INTRODUCTION<\/p>\n
It appears to me desirable, (and the opinion is not, I think, built upon slight grounds,) that before we enter on the history of the origin and progress of Christianity, a summary view should be taken of the age in which the Gospel Dispensation had its commencement. For in no other way than by a reference to the manners and opinions of those times, can we obtain any insight into the reasons and causes of many things which happened to the early Christians, or form a proper judgment of several of their primary regulations and institutions; nor can we know justly how to appreciate the great extent of those benefits which Christ hath procured for mankind, unless we previously acquaint ourselves with the forlorn and miserable condition of the human race before the Redeemer\u2019s advent. By way of introduction, therefore, to the following work, we shall, in the first place, present the reader with a sketch of the general state of the world at the time of our Saviour\u2019s birth; and then call his attention particularly to the civil and religious economy of the Jewish nation at the same interesting period.<\/p>\n
STATE OF THE WORLD<\/p>\n
CHAPTER I<\/p>\n
Of the Civil, Religious, and Literary State of the World in general, at the Time of Christ\u2019s Birth. [p. 2.]<\/p>\n
I. State of the Roman Empire. At the time when the SON OF GOD, having taken upon himself our nature, was born in the land of Judea, the greatest part of the habitable earth was subject to the senate and people of Rome, who usually committed the care and administration of those provinces which were removed to any considerable distance from the imperial city, to temporary governors or presidents sent from Rome; or if in any of them the ancient form of government was permitted to be retained, gave it such a modification, and clothed it with so many restrictions, as effectually secured to the Roman state a supreme and controling dominion. Although the appearance, or rather the shadow of freedom and dignity yet remained with the senate and people of Rome, the reality had long been lost to them; all power having centred in the one C\u00c6SAR AUGUSTUS, who was graced with the titles of Emperor, High Priest, Censor, Tribune of the People, and Proconsul, and invested with every office of the state that carried with it any thing either of majesty or authority.()<\/p>\n
II. Defects of the Roman Government. Were we to form [p. 3.] our judgment of the Roman government from the principles of its constitution, or the nature of its laws, we must consider it as mild and moderate.() But whatever promise of happiness the equitable spirit of the original system might hold out to the people, it was constantly checked and counteracted by a variety of causes, and particularly by the rapacity and dishonesty of the publicans to whom the collection of the public revenue was entrusted;() the unbounded avarice of the governors of provinces to increase their private wealth; and the insatiable cupidity of the people at large, which displayed itself not merely in the tenacity with which they maintained every part of their conquests, but also in a constant readiness to seize all opportunities of extending the bounds of the empire. Whilst, on the one hand, this incessant thirst after dominion gave rise to continual wars, and rendered it necessary constantly to burthen the inhabitants of the provinces with the maintenance of a formidable military force, a thing in itself doubtless sufficiently grievous, the greedy publicans and governors were, on the other hand, fleecing the people of the residue of their property by the most shameful and iniquitous pecuniary exactions.<\/p>\n
III. Benefits arising out of the Roman government. It must not, however, be overlooked, that the bringing of so many nations into subjection under one people, or rather under one man, was productive of many and great advantages. For, 1st, by means of this, the people of various regions, alike strangers to each other\u2019s language, manners, and laws, were associated together in the bond of amity, and invited to reciprocal intercourse. 2dly, By Roman munificence, which shrank from no expense to render the public ways commodious, an easy and ready access was given to parts the most distant and remote.() 3dly, Men that had hitherto known no other rules of action, no other modes of life, than those of savage and uncultivated nature, had now the model of a polished nation set before their eyes, and were gradually instructed by their conquerors to form themselves after it. 4thly, Literature and the arts, with the study of humanity and philosophy, became generally diffused, and the cultivation of them extended even to countries that previously had formed no other scale by which to estimate the dignity of man, than that of corporeal vigor, or muscular strength.
\nSince all these things materially contributed to facilitate the propagation of the gospel by our Saviour\u2019s apostles, and enabled them the more easily to impress mens minds with the doctrines of the true religion, we cannot but readily accord in opinion with those who maintain, that the Son of God could not have revealed himself to mankind at a more favorable or auspicious season.()<\/p>\n
IV. Peace prevails nearly throughout the world. Those intestine discords, by which the Roman state had long been distracted and ravaged, were terminated in the acquisition of the sovereign power by Augustus; and the wars with foreign states continued no longer to be undertaken with the accustomed precipitancy, or prosecuted with that degree of ardor by which they had been formerly characterised. Although, therefore, we cannot subscribe to the opinion of those writers, who, being led into a mistake by Orosius, have asserted, that at the time of our Saviour\u2019s birth the temple of Janus was shut, () and every part of the Roman empire wrapt in a profound peace, it must nevertheless unquestionably be admitted, that if the period of which we are speaking, be brought into comparison with antecedent times, it may justly be termed the age of peace and tranquillity. Indeed, had not such been the state of things, it would have been almost impossible, (as St. Paul pretty plainly intimates, 1 Tim. 2:2,) for our Saviour\u2019s apostles to have executed, with effect, the important commission to mankind with which they were entrusted.<\/p>\n
V. State of other nations. Our knowledge of the state of any of those nations which were situated beyond the confines of the Roman empire, is of necessity very imperfect and obscure, owing to the paucity of their historical monuments and writers. We obtain, however, light sufficient to perceive that the eastern nations were distinguished by a low and servile spirit, prone to slavery and every other species of abject humiliation, whilst those towards the north prided themselves in cherishing a warlike and savage disposition, that scorned even the restraint of a fixed habitation, and placed its chief gratification in the liberty of roaming at large through scenes of devastation, blood, and slaughter. A soft and feeble constitution both of body and mind, with powers barely adequate to the cultivation of the arts of peace, and chiefly exercised in ministering at the shrine of voluptuous gratification, may be considered as the characteristic [p. 5,] trait of the former; a robust and vigorous corporeal frame, animated with a glowing spirit, that looked with contempt on life, and every thing by which its cares are soothed, and the calamities to which it is obnoxious alleviated, that of the latter.()<\/p>\n
VI. All devoted to superstition and polytheism. The minds of the people inhabiting these various countries were fettered and held in melancholy bondage by superstitions of the most abominable and degrading nature. At the command of their priests, who were invested with an authority bordering on despotism, these deluded beings shrank from no species of mental debasement whatever, but were ready to plunge headlong into every extravagance of the most absurd and monstrous credulity. In saying this, we would not be understood to mean that the sense of a supreme deity, from whom all things had their origin, and whose decrees regulate the universe, had become entirely extinct; but, that the number of those who endeavoured by meditation and prayer to elevate their minds to a just conception of his nature and attributes, and to worship him in spirit and in truth, was comparatively insignificant, and of no account. Throughout every nation, a general belief prevailed, that all things were subordinante to an association of powerful spirits, who were called Gods, and whom it was incumbent on every one who wished for a happy and prosperous course of life to worship and conciliate. One of these gods was supposed to excel the rest in dignity, and to possess a supereminent authority, by which the tasks or offices of the inferior ones were allotted, and the whole of the assembly, in a certain degree, directed and governed. His rule, however, was not conceived to be by any means arbitrary; neither was it imagined that he could so far invade the provinces of the others as to interfere with their particular functions; and hence it was deemed necessary for those who would secure the favor of Heaven, religiously to cultivate the patronage of every separate deity, and assiduously to pay that homage to each of them which was respectively their due.<\/p>\n
VII. The same deities, however, not worshipped by all. Every nation, however, worshipped not the same gods, but each had its peculiar deities, differing from those of other countries, not only in their names, but in their nature, their attributes, their actions, and many other respects; and it is an highly erroneous supposition which some have adopted, that the gods of Greece and Rome were the same with those which were worshipped by the Germans, the Syrians, the Arabians, the Persians, the Egyptians, and others.() Pride and ignorance, amongst other motives, and possibly something of a similarity, which might be perceptible between their own statues and images, and those which they [p. 6.] found in other countries, induced the Greeks and Romans to pretend that the gods which they acknowledged were equally reverenced in every other part of the world. In support of this identity, they accustomed themselves to apply the names of their own divinities to those of foreign states; and the opinion of its existence having found abettors in every succeeding age, even down to our own times, the press has swarmed with an host of idle disquisitions on the subject, by which the history of ancient religions, instead of being elucidated, has been involved in a degree of uncertainty, confusion, and obscurity, that is scarcely to be described. It might probably be the case with most nations, that the gods of other countries were held in a sort of secondary reverence, and perhaps in some instances privately worshipped; but of this fact we are certain, that to neglect or disparage the the established worship of the state, was always considered as an offence of the deepest and most heinous nature.<\/p>\n
VIII. This diversity of religions did not generate wars. This diversity of gods, and of religious worship, was never known to generate animosity, or kindle the flames of war between nations, except in the one solitary instance of the Egyptians: and considerable doubts may be entertained whether even in this case a difference of religion alone was the cause of strife.() Each nation readily conceded to others the right of forming their own opinions, and judging for themselves, in matters of religious concern; and left them, both in the choice of their deities, and their mode of worshipping them, to be guided by whatever principles they might think proper to adopt. Although this may appear at first sight to many as a very extraordinary and unaccountable circumstance, yet, when it is examined there will be found nothing in it that should excite either our wonder or surprise.()
\nThose who were accustomed to regard this world in the light of a large commonwealth, divided into several districts, over each of which a certain order of deities presided, and who never extended their views or hopes beyond the enjoyments of this life, certainly could not, with any shadow of justice, assume the liberty of forcing other nations to discard their own proper divinities, and receive in their stead the same objects of adoration with themselves. The Romans, we know, were jealous in the extreme of introducing any novelties, or making the least change in the public religion; but the citizens were never denied the privilege of individually conforming to any foreign mode of worship, or manifesting, by the most solemn acts of devotion, their veneration for the gods of other countries.()<\/p>\n
IX. Various kinds of deities. The principal deities of most nations, consisted of heroes renowned in antiquity, kings, emperors, founders of cities, and other illustrious persons, whose eminent exploits, and the benefits they had conferred on mankind, were treasured up and embalmed in the minds of posterity, by whose gratitude they were crowned with immortal honours, and raised to the rank of gods. An apotheosis had also been bestowed on several of the softer sex, whose virtues or superior talents had improved and thrown a lustre on the age in which they lived. This may easily be perceived by any one who will take the pains to explore the sources of the heathen mythology; and it at once accounts for what must otherwise appear a monstrous incongruity, namely, that of their attributing to those celestial beings the same evil propensities, errors, and vices, that we have daily to deplore as the characteristic frailties of human nature. In no other respects were the gods of the Gentiles supposed to be distinguished beyond mankind, than by the enjoyment of power, and an immortal existence. To the worship of divinities of this description was joined, in many countries, that of some of the noblest and most excellent parts of the visible world; luminaries of heaven in particular, the sun, the moon, and the stars, in whom, since the effects of their influence were constantly to be perceived, a mind or an intelligence was supposed to reside. The superstitious practices of some regions were carried to an almost endless extreme: mountains, rivers, trees, the earth, the sea, the winds, even the diseases of the body, the virtues and the vices, (or rather certain tutelary genii, to whom the guardianship and care of all these things were conceived to belong,) were made the objects of adoration, and had divine honours regularly paid to them. In Egypt this excess of religious culture reached to the worshipping of the most noxious and venomous animals.()<\/p>\n
[p. 8.] X. Temples and statues of these deities. Buildings of the most superb and magnificent kind, under the names of temples, fanes, &c. were raised and dedicated by the people of almost every country to their gods, with the expectation that the divinities would condescend to make those sumptuous edifices the places of their immediate residence. They were not all open to the public, but some of them confined to the exercise of private and retired devotion. Internally, those of either description were ornamented with images of the gods, and furnished with altars, and the requisite apparatus for sacrifice.
\nThe statues were supposed to be animated by the deities whom they represented; for though the worshippers of gods like those above described, must, in a great measure, have turned their backs on every dictate of reason, they were yet by no means willing to appear so wholly destitute of common sense as to pay their adoration to a mere idol of metal, wood, or stone; but always maintained that their statues, when properly consecrated, were filled with the presence of those divinities whose forms they bore.()<\/p>\n
XI. Sacrifices and other rites. The religious homage paid to these deities consisted chiefly in the frequent performance of various rites, such as the offering up of victims and sacrifices, with prayers and other ceremonies. The sacrifices and offerings were different, according to the nature and attributes of the gods to whom they were addressed.() Brute animals were commonly devoted to this purpose; but in some nations of a savage and ferocious character, the horrible practice of sacrificing human victims prevailed.() Of the prayers of pagan worshippers, whether we regard the matter or the mode of expression, it is impossible to speak favorably: they were not only destitute in general of every thing allied to the spirit of genuine piety, but were sometimes framed expressly for the purpose of obtaining the countenance of heaven to the most abominable and flagitious undertakings.() In fact, the greater part of their religious observances were of an absurd and ridiculous nature, and in many instances strongly tinctured with the most disgraceful barbarism and obscenity. Their festivals and other solemn days were polluted by a licentious indulgence in every species of libidinous excess; and on these occasions they were not prohibited even from making the sacred mansions of their gods the scenes of vile and beastly gratification.()<\/p>\n
XII. Their priests. The care of the temples, together [p. 9.] with the superintendance and direction of all religious ordinances, was committed to a class of men bearing the titles of priests, or flamins. Within the peculiar province of these ministers it came to see that the ancient and accustomed honors were paid to the deities publicly acknowledged, and that a due regard was manifested in every other respect for the religion of the state. These formed their ordinary duties; but superstition ascribed to them functions of a far more exalted nature. It considered them rather in the light of intimate and familiar friends of the gods, than in that of officiating servants at their altars; and consequently attributed to them the highest degree of sanctity, influence, and power. With the minds of the people thus prejudiced in their favor, it could be no very difficult thing for an artful and designing set of men, possessed of a competent share of knowledge, to establish and support a system of spiritual dominion of the most absolute and tyrannical kind.<\/p>\n
XIII. Mysteries. In addition to the public service of the gods, at which every one was permitted to be present, the Egyptians, Persians, Grecians, Indians, and some other nations, had recourse to a species of dark and recondite worship, under the name of mysteries. The practice of certain secret religious rites may indeed be said to have been common to the people of almost all countries except the Romans, who adopted no such usage until the time of Adrian.() None were admitted to behold or partake in the celebration of these mysteries but those who had approved themselves worthy of such distinction, by their fidelity and perseverance in the practice of a long and severe course of initiatory forms. The votaries were enjoined, under the peril of immediate death, to observe the most profound secrecy as to every thing that passed:() and this sufficiently accounts for the difficulty that we find in obtaining any information respecting the nature of these recluse practices, and for the discordant and contradictory opinions concerning them that are to be met with in the writings of various authors, ancient as well as modern.() From what little can be collected on the subject, it should seem that these mysteries were not all of the same nature. In the celebration of some of them, it is pretty plain that many things were done in the highest degree repugnant to virtue, modesty, and every finer feeling. In others, perhaps, the course of proceeding might be of a very different complexion; and it is very probable that in those of a more refined cast, some advances were made in bringing back religion to the test of reason, by inquiring into and exposing the origin and absurdity of the popular superstitions and worship.() There might, therefore, be some foundation for the promise usually held forth to those who were about to be initiated, that they would be put in possession of the means of rendering this life happy, and also have the expectation opened to them of entering on an improved state of existence hereafter. However this might be, it is certain that the highest veneration was entertained by the people of every country for what were termed the mysteries; and the Christians, perceiving this, were induced to make their religion conform in many respects to this part of the heathen model, hoping that it might thereby the more readily obtain a favorable reception with those whom it was their object and their hope to convert.()<\/p>\n
XIV. The religion of the Greeks and Romans. At the time of Christ\u2019s birth the religion of Rome had been received, together [p. 11.] with its government and laws, by a great part of the world. The principal tenets of that religion were built on the superstition of Greece;() but, at the same time there was in some points a material difference between the two. For not to say any thing of the regulations established by Numa and others, relating to the government and support of the state, the people had, in the course of time, adopted much of the old Etruscan mythology, and a place amongst their gods had also been given by them to some of the Egyptian deities.()<\/p>\n
XV. The religions of other nations adulterated by the Romans. But since the conquered nations did not so implicitly conform to the Roman religion as utterly to discard that of their ancestors, a species of mixed religious culture by degrees sprung up in the provinces, partaking in its nature both of the religion of the country, and of that of Rome. It appears to have been the object of the Roman government, at one time, completely to abolish the religious systems of those nations whose sacred rites were of a ferocious and cruel character, or in any shape repugnant to humanity;() and to introduce their own religion in their stead. The attachment however of those barbarians to the superstitions of their forefathers, entirely defeated the accomplishment of those views, and rendered it impossible to effect any thing beyond a sort of compromise, by which certain of the Roman deities and rites were associated and intermixed with those peculiarly belonging to the conquered countries. Hence it is that we frequently find a deity distinguished by two appellations; the one being its original title, the other that which it had acquired by this kind of denization: and to the same cause we must refer much of that affinity which is often to be perceived between the Roman forms of worship, and those of the nations which they subdued.<\/p>\n
XVI. The religions of the Indians, Egyptians, Persians, and Celts. Amongst the most remarkable of the religions which prevailed at that time, may be reckoned those which were cultivated by the Indians, the Persians, the Egyptians, and the Celts. Of these the Indians and Celts are chiefly distinguished, by having [p. 12,] selected for the objects of their adoration a set of ancient heroes and leaders, whose memory, so far from being rendered illustrious by their virtues, had come down to posterity disgraced and loaded with vice and infamy. Both these nations (or rather classes of men) believed that the souls of men survived the dissolution of their bodies: the former conceiving that all of them without distinction migrated into new terrestrial habitations; whilst the latter on the contrary, considering immortal life as the meed bestowed by heaven on valor alone, supposed that the bodies of the brave, after being purified by fire, again became the receptacles of their souls, and that the heroes thus renewed, were received into the council and society of the gods. The most despotic authority was committed to their priests by the people of either country: their functions were not limited to the administration of divine matters, but extended to the enacting of laws, and the various other departments of civil government.<\/p>\n
XVII. The religion of the Egyptians. In treating of the religion of the Egyptians, it is necessary to make a distinction; since only a part of it can properly be considered as the general religion of the country, the practice of the rest being confined to particular provinces or districts. The liberty which every city and province enjoyed of adopting what gods it pleased, and of worshipping them under any forms which the inhabitants might think proper to institute, of course gave rise to a great variety of private systems. In the choice of their public or national gods, no sort of delicacy was manifested, the chief class of them being indiscriminately composed of mortals renowned in history for their virtues, and those distinguished alone by the enormity of their crimes: such as Osiris, Serapis, Typhon, Isis and others. With the worship of these, was joined that of the constellations, the sun, the moon, the dog-star, animals of almost every kind, certain sorts of plants, and I know not of what else. Whether the religion of the state, or that peculiar to any province or city be considered, it will be found equally remote in its principles from every thing liberal, dignified, or rational; some parts were ridiculous in the extreme, and the whole in no small degree contaminated by a despicable baseness and obscurity. Indeed the religion of the Egyptians was so remarkably distinguished by absurd and disgraceful traits, that it was made the subject of derision even by those whose own tenets and practice were by no means formed on the suggestions of a sound wisdom.() The priests had a sacred code peculiarly their own, founded on very different principles from those which characterized the popular religion, and which they studiously concealed from the curiosity of the public, by wrapping it up in characters the meaning and power of which were only known to themselves. Nothing absolutely certain, it should seem, can be ascertained respecting it; but if we may give credit to what is said by some ancient authors on the subject, it bore a pretty close analogy to that system which attributes the production of every part of the universe to a certain energy or power contained and operating within itself; putting nature, in fact, in the place of the Deity.()<\/p>\n
[p. 13.] XVIII. The religion of the Persians. The Persians owed their religious institutes chiefly to Zoroaster. The leading principle of their religion was, that all things were derived from two common governing causes; the one the author of all good, the other of all evil: the former the source of light, mind, and and spiritual intelligence; the latter that of darkness and matter, with all its grosser incidents. Between these two powerful agents they supposed a constant war to be carried on. Those however who taught upon this system did not explain it all in the same way, or draw from it the same conclusions; hence uniformity was destroyed, and many different sects generated. The opinion of the better instructed seems to have been, that there was one Supreme Deity, to whom they gave the name of MITHRA, and that under him there were two of inferior degree, the one called OROMASDES, the author of all good, the other ARIMAN, the cause of all evil. The common people who equally believed in the existence of a Supreme Being, under the title of MITHRA, appear to have considered him as all one with the sun; and it is probable, that with the two inferior deities above-mentioned, they joined others, of whom scarcely any thing can be known at this day.()<\/p>\n
XIX. These religions suited to the climate, &c. of the countries where they prevailed. Whoever will attentively examine the nature of the ancient religions, must, I think, readily perceive that nearly all of them were framed by the priests upon principles suited to the climate, the extent, and the civil constitution of the states for which they were respectively designed. Hence, by way of distinction, they may be divided into two classes, the civil, and the military. Under the former may be placed the systems of almost all the eastern nations, the Persians, Indians, Egyptians and others, whose religious institutes were manifestly subservient to the public weal, by promoting the safety and tranquillity of the people, encouraging those arts by which the necessaries of life were multiplied, and securing to the kings and magistrates a due degree of authority and dignity. Within the latter division we would comprehend the religious economy of all the people of the north; nations whose every sentiment imbibed from their priests, respecting the gods, and the proper mode of sacred worship, tended to inspire them with fortitude [p. 14.] of mind, a contempt of death, a ferocity of disposition, and every other quality calculated to form a valorous and warlike people. Under governments of a mild and moderate character, the gods were represented as just, placable, and merciful: in those of the opposite description, the people were made to believe that the deities delighted in severity, were harsh, wrathful, quickly to be irritated, and with difficulty brought over to the side of mercy.<\/p>\n
XX. Virtue and sanctity of morals not promoted by these religions. None of these various systems of religion appear to have contributed in the least towards an amendment of the moral principle, a reformation of manners, or to the exciting a love, or even a respect, for virtue of any sort. The gods and goddesses, who were held up as objects of adoration to the common people, instead of exhibiting in themselves examples of a refined and supereminent virtue, displayed in illustrious actions, stood forth to public view the avowed authors of the most flagrant and enormous crimes.() The priests likewise took no sort of interest whatever in the regulation of the public morals, neither directing the people by their precepts, nor inviting them by exhortation and example, to the pursuit of a wise and honorable course of life; but on the contrary indulged themselves in the most unwarrantable licentiousness, maintaining that the whole of religion was comprised in the rites and ceremonies instituted by their ancestors, and that every sort of sensual gratification was liberally allowed by the gods to those who regularly ministered to them in this way.() The doctrine of the immortality of the soul and of a future state of rewards and punishments, had also been but very partially diffused, and even what had been advanced on the subject was, for the most part, of a very vague and unsatisfactory nature, and in some respects calculated rather to corrupt the mind than to produce any good effects. Hence, at the coming of our Saviour, any notions of this kind found little or no acceptance with those who pretended to any thing beyond a common share of knowledge, and especially the Greeks and Romans, but were all regarded in the light of old wives fables, fit only for the amusement of women and children. No particular points of belief respecting the immortality of the soul being established by the public religion, every one was at liberty to avow what opinions he might please on the subject.()<\/p>\n
XXI. The lives of men professing these religions, most flagitions. Under the influence of such circumstances, it is not to be wondered at that the state of society should have become in the highest degree depraved. The lives of men of every class, from the highest to the lowest, were consumed in the practice of the most abominable and flagitious vices: even crimes, the horrible turpitude of which was such that it would be defiling the ear of decency but to name them, were openly perpetrated with the greatest impunity. If evidence be required of this, the reader may at once satisfy himself of the truth of what is here said, by referring to LUCIAN amongst the Greek authors, and to the Roman poets JUVENAL and PERSIUS. In the writings of the former in particular, he will find the most detestable unnatural affections, and other heinous practices, treated of at large, and with the utmost familiarity, as things of ordinary and daily occurrence. Should any one conceive that these or other writers might give the rein too freely to their imagination, and suffer themselves to be carried into extremes by their genius for satire and sharp rebuke, let him turn his attention to those cruel and inhuman exhibitions which are well known to have yielded the highest gratification to the inhabitants of Greece and Italy, (people, who in point of refinement, possessed a superiority over all other nations of the world,) the savage conflicts of the gladiators in the circus: let him cast his eye on that dissoluteness of manners by which the walks of private life were polluted; the horrible prostitution of boys, to which the laws opposed no restraint; the liberty of divorce which belonged to the wife [p. 16.] equally with the husband; the shameful practice of exposing infants, and procuring abortions; the little regard that was shown to the lives of slaves; the multiplicity of stews and brothels, many of which were consecrated even to the gods themselves. Let him reflect on these, and various other criminal excesses, to the most ample indulgence in which the government offered not the least impediment, and then say, if such were the people distinguished beyond all others by the excellence of their laws and the superiority of their attainments in literature and the arts, what must have been the state of those nations who possessed none of these advantages, but were governed entirely by the impulses and dictates of rude and uncultivated nature.()<\/p>\n
XXII. The arguments used by the priests in defence of these religions. It was impossible that the vanity, the madness, the deformity of systems like these, should escape the observation of any who had not renounced both reason and common sense. But to all objections that might be raised, the artful priests were ever furnished with a reply from two sources: first, the miracles and prodigies which they asserted were daily wrought in the temples, and before the statues of the gods and heroes; and, secondly, the oracles, or spirit of divination, by which they pretended that the gods, either by signs, or in words and verses, made known what was about to happen. The deception practised in either case was made the subject of ridicule by many, who saw through the fraud and knavery of the priests; but a regard for their own safety constrained them to observe no little degree of caution in the exercise of this sort of pleasantry. For in all these matters an appearance was constantly maintained, sufficiently specious and imposing to seize on vulgar minds; and the multitude was ever ready, at the call of the priests, to assert the majesty of their gods, and to punish with the utmost severity those who might be charged with having done any thing inimical to the interests of the public religion.<\/p>\n
XXIII. Philosophers. This state of things rendered it necessary for those who embraced opinions more consonant to reason, and whom it became customary to distinguish by the appellation of philosophers, to temporize in a certain degree; and although they might entertain a just contempt for those notions respecting religion by which the vulgar were influenced, they yet found it expedient to pay the accustomed honours to the gods of the country, and so far to qualify and soften down their doctrines as to render them not obviously repugnant to the ancient established religion. Amongst this class of men there were not wanting some, indeed, who ventured with much point and ingenuity to contend against the popular superstitions and absurd notions respecting the gods; and who, in many respects, defined the rules of human conduct on principles equally consonant [p. 17.] to nature and reason; apparently considering every part of this universe as subject to the governance of an omnipotent, all-bountiful, and pre-excellent deity; and there seems, therefore, to be no foundation for the opinion which some have entertained, that all these philosophers were the favourers of impiety, or in fact atheists, denying altogether the existence of a God.() It must, however, be acknowledged, that the principles laid down by many of them went wholly to extinguish every sense of God and of religion, and completely to do away all distinction between good and evil; and that in the tenets even of those who espoused the cause of God and of morality, many things were contained to which no good or rational men could yield his approbation or assent.() If the very best of these philosophic systems, therefore, had been substituted in the place of the ancient popular religions, it may well be questioned whether it would eventually have been attended with any considerable advantage to mankind.<\/p>\n
XXIV. Two modes of philosophising prevail. At the time of the Son of God\u2019s appearance upon earth, there were two species of philosophy that generally prevailed throughout the civilized world: the one, that of Greece; the other what is usually termed the Oriental. There are many, indeed, who make no distinction between these two kinds of philosophy; but it appears [p. 19.] to me that, in blending them together, they confound things of a very opposite nature, and betray no trifling want of information respecting matters of antiquity.() The term philosophy properly belonged to the former; those who were familiar with the Greek language having given to the other the appellation of \u03b3\u03bd\u1ff6\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2, or knowledge: to understand the force of which term, it is necessary that we consider the word \u0398\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6, or of God, as annexed to it;() since the leading tenet of those who professed this species of philosophy was, that by means of their institutes, that knowledge of the Supreme Deity and great First Cause of all things, which it had been the ill fate of mortals to lose, might again be discovered and restored to mankind. The principles of the former, or what was properly called Philosophy, were not confined to Greece, but were embraced by all such of the Romans as aspired to any eminence of wisdom. The followers of the latter were chiefly to be found in Persia, Chald\u00e6a, Syria, Egypt, and the other oriental regions. Many of the Jews had likewise adopted it. Both these sorts of philosophy were split into various sects, but with this distinction, that those which sprang from the oriental system all proceeded on one and the same principle, and of course had many tenets in common, though they might differ as to some particular inferences and opinions; whilst those to which the philosophy of Greece gave rise were divided in opinion even as to the elements or first principles of wisdom, and were consequently widely separated from each other in the whole course of their discipline. St. Paul adverts to each of these systems, (to that of Greece, Col. 2:8.; to the oriental, 1 Tim. 1:4; 4:7; 6:20.) and strenuously exhorts the Christians to beware of blending the doctrines of either with the religion of their divine master () To this admonition had those to whom it was directed paid due attention, they would in an eminent degree have consulted the interest of the cause they had espoused. But to the great injury of divine truth, it unfortunately happened that vain and presumptuous men could not be satisfied with that wisdom which leads to eternal life, as it came pure from above; but must needs set about reconciling it, first of all to the principles of the oriental philosophy, and afterwards to many of the dogmas of the Grecian sects.<\/p>\n
XXV. The Greek philosophic sects. The Epicureans. The more illustrious seets of the Grecian school, whose doctrines were also much cultivated by the Romans, may be divided into two classes: the one comprising those whose tenets struck at the root of all religion; pretending, indeed, by specious eulogium, to support and recommend the cause of virtue, but in reality nourishing the interests of vice, and giving color to almost every species of criminality; the other being composed of such as acknowledged the existence of a deity, whom it was the duty of men to worship and obey, and who inculcated an essential and eternal distinction between good and evil, just and unjust; but who unfortunately sullied and disgraced what they thus taught conformably to right reason, by connecting with it various notions, either absurd and trifling in their nature, or taken up hastily, and with an unwarrantable presumption.() Under the first of these classes may be ranked the disciples of Epicurus and those of the Academy. The Epicureans maintained that the universe arose out of a fortuitous concurrence of atoms; that the gods (whose existence they dared not absolutely to deny) were indifferent as to human affairs, or rather entirely unacquainted with them; that our souls are born and die; that all things depend on, and are determined by accident; that in every thing, voluptuous gratification was to be sought after as the chief good; and even virtue itself only to be pursued, inasmuch as it might promise to minister at the shrine of pleasure. The votaries of a system like this, (and there were but few amongst the favored children of prosperity, the wealthy, the noble, and the powerful, who were not captivated by its allurements,)() naturally studied to pass their lives in one continued round of [p. 22.] luxurious enjoyment: the only restraint they imposed on themselves arose out of a desire to avoid, at all times, such an excessive or immoderate devotion to pleasure as might generate disease, or tend in any other shape to narrow the capacity for future indulgence.<\/p>\n
XXVI. The Academics. The Academics, although they affected to be influenced by better and wiser principles than those of the Sceptics, yet entertained maxims of an equally lax and pernicious tendency with them. In fact, they subscribed to the fundamental dogma on which the whole system of sceptic discipline was built, namely, that \u201cnothing can be known or perceived with certainty, and therefore that every thing may be doubted of and questioned.\u201d The only distinction which they made was this, that whereas the Sceptics insisted that \u201cnothing should be assented to, but every thing made the subject of dispute;\u201d the Academics, on the contrary, contended that \u201cwe ought to acquiesce in all things which bear the appearance of truth, or which may be considered in the light of probabilities.\u201d But since the Academics were ever undetermined as to what constituted that sort of probability to which they would have a wise man assent, their doctrine contributed, no less than that of the Sceptics, to render every thing vague and unsettled.() To make it, as they did, a matter of doubt and uncertainty, whether the gods existed or not; whether the soul was perishable or immortal; whether virtue was preferable to vice, or vice to virtue; was certainly nothing less than to undermine the chief and firmest supports of religion and morality. The philosophy of the Academy was at one time so much neglected as to be nearly lost. Cicero revived it, at Rome, not long before the coming of our Saviour;() and so much weight was attached to his example and authority, that it was soon embraced by all who aspired to the chief honours of the state.()<\/p>\n
XXVII. The Peripatetics. Within the other class of philosophers, that is, of those who manifested a respect for religion, the most distinguished sects were the Peripatetics founded by Aristotle, the Stoics, and the Platonists. The Peripatetics acknowledged the existence of a God; and the obligations of morality; but, at the same time, their tenets were not of a character to inspire a reverence for the one, or a love of the other. The Aristotelian doctrine gave to the deity an influence not much beyond that of the moving principle in a piece of mechanism: considering him, indeed, to be of an highly refined and exalted nature, happy in the contemplation of himself, but entirely unconscious of what was passing here below; confined from all eternity to the celestial world, and instigating the operations of nature rather from necessity than volition or choice. In a god of this description, differing but little from the deity of the Epicureans, there was surely nothing that could reasonably excite either love, respect, or fear. We are unable to ascertain, with any precision, what were the sentiments of the Peripatetic philosophers respecting the immortality of the soul.() Could the interests of religion or morality, we would ask, be in any shape effectually promoted by teachers like these, who denied the superintendance of a divine Providence, and insinuated, in no very obscure terms, a disbelief of the soul\u2019s future existence?<\/p>\n
XXVIII. The Stoics. The Deity had somewhat more of majesty and influence assigned to him by the Stoics. They did not limit his functions merely to the regulating of the clouds, and the numbering of the stars; but conceived him to animate every part of the universe with his presence, in the nature of a subtle, active, penetrating fire. They regarded his connection with matter, however, as the effect of necessity; and supposed his will to be subordinate to the immutable decrees of fate: hence it was impossible for him to be considered as the author either of rewards to the virtuous, or of punishment to the wicked. It is well known to the learned world, that this sect denied the immortality of the soul, and thus deprived mankind of the strongest incitement to a wise and virtuous course of life. Upon the whole, the moral discipline of the Stoics, although it might in some respects be founded on unexceptionable principles, the result of sound reasoning, may yet be compared to a body of a fair and imposing external appearance, but which, on a closer examination, is found destitute of those essential parts which alone can give it either energy or excellence. ()<\/p>\n
XXIX. The Platonists. Of all the philosophers, Plato seems to have made the nearest approach to the principles of true wisdom; and there are certainly grounds for believing that his system was not wholly unproductive of benefit to the human race. He considered the Deity, to whom he gave the supreme governance of the universe, as a being of the highest wisdom and power, and totally unconnected with any material substance. The souls of men he conceived to proceed from this pre-eminent source; and, as partaking of its nature, to be incapable of death. He also gave the strongest encouragement to virtue, and equally discountenanced vice, by holding out to mortals the prospect of a future state of rewards and punishments. But even the system of Plato had its defects. For, not to mention his frequent assumption of things without any sort of proof, and the obscure and enigmatical way in which he often expresses himself, he ascribes to that power, whom he extols as the fashioner and maker of the universe, few or none of the grander attributes, such as infinity, immensity, ubiquity, omnipotence, omniscience; but supposes him to be confined within certain limits, and that the direction of human affairs was committed to a class of inferior spiritual agents, termed d\u00e6mons. This notion of ministering d\u00e6mons, and also those points of doctrine which relate to the origin and condition of the human soul, greatly disfigure the morality of Plato; since they manifestly tend to generate superstition, and to confirm men in the practice of worshipping a number of inferior deities. His teaching, [p. 25.] moreover, that the soul, during its continuance in the body, might be considered, as it were, in a state of imprisonment, and that we ought to endeavour, by means of contemplation, to set it free, and restore it to an alliance with the Divine nature, had an ill effect, inasmuch as it prompted men of weak minds to withdraw every attention from the body and the concerns of life, and to indulge in the dreams and fancies of a disordered imagination.()<\/p>\n
XXX. The Eclectics. Since the little of good that presented itself in the tenets of any of these various sects was sullied and deformed by an abundant alloy of what was pernicious and absurd; and as it was found that no sort of harmony prevailed amongst philosophers of any description, even though they might profess one and the same system, but that they were constantly at variance either with themselves or with others; it occurred to some, who perhaps were more than ordinarily anxious in their pursuit after truth, that the most ready way of attaining their object would be to adopt neither of these systems in the whole, but to select from each of them such of its parts as were the most consonant with sound and unbiassed reason. Hence a new sect of philosophers sprang up, who, from the manner in which their system was formed, acquired the name of Eclectics. We are certain that it first appeared in Egypt, and particularly in Alexandria, but the name of its founder is lost in obscurity; for though one Potamon of Alexandria is commonly represented as such by ancient writers, it is by no means clear that this opinion of theirs is correct. However, we have sufficient authority for stating, (indeed it might be proved even from Philo Jud\u00e6us alone,) that this sect flourished at Alexandria at the time of our Saviour\u2019s birth.() Those who originated this species of philosophy took their leading principles from the system of Plato; considering almost every thing which he had advanced respecting the Deity, the soul, the world, and the d\u00e6mons, as indisputable axioms: on which account they were regarded by many as altogether Platonists. Indeed, this title, so far from being disclaimed, was rather affected by some of them, and particularly by those who joined themselves to Ammonius Saecas, another celebrated patron of the Eclectic philosophy. With the doctrines of Plato, however, they very freely intermixed the most approved maxims of the Pythagoreans, the Stoics, the Peripatetics, and the oriental philosophers; [p. 26.] merely taking care to admit none that were in opposition to the tenets of their favourite guide and instructor.()<\/p>\n
XXXI. The Oriental Philosophy. The documents that have hitherto come to light relating to the oriental philosophy are so few, that our knowledge of it is of necessity very limited. Some insight, however, into its nature and principles may be obtained from what has been handed down to us respecting the tenets of several of the first Christian sects, and from a few other scattered relics of it, that may be collected here and there. Its author, who is unknown, perceiving that in almost every thing [p. 27.] which comes under our observation there is a manifest admixture of evil, and that human nature has an obvious leaning to what is criminal and vicious, whilst, at the same time, reason forbids us to regard the Deity in any other light than as the pure and unsullied fountain of good alone, was induced to seek for the origin of this calamitous state of things in a different source.() But as he could discover nothing besides God, to which this evil influence could be attributed, unless it were the matter of which the world, and the bodies of men, and all other living creatures are formed, he was led to regard this principle as the root and cause of every evil propensity, and every untoward affection. The unavoidable consequence of this opinion was, that matter should be considered as self-existent, and as having exercised an influence entirely independent of the Deity from all eternity. But this proposition imposed on its abettors a task of no little difficulty, namely, that of explaining by what agency or means this originally rude undigested mass of matter came to be so skilfully and aptly arranged in all its parts; how it happens that so many things of a refined and exalted nature are connected with it; and particularly, to account for the wonderful union of ethereal spirits with supine and vitiated fleshly bodies. It was found impossible to solve these points by any arguments drawn from nature or reason; recourse was therefore had to the suggestions of a lively invention, and a fabulous sort of theory was propounded respecting the formation of the world, and that remarkable admixture of good and evil in every thing belonging to it, which so continually obtrudes itself on our notice. The Deity could not, consistently with their views of him, be considered as the author of either; since it must have appeared incredible to those who regarded the Supreme Being as purity and goodness itself, and utterly averse from every thing of an opposite character, that he should have employed himself in giving form and arrangement to a vitiated and distempered mass, or have been anywise instrumental in associating good with evil.<\/p>\n
XXXII. The oriental philosophers divided into sects. As none more readily disagree among themselves, than those who pretend to resolve the most abstruse and intricate points by the strength of the human intellect alone, it will easily be conceived that those who endeavoured to extricate themselves from the difficulties above noticed, by the assistance of fiction, would of course run into a great diversity of sentiment. Those of the most numerous class seem to have believed in the existence of a being, whom they considered as the prince or power of darkness, upon whom the Prince of light (that is, the Deity himself) made war; and having obtained the victory, made matter the receptacle of the spoil and forces which he had taken from his opponent. Tales like this, of the wars carried on between a good and an evil power, were commonly adopted by all of this sect; but they were far from being unanimous as to the nature of that prince of darkness, or matter, who was thus set in opposition to the Deity. By some, he was considered as of an equal nature with the Author of all good, and of necessity to have existed from all eternity; by others, he was thought to have been generated of matter, which they supposed to be endowed with both animation and fertility; whilst others regarded him as the son of Eternal Light, the offspring of the Deity, who, unable to endure the control of a superior, had rebelled against the author of his existence, and erected for himself a separate and distinct estate. The opinion entertained by another sect was, that matter was not subject to the dominion of a prince or ruler peculiar to itself, but that it was fashioned and brought into order, and man created, by one of those eternal spirits whom God begat of himself, and who acted not from design, but was stimulated to the undertaking by a sudden accidental impulse. This opinion also, when it came to be discussed and enlarged upon, gave rise to much dissension. Some contended that this architect or fabricator of the world acted with the consent and approbation of the Deity; others denied this. Some supposed that, in the commencement of this undertaking, he was uninfluenced by any vicious principle; but that having accomplished his purpose, he gave himself over to iniquity, and, at the instigation of pride, withdrew men from the knowledge of the Supreme Deity. Others conceived him to have a natural and necessary inclination to what was evil; others imagined that he might be of a middle nature, somewhat between the two; and many esteemed him to be a compound essence, made up of a certain proportion of good and evil. The sentiments of a third sect appear to have been formed on an union of those of the two former. According to these, the world, and all things belonging to it, were under the regulation and guidance of three powers, namely, the Supreme Deity, the prince of darkness and of matter, and the creator or maker of the world. I believe I may venture to say, that every one who shall attentively examine the opinions and maxims entertained by some of the Christian sects [p. 29.] of the first century, will readily give his assent to the accuracy of this statement. Of the first class we may account Simon Magus, Manes, and others; the principal leaders of the Gnostics may be ranked under the second; and Marcion, with perhaps some others, may be considered as belonging to the third.<\/p>\n
XXXIII. Certain tenets, however, common to them all respecting the Deity. Notwithstanding that the various sects of oriental philosophers, who believed matter to be the cause of all evil, were so much divided in opinion as to the particular mode or form under which it ought to be considered as such; there were yet some maxims, or points of doctrine, to which they all subscribed without reserve, and which may be regarded as the principles on which the system in general was founded. In the first place, they were unanimous in maintaining that there had existed from all eternity a divine nature, replete with goodness, intelligence, wisdom, and virtue; a light of the most pure and subtle kind diffused throughout all space, of whom it was impossible for the mind of man to form an adequate conception. Those who were conversant with the Greek language gave to this pre-eminent Being the title of \u0392\u03c5\u03b8\u1f78\u03c2, in allusion to the vastness of his excellence, which they deemed it beyond the reach of human capacity to comprehend. The space which he inhabits they named \u03c0\u03bb\u03ae\u03c1\u03c9\u03bc\u03b1, but occasionally the term \u1f00\u03b9\u1f7c\u03bd was applied to it. This divine nature, they imagined, having existed for ages in solitude and silence, at length, by the operation of his omnipotent will, begat of himself two minds or intelligences of a most excellent and exalted kind, one of either sex. By these, others of a similar nature were produced; and the faculty of propagating their kind being successively communicated to all, a class of divine beings was in time generated, respecting whom no difference of opinion seems to have existed; except in regard to their number; some conceiving it to be more, others less. The nearer any of this celestial family stood in affinity to the one grand parent of all, the closer were they supposed to resemble him in nature and perfection; the farther off they were removed, the less were they accounted to partake of his goodness, wisdom, or any other attribute. Although every one of them had a beginning, yet they were all conceived to be immortal, and not liable to any change; on which account they were termed \u1f00\u03b9\u1ff6\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2, that is, immortal beings placed beyond the reach of temporal vicissitudes or injuries.() It was not, however, imagined that the vast extent of space called \u03c0\u03bb\u03ae\u03c1\u03c9\u03bc\u03b1 was occupied solely by these spirits of the first order: it was likewise supposed to contain a great number of inferior beings, the offspring of the \u1f00\u03b9\u1ff6\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2, and consequently of divine descent, but who, on account of the many degrees that intervened between them and the first parent, were considered comparatively to possess but a very limited portion of wisdom, knowledge, or power.<\/p>\n
XXXIV. Opinions of the oriental philosophers respecting matter, the world, the soul, &c. Beyond that vast expanse refulgent with everlasting light, which was considered as the immediate habitation of the Deity, and those natures which had been generated [p. 31.] from him, these philosophers placed the seat of matter, where, according to them, it had lain from all eternity, a rude, undigested, opaque mass, agitated by turbulent irregular motions of its own provoking, and nurturing, as in a seed-bed, the rudiments of vice, and every species of evil. In this state it was found by a genius or celestial spirit of the higher order, who had been either driven from the abode of the Deity for some offence, or commissioned by him for the purpose, and who reduced it into order, and gave it that arrangement and fashion which the universe now wears. Those who spoke the Greek tongue were accustomed to refer to this creator of the world by the name of Demiurgus. Matter received its inhabitants, both men and other animals, from the same hand that had given to it disposition and symmetry. Its native darkness was also illuminated by this creative spirit with a ray of celestial light, either secretly stolen, or imparted through the bounty of the Deity. He likewise communicated to the bodies he had formed, and which would otherwise have remained destitute of reason, and uninstructed except in what relates to mere animal life, particles of the divine essence, or souls of a kindred nature to the Deity. When all things were thus completed, Demiurgus revolting against the great First Cause of every thing, the all-wise and omnipotent God, assumed to himself the exclusive government of this new state, which he apportioned out into provinces or districts; bestowing the administration and command over them on a number of genii or spirits of inferior degree, who had been his associates and assistants.<\/p>\n
XXXV. Their tenets respecting man. Man, therefore, whilst he continued here below, was supposed to be compounded of two principles, acting in direct opposition to each other: 1st, a terrestrial and corrupt or vitiated body; 2d, a soul partaking of the nature of the Deity, and derived from the region of purity and light. The soul or etherial part being, through its connection with the body, confined as it were within a prison of matter, was constantly exposed to the danger of becoming involved in ignorance, and acquiring every sort of evil propensity, from the impulse and contagion of the vitiated mass by which it was enveloped. But the Deity, touched with compassion for the hapless state of those captive minds, was ever anxious that the means of escaping from this darkness and bondage into liberty and light should be extended to them, and had accordingly, at various times, sent amongst them teachers endowed with wisdom, and filled with celestial light, who might communicate to them the principles of a true religion, and thus instruct them in the way by which deliverance was to be obtained from their wretched and forlorn state. Demiurgus, however, with his associates, unwilling to resign any part of that dominion, of whose sweets they were now become sensible, or to relinquish the divine honors which they had usurped, set every engine at work to obstruct and counteract these designs of the Deity; and not only tormented and slew the messengers of heaven, but endeavoured, through the means of superstition and sensual attractions, to root [p. 32.] out and extinguish every spark of celestial truth. The minds that listened to the calls of the Deity, and who, having renounced obedience to the usurped authorities of this world, continued stedfast in the worship of the great first Parent, resisting the evil propensities of the corporeal frame, and every incitement to illicit gratification, were supposed, on the dissolution of their bodies, to be directly borne away pure, \u00e6rial, and disengaged from every thing gross or material, to the immediate residence of God himself; whilst those who, notwithstanding the admonitions they received, had persisted in paying divine honors to him who was merely the fabricator of the world, and his associates, worshipping them as gods, and suffering themselves to be enslaved by the lusts and vicious impulses to which they were exposed from their alliance with matter, were denied the hope of exaltation after death, and could only expect to migrate into new bodies suited to their base, sluggish, and degraded condition. When the grand work of setting free all these minds or souls, or, at least, the greatest part of them, and restoring them to that celestial country from whence they first proceeded, should be accomplished, God, it was imagined, would dissolve the fabric of this nether world; and having again confined matter, with all its contagious influence, within its original limits, would, throughout all ages to come, live and reign in consummate glory, surrounded by kindred spirits, as he did before the foundation of the world.<\/p>\n
XXXVI. Moral discipline of the oriental philosophers. The moral discipline deduced from this system of philosophy, by those who embraced it, was by no means of an uniform east, but differed widely in its complexion, according to their various tempers and inclinations. Such, for instance, as were naturally of a morose, ascetic disposition, maintained that the great object of human concern should be to invigorate the energies of the mind, and to quicken and refine its perceptions, by abstracting it as much as possible from every thing gross or sensual. The body, on the contrary, as the source of every depraved appetite, was, according to them, to be reduced and brought into subjection by hunger, thirst, and every other species of mortification; and neither to be supported by flesh or wine, nor indulged in any of those gratifications to which it is naturally prone; in fact, a constant self-denial was to be rigorously observed in every thing which might contribute either to the convenience or am\u0153nity of this life; so that the material frame being thus by every means weakened and brought low, the celestial spirit might the more readily escape from its contagious influence, and regain its native liberty. Hence it was that the Manich\u00e6ans, the Marcionites, the Encratites, and others, passed their lives in one continued course of austerity and mortification. On the other hand, those who were constitutionally inclined to voluptuousness and vicious indulgence, found the means of accommodating the same principles to a mode of life that admitted of the free and uncontroled gratification of all our desires. The essence of piety and religion, they said, consisted in a knowledge of the supreme Deity, and the maintaining a mental intercourse and association with him. Whoever had become an adept in these attainments, and had, from the habitual exercise of contemplation, acquired the power of keeping the mind abstracted from every thing corporeal, was no longer to be considered as affected by, or answerable for, the impulses and actions of the body; and consequently could be under no necessity to control its inclinations, or resist its propensities. This accounts for the dissolute and infamous lives led by the Carpocratians, and others, who assumed the liberty of doing whatever they might list; and maintained [p. 33.] that the practice of virtue was not enjoined by the Deity, but imposed on mankind by that power whom they regarded as the prince of this world, the maker of the universe.()<\/p>\n
XXXVII. Use of this chapter. The inferences to be drawn from the statement which has thus been given, of the wretched aspect of the whole world at the time of the Son of God\u2019s appearance upon earth, must, it is presumed, be sufficiently obvious. To every one who shall peruse it with a mind disposed to be informed, I conceive it will be manifest, that such was the hopeless and forlorn condition into which the human race had fallen at that period, that its recovery could only be effected by a divine instructor and guide, who might overthrow the strong and widely extended dominion of superstition and impiety, and call back unhappy, lost, and wandering man to the paths of wisdom and virtue. But little or no assistance was to be expected from the efforts of man himself against these adversaries; since [p. 34.] we see that even those mortals who were endowed with a superior degree of intellectual power, and who occasionally obtained a glimpse of the true path, were yet unable to proceed in it, but again lost themselves in the mazes of error and uncertainty, and disgraced what little they had acquired of sound wisdom, by an admixture of the most extravagant and absurd opinions. I should also hope, that from this view it will appear of what infinite advantages the Christian religion hath been productive to the world and its inhabitants; I mean not only in a spiritual sense, by opening to us the road that leads to salvation and peace, but also in the many and vast improvements in government and civilization to which its influence gave rise. Take away the influence which the Christian religion has on the lives of men, and you at once extinguish the cause to which alone those unspeakable advantages which we enjoy over the nations of old can be fairly or justly attributed.
