citing'  scripture  in  a  work  addressed  to  a  heathen.  But  the 
fault  which  he  imputes  to  Cyprian,  1  think,  must  be  sup- 
posed to  have  consisted  chiefly  in  quoting-  not  only  the  Old, 
but  likewise  the  New  Testament,  and  that"  expressly.  For 
Lactantius  himself  in  his  Institutions,  and  elsewhere,  openly 
appeals  sometiines  to  the  Mritings  of  the  ancient  prophets  ; 
and  quotes  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament  almost  as  freely 
as  he  does  Cicero,  or  Plato,  or  Ilydaspes,  or  any  other 
heathen  author  whatever. 

1.  We  saw  befor<>,  in  part,  this  writer's  regard  for  the 
Jewish  scriptures,  when  we  vindicated  him  from  the  charge 
of  Manichaeism.     It  is  fit,  that  we  should  now  show  it  more 

'  See  p.  474.  "  loquenle  Domino  et  jdicente  :  Ne 

dederitis  sanctum  canibiis. — Cypr.  ad  Demetr.  p.  185.  Ipsiim  denique  audi 
loquentem,  ipsum  voce  divina  instruentem  nospanter  etmonenlem:  Domiiium 
Deum  tuum  adorabis.  ib.  p.  187. 


Lactantius.     a.  D.  306.  527 

tlistiiic'tly,  aiul  likewise  observe  wliat  notice  he  lias  taken  of 
the  seiiptnres  of  the  New  Testament. 

(1.)  Laotautius  says  :  '  Alh  scriptun'  is  divided  into  two 
Testaments;  that  uhiih  preceded  Uk-  comin<>'  and  passion  of 
the  Lord,  caUcd  the  Old  Testament,  consisting- of  tlie  law  and 
the  prophets;  and  that  which  has  been  written  since  the 
resnrrection  of  Christ,  and  is  called  the  New  Testament. 
The  Jews  use  the  Old,  we  the  New  :  but  they  are  not  difi'er- 
ent;  for  the  New  is  the  accomplishment  of  the  Old,  and 
in  both  is  the  same  testator,  Christ.' 

(2.)  Lactantius  has  expressly  quoted  many  books  of  the 
Old  Testament,  and  the  l*salms,  and  some  others  very  often. 

(3.)  He  relates  from  the  books  of  Moses'''  the  history  of 
the  creation,  the  fall  of  man,  the  tlood,  and  likewise  the  his- 
tory of  the  Jews,  their  going-  down  into  Eg-ypt,  and  their 
return  thence  :  and  afterwards  from  the  other  books  of  the  Old 
Testament,  their  government  by  judges,  and  then  by  kings, 
till  the  Babylonish  captivity,  as  also  their  deliverance  thence, 
and  their  return  to  their  own  land. 

(4,)  Several  books  of  Moses  are  expressly  cjuoted^  by  him, 
and>  the  book  of  Joshua,  and^  the  books  of  the  Kings.  He 
quotes  the  book  of  Nehemiah  by''  the  title  of  Esdras  :  proba- 
bly, because  it  was  reckoned  the  second  book  of  Esdras;  or 
because  what  he  quotes  was  supposed  to  be  spoken  by 
Esdras.     See  Nehem.  ch.  ix.  particularly  ver.  26. 

(5.)  He  often  quotes  the  Psalms  of  David,  and  sometimes 
the  Proverbs  of  Solomon.  He  likewise  considers  the  book 
of  V^isdom  as  a  writing-  of  Solomon.  I  put  in  the  margin** 
passages,  which  show  these  several  particulars. 

(6.)   Lactantius  has  quoted  seveial   of  the  prophets  by 

"  Verum  scriptiira  omnis  in  duo  Testamenfa  divisa  est.  HIikI,  quod  advenlum 
Domini  passionemque  antecessit,  id  est,  lex  et  prophetae,  Vetiis  dicitur.  Ea 
vero,  quae  post  resurrectionem  ejus  scripta  sunt, Novum Testamentuai  nominatur. 
Judaei  Veteri  utuntur,  nos  Novo.  Sed  tamen  diversa  non  sunt,  quia  Nova  Veteris 
adimpletio  est,  et  in  utroque  idem  testator  est  Christus.  Inst.  1.  iv.  c.  20.  p.  420 

*  Vid.  Inst.  1.  ii.  c.  9—13.  1.  iv.  c.  10. 

"  Sed  et  ipse  Moses — in  Deuteronomio  sic  scriptum  reliquit.  Inst.  1.  iv. 
c.  17.  p.  404.  Dequa  tamen  apertius  ipse  Moses  in  Deuteronomio  ita  praedi- 
cavit. — Idem  rursus  in  Numeris,  1.  iv.  c.  18.  p.  413,  414.  Item  Moses  in 
Numeris  :  Orietur  stella  ex  Jacob.     Epit.  c.  44.  fin. 

y  Item  Jesus  Nave  successor  ejus.  1.  iv.  c.  17.  p.  405. 

^  Item  Helias  in  libro  BuaiXiKiov  tertio,  1.  iv.  c.  11.  p.  380.  Item  in 
liamXiKuiv  libro  secundo,  propheta  Nathan  missus  est  ad  David,  ib.  c.  13. 
p.  390.  *  Hesdras  etiam  propheta,  qui  fuit  ejusdem  Cyri 

temporibus,  a  quo  Judaei  sunt  restituti,  sic  loquitur.  1.  iv.  c.  11.  p.  380. 

''  Hunc  prophetae  divino  spiritu  pleni  praedicaverunt :  quorum  praecipue 
Salomon  in  libro  Sapientiae,  item  pater  ejus  ccelestium  scriptor  hymnoiuin, 
ambo  clarissimi  reges,  qui  Trojani  belli  tempora  clx.\x.  annis  antecesseruiit. 
Epit.  c.  42. 


528  Crcdihilily  of  the  Gospel  Ilislonj. 

name;  na"  Isaiah,  who  was  sawn  asunder  by  die  Jews, and'' 
Jeremiah,  and"  Daniel. 

(7.)  Citing'  Hosea,  lie  calls  him '^  the  first  of  the  twelve 
prophets;  which  shows,  they  were  all  received  by  him  :  and 
indeed  divers  others  of  them  are  quoted  by  him,  as^  Amos, 
''  jNIicah,  'Zechariah,  whom  he  calls  the  last  of  the  prophets, 
and''  Malachi. 

(8.)  What  Lactantius  saysofZechariah's  being"  the  last  of 
the  prophets,  is  an  argument,  that  he  did  not  receive  any 
Jewish  books  as  canonical,  which  were  written,  or  allowed 
to  be  written,  after  those  of  the  tw  elve  prophets. 

(9.)  He  often  speaks  very  honourably  of  the  Jewish  pro- 
phets :  the  fourth  chapter  of  the  first  book  of  the  Institutions 
is  all  in  their  favour.  He  argues  after  this  manner:  '  That' 
they  were  not  enthusiasts,  nor  yet  impostors  or  deceivers,  but 
sincere  men,  and  real  prophets,  is  manifest  from  the  consist- 
ence of  their  discourses,  from  the  actual  accomplishment 
of  their  predictions,  from  the  excellence  of  their  doctrine,  and 
their  self-denying  course  of  life.  And  some  of  them  were 
kings  and  princes,  who  are  not  apt  to  be  sw.iyed  by  mean 
ends  and  views.' 

Nam  et  David  in  principio  Psalrnoriim  suorum — beatum  esse  ait. — Et 
Salomon  in  libio  Sapientiae, — Inst.  1.  iv.  c.  16.  p.  401,  402. 

Videlicet  ipse  est  Dei  filius,  qui  per  Salomonem  sapientissimiim  regem, 
divino  spiritu  plenum,  locutus  est  ea  qua2  subjeci :  Deus  condidit  me  in 
initio  viarum  suarum.  1.  iv.  p.  365. 

Salomonem,  patrcmque  ejus  David,  potentissimos  reges  fuisse,  et  eosdem 
prophetas,  etiam  iis  fortasse  sit  notum,  qui  divinas  literas  non  attigerunt, 
quorum  alter. — Hujus  pater  divinorum  scriptor  hymnorum  in  Psalmo  xxxii. 
sic  ait.  1.  iv.  c.  8.  p.  372. 

"^  Esaias  enim,  quern  ipsi  Judaei  serra  consectum  crudclissime  necaverunt, 
itadicit.  1.  iv.  c.  11.  p.  381. 

^  Dicit  enim  propheta  Hieremias.  ib.  p.  379,  et  passim. 

*  Daniel  quoque  similia  praelocutus  est.  1.  iv.  c.  12.  p.  385.  Vid.  ib.  c.  21 
sub  in.  et  alibi. 

f  Oseas  quoque,  primus  xii.  prophelarum.  1.  iv.  c.  19.  p.  419. 

K  Qua  de  re  Amos  propheta  testatur.  1.  iv.  c.  19.  p.  41 G. 

''  Micheas  enim  novam  legem  daturum  denuntiat.  1.  iv.  c.  17.  sub  in. 

'  Quare etiam  singulorum  proplietaruni  tempera  colligi   possunl  : 

(juorum  sane  ultimus  Zacharias  fuit,  quem  constat,  sub  Dario  rege,  secundo 
anno  ejus,  octavo  mense,  cecinisse.  1.  iv.  c.  5.  p.  3G1,  362. 

^  Sicut  Malachias  propheta  indicat  dicens.  1.  iv.  c.  11.  p.  381. 

'  Atqui  impieta  esse,  impleriquc  fjuotidie,  illorum  vaticinia  videmus.  Et  in 
iinam  sententiam  congniens  divinatio  docet,  non  fuisse  furiosos.  Quis  enim 
mentis emota?,  non  modo  futura  prsccinerc,  sed  etiam  coha;rentia  loqui  possit? 
Quid  ab  his  tam  longe  alienum,  quam  ratio  fallcndi,  cum  ca,»teros  ab  omni 

fraudc  coliiberent  ? Pra;terea  voluntas  fingendi  ac  mentiendi  eorum  est, 

f|ui  ()|)es  ajiix.tunt,  qui  lucra  desiderant ;  quae  res  procul  ab  illis  Sanctis  viris 
abfuit. — Et  hi  non  modo  qusestum  nullum  habuerunt,  sod  etiam  cruciatus  atque 
mortem. — Quid  ?  quod  aliqui  eorum  piincipcs,  ant  etiam  reges  fuerunt,  in 
quos  cadere  suspicio  cupiditatis  ac  fraudis  non  potest.  I.  i.  c.  4. 


Lactantius.     a.  U.  306.  529 

(10.)  He  says  the'"  prophets  were  inspired, and  tliey  tanoht 
tlie  worship  of  one  God  only.  Again,  "^Ihey  Mere  sent  that" 
they  nii*>ht  teach  men  just  sentiments  coneernin<>'  the  divine 
glory  and  majesty.  They"  were  also  sent  to  reprove  and 
reform  mankind,  and  to''  foretell  things  to  eome,  partieularly 
concerning  the  Christ:  that  when  he  appeared,  men  ujight 
believe  in  him. 

(11.)  He  frequently  asserts^  the  antiquity  of  the  Jewish 
prophets. 

(12.)  He  observes,  that"^  the  ])rophets  often  declare  in 
what  kings'  reigns  they  lived  and  prophesied. 

(13.)  He  calls  their  scriptures*  sacred  and  divine. 

2.  We  are  not,  for  the  reason  before  hinted,  to  expect  the 
like  plain  citations  of  the  New  Testament.  Nev(Mtheless,  it 
may  be  discerned,  that  he  received  most  of  the  books  in 
that  collection  as  scripture,  or  writings  of  authority.  But 
his  reserved  manner  will  oblige  to  a  greater  prolixity  in 
making"  this  out,  than  otherwise  would  have  been  necessary. 

(1.)  In  the  passage  produced  not  long'  ago,  Ave  saw  dis- 
tinct mention  made  by  him  of  the  New,  as  well  as  the  Old 
Testament. 

(2.)  1  would  likewise  here  refer  to,  and  transcribe  in  the 
margin,  as  a  general  passage  concerning  the  New  Testament, 
what  Lactantius  says  of  one  of  those  persons,  who  at  the 
beginning  of  Dioclesian's  persecution  A^rote  against  the 
christians.     Lactantius  informs  us, 'that"  this  writer  endea- 

"  Prophetae,  qui  fuerimt  admodum  multi,  iinum  Deura  praedicant,  unum 
loquuiitur ;  qiiippe  qui  unius  Dei  spiritu  pleni.  1.  i.  c.  4.  in. 

"  Idcirco  enim  a  Deo  mittebantur,  ut  praecones  essent  majestalis  ejus,  et 
conectores  pravitatis  humanae.  J.  i.  c.  4.  in. 

°  Propterea  Deus  prophetas  ad  eos  raisit,  divino  spiritu  adimpletos,  qui  illis 
peccata  exprobrarent,  et  poenitentiani  indicerent.  Epit.  c.  43.  Vid.  et  Inst. 
1.  iv.  c.  11.  in. 

P  Ideo  prophetas  ante  praemisit,  qui  de  adventu  ejus  pradicarent,  ut,  cum 
facta  essent  in  eo  quaecunque  praedicata  sunt,  tunc  ab  hominibus  et  Dei  Filius 
et  Deus  crederetur.     Epit.  cap.  49. 

■i  quorum  sane  ultiuius  Zacharias  fuit. — Quae  omnia  eo  profero,  ut 

errorem  suuiii  sentiant,  qui  scnpturani  Sviuctam  coarguere  nituntur,  tanquam 
novam  et  recens  fictani,  1.  iv,  c.  5.  sub  tin.     Salomonem,  patremque  ejus 

David,  potentissimos  reges  fuisse,  et  cosdem  prophetas quorum  alter,  qui 

posterius  regnavit,  Trojanae  urbis  excidium  centum  et  quadraginta  annis  ante- 
cessit.  I.  iv.  c.  8.  p.  .372.  Vid.  Epit.  c.  42. — initium  facientes  a  propheta 
Moyse,  qui  Trojanum  bellum  nongentis  fere  annis  antecessit.  1.  iv.  c.  5.  p.  359. 

''  Teslati  sunt  enim,  sub  quo  quisque  rege  divini  spiritus  fuerit  passus  in- 
stinctuni.  i.  iv.  c.  5.  p.  359.  *  Sicut  sacrae  literae  decent,  1.  ii. 

c.  12.  p.  210.  quod  divinis  literis  proditum.  ib.  ut  sanctae  literae  decent,  ib. 
p.  212.  Vid.  1.  iv.  c.  8.  p.  372.  '  See  p.  52  7. 

"  Composuit  enim  hbellos  duos,   non   contra   christianos,  — sed  ad 

christianos in  quibus  ita  talsitatem  scripturae  sacrae  arguere  conatus  est, 

tanquam  sibi  esset  tota  contraria.  Nam  quaedam  capita,  quae  repugnare  sibi 
VOL    III.  2    M 


530  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  llisiory. 

voured  to  h\\o\\  (lie  falsehood  of  the  sacred  scriptures,  collect- 
ing" out  of  them  passages,  which  seemed  to  contradict  each 
other;  and  that,  such  a  number  of  them,  that  it  might  be 
suspected  he  had  himself  some  time  been  a  christian. — But 
he  especially  abuses  Peter  and  Paul,  and  the  other  disciples, 
as  propagators  of  falsehood  :  though,  as  that  writer  says,  they 
were  ignorant  and  unlearned,  and  some  of  them  earned  their 
livelihood  by  fishing-.' 

It  is  plain,  that  Lactantius  here  speaks  of  christian  scrip- 
tures, or  the  books  of  the  New  Testament.  But  I  say  no 
more  of  this  passage  at  present,  because  another  opportunity 
may  offer  to  take  more  particular  notice  of  it. 

(3.)  Lactantius  relates  our  Saviour's  conception^  in  the 
womb  of  a  virgin  by  the  power  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  And  he 
applies  to  that  event  the  words  of  Isa.  vii.  14,  both  in  his 
Institutions,  and  in  his  Epitome,  as  St.  Matthew  does, 
ch.  i.  23. 

(4.)  He  seems  also  to  refer  to  Matt.  i.  21,  in  the  Epitome, 
when  he  says,  '  That''  our  Lord  has  among  men  two  names, 
Jesus,  which  signifies  Saviour;  and  Christ,  which  is  the  same 
as  King,  or  anointed.  He  is  called  Saviour,  because  he  is 
health  and  salvation  to  all  that  through  him  believe  in  God.' 
He  speaks  to  the  like  purpose  in  the^  Institutions. 

(5.)  He  relates  our  Lord's  baptism  by  John  in  the  river 
Jordan.     '  Then,'  says  he-',  '  was  heard  a  voice  from  heaven, 

videbantur,  exposuit,  adeo  nuilta,  adeo  intima  enumcians,  ut  aliquando  ex 

eadem  disciplina  fuisse  videatur. Praecipue  tamen  Paulum,  Petrumque 

laceravit,  caeterosque  discipulos,  tanquam  fallaciae  seminatores,  quos  eosdein 
tamen  rudes  et  indoctos  fuisse  testatus  est.  Nam  quosdam  eorum  piscatorio 
artificio  fecisse  quaestum.  1.  v.  c.  2. 

*  Descendens  itaque  de  coelo  sancfus  ille  spiritus  Dei  sanctum  virginem, 
cujus  utero  se  insinuaret,  elegit.     At  ilia  divino  spiritu  hausto  repleta  concepit, 

et  sine  ullo  attactu  viri  repente  virginalis  uterus  intumuit. Item  propheta 

Esaias  cujus  verba  sunt  haec  :  Propter  hoc  dabit  Deus  ipse  vobis  signum,  et 
vocabitis  nomenejus  Emmanuel.  1.  iv.  c.  12.  p.  383. 

Apud  Esaiam  sic;  Ecce  virgo  accipiet  in  uteruni,  et  pariet  filium,  et  voca- 
bitis nomen  ejus  Emmanuel,  quod  significat,  Nobiscum  Deus.  Epit.  c.  44. 
p.  115.  Ed.  Davis. 

"  Ab  hominibus  tamen  duobus  vocabulis  nuncupatur,  Jesus,  quod  est  Salva- 
tor ;  et  Christus,  quod  est  Rex  :  Salvator  ideo,  quia  est  sanatio  et  salus  omnium, 
qui  per  eum  credunt  in  Deum  :  Christus  vero,  &c.  Epit.  c.  42.  in  fin.  p.  108. 
Vid.  Davis,  not. 

*  Jesus  quippe  inter  homines  nominatur.     Nam  Christus  non  proprium 

nomen  est. Erat  Judceisante  pracceplum,  ut  sacrum  conficerent  unguen- 

tum,  quo  perungi  possent  ii,  qui  vocabantur  ad  sacerdotium,  vel  ad  regnum, 
&c.  I.  iv.  c.  7.  p.  367. 

y  Cum  primum  coepit  adolescerc,  tinctug  est  a  Joanne  propheta  in  Jordane 

flumine. Tunc  vox  audita  de  coelo  est :  Filius  meus  es  tu,  Ego  hodie 

genui  te. Et  descendit  super  eum  Spiritus  Dei,  formatus  in  speciem 

columbae  Candida).     Exinde  maximas  virtutes  coepit  operari. QuEe  ojiera 


Lactantius.     a.  D.  306.  531 

"  Thou  art  my  Son,  this  day  liavc  I  begotten  thee."  And 
the  Spirit  of  God  descended  upon  him  in  the  shape  of  a 
white  dove.  From  that  time  he  began  to  work  great  mira- 
cles, which  are  so  many,  that  one  book  is  not  sufHcient  to 
contain  them.  1  sliall  rehearse  tliem,'  says  lie,  '  briefly,  and 
in  general,  without  names  of  persons,  or  places.  In  this 
enumeration  of  our  Lord's  miracles  he  mentions  his  healing 
all  sorts  of  diseases  by  his  word  only,  and  immediately  ;  that 
they  carried  their  beds,  who  before  were  carried  by  others  : 
that  the  blind  were  enabled  by  him  to  see,  the  deaf  to  hear, 
the  dumb  to  speak,  the  lame  to  walk  :  that  he  healed  those 
who  Avere  all  over  leprous,  and  also  raised  the  dead,  as  out 
of  a  sleep  :  that  the  Jews  who  saw  these  things,  maliciously 
ascribed  them  to  daemons.  [See  Matt.  xii.  24.]  He  parti- 
cularly relates  our  Lord's  feeding  five  thousand  in  a  desert 
place  with  five  loaves  and  two  fishes;  and  that  when  all  had 
been  refreshed  and    satisfied,   there   were   twelve    baskets 

tam  mulla  sunt  ut  unus  liber  ad  complectenda  omnia  satis  non  sit.  Enumerabo 
igitur  ilia  breviter,  et  generatim,  sine  ulla  personarum  ac  locorum  designatione. 

Quod  quacumque  iter  faceret,  aegros,  ac  dehiles,  et  omni  morboriim 

genera  laborantes,  uno  verbo,  unoque  momento  reddebat  incolumes,  adeo  ut 
membris  omnibus  capti,  receptis  repente  viribus  roborati,  ipsi  lectulos  suos 
portabant,  in  quibus  fuerant  paulo  ante  delati :  claudis  vero,  ac  pedum  vitio 
afflictis,  non  modo  gradiendi,  sed  etiam  currendi,  dabat  facultatem.  Tunc 
quorum  caeca  lumina  in  altissimis  tenebris  erant,  eorum  oculos  in  pristinum 
restituebat  aspectum.  Mutorum  quoque  linguas  in  eloquium,  sermonemque 
solvebat.  Item  surdorum  patefactis  auribus  insinuabat  auditum.  Pollutes, 
ac  sparsos  maculis,  repurgabat.  Et  haec  omnia  non  manibus  aut  aliqua 
raedela,  sed  verbo,  ac  jussione  faciebat. — Nee  satis  fuit,  quod  vires  imbecillis 
redderet,  quod  debiLbus  integritatem,  quod  segris  et  languentibus  sanitatem, 
nisi  etiam  mortuos  suscitarel,  velut  e  somno  solutos,  ad  vilamque  revocaret. 
Quae  videntestunc  Juda;i  daemoniaca  fieri  potentia  arguebant :  cum  omnia  sic 

futura,  ut  facta  sunt,  arcanae  illorum  literae  continerent. Ob  has  ejus 

virtutes  et  opera  divina,  cum  magnae  ilium  multitudines  sequerentur  vel  debi- 
lium,  vel  aegiorum,  vel  eorum  qui  curandos  suos  offerre  cupiebant,  adscendit 
in  monlem  quendam  desertum,  ut  ibi  adoraret ;  ubi  cum  triduo  moraretur,  ac 
fame  populus  laboraret,  vocavit  discipulos,  quaerens,  quantos  secum  cibos 
gestarcnt.  At  illi,  quinque  panes  et  duos  pisces  se  in  pera  habere,  dixerunt. 
Afferri  ea  jussit,  ac  multitudinem  per  quinquagenos  distributam  discutnbere. 
Quod  cum  discipuli  facerent,  frangebat  ipse  panem  minutatim,  carnemque 
piscium  comminuebat :  et  utraque  in  manibus  augebantur.  Et  cum  apponi 
ilia  populo  discipulis  imperasset^  saturata  sunt  quinque  hominum  millia,  et 
insuper  diiodccim  cophini  de  residuis  fragminibus  impleti.  Idem  secessurus 
orandi  gratia,  sicut  solebat,  in  montem,  praecepit  discipulis,  ut  naviculam 
sumerent,  seque  praecederent.  At  illi,  urgente  jam  vespera  profecti,  contrario 
vento  laborare  coeperunt.  Cumque  jam  medium  fretum  tenerent,  turn  pedibus 
mare  ingressus  consecutus  est  eos,  tanquam  in  solido  gradiens. — Et  rursus,  cum 
obdormisset  in  navi,  et  ventus  usque  ad  extremum  periculum  saevire  coepisset, 
excitatus  e  somno,  silere  ventum  protinus  jussit,  et  fliuctus,  qui  maximi  fere- 
bantur,  conquiescere :  statimque  sub  verbo  ejustranquillitas  insecuta  est.  Inst. 

1.  iv.  c.  15.  p.  395 399. 

2  M  2 


532  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

filled  with  the  fragments  that  remained.  He  then  relates 
our  Lord's  going-  up  to  a  mountain,  and  ordering  the  disci- 
ples to  take  sliipping,  and  go  over  to  the  other  side  of  tlie 
sea  before  him.  And  says,  that  when  they  were  in  the  midst 
of  the  sea,  tossed  with  a  tempest,  Christ  came  to  them, 
walking  upon  the  sea,  as  upon  dry  land.  And  at  anotjjer 
time,  when  he  was  asleep  in  the  ship,  and  the  wind  was 
extremely  boisterous,  being  awakened  out  of  sleep  he  quieted 
the  winds  and  the  waves,  and  there  was  a  great  calm.' 

(G.)  Here  he  starts  an  objection.  '  Perhaps^  our  scrip- 
tures do  not  speak  truth,  when  they  ascribe  to  Jesus  such 
[)ower  and  command  over  the  wind,  the  seas,  and  all  kinds  of 
diseases.' 

This  shows,  that  the  gospels,  from  whence  he  takes  the 
history  of  these  facts,  were  esteemed  sapred  by  him,  and  all 
christians  in  general. 

(7.)  Afterwards"*  he  relates  largely  the  history  of  our 
Lord's  last  sufferings:  '  How  he  was  betrayed  by  Judas, 
prosecuted  before  Pilate,  and  condemned  :  how  he  was 
mocked  and  derided,  being-  struck  with  the  palm  of  the 
hands,  spit  on,  arrayed  Avith  a  scarlet  robe,  and  a  crown  of 
thorns,  and  then  crucified  between  two  robbers.  And  that'' 
as  he  hung  on  the  cross,  he  cried  with  a  loud  voice,  and 
resigned  his  spirit.  And  likewise,  that  at  the  same  time 
there  was  an  earthquake,  and  the  vail  of  the  temple  AV»as 
rent:  the  sun  was  also  eclipsed,  and  there  was  darknes«:s 
from  the  sixth  to  the  ninth  hour.     Final ly'^  he  proceeds  to 

^  Mentiuntur  fortasse  literse  sanctae,  docentes,  tantam  fui?se  in  eo  potestafem, 
lit  imperiO  siio  cogeret  ventos  obsequi,  maria  fervire,  morbos  cedere,  inferos 
obedire.  ib.  p.  399. 

"*  Quod  cum  sciret  futurum,  et  subinde  diceret,  oportere  se  pati  ac  interfici 

pro  salute  multorum,  secessit  tamen  cum  discipulis  sui-, Itaque  Judas 

praemio  illectus  tradidit  eum  Judaeis.  At  illi  comprehensum,  ac  Pontio 
Pilato — oblatum,  cruci  affigi  postulaverunt. — Duxerunt  ergo  eum  flagellis 
verberatum,  et,  priusquam  cruci  affigerent,  illuserunt.  Indutum  enini  coloris 
punicei  veste,  ac  spinis  coronatum,  quasi  regem  salutaverunt,  et  dederunt  ei 
cibum  fellis,  et  miscuerunt  ei  aceti  potionem.  Post  haec  conspuerunt  in  faciem 
ejus,  et  palmis  ceciderunt.  Cumque  ipsi  carnifices  de  vestimentis  ejus  con- 
lenderenf,  sortiti  sunt  inter  se  de  tunica  et  pallio. — Tum  suspenderunt  eum 
inter  duos  noxios  medium,  qui  ob  latrocinia  damnati  erant,  crucique  affixerunt. 
ib.  c.  18.  p.  407—410. 

•"  Suspensus  igitur  atque  affixus  exclamavit  ad  Dominum  voce  magna,  et 
ultro  spiritum  posuit.  Et  eadem  hora  terrae  motus  factus  est,  et  velum  templi, 
quod  separabat  duo  tabernacula,  scissum  est  in  duas  partes ;  et  sol  repente  sub- 
ductusest,  et  ab  hora  sexta  usque  in  nonam  tenebrre  fuerunt.  c.  19.  p.  415. 

■^  Sed  quoniain  preedixerat,  se  tertio  die  ab  inferis  resurrecturum,  metuentes, 
ne,  a  discipulis  surrepto  et  amoto  corpore,  univcsi  resurrexisse  eum  crcderent, 
et  fieret  multo  major  in  plebe  confusio ;  detraxerunt  cum  cruci,  et  conclusum 
in  monumento  firmiter  militari  custodia  circumderunt.     Veriim  tertia  die  ante 


Lactantius.     a.  D,  306.  533 

relate  our  Lord's  burial,  and  the  military  gniard  at  tlie  sepul- 
chre, and  his  resurrection  on  the  third  day, as  he  had  foretold.' 

(8.)  Ot"  all  these  things  he  speaks  ag-ain  suniuinrily  in 
the''  Epitome.  And  in  another  chapter  ot"  the*^^  Institutions 
he  mentions  many  ot'our  I^ord's  miracles. 

(.9.)  That  whole  history  just  transcribed,  is  plainly  taken 
from  our  gospels.  And  though,  perhaps,  it  is  not  so  easy  to 
distinguish  references  to  St.  Mark's  gospel,  as  to  the  other 
three,  yet  I  suppose  most  will  allow,  that  here  is  good 
proof  of  his  receiving-  our  four  gospels,  as  authentic  his- 
tories of  Jesus  Christ. 

(10.)  in  the  Epitome  he  seems  to  allude  to  the  parable  of 
the  pharisee  and  the  j)ublican,  which  we  have  in  Lukexviii. 
9 — 14.  '  For'  humility, '  says  he,  '  is  dear  and  acceptable 
to  God.  And  if  he  rather  accepts  a  confessing  sinner,  than 
a  proud,  righteous  man;  how  much  more  will  he  approve  a 
righteous  man  who  confesseth  his  failings,  and  exalt  him 
ill  his  heavenly  kingdom  for  his  humility  !' 

(11.)  He  likewise  says,  '  that»  God  has  commanded  us, 
when  we  make  a  feast,  to  invite  such  as  cannot  invite  us 
again,  and  make  us  a  recompence  :'  referring',  I  think,  to 
Luke  xiv.  12. 

(12.)  He  must  be  allowed  now  and  then  to  use  expressions 
allusive  to  the  gospels.  He  speaks  of'  having- the  mind,  or 
heart  in  heaven.  Comj)are  Matt.  vi.  21.  Again  :  '  That'  we 
may  be  able  to  do  all  these  things,  we  must  despise  riches, 
and  lay  up  to  ourselves  heavenly  treasures,  where  no  thief 
may  break  through,  nor  rust  corrupt,  nor  tyrant  plunder.' 
See  Matt.  vi.  19,  20. 

(13.)  He  may  be  reckoned  likewise  to  refer  to''  what  is  in 
Matt.  V.  27—32. 

lucem,  terrae  motu  facto,  repente  patefactum  est  sepulcrum,  et  custodibus,  qiios 
attonitos  obstupefecerat  pavor,  nihil  videnfibixs,  integer  sepnlchro  ac  vivus 

egressus, in  sepnlchro  vero   nihil  repertum   est,  nisi  exuviae,  quibus 

in v'olufum  corpus  incluserant.  ib.  c.  19.  p.  417. 

<»  Epit.  c.  45-47.  ^  1.  iv.  c.  26. 

f  Humihtas  enim  cara  et  amabilis  Deo  est,  qui  cum  magis  suscipiat 
peccatorem  confitentem,  quam  justum  superbnm ;  quanto  magis  justum 
suscipiet  confitentem,  eumque  in  regnis  coelestibus  faciet  pro  humilitate  sub- 
limem.     Epit.  c.  ]  7.  ^  Idem  Deus  praecepit,  ut,  si  quando 

coenam  paraverimus,  eos  in  convictum  adhibeamus,  qui  recovare  non  possunt, 
et  vicem  reddere,  &c.  1.  vi.  c.  12.  p.  585. 

^  Quisquis  enim  aut  Deum  colendum  esse  intelligit,  aut  immortalitatis  spem 
sibi  propositam  habet,  mens  ejus  in  ccelo  est.  1.  iii.  c.  27.  p.  333. 

*  Ergo,  ut  haec  omnia,  quae  Deo  placent,  facere  possimus,  contemnenda 
est  pecunia,  et  ad  ccelestes  transferenda  thesauros,  ubi  nee  fur  etfodiat,  nee 
ruhigo  consuiiiat,  nee  tyrrannuseripiat.     Epit.  cap.  65. 

^  addantur  et  ilia, — adulterum  esse,  qui  a  marito  dimissam  duxerit. 


534  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  Histori/. 

(14.)  I  believe  few  can  make  any  doubt  but  he  lias  an  eye 
to  what  is  in'  Luke  vi. 35,  and""  Luke  xvi.  24,  and"  Malt, 
vi.  1—4,  and«  Matt.  xix.  10, 11, 12. 

(15.)  St.  John's  gospel  is  expressly  quoted  by  him  in 
this  manner:  '  So  aiso'^  John  declares,  "  In  the  beginning' 
was  the  word,  and  the  word  was  with  God,  and  the  word 
Mas  God.  All  things  M'ere  made  by  him,  and  without  him 
was  not  any  thing  made,"  '  John  i.  1,2,  3,  which*'  last 
words  are  also  in  the  Epitome. 

(IG.)  He  refers  to  John  ii.  20,  where "^  the  Jews  speak  of 
their  temple  having  been  forty  and  six  years  in  building. 
Compare  Mark  xiv.  58. 

(17.)  He  observes  that^  the  "  Father  loveth  the  Son,  and 
giveth  him  all  things:"  referring",  it  is  likely,  to  Joim  iii. 35, 
and  ch.  v.  20.  And  that  the  Father  and  the  Son  are  one, 
referring,  probably,  to  John  x.  30.  1  have  transcribed  the 
passage  at  the  bottom  of  the  page. 

(18.)  He  plainly  has  an  eye  to  those  places  in  St.  John's 
gospel,  where'  Christ  speaks  of  his  having  power  to  lay 
down  his  life,  and  to  take  it  up  again.  See  particularly 
John  X.  18. 

(19.)  It  is  not  unlikely  that  he  refers  to  the  history  of  our 

et  eum,  qui  prseter  crimen  adulterii  uxorem  dimiserit,  ut  alteram  ducat. — Prae- 
terea  non  tantum  adulterium  esse  vitandum,  sed  etiam  cogilationem  ;  ne  quis 
adspiciat  alienam  et  animo  concupiscat.  Adulteram  enim  fieri  mentem, 
si 1.  vi.  c.  23.  p.  630.  Vid.  et  Epit.  c.  66. 

'  Id  enim  juste,  id  pie,  id  humane  fit,  quod  sine  spe  recipienda  feceris. 
1.  vi.  c.  11.  p.  583. 

"*  Quia  jam  bonis,  quse  maluerunt,  potiti  sunt.  1.  vii.  c.  11.  in. 

"  Nee  tamen,  si  quid  boni  fecerimus,  gloriam  captemus  ex  eo.  Monet 
enim  Deus  operatorem  justitije  non  oportere  esse  jactantem,  ne  non — habeat- 
que  jam  pretium  gloriae,  quod  captavit,  nee  prcemium  ccelestis  illius  ac  divinae 
mercedis  accipiat.  1.  vi.  c.  18.  sub  fin. 

°  Quod  quidem  Deus  non  ita  fieri  pra&cepit,  tanquam  adstringat. — Si  quis 
hoc,  inquit,  facere  potuerit,  habebit  eximiam  incomparabilemque  mercedem. 
I.  vi.  c.  23.  p.  630. 

P  Joannes  quoque  ita  tradidit :  In  principio  erat  Verbum,  et  Verbum  erat 
apud  Deum,  et  Deus  erat  Verbum.  Omnia  per  ipsum  facta  sunt,  et  sine  ipso 
factum  est  nihil.  1.  iv.  c.  8.  F. 

1  solus  Deus  nuncupatus.     Omnia  enim  per  ipsum,  et  sine  ipso  nihil. 

Epit.  c.  42. 

''  Item,  quod  dixerat:  Si  solveritis  hoctemplum,  quod  jedificatum  est  annis 
49,  ego  illud  in  triduo  sine  manibus  suscitabo.  1.  iv.  c.  18.  p.  408. 

*  Qui  Filium  non  agnovit,  nee  Patrem  potuit  agnoscere. — Nee  tamen  sic 
habendum  est,  tanquam  duo  sint  Dii. — Pater  enimac  Filius  unum  sunt.  Cum 
enim  Pater  Filium  diligat,  omniaque  ei  tribuat,  et  Filius  fideliter  obsequatur, 
nee  velit  quidquam,  nisi  quod  Pater,  et  quae  sequuntur.     Epit.  c.  49. 

'  Nee  hoc  cuiquam  ignorandum  est,  quod  ipse  ante  de  sua  passione  praedi- 
cans,  etiam  id  notum  fecerit,  habere  se  potestatem,  cum  vellet,  deponendi 
spiritum,  et  resumendi.  1.  iv.  c.  26.  p.  437. 


Lactantius.     a.  D.  30G.  535 

Lord's  raising'  Lazarus  in  John  xi.  wlion  lie  says,  that"  Christ 
raised  some  iVoni  death,  calling-  them  by  name.     See  ver.  4o. 

3.  1  apprehend,  there  is  good  reason  to  think,  that  Lactan- 
tius received  and  made  use  of  the  book  of  the  Acts.  But  since 
he  has  not  expressly  quoted  it,  I  am  obliged  to  transcribe 
several  passages,  that  my  readers  may  judge  for  themselves. 

(L)  He  says,  '  that'  after  his  resurrection,  Christ  having- 
given  commandment  to  his  disciples,  concerning  preaching' 
the  gospel,  on  a  sudden  a  cloud  surrounded  him,  and  carried 
him  up  to  heaven  on  the  fortieth  day  of  his  passion.'  See 
Acts  i.  3 — 9. 

(2.)  The  like  to  which  comes  over  again  in  the  abridgment 
of  the  Institutions,  and  is  there  expressed  in  this  maimer: 
'  Going'"  therefore  into  Galilee,  after  his  resurrection,  he 
again  gathered  together  his  disciples,  whom  fear  had  sepa- 
rated, and  having  given  conunandment  concerning  the  things 
to  be  observed  by  them,  and  appointed,  that  the  gospel  should 
be  preached  all  over  the  world,  he  breathed  into  them  the 
Holy  Ghost,  [see  John  xx.  22.]  and  gave  them  power  to 
work  miracles,  that  they  might  promote  the  salvation  of 
men  by  their  Morks,  as  well  as  by  their  words.  And  at 
length  on  the  fiftieth  day  he  returned  to  the  Father,  being- 
taken  uj)  in  a  cloud.' 

Here  Lactantius  says  the  fiftieth  day.  Dr.  Davies  in  his 
notes  upon  the  place  says,  it  should  be  the  fortieth  day,  and 
that  the  number  fifty  is  owing  to  the  fault  of  the  transcriber. 
There  is  the  more  reason,  he  says,  to  think  so,  because  in  the 
parallel  |)lace  in  the  Institutions,  before  cited,  is  forty  days, 
agreeably  to  Acts  i.  3. 

(3.)  In  Acts  ii.  27,  St.  Peter,  speaking  of  our  Lord's 
resurrection,  quotes  words  out  of  the  16th  Psalm,  which  he 
applies  to  that  event,  as  does  Lactantius  likewise  in  his* 
Institutions,  and  J  Epitome. 

(4.)  St.  Paul  says,  Acts  xiii.  27,  "  For   they  that  dwell 

"  Jacentia  mortuonim  corpora  erexit,  eosque  nominibus  siiis  inclamatos  a 
morte  revocavit.  1.  iv.  c,  26.  p.  434.  '  Ordinato  vero  discipulis 

suis  evangelic,  ac  nominis  sui  prEedicatione,  circiimfiidit  se  repente  nubes,  eurn- 
que  in  ccElura  sustulit,  quadragesimo  post  passLonem  die.  1.  iv.  c.  21.  in. 

"  Profectus  igitur  in  Galilaeam  post  resurrectionem,  discipulos  suos  rursos, 
quos  metus  in  fugam  verterat,  congregavit,  datisque  mandatis,  quae  observari 
vellet,  et  ordinata  evangelii  praedicatione  per  totum  orbem,  inspiravit  in  eos 
spiritum  sanctum,  ac  dedit  eis  potestatem  miracula  faciendi,  ut  in  salutem 
hominura  tarn  factis,  quam  verbis  operarent.  Ac  turn  demum  quinquagesimo 
die  remeavit  ad  Patrem,  sublatus  in  nubem.     Epit.  c.  47. 

