Reason for the progress of but was originally with God, and was God. To other features of this heresy, he is supposed occasionally to point in his writings; the whole tone of which, of the Gospel especially, indicates a design to inculcate the doctrine of Christ's real and perfect divinity, in opposition to the conclusions which were drawn from these principles of Cerinthus; as, that he was inferior to God the Father, that he was a mere man while on the cross, and separated from the Eon who possessed his frame, &c. Even those, accordingly, who do not name Cerinthus and his sect as the occasion of this additional Gospel history being written by the apostle in his latter days, point to its spiritual character; and relate that it was composed with a view to represent Christ more in his Divine nature, and especially in that early part of his history, which had been hitherto chiefly occupied with his earthly birth and parentage. If it be asked, how it happened, that errors like those above described should have passed current with men accustomed to Gnosticism. scriptural religion founded on miraculous evidence; with Jews, who had received the Law on the testimony of Moses and his miracles;-with Christians, whose belief was grounded on a similar foundation, the reason some have assigned is the following:-The artful founders of Gnosticism, in recommending the Oriental philosophy to the Jews originally, were sensible of the difficulty: they perceived that it was not enough in this case, as in the attempt to reconcile their system with that of Plato, or Aristotle, or Zeno, to make its several parts harmonize and represent those of the other. There was one ingredient wanting, which neither Orientalism nor any human system of religion claimed or rested on an ingredient peculiar to the truth, and that was, evidence. In order to supply this want, it was found expedient to challenge as authority, the very same source to which the Jews themselves were accustomed to appeal. These secrets of revelation, they pretended, had been given from the beginning, together with what was contained in the Jewish Scripture. Adam, they said, received them, the patriarchs received them, and through them they were communicated to certain ancient sages, the especial confidants and guardians of holy wisdom. Whilst divine faith was presented to mankind in a homely garb, suited to vulgar apprehensions, this key to its real nature was thus preserved in the keeping of a few. 126 In short, theirs, according to their representation, was the Esoteric doctrine of religion, as that contained in Scripture had been the Exoteric. Recalled for testimony to an early age, to names of whom a blind reverence made it nearly blasphemy to doubt aught; and probably so bewildered in their view of the question, as to confound scepticism, concerning the fact of these holy men having received the communications pretended, with doubt as to the validity of their 126 Bruckeri Hist. Philosophiæ, Tom. II. p. 924-949. evidence, if given to such a fact, what wonder that many should fall into the snare? The experience of every age justifies the great historian of Greece, in the conclusion to which he was led, by his attempt to ascertain the grounds on which so much idle fable had been received as truth by his countrymen.' Men will not take the trouble to search after truth, if any thing like it is ready provided to their hands; and from this fate religious truth itself is not exempted. 127 127 Lib. I. C. 20. PART III. AGE OF THE APOSTOLICAL FATHERS. From A.D. 100-167. Gradual change from WITH the removal of God's inspired servants from the scene, Ecclesiastical History assumes a widely different character from that which belongs to it during the record of their ministry. As long as their agency is employed, we look on with pious confidence in the wisdom of the measures pursued, and presume not to question the reasonableness of the objects effected. But, from the moment at which a transfer of authority is made to fallible rulers and teachers, these become amenable for the discharge of their trust to posterity, as well as to God; and it is our duty to inquire into the fidelity with which they have discharged it. In no part of the Christian scheme is the Divine wisdom more Inspired to apparent than in this transfer. It was begun early, long before Uninspired the removal of the apostles; and was so gradually accomplished, Government. that even the death of St. John occasioned no such dismay in the Church Difficulties attendant on such a change. Church, as might have been expected at the extinction of the last star by which its course was to be directed. In the first instance, too, this transfer of authority was made to those who, for a season, had exercised it under the instruction of the apostles, and whom the loss of their inspired guides left, therefore, engaged in a routine of duty no longer new or doubtful. The change, immense as it was, came almost imperceptibly both on the Church and on its rulers. No portion of the Christian scheme awakens a more anxious inquiry, than the interesting experiment which was thus made in first intrusting Christianity to uninspired guardians. For, although this was done under circumstances which approach the nearest to extraordinary Divine assistance, and the abruptness of leaving the Church at once to the ordinary help of the Spirit was thereby prevented; although, unlike succeeding rulers of the various Christian societies, the first uninspired authorities had received instruction immediately from the apostles, had acted for a time under their superintendence, and were, accordingly, trained in the practices, and taught the doctrines of their religion, in a way which might seem to have precluded the possibility of misapprehension,—still, they were liable to error; and error so near the source of Divine truth, seems the more likely to mingle and to flow on with it, and to pollute its remotest streams. Of the primitive worthies, on whom this weighty responsibility Apostolical devolved, the most conspicuous are