\n[p. 35.]<\/p>\n
CHAPTER II<\/p>\n
Of the civil and religious State of the Jewish Nation in particular, at the time of Christ\u2019s Birth<\/p>\n
I. The Jewish nation governed by Herod the Great. The condition of the Jews, at the time of the Son of God\u2019s advent in the flesh, was not much superior to that of other nations. The reins of their government had been placed in the hands of a Stipendiary of Rome, called Herod, and surnamed the Great, (a title, by the bye, to which he could have no pretensions, except from the magnitude of his vices,) who, instead of cherishing and protecting the people committed to his charge, appears to have made them sensible of his authority merely by oppression and violence. Nature, indeed, had not denied him the talents requisite for a lofty and brilliant course of public life; but such was his suspicious temper, so incredibly ferocious his cruelty, his devotion to luxury, pomp, and magnificence so madly extravagant, and so much beyond his means: in short, so extensive and enormous was the catalogue of his vices that he was become an object of utter detestation to the afflicted people over whom he reigned, and whose subsistance he had exhausted by the most vexatious and immoderate exactions. With a view to soften, in some degree, the asperity of the hatred which he had thus drawn on himself, he pretended to adopt the religion of the Jews, and at a vast expence restored their temple, which, through age, had gone much to decay: but the effect of all this was destroyed by his still conforming to the manners and habits of those who worshipped a plurality of gods; and so many things were countenanced in direct opposition to the Jewish religion, that the hypocrisy and insincerity of the tyrant\u2019s professions were too conspicuous to admit of a doubt.()<\/p>\n
[p. 36.] II. Sons and successors of Herod. On the death of this nefarious despot, the government of Palestine was divided by the emperor Augustus amongst his three surviving sons. Archelaus, the eldest, was appointed governor of Judea, Idumea, and Samaria, under the title of ethnarch, though, by his conduct he made it appear that the title of monarch would have better suited him. Antipas had Galilee and Per\u00e6a for his share; whilst Batanea, Trachonitis, Auranitis, with some of the neighbouring territory, were assigned to Philip. The two latter, from their having a fourth part of the province allotted to each, were styled tetrarchs. Archelaus, who inherited all the vices of his parent, with but few or none of his better qualities, completely exhausted the patience of the Jews; and by a series of the most injurious and oppressive acts, drove them, in the tenth year of his reign, to lay their complaints before the emperor Augustus, who, having inquired into the matter, deposed the ethnarch, and banished him to Vienne, in Gaul.<\/p>\n
III. State of the Jews under the Roman Government. After the removal of Archelaus, the greater part of Palestine which had been under his government was reduced by the Romans into the form of a province, and put under the superintendance of a governor, who was subject to the controul of the president of Syria. This arrangement, it is probable, at first met with the ready concurrence of the Jews; who, on the death of Herod, had petitioned Augustus that the distinct regal form of government might no longer be continued to them, but their country be received under his own immediate protection, and treated as a part of the empire. The change, however, instead of producing an alleviation of misery to this unhappy people, brought with it an intolerable increase of their calamities. To say nothing of the avarice and injustice of the governors, to which there was neither end nor limit, it proved a most disgusting and insufferable grievance to most of them, who considered their nation as God\u2019s peculiar people, that they should be obliged to pay tribute to a heathen, and an enemy of the true God, like C\u00e6sar, and live in subjection to the worshipers of false deities. The extortion, likewise, of the publicans, who after the Roman manner were entrusted with the collection of the revenue, and for whose continual and flagrant abuses of authority it was seldom possible to obtain any sort of redress, became a subject of infinite dissatisfaction and complaint. In addition to all this, the constant presence of their governors, surrounded as they were by an host of foreign attendants of all descriptions, and protected by a Roman military guard, quartered with their eagles, and various other ensigns of superstition, in the heart of the holy city, kept the sensibility of the Jews continually on the rack, and excited in their minds a degree of indignation bordering on fury; since they considered their religion to be thereby disgraced and insulted, their holy places defiled, and in fact themselves, with every thing they held sacred, polluted and brought into contempt. To these [p. 37.] causes are to be attributed the frequent tumults, factions, seditions, and murders, by which it is well known that these unfortunate people accelerated their own destruction.
\nThe condition of the Jews who were under Philip and Antipas, the other sons of Herod, was somewhat better; the severe punishment of Archelaus having taught his brothers to beware of irritating the feelings of their subjects by any similarly excessive stretch or abuse of authority.<\/p>\n
IV. Their high priests and sanhedrim. If any remnant of liberty or happiness could have been possessed by a people thus circumstanced, it was effectually cut off by those who held the second place in the civil government under the Romans and the sons of Herod, and who also had the supreme direction in every thing pertaining to religion, namely, the chief priests, and the seventy elders, of whom the sanhedrim or national council was composed. The chief priests, according to what is handed down to us of them by Josephus, were the most abandoned of mortals, who had obtained that elevated rank either through the influence of money, or iniquitous pliability; and who shrank from no species of criminality that might serve to support them in the possession of an authority thus infamously purchased. Since all of them perceived that no reliance could be placed on the permanency of their situation, it became an object of their first concern to accumulate, either by fraud or force, such a quantity of wealth as might either enable them to gain the rulers of the state over to their interest, and drive away all competitors, or else yield them, when deprived of their dignity, the means of living at their ease in private. The national council, or sanhedrim, being composed of men who differed in opinion respecting some of the most important points of religion, nothing like a general harmony was to be found amongst its members: on the contrary, having espoused the principles of various sects, they suffered themselves to be led away by all the prejudice and animosity of party; and were commonly more intent on the indulgence of private grudge, than studious of advancing the cause of religion, or promoting the public welfare. A similar depravity prevailed amongst the ordinary priests, and the inferior ministers of religion. The common people, instigated by the shocking examples thus held out to them by those whom they were taught to consider as their guides, rushed headlong into every species of vicious excess; and giving themselves up to sedition and rapine, appeared alike to defy the vengeance both of God and man.()<\/p>\n
V. The Jewish worship corrupt. Two sorts of religion flourished at that time in Palestine; the Jewish and the Samaritan; and what added not a little to the calamities of the Hebrew nation, the followers of each of these regarded those of the other persuasion with the most virulent and implacable hatred; and mutually [p. 38.] gave vent to their rancorous animosity in the direst curses and imprecations. The nature of the Jewish religion may be collected from the books of the Old Testament; but at the time of our Saviour\u2019s appearance it had lost much of its original beauty and excellence, and was contaminated by errors of the most flagrant kind, that had crept in from various sources. The public worship of God was indeed still continued in the temple at Jerusalem, with all the ceremonies which Moses had prescribed; and a vast concourse of people never failed to assemble at the stated seasons for celebrating those solemn festivals which he had appointed; nor did the Romans ever interfere to prevent those observances: in domestic life, likewise, the ordinances of the law were for the most part attended to and respected: but it is manifest, from the evidence brought forward by various learned writers, that even in the service of the temple itself, numerous ceremonies and observances, drawn from the religious worship of heathen nations, had been introduced and blended with those of divine institution; and that, in addition to superstitions like these of a public nature, many erroneous principles, probably either brought from Babylon and Chaldea by the ancestors of the people at their return from captivity, or adopted by the thoughtless multitude, in conformity to the example of their neighbours the Greeks, the Syrians, and the Egyptians, were cherished and acted upon in private.()<\/p>\n
VI. The religion of the Jews. The opinions and sentiments of the Jews respecting the Supreme Deity and the divine nature, the celestial genii or ministering spirits of God, the evil angels or d\u00e6mons, the souls of men, the nature of our duties, and other subjects of a like kind, appear to have been far less extravagant, and formed on more rational grounds than those of any other nation or people. Indeed, it was scarcely possible that they should altogether lose sight of that truth, in the knowledge of which their fathers had been instructed through an immediately divine communication: since it was commonly rendered habitual to them, even at a tender age, to be diligent in hearing, reading, and studying the writings of Moses and the prophets. In every place where any considerable number of Jews resided, a sacred edifice to which, deriving its name from the Greek, they gave the appellation of synagogue, was erected, in which it was [p. 39.] customary for the people regularly to assemble for the purposes of worshipping God in prayer, and hearing the law publicly read and expounded. In most of the larger towns there were also schools under the management of well-informed masters, in which youth were taught the principles of religion, and also instructed in the liberal arts.()<\/p>\n
VII. Wrong opinions entertained by the Jews respecting God and the angels. Rational and correct, however, as the Jews appear to have been in those principles and sentiments which they had derived from their sacred code, they had yet gradually incorporated with them so large an admixture of what was false and absurd, as nearly to deprive the truth of all its force and energy. The common opinion entertained by them respecting the nature of God was, unless I am much deceived, closely allied to the oriental doctrine of its not being absolutely simple, but somewhat resembling that of our light. To the prince of darkness, with his associates and agents, they attributed an influence over the world and mankind of the most extensive nature; so predominant, indeed, as scarcely to leave a superior degree of power even with the Deity himself. Of various terrific conceits founded upon this notion, one of the chief was, that all the evils and calamities which befal the human race, were to be considered as originating with this prince of darkness and his ministering spirits, who had their dwelling in the air, and were scattered throughout every part of the universe. With a view, in some degree, to lessen the fear that was very naturally produced by this idea, they were willing to persuade themselves that an art had been divinely communicated to mankind, of frightening and driving away these evil spirits, by the use of various sorts of herbs, by repeating certain verses, or by pronouncing the names of God and of divers holy men; or, in other words, they were led to entertain a belief in the existence of what is termed magic. All these opinions, and others of a kindred nature, were, as it should seem, borrowed by the Jews from the doctrine of the Chald\u00e6ans and Persians, amongst whom their ancestors had for a long while sojourned in captivity. Their notions, also, and manner of reasoning respecting the good genii, or ministers of divine providence, were nearly of the same complexion with those of the Babylonians and Chald\u00e6ans, as may clearly be perceived by any one who will compare the highly absurd and irrational doctrines maintained by the modern descendants of the Magi, usually styled Guebres, as also by the Arabs, and other oriental nations, concerning the names, functions, state, and classes of angels, with the sentiments anciently entertained by the Jews on these subjects.()<\/p>\n
VIII. As also respecting the Messiah, the sum of religion, and other matters. The greatest part of the Jewish nation were looking with the most eager desire for the appearance of the deliverer, promised by God to their fathers; but their hopes were not directed to such an one as the Scriptures described: they expected not a saviour of souls, but a strenuous warlike leader, whose talents and prowess might recover for them their civil liberty.() Concerning the reign of this prince here on earth, which it was imagined would last for the term of a thousand years, as also of the profusion of pleasures and luxuries with which it would be attended, of his wars with a terrible adversary, to whom they gave the name of Antichrist, and finally of his victories and their consequences, many wonderful tales were related; some of which were afterwards adopted by the Christians. With the exception of merely a few of the better instructed, the whole nation may be said to have considered the sum and substance of religion as consisting entirely in an observance of the ceremonies prescribed by Moses, to which they attached so high a portion of merit, as to believe that every one who constantly and strictly conformed to them might, with a degree of certainty, look forward to the enjoyment of the blessings of Divine favour, both in this life and that which is to come. To the calls of humanity and philanthropy the Jews paid not the least attention, except in regard to those who were allied to them by nature and blood, or were at least so far connected with them as to belong to the same religious community with themselves. They were even so wholly destitute of every generous feeling or sentiment towards strangers, as not only to shun, by every means in their power, whatever might lead to any thing like an intimacy, or reciprocal interchange of good offices with them, but also to imagine themselves at liberty to treat them on all occasions in the most injurious and oppressive manner. It was, therefore, not without reason that they were taxed by the Greeks and Romans with cherishing an hatred of the human race.()<\/p>\n
IX. Jewish sects. Among the various untoward circumstances which conspired to undermine the welfare of the Jewish nation, one of the chief was that, those who possessed a superior degree of learning, and who arrogantly pretended to the most perfect knowledge of divine matters, so far from being united in sentiment, were divided into various sects, widely differing in opinion from each other, not only on subjects of smaller moment, but also on those points which constitute the very essence of religion itself. Of the Pharisees and the Sadducees, which were the two most distinguished of these sects both in number and respectability, mention is made in the writings of the New Testament. Josephus, Philo, and others speak of a third sect, under the title of the Essenes;() and it appears from more than one authority, that several others of less note contributed still farther to distract the public mind. St. Matthew, in his history, notices the Herodians; a class of men who, it seems highly probable, had espoused the cause of the descendants of Herod the Great, and contended that they had been unjustly deprived of the greater part of Palestine by the Romans. In Josephus we also find mention made of another sect, bearing the title of the Philosophers; composed of men of the most ferocious character, and founded by Judas, a Galilean, a strenuous and undaunted asserter of the liberties of the Jewish nation, who maintained that the Hebrews ought to render obedience to none but God alone.() In fine, I do not think that the accounts given of the Jewish sects or factions by Epiphanius and Hegesippus, as preserved in Eusebius, should be considered as altogether groundless and undeserving of credit.()<\/p>\n
X. Of the larger sects, their points of concord and disagreement. The Pharisees, the Sadducees, and the Essnes, the three most distinguished and powerful of the Jewish seets, were cordially united in sentiment as to all those fundamental points which constitute the basis and chief support of the Jewish religion. All of them, for instance, rejected with detestation the idea of a plurality of gods, and would acknowledge the existence of but one almighty power, whom they regarded as the creator of the universe, and believed to be endowed with the most absolute perfection and goodness. They were equally agreed in the opinion, that God had selected the Hebrews from amongst the other nations of the earth as his peculiar people, and had bound them to himself by an unchangeable and everlasting covenant. With the same unanimity they maintained that Moses was the ambassador [p. 46.] of heaven, and consequently that the law promulgated by him was of divine original. It was also their general belief, that in the books of the Old Testament were to be found the means of obtaining salvation and happiness; and that whatever principles or duties were therein laid down or inculcated, were to be received with reverence and implicitly conformed to. But an almost irreconcileable difference of opinion, and the most vehement disputes, prevailed amongst them respecting the original source or fountain from whence all religion was to be deduced. In addition to the written law, the Pharisees had recourse to another, which had been received merely through oral tradition. This latter both the Sadducees and the Essenes rejected with contempt, as altogether spurious. The interpretation of the law yielded still further ground for acrimonious contention. The Pharisees maintained that the law, as committed to writing by Moses, and likewise every other part of the sacred volume, had a two-fold sense or meaning; the one plain and obvious to every reader, the other abstruse and mystical. The Sadducees, on the contrary, would admit of nothing beyond a simple interpretation of the words, according to their strict literal sense. The Essenes, or at least the greater part of them, differing from both of these, considered the words of the law to possess no force or power whatever in themselves, but merely to exhibit the shadows or images of celestial objects, of virtues, and of duties. So much dissention and discord respecting the rule of religion, and the sense in which the divine law ought to be understood, could not fail to produce a great diversity in the forms of religious worship, and naturally tended to generate the most opposite and conflicting sentiments on subjects of a divine nature.()<\/p>\n
XI. Of the Pharisees. In point of numbers, riches, and power, the Pharisees far surpassed every other Jewish sect; and since they constantly exhibited a great display of religion, in an apparent zeal for the cultivation of piety and brotherly love, and by an affectation of superior sanctity in their opinions, their manners, and even in their dress, the influence which they possessed over the minds of the people was unbounded; insomuch that they may almost be said to have given what direction they pleased to public affairs. It is unquestionable, however, that the religion of the Pharisees was, for the most part, founded in consummate hypocrisy; and that at the bottom they were generally the slaves of every vicious appetite; proud, arrogant and avaricious; consulting only the gratification of their lusts, even at the moment of their professing themselves to be engaged in the service of their Maker.() These odious features in the character of the Pharisees [p. 47.] caused them to be rebuked by our Saviour with the utmost severity of reprehension; with more severity, indeed, than he bestowed even on the Sadducees, who, although they had departed widely from the genuine principles of religion, yet did not impose on mankind by a pretended sanctity, or devote themselves with insatiable greediness to the acquisition of honors and riches. The Pharisees considered the soul to be immortal. They also believed in the resurrection of the body, and in a future state of rewards and punishments. They admitted the free agency of man to a certain extent; but beyond this, they supposed his actions to be controlled by the decrees of fate. These points of doctrine, however, seem not to have been understood or explained by all of this sect in the same way; neither does it appear that any great pains were taken to define and ascertain them with precision and accuracy, or to support them by reasoning and argument.()<\/p>\n
XII. Of the Sadducees. The Sadducees fell greatly short of the Pharisees in number as well as influence. This is easily to be accounted for, from the manners and principles of the sect. Their leading tenet was, that all our hopes and fears terminate with the present life; the soul being involved in one common fate with the body and liable, like it, to perish and be dissipated. Upon this principle, it was very natural for them to maintain, that obedience to the law would be rewarded by God with length of days, and an accession of the good things of this life, such as honors and wealth; whilst the violators of it would, in like manner, find their punishment in the temporary sufferings and afflictions of the present day. But persons impressed with this opinion could not possibly consider any as the favorites of Heaven but the fortunate and the happy; for the poor and the miserable they could entertain no sentiments of compassion: their hopes and their desires must all have centred in a life of leasure, of ease, and voluptuous gratification: and such is exactly the character which Josephus gives us of the Sadducces. () With a [p. 48.] view in some degree, to justify this system, and cast as it were a veil over its deformity, they denied that man had any natural propensity to either good or evil; but insisted that he was left at perfect liberty to choose between the two. A man\u2019s happiness and prosperity, therefore, they asserted, depended entirely on himself; and hence if he were poor and miserable, he was not deserving of any commiseration or pity, since his adverse lot was altogether the consequence of his own depravity and misconduct.<\/p>\n
XIII. Division of the Essenes. The Essenes are generally divided by the learned into two classes, the practical, and the theoretical. This arrangement of the sect is founded upon a supposition that the Therapeut\u00e6, concerning whom Philo Jud\u00e6us has left us a distinct little treatise, belonged to it. To this opinion I cannot implicitly subscribe, since it has no other support on its side than mere probability; but, at the same time, I do not pretend to say that it may not be a just one. Those whom they call practical Essenes were such as engaged in agriculture, or practised medicine, or any of the other arts, and did not estrange themselves from the society of mankind. The term theoretical they apply to those who, renouncing every sort of bodily occupation, devoted themselves entirely to the exercise of contemplation; and who, to avoid pollution, withdrew themselves from all converse with men of a different persuasion. The practical Essenes were still further divided, according to Josephus, into two branches: the one being characterized by a life of celibacy, dedicated to the instruction and education of the children of others; whilst the other thought it proper to marry, not with a view to sensual gratification, but for the purpose of propagating the human species.() It is possible that these might not be the only opinions and habits, by a difference in regard to which these two classes were distinguished from each other. The monks of Christianity, a description of men that first appeared in Egypt, seem to have taken for their model the manners and scheme of life of the practical Essenes: indeed the account given us by Josephus of the latter corresponds so exactly with the institutions and habits of the early votaries of monachism, that it is impossible for any two things more nearly to resemble each other. Those solitary characters, who came to be distinguished by the appellation of hermits, appear to have copied after the theoretical [p. 51.] Essenes or Therapeut\u00e6.<\/p>\n
XIV. Of the practical Essenes. The practical Essenes were distributed in the cities, and throughout the countries of Syria, Palestine, and Egypt. Their bond of association embraced not merely a community of tenets, and a similarity of manners, and particular observances, like that of the Pharisees or the Sadducees; but extended also to a general participation of houses, victuals, and every sort of goods. Their demeanor was sober and chaste; and their mode of life was, in every other respect, made subject to the strictest regulations, and put under the superintendance of governors, whom they appointed over themselves. The whole of their time was devoted to labour, meditation, and prayer: and they were most diligently attentive to the calls of justice and humanity, and every moral duty. Like all other Jews, they believed in the unity of God: but from some of their institutes, it appears that they entertained a reverence for the sun; considering, probably, that grand luminary as a deity of an inferior order, or perhaps regarding him as the visible image of the Supreme Being. The souls of men they imagined to have fallen, by a disastrous fate, from the regions of purity and light into the bodies which they occupy; during their stay in which, they considered them to be confined as it were within the walls of a loathsome dungeon. For this reason, therefore, they would not believe in the resurrection of the body; although it was their opinion that the soul would be rewarded or punished in a life to come, according to its deserts. They also allowed themselves but little bodily nourishment or gratification, fearing lest the immortal spirit might be thereby encumbered and weighed down. It was, moreover, their endeavour, by constant meditation, to withdraw the mind as much as possible from the contagious influence of the corrupt mass by which it was unhappily enveloped. The ceremonies or external forms, enjoined by Moses to be observed in the worship of God, were utterly disregarded by many of the Essenes; it being their opinion that the words of the law were to be understood in a mysterious recondite sense, and not according to their literal meaning. Others of them, indeed, conformed so far as to offer sacrifices; but they did this at home, since they were totally averse from the rites which it was necessary for those to observe who made their offerings in the temple.() Upon the whole, I should think it no improbable conjecture, that the doctrine and discipline of the Essenes arose out of an endeavour to make the principles of the Jewish religion accord with some tenets which they had imbibed from that system, which we have above spoken of under the title of the oriental philosophy.<\/p>\n
XV. Of the theoretical Essenes, or Therapeut\u00e6. Notwithstanding that the practical Essenes were very much addicted to superstition, society derived no inconsiderable benefit from their labour, and the strictness of their morals. Those of the theoretical class, however, or the Therapeut\u00e6 of Philo, seem to have set scarcely any bounds whatever to their silly extravagance. Although they professed themselves to be Jews, and were desirous to be considered as the disciples of Moses, they were yet, if we except the name, and some few trifling observances, entirely strangers to the Mosaic discipline.() Renouncing every sort of employment, and all worldly goods, they withdrew themselves into solitary places, and there, distributed about in separate cells, passed the remnant of their days without engaging in any kind of bodily labour, and neither offering sacrifices, nor observing any other external form of religious worship. In this state of seclusion from the world and its concerns, they made it a point to reduce and keep the body low, by allowing it nothing beyond the most slender subsistance, and, as far as possible, to draw away and disengage the soul from it by perpetual contemplation; so that the immortal spirit might, in defiance of its corporeal imprisonment, be kept constantly aspiring after its native liberty and light, and be prepared, immediately on the dissolution of the body, to re-ascend to those celestial regions from whence it originally sprang. Conformably to the practice of the Jews, the Therapeut\u00e6 were accustomed to hold a solemn assembly every seventh day. On these occasions, after hearing a sermon from [p. 55.] their pr\u00e6fect, and offering up their prayers, it was usual for them to feast together,\u2014if men can in any wise be said to have feasted, whose repast consisted merely of salt and bread and water. This sort of refection was followed by a sacred dance, which was continued throughout the whole night until the appearance of the dawn. At first, the men and the women danced in two separate parties; but at length, their minds, according to their own account, kindling with a sort of divine ecstacy, the two companies joined in one, mutually striving, by various shouts and songs of the most vehement kind, accompanied with the most extravagant motions and gesticulations of the body, to manifest the fervid glow of that divine love with which they were inflamed. To so great an extent of folly may men be led, in consequence of their entertaining erroneous principles respecting the Deity and the origin of the human soul!<\/p>\n
XVI. The moral doctrine of these sects. Neither of these sects, into which the Jewish people were divided, can be considered as having the least contributed towards promoting the interests of virtue and genuine piety. The Pharisees, as was frequently objected to them by our blessed Saviour, paid no regard whatever to inward purity or sanctity of mind, but studied merely to attract the eyes of the multitude towards them, by an ostentatious solemnity of carriage, and the most specious external parade of piety and brotherly love. They were also continually straining and perverting the most grand and important precepts of the divine law; whilst, at the same time, they enforced an unreserved obedience to ordinances which were merely the institutions of men. Matth. 15:9; 23:13. &c. The Sadducees considered all those as righteous who strictly conformed themselves to the observances prescribed by Moses, and did no injury to the Jewish nation, from whom they had received none. Since their tenets forbade men to look forward to a future state of rewards and punishments, and placed the whole happiness of man in riches and sensual gratification, they naturally tended to generate and encourage an inordinate cupidity of wealth, a brutal insensibility to the calls of compassion, and a variety of other vices equally pernicious and degrading to the human mind. The Essenes laboured under the influence of a vain and depressing superstition; so that, whilst they were scrupulously attentive to the demands of justice and equity in regard to others, they appear to have altogether overlooked the duties which men owe to themselves. The Therapeut\u00e6 were a race who resigned themselves wholly to the dictates of the most egregious fanaticism and folly. They would engage in no sort of business or employment on their own account, neither would they be instrumental in forwarding the interests of others. In a word, they seem to have considered themselves as released from every bond by which human society is held together, and at liberty to act in direct opposition to nearly every principle of moral discipline.()<\/p>\n
XVII. Lives of the people dissolute and perverse. Owing to the various causes which we have thus enumerated, the great mass of the Jewish people were, at the time of Christ\u2019s birth, sunk in the most profound ignorance as to divine matters; and the nation, for the most part, devoted to a flagitious and dissolute course of life. That such was the miserable state of degradation [p. 58.] into which this highly favoured race had fallen, is incontestibly proved by the history of our Saviour\u2019s life, and the discourses which he condescended to address to them: and it was in allusion thereto that he compares the teachers of the people to blind guides, who professed to instruct others in a way with which they were totally unacquainted themselves; Matt. 15:14; John, 9:39; and the multitude to a flock of lost sheep, wandering without a shepherd. Matt. 10:6; 15:24.<\/p>\n
XVIII. The oriental philosophy adopted by many of the Jews. To all the sources of error and corruption above pointed out, we have still further to add, that, at the time of Christ\u2019s appearance, many of the Jews had imbibed the principles of the oriental philosophy respecting the origin of the world, and were much addicted to the study of a recondite sort of learning derived from thence, to which they gave the name of cabbala, and which they considered as of great authority; attributing to it, in many respects, a superiority over the plain and simple system of discipline prescribed by Moses. Abundant proof of this might be adduced from the writings of the New Testament, as well as from the early history of Christianity.() But to pass over other facts which might be noticed, it is certain that the founders of several of the Gnostic sects, all of whom, we know, were studious to make the Christian religion accommodate itself to the principles of the ancient oriental philosophy, had been originally Jews, and exhibited in their tenets a strange mixture of the doctrines of Moses, Christ, and Zoroaster. This is of itself sufficient to prove that many of the Jews were, in no small degree, attached to the opinions of the ancient Persians and Chald\u00e6ans. Such of them as had adopted these irrational principles would not admit that the world was created by God, but substituted, in the place of the Deity, a celestial genius endowed with vast powers; from whom, also, they maintained that Moses had his commission, and the Jewish law its origin. To the coming of the Messiah, or deliverer promised by God to their fathers, they looked forward with hope; expecting that he would put an end to the dominion of the being whom they thus regarded as the maker and ruler of the world. Their notions, therefore, so far as they related to the abolition of the ceremonial law by the coming of Christ, were certainly more correct than those of the Jews in common. But their hopes in this respect redounded but little to their credit, since they were founded on a most grievous error, and were accompanied with many strange and unwarrantable conceits, not less repugnant to right reason than to the Jewish religion.<\/p>\n
XIX. The Samaritans. The Samaritans, who performed [p. 59.] their sacred rites on mount Garizim, were involved in the same calamities which befel the Jewish people, and were no less forward than the Jews in adding, to their other afflictions, the numerous evils produced by factions and intestine tumults. They were not, however, divided into so many religious sects; although the instances of Dositheus, Menander, and Simon Magus, plainly prove that there were not wanting amongst them some who were carried away by the lust of novelty, and sullied the religion of their ancestors, by incorporating with it many of the principles of orientalism.() Many things have been handed down to us by the Jews respecting the public religion of these people, on which, however, we cannot place much reliance, since they were unquestionably dictated by a spirit of invidious malignity. But since Christ himself attributes to the Samaritans a great degree of ignorance respecting God, and things of a divine nature, John, 4:22, it is not to be doubted that in their tenets the truth was much debased by superstition, and the light in no small danger of being overpowered by obscurity; and that their religion was much more contaminated by error than that of the Jews. In this one thing only can they be said to have shown themselves superior to the Jews, that they did not attempt to gloss over or conceal the many imperfections of their religion, but frankly acknowledged its defects, and looked forward with hope to the time when the Messiah (whose advent they expected in common with the Jewish nation) would communicate to them that larger measure of spiritual instruction, of which they stood so much in need.()<\/p>\n
XX. State of the Jews not resident in Palestine. So exceedingly great was the fecundity of the Jewish people, that occasionally multitudes of them had been constrained to emigrate from their native country; and at the period of which we are now treating, the descendants of Abraham were to be met with in every part of the known world. In all the provinces of the Roman empire, in particular, they were to be found in great numbers, either serving in the army, or engaged in the pursuits of commerce, or practising some lucrative art. Those of the Jews who thus ventured to establish themselves without the confines of Palestine, were every where successful in obtaining that general sort of encouragement and protection from violence, which was to be derived from various regulations and edicts of the emperors and magistrates in their favour:() but the peculiarities of their religion and manners caused them to be held in very general contempt, and not unfrequently exposed them to much vexation and annoyance from the jealousy and indignation of a superstitious populace. Many of them, in consequence of their long residence and intercourse amongst foreign nations, fell into the error of endeavouring to make their religion accommodate itself to the principles and institutions of some of the different systems of heathen discipline, of which it would be easy to adduce numerous instances: but, on the other hand, it is clear that the Jews brought many of those with whom they sojourned to [p. 61.] perceive the superiority of the Mosaic religion over the Gentile superstitions, and were highly instrumental in causing them to forsake the worship of a plurality of gods. Upon the whole, the circumstance of the Jews having found their way into almost every region of the habitable globe, may, I think, justly be classed amongst the means made use of by Divine Providence to open a path for the general diffusion of the truths of Christianity. For it is not to be doubted that the knowledge which the Gentiles thus acquired from the Jews, respecting the only true God, the Creator and Governor of the universe, although it might be but partial, and of limited extent, inclined many of them the more readily to lend their attention to the arguments and exhortations which were subsequently used by our Saviour\u2019s apostles, for the purpose of exploding the worship of false deities, and recalling men to those principles of religion which have their foundation in reason and in nature.<\/p>\n
THE<\/p>\n
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY<\/p>\n
OF THE<\/p>\n
FIRST CENTURY<\/p>\n
I. The birth of Christ. With a view to effect the recovery of the human race from such a deplorable state of wretchedness and disorder, and to instruct mankind in the path that leads to everlasting salvation and peace, the Son of God voluntarily condescended to take upon himself our nature, and to be born of a virgin, a descendant of the royal house of David, in Bethlehem, a city of Palestine. This event, we know, took place under the reign of the emperor Augustus; but as to the identical day, or month, or even year of its occurrence, it is impossible to speak with any degree of precision, since all the historians of the life of our blessed Saviour, with whose writings we are acquainted, are entirely silent as to these particulars: and indeed it should seem that the earliest Christians were not much better informed on the subject than ourselves, since they appear to have been much divided in opinion as to the exact time of this most important nativity.() Several ingenious and profound scholars have, at different periods, bestowed an abundance of pains on the subject, in the hope of being able to supply this deficiency in the more ancient writers; but none of them have as yet made any discovery that can be said to put the matter out of all doubt.() But surely it is of little or no consequence that we are uninformed of the particular year and day that ushered in this glorious light to the world: it is sufficient for us to be assured that the Sun of Righteousness hath arisen on our benighted race, that its refulgence hath dispelled the darkness with which the human mind was enveloped, and that nothing intervenes to prevent us from availing ourselves of the splendour and invigorating warmth of its beams.<\/p>\n
II. Accounts of his infancy and youth. The inspired historians of the life and actions of our Saviour have left but little on record respecting his childhood and early youth. Whilst yet an infant, it appears that his parents fled with him into Egypt, in order to shield him from the persecuting violence of Herod the Great. Matt. 2:13. At twelve years of age we find him in the temple at Jerusalem, disputing with the most learned of the Jewish doctors, who were filled with astonishment at his understanding and knowledge. The remaining part of his life, until he entered on his ministry, he appears to have spent with his parents, exhibiting in himself an exemplary pattern of affectionate filial obedience.() Farther than this, it should seem the divine wisdom did not think it necessary that we should be informed. But these few particulars not being found sufficient to satisfy human curiosity, some artful unprincipled characters amongst the early Christians had the presumption to avail themselves of the ignorance and inquisitiveness of a credulous multitude in this respect, and, under the pretence of illustrating this obscure part of our Saviour\u2019s life, to impose on the public a compilation of ridiculous and nonsensical stories, which they entitled Gospels of the infancy of Christ.()<\/p>\n
III. John the pr\u00e6cursor of Christ. Christ entered on his ministry in the thirtieth year of his age; and, in order that his doctrine might obtain a more ready acceptance with the Jews, a man named John, the son of a Jewish priest, a person whose gravity of deportment and whole tenor of life was such as to excite veneration and respect, was commanded by God to announce to the people the immediate coming of the promised Messiah, and to endeavour to awaken in their senseless groveling minds a proper disposition to receive him. This illustrious character proclaimed himself to be the forerunner or herald of the Messiah, commissioned to call with a loud voice on the inhabitants of the wilderness to amend and make ready their ways for the King that was approaching;() and having his mind inflamed with a holy zeal, he executed his mission with ardour and fidelity, rebuking [p. 65.] the vices of the nation sharply and without reserve. The form of initiation which he adopted, in regard to all those who promised an amendment of heart and life, was to immerge them in the river, according to the ancient Jewish practice. Matth. 3:2; Joh. 1:22. Jesus himself, before he entered on his ministry, condescended to comply with this rite, and was solemnly baptized by John in the river Jordan, lest (according to his own words) he should appear to have disregarded any part of the divine law. John finished his earthly course under the reign of Herod the tetrarch. Having had the courage openly to reprove that tyrant for an incestuous connection with his brother\u2019s wife, he was in consequence thereof cast into prison, and after some little while beheaded.()<\/p>\n
IV. The life of Christ. It cannot be necessary that we should, in this place, enter into a minute detail of the life and actions of Jesus Christ. The writings of the four evangelists are in the hands of every one; and no one who has read them can need to be informed, that for upwards of three years, in the midst of numberless perils and insidious machinations, and in defiance of the most insulting and injurious treatment, he continued with an inflexible constancy to point out to the Jewish people, by a mode of instruction peculiarly adapted to the manners and way of thinking of themselves, and the other nations of the east, the true and only means by which everlasting salvation was to be obtained. It must be equally unnecessary to remark, that he discovered no sort of desire whatever for either riches or worldly honours, but that his life was spent in poverty, and distinguished by such sanctity and innocence, that even his most virulent enemies could find nothing whereof they might accuse him. In regard, likewise, to the divinity of his mission, and the truth of the doctrines which he taught, every one must be apprised that he placed both the one and the other beyond all doubt, not only by referring to various prophecies and oracular passages contained in the writings of the Old Testament, but also by a series of the most stupendous miracles. Of his miracles it may be observed, that, from beginning to end, they were uniformly of a salutary and beneficent character, i. e. they were, in every respect, strictly consentaneous to the spirit and tendency of his ministry, and exhibited no unfaithful types or images of those spiritual blessings which he was about to communicate to mankind. Had our Saviour come to enforce with rigour the penalties of the law, he might with propriety have established the authenticity of his mission by terrific prodigies and signs; but he [p. 66.] came as the messenger of divine clemency and pity, and in no way could the truth or the character of his doctrine have been more beautifully or emphatically marked than by the wonders of benevolence and love.<\/p>\n
V. Christ seceded from the Jewish church to a certain degree. In the line of duty which Christ prescribed for the Jews, he omitted none of those points which were enjoined by the law of Moses; and it is observable, that he joined with the inhabitants of Palestine in their acts of public worship, and in all other rites of divine origin. This should seem to have been done, partly for the purpose of bearing testimony to the divine authority of the Jewish law and religion, and partly with a view to avoid incurring the hatred and ill offices of the priests and lawyers by any unnecessary provocation. He made no scruple, however, openly to predict the downfall, not only of the Jewish state, but also of the Mosaic worship and religion, and to declare, in the plainest and most express terms, that under his auspices a new religious community would be established, founded upon more perfect principles of worship, and which, extending itself to the farthermost parts of the earth, would unite the whole human race in one common bond of fraternal love.() Neither did he confine himself merely to thus prophesying the rise of a new and most comprehensive religion, but proceeded at once with his own hands to lay the foundation of it, by causing his disciples to baptize with water all those who, either through the preaching of himself or his apostles, had been brought to confess that he was the Son of God, the Saviour of mankind commissioned from above; thereby initiating them under a new covenant, the terms and obligations of which were such as could not fail to separate them from the rest of the Jewish community. John, 3:22, 26; 4:2. Although, therefore, it must be allowed that Christ and his disciples did not formally renounce their connection with the Jewish church, or absolutely withdraw themselves from it; yet it is clear that, in a certain degree, he established a new sect therein, and that in reality he separated both himself and his followers from the rest of the Jews.()<\/p>\n
VI. Election of the apostles. Since it was intended that the religious community thus established by Christ, although confined at first within very narrow limits, should by degrees extend itself to the farthermost parts of the earth, it was requisite that he should select certain persons, who, from their being admitted to a constant and familiar intercourse with him, might acquire that lively degree of faith and zeal, which should enable them, in spite of every obstacle and difficulty, to make their way into the different regions of the world, for the purpose of propagating the religion of their divine Master, and bearing testimony to the exemplary purity of his life, and the stupendous deeds and miracles by which he established the truth of his doctrine. From amongst the great multitude of Jews, therefore, that had joined themselves to him, he chose twelve whom he deemed the most faithful and best fitted for the task; appointing them, in a more especial manner, his ambassadors to the human race, and distinguishing them from the rest of his disciples by the title of apostles.() The persons thus selected were of mean extraction, poor, illiterate, and utterly unprovided with any of those arts or gifts which are calculated to win the countenance and favour of the world, and to impose on the unwary and credulous part of mankind: and it is intimated in Scripture, (1 Cor. 1:20, 21, et seq.) that such were intentionally chosen, lest the efficacy and fruits of their mission should be attributed to eloquence, to authority, or to any other human and natural cause, and not to the divine power of God. In order, likewise, that the testimony with which they were to be charged might be of the most ample kind, and superior to all exception, he made them his constant and intimate companions through life; retaining them always about his person, except on one occasion when he sent them, for a short space, on a mission to the Jews. Matth. 10:5, 6, 7. Their number being fixed at twelve, has a manifest [p. 69.] relation to the Jewish tribes;() and it should seem that Christ intended thereby to intimate to the Jews that he was the Sovereign Lord, the true King, and great High Priest of all the twelve tribes of Israel.<\/p>\n
VII. And of the seventy disciples. In addition to these twelve, whom Christ ordained to be the messengers and teachers of his word to the world at large, he selected from his disciples seventy others, whom he sent before him into the different parts of Jud\u00e6a, whither he meant to come, for the purpose of preparing and disposing the minds of the Jewish people; so that his own preaching might be the more readily listened to, and attended with the greater effect. Luke, 10:1, &c. Of these seventy mention is only once made by any of the evangelists, and no reliance can be placed on the account which some more recent writers have pretended to give of their names, their journies, and their labours.() We are not, however, by any means authorized from hence to conclude that they were only once employed by Christ, or that their powers were withdrawn from them after they had fulfilled the object of this their first mission. Their number corresponded with that of the senators who composed the sanhedrim, or chief council of the Jews; and I therefore consider it as highly probable that Christ, [p. 72.] in the selection of this number, also might intend to impress on the minds of the Jewish people, by an ostensible sign, that the former authority of the high priest and chief council was now abolished, and all power as to divine matters become vested in himself alone.<\/p>\n
VIII. The fame of Christ extends beyond Judea. The personal ministry and instruction of our blessed Saviour was confined entirely to the Jews; nor did he suffer his disciples, during his continuance on earth, to go to any of the neighbouring nations. Matth. 10:5, 6; 15:24. The magnitude, however, of the wonderful things that he performed will not permit us to doubt but that his fame soon diffused itself throughout a great part of the world. Amongst other things which tend to prove this, it is related by writers of no small credit, that Abgarus, the king of Edessa in Syria, being afflicted with a severe disease, besought by letter the assistance of Christ; and that our Saviour not only returned an answer to the king, but also sent him his picture.() What are considered by some as genuine copies of the letters that passed on this occasion, are still extant. In regard to the fact itself, I see no reason for rejecting it as altogether undeserving of belief; but as to what is said of the picture, I think we may consider it as unquestionably the invention of the Greek writers of a later age: and it appears to me, that the letters carry with them no very obscure marks of forgery and imposition.()<\/p>\n
IX. Fruits of Christ\u2019s ministry. A considerable number of the Jews, penetrated with astonishment at the many wonderful proofs which Christ gave of his divine authority and power, became his disciples; being convinced that he could be none other than the holy one of God, the true Messiah, whose coming was predicted of old by the prophets: and it is clear that many more would have joined themselves to him, had not the priests and lawyers, whose crimes and deceit he exposed without reserve, and rebuked with the utmost severity, exerted all their influence, and made use of various arts and devices to prejudice the minds of a timid and fickle people against him. But it was not long that these enemies of Jesus rested content with giving vent to their animosity merely in this shape. For, finding that it would be impossible for them to retain their credit and authority with the world, and the numerous advantages attendant thereon, in any other way than by the destruction of Christ, they began to lay snares for his life. Our blessed Saviour, perceiving himself to be thus beset, had recourse to the dictates of prudence, and by avoiding, both in his words and actions, as far as was consistent with the nature of his function, every thing which might tend still further to inflame the malice of these perfidious men, he for some time succeeded in rendering all their schemes abortive. Moreover, when he was at Jerusalem, where there was every reason for him to be most apprehensive of danger, his enmies were withheld from laying hands on him during the day by a fear of the people, who were well inclined towards him; and the place where he passed his nights was not known to any, except his intimate friends and companions.<\/p>\n
X. The death of Christ. Of these his companions, however, one was at length found, named Judas, who, bartering his salvation for money, agreed, for a reward of no great value, to discover the nightly retreat of his divine Master; who was, in consequence thereof, seized on by a band of soldiers, and hurried away as a criminal to answer charges which involved his life. Betrayed thus infamously into the hands of his enemies, our blessed Saviour was first led before the high priest and chief council of the Jews, by whom, without the least shadow of justice, and merely on testimony of the most vague and contradictory nature, he was pronounced guilty of blasphemy, [p. 74.] and worthy of death. From thence he was taken to the tribunal of Pontius Pilate, the Roman governor, and accused of a crime totally different in its nature from that wherewith he had been first charged, and of which it had been his particular care to avoid incurring even the least suspicion, namely, attempting to excite sedition and conspiracy against C\u00e6sar. Pilate, although he does not appear to have been over scrupulous in the administration of justice, yet discountenanced this accusation, which he at once perceived to be founded in falsehood; and strenuously exerted himself to save a man, for whom, on account of his wisdom and sanctity, it should seem that he felt no little respect. Finding, however, after repeated efforts on the side of mercy, that the multitude, who were stirred up by the chief priests, would not be satisfied with any thing short of the blood of Christ, but persisted to call for it with a tumultuous violence, approaching nearly to a state of insurrection, he was at length induced, though evidently with considerable reluctance, to comply with their demands, and passed on the meek and blameless object of their fury a sentence of death. As our blessed Saviour had taken upon himself our nature with a view to expiate the sins of mankind, and was conscious that the divine councils and decrees had been satisfied by him, and that every purpose for which he took up his abode with man was fulfilled, he used no endeavours to screen himself from this injurious treatment, but voluntarily submitted to undergo the pain and ignominy of a capital punishment, and calmly breathed out his pure and spotless soul upon the cross; praying, even in his agony, for the forgiveness of those who were the merciless and unrelenting authors of his sufferings.()<\/p>\n
XI. His resurrection and ascension into Heaven. The body of Christ, being taken down from the cross, was laid in a sepulchre which Joseph, one of the Jewish senators, had prepared for himself, [p. 75.] where it remained until the third day. Early on the morning of that day, our blessed Saviour, according to his own prediction, again resumed the life which he had voluntarily laid down; and by triumphantly rising from the tomb, demonstrated that the divine justice was satisfied, and the path which leads to immortality and life once more rendered easy of access to the human race. During the succeeding forty days, he held frequent converse with his disciples, confirming their faith, and instructing them in the nature of those important functions and duties which he designed them to fulfil. It is observable that, after his return to life, he showed himself to none of his enemies. Amongst other reasons which he might have for this reserve, it is probable that he foresaw that even the appearance of one risen from the dead would produce no salutary impression on men, whose minds were not only blinded by malice, but corrupted by various popular superstitions respecting manes and spectres.() At the end of the above-mentioned period, having assembled his disciples, and commanded them to go and preach the gospel unto all nations, he blessed them, and rising sublimely from the earth, was in their presence received up into heaven.<\/p>\n
XII. Effusion of the Holy Spirit on the apostles. Those whom Christ had selected as above mentioned to be the witnesses of his life and acts, and the messengers of his gospel to the world, were not, at the time of his ascension, endowed with powers adequate to the discharge of the important functions with which they were invested. Having, therefore, again resumed his station in glory, and sat down at the right hand of the everlasting Father, he, about the fiftieth day from the time of his death, sent down on them from above, according to his promise, the divine power and gifts of the Holy Spirit. Acts, 2:1. In consequence of this miraculous effusion, their minds became irradiated with celestial light, their faith acquired strength, their knowledge of the will of their divine Master was rendered more perfect, and they were inspired with a zeal and fortitude which armed them against every difficulty that it was necessary to encounter in his service, and enabled them, in the execution of his commands, to triumph even over death itself. One of the most astonishing of the endowments thus bestowed by our Saviour on his apostles, was an instantaneous acquaintance with languages of which they were previously ignorant, so as to qualify them to instruct the different nations of the earth in their own proper tongues.()<\/p>\n
XIII. The gospel preached first to the Jews and Samaritans, and then to the rest of the world. Inspired with the requisite confidence and powers by this communication of succour from above, the apostles entered on their ministry without delay; endeavouring, first of all, as they had been commanded, to convert the inhabitants of Jerusalem to a faith in Christ, and then directing their efforts to the propagation of his gospel amongst the remainder of the Jewish nation. Luke, 24:47; Acts, 1:8; 13:46.) Nor were these their first exertions chilled by any thing like a want of success: for within a very short period, the flock of Christ, which, at the time of his departure, could not be considered otherwise than as small and weak, was augmented and strengthened by the accession of many thousands of Jews. It appears that by one sermon alone of Peter\u2019s, three thousand, and that by another, five thousand were added to the Christian community in this its infancy. Acts, 2:41; 4:4. A preference having been thus given to the Jews, the apostles, in compliance with the express commands of our Saviour, next extended the blessings of their ministry to the Samaritans. Acts. 1:8; 8:14. At length, having continued for many years at Jerusalem,() and given a due degree of stability and strength to the several Christian fraternities or churches which had been formed in Palestine, they proceeded to communicate the glorious light of the gospel to the different Gentile nations of the earth; and in the various regions through which they travelled were successful in establishing the church of Christ to an extent and with a rapidity that are, in every respect, truly astonishing.<\/p>\n
XIV. The election of a new apostle. The first concern of the apostles, after our Saviour\u2019s ascension into heaven, was to render their number complete according its first establishment, by electing a man of superior worth and sanctity to supply the place of Judas, who had perished by a miserable death. Having, therefore, gathered together the small assembly of Christians which had been formed in Jerusalem, two men distinguished for their sanctity and faith in Christ were proposed as candidates on this occasion; the one named Barsabas, the other Matthias. The whole assembly then joined in devout prayer to God, that their choice might not, through human frailty, fall on that man of the two which was least acceptable in his sight; after which, proceeding to the election, they either by lot, or rather, as I suspect, by the suffrages of such Christians as were present, chose Matthias to fill the office of a twelfth apostle.()<\/p>\n
XV. The conversion of St. Paul. All these apostles were uninformed, illiterate men. Through the gift of the Holy Spirit, indeed, their minds had become fully irradiated with eelestial light; but to any other sort of wisdom than that which is from above, they had no pretensions; neither were they at all instructed in any of the different branches of human learning. In the then infancy of the Christian church, however, it was absolutely requisite that, in addition to these, there should be some one appointed who might be able to repress the domineering spirit of the Jewish doctors, by encountering them with their own weapons; and also be qualified, if occasion should require, to enter the field of disputation with the advocates and supporters of the various systems of pagan philosophy. Our blessed Saviour, therefore, revealing himself from heaven in a very wonderful manner to a young man of the name of Saul, but who afterwards changed it for that of Paul, appointed him a thirteenth apostle. Saul, who was a Jew, a native of Tarsus in Cilicia, and belonging to the seet of the Pharisees, had been endowed by nature with great and excellent mental powers, and was eminently skilled in every kind of Jewish learning. He was also conversant with the literature and philosophy of the Greeks. Led away by prejudice and warmth of temper, he was at first the bitter persecuting enemy of Christ and his flock; but as he journeyed on a certain time towards Damascus, with power from the high priest to seize on any Christians whom he might find there, and bring them bound to Jerusalem, he was on a sudden struck to the earth, and so affected by the voice and power of our Saviour, that he became at once a convert to his cause, devoting himself wholly to it, and with the utmost cheerfulness and fortitude, exposing himself to innumerable hardships and dangers on account thereof, throughout the whole course of his future life. Acts, 9:1, et seq. In how great a degree every interest of Christianity was promoted by the exertions of this illustrious and admirable character, how many churches he founded throughout the greatest part of the Roman empire, how numerous and how formidable the contentions and perils which he encountered and overcame, his own epistles which are still extant, and the history of the Acts of the Apostles written by St. Luke, abundantly testify.<\/p>\n
XVI. Of the labours, martyrdom, &c. of the apostles. In the accounts which have been given by various writers, of the labours, the travels, the miracles, and the deaths of the apostles, there is little that can be altogether depended on, except what is recorded in the books of the New Testament, and a few other [p. 81.] monuments of great antiquity. In this case, as in most others of doubt and uncertainty, a difference of opinion prevails as to what ought to be received, and what rejected. For my own part, I think that we cannot well withhold our credit from such particulars as stand supported by the clear and positive testimony of Origen, Eusebius, Gregory Nanzianzene, Paulinus, Jerome, Socrates, and certain of the more ancient writers who are cited with approbation by Eusebius; but as to any thing that is to be met with merely in the writings of uncertain authors, or those of a later age, I should ever feel inclined to receive it with considerable hesitation and distrust, unless it should happen to be corroborated by documents that admit of no dispute. For when once certain of the Christian writers had been unfortunately tempted to have recourse to fiction, it was not long before the weakness of some and the arrogant presumption of others carried forgery and imposition to an extent, of which it would be difficult to convey to the reader any adequate idea. Amongst various other things that I consider as having been too readily received upon trust respecting the apostles, I cannot help including those accounts which have been handed down to us of their having, for the most part, undergone violent deaths; although I am well aware, that the fact of their having suffered in this way is commonly considered as established beyond dispute.()<\/p>\n
XVII. Churches founded by the Apostles. Amidst all the uncertainty, however, in which the history of the apostles is involved, it appears to be placed beyond a doubt that they travelled throughout the greatest part of the then known and civilized world, and within a short time, either by themselves, or with the assistance of certain of their disciples who accompanied them in their travels, and shared their labours, established churches dedicated to Christ in almost all the provinces.() But even here we are precluded from giving scareely any thing beyond this general statement of the fact: the great obscurity which hangs over nearly every part of the early history of Christianity not only preventing us from marking with precision the extent of the apostles\u2019 progress, but also rendering it impossible for us, with any degree of confidence, to name any particular churches as founded by them, except such as are mentioned in the writings of the New Testament.() Throughout the world there is scarcely, not to say a nation or people, but even a city of any magnitude or consequence, in which the religion of Christ may be said to flourish, that does not ascribe the first planting of its church to one or other of the apostles themselves, or to some of their immediate and most intimate disciples. But no reliance whatever can be placed on traditions of this sort: since it has been pretty clearly ascertained, that the same spirit of vain glory which prompted ancient nations to pronounce themselves the offspring of the soil, or the descendants of the gods, found its way into the churches of Christ, and induced many of them to suppress the truth, and claim for themselves a more illustrious origin than in reality belonged to them.()<\/p>\n
XVIII. The Writings of the Apostles. But the labours [p. 87.] of the apostles, in the cause of their divine Master, were not restricted merely to journeyings, to watchings, to the cheerful endurance of deprivations and sufferings, to the communication of oral instruction, or to the use of such other means as promised to be instrumental in promoting the edification of those of their own age. The welfare of future generations was likewise the object of their solicitude; and they accordingly made it a part of their concern to commit to writing a code of testimony and instruction, of which the whole human race might avail itself in all ages to come: the Holy Spirit, to whose influence and guidance their minds were in every respect subject, doubtless prompting them to the undertaking. St. Matthew with his own hand wrote a history of the life and actions of Christ, as did also St. John; and St. Peter and St. Paul respectively dictated similar histories to St. Mark and St. Luke.() Certain epistles, also, in which are comprised the leading principles of Christianity, and various precepts or rules of life, were addressed by St. Paul, St. James, St. Peter, St. John, and St. Jude, to the churches which they had established in different parts of the world. At no very great distance of time from the age of the apostles, the Christians, with a view to secure to future ages a divine and perpetual standard of faith and action, collected these writings together into one volume, under the title of The New Testament, or The Canon of the New Testament. Neither the names of those who were chiefly concerned in the making of this collection, nor the exact time of its being undertaken, can be ascertained with any degree of certainty; nor is it at all necessary that we should be precisely informed as to either of these particulars: it is sufficient for us to know that it may be proved by many strong arguments, that the principal parts of the New Testament had been collected together before the death of St. John, or at least not long after that event.()<\/p>\n
XIX. The Apostles\u2019 Creed. To these writings of the apostles it might be proper to add that formulary of faith, which is commonly known by the name of the Apostles\u2019 Creed, if any reasonable grounds appeared to warrant that notion respecting its origin, which obtained pretty generally in the Christian world subsequently to the fourth century, and which is entertained by many even at this day, namely, that it was drawn up by the apostles themselves before they departed from Jerusalem on their mission to the Gentiles.() But to say nothing of the silence of all the most ancient writers as to this point, and equally passing over the fact that this formulary was not uniformly adopted by the Christian churches, which would most undoubtedly have been the case, had they known it to have been dictated by such high authority; omitting, moreover, to lay any stress on the circumstance of its having never been received or accounted as a part of the apostolic writings; it is alone a sufficient refutation of this opinion, that we know for certain that this creed was at first extremely short; and that it was afterwards, by little and little, extended and dilated, according as new errors from time to time sprang up in the Christian community.() No one surely will maintain, that we ought to regard that as a genuine formulary of faith prescribed by the apostles, which can be proved to have been amplified in several respects subsequently to their death.