"  Ilium  autem  apud  inferos  non  remansurnm,  sed  die  tertio  resurrecturum, 
prophetae  cecinerant.  David  in  Psalmo  xvi.  Non  dcrelinques  animani  meam 
apud  inferos,  nee  dabis  sanctum  tuum  videre  interitum.  1.  iv,  c.  19.  p.  418. 

y  Ipsum  vero  resurrecturum  die  tertio  jam  dim  prophetae  fuerant  prolocuti. 


536  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

at  Jerusaleiij,  and  their  rulers,  because  they  kneM'  him  not, 
nor  yet  the  voices  of  the  prophets,  which  are  read  every 
sabbath-day,  they  have  fulfilled  them  in  condemning  him." 
Lactantius  several  times^  expresseth  himself  as  if  he  hid  an 
eye  to  this  text. 

(5.)  He  may  be  supposed  to  refer  to^*  St.  Paul's  argument 
at  Athens,  which  is  in  Acts  xvii. 

(6.)  In  Acts  xiv.  22,  Paul  and  Barnabas  teach  the  disci- 
ples, that  "  we  must  through  much  tribulation  enter  into 
the  kingdom  of  God."  To  this  text  it  might  be  thought 
that''  Lactantius  refers,  unless  he  has  an  eye  to  2  Tim.  iii. 
12.  "  Yea,  and  all  that  will  live  godly  in  Christ  Jesus  shall 
suffer  persecution." 

4.  There  are  not  in  Lactantius  many  clear  allusions,  or 
particular  references,  to  epistles  of  apostles. 

(1.)  It  may  be  argued  however,  that  he  was  acquainted 
with  the  Act-s,  and  the  epistles  of  the  apostles,  from''  the 
clear  manner  in  which  he  speaks  of  the  rejection  of  the  Jews, 
and  the  call  of  the  Gentiles  under  the  gospel.  But  he 
quotes  only  the  prophets  of  the  Old  Testament,  when  he 
speaks  of  this  matter. 

(2.)  Lactantius  often  speaks  of '^  Christ's  coming  again  to 

David  in  Psalmo  xvi.   Non  deielinques  animam  meam  ad  inferos,  nee  dabis 
sanctum  tuum  videre  corruptioneni.     Epit.  c.  47. 

"^  Sicut  etiam  voces  prophetarum,  quse  cum lectse  fuissent  a  populo 

Judseorum,  nectamen  intellectae  sunt.  1.  iv.  c.  15.  fin. 

Cum  igitur  ea,  quae  Deus  fieri  voluit,  quae  per  prophetas  suos  raultis  saeculis 
ante  praedixit,  Christus  mipleret,  ob  ea  incitati,  et  divmas  literas  nescientes, 
coiverunt,  ut  Deum  suum  condemnarent.  ib.  c.  18.  in. 

Quid  amplius  jam  de  facinoribus  Judaeonmi  dici  potest,  quam  excsecatos 
turn  fuisse,  atque  insanabili  furore  correptos,  qui  haec  quotidie  legentes  neque 
intellexerunt,  neque,  quin  facerent,  cavere  potuerunt.  ib.  c.  19.  in. 

Harum  literarum  igitur  immemores,  quas  legebant,  &c.     Epit.  c.  45. 

^  Non  ergo  utitur  his  omnibus,  quse  templis,  diisque  fictilibus  inferuntur. — 
Illis  autem,  quae  in  usum  Iribuit  homini  Deus,  ipse  non  indiget, — non  indiget 

templo,  non  mdiget  simulacro.  Epit.  c.  58. per  ilium  vivimus,  per  ilium 

in  hospitium  hujus  mundi  mtravimus — in  hujus  domo  habitamus,  hujusfamilia 
sumus.— De  Ira  Dei,  c.  23.  p.  824,  825. 

b  — et  postea  universos,  qui  eorum  disciplinam  secuti  essent,  acerba  et 
nefanda  passuros.  1.  v.  c.  3.  p.  464.  Quae  omnia  tolerare  ac  perpeti  necesse 
est  eos,  qui  veritatem  sequuntur.  1.  iv.  c.  2(1.  p.  435. 

•^  Exhaeredatos  autem  esse  Judaeos,  quia  Christum  reprobaverunt,  et  nos,  qui 
sumus  ex  gentibus,  in  eorum  locum  adcptatos,  scripturis  adprobatur.  Jeremias 
ita  dicit. — Malachias, — Esaias  quoque.  Epit.  c.  48.  Si  ergo  Judaei  a  Deo 
rejecti  sunt,  sicut  sacrarum  scnpturarum  fides  indicat  ?  gentes  aulem,  sicut 
videmus,  adscitae,  ac  de  tenebris  hujus  vilae  secularis,  deque  vinculis  daemonum 
liberatae.  ib.  c.  49.  in.  Conf.  Instit.  1.  iv.  c.  20. 

^  Ultimis  enim  ternponbus  statiiit  de  vivis  ac  mortuis  judicare.  1.  ii.  c.  17. 
sub  in.  Veniet  ergo  summi  ac  maximi  Dei  filius,  ut  vivos  ac  mortuos  jud-icei 
3.  vii.  c.  24.  in. 


Lactantius.     a.  D.  306.  537 

j inline  the  quick  and  tlio  dead.  But  that  being  mentioned 
in"  .several  books  of  the  New  Testament,  we  cannot  say  to 
which  book,  or  w  hat  text,  he  particidarly  refers. 

(3.)  Speaking-  of  good  actions,  he  says:  '  These*^  are 
offices  of  compassion,  which  if  a  man  performs,  |je  offers  a 
true  and  acceptable  sacrifice  to  God.'  Perhaps  lie  refers  to 
Rom.  xii.  1,  2. 

(4.)  In  another  place  he  may  be  supposed  to  have  an  eye 
tos  tl)e  prudent  and  generous  conduct,  recommended  in 
Rom.  xii.  14,  and  IS — 21. 

(5.)  He  says,  '  The  divine  scriptures''  assure  us,  that  the 
thoughts  of  philosophers  are  foolish  :'  and*  '  that  philosophy 
is  foolishness  with  God.'  St.  Paul  says,  1  Cor.  i.  20,  "  Has 
not  God  made  foolish  the  wisdom  of  this  Morld  ?"  and  ch. 
iii,  19,  20,  "  For  the  wisdom  of  this  world  is  foolishness  with 

God." And  again,  "  the  Lord  knoweth  the  thoughts  of 

the  wise,  that  they  are  vain."  Which  last  Mords  are  a  quo- 
tation from  Psal.  xciv.  11.     And  compare  Col.  ii.  8. 

(0.)  It  is  likely,  that  he  refers  to  1  Cor.  vi.  9, 10,  iu  words 
which  1  put  in  the''  margin. 

(7.)  He  says,  '  that'  Christ  sits  at  the  right  hand  of  God, 
and  will  subdue  his  enemies  under  his  feet.  A  like  expres- 
sion is  in  1   Cor.  xv.  24,  25  ;  and  also   in  Heb.  x.  12,  13. 

"  But  this  man sat  down  on  the  right  hand  of  God  : 

from  thenceforth  expecting,  till  his  enemies  be  made  his 
footstool." 

(8.)  He  seems  to  refer  to™  the  exhortation  in  Gal.  vi.  2, 
"  Bear  ye  one  another's  burdens,  and  so  fulfil  the  law  of 
Christ." 

(9.)  I  suppose  no  one  will  hesitate  to  allow  that  he  refers 

«  Acts  X.  42.     2  Tim.  iv.  1.     1  Pet.  iv.  5. 

'  Haec  sunt  opera,  haec  officia  misericordise,  quae  si  quis  obierit,  verum  et 
acceptum  sacnficiuin  Deo  immolabit.  Haec  litabilior  victima  est  apud  Deum, 
qui  non  pecudis  sanguine,  sed  hominis  pietate,  placatur.     Epit.  c.  65. 

e  Maledicetiti   bene   dicto    respondeat. Quin   etiani   caveat 

diligenter,  ne  quando  inimicum  sua  culpa  faciat.  Et  si  quis  exstiterit  tam 
protervus,  qui  bono  et  ju^to  facial  injuriarn ;  clementer  et  moderate  ferat,  et 
ultionem  suam  non  sibi  assumat,  sed  judicio  Dei  reservet.  1.  vi.  c.  18.  p.  609. 

*"  Cum  enim  sit  nobis  divinis  Uteris  traditum,  cogitationes  philosophorum 
stultas  esse.  1.  lii.  c.  1.  p.  235. 

'  ferrena,  et  de  terra  ficta  contemnant.     Philosophiam,  quae  apud 

Deum  stultitia  est,  pro  nihilo  computent.     Epit.  c.  52. 

■^  Hujus  proemii  coelestis  ac  sempiterni  participes  esse  non  possunt,  qui 
fraudibus,  rapinis,  circiimscriptionibus  conscientiam  suam  polluerunt,  &c.  De 
Ira  Dei,  c.  23.  sub  fin.  '  Cum  igitur  ad  dexteram  Dei  sedeat, 

calcaturos  inimicos,  qui  eum  cruciaverunt.  Epit.  c.  48.  in. 

"  Nos  ergo, quibus  solis  a  Deo  Veritas  revelata,  et  coelitus  missa 

sapientia  est,  faciamus,  quae  jubet  illuminator  noster  Deus:  sustineamus  invi- 
cem.  1.  vi.  c.  18.  prop.  in. 


538  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

t-o  Epli.  iv.  26,  M'lien  he  says:  God "  has  enjoined  us  not  to 
let  the  sun  go  down  upon  our  wrath. 

(10.)  He  says, '  tliat*'  a  good  man,  following  the  instructions 
of"  the  gospel,  will  not  be  bitter  toward  his  child,  or  his  ser- 
vant ;  knowing,  that  he  also  has  a  father  and  a  master.'  It 
is  likely,  that  here  is  a  reference  to  the  admonitions  in  Ejdi. 
vi.  4—9  ;  and  Col.  iii.  21,  22,  24 ;  and  iv.  1. 

(11.)  Perhaps  he  refers  to  Philip,  ii.  6 — 9,  Avhen  he  says, 
'  that''  Christ  being  sent  to  open  the  way  of  salvation  to  the 
meanest,  he  hundjied  himself,  that  he  might  help  them.  He 
therefore  underwent  that  kind  of  death,  which  is  wont  to  be 
inflicted  on  mean  people,  that  all  might  be  able  to  imitate 
him.     Hence  also  he  was  highly  exalted.' 

(12.)  Perhaps,  among  other  plain  references  to  several 
things  in  the  Revelation,  he  may  refer  toi  2  Thess.  ii.  4,  9. 

(13.)  Lactantius  has  some  observations  and  arguments 
which  are  also  in  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews.  Whether  he 
borrowed  them  thence,  is  not  easy  to  say. 

(14.)  In  one  place  he  argues  after  this  manner  :  '  From"^ 
which  reasons  it  appears,  that  all  the  prophets  declared  con- 
cerning- Christ,  that  the  time  would  come,  when  being,  as  to 
the  body,  born  of  the  seed  of  David,  he  should  erect  an 
eternal  temple  to  God,  which  is  called  his  church,  and  that 
he  should  gather  all  nations  to  the  worship  of  God.  This  is 
the  faithful   house,  the  immortal  temple.     Of  which  great 

"  Praecepit  Deus,  non  occidere  so!em  super  iram  nostram.  I.  vi.  c.  18.  sub 
fin.  Not!  igitur  in  totum  prohibet  irasci : — sed  prohibet  in  ira  permanere. — 
Deinde  rursus,  cum  irasci  quidem,.sed  tamen  non  peccare,  praeccpit,  non 
utique  evellit  iram  radicitus,  sed  temperavit.  Cum  ille  homines  ante  solis 
occasum  reconciliari  jubeat.     De  Ira  Dei,  c.  21.  p.  819. 

°  Non  sit  asper  in  filium,  neque  in  servum.  Meminerit,  quod  et  ipse  palrem 
habeat  et  dominum.     Epit.  c.  64. 

1"  Nam  cum  ad  hoc  missus  esset,  ut  humillimis  quibusque  viam  panderet,  ad 
salutem,  se  ipse  humilem  fecit,  ut  eos  liberaret.     Suscepit  ergo  id  genus  mortis, 

quod  solet  humihbus  irrogari,  ut  omnibus  facultas  daretur  imitandi. His 

etiam  illud  accidit,  quod  passione  ac  moite  suscepta  sublimum  fieri  oportebat. 
Adeo  ilium  crux  et  re  et  significatione  exaltavit,  ut  omnibus  majestas  ejus  ac 
virtus  cum  ipsa  passione  notuerit.     Epit.  c.  5 1. 

1  Rex  vero  ille  teterrimus  erit  quidem,  et  ipse,  sed  mendaciorum,  prophela. 
Et  seipsum  constituet  ac  vocabit  Deum,  et  se  coli  jubebit,  ut  Dei  filium. 
1.  vii.  c.  17.  p.  708. 

■■  Quibus  ex  rebus  apparet,  projjhetas  omnes  denuntiasse  de  Christo,  fore 
aliquando,  I'.texgenere  David  corporaliter  natus,  constitueret  sefernum  femplum 
Deo,  quod  appellatur  ecclesia,  et  universas  gentes  ad  religionem  Dei  veram 

convocaret.     H<ec  est  domus  fidelis,  hoc  immortaie  templum, cujus 

templi  et  magni  et  aeterni  quoniam  Christus  fabricator  fuit,  necesse  est,  habeat 
in  eo  sacerdotiuin  sempiternum.  Nee  potest,  nisi  pereum  qui  constituit  tem- 
plum, ad  adytum  templi,  et  ad  conspectum  Dei  perveniri.  David  in  Psalmo 
ex.  id  ipsum  docet,  dicens :  Ante  Liiciferum  genui  te.  Juravit  Doiiiinus,  ct 
non  pr£nitebit  eum:  Tu  es  sacerdos,  &c.  1.  iv.  c.  14.  in. 


Lactantius.     a.  D.  306.  539 

aiid  eternal  temple,  because  Christ  is  the  builder,  it  is  of 
necessity  that  he  have  it  in  everlastini>-  priesthood.  Nor 
is  it  possible  to  enter  the  temple,  and  obtain  the  sij^ht  of  Cod, 
but  by  him  \^  ho  erected  the  temple.  David  teaclietli  the 
same  thing-  in  the  110th  Psalm,  sayino-,  •'  Before  the  morn- 
ing' star  1  begot  thee.  The  Lord  hath  sworn,  and  will  not 
repent.  Thou  art  a  priest  for  ever,  after  the  order  of  Melchi- 
zedec."  ' 

These  thoughts  of  Lactantius  m;iy  be  compared  with  some 
texts  in  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  as  ch.  iii.  3 — (J,  and  cli. 
V.  5,  G,  and  vii.  21.  And  besides,  the  author  of  the  ej)istle 
to  the  Hebrews  speaks  likewise  of  Christ  having  an  "  un- 
changeable or  eternal  priesthood,  "  vii.  24,  and  often  of  our 
"  coming  to  God  through  him."     See  ch.  iv.  16,  vii.  25. 

(15.)  Lact-'.ntius  has  an  argument*  extremely  resembling 
that  in  Heb.  viii.  1- — \'i,  and  quotes  the  same  text  of  Jeremiah, 
which  is  there  quoted,  as  well  as  some  others. 

(16.)  He  says  of  Christ  in  the  words  of  Heb.  vii.  3,  that^ 
he  Mas  "  without  father,  and  without  mother." 

(17.)  He  says,  '  that"  till  a  testator  is  dead,  a  testament 
can  be  of  no  force  :'  which  is  also  in  Heb.  ix.  16,  17,  but  that 
is  an  obvious  thought. 

(18.)  He  has  an  argument^  to  patience  under  afflictions, 
much  resembling  that  in  Heb.  xii.  5 — ^10. 

(19.)  Frederic  Spanheim,  in  his  Dissertation  concerning- 
the  author  of  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  alleges  not  any 
passages  fronj  Lactantius,  not'''  expecting  in  him  testimonies 
to  particular  books  of  scripture.  Nevertheless  he  argues 
it   to  be   probable,  that^  Lactantius  received  this  epistle, 

*  Sicut  Hieremias  propheta  testatur :  Ecce  dies  veniunt,  dicit  Dominus,  et 

consummabo  domiii  Israel  et  doimii  Juda  testamentum  novum. Nam 

quod  superius  ait,  consiimmaturum  se  domiii  Juda  testamentum  novum  j 
cstendit,  vetus  illud  testamentum,  quod  per  Mosen  est  datum,  non  fuisse  per- 
fectum  :  id  autem,  quod  per  Christum  dari  deberet,  consummatum  fore.  1.  iv. 
c.  20.  p.  421.  '  Idcirco  etiam  Filiuni  nasci  oportuit,  ut 

ipse  fieret  aTrarwp,  atque  o/ij/rwp,  &c.  1.  iv.  c.  13.  p.  387. 

"  quia   nisi  testator  mortuus   fuerit,  nee  confirmari  testamentum 

potest,  nee  sciri,  quid  in  eo  scriptum  sit ;  quia  clausum  et  obsignatum  est. 
1.  iv.  c.  20.  p.  420. 

''  Quare  nemini  mirum  debet  videri,  si  pro  nostris  S3epe  delictis  castigamur 
a  Deo.  Imo  vero  cum  vexamur  ac  premimur,  tum  rnaxime  gratias  agimus 
indulgentissimo  patri,  quod  corruptelani  nostrani  non  patitur  longius  procedere, 
sed  plagis  ac  verbenbus  emendat.  Ex  quo  infelligiinus,  esse  nos  Deo  curse  : 
quoniani,  cum  peccemus,  irascitur.  1.  v.  c.  22.  p.  532. 

*  Paulum  epi.sfolae  auotorem  nee  aftirmat,  nee  negat,  totus  in  gentibus  con- 
futandis.     Spanh.  0pp.  T.  ii.  p.  201.  n.  vi. 

"  Interim  epistolam  ad  Hebraeos  adscripsisse  Paulo,  vel  ex  omnium  fere 
Latinorum,  quotquot  etiam  ex  Afris,  post  Lactantium,  scripsere,  consensu 
colligimus.  ibid. 


540  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

because  it  was,  he  says,  generally  received  as  Paul's  by  the 
Latin  christians  after  his  time. 

5.  Doubtless  Lactantius  admitted  the  authority  of  all  those 
catholic  epistles  which  were  universally  received  by  chris- 
tians all  along".  But  it  is  not  easy  to  perceive  in  his  works 
references  to  any  of  them.  However,  1  shall  observe  a  few 
particulars. 

(1.)  '  If  y  any  one  lack  food,  let  us  give  it  him  :  if  we  see 
any  one  naked,  let  us  clothe  him  :  if  any  one  is  oppressed 
by  the  powerful,  let  us  rescue  him.  Let  our  dwelling  be 
open  to  strangers,  and  such  as  have  no  home  :  let  us  not 
fail  to  defend  and  relieve  the  widow  and  the  fatherless.  It 
is  a  noble  act  of  compassion,  to  redeem  such  as  have  been 
carried  into  captivity  by  enemies,  as  also  to  visit  and  comfort 
the  sick  and  the  poor.'  See  James  i.  27,  and  ch.  ii.  13—15. 
But  it  must  be  owned,  that  there  are  also  like  expressions  in 
other  books  of  the  New  Testament ;  as  Matt.  xxv.  42 — 44  ; 
1  Tim.  v.  10  ;  Heb.  xiii.  2. 

(2.)  St.  James  says,  ch.  ii.  19,  "  The  daemons  also  believe, 
and  tremble."     Lactantius  has  a  like^  observation. 

(3.)  St.  James,  ch.  v.  20,  speaks  of  "  converting  a  sinner 
from  the  error  of  his  way,  and  saving  a  soul  from  death." 
Lactantius  has  like*  expressions. 

(4.)  He  says,  '  that''  Jesus  is  health  and  salvation  to  all 
those,  who  by  him  do  believe  in  God :'  which  resembles 
1  Pet.  i.  21. 

(5.)  St.  Peter  says,  1  ep.  v.  8,  "  Be  sober,  be  vigilant, 
because  your  adversary,  the  devil,  as  a  roaring  lion,  seeketh 
whom  he  may  devour."  Lactantius,  in  an  argument  to 
sobriety,  calls'  Satan  '  our  adversary,'  and  insists  upon  his 
dangerous  temptations  to  intemperance.  There  are  some 
other  places,  where''  he  seems  to  have  an  eye  to  that  text  of 
St.  Peter. 

y  Si  quis  victu  indigat,  impertiamus  :  si  quis  nudus  occurrerit,  vestiatnus : 
si  quis  a  potentiore  injuriam  sustinet,  eruamiis.  Pateat  domicilmm  nostrum 
peregrinis,  vel  indigentibus  tecto.  Pupillis  defensio,  viduis  tutela  nostra  non 
desit.  Redimere  ab  hoste  captivos  magnum  misericordiae  opus  est.  Item 
aegros  pauperes  visitare  atque  iovere.     Epit.  c.  65. 

''  Nam  et  angeli  Deum  metuunt — et  da;mones  reformidant  Deura,  quia 
torquentur  ab  eo  et  puniuntur.  1.  vii.  c.  21.  prop.  in. 

^  Quid  igitur  ?  Operamne  perdenius ?  Minime.  Nam silucrari  hos a morte, 
ad  quam  concitassime  tendunt,  non  potuerimus:  si  ab  illo  itinere  devio  ad 

vitam  lucemque  revocare, nostros  tamen  confirmabimus.  I.  v,  c.    1. 

p.  457.  ''  Salvator  ideo,  quia  est  sanatio  et  salus  omnium, 

qui  per  eum  credunt  in  Deum-  Epit.  42.  sub  fin. 

*  Scit  ergo  adversarius  iile  nosier,  quanta  sit  vis  hujus  cupidifatis. — Objicit 
quippe  ocul  s  imitabiles  Ibrmas,  suggent  Ibmenta,  et  vitiis  pabulum  submmis- 
trat.  1.  vi.  c.  22.  p.  G25.  ^  ne  quando  in  laqueos 


Lactantius.     a.  D.  30G.  541 

(6.)  St.  Peter,  2  cp.  i.  14,  lias  these  words  :  "  Knowing-, 
that  shortly  I  must  put  oft"  tliis  my  tabernacle,  even  as  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  has  showed  me  :"  which  thin<>'  is  also 
spoken  of,  John  xxi.  18.  Lactantius  observes,  '  thaf  the 
apostles  of  Christ  did  not  only  suffer  death  for  the  uospel, 
but  they  likewise  knew  it  beforehand,  and  foretold  it.' 
Whether  he  refers  to  that  text  of  St.  Peter,  or  to  some  text 
of  St.  Paul,  where  he  speaks  of  expecting'  death,  or  to  both, 
■we  cannot  certainly  say.     See  2  Tim.  iv.  C. 

(7.)  Lactantius  says,  '  He'  that  does  not  acknowledge 
the  Son,  neither  can  he  acknowledge  the  Father.'  Which 
is  very  agreeable  to  1  John  ii.  23.  But  there  is  somewhat 
resemf^ling"  that  observation  in  words  of  our  Lord,  John  viii. 
19,  and  in  xiv.  1 — 7. 

(8.)  Speaking"  of  christians,  he  says,  '  No=  evil  can  so 
affright  us,  as  to  hinder  us  from  keeping-  the  faith  that  has 
been  delivered  to  us.'  But  we  cannot  be  sure  that  he  refers 
to  Jude,  ver.  3. 

6.  That  Lactantius  received  and  respected  the  book  of 
the  Revelation,  is  evident  from  what  he  writes  about  Christ's 
coming  to  reigTi  a  thousand  years  upon  this  earth.  I  refer 
in  the  margin  to  some  places  in''  the  Institutions,  and'  the 
Epitonie,  where  he  plainly  borrows  from  the  Revelation. 

(1.)  Moreover  he  expressly  cites  it.  '  The*"  Son  of  God,' 
says  he,  '  has  a  tiame  known  to  none  but  himself,  an<l  the 
Father,  as  John  teacheth  in  the  Revelation  :'  undoul)fedIy 
intending  Rev.  xix.  12,  "  And  he  had  a  name,  which  no 
man  knew  but  himself." 

(2.)  He  quotes  the  book  very  respectfully,  saying,  '  The^ 
divine  scriptures  call  the  future  everlasting  punishment  of 
bad  men  the  second  death.'     See  Rev.  ii.  11. 

7.  We  saw  before  what  Lactantius  says  of  all  scripture, 
consisting  of  the  Old  and  the  New  Testament.  This  collection 

adversarii  nostri incidamus.  1.  iv.  c.  30.  p.  448.     Nam  et  ille  colluc- 

tator  et  adversariiis  noster,  scis,  quam  sit  astutiis,  et  idem  ipse  violentus,  sicuti 
nunc  videmus.     De  Opif.  c.  i.  p.  830. 

'^  Et  qui  non  tantum  pro  fide  mortem  subierint,  ted  etiam,  morituros  esse 
se  et  scierint  et  praedixerint.  I.  v.  c.  3.  p.  4G4. 

'  Nee  sibi  de  summo  Deo  vel  Judaei  vel  philosophi  blandiantur.  Qur 
Filium  non  agnovit,  nee  Patrem  potuil  agnoscere.     Epit.  c.  49.  prop.  in. 

8  Nullus  nos  metus,  nullus  terror  inflectat,  quo  minus  tradilam  nobis  fidem 
custodiamus.     Epit.  c.  G6. 

^  Vid.  Inst.  1.  vii.  c.  17. 

'  Epit.  c.  73,  74.  ''  Hujus  nomen  nulli  estnotum,  nisi  ipsi 

et  Path,  sicut  docet  Johannes  in  Revelatione.     Epit.  c.  42.  sub  fin. 

'  Is  vero  damnatus  seternam  luit  poenam,  quam  divinae  literae  secundam 
mortem  nominant.  1.  vii.  c.  10.  p.  679.  Eam  poenam  secundam  mortem  nomi- 
namus.  1.  ii.  c.  12.  p.  206. 


542  Credibility  of  tlie  Gospel  History. 

he  calls  "Mi  vine  scripture,  "sacred  books,  "scriptures  of  truth, 
archives  I'  of  sacred  scripture,  word  of  God,  and  the  like: 
sometimes  by  such  expressions  particularly  intending  the 
Old,  at  other  times  the  New  Testament.  '  Bring-  me  a  man,' 
saysi  he,  '  who  is  passionate,  abusive,  ungovernable;  with 
a  few  M'ords  of  God  1  will  make  him  as  meek  as  a  lamb.' 
He  also  frequently  calls  them"^  heavenly  scriptures. 

(1.)  And  though  Lactantius, for  a  reason  formerly  assigned, 
scrupled  to  quote  the  New  Testament,  as  decisive  :  he  doubt- 
less so  esteemed  it,  in  like  manner  as  he  did  the  Old,  which 
he  frequently  quotes,  as  of  authority.  '  But^  why  do  I  strive 
to  prove  the  inunortality  of  the  soul  by  arguments,  when 
we  have  divine  testimonies?  '  '  For  the  sacred  scriptures 
and  the  words  of  the  prophets  teach  it.'  And  in  another 
place  to  the  like  purpose  he  says,  '  He'  will  prove  the 
future  rewards  of  virtue  by  probable  arguments  of  reason, 
and  by  testimonies  of  the  divine  scriptures.'  And  in  many 
of  the  passages  just  cited,  and  transcribed  by  me  in  the 
margin,  the  epithets,  sacred  and  divine,  are  given  by  him 
to  the  scriptures  of  the  New  Testament.  And  referring 
to  the  sublime  moral  directions  of  the  christian  revelation, 
which  are  either  in  the  gospels  or  the  epistles,  he  not  seldom 
introduces  them  in  this  respectful  manner  :  God"  commands 
us  not  to  boast  of  good  works  done  by  us,  and  the  like. 

(2,)  Lactantius  more  than  once  intimates,  that"  the  celes- 

■"  Decent  autein  divinae  literce  non  extingui  animas,  sed  aut  pro  justitia 
praemio  affici,  aut  poeaa  pro  sceleribus  sempiteraa.  1.  iii.  c.  19.  p.  302. 

"  Sed  tamen  sanctae  literae  decent ;  in  quibus  cautuni  est,  ilium  Dei  filium, 
Dei  esse  sermonem.  1.  iv.  c.  8.  p.  370.  Mentiuntur  fortasse  literae  sanctae, 
docentes  tantam  fuisse  in  eo  potestatem,  ut  iniperio  suo  cogeret  ventos,  &c. 
ib.  c.  15.  p.  399.  °  NuUas  enim  literas  veritatis  attigerant. 
1.  ii.  c.  10.  p.  195.  Sed  videlicet  Grasci,  qui  sacras  veritatis  literas  non  atti- 
gerant. 1.  iii.  c.  16.  p.  28S.  p  ante  diem  septimam 

Calendarum  Aprilium  Judaei  Christum  cruci  affixerunt.  Hie  rerum  textus, 
hiccrdoin  arcanis  sanctarum  literarum  continetur.  1.  iv.  c.  10.  p. ^79. 

<)  See  before,  p.  500,  501.  note  ". 

■■  qnos  vera  ccelestiura  literarum  doctrinanon  imbuit.  1.  iv.  c.  22.  in. 

Quidam  vero  non  satis  coelestibus  Uteris  eruditi.  1.  iv.  c.  30. 

^  Sed  quid  argumentis  coUigimus  aeternas  esse  animas,  quum  habeamus 
testimonia  divina  ?  Id  enim  sacrae  literae  et  voces  prophetarum  docent.  Epit. 
c.  71.  ^  Satis  ethnic  parti  faciamus,  turn  testimoniis divinarum 

literarum,  turn  etiam  probabilibus  argumentis.  1.  vii.  c.  i.  p.  646. 

"  Idem  Deus  praecepit,  ut  si  quando  coenam  paraverimus,  1.  vi.  c.  12.  sub  in. 
Monet  enim  Deus  operatorem  justitiae,  non  oportere  esse  jactantem,  1.  vi.  c.  18. 
prop.  in.  Quod  quidem  ita  Deus  praecepit,  1.  vi.  c.  23.  p.  630. — faciamus 
quae  jubet  illuminator  noster,  Deus,  1.  v.  c.  18.  prop.  in.  Pnccepit  Deus,  non 
occidere  solem  super  iram  nostram.  ib.  sub  fin. 

"  Inde  est,  quod  scriptis  coelestibus,  (]uia  videntur  incompta,  non  facile 
credunt,  qui  aut  ipsi  sunt  diserti,  aut  diserta  legere  malunt,  nee  quaerunt  vera, 
sed  dulcia. Ita  respuunt  veritatem,  dum  sermonis  suavitate  capiuntur. 


LACTA.NT1US.     A,  D.  30C.  543 

tial  scriptures  were  despised  and  derided  by  many  heathens, 
for  want  of  elegance  and  politeness  of  style.  As  for  himself, 
he  approves  of  the  style  of  scripture,  as  it  is:  saying,  that'"^ 
it  is  the  effect  of  wise  design.  Divine  things  are  delivered 
to  us  without  artincial  ornaments,  in  the  language  of  the 
people,  that  all  might  understand  what  God  spake  to  all. 

(•3.)  By  which  it  may  be  perceived,  that  Lactantius  was 
not  for  concealing  the  scri|)tures  from  men  of  any  condition. 
And  indeed  he  says  in  another  place,  '  If'^  any  one  desires 
farther  information  upon  the  point,  or  does  not  entirely 
credit  me,  let  him  go  to  the  sacred  treasury  of  the  celestial 
scriptures.' 

(4.)  He  has  another  just  observation  concerning"  the  con- 
cise authority  with  which  things  are  usually  delivered  in 
scripture.  '  Ity  is  such  as  became  God,  when  speaking  to 
men.  Many  reasons  and  arguments  are  needless,  and  would 
have  been  improper,  and  unbecoming  the  divine  majesty.' 
Seneca  has  a  like^  observation. 

(5.)  He  has  an  argument  in  behalf  of  the  Credibility  of 
the  Evangelical  History,  in  answer  to  one  of  the  heathen 
authors,  who  in  his  time  wrote  against  the  christians  :  '  This'' 

Epit.  c.  62.  Nam  haec  in  priniis  causa  est,  cur  apud  sapientes  et  doctos  et 
principes  hujus  saeculi,  scriptura  sancta  fide  careat,  quod  prophetae  communi 
ac  simplici  sermone,  ut  ad  populum,  sunt  locuti.     Contemnuntur  itaque  ab 

iis,  qui  nihil  audire  vel  legere,  nisi  expolitum  ac  disertum,  volunt Non 

credunt  ergo  divinis,  quia  fuco  carent :  sed  ne  illis  quidem,  qui  ea  interpretan- 
tur,  quia  suntct  ipsi  aiit  omnino  rudes,  aut  certe  parum  docti.  1.  v.  c.  1.  p.  458. 

*  Adsueti  enim  dulcibus  et  politis  sive  orationibus  sive  carniinibus  divinarum 
literarum  simplicem  communemque  sermonem  pro  sordido  aspernantur.  Num 
igitur  Deus,  et  mentis  et  vocis  et  linguae  artifex,  diserte  loqui  non  potest  ? 
Immo  vero  summa  providentia  carere  fuco  voluit  ea,  quae  divina  sunt,  ut 
omnes  intelligerent  ea,  quae  ipse  omnibus  loquebatur.  1.  vi.  c.  21. 

"  ut  testimoniis  utamur,  immensum  est.     Si  quis  ilia  desiderat,  aut 

nobis  minus  credit,  adeat  ad  ipsum  sacrarium  ccelestium  literarum.  Epit. 
c.  70.  [al.  72.]  p.  237.  ed.  Davis. 

y  Quge  quidem  tradita  sunt  breviter,  ac  nude.  Nee  enim  decebat  aliter  :  ut, 
cum  Deus  ad  hominem  loqueretur,  argumentis  assereret  suas  voces,  tanquara 
fides  ei  non  haberetur :  sed,  ut  oportuit,  est  locutus,  quasi  return  omnium 
maximus  judex,  cujus  non  e:t  argumentari,  sed  pronuntiare.  Verum  ipse  ut 
Deus.  1.  iii.  c.  ].  p.  235. 

"  In  hac  re  dissentio  a  Possidonio.  Non  probo,  quod  Platonis  legibus 
adjecta  principia  sunt.  Legem  enim  brevem  esse  oportet,  quo  facilius  ab 
imperitis  feneatur,  velut  emissa  divinitus  vox  sit.  Jubeat,  non  disputet.  Nihil 
videturmihi  frigidius,  nihil  ineptius,  quam  lex  cum  prologo.  Scnec.  Ep.  94. 
T.  ii.  p.  446,  447.  Ainst.  1672. 

*  Abfuit  ergo  ab  his  fingendi  voluntas  et  astutia,  quoniam  rudes  fuerunt 
Aut  quis  possit  indoctus  apta  inter  se  et  cohaerentia  fingere,  cum  philosophorum 
doctissimi,  Plato  et  Aristoteles,  et  Epicurus  et  Zenon,  ipsi  sibi  repugnantia  et 
contraria  dixerint  ?  Haec  est  enim  mendaciorum  natura,  ut  cohaerere  non 
possint.  Illorum  autem  traditio,  quia  vera  est,  quadrat  undique,  ac  sibi  tota 
consentit,  et  ideo  persuadet. — Non  igitur  quaestus  et  conimodi  gratia  religionem 


544  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

history,  says  he,  is  true.  For  it  is  entirely  unit'orin  and  con- 
sistent tijroiighout,  though  written  by  illiterate  and  ignorant 
men.  Nor  did  they  invent,  for  the  sake  of  gain,  or  any 
otherworldly  advantage;  for  they  taught  and  practised  the 
strictest  rules  of  self-denial.  They  not  only  died  in  testimony 
to  the  doctrine  they  preached,  but  they  knew  before-hand 
that  they  must  die  for  it,  and  foretold  their  death.  And  they 
declared  likewise,  that  all  others  who  received  their  doctrine 
must  suffer  persecution.' 

VII.  It  will  be  some  addition  to  our  trouble,  to  consider, 
whether  Lactantius  quotes  any  books,  which  are  not  a  part 
of  the  present  received  canon  of  christians,  with  the  like 
regard  to  M'hat  he  has  shown  to  those  already  mentioned. 

1.  And  it  must  be  owned,  that  he  has  frequently  quoted 
in  his  Divine  Institutions  the  Sibylline  Verses,  or  the  Poems 
of  the  Sibyls,  and  some  writings  of  Hydaspes,  and  Hermes 
Trismegistus  ;  or  however,  writings  ascribed  to  them  :  and 
once  a  book,  entitled  the  Preaching  of  Peter. 

2.  The  Sibylline  verses  more  especially  are  quoted  by  him. 
He  considers  them  as  containing*  predictions  concerning- 
Christ,  and  some  of  them  very  plain.  He  makes  use  of 
them  as  arguments  for  the  truth  of  the  history  of  things  re- 
corded in  the  sacred  scripture,  and  believed  and  taught  by 
christians.  Nevertheless  he  did  not  reckon  them  a  part  of 
those  books  which  were  of  authority  with  christians.  A  few 
quotations  from  him  may  render  this  evident. 

3.  '  The  Sibyl''  testifies,  that  man  is  the  work  of  God. 
The  same  is  contained  in  the  sacred  scriptures.'  And  soon 
after:  'As''  the  sacred  scriptures  teach,  and  likewise  the 
Erythraean  Sibyl.'  Therefore  the  Sibylline  poems  were  not 
a  part  of  scripture. 

4.  Though  the  Sibyls,  according-  to  him,  foretold  many 
future  things,  he  does  not  allow  them  the  title  and  character 
of  prophets,  in  the  most  honourable  sense  of  the  word.  '  That'^ 
these  things,' says  he,  '  were  to  come  to  pass,  is  declared  in 
the  words  of  the  prophets,  and  in  the  Sibylline  poems.'  And 
exactly  to  the  same  purpose  in  the*^   Epitome.      Again: 

istam  commenti  sunt ;  quippe  et,  praecepfis  et  re  ipsa  vitam  seciiti  sunt,  quae 
et  voluptatibus  caret,  et  omnia,  quae  habentur  in  bonis,  spernit :  et  qui  non 
tantum  pro  fide  mortem  siibierint,  seel  etiam  morituros  esse  se,  et  scierint  et 
preedixerint,  et  postea  universes,  qui  eorum  disciplinam  secuti  essent,  acerba 
et  nefanda  passuros.  1.  v.  c.  3.  in.  ''  Sil)ylla  hominem  Dei  opus  esse 

testatur. — Eadem  sanctne  literae  continent.  1.  ii.  c.  11.  p.  202,  203. 

*=  sicut  sacrae  literaj  decent,  et  Sibylla  Erythraea. — ib.  c.  12.  p.  210. 

^  Haec  autem  sic  futura  fuisse,  et  prophetarum  vocibus,  et  Sibyllinis  carmi- 
nibus  denuntiatum  est.  1.  iv.  c.  18   p.  410.  *  Quae  omnia  et  in  Pro- 

phetarum libris,  et  in  carminibus  Sibyllinis,  praedicta  invenimus.     Ep.  c.  45. 


Lactantius.     a.  D.  306.  545 

'  Epicurus,  who*"  denied  a  future  state,  is  confuted  not  only 
by  the  rest  ot"  tlie  pliilosophers,  and  the  common  opinion, 
but  likewise  by  the  answers  of  oracles,  the  poems  of  the 
Sibyls,  and  the  divine  words  of  the  prophets.'  I  put  in  the 
margin «  another  like  place. 

5.  Moreover,  though  Lactantius  thought  fit  to  fetch  argu- 
ments from  these  writings,  in  support  of  the  christian  religion 
against  heathens,  it  can  never  be  suspected,  that  he  allowed 
them  canonical  authority,  because  he  ascribed  their  predic- 
tions to  the  instinct  of  drcmons.  '  The''  prophets,'  says  he, 
'  foretold  these  things  by  the  Spirit  of  God  :  the  diviners,  as 
Hydaspes  ;  Hermes,  the  Sibyl,  by  the  impulse  of  dfemons  :' 
that  is,  evil  spirits.  For,  Origen  assures  us,  with'  christians 
all  daemons  were  so  reputed:  they  did  not  call  any  good 
beings  dtemons. 

6.  That  Lactantius  calls  all  those  writers  vates,  or  divine  rs, 
we  have  just  seen.  In  the  like  manner  he  speaks  of  them 
in  other"*  places.  That  under  that  title  and  character  the 
Sibyls  are  included,  is  most  manifest  from  a*  passage,  which 
1  place  at  the  bottom  of  the  page. 