known by the title of the Fathers. APOSTOLICAL FATHERS, a term obviously derived from the peculiarity of character and circumstances to which I have been adverting. Others, indeed, may have been equally serviceable by their lives, and equally important to the age in which they flourished; but these have become eminently so to us by their writings, or, rather, the writings which have been transmitted to us as theirs. In the catalogue of the apostolical Fathers we usually find the names of BARNABAS, HERMAS, CLEMENT, IGNATIUS, and POLYCARP. Barnabas. Why the first of these, himself an apostle of no small note, should be classed among the Fathers, it is difficult to understand. Among the works of the apostolical Fathers, is an Epistle claiming to be His Epistle. the production of Barnabas the apostle. Now, obviously, the only ground for classing this Epistle with these works, and not with the Scriptures, is that Barnabas did not write it; whilst the only reason for calling him an apostolical Father, is that he did write it. It is, in short, to suppose him at once, the author, and not the author. One view alone can be at all compatible with this arrangement; which is, that the Epistle was originally his, but became so corrupted as to forfeit its scriptural character. This is possible; but this is not the view taken by the several disputants who from time to time have either advocated or condemned it in toto. And even then, although this solution might make the catalogue of the writings of these Fathers a convenient place for the degraded Scripture, it would not bring down the author to the level of the Fathers. His history, therefore, can only be placed properly where it has been already noticed, with that of the other apostles. Shepherd. HERMAS is another apostolical Father, whose title is doubtful. Hermas. If his claim be good, he is the same with him whom St. Paul names at the close of his Epistle to the Romans; and he is so described Rom. xvi. 14. by most of the early authorities. Many learned men of later times, however, offended at the character of his singular work, The Shepherd, His have anxiously sought for external evidence against this identity; nor have they been unsuccessful. There is strong ground for supposing that The Shepherd was a production of the second century, and that the Hermas who wrote it was a brother of Pius, bishop of Rome.1 Nevertheless, as the point is not quite incontrovertible, and as this extraordinary performance was once so famous as by some to be accounted Scripture,2 Hermas may still, perhaps, be allowed to keep his place among the apostolical Fathers, subject to such a protest as the evidence against his claim may seem to require. CLEMENT is more certainly identified with him whom St. Paul, Clement. in his Epistle to the Philippians, names as one of "his fellow 1 Moshemii De Rebus Christ. ante Const. p. 162. 2 Irenæus apud Euseb. Hist. Eccl. Lib. V. C. S. Origen, too, considered it inspired. labourers ;' " and from the great number of writings which were made popular by the authority of his assumed name, he may be considered as the most distinguished among the apostolical Fathers. He was bishop of Rome by the appointment of St. Peter; and on the death of Anacletus, he appears to have united in his person the dignity which was before divided between St. Paul's successor and St. Peter's. Like most of the bishops of that dangerous see, he His Epistles. suffered martyrdom. Of his writings, only one Epistle has come down to us, the authenticity of which can be clearly made out. It is addressed from the Church of Rome to the Church of Corinth. His Second Epistle, as it is called, if originally his, is confessedly very much changed from its original character. But, in truth, there is good reason to believe that no Epistle corresponding to this was ever written by Clement. Irenæus was not acquainted with more than one, and his quotations prove that one to have been the first. Eusebius mentions the second, but expressly states, that he could discover no ancient authority for it, and rejects it. Dionysius, bishop of Corinth, Clement of Alexandria, and Origen, all bear testimony to one only, the first. Two more have been found of late years, attached to a Syriac version of the New Testament, and were appended by Wetstein in his folio edition of the sacred volume. Allowing the full force of the evidence in favour of the genuineness of these, arising out of their scriptural language, and the absence of terms and topics which belong to a later period, still, this is counterbalanced by other internal evidence which is no less strong against it; and no trace of them is to be found in ancient writers.6 About the spuriousness of the other pieces to which his name has been attached, there is no controversy." Ignatius. The remains of IGNATIUS are less scanty, and yet these are conHis Epistles. fined to seven Epistles, written during a hasty and harassing journey from Antioch to Rome, for the purpose of being put to death at a public exhibition. No ancient writings have been more the subject of fraud and corruption than these.8 Eusebius mentions seven genuine Epistles, which Pearson, in his Vindicia Ignatianæ, has very ably identified with that collection which is now called The genuine Epistles." There is another collection of Ignatius's Epistles, of which the former are the basis, but they are most grossly altered and interpolated. A third set appears with his 3 Phil. iv. 3. "Clement also, and other my fellow-labourers, whose names are in the book of life." 4 Adv. Hæres. Lib. III. C. 3. 5 Hist. Eccl. Lib. III. C. 38. "OT 7 These are, 1. An Epistle to James, our Lord's brother. 2. Recognitions, in ten books. 3. Clementina. 4. Apostolical Constitutions, in eight books. 5. Apostolical Canons. Of these, the Recognitions is the most ancient and the most valuable: it was written, probably, about the middle of the second century. 8 Ignatius's Epistles were first published in Latin by Archbishop Usher, and afterwards in Greek by Vossius. 9 See Eusebius, Lib. III. C. 36. |