\n[p. 89.]<\/p>\n
XX. Causes to which the quick propagation of Christianity must be ascribed. The system of discipline which the apostles, by the authority and command of their divine Master, employed themselves in propagating throughout the world, was not only repugnant to the natural disposition and inclinations of mankind, but also set itself in direct opposition to the manners, the laws, and the opinions of all the different nations of the earth; and as for the persons themselves who were selected to be the propounders of it, they were altogether rude and unskilled in any of those arts by which the human mind is to be rendered docile, and brought to yield assent and obedience. It is impossible, therefore, to account for the astonishingly rapid propagation of the Christian religion amongst so many different nations, part of them of a savage and ferocious character, and part entirely devoted to licentiousness and sloth, otherwise than by receiving with implicit credit the accounts which are given us, by profane as well as sacred writers, of the miraculous gifts by which the apostles were distinguished; namely, that they possessed a faculty of persuasion more than human, that they predicted future events, laid open the secrets of men\u2019s hearts, held the operations of nature in control, enacted wonders beyond the reach of any human power, and lastly, were capable of transmitting these supernatural endowments to any on whom they thought proper to confer them, simply by the imposition of their hands on them, accompanied with prayer. Let these things be considered for a moment as false, and we shall at once find how utterly out of our power it is to assign any rational cause that could have prevailed on so large a portion of mankind, within so short a period, to turn their backs on the allurements of pleasure, to forsake the religion of their ancestors, and voluntarily to embrace Christianity, at the hazard of life, fortune, honour, and every thing else that could be dear to them.()<\/p>\n
XXI. The early Christians for the most part of low condition. Our opinion in regard to this point is not at all shaken by the arguments of those, who, after the example of Celsus, Julian, Porphyry, and other ancient adversaries of Christianity, call upon us to recollect that the first Christian assemblies [p. 91.] or churches formed by the apostles consisted of men of low degree, of servants, labourers, artificers, and women; in short, that they were wholly composed of uninformed illiterate persons, possessed of neither wealth nor dignity, and who were, of course, easily to be wrought upon and managed by any one even of very moderate abilities. For, in the first place, what they thus so confidently press on our attention is not a correct representation of the fact; since we are expressly taught in Scripture, that amongst those who were converted by the apostles to a faith in Christ were many persons of wealth, rank, and learning.() And, in the next place, it is well known to every one who has had the least experience in human affairs, that men, even of the lowest class, not only inherit from nature, in common with their superiors, the warmest attachment to life, and whatever may contribute to their own well-being, but are also in a far greater degree bigoted to, and consequently much more jealous over, the customs, opinions, and religious principles handed down to them from their ancestors, than those of intelligent and cultivated minds, who are possessed of wealth and authority, and fill the higher stations in life.()<\/p>\n
XXII. Christ held in great estimation by the Gentiles. That the apostles, in accomplishing the objects of their mission, derived no inconsiderable assistance from the great fame of their divine Master, which soon spread itself far and wide, and thus preceded them in their journeys, admits of little or no doubt. Authors of no mean credit assure us that, before the departure of the apostles from Jerusalem, the fame of the wonders wrought by Christ in the land of Judea had extended itself throughout a great part of the world, or at least of the Roman empire, and impressed many with the highest estimation of his character. It is even said that some of the Roman emperors themselves entertained an honourable respect for his name, his doctrine, and his acts. Indeed, if Tertullian and some others may be credited, Tiberius, who was in other respects a most execrable tyrant, conceived such an esteem for the character of our Lord, that it was his intention to have assigned him a place amongst the deities publicly worshipped by the Roman people; but that the design fell to the ground, in consequence of its being opposed by the senate. There have not, indeed, been wanting amongst the learned some who consider this as altogether a fabrication; but, on the other hand, men, by no means inferior to these in point of erudition, have brought forward several arguments in its support, which, as it appears to us, are not easily to be answered.()<\/p>\n
XXIII. Persecution of the Christians commenced by the Jews. The very great and daily accelerating progress of Christianity, was, however, contemplated with the utmost jealousy and apprehension by the Jewish priests and rulers, who plainly perceived that if the people should be prevailed on to embrace this new religion, the law of Moses would no longer retain its dignity, and there would consequently at once be an end of their authority, and of the many emoluments and advantages of which they contrived to make it the source. They, therefore, opposed the doctrine of Christ with all imaginable violence and rancour; and availing themselves of every favourable opportunity to lay hold on his apostles and their disciples, they threw them into prison, were they were threatened and scourged, and had every other species of evil heaped on them without reserve: some of them being even made to undergo capital punishment. Of the malevolence and injustice which the first teachers of Christianity thus experienced at the hands of the Jews, abundant testimony is left us on record by St. Luke, in the Acts of the Apostles. The most eminent amongst those who suffered death at Jerusalem for the cause of Christ were Stephen, a very devout man, whom the Jews stoned; Acts, 7:1. St. James, the apostle, the son of Zebedee, whom Herod Agrippa put to the sword; Acts, 12:1, 2. and St. James the Just, the bishop of the church at Jerusalem, who was slain in a cruel manner, as is shortly noticed by Josephus;() but described more at large by Hegesippus;() in whose account, however, there are many things to which no one, who is in the smallest degree conversant with either Christian or Jewish antiquities, can by any means give credit.<\/p>\n
XXIV. Enmity of the foreign Jews excited against the Christians. Moreover, not content with thus accumulating every possible injury on such of the harmless disciples of Christ as were to be found in Palestine, the high priest and rulers of the Jews dispatched legates or missionaries into all the different provinces, for the purpose of animating their distant brethren with similar sentiments of jealousy and hatred towards the Christians, and stirring them up to seek for every occasion of annoying and persecuting this inoffensive flock.() By what is recorded in the Acts of the Apostles, and other ancient authorities, it appears that the Jews, throughout every part of the world, discovered the utmost readiness in obeying this call of their spiritual instructors and governors, and with one consent made it their endeavour, by various calumnies and infamous machinations, to draw on the Christians the indignation and ill-will of the presidents, the magistrates, and the people at large. The chief of all the accusations wherewith the followers of Christ were loaded by the malice of these their inveterate foes, was that of their being enemies to the state, and conspirators against the imperial majesty: in proof whereof, it was alleged that they regarded one Jesus, a malefactor, who had been put to death by Pilate on very sufficient grounds, as a monarch sent down to mankind from above. To this conduct are to be attributed the many complaints that we meet with in the writings of the early Christians, respecting the hatred and cruelty of the Jews, whom they represent as more inimical and malicious in their carriage towards them than even the pagans themselves.()<\/p>\n
[p. 97.] XXV. Overthrow of Jerusalem and the Jewish nation. An effectual check, however, was given to the insatiable rancour with which the Jews thus persecuted the Christians, about the seventieth year from our Lord\u2019s birth, when Divine Justice delivered up their land, their city, and their temple, to be laid waste and overthrown, and even their name as a nation to be utterly blotted out, by the Romans under Vespasian and his son Titus. This tremendous scene of carnage, ruin, and devastation, which had been foretold by our Saviour himself, is very particularly described by the historian Josephus, who was present at the destruction of Jerusalem, and for the most part an eye-witness of all its attendant horrors. The cause which, beyond all others, may be considered as having more immediately contributed to bring down these heavy calamities on the Jewish nation, was the mal-administration of the Roman presidents, to whom the government of Palestine had been from time to time committed, and particularly of Gessius Florus, whose oppressive and vexatious conduct was every way calculated to exhaust the patience of this wretched and unfortunate people. Irritated and goaded by insults and severities, to which they saw no prospect of an end, they endeavoured to regain their former liberty; but their efforts, instead of promoting the object they had in view, served only to accelerate their final ruin, by rendering them at one and the same time a prey to intestine faction and the Roman sword. In the course of a seven years\u2019 war there perished of this ill-fated people, according to Josephus, either by fire, the sword, famine, pestilence, or different kinds of punishments, no less a number than one million three hundred and thirty-seven thousand four hundred and ninety. In the fourth year of this memorable contest, the city of Jerusalem was taken, after a six months\u2019 siege, and the temple, contrary to the wish of the emperor Titus, consumed by fire. The buildings that escaped the ravages of the flames were afterwards pulled down and levelled with the ground. Throughout the whole history of the human race, we meet with but few, if any, instances of slaughter and devastation at all to be compared with this. In contemplating it, amongst various other things which present themselves to our notice as well deserving of the most serious attention, it is particularly worthy of remark that the Jews themselves, rather than the Romans, must be considered as the authors of that great and tremendous accumulation of evils which signalized this final desolation of the house of Israel.<\/p>\n
XXVI. The ten persecutions of the Christians. About two years before the breaking out of this war between the Romans and the Jews, the Christians who dwelt at Rome were made subject to very unjust laws, and otherwise experienced the most severe and iniquitous treatment at the hands of the emperor Nero. His example was, in this respect, pretty uniformly copied after by his successors, during three centuries; although their severity was not always carried to the same extent: and hence the professors of Christianity had to endure a long series of dire afflictions, or, to use a more familiar term, persecutions, to which an end was not put until the time of Constantine the Great. We have been for ages in the habit of considering the number of these persecutions as decidedly fixed at ten; but the early history of Christianity does not appear by any means to warrant this. [p. 98.] If it be meant to speak merely of such persecutions as were particularly severe, and of general extent throughout the empire, they certainly did not amount to ten; if, on the contrary, the lesser ones, or such as may be termed provincial, are designed to be included, it is equally clear that they exceeded that number. The persons who first fixed the number at ten, certainly found nothing on record to authorize their doing so; but were, as it should seem, led away by a wish to make history in this respect, accommodate itself to certain passages of Scripture, in which they imagined it to be foretold that just so many persecutions would befal the Christians.()<\/p>\n
XXVII. Causes of these persecutions. As the Romans allowed to every citizen the free exercise of his own reason and judgement in regard to matters of a divine nature, and never molested the Jews on account of their religion, it has afforded grounds for surprise to many that they should have discovered a temper so inhuman and implacable in their carriage towards the Christians, a set of men of the most harmless inoffensive character, who never harboured in their minds a wish or thought inimical to the welfare of the state.() But it is not very difficult to account for this. The Romans, it is true, extended their toleration to every kind of religion, from whence no danger to the public safety was to be apprehended; but, at the same time, they would not endure that any one should deride or attempt to explode the religion of the state, or that which had the support of the laws: for there existed between the government and religion of the Romans such an intimate connection and dependence on each other, that whoever attacked or endeavoured to undermine the latter, could not of necessity appear to them otherwise than as hostile to the former, and inimical to the dignity of the state. On this account all such of the Jews as lived intermixed amongst the Romans, were particularly cautious in whatever they said or did, to avoid every thing which could be construed into a reflection on the religion or gods of the commonwealth. But the conduct of the Christians was directly the reverse of this: for, laying aside every sort of fear, they strenuously endeavoured to make the Romans renounce their vain and silly superstitions, and were continually urging the citizens to give up and abolish those sacred rites, on the observance of which, as we above remarked, the welfare and dignity of the commonwealth were thought so much to depend. Under these circumstances, it could not well otherwise happen but that the Christians, although they intended no ill whatever to the state, yet should come to be looked upon and treated as enemies of the Roman government.<\/p>\n
XXVIII. Causes of these persecutions. It yielded a still further ground for offence, that the Christians did not content themselves with entering the lists against the religion of the Romans only, but also boldly asserted the falsehood and insufficiency of every other religious system in the world; and contended that eternal salvation was to be obtained in no other way than by laying hold on Christ. For the inference which the Romans drew from this was, that the members of this sect were not only immeasurably arrogant and supercilious in their pretensions, but were also filled with hatred towards all those who differed from them in opinion, and were consequently to be regarded as persons likely to sow amongst the people the most inveterate discord, and to occasion disturbances of a very serious nature to the state. For it was of old recognised as a maxim of civil polity, that a sect which not only believes those of every other persuasion to be in the wrong, but also considers every other species of religious culture, except that which its own tenets prescribe, as impious and offensive in the sight of heaven, is ever prone to excite public commotions, and give annoyance to those who do not belong to it. And I have no doubt but that we ought to understand Tacitus as intending to reproach the Christians with cherishing a disposition of this sort, when he represents them as odii generis humani convictos: and in like manner, Suetonius, when he attributes to them maleficam superstitionem.()<\/p>\n
XXIX. Causes of these persecutions. Whilst these [P. 103.] considerations had the effect of stirring up the emperors, the senate, the presidents, and the magistrates, to endeavour, as far as in them lay, to arrest the progress of Christianity, by means of the most rigorous laws and punishments; there were others which operated no less powerfully on the people, and particularly on the pagan priesthood, so as to cause them to require of their governors and magistrates, with an importunity approaching even to violence, that the Christians, wherever they could be found, should be put to death: and it not unfrequently happened that, by their clamours and threats, they extorted a compliance with their demands, even from those who would never otherwise have been prevailed on to imbrue their hands in the blood of the just. The Jews were possessed of a splendid temple; the ceremonies attending their religious rites were grand and magnificent; they offered up sacrifices, and had a supreme pontiff, with a numerous priesthood; and their mode of worship was, in several other respects, of a showy and an attractive nature: hence the Jewish religion appeared to the heathens as differing in no very material degree from those of other nations; and the God of the Hebrews was looked upon by them as the provincial deity, who had the immediate and especial care and governance of that particular people. But the Christian mode of worship was accompanied with none of those appendages which constituted the apparent affinity between the Jewish religion and those of other nations: ignorant men, therefore, like the pagan multitude, who imagined that the worship acceptable to the gods consisted in the observance of ceremonies and festivals, and the offering up of victims, at once concluded that the Christians paid no sort of homage to Heaven, and consequently believed neither in a Supreme Being, nor a Providence. When the minds of the people at large had received an impression of this sort, it could scarcely happen but that the most virulent rage for persecution should ensue: for it was inculcated no less strongly by the Roman laws than by those of other states, that men who disbelieved the existence of the gods, ought to be regarded as pests of the human race, the toleration of whom might endanger the state, and be productive of the highest detriment to the best interests of society.<\/p>\n
XXX. Causes of these persecutions. But this was not all. Attached to the service of that host of deities which the Romans worshipped, both in public and private, there was an immense number of priests, augurs, soothsayers, and ministers of inferior order, who not only derived from it the means of living at their ease, with every luxury at command, but were also, from the sacred nature of the functions with which they were invested, sure to stand high in the estimation of the people, and to possess no inconsiderable degree of influence over them. When all these perceived that it was highly probable, or rather felt it to be morally certain, that if once the Christian religion should become predominant with the public, there would immediately be an end to all the emoluments, honours, and advantages, which they then enjoyed; a regard for their own interests naturally prompted them to endeavour, by every means in their power, to lessen the credit of the Christians, and to render them obnoxious to the people and the magistrates. Associated with these in their efforts to put down Christianity, there was an innumerable multitude of persons of various other descriptions, to whom the public superstitions were a source of no small profit; such as merchants who supplied the worshippers with frankincense and victims, and other requisites for sacrifice, architects, [p. 104.] vintners, gold and silver smiths, carpenters, statuaries, sculptors, players on the flute, harpers, and others; to all of whom the heathen polytheism, with its numerous temples, and long train of priests, and ministers, and ceremonies, and festivals, was a principal source of affluence and prosperity.()<\/p>\n
XXXI. Calumnies propagated respecting the Christians. From the enmity of the Jews, and of persons like these, proceeded those horrible calumnies, with which it is well known that the character of the first Christians was very generally aspersed, and which occasioned them to be considered by the magistrates and the people at large as entirely undeserving either of benevolence or pity. Nor is it at all to be wondered at that the slanders to which we allude should, until they were refuted, have been productive of this effect; for the crimes thus falsely imputed to the Christians were of the foulest and most disgusting complexion. Amongst other heinous offences whereof they were accused, it was asserted that even their solemn religious assemblies were polluted by the commission of the most detestable of crimes: that in the place of the Deity they worshipped an ass; that they paid divine honours to their priests,* in a way in which it would be an unpardonable violation of decency even to name; that they were active in promoting sedition, and desirous of bringing about revolutions in the state.() And with so much art and address were these malignant falsehoods framed and supported, that they obtained credit even with those who filled the highest stations in the government. But what contributed as much as anything to inflame the passions of the lower orders, and stir them up to acts of revenge, was the malicious artifice of their priests, in attributing every thing which could be regarded in the light of a national or general affliction, to the toleration of the Christian religion: for whether it were war, or tempest, or pestilence, or any other species of calamity which befel the public, they equally availed themselves of it, and assiduously inculcated on the minds of the people that such was the method in which the gods avenged themselves of the insults offered them by the Christians. Instructed thus from what they deemed infallible authority, that such was the origin and cause of their sufferings, the credulous multitude thought of nothing but revenge, and demanded of their magistrates, with the most imperious clamour, the extirpation of a sect so utterly hateful and pernicious.()<\/p>\n
[p. 105.] XXXII. Martyrs and confessors. Those belonging to the Christian commonwealth who, during this critical situation of its affairs, fell victims to their piety, and whose constancy in the cause of their divine Master even death itself under a variety of terrific forms had not been able to shake,() were thenceforward denominated martyrs: an appellation borrowed from the sacred writings, Heb. 11:39; 12:1. and emphatically applied to these illustrious witnesses of the divinity of the Christian religion, in consequence of their having sealed their testimony with their blood. Those who had never been called upon to give this last severe proof of their faith and sincerity, but had nevertheless, at the peril of their lives, and with the hazard of honour, fortune, and every other wordly consideration, made open profession of their belief in Christ in the face of the heathen tribunals, were distinguished by the title of confessors. The authority and respect which holy men of either of these descriptions enjoyed amongst their brethren during life, and the veneration in which their memory was afterwards held by the Christians of their own age, were such as almost surpass belief.() As time advanced, this reverence for the characters of both martyrs and confessors increased; and being seconded by various opinions respecting these victims of persecution, of an inspiriting nature indeed, but which appear to have been by far too hastily adopted, it had the effect of stimulating others to make equal sacrifices in the cause of Christ, and for his sake to encounter the hazard of a cruel and ignominious death with the utmost readiness and fortitude, and to meet this most severe of human punishments in all its terrors, without the least reluctance or dismay. By degrees, however, it degenerated into a pernicious kind of superstition, and becoming a source of corruptions in the true religion, was eventually productive of no small detriment to the interests of Christianity.<\/p>\n
XXXIII. Multitude of martyrs. That the number of those who suffered death in the cause of Christ, during the different persecutions to which the church was exposed for upwards of three centuries, so far from being small, was, on the contrary, very considerable, is a fact that stands supported by the weightiest and most positive evidence. There can, however, at the same time, be no doubt but that many of those whose names are to be found in the immense army of martyrs, which both the Greek and Roman churches laud and worship, might with very great propriety be struck out of the list. To be at once convinced of this, we need only be apprised that the governors and magistrates did not direct their severity promiscuously against the great body of Christians at large, but selected as objects of capital punishment merely such of them as filled the office of bishop or presbyter, or held some other station of rank and consequence in the church, or who had displayed a more than ordinary zeal for the propagation of the Christian faith, or were distinguished for their wealth and dignity.() As for those of a lower order in the church, or of an inferior condition in life, although they might be occasionally imprisoned and called to an account, they were, for the most part, considered by the civil power as beneath notice, and might, without any danger to themselves, be present at the last sad scene of their brethren\u2019s sufferings. Whenever, therefore, a Christian of either of the descriptions above noticed was thrown into prison, the deacons and Christians of common rank found nothing to prevent them from visiting him, and otherwise ministering, as far as in them lay, to his assistance and comfort, or finally from accompanying him, after his condemnation, to the place of punishment.()<\/p>\n
XXXIV. The Neronian persecution. Foremost in the rank of those emperors, on whom the church looks back with horror as her persecutors, stands Nero, a prince whose conduct towards the Christians admits of no palliation, but was to the last degree unprincipled and inhuman. The dreadful persecution which took place by order of this tyrant, commenced at Rome about the middle of November, in the year of our Lord 64.() As a pretext for his cruelty, Nero did not, according to Tacitus,() bring forward any accusation against the Christians on account of their religion, but imputed to them the commission of a most heinous crime against the public. For having himself, by way of sport, caused some houses to be set on fire, and thus kindled a conflagration, by which great part of the city of Rome was destroyed, he, in order to divert the tide of popular indignation from its proper channel, denounced the Christians as the authors of this public calamity, and displayed the utmost eagerness in directing against them all the vengeance of the state; putting them to death without mercy, and even making a jest of their torments. Amongst other horrible cruelties exercised on them by his command, they were wrapped in pitched garments, and, being fastened to stakes, were lighted up as torches to dispel the darkness of the night; their punishment being thus made to bear somewhat of an analogy to the crime whereof they were accused. According to some ancient authorities, both St. Peter and St. Paul suffered martyrdom under this first persecution; the former being crucified invertedly; the latter beheaded: but this has been much questioned by subsequent writers, who find a difficulty in reconciling it with chronology.() Of any of the other victims of Nero\u2019s cruelty no memorial is left us whatever; none even of their names having escaped the obliterating hand of time: for as to what is told us by the people of Milan, as well as those of Lucca, Pisa, Aquileia, Ravenna, and other cities of Italy and Spain, about their patron saints having been put to death under the Neronian persecution, it can obtain but little credit with any one of the least intelligence, since it stands altogether unsupported by any evidence of weight or authority. Clement of Alexandria says, that St. Peter\u2019s wife was slain before her husband;() but even this is by no means certain. This dreadful persecution ceased but with the death of Nero. The empire, it is well known, was not delivered from the tyranny of this monster until the year 68, when he put an end to his own life: it appears, therefore, that the Christians must, in this first instance, have been exposed to every species of insult and outrage, under sanction of the imperial authority, for a period of no less than four years.<\/p>\n
XXXV. Limits of the Neronian persecution. Ancient authors leave us in much doubt as to the extent of this persecution; so that we cannot well say whether Nero made it his object to extirpate the Christians from every part of the empire, or whether his severity was limited so as for it to fall merely by way of punishment on those who, from their residence at Rome, might be considered as immediately implicated in the crime of setting fire to the city. Hence it has arisen that although the learned in general favour the former opinion, yet we meet with several very eminent men who propend towards the latter. Those who will be at the pains to compare the arguments that are urged on both sides must at once perceive that there is no possibility of setting the question so completely at rest, as to leave no room for hesitation or doubt on the subject; since if the famous Spanish inscription, which there is every reason to consider as a forgery, be rejected, there is nothing like positive testimony to be brought forward by either party. The weight of probability, however, as well as of argument, is certainly in favour of the more common opinion of the two.()<\/p>\n
XXXVI. Domitian\u2019s persecution. The persecution of the Christians, which had ceased on the death of Nero, was, towards the end of the first century, revived by the emperor Domitian, who, taking, as it should seem, the cruelty of the former for his model, began about the year 94 or 95 to afflict the church of Christ afresh. As to the immediate cause of this second persecution, we have no express testimony on record: but if what Eusebius reports be true, (and his statement is, he tells us, grounded not only on ancient tradition, but also on the testimony of Hegesippus, an author of great antiquity,) namely, that Domitian had ordered every descendant of the House of David to be [p. 111.] put to death; and that in consequence of this, the relations of Christ, who dwelt in Palestine, were called forward, in order that he might know who they were;\u2014I say, if this may be depended on, we are certainly warranted in concluding that it was the apprehension of their being implicated in seditious conspiracies against his government that prompted this tyrant to aim at the extirpation of the Christians.() It was during this season of calamity to the church that St. John the apostle was banished to the island of Patmos, after having, as Tertullian and others report, come forth safe and uninjured from the midst of a cauldron of boiling oil, into which his enemies had caused him to be thrown.() The principal persons who are said to have suffered at this period, were Flavius Clemens, a consul, and Flavia Domitilla, who was either his niece or his wife. The former is stated to have been put to death, and the latter, to have been commanded to withdraw into the island Pandataria. They were both of them related to the emperor.()\u2014It is admitted on all sides that this persecution was not of any long continuance. Ancient writers, however, are not agreed as to the authority by which it was put an end to: some of them representing Domitian himself as having retracted the orders he gave for persecuting the Christians; whilst others consider the revocation of them as the act of the senate, upon Domitian\u2019s death.()<\/p>\n
XXXVII. Constitution and order of the church of Jerusalem. Amidst all this distress and calamity, however, the Christian community had to exult in the most rapid extension of its limits; the labours of the apostles and of their companions and disciples being crowned with such success, that churches dedicated to Christ had by this time been established in nearly all the provinces of the empire. Since all these churches were constituted and formed after the model of that which was first planted at Jerusalem, a review of the constitution and regulations of this one church alone will enable us to form a tolerably accurate conception of the form and discipline of all these primitive Christian assemblies.\u2014The Christians at Jerusalem, then, although they did not [p. 113.] secede from the public worship of the Jews, were yet accustomed to hold additional solemn assemblies of their own, for the purposes of devotion, in which, agreeably to apostolic institution, they joined in offering up general prayers, and in commemorating the death and passion of our Lord by partaking of the holy supper.() It may be considered as not merely probable but certain, that the day of the week on which our Saviour arose from the dead, was expressly set apart for the holding of these solemn assemblies.() As to the place of these meetings, it should seem that at the first they were held in such of the private houses of the Christians, as had room adequate to the accommodation of any thing like a considerable number of persons. When the church, however, came to consist of many thousands of people, so that it was utterly impossible for them to assemble with any degree of convenience in one place, it is probable that the members distributed themselves into classes, or, as we should say in modern language, parishes, to each of which was assigned a separate place of meeting, for the purposes of divine worship.() The presidency or chief superintendence of the whole church rested with the apostles themselves. Next, under these, were certain men of approved faith and authority, who were distinguished by the Jewish appellation of presbyters or elders. They were no doubt appointed to their office by the apostles, with the consent of the people, and gave their counsel, voice, and assistance in the government of the church at large, or certain parts of it. A considerable portion of the members of this primitive church having to struggle with poverty and distress, their necessities were liberally supplied by the bounty of such of their brethren as were in better circumstances: indeed to such an extent did this spirit of charity prevail amongst the first Christians, that St. Luke represents them as having had all things in common.() The management and disposal of these contributions of the brethren, towards the relief of the necessitous, were at first entrusted to certain men selected by the apostles from amongst the Hebrews or indigenous Jews; but, it being complained of that these persons were guilty of partiality in the distribution of the alms, the church, by the direction of the apostles, appointed seven others from amongst the Greeks or foreigners, for the purpose of taking care that this branch of the church might for the future experience no similar kind of injury.() The power of enacting laws, of appointing teachers and ministers, and of determining controversies, was lodged in the people at large; nor did the apostles, although invested with divine authority, either resolve on or sanction any thing whatever without the knowlege and concurrence of the general body of Christians, of which the church was composed.()<\/p>\n
XXXVIII. Presbyters of the primitive church. When a number of Christians, therefore, were collected together sufficient to form a church, certain men of gravity and approved faith were without delay appointed, either by the apostles themselves, or their companions, with the assent of the multitude, to preside over it, under the title of presbyters or bishops. By the former of these titles was implied the prudence of old age, rather than age itself, in those who bore it; the latter had an allusion to the nature of the function wherewith they were charged.() Of these presbyters it is a commonly received opinion, (founded on the words of St. Paul, 1 Tim. 5:17.) that a part only took upon them to instruct the people, and deliver exhortations to them in their solemn assemblies, after the manner of the apostles; and that such of them as had not either received from nature, or acquired by means of art, the qualifications requisite for this, applied themselves to promote the prosperity and general interests of the church in some other way.() But since St. Paul requires in express terms that a presbyter or bishop should possess the faculty of teaching, it is scarcely possible, or rather impossible, to entertain a doubt, but that this distinction between teaching and ruling presbyters was after a short time laid aside, and none subsequently [p. 126.] elected to that office but such as were qualified to admonish and instruct the brethren. The number of these elders was not the same in every place, but accommodated to the circumstances and extent of the church. The endowments which it was requisite that a presbyter should possess, and the virtues which ought to adorn his character, are particularly pointed out by St. Paul in 1 Tim. 3:1. and Tit. 1:5.; and it cannot be questioned that his injunctions on this subject were strictly adhered to, in those early golden days of the church, when every thing belonging to it was characterized by an ingenuous and beautiful simplicity. It must, however, I conceive, be so obvious to every one as scarcely to need pointing out, that in the requisite qualifications thus specified by the apostle, there are several things which apply exclusively to those times, when Christianity had scarcely established a footing for itself in the world, and the state of manners was far different from what it is at the present day.<\/p>\n
XXXIX. Election of the presbyters, their stipends, &c. That the presbyters of the primitive church of Jerusalem were elected by the suffrages of the people connot, I think, well be doubted of by any one who shall have duly considered the prudence and moderation discovered by the apostles, in filling up the vacancy in their own number, and in appointing curators or guardians for the poor. This power of appointing their elders, continued to be exercised by the members of the church at large, as long as primitive manners were retained entire, and those who ruled over the churches did not conceive themselves at liberty to introduce any deviation from the apostolic model.() The form of proceeding in this matter was unquestionably the same in the first age as we find it to have been in the second and third centuries. When at any time the state of the church required that a new presbyter should be appointed, the collective body of elders recommended to the assembly of the people one or more persons, (in general selected from amongst the deacons,) as fit to fill that office. To this recommendation the people were constrained to pay no further respect than it might appear to them to deserve.() Indeed it is placed beyond a doubt, that the multitude, so far from always adopting the candidates proposed by the presbyters, were accustomed not unfrequently to assert the right of judging wholly for themselves, and to require that this or that particular person, whom they held in higher esteem than the rest, should be advanced to the office of an elder. When the voice of the multitude, in the election of any one to the sacred ministry, was unanimous, it was considered in the light of a divine call. In compliance with the express commands of our Lord himself and his apostles, these teachers and ministers of the church were, from the first, maintained and supplied with every necessary by the people for whose edification they laboured; 1 Cor. 9:13, 14; 1 Tim. 5:17; Gal. 6:6; 1 Thess. 5:12, 13; a certain portion of the voluntary offerings, or oblations as they were termed, being allotted to their use. It will easily be conceived that whilst the churches were but small, and composed chiefly of persons of the lower or middling classes, the provision thus made for the support of the presbyters and deacons could not be very considerable.<\/p>\n
XL. The prophets. By far the greater part of those who embraced the Christian religion in this its infancy being of mean extraction, and wholly illiterate, it could not otherwise happen but that a great scarcity should be experienced in the churches of persons possessing the qualifications requisite for initiating the ignorant, and communicating instruction to them with a due degree of readiness and skill. It pleased God, therefore, to raise up in every direction certain individuals, and by irradiating their minds with a more than ordinary measure of his holy Spirit, to render them fit instruments for making known his words to the people, and imparting instructions to them, in their public assemblies, on matters relating to religion. These are they who, in the writings of the New Testament, are styled prophets.() Whoever professed himself to be under the influence of a divine inspiration, and claimed attention as an extraordinary interpreter of the will of God, had permission granted him to speak in public: for, without hearing him, it was impossible for any one to say whether his pretensions to inspiration were or were not well founded. When once he had spoken, however, all uncertainty with regard to his commission was at an end; for there were in the churches persons instructed of God, who could discern by infallible signs between a true prophet and one who falsely pretended to that character. The apostles also had left on record certain marks, by which one specially commisioned from above might clearly be distinguished from an impostor. 1 Cor. 12. [p. 130.] 2, 3; 14:29; 1 John, 4:1. This order of prophets ceased in the church, when the reasons which gave birth to it no longer existed. For when the affairs of the church took a prosperous turn, and regular schools or seminaries were instituted, in which those who were designed for the sacred ministry received an education suitable to the office, it consequently became unnecessary that God should any longer continue to instruct the people by the mouths of these extraordinary ministers or prophets. ()<\/p>\n
XLI. The origin of bishops. Whilst the Christian assemblies or churches were but small, two, three, or four presbyters were found amply sufficient to labour for the welfare, and regulate the concerns of each: and over a few men like these, inflamed as they were with the sincerest piety towards God, and receiving but very moderate stipends, it was not required that any one should be appointed to preside in the capacity of a ruler or superintendant. But as the congregations of Christians became every day larger and larger, a proportionate gradual increase in the number of the presbyters and ministers of necessity took place; and as the rights and power of all were the same, it was soon found impossible, under the circumstances of that age, when every church was left to the care of itself, for any thing like a general harmony to be maintained amongst them, or for the various necessities of the multitude to be regularly and satisfactorily provided for, without some one to preside and exert a controuling influence. Such being the case, the churches adopted the practice of selecting, and placing at the head of the council of presbyters, some one man of eminent wisdom and prudence, whose peculiar duty it should be to allot to his colleagues their several tasks, and by his advice, and every other mode of assistance, to prevent as far as in him lay the interests of the assembly, over which he was thus appointed to preside, from experiencing any kind of detriment or injury.() The person thus advanced to the presidency, was at first distinguished by the title of \u201cthe angel\u201d of his church; but in after-times it became customary to style him, in allusion to those duties which constituted the chief branch of his function, \u201cthe bishop.\u201d() In what particular church, or at what precise period, this arrangement was first introduced, remains nowhere on record. It appears to me, however that there are the strongest reasons for believing that the church of Jerusalem, which in point of numbers exceeded every other, took the lead in this respect; and that her example was gradually copied after by the rest in succession, according as their increase in size, or their situation in other respects, might suggest the propriety of their doing so.()<\/p>\n
XLII. Rights, &c. of the first bishops. That these bishops were, on their creation, invested with certain peculiar rights, and a degree of power which placed them much above the presbyters, will not be disputed by any unprejudiced or impartial person: but we are not possessed of sufficient information on the subject, to enable us to state with exact precision the extent to which those rights and that power reached during the first century. It is certain, however, that it would be forming a very erroneous judgment, were we to estimate the power, the revenue, the privileges, and rights of the first bishops, from the rank, affluence, and authority attached to the episcopal character in the present day. A primitive bishop was, as it should seem, none other than the chief or principal minister of an individual church, which, at the period of which we are speaking, was seldom so numerous but that it could be assembled tinder one roof. He taught the people, administered what are termed the sacraments, and supplied the ailing and the indigent with comfort and relief. With regard to the performance of such duties as it was impossible for him to fulfil or attend to in person, he availed himself of the assistance of the presbyters. Associating, likewise, these presbyters with him in council, he inquired into and determined any disputes or differences that might subsist amongst the members of his flock, and also looked round and consulted with them as to any measures which the welfare and prosperity of the church appeared to require. Whatever arrangements might be deemed eligible, were proposed by him to the people for their adoption, in a general assembly. In fine, a primitive bishop could neither determine nor enact anything of himself, but was bound to conform to and carry into effect whatever might be resolved on by the presbyters and the people.() The episcopal dignity would not be much coveted, I rather think, on such terms, by many of those, who, under the present state of things, interest themselves very warmly on behalf of bishops and their authority. Of the emoluments attached to this office, which, it may be observed, was one of no small labour and peril, I deem it unnecessary for me to say anything: for that they must have been extremely small, cannot but be obvious to every one who shall consider that no church had, in those days, any other revenue than what arose from the voluntary offerings, or oblations as they were termed, of the people, by far the greater part of whom were persons of very moderate or slender means; and that out of these offerings, in addition to the bishop, provision was to be made for the presbyters, the deacons, and the indigent brethren.<\/p>\n
XLIII. Rural bishops and dioceses. It was not long, [p. 137.] however, before circumstances became so changed, as to produce a considerable extension and enlargement of the limits, within which the episcopal government and authority had been at first confined. For the bishops who presided in the cities, were accustomed to send out into the neighbouring towns and country adjacent certain of their presbyters, for the purpose of making converts, and establishing churches therein; and it being of course deemed but fair and proper that the rural or village congregations, which were drawn together in this way, should continue under the guardianship and authority of the prelate by whose counsel and exertion they had been first brought to a knowledge of Christ and his word, the episcopal sees gradually expanded into ecclesiastical provinces of varied extent, some greater, some less, to which the Greeks in after times gave the denomination of dioceses. Those to whom the instruction and management of these surrounding country churches were committed by the diocesan were termed chorepiscopi, i. e. \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c7\u1ff6\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u1f76, \u201crural bishops.\u201d Persons of this description are doubtless to be considered as having held a middle rank between the bishops and the presbyters: for to place them on a level with the former is impossible, since thay were subject to the diocesan; but at the same time, it is manifest that they were superior in rank to presbyters, inasmuch as they were not accustomed to look up to the bishop for orders or direction, but were invested with constant authority to teach, and in other respects to exercise the episcopal functions.()<\/p>\n
XLIV. Deacons and deaconesses. In addition to these its governors and teachers, the church had ever belonging to it, even from its very first rise, a class of ministers, composed of persons of [p. 138.] either sex, and who were termed deacons and deaconesses. Their office was to distribute the alms to the necessitous; to carry the orders or messages of the elders, wherever necessary; and to perform various other duties, some of which related merely to the solemn assemblies that were held at stated intervals, whilst others were of a general nature. That the greatest caution and prudence were, in the first ages, deemed proper to be observed in the choice of these ministers, appears plainly from St. Paul\u2019s directions on the subject. 1 Tim. 3:8. et. seq. From what is afterwards said by the apostle, at verse 13. of the same chapter, learned men have been led to conclude, and apparently with much reason, that those who had given unequivocal proof of their faith and probity in the capacity of deacons, were, after a while, elected into the order of presbyters. The deaconesses were widows of irreproachable character and mature age. In the oriental countries, where, as is well known, men are not permitted to have access to the women, the assistance of females like these must have been found of essential importance: for, through their ministry, the principles of the Christian religion could be diffused amongst the softer sex, and various things be accomplished in relation to the Christian sisterhood, which, in a region teeming with suspicion and jealousy, could in no wise have been consigned to or undertaken by men.()<\/p>\n
XLV. Constitution and order of the primitive churches. The People. From these particulars we may collect a general idea of what was the form and constitution of those primitive Christian associations, which in the language of Scripture are termed churches. Every church was composed of three constituent parts: 1st, Teachers who were also invested with the government of the community, according to the laws; 2dly, Ministers of each sex; and 3dly, The multitude of people.() Of these parts, the chief in point of authority was the people: for to them belonged the appointment of the bishop and presbyters, as well as of the inferior ministers;\u2014with them resided the power of enacting laws, as also of adopting or rejecting whatever might be proposed in the general assemblies, and of expelling and again receiving into communion any depraved or unworthy members. In short, nothing whatever of any moment could be determined on, or carried into effect, without their knowledge and concurrence. All these rights came to be recognised as appertaining to, and residing in the people, in consequence of its being entirely by them that the necessary means were supplied for maintaining the teachers and ministers, relieving the wants of the indigent, promoting the general interests and welfare of the community, and averting from it occasionally impending ill. The contributions thus furnished consisted of all kinds of offerings, or oblations as they were commonly termed, which every one according to his ability, and of his own free will, without any sort of demand or admonition, brought with him to the assembly, and threw into the common stock. After some little while, it was judged expedient to divide the multitude into two orders or classes, viz. that of the faithful, and that of the catechumens.() Of these, the former were such as had been solemnly admitted members of the church by the sacrament of baptism, and publicly pledged themselves to God and the brethren that they would strictly conform themselves to the laws of the community, and who, in consequence thereof, possessed the right of voting in the public assemblies, and of being present at, and taking a share in, every part of divine worship. The latter were those converts who, not having gone through the course of preparatory discipline and probation prescribed by the rules of the church, remained as yet unbaptized, and whose title to the rights of Christian fellowship was consequently [p. 141.] deemed incomplete. These were not permitted to be present at the solemn assemblies of the church, or to join in the public worship; neither were they suffered to participate of the Lord\u2019s supper. All the members of the Christian community considered themselves as being on a footing of the most perfect quality. Amongst a variety of other proofs which they gave of this, it was particularly manifested by their reciprocally making use of the terms \u201cbrethren,\u201d and \u201csisters,\u201d in accosting each other.() On the ground of this sort of spiritual relationship, the utmost care was taken that none should be suffered to languish in poverty or distress; since, whilst the means of assistance were not wanting, it would have been contrary to the laws of fraternal love to have permitted any brother or sister to remain without the necessaries of life.() That even in this early age, there was in the church a mixture of the bad with the good, is what no one can doubt:\u2014it is impossible, however, that any one belonging to the Christian community could have openly persisted in a wicked, flagitious course of conduct; since it was particularly enjoined both by Christ and his apostles, that if repeated admonition and reproof should fail to produce repentance and amendment of life in any who might pollute themselves by a depraved demeanor, or by flagrantly violating the laws of morality and religion, they should be excommunicated, or in other words, be expelled from every kind of intercourse and association with the faithful.()<\/p>\n
XLVI. Teachers and ministers. Both the teachers and the ministers of the church, when their appointment had received the approbation of the people, were consecrated by the presbyters to their office by prayer and the imposition of hands;\u2014a practice which the Christians adopted from the Jews, probably on account of its very high antiquity, and the great appearance of piety which it carried with it. The duties of the presbyters consisted in instructing and exhorting the multitude, both publicly and in private. It belonged to them also to endeavour, by argument and persuasion, to convince and bring over the adversaries and enemies of the faith. Tit. 1:9; 2 Tim. 2:24. The converts were baptized by them. They also presided at the feasts of love, and celebration of the Lord\u2019s supper. In short, they were invested with the superintendance and management of everything which might be essentially connected with the welfare and prosperity, either of the church in its collective capacity, or of its several members individually. When it came to be the practice for a chief or presiding presbyter to be appointed, under the title of \u201cbishop,\u201d the province of teaching, and also the direction and management of every thing of a sacred nature, was transferred to him. As it was not, however, to be expected that one man could be equal to the personal discharge of duties so various and extensive, he had the power of committing to either of the elders the fulfilment of such of them as that elder might appear to him to be particularly well qualified to execute. When anything of more than ordinary [p. 144.] moment occurred, the bishop called together the presbyters, and consulted with them as to what was necessary or proper to be done. Having thus taken council with the elders, he next convened a general meeting of the people, to whose determination every thing of importance was always finally referred, and submitted to them, for their approval or rejection, the measures which appeared to him and the presbyters as either requisite or eligible to be pursued. Acts, 21:18, 22. The bishop was commonly chosen from amongst the presbyters, and the presbyters for the most part, taken from the class of deacons. The people, however, were not bound to abide by this rule; and it was occasionally departed from, when the probity, the faith, and the general merits of any individual amongst the multitude pointed him out as a person deserving of preference. That the income or stipend of the several teachers and ministers of the church could have been but small, whilst, at the same time, the trouble and perils which they necessarily had to encounter in the discharge of their functions were manifold and great, is so apparent as not to admit of a doubt. But in those primitive times of which we are now treating, a Christian pastor\u2019s station in the scale of dignity and honour was, for the most part, estimated by the magnitude of the benefits derived from his labours, and not by the extent of his revenue, or of any other kind of pecuniary remuneration, that might be attached to his office.<\/p>\n
XLVII. Order of proceeding, when assembled. The particular form or manner of proceeding in those solemn assemblies, which were held at stated intervals for the purpose of divine worship, does not appear at the first to have been every where precisely similar.() It was frequently required that much should be conceded to place, to time, and to various other circumstances. From what is left us on record, however, in the books of the New Testament, and some other very ancient documents, it appears that the course observed in most of the churches was as follows. After certain introductory prayers, (with the offering up of which there can be no doubt but that the service commenced,) a select portion of Scripture was read by one or other of the deacons. The lesson being ended, some presbyter, or, after the appointment of bishops, the bishop, addressed himself to the people in a grave and pious discourse; not, as it should seem, composed according to the rules of art, but recommending itself to attention and respect through the unaffected piety and fervent zeal of the preacher. In this discourse, the multitude were exhorted to frame their lives agreeably to the word which they had heard read, and to embrace every occasion of proving themselves worthy disciples of that Divine Master, whose followers they professed themselves to be.() Some general prayers (the extemporaneous effusions, as it should seem, of a mind glowing with divine love) were then offered up aloud by the officiating minister, and repeated after him by the people. If there were any present who declared themselves to be commissioned of God to make known his will to the people, I mean persons professing themselves to be prophets, they were now at liberty to address the congregation. After having heard what they had to say, it was referred to the acknowledged prophets, to determine whether they spake under the influence of a mere natural impulse, or were prompted in what they delivered by a divine inspiration. To this first solemn act of public worship succeeded a second, which commenced with the offering of certain voluntary gifts, or oblations, which all those who were possessed of sufficient ability, were accustomed to bring with them, and present to the elders. From what was thus offered, the presiding minister selected so much as might appear to him to be necessary for the [p. 145.] celebration of the Lord\u2019s supper, and consecrated it to that purpose in a set form of words; the people expressing their approval of his prayers, by pronouncing aloud the word \u201camen\u201d at the conclusion of them. After partaking of the Lord\u2019s supper, the assembly sat down to a sober and sacred repast, denominated the feast of love. In this, however, the same order was not observed in all the churches. At the breaking up of the assembly the brethren and sisters exchanged with each other what, from its being meant as a token of mutual good will, was termed the kiss of peace. How truly admirable the simplicity by which the rites of our holy religion was characterized in these its infant days!()<\/p>\n
XLVIII. All the primitive churches independent. Although all the churches were, in this first age of Christianity, united together in one common bond of faith and love, and were in every respect ready to promote the interests and welfare of each other by a reciprocal interchange of good offices; yet with regard to government and internal economy, every individual church considered itself as an independent community, none of them ever looking in these respects beyond the circle of its own members for assistance, or recognizing any sort of external influence or authority. Neither in the New Testament, nor in any ancient document whatever, do we find any thing recorded, from whence it might be inferred that any of the minor churches were at all dependent on, or looked up for direction to, those of greater magnitude or consequence: on the contrary, several things occur therein, which put it out of all doubt that every one of them enjoyed the same rights, and was considered as being on a footing of the most perfect equality with the rest.() Indeed it cannot,\u2014I will not say be proved, but even be made to appear probable, from any testimony divine or human, that in this age it was the practice for several churches to enter into, and maintain amongst themselves that sort of association, which afterwards came to subsist amongst the churches of almost every province:\u2014I allude to [p. 153.] their assembling by their bishops, at stated periods, for the purpose of enacting general laws, and determining any questions or controversies that might arise respecting divine matters.() It is not until the second century that any traces of that sort of association, from whence councils took their origin, are to be perceived: when we find them occurring here and there, some of them tolerably clear and distinct, others again but slight and faint: which seems plainly to prove that the practice arose subsequently to the times of the apostles, and that all that is urged concerning the councils of the first century, and the divine authority of councils, is sustained merely by the most uncertain kind of support, namely, the practice and opinion of more recent times.()<\/p>\n
XLIX. But few persons of erudition amongst the primitive Christians. The apostolic fathers. In the age of which we are now treating, it was not deemed so essentially requisite in a teacher that he should be distinguished for profound or extensive knowledge, either human or divine, as that he should be a man of virtue and probity, and, in addition to a due measure of gravity, be possessed of a certain degree of facility in imparting instruction to the ignorant. Had the apostles indeed thought otherwise, and directed that none but men of letters and erudition should have been elected to the office of presbyters, it would not have been possible for the churches to have complied with such a mandate; [p. 156.] since, at that time, the number of the wise and learned who had embraced the faith of Christ was but small, and as it were of no account. The Christian writers of the first century consequently were not many; and from the labours of the few whose works have reached us, whether we consult such as have been handed down whole and entire, or such as carry with them the marks of interpolation and corruption, it is uniformly evident that, in unfolding the sacred truths of Christianity to the world, the assistance of genius, of art, or of human means of any other kind, was but little, if it all, courted. For if the mind of a reader is not to be charmed or wrought upon by sanctity of sentiment, simplicity of diction, or the effusions of a genuine unaffected piety, it will be in vain for him to seek for either gratification or improvement in the perusal of the writings to which we allude. All these authors, although by no means on a level in point of dignity and judgment, are yet usually classed together under the general title of \u201cthe Apostolic Fathers;\u201d alluding as it should seem, to their having conversed with the apostles themselves, or with some of their immediate associates, and their works have, in consequence, been most commonly edited together. On this account, it may be the better way perhaps for us to collect here into one view whatever we may judge necessary to be known respecting them, than to postpone any part of it to a subsequent period; although Ignatius, Polycarp, and Hermas, rather belong to the second century, as that was the age in which they wrote and died.()<\/p>\n
L. The genuine writings of Clement of Rome. At the head of these writers stands that Clement who, from his having been bishop of Rome, is usually, by way of distinction styled the Roman; a man of unquestionably the highest authority, since we find other authors, with a view to obtain for their opinions and writings a favourable reception with the public, prefixing to them his name. The common accounts that we have of his life, the incidents by which it was chequered, and the manner of his death, are for the most part undeserving of credit, at least they are by no means well authenticated.() There are extant two epistles of his in Greek addressed to the church of Corinth, at a time when it was distracted by intestine faction. Of these the first is generally, and I think not without reason, considered as indisputably genuine in the main; although a very ill applied industry appears to have been subsequently exercised upon it by some one or other, probably, however, without any evil design, in the way of interpolation.() The authenticity of the latter one has [p. 157.] been regarded, even from a very remote period, as somewhat questionable, though it is not easy to say on what grounds, since there seems to be nothing whatever in it that is manifestly irreconcileable with what we know of the genius and character of Clement.()<\/p>\n
[p. 158.] LI. Suppositious writings of Clement. In addition to these epistles, there have been attributed to Clement the following works: 1. Eight books of Apostolical Constitutions, a work of undoubted antiquity, but, at the same time, of uncertain date; the production of an author beyond all measure, austere, and who, as it should seem, entertained a thorough contempt for intellectual culture of any kind. The most probable origin that we can assign to this work is, that some ascetic writer having drawn up a form of church government and discipline, upon what he conceived to be apostolic maxims, he, in order to gain for it more attention and respect, attributed it at once to the apostles themselves, pretending it to have been received direct from them by their disciple Clement.() 2. A set of Apostolical Canons, or Ecclesiastical Laws, eighty-five in number, which the person who framed them wished to be considered as having been enacted by the apostles, and transmitted by them to Clement. It should seem to be not at all unlikely that these Canons and the above-mentioned Constitutions might originate with one and the same author. Be that as it may, the matter of this work is unquestionably ancient; since the manners and discipline of which it exhibits a view are those which prevailed amongst the Christians of the second and third centuries, especially those resident in Greece and the oriental regions.() With respect to its form, however the work is commonly looked upon as belonging to a more recent age. 3. The Recognitions of Clement, in ten books. This is a narrative entirely fictitious, but at the same time of an agreeable interesting nature, and of considerable use in bringing us acquainted with the tenets of the Gnostics, and enabling us rightly to comprehend the state of Christian affairs in the age to which it refers. The work professes to be an account of the travels of St. Peter, and his disputes with Simon Magus, the leader of the Gnostics, written by Clement; in reality however it appears to have come from the pen of an Alexandrian Jew, who had but partially embraced Christianity, and still cherished errors of the grossest kind. Considerable hostility is nevertheless manifested by him towards the tenets of the Gnostics, and in some respects he proves himself to be neither a weak nor an unskilful adversary. For some time these Recognitions were known to the public merely through the medium of a Latin translation by Rufinus: we may consider the Greek text as having been first published by Cotelerius in his Patres Apostolici. For although the Clementina, as printed by Cotelerius, differ in many respects from the Recognitions, yet in both the argument of each respective book is the same, in both the same order of narration is observed, and a similar correspondence between them prevails in the winding up and conclusion of the narrative: in fact it should seem that one and the same book was anciently edited twice, or perhaps oftener, under a somewhat different form.()<\/p>\n
LII. Ignatius and his Epistles. Next after Clement in point of time comes Ignatius, to whom St. Peter himself is said to have committed the care and superintendance of the church of Antioch, and who, by command of the emperor Trajan, was delivered over as a prey to wild beasts in the theatre at Rome.() There are extant several Epistles with the name of Ignatius prefixed to them; but a question having been made as to their authenticity, a deal of learned and elaborate discussion has taken place on the subject amongst men of erudition, and the point has been contested by them with considerable vehemence; some asserting them to be spurious, others insisting on it that they are genuine.() The most prevailing opinion appears to be that the seven which are reputed to have been written by him in the course of his journey to Rome, namely those respectively addressed to the Smyrneans, to Polycarp, to the Ephesians, to the Magnesians, to the Philadelphians, and to the Trallians, as they stand in the edition of them published in the seventeenth century, from a manuscript in the Medicean library at Florence are unquestionably genuine; though there are not wanting those who, on account of its dissimilitude of style, consider the authenticity of the Epistle to Polycarp as less to be depended on than that of the other six. As for the rest of these Epistles, of which no mention whatever is made by any of the early Christian writers, they are commonly rejected as altogether spurious. The distinction thus generally recognized in favour of the above-mentioned particular letters is grounded on reasons of no little force and weight, but at the same time they are not of such a conclusive nature as to silence all objection: on the contrary, a regard for truth requires it to be acknowledged, that so considerable a degree of obscurity hangs over the question respecting the authenticity of not only a part, but the whole of the Epistles ascribed to Ignatius, as to render it altogether a case of much intricacy and doubt.()<\/p>\n
LIII. Polycarp and Barnabas. The Epistle to the Philippians which is attributed to Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna, who had been one of St. John\u2019s disciples, and who, about the middle of the second century, suffered martyrdom at a very advanced age, has merely a questionable claim to credit; in consequence of which it is regarded by some as spurious, though others consider it to be genuine.() The Epistle that has come down to us with the name of Barnabas affixed to it, and which consists of two parts, the one comprising proofs of the divinity of the Christian religion derived from the books of the Old Testament, the other, a collection of moral precepts, is unquestionably a composition of great antiquity, but we are left in uncertainty as to its author. For as to what is suggested by some, of its having been written by that Barnabas who was the friend and companion of St. Paul, the futility of such a notion is easily to be made apparent from the letter itself; several of the opinions and interpretations of Scripture which it contains, having in them so little of either truth, dignity, or force, as to render it impossible that they could ever have proceeded from the pen of a man divinely instructed.()<\/p>\n
LIV. Hermas. The list of apostolical fathers closes with Hermas, a writer of the second century, who, according to early authorities, was brother to Pius, bishop of Rome.() His book, which is now known to the world merely through the medium of a Latin translation, was originally written in Greek, and is entitled \u201cThe Shepherd,\u201d the principal character introduced in it being that of an angel who had assumed the form and garb of a shepherd, and who, under this disguise becomes the instrument of conveying to Hermas instruction and admonition from above. [p. 163.] The object of this author evidently was, to impress the world with the belief that his book was not the offspring of any human understanding or talents, but that whatever it contained had been derived either from God himself or from the above-mentioned angelic shepherd. But there is such an admixture of folly and superstition with piety, such a ridiculous association of the most egregious nonsense with things momentous and useful, not only in the celestial visions which constitute the substance of his first book, but also in the precepts and parables which are put into the mouth of the angel in the two others, as to render it a matter of astonishment that men of learning should ever have thought of giving Hermas a place amongst the inspired writers. To me it appears clear that he must have been either a wild disordered fanatic, or else, as is more likely, a man who, by way of more readily drawing the attention of his brethren to certain maxims and precepts which he deemed just and salutary, conceived himself to be warranted in pretending to have derived them from conversations with God and the angels.()<\/p>\n