7.  His  reasons  for  frequently  quoting  these  writings,  and 
his  views  therein,  appear,  I  think,  in  this  passage  of  the  se- 
venth book  of  the  Institutions:  *  I"'  have  proved  the  immor- 
tality of  the  soul  by  reason.  It  remains,  that  1  produce 
testimonies  to  the  same  doctrine  ;  nevertheless,  I   shall   not 

now  cite  the  prophets, but  such  witnesses  rather,  as  they 

cannot  refuse,  who  as  yet  know  not  the  truth.'     After  which 

'  Quid  quod  idem  animas  extinguibiles  facit  ?  quem  refellunt  non  modo 
philosophi,  et  publica  persuasio,  verum  etiam  responsa  vatum,  carmina 
Sibyllarum,  ipsae  denique  divinae  voces  prophetarum.     Epit.  c.  36. 

f>'  Id  enim  sacrae  literae  ac  voces  prophetarum  docent.  Quod  si  cui  parum 
id  videtur,  legal  carmina  Sibyllarum.  Apollinis  quoque  Milesii  responsa 
consideret.     Epit.  c.  70.  [al.  71.]  p.  235.  Davis. 

^  Haec  ita  futura  esse,  cum  prophetae  omnes  ex  Dei  spiritu,  turn  etiam  vates 
ex  extinctu  daemonum  cecinerunt. — Sed  et  illud  non  sine  daemonum  fraude 
subtractum  est,  missum  iri  a  Patre  tuncfilium  Dei, — quod  Hermes  tamen  non 
dissimulavit. Sibyllae  quoque  nonaliter  fore  ostendunt.  1,  vii.  c.  18. 

'  Kara  fitv  hv  r]fiag,  tsq  Xtyovrag,  wavraQ  SaiyiOvaQ  tivai  (pavXng.  Or. 
contr.  Cels.  1.  viii.  T.  1.  p.  770.  E.  F.  Benedict. 

^  Denique,  ut  taccam  dc  prophetis  unius  Dei  praedicatoribus,  poetseque,  et 
philosophi,  et  vates  testimonium  singulari  Deo  perhibent.     Epit.  c.  3.  prop.  in. 

'  Superest  de  vatibus  dicere.  Varro  decem  Sibyllas  fuisse  tradit.  Epit. 
c.  5.  in.  "'  Declaravi,  ut  opinor,  ammain  non  esse  solubilem. 

Superest,  citare  testes,  quorum  auctoritate  argumenta  firmentur.     Neque  nunc 

prophetas  in  testimonium  vocabo, sed  eos   potius,  quibus  istos,  qui 

respuuntur  veritatem,  credere  sit  necesse.    Hermes  naturam  hominis  descnbens 

Polites  quidem  consuluit  Apollinem  Milesium,  utrum  maneat  anima 

post  mortem,  an  resolvatur  :  et  respondit  his  versibus. Quid  Carmina 

Sibyllina  ? — 1.  vii.  c.  13.  in.  &c. 

VOL.    III.  2    N 


546  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

he  proceeds  to  allege  Hermes  Trismegisfus,  an  oracle  of 
i\ polio,  and  the  Sibylline  poems.  He  speaks  to  the  like 
purpose  in  the  first  book  of  the  "Institutions. 

8.  1  have  already  several  times"  had  occasion  to  take 
notice  of  these  Sibylline  books,  and  of  the  use  which  Lac- 
tantius,  in  particular,  has  made  of  them.  I  would  add  here, 
that  Lactantius  having  shown  what  was  the  number  of  Sibyls, 
according?  to  accounts  given  by  Varro,  and  several  other 
learned  heathen  authors,  informs  us,  what  Sibylline  books 
he  made  use  of  and  quoted,  or  supposed  he  quoted.  He 
says,  that  the  volumes  of  the  Cumsean  Sibyl,  containing  the 
fates  of  the  Roman  empire,  are  kept  secret ;  but  the  books 
of  the  rest  are  open  to  every  body.  He  speaks  to  this  pur- 
pose in  the  Institutions,  the*^  Epitome,  and^  the  treatise 
Of  the  Wrath  of  God.  He  says  in*  tjie  Epitome,  that  all 
the  Sibylline  books,  except  those  of  the  Cumcean  Sibyl, 
teach  one  God,  Creator,  and  Governor  of  the  world.  In" 
the  Institution  he  seems  to  say  the  same  thing  of  all  in 
general,  without  exception,  particularly  the  Erythraean  Sibyl, 

"  Sed  cum  defendamus  causam  veritatis  apud  eos,  qui  oberrantes  a  verifate 
falsis  religionibus  serviuntj  quod  genus  probationis  adversum  eos  magis  adhi- 
bere  debemus,  quam  ut  eos  deorum  suorum  testimoniis  revincamus  ?  I.  i. 
c.  6.  tin.  "  See  Sibylline  Books  in  the  Index. 

P  M.  Varro,  quo  nemo  unquam  doctior,  ne  apud  Grsecos  nedum  apud 
Latinos,  in  libris  rerum  divinarum. — Cum  de  Quindecim  Viris  loquerefur, 
Sibyllinos  libros  ait  non  fuisse  unius  Sibyllae,  sed  appellari  uno  nomine  Sibyl- 
linos,  quod  omnes  feminse  vates  Sibyllae  sunt  a  veteribus  appeliatae. — Cseterum 
Sibyllas  decem  numero  fuisse,  easque  omnes  enumeravit.  1.  i.  c.  6.  p.  31. 
Superest  de  vatibus  dicere.  Varro  decem  Sibyllas  fuisse  tradit,  primam  de 
Persis, quaitam  Cumanam,  quintam  Erythrseam.     Epit.  c.  5. 

■i  Harum  omnium  Sibyllarura  carmina  et  feruntur  et  habentur,  praeterquam 
Cumaeae :  cujus  libri  a  Romanis  occuluntur.  Nee  eos  ab  ullo,  nisi  a  Quinde- 
cim Viris,  in?pectos  habent.  1.  i.  c.  6.  p.  .'^5,  36. 

'  Ex  his  omnibus  Cumanae  solius  tres  esse  libros,  qui  Romanorum  fata  con- 
tineant,  et  habeantur  arcani ;  caeterarum  autem  fere  omnium  singulos  exstare 
haberique  vulgo,  sed  eos  Sibyllinos  velut  uno  nomine  inscribi,  nisi  quod 

Erythraea nomen  suum  verum  posuit  in  libro,  aliarum  confusi  sunt. 

Hae  omnes,  de  quibus  dixi,  Sibyllae,  praeter  Cumaeam,  quam  legi  nisi  a  Quin- 
decim Viris  non  licet,  unum  Deum  esse  testantur  principem,  conditorem. 
Epit.  c.  5.  '  Verum  quia  plures,  ut  ostendi,  Sibyllae  a  doctissimis 

auctoribus  fuisse  traduntur, — Cumaeae  quidem  volumina,  quibus  Romana 
fata  conscripta  sunt,  in  arcanis  habentur :  caeterarum  tamen  fere  omnium 
libeili,  quo  minus  in  usu  sint  omnibus,  non  vetantur.  De  Ira  Dei,  cap.  28. 
in.  '  See  before,  note  "■. 

"  Omnes  igitur  hae  Sibyllae  unum  Deum  praedicant,  maxime  tamen  Ery- 
thraea, quae  celebrior  inter  caeteras  ac  nobilior  habetur.  Siquidem  Fenestella, 
diligentissimus  scriptor,  de  quindecim.viris  dicens,  ait :  Restituto  Capitolio, 
retulisse  ad  senatum  C.  Curionem  Cos.  ut  legati  Erythras  mitterentur,  qui 

carmina  Sibyllse  conquisita  Romam  deportarent. In   iis  ergo  versibus, 

quos  legati  Romam  attulerunt,  de  uno  Deo  haec  sunt  testimonia,  1.  i.  c.  6. 
p.  37. 


Lactantius.     a.  D.  306.  547 

in  verses  broug^ht  to  Rome  from  Erythree,  by  order  of  the 
senate. 

i).  The  Preaching-  of  Peter  is  but  once  quoted  by  Lactan- 
tius ;  it  is  in  this  niaruier  :  '  After*'  his  resurrection,  Christ 
opened  to  his  disciphs  all  things  which  should  come  to  pass, 
Avhich  things  Peter  and  Paul  preached  at  Rome.  And  for 
the  better  remembrance,  that  preaching  has  been  written, 
and  remains  to  this  time.  In  which,  besides  many  other 
wonderful  things,  they  say  it  would  come  to  pass,  that  in  a 
siiort  time  God  would  send  a  king,  w  ho  would  conquer  the 
Jews,  overthrow  their  cities,  and  bring  upon  them  many 
drendful  afflictions,  and  calamities.' 

Upon  this  book  I  have  already  had  occasion  to  make 
divers  remarks,  in**  the  chapter  of  Clement  of  Alexandria, 
and  in  the  article  of^  the  Anonymous  Author  of  the  treatise 
Of  Rebaptizing,  joined  with  St.  Cyprian's  works,  to  which 
the  reader  is  referred. 

Upon  this  passage  of  Lactantius  we  may  now  make  the 
following  remarks  : 

(1.)  It  is  probable,  that  this  book  contained  some  account 
of  the  preaching  both  of  St.  Peter  and  St.  Paul. 

(2.)  It  is  likely,  that  Lactantius  did  not  know  who  was 
the  author  of  it. 

(3.)  There  is  no  reason  to  conclude  from  this  passage, 
that  the  preaching  here  spoken  of,  was  esteemed  by  Lactan- 
tius, or  other  christians  at  that  time,  a  book  of  authority,  or 
a  part  of  sacred  scripture. 

VIII.  Nothing  remains,  but  that  we  briefly  sum  up  this 
writer's  testimony  to  the  scriptures. 

We  have  seen  in  Lactr.ntius  references  to  the  gospels,  the 
Acts  of  the  Apostles,  and  some  of  the  epistles,  and  to  the 
book  of  the  Revelation,  which  he  expressly  quotes  as  sacred 
scripture,  and  written  by  John.  We  have  likewise  observed 
plain  proof  of  his  having  a  collection  of  scriptures,  consisting 
of  the  Old  and  New  Testament ;  w  hich  he  esteemed  sacred 
and  divine,  and  of  the  highest  authority.  If  Lactantius  had 
not  purposely  restraiiied  himself  from  quoting  christian 
scriptures  in  his  arguments  with  heathens,  his  testimony 
would  have  been  much  more  full  and  particular.     For,  not- 

"  Sed  et  futiira  aperuit  illis  omnia,  quae  Petrus  et  Paulus  Romae  praedicave- 
ruiit.  Et  ea  praedicafio  in  inemoriam  scripta  permansit :  in  qua  cum  multa 
alia  mira,  turn  etiam  hoc  futurum  esse  dixerunt,  ut  post  breve  tempus  immit- 
teret  Deus  regem,  qui  expugnaret  Judaeos,  et  civitates  eorum  solo  adaequaret, 
ipsos  autera  fame  sitique  obsideret. — I.  iv.  c.  21.  p.  422,  423. 

*  Vol.  ii.  p.  252—255.  "  Vol.  iii.  p.  70,  71. 

2  N  2 


548  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

withstanding  the  reserv^edness  which  he  imposed  on  himself 
in  that  respect,  there  are  in  him  many  allusions  and  refer- 
ences to  them :  which  seems  to  show,  that  the  christians  of 
that  time  were  so  habituated  to  the  language  of  scripture, 
that  it  was  not  easy  for  them  to  avoid  the  use  of  it,  whenever 
they  discoursed  upon  things  of  a  religious  nature. 

His  quotations  of  Sibylline  books,  and  other  writings 
ascribed  to  heathen  vates  or  diviners,  such  as  Hydaspes  and 
Hern»es  Trismegistus,  have  been  just  now  accounted  for. 
And  it  has  been  shown,  that  he  was  far  from  esteeming  them 
of  canonical  authority.  Nor  does  it  appear,  that  he  placed 
the  Preaching  of  Peter  and  Paul  in  the  rank  of  sacred  scrip- 
ture, though  he  has  once  quoted  it. 

IX.  We  come  now  to  the  author  of  the  books  of  the  Deaths 
of  Persecutors :  in  whom  there  are  no  quotations  of  scripture, 
and  but  few  references  or  allusions  to  it.  I  shall  therefore 
transcribe  but  little  from  him  at  present. 

1.  It  is  manifest  that  he  refers  to  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles, 
and  perhaps  to  the  gospels  likewise,  in  the  second  chapter 
of  his  work  :  '  Near>  the  end  of  the  reign  of  Tiberius  Caesar, 
as  we  find  it  written,  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  was  crucified  by 
the  Jews.  When  he  had  risen  again  on  the  third  day,  he 
assembled  his  disciples,  whom  the  fright  of  his  apprehension 
had  dispersed.  And  continuing  with  them  forty  days,  he 
opened  their  hearts,  and  explained  to  them  the  scriptures, 
which  to  that  time  were  obscure  and  difficult  to  them.  He 
also  gave  them  instructions  concerning  the  preaching  his 
doctrine. — When  he  had  so  done,  he  was  surrounded  by  a 
cloud,  which,  withdrawing  him  from  human  sight,  carried 
him  up  to  heaven.  Whereupon  his  disciples,  who  were 
then  eleven,  taking  into  the  room  of  Judas  the  traitor  Mat- 
thias and  Paul,  went  abroad  throughout  the  world,  and 
preached  the  gospel,  as  the  Lord  had  commanded  them.' 

2.  This  M'riter  speaks  of  the  early  success  of  the  apostles 
in  preaching  the  gospel,  and  the  swift  progress  of  the  chris- 

y  Extremis  temporibus  Tiberii  Csesaris,  ut  scriptum  legiraus,  Dominus 
noster  Jesus  Christus  a  Judaeis  cruciatus  est  post  diem  decimum  calendarum 
April  is,  duobiis  Geminis  Consulibus.  Cum  resurrexisset  die  tertio,  congre- 
gavit  discipulos,  quos  metus  comprehensionis  ejus  in  fugam  verterat,  et  diebus 
quadraginta  cum  his  commoratus,  aperuit  corda  eorum,  et  scripturas  interpre- 
tatus  est,  quae  usque  ad  id  tempus  obscurae  et  involutae  fuerant.  Ordinavitque 
eos,  et  instruxit  ad  praedicationem  dogmatis  ac  doctrinae  suae. — Quo  officio 
repleto,  circumvolvit  eum  procella  nubis,  et  subtractum  oculis  hominum  rapuit 
in  ccelum.  Et  inde  discipuli,  qui  tunc  erant  undecim,  assumtis  in  locum 
Judaei  proditoris  Matthia  et  Paulo,  dispersi  sunt  per  omnem  terram  ad  evan- 
gelium  praedicandum,  sicut  illis  magister  Dominus  imperaverat. — De  M.  P. 
c.  2.  in. 


Of  Burning  the  Scriptures,  and  of  Traitors.  549 

tian  religion  in  the'  time  of  Nero, and  afterwards  particularly" 
in  the  times  followino  the  reign  of  Domitian. 

3.  He  speaks''  of  the  coming  of  Antichrist:    perhaps  he 
has  therein  an  eye  to  the  book  of  the  Revelation. 

4.  Finally,  he  takes  notice  of  the  burning'^  of  the  christian 
scriptures  in  Dioclesian's  persecution. 


CHAP.  LXVl. 


Of  hurtling  the  scriptures,  and  of  traitors,  in  the  time  of 
Dioclesian's  persecution. 

1.  EUSEBIUS  assures  us,  that  in  the  imperial  edict  for 
Dioclesian's  persecution  in  303,  it  was  expressly  ordered, 
not  only  that  the  christian  churches  should  be  demolished, 
but  also  that^*  their  scriptures  should  be  burned.  And  this 
was  one  of  the  affecting  scenes  of  that  persecution,  that''  he 
had  seen  the  sacred  and  divine  scriptures  burned  in  market- 
places. 

2.  This  order  shows  that  the  heathen  people  were  now  sen- 
sible of  the  importance  of  the  scriptures,  which  the  christians 
made  use  of  as  the  grounds  of  their  religion,  the  rule  of  their 
conduct,  and  the  support  of  their  steadiness  and  zeal. 


*  et  per  annos  25,  usque  ad  principium   Neroniani  imperii  per 

omnes  provincias  et  civitates  ecclesiae  fundamenta  miserunt. — Qua  re  ad 
Neronem  delata,  cum  animadverteret,  non  modo  Romae,  sed  ubique  quotidie 
magnam  multitudinem  deficere  a  cultu  idolorum,  et  ad  religionem  novam, 
damnata  vetustate,  transire — ib.  c.  2. 

*  Rescissis  igitur  actis  tyranni,  non  modo  in  statum  pristinum  ecclesia 
restituta  est,  sed  etiam  miilto  clarius  ac  floridiusenituit:  secutisquetemporibus, 
quibus  niulti  ac  boni  principes  Romani  imperii  clavum  regimenque  tenuerunt, 
nullos  inimicorum  impetus  passa,  manus  suas  in  orientem  occidenlemque 
porrexit  :  ut  jam  nullus  esset  terrarum  angulus  tam  remotus,  quo  non  relig  o 
Dei  penetrasset,  nulla  denique  natio  tam  feris  moribus  vivens,  ut  non  suscepto 
Dei  cultu  ad  justitiae  opera  niitesceret.  cap.  3.  fin. 

''  ut,  quia  primus  persecutus  est,  idem  etiam  novissimus  persequatiir, 

et  antichristi  praecedat  adventum, — cap.  2. 

•^  Qui  dies  cum  illuxisset, repente  adhuc  dubia  luce  ad  ecclesiam 

profectus  cum  ducibus  ac  tribunis  et  rationalibus  venit :  et  revulsis  foribus 
simulacrum  Dei  quaeritur,  scripturae  repertae  incenduntur.  cap.  12. 

'  — rag  Se  ypatpag  a(pavtig  irvpi  yeveaOai  vpo'^arrovra.  H.  E.  1.  viii.  c.  2. 
p.  294. 

''  — rag  St  tvOtag  Kai  itpag  ypaipag  Kara  ^tffag  ayopag  Trrpi  napaSidofiU'aQ 
avTOig  iTretSofiiv  O(p9a\iioig.  ib.  p.  293.  C. 


550  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

3.  The  burning*^  of  the  scriptures  is  also  mentioned  by 
tl)e  author  Of  the  Deaths  of  Persecutors,  in  his  account  of 
this  persecution;  but  he  does  not  speakofitsoparticularly, 
and  so  much  at  large,  as  might  have  been  expected. 

4.  Arnobius  likewise  refers  to  it,  and  insists,  that*^  there 
was  nothing  dishonourable  to  the  Deity  in  the  scriptures  of 
the  christians,  that  should  expose  them  to  such  usage  from 
the  heathen  people  ;  though  many  writings  of  their  own 
well  deserved  to  perish  in  the  flames. 

5.  The  first  council  of  Aries,  which  met  in  314,  soon 
after  the  persecution  was  over,  made  a  canon,  that®  whoever 
of  the  clergy  should  be  convicted  by  the  public  acts  of 
betraying  to  the  persecutors  the  scriptures,  or  any  of  the 
holy  vessels,  or  the  names  of  any  of  their  brethren,  should 
be  deposed. 

6.  This  was  peculiar  to  Dioclesian's  persecution :  at 
least  we  do  not  know  of  any  such  order  before. 

7.  The  persecution  was  for  a  while  exceeding  hot  in  Africa, 
both  in  Numidia,  and  in  the  proconsular  province  :  the  two 
governors  of  which,  Anulinus  and  Florus,  acted  with  great 
severity  toward  the  christians,  as  Optatus^  relates.  The 
inquest  after  the  scriptures,  and  other  sacred  things,  was 
very  strict  in  that  country  :  the  magistrates  in  the  several 
cities  were  very  active  and  diligent  in  their  searches:  they 
seized  what  they  could  by  any  means  discover,  and  gave 
informations,  as  they  saw  fit,  to  the  superior  officers  of  their 
district.  And  here  seems  to  have  been  the  greatest  number 
of  traitors:  some  bishops,  as  well  as  others,  were  guilty  of 
that  crime,  which  Optatus"  laments. 

8.  How  the  imperial  orders  were  published  and  executed, 

*  Scripturae  reperlae  incenduntur.     DeM.  P.c.  12. 

^  Quod  si  haberet  vos  aliqua  pro  religionibus  indignatio  has  potius  literas, 
hos  exurere  debuistis  libros.  Nam  nostra  quidem  scripta  cur  ignibus  meruenmt 
dari  •• — Arnob.  1.  iv.  sub  fin.  "^  De  his  qui  scripturas  sanctas 

tradidisse  dicuntur,  vel  vasa  dominica,  vel  nomina  fratrum  suorum,  placuit 
nobis,  ut  quicumque  eorum  ex  actis  publicis  fuerit  delectus,  non  verbis,  nudis, 
ab  ordine  cleri  amoveatur.     Concil.  Arl.  i.  c.  13. 

f  Alia  persecutio,  quie  fuit  sub  Diocletiano  et  Maximiano  ;  quo  tempore 
fuerunt  et  impii  judices,  bellum  christiano  nomini  inferentes.  Ex  quibus  in 
Provincia  Proconsulari  fuerat  Anulinus,  in  Numidia  Florus.  Omnibus  notuni 
est,  quid  eorum  operata  sit  artificiosa  crudelitas. — Ahi  cogebanfur  templa  Dei 
vivi  subvertere  :  alii  Christum  negare  ;  ahi  leges  divinas  incendore  ;  ahi  thura 
ponere.  Optat.   1.  iii.  c.  8.  ^  In  Africa  duo  mala  et  pessima 

adraissa  esse  constat,  unum  in  traditione,  alterum  in  schismate. — Nam  ferme 
ante  annos  sexaginta,  et  quod  excurrit,  per  totam  Africam  persecutionis  est 

divagata  tempestas. Ipsi  apices  et  principes  omnium,  ahqui  episcopi, 

illis  temporibus,  ut  damno  aeternae  vitae  ilhus  incertae  lucis  moras  brevissimas 
compararent,  instrumenta  divinae  legis  tradiderunt.     Optat.  1.  i.  c.  13. 


Of  BuniiiKj  the  Scriptures,  and  of  Traitors.     A.   D.   303.    551 

may  be  seen  in  the''  Acts  of  Felix,  an  African  bishop,  who 
sntt"ere«l  niarJynhun  at  the  b<><iiniiino-  of  the  persecution,  for 
refusing-  to  ileliver  up  the  scriptures.  I  transcribe  tliose 
Acts  in  the  niarg-in  somewhat  hui>'ely.  They  show  the  great 
regard  which  the  christians  of  that  time  had  for  the  sacred 
scriptures.  And  the  reader  may  there  observe,  that  the 
book  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  was  well  known,  and  re- 
ceived in  Africa. 

9.  There  are  extant  '  Acts'  of  the  martyrs  Saturninus  pres- 
'  byter,  Felix,  Dativus,  Ampelius, and  others,who  on  account 
'  of  the  assemblies,and  the  sacred  scriptures,  having  been  ex- 
'  amined  and  made  confession  before  Anulinus  the  proconsul 
'  of  Africa  at  Carthag^e,  at  divers  times,  and  in  divers  places, 
'  shed  their  precious  blood.'  These  Acts'*  are  the  work  of 
a  Donatist  writer  ;  nevertheless  they  are  very  curious. 

10.  These  persons  were  apprehended  at  their  worship, 
and  carried  to  Carthage  in  the  year  304  ;  where  they  made 
a  glorious  confession,  and  surmounted  all  the  temptations 
they  met  with. 

11.  The  author  relates'  the  edict  of  the  emperors  DiocJe- 
sian  and  Maximian,  for  burning  the  scriptures,  for  demolish- 
ing churches,  and  forbidding  the  assemblies  of  divine  wor- 
ship ;  and  bears  an  honourable  testimony  to  the  fidelity  and 

^  Diocletiano  octies  et  Maximiano  septies  Coss. exivit  edictum  Im- 

poratorum  et  Caesarum  super  omnem  faciem  terrae.  Et  propositum  est  per 
colonias  et  civitates  piincipibiis  et  magistratibus,  suo  cuique  loco,  ut  libros 
deificos  peterent  de  manu  episcoporum  et  presbyterorum.  Tunc  progranima 
positum  est  in  civitate  Tibnrensi. — Tunc  Magnilianus  curator  jussit  ad  se  per- 
due! per  officialem.  Cui  Magnilianus  curator  dixit :  Da  libros,  vel  membranas 
quascumque  halves.  Felix  episcopus  dixit :  Habeo,  sed  non  do.  Magnilianus 
curator  dixit :  Da  libros,  ut  possint  aduri.  Felix  episcopus  dixit :  Melius  est 
me  igne  aduri,  quam  scripturas  deificas;  quia  bonum  est  obedire  Deo  magis 
quam  hominibus.     [Act.  v.  29.] — Praefectus  dixit :  Feliceni  gladio  interficite. 

Et  ductus  est  ad  passionis  locum. Felix  episcopus,  elevans  oculos  in 

coelum,  clara  voce  dixit :  Deus,  gratias  tibi.  Quinquaginta  et  sex  annos 
liabeo  in  hoc  seculo.  Virgin itateni  custodivi :  Evangelia  servavi :  fidem  et 
veritatem  praedicavi.     Ap.  Ruinart.  p.  355 357. 

'  Ap.  Baluz.  Miscell.  T.  ii.  p.  56,  &c.  et  Optat.  ex  edit.  Du  Pin,  jx  150,  &c. 

^  Scripta  sane  sunt  ista,  quod  negari  non  potest,  ab  aliquo  Donatista,  sed 
docto  et  erudito.  Dignaque  mihi  visa  sunt  quae  cum  Lactantio  [De  M.  P.] 
conjungerentur,  cum   ob  similitudinem  argument!,  turn  ob  elegantiam  ser- 

nionis. Opus  tamen  est  anfiqui  scriptoris,  et  qui  non  admodum  remotus 

fuit  ab  aevo  Diocletiani.     Baluz.  Monit.  apud  Du  Pin,  ut  supra,  p.  150. 

'  Temporibus  nanique  Diocletiani  et  Maximiani  belluni  diabolus  christianis 
mdixit  isto  modo,  ut  sacrosancta  Domini  testamenta  scripturasque  divinas  ad 
exurendum  peteret,  basilicas  dominicas  subverteret,  et  ritus  coetusque  sanctissi- 
mos  celebrari  Domino  prohiberet.     Sed   non  tulit  exercitus   Dei   immane 

praeceptiim. Et  quamvis,  tradendo  gentilibus  scripturas  dominicas  atque 

testamenta  divina  profanis  ignibus  comburenda,  a  fidei  cardine  cecidere  non- 
nuUi,  conservando  tamen  eas,  et  pro  ipsis  libenter  suum  sanguinem  eflfundendo 
fortiter  fecere  quamplurimi.     Act.  Saturnin.  &c.  n.  ii. 


552  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

fortitude  of  the  christians  at  that  time.  And  he  particularly 
relates  the  examinations'"  of  the  persons  above  mentioned, 
and  the  resolute  answers  made  by  them.  It  will  appear 
likewise,  from  what  I  shall  transcribe  in  the  margin  from 
this  piece,  that  the  christians  of  Africa  were  very  assiduous 
in  the  assemblies  of  public  worship,  and  constantly  had  there 
readings  of  scripture. 

12.  If  that  writer  may  be  credited,  there"  had  been  a 
miraculous  appearance  in  that  place,  when  the  bishop  Fun- 
danus  had  delivered  up  some  scriptures,  a  short  time  before. 

13.  The  inquiries  of  the  heathen  persecutors  at  that  time, 
were  not  confined  to  the  scriptures,  but  they  searched  like- 
wise for  sacred  vessels,  and  seized  gold  and  silver  cups,  and 
lamps,  and  suits  of  apparel  ready  made  for  the  use  of  poor 
people,  as  occasions  might  require.  This  may  be  collected 
from  the  canon  of  the  council  of  Aries  before  quoted,  and 
more  particularly  from  an"  enumeration  of  such  things, 
taken  from  the  public  Acts  or  Register  of  the  city  of  Cirtlia, 
where  is  an  account  of  things  taken  with  the  consent,  or  by 
the  discovery,  of  Paul,  the  bishop,  and  one  of  the  deacons, 
Silvanus,  who  therefore  are  reckoned  traitors.  Which  is 
also  taken  notice  of  by  Augustine,  in  an  epistle  of  his,  a 
part  of  which  I  shall  transcribe  in  the?  margin,  for  the  sake 
of  curious  readers. 

"■  Contra  quae  confessores  Domini,  invicti  martyres  Christi,  tanquam 

ex  uno  ore  dixerunt,  Christiani  sumus.  Non  possumus  nisi  Domini  legem 
sanctam  usque  ad  effusionem  sanguinis  custodire.  Qua  voce  percussus 
inimicus  Felici  dicebat :  Non  quaere,  utrum  christianus  sis ;  sed  an  collectam 
feceris,  vel  scripturas  aliquas  habeas. — Respondit :  Quasi  christianus  sine 
Dominico  possit,  aut  Dominicus  sme  christiano  celebrari. — Collectam,  inquit, 
gloriosissime  celebravimus,  ad  scripturas  dominicas  legendas  in  Dorainicum 
convenimus  semper,  ibid.  n.  x. 

"  In  isto  namque  foro  jam  pro  scripturis  dominicis  dimicaverat  coelum,  cum 
Fundanus  civitatis  quondam  episcopus  scripturas  dominicas  traderet  exurendas : 
quas  cum  magistratus  sacrilegus  igni  apponeret,  subito  imber  sereno  coelo 
ditfunditur  ;  ignis  scripturis  Sanctis  admotus  exstinguitur :  grandines  adhiben- 
tur,  omnisque  ipsa  regio,  pro  scripturis  dominicis,  dementis  furentibus  devas- 
tabatur.  ib.  n.  iii. 

"  Ex  actis  Munatii  Felicis,  flaminis  perpetui,  perpetui  curatoris  coloniae 

Cirtensium.  Cum  ventum  esset  ad  domum  in  qua  cliristiani  conveniebant, 
Felix  flamen,  perpetuus  curator,  Paulo  episcopo  dixit,  Proferte  scripturas,  et 
si  f)uid  aliiid  hie  habetis.  Paulus  episcopis  dixit :  Scripturas  lectores  habenf. 
Sed  nos,  quod  hie  habemus,  damus.  In  brevi  sic — Calices  duo  aurei,  item 
calices  sex  argentei,  urceola  sex  argentea, — lucernae  argenteae  vii.  candelae 
breves,  aeneae  cum  lucemis  suis  vii.  item  lucernae  aenese  xi.  cum  catenis  suis, 
tunicae  muliebres  Ixxii.  tunicae  viriles,  xvi.  caligae  viriles,  paria  xiii.  caligae 
muliebres,  paria  xlvii.  &c.    Acta  Purgationis  Caecil.  ap.  Optat.  DuPin,  p.  lb'8. 

p  — recita  illi  gesta  apud  Munatium  Felicem,  flaminem  perpetuum,  cura- 
torem  tunc  civitatis  vestrae,  Diocletiano  octavum,  et  Maximiano  septimum 
consulibus quibus  liquid©  constitit  Paulum  episcopum  tradidisse,  ut  Silva- 


The  DoNATisTs.  553 


CHAP.  LXVII. 


THE  DONATISTS. 


I.  DonatuSy  bishop  of  Curthage.  II.  A  hrief' history  of  the 
Donatists :  1.  The  f/roiaul  oj'  the  controversy  between 
them  and  the  catholics.  2.  The  rise  and  occasion  of  the 
controversy.  3.  Their  mimhers.  4.  Their  persecutions. 
III.  Donatist  writers:  1.  J]  nonymous  author  of  the  Acts 
of  Saturninns  and  others.  2.  Cresconius.  3.  Gaudentius. 
4.  Macrobins.  5.  Parmenian.  ().  Petilian.  7.  Ticho- 
m7ts.  8.  Vitellius.  IV.  Their  testimony  to  the  scrip- 
tures. 

I.  SAYS  Jeroni,  '  Donatus/  from  whom  sprang  the  Dona- 

*  tists  in  Africa,  in  the  time  of  the**  emperors  Constantius  aud 
'  Constantine,assertino-,  that  the  scriptures  had  been  betrayed 
'  to  the  heathen  by  our  people  in  the  time  of  the  persecution, 

*  by  his  plausible  speeches  deceived  almost  all  Africa,  espe- 
'  cially  Numidia.  There  are  extant  many  small  Morks  of 
'  his  in  support  of  his  own  heresy,  and  a  book  of  the  Holy 
'  Spirit,  agreeable  to  the  Arian  doctrine.' 

I  shall  now  transcribe  likewise  a  part  of  Augustine's 
article  in  his  book  of  Heresies  concerning-  the  Donatists, 
with  whom  certainly  he  was  well  acquainted.  I  put  it  down 
here,  as  it  has  some  account  of  this  Donatus,  the  second 
bishop  of  the  party  at  Carthage,  and  as  a  foundation  of 
farther  remarks  hereafter. 

nils  tunc  ejus  subdiaconus  fuerit,  et  cum  illo  tradiderit  proferens  inslrumenta 
dominica,  etiam  quae  diligentissirae  fuerant  occultata,  capitulatam  argenteam, 
et  lucemam  argenteam.  Ep.  53.  n.  4. 

*  Donatus,  a  quo  Donatiani,  per  Africam  sub  Constantio  Constantinoque 
principibus  asserens  a  nostris  scripturas  in  persccutione  ethnicis  traditas,  totam 
pene  Africam,  et  maxime  Numidiam,  sua  persuasione  decepit.  Exstant  ejus 
multa  ad  suam  haeresim  pertinentia  opuscula,  et  de  Spiritu  Sancto  liber  Ariano 
dogmati  congruens.     De  V.  I.  cap.  93. 

''  *  In  the  times  of  the  emperors  Constantius  and  Constantine.']  Here  are 
various  readings.  Soplironius  the  Greek  interpreter  has  only  Constantius.  In 
Martianay's  edition  is  '  sub  Constanfe  Constantinoque.'  But  I  imagine  the  right 
reading  to  be  as  above:  and  that  by  Constantius  Jerom  intends  Constantine's 
father ;  the  Donatian  controversy  having  had  its  foundation  in  what  happened 
near  the  beginning  of  Dioclesian's  persecution,  during  the  reign  of  Constan- 
tius. 


554  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

'  The*^  Donatians,  or  Donatists,  who  at  first  made  a  schism, 
because  Coecilian  had  been  ordained  bishop  of  Carthage 
against  their  mind,  accused  him  of  crimes  they  could  never 
prove,  and  objected,  likewise,  that  he  had  been  ordained 
by  the  betrayers  of  the  divine  scriptures.  And  by  their 
continued  obstinacy  turned  their  schism  into  heresy. 
Their  notion  is,  that  by  means  of  Csecilian's  crimes,  whe- 
ther true,  or  rather  false,  as  appeared  to  those  who  were 
chosen  judges  of  the  cause,  the  church  of  Christ  has 
perished  throughout  the  world,  and  subsists  only  in  Africa 
among  themselves.  Every  where  else,  according'  to  them, 
the  church  is  lost  by  communicating  with  unworthy  per- 
sons. They  take  upon  them  to  rebaptize  catholics. — We 
have  understood,  that  the  first  author  of  this  heresy  was 
Donatus  of  Numidia,  who  came  to  Carthage,  and  divided 
the  christian  people  under  Csecilian,  and  getting  other 
bishops  of  a  like  disposition  to  join  them,  ordained  Majo- 
rinus  bishop  of  that  city.  Which  Majorinus  was  succeeded 
by  another  Donatus,  who  by  his  eloquence  greatly  strength- 
ened this  heresy  ;  and  many  think  they  are  called  Dona- 
tists from  him.  There  are  writings  of  his  still  extant,  by 
which  it  appears,  that  he  did  not  hold  the  catholic  doctrine 
of  the  Trinity.  For  though  he  allowed  the  Son  to  be  of 
the  same  substance,  he  thought  him  inferior  to  the  Father, 
and  the  Holy  Spirit  inferior  to  the  Son.  But  in  this  he  is 
not  generally  followed  by  the  Donatists:  nor  are  there 

*=  Donatiani,  vel  Donatisfae,  sunt,  qui  priraum  propter  ordinatum  contra 
suam  voluntatera  Caecilianum  ecclesiae  Carthaginensis  episcopum  schisina 
fecerunt :  objicientes  ei  crimina  non  probata,  et  maxime  quod  a  traditoribus 
divinarum  scripturaruin  fuerit  ordinatus.  Sed,  post  caussam  cum  eo  dictam 
atque  finitam,  falsitatis  rei  deprehensi  pertinaci  dissensione  firmata,  in  ha?resim 
schisma  verterunt :  tanquam  ecclesia  Christi  propter  crimina  Caeciliani,  seu 
vera,  seu,  quod  magis  judicibus  apparuit,  falsa,  de  toto  terrarum  orbe  perierit, 
ubi  futura  promissa  est,  atque  in  Africana  Donati  parte  remanserit,  in  aliis 
terrarum  partibus  quasi  contagione  communionis  extincta.  Audent  etiam 
rebaptizare  catholicos. — Hujus  haeresis  principem  accepimus  fuisse  Donatum, 
qui  de  Numidia  veniens,  et  contra  Caecilianum  christianum  dividens  plebem, 
adjunctls  sibi  ejusdem  factionis  episcopis,  Majorinum  apud  Carthaginem 
ordinavit  episcopum.  Cui  Majorino  Donatus  alius  in  eadem  divisione  suc- 
cessit,  qui  eloquentia  sua  sic  confirmavit  banc  haeresim,  ut  multi  existiment, 
propter  ipsum  potius  eos  Donatistas  vocari.  Exstant  scripta  ejus,  ubi  apparet 
eum  etiam  non  catholicam  de  Trinitate  habuisse  sententiam  ;  sed,  quamvis 
ejusdem  substantiae,  minorem  tamen  Patre  Filiam,  et  minorem  Filio  putiisse 
Spiritum  Sanctum.  Verum  in  hunc,  quern  de  Trinitate  habuit,  ejus  errorem, 
Donatistarum  multitude  intcnta  non  fuit.  Nee  facile  in  eis  quisquam,  qui  hoc 
ilium  sensisse  noverit,  invenitur.  Isti  hacretici  in  urbe  Roma  Montenses 
vocantur,  quibus  hinc  ex  Africa  solent  episcopum  mittere ;  aut  hinc  illud 

Afri  episcopi  eorum  pergere,  si  forte  ibi  eum  ordinare  placuisset. Aug. 

Ilaer.  69. 


The  Donatists.  555 

'  many,  who  are  aware,  that  this  was  his  sentiment.  Those 
'  heretics  are  called  Mountaineers  at  Rome,  to  >vi)om  they 
'  are  wont  to  send  a  bisiiop  from  Africa,  or  else  some  African 
'  bishops  go  thither,  if  they  have  a  mind  he  should  be 
'  ordained  there.' 

Aug-ustine  has  in  another  place*^  taken  notice  of  Donatist's 
opinion  concerning-  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity. 

II.  1  do  by  no  means  intend  to  write  at  large  the  history 
of  the  Donatists  ;  I  omit  entirely  their  practice  of  rebaptiz- 
ing.  I  shall  oidy  take  some  notice  of  the  subject-matter,  or 
ground  and  reason  of  the  difterence  between  the  catholics 
and  them  :  and  then  observe  the  rise  and  occasion  of  this  con- 
troversy. For  other  particulars  I  refer  to  divers  writers,*^ 
ancient  and  f  modern. 

I.  At  the  beginning-  of  his  article  just  transcribed,  Au- 
gustine jnentions  two  objections  of  the  Donatists  against 
Caicilian  ;  one  taken  from  crimes  which  he  himself  was  said 
to  be  guilty  of,  the  other  is,  that  he  was  ordained  by  traitors. 
What  the  crimes  were,  which  they  accused  Ctecilian  himself 
of,  may  be  seen  in  a  passage  of  an  anonymous  Donatist  writer, 
which o  I  put  at  the  bottom  of  the  page.  Whence  it  appears, 
that  they  also  charged  Mensurius,  Csecilian's  predecessor, 
with  betraying  the  scriptures.  The  whole  story  is  indeed 
very  unlikely  :  nevertheless  it  was  not  forgot''  by  the 
Donatists  in  the  conference  at  Carthage  in  411. 

^  Ariani  Patris  et  Filii  et  Spiritus  Sancti  diversas  substantias  esse  dicunf. 
Donatistae  autem  non  hoc  dicunt,  sed  unam  Trinitatis  substantiam  confitentur. 
Et  si  aliqui  ipsorum  minoretn  Filium  esse  dixerunt  quani  Pater  est,  ejusdera 

tamen  substantiae  non  negarunt. Nee  ipsa  cum  illis  vertitur  qusestio,  sed 

de  sola  communione  infeliciter  litigant.     Ep.  85.  [al.  50.]  cap.  1. 

«  Vid.  Euseb.  H.  E.  1.  x.  c.  vi.  p.  391,  392.  De  Vit.  Const.  I.  ii.  c.  66. 
Optat.  de  Schism.  Donatist.  Aug.  0pp.  T.  ix.  Ed.  Bened.  et  passim.  Philast. 
H.  83.  Theodoret.  H.  F.  1.  iv.  c.  6. 

'  Vid.  H.  Vales,  de  Sch.  Donatist.  ad  calc.  Annot.  ad  Euseb.  H.  E.  Ittig. 
ad  calc.  Append.  De  Haeresiarchis.  Leydeck.  Hist.  Ec.  African.  Witsii  Diss, 
de  Sch.  Donat.  ap.  Misc.  Sacr.  T.  i.  p.  742,  &c.  Vitringa  de  Commun.  Chris- 
tian. Observ.  Sacr.  T.  i.  p.  742,  &c.  Tillem.  Mem.  Ec.  T.  vi.  H.  Norisii 
Hist.  Donatist.  ap.  0pp.  T.  iv. 

8  Maxime  cum  etiam  Mensurius,  Carthaginensis  quondam  episcopus, 

recenti  scripturarum  proditione  pollutus,  sceleris  sui  amentiam  pejore  coepisset 
ferocia  publicare.  Quippe  qui  combustorum  veniam  hbrorum  a  marfyribus 
poscere  atque  implorare  debiierat,  ut  delicta  sua  majoribus  flagitiis  cumularet, 
eo  animo  saeviabat  in  martyres,  quo  divinas  tradiderat  leges.  Etenim  hie, 
tyranno  saevior,  carnifice  crudelior,  idoneum  sceleris  sui  ministrum  diaconum 
suum  elegit  Caecilianum..  Idemque  lora  et  flagra  cum  armatis  ante  fores 
carceris  ponit,  ut  ab  ingressu  atque  aditu  cunctos,  qui  victum  potumque  in 
carcerem  martyribus  atFerebant,  gravi  affectos  injuria  propulsaret.     Et  caede- 

bantur  a  Caeciliano  passim  qui  ad  alendos  martyres  veniebant. &c. 

Acta  Martyr.  Saturnin.  et  alior.  cap.  xvii.  ap.  Du  Pin,  Optat.  p.  156. 

•^  Tunc  Donatistae  aliquantum  praelocuti  sunt,  quod  Mensurius,  qui  fuerat 


556  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

Csecilian's  faulty  ordination  was  always  one'  pretence 
And,  if  Optatus  may  be  relied  upon,  the  only  complaint, 
which  the  Donatists  at  first  made  ag-ainst  Ctecilian,  was, 
that^  he  had  been  ordained  by  Felix  of  Apthronga,  who, 
they  said, delivered  up  the  scriptures  to  persecutors:  whilst 
the  catholics^  always  denied  the  charge,  as  groundless. 

Augustine,  as  we  have  seen,  farther  assures  us,  their 
opinion  was,  that  the  church  of  Christ  subsisted  in  Africa 
only  among  themselves;  and  that  every  where  else  the 
church  of  Christ  was  lost  and  ruined,  by  communicating' 
with  unworthy  persons,  particularly  with  such  as  adhered 
to  Caecilian,  who  had  been  ordained  by  traitors. 

With  what  warmth  and  bitterness  they  expressed  them- 
selves upon  this  head,  appears  from™  a  passage  of  an  author 
of  theirs,  whom  I  have  quoted  more  than  once  ;  as  also  from 
a  place  of  "Petilian,  in  Augustine. 

Augustine  himself  has  mentioned  a  remarkable  instance 
of  their  disdain  of*'  other  men,  which  I  suppose  may  be 
relied  upon. 

But  though  the  Donatists  scrupled  to  communicate  with 
the  catholics,  because  they  were  traitors  of  the  divine  scrip- 
ante  Caecilianum  ecclesise  Carthaginis  episcopus,  tempore  persecutionis  tradi- 
derit  persecutoribus  sanctas  scripturas,  kc.  August.  Brev.  Collat.  D.  iii.  cap. 
:.iii.  n.  25. 

'  Dicunt  ordinatorem  ejus  sanctos  libros  tradidisse.  Aug.  Psalm.  Contr. 
Donat.  D. 

^  Illo  tempore  a  tot  inimicis  nihil  in  eum  potuit  confingi  sed  de  ordinatore 
sue,  quod  ab  iis  false  traditor  diceretur,  meruit  infamari.     Optat.  1.  i.  c.  19. 

'  Deinde  Gesta  Proconsularia,  ubi  Felix  diligentissimo  examine  probatus 
estinnocens.  Aug.  Ep.  43.  [al.  162.]  c.  2.  n.  5.  Vid.  Gesta  Purgation  is  Felicis 
Aptungitani. 

■"  Igitur  cum  hfec  ita   sint,  quisnam  est  divini  juris  peritia  pollens, — qui 

judicii  Dei  memor separat  a  stante  lapsum,  ab  integro  vulneratum,  a 

justo  reum,  ab  innocente  damnatum,  a  custode  legis  proditorem,  a  confessore 

Christi  nominis  ejus  negatorem et  unum  atque  idem  existimet  et  eccle- 

siam  martyrum  et  conventicula  traditorum. Quamobrem  fugienda  bonis, 

et  vitanda  est  semper  religiosis  conspiratio  traditorum,  hypocritarum  domus. — 
Denique  isti  falsi  sacrorum  ritus  fictaque  mysteria  non  tamen  in  salutem  quam 
in  perniciem  miserorum  celebrantur,  cum  erigitaltare  sacrilegus,  celebrat  sacra- 
menta  profanus,  baptizat  reus,  curat  vulneratus, — legit  evangelia  traditor, 
haereditatem  coeli  promittit  divinorum  testamentorum  exustor.  Acta  Satur- 
nini,  &c.  cap.  19.  ap.  Du  Pin,  Optat.  p.  150. 

"  Qui  utique  spiritus — sancfus  in  vos  venire  non  potuit,  quos  non  vel 
poenitentise  baptismus  abluit :  sed  poenitenda,  quod  verum  est,  aqua  polluit 
traditoris.     Aug.  Contr.  Lit.  Petil.  1.  ii.  c.  36.  n.  83. 

°  Usque  adeo  ex  ipso  numero  sunt,  ut  nuper  in  Collatione  nostra,  quod 
etiam  in  gestis  ipsis  legere  potestis,  cum  eis  a  cognitore  esset  confessus  oblatus, 
ut  sederent  nobiscum,  respondendum  putarunt :  Scriptum  est  nobis,  cum 
talibus  non  sedere,  scilicet  ne  per  contactum  subselliorum  ad  eos  velut  nostra 
contagio  perveairet.     Aug.  Semi.  99.  cap.  8.  Tom.  v.  p.  524.  E. 


The  Donatists.  557 

tures,  the  catholicsP  retorted  the  charge,  and  calle<l  the 
Donatists  the  children  of  traitors ;  and  averred,  that  they  who 
were  the  first  authors  of  the  separation,  were  themselves 
traitors. 

2.  This  shall  suffice  for  a  brief  account  of  the  ground  of 
this  diflerence,  which  had  its  rise  after  this  uianner  : 

Mensurius  bishop  of  Carthage  being"  dead,  and  Maxen- 
tius  giving-  liberty  to  the  christians  in  Africa  in  311,  Cteci- 
liaii  was  chosen  in  his  room,  and  ordained  by  Felix  of  Ap- 
thonga,  and  others.  But  some  being  dissatisfied,  Majorinus'i 
was  chosen  and  ordained  by  another  party,  afterwards  called 
Donatists,  from  Donatus,  bishop  of  Casse  Nigrse  in  Numidia, 
who  was  exceeding-  active  in  the  support  of  that  interest. 
About  this  time,  therefore,  we  may  date  the  beginning-  of  this 
dift'erence. 

Soon  after  that  Constant ine  became  master  of  Africa,  upon 
the  defeat  of  Maxentius,  the  Donatists  sent  a  request  to  the 
emperor,  by  Anulinus  proconsul  of  Africa,  desiring-  that 
their  cause  might  be"^  heard  and  examined  by  some  bishops 

P  Ipsi  tradiderunt  libros,  et  nos  audent  accusare. 

Aug.  Psalm,  contr.  Donat.  B. 
Dixerunt  majores  nostri,  et  libros  fecerunt  inde. 
Qui  tunc  causam  cognoverunt,  quod  recens  possent  probare. 
Erant  quidera  traditores  libroium  de  sancta  lege,  &c.  D. 
Sed  hoc  libenter  finxerunt,  quod  se  noverunt  fecisse.     lb.  E. 

Quicquid  invicem  objicimus  de  traditione  codicum  divinorum,  de  thurifica- 
tione.     Id.  De  Unit.  Ec.  cap.  ii. 

Deinde  non  post  longum  tempus  iidem  ipsi,  tot  et  tales,  ad  Carthaginem 

profecti  traditores,  thurati, Majorinum post  ordinationem  Cseci- 

liani  ordinaverunt,  schisma  facientes.  Et  quoniam  traditionis  reos  principes 
vestros  fuisse  monstratum  est.     Optat.  1.  i.  c.  15. 

Si  traditoribus  non  licet,  vobis  licere  non  debuit,  quomm  principes  probamus 
fuisse  traditores.     Id.  ib.  cap.  5. 

Paulo  ante  docuimus  vestros  parentes  fuisse  traditores  et  schismaticos ;  et  tu 

ipsorum  hseres. Omnia,  igitur,  quae  a  te  in  traditores  et  schismaticos  dici 

potuerunt,  vestra  sunt.  Id.  1.  i.  c.  28. 

Nee  dicalur  ad  excusationem,  quia  traditoribus  communicare  noluerunt ;  cum 
manifestissime  probatum  sit,  eosdem  ipsos  filios  fuisse  traditorum.  Ib.  1.  iii. 
c.  8.  p.  65.     Vid.  et  1.  ii.  c.  1.  in.  et  1.  v.  c.  1,  in. 

•J  Hoc  apud  Carthaginem  pest  ordinationem  Caeciliani  factum  esse,  nemo 
est  qui  nesciat.  Optat.  1.  i.  c.  17.  Tempestas  persecutionis  peracta  et  definita 
est.  Jubente  Deo,  indulgentiam  mittente  Maxentio,  christianis  libertas  est 
restituta.  cap.  18.  Et  Majorinus,  qui  lector  in  diaconio  Caeciliani  fuerat, 
domesticus  Lucillie,  ipsa  suffragante,  episcopus  ordinatus  est  a  traditoribus. 
Ib.  cap.  19.  *■  Nam  majores  vestri — imperatorem,  Con- 

stantium,  harum  rerum  adhuc  ignarum,  hie  precibus  rogarunt — Constantine, 
optime  imperator,  quoniam  de  genere  jusfo  es,  cujus  pater  inter  caeteros 
imperatores  persecutionem  non  exercuit,  et  ab  hoc  facinore  immunis  est  Gallia. 
Nam  in  Africa  inter  nos  et  caeteros  episcopos  contentiones  sunt.  Peti.nius,  ut 
de  Gallia  nobis  judices  dari  praecipiat  pietas  tua.  Optat.  1.  i.  c.  22.  Vid.  et 
August.  Ep.  88.  al.  65. 


558  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

of  Gaul,  who  had  lived  under  his  father  Constantius :  and 
not  having-  been  persecuted,  as  other  christians  had  been  in 
other  parts  of  the  world,  were  free  from  the  charge  of  be- 
traying the  scriptures,  and  like  faults,  which  many  others 
had  been  guilty  of. 

The  emperor  received  this  petition  in  Gaul,  and'  soon  sent 
back  orders  to  Anulinus.  He  likewise  wrote  a  letter  to 
Miltiades  bishop  of  Rome.  The  emperors  appointment  was, 
that  ^  Majorinus  with  ten  of  his  friends,  and  Coeciiian  with 
ten  others,  favourers  of  him,  should  appear  at  Rome  before 
Miltiades,  and  three  bishops  of  Gaul.  These  were  Maternus 
bishop  of  Cologne,  Reticius  of  Autun,  and  Marinus  of  Aries. 
There  were  besides  in  this  council  fifteen  Italian  bishops, 
whose  names  may  be  seen  in  Optatus,  making  in  all  nineteen. 
This  hearing  was  in  the  year  313,  and-  Caecilian"  was  ac- 
quitted by  the  unanimous  vote  of  the  council. 

TheDonatists,not  being  yet  satisfied,  entreated  the  emperor, 
that  their  cause  might  be  taken  into  farther  consideration. 
In  compliance  with  their  request,  was  appointed  the  council 
of  Aries,  which  sat  in  314,  when  a  like  judgment  was  again 
passed. 

Still  theDonatists  were  uneasy,  and  made^  fresh  applica- 
tions to  Constantine,  to  examine  the  affair  himself.  Which 
he  consented  to,  and  after  all  decided  as  the  ecclesiastical 
judges  had  done  already.     This  hearing  before  the  emperor 

»  Vid.  Euseb.  H.  E.  1.  x.  c.  6.  et  Collat.  Carth.  D.  3.  c.  llC.  et  August. 
Brev.  Col.  D.  3.  cap.  vii.  et  xii. 

'  Et  tamen  dati  sunt  judices,  Maternus  ex  Agrippina  civitate,  Reticius  ab 
Augustoduno  civitate,  Marinus  Arelatensis.  Ad  urbem  Romam  ventum  est 
ab  his  tnbus  Gallis,  et  ab  aliis  quindecim  Italis.  Optat.  1.  i.  c.  23.  His 
decern  et  novem  considentibus  episcopis,  causa  Donati  et  Caeciliani  in  medium 
missa  est.  c.  24.  "  Caecilianus  omnium  supra  memoratorum 

sententiis  innocensest  proniinciatus.     Optat.  1.  i.  c.  25. 

"  Deinde  diximus,  aliquanto   post  Majorini  ordinationem,   quem  contra 

Csecilianum  nefario  sceleie  levaverunt eos  petiisse  a  Constantino  tunc 

imperatore  judices  episcopos,  qui  de  suis  quaestionibus,  quae  in  Africa  exortae — 
arbitrio  medio  judicarent.  Quod  postea,  quam  factum  est  praesente  Caeciliano 
et  illis  qui  ad  versus  euni  navigaverant,  judicante  Melciiiade  tunc  Romanae 
urbis  episcopo  cum  colkgis  suis,  quos  ad  preces  Donatistarum  miserat  impera- 
tor,  in  Csecilianum  nihil  potuisse,  ac  per  hoc  illo  in  episcopatu  confirmato — 
Quibus  peractis  rebus  cum  ilh  omnes  in  pertinacia— permanerent,  post  apud 
Arelatum  memoratum  iniperatorem  eandem  causam  diiigentius  examinandam 
— curasse.  lUos  vero  ab  ecclesiastico  judicio  provocasse,  ut  causam  Constan- 
tinus  audiret.  Quo  postea  quam  ventum  est,  utraque  parte  assistente,  inno- 
centem  Caecilianum  fuisse  judicatum,  atque  illos  recessisse  superatos,  et  in 
etldein  perversitafe  mansisse.  Aug.  Ep.  43.  [al.  162.]  c.  2.  n.  4.  Conf.  libr. 
post  Collat.  cap. 33.  Vid.  Aug.  Ep.  10.5.  [al.  ]GG.']  n.  8.  Ep.  129.  n.  4.  et 
185.  [al.  50.]  c.  2.  n.  6.  Ep.  89.  n.  3.  Et  recitaium  est  judicium  Constantini, 
— Aug.  Brev.  Coll.  D.  3.  c.  19.  in.  Vid.  et  Monumenta  Vetera  ap.  Du  Pin, 
Optat.  p.  182. 


The  Donatists.  559 

was  fit^  Milaiii  in  31().  But"  the  Donatists  did  not  ac(|ni- 
c'sce  any  more  in  tlic  judgment  now  passed  than  in  the  for- 
mer. 

Thus  the  ditt'erence  was  fixed:  there  was  no  reconciling 
the  two  parties.  There  was  however  a  famous  conference 
held  at  Carthage  in  411,  between  the  catholics  and  Dona- 
tists :  by  which,  and  by  the  writings  of  Augustine  about  that 
time,  the  Donatists  seem  to  have  been  much  weakened.  Ne- 
vertheless, they  subsisted  in  Africa  till  the  end  of  the 
sixth  century,  or>  later. 

3.  The  Donatists  were  very  numerous;  there  must  have 
been  many  of  them  in  Numidia,  and  the  proconsular  province 
of  Africa.  Augustine  intimates  that'  though  there  were 
Donatists  in  many  places,  yet  in  most  cities,  except  those  of 
Numidia,  the  catholics  were  much  more  numerous  than  they. 

At  the  fore-mentioned  conference  at  Carthage  were  pre- 
sent 286  catholic  bishops:  the  Donatists  counted'*  but  279, 
and  some  of  them  absent.  Tychonius''  speaks  of  a  council 
of  Donatists  at  Carthage,  consisting  of  270  bishops,  but  the 
time  of  it  is  uncertain.  Augustine  often  speaks  of  a  council  of 
theirs,  about  the  year  394,  consisting'^  of  310  bishops  ;  and 
all  these  310  were  friends  of  Primianus :  if  the  Maximianists, 
who  were  absent,  were  100,  their  number  in  the  whole  were 
410. 

For  certain  this  unhappy  difference  among  the  christians 
of  Africa  affords  an  admonition  to  all  men  to  respect  and 
hearken  to  Solomon's  observation,  and  the  counsel  founded 
upon   it;  Prov.  xvii.  14.     "  The  beginning  of  strife  is  as 

"  Vid.  Pagi  Crit.  in  Baron.  A.  316.  n.  xiv.  xv. 

"  Responderunt,  etiani  imperatorias  aures  pravis  siiggestionibiis  inflatas. 
Aug.  Brev.  Coll.  D.  3.  cap.  19. 

^  Vid.  Vales,  de  Schism.  Donat.  cap.  ult.  fin. 

^  Quod  enim  propterea  se  universos  adesse  dixerunt,  et  eorum  numerus 
appareat,  quoniam  eos  paucos  esse  adversarii  sui  saepe  mentiti  sunt.  Hoc  si 
aliquando  a  nostris  dictum  est,  de  his  locis  dici  verissime  potuit,  ubi  nostiorum 
coepiscoporum  et  clericoium  et  laicoium  longe  major  est  numerus,  et  maxima 
in  Proconsulari  Provincia.  Quanquam,  excepta  Numidia  Consulari,  etiam  in 
caeteris  provinciis  Africanis,  nostrorum  numero  facillime  superantur.  Aug. 
Ep.  129.  n.  E.  ''  Respondit  Officium,  nomina  Donatistarum 

episcoporum  esse  ducenta  septuaginta  novem,  annumeratis  etiam  illis,  pro 
quibus  absentibus  alii  subscripserant.  Catholicorum  autem  omnium  praesen- 
fium  nomina  esse  constitit  ducenta  octoginta  sex.     Aug.  Brev.  D.  1.  cap.  14. 

''  Dicit  enim  Tychonius,  homo,  ut  dixi,  vestrse  communionis,  a  ducentis 
et  septuaginta  vestris  episcopis  concilium  Carthagini  celebratum.  Aug. 
Ep.  93.  [al.  48.]  cap.  x.  n.  43. 

■^  Sed  ecce  damnaverunt  in  concilio  suo  Maximianistas  trecenti  decern 
episcopi  Donatistae.  Contr.  Ep.  Petil.  1.  i.  c.  11.  n.  18.  Sic  enim  eos 
describunt  trecenti  decern  plenarii  concilii.  Contr.  Ep.  Parmen.  1.  ii.  c.  3.  n.  7. 
Vid.  et  contr.  Crescon.  I.  iii.  c.  52.  n.  58.  et  c.  53 — 56.  et  passim. 


560  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

when   one  lets  out  water.     Therefore  leave  off  contention 
before  it  be  meddled  with." 

4.  1  forbear  to  enter  into  an  account  of  the  persecutions 
suffered  by  the  Donatists.  They  were  restrained  by  the 
imperial  laws,  which  sometimes  were  very  severe  ;  but'' 
they  were  rarely  executed  in  their  utmost  rigour.  And 
the  Donatists,  who  were  not  free  from  differences  among 
themselves, often''  showed  great  bitterness  toward  each  other: 
and  in  places  where  they  were  superior  in  number,  they^ 
bore  hard  upon  the  catholics. 

III.  I  add  a  brief  account  of  some  Donatist  writers. 

It  ought  to  be  observed,  that  I  have  already  transcribed 
Jerom's  article  of  Donatus  bishop  of  Carthage  next  after  Ma- 
jorinus:  from  whom,  as  some  supposed,  the  party  had  its 
denomination. 

1.  Anonymous?  author  of  the  Acts  of  Saturninus,  Felix, 
Pativus,  Ampelius,  and  others  ;  which  appear  to  have  been 
written  not  long  after''  the  beginning  of  the  fourth  century. 

2.  Cresconius,  a  learned'  grammarian  among  the  Dona- 
tists, wrote  a  book  against  the  first  part  of  Augustine's  con- 
futation of  Petilian  :  which  Augustine  answered  in  four 
books,  still  extant,  written  in  406. 

3.  Gaudentius,''  bishop  of  Tamugada  in  Numidia.     He 

^  Quae  res  coegit  tunc  primum  adversus  vos  allegari  apud  Vicariura  Serranum 
legem  lUam  de  decern  libris  auri,  quas  nullus  vestruni  adhuc  pendit,  et  nos 
crudelitatis  arguitis.     Contr.  Lit.  Petil.  1.  ii.  c.  83.  n.  184. 

*  Ita  caeci  et  insani,  ut  cum  schismaticos  suos  Maximianistas  per  potestates 
a  catholicis  imperatonbus  missas  de  basilicis  excluserint,  et  vi  magna  jussionem 
et  auxiliorum  cedere  sibi  compulerint,  arguant  catholicam,  si  pro  ea  catholici 
principes  tale  aliquid  fieri  praeceperit.     Contr.  Parm.  1.  i.  c.  10.  n.  16. 

^  Nonne  apud  Hipponem,  ubi  ego  sum,  non  desunt,  qui  meminerint, 
Faustinum  vestrum  regni  sui  tempore  praecipisse,  quoniam  catholicorum  ibi 
paucitas  erat,  ut  nullus  eis  panem  coqueret  ?  &c.  Contr.  Petil.  1.  ii.  c.  83. 
n.  184.  e  Extant  ap.  Baluz.  Misc.  T.  ii.  p.  56,  &c.  et  Optat. 

Milev.  ex  Edit.  Du  Pin.  p.  150,  &c.  "  Vid.  Baluz.  Monitum. 

'  Grammaticus  etiam  quidam  Donatista  Cresconius,  cum  invenisset  epistolam 
meam,  qua  prmias  partes,  quae  in  manus  nostras  tunc  venerant  epistolfe 
Petiliani,  redargui,  putavit  mihi  esse  respondendum,  et  hoc  ipsum  scripsit  ad 
me.     Cui  operiejus  libris  quatuor  respondi.     Retract.  1.  ii.  c.  26. 

■^  Per  idem  tempus  Dulcitius  tribunus  et  notarius  :  hie  erat  exsecutor  impe- 
rialium  jussionum  contra  Donatistas  datarum.  Qui  cum  dedisset  literas  ad 
Gaudentium  Thamugadensem  Donatistam  episcopum,  unum  illorum  septem, 
quos  in  nostra  coUatione  auctores  sude  defensionis  elegerant,  exhortans  eum 
ad  unitatem  catholicam,  et  dissuadens  incendium,  quo  se  ac  suos  cum  ipsa,  in 

qua  erat,  ecclesia  consumere  minabatur. Hie  rescripsit  epistolas  duas, 

unam  brevem aliam  prolixam— Has  mihi  supra  memoratus  tribunus 

existimavit  esse  mittendas,  ut  eas  potius  ipse  refelierem  :  quas  ambas  uno  libro 
redargui.     Qui  cum  in  ejusdem  Gaudentii  pervenisset  manus,  rescripsit  quod 

ei  visum  est,  ad  meipsum. Hinc  factum  est,  uf  hi  nosfri  ad  ilium  duo 

libri  cssent.     Aug.  Retr.  1.  ii.  c.  59.  Conf.  0pp.  T.  ix.  sub  fi.i. 


The  Donatists.  561 

was  one  of  the  seven  Donatist  bisliops,  chosen  to  defend  their 
cause  at  the  conference  at  Carthaj^c  in  411.  Some  time 
after  that  conference,  tlie  tribune  Dulcitius,  who  was  the 
emperor's  commissary  for  executing-  the  imperial  laws  against 
the  Donatists,  sent  an  admonition  to  him,  to  return  to  the 
unity  of  the  catholic  church  ;  which  Gaudentius  answered, 
first  by  a  short,  then  by  a  long  letter.  Dulcitius  having 
sent  those  letters  to  Augustine,  he  answered  tliem  in  one 
book.  Gaudentius  published  a  defence  of  his  letters;  and 
Augustine  replied  in  another,  or  second  book. 

That  is  the  substance  of  what  Augustine  himself  writes. 
By  which  it  appears,  that  Cave's  account  of  this  matter  is 
not  quite  right:  who'  supposeth  Augustine  to  have  written 
three  books  against  Gaudentius. 

Gaudentius  seems  to  have  been  a  man  of  a  violent  temper : 
for™  he  had  formed  a  design  to  set  fire  to  his  church,  and 
therein  to  burn  himself  and  some  others.  The  only  apology 
that  can  be  made  is,  that  the  hard  usage  the  Donatists  met 
with  made  them  desperate,  and  filled  them  with  a  rage,  which 
they  were  not  able  to  govern. 

1  have  placed  Gaudentius  as  flourishing  about  the  year 
411,  the  time  of  the  fore-mentioned  conference;  but  his 
letters  to  Dulcitius,  and  his  answer  to  Augustine's  first  book, 
were  not  written  until  some  good  while  after:  for  Augus- 
tine's vi'ritings  in  this  controversy  are  supposed  to  have  been 
published  about  the  year  420. 

4.  Says  Gennadius,  in  the  chapter  next  following  in  his 
Catalogue  that  of  Vitellius,  to  be  hereafter  transcribed  : 
'  Macrobius"  also,  a  presbyter  among  the  Donatists,  and 
'  afterwards  their  secret  bishop  at  Rome,  whilst  he  was  yet 
'  a  presbyter  of  the  church  of  God,  wrote  one  book  addressed 
'  to  confessors  and  virgins  ;  a  work  of  the  moral  kind,  but 
'  very  useful,  especially   for  preserving  chastity.     He  first 

'  Graudentium,  episcopum  Tamugadensem,  sectae  Donatistae,  qui  Dulcitio 
tribuno,  imperatoris  apud  Africam  legato,  duas  epistolas  apologeticas  obtulit, 
ab  Augustino  totidem  libris  refutatas :  quibus  responsionem  opposuit  Gaudea- 
tius,  ab  Augustino  itidern  libro  tertio  eversam.  Cav.  H.  L.  De  Gaudentio 
Brixiensi. 

■"  Gaudentius, cum  seipsum   in   ecclesia  quibusdam  sibi  adjunctis 

perditis  incendere  rainabatur.  Aug.  Contr.  Gaud.  1.  i.  c.  i.  Vid.  ejusd. 
Retract,  supr.  not.  ''. 

"  Macrobius,  presbyter  et  ipse,  ut  ex  scriptis  Optati  cognovimus,  Donatista, 
et  suorum  postea  in  urbe  Roma  occultus  episcopus  fuit.  Scripsit,  cum  adhuc 
in  ecclesia  Dei  presbyter  fuisset,  ad  confessores  et  ad  virgines  librum  uniim, 
moralis  quidem,  sed  valde  necessarise  doctrinse,  et  prsecipue  ad  custodiendam 
castitatem  aptissimis  valde  sententiis  communitum.  Claruit  inter  nostros 
primum  Africce,  et  inter  sues,  id  est  Donatianos,  sive  Montenses,  postea  Roiuae. 
Gennad.  De  V.  I.  cap.  v. 

VOL.   III.  2    o 


562  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

'  flourished  among'  us  in  Africa,  and  afterwards  among-  the 
'  Donatists,  or  Mountaineers,  at  Rome.' 

JMacrobius  was  the  fourth"  Donatist  bishop,  who  sat  at 
T?ome,  and  was  living-  when  Optatus  of  Milevi  wrote,  about 
370.  Optatus  may  be  relied  upon  for  that.  But  whether 
Gennadius  be  in  the  right  in  saying-,  that  Macrobius  \vas 
first  a  presbyter  among-  the  catholics,  may  be  questioned. 
Nor  is  it  easy  to  form  a  clear  conception  concerning  the  oc- 
casion, which  a  catholic  presbyter  should  have  about  that 
time  to  write  an  exhortation  to  confessors.  Insomuch,  that 
it  may  be  doubted,  whether  Gennadius  did  not  confound 
two  persons  of  this  name.  Tillemonti'  has  good  remarks 
uj)on  this  account   of  Gennadius. 

There  is  still  extant  a  piece  entitled,*!  The  Passion  of 
Maximian  and  Isaac,  Donatists :  which  is  generally  sup- 
posed to  "^  have  been  written  by  the  above-named  Donatist 
bishop  Macrobius,  in  the  year  '348,  or  349. 

5.  Parmenian  succeeded*  Donatus  in  the  see  of  Carthage 
about  the*  year  350.  Not  long  before  the  year  370,  he 
wrote  a  book  or  epistle  against  the  catholics,  which  was 
soon  after  answered  by  Optatus  of  Milevi,  in  a  work  still 
extant. 

Parmenian  afterwards  wrote  another  letter  against"  Ticho- 
nius,  a  Donatist,  who  differed  in  some  things  from  the  rest 
of  his  party.  This  letter  was  answered  by  Augustine  in 
three  books. 

It  does  not  appear  with  certainty  when^  this  letter  of  Par- 
menian was  published  :  but  Augustine's  answer  was  writ- 
ten about  the  year  400,  and  Parmenian  was  then  dead. 
He  seems  however  to  have  lived  to  the  year™  390,  and  the 
Donatist  interest  flourished  greatly  under  him. 

6.  Petilian,  bishop  of  Cirtha,  called  also  Constantina,  in 

"  Ergo  restat,  ut  fateatur  socius  vester  Macrobius  se  ibi  sedere,  ubi  aliquando 
sedit  Encolpius. Optat.  1.  ii.  c.  4. 

p  Les  Donatistes.     Note  21.  ■>  Apud  Du  Pin,  Optat. 

p.  199,  &c.  '  See  Tillem,  Donatistes,  Art.  48. 

'  Noil  enim  Caecilianus  exivit  a  Majorino  avo  tuo.     Optat.  1.  i.  c.  10. 

In  tribus  libris  contra  epistolam  Parmeniani  Donatistarum  Carthaginensis 
episcopi,  successoremqiie  Donati.     Aug.  Retr.  1.  ii.  c.  17. 

Dicant,  unde  natus  est  Majorinus,  aut  Donatus,  ut  per  eos  nasceretur  Par- 
menianus  atque  Primianus.  Aug.  cont.  Pann.  1.  iii.  c.  2.  n.  11.  Vid.  etc.  3. 
n.  18. 

'  Vid.Du  Pin,  Praef.  ad  Optat.  et  Tillem.  Les  Donatistes,  Art.  L.  fin. 

"  Nunc  autem  quoniam  incidit  in  manus  nostras  Parmeniani,  quondam  epis- 
copi eorum,  quaedam  epistola,  quae  scribitur  ad  Tichonium.  Aug.  conlr. 
Parmen.  1.  i.e.  1.  Conf.  Aug.  Ep.  92.  n.  44. 

"  See  Tillem.  Donatistes,  Art.  59. 

"  Id.  ib    Art.  Go 


The  Donatists.  563 

Nimiidia:  who"  formerly  pleaded  at  the  bar  as  an  advocate, 
wrote  a  letter  to  the  Donatist  clerg-y,  which  Augustine  soon 
after  answered >  in  three  hooks.  He  was  one  of  the  seven 
Donatist  bishops,  appointed  to  defend  their  cause  at  the 
famous  conference  at  Carthage. 

7.  Says  Gennadius,  who  wrote  near  the  end  of  the  fifth 
centmy,  '  Tichonius*^  of  Africa,  well  acquainted  with  the 
'  literal  sense  of  scripture,  and  not  ignorant  in  secular  learn- 
'  ing,  and  well  versed  in  ecclesiastical  affairs,  wrote  three 
'  books  concerning-  Intestine  Divisions, an  Exposition  of  se- 
'  veral  Matters,  [or  a  Miscellany,]  in  which  works  he  men- 
'  tions  some  ancient  synods  in  defence  of  his  own  cause. 
'  By  all  w  Inch  it  appears  he  was  of  the  Donatist  party.  He 
'  wrote  also  a  book  of  Seven  Rules  for  attaining*  the  true 
'Meaning  of  Scripture.  He  likewise  wrote  a  Commentary 
*  upon  the  Revelation  of  John,  from  the  beginning-  to  the 
'  end.' 

That  is  a  part  of  Gennadius's  article;  for  the  rest  I  refer 
to  himself. 

Augustine  in  his  answer  to  Parmenian  gives  Tichonius'' 
the  character  of  a  man  of  good  sense,  and  a  great  deal  of 
eloquence.  He  was  a  moderate  Donatist.  But  then  he^  is 
reckoned  inconsistent :  and  he  fell  under  the  displeasure  of 
his  own  party.  Parmenian,  bishop  of  Carthage,  as  we  have 
seen,  wrote  against  him.  Du  Pin  says,  he"^  flourished 
about  the  year  380.  Tillemont's'^  computation  is  not  very 
diflferent.  The  book  of  the  Civil  War,  or  Intestine  Divisions, 
may  be  the  book  referred  to  by  Augustine,  and  against 
which  Parmenian  wrote.  The  Seven  Rules  for  finding-  the 
true  Meaning-  of  Scripture,  are  ^  still  extant. 

8.  '  Vitellius  of  Africa,'  says*^  Gennadius,  '  defending  the 

«  Vid.  Aug.  contr.  Petil.  1.  iii.  c.  16.  y  0pp.  T.  ix. 

'  Tichonius,  natione  Afer,  in  divinis  literis  eruditus,  jiixta  historiam  siiffi- 
cienter,  et  in  seculanbus  non  ignariis  fiiit,  in  ecclesiasticis  quoque  negotiis 
studiosus.  Scripsit  de  bello  intestine  libros  tres,  et  expositiones  diversarum 
causarnm,  in  quibiis  ob  suorum  defensionem  antiquarum  meminitsynodorum. 
E  quibus  omnibus  agnoscitur  Donafionse  partis  fuisse.  Composuitet  Regulas 
ad  invesfigandam  et  inveniendani  intelligentiam  scripturarum  septem,  quas  in 
lino  volumine  conelusit.  Exposuit  et  Apocalypsin  Johannis  ex  integro,  nihil 
in  60  camale,  sed  totum  intelligens  spirituale.     Gennad.  De  V.  I.  c.  18. 

*  incidit  in  manus  nostras  Parmeniani epistola,  quse  scribitiir 

ad  Tichonium,  hominem  quidem  et  acri  ingenio  praeditiim,  et  uberi  eloquio, 
sed  Donatistam.     Aug.  contr.  Farm.  1.  i,  c.  1. 

''  Tichonius — vidit  ecclesiam  Dei  toto  orbe  ditTusam. — Aug.  ibid.  Conf. 
fjusd.  Ep.  93.  c.  X.  n.  43.  ^  Hist.  Donat,  p.  12. 

"*  Les  Donatistes,  Art.  59.  et  note  31, 32.  =  App.  Bib.  PP.  Mex.  T.  vi. 

'  Vitellius  Afer,  Donatianorum  schisma  defendens,  scripsit  de  eo  quod  odio 
sint  mundo  servi  Dei.  In  (juo  si  tacuisset  de  nostro  velut  persecutorum  nomine, 
egr^iam  doctrinam  ediderat.     Scripsit  ct  adversum  gentes,  et  advei-sum  nos 

2  o  2 


564  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  Histortj. 

'  schism  of  the  Donatists,  wrote  a  book,  showing',  that  the 
'  servants  of  God  are  hated  by  the  w oild.  In  which,  if  he 
'  had  not  treated  us  as  persecutors,  he  delivered  an  excellent 
'  doctrine.  He  also  wrote  against  the  Gentiles,  and  against 
'  us,  as  traitors  of  the  divine  scriptures  in  the  persecution. 
'  He  likewise  wrote  several  other  books,  relating  to  eccle- 
'  siastical  discipline.  He  flourished  under  Constans,  son  of 
'  the  emperor  Constantine;'  that  is,  as  Cave  computes,  about 
the  year  344. 

As  Gennadius's  is  the  only  account  we  have  of  this  au- 
thor, and  none  of  his  writings  remain,  nothing*  farther  can 
be  added.  We  may  however  conclude  from  hence,  that  the 
Donatists  were  not  concerned  for  the  interests  of  their  own 
party  only  :  but  employed  themselves  likewise  in  the  defence 
of  the  common  cause  of  Christianity  against  its  enemies. 

IV.  The  Donatists  used  the  same  scriptures  that  other 
christians  did  :  as  is  often  owned  by  their  catholic  adver- 
saries, s^Optatus  and  ''Augustine. 

1.  That  they  received  all  the  several  parts  of  the  Old  and 
New  Testament,  appears  from  St.'  Augustine's  enumeration 
of  them  in  his  arguments  with  these  people. 

velut  traditores,  in  persecutione,  divinarum  scripturanim.  Et  ad  regiilam 
ecclesiasticam  pertinentia  multa  disseruit.  Claruit  sub  Constante,  filio  Con- 
stantini  principis.     Gennad.  cap.  iv. 

8  Cum  constet  merito,  quia  nobis  et  vobis  ecclesiastica  una  est  conversatio — 
Denique  possumus  et  nos  dicere :  Pares  credimus,  et  uno  sigillo  signati  sumus, 
nee  aliter  baptizati  quam  vos.  Testamentum  divinum  Itgimus  pariter.  Optat. 
I.  iii.  c.  9. 

Denique  et  apud  vos  et  apud  nos  una  est  ecclesiastica  conversatio,  communes 
lecliones,  eadem  fides. — Id.  1.  v.  c.  1.  fin. 

^  Proferte  certe  aliquam  de  scripturis  canonicis,  quarum  nobis  est  communis 
auctoritas,  ab  haerelicis  venientem  denuo  baptizatum.  Aug.  contr.  Crescon. 
1.  1.  c.  31.  n.  37. 

In  scripturis  discimus  Christum :  in  scripturis  discimus  ecclesiam.  Has 
scripturas  communiter  habemus.     Ep.  105.  [al.  166.]  c.  4.  n.  14. 

Isti  autem  fratres  utriusque  testamenti  auctoritate  devincti  sunt.  Ep.  129. 
n.  3. 

'  Non  invidemus  alicui.  Legite  nobis  hoc  de  lege,  de  prophetis,  de 
Psalmis,  de  ipso  evangelio,  de  apostolicis  literis.  Legimus,  et  credimus. 
Aug.  de  Unit.  Ecc.  cap.  6.  n.  11. 

Ut  ergo  non  commemorem  gentes,  quae  post  apostolorum  tempora  credi- 
derunt,  et  accesserunt  ecclesiae :  illae  ipsae  solae,  quas  in  Sanctis  literis,  in 
Actibus,  et  epistolis  Apostolorum,  et  Apocalypsi  Johannis  invenimus ;  quas 
utrique  amplectimur,  et  quibus  utrique  subdimur,  &c.  lb.  c.  12.  n.  31. 

Sed  in  praescripto  legis,  in  prophetarum  praedictis,  in  Psalmorum  cantibus, 
in  ipsius  Pastoris  vocibus,  in  cvaiigclistarum  pra?dicationibus  et  laboribus,  hoc 
est  in  omnibus  sanctorum  librorum  auctoritatibus.     lb.  c.  18.  n.  47. 

Quas  utique  scripturas,  nisi  canonicas  legis  et  prophetarum  ?  Hue  accesse- 
runt evangelia,  apostolicse  epistolse,  Actus  Apostolorum,  Apocalypsis  Joannis. 
lb.  c.  19.  n.  51. 


TlIK    DONATISTS.  565 

2.  There  can  be  no  question  therefore,  but  they  received 
all  those  books  in  particular,  which  were  generally  re- 
ceived. 

3.  The  book  of  the  Acts  is  largely  quoted  by"^  Petilian, 
and'  Tichonius. 

4.  1  cannot  say,  whether  they  received  the  epistle  to  the 
Hebrews.  Tichonius  has  the  words'"  of  Ileb.  x.  '38,  "  The 
just  shall  live  by  faith  ;"  but  he  seems  to  consider  them  as 
the  prophet  Ilabakkuk's. 