[p. 168.] LV. Origin of dissensions and errors in the Primitive Church. That disputes and dissensions should not have been altogether unknown in the first Christian churches, or that errors of no small moment should have been engendered by some of them, can occasion no very great surprise to any one who shall reflect on the nature of their constitution, and the situation of things in the age of which we are treating. For the Christian fraternity was at that period composed in part of Jews and partly of Gentile worshippers, i. e., of people altogether differing from each other both in their opinions and manners; and of whom the former could by no means be induced to renounce their attachment to the law of Moses whilst Jerusalem was in existence, nor could the latter, without the greatest difficulty, prevail on themselves to endure with any becoming degree of moderation the superstition and imbecility of the Jews. Associated with these were also others of a middle class, who had either unconditionally embraced the maxims of the oriental philosophy respecting the nature of matter, the origin of this world, the conjunction of ethereal spirits with terrestrial bodies, and their expected future deliverance, or had else espoused them under certain modifications deduced from the principles of the Jewish religion. And from any of these no other conditions had been exacted previously to their being received into the Christian community by baptism, than that they should solemnly profess a belief in Christ as the Lord and Saviour of the human race, and declare themselves to be desirous of leading an innocent and holy life for the future, agreeably to his commands. Nothing like a regular course of preparatory institution had been gone through, no formal examination as to principles or opinions had taken place, no pains had been used even to root out from the minds of the converts any erroneous notions which they might have conceived or imbibed. In fact, a naked faith was all that in this infancy of the Christian church was required of any who were desirous of being admitted within its pale. A fuller and more perfect insight into its doctrines was left to be acquired in the course of time. That amongst men of this description then, allied closely indeed in point of moral worth and sanctity of demeanor, but at the same time differing widely from each other as to various matters of opinion, there should have occasionally arisen some disputes and controversies, was a circumstance so much within the ordinary course of things, as surely to yield no ground whatever for surprise.<\/p>\n
LVI. The first controversy, respecting the necessity of observing the law of Moses. The first controversy by which the peace of the church appears to have been disturbed, was that which was kindled in the church of Antioch by certain Jews, who, conceiving that the ceremonial law promulgated by Moses was designed to be of perpetual duration, and that the observance of it was consequently necessary to salvation, contended that its ordinances ought to be complied with even by those of the Gentiles who had been converted to Christianity: Acts, 15:1. et seq. Being unable to come to any agreement as to this point amongst themselves, the Christians of Antioch deputed Paul and Barnabas to consult with the apostles on the subject. The latter, having submitted the matter to the consideration of the church of Jerusalem, the controversy was at length, with the general consent, put an end to by them in the following way, namely, that such of the Christian converts as were of the Jewish nation should be at liberty to conform themselves to the Mosaic ritual, but that those of every other description should not be considered as [p. 169.] under any obligation whatever to comply with the ceremonies of the Jewish law. Lest the minds of the Jewish converts, however, should be too far alienated from the Gentile brethren, it was required of the latter to abstain from those things which were regarded as polluting and abominable by the Jews, namely, from partaking of those feasts which it was usual for pagan worshippers to prepare from the victims offered to their false gods, and from joining in the obscene libidinous indulgences with which the celebration of these feasts was in general accompanied, as likewise from blood and the flesh of animals strangled.()<\/p>\n
LVII. Controversy respecting the law of Moses. Constantly bearing in mind the decree which he had thus received from the mouths of the apostles themselves at Jerusalem, we find St. Paul not only making it his endeavour, both in the churches of which he was the immediate founder, and likewise in those to which he addressed epistles, to repress with every possible energy the attempts of the Jewish converts to impose on the necks of their Gentile brethren the yoke of the Mosaic covenant, but also labouring by degrees to extinguish in the minds of the Jews themselves that blind and immoderate partiality which they entertained for this law of their forefathers. From his epistles, however, it appears that, in his attempts to accomplish these objects, he was ever most violently, and not unfrequently successfully, opposed by the Jews; the mistaken zeal and intemperate warmth of some of whom led them into such extremes, that they hesitated not at making use of every means to excite a general feeling of ill-will towards St. Paul, and to detract from the high character of this great apostle of the Gentiles, who could justly boast of having, in the most marked and emphatical manner, been called to the ministration of the word by the voice of our Lord himself. On the other hand, it was not without considerable difficulty that the Gentile converts could be brought to endure with patience that the Jews should thus obstinately persist in refusing to recede from the customs and institutions of their forefathers, and that they themselves should yield obedience to the decree of Jerusalem, which forbad them to partake of meats offered to idols, or to be present at the feasts of heathen worshippers. As for any disputes of inferior moment, of which description there are some particularly adverted to, and others incidentally noticed, by St. Paul in his Epistles, I purposely pass them over in silence, as possessing no claim to our attention.<\/p>\n
[p. 172.] LVIII. Schism generated by this controversy respecting the Mosaic law. Invincible nearly as the attachment of the Jewish converts to the law of ceremonies appeared for a long while to be, the destruction of their national city and temple by the Romans caused it sensibly to fall into the wane amongst such of them as had taken up their abode without the confines of Palestine.() By the immediate inhabitants of that region, however, who appear to have been buoyed up with the hope that it would not be long before they should obtain permission of the Romans to rebuild both their temple and the city, a belief continued still to be retained that the authority of the law of Moses was ever to be regarded by the descendants of Abraham as altogether sacred and inviolable. To the delusive expectations of these latter, an end was not put until Jerusalem had experienced its second and final overthrow, under the reign of the emperor Hadrian; when, every hope respecting the restoration of their city having vanished, a part of the Jewish brethren were prevailed on to renounce the institutions of Moses, and to embrace the freedom that was held out to them in the Gospel of Christ; others of them, however, gave the preference to continuing under the bondage of their ancient system of discipline, and in consequence thereof withdrew themselves from the assemblies and society of the rest. Those who thus inflexibly persisted in encumbering the profession of Christianity with the observances of the Mosaic ritual, had the denomination of Nazarenes and Ebionites given to them by the other Christians, or otherwise assumed these titles of their own choice by way of distinction.()<\/p>\n
LIX. Controversy respecting the means of obtaining justification and salvation. Nearly allied to these disagreements and contentions, respecting the necessity for observing the Mosaic law of ceremonies, although of infinitely greater moment, was [p. 173.] a dispute stirred up by the Jewish doctors at Rome, and in others of the Christian churches, concerning the means whereby we are to arrive at justification and salvation. For whereas the doctrine taught by the apostles was, that our every hope of obtaining pardon and salvation ought to centre in Christ and his merits, these Jewish teachers, on the contrary, made it their business to extol the efficacy and saving power of works agreeable to the law, and to inculcate on men\u2019s minds, that such as had led a life of righteousness and holiness, might justly expect to receive eternal happiness from God as their due. To this doctrine, inasmuch as it went materially to lessen the dignity and importance of our blessed Saviour\u2019s character, and was founded on a false estimate of the strength of human nature, as well as repugnant to the voice and authority of the moral law itself, St. Paul opposed the most unremitting and particular resistance.()<\/p>\n
LX. Heretics commemorated by the apostles. With these supporters of the law of Moses, these mistaken advocates for the strength of human nature, by whose contentious spirit the church of Christ was prevented from enjoying a perfect tranquillity even in this its golden age, we find ancient as well as modern writers very commonly joining the following persons, of whose apostacy or errors St. Paul and St. John make mention in their epistles, namely, Hymen\u00e6us, Alexander, Philetus, Hermogenes, Phygellus, Demas, and Diotrephes. For they conceive all these to have been the founders of sects, or at least to have been the authors of various pernicious errors, through the introduction of which into some of the churches, Christianity experienced a partial adulteration.() But it appears to me, that if what the sacred writers have left us on record respecting these men be maturely weighed, [p. 174] the inclination of opinion must be that, with the exception of Alexander, Hymen\u00e6us, and Philetus, it is rather of a dereliction of Christian duty and charity that they are accused, than of perverting Divine truth, or entertaining any heretical opinions.()<\/p>\n
LX. Gnostic heretics. But by none of its adversaries or corrupters was Christianity, from almost its first rise, more seriously injured; by none was the church more grievously lacerated, and rendered less attractive to the people, than by those who were for making the religion of Christ accommodate itself to the principles of the oriental philosophy respecting the Deity, the origin of the world, the nature of matter, and the human soul. We allude to those who, from their pretending that they were able to communicate to mankind, at present held in bondage by the Architect of the World, a correct knowledge (\u03b3\u03bd\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4) of the true and ever-living God, were commonly styled Gnostics. This calamity was foreseen by St. Paul, and is predicted by him in 1 Tim. 4:1.() We find him also, in various parts of his Epistles, exhorting the followers of Christ to maintain the discipline of their blessed Master whole and uncontaminated by any of the fables or inventions of the philosophers of this sect. 1 Tim. 6:20.; 1 Tim. 1:3, 4.; Tit. 3:9.; Col. 2:8. But an insane curiosity, and that itch for penetrating into abstruce or hidden things, by which the human mind is so liable to be tormented, caused many to turn their backs on the advice and admonition of the apostle and his associates, and no sooner did some of the Gnostics gain a footing in the recently established Christian churches, than the principles that they maintained respecting the first origin of all things, and the causes for which Christ came into this world, and to which their great austerity of demeanour, and rigid abstinence from even the lawful gratifications of sense, communicated an imposing gloss, were by numbers received with open ears, and suffered to take entire possession of their minds. To no purpose was it that the apostles and their disciples pointed out the emptiness of all these things, and how very incongruous they were with the genuine Christian discipline, although they might carry with them a specious show of somewhat like recondite wisdom.() Intoxicated with a fondness for these opinions, not a few of the Christians were induced to secede from all association with the advocates for the sound doctrine, and to form themselves into various sects, which, as time advanced, became daily more extensive and numerous, and were for several ages productive of very serious inconveniences and evils to the Christian commonwealth.()<\/p>\n
LXI. Nature of the Gnostic discipline. It is, however, by no means difficult to point out the way in which these people contrived to make the religion of Christ appear to be altogether in unison with their favorite system of discipline. All the philosophers of the East, whose tenets, as we have seen, were, that the Deity had nothing at all to do with matter, the nature and qualities of which they considered to be malignant and poisonous\u2014that the body was held in subjection by a being entirely distinct from him to whom the dominion over the rational soul belonged\u2014that the world and all terrestrial bodies were not the work of the Supreme Being, the author of all good, but were formed out of matter by a nature either evil in its origin, or that had fallen into a state of depravity\u2014and, lastly, that the knowledge of the true Deity had become extinct, and that the whole race of mankind, instead of worshipping the Father of Light and Life, and source of every thing good, universally paid their homage to the Founder and Prince of this nether world, or to his substitutes and agents: I say all these looked forward with earnest expectation for the arrival of an extraordinary and eminently powerful Messenger of the Most High, who, they imagined, would deliver the captive souls of men from the bondage of the flesh, and rescue them from the dominion of those Genii by whom they supposed the world and all matter to be governed, at the same time communicating to them a correct knowledge of their everlasting Parent, so as to enable them, upon the dissolution of the body, once more to regain their long lost liberty and happiness. An expectation of this kind even continues to be cherished by their descendants of the present day. Some of these philosophers then, being struck with astonishment at the magnitude and splendour of the miracles wrought by Christ and his apostles, and perceiving that it was the object of our Lord\u2019s ministry both to abrogate the Jewish law, a law which they conceived to have been promulgated by the Architect or Founder of the World himself, or by the chief of his agents, and also to overthrow those gods of the nations whom they regarded as Genii placed over mankind by the same evil spirit; hearing him, morever, invite the whole world to join in the worship of the one omnipotent and only true God, and profess that he came down from Heaven for the purpose of redeeming the souls of men, and restoring them to liberty, were induced to believe that he was that very messenger for whom they looked, the person ordained by the everlasting Father to destroy the dominion of the founder of this world as well as of the Genii who presided over it, to separate light from darkness, and to deliver the souls of men from that bondage to which they were subjected in consequence of their connection with material bodies.<\/p>\n
LXII. Nature of the Gnostic discipline. The principles [p. 182.] and nature of this system of discipline, however, were such as to render it impossible for its votaries to yield their assent to many things which were delivered by Christ and his apostles, or to interpret them according to their obvious and commonly accepted sense. To have done so would have been acting in direct opposition to certain leading maxims, which were considered by persons of their persuasion as indisputable truths.() To various articles, therefore, propounded in the Christian code as essential points of belief, they utterly refused their assent: such, for instance, as that which attributes the creation of the world to the Supreme Being, and those respecting the divine origin of the Mosaic law, the authority of the Old Testament, the character of human nature, and the like: for it would have amounted to nothing short of an absolute surrender of the leading maxims of the system to which they were devoted, had they not persisted in maintaining that the Creator of this world was a being of a nature vastly inferior to the Supreme Deity, the Father of our Lord, and that the law of Moses was not dictated by the Almighty, but by this same inferior being, by whom also the bodies of men were formed and united to souls of ethereal mould, and under whose influence the various penmen of the Old Testament composed whatever they have left us on record. In addition to the articles of Christian belief, which they felt themselves constrained thus peremptorily to reject, there were others which they found it necessary to explain after their own manner, in order to render them compatible with the principles of the oriental discipline. Respecting Christ and his functions in particular, it was requisite for them, in support of their tenets, to maintain that he was to be considered as inferior to the Supreme Being, and as never having in reality assumed a material body. Their adoption of the former of these positions was an inevitable consequence of their believing, as they universally did, that the Deity had existed from all eternity in a state of absolute quiescence, but that at length, after ages spent in silence and repose, he begat of himself certain natures or beings after his own likeness, of whom Christ was one: to the maintenance of the latter they were constrained by that leading maxim of the oriental system, that all matter was intrinsically evil and corrupt. Consistently with these sentiments, they moreover found themselves called upon to deny that Christ, in reality, either underwent what he is reported to have suffered, or died, and returned again to life, as is recorded of him. In their exposition of this doctrine, however, they did not all of them follow precisely the same plan. Again, in regard to the purposes for which Christ came into the world, the principles of their system rendered it necessary for them to assert, that it was not with a view to expiate the sins of mankind, or to appease the wrath of an offended Deity, that he relinquished for a while his abode in the Heavens, but merely in order to communicate to the human race the long lost knowledge of the Supreme Being; and that, having put an end to the usurped dominion of the arrogant founder of this world, he might point out to the souls of men (those spirits of ethereal origin unhappily confined in earthly prisons) the means of recovering for themselves their native liberty and happiness. Finally, to pass over some other points which might be noticed, these votaries of orientalism were compelled, in support of their favourite maxim respecting the malignant nature of matter, to discountenance [p. 183.] every idea of a future resurrection of men\u2019s bodies from the dead, and to maintain that what is said in Scripture on the subject is altogether figurative and metonymical. In their manners and habits the Gnostics were for the most part melancholy and austere. Indeed, allowing the principles and notions which they cherished respecting matter and the origin of our earthly forms to be just and correct, it cannot but follow, that to obey the instincts of nature, or to indulge in any sort of bodily gratification, must be contrary to reason, and even criminal. Strange, however, as it may appear to those who are not aware of the discordant conclusions which different men will sometimes deduce from the same premises, it is most certain that some of this sect conceived themselves to be warranted by these self-same principles in plunging, with the most barefaced effrontery, into every species of libidinous and vicious excess.()<\/p>\n
LXIII. Arguments urged by the Gnostics in defence of their system. That the principles and opinions which we have been considering, as well as others of their tenets and maxims, were repugnant not only to the doctrine openly delivered by Christ himself, but also to the tenor of those writings which are considered by the whole body of Christians as the rule and standard of their religion, is what the generality of the Gnostics did not attempt to deny. In truth, the fact was too glaring to admit of a question. They, however, took care not to be unprepared with arguments, whereby to defend and support the system of discipline to which they were devoted. By the leaders of some of their sects it was contended, that the religion propounded by Christ was of two sorts; the one of easy comprehension, and suited to the capacity of the vulgar; the other sublime, and to be understood only by persons of refined intellect. The former they represented as being contained in the books of the New Testament, the latter as having been unfolded by Christ to his apostles alone, in private. For their own knowledge of the latter they professed themselves to be indebted to certain disciples of the apostles Peter, Paul, and Matthias.() Others pretended that their leading tenets and maxims were drawn from the oracles and visions of Zoroaster and other divinely instructed sages of the East, as likewise from certain secret writings of Abraham, Seth, Noah, and other holy men of the Jewish nation, who flourished long before the time of Christ; a pretence which, in the age of which we are speaking, was certainly not wholly destitute of colour, since there were various fictitious writings in the hands of many at that time, which a set of villainous and artful men had palmed on the world as the productions of those great and sacred characters.() Some took upon them to exclude from the sacred code all such writings of the New Testament as appeared to militate with any degree of force against their principles, and to substitute in their places other gospels and epistles of their own forging, but which they pretended to have been written by certain of our Lord\u2019s apostles, such as Peter, Thomas, and Matthias.() Others, again, maintained, that the ordinary copies of the New Testament were corrupted, and in proof of this produced what they pretended to be correct ones, and in which, either through their own artifice, or want of care in the transcribers, a difference of reading presented itself in those passages which were adverse to the Gnostic tenets. Lastly, there were many of them who insisted on it, that, in the words of Scripture there was enveloped a recondite meaning; (an opinion, indeed, at that time commonly entertained even by persons of strictly orthodox sentiments;) and, upon this principle, were [p. 186.] continually labouring in the most silly and puerile way, by the squeezing and torturing of words, to wring from them that assistance and support, which, without resorting to such means, they could in no wise be made to yield.<\/p>\n
LXIV. The Gnostic Factions. Great was, indeed, the detriment which the interests of Christianity experienced from this presumptuous sect, which arrogated to itself a correct and perfect knowledge of the Deity: but in a much heavier degree would the malign influence of its doctrines have been felt, had they been urged with a due measure of uniformity and consistence. Fortunately, however, it happened, that from its very first rise, this faction was split into various parties, the leaders and directors of which were as much at variance among themselves as with the Christians, whose tenets they stigmatized as highly derogatory to the character of the Deity, inasmuch as they attributed to him the creation of the world. For, although all of them took for their ground-work the same principles, yet when they came to enter into particulars, and proceeded to bring the different points of their doctrine to the test of a closer examination, for the purpose of ascertaining their due force, and reconciling them with each other, as well as of adapting them to the principles of the Christian religion, the difference of opinion that sprung up amongst these pretenders to superior knowledge was truly astonishing. All of them, for instance, were unanimous in regarding the Supreme Deity as a being altogether different from the creator and governor of this world: but as to the precise nature of this last mentioned being, and also the degree of his inferiority to the Father of our Lord, considerable controversy prevailed. Again, all of them were agreed in considering matter as intrinsically evil and corrupt, and as the womb and nurse of all those vicious desires and propensities wherewith mankind are continually tormented; but whether such had been its pernicious nature or quality from all eternity, or whether it had accidentally become thus depraved; whether it was animate or inanimate, and whether it were possessed of a generative faculty, and could of itself produce living beings or not, was made the subject of very violent contention. That Christ was the Son of the Supreme Deity, and was sent into the world for the purpose [p. 187.] of liberating the souls of men from the wretched bondage in which they were held by the body, was what all of them professed to believe: by some, however, his character was estimated higher than by others; and with regard to the body which he assumed, it was asserted by some to have been merely a visionary form; whilst others maintained it to have been a frame of an ethereal and celestial nature. A similar disagreement of opinion prevailed amongst them respecting a variety of other things. Nor have we far to seek for the cause which gave rise to these manifold dissensions. For, in the first place, the oriental philosophy, to which the Gnostics were addicted, having no foundation whatever in the principles of sound reason, but being grounded merely on various refined conceits, the offspring of human ingenuity, had for a long while been split into a great number of parties and sects.() In the next place, a considerable portion of the Gnostics had, previously to their embracing Christianity, assigned no limits whatever to their philosophical speculations; whereas others of them, who were of Jewish extraction, had, in a certain degree, restricted and modified the system of discipline to which they were attached, by incorporating with it various particulars of the law and institutions of Moses. By some again, the principles of Gnosticism had been united with certain maxims derived from a rude and superstitious kind of astronomical knowledge, by the cultivation of which different nations of the East, and particularly the Egyptians, had much corrupted their minds; whilst by others this study of the heavenly bodies was either altogether neglected, or attended to only to be treated with contempt. Finally, in addition to the above-mentioned sources of disagreement, it may be remarked, that the attempt to blend philosophy, under any certain or particular form, with religion, no matter whether true or false, has never failed very quickly to produce much difference of opinion amongst those who have made it, and to supply them with a variety of grounds for disunion, contention, and dispute.<\/p>\n
LXV. Simon Magus. At the head of the heretics of this age, and particularly of the Gnostics, we find the ancient fathers of the church unanimous in placing a Simon Magus, whom [p. 188.] they assert to have been one and the same with him whose depravity and perfidy was so severely reprobated by St. Peter at Samaria: Acts, 8:9, 10.() Being in possession of no testimony or other means whereby to controvert their authority with regard to the identity of Simon Magus, and that Simon who was accounted the parent or chief leader of the Gnostics, it appears to me that we have no alternative but to acquiesce in it; although there are not wanting several very eminently learned men who cannot prevail on themselves to concede even thus much.() But as to the remainder of what they thus state respecting this Simon, I must confess that it seems to me to be entitled to no sort of credit whatever. For from everything which even they themselves have handed down to us concerning the man, it is manifest beyond dispute that he cannot with the least propriety, be included in the class of heretics or corrupters of the Christian religion, but is to be reckoned amongst the most hostile of its adversaries, inasmuch as he hesitated not to revile and calumniate the character of our blessed Saviour, and made use of every means within his power to impede the progress of Christianity: pretending at the same time that he himself, and a female associate of his, of the name of Helen, were persons really commissioned from above for the purpose of enabling the souls of men once more to regain their native liberty and light.()
\nFrom this one circumstance alone, supposing that we were to lay out of the case various other corroborative proofs, it is plainly to be perceived that there must have been some mistake with regard to the Gnostic Christians being considered as the disciples of Simon, and his being accounted the parent or inventor of the Gnostic philosophy. The principles and maxims of this species of philosophy had become familiar to the people of the East long before the time of Simon\u2019s applying himself to the study and culture of it in Egypt; and as to his having been the chief leader of the Gnostics, it is certain that not one of their sect held him in the least reverence.() The probability is, that the early fathers, perceiving the similarity that subsisted between Simon\u2019s tenets and those of the Gnostics, and being, notwithstanding their proficiency in Greek literature, but mere novices in Oriental learning, and consequently not aware of any one\u2019s having philosophized after this manner previously to him, were induced to believe that the whole tribe of Gnostics had proceeded from his school.<\/p>\n
LXVI. The history of Simon. The history of Simon is briefly this. He was by birth a Samaritan, but having gone down into Egypt, he was induced to continue there for some time, and apply himself to the study of the various arts which were cultivated by those who termed themselves magi, and the scourges of evil d\u00e6mons. Upon returning into his own country, he contented himself for awhile with practising on the credulity of the multitude by means of the powers of deception which he had thus acquired. But having been a witness of the real miracles wrought by Philip the deacon, at Samaria, in confirmation of the truth of the doctrine which he preached, he professed himself a convert to Christianity, cherishing, as it should seem, a hope that by so doing he should ultimately, either through obsequiousness or bribery, find a way to obtain for himself the faculty of working similar wonders, and hence have divine honours paid him by the people. An impious attempt which he made to realize these expectations having met with its merited chastisement from St. Peter in that severe and memorable reproof which stands recorded in Acts, 8:9, 10. he betook himself again to his former evil courses, and associating with him a woman of the name of Helen, spent the remainder of his days in wandering about through various provinces, endeavouring, wherever he came, by means of the different tricks and artifices of which he had made himself master, to impose on weak and ignorant minds, and make them believe that the two chief faculties of the Supreme Deity, the one being in its nature masculine, the other feminine, were actually resident in the bodies of himself and his female companion, having been sent down from above for the purpose of controuling the power of those enemies and tormentors of the human race, the creator of this nether world and his subordinate agents; and of stirring up the minds of men, in spite of their unhappy alliance with vile matter, to the acknowledgment and worship of the only true God. This certainly is all that can with truth, or with any great semblance of truth, be said of this extraordinary character; at least a considerable degree of suspicion attaches itself to whatever else is reported of him.() In what place, and under what circumstances, his mortal career terminated is altogether uncertain: for as to what several ancient authors report of his having, in consequence of the prayers of St. Peter, fallen headlong from a vast height in an attempt to fly which he made at Rome in the reign of the emperor Nero, and received thereby such wounds as shortly afterwards occasioned his death, it is a tale to which no credit is at present given, except by such as are the dupes of superstition, or ready to swallow down every thing that has the support of antiquity on its side. Nor is any belief now placed by the [p. 191.] generality of people, in what Justin Martyr says of the Romans having honored Simon with an apotheosis, and erected a statue to his memory; although it appears to be pretty certain, that the sect which he founded continued to exist in the third, and even down to the fourth century, and persisted to the last in paying a sort of honorary worship both to him and his concubine.()<\/p>\n
LXVII. Tenets of Simon. The principles on which the discipline of Simon was founded, appear to have been much the same with those which were recognized by all the different sects of the Gnostics. The Supreme Deity, for instance, to whom he attributed every possible degree of excellence, had, according to his tenets, existed from all eternity, and at a certain period begotten of himself a number of \u00e6ons, or natures after his own likeness. Again, matter, which he regarded as being radically corrupt, was represented by him as having in like manner existed eternally, and being possessed of a generative faculty, to have become the parent and the author of all evil, as well as of various other viciously disposed natures. The creation of this world he considered as having been brought about by a female \u00e6on, with the assistance of certain powerful genii, without the concurrence or sanction of the Supreme Deity. By this creator of the world, he maintained, who was herself of a divine nature and origin, were generated an incredible number of living souls, whom she united with bodies composed of matter, and consequently corrupt. Man, therefore, according to him, was compounded of two parts, the one celestial, the other terrene; the one divine, the other depraved. The human race he represented as held in bondage by the founders or creators of this world, and as living in utter ignorance of the Supreme Deity, who contemplating with sorrow the disastrous situation and miserable servitude into which such a number of \u00e6thereal spirits were thus unhappily plunged, was in the highest degree solicitous that they should be stimulated to pursue that path which, upon their release from the body, would conduct them to his immediate residence, the seat of everlasting joy and happiness, to which this pretended philosopher, in common with the rest of the Gnostics, gave the appellation of pleroma. The course pointed out by him to be observed by the souls who were desirous of attaining to this blissful state, was to cast off all obedience to the founders of this world, by whom he professed himself to mean those beings who were commonly worshipped as deities by the multitude, and to endeavour by means of meditation and mental exertion, to elevate themselves, and approach as nearly as possible to the supreme source of all good. Souls not inflamed with such a wish, were, upon the dissolution of their present earthly prisons, to pass into new bodies until they should arrive at a knowledge of their great and everlasting parent. The laws to which the nations of the earth paid obedience, not excepting even the peculiar code of the Jews, were, he maintained, all fabricated by the founders of this world for the purpose of perpetuating the bondage of captive souls, and that they might therefore be disregarded with impunity by all such minds as had acquired illumination from the fountain of all wisdom. When the projected deliverance of the [p. 194.] souls of all mankind from the captivity of matter had been finally accomplished, and they had again joined their first great parent in the regions above, the whole fabric of this nether world and all its dependencies, which he pronounced to be a rude and imperfect work, would, according to his tenets, experience an overwhelming and utter destruction at the hands of the Deity. The discipline of Simon, however, differed most essentially from that of the Gnostic Christians in its principal feature, since, instead of joining with them in paying homage to the Saviour of mankind, his aim evidently was to wrest from Christ the glory of man\u2019s recovery, and make it the inheritance of himself and his concubine. For he pretended that the greatest and most powerful \u00e6on, of the masculine sex, was actually resident within himself, and that the mother of all souls had in like manner taken up her abode in the corporeal frame of his companion Helen; and asserted that he was in an especial manner commissioned by the Most High for the threefold purpose of communicating to captive souls the knowledge requisite for their deliverance, of overthrowing the dominion of the founder of this world, and of delivering Helen from the subjection in which she had long been held by the subordinate agents or associates of this author of all evil.()<\/p>\n
LXVIII. Menander. The second station in the class of heretics derived from the Gnostics, is in general assigned by ancient writers to Menander, another Samaritan, whom they represent as having been initiated in the school of Simon. But little credit, however, can be given to this, after comparing together the accounts which Iren\u00e6us, Justin, Tertullian, and a few others, have handed down to us respecting this man. For from what they say, it is plain that his object was to supplant both Christ and Simon, and to pass himself on the world as the Saviour of mankind, or an \u00e6on sent down from above for the purpose of effecting the salvation and deliverance of the souls of the human race, by communicating to them a knowledge of the true God; a circumstance which places it beyond all doubt, that he came neither within the description of a heretic, nor that of a Simonian. The opinion of the early writers above alluded to, respecting him, was in all probability, grounded on their perceiving that his tenets and doctrine respecting the Deity, the nature of matter, the origin of this world, and the souls and bodies of its inhabitants, [p. 195.] were nearly similar to those which were entertained and taught by Simon and the Gnostic Christians. From what has reached us respecting Menander, I should conceive his character to have been rather that of a weak enthusiast than of an artful impostor. The sect which he founded existed but for a short period, and appears to have been always confined within very narrow limits.()<\/p>\n
LXIX. The Nicolaitans. Since Simon and Menander cannot properly be said to come within the descriptions of heretics, it follows of course that at the head of those Christians who were tainted with the Gnostic heresies we must place the Nicolaitans, provided that the Nicolaitans who are rebuked by our blessed Lord in Rev. 2:6, 14, 15, be the same with those who under that denomination are reckoned by the writers of the second century amongst the sects of the Gnostics.() The generality of ancient writers consider Nicolaus, one of the seven men elected by the church of Jerusalem, as having been either directly or indirectly the author of this sect. It should seem, however, as if their opinion as to this was founded rather on uncertain report and conjecture than on any testimony that can be relied on.() Our blessed Saviour states the Nicolaitans to have incurred his displeasure in consequence of the laxity of their morals, and their continuing to partake of meats offered to idols, and to indulge in fornication, contrary to the Apostle\u2019s injunction, Acts, 15:29, but he does not charge them with entertaining any heretical principles or opinions. By the writers of the subsequent ages, however, they are represented as having adopted the Gnostic maxims respecting the existence of two principles, the one of light, the other of darkness, the origin of the visible world, the ministry of \u00e6ons, and the like. Over every thing relating to this sect there hangs a degree of obscurity which we believe it will ever be found beyond the power of human ingenuity to dispel.()<\/p>\n
LXX. Cerinthus. In the same age with St. John and the Nicolaitans, flourished, as is commonly thought, the Jew Cerinthus, though there are not wanting some who consider him as having lived in the second century, and long posterior to the time of [p. 197.] John.() Having devoted himself for some time to the study of letters and philosophy at Alexandria in Egypt, he at length engaged in one of the most difficult undertakings imaginable, namely, that of harmonizing the principles of the Gnostic discipline and those of Christianity, with the peculiar maxims and opinions of the Jews. From the principles of the Gnostic philosophy he adopted those which respect the pleroma, the \u00e6ons, the origin of this world, and the great length of time through which the human race had remained in utter ignorance of the supreme Deity, together with all such maxims and tenets as were intimately connected with these. As he could not however, with consistency, admit into his system any thing absolutely repugnant to the Jewish religion, it became necessary for him in part to qualify what he thus adopted, and he accordingly relinquished the position that matter was intrinsecally evil and corrupt, inasmuch as it set itself in opposition to the belief entertained by the generality of the Jews respecting the future resurrection of men\u2019s bodies. The character likewise of the founder of this world, whom he considered as the legislator and governor of the Jewish people, was much softened down by him. The depravity, pride, and cruelty attributed to this Being by the Gnostics were all thrown into the shade, and he was represented as one of the most powerful genii, although unfortunately estranged from the true God. In the creation of this world he was not supposed to have acted without the knowledge and permission of the Deity, or to have been influenced by any improper motive. By way of reconciling this strange jumble of opinions with Christianity, Cerinthus maintained, that the supreme Deity, being displeased with the uncontrouled dominion usurped by the founder of this world and his subordinate agents over the human race, which had by degrees degenerated into the most irrational tyranny, resolved at length to put an end to it, and with this view to send down amongst mankind a celestial legate, or messenger, who should remove from their minds that cloud of superstition and ignorance with which they were oppressed, and by communicating to them a knowledge of their first great Parent, instruct them in the way of regaining their native liberty and happiness. Amongst the sons of men no corporeal receptacle was deemed by the Almighty wisdom to offer so fit an abode for an heavenly guest of this kind as the body of Jesus, the legitimate child of Joseph and Mary, a person eminently gifted with talents and understanding. Upon him therefore it was ordered, that one of the ever-blessed \u00e6ons, whose name was Christ, should descend in the shape of a dove at the time of his baptism by John. Jesus then having the \u00e6on Christ thus united with him, commenced, according to Cerinthus, a vigorous attack on the power and dominion of the founder of this world and his associates, endeavouring to convince the Jews that the one only supreme God was alone deserving of their worship, and confirming the truth of his doctrine and precepts by various miracles and signs. The result, however, of these his labours in the cause of the Deity was unfavourable: for the Jewish elders, at the instigation of that Being whose empire was thus seriously invaded, and whose energies were of course exerted to the utmost for the preservation of his usurped authority, laid violent hands on Jesus and put him to death on the cross. In the ignominy and horrors of this punishment nothing was supposed to have been involved beyond the bare corporeal frame of the man Jesus, the Nazarene: for immediately on the seizure of his person by the Jews, the divine principle, or Christ, by which it had been animated, took its departure [p. 198.] from the earth and returned to the blissful regions of the pleroma, from whence it had originally proceeded. The way chalked out by Cerinthus for obtaining salvation partook in like manner of the Gnostic, Jewish, and Christian schemes. According to him it was incumbent on all who were desirous of arriving at future happiness to relinquish every sort of homage which they might have been accustomed to pay to the founder of this world (who previously to the time of Christ had been the leader of the Jewish people) and his associates, or to any of the various Gentile deities, and to make the Supreme Deity, and father of Christ, together with Christ himself, the only objects of their reverential worship. Such parts of the law of Moses as Jesus by his example had sanctioned, he pronounced fit to be still observed, the rest to be disregarded. Finally, he declared it to be necessary that in all their actions they should strictly conform themselves to the law of Christ. To those who should continue stedfast in their obedience to these precepts he held out the promise of a future resurrection from the dead\u2014enjoyments of the most exquisite nature during Christ\u2019s reign here upon earth\u2014and subsequently, a life of immortality and endless joy in the blissful regions above. For, adhering to the Jewish way of thinking in this respect, Cerinthus held, that upon the resurrection of our bodies Christ would be again united with the man Jesus, and having founded a new city on the site of the ancient Jerusalem, would reign there in triumphant splendor for the space of a thousand years.()<\/p>\n
END OF THE FIRST CENTURY<\/p>\n
THE<\/p>\n
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY<\/p>\n
OF THE<\/p>\n
SECOND CENTURY<\/p>\n
I. Propagation of the Christian religion. The Christian religion, which in the course of the former age had made its way throughout a considerable portion of the world, and pervaded nearly the whole of the Roman empire, was, in the century on which we are now about to enter, by the zeal and incredible exertions of its teachers, still more widely diffused, and propagated even amongst those nations, which on account of their ferocity and the loathsomeness of their manners were justly regarded with horror by the rest. Being destitute of any documents on the subject that can properly be relied on, it is impossible for us, with any degree of exactness, to specify either the time, circumstances, or immediate authors, of this further diffusion of the blessings of the gospel, or particularly to distinguish the provinces which had hitherto remained uncheered by, and now first received the light of celestial truth from those to which it had been communicated in the former century. We must rest satisfied therefore with being able to ascertain, in a general way, from the unexceptionable testimony of writers of these and the following times, that the limits of the church of Christ were, in this age, extended most widely; in so much, indeed, as to make them correspond very nearly with the confines of the then known habitable world.()<\/p>\n
II. Mission of Pant\u00e6nus to India. The name of one of those, however, who devoted themselves to the propagation of the gospel amongst the nations of the east, has been transmitted to posterity, viz. that of Pant\u00e6nus, a man of eminent abilities, and one by whom the cause of Christianity was, in various ways, considerably benefited. Having applied himself with diligence to the cultivation of letters and philosophy, and presided for a while with distinguished credit over the Christian school at Alexandria, he at length, either on the suggestion of his own mind, or by the [p. 206.] command of Demetrius, his bishop, engaged in a mission to the Indians, who had about this time manifested a wish for Christian instruction, and communicated to them that saving knowledge of which they stood in need. To which of the many nations comprehended by the ancients, under the general title of Indians, it was that Pant\u00e6nus thus went, has been the subject of dispute. My own opinion is that this mission originated in an application made to the bishop of Alexandria by certain Jews who were settled in Arabia Felix, and who had been originally converted to Christianity by Bartholomew, requesting that a teacher might be sent them for the purpose of renovating and keeping alive amongst them the true religion, which, for want of such assistance, had gone much to decay, and was visibly every day still further on the decline. If this conjecture of mine be well founded, it must of necessity follow, that those are in an error who conceive that India obtained her first knowledge of the Gospel through Pant\u00e6nus.()<\/p>\n
III. Origin of the Gallic, German, and English churches. Turning to the European provinces, we find it acknowledged by the best informed French writers, that their country, which anciently bore the name of Trans-alpine Gaul, was not blessed with the light of the gospel until this century, when a knowledge of the religion of Christ was first communicated to their rude forefathers by Pothinus, who, together with Iren\u00e6us, and certain other devout men, had travelled into Gaul from Asia. There are not wanting some, however, who would carry up the origin of the Gallic church to the apostles themselves, or their immediate [p. 208.] disciples.() From Gaul it seems probable that Christianity passed into Cis-rhenane Germany, at that time under the dominion of the Romans, and was also transferred to the opposite shores of Britain, although it is insisted on by not a few of the Germans, that their church owes its foundation to certain of the immediate companions and disciples of St. Peter and the other apostles(); and the inhabitants of Britain would rather have us, with respect to the introduction of Christianity into their country, receive the account of Bede, who represents Lucius, an ancient king of that island, as having in this century procured some Christian teachers to be sent him from Rome by the pontiff Eleutherus.()<\/p>\n
[p. 217.] IV. Number of the Christians in this age. It is scarcely, indeed we might say, it is not at all possible to ascertain, with any thing like precision, the proportion which the number of the Christians in this age, and more especially within the confines of the Roman empire, bore to that of those who still persisted in adhering to the heathen superstitions. Most of those by whom the subject has been adverted to in modern times have erred by running into one or other of the extremes. The number of the Christians at this period is as unquestionably over-rated by those who, not making due allowance for the tumid eloquence of some of the ancient fathers, represent it as having exceeded, or at least equalled that of the heathen worshippers,() as it is underrated by those who contend that in this age there were nowhere to be met with, no not even in the largest and most populous cities, any Christian assemblies of importance, either in point of magnitude or respectability.() That both are equally in an error, is manifest from the persecutions that were carried on with such fury against the Christians in this century. Had their number been any thing equal to what many would have us believe, common prudence would have withheld the emperors, magistrates, and priests, from irritating them either by proscriptions, or punishments, or rigorous severities of any kind. But on the other hand, had they been merely a trifling set of obscure, ignoble persons, they would, instead of being combated with so much eagerness and pertinacity, have been spurned at and treated with derision. Upon the whole, the conclusion that seems least liable to exception is, that the number of the Christians was in this age very considerable in such of the provinces as had been early brought to a knowledge of the truth, and continued still to cultivate and cherish it; but that nothing beyond a few small and inconsiderable assemblies of them was to be found in those districts where the light of the Gospel had been but recently made known, or if communicated at an early period, had been suffered to languish and fall into neglect.<\/p>\n
V. Causes to which the rapid propagation of Christianity is to be attributed. The astonishing progress thus made by Christianity, and the uninterrupted series of victories which it obtained over the ancient superstitions, are attributed by the writers of those days, not so much to the zeal and diligence of those who, either in conformity to what they considered as a divine call, of their own accord assumed the office of teachers, or had else been regularly appointed thereto by the bishops, as to the irresistible operation of the Deity acting through them. For, according to these authors, so energetic and powerful was the operation of divine truth, that most frequently, upon its being simply propounded, without entering into either proofs or arguments, its effects on the hearers\u2019 minds was such, that persons of every age, sex, and condition, became at once enamoured of its excellence, and eagerly rushed forward to embrace it. The astonishing fortitude and constancy likewise, they report, with which many of the Christians sustained themselves under torments of the most excruciating nature, even to the very death, inspired great multitudes of those who were spectators of their sufferings with an invincible determination to enrol themselves under the banners of a religion capable of inspiring its followers with such magnanimity of soul and such a thorough contempt for every thing temporal, whether it were good or evil.() Finally, they represent the Deity as having bestowed on not a few of his ministers and chosen servants, such a measure of his all-powerful Spirit, that they could expel d\u00e6mons from the bodies of those that were possessed, cure diseases with a word, recall the dead to life, and do a variety of other things far beyond the reach of human power to accomplish.() Most certain it is that the generality of those who in this century devoted themselves to the propagation and defence of Christianity, were not possessed either of sufficient knowledge, eloquence, or authority, to be capable of effecting any thing great or remarkable without preternatural assistance. For although, as the age advanced, the study of philosophy and letters gained ground amongst the Christians in general, and [p. 221.] more particularly in Egypt, and the truths of the Gospel were embraced by some even of those who were distinguished by the title of philosophers, yet there was every where a considerable scarcity of learned and eloquent men; and by far the greater part of the bishops and elders of the churches took to themselves credit rather than shame, for their utter ignorance of all human arts and discipline.<\/p>\n
VI. Human causes which contributed to forward the propagation of Christianity. But we should do wrong to understand what is thus recorded respecting the wonderful means by which the Deity himself contributed towards the propagation of the Gospel, in such a way as to conceive that the cause of Christianity was not at all indebted for its success to human counsels, labour or studies. For without doubt the progress of divine truth was, in no little degree, forwarded by the very wise and laudable exertions of the bishops and other pious characters in getting the writings of the apostles, which had been collected into one volume, translated into the most popular languages, and distributed amongst the multitude: indeed, the bare reading of these works [p. 224.] is stated to have so affected many, as to cause them instantly to embrace the Christian faith.() The cause of Christianity derived also no inconsiderable benefit from the different Apologies, in Greek as well as Latin, by which those learned and eloquent writers, Justin Martyr, Athenagoras, Quadratus, Aristides, Miltiades, Tertullian, Tatian, and others, throughout the whole of this century, repelled the slanders and reproaches of its froward and impetuous adversaries, and demonstrated the extreme turpitude and folly of the popular superstitions.() It would be an act of injustice moreover, were we to omit mentioning, with due praise, the exertions of certain philosophers and men of erudition, who had embraced Christianity in various provinces of the Roman empire, and who, from their great authority with the people, and the facility of intercourse which they enjoyed with the more cunning and wily enemies of religion, became highly instrumental in causing many to turn from the paths of error into the way of truth.<\/p>\n
VII. Disingenuous artifices occasionally resorted to in the propagation of Christianity. With the greatest grief, however, we find ourselves compelled to acknowledge, that the upright and laudable exertions thus made by the wise and pious part of the Christian community, were not the only human means, which in this century were employed in promoting the propagation of the Christian faith. For by some of the weaker brethren, in their anxiety to assist God with all their might, such dishonest artifices were occasionally resorted to, as could not, under any circumstances, admit of excuse, and were utterly unworthy of that sacred cause which they were unquestionably intended to support. Perceiving, for instance, in what vast repute the poetical effusions of those ancient prophetesses, termed Sybils, were held by the Greeks and Romans, some Christian, or rather, perhaps, an association of Christians, in the reign of Antoninus Pius, composed eight books of Sybilline Verses, made up of prophecies respecting Christ and his kingdom, with a view to persuade the ignorant and unsuspecting, that even so far back as the time of Noah, a Sybil had foretold the coming of Christ, and the rise and progress of his church.() This artifice succeeded with not a few, nay some even of the principal Christian teachers themselves were imposed upon by it; but it eventually brought great scandal on the Christian cause, since the fraud was too palpable to escape the searching penetration of those who gloried in displaying their hostility to the Christian name.() By others, who were aware that nothing could be held more sacred than the name and authority of Hermes Trismegistus were by the Egyptians, a work bearing the title of Poemander, and other books, replete with Christian principles and maxims, were sent forth into the world, with the name of this most ancient and highly venerated philosopher prefixed to them, so that deceit might, if possible, effect the conversion of those whom reason had failed to convince.() Many other deceptions of this sort, to which custom has very improperly given the denomination of PIOUS frauds, are known to have been practised in this and the succeeding century. The authors of them were, in all probability, actuated by no ill intention, but this is all that can be said in their [p. 230.] favour, for their conduct in this respect was certainly most ill advised and unwarrantable. Although the greater part of those who were concerned in these forgeries on the public, undoubtedly belonged to some heretical sect or other, and particularly to that class which arrogated to itself the pompous denomination of Gnostics,() I yet cannot take upon me to acquit even the most strictly orthodox from all participation in this species of criminality: for it appears from evidence superior to all exception, that a pernicious maxim, which was current in the schools not only of the Egyptians, the Platonists, and the Pythagoreans, but also of the Jews, was very early recognized by the Christians, and soon found amongst them numerous patrons, namely, that those who made it their business to deceive with a view of promoting the cause of truth, were deserving rather of commendation than censure.()<\/p>\n
VIII. State of the Christians under the reign of Trajan. But whilst the circumstances above enumerated conspired most happily to forward the cause of Christianity, the priests and pr\u00e6fects of the different religions that were publicly tolerated in the Roman empire, most strenuously exerted themselves to arrest its progress, not only by means of the foulest accusations, calumnies, and lies, but by frequently exciting the superstitious multitude to acts of wanton and outrageous violence.() These efforts of the heathen priesthood the emperors zealously seconded by various proscriptive edicts and laws, the magistrates and presidents of provinces by subjecting the faithful followers of Christ to punishments and tortures of the most excruciating kind, and finally several philosophers and orators by declamation and cavil; in short, throughout the whole of this century the Christians had to contend with an almost infinite series of injuries and evils, and even under the very best and most mild of the emperors that Rome ever knew, were in various districts and provinces exposed to calamities of the most afflictive and grievous nature. At the time of Trajan\u2019s accession to the government of the empire there were neither laws nor edicts of any kind in existence against the Christians. That this was the case is clear beyond a doubt, as well from other things that might be mentioned, as from the well known epistle of Pliny to Trajan, in which he signifies to the emperor that he was altogether at a loss how to proceed with people of this description. Had any laws against the Christians been at that time in force, a man so well versed in the customs and jurisprudence of the Romans as Pliny was, must undoubtedly have been acquainted with them. The fact unquestionably was, that the laws of Nero had been repealed by the senate, and those of Domitian by his successor Nerva. So difficult, however, is it to abrogate what has [p. 232.] once acquired the force of custom, that the Christians, as often as either the priests or the populace, stirred up by superstition and priestcraft, thought proper to institute a persecution of them, continued still to be consigned over to punishment. It was this which gave occasion to Eusebius to state that under the reign of Trajan, per singulas urbes populari motu passim persequutio in Christianos excitabatur.() Such a persecution took place not long after the commencement of this century in Bithynia, at the time when Pliny the Younger was president of that province, at the instigation, no doubt, of the priests.()<\/p>\n
[p. 233.] IX. Trajan\u2019s law respecting the Christians. The attack, however, thus made on the Christians in Bithynia, eventually occasioned a restraint to be put on that immoderate fury with which it had become customary to persecute them. For it having been most clearly ascertained by Pliny, that with the exception of their dissent from the public religion, there was nothing in the principles or conduct of the followers of Christ deserving of animadversion, and it being at the same time perceived by him that their enemies in their proceedings against them had no regard whatever either to equity or clemency, he requested of the emperor Trajan, that the mode of coercing the Christians might be regulated by some certain law, intimating his own opinion to be, that on account of their great number and evident innocence, they should be treated rather with moderation than severity. In answer to this it was ordered by the emperor, that the Christians for the future should not be officiously sought after, but that if any of them should be brought before the Roman tribunals in a regular way and convicted, they should, unless they would renounce Christianity, and again embrace the public religion, be consigned over to punishment. From the first part of this regulation we may naturally infer, that the emperor did not regard the Christians with an unfavourable eye, whilst, from the latter part, it is as obviously to be collected that he was fearful of discovering too much lenity towards them, lest he should thereby exasperate the priesthood and the populace.()<\/p>\n
X. Effects produced by this law of Trajan. This decree of Trajan being registered amongst the public ordinances of the Roman empire, was the cause of many Christians\u2019 being thenceforward put to death, even under the most mild and equitable emperors. For as often as any one was to be found who would run the risk of becoming an accuser, and the person accused did not deny the crime imputed to him; nothing further was left to the magistrate than to endeavour, by threats and torture, to subdue the constancy of the person thus convicted; which if he failed to effect, the pertinacious and obstinate delinquent was, according to this law of Trajan, to be delivered over to the executioner. Under this regulation Simeon, the son of Cleopas and bishop of Jerusalem, an old man of one hundred and twenty years of age, being about the year cxvi, accused by the Jews before the pr\u00e6fect of Syria, and persisting for several days, although put to the torture, in an absolute refusal to repudiate Christianity, was, contrary to the inclination of his judge, condemned to suffer death [p. 235.] upon the cross.() In conformity to this same law likewise, Ignatius, the renowned bishop of Antioch, who had been accused by the priests, and was not to be moved by the threats of even the emperor himself, was in the course of the same year brought to Rome by an imperial order, and delivered over as a prey to wild beasts.() But what will no doubt appear to the reader particularly astonishing is, that this sufficiently harsh and inhuman law excited the discontent of such of the Christians as glowed with a more fervid zeal, on account of its lenity, inasmuch as for want of inquiry being made by the magistrate, or of some one being found to step forward as an accuser, they were often times precluded from finishing their earthly course by a glorious and triumphant sacrifice of their lives in the cause of Christ. Hence it became by no means unusual for numbers of them voluntarily to hand over their names as Christians to the Judges.() This unseasonable eagerness to obtain the honours of martyrdom, however, having in the course of time become perniciously prevalent, it was at length deemed expedient to repress it by a law.<\/p>\n
XI. State of the Christians under the reign of Hadrian. [p. 236.] Although the law of which we have been speaking was not in any respect repealed or altered by the emperor Hadrian, who succeeded Trajan in the year of our Lord 117, nor had the Christians to complain of any infringement of it by the presidents or inferior magistrates; yet by the heathen priesthood means were at length discovered for enervating its force, and rendering its protection of the objects of their hatred inefficient. Finding that but few individuals could be prevailed on to take upon themselves the unthankful and perilous office of an accuser, they made it their business, on every favourable occasion to excite the lower orders of the people to join in one general disorderly clamour for the punishment of the Christians at large, or of certain individuals amongst them, whom they were taught to consider as particularly obnoxious. Amongst other opportunities that offered, they were accustomed particularly to avail themselves of those seasons when the multitude were drawn together by the exhibition of any public games or other spectacles. To general and public accusations of this sort no degree of hazard whatever was attached; whilst on the other hand it was a thing of no ordinary danger amongst the Romans to turn a deaf ear to them, or treat them with disrespect. In consequence of these tumultuary denunciations, therefore, a considerable number of Christians, at different times, met their fate, whom the magistracy would otherwise most willingly have permitted to remain unmolested.() Indeed, under the reign of Hadrian it was so much the more easy for the heathen priesthood to get the multitude to unite in one general clamour for the destruction of the Christians, since, as Eusebius expressly relates, the Gnostic sects, which seem to have been made up in part of evil designing persons, and in part of madmen and fools, were at that time continually obtruding themselves on the attention of the world; and the crimes and infamous practices of which these were guilty, being indiscriminately imputed to the Christians in general, the public prejudice was in no small degree increased against the whole body of them.()<\/p>\n
XII. Hadrian\u2019s new law in favour of the Christians. [p. 237.] This highly iniquitous and impious artifice of the priesthood being seen through by Serenus Granianus, the proconsul of Asia, he addressed a letter to the emperor on the subject, pointing out what an unjust and inhuman thing it was, to be every now and then shedding the blood of men convicted of no crime, merely with a view to silence the clamours of a misguided tumultuous rabble. Nor was the representation of this discerning and judicious man disregarded by his master: for an edict was soon after directed by Hadrian to Minutius Fundanus, the successor of Serenus, and to the other governors of provinces, forbidding them to pay attention to any such public denunciations; and signifying it to be his pleasure, that for the future no Christians should be put to death, except such as had been legitimately accused and convicted of some sort of crime.() Possibly also the two masterly apologies for the Christians, that were drawn up and presented to the emperor by those pious and learned characters, Quadratus and Aristides, and of which we of the present day have unfortunately to regret the loss, might have contributed not a little to the softening of the imperial mind.() This lenity of Hadrian towards the Christians was looked upon by some as indicative of a disposition to favour the Christian religion, and therefore, when he subsequently caused temples without images to be erected in all the cities, a suspicion arose in the minds of many that he had it in contemplation to assign to Christ a place amongst the Deities of Rome, and meant to consecrate these edifices to his service.()<\/p>\n
XIII. Barchochba an enemy of the Christians. The Christians, however, had under the reign of Hadrian to encounter a still more fierce and cruel enemy in a leader of the Jews, named Barchochba, or, \u201cthe son of the star,\u201d whom his infatuated countrymen regarded as the long-promised Messiah who was to restore the fallen fortunes of the house of Israel. Impatient of the injuries and contemptuous treatment which they were continually experiencing at the hands of the Romans, the Jews had once already, during the reign of Trajan, had recourse to arms for redress. The experiment entirely failed; but their wretchedness and calamities continuing still to increase, these hapless people, at the instigation, and under the conduct of the above-mentioned daring character, a man thoroughly conversant in blood and rapine, were, in the year 132, induced to hazard a [p. 239.] repetition of it.() During the continuance of the war which he had thus excited, Barchochba subjected to the most cruel tortures as many of the Christians as he could get within his power, and put all such of them to death without mercy as refused, in spite of the various tortures thus inflicted on them, to abjure Christianity.() The event of this contest, which was for a while maintained on both sides with incredible valour, was most disastrous to the Jews. An innumerable host of this ill-fated people having fallen by the sword, and Palestine being almost wholly depopulated, the dreadful scene was closed by Hadrian\u2019s ordering Jerusalem, which had begun to revive again from its ashes, to be finally overthrown and laid waste, and causing a new city, called after himself \u00c6lia Capitolina, to be erected on a part of its site(); at the same time debarring the Jews from every access to such new city, as well as to any of their former sacred places in its neighbourhood, under the severest penalties.()<\/p>\n
XIV. State of the Christians under Antoninus Pius. Upon the death of Hadrian, so immediately did the aspect of affairs change, that it seemed as if his rescript respecting the Christians had expired with him. For scarcely had Antoninus Pius assumed the government of the empire, when the Christians found themselves assailed in various places by numerous accusers, who being obliged by the above-mentioned edict of Hadrian to allege some sort of crime against them, and probably finding the more equitable of the presidents disinclined to consider the bare profession of Christianity in that light, had recourse to the expedient of charging them with impiety or atheism. This new attack was met by Justin Martyr with an apology presented to the emperor, in which he ably repels various other calumnies with which the Christians were assailed, as well as completely vindicates them against this last atrocious charge of impiety. The effect, however, produced by this apology, was but trifling. At length an immediate application having been made to the emperor by several of the magistrates, for the purpose of ascertaining the extent to which the populace, who were thus continually calling for the blood of the Christians, were to be gratified in their demands, he commanded them to take for their direction the law of [p. 240.] Hadrian, and not put any Christian to death unless it should appear that he had committed some crime against the state.() But even this was not found sufficient to prevent those ebullitions of popular fury which the priesthood continually made it their business to promote. For in consequence of some earthquakes which shortly after occurred in Asia, and which the priests, with their accustomed malevolence, ascribed to the displeasure of the gods at the toleration of the Christians, the multitude burst through every restraint, and heaped on these fancied authors of their calamities every species of outrage and injury. A representation of the grievous afflictions to which they were thus exposed having been submitted to the emperor by the Christians, he addressed a severe edict to the whole region of Asia, commanding, that unless the Christians should be convicted of some sort of crime, they should be discharged with impunity, and that the punishment to which, in case of conviction, they would have been subjected, should, upon their acquittal, be inflicted on their accusers.()<\/p>\n
XV. State of the Christians under Marcus Aurelius. The security and tranquillity enjoyed by the Christians under this edict of Antonine lasted no longer than until the year clxi, when the government of the empire passed into the hands of Marcus Aurelius Antoninus, who from his great attachment to the Stoic system of discipline, acquired the surname of \u201cThe Philosopher.\u201d At the very commencement of this emperor\u2019s reign, the ancient practice of preferring public accusations against the Christians was vigorously resumed; and as many of the persons thus accused as acknowledged themselves to be followers of the religion of Christ, and refused to change their tenets, were delivered over to the executioner. Upon this occasion it was that Justin Martyr addressed to the emperor his second apology for the Christians, a composition much resembling his former one, both as to style and argument; but which was so far from exciting in the mind of the emperor anything like lenity or compassion towards those on whose behalf it was drawn up, that after its appearance the calamities of the Christians were increased throughout the whole of the Roman empire. Nor did it appear sufficient to the emperor to free the enemies of Christianity from those restraints which his father had imposed on them: but by the publication of various edicts inimical to the Christians, he held out, as it were, an invitation or incitement to the people [p. 242.] to become their accusers.() It appears, indeed, as well from other authorities, as particularly from the tract written by Athenagoras in defence of the Christians, that Marcus did not absolutely repeal the edict of his father which forbade the Christians to be put to death, unless they should be convicted of some sort of capital offence;() but, through the iniquity of the judges, the greatest facility was afforded to accusers in establishing any false charges which they might bring forward against the Christians; and the accused, in defiance of the laws of the empire, were, without either being regularly convicted of, or confessing themselves to have committed, any sort of crime, declared to have incurred the penalty of death.()