5.  They  plainly  received  the  Revelation  of  St.  John. 
Augustine  frequently"  (|uotes  it  in  his  arguments  with  them. 
It  is  also  cited  by  the"  anonymous  author  of  the  Acts  of 
Saturninus  and  others.  TichoniusP  the  Donatist  wrote  a 
Commentary  upon  the  whole  book,  as  we  before  saw  in  his 
article  from  Gennadius. 

Augustine  bears  witness  to  them,  thati  they  had  the  like 
respect  for  the  scriptures  that  the  catholics  had,  and  were 
not  unwilling  to  be  determined  by  them. 

Moreover,  their  respect  for  the  divine  scriptures  was  ma- 
nifest, in  their  aversion  for  all  those  who  had  betrayed  them, 
or  were  supposed  to  have  done  so. 

Quod  non  de  lege,  non  de  propheta,  non  de  Psalmo,  non  de  apostolo,  non 
deevangelio, recitatis.     Ep.  105.  [al.  166.]  c.   1.  n.  2. 

''  Sed  ut  haec  ab  apostolis  praeluceant,  eorum  Actibus  edoceraur.  Petilian. 
ap.  Aug.  contr.  Lit.  Pet.  1.  ii.  c.  37.  n.  85.  Vid.  ib.  c.  20.  n.  44.  et  c.  21.  n.  47. 

'  Tichon.  Reg.  iii.  p.  52.  Bib.  PP.  T.  6. 

■"  Quoraodo  autem  ex  lege  nemo  justificatur  apud  Deum  ;  Justus  autem  ex 
fide  vivit.  [Conf.  Gal.  iii.  1 1.]  Ostendit  praeterea,  dictum  esse  per  prophetam, 
ex  fide  vivit.     Tich.  Reg.  iii.  ap.  Bib.  PP.  T.  vi.  p.  52.  F. 

"  Nam  populos  significari  aliquando  vocabulo  aquarum,  legant  in  Apoca- 
lypsi. — Sic  enira  dicitur  Joanni. — Aug.  contr.  Ep.  Parmen.  1.  ii.  c.  10.  n.  22. 
Vid.  ib.  n.  20.  Et  conf.  Aug.  contr.  Crescon.  1.  iii.  c.  66.  n.  75.  et  c.  67. 
n.  77.  °  Et  banc  sententiam  suam  Sancti  SpiritAs  auctoritate 

conscriptam  tali  comparatione  firmabant.  Scriptum  est,  inquiunt,  in  Apoca- 
lypsi. Acta  Saturnin.  &c.  cap.  18. 

P  Exposuit  et  Apocalypsin  ex  integro.     Gennad.  De  V.  I.  cap.  18. 

''  Sed,  ut  dicere  ccEperam,  non  audiamus  :  Haec  dicis,  haec  dico.  Sed  audia- 
mus  :  Haec  dicit  Dominus.  Sunt  certe  libri  dominici,  quorum  auctoritatibus 
utrique  consentimus,  utrique  cedimus,  utrique  servimus.  De  Unit.  Ec.  c.  3. 
c.  5. 

Sileant  humanarum  contentionum  animosa  et  perniciosa  certamina.  Incli- 
ncmus  aurem  verbo  Dei.  ib.  c.  7.  n.  15. 


566  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

CHAP.  LXVIII. 

ALEXANDER,  BISHOP  OF  ALEXANDRIA. 


I.  His  history  and  ivorks.     II.  His  testimony  to  the 

scriptures. 

1.  ALEXANDER,  bishop  of  Alexandria,  succeed€d* 
Achillas  in  the  year  312,  or  313.  In  iiis  time  arose  the 
Arian  controversy,  which  made  so  mucl;  noise  in  the  world. 
He  was  present  at  the  council  of  Nice  in  325,  and  died  at 
Alexandria,  before  the  end  of  that  year,  or  some  time  in 
326,  within  five  months''  after  the  breaking  up  of  the  coun- 
cil, or"^  after  his  return  home  from  it. 

By  Theodorethe  is  called*^  the  great  Alexander,  and^  an 
excellent  defender  of  the  evangelical  doctrine. 

It  is  not  known  that  Alexander  wrote  any  thing  beside 
epistles,  sent  to  bishops  in  several  parts  of  the  world  ;  which, 
as  ^  Epiphanius  says,  were  in  number  almost  seventy,  and 
were  extant  in  his  time  in  the  hands  of  the  curious.  Socra- 
tes says,  thats  great  numbers  of  epistles  having  been  written 
by  many,  sent  chiefly  to  the  bishop  of  Alexandria,  collections 
were  made  of  them  ;  one  by  Arius,  of  those  favouring  him, 
another  by  Alexander,  on  the  contrary  side.  It  is  probable, 
that'^  each  collection  contained  the  letters  written  by  them- 

»  Vid.  Cav.  Hist.  Lit.  et  Pagi  Crit.  in  Baron.  Ann.  311.  n.  25. 

''  Alexander  quinto  post  synodum  habitaiii  mense  obiit,  exeunte  anno  325, 
vcl  menjEe  primo  insequentis  anni.     Cav.  ib.  in  Alexandre. 

<=  Quo  pacto  Alexander  in  suam  ecclesiam  initio  hiemis  pervenit,  et  die  16 
Aprilis  defunctus  est.  Qu3e  Athanasii  laudati  sententia  fuisse  videtur.  Haec 
enim  ejus  verba :  Outtw  ^£  Trtvre  fir/veg  Tranr]\9ov,  Kai  b  fitv  fiaKapiTriQ  AXt'iav- 
^poe  TtTi\ivTr]KtV  id  est,  nondum  quinque  meases  (scilicet  ab  adventu  Alex- 
andri  in  ecclesiam  suam)  praeterierant,  cum  Alexander  mortem  obiit.  Pagi  ib. 
An,  326.  n.  3.  Conf.  Ap.  d.  contr.  Arian.  n.  59.  p.  178.  et  Thdrt  1.  i.  c.  26. 

^  Ha?r.  Fab.  1.  iv.  n.  1.  p.  232.  et  n.  7.  p.  239. 

•=   AXi^av^Qog   6    ytwaioc    twv    ivayyikiKuv    Soyftartov    ytvofitvog 

■KponaxoQ.     Id.  H.  E.  1.  i.  c.  2.  p.  7. 

^  u)Q  Tov  apiOfiov  ificoiir]KovTa.  Epiph.  H.  69.  n.  4. 

^  OiiTojg  fvavTiiov  yna/ifiaTOJV  Trpog  tov  imrtKOTZov  AX^av^ptiag  TTtftirofiivuv 
VEiroijjvTai  To)v  tTriroXtJv  thtojv  avvaywyag,  Aptiog  fxtv  twv  virip  avrs,  AXi^- 
avS(io:  £t  rwv  ivavnwv.     Socr.  1.  i.  c.  6.  f. 

^  Non  omittendum,  quod  Socrates  narrat,  Arivira  collectionem  fecisse  epis- 
tolarum  causee  suae  f'aventium,  in  qiiibus  non  dubium  est  etiam  Arii  ipsius  epis- 
tolas  incertas  fuisse.     Fabric.  Bib.  Gr.  T.  8.  p.  309.  Vid.  et  p.  340. 


Alexander,  Bishop  of  Jkxundria.     A.  D.  313.         567 

selves,  as  well  as  by  others  in  their  favour.  But,  as  may 
be  argued  frotn  the  words  of  Socrates,  and  is  farther  evident 
from'  .Sozotncii,  each  collection  consisted  of  letters  written 
on  one  side  only. 

Of  all  those  epistles  of  Alexander  there  now  remain  two 
only,  one  in  Socrates,  to''  the  bishops  of  the  catholic  church 
throughout  the  world  :  the  other  in'  Theodoret,  to  Alexan- 
der bishop  of  Byzantium,  with'"  fragments  of  some  others. 
The  time  of  writing*  those  two  letters  will  be  shown  more 
particularly  at  the  i)eginning  of  the  next  chapter. 

It  must  bo  owned  that  Alexander  expresseth  himself  with 
much  warmth,  if  not  with  bitterness  of  spirit. 

He  calls  Arius  and  his  followers"  apostates,  and "^  enemies 
of  Christ,  andf  impious.  He  says'i  they  had  done  their 
utmost  to  exceed  all  past  heresies,  and  approach  nearer  to 
Antichrist. 

H.  All  the  farther  account  which  T  shall  give  of  those  two 
letters  will  relate  to  the  holy  scriptures. 

1.  It  is  observable,  that  several  books  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment, particularly  St.  Paul's  epistles,  are  here  frequently 
quoted. 

2.  St.  John's  g-ospel  is  largely  and  expressly  quoted. 
*  John"^  the  evangelist :  John''  in  his  gospel :  the'  most  excel- 
lent John.' 

3.  Alexander  received  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews  as 
Paul's.  '  As"  the  apostle  says,  Jesus  Christ,  the^  same  yes- 
terday, to-day,  and  for  ever;  and  what  reason  have  they  to 
say  that  he  was  made  for  us,  when  Paul  m  rites,  "  for'' 
whom  are  all  things,  and  by  whom  are  all  things."  '     Again, 

'    ffvvaywyrjv  iiroir\(iavTO  rwv  vTrtp  Tr)<;  oiKuaq  acp«(7£wc  <pepofitvu}v 

tiriroXiov,  Kai  rag  tvavTiaQ  irapiKafiov.      Sozoin.  1.  i.  c.  1.  p.  402.  A. 

^   Tote  ayaTTijroig avWuTupyoiQ  roig  cnravraxa  Ttjg  KaOoXiKrjg  ikkXt]- 

mag.     Socr.  1.  i.  c.  6.  p.  10.  A.  '  Ap.  Thdrt.  1.  i.  c.  4. 

'"  Vid.  Const.  Ap.  1.  viii.  c.  28.  in  notis :  et  Fabric.  Bib.  Gr.  T.  viii.  p.  341. 
et  S.  Maxim.  Confess.  T.  ii.  p.  152,  155.  Conf.  Car.  H.  L.  in  Aiexandro. 

"  EKt]\9ov  vvv  avSptg  Trapai'ofioi  Kai  ^^pi^-o/iaxot,  SiSatricovTfg  airoracriav. 
Ap.  Socr.  1.  i.  c.  6.  p.  10.  A.  B. 

'Evatf3iog — TrpoiVarat  kcu  rurwv  rsv  airoTarwv.  ib.  B. 

°    "AjraS  yap  7rpo0£^troi  i^pj<ro/iax««v.   p.  112.  B. 

P   <pa<nv  01  aXa'^oatg.  ap. 'I'll.  p.  10.  D.  i  — t5iKai(0(Tav 

i%,  lavrwv  SKeivag,  o)g  iyyvrtpoi  r«  airi^^pi?**  ycvojiivoi.   p.  12.  D. 

■■  — IwavvTjg  tvayytXiTtjg-  k.X.  Ap.  Thdret.  1.  i.  c.  4.  p.  11. 

'  Tic  aKnojv  lioavvs  Xtyovrog — ;  t]  rig  aKawv  iv  tij)  ivayyiki(^ —  ;  Ap. 
Socr.  1.  i.e.  6.  p.  ll.C.  D. 

'    "O  ivXafii-^arog  lojavvtjg.  Ap.  Theod.  p.  12.  A. 

"  AX\'  ujg  a-TToroXog'  I»;(T«c  Xpi^oc  x^^C  xai  ffijutpov  avrog,  km  iig  rug 
atwvug'  Ti  Si  apa  utruv  avrag  tiTHisiv,  on  Si  r'/iiag  ytyovt,  koitoi  th  lIaiA<* 
ypa(poi>Tog,  St   ov  ra  irav-a  Kai  Si  «  to  vavra ;  ap.  Socr.  p.  12.  B. 

"  Heb  xiii.  8,  "   Heb.  ii.  10. 


568  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

having  cited  various  texts,  lie  adds,  '  Agreeably''  to  these 
speaks  the  most  eloquent  Paul,  saying-,  "  Wliomy  he  has 
appointed  heir  of  all  things,  by  whom  also  he  made  the 
worlds."  '     In  another  place^  he  has  words  of  Heb.  i.  3. 

4.  He  quotes   the    second    epistle  of  St.  John,  ver.  10. 

'  For"  it  becometh  us  as  christians, "  not  to  say  to  such  : 

God  speed,  lest  we  be  partakers  of  their  sins,"  as  the 
blessed  John  directs.' 

5.  I  shall  add  some  things,  showing  his  respect  for  the 
scriptures,  and  the  general  divisions  then  in  use. 

(1.)  He  calls  them*^  divine  scriptures.  He  ever  asserts 
his  own  opinion  upon*^  the  ground  of  their  authority,  and'^ 
chargeth  his  adversaries  with  opposing  and  contradicting  the 
same  divine  scriptures.  The  doctrines  which  he  maintains 
to  be  true,  he  says,  are  apostolical,  which*=  we  teach  and 
preach,  and  for  which  we  are  ready  to  die. 

(2.)  Other  passages  to  the  like  purpose  are  such  as  these: 
'  We'  believe  in  one  only  unbegotten  Father,  giver  of  the 
law,  and  the  prophets,  and  the  gospels,  Lord  of  the  patri- 
archs, and  apostles,  and  all  holy  men.'  Afterwards,  '  We^ 
also  confess,  as  the  divine  scriptures  teach,  one  Holy  Spirit, 
who  renewed  both  the  holy  men  of  the  Old  Testament,  and 
the  divine  teachers  of  that  which  is  called  the  New.'  He 
thinks  that''  the  hypostasis  of  the  Son,  may  be  above  the 
comprehension  of  evangelists,  and  even  of  angels.  Having 
cited  some  texts  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  St.  Paul's  epis- 
tles, he  proceeds,  '  And'  in  the  gospel  it  is  written.' 

(3.)  I  have  not  observed  in  Alexander  quotations  of  any 
books,  beside  (hose  of  the  Old  and  the  New  Testament.  But 
representing  in  strong  terms  the  perverseness  of  his  adver- 

"  "SiViKpiova  ynv  ruToig  j3oa  (cat  6  jityaXocpMVoraTog  IlavXog,  (pacTKWv  irepi 
avm'  ov  t9r]Kf  K\i]povo^ov  iravTwy.  a.  \.  ap.  Theod.  p.  13.  B. 

y   Hebr.  i.  2.  "  — airavyaana  yap  iti  rriq  So^rig,  Kai  xcipi^i'''''>}p 

TTjc  iraTpiKijQ  viroTaasMQ.  ap.  Th.  p.  17.  D.  vid.  et  Socr.  p.  12.  D. 

^  — Kai  fii\  Se  Kq.v  %rttp£tv  roig  TOiHTOig  Xiyiiv,  tva  fir)  ttote  kuc  raig  afiaprtaig 
avTMV  Koivojvoi  ytvujfitdat  w'c  TrapriyytiXtp  6  jiaKapiog  loiavvrjg.  ap.  Socr. 
p.  13.  C.  ''   BvToXtjg  re  ^aijg  tv  raig  Sreiaig  ypafaig.  ap.  Socr. 

p.  10.  A.  et  passim.  '^   Kai  ravra  Xtyovng,  Kai  avuTrrvffffovTtg 

rar  Srtiag  ypa(pag,  TToXXaKig  averpeipanev  uvrng.  ap.  Socr.  p.  12.  C. 

■^  Uota  Se  TTapa  Tag  ypa(pag  ((ptvpovrsg  XaXscriv,  tTi  ravra.  Ap.  Soc.  p.  10. 
D.  rag  ^tiag — avvavaipsvrtg  ypaipag.  ap.  i^h.  p.  10.  D.  Kai  raig  ypa(paig  (ynra- 
poivHvrtg.   ib.  p.  11.  B.  ^   Tavra  SiSarrKOntv,  ravra  Ktjpva- 

aofiiv,  ravra  rrig  tKKXrjaiag  ra  UTroToXiKa  ^oyfiaray  VTvtp  lov  Kai  aTro9vt]<TKoixev. 
Ap.  Til.  p.   19.  A.  B.  ^  No/j8  Kai  ■Kpo(l>r]Tuiv  Kai  ivayytXiov  Sor7]pa, 

Trarpiapxi^v  Kai  arroToXiov  Kai  dnavrwv  ayiwv  Kvpiov.     Ap.  Th.  p.  1 7.  A.  B. 

*  KaOti)g  I'lfiag  ai  Btiai  ypa(pai  SiSaaKnmv,  iv  Trvevfia  ayiov'  ofioXoysniv,  to 
Kaivirrav  rag  rt  rrjg  iraXaiag  SiaOtjKrigayiHg  avOpdiTThg,  Kai  rsg  ri}g  i^f);jjita7"i?«iTr/c 
Kaivrjg  rraiSivrag  SretHg.   Ib.  p.  18.  C.  D. 

*"  lb.  p.  12.  B.  Conf.  p.  17.  C.  '  Evdt  ry  ivayytXiifi.  ib.  p.  14.  B. 


Arius,  and  his  Followers.     A.  D.  316.  569 

saries.  Alius  and  lii;^  adherents,  lie  says:  '  They''  have  no 
'  regard  to  the  wisdom  and  piety  of  ancient  writin<>s,  nor  to 
'  the  iinaniinoiis  consent  ofour  colleaj>iies  in  the  doctrine  con- 
'  cerning-  Clirist.'  Jiy  ancient  writings,  1  suppose  he  means 
those  of  early  christians,  near  the  days  of  the  apostles  :  for 
which  he  seems  to  have  had,  and  justly,  a  high  respect.  Ne- 
vertheless they  were  not  esteemed  decisive,  and  of  authority  in 
matters  of  religion.  If  they  had  been  so,  they  would  have 
beeu  frequently  quoted  by  him. 


CHAP.  LXIX. 

ARIUS,  AND  HIS  FOLLOWERS. 


I.  His  history.  II.  His  toorks.  III.  His  character.  IV. 
The  rise  and  occasion  of  the  Avian  controversy.  V. 
The  opinions  of  Arius  and  his  foUoicers.  VI.  Divisions 
amony  them,  and  their  nvmerons  councils  and  creeds.  VII. 
Their  want  of  moderation.  VIII.  Their  testimony  to  the 
scriptures.  IX.  Arian  writers  :  1.  Acacins.  2.  Aetius. 
3.  Anonymous  author  of  a  Commentary  upon  the  Book 
of  Job.  4.  Another  author  of  a  Discourse  in  Auyustine. 
5.  Asterius.  6.  Basil  of  Anchyra.  7.  Munomius.  8. 
Eusehius  of  Emesa.  9.  Ensehius  of  Nicomedia.  10. 
Euzoius.  11.  George  of  Laodicea.  12.  Lucius.  13. 
Maximin.  14.  Philostoryius.  15.  Sabinus.  l(j.  Theo- 
dore, bishop  of  Heraclea.     17.  Ulphilas. 

I.  THE  history  of  the  y\rian  controversy  may  be  learned 
not  only  from  Eusehius,  Socrates,  and  Sozomen,  and  other 
ecclesiastical  historians,  but  likewise  from  Arius  himself, 
Alexander,  and  Athanasius,  principals  in  the  debate. 

It  began,  as  some  think,  in  the  year*  316,  others  about"' 
319 :  whereas''  Baronius  placed  it  as  early  as  315,  agreeably 
to'^  Orosius,  as  he  thought.     But''  Basnage  and  others  say, 

^  Ov  KaryStffev  avrag  /;  rwv  apxaiwv  y^aiptitv  (piKoQeog  (ja<pr\vua'  aSe  ri  rtov 
(TiiXXftrapywv  avfKpwvog  Tnpi  XpiTS  ivXaPtia.  lb.  p.  16.  C.  Vid.  ib.  B. 

^  Fabr.  Bib.  Gr.  T.  viii.  p.  308.  "  TiUem.  T.  vi.  Les  Ariens. 

Art.  2.  et  Note  i.  '  A.  315.  n.  20. 

•»  L.  vii.  c.  28.  '  A.  317.  n.  v.  Conf.  eund.  A.  351. 

n.  ix.  et  Pagi  ann.  315.  n.  vi.  vii. 


570  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

that  the  beginning'  of  Arianism  is  put  by  that  author  in  317. 
Cave  likewise  thinks,  that  Ariiis  was  not  known '^  as  an  here- 
siarch,  until  after  315,  though  he  speaks  of  him  as  flourish- 
ing- about  that  year.  Barnard  de  Varenne  S'ays,  that^  Arius 
did  not  open  himself  fully,  till  the  year  319,  when  he  knew 
that  he  had  several  bishops  and  presbyters  on  his  side. 

Epiphanius  informs  us,  it  was  said,  that'*  Arius  was  a  na- 
tive of  Libya :  he  does  not  speak  positively.  Constantine 
seems  to  mean  Alexandria,  when  he  speaks  of'  sending  back 
Arius  to  his  own  country.  It  is  now  commonly  said,  that 
his  father's  name  was  Ammonius  :  and  indeed,  Arius  sent 
his  letter  to  Eusebius  of  Nicomedia  by  one*"  Ammonius, 
whom  he  calls  father.  But  in  what  sense  he  useth  the 
word,  may  be  questioned,  as  has  been  already  observed  by 
'  Basnage. 

Sozomen  says,  that"*  Arius  was  made  deacon  by  Peter, 
but  was  afterwards  excommunicated  by  the  same  bishop, 
for  not  approving  of  his  treatment  of  Meletius  and  his  adhe- 
rents. When  Peter  had  sufl'ered  martyrdom,  Achillas  not 
only  forgave  Arius,  and  admitted  him  deacon  again,  but 
ordained  him  presbyter.  After  whose  death,"  he  was  also  for 
a  time  much  esteemed  by  Alexander. 

It  is  universally  agreed,  that  Arius  was  presbyter  of 
Alexandria,  and"  officiated  in  a  church  of  that  city.  Theo- 
doret  says,  heP  was  intrusted  with  the  interpretation  of  the 
sacred  scriptures,  whether  Theodoret  thereby  means,  as 
catechist,  or  only  as  preacher  in  the  church  allotted  to  him, 
is  not'i  certain.  For  it  seems  to  me,  that  there  is  no  good 
reason  to  conclude  from  these  expressions  of  Theodoret,  that 
Arius  had  the  office  of  catechist  at  Alexandria. 

Arius's  particular  opinions  being  known,  and  spreading* 
considerably,  Alexander  convened  a  council  at  Alexandria  : 
in  which  Arius  and  divers  others  were^  excommunicated,  as 

'  Ccepitque,  ut  volunt,  ab  anno  315,  lanquam  haeresiarcha,  innotescere ; 
quod  famen  paulo  serins  mihi  contigisse  videtur,  paucis  ante  synodum  Nicsenam 
annis.  Cav.  H.  L.  in  Ario. 

8  Histoire  de  Constantin.  1.  v.  p.  207.  a  Paris.  1 728. 

*"   (pamv  Se  avrov  Ki^vv  rtj)  y(vu.  Epiph.  H.  6.  9.  n.  69. 

'   tTTi  rjjj/  irarpida  n(piK((j6ai  Svvr]Qt}Q.  ap.  Socr.  1.  i.  c.  25.  p.  61.  B. 

^  Ap.  Epiph.  H.  69.  n.  6.  '  Sed  ambigiuim  patris  nomen, 

quod  episcopis  ef iani  iVequentissimedebatur,  in  incerto  ponit,  naturane  an  dig- 
nitale  pater  Arii  vocetur  Ammonius.     Basn.  A.  318.  n.  v. 

'"   Soz.  1.  i.  c.  15.  p.  426.  A.  B.  "   yura  Se  tuvtu  icai 

AXiKavSpog  EV  Tifiy  Hxtv  avrov.  Soz.  ib.  B. 

"  Vid.  Ilpiph.  II.  69.  n.i. 

P  ApHog  T<,)  fitv  KaraXoyqi  rwv  TrptrrPuTtpiov  tvTdrayyiivoq,  Trjv  St  tuv  Btiuv 
ypai^Mv  TrtTTiTfw/xtvor  tir)yi]<yiv.  Thdrt.  I.  i.  c.  2.  p.  7. 

•1  Vid.  Tillem.  Les  Arions,  Art.  2.  sub  in.  '  Km  awtdptov 


Arius,  and   his  Followers.     A.   D.  31G.  571 

Socrates  says.  To  the  like  purpose  Alexander  himself,^  in 
liis  epistle  to  Alexander  bishop  of  Byzantium,  afterwards 
called  Constantinople.  Sozonien  says,  that*  Alexander 
excommunicated  Arius  and  the  clergy  that  followed  him. 

This  sentence  was  passed  upon  Arius,  as"  Tillemont 
thinks,  in  319  or  320,  or  as  other  learned'  men,  in  320  or 
321.  It  appears  to  me  very  difficult  to  determine  the  year 
with  certainty. 

Jt  ought  to  be  observed,  that  about  the  year  319,  or  in 
some  short  time  after,  two  synods  were  held  at  Alexandria. 
After  the  former  of  which  Alexander  wrote  his  letter  to  his 
namesake  at  Constantinople;  after  the  latter,  at  which  were 
present  almost"  a  hundred  bishops  of  Egypt  and  Libya,  he 
wrote  the  letter  to  the  bishops  of  the  catholic  church  in  all 
places.  There  seems  not  to  have  been  any  long-  space  of 
time  between  those  two  syno<ls:  and  both  these  letters  of 
Alexander  were  written  a  good  while  before  Constantine's 
letter  to  the  same  Alexander  and  Arius,  which  was  not 
written  before  the  year  324.     Sn^  Pagi,  and  others. 

Whenever  these  things  were  done,  Arius,  in  his  letter  to 
Eusebius  of  Nicomedia,  complains  heavily  of  the  hard  treat- 
ment given  him  by  his  bishop.  He  says,  he  was^  unjustly 
j)ersecuted  by  Alexander  for  the  truth's  sake:  and  that  he'^ 
and  his  brethren  were  expelled  the  city,  as  impious,  for  not 
assenting-  to  the  doctrine  taught  by  him.  Epiphanius,  too, 
expressly  says,  that^  Arius  and  they  Avho  adhered  to  him, 
were  expelled  both  the  church  and  the  city. 

Arius  being-  expelled  from  Alexandria,  went''  into  Pales- 
tine, to  strengthen  his  interest.  Indeed,  there  were  many 
who  favoured  him  and  his  cause.  Epiphanius  says,  it  was 
reported,  tUat"  he  drew  over  to  his  party  seven  hundred 
virgins  consecrated  to  God,  seven  presbyters,  twelve  deacons, 
and  some  bishops.     This  great  increase,  or  a  large  part  of 

iroWiov  iiriaKoviDV  KaOiaag  top  /lev  Aptiov,  Kai  tuq  fiiv  aTro^exoniPii(;  rijv 
So^av  avTs,  KaOaipei.     Socr.  1.  i.  c.  6.  p.  9.  D. 

*  7raix\p)]<p(i  TTJQ  irpoaKvvaarjQ  XptTS  Tr]v  Btorr^Tci  (KKXrimag  i^i]K.aaaiuv. 

Ap.  Thdrt.  1.  i.  c.  4.  p.  Id.  A.  Vid.  et  p.  19.  B. 

'  -^mrtKTjpvKf  Ti)Q  (KK\r]<nag  avrov  rt  Kai  rug  avinrparrovTag  avrtf)  Tnpt 
Soyjia  KXiipiKng.     Soz.  1.  i.  c.  15.  p.  427.  A. 

"  Les  Ariens,  Art.  3.  et  note  i.  '  Vid.  Pagi  Ann.  315.  n. 

vi.  vii.  viii.  Basnage,  3-21.  n.  ix.  *  Ap.  Socr.  1.  i.  c.  6.  p.  11.  C. 

"  A.  315.  n.  viii.  Conf.  Vales.  Annot.  ad  Thdrt.  1.  i.  c.  4.  et  Basnag.  ann. 
324.  n.  XX.  y  6  tuoKonevog  vtto  AXt^avSpn  nana  aSixojg  Sia— 

aXtjOiiav.  ap.  Epiph.  II.  G9.  n.  G.  in, 

^  — Kai  Trap  kukov  kivii  kuQ'  t'lfiujv — wtj  tKdico^ai  vfiag  tic  Tr}g  TToXfwg,  <og 
avOpujiTHg  aOtng.  ib.  p.  731.  B.  ^  — i^toi  avrov  rrjg  iKicXjiinac, 

Kai  eKKiipvKTov  TTotii  IV  Ttj  TToXii.     H.  G9.  n.  iii.  p.  729.  D. 

''  Epiph.  ib.  n.  iv.  in.  ^  H.  69.  n.  iii.  in. 


572  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  Hisloiy. 

it,  Epiphanius  plainly  supposes  to  have  been  made  before 
Arius  was  excommunicated.  For  he  says,  that  Alexander 
having-  summoned  his  presbyters,  and  some  bishops,  and 
strictly  examining  the  matter,  when  Arius  refused  to  own 
the  truth,  he  was  expelled  the  church  and  city  :  and''  with 
him  were  excommunicated  the  virgins  and  the  clergy  above- 
mentioned,  and  a  great  number  of  people.  Alexander,  in  his 
letter  to  his  namesake  of  Byzantium,  which  we  have  in  Theo- 
doret,  speaks  as  if  there*^  were  many  women  at  Alexandria 
who  sided  with  Arius:  and  their  zeal  is  represented  by  him  as 
very  great;  though  afterwards,  to  diminish  their  credit,  as 
it  seems,  he  speaks  of  the  women  that  had  been  deceived,  as*^ 
few,  or  inconsiderable.  He  owns  likewise  that  Arius  and 
his  friends  boasted  of  having^  bishops  on  their  side.  Alex- 
ander complains  also  of'  three  bishops  of  Syria,  who  coun- 
tenanced them :  meaning  Eusebius  of  Caesarea,  Theodotus 
of  Laodicea,  and  Paulinus  of  Tyre.  And  at  the  end  of  that 
letter,  he  mentions  by  name'  ten  presbyters  and  deacons  at 
Alexandria,  who  had  been  anathematized  by  him  as  he- 
retics. 

In  the  letter  to  the  bishops  of  the  catholic  church,  pre- 
served in''  Socrates,  Alexander  complains  of  Eusebius  of 
Nicomedia,  for  patronizing  Arius.  And  moreover  mentions 
twelve  presbyters  and  deacons  at  Alexandria,  and  two 
bishops  of  that  country,  who  were  of  that  party.  Their 
names  are,  Arius,  Achillas,  Aithales,  Carponas,  another 
Arius,  Sarmates,  Euzoius,  Lucius,  Julian,  Menas,  Helladius, 
Gaius:  the  bishops  are  Secundus  and  Theonas. 

Arius,  in  his  letter  to'  Eusebius  of  Nicomedia,  mentions 
Eusebius  of  Csesarea,  Theodotus,  Paulinus,  Athanasius, 
Gregory,  and  Aetius  by  name  :  and  refers  in  general  to  other 
bishops  of  the  east,  who  had  been  anathematized  by  Alex- 
ander, for  teaching  the  same  doctrine  that  he  did.  And  in- 
timates, that  none  of  the  bishops  of  the  east  had  escaped  that 
censure,  except  Philogonius,  Hellanicus,  andJMacarius.  The 
places  where  all  these  were  bishops,  are  afterwards  particu- 
larly shown  by  Theodoret. 

Socrates  observes,  that"'    the  evil,  which  began  at  Alex- 

^  — aw  avTif)  Se  aTrecTraaOrjcrav  a'l  ■jrpoetptJiKvai  Trapdtvtvaaai,  Kai  KXypiKoi 
01  irpoeiprifjitvi'i,  kui  o)(\oq  aWor;  ttoXvc-  ib.  ad  fin. 

'  — Si  ivTV)(iaQ  yvvaiKapiuiv  utuktiov  a  T/Trarjjffav" — ek  th  irtpi  rpo^aZtiv 
Ttaaav  ayviav  aatfivwQ  raq  Trap'  avToiQ  vtwripaQ.  ap.  Thdrt.  p.  9.  D. 

^  TjTTaTrjftiva  oKiya  yvvuiKcipia.    ib.  p.  19.  C. 

''  —lug  av  avnxf/r)ips(;  avTOig  Kat  o/iofpavaQ  txcvreg  ETTiffKoirng.   ib.  p.  10.  B. 

"  lb  p.  15.  C.  •  Ib.  p.  20. 

^  Vid.  Socr.  i.  c.  G.  p.  10. 

'  A  p.  Thdret.  1.  i.  c.  v.  p.  21.  A.  "  L.  i.  c.  6.  in. 


Arius,  aivl  his  Follmuers.     A.  D.   316.  573 

amlria,.soon  spread  itself  all  over  Egypt  and  Libya,  and  the 
upper  Thebais,  and  at  length  into  other  cities  and  countries. 

Arius  was  at  Nice  when  the  council  met  there:  his 
opinions  having"  been  condenjned,  he"  was  banished  by 
Constantine.  By  an  edict  of  the  same  emperor  he  and  his 
adherents  were  stigmatized  with  the  opprobrious  name  of 
Porphyrians,  his  books  Mere  ordered  to  be  burned,  and 
whoever  concealed  any  of  them  were  to  be  put  to  death. 

Arius  was  afterwards  recalled  ;  and,  as"  Sozomen  says,  in 
a  short  time:  but  was  not  allowed  to  go  to  Alexandria; 
where  indeed  he  never  settled  after  the  council  of  Nice, 
thoughP  he  attempted  it.  Tillemont  says,  that^  Arius  was 
not  recalled  before  the  year  330.  Other  learned  men  think, 
he"^  returned  from  his  banishment  in  327.  It  is  certain,  that 
Arius  and  Euzoius  did*  some  time  present  a  Confession  of 
Faith  to  Constantine,  with  which  the  emperor  was  satisfied. 
He  was  received  to  the  communion  of  the  church*^  by  the 
council  of  Jerusalem  in"  335.  A  like  attempt  was*  after- 
wards made  at  Constantinople,  but  in  vain.  It  is  generally 
said,  that'*^  he  died  in  a  sudden  and  remarkable  manner  at 
Constantinople  in  the  year  336. 

II.  It  does  not  appear  that  Arius's  works  were  voluminous; 
though  it  is  probable,  that  he  wrote  a  good  number  of  letters. 
We  still  have  an  epistle  written  by  him"  to  Eusebius  of 
Nicomedia,  aiid  another  toy  Alexander,  bishop  of  Alexan- 
dria; and  the  ^  Confession  of  Faith,  presented  by  him  and 
Euzoius  to  Constantine.  He  also  wrote''  divers  little  poems, 
fitted  for  the  use  of  common  people,  for  promoting  his  pecu- 
liar opinions.  A  book  called  Thalia,  whether  in  verse  or 
prose  is  not  absolutely  "^  certain;  for  there  are  some  frag- 
ments of  it  in  Athanasius,  which  do  not  appear  to  be  in 
verse.     This  book  is  mentioned  by  several  authors,  particu- 

"  Vid.  Socr.  1.  i.  c.  9.  p.  32.  Sozom.  1.  i.  c.  21.  p.  4.35,  436. 

"  Soz.  1.  ii.  c.  16.  Conf.  Socr.  1.  i.  c.  14.  p.  44.  C. 

p  Vid.  Socr.  1.  i.  c.  27,  et  37.  Soz.  1.  ii.  c.  29. 

«i  Les  Ariens,  Art.  xiii.  et  note  ix.  "■  Vid.  Pagi  ann.  327. 

n.  iii.  iv.     Basnag.  327.  n.  iii.     Fabr.  Bib.  Gr.  T.  viii.  p.  308. 

»  Socr.  1.  i.  p.  25,  26.  Soz.  1.  ii.  c.  27.  '  Ath.  contr.  Arian. 

p.  199,  200.     De  Synod,  p.  734.     Soz.  1.  ii.c.  27.  p.  486. 

"  Tillem.  Les  Ariens,  Art.  xxi.  Pagi  A.  390.  n.  xiii,  xvi. 

»  Pagi  340.  n.  xv.  Basnag.  ann.  336.  n.  iv.  TiUem.  Les  Ariens.  Art.  xxiv.  xxv. 

*  Vid.  Athanas.  Ep.  ad  Serap.  de  Mort.  Arii,  p.  340,  341.  Socr.  1.  ii. 
c.  38.  Soz.  1.  ii.  c.  29.  Thdrt.  H.  E.  1.  i.  c.  14.  H.  F.  1.  iv.  cap.  1.  p.  234. 
Epiph.  H.  69.  n.  v.  Ruf.  H.  E.  1.  i.  c.  13. 

"  Ap.  Epiph.  H.  69.  n.  vi.  Thdrt.  1.  i.  c.  v. 

y  Ap.  eund.  ib.  c.  vii.  viii.  '•  Ap.  Socr.  1.  i.  c.  26.  Soz.  1.  ii. 

c.  27.  p.  485.  ^  Philost.  H.  E.  1.  ii.  c  2. 

'*  Vid.  Cav.  H.  L.  ia  Ario,  sub  fin. 


574  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

larly"^  Socrates  and**  Sozomen  ;  Avho  censure  the  style  of  it, 
as  soft  and  eftbrninate.  But  Sozomen  honestly  owns,  that 
he  speaks  upon  hearsay  only,  and  that  he  had  not  seen  the 
book.  Ho\vever,they  both  say  it  was  condemned  by  the  coun- 
cil of  Nice.  As  Athanasius  quotes  it  several  times,  he  must 
be  supposed  to  have  read  it.  He  speaks  of*^  the  softness  and 
pleasantry,  or  buffoonery,  with  which  it  was  written  :  and 
perhaps  both  the  fore-mentioned  writers,  and  others  likewise, 
took  this  character  of  the  book  from  him.  And,  possibly, 
some  said  as  much  of  Augustine's  Psalm  or  Song-  upon  the 
Donatists.  Beside  all  these,  Tillemont  imagines,  that*^  Arius 
also  published  some  work  against  the  heathens  in  defence  of 
the  christian  religion. 

III.  Arius  was"  very  tall,  grave  and  serious,  yet  affable 
and  courteous.  With  good  natural  paVts,  and  no  inconsi- 
derable share  of  secular  learning  of  all  sorts,  he  was''  par- 
ticidarly  distinguished  by  his  skill  in  logic,  or  the  art  of 
disputing'.  He'  had  at  least  the  outward  appearance  of  piety. 
In  short,  he  is  represented  as  a  man  exceedingly  well 
qualified  to  form  a  party,  and  carry  on  any  enterprize  he 
should  enoaoe  in.  So  far  as  I  recollect,  his  conduct  was 
unblamable;  excepting  what  relates  to  his  zeal  for  main- 
taining his  supposed  errors;  and  that  he  is  charged''  with 
dissembling"  his  real  sentiments,  upon  some  occasions,  in 
those  difficult  circumstances  to  which  he  was  reduced  by 
the  prevailing- power  of  his  adversaries. 

I  may  add  here,  that  he  writes  with  much  spirit,  and  a 
full  assurance  of  the  truth  of  his  opinions;  particularly  in 
liis  letter  to  Eusebius  of  Nicomedia,  whom  he  styles'  ortho- 
dox; and  he  tells  that  bishop,  that"'  he  and  his  friends  were 
unjustly  persecuted  by  Alexander  for  the  truth's  sake,  Avhich 
conquers  all  things:  that  all  the  bishops  of  the  east  in  gene- 
ral had  been  anathematized  by  Alexander,  except  Philogo- 
nius,  Ilellanicus,  and  Macarius,  whom  he  calls"  ignorant 
heretics.     As  for  himself,  he  was  not  able  to  endure  their 

«=  Socr.  1.  i.  c.  ix.  p.  30.  A.  *  Soz.  1.  i.  c.  xxi.  p.  435.  C.  D. 

^  E-/pa\p(  OaXitav  iKrtOrjXvfitvoiQ  Kai  yeXotoig  T]9t(n.  De  Sent.  Dionys.  n.  6. 
p.  247.  '  Outre  sa  Thalie  et  ses  autres  ecrits  centre  I'eglise, 

il  semble  qu'il  ait  fait  quelque  ouvrage  centre  les  payens. — Tillem.  les  Ariens, 
Art.  XXV.  m.  ^   Hv  St  rr]v  7)\iKiav  vTTfpfitjKrjg,  Karijfrig  to 

tiSoQ yXvKVQ  i]v  ry  irpo(Triyo()i(f.  Epiph.  H.  69.  n.  iii.  in. 

''  AiaXiKTiKuraTog St  ytvojxivog.  k.  X.  Soz.  1.  i.  c.  15.  p.  426.  B.  Conf.  Socr. 
1.  i.e.  V.  '  Vir  specie  et  forma  magis  quam  virtute  religiosus. 

R.ifin.  H.  E,  1.  i.  c.  1. 

^  Apetog  yap,  wg  irportpov  i(prjv,  htpa  Kara  Siavoiav  (ppovuiv,  Irtpa  St  0wvy 
ojfioXoyrjatv,  Socr.  1.  ii.  c.  35.  in. 

'  OpOoSoKu).  ap.  Epiph.  69.  n.  vi.  p.  731   B.  ""  lb. 