\nFrom whence this ill-will of the emperor towards the Christians proceeded, is not to be ascertained from any memorials that have reached our times. It may, with great probability, however, be conjectured, that from the representation of the philosophers, to whose guidance he appears entirely to have surrendered himself, he was led to regard the Christians as a set of absurd, irrational, obstinate and conceited men; and therefore, upon the principles of that harsh and rigid system of moral discipline to which he was devoted, conceived it expedient rather to destroy than to tolerate them.()<\/p>\n
XVI. Afflictions of the Christians under the reign of Marcus. Under no emperor, therefore, subsequently to Nero, were the Christians exposed to weightier or more numerous afflictions than they suffered during the reign of the illustrious Marcus Aurelius, whom posterity has been taught to regard as the best and wisest emperor that Rome ever saw. Nor were there ever more apologies sent forth into the world on behalf of the Christians than were in his time offered to the public; for in addition to Justin Martyr, of whom we have already spoken, Melito, bishop of Sardis, Athenagoras, a philosopher of Athens, Miltiades, Theophilus of Antioch, Tatian the Assyrian, and others whom it is unnecessary to enumerate, made it their business, in various literary productions, as well to render the innocence and piety of the Christians unquestionable, as to demonstrate the sanctity of the religion which they professed, and to expose the madness and absurdity of those other religious systems to which the world in general was so fondly attached. Of these works there are some that have reached our days, but others have perished through the ravages of time.() Amongst the many who, under the reign of Marcus, were put to death for their adherence to the religion of Christ, the most distinguished were those very celebrated characters: Justin, the philosopher, who suffered at Rome; and Polycarp, who met his fate at Smyrna. Both of these sealed their attachment to the cause of their blessed Master with their blood, in the year clxix.() To none, however, has posterity assigned a higher place in its estimation than to the Christians of Lyons and Vienne, who, in the year clxxvii, were in great numbers made to encounter death under various excruciating and terrific forms, in consequence of their having been falsely charged, by certain of their inferior servants or slaves, with the commission of crimes almost too shocking even to be named. The most eminent of these Gallic martyrs was Pothynus, the bishop and parent of the church of Lyons; a venerable character of the age of ninety and upwards, who, not long before, had, with certain others, travelled from the east into Gaul, [p. 247.] and with great care and industry established there that Christian church or assembly which was doomed, in a particular manner, to experience the devastating fury of this very remarkable and tremendous persecution.()<\/p>\n
XVII. The miracle of the Thundering Legion. It is said, however, that some short time before his death, namely, in the year clxxiv, the sentiments of Marcus underwent a considerable change with respect to the Christians, and that in consequence of his having been very essentially benefited by them on a particular occasion, in the course of a war in which he was engaged with the Marcomanni and the Quadi, two of the bravest German nations; he was induced entirely to relieve them from every sort of penalty and hazard to which they had been previously exposed. The story is, that being so effectually surrounded on all sides by the enemy, during a season of severe and long continued drought, as not to be able to gain access to any place from whence water might be obtained, the Roman emperor and his forces were in the most imminent danger of perishing from heat and thirst. When things, however, were arrived at the last extremity, a band of Christians, who were at that time serving in Marcus\u2019s army, having earnestly cried to heaven for assistance, the Almighty was pleased at once to manifest a regard for their prayers, by causing the clouds on a sudden to pour down rain in abundance, accompanied with thunder and lightning. Reanimated by the very critical relief thus afforded them, the Romans lost not a moment in attacking their enemies, whom this alteration in the aspect of the heavens had filled with conternation and dismay, and succeeded in obtaining over them a most signal and important victory. This wonderful event made a very deep impression on the mind of the emperor, and so entirely changed his sentiments with regard to the Christians, that he publicly proclaimed to the world his conviction of their virtue and good faith towards him, and decreed that the heaviest punishments should await all their enemies and accusers. Such is the account given of the matter by the early Christian writers. But it must not pass without remark, that in this narrative there are some things manifestly false; and that, with regard to the critical fall of rain accompanied with thunder and lightning, to which the Roman army [p. 249.] was indebted for its preservation, it possesses not the characteristic features of a true and unquestionable miracle; but may, without any difficulty, be accounted for upon natural grounds, and without in the least interfering with the established laws of divine providence.()<\/p>\n
XVIII. State of the Christians under Commodus and Severus. During the reign of Commodus, the son and immediate successor of Marcus, no very heavy or general persecution of the Christians appears to have taken place; at least nothing of this kind is recorded by any historian. There are not wanting, however, individual instances of Christians that were put to death during this period, the most remarkable of which is that of Apollonius, a dignified and eminent character, who, together with his accuser, underwent capital punishment at Rome.() The fact was, that none of the laws which had been enacted by different emperors respecting the Christians, of which some indeed were lenient, but others most severe, having been repealed, the judges could at any time, when it might suit their humour, by straining matters a little, contrive, with an apparent show of justice, to inflict capital punishment on all such Christians as might be accused before them. Of this evil the full weight was never so sensibly experienced by the Christians as under the reign of Septimius Severus, the successor of Commodus. For although this emperor, upon his first assuming the government, manifested a disposition to favour the Christians, to one of whom he stood indebted for a very signal benefit;() yet under cover, as it should seem, of the turbulence of the times which succeeded, the magistrates and enemies of Christianity took occasion to rekindle the flames of persecution, and to carry their oppression and cruelty to the greatest extent. By the concurrence of abundant authorities, it is rendered indisputable, that in some provinces, towards the close of this century, the Christians were exposed to such a dreadful series of calamities and sufferings as it had scarcely ever fallen to their lot to encounter before. It was the distressing view presented by these accumulated miseries of the brethren, which gave birth to that very ingenious and eloquent defence of the Christians, the Apologeticon of Tertullian.()<\/p>\n
XIX. Philosophers inimical to the Christian cause. To the flame thus prevailing in the breasts of the priests and the populace, not a little fuel was added by the writings of some of those who affected to possess a more than ordinary share of wisdom and virtue, and were distinguished by the titles of Philosophers and Orators. Of these, one of the most celebrated was a disciple of the modern Platonic school, named Celsus, who, towards the close of this century, attacked the Christians in a declamation teeming with invective and reproach, which, at a subsequent period, was met by a very masterly refutation from the pen of Origen.() At Rome likewise, nearly about the same time, the Christians were assailed by one Crescens, a cynic philosopher, who, according to the prevailing custom of the age, arraigned them of the grossest impiety. His attack was in a particular manner directed against Justin Martyr, who had exposed to the world the secret vices and deceptive arts of those who styled themselves philosophers; nor was it for a moment relinquished until this very celebrated Christian father had undergone the punishment of death.() As cotemporary with these, it should seem that we may reckon Fronto, the rhetorician of Cirta in Africa, who made it his endeavour, in a studied discourse that he sent abroad into the world, to establish against the Christians that vile calumny so frequent in the mouths of the mob, of their countenancing an incestuous intercourse of the sexes.() Many more persons of this description, in all probability, laboured to defame the Christians; but neither their works nor their names have come down to our times.<\/p>\n
XX. Government of the church. Amidst these vicissitudes of fortune, the Christians applied themselves every where with an ardent and holy zeal to add to the strength and stability of their cause, and at the same time to improve it as much as possible by means of salutary laws and regulations. Over each of the larger churches, and such as were established in cities or towns of any note, there presided a teacher who bore the title of Bishop, and whose appointment to this office rested entirely with the people. The bishop was assisted by a council of presbyters or elders, who, in like manner, depended for their appointment on popular suffrage, and, availing himself of the aid thus furnished him, it was, in an especial degree, his duty to be ever vigilant and active in preventing the interests of religion from experiencing any detriment. To the bishop likewise it belonged to allot to each of the presbyters his proper functions and department; and to see that, in every thing appertaining to religion and divine worship, a due respect was had to the laws and regulations which the people had enacted or otherwise sanctioned with their approbation. The deacons and deaconesses filled subordinate stations[p. 258.] in the church, and had various duties assigned to them, according as circumstances might require. The daughter churches, or lesser Christian assemblies, that through the care and exertions of the bishop had been established in the neighbouring districts and villages, were governed by presbyters sent from the mother church, who, in consequence of their representing the person, and exercising, with a few exceptions, all the rights and functions of the bishop by whom they were commissioned, came to be distinguished by the title of Chorepiscopi, or rural bishops.\u2014The supreme power in these equal assemblies or congregations resided in the people; and consequently no alteration of importance, nor in fact any thing of more than ordinary moment, could be brought about or carried into effect without having recourse to a general assembly, by the suffrages and authority of which alone could the opinions and counsels of the bishop and the presbyters be rendered obligatory, and acquire the force of laws.<\/p>\n
XXI. Authority of the apostolic churches. The most perfect equality prevailed amongst all the churches in point of rights and power, each of them prescribing to itself at any time, according to its own will and judgment, such laws and regulations as its circumstances appeared to demand: nor does this age supply us with a single instance of any church assuming to itself anything like a right of dominion or command over the others.() An ancient custom, however, obtained of attributing to those churches which had been founded by the apostles themselves, a superior degree of honour, and a more exalted dignity; on which account it was, for the most part, usual, when any dispute arose respecting principles or tenets, for the opinion of these churches to be asked; as also, for those who entered into a discussion of any matters connected with religion, to refer, in support of their positions, to the voice of the apostolic churches.() We may, therefore, hence very readily perceive the reason which, in cases of doubt and controversy, caused the Christians of the west to have recourse to the church of Rome, those of Africa to that of Alexandria, and those of Asia to that of Antioch, for their opinion, and which also occasioned these opinions to be not unfrequently regarded in the light of laws, namely, that these churches had been planted, reared up and regulated either by the hand or under the immediate superintendence and care of some one or more of the apostles themselves.<\/p>\n
XXII. Civil unity introduced amongst the Christians. Although, [p. 264.] therefore, all the churches had, at the commencement of this century, various laws and institutions in common, which had been received from the apostles themselves, and were particularly careful in maintaining with each other a certain community of tenets, morals and charity; yet each individual church which had a bishop and presbyters of its own, assumed to itself the form and rights of a little distinct republic or commonwealth; and with regard to its internal concerns, was wholly regulated by a code of laws, that, if they did not originate with, had, at least, received the sanction of the people constituting such church. This primitive liberty and independence, however, was by degrees relinquished, and it became the practice for all the minor churches within a province to form themselves into one large association, and to hold at stated seasons, much after the manner of confederate republics, a convention, in which the common interests and welfare of the whole were taken into consideration and provided for. Of the immediate authors of this arrangement we are uninformed, but it is certain that it had its origin in Greece; and there are many things which combine to prove, that during this century it did not extend itself beyond the confines of Asia. In process of time, however, the very great advantages attending on a federation of this sort becoming apparent, other provinces were induced to follow the example of Greece, and by degrees this form of government became general throughout the whole church; so that the Christian community may be said, thenceforward, to have resembled one large commonwealth, made up, like those of Holland and Switzerland, of many minor republics. These conventions or assemblies, in which the delegates from various associated churches consulted on what was requisite to be done for the common welfare of the whole, were termed synods by the Greeks, and by the Latins councils. To the laws enacted by these deputies under the powers with which they were invested by their respective churches, the Greeks gave the name of canons or general rules, and by this title it also became usual for them to be distinguished by the Latins.()<\/p>\n
[p. 269.] XXIII. Effects produced by the introduction of this civil unity. The associations, however, thus introduced amongst the churches, and the councils to which they gave rise, although not unattended with certain benefits and advantages, were, nevertheless, productive of so great an alteration in the general state of the church, as nearly to effect the entire subversion of its ancient constitution. For, in the first place, the primitive rights of the people, in consequence of this new arrangement of things, expeperienced a considerable diminution, inasmuch as, thenceforward, none but affairs of comparatively very trifling consequence were ever made the subject of popular deliberation and adjustment; the councils of the associated churches assuming to themselves the right of discussing and regulating every thing of moment or importance, as well as of determining all questions to which any sort of weight was attached. Whence arose two sorts of ecclesiastical law, the one public or general, and thenceforward termed \u201cCanonical,\u201d from the canons; the other private or peculiar, consisting merely of such regulations as each individual church deemed it expedient, after the ancient manner, to enact for itself.\u2014In the next place, the dignity and authority of the bishops were very materially augmented and enlarged. In the infancy, indeed, of councils, the bishops did not scruple to acknowledge that they appeared there merely as the ministers or legates of their respective churches, and that they were, in fact, nothing more than representatives acting from instructions: but it was not long before this humble language began, by little and little, to be exchanged for a loftier tone; and they at length took upon them to assert that they were the legitimate successors of the apostles themselves, and might consequently, of their own proper authority, dictate laws to the Christian flock. To what an extent the inconveniences and evils arising out of these preposterous pretensions reached in after times, is too well known to require any particular notice in this place.\u2014Another effect which these councils had, was to break in upon and gradually destroy that absolute and perfect equality which had reigned amongst the bishops in the primitive times. For, as it was necessary that some certain place should be fixed on for the seat of council, and that the right of convening the assembly, and presiding therein as moderator, as well as of collecting the suffrages and preserving the records of its acts, should be vested in some one or other of its members, it, for the most part, became customary to give a preference in these respects to the chief city of the province and its bishop, and hence, in process of time, sprung up the dignity and authority of \u201cmetropolitans,\u201d a title conferred by way of distinction on the bishops of principal cities. These associations of churches, situated within one and the same province, soon gave rise to the practice of many different provinces associating together; and hence a still greater disparity, by degrees, introduced itself amongst the bishops. In fine, this custom of holding councils becoming at length universally prevalent, the major part of the church() assumed the form of a large civil commonwealth, made up of numerous inferior republics; to the preservation of which order of things, it being found expedient that a chief or superintending prelate should be appointed for each of the three grand divisions of the earth; and that, in addition to this, a supreme power should be lodged in the [p. 270.] hands of some one individual bishop; it was tacitly assented to() that a certain degree of ecclesiastical pre\u00ebminence should be recognised as belonging to the bishops of Antioch, Rome, and Alexandria, the principal cities in Asia, Europe, and Africa, and that the bishop of Rome, the noblest and most opulent city in the world, should moreover take the precedence amongst these principal bishops, or, as they were afterwards styled, patriarchs, and also assume the primacy of the whole Christian church throughout the world.()<\/p>\n
XXIV. Comparison of the Christian with the Jewish priesthood. By whatever advantages this new form of ecclesiastical government might be attended, they were confined exclusively to pastors of the higher order, i. e. the bishops who sat in these councils as the representatives of their respective churches: but much about the same time there arose and quickly gained ground in the Christian world, an opinion respecting the nature of the functions wherewith the ministers of the church were invested, which tended, in no small degree, to augment the dignity and rights of the whole sacred body. Whilst the least probability remained that Jerusalem might, at one time or other, again rear its head from the dust, the Christian teachers and elders assumed to themselves no titles or distinctions, at least none but the most modest and humble ones;() but when the fate of that once glorious city had been finally sealed by Hadrian, and not the most distant hope could any longer be entertained by the Jews of seeing their ancient government re-established, these same pastors and ministers, for the most part, conceived a wish to have it believed by their flocks that they themselves had succeeded to the rights of the Jewish priesthood. The bishops, therefore made it their business thenceforward to inculcate the notion that they were invested with a character resembling that of the great high priest of the Jews, and were consequently possessed of all those rights which had been recognized as belonging to the Jewish pontiff. The functions of the ordinary Jewish priests were, in like manner, stated to have devolved, though under a more perfect form, on the presbyters of the Christian church: and, finally, the deacons were placed on a parallel with the Levites or inferior ministers of the temple. Whether the comparison thus instituted between functions altogether opposite in their nature, had its origin in art and design, or was rather the offspring of ignorance and imprudence, is a thing not now to be ascertained; of this, however, there can be no doubt, that having once been approved of and admitted to be just, it not only gave rise to a variety of errors, and introduced a greater distinction between teachers and learners than seems consonant to the spirit of the Christian discipline, but also very materially added to the rights and emoluments of the ministers and dispensers of Christ\u2019s word.()<\/p>\n
XXV. A taste for philosophy introduced amongst the Christians. The external change thus wrought in the constitution of the church would have been, however, far less detrimental to the interests of Christianity, had it not been accompanied by others of an internal nature, which struck at the very vitals of religion, and tended, in no small degree, to affect the credit of those sacred writings on which the entire system of Christian discipline relies for support. Of these the most considerable and important are to be attributed to a taste for the cultivation of philosophy and human learning, which, during the preceding century, if not altogether treated with neglect and contempt by the Christians, had at least been wisely kept under, and by no means permitted to blend itself with religion; but in the age of which we are now treating, burst forth on a sudden into a flame, and spread itself with the utmost rapidity throughout a considerable part of the church. This may be accounted for, in some measure, from its having been the practice of the many Greek philosophers, who, in the course of this century, were induced to embrace Christianity, not only to retain their pristine denomination, garb, and mode of living, but also to persist in recommending the study of philosophy, and initiating youth therein. In proof of this, we may, from amidst numerous other examples, adduce in particular that of Justin, the celebrated philosopher and martyr.() The immediate nursery and very cradle, as it were, of Christian philosophy, must, however, be placed in the celebrated seminary which long flourished at Alexandria under the denomination of the Catechetical School. For the persons who presided therein, in the course of the age of which we are treating, namely, Pant\u00e6nus, Athenagoras, and Clement of [p. 273.] Alexandria, not only engaged with ardour in the cultivation of philosophy themselves, but also exerted their influence in persuading those whom they were educating for the office of teachers in the church, to follow their example in this respect, and make it their practice to associate philosophical principles with those of religion.() It is to be observed, however, that what was termed by these philosophy, was not the discipline of any particular sect, but a selection of such principles and maxims from all the different philosophic systems, as appeared to be most consentaneous to right reason, and admitted of being so tempered and modified as to reconcile them, in a certain degree, with Christian notions and tenets.()<\/p>\n
XXVI. Contentions amongst the Christians with regard to philosophy. The rise, however, of this taste for philosophical speculation, and the ascendancy which they perceived it gradually acquiring in the minds of so many of their teachers, became a source of the most poignant regret to all such as continued steadfastly attached to that ancient and simple species of piety which had been delivered down by the Apostles and their disciples; inasmuch as they saw reason to fear that the cause of celestial truth [p. 277.] might be thereby materially injured, as in reality proved to be the case, and that divine wisdom would not long retain either its proper value or dignity in the estimation of mankind. In consequence of this the Christian church became divided into two parties, which opposed each other with the utmost warmth; the one regarding every species of human learning, and more particularly philosophy, with detestation and contempt, and enjoining the brethren to maintain the faith in all its genuine simplicity; the other contending for the utility and excellence of philosophic disquisition, and encouraging the teachers of the church to occupy themselves in demonstrating the accordance of religion with the principles of right reason.() The issue of this dispute, which lasted for a considerable while, at length was, that victory declared itself in favour of the patrons of philosophy, and that those teachers came to be most respected who, in unfolding the doctrines of religion, called in the aid of philosophical principles and precepts.<\/p>\n
XXVII. The school of Ammonius Saccas. That particular scheme or mode of philosophising, which was adopted at the first by the pr\u00e6fects of the school of Alexandria, and a few others, did not indeed maintain its ground for any great length of time, but was by degrees considerably departed from: the spirit of philosophising, however, so far from experiencing any decline or abatement, continued to increase and diffuse itself more and more, particularly towards the close of this century, when a new sect sprung up at Alexandria under the title of \u201cThe Modern Platonists.\u201d The founder of this sect was Ammonius Saccas, a man of a subtile penetrating genius, but prone to deviate, in many things, from right reason, and too much inclined to indulge in ridiculous flights of imagination.() In addition to a multitude of others who flocked to this man for instruction, his lectures were constantly attended by a great number of Christians, who were inflamed with an eager desire after knowledge, and of whom two, namely, Origen and Heraclas, became afterwards very distinguished characters, the former succeeding to the presidency of the school, the latter to that of the church of Alexandria.() By the Christian disciples of Ammonius, and more particularly by Origen, who in the succeeding [p. 281.] century attained to a degree of eminence scarcely credible, the doctrines which they had derived from their master were sedulously instilled into the minds of the youth with whose education they were entrusted, and by the efforts of these again, who were subsequently, for the most part, called to the ministry, the love of philosophy became pretty generally diffused throughout a considerable portion of the church.<\/p>\n
XXVIII. The philosophy of Ammonius. The favourite object with Ammonius, as appears from the disputations and writings of his disciples, was that of not only bringing about a reconciliation between all the different philosophical sects, Greeks as well as barbarians,() but also of producing a harmony of all religions, even of Christianity and heathenism, and prevailing on all the wise and good men of every nation to lay aside their contentions and quarrels, and unite together as one large family, the children of one common mother. With a view to the accomplishment of this end, therefore he maintained, that divine wisdom had been first brought to light and nurtured amongst the people of the east by Hermes Trismegistus, Zoroaster, and other great and sacred characters;() that it was warmly espoused and cherished by Pythagoras and Plato amongst the Greeks;() from whom, although the other Grecian sages might appear to have dissented, yet that, with nothing more than the exercise of an ordinary degree of judgment and attention, it was very possible to make this discordance entirely vanish, and show that the only points on which these eminent characters disagreed were but of trifling moment, and that it was chiefly in their manner of expressing their sentiments that they varied.() The religion of the multitude, he also contended, went hand in hand with philosophy, and with her had shared the [p. 284.] fate of being by degrees corrupted and obscured with mere human conceits, superstition, and lies: that it ought therefore to be brought back to its original purity, by purging it of this dross, and expounding it upon philosophical principles: and that the whole which Christ had in view by coming into the world, was\u2014to reinstate and restore to its primitive integrity, the wisdom of the ancients,\u2014to reduce within bounds the universally prevailing dominion of superstiton,\u2014and in part to correct, and in part to exterminate, the various errors that had found their way into the different popular religions. This great design of bringing about an union of all sects and religions, the offspring of a mind certainly not destitute of genius, but distracted by fanaticism, and scarcely at all under the dominion of reason, required, in order to its execution, not only that the most strained and unprincipled interpretations should be given to ancient sentiments, maxims, documents, and narratives, but also that the assistance of frauds and fallacies should be called in: hence we find the works which the disciples of Ammonius left behind them abounding in things of this kind; so much so indeed, that it is impossible for them ever to be viewed in any other light than as deplorable monuments of wisdom run mad.<\/p>\n
XXIX. The theoretical or speculative philosophy of Ammonius. But to descend more into particulars. Ammonius in the first place adopted the ancient and generally received principles of the Egyptians respecting the Deity, the world, the soul, providence, the power of d\u00e6mons, and the like. Agreeably, for instance, to what we well know to have been the doctrine maintained by the Egyptian philosophers of old, he contended that every thing was a constituent part of one great whole:() that the Deity could be severed from this universe only in imagination, or, which is the same thing, that this world had flowed from all eternity from the Deity: which is, in fact, assigning to the world an existence of equal duration with that of the Deity, although of a different kind; that all minds were equal in point of nature, but of very different degrees; that they were all, without exception, the offspring of the divine essence, and had, therefore, formerly all partaken of a state of bliss in the regions above: that most minds of the inferior order, being stimulated by a desire to enjoy [p. 287.] those pleasures which were to be derived to the senses from an alliance with matter, had descended into terrestrial bodies:() that every man, therefore, in addition to a sensitive and mutable soul derived from the soul of the universe, possesses, inclosed within his mortal frame, a mind unchangeable and nearly related to the Deity himself; and that hence it is the duty of a wise man to ascend in spirit to the parent of all things, and to strive by every means in his power to hold communion with him. From minds of the higher order, or, as they were termed, d\u00e6mons, the Deity had, he asserted, given to the different nations of the earth superintendents and guardians, and to the different departments of nature governors and directors. Certain of these, distinguished beyond the rest for their virtue and power, he considered as presiding over the sun, the moon, the planets, and the other stars; whilst of the remainder, to whom was entrusted the care of inferior and terrene things, many were actuated by vicious propensities; and some were so completely destitute of every virtuous and dignified principle, as even to rejoice over others\u2019 ills, and burn, as it were, with the lust of doing harm. His next care was to incorporate these principles with the Platonic discipline, a task of but little labour, inasmuch as, with the exception of but a few things, the tenets of Ammonius and those of the Athenian sage, were not distinguished from each other by any very material shades of difference.() In the last place he exerted every possible ingenuity and address in giving to the dogmas of the remaining sects, nay even to the fables of the ancient poets, and the history of the heathen deities, that kind of interpretation which made them appear in perfect unison with his system; and whenever he met with any thing in either of these that could by no means be brought to harmonise therewith, he rejected it as totally unfounded in reason.()<\/p>\n
XXX. The moral philosophy of Ammonius. With this [p. 289.] system of theoretical or speculative philosophy, which its author, a man of powerful talents, defended with no little portion of subtilty and address, was conjoined a course of moral discipline in the highest degree rigid and austere. On such people indeed, as were necessarily involved in the cares and concerns of this life, Ammonius did not impose precepts of much difficulty in the observance, but suffered them to live agreeably to the laws of nature and those of their country; but every one who laid claim to the character of a wise man, was strictly enjoined by him to assert the liberty of his divine and immortal part, by extricating it, as it were, from all connection with the body; the consequence of which would be, that it would, even in this life, enjoy a communion with the Deity; and when death should disencumber it of every gross and corporeal tie, escape free and unpolluted into the arms of the first great parent of all things. With this view, he willed all such to lead a life resembling that to which Plato gives the denomination of Orphic;() to abstain from wine, flesh, and every kind of food which might tend to invigorate or refresh the body; to decline marriage, to court solitude, to abstract the mind from the senses and call it off from visible objects, to strive by means of contemplation to subdue the impulses and powers of the sensitive soul; in fine, to shrink from no exertion that might tend to free the immortal spirit from all corporeal influence, and restore it to a participation of the divine nature.() These obligations, to which, according to the Ammonian scheme, every wise man was subject, its author, as was natural for one that had been born and educated and constantly lived amongst Christains, was accustomed to expound and recommend in a language and phraseology evidently borrowed from the Christian discipline, a practice of which many very striking instances also occur in such of the writings of his followers as are extant among us at this day.() In addition to this rigid system of discipline, the offspring of the peculiar tenets entertained by him respecting God and the human soul, Ammonius propounded to his followers an art fraught with less important benefits, and suited only to capacities of a refined and an exalted nature, which he termed Theurgia, and for which there can be no doubt but that he was indebted to the Egyptian priests. This art embraced the faculty of so consecrating and purifying, by certain secret rites, that part of the mind or soul which receives the images of corporeal things, as to render it capable of perceiving d\u00e6mons, and also of holding an intercourse with spirits or angels, and of performing, with their assistance, things admirable in themselves, and utterly beyond the powers of human nature alone to accomplish. This species of magic was not cultivated by all the philosophers of the Modern Platonic school, but only by those of the higher order, who aspired to a sort of superiority over the rest. In fact, an acquaintance with it was considered rather as ornamental than useful, and as by no means necessary in attaining to the chief good.()<\/p>\n
[p. 292.] XXXI. The sentiments of Ammonius respecting the different popular religions. In order that the different popular religions by which a plurality of Gods was recognized, might not appear repugnant to his doctrine, Ammonius endeavoured to reduce the whole history of the heathen deities, as it had been handed down by the poets and inculcated by the priests, to somewhat of a rational system, and contended that it was altogether an allegorical exhibition of either natural or moral precepts and maxims.() Conformably to the Christian faith, he maintained that there was one God, from whom all things had proceeded. The host of beings whom the multitude and the heathen priesthood commonly honoured with the name of gods, he would not allow to be actually gods, but merely the ministers of God, or d\u00e6mons, to whom the supreme governor of the universe had committed the superintendence and guardianship of nations, or the direction of certain parts of nature, or finally the administration and guidance of human affairs and actions.() To these agents of Divine Providence he thought it reasonable that a certain sort of honour and worship should be paid: just as amongst men a certain degree of attention and respect is shown to the legates of kings and inferior magistrates; but he by no means deemed it necessary that they should be addressed with the same ceremonies that were used in worshipping the Deity, much less that they should be conciliated or appeased with sacrifices and the blood of animals. According to him, none but natures that were inimical to the human race, and that delighted in sensuality, could find any gratification in the death and blood of animals. The offerings in which such natures as resembled and were allied to the Supreme Deity took pleasure, were frankincense, hymns, herbs, and things altogether innoxious. It was no other than fitting, he conceived, that prayers should be addressed to these agents of the Deity, inasmuch as to them was committed the dispensation of God\u2019s benefits and blessings; but that prayers of this kind were to be regulated by reason and wisdom, since the good things that were placed at the disposal of these d\u00e6mons were those which concerned merely the welfare of the body, not such as might benefit the celestial and immortal spirit. It became, therefore, a wise man, he held, whose main object ought to be to improve the excellence and felicity of his mind, for the most part to pass by these inferior deities, and prefer his petitions at once to the Supreme Being.<\/p>\n
XXXII. The tenets of Ammonius respecting Christ. With a view to render Christianity apparently consistent with his new philosophy and the ancient religion, Ammonius admitted that Christ was a great and wise character, full of the counsel and power of the Deity, an admirable Theurgist, and a friend to the d\u00e6mons: that the discipline which he had instituted was of a most holy nature, and had been confirmed by miracles and preternatural signs: but he denied that Christ had ever taught anything repugnant to the principles which he himself sought to establish, or that he had endeavoured to abolish the ancient popular religious rites, and the worship of the d\u00e6mons that had been appointed by the Deity to preside over nations and the different departments of nature.() And that he might the more readily procure for this part of his system an acceptance with the world, he endeavoured, as far as possible, by means of strained interpretations, or rather perversions, to enlist on his side the tenets of the Christians respecting the Deity, the human soul, the world, the trinity of persons in the Godhead, good and bad angels, and the like, as well as their different maxims and precepts relating to piety and morals.() Such points of the Christian doctrine as it surpassed his ingenuity to render by any means subservient to his purpose, he pronounced to be unauthorised additions that had been made to the system of Christ, by ignorant and injudicious disciples. The principal articles to which he thus took exception as interpolations, were those which respected the divinity of Christ, the salvation obtained through him for the human race, the abandoning the worship of a plurality of gods, and adoring the one only Supreme Being. None of these points, he contended, had ever been inculcated by Christ himself, nor had he forbidden the paying of an honorary worship to all d\u00e6mons indiscriminately, but only to such as were of an evil nature. When in the following age this matter was brought into dispute, and the miracles of our Blessed Saviour were urged by the Christians, in proof both of his divinity and also of his having meant to explode the worship of d\u00e6mons, the philosophers of the Ammonian school maintained that several of the more eminent of the Pagan worshippers, such as Apollonius Tyan\u00e6us, Pythagoras, Euclid, Apuleius, and others, had immortalized their names by miracles equally great and splendid with those which had been wrought by Christ.()<\/p>\n
XXXIII. Forced interpretation of the Scriptures. When once this passion for philosophising had taken possession of the minds of the Egyptian teachers and certain others, and had been gradually diffused by them in various directions throughout the church, the holy and beautiful simplicity of early times very quickly disappeared, and was followed by a most remarkable and disastrous alteration in nearly the whole system of Christian discipline. This very important and deeply to be regretted change had its commencement in the century now under review, but it will be in the succeeding one that we shall have to mark its chief progress. One of the earliest evils that flowed from this immoderate attachment to philosophy, was the violence to which it gave rise in the interpretation of the Holy Scriptures. For, whereas, the Christians had, from a very early period, imbibed the notion that under the words, laws, and facts, recorded in the sacred volume, there is a latent sense concealed, an opinion which they appear to have derived from the Jews,() no sooner did this passion for philosophising take possession of their minds, than they began with wonderful subtilty to press the Scriptures [p. 299.] into their service, in support of all such principles and maxims as appeared to them consonant to reason; and at the same time most wretchedly to pervert and twist every part of those divine oracles which opposed itself to their philosophical tenets or notions. The greatest proficients in this pernicious practice were those Egyptian teachers who first directed the attention of the Christians towards philosophy, namely, Pant\u00e6nus and Clement. Their expositions of the Scriptures have not reached our days, but it appears from such of the writings of Clement as are at present extant, that he and Pant\u00e6nus are not to be considered as having struck out an absolutely original path in this respect, for that in reality they were merely followers of the celebrated Alexandrian Jew, Philo, whose writings they assiduously studied, and whose empty wisdom they were unhappily led to admire and to imitate.()<\/p>\n
XXXIV. The practice arises of expounding Christian tenets upon philosophical principles. The secret discipline. With this evil was connected another that proved equally detrimental to the interests of Christianity. For, not content with thus perverting and straining the Holy Scriptures, in support of such philosophical tenets as they deemed just and reasonable, the Christians of the Ammonian school, with a view to illustrate, still more clearly, the perfect accordance of human with divine wisdom, and in this way the more readily to draw over philosophers to their side, proceeded to the further length of giving to the most plain and obvious maxims and precepts of the Gospel, such an exposition as might render them apparently consistent with the philosophical [p. 303.] notions and opinions which they had so unfortunately been led to espouse.() In their manner of doing this, however, a greater degree of caution and prudence was observed by some than by others. By not a few the expositions of the Christian mysteries, which their ingenuity had thus suggested, were promulgated without reserve, and endeavours used to get them adopted by the church, as appears from the disputes that took place with Praxeas, Theodotus, Hermogenes, and Artemon. But by far the greater part, pursuing the example of the Egyptian teachers, appear to have wished, that the principles of Christianity should be unfolded and explained to the people at large, with every possible degree of plainness and simplicity, and that the more abstruse and philosophic interpretation of them should never reach the ears of the multitude, but be made known only to certain select persons of tried faith and a cultivated understanding; and not even to these through the medium of writing, but merely by word of mouth. Hence arose that more secret and sublime theology of the ancient Christians, to which we have of late been accustomed to refer, under the title of Disciplina Arcani,() and which Clement of Alexandria styles \u03b3\u03bd\u03ce\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2, or knowledge, but which differs from what is called Mystical Theology, only in name.()<\/p>\n
XXXV: Moral theology assumes a two-fold character. As the love of pliilosophy originated amongst the Christians, a two-fold interpretation of those principles by which the intellect is instructed in the way of salvation, the one public, and accommodated to vulgar minds, the other secret, and intelligible only to capacities of the higher order; so likewise did it occasion a two-fold form to be assumed by that wisdom which, in a more particular manner, respects life and morals; the one suited to the multitude, who incline to society and suffer themselves to be involved in the cares and concerns of this life; the other calculated for such as, aspiring after a higher degree of sanctity and a more intimate communion with the Deity, turn their backs on the business, noise, and bustle of the world. It is true, indeed, that even at an early period, when the Christians were as yet strangers to philosophy, there were to be found amongst them persons who, by abstaining from those things which gratify the senses, such as marriage, flesh, wine, and the more solid kinds of food, and by neglecting every culture or attention to the body, sought to disengage and purify their minds from all inordinate desires and affections, and thus to consecrate themselves entirely to God:() but upon the introduction of the Egyptian and Platonic philosophy, this simple mode of life was reduced into the form of an art, and interwoven with such maxims respecting the Deity, the human soul, and tlie nature of man, as were thought most consonant to reason. All such Christians, for instance, as aspired to a degree of sanctity beyond the vulgar, were enjoined, by means of contemplation, sobriety, continence, mortifications of the body, solitude, and the like, to separate, as far as possible, that soul which was the offspring of the eternal reason of the Deity, from the sensitive soul, as well as from every sort of bodily influence, so that they might, even in this life, be united to and enjoy the most intimate communion with the Supreme Parent of souls; and upon the dissolution of the body, their minds being thoroughly disencumbered of every [p. 311.] sordid and debasing tie, might regain, without impediment, their proper stations in the regions above. To this source is to be ascribed the rise of the Mystics, a denomination of men that first made their appearance amongst the philosophising Christians of Egypt, in the course of this century, and gradually spread themselves throughout the Christian church.() Hither, also, may we refer the origin of Monks, Hermits, and C\u00e6nohites, whose rules and institutions are uniformly grounded upon the principle of delivering the immortal spirit from the oppression under which it groans in being connected with the body, of purifying it from the corruptions of sense, and of rendering it fit to be admitted into the presence of the Deity in the realms of everlasting light and life.()<\/p>\n
XXXVI. Alteration in the form of Divine worship. Religion having thus, in both its branches, the speculative as well as the practical, assumed a two-fold character, the one public or common, the other private or mysterious, it was not long before a distinction of a similar kind took place also in the Christian discipline, and form of Divine worship. For observing that in Egypt, as well as in other countries, the heathen worshippers, in addition to their public religious ceremonies, to which every one Was admitted without distinction, had certain secret and most sacred rites, to which they gave the name of \u201cmysteries,\u201d and at the celebration of which none, except persons of the most approved faith and discretion, were permitted to be present, the Alexandrian Christians first, and after them others, were beguiled into a notion that they could not do better than make the Christian discipline accommodate itself to this model. The multitude professing Christianity were therefore divided by them into the [p. 320.] \u201cprofane,\u201d or those who were not as yet admitted to the mysteries, and the \u201cinitiated,\u201d or faithful and perfect. To the former belonged the \u201ccatechumens,\u201d or those that had indeed enrolled themselves under the Christian banner, but had never been regularly received into the fellowship of Christ\u2019s flock by the sacrament of baptism; as also those who, for some transgression or offence had been expelled from communion with the Faithful. The latter, who were properly termed \u201cthe church\u201d consisted of all such as had been regularly admitted into the Christian community by baptism, and had never forfeited their privileges, as well as of those who, having by some misconduct incurred the penalty of excommunication, had, upon their repentance, been again received into the bosom of the church. It became, moreover, customary, even in this century, more especially in Egypt and the neighbouring provinces, for persons desirous of being admitted into either of these classes, to be previously exercised and examined, we may even say tormented, for a great length of time, with a variety of ceremonies, for the most part nearly allied to those that were observed in preparing people for a sight of the heathen mysteries. Upon the same principle, a two-fold form was given to Divine worship, the one general and open to the people at large, the other special and concealed from all, except the faithful or initiated. To the latter belonged the common prayers, baptism, the agap\u00e6, or love-feasts, and the Lord\u2019s Supper; and as none were permitted to be present at these \u201cmysteries,\u201d as they were termed, save those whose admission into the fellowship of the church was perfect and complete, so likewise was it expected that, as a matter of duty, the most sacred silence should be observed in regard to everything connected with the celebration of them, and nothing whatever relating thereto be committed to the ears of the profane. From this constitution of things it came to pass, not only that many terms and phrases made use of in the heathen mysteries were transferred and applied to different parts of the Christian worship, particularly to the sacraments of baptism and the Lord\u2019s Supper,() but that, in not a few instances, the sacred rites of the church were contaminated by the introduction of various pagan forms and ceremonies.()<\/p>\n
XXXVII. Christian writers. As by far a greater number of learned and philosophical characters were converted to Christianity in the course of this century than during the preceding one, it is not to be wondered at, that this period should also have had to boast of many more authors who consecrated their talents to the service of the true religion and the edification of the brethren. Numerous, however, as the Christian writers of this age were, but few can be named whose works have escaped the ravages of time. Of those who wrote in Greek there are [p. 322.] three of distinguished eminence, namely, Iren\u00e6us, Justin Martyr, and Clement of Alexandria; men whom, allowing for the times in which they lived, we certainly cannot otherwise regard than as learned, eloquent, and gifted with no contemptible degree of genius and talent. The first of these having passed from Asia Minor into Gaul, was primarily made a presbyter, and afterwards bishop, of a small church which had in this century been founded at Lyons. Of his writings in support of the Christian faith, which were not a few, none besides his five books against heresies have come down to our time; and indeed these (with the exception of the first) have reached us merely through the medium of a wretchedly barbarous and obscure Latin translation. () The second, who was finally led to embrace Christianity after having tried almost every philosophical sect, published, amongst many other works, two Apologies for the Christians, addressed to the emperors Antoninus Pius, and Marcus Aurelius, which are not undeservedly held in very high estimation.() Both of these suffered martyrdom in the cause of Christ; the latter at Rome under the reign of the emperor Marcus, the former at Lyons during the persecution of Severus.\u2014The third, a presbyter of the church of Alexandria, and prefect of the Christian school established in that city, was a man of various reading, and particularly well versed in the literature of ancient Greece. Of the numerous works in behalf of Christianity that are ascribed to him, we possess merely his Stromata. Pedagogue, and Exhortation to the Greeks. Unfortunately his attachment to philosophy was such as to lead him into many and very great errors.() To these three are to be added Theophilus, bishop of Antioch, whose three boohs to Autolycus, in defence of the verity and dignity of the Christian religion, are still extant. Tatian, an Assyrian philosopher and orator, of whose numerous writings we possess no other than an Oration addressed to the Gentiles of his time, but which will not be found undeserving of perusal, even in the present day; and finally Athenagoras, a philosopher of no mean rank, and pr\u00e6fect of the Christian school of Alexandria, whose Apology for the Christians, and Treatise concerning the Resurrection, have both of them happily escaped the ravages of time.()
\nOf the Christian Latin writers of this century none of any name or value have reached our days except Tertullian, who was originally a lawyer, but afterwards became a presbyter of the church of Carthage. Much of ingenuity and acumen undoubtedly discovers itself in the various treatises of this author now extant, which are written partly in defence of the Christian religion against its enemies and corrupters; and partly with a view to the reformation of men\u2019s morals, and the lighting up within their bosoms a spirit of genuine godliness and piety; but they are all of them composed in a style, not only tumid and bombastic, but [p. 323.] beyond all measure obscure. The opinions, moreover, which they exhibit, are harsh, oftentimes uncertain, and not less foreign from reason than from the sacred writings. In fine, they plainly indicate him to have been a man of a credulous turn of mind, much addicted to severity, and possessed of more subtilty than solid learning.()<\/p>\n
XXXVIII. Rise and propagation of Christian sects. Judaizing Christians. Amidst this mixture of prosperous and untoward circumstances, and these endeavours, on the part of certain teachers, to render letters and philosophy instrumental in giving additional stability and recommendation to the cause of Christianity, the church most unhappily became divided into various factions and sects, which had for their authors and leaders a set of men who wished rather to take their own wisdom for a standard than to be guided by the words of Christ and his apostles. The first dissension of this nature that took place occurred amongst the Christians of Palestine under the reign of the emperor Hadrian. For when Jerusalem, which had begun in some measure to revive from its ashes, was finally razed to the foundation by this emperor, and the whole Jewish nation were rendered subject to laws of the most rigorous cast, the greatest part of the Christians inhabiting Palestine renounced the law of Moses, to which they [p. 325.] had before paid obedience, and placed themselves under the guidance of a leader named Marcus, who was not a Jew, but a stranger, and whom they appear to have selected for the express purpose of manifesting that they meant to have nothing in common with the Jews. Filled with indignation at this proceeding of their brethren, the rest of the Jewish converts, who still retained an immoderate attachment to the law of Moses, withdrew into that part of Palestine which is distinguished by the name of Per\u00e6a, and there established a peculiar church of their own, in which the ceremonial law was retained in all its ancient dignity. This church, which could, unquestionably, have been but a small one, never attained to any degree of celebrity, but, after having maintained its ground in Palestine for some centuries, began, not long after the age of Constantine the Great, to go back, and gradually dwindled away into nothing.()<\/p>\n
XXXIX. The Nazarenes and Ebionites. Insignificant, however, as these Judaizing Christians, comparatively, were in point of numbers, unanimity was not to be met with amongst them; for they were divided into two sects differing widely from each other in their tenets respecting Christ, and the necessity of obedience to the law, and possibly as to various other matters of opinion. Of these the one, namely, that of the Nazarenes, is not considered by ancient Christian writers as coming within the class of heretics; but the other, that of the Ebionites, is uniformly reckoned in the catalogue of those sects whose principles strike at the very fundamentals of the Christian faith. Neither of them adopted those accounts of our Blessed Savour\u2019s life which were held sacred by other Christians, but each had a peculiar gospel of its own, differing in severel respects from that which we regard as genuine.() By the Nazarenes,() our Blessed Saviour was considered, not only as having been generated of a virgin, but also as partaking, in a certain degree, of the divine nature.() The rites instituted by Moses, they regarded as still necessary to be observed by all Christians of the Hebrew race, but they did not exact a conformity to the Jewish law from such as were of a different origin: neither did they consider the additions that had been made to the Mosaic ritual at different times, by certain masters and doctors of the law, as deserving of any sort of respect, but treated them as things that ought to be either abolished or at least suffered to sink into oblivion.()<\/p>\n
XL. The Ebionites. The Ebionites, who derived their name either from some man, or from some particular fact or opinion,() were a sect of a much worse description than that of the Nazarenes. For in the first place, although they held our Savour Jesus Christ in great veneration as a divine legate or prophet, they would not admit that any miraculous circumstances attended his birth, but maintained that he was the natural son of Joseph and Mary, begotten according to that law by which all other mortals are produced. In the next place they not only observed the Mosaic law of ceremonies in all particulars themselves, but also insisted on its being requisite for every one who would obtain favour with God, to do the like. St. Paul, therefore, who had so strenuously exerted himself in demonstrating that no necessity existed for conforming to the Mosaic ritual, it may easily be believed, found but little favour with them. Lastly, they refused to give up even the superstitious appendages which had been added to the institutions of Moses by the Pharisees and doctors of the law.()<\/p>\n
XLI. Sects generated of the oriental philosophy. From [p. 333.] the insignificant and obscure sects which we have thus enumerated, unsupported as they were by any considerable degree either of talents or authority, the Christian church experienced comparatively but little detriment. By far the greater part of the ill-will and malignity which it had to encounter from without, as well as of the discord and dissensions by which it was internally distraeted and disturbed, is undoubtedly to be attributed to those who were for expounding the religion of Christ upon the principles of the oriental philosophy. During the first century these men can scarcely be said to have emerged from obscurity: they lived unnoticed, and the converts that they made were but few; but under the reign of Hadrian, the apostles, and the principal of their disciples being dead, they began to take courage, and by degrees succeeded in forming numerous congregations of their followers in various of the provinces; and indeed did not rest satisfied with merely instituting these associations, but left no means unessayed that might contribute either to their reputation, their stability, or their increase.() Under the banners of these new sects great numbers of Christians, who had previously entertained none but sound opinions, were tempted to enrol themselves, being seduced, in part by a fanatical kind of eloquence that characterised many of their leaders, in part by the very great show of piety exhibited by others, and in part by the prospect of being countenanced in living more at their ease and sinning without controul. A no less disastrous evil attending the rise of the Gnostics was, that both the Jews and the heathens, considering the disgraceful maxims and tenets of these sectaries as the genuine principles of Christianity, were led to regard the religion of the Gospel with increasing hatred and contempt: so that the Christian teachers were thenceforward necessarily compelled to employ a considerable portion of the time allotted to the establishment and propagation of the faith, in repressing the progress of Gnosticism, and in exposing, through the medium of writings and disputations, the insane pretensions and principles maintained by its abettors.()<\/p>\n
XLII. Gnostic sects. This business of arresting the progress of Gnosticism amongst the multitude, became every day a concern of still wider extent, and attended with increasing difficulties, in consequence of the numerous dissensions, disputes, and seperations that were continually taking place amongst the votaries of the oriental philosophy. For notwithstanding all of those who looked upon the Creator of the world as a different being from the Deity, may be considered as having commenced their career upon nearly one and the same set of principles, yet they had proceeded but a little way when, as many of them as preferred following their own judgment rather than any other man\u2019s, struck off into different paths, and not only gave to the philosophy which they had espoused a diversity of modification in itself, but also introduced variations in the manner of reconciling and connecting it with the Christian religion. Hence were generated [p. 335.] disagreements, disputations, and controversies, which soon gave rise to factions, parties, and sects that were continually at strife with each other. It is by no means easy to determine as to the number of these sects. There seems, indeed, to be but little hazard in our considering them as having been less numerous than they are represented by ancient authors; but at the same time it is certain, that the greatest discord prevailed amongst the Gnostics, and that the sects generated by this discord were not a few.() Owing to the inconsistency and obscurity of ancient authors, we find ourselves equally in the dark as to the precise time when either of these sects individually was formed, or the circumstances that attended its rise: but since it is certain that all of them, which attained to any degree of consequence or celebrity, were in a flourishing state so early as the middle of this century, it is not to be doubted but that the principal of them must have been instituted not long subsequent to its commencement.<\/p>\n
XLIII. The Elcesaites. In bringing some of the principal of these sects under review, we find our attention first called towards the Elcesaites, whose founder, according to Epiphanius, was a Jew named Elxai, who, under the reign of Trajan, so successfully ingratiated himself with a Jewish sect, named the Ossens, as to make converts of them all, and prevail on them, in a body, to adopt his errors. This man, although a Jew, and of course a worshipper of the one only true God, yet contrived to blend much of the superstitions of the east with the religion of his forefathers; and, amongst other things, protested altogether against the use of sacrifices; contending that the offering up of victims to the Deity was a practice to which the patriarchs of old were utter strangers. This circumstance, considering that in other respects he manifested a reverence for Moses, and adhered strictly to the Jewish ritual, seems to indicate his having belonged to the [p. 336.] sect of the Essenes, who pretended that the law of Moses ought not to be taken literally, but that there was a recondite system of morality concealed beneath its precepts. It is, however, not by any mean certain, as even Epiphanius himself allows, that the Elcesaites were a Christian sect. Elxai, it is true, in a book which Epiphanius had seen, speaks in a general way of Christ, and bestows on him very high encomiums; but nothing whatever is added from whence it can be ascertained whether or not he meant, under that title, to speak of Jesus of Nazareth. This certainly is not characteristic of a Christian; and I, therefore, for my own part, entertain not the least doubt but that the Elcesaites were a Jewish sect, and some branch of the Essenes.()<\/p>\n
XLIV. The philosophy of Saturninus. If the Elcesaites then be considered as not coming properly within the description of a Christian sect, we are certainly bound, in marshalling the leaders of the different Gnostic factions, to assign the first place to Saturninus of Antioch, whom the early Christian writers represent as having been a disciple of the Samaritan Menander: a circumstance which, though it cannot well be believed, must yet be allowed to possess no inconsiderable weight as an argument in favour of the antiquity of this sect.() This man, previously to his becoming a Christian, belonged to that class of philosophers who believed that, in addition to the Deity, of whom they pretended that no one had any knowledge, there had existed from all eternity a material principle intrinsically evil and corrupt, over which presided a certain governor or prince. This world, and the first parents of the human race, he supposed to have been created by seven angels, without the knowledge of the Supreme Deity. These seven spirits, there can be no doubt, were the same with those powerful genii begotten of God, whom the people of the east conceived to reside in and rule over the seven planets or moveable stars; for that such were the founders of this nether world, was an opinion entertained by various others of the Gnostics. The fabric of the world, when completed, did not appear displeasing in the sight of the Almighty, wherefore he breathed into man, who as yet was endowed with nothing beyond mere animal life, a rational soul; and having divided the newly-created world into seven districts, he permitted the seven angels by whom it had been fashioned, to assume the dominion thereof, reserving, however, to himself a supreme and irresistable command over the whole. One of these angels, Saturninus held to be the ruler of [p. 337.] the Hebrew nation, the being that brought them up out of the land of Egypt by the hand of Moses, and afterwards gave them a law, and whom the Jews, therefore, not knowing anything of the Supreme Deity, ignorantly paid their adoration to as God. To Satan, or the ruler who presided over matter, this creation of the world and the human race was in the highest degree displeasing; wherefore, being stimulated by hatred and emulation, he contrived to introduce upon earth, in opposition to the human beings on whom the Deity had bestowed a rational and virtuously disposed soul, another race of men, created by himself out of matter, and endowed with a malignant and irrational soul like his own.() Hence was generated that astonishing difference which is found to exist between the inhabitants of the earth; of whom some are of a sound and virtuously disposed mind, others of a radically vicious character, inclining to every thing that is evil. The former derived their body from the founders of this world, their soul from the Supreme Deity; the latter derived both body and soul from Satan, the governor of matter.() That all these things were devised by way of accounting for the existence of natural as well as moral evil, must be obvious to every one.<\/p>\n
XLV. The Saturninian system of theology. Upon his conversion to Christianity, Saturninus made it his endeavour to produce, as far as possible, a congruity between the religion that he had thus espoused and his former philosophical opinions. The way he took was to pretend that the founders and governors of the world had, after a certain period, rebelled against the Supreme Deity.() That in consequence of this, Christ, the Son of God, had descended from above and taken upon him a body, not indeed a true or real body composed of depraved matter, but merely the shadow or resemblance of one. That the cause or purpose for which [p. 340.] Christ came into the world, was, that he might overthrow, not only the dominion of the founders of the world, but also that of Satan, or the prince of matter, and his satellites: he was, moreover, to destroy those ministers of Satan, the men of his creation; and finally to liberate and bring back to God the good men, in whom existed a divine soul.() The moral discipline prescribed by Saturninus to his followers was rigid and austere. Regarding matter as inherently corrupt, and the body, therefore, as the seat of all vices, he enjoined an abstinence from wine, flesh, and every aliment that might tend to recruit or invigorate the corporeal frame; so that the body, being extenuated and brought low, the mind might, with the greater readiness and alacrity, perceive and worship the Supreme Deity. He was also averse to marriage, inasmuch as its object was the propagation of bodies.() In what way, or by what authorities Saturninus supported his tenets and doctrine, we are altogether uninformed. It appears however that the code of the Old Testament, which we know to have been held in reverence by the Gnostics, was rejected by him, on the ground of its having been compiled in part by the creators of the world, and in part by the prince of matter, or Satan.<\/p>\n
XLVI. The philosophy of Basilides. Nearly about the same time that Syria, and more particularly its chief city, Antioch, was infested and disturbed by the wild theories of Saturninus, an Alexandrian philosopher of a similar genius, named Basilides, was endeavouring to introduce amongst his countrymen and the inhabitants of the various provinces of Egypt another form of religion, differing widely from the principles entertained by the Christians at large.() His system took for its basis certain points which, in common with Saturninus and the rest of those who were addicted to the oriental philosophy, he assumed as indisputable; namely, that there had eternally existed a Deity of the very highest excellence; of a nature, in fact, beyond all human conception: that matter had also an eternal existence; that it was animated, and intrinsically corrupt; and from these premises it necessarily followed that the frame or machine of this world could not have been the work of the Deity, inasmuch as he was totally estranged from every thing evil.() The nature of the Deity, however, together with the origin of this world, and of the human race, was explained by him after a more diffuse and subtile man ner than by Saturninus, in consequence of his calling in the assistance of the Egyptian philosophy. His doctrine was, that the Deity had, long before the foundation of the world, begotten of himself seven natures of the most exalted kind; or, as the Gnostics termed them, \u00c6ons, who, together with the Deity, from whom they proceeded, constitute a perfect and supremely blessed Ogdoad,() Of these \u00c6ons two of the feminine sex, if any conclusion is to be drawn from their names, viz. Sophia and Dynamis, or Wisdom and Power, generated of themselves certain princes or angels of the first order. These latter having founded for themselves an habitation or heaven wherein to dwell, begat certain other angels of an order somewhat inferior to their own; who, in like manner, having constructed an heaven for themselves, became the parents of a third order of angels. These fabrications of heavens [p. 343.] and generations of angels, were by degrees multiplied to such an extent that they at length came to correspond with the number of the days in the year, no less than three hundred and sixty-five heavens, and as many different classes of angels, having been successively called into existence.() All these heavens were supposed to be under the dominion of a Supreme Lord, to whom Basilides gave the name of \u201cAbraxas;\u201d a title that should seem to have comprehended under it little more of mystery than this, that the Greek letters of which it is composed, if taken as numerals, will be found to express the number of the Basilidian heavens, viz. 365.() The last, or three hundred and sixty-fifth of these heavens, being situated immediately on the confines of eternal matter, the prince of those angels whose dwelling this nether heaven was, conceived the idea of digesting the confused mass that thus lay near him, and of forming it into a world, and replenishing it with inhabitants. This design he, with the assistance of the minor angels that were resident with him, at length carried into effect: but whether with or without the knowledge of the Supreme Deity is uncertain. Of this, however, we are left in no doubt, that Basilides did not conceive the form of this world and of mankind to have been first devised by these angels themselves, but that they worked after a model with which they had been supplied by Sophia, or Wisdom, one of the \u00c6ons.() The first of the human race, in addition to a body composed of matter, were possessed of a sensitive and concupiscent soul derived from the soul of the world. To this, through the benevolence of the Deity, was subsequently added an intelligent and rational soul, whose powers, however, were much impeded and diminished by that brutal soul which had been derived from mattor.() The angels who framed this world apportioned the government of it and its inhabitants amongst themselves in such a way as that each nation or people might have its peculiar president or ruler. The chief of these angels was represented as having made choice of the Jewish nation for himself, and given it a law by the mouth of his servant Moses.