"    A'ipiTiKuv  aKaTr)xqT(i)v.  ib.  D. 


Aitius,  and  his   roUowcrs.     A.  D.  316.  575 

impious"  doctrine  ;  nor  would  lie  ever  receive  it,  though  he 
Mere  to  sutler  a  thousand  deaths  from  those  heretics. 

IV.  Socrates  gives  this  account  of"  tlie  rise  and  occasion 
of  the  Arian  controversy.  '  Alexander,'  he''  says,  '  dis- 
'  coursing-  one  day  too  curiously  concerning  the  doctrine  of 
'  th<'  Trinity  in  Unity,  in  the  presence  of  his  presbyters 
'  and  the  rest  of"  his  clergy,  Arius,  one  of  the  presbyters, 
'  supposed  his  bishop  to  advance  the  doctrine  of  Sab(!llius, 
'  and  disliking  that,  he  went  into  an  opinion  diametrically 
'  opj)osite.'  Theodoret  too  says,  that''  Arius  took  occasion 
from  things  said  by  Alexander  to  raise  a  disturbance.  And 
Constantine  likewise,  in  his  letter  to  Alexander  and  Arius, 
first  blames  the  former''  for  putting  questions  to  his  presby- 
ters, whicli  he  ought  not ;  and  then  the  latter,  for  inconsi- 
derately uttering  notions,  that  ought  to  have  been  buried  in 
silence. 

Sozomen  gives  this  account:  that*  Arius  had  for  some 
time  published  the  doctrines  ascribed  to  him,  Alexander 
taking  little  notice  of  the  matter;  but  some  blaming  him  for 
tolerating  such  novelties,  move*!  by  those  complaints,  and 
desiring-  to  act  equitably,  he  appointed  a  time  for  hearing- 
the  i)oint  f;iirly  debated  by  Arius,  and  those  who  opposed 
him.  At  which  time  Arius  stood  to  the  things  he  advanced  : 
and  they  who  opposed  him,  asserted  the  Son  to  be  consub- 
stantial  and  coeternal  to  the  Father.  And  thougli  another 
assembly  was  appointed  for  debating  the  point,  they  could 
by  no  means  come  to  an  agreement.  The  point  sjill  re- 
mained doubtful  and  undecided,  and*^  Alexander  himself 
was  at  first  in  some  suspense  ;  but  at  length  he  declared 
himself  in  favour  of  those  who  asserted  the  Son  to  be  con- 
substantial  and  coeternal  to  the  Father. 

If  we  could  rely  upon  this  account,  it  might  afford  a 
great  deal  of  reason  to  think,  that  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity, 
and  of  the  Son's  deity,  was  not  fully  defined  and  determined 
among  christians  before  the  council  of  Nice  ;  and  that  there 
were  no  small  numbers  of  persons,  who  held  much  the  same 
doctrine  with  Arius.  Moreover  Arius,  in  his  letter  to  Alex- 
ander, tells  him,  that"  his  faith  was  the  same  he  had  received 

°  TsTiDV  TO)V  aatfitxiv  uSe  aKHVai  Swa/itOa,  tav  fxvpiHC  ^avarag  vfiiv   (na- 

TTtiXwfftj/  oe  aipiTiKoi.  ib.  D.  p   tpiXorinorepov  ttc^h  rjjc 

dying  rpinSog,  tv  rpiaSi  fiovaSa  tivai,  ^iXoao^uiv.   Socr.  1.  i.  C.  v. 

1  Tlieod.  H.  F.  1.  iv.  c.  i.  in.  ■■  Ap.  Euseb.  D.  V.  C.  1.  ii. 

c.  69.  et  Socr.  1.  i.  c.  7.  p.  15.  C.  D.  *  Soz.  1.  i.  c.  xv. 

A/x^»jpiT8  Se  Trig  KilTtjfftMg  tri  SoKsffrtg  tivai,  ntirovQt  ri  Kat  A.\i^nvSpog  ra 
irpwTa,  ny  [lev  tuthc.  Try  fiiv  tKuvng  tiraivuv'  rtXtvruiv  Si  TOig  bfxoHdiov  Kai 
(Tvva'idiov  iivai  tov  v'wv  aTTcxpaivofiivoig  tOiTO.  ih.  p.  427.  A. 

"   r]v  (cat  aiTo  as  fiffiaOijKaniv.  ap.  Epiph.  p.  732.  C. log  kcu 


576  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

from  himself,  and  had  often  heard  him  preach.  And  though 
there  is  some  difference  between  them,  it  seems  to  me,  that 
the  first  three  accounts,  above  represented,  do  confirm  this 
supposition,  as  well  as  Sozomen's. 

V.  In  the  next  place  I  would  observe  the  opinions  of 
Arius  and  his  followers. 

Alexander,  in  his  letter  to  his  bishops  of  the  catholic 
church,  represents  their  opinion  in  this  manner.  '  That^  they 
'  said,  God  was  not  always  Father.  But  there  was  a  time 
'  when  God  was  not  Father  :  that  the  word  of  God  was  not 
'  always,  and  was  made  out  of  nothing" :  God  who  was,  made 
'  him  who  was  not,  out  of  nothing-.  Therefore  there  was  a 
'  time,  when  he  was  not.  For  the  Son  is  a  creature,  and 
'  made:  nor  is  he  like  the  Father  in  essence.' 

But  we  may  take  Arius's  opinion  fr-om  himself.  And  I 
think  it  will  appear,  that  in  what  is  above  transcribed  from 
Alexander,  he  is  not  misrepresented.  For  in  his  letter  to 
Eusebius  of  Nicomedia  he  says:  '  We''"  cannot  assent  to 
'  those  expressions,  always  Father,  always  Son,  at  the  same 
'  time  Father  and  Son  :  that  the  Son  always  co-exists  with 
'the  Father:  that  the  Father  has  no  pre-existence  before 
'  the  Son,  not  so  much  as  in  thought,  or  a  moment.  But  this 
'  we  think  and  teach,  that  the  Son  is  not  unbegotten,  nor  a 
'  part  of  the  unbegotten  by  any  means.  Nor  is  he  made  out 
'  of  any  pre-existent  thing:  but  by  the  will  and  pleasure  of 
'  the  Father  he  existed  before  time  and  ages,  the  only-be- 
'  gotten  God  unchangeable:  and  that  before  he  was  begotten, 
'  or  made,  or  designed,  or  founded,  he  was  not. — But  we  are 
'  persecuted,  because  we  say,  that  the  Son  has  a  beginning, 
'  and  that  God  has  no  beginning.  For  this  we  are  persecuted, 
*  and  because  we  say,  the  Son  is  out  of  nothing.  Which  we 
'  therefore  say,  because  he  is  not  a  part  of  God,  nor  made 
'  out  of  any  pre-existent  thing.' 

In  his  letter  to  Alexander  himself,  beside  many  other 
things,  he  says,  '  We"  believe,  that  there  are  three  persons, 
the  Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Ghost.      God  the  cause 

rrv  avTOQ iv  fiecry  ry  eKKXtjatq,  Kai  avvfSptu) TrXfiTrtfcig  tuq  ravra 

n(Triyr]rTajjLivH{:  aTTTjyoptvfTag.  ib.   p.  733.  A. (Jf  vapa   as   yLifiaQrjKaniv, 

fitrry  ry  £KkXjjctj^  KTjpv^avrog.   ib.  C. 

'   Ouic  att  6  QioQ  lluTTjp   t]v. 8/c  ail  r/v  6  ra  Qm  Aoyog,  aW  £$  hk 

ovTuiv  ytyovtv'  6  yap  o)v  6£0g  rov  /it]  ovtu  tic  rn  firi  ovro^  TrtTroiijKt.  k.  \.  ap. 
Socr.  p.  10.  D. 

*   — ■ ■ —  iiriiSt)  «  aviKpuvH^Liv  avn^  Stjfioaiq  Xtyovri,  au  QioQ,  attYlof, 

ujxa  UaTr]^),  afia  Y'log- nr   tirivoiq.,  ht  arofiq)  tivi,  Tfpoa-vH  6  Qeog  th 

Yin Si(i)K0ni9a  St,  on  mronev,  ap')(^rfv  tx^t  6  Yiog,  o  St  Gioc;  avap^pc 

tTlV Kal  OTl  llTTOfltV,  I'i  8(C  OVTIl}V  1'71V.  K.  \.     Hp.    Epipll.    H.  G9.  II.    vl, 

"  Ap.  Epiph.  ib.  n.  viii.  in. 


Arius,  and  his  Followers.     A.  D.  316.  577 

of  all  thiiio-s,  is  alone  without  bog-inning-.  Tlie>  Son,  bogot- 
ten  of  the  Father  before  time,  made  before  the  ages,  and 
founded,  was  not  l)efore  he  was  begotten.  Nor  is  he  eternal, 
or  co-eternal,  or  begotten  at  the  same  time  with  the  Father.' 

So  far  from  Alexander  and  Arius  himself.  It  ujay  be 
proper  to  take  somewhat  also  out  of  other  authors. 

Epiphanius's  Synopsis  is  to  this  purpose:  '  The^  Arians 
'  say,  that  the  Son  is  a  creature  of  God,  and  the  Holy  Ghost 
'  the  creature  of  a  creature:  and  that  our  Saviour  took 
'  flesh  of  Mary,  but  not  a  soul.' 

In  his  large  work  he  says,  they''  argued,  that  the  Spirit 
Mas  made  by  the  Son, because  the  scriptiue  says,  "  All  things 
were  made  by  him,  and  without  him  nothing  was  made." 
See  John  i.  3. 

Of  their  denying  our  Saviour  to  have  a  soul,  that  is,  an 
human  soul,  he  speaks''  several  times,  and  argues  against 
it'  largely.  Athanasius,  too,  expressly  says,  that**  the 
Arians  maintained,  that  Christ  had  flesh  only,  as  a  covering- 
for  his  Deity  :  and  that  the  AVord  in  him  was  the  same  as 
the  soul  in  us.  He  supposeth  them  likewise  to  allow,  that 
the  Word,  or  Deity  in  Christ,  was  liable  to  suftering  in  the 
body.  Theodoret'-  ascribes  to  them  the  same  opinion.  lie 
again  ascribes  it  to*^  Arius  and  Eunomius.  Augustine,  too, 
takes  notice  of  this  opinion  in  his  accounf^'  of  this  sect,  and 
in  other  arguments''  t^gainst  them. 

An  anonymous  Arian  in  Augustine  says,  The'  Father  is 

^  O  Sf  YioQ  axpovuQ  yevvt^Oeis  inro  rs  fTarpog— 8K  ijv  Trpo  re  ycvvrjOrjvat. 
ibid.  =■  T.  i.  p.  606. 

»  H.  69.  n,  18.  p.  741.  D.  Vid.  et.  n.  56. 

*•  AXXa  Km  apvavrai  ipvxr)v  avrov  avdpti)irivriv  ii\i](pevai.  H.  69.  n.  19. 
p.  743.  A.  Conf.  n.  48—51.  ^  Vid.  ib.  n.  16,  et  17. 

"^  Apetog  Se  aapKa  fiovj]v  irpog  mroKpvcprjv  Tt]c  OioTTjTog  ofioXoyBi'  avri  di  ts 
taojQtv  tv  yifiiv  avQpwTts,  THTf^i  ttjc  ipvx'HQ'  tov  Xoyov  tv  ry  aaiJKi  Xiyti  ytyovi- 
vaC  Tt]v  TH  TraQnf;  voijaiv,  Kca  Tr]v  eS,  aSu  uvw^aaiv  ry  SrtOTTjri  npotyayeiv 
ToXfiiDv.     Confr.  Apollin.  1.  ii.  ii.  3.  p.  942.  C. 

*  Kai  ixiVTOi  (cat  rov  rt]g  tv  avOpwirrjanxiq  rjKpuTtjpiaffe  Xoyoi"-  ercu/irt  yap 
avTOV  aypvxov  t<j)i]  (tXjj^fvai,  ivrjpyijKtvai  Ss  ra  rrjg  4"^X^G  ^'J''  Otortjra.  H.  F, 
].  iv.  c.  l.p.  232.  D. 

^  Apeinc  (^£  Kca  Evvo/iiog  aufia  fi(v  avrov  ifaaav  £iXj;<^twji,  r»jv  9tOTr}Ta  Ss 
rijQ\pvxt}C  ivi]pytjKtvai  rrjv  xp^iov.     lb,  1.  v.  c.  11.  p.  278.  D. 

s  In  eo  autem  quod  Christum  sine  anima  solam  carnem  suscepisse  arbitran- 
tur,  minus  noti  sunt :  nee  adversus  eos  ab  aliquo  inveni  de  hac  re  aliquando 
fuisse  certatum.  Sed  hoc  verum  esse,  et  Epiphanius  non  tacuit,  et  ego  ex 
eorum  quibusbam  scriptis  et  coUocutionibus  certissirae  inveni.    De  Haer.  c.  49. 

^  Ecce  in  quibus  verbis  suis  omnino  manifestant  negare  se,  quod  ad  unitatem 
personae  Christi  etiam  humana  anima  pertineat:  sed  in  Christo  carnem  et  divi- 
nitatera  tantummodo  confiteri.     Contr.  Serm.  Arian.  n.  7.  T.  8. 

'  Pater  major  est  Filio  :  Filius  incomparabiliter  major  et  raeliorest  Spiritu. 
Serm.  Arian.  n.  24.  ap.  Aug.  T.  8. 

VOL.    IN.  2    P 


578  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

greater  than  the  Son,  tlie  Son  incomparably  greater  and 
better  than  the  Spirit.  And''  the  Father  begot  the  Son  by 
his  will :  the  Son  by  his  own  power  alone  made  the  Spirit. 

Maximin,  in  Augustine,  says,  the'  Son  is  not  only  God, 
but  a  great  God  :  which  he  argues  from  Tit.  ii.  13.  Again, 
We™  worship  the  Father  and  the  Son:  but  show  a  text 
where  we  are  commanded  to  worship  the  Spirit. 

VI.  There  were  in  the  fourth  century  several  divisions  in 
this  sect.  Epiphanius,"  and  Augustine*'  after  him,  have 
four  distinct  articles  in  speaking  of  them:  Arians  or  Ario- 
manites,  Semiarians,  Macedonians  or  Pneumatomachi, 
Aetians,  called  also  Eunomians  and  Anomeans. 

They  were  very  remarkable  for  the  numerous  councils 
held  by  them,  and  for  their  numerous  creeds,  especially  in 
the  time  of  Constantius.  Socrates  conrputes  their  creedsi'  or 
confessions  to  have  been  nine  in  number;  and  calls  them  a 
labyrinth.  Some  moderns,  not  attending  to  the  design  of 
Socrates,  have  multiplied  them  greatly.  He  speaks  of  public 
creeds,  agreed  in  councils  of  bishops:  they  add  to  them 
several  confessions  made  by  particular  persons  upon  divers 
occasions.  Insomuch,  that  Fleury'^  makes  out  a  catalogue 
of  sixteen  ;  and  Tillemont,  not  content  to  stop  there,  com- 
putes'^ eighteen.  Athanasius  using  a  round  number,  says 
they  had  had  at^  least  ten  synods.  Learned  moderns  do 
sometimes  reckon  eleven*  public  creeds,  the  last  of  Avhich 
was  drawn  up  in  the  year"  361. 

The  Arians  seem  to  have  pleased  themselves  with^  the 
great  number  of  their  synods.  But  others  were  of  a  different 
opinion  :  and  the  confessions  of  faith  published  by  them  were 
not  unanimous.     Athanasius''   often  banters  them  for  their 

^  Pater  immobiliter  et  impassibiliter  volens  Filium  genuit :  Filius  sine  labore 
et  fatigatione  sola  viitute  sua  Spiritum  fecit.     lb.  n.  26. 

'  Est  autem  Filius  secundum  apostolum  non  pusillus,  sed  magnus  Deus. 
Sicut  ait  beatus  apostolus ;  exspectando  beatam  spem,  et  adventum  glorise 
magni  Dei  et  Salvatoris  nostri  Jesu  Chiisti.  Collat.  cum  Maxim,  n.  13.  ap. 
Aug.  T.  8.  ■"  lb.  n.  14.  Vid.  n.  xi. 

"  H.  G9,  73,  74,  76.  "  De  Hser.  c.  49, 51,  52,  54. 

''  'HuHQ  cs  Tov  Xa(3vpiv6ov  Twv  iKOeaewv  oipt  ttots  ^lavvaavreg,  rtjv  airapiQ- 
ixr]aiv  avrujv  avvayayiofitv.     Socr.  1.  i.  c.  41.  p.  154.  D. 

"  Fleury,  B.  14.  ch.  33.  Vol.  2.  p.  294. 

'  Les  Ariens,  Art.  102.  *  H^>j  yan  romroi  StKu  km  irXtov 

TTB  (TwoBsg  TTtTToiTiKacTi.     Ad  Affos.  n.  2.  p.  892.  B. 

'  Vid.  Petav.  ad  Epiph.  H.  73.  n.  xxvii.  p.  327. 

"  Vid.  Benedictin.  Monit.  ad  Athan.de  Synod,  p.  715. 

"  — 7rapaica\»n(v  nt]  a%>i\ie!Oai,  KctOa  TrpotnTo/^uv,  twv  ivfiofiaWofXtviov  o;i^Xov 
(TMi/o^ojv  Tro(jja(rH  TTi'jtoir — /c.  \.  Ad  At'ros.  n.  10.  p.  899.  C. 

^  IfaiTrt  ynv  Kivnai  Kai  rapciTTHffi,  Kai  H^e  htio  toiq  lavnov  cip^nvraC  kut 
eviavTOv  yap,  (oq  oJ  rag  SiaOtjKag  ypacjtovTig,  <Jvvipxoy.ivoi  (cat  avroi  TrpoairoiHVTai 
7r»pt  TriTtwr  yp(i<l>uv  tva  Kai  f  j'  mrti)  ytXojra  naWov  Kai  ai(ryyvr\v  (xpXrfatoaip, 


Aiiius,  (ind  /lis  Followers.     A.   U.  316.  579 

nuincrous  creeds,  and  for  niakiiig'  new  creeds  alinust  every 
year;  thus  showing-  themselves  dissatisfied  with  their  own  [x  i- 
forniances, and  rescinding"  what  had  been  befon;  established 
by  them,  lie  says,  it  was  matter  of  great  grief  to  himself, 
and  many  others,  that  tlie  whole  world  was  disturbed  by 
them.  Nor  coidd  they  without  pain  see  those''  who  were 
called  clergymen,  continually  running-  from  one  place  to 
another,  to  learn  how  they  ought  to  believe  in  Jesus  Christ. 
It  was,  moreover,  a  cause  of  scandal  to  catechuniens,  and  of 
much  laughter  to  the  heathen. 

These  numerous  synods,  this  frequent  creed-making, 
occasioned  that  remark  of  Ammianus  Marccllinus,  a  heathen 
author;  that^  Constantius  corrupted  the  simplicity  of  the 
christian  religion  ;  and  that  the  bishops  of  his  reign,  conti- 
nually galloping  to  councils,  jaded  all  the  post-horses,  and 
wore  out  all  the  public  carriages  of  the  empire.  The  same 
complaint  is  found  in  some^  of  the  ecclesiastical  writers. 

VII.  In  their  creeds  they  are  generally  very  free  in  ana- 
thematizing such  as  differed  from  them.  In  their  council 
at  Antioch  in  341,  under  the  direction  of  Eusebius  of  Nico- 
media,  and  his  friends,  they  say :  '  We^  anathematize  all 
'  heretical  pravity.  And  if  any  one  contrary  to  the  sacred 
'  doctrine  of  the  scriptures  say,  that  the  Son  is  a  creature  as 

'  one  of  the  creatures or  if  any  one  shall  teach  or  preach 

'  any  thing  beside  what  we  have  received,  let  him  be  anathe- 
'  ma.'  And  in  a  like  manner,  more  at  large  in  their  long 
creed  at  Antioch,  in  345,  which  may  be  seen  in"'  Athanasius, 
and*^  Socrates.  Their  creed  at  Sirmium,  against  Photinus, 
in  351,  concludes  with'^  seven  and  twenty  anathemas,  three 
of  which  are  these:  '  If*^  any  one  say,  that  Abraham  did  not 

oTi  nTj  Trap  irtpuyv,  aX\a  irap  avTUiv,  ra  avTuv  t/c/SaXXtrai.  Ad.  Ep.  ./Eg.  et 
Lib.  n.  6.  in.  p.  275. 

''    WT£  rr)v  oiKHjxivriv  Siarapaxdrivai,  Km  rut;  XcyofifVHQ  iv  to)  KaipiiJ 

THTqj   (c\j;piK8£  SiaTpf)(tlV   aVlO  KM  KUTIO,  Kal   l^lJTtlV,  TTOIQ  apCl   jUaSuJfft  TTl'TlVttV  iig 

Tov  Kvpiov  I'lucov  Ij;(T8V  XptTov  —  mro  ct  roig  jxiv  Karrj^sixtvouj  sKoXiyov  OKav- 
SaXov,  Toig  Se  'EWr]<Tiv  «  to  tvxov,  aWu  Kui  vXaTW  yeXwTci  Traptaxtv-  De 
Synod,  n.  2.  p.  717.  ^  Chnstianam  religionem  absolutam  et  sim- 

plicem  anili  superstitioneconfundens;  in  qua  scrutandaperple.xiLis,  quam  coni- 
ponenda  gravius,  excitavit  discidia  plurima,  quaj  progressa  fusius  aluit  concer- 
iatione  verborum;  ut  catervis  antistituni  jumentis  publicis  ultro  citroque  dis- 
currentibus  per  synodos  quas  appellant,  dum  ritum  omnem  ad  suum  trahero 
conantur  arbitrium,  rei  vehiculariffi  succideret  ncrvos.  Ammian.  1.  xxi.  c.  ult. 
■^  Cursusque  ipse  puljlicus  attritus  ad  nihilum  dediicitur.     Hilar,  p.  1320.  c. 

*   Traaav  a\ptTiKt]v  avaOifiaTi'CoiJiiv  KciKoSo'Cutv'   (cat   fine — Si^uctkii, 

Xeyiov,  avaOtfia  £<ra)'  km  ft  Tig  Xcyu  tov  v'lov  KTiOfia,  ojg  iv  twv  KTianaTiov — i) 
II  Tig  aXXo  didarjKH  t]  tvayytXi^tTai  nap  6  TrapeXufio/jitv,  avaQtfia  etu).  Ap.  Socr 
1.  ii.  c.  X.  p.  88.  B.  ''  De  Synod,  n.  2G.  p.  738,  &c. 

•^  L.  ii.  c.  19.  "^  Ap.  Athan.  de  Synod,  n.  27.  p.  742,  743 

*  Vid.  ib.  p.  743.  Anathcin.  xv.  xvi.  xvii. 

2  p  2 


580  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

'  see  ihe  Son,  but  tlie  linbegotten  God,  or  a  part  of  liiin,  let 
'  Iiiiii  be  anathema.  If  any  one  say  it  was  not  the  Son  who 
'  wrestled  with  Jacob,  but  the  unbegotten  God,  or  a  part  of 
'  him,  let  him  be  anathema.  If  any  one  understand  those 
'  Avords  in  Gen.  xix.  24,  "  the  Lord  rained  fire  from  the 
'  Lord,"  not  of  the  Father  and  Son,  but  that  God  rained  from 
'  himself,  let  him  be  anathema.  For  the  Lord  the  Son  rained 
'  from  the  Lord  the  Father.' 

Indeed  I  think,  that  this  sect  showed  little  moderation  in 
the  fourth  century.  Whenever*^  they  had  the  emperor  on 
their  side,  they  failed  not  to  make  use  of  his  authority. 
Between  the  emperors  Valentinian  and  Valens,  two  brothers, 
the  former  the  elder,  emperor  in  the  West,  and  favourer  of 
the  Nicene  doctrine,  the  latter  emperor  in  the  East,  Socrates 
observes  this  diflerence  ;  Valentinian^  encouraged  the  men 
of  his  own  principles,  without  being  at  all  troublesome  to  the 
Arians :  but  Valens,  desirous  to  promote  Arianism,  griev- 
ously entreated  those  who  were  not  of  that  opinion,  as  the 
sequel  of  our  history  will  show. 

So  Socrates,  who  is  the  more  to  be  regarded,  because  he 
shows  a  great  deal  of  impartiality,  and  censures  the  bishops 
of  his  own  principles,  MJien  they  assumed  a  lordly  power 
and  authority ;  of  which  some  instances  were  given'^  formerly. 
Another  is  this.  '  Theodosius,  bishop  of  Synada  in  Phrygia 
'  Pacatiana,'  he  says,  '  cruelly'  persecuted  the  heretics  in 
'  that  city:  of  which  there  were  many  of  the  Macedonian 
'  sect.  He  not  only  expelled  them  the  city,  but  the  country  : 
'  in  M'hich  he  did  not  act  agreeably  to  the  custom  of  the 
'  orthodox  church.  Nor  was  he  inHuenced  by  a  zeal  for 
'  the  right  faith,  but  by  love  of  money,  which  he  endea- 
'  voured  to  extort  from  the  heretics.' 

I  know  not  how  to  forbear  observing  Acacius's  bitter 
manner  of  writing  controversy  ;  who  tells  Marcellus,  that'' 
he  deserved  to  have  his  tongue  cut  out. 

If  any  desire  to  see  some  other  instances  of  their  partiality, 

'   VTroaxiTu  re  ctfia  Krti  (po^tpirtfioic,  on  toiq  fiamXiKotg  TrpoTayiiam, 

Kai  TH  PaaiXtwg  OvaXivTog  BrvfK^t  tvavTinaOe,  roiQui]  ^aXofiivoiQ  Kara  tijv  avrtov 
TTi'^iv  (pipiaOai.     Epiph.  H.  69.  n.  34.  p.  757.  B. 

*  OvaXtVTivtavot;  jxev  yap  thq  fj.ev  oikhhq  avveKpora'  TOtg  ci  aptiavi^HViv 
sCafKOQ  r]v  o-^Tipoq'  Ova\r)Q  £e  AptiavH^  av^i]Uui  Trpoainnfitvog,  Suva  Kara  rwv 
f(jj  roiavra  (ppovavTuv  iipyaaaro. — Socr.  1.  iv.  c.  I.  p.  211.  B. 

''  Sec  p.  2.'52.  '    'Og  Tsg  iv  avry  aiptriKHg,  iroXKoc  Se  iv 

avTy  ovTtQ  irvyxavov  rrjc  MaKtOoviavwv  ^pr^aKtiag,  avvrovbig  iSiojKiv'  i^tXavvwv 
avTHc  fir]  fjLovov  Tt)Q  TToKtwc,  ahXa  ci]  kui  rojvayptov.  Kai  thto  tTroui,  eK  huj9u>q 
ciwKHv  Ty  opQoSo'iii)  tKK\r](jiq..     L.  vii.  c.  3.  in. 

^  tKTtTfiT)(y6ai  Tt}v  avoatav  wpiiXig  yXwrrav.      Ap.  Epiph.  H.  72. 


n.vm.  in. 


Arius,  and  his  Followers.     A,  D.  31G.  581 

and  violent  zeal,  tliey  may  consult  the  authors  referred  to  at 
the  bottom  of  the'  page. 

VIII.  Arius  and  his  followers  received  the  same  books 
of  the  sacred  scripture  that  other  christians  did,  and  showed 
the  like  respect  for  them. 

1.  It  is  needless  to  allege  particular  proofs  of  their  re- 
ceiving- the  several  books  of  the  New  Testament.  It  is  ap- 
parent from  the  remains  of  Arius  himself,  and  from  the  Arian 
writers,  and  their  councils,  and  the  arguments  of  catholic 
writers  against  them,  that  they  received  the  four  gospels,  the 
Acts,  and  all  other  books  g^encrally  received  by  other  chris- 
tians. 

2.  There  is  indeed  one  exception :  for  Theodoret,  in  his 
preface  to  his  Commentary  upon  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews, 
says,  that"'  they  did  not  receive  that  epistle.  And  Epiplia- 
nins  speaks"  to  the  like  effect. 

With  regard  to  this,  we  may  say,  that  if  it  be  true,  it 
needs  not  to  be  reckoned  a  very  great  fault :  forasmuch  as 
there  were  about  the  same  time  some  catholics,  who  either 
quite  rejected  this  epistle,  or  doubted  of  its  genuineness  and 
authority.  But  secondly,  I  apprehend,  it  was  generally 
received  by  them,  and  that  it  could  not  be  rejected  by  many 
of  them.  What  Epiphanius  says  is  very  pleasant ;  '  Let" 
*  us  now,'  says  he,  '  observe  some  other  texts,  which  they 
'  perverting-  allege  in  favour  of  their  sentiments.  And  here 
'  they  in  vain  allege  that  text,  "  ConsiderP  the  Apostle  and 
'  High-priest  of  your  profession,  who  was  faithful  to  him 
'  that  made  him."  For  first  of  all,  they  reject  the  epistle  to 
'  the  Hebrews,  saying-  that  it  is  not  the  apostle's,  though 
'  they  allege  that  text,  in  order  to  pervert  it.'  Now,  if  they 
quoted  that  epistle,  I  think  they  could  not  reject  it.  And 
in  another  place  Epiphanius  expresseth  himself  in  this  man- 
ner: *  And'^  beside  this,  they  allege  the  saying-  of  the  apos- 
'  tie,  "  Consider  the  High-priest  of  your  profession,  who 
'  was  faithful  to  him  that  made  liim :''  and  what  is  written 

'  Vid.  Ath.  Hist.  Arian.  n.  1,2.  p.  345.  et  n.  30,  &c.  p.  631,  &c.  Tilleni. 
Les  Aliens,  art.  95.  ""   Qavfiarov  aSev  ^pumv  oi  rtiv  AptiavtKtjv 

(ladf^afitvoi  vocov  Kara  raiv  airoToXtKwv  Xvttmvtis  ypafifiaTiov,  Kai  rrjv   wpoQ 

'E^paiHQ    STTlToXtJV   Tb)V  XoilTWV  UTTOKplVOVrfQ,  KOI    VoQoV    TaVTr\V     aTTOKuXsVTtQ. 

Theod.  opp.  T.  iii.  p.  393.  A.  "  Vid.  II.  69.  n.  37. 

°  Kui  yap  iraXiv  xvcaiuiQ  <pa(ji  tbto  to  ptjrov  napepftivtvovTig'  to  St^aaOt  top 
apxupici  vfnov  TTiToi/  ovTa  r(f»  Trou/cravn  avTOv.  Km  npioTov  p.tv  rrjv  f!n'7o\i]v 
TavTrjv,  Tt]v  TrpoQ  'EjSpaise  ^»7//i,  aTTuiOsvrai,  ipvau  avrtiv  avaipavTeg  airo  ra 
a;ro7o\H,  km  XeyovTSQ  fir)  inmi  th  uvth.     H.  69.  n.  37.  in 

p  Heb.  iii.  1,  2. 

1  AXXa  XoiTTOv  oua  £ti  rsroic  Ofioia,  to  iv  Ttfi  aTTOToXy  ytypapiin'ov,  to 
hlaaOi,  K.  X.  H.  69.  n.  xiv. 


582  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  Hislotij. 

'  in  the  Gospel  of  John,  "  He"^  that  cometh  after  nie  was 
'  before  me  :"  and  that  which  is  written  in  the  Acts  of  the 
'  Apostles,  "  Therefore*  let  all  the  house  of  Israel  know  as- 
'  suredly,  that  God  hath  made  that  same  Jesus,  whom  ye  have 
'  crucified,  both  Lord  and  Christ."  '  Since  then  they  quoted 
the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  together  with  other  books  of 
unquestioned  authority,  it  could  not  be  rejected  by  them.' 

Maximin,  the  Arian  bishop,  quotes  the  epistle  to  the 
Hebrews  as"  Paul's.  Eunomius^  likewise  seems  to  refer 
to  it. 

3.  Having  said  what  is  needful  relating-  to  this  point,  I 
shall  allege  some  evidences  of  their  respect  for  the  sacred 
scriptures. 

In  his  letter  to  Alexander,  Arius  professes  to  believe  in 
one  God,  the''  God  of  the  law,  and  the  prophets,  and  the 
New  Testament. 

A  creed  of  theirs  beg-ins  in  this  manner:  '  We"  believe 
agreeably  to  the  evangelical  and  apostolical  tradition,  or 
doctrine.'  Afterwards,  in  the  same  creed,  '  Wey  sincerely 
believe  and  maintain  all  things  taught  in  the  divine  scrip- 
tures, both  by  prophets  and  apostles.'  Again,  '  We''  declare 
the  ancient  faith,  which  the  prophets,  and  gospels,  and 
apostles,  have  preached  by  the  authority  of  our  Lord  and 
Saviour  Jesus  Christ.' 

Moreover,  the  Arians  all  along  argued  against  the  use  of 
the  M'ords  consubstantial  and  essence,  and  like  phrases, 
because  they''  were  not  in  scripture.  Athanasius  often  takes 
notice  of  this.     But  he  says,  that''  though  they  blamed  the 

■■  John  i.  oO.  =  Acts  ii.  3G. 

'  Comp.  Leontius  Byz.  de  Sectis,  Act.  3.  p.  505.  Bibb.  P.  P.  T.  xi.  Paris. 
1644.  Where  he  supposes  them  to  receive  the  Acts  and  the  ep.  to  the  Hebrews, 
and  to  argue  as  they  are  represented  by  Epiphanius. 

"  Sic  ad  Hebrseos  ipse  scribens  ait :  Purificatione  peccatorum  facta,  conse- 
dit  ad  dexteram  magnitudinis  inexcelsis.  Vid.  Collat.  cum.  Maximin.  n.  14. 
(3.)  Conf.  Heb.  i.  3.  "   Tov  an  tojv  ■7rpo<priTwv  ofiiKtjffavra 

Toic  naXaioig.     Eunom.  Exp.  Fid.  ap.  Tabr.  Bib.  Gr.  T.  viii.  p.  257. 

"   vo/iH  Kai  Trpo(pt]T(j)V,  KM  Kaivrjg  ^laOrjKtjg  tutov  Qiov — k.  X.   Ap. 

Epiph.  H.  ()9.  n.  vii.  "   {Urtvoiiiv  aKoXaQatg  ry  tvayytXiKy 

KM  awo-7o\iKy  7rapa?orTEt.  Ap.  Socr.  1.  ii.  c.  X.  p.  87.  B. 

^'  'HiutQ  yap  iraai  rotf  tK  rwv  Siciujv  ypa<j)ti)v  TrapaHiSojiivotQ,  vno  n  rwv 
vpo(pi]Twv  Kai  aiTO<7o\uv,  a\7]0tpu)C  rt  Kca  6^f/)«va)f,  km  TTi'^fuOfiev  Kai  ukoKo- 
e^fiiv.  ib.  p.  88.  C. 

'   ?ji/  Krtt  ol  7rpO(j»jTai,  Kai  ra  svayyt\ia,  icai  n'l  aTroToXoi  Sia  r«  KvpiK 

rinwv  lr]<Tn  XptTw  iKijpv^av.  Ap.  Ath.  de  Synod,  p.  723.  B. 

'     ThTH    T^n^JlV,   TO    fllV   OjlOHCItOV,   KUl  TO     bflOlHOWV  iKfiuXXofllV,   U)Q    oXXoTpiOV 

ypa<f,u>v.     A\>.  Ath.  de  Synod,  n.  29.  p.  746.  B.  Vid.  ib.  n.  30.  p.  747.  C.  D. 
"   Vid.  Or.  i.  contr.  Arian.  n.  30.  p.  434.  D.     Du  Decret.   Nic.  Synod. 
n.  18.  p.  223,  224      De  Synodis.   n.  36.  p.  752.  A.  Ad.   Afr.  Ep.  n.  6. 
p.  89G.  A. 


Arius,  and  his  Followers.     AcAcius.     A.  D.  310.        383 

council  of  Nice  for  using-  unscripturni  words,  they  did  the 
same  tlieuiselves.     So  likewise"^  Epiplianius. 

Maxiruin  opens  tlie  conference  witli  Augustine  in  this 
manner.  '  If''  you  say  what  is  reasonable,  I  must  submit.  If 
'  you  allege  any  thing  from  the  divine  scriptures,  which  are 

*  common  to  both,  1  must  hear  :  l)ut  unscriptural  expressions 
'  deserve  no  regard.'  And  as  he  professeth  to  receive  the 
creed  drawn  up  at  Ariminum,  so  he*^^  alHrmsit  to  be  agree- 
able to  scripture.  And  he  concludes  with  saying,  that'  it 
is  his  wish  and  aim,  to  think  in  all  things  as  the  divine  scrip- 
tures teach. 

IX.  I  shall  now  give  a  short  account  of  several  Arian 
authors. 

1.  SaysJerom,  *  Acacius,«  called  Monopthalmus  because 

*  he  was  blind  in  one  eye,  bishop  of  Ca;sarea  in  Palestine, 
'  wrote  seventeen  volumes  upon  Ecclesiastes,  and  six 
'  volumes  of  Miscellaneous  Questions,  and  many  other  trea- 
'  tises.  So  great  was  his  authority  under  Constantius,  that 
'  he  got  Felix,  an  Arian,  to  be  made  bishop  of  Rome  in  the 
'  stead  of  Liberius.' 

Acacius  succeeded  the  famous  Eusebius,  in  340,  and  died 
about  the  year  3G6.  Socrates,  speaking  of  Eusebius's  death, 
and  Acacius's  succeeding  him,  says,  that''  he  was  Eusebius's 
scholar,  and  wrote  many  books,  particularly  the  life  of  his 
master:  which  last  to  our  great  grief  is  lost,  as  well  as  the 
rest.  And  it  is  somewhat  strange,  that  Jerom  should  omit 
Acacius's  life  of  his  predecessor. 

In  Epiphanijis'  is  a  long  quotation  from  abook  of  Acacius 
against  Marcellus.  In  one  of  his  letters  Jerom  quotes''  a 
long  passage  of  the  fourth  book  of  this  writer's  Select  Ques- 
tions.    It  contains  an  explication  of  1  Cor.  xv.  21.     After- 

<^  Vid.  J'lpiph.  H.  73.  n.  i.  p.  845.  C. 

"^  Si  aliquid  rationale  dixeris,  necesse  est  ut  sequar.  Si  quid  enim  de  divinis 
scripturis  protuleris,  quod  commune  est  cum  omnibus,  necesse  est  ut  audiamus. 
Eae  vero  voces,  quae  extra  soripturam  sunt,  nullo  casu  a  nobis  suscipiuntur,  &c. 
Collat.  cum  Maxinun.  n.  i.  ap.  August.  T.  viii. 

"  — sed  ut  ostendam  auctoritatem  patrum,  qui  secundum  divinas  scripturas 
fidem  nobis  tradiderunt  illam,  quam  a  divinis  scripturis  didicerunt.     lb.  n.  4. 

^  Oro  et  opto  discipulus  esse  divinarum  scripturarum. Si  affirniaveris 

de  divinis  scripturis ;  si  alicubi  scriptam  lectionem  protuleris,  nos  divinarum 
scripturarum  optamus  inveniri  discipuli.  lb.  sub  fin. 

B  Acacius,  quern,  quia  luscus  erat,  novo<l)Qa\nov  nuncupabant,  Caesariensis 
ecclesiae  in  Palastina  episcopus,  olaboravit  in  Ecclesiiistem  decern  et  septem 
volumina,  et  m'lXfiiKrojv  ?;)r?jfiarajr  sex,  et  multos  praeterea  diversosque  tracta- 
tus.  In  tantuni  autem  sub  Constantio  imperatore  claruit,  ut  in  Liberii  locum 
Romve  Felicem  Arianura  episcopum  constitueret.     De  V.  I.  c.  98. 

h  Socr.  1.  ii.  c.  4.  Conf.  1.  iii.  c.  2.  p.  499.  C.  '  H.  72.  n.  vi— ix. 

•^  Acacius  Cajsareae — post  Eusebium  Pamphili  episcopus,  in  quarto  avWfKTwv 
^rmxarw  libro.— Ep  152.  ad  Miiierv.  et  Alex.  T.  4.  P.  i.  p.  213.  m. 


584  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

M'ards  in  the  same  letter,  he  mentions  Acacius'  with  other 
commentators  uhom  he  had  made  use  of,  though  for  learn- 
ing- they  fell  much  short  of  Origen  and  Eusebius. 

Tillemont  supposes  Acacius  to  be  tlie  author  of'"  a  book 
against  Sabellius  :  one  of  the  fourteen  small  pieces  published 
by  Sirmond,  as  written  by  Eusebius. 