\nA rule of life and action was also prescribed to the various other nations of the earth by the angels to whose guardianship and government they had been respectively assigned. Finally, with a view to the preservation of the rational souls, or those that were of a kindred to the Divine Nature, the Supreme Deity had, according to Basilides, at various times sent to the different nations of the world legates and prophets from himself, who, by their exhortations and instruction, might prevent those souls from sinking altogether into a state of brutal insensibility.() The souls that were attentive and paid obedience to the calls of these divine missionaries, were, upon the dissolution of the material body, received up into the regions of felicity; but those which rejected the proffered benevolence were constrained to migrate into other bodies, either of men or brute animals, and there to take up their residence until they should become qualified for reascending to their pristine blissful abodes.()<\/p>\n
XLVII. The Basilidian system of theology. When Basilides, overpowered by the divine lustre of Christianity, had been induced to enrol himself amongst the number of its votaries, he made it his study to bend and interpret its principles in such a way as that they might appear rather to support than to militate against these his philosophical tenets. The cause of Christ\u2019s advent he maintained to be the defection of the founders and governors of this world from the Supreme Deity, the contentions and wars amongst themselves, in which they were continually engaged, and the consequent utter depravity and miserable situation of the whole human race. Those eminently powerful genii, he asserted, who both created and govern the world, being endowed with the most perfect freedom of will, as to the choice of either good or evil, inclined by degrees to the latter, and endeavoured to root out and obliterate all knowledge of the true God, with a view to get themselves regarded and worshipped by mankind as gods in his stead. They then engaged in wars amongst themselves, each one striving to extend the sphere of his own power.() The president or ruler of the Jewish nation, in particular, the chief angel of the whole, aimed at nothing short of universal sovereignty, his efforts being directed to the entire subjugation of his associates, and the various regions of the earth over which they respectively resided. The consequences produced by this perturbed state of things were, that the true religion sunk into oblivion, men resigned themselves wholly to the dominion of depraved appetites and lusts, and every part of the earth groaned under an [p. 353.] accumulation of calamities, crimes, and wretchedness. Touched with compassion on beholding souls of a divine origin involved in so much misery and distress, the Supreme Deity directed his Son, that is Nus, the first of the seven \u00c6ons begotten of himself, to descend on earth for the purpose of putting an end to the dominion of these presiding angels, particularly that of their superlatively proud and arrogant chief whom the Jewish nation had learnt to venerate as a God. Having accomplished this, he was to revive amongst men the long lost knowledge of his father, and teach them to subdue the force of those turbulent and irregular appetites which war against the soul. Taking upon himself, therefore, the form and semblance of a man, but without assuming a real body, the son made his appearance amongst the Jews, and entered on the duties of the function that had thus been assigned him by his father, confirming the truth of his doctrine by miracles of the most stupendous nature. Enraged at this invasion of his dominion, the god of the Jews caused Christ to be apprehended and condemned to suffer death; but the latter, not being cloathed with a real body of his own, adopted that of Simon the Cyrenian, who had been compelled to bear his cross, and transferred his form to Simon; so that instead of Christ it was Simon the Cyrenian whom the Jews crucified.() The souls that paid obedience to the precepts and injunctions thus communicated to them from above, might expect, upon the dissolution of the body, to regain their original seats in the blissful mansions above; but those who neglected availing themselves of the proffered instruction, were destined to migrate into other bodies, either of men or brute animals, until their impurities should be wholly purged away. As for the body, a mass of corrupt and vitiated matter, no hope was to be entertained of its being ever restored to life again. Of the books of the Old Testament, which he conceived to have been composed, in part, by command of the prince of the Jewish nation, and in part at the instance of the other angels, Basilides could not, of course, have made any great account. What the books of the New Testament might be, of which he approved, is not at present known.
\nHe wrote a long explanatory comment indeed on the gospel, but whether the gospel, which he thus took upon him to expound, was one of those which we recognize as genuine, or a different one, is not altogether certain.()<\/p>\n
XLVIII. The moral doctrine of Basilides. The moral discipline prescribed by Basilides, although founded, in some degree, in superstition, and supported rather by vain and empty subtleties than any true or solid principles, yet held out no encouragement to the irregular appetites and vices of mankind. The soul, he maintained, was possessed of a sufficient power or energy to overcome every incitement to evil, internal as well as external; and consequently that no man could become wicked except through [p. 358.] his own fault. God, he asserted, would forgive no other offences but those which had been unknowingly and unwillingly committed, and considered even a propension or leaning towards any sin, in one and the same light with the actual commission of such sin. All this is so obviously repugnant to a licentious course of life and action, that it is impossible for us to place any faith in the accounts of those ancient authors who represent Basilides as having countenanced the utmost laxity of manners amongst his followers.() The unfavourable suspicions that were entertained by many respecting the nature of his moral discipline, appear to have been excited in part by the infamous lives led by some of his disciples,() and in part by the objectionable opinions which he maintained in regard to the lawfulness of concealing one\u2019s religion, of denying Christ in times of peril, of partaking of the flesh of victims offered to idols, of disparaging the estimation and authority of the martyrs, and peradventure as to various other points.() The Basilidian sect flourished for a considerable time, and had not become altogether extinct even so late as the fourth century.<\/p>\n
XLIX. The system of Carpocrates. Whatever might be the errors and depravity of Saturninus and Basilides, Alexandria produced nearly about the same time, in the person of Carpocrates, a character by far worse than either of these two, nay, a very monster of a man, if faith is to be placed in those accounts of his tenets and doctrine which are given us by ancient as well as more recent authors. To confess the truth, however, the more ancient writers have not only left us a very lame and unintelligible account of the Carpocratian system of discipline, but appear to have failed in arriving at any thing like a perfect comprehension of it themselves; nay, in some respects to have actually misrepresented it; whilst, at the same time, in regard to other particulars, they themselves seem to have been much misunderstood by more recent authors.() The philosophy of Carpocrates respecting the Deity, the world, and the nature of man, differed but little from the sentiments entertained on these subjects by the rest of those whom we commonly term Gnostics. He believed, for instance, that there existed a Deity supreme over every thing, and, in point of nature, infinitely beyond the reach of all human conprehension;\u2014that of this Deity had been generated certain \u00c6ons or immortal and immutable natures;\u2014that matter was eternal, and that it was the fountain or source of every thing evil and pernicious. He further held that the world had been founded by angels who, in point of nature, were far inferior to the Supreme [p. 362.] Being;\u2014that the rational souls of men had been sent down from the regions above into terrene bodies, as into a sort of prison;()\u2014that the founders of this world, after extinguishing amongst mankind every knowledge of the true and Supreme Deity, had arrogated to themselves the title and honours of gods, and endeavoured by every means to prevent the souls imprisoned in bodies of matter from understanding that there was any nature of a more excellent or perfect kind;\u2014that considerable assistance was afforded to them in this matter by a certain angel, malignant in his very nature; that is, the devil; whose study it is to draw over mankind from the true God to the prince of this world;\u2014that the souls who are so unfortunate as to be thus seduced by this evil angel, upon their being released by death from one body, are constrained to migrate into another, whilst such as successfully resist his wiles, and those of the founders of this world, ascend, on the dissolution of the body, to God the parent of all souls. All this has nothing in it at all incredible, and sufficiently accords with those principles on which the whole Gnostic philosophy was built.<\/p>\n
L. The Carpocratian theology. Ancient authors, however, leave us entirely in the dark as to the mode in which Carpocrates endeavoured to make the Christian religion accommodate itself to these principles. The doctrine he taught is commonly reported to have been that Jesus was begotten of Joseph and Mary, according to the ordinary law of nature; and that he was superior to the rest of mortals in no other respect than that of having a more excellent soul residing within him, and being endowed by the Deity with certain qualities and virtues by means whereof he was enabled to overcome the power of the founders of this world. But there is not wanting abundant cause for suspicion that, as to this, his tenets have been misrepresented; and that, in point of fact, he, like other Gnostics, made a distinction between the man Jesus and Christ, considering the latter as one of the \u00c6ons, and son of the Supreme Deity.() With regard to the cause, however, for which Christ was sent down by his Father to mankind, it is impossible, if his other tenets be duly considered, that Carpocrates could have believed it to have been any other than that he might abolish the worship of a plurality of gods: or to speak after the manner of the Gnostics, put an end to the dominion of the founders of this world; and after having excited in the souls that had long been languishing under the dominion of superstition, a wish to know and worship the Supreme Deity, might point out to them the way in which this knowledge of the True God would enable them to triumph over the wiles of the devil, as well as the power of the founders of this world, and qualify them for re-ascending, on the dissolution of the body, to their original stations in the realms of light.<\/p>\n
LI. The moral discipline of Carpocrates. All ancient writers concur in representing the moral discipline of Carpocrates as in the highest degree vile and pernicious, and the lives led by his followers as having consequently been gross, libidinous, and filthy in the extreme. Nor can we altogether withhold our credit from this: for it is certain that he countenanced a community of women, and inculcated several other things which had a manifest tendency to encourage men in various wicked and flagitious practices. There are not wanting, however, circumstances which incline us to believe that the inferences deduced from his tenets have not been in every instance correct, and that the turpitude of certain of his maxims was tempered and corrected by doctrine of a very different character and tendency contained in others.() Nor can I easily bring myself to believe what is handed down to us respecting a place amongst the gods having been assigned to his son Epiphanes by the inhabitants of the city of Sama, in the island of Cephalonia.() Like the rest of the Gnostics, he asserted that his tenets and doctrine were founded on the secret discipline communicated by Christ to a few only of his followers. Hence it is clear that he could have attached but little weight or authority to the sacred writings. He did not, however, reject them entirely, but seems in particular to have approved of the gospel according to St. Matthew.()<\/p>\n
LII. The system of Valentine. In fecundity of genius, however, extent of travels, reputation, number of disciples, and various other respects, the heretics whom we have just been commemorating were left at an infinite distance behind by Valentine, who, like them, was born in Egypt, but having at the commencement of this century originated a new system of discipline, and met with no little success in the propagation of it amongst his countrymen, was induced to transfer his abode to Rome.() In this city and its neighbourhood he prevailed on such a number of Christians to embrace his corrupt opinions, that the church became alarmed, and, after having been twice excommunicated without effect, he was at length absolutely and finally expelled from her bosom as a desperate and incorrigible heretic. Forsaking Italy, therefore, he withdrew to the island of Cyprus, where, laying aside all dissimulation, he became the parent of a sect, which in point of form and external observances differed in no material degree from other Christian assemblies; but in opinions and tenets retained scarcely any resemblance to them whatever. From this spot the sect soon widely diffused itself throughout Asia, Africa, and Europe. Valentine, it should seem probable, ended his days in Cyprus, somewhat about the middle of this century. It is reported that the idea of instituting a new sect first suggested itself to him in consequence of his having been disappointed in the attainment of the bishopric of I know not what city, and that his conduct ought rather to be ascribed to ambition than to error: but the history of his fortunes seems to give a complete contradiction to this.()<\/p>\n
LIII. The Valentinian \u00c6ons. The leading principles of the Valentinian system of discipline corresponded with those of the various other Gnostic sects;() nor did its founder attempt to disguise this, but was well contented that himself and his followers should be styled Gnostics. Being endowed by nature, however, with a genius most surprisingly prolific, he boldly ventured forth beyond the limits within which the rest of this tribe had deemed it expedient to confine themselves, and dilating on such topics as had been previously noticed by them merely in a general way, distributed them into parts, and, with the assistance of an inexhaustible imagination, endeavoured to fill up the intervals in such a way as effectually to meet the numerous difficulties with which he knew they were beset.() First, in the Pleroma, or that immense space refulgent [p. 374.] with unclouded light, which the Gnostics considered as the immediate habitation of the Deity, he placed thirty \u00c6ons, or natures of the highest dignity, of whom the one half were males, the other females. These, again, he divided into three orders of different degrees of excellence and power: an Ogdoad, a Decad, and a Duodecad. The Ogdoad, which possessed in many respects a superiority over the rest, and contained within it the causes and reasons of all things, he represented as made up of two Tetrads. The first of these Tetrads he stated to consist of the Deity himself, whom he termed Bythus and Propator, and his spouse, Ennoia (Thought), who was also occasionally styled Sig\u00e8 (Silence), together with their immediate offspring, Nus (Mind), and Aletheia (Truth). The second, which was somewhat inferior in point of dignity to the first, he represented as being composed of Logos (the Word), and Zo\u00eb (Life), Anthropos (Man), and Ecclesia (the Church). Of these latter four, he conceived the first two to have been generated of Nus and Aletheia, and in process of time to have become the parents of the second pair. The Decad, which followed next in succession to the Ogdoad, he considered as owing its existence, in the first instance, to Logos and Zo\u00eb. From these sprung Bythius and Mixis, who, in their turn, begat Ageratos and Henosis, from the union of whom again were produced Autophyes and Hedone, of whom were generated Acinetos and Syncrases, whose offspring, Monogenes and Macaria, terminated the Decad. For in these \u00c6ons the generative power was supposed gradually to diminish until it became quite extinct. From Anthropos and Ecclesia, the other branch of the second Tetrad, sprung that order or class of the celestial family to which the title of Duodecad was given, in consequence of its being composed of twelve \u00c6ons, the one half males, the other females. The first two of these were Paracletos and Pistis, of whose offspring, Patricos and Elpis, were generated Metricos and Agape. By the union of these latter again were produced Ainos and Synesis, of whom were begotten Ecclesiasticos and Macariotes, with whose offspring, Theletos and Sophia, who proved unfruitful, the Duodecad terminates.\u2014To these thirty \u00c6ons were added four others of a singular and extraordinary nature, to whom no female associates were assigned. Of these, the first, who was styled Horus, being placed by his parents, Bythus and Sig\u00e8, at the extreme limits of the Pleroma, kept a continual guard over its boundaries, and restrained the inferior \u00e6ons, lest possibly, being stimulated by an ambitious curiosity, they might be tempted to overleap their proper barrier, and be swallowed up in that immense ocean by which the Pleroma was supposed to be surrounded. Next after Horus came Christos (Christ), and Pneuma agion (the Holy Spirit), two unassociated \u00e6ons, whom Bythus, the father of all, through the channel of Monogenes, called into existence for the purpose of instructing and confining within the line of duty such other \u00e6ons as might be found wavering, or in any degree disposed to deviate therefrom. The last of this numerous spiritual family was Jesus, a most noble \u00e6on, produced by the united act [p. 375.] of all the other \u00e6ons, endowed by them with every gift and faculty of the most exalted kind, and constantly encompassed with a mighty host of angels as a guard.\u2014In this long and tiresome fable, it is scarcely possible to believe that there can be anything contained at all savouring either of wit, wisdom, or ingenuity: and all the pains which have hitherto been bestowed in endeavouring to reconcile these intricate reveries of a disordered brain with reason and truth, can only be regarded in the light of so much labour entirely thrown away.()<\/p>\n
LIV. The Valentinian theology. These \u00c6ons, although of divine origin, were yet supposed to be liable to the same passions and perturbations of mind as distract the human race.() All of them, for instance, are represented as being filled with envy at the distinguished felicity enjoyed by Nus, the chief son of the Deity, who alone was adequate to the full comprehension of his father\u2019s greatness, and all of them described as animated with the most ardent desire of attaining to a similar degree of knowledge, not one of them believing it beyond the reach of his capacity to arrive at a just conception of the transcendent majesty and excellence of the first great Parent. Inflamed beyond measure with this desire of fully comprehending the nature of the Supreme Deity, Sophia, or Wisdom, the youngest, and consequently the weakest of the \u00c6ons, became at length so agitated and perturbed, that, had she not been prevented by Horus, the guardian of the celestial boundaries, she would have overleaped the limits of the Pleroma, and plunged headlong into the vast ocean of matter that lay beyond it.() This violent commotion, however, was productive of an effect which it was utterly out of the power of Horus to prevent, namely, that Sophia was delivered of a daughter styled Achamoth, who, being expelled from the Pleroma, was immersed in the rude and chaotic mass of unformed matter which lay without it. With a view to prevent the other branches of his family from incurring any similar risk, Bythus, or the Supreme Being, by means of Nus, produced two new \u00c6ons, Christ and the Holy Spirit; of whom the former had it in command to instruct the celestial family that the immense greatness of the Deity could be comprehended only by Nus, or the First Begotten; whilst the latter was to exhort and persuade the \u00c6ons [p. 380.] to subdue, as far as possible, every irregular commotion of mind, and to make it their object to celebrate and worship their first great Parent with a tranquil spirit. Calmed and enlightened by the admonitions of these instructors and guides, the \u00c6ons unanimously resolved to give a different direction to their energies, and, uniting together their powers, produced, with the approbation, and in honour of the Supreme Father, the being styled Jesus, the most illustrious Star of the Pleroma.<\/p>\n
LV. The Valentinian theology. Scarcely were the internal peace and tranquillity of the celestial commonwealth thus re-established, when commotions of the most violent kind began to take place without its limits; commotions which eventually occasioned the formation of this world, and the generation of the human race. Achamoth, the daughter of the \u00c6on Sophia, upon being expelled from the Pleroma, lay at the first in a very miserable state, being utterly destitute of either form, figure, or light. Touched with her calamitous situation, Christ, who, as we have seen, was invested with the function of a governor and instructor of the \u00c6ons, in conjunction with the Holy Spirit, imparted to her somewhat of form, intelligence, and rationality. Aroused and stimulated by the assistance thus given her, Achamoth made a nearer advance to the Pleroma, and endeavoured to obtain for herself a larger portion of light. In her attempts at this, however, she found herself sedulously opposed by Horus, the ever-watchful guardian of the borders of the Pleroma; a circumstance [p. 381.] which threw her into the most violent perturbations, and overwhelmed her, as it were, with apprehension and anxiety. At one time, giving way to despondency, she would be dissolved in tears; at another, recollecting the light of which she had obtained a glimpse, her countenance would be illuminated with smiles. These different affections had a very wonderful influence on the barren and shapeless mass of matter with which she was surrounded, and eventually gave birth to the various elements of the universe. From the irresistible desire with which she was inflamed of obtaining further light, arose \u201cThe Soul of the World,\u201d \u201cThe Soul of Demiurgus,\u201d and the like; from her anxiety and sorrow, all other things. All liquid matter had its origin in her tears, all lucid matter in her smiles, all the elements of the world in her sorrows and despondency.() All the component parts of the world were therefore now supplied; but there was still wanting an architect who might reduce them into order, and knit them together in one grand whole. Addressing herself in supplication, therefore, to Christ, Achamoth obtained the favour of having Jesus, or the Saviour, sent to her, surrounded with his host of angels. With this assistance she produced three substances, the material, the animal, and the spiritual; on one of which, namely, the animal, she bestowed the gift of Form, a boon rejected by the other two; and hence sprung Demiurgus, the Founder and Governor of all things.()<\/p>\n
LVI. The Valentinian tenets respecting the creation. Demiurgus being thus generated of animal matter, undertook, without delay, the formation of the corporeal universe, a work in which he was privately assisted in part by Jesus, or the Saviour, and in part by his mother Achamoth. The course he pursued was, in the first place, to separate the animal matter from the material. Of the former, or the animal portion, he then formed certain celestial bodies, particularly seven heavens, by which, it is easy to perceive, were meant seven planets or wandering stars, which constituted places of residence for, and were governed by an equal number of the most powerful spirits or angels.() The supreme heaven Demiurgus reserved to himself, and assigned to his mother that space which separates the Pleroma from the world. The material portion, in consequence of its having originated from a three-fold source, namely, the apprehension, the sorrow, and the anxiety of Achamoth, was of a three-fold nature, and, under the plastic hand of Demiurgus, gave birth to three distinct genera of things. From that which was the fruit of Achamoth\u2019s apprehension or fear, were produced the various descriptions of animals; from the offspring of her sorrow the evil angels, of whom the principal one, that is, the devil, had his habitation in the air below Demiurgus; and from that which had flowed from her anxiety, the elements of the world, all of which had been tempered with fire. Man was compounded by Demiurgus of both substances, the material and the animal, and enveloped by him with an external, sensible body, as with a tunic or mantle. To these two constituent parts of man, a portion of the spiritual or celestial substance was added by Achamoth, the mother of Demiurgus, but entirely without the knowledge of her son. The outward corporeal frame of each individual man, therefore, was said, by ancient authors, to comprise, as it were, three men: 1st, The material man, who was incapable of salvation; 2dly, The animal man, who might be either saved or lost; and, 3dly, The spiritual man, who could never perish, having been generated of the celestial or divine substance.()<\/p>\n
LVII. The Valentiuian tenets respecting Christ. The Founder of the world, having perfected the work which he had undertaken, became at length so puffed up with arrogance and pride as to imagine that he himself was the only true God, and in consequence thereof, to arrogate to himself, by the mouths of divers prophets which he dispatched to the Jewish people, the honours due to the Supreme Deity. His example, as to this, being followed by his associates, the presidents or rulers of the celestial orbs, as well as by the minor angels, who were invested with dominion over the different parts of the universe, every knowledge of the real and only Supreme God was gradually obliterated from the minds of the human race, the generality of mortals resigning themselves wholly to the empire of their lusts, and turning a deaf ear to all the suggestions of reason.() With a view to the extrication of mankind from this deplorable state, Christ, who was compounded both of the animal and the spiritual substance, and was furnished, moreover, with a sensitive body, (composed, however, of ethereal matter,) descended from the regions above to this nether world, passing through the body of Mary, without contamination, as water does through a conduit. Upon the baptism of this celestial guest by John, in the waters of Jordan, Jesus, an \u00c6on of the highest order, descended on him in the form of a dove.() The divine man, thus constituted, immediately commenced, by means of discourses, miracles, and denunciations, a most vigorous attack on the tyranny of the founder of this world and his associates, whilst, at the same time, he re-instated mankind in the knowledge of the Supreme Deity, and instructed them as to the mode of bringing into subjection that soul which is the seat of sensual appetite and all our irregular desires. Enraged at these proceedings, the Founder of the World caused Christ to be apprehended and crucified. Previously, however, to his undergoing this punishment, not only the Divine Jesus, the Son of the Deity, but also the rational soul with which he had been animated, took their departure out of him and fled away. It was his sensitive soul alone, therefore, that in conjunction with his \u00e6ther\u00ebal body was affixed to the cross. Those mortals, who in obedience to the precepts of Christ, should renounce the worship of all false gods, the God of the Jews not excepted, and confining their adoration to the Supreme Father alone, should make [p. 385.] the sensitive and concupiscent soul submit itself to the castigation and emendatory discipline of right reason, would obtain salvation for their souls of both descriptions, which, on the dissolution of the body, would be transferred to the regions of unbounded space adjoining the Pleroma, and there be made partakers of everlasting joy and felicity. The sensitive souls of those, on the contrary, who should pursue an opposite course, and spurning at the controul of the rational soul, should persevere in upholding the cause of superstition, had no prospect whatever held out to them, but that of everlasting perdition.() When all those parts of the Divine nature, constituting what were termed celestial souls, should be delivered from the bondage of matter, and cleansed from all impurity, Achamoth would, it was asserted, pass into the Pleroma, and there be united with Jesus as with a husband; whilst Demiurgus would proceed to take up his abode in those regions of space contiguous to the Pleroma, which had previously been the habitation of his mother. The spiritual or celestial souls, at the same time taking leave of the sensitive souls, their former companions, would, in like manner, ascend into the Pleroma, and for the future be associated with the angels: whilst the sensitive souls, or those of inferior order, would continue to experience the highest degree of felicity in the region without the Pleroma, under the dominion of Demiurgus. Finally, the fire that had been originally distributed throughout every part of the universe, would burst forth from its concealment, and involving the whole machine of the world in flame, produce its utter destruction.() That Valentine should have encouraged, or even countenanced in his followers any thing like moral depravity, or a sinful and flagitious course of life, is altogether impossible; since his injunctions were that the inferior soul of man should always be made to yield obedience to the one that was superior, or, in other words, to right reason. We, at the same time, however, feel no difficulty whatever in so far giving credit to Iren\u00e6us, and other ancient writers, as to believe that certain of his disciples and followers might have led a very disgraceful course of life, and endeavoured, by a perversion of the precepts of their master, to supply themselves with an excuse for plunging into vice and every species of iniquity.()<\/p>\n
LVIII. Inferior sects that owed their origin to the Valentinian school. From the Valentinian school are said to have issued not a few founders of other sects, who, retaining the fundamental principles of their master\u2019s discipline, endeavoured, either by certain partial emendations or by a new exposition and arrangement, to improve upon the original plan, and communicate to it a more specious and imposing air. It should seem, however, not at all unlikely that the same thing which occurred in the ease of Simon Magus again took place with regard to Valentine; namely, that every one who professed sentiments bearing the least affinity or resemblance to his opinions was at once, without farther evidence, accounted to be of the number of his disciples. Amongst those who are thus reported to have derived the first rudiments of their discipline from Valentine, we may first mention Ptolemy, the founder of the sect of the Ptolemaites, a man of ingenuity and eloquence, who differed widely from the general body of the Valentinians in his tenets respecting the \u00c6ons, as well as in regard to some other points. His \u00c6ons are not only differently named and arranged from those of his reputed preceptor, but he appears likewise to have considered them merely in the light of divine attributes or virtues.() Far different were the sentiments of Secundus, who is commemorated by Iren\u00e6us as a very distinguished [p. 390.] disciple of the Valentinian school. According to him, the \u00c6ons were real substances or persons, and, what is particularly deserving of remark, he placed at the head of them two principles, light and darkness, a circumstance which plainly proves him to have borrowed more from the Oriental philosophy than his master had done, and also indicates in him somewhat of an inclination to the discipline of the Manichees.() A third disciple of the Valentinian school, not at all inferior to these in point of fame, indeed, rather their superior, was Heracleon, an author whom we find Clement of Alexandria and Origen repeatedly citing, for the purpose of exposing and confuting his errors. Whether Heracleon dissented in reality from Valentine, or merely in words and phrases, and if there was really a difference between them, in what such difference consisted, and what were the peculiar opinions or tenets of the former, are points which, in the present day, it will be found far from easy to determine.()<\/p>\n
LIX. Marcus and Colarbasus. Amongst the disciples of Valentine, we find ancient authors agree also in reckoning (though on what authority is uncertain) one Marcus, the founder of the sect of the Marcosians, and a Colarbasus, who was some how or other connected with this Marcus, either as an associate, a pupil, [p. 391.] or a preceptor. Of Colarbasus not much is handed down to us by either Iren\u00e6us or any other writer. What little they do say of him almost entirely respects his tenets concerning the \u00c6ons, whom, it appears, he distributed, named, and associated in a very different way from Valentine. To enter further, therefore, into the history of this man\u2019s opinions, would be only a waste of words. Concerning Marcus, however, many things are left us on record, particularly by Iren\u00e6us. Of these some may easily be reconciled with the principles of the Valentinian discipline, but others are entirely new, and at the same time exceedingly obscure, so much so, indeed, as scarcely to admit of explication.\u2014Amongst other<\/p>\n
LX. Bardesanes. Ancient writers are also agreed in reckoning, as the disciples of Valentine, (in addition to others, whom we deem it unnecessary to notice, inasmuch as they are scarcely known even by name at this day,) those two very celebrated characters, Bardesanes and Tatian, from both of whom the cause of Christianity derived no inconsiderable degree of benefit, although each of them became the parent of a new sect, and patronized several very important errors. In this, however, it is manifest that the authors to whom we allude must have laboured under a mistake, since the doctrine of Bardesanes, as well as that of Tatian, is very considerably removed from the Valentinian principles and discipline. Each had a manifest leaning to the Oriental opinions which were cherished by the Gnostics respecting the origin of all things, and more particularly evil; but by neither was the plan of the Gnostics adhered to in endeavouring to produce an accommodation between those tenets and the principles of Christianity. Bardesanes, who was born of Christian, parents at Edessa, in Mesopotamia, and appears to have been a man of very considerable talents and erudition, had, by his writings, acquired for himself no little degree of reputation under the reigns of the emperors Marcus Antoninus and Lucius Verus; but, having unluckily been induced to espouse the Oriental (or, as ancient writers term them, Valentinian) notions respecting the existence of two principles, he devoted himself for a while to the propagation of an erroneous doctrine; and, being possessed of great subtilty [p. 395.] and address, succeeded in gaining over numerous converts, from whence sprung the sect of the Bardesanists that flourished in Syria and the neighbouring regions.() After some time, indeed, he again embraced the orthodox faith, and became the determined opponent of certain of those errors of which he had formerly been the distinguished patron and defender; but the poison which he had imbibed was never thoroughly eradicated from his mind,() nor was he ever capable of healing the cruel wound which his conduct had given to the interests of Christianity. His doctrine was, that all things had originated from two principles: the one good, i. e. the Deity; the other evil, viz. the Prince and Governor of matter, which he held to be eternal and intrinsically corrupt. The formation of the world, and the creation of mankind, he ascribed to the supreme and superlatively excellent Deity; but a world of an infinitely better constitution than the one which we at present inhabit, and mankind of a nature vastly superior to that of the human race at this day.() The primitive world, according to Bardesanes, was entirely free from every species of evil; and man, as he came from the hands of his Maker, was compounded of a celestial mind joined to an a\u00ebrial or highly subtilized body. When the Prince or Governor of matter, however, had succeeded in seducing the innocent soul into sin; the Deity permitted him to go the further length of enveloping man with a dense and cumbrous body, composed of depraved matter; and, by way of punishing the human race for their defection, allowed this author of all evil to mar the fair face of the world, and despoil it of the greatest part of its beauty.() Hence the perpetual contention between reason and appetite, by which mankind are tormented in the present day; for the gross and corrupt material body with which man became thus invested is ever impelling the soul to acts of iniquity and sin. For the purpose of putting an end to this calamitous state of things, Jesus, according to this heresiarch, descended from the mansions above and assumed a corporeal frame; a frame, however, not at all resembling the bodies with which the human race are enveloped, but of a celestial and ethereal nature. It was, therefore, in appearance merely that this heavenly guest was brought forth, or that he ate, suffered, and underwent death; for that in reality he neither was born, nor did he die.() The doctrine which he represented Jesus as having taught, was that the souls of men should yield in nothing to the influence of the body, but be constantly striving to release themselves from the chains of vitiated matter. On the dissolution of the material body, the souls who had availed themselves of the instruction thus afforded them, would, he held, ascend, invested with their original bodies of ethereal mould, into the presence of the Supreme Deity; whilst the terrene and external body itself, which had, in fact, been the prison of the soul, and the origin or fountain of all its transgressions, would, he supposed, again be absorbed in the vast material mass from whence it had been taken, without the least hope of reviviscence or a future resurrection.<\/p>\n
LXI. Tatian. Tatian, who was a native of Assyria, and a man of considerable learning and talents, having, according to his own account,() from a perusal of the sacred writings, been led to entertain a favourable opinion of Christianity, betook himself to Rome, and there assiduously laboured in cultivating a more intimate acquaintance with its nature and principles under the tuition of the celebrated Justin Martyr. The latter having been called upon to lay down his life in the cause of his Divine master, Tatian at first opened a school in the city of Rome, but at length was induced to return to his native country, where, either on the instigation of his own mind, (for he was naturally of an austere disposition,) or, by the persuasion of others, he was led to embrace the tenets of those who, in expounding the principles of Christianity, called in the assistance of the Oriental philosophic notions respecting the Deity, matter, the world, and the human soul. The exact form of the religion which he invented, or otherwise [p. 398.] adopted, is not to be collected from any ancient writer.() Of this much, indeed, we are certain, that it must have possessed somewhat of the Valentinian cast, since, besides ascribing great honour to the \u00c6ons, we find that it recognized a distinction between the founder of the world and the Supreme Deity, and disclaimed the notion of Christ\u2019s having assumed a real body.() There can, therefore, be no difficulty in accounting for the circumstance of Tatian\u2019s having been regarded by many as a disciple of the Valentinian school. It is, however, equally certain, that as well in other things as in the precepts which relate to morality, the disagreement that existed between the system of Tatian and that of Valentine was far from, being either trifling or inconsiderable. Matter, for instance, being considered by the former as intrinsically evil, and the bodies of men consequently as not having been framed by the Deity, but as so many prisons of celestial souls, he willed his followers to abstain from propagating their species, and likewise from everything that might conduce either to the strengthening or recreation of their coporeal fabric; in other words, he commanded his disciples to avoid wedlock, to forego the use of animal food as well as of wine, and, leading a solitary life, to content themselves with a very moderate quantity of the most slight and meagre sustenance. To such an excess, indeed, were his regulations with regard to abstinence carried, that even in the celebration of the Lord\u2019s supper, he enjoined the use of water instead of wine.() This severe and melancholy system of discipline procured for his followers, of whom Tatian had soon to boast of great numbers in Syria, the people of which country naturally lean to an austerity of manners, and subsequently in other regions, the denominations of Encratites, or \u201cthe Continent;\u201d Hydroparastates, or \u201cWater Drinkers;\u201d Apotactites, or \u201cRenuntiants\u201d of this world\u2019s goods, and the like; although it was by no means unusual for them to be termed, in reference to the author of their sect, Tatianites, or Tatianists. A species of piety that wears an austere and rigid aspect being sure to make a considerable impression on the minds of people in general, it is not to be wondered at that this sect should have maintained its ground in various countries so low down as the fourth century, or, indeed, even later.()<\/p>\n
LXII. The Ophites. That I should enter into a history of the smaller and more obscure of the Gnostic sects, of which a numerous catalogue might easily be collected from ancient writers, will not, I take it for granted, be thought necessary; for, besides that nothing of any moment respecting them is to be met with on record, it should seem that ancient authors fell into the error of considering, as separate and distinct sects, what were merely members or branches of other sects; to say nothing of the occasion that was afforded for the mistaken multiplication of sects, by the practice that appears to have prevailed of frequently giving to an individual sect a great variety of denominations.() I cannot, however, omit taking notice of the Ophites, a sorry, infatuated set of men, on whose tenets Iren\u00e6us and other ancient writers have bestowed a much greater degree of attention than on those of many Other sects. With regard to the first rise of this sect, there are various considerations which will not permit us to doubt of its having had its origin amongst the Jews, or of its having existed long prior to the age of Christ. Struck with the magnitude and splendour of our blessed Saviour\u2019s miracles, a part of the Ophites were induced to acknowledge his divine authority, reserving to themselves, nevertheless, the liberty of making the religion which he promulgated conform itself to certain principles which they had previously adopted from the Egyptian and Oriental philosophy. The remainder of the sect, however, continued to cherish their ancient superstitions, and execrated the name of Christ in common with other Jews. Hence arose two descriptions of the Ophites, the one Jewish, the other Christian. The tenets of the latter embraced most of those vain fancies which were cherished by the other Gnostics of Egyptian origin, respecting the \u00c6ons; the eternity of matter; the creation of the world without the approbation or knowledge of the supreme Deity; the imprisonment, as it were, of souls within the body; the directors or rulers of the seven planets, or wandering stars; the tyranny exercised by Demiurgus, whom they termed Jaldaboth, and his associates, over celestial minds; the progress of souls ascending to the [p. 400.] Deity through the seven celestial orbs, and the means which Sophia, or Achamoth, had in contemplation for delivering them from the power of Demiurgus: they also held that Christ had descended from above, and joined himself to the most just and holy man, Jesus, for the purpose of overthrowing the dominion of the architect of this world; but that, upon the seizure of Jesus by the Jews, Christ withdrew himself, and returned to his station in the celestial regions. The difference, therefore, between these Ophites and the other Gnostics of Egyptian origin, as to things of any material moment, was but small. They had, however, one tenet peculiar to themselves, and to which they owed the appellation of Ophites, namely, that the serpent by whom our first parents were beguiled was not an enemy, but a friend to the human race; and that it was either Christ himself, or Sophia, who, under the disguise of a serpent\u2019s form, wished to overthrow the councils of the architect of this world, or Jaldaboth, and to accomplish the salvation of mankind. Under the influence of this strange persuasion, they are said to have nourished a number of living serpents, and paid them a sort of honorary worship.()<\/p>\n
LXIII. Cerdo and Marcion. Nearly about the same time that the Roman church was infested by the depraved opinions of Valentine, its tranquillity was further disturbed by the dissemination within its bosom of another system of heretical discipline that owed its origin to one Cerdo, a native of Syria; a system which, if we can depend on ancient authors for having given it to us entire, was certainly shorter, more simple, and, consequently, easier to be understood than that of Valentine, but built upon the same principles, and teeming with similar depravities.() With Cerdo was associated Marcion, the son of a bishop of Pontus, a man of genius and learning, as well as of distinguished gravity and moderation, who had, at an earlier period, when he resided in Asia, manifested his dissent from the established tenets of the church, and thereby, as it should seem, rendered himself an object of public censure.() On his arrival at Rome, Marcion appears, for a while, to have disguised his real sentiments with regard, to religion, under the hope of being able to obtain for himself some situation of dignity in the church; but having, in an unguarded moment, been led to disclose so much of the nature of his tenets as effectually to cut himself off from every expectation of this kind, (for he was so imprudent as, in familiar conversation with some of the Roman presbyters, to speak contemptuously of the books of the Old Testament, and the God of the Hebrews,) he at once threw off the mask, and, openly associating himself with Cerdo, devoted the remainder of his days to the establishment of a new sect in Italy, and various other provinces through which he travelled.() So eminently successful was he in the accomplishment of this object, that he left behind him a most numerous tribe of followers in almost every region of the earth, who, in spite of every effort that was made to subdue them, continued to maintain their ground down to the fifth, nay, even to the sixth century.() Of his disciples, Lucan or Lucian, Severus, Blastes, and others, but more particularly Apelles, are said, in some respects to have corrected the errors of their master, in others to have aggravated them, and to have become the authors of various new sects; but the accounts given of them by different writers, possess but little consistency, and seem not at all calculated to stand the test of severe examination.<\/p>\n
LXIV. The system of Marcion. Ancient writers vary considerably in their exposition of the discipline of Marcion. Their disagreement, however, is not so great as to prevent us from ascertaining, in a general way, what were his sentiments respecting the origin of all things, and the nature of Jesus Christ, whom he considered as having come into the world for the purpose of saving souls. In the first place, he, after the example of the Oriental philosophers, figured to himself two primary principles, from whence all things had proceeded: the one devoid of every thing evil, the other destitute of every kind of good; the former, the Prince of Light; the latter, the lord or governor of matter and darkness. Of these two deities, the best and most powerful not only begat of himself a number of immortal and immutable natures of different orders and degrees, but also laid the foundations of the superior or celestial world in which the stars hold their course. The Creator of this nether world and its inhabitants, he represented as holding a middle station between those two primary beings, considering him as an angel of divine origin, endowed with the most extensive powers, who had formed this visible universe and the human race out of corrupt and shapeless matter, against the consent of its prince or ruler, mingling, however, there with a considerable portion of celestial or \u00e6thereal matter, and uniting with the vitiated and mortal body a soul divine in its origin, and endowed with rationality.() This founder of the world was, according to Marcion, that Being whom the Jews worshipped as the Supreme Deity; the same that commissioned Moses, and gave to the Hebrew nation, through him, a law; a law not indeed positively evil, but imperfect, and suited to men who were ignorant of the Supreme Deity, and paid greater obedience to their own sensual appetites and inclinations than to the dictates of right reason. Between this parent of the material world, and the two above-mentioned eternal principles of all things, the chief point of difference appears to have been, that the former was looked upon as being neither positively good, nor yet as absolutely evil, but of a nature partaking of both, or, as Marcion expressed it, he was just.() For, by means of punishments and calamities, which the good Deity was from his nature incapable of inflicting, this middle Being took vengeance on all those who neglected his laws, whilst, on the other hand, he, with blessings and rewards, which it was not in the nature of the evil Deity to [p. 405.] confer, remunerated those who acted uprightly, and led a life agreeable to his commandments. Between him and the Lord or Governor of matter there was perpetual war; for, since in the creation of the world and the replenishing of it with inhabitants, he had invaded the province of this Prince of darkness, the latter, out of revenge, set himself to work with every possible degree of care and diligence, to seduce mankind from their allegiance to their maker, and bring them into subjection to himself. Those souls who suffered themselves to be led astray by the counsels of this deceiver, and paid obedience to his mandates, would, according to Marcion, on the dissolution of the body, be sent by the God of the Jews, the founder and legislator of the world, into a place of wo, where they would suffer inexpressible torments; whilst those who. in spite of every artifice, remained steady in their allegiance to their Creator, would, after death, be transferred into the regions of unbounded felicity and joy.()<\/p>\n
LXV. The tenets of Marcion respecting Christ. With a view to put an end to this war of the evil principle with the founder of the world, and, at the same time, to recall the souls that lay imprisoned within material bodies back to their true origin, the supreme and all-benevolent Deity, according to this heresiarch, sent down to the Jews a most excellent nature, nearly resembling himself, namely, his son Jesus Christ, investing him with no sort of body or material clothing, but merely with such a semblance or likeness of a body as might render him visible to human eyes.() The son, with a view to obtain for himself a more ready attention from the people to whom he was thus commissioned, pretended that he was the Christ, of whom their ancient prophets had sung, and demonstrated the truth of his legation by a variety of miraculous acts.() With respect to the nature of Christ\u2019s functions, Marcion held that he, in the first place, had it in command to revive amongst mankind the knowledge and worship of the supreme and only true God, and to overthrow, not only the kingdom of the Prince of Darkness, which had its foundation in, [p. 407.] and was upheld by superstition, but also the government and dominion of the founder of this world, or the God of the Jews; and, in the next place, he was to supply the souls endowed with reason with instruction as to the means whereby they might cleanse themselves from the contagion of the body and of matter, and render themselves worthy of attaining to everlasting felicity in the realms of light.\u2014Such being the objects of his mission, he was at once assailed with the united strength of the Prince of Darkness and the founder of this world. The latter, in particular, perceiving that no respect whatever was paid by Jesus to his law, and that his subjects were incited to sedition, procured him to be apprehended by his servants, and condemned to undergo the punishment of death; not being in the least aware that the person with whom he had to deal was the son of the supreme Deity. His expectations, however, were completely disappointed; for, as Jesus was not invested with a real body, it was impossible that he could be subjected to punishment, or die. Christ, however, permitted his imaginary body to be apparently punished, and deprived of life, by way of impressing on the minds of mortals, that the vile and corrupt body wherewith they are clothed, ought to be deemed unworthy of the least consideration by a wise and religious man.()\u2014Having executed his commission, here on earth, the Son of God, according to Marcion, descended into the infernal regions, and set at liberty all those souls whom the founder of the world had there condemned to the flames, in consequence of their having manifested a contempt for his law.()\u2014The rule of life prescribed by Marcion to his followers, is acknowledged, even by his adversaries, to have been severe in the extreme. Impressed with the belief that the soul was constantly in the greatest danger of being enervated and corrupted, through the influence of the material body by which it was enveloped, he particularly inculcated the necessity of bringing the latter into subjection, and recommended to his followers to avoid marriage. He also willed them to spurn the delights of sense, and content themselves with diet of a meagre, attenuating nature, such as bread, water, herbs, pulse, and fish.()<\/p>\n
LXVI. The heresy of Montanus. The various Commotions which thus arose out of the endeavour to bring about an accommodation between the Oriental philosophy and the Christian religion, although in themselves sufficiently afflictive, may be said to have prevailed rather without the confines of the church, and to have interfered but little with its internal state. By far more baneful and pernicious in their consequences, to the welfare of the Christian cause, were those disagreements and dissensions which, not long after, sprung up within the very bosom of the church itself, and amongst Christians who, in respect to the sum and substance of religion, were entirely agreed. Of this species of dissensions, the first entitled to notice is that which Montanus, under the reign of Marcus Aurelius, about the middle of this century, originated at Pepuza, an obscure, insignificant little village in Phrygia.() heresiarch, a man of low origin, and, as it should seem, not naturally inclined to evil, but of a [p. 411.] melancholic disposition and infirm judgment, in consequence of some morbid affection of the mind, became so disordered in his imagination as to conceive that the Holy Spirit, the Paraclete, or Comforter, by whom the apostles of our blessed Saviour had been animated, had, by divine appointment, descended upon him for the purpose of foretelling things of the greatest moment that were about to happen, and promulgating a better and more perfect discipline of life and morals than that which had been built upon the apostolic mandates.() Teeming, therefore, with this fancied inspiration, and bursting through every kind of rational restraint, he poured forth a multitude of prophecies, in which the Roman territory and government were threatened with calamities of the most grievous nature; and a severer rule of life and action was prescribed to mortals in the very words, as it was pretended, of the Deity himself.\u2014At the first, he so far succeeded as to prevail on many to believe that he was in reality the character which he wished to pass for, and to win over to his party, amongst several others of no mean rank, two opulent women named Priscilla and Maximilla, who, with others of his disciples, pretending, like their master, to the gift of prophcey, diffused his opinions within a short time throughout Asia, Africa, and some portion of Europe.() When people\u2019s minds, however, began in some degree to recover from the effect of this first impression, and these recently-divulged prophecies came to be scrutinized with proper calmness and attention, the imposture became apparent, and the bishops of Asia, after discussing the subject in certain of their councils, adopted the resolution of expelling Montanus, together with his friends and associates, from every sort of connection with the faithful. The example thus set by the Asiatic prelates was gradually followed by the other Christian bishops, so that the excommunication of the Montanists became at length universal. Cut off, therefore, from all intercourse with the general body of Christians, these heretics formed themselves into a peculiar church, the chief president over which had his residence at Pepuza, in Phrygia. This sect continued to flourish down to the fifth century, when it experienced some annoyance from imperial edicts;() and the list of its members was ennobled by not a few names, distinguished both for learning and genius, amongst which none claims a higher rank in point of celebrity than that of Tertullian, a man of great eminence, certainly, but beyond all measure rigid and austere, who, in several books written by him expressly on the subject, advocates, with considerable firmness and spirit, the cause of the sect under whose banners he had been induced to enlist.()<\/p>\n
LXVII. The errors of Montanus. With regard to the leading and generally-received notions of the Christians on the subject of religion, Montanus attempted no innovations of any moment;() nor were his moral precepts altogether new and unheard of, or of such a nature as to appear intolerable in the eyes of the Christians. For in the age in which he flourished there were not wanting, even amongst the more orthodox Christians, certain who publicly avowed their approbation of most of those points which constituted the leading features of the discipline which he inculcated: such as, that fasts ought to be multiplied and protracted; that second marriages were unbecoming in persons professing the religion of Christ; that the church ought not to extend its pardon to persons guilty of the more grievous sins; that all decoration of the body ought to be disregarded; that for women to array themselves in costly attire was repugnant to the injunctions of the apostles Paul and Peter; that the study of letters and philosophy tended rather to injure than promote the cause of religion and piety; that virgins ought to wear veils, lest they might awaken impure desires in persons beholding them; that it was not allowable for Christians in times of persecution to betray anything like timidity, or to adopt a prudential line of conduct; and, consequently, that it was incompatible with genuine Christian fortitude for persons, at such seasons, to endeavour to save themselves by flight, to redeem their lives by money, or to hold their meetings for the purposes of worship by stealth or in a private manner. Neither was any sort of stigma considered as attaching itself to those who defended such opinions, nor does it appear that they were on that account deemed the less worthy of being continued in communion with the faithful; indeed, by many they were even highly commended, and by others were looked upon with an increased degree of respect and veneration.()\u2014Notwithstanding, however, that the shades of difference between the doctrine of Montanus and that of other Christians as to most points were but trifling, very sufficient cause existed for expelling him from all communion with the faithful. For those things which had been merely propounded by others in a spirit of meekness, and without any detriment to Christian harmony and liberty, were arrogantly brought forward by him as oracles dictated by the Holy Spirit for the benefit of the universal church; whence it necessarily followed, that he must have regarded all those who refused to place implicit confidence in him and his female [p. 415.] associates as contemners of the Holy Spirit, and considered himself and his followers as constituting the only true church. This one circumstance of itself, without doubt, virtually separated him from the church, and amply justified the Catholic Christians in refusing any longer to hold communion with him and his associates.() In the prophecies, moreover, which were uttered by this heresiarch and his female companions, there was a tone which might well induce the Christians at large to avoid maintaining any sort of intercourse with him; for, since he announced the most disastrous fortunes as awaiting the human race, there was certainly reason to apprehend that the Christians, if they continued in association with him, might come to be regarded as enemies to the commonwealth.()<\/p>\n