Sozomen  says  of  Acacius  that"  he  was  a  diligent  imitator 
of  his  predecessor,  by  whom  he  had  been  instructed  in  sacred 
learning;  [or  in  the  knowledge  of  the  sacred  scriptures;]  that 
he  was  a  man  of  good  sense,  and  able  to  express  himself 
agreeably,  and  that  he  left  behind  him  many  books  worthy 
of  notice.  In  another  place  he  says,  that"  the  dignity  of 
his  see,  and  the  reputation  of  his  master,  together  with  his 
succeeding  to  the  possession  of  his  library,  gave  Acacius  a 
great  deal  of  authority.  He  moreover  says  that  he  was  very 
dexterous  in  accomplishing  his  designs. 

Philostorgiussays,thatP  Acacius  was  a  bold  disputant,  very 
ready  at  discerning  the  merits  of  a  cause,  and  able  to  express 
his  thoughts  to  advantage.  He  likewise  chargeth  him*!  with 
dissimulation  upon  some  occasions.  And  indeed  Acacius 
is  generally  reckoned  a  man  of  unsteady  principles. 

1  hope  this  may  suffice  for  an  account  of  Acacius,  with 
regard  to  letters,  and  his  general  character.  For  his  be- 
haviour and  management  at  synods,  his  various  fortune,  his 
differences  with  Cyril  of  Jerusalem,  and  others,  I  beg*  leave 
to  refer  to  other"^  writers. 

2.  Aetius,  according-  to^  Cave,  began  to  be  famous  about 
the  year  359,  and  died  in  366,  or  soon  after,  in  the  reig-n  of 
Valens. 

Socrates  has  a'  chapter,  entitled,  Of  Aetius  the  Syrian, 
Master  of  Eunomius.  He  says,  that  Aetius  was  born  at 
Antioch,    and    studied    some    while   at    Alexandria ;   from 

'  Ego  et  in  adolescentia  et  in  extrema  setate  profiteer  et  Originetn  et  Euse- 
bium  Caesariensem  viros  esse  doctissimos,  sed  errasse.  Quod  e  contrario  de 
Theodore,  Acacio,  Apollinario  possLimus  dicere.  Et  tamen  omnesin  explana- 
fionibus  scripturarum  sudoris  sui  inemoriam  reliquerunt.     lb.  p.  220.  m. 

'"  See  Les  Arieiis,  art.  28.  et  Eiisebe  de  Ccsaree,  art.  9. 

"  'Oq,  TTQog  avTov  EvatjSwv  rov  t^rjXov  fx*^^'  ''"'*•  ^''''  '^vrq)  tsq  \sQsq  vaiScv- 
OiiQ  \oy8c,  iKavog  re  votiv  kcu  (ppa^eiv  a^tiOQ  tyivtro,  wq  koi  voXKa  ffvyypanfiara 
Xoya  a^ia  KaraXnrtiv.     Soz.  1.  lii.  c.  2.  p.  499.  C. 

"  Kai  eTrtfTrjfXH  ■TrpocrwQ  iKKXijaiag,  xai  Eufff/^tov  rov  nor^^tXs — SiSaffKaXov 
avxii}V,  Kai  Ty  toKr)<7ii  kcu  liacoxy  tujv  avTH  fti^Xitav,  rrXeiuj  tuv  aXXwv  a'^itav 
tiSevai.     Soz.  i.  iv.  c.  23.  p.  578.  A.  B. 

•*  Hv  Se  AKaxiOQ  ^ap(Ta\iog  iv  roig  aywm,  CiavotjOtjvai  re  irpay/iaTOQ  ^vaiv 
oKvQ,  KOI  Xoy(i)  ^rjXojmuTO  yviocrGev'iKavoc.    Phil.  1.  iv.  c.  12.  p.  497.  A. 

''   'Oc  (TfpoQ  jKv  r)v  ri}v  lo'iav,  hipoc  Ct  Tt]v  yXwrrav.   ib.  p.  498.  A. 

'  Vid.  Cav.  Hist.  Lit.  T.llc-m.  Ilist.  des  Ariens.  Touttee  Dissert,  de  Vit.  S. 
Cyrill.  ^  H.  L.  T.  i.  p.  218.  '  L.  ii.  c.  35. 


Arius,  and  his  Followers.     Aetius.     A.  D.  358.        585 

wlience  lie  returned  to  Antioch,  and  was  ordained  deacon  by 
Leontius,  then  bisliop  of  that  city.  Epiphaniiis  snys,  fie" 
was  made  deacon  by  Geor<^e,tlje  Arian  bishop  of  Alexandria. 

Aetius's  history  is  told  at  large  by'  Gregory  Nyssen,  and"* 
Philostorgius.  Gregory  seems  to  give  wrong-  turns  to  seve- 
ral things.  The  sum  however  of  both  accounts  is  to  this 
purpose  :  Aetius's  father,  by  some  mismanagement  of  his 
affairs,  was  reduced  ;  and  when"  he  died  Aetius  and  his 
mother  were  left  in  great  straits.  For  some  time  Aetius 
worked  at  the  goldsmith's  trade  for  a  livelihood  :  after  his 
mother's  death,  as  Philostorg'ius  says,  Aetius  applied  him- 
self to  learning,  and  with  great  success,  through  the  happi- 
ness of  his  genius.  Ile>  afterwards  learned  the  art  of  physic, 
from  a  skilful  physician  at  Alexandria;  which  he  practised 
in  a  very  honourable  manner,  giving  his  advice  free  to  such 
as  M'anted  it.  And  Cave'  allows  his  happy  disposition  for 
literature.  Epiphanius  observes,  that''  Aetius  was  ignorant 
of  secular  learning-,  till  he  came  to  man's  estate. 

Socrates,  in  the  chapter  before  referred  to,  says  of  Aetius, 
that^  his  chief  excellencewas  a  contentious  skill :  that  he  had 
small  ac(juaintance  with  the  scriptures,  or  the  ancients  who 
had  written  commentaries  upon  the  christian  oracles:  and 
that  he  had  but  little  esteem  for  Clement.  Africanus,  and 
Origen,  though  they  were  so  distinguished  for  knowledge  and 
learninff. 

So  Socrates  :  and  what  he  says  may  be  true  for  the  most 
part.  It  is  likely  enough,  that  Aetius  had  not  fully  acquaint- 
ed himself  with  the  more  ancient  christian  writers  :  notwith- 
standing- which  he  might  be  a  man  of  good  sense.  And 
Philostorgius  says,  that"^  when  one  of  his  masters  gave  a 

"  H.  IG.  n.  i.  "  Gr,  N.  contr.  Eunom.  1.  i.  p.  292,  &c. 

"  Phil.  1.  iii.  c.  15.  "   titov  ce  tov  Atriov  ovra  tig  ta')(aTov 

aw  T7J  fii]Tpi  -KtviaQ  eXaaai,  km  Sia  tsto  etti  to  xpvffoxonv  opfii\uat. Sia 

pti}fiT}v  ipvaiwQ  tTTt  Tag  XoyiKn^  nrtrpaftjvai  fiaOriatiQ.  k.  X.    lb.  p.  488.  B. 

'  hpi-tvu}v  St  IV  larpiKij  AtTioQ  ctfiKrOov  Tvapif^t  toiq  ctOfitvoig  ttjv  ^tpairtiav. 
ib.  p.  488.  B.  ^  Aunfabrum  vero  t'uisse  Aetium,  certius  constat : 

sed,  mortiii  demuni  matre,  homo  praestanti  indole  ad  philosophicas  disciplinas 
animum  applicuit.     Cav.  in  Aetio.  ^  Ovrng  6  Atrwg  b  Kara  tov 

KoafiiKov  \oyov  airaiStvroQ  tjv,  iioQ  Tijg  TiXtiag  avroj  i/XiKiag,  ug  Xoyog.  II.  7G. 
n.  ii.  in.  °  Ovrm  ct  ijv  oXtyo/iaOtig  6  AtTiog,  koi  tujv  ifpwi' 

ypa^fiaT(jiv  afivr\Tog'  to  tpiTt/cov  St  KUToipQwKti  iiovov,  ovtp  Kai  aypoiKog  Tig 
TTOirjctitv  oig  firjTt  Tag  apx<^iiig  Tsg  Ta  ;^piTiai'(/fa  Xoyia  ippr)viv<TavTag  acTKtj- 
Btjvai,  TToXXn  xaiptiv  tjipaaag  Toig  TTipi  KXij^iVTCt,  Kai  A<ppiK(ivov,  km  Qinytvtjv, 
avSpag  naaijg  aoipiag  iTrinjfiovag.  Socr.  I.  ii.  c.  3.5.  p.  13  >.  15.  C'o'.if.  Thdrf. 
1.  ii.  c.  24,  ct  27.  *^  'O  St  th  SiSaffKaXn  SijuocrKf  iroTt  Kara-ag 

tig  iXiyx^ov,  OTi  firi  Tiav  Qtwv  Xoyiuv  opOijv  tvoitiro  ti]v  Siyjyrjffiv iKtiQiv 

Si  iXaOiic,  AOavamo)  ffvyyivircn,  Trap'  (f)  Tag  ivnyytXiTug  at>ayvi<g,  kcii  Toig  Ka9' 

iKaTOV  aVTOv  tTTiTyjaag,  tni   ri]v  Tapnov  Trapa  Avtojvwv  afiKviirai h<f 

B  rag  th  uttotoXs  avaSiSaxOtig  trri'^oXag. k.  X.  iibi  supr.  p.  487.  B.  C 


586  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

wrong  interpretation  of  the  divine  oracles,  Aetiiis  corrected 
Iiini:  and  that  he  read  and  studied  the  gospels  with  great 
care  under  Athanasius,  a  disciple  of  Lucian,  and  bishop  of 
Anazarbus  :  and  that  he  read  the  epistles  of  Paul  with 
Antony,  then  presbyter  of  Tarsus  ;  and  afterwards  the  pro- 
phets, particularly  Ezekiel,  with  Leontius,  at  that  time  pres- 
byter of  Antioch. 

And  Theodoret  observes,  that*  Eunoniius  greatly  extolled 
Aetius  in  his  writings,  and  called  him  a  man  of  God,  and 
bestowed  on  him  many  commendations. 

Theodoret  in  an  account  of  Aetius  and  Eunomius  says,  that® 
Aetius  improved  upon  the  blasphemies  of  Arius:  for  which 
causeConstantius  banished  him  into  a  remote  partof  Phryg'ia. 
For  after  his  father's  death,  being  influenced  by  some  of  his 
courtiers,  he  made  a  law,  that  no  maiv  should  say  the  Son 
of  God  was  of  the  same  substance  with  God,  nor  of  a  differ- 
ent substance:  for  he  said,  it  was  not  lawful  to  talk  of  the 
nature  of  God.  But  he  directed  men  to  say,  that  he  is  in  all 
things  like  to  him  that  begat  him.  Aetius  therefore  being 
the  first  who  said  the  Son  was  altogether  unlike  to  the  Father, 
was  banished  into  the  fore-mentioned  place. 

The  emperor  Julian  not  only  restored  Aetius,  as  he  did 
others  who  were  banished  in  the  reign  of  Constantius;  but 
likewise  did  him  the  honour  to  write  him^  a  letter,  and  invite 
him  to  court.  He  alsos  gave  him  an  estate  near  Melitene 
in  Lesbos,  where  Aetius  resided  sometime.  Nevertheless, 
it  is  generally  concluded  from*'  Philostorgius's  account,  that 
Aetius  died  at  Constantinople.  He  plainly  says,  that*  Aetius 
was  buried  by  Eunoniius  and  other  friends,  in  a  very  hand- 
some manner. 

The  displeasure  of  the  catholics  against  Aetius  was  so 
great,  that,  as"*  Socrates  says,  he  had  the  surname  of  Atheist. 
Athanasius'  mentions  him  with  the  same  odious  appellation. 
And  Cave  says,  he™  was  justly  so  called. 

d  Theod.  H.  E.  1.  ii.  c.  29.  in. 

*   vofiov  TtOuKfv  airayopivovra  fif]Te  bfiosowv,  firjre  nt]v  iTipoatTtov 

roX/^^ti/  Tiva  XiyHV  rov  'Yiovra  Otn'  «  ycip  uaiov  iXiys  th  0£s  t)]v  Hcnav  iptvvav' 
6[ioiov  Ct  Kara  Truvra  T(p  yiyoi'OTi  Xtytiv  tKtXtvrrC  Aia  rot  tuto  Kai  tov  AtTiov 
(pavai  irpo)TOV  ToXfitjffavTa  avofiowv  iivai  tov  'Yiov  Kara  iravra  ri{j  yiyivqKori 
Gey.  K.  X.  H.  F.  I.  iv,  c.  3.  sub  in.  Conf.  ejusd.  H.  E.  1.  ii.  c.  27.  p.  112.  et 
Epiph.  H.  7G.  n.  iii.  ^  Julian.  Ep.  31. 

e  Phil.  I.  ix.  c.  4. 

h  lb.  cap.  6. 

'  Krtt  Tr]v  aXXrjv  KtfStiav  fiira  tuv  by,o(ppovi>iv  TtXiaaittva  irpog  to  Xafnrpo' 
TOTov.  ib.  ^  Ato  Kai  tniKaXiiTo  6  a9tOQ.     Socr.  1.  ii.  C.  35 

p.  130.  D.  Vid.  eund.  1.  iv.  c.  7.  p.  215.  B. 

'  'O  OpyXXn/iivog  Atrtoc,  6  emKXt]6ug  aOiog.     De  Synod,  n.  6.  p.  720.  A. 

"•  Unde  Athei  cognomen  ei  nicrito  adhsesit.     Cav.  ubi  supr. 


Anius,  and  his  FoUoiuers.     Asterius.  587 

Socrates  says,  that"  Aetius  wrote  letters  to  the  emperor 
Constaiitius,  ami  others,  filled  with  a  contentious  sophistry. 

Epiphaiiiiis  has  preserved"  a  small  hook  of  Aetiiis,  con- 
cerning- the  faith,  consisting  of  seven  and  forty  propositions, 
or  short  chapters,  which  he  distinctly  answers.  And  Epi- 
phanius  says,  it  was  reported,  that  he  p  had  drawn  up  three 
l)undred  such  chapters. 

3.  Anonymous  author  of  a  Commentary''  upon  the  book 
of  Job,  in  three  books,  ascribed  to  Origen,  but  plainly  not 
his,  and  written  after  the  rise  of  the  Arian  controversy. 
Some  have  thought  it  to  be  the  work  of  a  Latin  author, 
particularly  Maxituin  the  Arian,  to  be  mentioned  by  and  by. 
But  Huet,  to  whom"^  I  refer,  has  well  observed,  that  this 
work  in  Latin,  as  we  now  have  it,  is  a  translation  from  the 
Greek.  I  know  not  the  exact  time  of  it ;  but  probably  it 
was  written  before  the  end  of  the  fourth  century.  The  three 
books  of  this  work  contain  a  comment  only  upon  the  first 
and  second,  and  part  of  the  third  chapter  of  the  book  of  Job. 
It  is,  in  my  o|)inion,  a  dull  and  tedious  performance. 

I  shall  make  no  extracts  out  of  it  any  farther  than  to 
observe,  that  many  books  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament 
are  here  quoted,  particularly^  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles;  and 
that  the  author  appears  to  have  received*  the  epistle  to  the 
Hebrews. 

4.  Anonymous  author  of  a  Discourse"  or  Sermon,  answered 
at  length  by  Augustine :  which  confutation  was  written^ 
about  the  year  418.  That  sermon  is  a  short  performance,  in 
which  many  texts  of  the  gospels  and  epistles  of  the  apostles 
are  quoted. 

5.  '  Asterius,'  says"^  Jerom,  '  a  philosopher  of  the  Arian 
*  faction,  in  the  reian  of  Constantius,  wrote  Commentaries 
'  upon  the  epistle  to  the  Romans,  and  upon  the  gospels,  and 

"  Ubi  supr.  p.  130.  B.  °  H.  76.  p.  924,  &c. 

P  lb.  p.  930.  D.  1  Ad  calcem.  T.  ii.  0pp.  Origen.  ex  edit. 

Bened.  ■■  Origenian.  1.  iii.  n.  2. 

*  Sicut  dictum  est  ad  Cornelium  :  Orationes  tuae  et  eleemosynae  tuae  ascen- 
derunt  sursum  in  memoriam  coram  Deo.  Act.  x.  4.  Ascenderunt  procul 
dubio  ab  angelis,  atque  spiritalibus  ministris  delatae.  De  quibiis  dicitur : 
Omnes  sunt  ministeriales  spiritus  pro  his  qui  salutem  in  haereditatem  capiunt. 
Hebr.  i.  14.     Orig.  0pp.  T.  ii.  p.  856.  B.  C, 

'  Vid.  not.  =. 

"  Ap.  August.  T.  8. 

"  Sub  haec  venit  in  manus  meas  quidam  sermo  Arianorum,  sine  nomine 
auctoris  sui.  Huic,  petente  atque  instante  qui  eum  mihi  miserat,  quanta  potui 
etiam  brevitate  ac  celeritate  respondi.     Retr.  1.  ii.  c.  52. 

*  Asterius,  Arianae  philosophus  factionis,  scripsit  in  epistolam  ad  Romanos, 
et  in  evangelia,  et  Psalmos,  Commentarios,  et  multa  alia,  quae  a  suae  partis 
hominibus  studiosissirae  legimtur.     De  V.  I.  c.  94. 


588  CredihiUtij  of  the  Gospel  History. 

'  the  psalms,  and  many  other  things,  which  are  much  read 
'  by  the  men  of  his  party.' 

In  the  chapter^  of  JMarcelkis,  Jerom  had  before  mentioned 
a  book  of  Asterius  against  that  bishop.  And  there  must 
have  been  before  that  some  work  of  Asterius,  which  pro- 
voked Marcellus  to  write:  as  is  evident  from^  Eusebius, 
and^  Sozomen. 

All  his  writings  are  lost.  Athanasius  however  has  quoted^ 
some  passages  :  and  there  are  some  other  in  Eusebius's  books 
against  Marcellus.'^  And  in  Eusebius's  Commentary  upon 
the  fourth  Psalm,  published  by  Montfauqon, there  are  inserted 
Asterius's  observations  upon  the  same  Psalm  :  in  w  hich  seve- 
ral texts  of  the  New  Testament  are  quoted,  and  divers  of  our 
Saviour's  miracles  rehearsed ;  where  also  there  appears  an 
air  of  piety,  and  zeal  for  the  christian  religion. 

Socrates  says,  thaf^  Asterius  was  a  sophist  of  Cappadocia, 
and  that  forsaking  gentilism  he  embraced  Christianity.  He 
afterwards  published  books  in  favour  of  Arianism,  which 
were  extant  in  the  time  of  that  ecclesiastical  historian ; 
who  farther  adds,  that  Asterius  was  very  much  with  Arian 
bishops,  and  frequented  synods,  desiring  to  be  himself  also 
bishop  of  some  city.  But  having  sacrificed  in  the  time  of 
the  persecution,  he  never  obtained  that  honour.  This  chap- 
ter of  Socrates  may  be  compared  with  another  of*^  Sozomen. 
That  lapse  of  Asterius  happened,  it  is  likely,  in  the  year 
004,  or  thereabout.  Epiphanius  expressly  says,  \V  Mas  in 
Maximian's  persecution.  Asterius  is  often  mentioned  by 
Athanasius;  he  calls*^  him  a  cunning  sophist  and  patron  of 
heresy  ;  and  speaks"  of  his  having  sacrificed  in  the  time  of 
the  last  heathen  persecution.     Nor  does  Philostorgius  dis- 

*  Cap.  8G.  J'  Vid.  Euseb.  contr.  Marcell.  1.  i.  c.  4.  et  de 

Ecc.  Theod.  1.  ii.  c.  19.  p.  132,  133.  D.  1.  iii.  c.  4.  p.  8G8.  A.  B. 

^  'npo(pa(ng  di  yeyovt  MapicfXXf-j  ravTr^q  Tt]C  ypa^^jjc  A^tpiog  re  tK  KairrraSo- 
Kiag  (T0(pi'7r]g,  6g  Kai  -Trtpi  ra  Soynarpg  Xoyag  avyyQa<puiv  Tt]g  Aptis  Soy/xarog 
avjKjitponiviig.  K.  \.     Soz.  1.  ii.  c.  33.  p.  495. 

'  Vid.  Orat.  2.  contr.  Arian.  n.  37.  p.  505.  et  Or.  3.  n.  2.  et  de  Synod, 
n.  18.  et  alibi.  ^  Vid.  supr.  not.  y. 

*^  A'7fpiog  Tig  IV  KaTnruSoKiq,  aoipiTiKriv  jietuov,  ti]v  jiiv  KaTtXemt  j^ptTia- 
viUleiv  dt  eTTTiyytWero.  ETrt^^stpti  ds  Kai  Xoyhig  ffuyypa^fir,  o'l  fitxP^  ^^^  ipepovrat, 
ci  ojv  TO  AptiH  avriryj  Soyjjia.  k.  \.  Socr.  1.  i.  c.  36.  in,  Vid.  et  Soz.  1.  ii. 
c.  33.  ot  supr.  not.  '■.  ''  L   ii.  c.  33. 

«  H.  7G.  n.  iii.  p.  915.  C. 
'O  Travspyog  ff0(pi'7r]g  Aripiog  <>  Kai  T}}r  a'loerjeojg  avvr]yopog.     Or.  i.  contr. 
Arian.  n,  30.  p.  435.  B.  Vid.  et  Or.  2.  n.  28. 

8  A'^ipiog  6  Srvirag.     De  Decret.  Nic.  Synod,  n.  8.  in.     ATtptog  Se  Tig  airo 

KaTTTraSoKictg,  Tro\vKt(pa\og  (To^itt/^ eTrtiSt]  3vaag  ev  ti^)  Trportp'/J  Siuiy/iip 

Ti[j  KUTa  Tov  Trmnrov  th  KwvTavTia,  sk  r)SvvaTO  rrap'  avTwv  tig  kXtjoov  wpoax- 
Ortvui.     De  Synod,  n.  18.  p.  731.  E. 


Arius,  and  Ins  Followers.     Basil.  589 

seinble  that''    fault;   but  adds,  that  Asterius  was  recovered 
hy  his  master  Lucian. 

Acconling-  to  Philostorj^ius,  Asterius  was  a  moderate 
Arian;  for  in  one  place  lie  says,  that 'Asterius  taught  the 
Son  to  be  in  substance  like  the  Father:  in  another,  to''  be 
a  complete  likeness  of  the  Father. 

It  is  needless  to  give  any  farther  account  of  the  remaining' 
fragments  or  passages  of  this  writer.  Jerom's  article  alone 
is  sutticient  evidence  of  his  respect  for  the  scriptures  of  the 
Old  and  New  Testament. 

(>.  Says  Jerom,  '  Basil'  of  Ancyra,  skilful  in  the  art  of 
'  physic,  wrote  against  Marcellus,  and  a  book  concerning* 
'  Virginity,  and  some  other  things.  In  the  time  of  Constan- 
'  tins  he  was,  together  with  Eustathius,  bishop  of  Sebasta, 
'  the  chief  of  the  Macedonian  faction.' 

Basil,  called  also  Basilas,  as""  Socrates  says,  was  placed 
in  the  see  of  Ancyra  by  the  council  of  Constantinople  in 
336,  which  deposed  Marcellus. 

In  the  year  351,  he  had  a  disputation  at  Sirmium,  with 
Photinns,  which,  as"  Socrates  says,  was  taken  d(nvn  in 
writing-. 

Epiphanius"  reckons  him  among-  the  chief  of  the  Semi- 
Arians,  who  held  the  Son  to  be  of  like  substance  to  the 
Father. 

Sozomen  says,  he?  Mas  in  esteem  for  eloquence  and 
learning:  or,  asi  Tillemont  understands  the  last  phrase,  for 
his  capacity  to  teach.  And  Theodoret  says,  that"^  this  Basil 
and  the  above-mentioned  Eustathius  of  Sebaste,  were  in 
great  favour  with  the  emperor  Constantius  for  the  sake  of 
their  piety. 

For  the  rest  of  this  bishop's  history  I  would  refer  to' 
others. 

"  Phil.  1.  ii.c.  14. 

'  'O  St  [Eu^o^toc]  Ti)Q  ApuavtjQ  fiiv  So^r}Q  r]v,  Tr\r}v  ik  ts  A^ipis  ypa^juaroii. 
tis  TO  Kar  amav  ofioiov  vTrtvrjvtKro.     Phil.  1.  iv.  c.  4. 

cnrapaWaKrov  nKova  ti]q  th  HciTpoQ  s/jiag  uvai  rov  'Yiov  ev  Toig 

avTH  \oyaiQ  Kai  ypcijxnadi  Sia/iapTvpoiiivov.      Id.  1.  ii.  C.  15. 

'  Basilius,  Ancyraiius  episcopus,  artis  medicinae,  sciipsit  contra  Marcellum, 
et  de  Virginitate  librum,  et  nonnulla  aha.  Et  sub  rege  Constantio  Macedo- 
nianae  partis  cum  Eustathio  Sebasteno  princeps  fuit.     De  V.  I.  c.  89. 

■"  L.  ii.  c.  4-2.  p.  1.55.  C. 

"    o^vypa(p(i]v  Ti  Taq  (pwvag  avrwv  ypa(povr(jJv.      Socr.  1.  ii.  C.  30. 

"  Haer.  73.  n.  'i.  p.  845.  C.     Compare  Tillem.  Les  Ariens,  Art.  66. 

P  Kat  jSrtffiXfiy  Stivti)  Xiytiv,  Kai  tvi  Trailtvau  viruXriiifitvoj. — Soz.  1.  ii. 
c.  33.  sub  in.  "i  Qui  avoit  la  reputation  d'  etre  un  hommo 

eloquent,  et  fort  capable  d"  instruire.    Tillem.  Les  Ariens,  Art.  22,  near  the  end. 

'  ^vvrjOeiQ  St  i]<Tav  htoi  tij)  fiaffiXii,  Kai  ttXh^j/c  oarjg  Sia  rt]v  a^inraivov 
iSiOTtjv  cnrrjXavav  irapprjffiag.      Theod.  I.  ii.  C.  25.  f.  *   Vid.  Cav. 

Hist.  Lit.  Tillem.  Histoire  des  Ariens.  Fabric.  Bib.  Gr.  T.  8.  p.  347. 


590  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

7. Says  Jerom,  '  Eiinomiiis*  of  the  Ariau  faction,  bishop  of 
'  Cyziciim,  breaking  out  into  the  open  blasphemy  of  his 
'  heresy,  so  as  to  profess  publicly  what  they  hiile,  is  said  to 
'  live  siill  in  Capj>adocia,  and  to  write  many  things  against 
'  the  church.  He  has  been  answered  by  Apollinarius, 
'  Didymus,  Basil  of  Csesarea,  Gregory  Nazianzen,  and 
*  Gregory   Nyssen.' 

Eunomius  was  ordained  bishop  of  Cyzicum  by"  Eudoxius 
and  Maris,  in  the  year  360 ;  soon  after  which  he  was  banished 
by  Constantius.  He  suffered  the  like  disgrace  in  the  reign 
of  Valens ;  and  once  more  under  Theodosius  ;  who  how- 
ever at  length  suffered  him  to  retire  to  some  lands  of  his 
own  at  Dacora,  "'  his  native  place,  in  Cappadocia.  The 
occasion  of  this  last  banishment,  as  Philostorgius  says,  was, 
that'"^  the  emperor  understood  he  had  perverted  some  of  Jiis 
courtiers  whilst  he  lived  at  Constantinople.  Eunomius  was 
alive  in  392,  when  Jerom  wrote  his  Catalogue  of  Ecclesias- 
tical Writers.  But  he  died  not  long  after,  about  the  year 
394. 

Eunomius  was  not  only  a  disciple  of  Aetius,  but  also  his  ^ 
secretary,  or  amanuensis. 

I  shall  transcribe  here  an  article  from  Augustine's  book 
of  Heretics.  '  They  Aetians  were  so  called  from  Aetius, 
'  and  are  also  called  Eunomians  from  Eunomius,  the  disciple 
'  of  Aetius,  by  which  name  they  are  better  known.  For 
'  Eunomius,  being  a  better  logician,  Avas  more  successful  in 
'  spreading  that  lieresy,  which  holds  the  Son  to  be  in  all 
'  things  unlike  to  the  Father,  and  the  Spirit  to  the  Son.  He 
'  is  reported  to  have  been  so  great  an  enemy  to  good  manners, 
'  as  to  have  asserted  that  no  man  need  to  fear  harm,  what- 
'  ever  vices  he  indulged,  if  he  embraced  the  doctrines  taught 
'  by  him.' 

'■  Eunomius,  Arianae  partis,  Cyzicenus  episcopus,  in  apertam  hsereseos  suae 
prorumpens  blasphemiam,  ut  quod  illi  tegunt,  ille  publice  fateretur,  usque  hodie 
vivere  dicitur  in  Cappadocia,  et  multa contra  ecclesiam  scribere.  Responderunt 
ei  Apollinarius,  Didymus,  Basilius  Ceesariensis,  Gregorius  Nazianzenus,  et 
Gregorius  Nyssenus.     De  V.  T.  c.  120. 

"  Thdrt.  1.  ii.  c.27.  p.  113.  D.     Phil.  1.  v.  c.  3. 

"  Soz.  1.  vii.  c.  17.  in.  "  Phil.  1.  x.  c.  6. 

"  Taxvypacpog  wv  iKiivs,  Kai  inr  avrs  iraidivOtiq  ttjv  alptTticriv  Xs^tv.  Socrat. 
I.  ii.  c.  '45.  p.  130.  C.  'EvvofiioQ  vTtoy pa<pivQ  ytyovtv  Atnn,  th  eTnK\t]9tvTos 
aOts.  Id.  1.  iv.  c.  7.  sub  in. 

>■  Aetiani  ab  Aetio  sunt  vocati,  iidemque  Eunomiani  ab  Eunomio  Aetii 
discipulo,  quo  nomine  magis  innotuerunt.  Eunomius  quippe  in  <lialectica 
prajvaiens  acutius  et  crebius  defendit  banc  haeresim,  dissimilem  per  omnia 
Patri  asserens  Filium,  et  Filio  Spiritum  Sanctum.  Fertur  etiam  usque  adeo 
fuisse  bonis  nioribus  inimicum,  ut  asseveraret,  quod  nihil  cuiqne  obesset  quo- 
rumlibet  perpetratio  ac  perseverantia  peccatorum,  si  hujus,  quae  ab  illo  doce- 
batur,  fidei  particeps  esset.     De  Haer.  c.  54. 


Arius,  and  his   Followers.     EuNOMius.  591 

This  last  charge  too  is  in^  Epiphaniiis,  from  whom,  I 
suppose,  Augustine  had  it.  And  'I'heodoret  says,  he"  had 
heard  of  such  things,  but  he  does  not  know  them  to  be 
true. 

These  people  were  also  called  Anomeans  from  the  prin- 
ciple just  mentioned  ;  that  the  Son  is  unlike  the  Father. 
Epiphanius  calls  the  heresy  by  that  name,  and  says,  that'' 
Aetius  was  the  author  of  it.  Which  is  evident  from  things 
taken  notice  of  by  us  formerly. 

Let  us  now  observe  Eunomius's  writings. 

1.)  A  Commentary  upon  the  Ej)istle  of  Paul  to  the 
Romans,  not  extant;  of  which  Socrates  speaks  in  this  man- 
ner: '  Eunomius''  had  but  little  skill  in  the  sacred  writings, 
'  and  was  not  able  to  interpret  them.  With  abundance  of 
'  words,  repeated  and  diversified,  he  never  attained  his 
'  purpose:  which  fully  appears  from  his  seven  tomes  upon 
'  the  epistle  of  the  apostle  to  the  Romans;  where  wasting 
'  a  great  many  words,  he  shows  himself  not  able  to  repre- 
'  sent  the  scope  of  the  epistle.' 

2.)  An  Apologetical  Discourse,  still''  extant,  answered 
by  Basil  in  five  books. 

3.)  An  Exposition*"  or  Confession  of  Faith,  presented  to 
the  emperor  Theodosius  in  383,  stilH  extant:  upon  which  I 
would  make  the  following  remarks. 

(1.)  This  confession  is  in  the  common  order  of  ancient 
creeds :  first  of  God,  then  of  Christ,  his  person,  death,  resur- 
rection ;  then  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  the  resurrection  of  the  body, 
the  general  judgment,  eternal  life:  but  nothing  of  Christ's 
descent  into  hell,  nor  of  the  catholic  church,  nor  the  com- 
munion of  saints,  nor  the  forgiveness  of  sins. 

(2.)  Here  are  references  to  many  texts  of  scripture,  par- 
ticularly the  first  epistle^'  of  Peter,  and  the''  epistle  to  the 
Hebrews. 

(3.)  Here  Eunomius  says,  that'  Christ  took  man,  consist- 

^  To  Se  a^aXrjvcn  tv  Tivi  iropytiq.,  r}  trepg.  ajiaprKf  aSiv  tivai  faaiv'  Oucjv 
yap  ^r]TU  Qioq,  aXka  to  eivat  iv  ravrij  jiovy  ry  avTqt  vojXiZofitvrj  7ri7£t.  Epiph. 
Synops.  p.  810.     Vid.  etH.  76.  n.  iv. 

•*  H.  Fab.  1.  iv.  c.  3.  p.  237.  B.  C.  ^   Avonom  vaXiv    ivtg 

iKTiv  icaXiifiEvoi'  Eff;^oj^  Se  apxT]yov  Aetiov  tivu  Siukovov.  H.  76.  n.  1. 

■^   OXiyofiaQiijg  fiEv  exi^v  vpog  ra  if  pa  ypafifiara ojq  dtiKvvnaiv  avrif) 

01  kirra  TO[ioi,  hq  ifiaranroitjatv  eig  rrjv  Trpog  'Pio^amc  th  uttotoXh  itti'^oXijv' 
TToXXag  yap  Xoy»g  eiQ  avTtjv  avaXwcag,  ti]q  eTriToXtjg  tov  okottov  Xa^tiv  a  StSv- 
vttrai.  1.  iv.  c.  7.  p.  215.  C.  ^  ^p.  Fab.  Bib.  Gr.  T.  viii.  p.  262, 

&c.  et  Canis.  Lection.  A.  T.  i.  et  ap.  Basilii  opp.  T.  i.  p.  618.  ex  edit.  Bened. 

«  Vid.  Socr.  1.  v.  c,  10.  p.  269.  A.  Sozom.  1.  vii.  c.  12.  p.  719.  B. 

f  Ap.  Fabr.  B.b.  Gr.  T:  viii.  p.  253.  et  alibi. 

3  lb.  p.  253,  et  257.  "  P.  257. 

'   avaXa^ovTu  tov  £K  •pvx^Q  '^f"  awfiarog  av6p<onov.  p.  257. 


592  CredibiUty  of  the  Gospel  History. 

ing-  of  soul  and  body.  Nevertheless,  Fabricins  well  observes, 
that"^  thereby  is  not  understood  a  rational,  but  only  a  sen- 
sitive soul. 

(4.)  In  this  Confession  Eunoniiusis  truly  an  Arian.  And 
yet  he  calls  Christ  our'  God,  the"  only-begotten  God,  and 
true  God,  but  not  unbegotten. 

4.)  Apology  for  an"  Apology  ;  a  work  in  three  parts,  by 
May  of  answer  to  S.  Basil.  This"  book  was  answered  by 
Theodore,  probably  of  Mopsuesta,  Gregory  Nyssen,  and 
Sophronius,  as  we  learn  from  Photius. 

5.)  Epistles.  Photius  assures  us,  thatP  Philostorgius,wlio 
extols  all  Eunomius's  writings,  still  prefers  the  epistles  to 
the  rest.  But  Photius'i  himself,  m  ho  had  seen  forty  of  them, 
says,  they  are  written  as  if  the  author  had  not  any  know- 
ledge of  the  rules  of  epistolary  writings.  A  like  censure 
he  passeth  upon  the  style  of  all  Eunomius's  works  in 
general. 

Philostorgius,who  greatly  admired  both  master  and  scholar, 
compared  them  together.  He  says  that  Aetius  excelled  in 
the  force  of  reasoning,  and  readiness  of  answer  :  whilst 
Eunomius  was  more  remarkable  for  perspicuity  and  method, 
whereby  his  instructions  were  more  easily  instilled  into 
men. 

I  forbear  to  add  any  more,  and  for  the  rest  would  refer 
to  other''  writers,  in  whom  may  be  found  divers  things  omit- 
ted by  me. 

8.  Says  Jerom,  '  Eusebius*^  bishop  of  Emesa,  a  polite  and 
'  agreeable  writer,  published  innumerable  pieces,  suited  to 
'  gain  applause.     And  following  the  historical  sense,  he  is 

''  ut  per-ipvxtiv  non  mentem,   ed  infeiiorem  modo  animam  sensibus 

constantem.     lb.  p.  250.  '  Th  Ofs  kui  ^lorrjpos  r)fnov  Iriaa 

XptTw.  n.  1.  p.  253.  '"    ITtTfuivj/jfi'  hq  tov  th  Ota  'Ylov,  tov 

fiovoytvtj  Gtoj'. XpiTOv  iiki)Qivov  Gfov,  hk  ctytvinjrov.  u.  ii.  p.  255. 

"   Vid.  Gr.  Nys.  contr.  Eunom.  1.  i.  p.  289,  298,  299. 

°  — TH  avrs  Euj'ojuia  f3i^\wv,  ev  Xoyoig  Tpiffiv — <j)  nspirvxovreQ  QeoScopoQ, 
icat  Tpriyopwg  'Nv(T(yr}g,  km  ^McjypwvioQ.  I'hot.  Cod.  138.  p.  113.  Vid.  et  Cod. 
4,  5,  (>.   Cowi.  Philost.  1.  viii.  c.  12.  i'   Thq  Se  \oysg  avrs  iravTaq 

anoOnaiCdiv  Sict(p(peiv  Toiv  aWujv  stti  fxaWovXeyd  tuq  tTriToXag.     Philost.  1.  X. 

C.  (i.  fin.  ''   TravTcXiogTH  Tu)v  iTTi'^oXuJv  xapaKTTjpoQ 

sSeTHc  vofiHQ  ansaaQ.     Cod.  138.  p.  314.  ■■  Phil.  I.  viii.  c.  18. 

'  Vid.  Fabr.  Bib.  Gr.  T.  viii.  Cav.  II.  L.  in  Eunomio.  Canisii  Lect.  Antiq, 
T.  i.     Tiilemont,  Les  Aricns,  art.  98 — 100. 

'  Eusebius  Emisenus  episcopus,  elegantis  et  rhetorici  ingenii,  innumerabiles, 
et  qui  ad  plausum  popnli  pertinent,  confecit  libros.  Magisque  historiam 
secutus,  ab  his  qui  declamare  vukint  studiosissinie  legitur.  E  quibus  vel 
praecipue  sunt  adversum  Judseos,  et  Gentes,  et  Novatianos,  et  ad  Galalas  libri 
decern,  et  in  evangelia  homihaj  breves,  sed  plurimee.  Floruit  temporibus 
Constantii  Imperatoris,  sub  quo  et  mortuus.  Antiochise  sepultus  est.  De  V. 
I  cap.  91. 


Arius,  a7ul  his  Followers.     EusEuius.  593 

'  much  read  by  those  who  have  occasion  to  speak  in  public. 
'  The  chief  of  his  works  are  these  :  Against  the  Jews,  and 
'  Against  the  Gentiles,  Against  tlie  Novatians,  ten  books  upon 
'  the  epistle  to  the  Galatians,  and  many  short  homilies  upon 
'  the  gospels.  He  flourished  in  the  reign  of  the  emperor 
'  Constantius,  in  whose  time  also  he  died.  He  was  buried  at 
'  Antioch.' 

Eusebius  flourished  about  the  year  340,  and  died  about 
the  year  360,  as  Cave  thinks.  Fabricius  roundly  placeth 
his  death"  in  360,  Tillemont^  before  359. 

Socrates"  and  Sozomen'^  had  before  them  the  life  of  this 
bishop,  written  by  his  friend  George  of  Laodicea.  From 
whom  we  learn,  that^  JEusebius  was  descended  of  a  very 
honourable  family,  and  born  at  Edessa  in  Mesopotamia. 
He  was  early  instructed  in  the  sacred  scriptures,  and  then 
in  secular  learning,  by  a  master  at  Edessa.  He  afterwards 
came  into  Palestine,  that  he  might  farther  perfect  him- 
self in  sacred  learning:  where  he  studied  under  Patrophi- 
lus  of  Scythopolis,  and  Eusebius  of  Caesarea,  He  likewise 
went  to  Antioch,  and  from  thence  to  Alexandria,  where 
he  studied  philosophy,  and  then  returned  to  Antioch. 

Some  time  after  that  he  was  ordained  bishop  of  E mesa  in 
Phoenicia,  but''  the  people  could  not  endure  him,  having  a  no- 
tion, that  he  practised  magical  arts.  Such  is  the  reward  which 
some  men  meet  with  for  diligent  application  to  letters  !  And 
upon  another  occasion,  as  Sozomen  relates,  good'*  and  great 
as  he  was,  he  experienced  the  envy  of  those,  who  are  offended 
at  other  men's  virtues.  However,  the  emperor*^  Constantius 
was  greatly  pleased  with  him,  and  always  carried  him  with 
him  in  his  wars  against  the  Persians. 

His*^  piety,  as  well  as  his  learning  and  elo(juence,  appears 
to  have  been  at  that  time  very  conspicuous. 

Theodoret  sjiys,  that''   his  writings  showed  him  to  be  an 

"  Bib.  Gr.  T.  vi.  p.  IGO.  T.  viii.  p.  366,  *  Les  Ariens,  art.  31. 

"  Socr.  1.  ii.  c.  9.  "  Soz.  1.  iii.  c.  G. 

^   bjg  tir)  tK  T(i)v  iv7raTpi5u)v  rrjQ  tv  MeaoTTOTa/iig.  lESiaijc — tic  vtag  n 

TjXiKiag  ra  If  pa  fiaOiov  ypafifiara'  lira  ra  '  EXKtjviov  TraidsvOtu;  napa  t(;j  rrjviKavTa 
ry  'EStay  tTridiiiiTjffavTi  TnaSivry'  rfXot,"  vtto  ITarpo^iXs  Kai  Encrt/Sta  ra  Upa 
ipfjiilvtvBt]  B(/3Xta — KaraXa^tiv  rrjv  AXi^avSpeiav,  K(fKH  fiaQitv  ra  (piKoaoipa. 
Socr.  1.  ii.  c.  9.  Conf.  Soz.  I.  iii.  c.  6. 

*  Ain<Tafftavro)i>  Ss  riov  Ejutff/jvoji/  £7ri  ry  y^iipoToviq,  avTS'  sXoiSoptiro  yap, 
log  fiaOijuariKtjv  aCKHfiivoq,  (pvyy  ^pr/Tai.      Socr.  ubi  supr.  p.  86.  A. 

''  A\X  6  fitv,  KaiTTtp  Toisrog  wv,  h  Sttipvye  tov  (jiOovov  twv  aviaaOai  tti^vko- 
rwv  iiri  raiQ  aWiov  aptraig.     Soz.  1.  iii.  c.  6.  p.  504.  c. 

''   EyivtTo  St  Kojv^avTUij  ti[J  (3am\u  Kf)(<ipiciti-tvoQ.  k.  \.  ib.  p.  504.  B. 

'  QsTO  yap  avrov  ev  fiaXa  TroXirtuo/ifi/ov,  icai  Xiyeiv  KpariTOv  ovra. — lb. 
p.  504.  A.  ''    EvtTvxov  tvioig  TUTS  GVyypafmacn  km  evpov  ye 

ToiQ   Apc(<j  tTvn(pspofiivov  Soynaui.     Dial.  .3.  p.  171.  D. 

VOL.  III.  2   g 


594  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History, 

Arian.  And  in  Jeroni's  Chronicle  he  is  called''  a  standard- 
bearer  of  the  Ariansi.  Nevertheless  Jerom  has  elsewhere 
owned,  that  fDiudorus  of  Tarsus  and  ^John  Chrysostoni 
imitated  him,  as  a  good  model  of  writing-. 

Jerom  in  the  article  from  his  Catalogue  mentions  several 
of  our  Eusebius's  works:  and  Sozomen  says,''  in  general, 
that  he  wrote  many  books,  and  speaks  of  them  with  com- 
mendation :  and  reckons  him  among-  the  most  noted  and 
eminent  persons  that  flourished  in  the  church  at  that  time. 
Beside  the  works  mentioned  by  Jerom,  we  know  from  Epi- 
phanius'  and  Theodoret,  that**^  he  wrote  a  piece  against  the 
Manichees. 

Theodoret  has  transcribed  a  long^  passage  from  some 
work  of  this  writer;  and  fragments  of  him  may  be  found  in 
some  other  places:  but  in  general  his- works  are  lost. 

His  work  against  the  Jews  is  said  to  be  still  in  the  library 
at  Vienna.  But  as  it  has  not  been  published,  it  is  not  easy 
to  form  a  sure  judgment  about  it.  The  Homilies,  which 
have  been  published  under  his  name,  are  now  allowed  to 
belong-  to'"  others. 

Ebedjesu  in  his  Catalogue  mentions"  a  book  of  Questions 
upon  the  Old  Testament,  not  taken  notice  of  by  Greek  or 
Latin  authors. 

0.  Eusebius,"  at  first  bishop  of  Berytus  in  Phoenicia,  then 
of  Nicomedia,  the  chief  city  of  Bithynia,  was  advanced  to 
the  see  of  Constantinople  in  338,  or  339,  and  died  about  the 
year  341. 

He  was  present  at  the  council  of  Nice  in  325,  and  after 
some  hesitation  signed  the  creed  there  composed.  Neverthe- 
less, havinggiven  some  ofl'ence,heandTheog-nis  were  banished 
by  Constantino,  ini'  three  months'  time  after  the  breaking  up 
of  the  council.  Upon  submission  made  by  them,  they  werei 
both  restored  to  their  sees  in  the  latter  part  of  the  year  328, 
or  the  beginning-  of  the  year  329.  And  Amphion,  who  had 
been  put   in   Eusebius's  room  at  Nicomedia,  and  Chrestus, 

*  Eusebius,  episcopus  Emisenus,  Arianae  signifer  factionis,  muUa  et  varia 
describit.     Chr.  p.  183.  '  Extant  ejus  in  apostolum  com- 

mentarii,  et  multa  alia,  ad  Eusebii  magis  Emiseni  characterem  pertinentia.  De 
V.  I.  c.  119.  ^  Eusebii  Emiseni,  Diodorique  sectator.     lb.  c.  129. 

"  Soz.  1.  iii.  c.  14.  p.  522.  C.  D.  '  H.  66.  n.  21. 

"  H.  Fab.  1.  i.  c.  ult.  fin.  '  Dial.  3.  p.  171—175. 

•"  Vid.  Cav.  Hist.  Lit.  et  Fabr.  Bib.  Gr.  T.  6.  p.  107,  108. 

"  Eusebius  Emesenus  composuit  hbrum  adversus  Judaeos,  et  Quiestiones  in 
Vetus  Testamentum,  et  Homiiiam  de  Stephano.  Ebed.  ap.  Assem.  B.  O.  T.  iii. 
p.  44.  "  They  who  are  desirous  to  make  farther  inquiries 

concerning  this  bishop,  may  consult  Fabr.  Bib.  Gr.  T.  vi.  p.  109,  1 10.  Cav. 
Hist.  Lit.  Tillcm.  Les  Ariens,  T.  vi.  and  elsewhere. 

i>  Vid.  Philost.  I.  i.  c.  9.  ''  Vid.  Socr.  1.  i.  c.  23.     Soz.  1.  i.  c.  21. 


Aiiius,  and  his  Followers.     Euzoius.  595 

who  had  been  made  bishop  oi'  Nice  instead  of  Theognis, 
were  removed. 

Nothino-  remains  of  Eusebius,  that  is  nndonl)t('dly  oemi- 
ine,  except  a  letter  to  Paulinus  liishop  of  Tyre,  preserved 
by'  Tlieodoret. 

Ammianiis  says,  that*  he  was  related  at  a  distance  to  the 
emperor  Julian;  and  possibly  therefore  to  Constantino  like- 
wise. Unquestionably,  Ensebins  was  a  man  of  great  abili- 
ties :  the  eminence  of  the  sees  of  Nicomedia,  and  then  of 
Constantinople,  in  which  he  presided,  g-ave  him  an  advan- 
tage, as  he  was  always  near  the  court.  But  his  own  address 
was  what  principally  rendered  him  so  capable  to  forward 
the  Arian  interests  as  he  did.  Sozomen,  not  to  mention  the 
praises  bestowed  on  him  by  Eusebius  of  Coesarea,  and  others, 
his  particular^  friends,  owns"  he  was  a  learned  man. 

10.  '  Euzoius,'  says  '  Jerom,  '  when  young-,  was  educated 
'  at  Caisarea,  together  with  Gregory  Nazianzen,  by  Thespe- 
'  sins  the  rhetorician.  And,M'hen  afterwards  bishop  of  that 
'  city,  he  took  a  great  deal  of  pains  to  repair  the  library  of 
'  Origen  and  Pampliilus,  which  had  suffered  very  much  in 
*  the  parchments.  At  length  in  the  reign  of  Theodosius  he 
'  was  expelled  tlie  church.  Many  treatises  of  his,  upon 
'  various  subjects,  are  in  being,  and  may  be  easily  had.' 

Euzoius  succeeded  ''"  Acacius  in  366,  or  soon  after,  and 
was  deposed  in  379  or  380. 

Jerom  does  in  another  place  s])eak  of  these  repairs  of  the 
library  at  Ca^sarea.  The  passage  seems  to  be  curious;  I 
therefore  transcribe  it  largely  at  the  bottom  of  the"  page. 

•■  Theod.  1.  i.  c.  6.  '  ibidem  ab  Eusebio  educatus 

episcopo,  quern  generelongiiis  contingebat.     Arnm.  1.  xxii.  c.  9. 

'  — bv  uTOQ  aTroOicd^H  ytiyav.     Phist.  1.  i.  C.  8. 

"   avt^a  fWoyifjiOv,  Kai  iv  (iaaiknoiQ  TtTi^i]fisvov.     Soz.  1,  i.   C.    15. 

p.  427.  D.  "  Euzoius  apud  Thespetium  rhetorem  cum  Gre- 

gorio  Nazienzeno  episcopo  adolescens  Caesareae  eruditus  est :  et  ejusdem  postea 
iirbis  episcopus  plurimo  labore  corruptam  bibliothecam  Origenis  et  Pamphili 
membranis  inslaurare  conatus  est.  Ad  extremum  sub  Theodosio  principe 
ecclesia  pulsus  est.  Feruntur  ejus  varii  multiplicesque  Iractatus,  quos  nosse 
perfacile  est.     De  V.  I.  c.  13. 

*  V.  Cav.  in  Euzoio. 

"  Beatus  Pamphilus  martyr — quum  Demetrium  Phalereum  et  Pisistratum  in 
sacrce  bibliothecae  studio  vellet  eequare— tunc  vel  niaxime  Origenis  libros  im- 
pensius  prosecutus,  Csesariensi  ecclesia;  dedicavit :  quam  ex  paile  corruptam 
Acacius,  dehinc  et  Euzoius,  ejusdem  ecclesiae  sacerdotes,  in  membranis  restau- 
rare  conati  sunt.  Hie  cum  multa  repererit,  et  mventorum  nobis  indicera 
reliquerit,  centesimi  vigesimi  sextiPsalmi  commentarium,  et  Phe  literae  tracta- 
tum,  ex  eo  quod  non  inscripsit,  confessus  est  non  repertum.  Non  quod  talis 
tantusque  vir  (Adamantium  dicimus)  aliquid  prffiterieril :  sed  quod  negligentia 
posterorum  ad  nostram  usque  mcmoriam  non  duravit.  Ad  Marcellum.  0pp. 
T.  ii.  p.  171.  al.  Ep.  141 


596  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

*' Cave y  speaks  honourably  of  Euzoius:  but  none  of  his 
works  remain,  no,  not  the  titles  of  them  ;  though  Jerom  says, 
they  might  be  easily  had  in  his  time. 

Euzoius  is  mentioned  by  Epiphanius^  among  those,  whom 
he  calls  Semi-Arians. 

11.  George,  bishop  of  Laodicea,  Hourislied,  as  Cave  says, 
about  the  year  340.  He  wrote  the  Life  of  Eusebius  bishop 
of  Emesa,  which'^  Socrates  and  *"  Sozomen  made  use  of.  He 
likewise  published  a  book  against  the  Man ichees,  mentioned 
by*"  Theodoret  and'^  Photius.  And  Sozomen®  has  a  short, 
but  warm  letter  of  his  against  Aetius. 

He  was  a  native  of  Alexandria,  and  at  first  presbyter 
there,  before  he  was  bishop.  George  is  often  mentioned, 
and  sometimes  quoted  bys  Athanasius.  Theodoret  says, 
that''  though  he  was  an  Arian,  he  was  a  great  philosopher. 
Nor  has  Philostorgius  failed  to  observe,  that'  before  he  was 
made  bishop,  he  made  good  progress  in  philosophy. 

One  thing  however,  perhaps,  is  not  to  the  honour  of  this 
Arian  bishop  and  philosopher,  that  in  his  Life  of  his  friend 
Eusebius,  bishop  of  Emesa,  he**^  relates  many  miracles  to 
have  been  done  by  him.  This,  in  all  probability,  ought  to 
be  ascribed  to  credulity  or  partiality. 

Beausobre  particularly  laments  the  loss  of  two  books, 
written  against  the  Mnnichees,  '  which  '  probably  were  very 

*  excellent  and  valuable,  as  may  be  concluded  from  the 
'  capacity  of  the  authors.  The  first  is  that  of  George  bishop 
'  of  Laodicea,  whom  Athanasius  decries  as  the  worst  of  all 
'  men,  because  he  was  one  of  the  principal  supports  of 
'  Arianism  :  to  whom  however  Theodoret  bears  witness,  as 
'  one  of  the  greatest  philosophers  of  his  time.  The  second 
'  book  is  that  of  Eusebius  of  Emesa.     This  bishop,  being 

*  born  at  Edessa  in  Mesopotamia,  understood  Syriac,  which 

*  was  the   vulgar  tongue  of  the  province,  and  was  able  to 

*  read    the   works  of  Mani  in  the  original.     Moreover  he 

*  lived  at  a  time,  when  the  memory  of  his  life  and   actions 

y  Vir  plane  docfus  ac  diligens.     Ubi  supr. 

^  H.  73.  n.  37.  p.  685.  C.  »  L.  ii.  c.  9. 

••  L.  iii.  c.  6.  '^  H.F.I,  i.  c.  ult.  fin. 

d  Cod.  85.  '  Vid.  Sozom.  1.  iv.  c.  1.3. 

'  Vid.  Philost.  1.  viii.  c.  17.  e  Tttopytog  St  6  vw  ev  hao^iKixf, 

vpt<T(ivTtpoQ  ^i(v  u>v  TOTi  rt]Q  AXiKnvSptia^.  De  Synod,  n.  17.  p.  731.  B. 

''    ai'rjfi  Tt]c  liiv   ApiiH  TTpOTareviov  ciiixusmq,  toiq  Se  fiKonoipoiQ  ivri- 

dga^iuivoQ  ixaQrjfiam,  II.  F.  1.  i.  c.  lilt.  f.  '  K«i  VfMpywqSf  AXi^av- 

Sptvg  ytp  TO  yn'or,  kcu  rwv  t/c  (/uXocro^mc  ipfuopfiivutv. — Phil.  1.  viii.  c.  17. 

^   TiXivraiov  Se  nrayii Kai  on  Tfpa<7tn  iv  toiq  ■x^epffiv  avrn  tyiviTO. 

Socr.  1.  ii.  0.  f).  p.  SG.  B.  Aiyirni  yaQ  TroXXa  Si  avrn  BavnaTH(>yr)(Tai  to  Ohov, 
wf  fiapTvpti  rtwfiytoc  u  AaoSiKivc- — '^o'i.  1.  iii.  c.  (').  p.  504.  B. 

'  See  Hist,  dc  Munich.  T.  i.  p.  223,  224. 


Arius,  and  his  Followers.     Philostorgius.  597 

'  was  fresh,  and  in  places  were  he  saw  many  of"  his  followers. 

'  All  this,  joined  with  unconinion  knowledjL»e  and  eloquence, 

'  rendered  Eiisebius  the   most   proper  man  in  the  world  to 

'  teach  us  both  the  history  and  the  opinions  of  that   heresi- 

arch.     But  the  envy  of  the  Greeks,  or  their  inunoderate  zeal 

against  the  Arians,  has  caused  the  loss  of  all  the  works  or 

this  excellent  personage,  except  a  few  remains   preserved 

by  the  Syrians.' 

12.  Lucius,  the  Arian  bishop  at  Alexandria  after  Atha- 
nasius,  as'"  Jerom  says,  pul)lished  some  small  pieces  upon 
divers  subjects:  for  which  cause  Jerom  has  given  him  a 
place  in  his  Catalogue  of  Ecclesiastical  Writers,  and  I 
have  put  his  words  at  the  bottom  of  the  page,  and  refer  to 
some  others"  for  a  fuller  account. 

13.  Maximin,  an  Arian  bishop,  with  whom  Augustine,  in 
the  year  427  or  428,  had  a  public  disputation  or  conference, 
still"  extant.  And  soon  after  that  conference,  Augustine 
wrote  two  books  against  Maximin,  likewise  in  being\  Hav- 
ing already  i"  exhil)ite(l  his  testimony  to  the  scriptures,  T  need 
not  add  any  thing  farther  here. 

14.  Philostorg'ius  was  born  about  the  year^  368,  at  a 
village  in  Cappadocia.  His"^  father's  name  was  Carterius, 
his  mother's  Eulampia,  only  daughter  of  a  presbyter  named 
Anysius,  who  however  had  four  sons  besides.  His  mother's 
ancestors,  both  by  the  father's  and  mother's  side,  were 
Homoiisians  :  but  Carterius  was  a  follower  of  Eunomius. 
He  brought  over  his  w'ife  to  his  own  opinion  ;  she  persuaded 
her  brothers,  at  length  her  father  and  other  relations.  Of  this 
opinion  Philostorgius  makes  open  profession;  that  is,  he  did 
not  believe  the  Son  of  God  to  be  like  the  Father.  When 
he  was  twenty^  years  of  age,  he  went  to  Constantinople  to 
improve  himself  in  learning. 

His  Ecclesiastical  History,  in'  two  parts,  making*  in  all 
twelve  books,  was  published  about  the  year  425,  in  the  time 
of  the  emperor  Theodosius  the  younger,  in  whose  reign  like- 
Avise  wrote  those  other  historians,  Socrates,  Sozomen,  and 
Theodoret ;  containing- the  history  of  affairs  from  the  begin- 
ning of  the  Arian  controversy,  or  about  the  year  300,  to  that 
time.     The  work  itself  is   lost,  but  we  have  large  extracts 

'"  Lucius,  post  Athanasium  Arianee  partis  episcopus  usque  ad  Theodosium 
principem,  a  quo  est  pulsus,  Alexandrinam  ecclesiam  tenuit.  Exstant  ejus 
solennes  de  Pascha  epistolae,  et  pauci  variarum  hypolheseon  libelii.  De  V.  I, 
c.  118.  "  Vid.  Cav.  Hist.  Lit.  et  Tilleni.  Les  Ariens,  Art. 

123,  &c.  °  Vid,  August.  Opp.  T.  viii. 

P  See  p.  582,  583.  "  Vid.  Cav.  Hist.  L.  T.  1.  p.  410. 

'  Vid.  Philost.  1.  ix.  c.  9.  '  Id.  1.  x.  c.  6. 

'  Vid.  Phot.  cod.  40. 


598  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  Histoiy. 

made  by  Pliotius.  Beside  that  history,  as  he  himself  informs 
us,  he  wrote  an"  encomium  of  Eunomius,  and^  a  book  against 
Porphyry  in  defence  of  the  christian  religion.  Philostorgius 
was  undoubtedly  a  man  of  a  great  deal  of  knowledge  and 
learning,  and  Photins  conunends  his'*'  style;  nevertheless, 
he  may  be  said  to  be  remarkably  credulous.  In  his  brief 
account  of  Philostorgius's  history  Photius  observes,  that''  he 
extols  Eusebius  of  Nicomedia,  Theophilus  the  Indian,  and 
many  others,  as  eminent  for  miracles,  as  well  as  for  piety 
of  life  and  conversation. 

I  apprehend  it  may  be  worth  the  while  to  take  notice  of 
some  other  instances  of  credulity  and  superstition  in  this 
learned  and  zealous  Arian. 

He  highly  commends,  as  Photius^  says,  Constantius,  and 
says,  that  he  built  the  church  at  Constantinople,  which  is 
called,  and  really  is,  great ;  and  that  he  brought  from  Achaia 
the  apostle  Andrew,  and  placed  him  in  the  church  he  had 
built,  called  also  the  church  of  the  apostles  ;  near  to  which 
he  set  his  father's  tomb.  He  also  translated  from  the 
same  Achaia,  Luke  the  evangelist,  and  to  the  same  temple. 
Finally,  in  like  manner  he  caused  to  be  brought  the  apostle 
Timothy  from  Ephesus  in  Ionia,  to  the  same  celebrated  and 
venerable  church. 

So  writes  Philostorgius,  with  manifest  signs  of  approba- 
tion. And  I  suppose  these  to  be  some^  of  the  very  first 
translations  of  reliques.  But  they  are  mentioned  by  some 
other  writers  m  a  different  order.  For  the  author  of  the 
Paschal  Chronicle  first''  mentions  the  translation  of  the 
reliques  of  Timothy  in  356,  and  then  the  reliques  of  Luke 
and  Andrew  in  the  next  year.  And  he  says  of  those  last, 
that''  by  order  of  the  emperor  Constantius,  the  reliques  of 
those  holy  apostles  were  brought  to  Constantinople,  with 
much  care  and  veneration,  with  singing  of  psalms  and 
hymns,  and  were  deposited  in  the  church  of  the  holy  apos- 
tles. St.  Jerom's  manner  of  speaking  leads  us  to  consider 
this  as  a  very  early  iiistance*^  of  this  kind  of  translations. 

It  is  our  author  who  says,  that'^  Lucian  after  his  martyr- 
dom was  brought  by  a  dolphin   to  the  bay  of  Nicomedia  : 

"  L.  iii.  c.  21.  '  L.  x.  c.  10.  *  Cod.  40. 

"   E)/   Tipareioic  St   Kai  ftuj)  'Evaiftiov  rov  'NiKo/j.t^Seiag iccu  Gto^iXov 

Tov  IvSov,  Kui  aXKsQ  ■kXhovciq.     Cod.  40.  p.  30. 

"  Philost.  1.  iii.  c.  2.  '^  Vid.  Basnage,  ann.  35G.  n.  xi.  &c. 

et  Basnage,  Hist,  de  I'Eglise,  liv.  19.  ch.  iv.  n.  vi. 

^  Chr.  Pasch.  p.  293.  B.  "  Ibid. 

*=  Sacrilegus  fuit  Constantius  imperator,  qui  sanctasreliquias  Andrea;,  Lucae, 
Timothci  tianstulit  Constantinopolim  ? — Adv.  Vig.  p.  283.  in. 

0  L.  ii.  c.  12. 


Arius,  and  his  Followers.     Piiilostorgius.  599 

near  to  which  place  was  afterwards  built  the  city  of  Hele- 
nopolis. 

Heside  many  wonderful  appearances  related  by  other 
liistorians,  by  which  Julian's  attempt  to  build  the  temple  of 
Jerusalem  M'as  frustrated,  Philostorgius  tells  this  strange 
story  :  '  Av  clearing  the  foundation  a  stone  was  taken  up 
'  that  covered  the  mouth  of  a  cave,  cut  out  in  the  rock,  into 
'  which  one  of  the  labourers  being  let  down  by  along  rope, 
'  found  it  full  of  water  to  the  middle  of  the  leg".     Having 

*  carefully  viewed  the  cave  on  every  side,  he  found  it  to  be 
'  four-square.  This  was  the  report  he  then  made.  Being 
'  let  down  again,  he  observed  a  pillar  reaching  a  little  above 
'  the  water,  whereon  lay  a  book  wrapped  up  in   clean  and 

*  fine  linen.  Being  drawn  up,  the  linen  was  seen  to  be  fresh 
'  and  fair.  And  at  the  front  of  the  book  was  found  written 
'  in  capital  letters,  to  the  great  surprise  of  all,  but  especially 

*  of  Jews  and  Gentiles,  "  In  the  beginning  was  the  Word, 
'  and  the  Word  was  with  God,  and  the  Word  was  God."  ' 
This  is  related  by  no  other  writer  of  that  time.  For  which 
reason,  as  Cave*^  well  observes,  '  It  stands  upon  the  single 

*  authority  of  Philostorgius  ;'  though  he  is  pleased  to  add  : 

*  but  he  ancient  enough,  being  born  within  five  years  after 
'  the  thing  was  done.' 

He  says,  the^  empress,  wife  of  Constantius,  was  mira- 
culously cured  of  a  certain  distemper  by  Theophilus  the 
Indian. 

Photius  says,  that  tlie  ninth  book  of  Philostorgius's  his- 
tory contains  many''  wonderful  works  of  Aetius,  Eunomius, 
and  Leontius,  forged  by  the  author,  as  also  of  Euagrius, 
and  Arianus,  and  Florentios,  especially  of  Theophilus  the 
Indian,  and  some  others;  which'  nothing  but  a  bigoted  zeal 
could  make  him  invent:  yet  he  relates  them  without  any 
restraint  from  a  sense  of  shame  of  their  absurdity  and  im- 
probability. 

He  has  many  stories  of  judgments''  befalling  the  apostates 
from  Christianity,  in  the  time  of  Julian  ;  and  another  judg- 
ment^ upon  a  wicked  man,  who  endeavoured  to  shelter  him- 
self in  communion  with  Athanasius. 

Speaking  of  things  that  happened  in  his  own  time,  he  says, 
that"'   in  several  places  there  fell   hail  as  large  as  a  man 

^  L.  vii.  c.  14.  '  Life  of  St.  Cyril  of  Jerus.  in  English,  cap.  x.  p.  353. 

*>'   L.  iv.  c.  7.  ^  — AtTia  -x^tipittv  vTrip<pvr}  fpya — SiaTrKarTii. 

1.  ix.  c.  1.  in.  '   OvQ  t)  avrt]  rrjg  acrf/Ssiwg  Xuffca  Siepfxtrepug 

fTriStiKvV  Kai  Tavra  Kara  to  airiOavurarov  avanXarrovTi,  sdenia  irapjjv  ai<j- 
Orjffig  TTjQ  aTOTTioQ  ovrtKs^t^affa.  ib. 

"  L.  vii.  c.  10,  11,  et  13.  '  L.  iii.  c.  12. 

*"  L.  xi.  cap.  7. 


600  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

could  grasp  in  his  band  ;  and  some  pieces  were   found  to 
weigh  eight  pounds. 

1  forbear  to  mention  any  more  of  these  wonders ;  but  I 
shall  refer  in  the  margin  to  a  place  or  two"  more. 

I  proceed  to  take  some  things  in  him  relating-  to  the 
scriptures. 

At  the  beginning-  of  his  large  extracts  Photius  observes, 
that  Philostorgius  says,  he°  does  not  know  who  is  the  author 
of  the  books  of  the  Maccabees.  He  esteems  the  first  of 
those  books  very  valuable,  as  agreeable  to  the  prophecies  of 

Daniel. Moreover  he  says,  that  the  second  book  does  not 

appear  to  be  written  by  the  same  author. The  third  book 

he  much  dislikes.     The  fourth  book,  he  says,  was  written  by 
Josephus. 

He  blames  some  people  for  sitting;  when?  the  gospels 
were  read. 

He  speaks  of  Aetius'^  having  first  with  care  studied  the 
evangelists,  then  the  epistles  of  Paul,  after  that  the  prophets, 
particularly  Ezekiel :  which  was  mentioned  formerly:  as 
have  been  also  divers  other  things,  relating  to  the  scriptures, 
in  the  history  of  several,  taken  from  this  writer. 

15.  Sabinus.  Cave""  supposeth  him  to  have  flourished 
about  the  year  425.  For  what  reason  he  placed  him  so 
late  I  cannot  tell.  Tillemont  agrees,  that^  he  wrote  in 
the  time  of  Valens  :  and  Fabricius,  under  '  Valeus  or 
Gratian. 

By  Socrates  we  are  informed,  that"  Sabinus  was  bishop  of 
the  Macedonians  at  Heraclea  in  Thrace.  He  sometimes 
calls  Sabinus  a'  leader  of  the  Macedonian  sect,  and  a"* 
Semi-Arian.  He  wrote  a  History  of  Councils,  beg-inning- 
with  that  of  Nice.  The  title  of  his  book  seems''  to  have 
been  a   Collection  of  Synods,  or  of  the  Acts  of   Synods. 

"  Vid.  1.  iii.  c  26. 1.  ix.  c.  2. 1.  x.  c.  9,  1 1.  "  L.  i.  c.  1. 

P  Kai  yap  Kctdt'Cofitvoi  Tti)v ivayytKiKuiv  avayvotafia'^wv enoiavro ri)V uKpoaffiv. 
L.  iii.  c.  5.  ''    —Trap'  (^  tsq  tvayytXi'^ag  avayvag,  (cai  roigKaO' 

tKw^ov  en-iT/jffat, — c(f  a  rag  th  aTroToXs  avaCtCiaxQtiQ  eiri'^okag. — k.  X.   I.  iii 
c.  15.  p.  481.  B.C.  '  H.  L.  T.  i.  p.  41. 

^  Je  ne  sqai,  si  cette  retenue  de  Sabin  a  leur  egard  ne  marqueroit  point,  qu'il 
ecrivoit  sous  Valens,  dans  le  temps  que  les  purs  Ariens  etoient  encore  tout- 
puissans.     Les  Ariens,  Art.  107.  med. 

I  cujus  collectionem a  Concilio  Nicaeno  usque  ad  Valentis 

tempora,  sub  quo,  vel  sub  Gratiano,  scripsisse  videtiu-.     Fabr.  Bib.  Gr.  T.  6. 
p.  119.  not.  '.  "    2a/3ivoe  yap,  6  rwv  iv'EpaKXtig,  r>jfi  Gpaicjjc 

MaKicoviaviov  tniaKO-nroc.  k.  X.   1.  i.  c.  8.  p.  20.  A. 

*  2a/3tvoc  o  Tijg  MaKtvovm  a'lpeatojg  irpoe'Twc.  1.  i.  c.  9.  p.  31.  D.  Via.  et 
I.  ii.  C.  15.  "    Aptiavii^ojv  yap  ri  ijfuav.  1.  iv.  c.  22.  p.  231.  B. 

"   iv  Ty  avvayuty-g  rwv  cfwocoiv.  1.  ii.  C.  17.  p.  95.  B.   ry  crvvayuyy 

701V  <JuvodiKU)v  2a/3tve.   1.  iii.  C.  25.  p.  204.  D. 


Aaius,  and  his  Followers.     Theodore.  601 

This  author  is  often  quoted  by  Socrates,  who  took  some 
materials  from  him  for  his  own  work.  Socrates  does  like- 
wise several  times  complain  of  his  partiality, y  in  suppress- 
ing* and  concealing'  divers  things  which  did  not  make  for  the 
lionour  of  his  party.  And  the  justness  of  those  remarks 
must,  I  think,  be  allowed  by  every  one  who  reads  them  in 
Socrates. 

16.  Says  Jeroin  :  '  Theodore'^  bishop  of  Heraclea  in 
'  Thrace,  in  the  time  of  the  emperor  Constantius,  published 
'  Commentaries  upon  Matthew  and  John,  and  upon  the 
*  Apostle,  and  upon  the  Psalter,  in  a  neat  and  elegant  style, 
'  explaining  chieHy  the  literal  sense.' 

Cave  computes,  that^  he  was  made  bishop  of  Heraclea 
about  the  year  334.  Tillemont  says  that''  he  was  put  in 
that  see  some  time  before  the  year  334,  but  in  what  year  is 
uncertain.  The  time  of  his  episcopate  is  collected  from  a 
passage  of'  Theodoret.  Athanasius  expressly  says  that  he"^ 
was  promoted  by  the  Arians.  He  was  deposed  by  the 
synod  ofSardica  in  347.  He  died,  as  some  think,  in''  355, 
others  about  the  year*^  358.  Theodoret  reckons  him,  with 
Eusebius  of  Nicomedia,  and  Theognis  of  Nice,  one&  of  the 
prime  adversaries  of  Athanasius.  He  nevertheless  owns, 
that''  he  was  a  very  learned  man,  and  wrote  a  Commentary 
upon  the  divine  gospels. 

Jerom  has  elsewhere  plainly  mentioned  this  bishop's' 
Commentary  upon  the  Psalms;  and  refers  also,  as  it  seems, 
to  his**  Commentary  upon  the  epistle  to  the  Galatians. 

It  is  supposed  by'  Cave,  and™  Fabricius,  that  his  Com- 
mentary upon  the  Psalms  is  still  extant  entire.     Tillemont 

y  Vid.  1.  ii.  c.  15.  p.  92.  et  c.  17.  p.  95.  1.  iv.  c.  22. 

'  Theodorui,  Heracleae  Thraciarum  episcopus,  elegantis  apertique  sennonis, 
et  magis  historicae  intelligentiae,  edidit  sub  Constantio  principe  commenfanos 
in  Matthaeum  et  in  Joannem,  et  in  Apostolum,  et  in  Psalterium.  De  V.  I. 
cap.  90.  =■  Hist.  Lit.  T.  i.  p.  203. 

''  Les  Ariens,  Art.  20.  <^  L.  i.  c.  28. 

^  Ad  Episc.  ^g.  et  Lib.  p.  277.  A. 

«  Fabr.  Bib.  Gr.  T.  viii.  p.  412.  f  Cav.  ubi  supr. 

s  Vid.  Thdrt.  H.  E.  1.  i.  c.  28.  1.  ii.  c.  3,  et  8.  1.  v.  c.  7. 

^  EWoyi/io^  Ss  lia<ptpovTiOQ  o  9f ocwpoc  fjv,  km  Sij  kui  tuv  Qeiwv  evayytKiuv 
-l]V  ipfir]Vtiav  ffvyyi-yparptv.   \.  ii.  C.  3.  p.  71.  B. 

'  niaxime  in  explanatione  Psalmorum,  quos  apud  Graecos  interpretati 

sunt  multis  voluminibus  primus  Origenes,  secundus  Eusebius  Caesariensis, 
tertius  Theodorus  Heracleotas.  Hier.  ad  Aug.  Ep.  73.  [al.  95.]  p  627.  in. 

''  Praetermitto  Didymum, — Eusebiuni  quoque  Emisenum,  et  Theodorum 
Heracleotem  :  qui  et  ipsi  nonnuUos  super  hac  re  commentarios  reliquerunt.  lb. 
p.  619.  in.  '  Ex  hisexstat  nonnisi  commentarius  integer  in 

Psalinos.  Cav.  ib.  p.  203.  "  Commentarium  Theodori  in 

Psalmos  integrum  cum  Pafrum  in  Psalmos  Catena  Corderius  edidit.  Fabr. 
ubi  supr.  p  412. 

VOL.    III.  2  R 


602  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  History. 

only  says:  It"  is  thought,  that  we  still  have  his  Commentary 
upon  tlie  Psalms,  and  some  fragments  of  what  he  wrote  on  St. 
MaJthew.  1  must  own  likewise,  that  it  appears  to  me  very 
doubtful,  wliether  the  Commentary  upon  the  Psalms,  pub- 
lished by  Corderius,  be  justly  ascribed  to  this  bishop  of 
Heraclea  in  its  present  condition.  It  is  however  well  written, 
and  there  are  in  it  many  good  observations.  The  author  (if 
the  remarks  of  several  are  not  there  mixed  together)  re- 
cieved"  the  epistle  to  the  flebrews  as  St.  Paul's. 

17.  I  may  not  omit  Ulphilas,  but  must  aim  at  brevity, 
and  refer  to  others,  both p  ancients  andi  moderns,  for  a  more 
particular  account. 

Cave  supposeth  him  to  have  flourished  chiefly  about  the 
year  365. 

Socrates  says,  thaf  Ulphilas  subscribed  the  Arian  creed 
of  the  council  held  at  Constantinople  in  360,  who  before 
had  followed  the  Nicene  faith,  whicli  had  been  signed  by 
Theophilus,  bishop  of  the  Goths,  who  was  present  at  that 
council. 

It  seems,  that^  in  the  time  of  the  emperor  Valens,  the 
christians  of  that  country  were  brought  more  generally  into 
the  Arian  scheme  than  they  had  been  before.  Theodoret 
expressly  says,  that^  the  Goths  had  long  before  received  the 
rays  of  divine  light,  and  until  that  time  had  been  nourished 
in  the  apostolical  doctrine.  He  adds,  that"  even  after  that 
alteration  they  believed  indeed  the  Father  to  be  greater 
than  the  Son  ;  but  they  did  not  call  the  wSon  a  creature, 
though  they  communicated  with  those  who  did  so. 

Ulphilas  was  in  great  authority  with  that  people,  and 
very  useful  to  them.  He  cultivated  among  them  civility 
and  learning,  and  made  many  converts  to  the  christian  reli- 
gion. He"  invented  for  them  an  alphabet,  and  translated 
the  scriptures  of  the   Old   and   New  Testament  into  their 

"  Les  Ariens,  Art.  21.  sub  fin.  °  Vid.  Corderii  Caten.  Patr. 

Gr.  in  Ps.  ii.  ver.  7.  T.  i.  p.  27.  In  Ps.  viii.  ver.  6.  p.  158.  In  Ps.  xxix 
[al.  xl.]  ver.  7.  p.  740.  ''  Socr.  1.  ii.  41.  f.  1.  iv.  33.  Soz 

1.  iv.  c.  24. 1.  vi.  c.  37.  Theod.  1.  iv.  c.  37.  Piiilost.  1.  ii.  c.  5. 

•I  Cav.  H.  L.  Tillein.  Les  Ariens,  art.  132, 133. 

■•  Socr.  I.  ii.  c.  41.  ^  Vid.  Socr.  1.  iv.  c.  33.  Soz.  1.  vi.  c.  37. 

'  IlaXai  yap  rag  tt]Q  ^toyvwaiaQ  aKrivuQ  Si^ajiivoi,  toiq  aTro'^oXiKOig  ivtrpt' 
(povTo  doyfiaat.  Theod.  1.  iv.  c.  37.  p.  195.  D. 

"  Oil  Sr]  tvtKn,  liixpi  Km  Tijjxfpov  o't  Vot9oi  fifi^oi>a  fitv  tov  Ylaripa  XfysiTi 
78  'Yt8*  KTin/xa  Se  roi/  'Xtov  enruv  «k  aj/jj^orrat.  k.  X.    ib.  p.  190.  B. 

"  Tort  St  Kai  Ov\<pi\ac,  6  rtov  VorBon'  tTnTKojrog,  ypanj-iara  KjiEvpe  rorOiica, 
Kat  rag  ^tutij  ypit(l>ac,  tiQ  ttjv  TotOwv  utrajiaXwv,  tsq  j3apj3apsQ  ixavQavuv  ra 
&£(a  Xoyia  iraptaKvaatv.     Socr.  1.  iv.  c.  33.  p.  251. 

Ylpu)TOQ  Ci  ypaiiixaruv  tvptrrii'  avToiq  lytvtro,  icai  hq  ttjv  oiKiiav  (pMvriv 
IUTafpa(re  rag  itpag  ftiftXag.  Soz.  1.  vi.  c.  37.  p.  698.  A. 


Arius,  and  his  Followers.     Ulphilas,  603 

langiiag-e  ;  excepting'  only,  as  Pliilostorgius^''  says,  tlie  books 
of  the  Kingdoms,  ^meaning,  it  is  likely,  the  two  books  of 
Samuel,  the  two  books  of  the  Kings,  and  the  books  of  the 
Chronicles,]  containing  the  history  of  wars  :  for  the  Goths 
being-  a  warlike  people,  he  thought  they  rather  needed  a 
check,  than  an   incentive  to  fighting. 

As  these  were  great  performances,  I  have  placed  at  the 
bottom  of  the  page  the  accounts  of  several  writers  in  the 
original  words  at  length. 

This  may  suffice  for  a  brief  history  of  the  Arian  writers, 
in  most  of  which  articles  somewhat  has  offered  relating  to 
the  scriptures,  so  much  respected  by  all  christians  in  ge- 
neral. 

"  Kai  ypaufxaTiov  avroiQ  oikeiojv  tvpeTi]Q  Kararag,  utTtcppacrev  hq  t)]v  avTujv 
^wvr]v  rag  ypa0ac  airaaag,  TrXrjv  ye  Si]  riov  TiaaiKHMV,  are  tuiv  nokmwv 
iTopiav  t^sffwv.  K.  X.     Phil.  1.  ii.  c.  5. 


END    OF    THE    THIKD    VOLUME. 


JOHN    GUILDS    AND    SON,    BUNGAY. 


Princeton   Theological   Seminary   Libraries 


1    1012  01195  6010