LXVIII. Praxeas. Amongst the adversaries of [p. 425.] Montanus, none held a more distinguished place than Praxeas, a man of no mean reputation in the church, inasmuch as he had, on an occasion that involved his life in the utmost peril, manfully avowed his faith in Christ before a heathen tribunal, and on the same account undergone an imprisonment of no inconsiderable duration.() Having at a subsequent period, however, been led to engage zealously in the task of combating the erroneous doctrines of others, he unfortunately fell into an error himself respecting the Divine Nature and the Saviour of the human race, not at all less grievous than those with which he had undertaken to contend; for, by means of various arguments supported by passages drawn from the holy scriptures, he endeavoured to do away all distinction between the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit; and maintained that it was not some one divine Person, but the Father, the sole Creator of all things, that united himself with human nature in the person of Christ. Hence his followers came to be termed Monarchians and Patripassians.() Being detected in this error, and publicly accused thereof at Rome, he put on the appearance of concession, and in a recantation, which he wrote and published, professed his entire acquiescence in the catholic sentiments respecting the Divine Nature. Upon passing over afterwards into Africa, however, he again stood forth the avowed patron of the doctrine which he had abjured at Rome, and sought and obtained many adherents from amongst the people. It does not, however, appear that he became the parent of a particular sect.<\/p>\n
LXIX. Theodotus and Artemon. Just about the same period, or some short time before, the Catholic doctrine respecting Christ and the existence of three persons in the divine nature was assailed after a different manner by one Theodotus, who had passed over to Rome from Constantinople, and practised the art of a tanner, but was, notwithstanding, a man of no mean proficiency in letters.() This heresiarch denied altogether the divinity of Christ, refusing to acknowledge in him any other kind of personal excellence than that of his corporeal frame having been divinely begotten.() The same doctrine is said to have been maintained at Rome, either some short time before, or else within a little while after Theodotus, by one Artemas or Artemon, from whom the Artemonites took their denomination.() Towards the close of the century Theodotus was condemned by the Roman bishop Victor; and it should seem not unlikely that Artemon and his disciples were excommunicated by the same prelate.\u2014The notices that have reached us respecting these sects, both of which should seem to have quickly disappeared, are but scanty. The circumstance of all others most deserving of attention in respect to them is, that the Theodotians and Artemonites are said to have set a great value on philosophy and geometry, indeed more than well comported with a proper respect for religion and the sacred writings.() In truth, the principal fruit derived from the introduction of a taste for the Grecian philosophy amongst the Christians was, that by the application of its precepts to the mysteries of religion birth was given to a variety of opinions and disputes respecting the manner in which these latter ought to be understood.<\/p>\n
LXX. Hermogenes. A station in point of time somewhat prior to these last-mentioned corrupters of the Catholic doctrine respecting the divine nature and the Saviour of the human race, appears to belong to Hermogenes, a painter by profession, but at the same time a man of subtile genius, and a philosopher, whom we find denounced by Tertullian as a heretic of the first class, although he seems never to have become the parent of any particular sect, but to have passed the whole of his days in undisturbed communion with the church.() Hermogenes was a corrupter of the catholic doctrine respecting the origin of the world. For since he considered matter as the source or fountain of all evil, he felt it incumbent on him to deny that the Deity had created matter out of nothing.\u2014This involved him in the necessity of maintaining, that the matter of which God formed the world was eternal, although subject to his power.() Under the denomination of the world, he included not only corporeal substances but mind and spirit, which he considered as having been in like manner produced by the Deity from vicious and eternal matter.() As to any other points of Christian belief, he appears to have attempted no innovation whatever.()<\/p>\n
LXXI. Controversy respecting the Pascal observances. In addition to these numerous and great disputes, involving the very essentials of religion, there arose towards the close of this century, between the Christians of Asia Minor and those of other parts, particularly such as were of the Roman church, a violent contention respecting a matter that related merely to the form of religion or divine worship; a thing, in itself, truly of light moment, but in the opinion of the disputants, of very great importance. The affair was this. The Asiatic Christians were accustomed to celebrate their passover, that is the Pascal feast which it was, at this time, usual with the Christians to observe in commemoration of the institution of the Lord\u2019s Supper and the subsequent death of the Redeemer, on the fourteenth day of the first Jewish month; that is to say, at the same time when the Jews ate their Pascal lamb; occasioning thereby an interruption in the fast of the great week. This custom they stated themselves to have derived from the apostles Philip and John, as well as from many other characters of the very first eminence. But the rest of the Christians, as well in Asia as in Europe and Africa, deemed it irreligious to terminate the fast of the great week before the day-devoted to the commemoration of our Saviour\u2019s return to life, and therefore deferred the celebration of their passover, or pascal feast, until the night immediately preceding the anniversary of Christ\u2019s resurrection from the dead. And for their acting thus, the Roman Christians, in particular, alleged the authority of the apostles Paul and Peter.\u2014This difference gave birth to another of still greater moment. For as the Asiatic Christians always commemorated our Lord\u2019s return to life on the third day after their partaking of the Pascal supper, it was a circumstance liable to occur, and the which, no doubt, frequently did occur, that they kept the anniversary of Christ\u2019s resurrection, which afterwards acquired, and continues still to retain the denomination of Pascha or Easter, on a different day from the first day of the week, or [p. 436.] that which is commonly termed Sunday; whereas the other Christians, as well those of the East as of the West, made it a rule to hold their annual celebration of our blessed Saviour\u2019s triumph over the grave on no other day than that on which it actually occurred, namely, on the first day of the week.()<\/p>\n
LXXII. Termination of the Pascal Controversy. In the course of this century attempts were not unfrequently made to put an end to this dissension, which was found by sad experience to yield repeated occasion for unchristian-like wranglings and the most intricate and accrimonious disputes.() Under the reign of Antoninus Pius, in particular, about the middle of this century, a serious discussion of the affair took place at Rome between Anicetus, the bishop of that city, and Polycarp, the celebrated bishop of Smyrna.() But by no arguments whatever could the Christians of Asia be prevailed on to abandon their practice, which they considered as having been handed down to them by the apostle St. John. Impatient, therefore, of their pertinacity, it was towards the close of this century determined by Victor, bishop of Home, that these Asiatics should be dealt with after a more peremptory manner, and be compelled by certain laws and decrees to conform themselves to the rule observed by the greatest part of the Christian community. In this resolution he was supported by the voice of several councils that were called together in various provinces on the subject; and under the cover of their sanction, he addressed to the Asiatic bishops an imperious epistle, admonishing them no longer to persist in differing from other Christians as to their pascal observances.() Finding, however, that they were not in this way to be moved, but that they boldly addressed letters to the Roman church by Polycrates, bishop of Ephesus, in justification of their ancient practice, Victor proceeded to the further length of excluding them from his communion, or, in other words, he pronounced them altogether unworthy of being any longer considered by him and his church in the light of brethren.() This imprudent step might have been productive of the most serious detriment to the interests of Christianity, had not Iren\u00e6us, bishop of Lyons, in Gaul, interfered, and, although differing himself in opinion from the Asiatics, written letters to the bishop of Rome and the other prelates, pointing out, in the most forcible terms, the injustice of depriving of their rights, and pronouncing unworthy of the name of Christians, brethren, whose sentiments, with regard to religion itself, were strictly correct, and against whom no other matter of offence could be alleged than a diversity as to certain external rites and observances. The Asiatics also, in a long epistle which they circulated throughout the Christian world, took care to remove from themselves every suspicion of an attempt to corrupt the Catholic religion. A sort of compromise, therefore, took place with regard to those ritual differences, each party retaining its own peculiar opinions and usages, until the holding of the council of Nice, in the fourth century, when the custom of the Asiatics was altogether abolished.<\/p>\n
THE<\/p>\n
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY<\/p>\n
OF THE<\/p>\n
THIRD CENTURY<\/p>\n
\u00a7 I. Propagation of Christianity in Arabia. That the [p. 448.] limits of the Christian commonwealth were much extended during this century, no one hesitates to admit; but, in what manner, by whose instrumentality, and in what parts of the world, is not equally manifest, the ancient memorials having perished. While Demetrius ruled the Alexandrian church, over which he is said to have presided until the year 230, a certain Arabian chieftain, (that is, as I suppose, the head and leader of a tribe of those Arabs who live in tents, and have no fixed and permanent residence,) sent letters to this prelate, and to the prefect of Egypt, requesting that the celebrated Origen might be sent to him, to impart to him and his people a knowledge of Christianity. Origen, therefore, went among these Arabs; and, having soon dispatched the business of his mission, he returned to Alexandria.() He undoubtedly took with him from Alexandria several Christian disciples and teachers, whom he left with that people, as he himself could not be long absent from Alexandria.<\/p>\n
\u00a7 II. Propagation of Christianity among the Goths. To the Goths, a most warlike and ferocious people, dwelling in Moesia and Thrace, the wars they waged with various success against the Romans, during almost the whole of this century, produced this advantage, that they became friendly to Christian truth. For, in their incursions into Asia they captured and carried away several Christian priests, the sanctity of whose lives and manners, together with their miracles and prodigies, so affected the minds of the barbarians, that they avowed a willingness to [p. 449.] follow Christ, and called in additional teachers to instruct them.() There is, indeed, much evidence that what is here stated, must be understood only of a part of this race, and that no small portion of them remained for a long time afterwards addicted to the superstitions of their ancestors; yet, as in the next century Theophilus, a bishop of the Goths, was a subscriber to the decrees of the Nicene council,() there can be little doubt that quite a large church was gathered among this people in a short space of time.<\/p>\n
\u00a7 III. Christianity in Gaul, Germany, and Scotland. In Gaul a few small congregations of Christians were established by Asiatic teachers, in the preceding century. But in this century, during the reign of Decius, seven holy men, namely, Dionysius, Gatianus, Trophimus, Paulus, Saturninus, Martialis, and Stremonius, emigrated to this province, and, amidst various perils and hardships, established new churches at Paris, Tours, Arles, Narbonne, Toulouse, Limoges, and in Auvergne;() and their disciples, afterwards, gradually spread the knowledge of Divine truth over the whole of Gaul. With these seven men, some have associated others, but it is on authorities obscure and not to be relied on.() To the same age is now ascribed, by men of erudition, who are more eager for truth than for vain glory, the origin of the churches of Cologne, Treves, Metz, and other places in Germany; although the old tradition is, that the founders of these churches, Eucharius, Valerius, Maternus, Clemens, and others, were sent forth by the apostles themselves, in the first century; and there still are some who fondly adhere to these fables of their ancestors.() And, it must be confessed, that those have the best of the argument, who thus correct the old opinion respecting the origin of the German churches. The Scots, also, say that their country was enlightened with Christianity in this century; [p. 450.] which, although probable enough in itself considered, rests on proofs and arguments of no great force.()<\/p>\n
\u00a7 IV. Causes of the progress of Christianity. We give credence to the many and grave testimonies of the writers of those times, who cannot be suspected of either fraud or levity, that the successful progress of Christianity in this century was, in a great measure, attributable to divine interpositions, by various kinds of miracles, exciting the minds of the people, and moving them to abandon superstition.() Neither can we easily either reject altogether, or [p. 452.] seriously question what we find testified by the best men of the times, that God did, by dreams and visions, excite not a few among the thoughtless and the enemies of Christianity, so that they at once, and without solicitation, came forward and made a public profession of the Christian faith:() and their examples, without doubt, served to overcome the timidity, or the hesitation, or the indecision of many. And yet, I suppose, it will be no error to maintain, that causes merely human and ordinary, so operated on the minds of many as to lead them to embrace Christianity. For the earnest zeal of the Christians, to merit the good will of all men, even of their enemies; the unparalleled kindness to the poor, the afflicted, the indigent, to prisoners, and to the sick, which was peculiar to the church; the remarkable fortitude, gravity, and uprightness, which characterized their teachers; their unwearied assiduity in translating the Sacred Books into various languages, and publishing copies of them; their amazing indifference to all human things, to evils and sufferings, and even to death itself;\u2014all these, and other equally distinguishing traits of character, may, very justly, have induced many to admire and to embrace the religion of Christians, which produced and sustained so great virtues. And if, as I would by no means deny, pious frauds found a place among the causes of the propagation of Christianity in this century, yet, they unquestionably held a very inferior position, and were employed by only a few, and with very little, if any success.<\/p>\n
\u00a7 V. Persecution under Severus. This zeal of Christians [p. 453.] for extending and enlarging the church, was often much favored by the circumstances of the times. For, although they never enjoyed perfect security the laws against them being not repealed, and the people frequently demanding their condemnation, yet, under some of the Roman emperors of this century, their enemies, in most of the provinces, seemed to be quiet, and to dread the perils to which a legal prosecution exposed them. Still, seasons of the severest trial frequently occurred, and emperors, governors, and the people, disregarding the ancient edicts, came down as furiously upon the Christians as they would upon robbers: and these storms greatly impeded the work of extirpating the old superstitions. The commencement of this century was painfully adverse to the Christian cause. For, although Severus, the Roman emperor, was not personally hostile to Christians, yet, from the records of that age, still extant, it appears that, in nearly all the provinces, many Christians, either from the clamorous demands of the superstitious multitude, whom the priests excited, or by the authority of magistrates, who made the law of Trajan a cloak for their barbarity and injustice, were put to death in various forms of execution. To these evils, originating from various causes, the Christians themselves undoubtedly gave some impetus, by a practice which had for some time prevailed among them, with the approbation of the bishops, that of purchasing life and safety by paying money to the magistrates.() For the avaricious governors and magistrates would often assail the Christians, and direct some of the poorer ones to be put to death, in order to extort money from the more wealthy, and to enrich themselves with the treasures of the churches.<\/p>\n
\u00a7 VI. The Edict of Severus against conversions to. [p. 455.] Christianity. These evils were greatly augmented, when the emperor, in the year 203, for some cause not known, became somewhat differently disposed towards the Christians, and issued an edict, forbidding Roman citizens, under a severe penalty, from abandoning the religion of their fathers, and embracing Christianity. This law, although it opposed only the increase of the church, and affected only those recently converted, and those who wished to join the Christians after the publication of the law, yet afforded occasion for the adversaries of Christians to persecute and harass them at their pleasure; and especially because the ancient laws, and particularly that most vexatious one of Trajan,\u2014that persons accused, and refusing to confess, might be put to death,\u2014remained unrepealed, and in full force.() Hence, so great was the slaughter among Christians, especially of such as could not, or, from conscientious motives, would not redeem their lives with money, that some of their teachers supposed the coming of Antichrist to draw near. Among others, many of the Alexandrian Christians lost their lives for Christ, of whom was Leonidas, the father of Origen; and in Africa, the celebrated Christian females, Perpetua and Felicitas, whose Acta, illustrious monuments of antiquity, have been often published; and Potamiena, a virgin of Alexandria, and her mother, Marcella, with various others. Respecting the termination of this persecution, the ancient writers are silent; but, as it appears from reliable authorities, and especially from Tertullian, that the Christians were also persecuted in some places under Caracalla, the son of Severus, it seems to be judging correctly to suppose that the persecution did not cease till after the death of Severus.<\/p>\n
\u00a7 VII. The state of Christians under Caracalla and Heliogabalus. Severus, having died at York, in Britain, in the year 211, was succeeded by his son, Antoninus, surnamed Caracalla, who better deserved the title of tyrant than that of emperor. Yet, under him, the persecution which his father had excited against the Christians, gradually subsided:() and, during the six years of his reign, we do not learn that they endured any very great grievances. Whether this is ascribable to his good will towards Christians, or to other causes, does not sufficiently appear.() He being slain, after the short reign of Macrinus, who instigated the murder, the government of the Roman empire was assumed by Antoninus Elagabalus, a prince of the most abandoned character, and a monster of a man. Yet, he also, did nothing against the Christians.() After a reign of three years and nine months, he was slain, with his mother, Julia, in a military tumult at Rome; and Alexander Severus, the son of Mammaea, whom Elagabalus had adopted, and had constituted C\u00e6sar, was hailed emperor in the year 222, and proved to be a very mild and excellent prince.<\/p>\n
\u00a7 VIII. State of Christians under Alexander Severus. Under Alexander Severus, the Christians saw better times, than under any of the preceding emperors. The principal cause of their peace and tranquillity, was Julia Mamm\u00e6a, the emperor\u2019s mother, who influenced and guided her son; and, having the greatest respect for Christianity, once invited Origen, the celebrated Christian doctor, to visit the court, that she might profit by his instructions and conversation.() Yielding himself, therefore, wholly to the judgment and pleasure of his mother, Alexander not only adopted no measures adverse to the Christians, but he did not hesitate to show, by various tokens, his kind feelings towards them. And yet, if we examine carefully all the evidences of these his kind feelings, which history records, they do not appear sufficient to prove, that he regarded Christianity as more true or more excellent than other religions. If I can rightly judge, Alexander was one of those who supposed, that but one God was worshipped by all the nations, under different names, in differing modes and forms, and with diversity of rites. This opinion, it is well known, was held by many of the philosophers of that age, and particularly by the Platonists. And, if so, he would think, that the Christian mode of worshipping God might be tolerated as well as the others; and perhaps, also, he deemed it in some respects more consentaneous to reason than some of the others.() Yet his estimate of Christianity was not sufficient to lead him to abrogate the old laws against Christians, if it was true, as it seems to be, that in his reign, Ulpian collected all the laws enacted against the Christians, so that the Roman judges might understand how they were to proceed against them. And hence, perhaps, we must not regard as fictitious, all the examples of martyrdom endured by Christians under him, in one place and another, of which we find mention.()<\/p>\n
\u00a7 IX. The Persecution under Maximin. This tranquility of the Christians was disturbed by Maximin the Thracian, whom the soldiers created emperor, when Alexander Severus was slain, in the year 235. Maximin was actuated, not so much by [p. 468.] hatred of Christianity, as by fear, lest the Christians should seek to avenge the slaughter of their beloved Alexander; and he therefore did not order all Christians promiscuously to be executed, but only the bishops and doctors; hoping that when these were removed, the Christians, being deprived of their leaders and guides, would remain quiet and attempt nothing to his injury.() Perhaps also, the tyrant did not purpose the death of all Christian bishops, but only of those whom he had known to be the friends and intimates of Alexander. It is certain, that very few cases are recorded of bishops or doctors, who honored Christ by martyrdom, or by any severe sufferings, under this emperor.() We know, indeed, that in some of the provinces, during this reign, the sufferings and calamities of the Christians were more extensive, and reached all classes; but these extensive calamities are not to be traced to the emperor\u2019s edict, but either to insurrections of the populace, who regarded Christianity as the cause of their misfortunes, or to the injustice and cruelty of the governors. And hence, we readily agree with those who maintain, that the Christians were harrassed, in various places, during the whole three years reign of Maximin.()<\/p>\n
\u00a7 X. The tranquillity under Gordian and Philip. Maximin [p. 471.] being slain, by the African legions, in the year 238, Gordian, a mere boy, was created emperor; and, by means of his father-in-law, Misitheus, a man of great energy, he so conducted the government for six years, as to place the Christians in perfect safety. But, being unable to prevent the murder of Misitheus by Philip the Arabian, he was, the next year, himself slain by the same man, who had usurped the office of Pr\u00e6torian Pr\u00e6fect. From the year 244 this M. Julius Philip, with his son of the same name, as the C\u00e6sar, governed the Roman empire for almost five years, and showed himself exceedingly friendly to the Christians. From this fact arose the report, which was propagated in the subsequent ages with great unanimity among the writers, that both these Philips privately renounced the superstition of the futile gods, and embraced Christianity. But whether this report states a fact, or only a vulgar fable, originating from the kindness of the emperors towards Christians, has been disputed with great earnestness by the learned. Whoever will candidly and impartially weigh the arguments on both sides of the question, will see, that arguments are adduced by both parties, which, on examination, appear weak and powerless; and that there is nothing to fully settle the point, and compel us to accede to either party in the dispute.()<\/p>\n
[p. 477.] \u00a7 XI. The Persecution under Decius. Philip, after reigning five years, was slain in the year 249, and was succeeded by Decius Trajanus, a prince, in many respects commendable, but superstitious, and immoderately attached to the old Romish religion. He, in the very beginning of his reign, either from fear of the Christians, whom he knew to cherish the memory of Philip, or from the promptings of superstition,() issued terrible edicts against the Christians, commanding the governors and magistrates, on pain of incurring themselves the severest animadversions, to either wholly exterminate the Christians, or recover them to the service of the gods by tortures and the rack. From what is handed down to us respecting this persecution, it appears that it was conducted differently by those intrusted with its execution; some proceeding more violently, and some more gently; and this seems to prove, that the emperor, only in general, ordered the Christian worship to be suppressed, and the Christians forced to return to idolatry; but left the mode of proceeding, and the kinds and degree of punishment, to the discretion of the governors.() Very many lost their lives during this persecution, in all parts of the Roman empire, and among them the distinguished bishops of the larger cities, as Fabian of Rome, Babylas of Antioch, Alexander of Jerusalem, and many others. But, to the extreme grief of their pastors, vast numbers of Christians, preferring the enjoyments of this life more than religion, procured for themselves safety, by sacrifices or incense presented to idol gods, or by the purchase of certificates that they were idolaters. And hence arose the reproachful titles of Sacrificati, Thurificati, and Libellatici, denoting those guilty of these several forms of perfidy towards Christ.()<\/p>\n
\u00a7 XII. Contests respecting the Lapsed. This great multitude of apostates caused a large portion of the Christian community to be thrown into commotion; and here and there it produced inveterate contests. For while those persons wished to be reinstated in the church, without undergoing the long penances prescribed by the ecclesiastical laws; and some of the doctors, from a propensity towards lenity, favored that course; and others of a sterner mould, and more rigidly adhering to the ancient discipline, resisted it; parties very naturally arose among the Christians. Very many of the lapsed, especially in Egypt and Africa, () in order to obtain more readily a reconciliation with their bishops and churches, employed the martyrs to intercede for them. For, as the reputation and influence of martyrs and confessors among the early Christians were amazingly great, and their decisions were regarded as almost divine, it had become the custom, [p. 490.] even in the preceding century, () to admit to the communion those among the lapsed who could procure a testimonial of fraternal love from a martyr, on their exhibiting to him a few signs of contrition. Such testimonies from a martyr, signifying that he could forgive and hold fellowship with certain persons, were usually called Libelli Pacis. During this Decian persecution, some martyrs in Africa abused this prerogative immoderately; and some of the bishops and presbyters, either from fear or veneration of the martyrs, or from ignorance of ecclesiastical law, were too ready to receive the offenders who were provided with these certificates.() To the evils which were to be apprehended from this imprudence and ready acquiescence, Cyprian, the bishop of Carthage, placed himself in strong opposition. Being then absent from his church, he wrote Epistles, recommending that this lenity should be tempered with due severity, and that proper limits be set to the rule respecting the certificates of peace. And hence he became involved in a troublesome controversy with the martyrs, the confessors, the presbyters, the lapsed, and the people; but from it he came forth victorious.()<\/p>\n
\u00a7 XIII. Contest between Cyprian and Novatus. The controversy just described, was accompanied by another more trivial and limited in its nature, but, on account of its source and origin, greater and more formidable; for it arose from hatred and the indulgence of unrestrained passion; and it was protracted, and was conducted with an animosity, perhaps, greater than the case demanded, till it ended in a deplorable schism.() Novatus, a presbyter of Carthage, even prior to the persecution under Decius, had had disagreement with Cyprian, his bishop, for some cause not now known, and had drawn off some of the brethren from him; that is, he had persuaded them not to follow the demands of the bishop in everything.() If we give credit to his adversary\u2019s statements, Novatus was not only factious, vain, and rash, but also guilty of many offences and crimes. Cyprian, therefore, purposed to call him to a judicial trial, and to exclude [p. 498.] him from the communion of the church. And the day for his trial had been appointed, when, suddenly, the publication of the emperor\u2019s edict intervened; and, as it obliged Cyprian to betake himself to flight, Novatus remained safe in his former position.() This was the first act in this protracted drama.<\/p>\n
\u00a7 XIV. The Schism of Felicissimus at Carthage. After the departure of Cyprian, and so long as the African magistrates kept up a vigorous persecution of the Christians, these movements were dormant. But when the fury of the persecution gradually subsided, and Cyprian began to prepare for returning to his church, now fast recovering its former tranquillity, Novatus, doubtless, fearing that the returning bishop would revive the prosecution which he had commenced before his flight, deemed it necessary to organize a party which should obstruct the return of his adversary to his church, and thus to deprive him of the means of annoyance to himself.() And, therefore, by means of Felicissimus, the deacon whom he had ordained against the pleasure of the bishop, he drew off a portion of the church from Cyprian; and, particularly, with the aid of one Augendus, he resisted the regulations which Cyprian had sanctioned, in reference to the poor. To his party belonged, not only many of the people, but especially five presbyters, who had long indulged animosity towards Cyprian.() This turbulent faction were able to retard somewhat the return of Cyprian, but they could not frustrate it. Therefore, after a short delay, which prudence suggested, the bishop returned to Carthage, and assembling a council, principally on account of the lapsed, he began to repress the rashness of his adversaries; and he expelled Felicissimus, the author of the sedition, and the five presbyters, his associates, from the church. The ejected persons, unawed by this punishment, set up a new church at Carthage, in opposition to Cyprian\u2019s congregation, and placed over it, as bishop, Fortunatus, one of the five presbyters, whom Cyprian had excommunicated.() But this company had more courage than efficiency, and sinking into discord, seems, not long after, to have become extinct, for none of the ancients make mention of its progress.<\/p>\n
\u00a7 XV. The Schism of Novatian at Rome. Before the return of Cyprian from exile, Novatus, dreading the severity of the bishop, had retired to Rome; where discord and strife were no less prevalent than at Carthage. Novatian, one of the Roman presbyters, a learned, eloquent, and grave man, but rigid and austere, denied that any persons falling into the grosser sins, and especially the persons who had forsaken Christ in the Decian persecution, were to be received again to the church; and, perceiving that Cornelius, a man held in the highest estimation among the Romish presbyters, and also some others, differed from him on this subject, he made the most strenuous opposition to the election of Cornelius to succeed Fabian, as bishop of Rome.() From hatred, perhaps, of Cyprian, who was much attached to Cornelius, Novatus became an associate and co-adjutor of Novatian. Nevertheless, Cornelius was elected bishop, and Novatian withdrew from communion with him, and was followed, at the instigation of his friend, Novatus, by five presbyters, several of the confessors, and a portion of the people.() Both parties, by their letters, appealed to Cyprian; and he, after dispatching legates to Rome, and carefully examining the case, gave his decision in favor of Cornelius. And, on the other hand, Cornelius followed the example of Cyprian\u2019s fortitude; and, in a numerous council, which he assembled at Rome, in the year 251, procured the ejectment of Novatian and his adherents from the church, since nothing would persuade them to entertain milder sentiments in regard to the lapsed.() The issue of this affair was as unhappy as that of the African contest; and it was the more lamentable, on account of the long continuance of the evil, whereas the African schism was comparatively of short duration. Those whom Cornelius had excluded from the Romish church formed themselves into an associated body, over which they placed, as bishop, Novatian, the parent of the association. This new company of Christians, although detested by most of the bishops, who approved the decrees [p. 513.] of the Roman council, respecting the lapsed, enjoyed, nevertheless, staunch patrons, and was at once diffused through many parts of Christendom, and could not be suppressed before the fifth century. For this, its good fortune, it was indebted to the gravity and probity of the teachers who presided over it, and to the severity of its discipline, which tolerated no base characters, none guilty of the grosser sins.()<\/p>\n
\u00a7 XVI. The Novatian Doctrines. As to the Christian religion, generally, there was no disagreement between the Novatians and other Christians. But that which especially distinguished them from the great body of Christians was, that they denied a readmission into the church, to all who fell into the greater sins after baptism, and especially to those who, under the pressure of persecution, revolted from Christ and sacrificed to the gods: and yet they did not exclude these persons from all hope of eternal salvation.() In close connection with this doctrine was another, that they could not look upon a church as anything short of an assembly of unoffending persons; persons who, since they first entered the church, had not defiled themselves with any sin which could expose them to eternal death. And this error obliged them to regard all associations of Christians, that allowed great offenders to return to their communion, (that is, the greatest part of the Christian commonwealth,) as unworthy of the name of true churches, and destitute of the Holy Spirit; thus [p. 521.] arrogating to themselves alone, the appellation of a genuine and pure church. And this they ventured publicly to proclaim. For they assumed to themselves the name of Cathari (the Pure), thereby obviously stigmatizing all other Christians as impure and defiled; and they re-baptized the Christians who came over to them, thereby signifying that the baptisms of the churches from which they dissented were a vain and empty ceremony.() The other things reported concerning the faith of this sect, are either uncertain, or altogether incredible.<\/p>\n
\u00a7 XVII. The Persecution under Gallus. While these controversies among Christians were rife, in the year 251, Decius was slain, with his sons; and Gallus succeeded him in the government, with his son, Volusian. The year following, the persecution against the Christians, which had been less vigorously prosecuted during the last years of Decius, was renewed, either by [p. 528.] the publication of new edicts, or by the revival of the old ones; and again the Christians had to undergo many evils, in various provinces of the Roman empire, which, however, they seem to have endured with more fortitude than under Decius.() The fury of the people was augmented by the calamities with which the Roman empire was at the time much afflicted, and in particular by a pestilential disease, which carried off an immense number of persons in various parts of the country. For it was supposed that the gods inflicted these penalties on the nations on account of the Christians. This opinion occasioned Cyprian to write his tract, ad Demetrianum, in which he attempts to confute it.() This persecution ceased in the year 254, when Gallus and his son being slain at Interamnia, Valerian, and his son Gallienus, were placed at the head of the Roman empire; for Valerian immediately restored peace to the Christian world.<\/p>\n
\u00a7 XVIII. Disputes respecting the Baptisms of Heretics. This external tranquillity gave rise to internal conflicts among Christians. How persons should be treated who left heretical congregations, and came over to the Catholics, had never been determined by any general rules. Hence some, both in the East, and in Africa, and elsewhere, placed reclaimed heretics in the class of Catechumens; and, though already baptized, received [p. 534.] them into the church by a second baptism. But the greater part of the Europeans considered the baptisms of erroneous churches as conveying forgiveness of sins for Christ\u2019s sake, and therefore they received the heretics who came over to them, solely by the imposition of hands and prayers.() This difference of practice, however, had not hitherto prevented their having fraternal intercourse. The Asiatic Christians, in councils held at times not ascertained, in Iconium, Synnada, and other places, changed their former usage into an established law, by enacting, that all heretics coming over to the true church, should be purified by a second baptism. On learning this, Stephen, bishop of Rome, esteeming the other custom more sacred, and as being derived from the Apostles, excluded those oriental Christians from the communion of the Romish church, but not from the church universal. Nevertheless, Cyprian, after consultation with certain African bishops, in a council held at Carthage, assented to the oriental doctrine, to which many of the Africans had long been adherents; and this he signified, though modestly, to Stephen. But so offended was Stephen, that he not only gave Cyprian a severe reprimand, but when Cyprian replied with firmness, and by a unanimous vote in a second council at Carthage, pronounced the baptisms of all heretics destitute of any efficacy, Stephen declared him and the African bishops unworthy of the name of Brethren, and loaded them with severe reproaches. An end was put to this contest, partly by the prudence of the Africans, who were unwilling to render evil for evil, and partly by the death of Stephen, and the occurrence of a new persecution under Valerian; each party persevering in its opinions.()<\/p>\n
\u00a7 XIX. The Persecution under Valerian. After showing himself kind and indulgent towards the Christians until the fifth year of his reign, suddenly, by the persuasion of Macrianus, his bosom companion, a man of very high rank and reputation, but exceedingly superstitious, Valerian, in the year 257, changed his policy towards them, and ordered the governors of provinces [p. 548.] to inhibit the meetings of Christians, and to send their bishops and teachers into exile.() But these milder mandates rather animated than disheartened the Christians, who had been accustomed previously to greater evils. Therefore, in the following year he issued a much severer edict, in the execution of which the magistrates put to death no small number of Christians throughout the provinces of the Roman empire, and frequently inflicted on them punishments worse than death.() Eminent among those that fell in this persecution were Cyprian, the celebrated bishop of Carthage, who was beheaded; and Sixtus, the Romish prelate, who is said to have been crucified; and Laurence, the Roman deacon, famous among the martyrs, who is said to have been roasted to death on a slow fire: some, however, refer this last martyrdom to the Decian period. But Valerian being taken captive in a war with Sapor, king of Persia, his son Gallienus, by a rescript addressed to the provincial governors in the year 260, restored full peace to the Christians, after four years of suffering.() Yet they were not placed in entire security; for the ancient laws of the Emperors against them were not abrogated, and, therefore, such of the governors as were so disposed, could put those Christians to death who were regularly accused and acknowledged their faith, if they refused to sacrifice to the gods.()<\/p>\n
\u00a7 XX. Persecution under Aurelian. If, therefore, a few examples be excepted, of Christians put to death by governors who abused their power, the Christians enjoyed a good degree of tranquillity under Gallienus, who reigned eight years with his brother Valerian, and also under his successor Claudius, who reigned two years. () Aurelian, who succeeded Claudius in the year 270, although immoderately given to idolatry, and possessing a strong aversion to the Christians, yet devised no measures for their injury during four years.() But in the fifth year of his reign, either from his own superstition, or prompted by the superstition of others, he prepared to persecute them:() and, had he lived, so cruel and ferocious was his disposition, and so much was he influenced by the priests and the admirers of the gods, that this persecution would have been more cruel than any of the preceding. But before his new edicts had reached all the provinces, and when he was in Thrace, in the year 275, he was assassinated by the instigation of Mnestheus, whom he had threatened to punish. And, therefore, only a few Christians suffered for their piety under him.()<\/p>\n
\u00a7 XXI. Efforts of the Philosophers against the Christians. While the emperors and magistrates were striving to subvert the Christian commonwealth by means of laws and punishments, it was assailed with craft and subtly, during this whole century, by the philosophers of the Ammonian school; who assumed the name of Platonists, extended their discipline over nearly all the Roman empire, and gradually obscured the glory of all the other sects. For, as most of the people who cultivated piety and virtue, [p. 561.] more readily repaired to the Christians than to the schools of the Philosophers, and many went also from the schools of the Platonists themselves,() they were induced to resist to the utmost a sect which threatened ruin to their prosperity and fame. Hence Porphyry, a Syrian or Tyrian, the coryph\u00e6us of the Platonist sect in this century, (according to Plotinus,) a man distinguished for his subtlety and acuteness, composed a long treatise against the Christians; which, it is to be regretted, the laws of the Christian emperors have caused to disappear: for the few fragments of it still remaining, show that Porphyry was no very formidable adversary.() Others of this sect adopted into their creed the best and most sublime precepts of Christianity, and especially those relating to piety and morality, so that they might appear to teach religion and virtue with as much purity and sanctity as the Christians. Others, again, in order to weaken the Christians\u2019 argument from the life and miracles of the Saviour, labored to show, that among the more devout worshippers of the gods, there had been men not inferior, and perhaps actually superior, to Jesus Christ, both in their origin and virtue, and in the number and magnitude of their miracles; and for this purpose they drew up the lives of Archytas of Tarentum, Pythagoras, Apollonius Tyan\u00e6us, and other men of great fame; and, stuffing these biographies with silly fables, they put them into the hands of the common people.() The men of this class did not revile Jesus Christ, nor deny that the precepts which the Christians taught as coming from him, were, for the most part, excellent and commendable, but they devised a sort of harmony of all religions, or a universal religion, which might embrace the Christian among the rest. This plan, which was contrived by Ammonius, the founder of the sect, required the admission of only so much of the Christian system as was not utterly repugnant to idolatry, or to the ancient popular religions.<\/p>\n
\u00a7 XXII. The First Movements of Diocletian. Diocletian was advanced to the government of the empire A. D. 284; and being by [p. 564.] nature more inclined to clemency than to cruelty, he suffered the Christians to live in tranquillity, and to propagate their religion without restraint. But in the subsequent year, 285, he took for his colleague in the government Maximian Herculius, a man who is represented as most inveterately hostile to the Christians, and as having punished many of them, both in Gaul and at Rome, with extreme rigor; nay, as having put to death the whole Theb\u00e6an legion, composed of Christians, because they refused to sacrifice to the gods at the Leman lake. I say, he is so represented; for the alleged examples and proofs of such atrocity are not of so high authority that they cannot be called in question and invalidated.() It is more certain that, near the end of the century, Maximian Galerius, (whom the two emperors had created a C\u00e6sar, together with Constantius Chlorus, in the year 292,) persecuted both the ministers of his palace and the soldiers, who professed Christianity, removing some of them from office, harassing others with reproaches and insults, and even causing some to be put to death.() But this hatred of Galerius, because it did not reach very far, and seemed to be tolerated rather than approved by the two emperors, did not prevent the daily advance of the Christian cause; and the Christians, rendered secure by long-continued peace, deviated sadly from the primitive sanctity and piety. ()<\/p>\n
\u00a7 XXIII. Constitution and Government of the Church. The form or Constitution of the Christian church, which had been introduced in the preceding century, not only continued, for the most part, to exist in this century, but became confirmed and strengthened. Over the individual congregations of the larger cities, one person presided, with dignity and authority, entitled the Bishop; but he was allowed to decide nothing in private matters, without taking counsel with the Presbyters; and nothing in public matters pertaining to the whole church, without assembling and consulting the people.() All Bishops, as well as all Presbyters, were perfectly equal in rank and authority; yet, for keeping up the consociation of the churches, the Bishop who governed the congregation in the principal city of a province, was entitled to some precedence and honor above the others. And the necessity for this regulation became greater, as councils were more frequently called together throughout the Christian commonwealth, in which the representatives of the churches deliberated and established rules for the common welfare of the whole province, or of several provinces. The cause which led one Bishop in a province to have a sort of pre\u00ebminence over the rest, also procured a primacy and some authority for the Bishops of the primary cities in Asia, Africa, and Europe; among whom, unquestionably, the first place was assigned to the Bishop of the city of Rome. But as for any common judge of the whole church, or a Bishop of Bishops, performing the functions of a vicegerent of Christ, those times knew nothing of it.() To the Deacons, in the larger and more opulent churches, there were [p. 575.] added functionaries of lower rank, Subdeacons, Acolythists, Janitors, Lectors, and Exorcists; in consequence, as I apprehend, of the fastidiousness and pride of the Deacons, who, finding themselves in greater affluence, were unwilling to discharge the humble offices which they had previously never declined.()<\/p>\n
\u00a7 XXIV. The Prerogatives and Powers of the Bishops much enlarged. Although the ancient and venerable form of church government which was sanctioned by the Apostles, might seem in general to remain undisturbed, yet it was gradually deflected more and more from the ancient model, and, in the larger congregations especially, assumed the nature of a monarchical government. For, as is common in human affairs, the bishops, who presided over the congregations, arrogated to themselves much more dignity and authority than they had before possessed, and the ancient rights, not only of the people but also of the presbyters, they first abridged, and then wholly subverted, directing all the affairs of their communities according to their own pleasure. And, lest this should appear to be done rashly and wrongfully, they devised and set forth new doctrines respecting the church and the office and authority of bishops, which they seem not to have fully understood themselves. In this business, Cyprian was an example to his brethren in this century; for, being himself a bishop, and, as cannot be denied, of an aspiring and ambitious disposition, he contended most strenuously for the [p. 588.] honor and the power of bishops, and, lest those prerogatives, which he thought belonged to them, should in any measure be wrested from them, he labored to establish them on stable and immoveable foundations. And, as the influence of this man, both while he lived and after his decease, was very remarkable, and such that he might almost be called the common master and guide, his inventions for establishing the dignity and power of bishops, without any difficulty, spread through the church universal, and were received with implicit faith.()<\/p>\n
\u00a7 XXV. The Morals of the Clergy. Many complaints occur here and there in the writers of this century, of the corrupt morals of the clergy; and these complaints cannot be supposed to be vain and groundless: and yet splendid examples of primitive integrity and sanctity are frequently to be seen, both among the bishops and among the presbyters and deacons; examples well adapted to impress the human mind, and to exhibit the power of religion. Bad men were therefore commingled with the good; and those deserve not our confidence, who, as many in fact do, would measure the happiness of this age by the examples of either of these descriptions.() I will therefore only observe, that the growing errors among Christians, respecting the nature of true piety, had such influence on not a few of the ministers of religion, that by striving to obtain a reputation for sanctity, they brought upon themselves disgrace and a suspicion of criminal conduct. A striking example of this is afforded by those in Africa, and perhaps also in other provinces of the East, who received into their houses females who had vowed perpetual chastity, and even made them partakers of their bed, at the same time most solemnly protesting that nothing occurred incompatible with modesty. For, extravagant ideas of the sanctity of celibacy having grown up, and consequently those among the priests being regarded as most venerable, and the most acceptable before God, who had no wives, many wished so to consult their reputation, as still to retain a measure of social comforts and enjoyments. The bishops, by their exhortations and precepts, resisted this custom, which was very offensive to the people: but, so very powerful is every thing which favors our natural instincts, that this practice could not be wholly exterminated, either in this century or the next.()<\/p>\n
\u00a7 XXVI. Christian Writers of this Century. Among those who superintended and managed the affairs of the church, there were doubtless more learned and well-informed men than in the previous centuries. For many from the different sects of philosophers, especially from the Platonists, and also from among the rhetoricians, embraced Christianity; and they were honored for their [p. 601.] erudition and talents by being made bishops and presbyters. The Christians likewise perceived, that their cause needed the support of learning and human science, and therefore took pains to have the youth of the church instructed in sound learning and philosophy. And yet it is well attested, and not to be denied, that many illiterate and ignorant men presided over the churches, in numerous places, and that human learning was not yet considered as an indispensable qualification of a good bishop and teacher. For, not to mention the paucity of schools in which candidates for the sacred office might be educated, and the consequent scarcity of the learned men, the opinion was too deeply fixed in many minds to be at all eradicated, that learning and philosophy were prejudicial rather than advantageous to piety, and should therefore be excluded from the church.() And hence, only a few Christians in this age obtained permanent notoriety, by their writings. Among those who wrote in Greek, the most eminent was Origen, who presided in the school of Alexandria, a man of indefatigable industry, and equalled by few in learning and genius, but of whose works the greatest and best part are lost, and a part are preserved only in Latin. Inferior to him in fame and reputation, but not, I think, in solid worth and genius, were Julius Africanus, Dionysius of Alexandria, and Hippolytus, most of whose writings have unfortunately not been preserved. Eminent among the disciples of Origen, was Gregory, bishop of Neoc\u00e6saria, more famous for the numerous miracles said to have been wrought by him, and from which he obtained the surname of Thaumaturgus, than for his writings.()\u2014Among the Latins, only three deserve our notice: Cyprian, first a rhetorician, and then bishop of Carthage, a man, like most Africans, possessing eloquence, but at the same time tumid, and more splendid in his words and phrases than in his conceptions; Minucius Felix, from whose pen we have a neat and elegant dialogue, entitled Octavius, in which he skilfully recounts and nervously confutes the calumnies then charged upon Christians; and Arnobius, an African rhetorician, who strenuously defended the cause of Christianity against its opposers, and often with ingenuity, in his Libri septem contra Gentes: but he shows himself to be not well acquainted with the religion which he defends.()<\/p>\n
\u00a7 XXVII. Philosophising Theologians. Origen. The philosophising teachers of Christianity frequently resorted to what they regarded as the dictates of reason, in order to explain and elucidate those religious doctrines which appeared to lack precision and clearness, so that the harmony of human and divine wisdom might be manifest. The result was, that the ancient simplicity, which received without comment whatever was divinely inculcated, became less esteemed, the subtilties of human device became mixed up with the divine instructions, and contentions and disagreements arose respecting the nature of certain mysteries. In the western regions, indeed, this practice of commingling human and divine views made slower progress; and the Latin theologians of this century were still sufficiently cautious in their explications of the scriptural doctrines, except perhaps Arnobius, who began to write when but slightly acquainted with the principles of religion, and treated them rhetorically rather than philosophically. But among the theologians of Asia and Africa, we more frequently meet with such as ventured to explore the internal nature and the recondite grounds of scriptural doctrines, either for the gratification of curiosity, or for the purpose of confuting heretics and the opposers of Christianity. Among these the Alexandrian doctors of Egypt were pre\u00ebminent, they having, in the preceding century, conceded to philosophy some authority in matters of religion. At the head of these doctors stood Origen, the master of the school at Alexandria, a man distinguished for genius, learning, virtue and usefulness. In his [p. 605.] Libri de principiis, still extant in a Latin translation, and in his Stromata, which are lost, he attempted formally to demonstrate the harmony between philosophy and Christianity; and he endeavored to reconcile with the principles of reason whatever appeared strange and incredible in the Christian faith. And yet Origen himself,\u2014and it greatly diminishes his fault,\u2014treated this slippery and hazardous business with becoming prudence and modesty, and he repeatedly stated, that he timidly proposed conjectures, rather than inculcated and decided positively. But his disciples, who were very numerous, followed the speculations of their teacher, too confidently, and not unfrequently they put forth as certainties, what he had only stated as probabilities, and which he requested wise men to examine more profoundly.()<\/p>\n
\u00a7 XXVIII. Origen\u2019s allegorical expositions. Origen\u2019s new method of explaining and illustrating religious truths by means of philosophy, required also a new method of expounding the sacred Scriptures. For, meeting with many things in the Scriptures repugnant to the decisions of his philosophy, he deemed it necessary to devise some method of removing this disagreement. And as it would add confirmation to his opinions, if he could make it appear that they were supported by the authority of Scripture, some plausible way was to be devised which [p. 630.] should make his speculations appear to be taught in the holy oracles. Therefore, taking up the ancient doctrine of the Pharisees and Essenes, which also he had learned from his preceptor, Clement, namely, that of a double sense in holy Scripture, he amplified and adorned it so ingeniously that it afforded him ample means of bending the sense of Scripture to suit his purpose, and eliminating from the Bible whatever was repugnant to his favorite opinions.() Yet strange as it may appear, this same Origen,\u2014who had offered so much violence to the sacred books, and almost subverted their true meaning,\u2014resolutely undertook and most patiently accomplished an incredible labor in aid of those who wish to investigate the literal sense of scripture, and thus produced an enduring monument of his industry, in what is called his Hexapla. And so, frequently, those who disagree with every body, also disagree with themselves; and having magnificently extolled something, are found tacitly disapproving and censuring it.()<\/p>\n
\u00a7 XXIX. Origen and Mystic Theology. This Origen, who was the chief corrupter of Christianity by philosophical speculations, and who introduced the fictions of his own mind into the holy scriptures, did likewise, by his precepts respecting the origin of the soul, and its self-determination in action, give encouragement and support to that unsocial class of men who strive to withdraw their minds from all sensible and material objects, and to associate themselves with the divine nature by contemplation. At least, this is a fact, that after his writings began to circulate among Christians, and his opinions to be lauded, embraced, and propagated, far greater numbers than before gave up all worldly business and cares, to increase their piety; and, in order to behold God mentally, resolved to retire into solitary places, expecting, by concentrated meditation and by the mortification of their bodies, to obtain spiritual freedom and complete tranquillity of mind.() And, perhaps, the famous Paul of Thebais, who, to save his life during the Decian persecution, is reported to have fled into the deserts, and there to have lived to extreme old age, [p. 659.] and who was accounted the leader and father of the Eremites,\u2014chose, on the termination of the persecution, not to return to social life, but to spend all his days among wild beasts, for this reason, that he might purge out of his mind all images of sensible things, and bind it to God by indissoluble ties.()<\/p>\n
\u00a7 XXX. Origen\u2019s Controversies with his Bishop. That the author of so many new and singular opinions should have been assailed and harassed by the criminations and reproaches of many, is not at all strange. And Origen himself, in his writings yet extant, complains bitterly of the malice, the machinations, and the abuse of his adversaries; some of whom condemned his philosophical explanations of Christian doctrines, and others assailed his rules for interpreting the scriptures. Yet his great merits, his blameless life, and the high reputation he had everywhere gained, might have overcome all this opposition, if he had not incurred the displeasure and hatred of his patron, Demetrius, the bishop of Alexandria. The cause of this enmity it is at this day difficult to trace; nor is the generally reported envy of Demetrius free from all doubts, while its effects are most manifest. [p. 671.] For Demetrius compelled Origen to flee his country, and in two councils convened at Alexandria in his absence, first removed him from his office of preceptor, and then deprived him of his standing among the priests! The great majority of Christian bishops approved the sentence; but the prelates of the churches in Achaia, Palestine, Phenicia, and Arabia, disapproved it.() He therefore passed the remainder of his very laborious life at C\u00e6sarea, and at other places; and at last died at Tyre, A. D. 253, an old man, exhausted by his heroic sufferings for Christ in the Decian persecution. But after his death he was the occasion of even greater disputes among polemics, some assailing and others defending his reputation and his correctness; of which long-protracted and unhappy contests, the history of the following centuries will exhibit abundant evidence.<\/p>\n
\u00a7 XXXI. Disputes in the Church respecting the Trinity and the person of Christ. That authority, which Origen attributed to reason or philosophy\u2014(for he held them to be the same thing)\u2014over theology generally, was extended by others to certain parts of theology in particular, and especially to that part which distinguishes in the Divine Nature three persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Closely connected with this doctrine is, that concerning the origin and the dignity of Jesus Christ. As this division of the Divine Nature, of which the Scriptures require a belief, may seem to disagree with what reason teaches [p. 681.] respecting the unity or oneness of God, various persons attempted to so explain it, as to remove all disagreement between theology and philosophy. Those who engaged in this business, pursued various methods; if, indeed, the ancients correctly apprehended their views, which I must confess is very doubtful. Wherefore, about four different opinions may be produced, respecting the Holy Trinity and the Saviour of mankind, advanced in this century. These opinions, all the prelates of the age strenuously resisted, casting their authors out of the church. But they did not so combat these opinions as to exterminate the roots of the evil, and prevent the future rise of similar opinions. For, although they determined what should not be believed, respecting God and Christ, and thus suppressed the rising errors; yet they did not determine, with equal care and clearness, what should be positively believed, and in what terms the Scriptural doctrine of three persons in one God should be expressed. And this enabled others, subsequently, and especially Arius, to disturb the church with new explications of this doctrine.()<\/p>\n
\u00a7 XXXII. The No\u00ebtian Controversy. At the head of those in this century, who explained the scriptural doctrine of the Father, Son, and holy Spirit, by the precepts of reason, stands No\u00ebtus of [p. 682.] Smyrna; a man little known, but who is reported by the ancients to have been cast out of the church by presbyters, (of whom no account is given,) to have opened a school, and to have formed a sect.() It is stated, that being wholly unable to comprehend, how that God who is so often in Scripture declared to be one, and undivided, can, at the same time, be manifold; No\u00ebtus concluded, that the undivided Father of all things, united himself with the man Christ, was born in him, and in him suffered and died.() On account of this doctrine, his followers were called Patripassians; which name, though not perfectly correct and appropriate, yet appears to be not altogether unsuitable or inappropriate.() That No\u00ebtus and his followers believed as above stated, must be admitted, if we place more reliance on the positive testimony of the ancients, than upon mere conjecture, however plausible.<\/p>\n
\u00a7 XXXIII. Sabellius and the Sabellians. After the middle [p. 688.] of this century, Sabellius, an African bishop, or presbyter, of Ptolemais, the capitol of the Pentapolitan province of Libya Cyrenaica, attempted to reconcile, in a manner somewhat different from that of No\u00ebtus, the scriptural doctrine of Father, Son, and holy Spirit, with the doctrine of the unity of the divine nature. As the error of Sabellius infected several of the Pentapolitan bishops, and perhaps some others, Dionysius, the bishop of Alexandria, assailed it both orally and by writing; but he was not able to eradicate it entirely. For, from unquestionable testimony, it appears that, in the fourth and fifth centuries, there were Sabellians in various places.() The doctrine of Sabellius was not identical with that of No\u00ebtus; for the former did not hold, as the latter appears to have done, that the person of the supreme Deity, which he considered perfectly simple and indivisible, assumed the human nature of Christ into union with himself: but that only an energy or virtue, emitted from the Father of all, or, if you choose, a particle of the person or nature of the Father, became united with the man Christ. And such a virtue or particle of the Father, he also supposed, constituted the holy Spirit. Hence, when the ancients call Sabellius and his disciples Patripassians, the appellation must be understood differently from what it is when applied to No\u00ebtus and his followers.()<\/p>\n
\u00a7 XXXIV. Beryllus of Bostra, in Arabia. About the same time a similar error, though a little worse, was broached by Beryllus, the bishop of Bostra, in Arabia, a man otherwise devout, grave, and erudite, who had long governed his congregation praiseworthily, and also acquired reputation by his writings. He likewise subverted the distinction of persons in God, and denied that Christ existed before Mary. He supposed that a soul, the offspring of God himself, and therefore, doubtless, superior to all human souls, was divinely implanted in Christ at his birth. This opinion of Beryllus was long opposed by many persons, but in vain. At length, Origen, being invited from Egypt for this purpose, confronted him in a council held at Bostra, with such force of argument, that Beryllus gave up his opinion, and was reconciled to the church.()<\/p>\n
\u00a7 XXXV. Paul of Samosata. Much more pertinacious, and producing far greater disturbance in Syria, was Paul, a native of Samosata, and bishop of the church at Antioch; a man not unlearned, [p. 702.] nor destitute of genius, but vain and proud, and, what was unusual, sustaining a civil office under the government.() His opinion, respecting the divine nature and Jesus Christ the Saviour, is so variously and inconsistently stated by the ancients, that it is with difficulty ascertained. But by comparing the principal documents which have reached us, respecting the controversy with him, I think it will appear that Paul held these tenets: That the Father, Son, and holy Spirit, are not different persons: That the Son and the holy Spirit are in God, just as reason, or the reasoning faculty and action, or the operative power, are in a man: That the man Christ was born without any connection with the divine nature: That the Word or Reason of the Father descended into the man, and united itself with him; but not so as to make one person with him: That the Wisdom or Reason of the Father, merely dwelt in the man Christ, and taught and wrought miracles by him: On account of this connection of the divine Word with the man Christ, the latter is, though improperly, called GOD.()\u2014Dionysius of Alexandria first wrote against him, and afterwards assembled some councils against him at Antioch. In the last of these councils, which appears to have met in the year 269, one Malchion, a rhetorician, an acute and eloquent man, so skilfully drew Paul out of the subterfuges in which he had before lurked, that his error became manifest to all. And, as he would not renounce his error, he was divested of the episcopal office, and excluded from the communion by common suffrage. This decision Paul resisted; and relying, perhaps, on the patronage of Zenobia, the queen of Palmyra, and on the favor of the people, he refused to give up the house in which the bishop resided, and in which the church was accustomed to assemble. But this queen, after governing the province of the East for a time, was conquered by the emperor Aurelian, in the year 272; and the contest being brought before the emperor, he did not, indeed, decide it, but referred it to the arbitrament of the Romish and Italian bishops, who decided against Paul.() He left behind him a sect, the Paulians, or Paulianists, which, however, was not numerous, and did not continue beyond the fourth century.<\/p>\n
\u00a7 XXXVI. The Arabians reclaimed by Origen. Seduced also by philosophy, beyond a doubt, were those Arabian followers of an unknown leader, who supposed the soul of man to die with the body; and that it would hereafter, along with the body, be restored by God to life. As the parent of this sect is unknown, they are denominated Arabians, from the country they inhabited. The disturbances produced by this sect in Arabia, under the emperor Philip, were quieted by Origen; who, being sent for, discussed the subject with so much eloquence, in a pretty numerous council, called for the purpose, that the friends of the error gave up their opinion.()<\/p>\n
\u00a7 XXXVII. Benefits to Christianity from Philosophy. Yet, it must not be denied that Christianity received some advantages from this disposition to elucidate theology by means of philosophy. For, in the first place, certain doctrines, which had before been taught indistinctly and ambiguously, assumed a better form, and were better explained in the discussions with those who brought philosophy into the church. In the next place, the growth and progress of the Gnostic sects were more forcibly and more successfully resisted than before, by such as brought in the aids of reason. For if the philosophical light, which shone in Origen and others, was not great, yet it was sufficient to dissipate, and entirely to overthrow the absurd fictions of these sects. And therefore, from the time when Christians began to cultivate philosophical knowledge, the Gnostics were unable to entice so many from the Catholic ranks into their camp, and to found so many new associations, as in the preceding century, when they were assailed only with scriptural arguments.() Lastly, this light of human wisdom, though deceptive and dim, which some doctors wished to unite with the light of revelation, was useful in chasing from the church some opinions which the Christians had received from the Jewish schools, but which were thought by many to be of a holy and divine origin.<\/p>\n
\u00a7 XXXVIII. Chiliasm vanquished. Among the Jewish opinions, to which, in this age, Philosophy proved detrimental, the most distinguished was that of the reign of Christ on earth, a thousand years, with the saints restored to their bodies. This opinion, I believe, was introduced into the church near the commencement of the Christian commonwealth. And down to the times of Origen, all the teachers who were so disposed, openly professed and taught it; although there were some who either denied it, or at least called it in question. But Origen assailed it fiercely; for it was repugnant to his philosophy: and, by the system of biblical interpretation which he discovered, he gave a different turn to those texts of scripture on which the patrons of this doctrine most relied. The consequence was, that this error lost its influence with most Christians. But, a little past the middle of this century, Nepos, an Egyptian bishop, endeavored to revive it and give it currency, by an appropriate treatise, which he called a Confutatio Allegoristarum. This book was admired by many in the district of Arsino\u00eb, and was thought to confirm the visible reign of Christ on earth, by the most solid arguments. Hence great commotions arose in that part of Egypt, and many congregations gladly resumed their expectation of the future millennium. But these commotions were quieted by Dionysius, the bishop of Alexandria, a pupil of Origen, and inheriting his preceptor\u2019s learning, as well as his mildness of disposition. In the first place, he held a discussion with one Coracion, the head and leader of the controversy, and with his followers; in which, by his admonitions, arguments, and exhortations, he induced them to give up the opinion they had derived from the treatise of Nepos: and afterwards, to stop up the fountain of the evil, he wrote a confutation of Nepos, in two books, entitled de Promissionibus divinis. In the second book of this work he very discreetly treated particularly on the authority of the Apocalypse of St. John; from which Nepos had derived the chief support of his opinion.()<\/p>\n
\u00a7 XXXIX. Rise of Manichaeism. Amid these efforts of the more sagacious Christian doctors, by means of philosophy, to arrest the progress of the Gnostic sects, and to purge Christianity from Jewish defilements, a little past the middle of the century, a new pest, worse than all that preceded, invaded the church from Persia; and, although the greatest and wisest men withstood it, both in oral discussion and in books, yet they could not prevent its spreading with surprising rapidity, almost throughout Christendom, and captivating a vast multitude of persons of moderate talents and judgment. MANES, a man of uncommon genius, eloquence, and boldness, and richly endowed with all the qualities which can easily move and inflame the popular mind,\u2014either misled by some mental disease, or actuated by the love of fame, devised a new system of religion, which was a strange compound of the ancient Persian philosophy and Christianity; and boldly urged it upon the people, as being divinely communicated to men. The man himself experienced very adverse fortune, and died a miserable death; but the way of salvation which he proposed, though full of monstrous ideas and puerile conceptions, and in no respect superior to the Gnostic fables, and more absurd than most of them, obtained a wider circulation than any of the sects of the preceding times. Nor will this be strange to a person understanding its character. For, if we regard its doctrines, they are all popular, and explain whatever is abstruse and difficult of comprehension, in the manner best suited to vulgar apprehension; and if we regard its moral precepts, they are gloomy, and impress the beholder with a great show of sanctity, self-denial, and contempt for worldly things. Such systems of religion, though void of solidity, yet, through the weakness of human nature, generally find many friends and followers.()<\/p>\n
\u00a7 XL. The Life and Labors of Manes. Respecting the life and labors of MANES, there is great disagreement between the Greek and the Oriental writers; and as this disagreement can in no way be reconciled, and both seem to have blended the true and the false, beyond the possibility of a separation at this late day, all that remains for us to do, is to state what they unitedly teach, and leave the rest to be discussed by the curious.() The things in which they all agree, are substantially as follows: MANES, or MANICH\u00c6US, for he is called by both names, was a native of Persia, a man of a venerable aspect, of an exceedingly fecund genius, was educated in the schools of the Magi, and was master of all the arts and learning, which the Persians of those times considered as constituting human wisdom. Having become acquainted with the books of the Christians, and perceiving that the religion they contained agreed, in some respects, with his philosophy, but disagreed with it in other respects, he formed the purpose of combining them, correcting and enlarging the one by the other, and then of inculcating on mankind a new system of religion, compounded of the two. Adopting this plan, he first decided that Jesus Christ left his statement of the way of salvation imperfect; and in the next place, he ventured to declare himself to be either a divinely taught Apostle of Jesus Christ, or rather that very Paraclete, or Comforter, whom the retiring Saviour promised to his disciples.() With what sincerity he assumed such a character, it is not easy to say. Some tell us, that being by nature proud, excessively arrogant, and vain, his heated mind became deranged. Yet his insanity was not such as to prevent his digesting his system very well, and distinctly seeing [p. 734.] how it could be assailed, and how defended. Among other proofs of this, is the fact that he either wholly rejected, or essentially altered, whatever he found in the Christian scriptures apparently contrary to his doctrines and purposes; and in place of the discarded passages, he substituted others, especially such as he wished to have considered as written by him under a divine inspiration.()\u2014The king of Persia, for some cause not ascertained, cast him into prison. Escaping from confinement, and calling to his aid twelve friends or Apostles, in imitation of Christ, he spread the religion he had devised, over a great part of Persia, persuading many to embrace it; and he sent out the most eloquent of his disciples into the adjacent countries, who were also successful. In the midst of these enterprises, by the command of the king of Persia, he was seized by soldiers and put to death. This was probably in the year 278, or a little later. As to the mode of his death, writers are not agreed. That he was put to death, is very certain. The memorial of it, the Manich\u00e6ans annually celebrated in the month of March, by a festal day, which they called Bema.() This sad fate of the man strengthened his adherents, more than it terrified them. For such of them as had the most talent and eloquence, roamed over Syria, Persia, Egypt, Africa, and almost all countries of the civilized world, and everywhere converted many, by the gravity of their deportment, and by the rude simplicity of the religion they inculcated.<\/p>\n
\u00a7 XLI. Two Eternal Worlds, under Two Eternal Lords. Manes affirmed two first principles of all things; namely, a subtile and a gross sort of matter, or light and darkness, separated from each other by a narrow space. And over each of these he placed an eternal King or Lord; the Lord over light, he called God; the Lord over darkness, he called Hyle, or Demon.() The world of light and the world of darkness, although different in their natures, have some things in common. For each is distributed into five opposing elements, and the same number of provinces: and both are equally eternal, and both, with their respective Lords, self-existent; both are unchangeable, and both to exist for ever; both are of vast extent, yet the world of light seems to fill more space than the empire of darkness.() The condition of the two Lords, presiding over the two kinds of matter, is equal; but they are totally unlike in their natures and dispositions. The Lord of light, being himself happy, is beneficient, a lover of peace and quietness, just and wise; the Lord of darkness, being himself very miserable, wishes to see others unhappy, is quarrelsome, unwise, unjust, irascible, and envious. Yet they are equal in the eternity of their existence, in their power to beget beings like themselves, in their unchangeableness, and in their power and knowledge; and yet the King of light, or God, excells the Prince of [p. 756.] darkness, or the Demon, in power and knowledge.()<\/p>\n
\u00a7 XLII. Nature and Attributes of the good God or Principle. The God who governs the world of light, is, as it were, an immense sun: and consists wholly of the purest light, much more subtile than our light, wonderfully diffused through his whole realm. He has twelve members, equally bright and splendid; and an innumerable family, who abound in every species of good things. For he had begotten from himself an immense number of most happy S\u00e6cula; that is, immutable and enduring Beings. But though the highest and greatest Being, yet he is finite, and limited to a certain space; and of course, is not omnipresent. His natural powers also have their limits. For he does not know all things, nor foresee future events, nor can he accomplish all his pleasure; and much less, can he effect his purposes solely by his volitions. But his moral virtues, his goodness, beneficence, justice, sanctity, and love of truth, can be confined within no bounds, nor be limited or restrained by anything.()<\/p>\n
\u00a7 XLIII. The Manichaean Trinity. Christ and the Holy Spirit. The good God, the Lord of light, although he is one, simple, and immutable, yet, in a certain sense, is triple or threefold. For after the world was founded, he produced from himself two Majesties, that is, two Beings like himself; by whom he might both save the souls inclosed in bodies, and gradually extract the portion of light and of the good fire mixed with earth from it, and restore it to its original state.() The one of these Beings is called Christ; the other the Holy Spirit. Christ is a splendid mass of the purest light of God, self-existent, animated, endued with wisdom and reason, and having his seat in the sun, yet communicating a portion of his influence to the moon. Hence prayers are to be directed to the sun and moon.() Inferior to him, the Holy Spirit is also an animated and lucid mass, of the same nature with God himself, connected with and resident in the ether which encompasses our globe. He not only moves and illuminates [p. 776.] the minds of men, but he also fecundates the earth; that is, he excites the particles of the divine fire latent in the earth, and makes them shoot up in herbs, and shrubs, and trees, and yield fruits useful and convenient for men.() This whole doctrine is derived from the ancient Persian system. And hence, all that the Manich\u00e6ans teach respecting a divine Trinity, must be understood and explained, not in conformity with Christian views, but in accordance with the Persian principles respecting Mithra and the ether, to which Manes() accommodated the Christian religion.<\/p>\n
\u00a7 XLIV. War of the Prince of Darkness on the Prince of Light. After a vast length of time, the race of darkness having become exceedingly numerous, an intestine war raged in that miserable [p. 789.] world, perhaps respecting boundaries and residences. In this war, while the victors pursued the vanquished, and the latter fled into the mountains on the frontiers of the province, suddenly, from these mountains, the sons of darkness descried the realm of light and its astonishing splendor, of which they before had no knowledge. On descrying the light they ceased fighting; and, taking counsel together, they determined to invade that happy world they so much admired, and to bring it under their dominion. Without delay an army was raised and marched forth.\u2014As the countless and infuriated host came near, the Lord of the world of light opposed to it a Being of his own nature, whom he had suddenly procreated, attended by the five celestial elements and a vast multitude of troops. This General of the world of light, who bore the name of First Man, conducted the war with valor and discretion, yet not very successfully. For the leaders of darkness not only plundered a considerable portion of the celestial elements, which they mixed up with their own depraved elements, but they also greedily devoured large quantities of the divine light, which was animated: nay, they nearly overpowered First Man himself, and stripped him of a part of his excellence. As therefore the hard pressed commander of the forces of light implored the aid of God, he sent forth another General, produced in like manner from himself, but more powerful than the former, and bearing the name of Living Spirit. This General rescued First Man, and conquered the Prince of darkness: but he could not restore to its pristine state the plunder taken from the world of light, because it had been commingled with vicious matter.()<\/p>\n
\u00a7 XLV. Origin, composition and character of Man. In the commencement of the new campaigne, the Prince of darkness, being terrified with the splendor of the Living Spirit, and foreseeing that the particles of divine light, or the rational souls devoured by him and his companions, would be wrested from them, formed a cunning device for avoiding, in a measure, so great a loss. For he persuaded his chiefs to transfer into their wives by coition those portions of light which were in them: and the children thus produced, he himself devoured, and of course with them all the souls: and they being thus incorporated with his blood and fluids, he embraced his wife, and so begat the first man Adam, in part resembling the celestial First Man whom he had seen, and in part like himself.() When all the souls which the Princes of darkness had captured, were in this manner inclosed in the body of Adam only, and thus placed beyond the power of the Living Spirit, the King of darkness gave to Adam a wife, namely Eve; and Adam, being allured by her beauty, copulated with her contrary to the will of God: and thus the miserable race of mortals peopling our globe, began to exist and to be propagated.() These unhappy children of Adam consist of a body and two souls. Their body is composed of depraved matter, and belongs wholly to the King of darkness, the father of Adam; and consequently, when a man dies it returns to its original source. Of their two souls, the one is animal, sentient, and concupiscent, and was derived from the same Prince of evil; but the other, which possesses reason, and is alone immortal, is a particle of that divine light which was captured by the race of darkness in the contest with the First Man, and was afterwards by their Prince infused wholly into the body of Adam, and thence distributed among all his offspring, male and female. It hence appears, whence arose that mixture of good and evil in individual [p. 803.] men, and the perpetual conflict between reason and concupiscence.()<\/p>\n
\u00a7 XLVI. Formation of this our World. Its structure and design. Man having been formed by the Prince of darkness, and the souls, those daughters of light, inclosed in his body, and the celestial elements combined with matter or with the elements of the world of darkness; nothing remained for God, who was desirous of rescuing those souls and the celestial elements, except, to form from the vitiated matter an intermediate world, between [p. 818.] the world of light and that of darkness, and compounded of both; which should afford to men a domicile, and to God a suitable opportunity for carrying out his purpose of gradually extracting the souls from the bodies, and separating the good matter from the bad, and restoring both to the world of light.() Therefore, by God\u2019s command, the Living Spirit, who had already conquered the Prince of darkness, constructed this our world. In doing so, he first fabricated the sun and moon, from matter that had not been corrupted; then, from that which was but little contaminated, he formed the ether, and the stars which revolve in the ether; and lastly, from that which was entirely pervaded by depraved matter, he constructed this our earth.() And, as the son of the First Man, whose name was Jesus, was still detained a captive in the bodies of the Prince of darkness and his associates, those miserable Beings were to be confined, lest they should abscond with their plunder: and therefore the Living Spirit chained them to the stars. This measure was necessary and wise, and on many accounts exceedingly useful; and yet it was a source of troubles and dangers. For these Princes of evil, from the stars where they dwell, not only lay snares for good minds, but also send down upon our world hosts of evils, pestilences, thunders, lightnings, tempests, war, &c.() And lest so vast a world should fall and come to pieces, a very powerful Being from the world of light, by divine command, props it up and sustains it. His name is Omophorus, significant of the very onerous task he has to perform. And lest he should succumb under such a burden, an assistant is given him, to hold the suspended orb steady. He is a Being equally strong and robust, and bears the name of Splenditenens.()<\/p>\n
\u00a7 XLVII. The Mission and Offices of Christ. The world being framed and adjusted, the grand aim of the supreme Deity was, first, to liberate from bondage, and restore to the world of light, those particles of his own nature, or of eternal light, that is, [p. 830.] the rational souls, which had become inclosed in bodies; and then, gradually to extract from depraved matter, and recover to their former happy state, those shreds of the celestial elements which were dispersed among all the depraved matter; and lastly, to press out and set free, the living and sentient soul, the son of the First Man, which was absorbed in the bodies of the Prince of darkness and his fellow warriors. To hasten the return of souls to the world of light, as much as possible, their heavenly Father had frequently sent among mankind angels and very holy men, actuated by himself, to instruct men both orally and by writings, and to show them the way of return to God when released from the body. But the work went on too slowly; for the Prince of darkness, by his ministers and satellites, by the body and its senses, and by the depraved soul, impeded the divine plans, and ensnared the good souls. And, in the meantime, Omophorus became weary of his burden, and earnestly importuned for an end of his toil. And, therefore, to accelerate the recovery of the numerous souls unhappily inclosed in bodies, God directed Christ, his Son, to descend from his residence in the sun to this lower world. And he, having assumed a human form, but without uniting himself to a body or to human nature, appeared among the Jews; and he, by his words and deeds, made known to the captive intelligences the way of escape from their thraldom: and, lest mortals should not place confidence in him, he demonstrated his divinity by the most signal miracles. But the Prince of darkness, fearing the subversion of his empire, excited the Jews, his most loyal subjects, to seize and crucify him. Yet Christ did not really endure that punishment, but only seemed to men to do so. For, as he had no body, and only assumed the appearance of a man, he could, neither be seized, nor crucified, nor die at all. Yet Christ feigned death, in order that, by this seeming example, he might teach men, or the good souls lodged in bodies, that the body and the evil soul resident in the body, should be tortured, chastised, and mortified, if they would obtain freedom and salvation. When he had accomplished his mission, Christ returned to his residence in the sun, having directed his Apostles to diffuse his religion among mankind. These ambassadors of Christ, although they did immense good to men, and [p. 831.] greatly weakened the empire of the Prince of darkness, yet did not make known that full and perfect wisdom which is necessary for the souls that long for salvation; for Christ did not impart to them the full knowledge of the truth. But, as he was departing, he promised to send forth in due time a greater and more holy Apostle, whom he named the Paraclete; who should add to his precepts such things as men at that time were not able to receive and digest, and should dissipate all errors in regard to divine things. That Paraclete came, in the person of Manes the Persian; and he, by command of Christ, expounded clearly and perfectly, and without figures and enigmas, the whole way of salvation for toiling and suffering souls.()<\/p>\n
\u00a7 XLVIII. Christ as the Saviour of Men. Christ the Son of God, therefore, came to restore lost happiness to souls: but he did not, by his sufferings and death, make expiation for the sins of intelligent beings; nor did he, in their stead, satisfy the divine law. For, good souls, because they are parts of the divine nature, and God is unchangeable, cannot become polluted and corrupt; and, of course, they cannot really commit sin. They remain pure, holy, and innocent, even in the most impure body; and, by their native energy, if they would exert it, they can pave and prepare for themselves a way of return to their celestial country.() Christ therefore came down to men, first, to destroy the kingdom of the Prince of darkness; that is, to withdraw men from the worship of the evil Principle, and his captains, and fellow warriors, and draw them to the worship and religion of the true God. And, secondly, he came down to teach men in what ways the evil soul, together with the body in which it resides, should be overcome and subdued; so that the good mind may be purged from all its contagion, and gradually become fitted and prepared for a return to the world of light from which it came. Christ therefore taught a severe moral discipline, and prohibited all desires after external and sensible objects, and all bodily and sensual pleasures whatever. For as the body is composed of matter that is evil by nature, and the soul living in it is a part of the nature of the Prince of darkness; and as in these, consequently, the root of all evil is located; all the motions of the sentient and craving soul are to be most studiously repressed; and the body, which excites those motions, must be weakened and enervated.()<\/p>\n
\u00a7 XLIX. The Return of holy Souls to the World of Light. So many souls as receive Jesus Christ for the Son of God and Savior, and, forsaking the worship of the Prince of darkness and his associates, serve only the Father of Light, and obey with all their [p. 860.] might the perfectly holy law enacted by Christ, and constantly resist the desires of the evil soul; are becoming gradually purged from the pollutions of vicious matter. This process, indeed, the Prince of darkness, both personally and by his ministers and satellites, strives with all his power to retard: But the Holy Spirit, resident in the ether, aids the struggling souls, that they may more easily escape his snares and overcome the perpetual temptations.() And to those souls which occasionally succumb and give the reins to the evil soul, as is not uncommon, the gate of sorrow and repentance is open, by which the pardon of their offences may be obtained from God.() Yet the entire purgation of souls cannot be effected in the body. Therefore, these souls, when released from the body, must undergo a two-fold lustration after death; the first by pure water, and the second by fire. That is, they are first elevated by the sun\u2019s rays, and pass into the moon, which is composed of good water: in that they are purified during fifteen days, and then they proceed to the sun, the good fire of which entirely takes away what defilement remains; and thence they go perfectly clean and bright to their native country.() And the body, which they left on the earth, being composed of evil matter, returns to its original state, and will never be resuscitated.()<\/p>\n
\u00a7 L. Condition of unpurgated Souls after Death. The Souls that were ignorant of the saving truth, or that neglected their purgation while in the body, or that committed certain great crimes, would, after their exit from their former bodies, pass into other bodies, either of animals, or trees, or plants, or of something else; until they shall fully expiate their guilt, and become prepared to enter on their celestial journey. In this matter, divine justice will regard the different merits of individuals, and will assign purer and better bodies to the more innocent, and more uncomfortable and filthy habitations to the more polluted and deformed.() Heavier punishments will fall on the souls which either contemptuously rejected the truth when presented to them, or persecuted its friends and professors, or defiled themselves with crimes of the higher order. For, on leaving the body, such souls will be delivered over to the princes of darkness dwelling in the stars, to be tortured and punished by them, in proportion to their offences, in the bad fire situated beyond our earth. And yet these punishments of hell are to have an end. For, after a certain time, determined by God, has been spent in hell, these souls will be sent again into this our world, and be put into other bodies, to commence as it were a new course, and to resume with more fervor the purgation which they neglected in their former life.()<\/p>\n
\u00a7 LI. The Liberation of the Passive Jesus. Besides the rational and intelligent souls, those particles of the divine light, there are portions of the celestial elements scattered throughout the natural world, and mixed up with base matter; and these, in various ways, but especially by the heat and influence of the sun, are detached from base matter, and drawn upwards; and, being purgated in the moon and sun, they return to the world of light.() But the son of the First Man, the Passive Jesus, whom [p. 875.] the Prince of darkness and his warriors devoured during the first war, and still hold in durance, is gradually liberated by a singular artifice of God. For at certain times God presents to the view of the demon some of the celestial Beings resident in the sun and moon, clothed in the form of very beautiful boys and girls; and on seeing them, the lusts of the demons are so inflamed that they sweat most profusely, and the celestial matter oozing out with the sweat from their huge bodies, falls upon our earth. This celestial matter, thus expressed from the princes of darkness and falling upon the earth, fecundates it and causes it to produce or send forth trees, fruits, plants, salads, potherbs, &c.; and when these are eaten, that which is divine in them, the sentient soul, is detached from depraved matter and escapes, and, being purgated in the moon and sun, ascends to the world of light. And this accounts for the clouds, the rains, the storms, the showers, the lightnings and the thunder. For the Prince of darkness and his associates, becoming enraged and agitated when God frustrates their lustful desires, disturb both heaven and earth, and frequently produce terrible commotions in nature; which, however, are in some respects useful and salutary.()<\/p>\n
\u00a7 LII. Destruction of the World and Consummation of all things. When the greatest part of souls shall have been recalled to the world of light, and of course the human race be reduced to a few persons, when the celestial matter dispersed through our world shall in various ways have been extracted, and no souls remain on earth, except such as can in no way be purgated and reformed; then will God remove the walls and ramparts by which the evil fire is inclosed; and that fire, bursting from its caverns, will burn up and destroy the fabric of the world. At the same time Omophorus will withdraw his shoulders from it, and will suffer this dirty, depraved mass, now divested of all life, to be consumed. After this, the Princes of darkness, being deprived of all celestial matter or light, will be compelled to return to their own wretched country: and in that dreary world they will forever remain.() And to prevent their again invading the world of light, God will guard the orb of darkness with a very strong [p. 882.] force: for those souls, whose reformation and salvation are despaired of, like a cordon of soldiers, will surround the world of darkness and guard its frontiers, lest its wretched inhabitants should again issue forth and invade the realm of light.()<\/p>\n
\u00a7 LIII. Public Worship among Manich\u00e6aus. Thc mode [p. 886.] of public worship among the Manich\u00e6ans was very simple. They had no temples or houses dedicated to God, no altars, no images, no love-feasts, nor any of the ceremonies usually practised by other Christians. When assembled they prayed to God with becoming devoutness, but with their faces turned towards the sun. They sung hymns in praise of God, of the sun and moon, and of the principal \u00c6ons; read the books of Manes, especially his Epistola Fundamenti; and heard exhortations from their teachers, enjoining the renunciation and subjugation of sinful desires. They observed Sunday as a sacred day, but abstained wholly from food on that day. Among their annual holy days, the most noted was the Bema, the day on which they honored with great solemnity the memory of their master, who was cruelly slain by the king of Persia. The Christian festivals commemorative of the birth and baptism of the Saviour, they did not observe; because they denied that Christ was either born or baptized. Easter they observed with other Christians, but with little, or rather with no ceremony. For, believing that Christ only feigned death and a return to life, they supposed that short services were all that the day required.()<\/p>\n
\u00a7 LIV. The exclusive Worship of the Elect. Baptism and. [p. 888.] the sacred Supper. Besides the public assemblies, in which the Elect or perfect and the Auditors or imperfect met together, other and more private conventions for religious objects were held exclusively by the little band of the Elect. What was done in these private conventions, or in what manner God was there worshipped, is not known at the present day; the books of the sect being lost, or at least not being known.() To the arcane or private worship of the Manich\u00e6ans, pertained baptism and the sacred Sapper. Baptism, the Manich\u00e6ans held to be a mere ceremony, which conveyed no benefit whatever to the soul. They did not admit that Christ was baptized; and their fundamental principles forbid their believing that any efficacy existed in water for purifying the divine soul, the offspring of God. Hence they did not require their people to receive baptism: but if any of the Elect desired a lustration by water, the leaders of the sect did not oppose their wishes.() Of the sacred Supper of the Elect, nothing scarcely is known at the present day: for the horrid and obscene rites of it, reported by many of the ancients, lack authority, credibility, and probability; and the genuine followers of Munes cannot be taxed with them, without extreme injustice.()<\/p>\n
\u00a7 LV. Constitution of the Manich\u00e6an Church. The organization of the community established by Manes, was peculiar. Over the whole community an individual presided, who represented Jesus Christ. Next to him were twelve Magistri, representing the twelve Apostles. After them came seventy-two Bishops, corresponding with the seventy-two disciples of Christ. To the several Bishops were subject the Presbyters and Deacons. All these belonged to the class of the Elect, and were the head men of the. sect.() The members of the community were divided into two classes, the Elect or Perfect, and the Auditors, who were also called Catechumens. The Elect were subjected to a severe and uncomfortable rule of life, and consequently were held in very high veneration. They were of two descriptions, the baptized and the unbaptized. The baptized could never change their condition; but the unbaptized, if they found themselves utterly unable to endure the rigorous discipline of the Elect, might descend to the rank of Auditors, who were allowed to live and act with greater freedom.()<\/p>\n
\u00a7 LVI. The Sect of the Hieracites. The Manichaeans were early divided into several sects: which is by no means strange, considering how many of their doctrines were vaguely stated. Among these sects, many esteem that to be one, which was successfully founded in Egypt by Hierax or Hieracas, an Egyptian of Leonto, a learned man and a great writer, near the close of the century. But this opinion is not supported by competent testimony, nor by valid arguments. For although Hierax, equally with Manes, opposed marriages, and enjoined on his followers a severe code of morals, and perhaps also believed that the source of all evil propensities and sins is to be found in matter or the body; yet in other respects he differed widely from Manes: nor is there any testimony that he approved the fundamental principles which are the basis of the Manichacan religion. ()<\/p>\n
THE<\/p>\n
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY<\/p>\n
OF THE<\/p>\n
FOURTH CENTURY<\/p>\n
\u00a7 I. Attempts of the Pagan Priests to get up a new persecution. At the commencement of the fourth century after the birth of the Savior of mankind, the Roman empire was under the government of four sovereigns; of whom the two highest in rank, Diocletian and Maximianus Herculius, were called Augusti, and the two lower in rank, Constantius Chlorus and Maximianus Galerius, were called Cesars; but each of them had supreme power over the province allotted to him. Under these four Emperors, the state of the christian community, as well as that of the commonwealth, was quite flourishing. For the chief of the Augusti, Diocletian, although superstitious and an assiduous worshipper of the Gods, yet harbored no ill will against the Christians; and the first of the Cesars, Constantius Chlorus, was averse to the pagan religion, followed reason as his religious guide, was friendly to the Christians, and preferred them before the idolaters. Nor did the future portend any worse condition of the church: but rather, it was to be expected, that Christianity would soon gain the ascendancy in the Roman empire, or at least obtain as much influence and reputation as the old superstition. The friends of paganism, particularly the priests, perceiving the danger, exerted themselves to the utmost to raise a new persecution against the Christians, who then felt themselves too secure: and, by fictitious oracles and other frauds, they labored especially to excite Diocletian, whom they knew to be timid and credulous, to enact laws against the Christians.()<\/p>\n
\u00a7 II. Maximianus Galerius moves Diocletian to commence Persecution, A. D. 303. As these artifices produced little effect, the priests used Maximianus Galerius, a man naturally cruel, pround, superstitious, barbarous, and hostile to the Christians, for inflaming the mind of his father-in-law against the Christians. And [p. 916.] this high patron of the sinking cause of the Gods, seems to have been found ready at hand, rather than sought for, by the anxious ministers of the Gods. For his own rough and furious temperament, which delighted in nothing but war, and his mother\u2019s extravagant devotion to the Gods and to the priests, and that lust of power with which he burned, sufficiently prompted him to extirpate a class of people opposed to his desires and purposes. He therefore did not cease to urge and importune Diocletian, then residing at Nicomedia, till he finally obtained from him, in the year 303, an edict, by which the temples of the Christians throughout the Roman empire were to be demolished, their sacred books to be burned, and Christians themselves to be deprived of all their civil privileges and honors.() This first edict, although it spared the lives of the Christians, yet caused the destruction of many, who refused to deliver up to the magistrates the sacred books, the furniture of the temples and the treasures (of the churches,) as the imperial law demanded. And yet many, even among the bishops and clergy, to save their lives obeyed the commands of the Emperor, and gave up the books in their hands and the sacred utensils; and these persons, who supposed themselves guilty of only a slight fault, were considered by the more resolute Christians as having committed sacrilege, and were therefore reproachfully denominated Traditors.()<\/p>\n
\u00a7 III. First Year of the Persecution. Occurrences at Nicomedia. New Edicts. The hatred of Diocletian against Christians became more violent a little after the promulgation of his first decree, when two fires occurred in the palace at Nicomedia; for the enemies of Christianity persuaded the credulous and timid old man that the Christians were the authors of those fires. Therefore the Emperor commanded that the Christians of Nicomedia, of all classes and descriptions, should be put to torture; and many were burned at the stake as incendiaries.() About the same time, seditions [p. 929.] occurred in Armenia and Syria; and as the enemies of Christianity charged the blame of these also upon the Christian pastors and teachers, the emperor issued a new edict, requiring all bishops and clergymen to be thrown into prison. This decree was soon afterwards followed by a third, in which the Emperor ordered that all the imprisoned clergymen, who refused to worship the Gods, should be compelled to offer sacrifices by tortures and extreme penalties. For the timid Emperor, terrified by the priests and their friends, had come to believe that neither he nor the republic could be safe so long as the Christians remained; and he hoped, that if the bishops and teachers were subdued, their flocks would follow their example. And thus a great multitude of holy and excellent persons, in all the provinces of the Roman empire, were put to death by various kinds of the most cruel executions: and others, mutilated and deprived of their bodily members, were condemned to the mines.() Gaul alone escaped this calamity; for there Constantius Chlorus, although he did not prevent the Christian temples from being demolished, forbid the infliction of personal injuries on the Christians.()<\/p>\n
\u00a7 IV. Fourth Edict of Diocletian.\u2014Maximian Emperor. [p. 937.] of the East. When the enemies of Christianity found these laws against the Christian pastors and ministers less effective than they anticipated, they induced Diocletian, in the second year of the persecution, A. D. 304, to issue a fourth edict, more cruel than the preceding, in which he required all Christians, without exception, to be compelled to worship the gods, by all the methods of torture and punishment which ingenuity could devise. Yet, even this edict, sanguinary and most iniquitous as it was, did not command the capital punishment of the Christians refusing to sacrifice. But those governors and magistrates, who were either the slaves of superstition, or naturally propense to cruelty, or solicitous to please Maximian, now marching with rapid strides to supreme power, took occasion from this edict to destroy, either by protracted tortures, or by sentences of death, a great multitude of Christians in most of the provinces.() The Christian community being thus debilitated and down-trodden, Maximian openly disclosed the designs he had been secretly revolving. He compelled his father-in-law Diocletian, and the colleague Emperor Maximianus Herculius, to abdicate their power, and assumed to himself the rank of Emperor of the East, leaving the West under Constantius Chlorus. At the same time he appointed two colleagues in the government, or two Cesars, of his own choice, and entirely devoted to himself, namely, Maximin, his sister\u2019s son, and Severus, excluding altogether Constantine, the son of Constantius. This revolution in the government was advantageous to the Christians of the western provinces, and in a measure restored their peace; but the Christians of the East were persecuted with increased violence and cruelty, by Maximian Galerius and Maximin. Hence, the number of Martyrs and Confessors in those regions was great.()<\/p>\n
\u00a7 V. Civil wars, and state of Christians, from A. D. 306 to A. D. 311. While Maximian Galerius, by the slaughter and destruction of the Christians and other tyrannical arts, was seeking to obtain for himself and son-in-law the supreme power over the whole empire, divine Providence suddenly disturbed all his cogitations and all his concealed plans. For in the year 306 Constantius Chlorus, his colleague Emperor, whose death he had long anticipated, died in Britain, having by his will appointed, as the heir to his empire, Constantine, his son; the very man of whom Maximian stood most in fear: and the soldiers, immediately on the death of the father, proclaimed the son Augustus and Emperor. To this adverse occurrence Maximian found it necessary to submit; but he craftily sought to modify it somewhat, that it might produce the less harm. He unwillingly conceded to Constantine the lowest place among the Sovereigns of the Empire, with the title of Cesar: and at the same time he raised Severus, previously a Cesar, to the rank of an Augustus or Emperor, thus curtailing the power of Constantine. But the obstruction which human sagacity opposed to the rising power of Constantine, the current of events soon prostrated. Maxentius, the son-in-law of Maximian Galerius, and the son of Maximian Herculius, indignant that Severus should be preferred before him, assumed to himself the rank of Emperor, and took for a colleague his own father, whom Maximian Galerius had deprived of empire. And [p. 948.] hence arose, in the Roman world, very great commotions and most destructive civil wars; in which, fortune so favored Constantine, that he obtained, contrary to the calculations and the will of his enemy Maximian, the rank of Augustus and Emperor. Amidst these civil commotions, the Christians experienced various fortune, especially in the countries of the East: for the servants of Christ in the western provinces, if we except those of Africa and Italy, felt none of the troubles of those tempestuous times. For those who contended for political power, according as they supposed the Christians might aid or thwart their wishes and interests, showed themselves either friendly or hostile to them.() This dubious and fluctuating state of things, Maximian Galerius, the author of so great evils and sufferings to the Christians, himself at length terminated. For while laboring under a long continued and distressing disease, previous to his death, in the year 311, he issued a public edict, restoring the Christians to their ancient tranquillity.()<\/p>\n
\u00a7 VI. Constantine\u2019s Edicts in favor of the Christians, A. D. 312, 313. On the death of Maximian Galerius in the year 311, the provinces which he had governed were divided between Maximin and Licinius. The former had the Asiatic provinces, and the latter the European. But Maxentius, the Emperor of Italy and Africa, meditated war against Constantine, that he might render himself Emperor of the entire West. The ostensible cause, however, of the war, was the death of his father Maximian Herculius, whom Constantine had compelled to destroy his own life. Constantine, therefore, prudently anticipating the counsels of his enemy, marched his army from Gaul into Italy, and after weakening Maxentius in several conflicts, entirely routed him in the year 312, in a fierce battle, at the Milvian Bridge, not far from Rome: and Maxentius in the flight, by the breaking down of the bridge, fell into the Tiber and perished. The victorious Constantine entered the city, and not long after, with Licinius his colleague, [p. 959.] issued an edict which gave the Christians the fullest liberty of living according to their own principles, institutions and usages. And the next year A. D. 313, he confirmed and defined this liberty more precisely, in an edict drawn up at Milan. Maximin, indeed, who governed the East, was menacing the Christians with new calamities, and also preparing for war with the Emperors of the West. But fortune forsook his enterprises. For Licinius, encountering him at Adrianople, obtained a complete victory. And Maximin escaping by flight, drank poison, and died a miserable death at Tarsus, in the year 311.()<\/p>\n
\u00a7 VII. Constantine\u2019s Conversion to Christianity. About the same time, and after the victory over Maxentius at the Milvian bridge, Constantine the Great is said to have embraced the Christian religion: and it is the common and ancient opinion, that the sign of a cross seen by him in the heavens, produced and confirmed this resolution of the Emperor. If that man is a Christian who thinks the Christian\u2019s manner of worshipping God is a good and holy one, then I have no doubt that Constantine was, at that time, a Christian. But if no man should be called a Christian, unless he believes that Christianity is the only true religion, and that all other religions are false, then I suppose Constantine became a Christian at a later period, and some years after the victory over Maxentius. For, if any reliance can be placed on public records, it is certain that Constantine at first considered all religions to be good, and he supposed Christ to be like the rest of the national Gods; but after some time he acquired purer and better knowledge on religious subjects, and he concluded that God ought to be worshipped in no other than the Christian manner.() But what is reported of the sign of a cross, or rather, of a Monogramm of the name of Christ, seen in the clouds by him and his army, is more difficult to be explained than many imagine; and the inquiring and truth-seeking mind is so perplexed, that it can hardly determine what to deny, or what to believe.()<\/p>\n
\u00a7 VIII. A Short Persecution by Licinius. The Roman republic appeared tranquil and happy, after the subjugation of Maxentius and Maximin; but soon after a new war for dominion, [p. 987.] arose between Constantine the Great and his colleague Licinius, to whom Constantine had given his sister in marriage. But this war was of short duration. For in the year 314, Licinius being defeated in two battles, at Cibal\u00e6 in Pannonia, and in Thrace, was compelled to sue for peace with his kinsman. But, nine years after his defeats, this turbulent man, who wished to have no associate in the government, both from his own choice and at the instigation of the Pagan priests, assailed Constantine with larger and more powerful forces, in the year 324. To attach those priests the more to himself, Licinius not only inflicted very great wrongs upon the Christians of the provinces under his government, but also cruelly put to death not a few of their bishops.() But fortune was again adverse to him. After being defeated in several battles, he had no resource but to cast himself on the clemency of his conqueror; and he, in the year 325, for reasons not known, ordered him to be strangled. After this victory over Licinius, Constantine reigned sole Emperor all his life; and he strove to the utmost, by his counsels, his laws and regulations, and by rewards, to extend the Christian religion over all the nations he governed, and to depress and gradually destroy the religion of the Gods and the ancient superstitions.<\/p>\n
title Historical Commentaries on the State of Christianity during the First Three Hundred and Twenty-Five Years II
\nauthor von Mosheim, John Laurence<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
INTRODUCTION It appears to me desirable, (and the opinion is not, I think, built upon slight grounds,) that before we enter on the history of the origin and progress of Christianity, a summary view should be taken of the age in which the Gospel Dispensation had its commencement. For in no other way than by … <\/p>\n