5//^//., 
 
 PRINCETON, N. J. 
 
 BR 165 .S55 1881 ) 
 
 Simcox, William Henry, 1842- 
 
 1889. 
 The beginnings of the 
 
 Christian church 
 

 'i^ 
 
THE BEGINNINGS 
 
 CHRISTIAN CHURCH 
 
fc-2o6l 
 
THE BEGINNINGS 
 
 CHRISTIAN CHURCH 
 
 LECTURES DELIVERED IN THE CHAPTER-ROOM 
 OF WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL 
 
 WILLIAM HENRY '^SIMCOX, M.A. 
 
 RECTOR OF WEYHILL, HANTS ; LATE FELLOW OF QUEEN's COLLEGE, OXFORD 
 
 RIVINGTONS 
 
 WATERLOO PLACE, LONDON 
 
 MDCCCLXXXI 
 
piin';G,L.L-...; 
 
 
 PREFACE 
 
 CANON WILBERFORCE, of Winchester, asked 
 me to give a course of Lectures in the Cathedral 
 during the Lent of 1880 on the history of the early- 
 Christian Church. Owing to accidental circum- 
 stances, the delivery of the Lectures was postponed 
 to the beginning of the present year. After the first 
 of them, I was encouraged by Canon Wilberforce and 
 other friends to prepare them for publication ; and in 
 doing so, I have been able to include a good deal 
 which the limits of time obliged me to omit in 
 delivery. What now forms the last four Lectures 
 had then to be compressed into two. But though 
 the matter has been thus amplified, and to a certain 
 extent rearranged, it was for oral delivery that the 
 Lectures were written ; and I have not thought it 
 worth while to divest them of their original form, 
 further than altering a few colloquialisms, or expres- 
 sions which it was easier to follow when heard than 
 when read. The postponement of the Lectures has 
 had this advantage, that I have been able to read 
 before their publication (though mostly since their 
 delivery) three recent books bearing on the subject : 
 
 a 2 
 
vi PREFACE. 
 
 the Bishop of Lincoln's Church History to the Council 
 of Nicaca, the late Dean Stanley's Christian Institu- 
 tions, and Mr. Hatch's Bampton Lectures on The 
 Organisation of the Early Christian Churches. 
 
 When writers of such reputation as the two former 
 named, and such a thorough and painstaking student 
 as the last, had entered the field, it was perhaps pre- 
 sumptuous to offer to the public so slight a work as 
 these Lectures, which cannot pretend to any origi- 
 nality of research, or use of any but the most familiar 
 authorities. But in the period treated of, unlike most 
 others, the most familiar authorities are happily to a 
 great extent first-hand ones ; and among the first- 
 hand authorities, the familiar ones (the New Testa- 
 ment and the Apostolic Fathers) are, I venture to 
 think, more important as well as easier to use than 
 the unfamiliar ones which Mr. Hatch has collected 
 with such praiseworthy diligence. 
 
 In fact, Mr. Hatch himself encourages me to hope 
 these Lectures may be useful, because part of their 
 object was to bring out a point on which he very 
 properly insists, in a passage of his introductory 
 Lecture, with which it is easier to agree entirely than 
 with much of what follows : " The special difficulty of 
 studying any such period of history arises from the 
 fact that the centuries which are remote from our own 
 seem, in the long perspective, to be almost indis- 
 tinguishable. . . . Between the third century and the 
 fourth, for example, or between the fourth and the 
 fifth, there seems to all but the scholars who have 
 trod the ground to be an hardly appreciable differ- 
 
PREFACE. vii 
 
 ence." One may surely add, that between the second 
 century and the third the difference seems to be even 
 less, no such revolution intervening as the conversion 
 of the Emperors or the conquests of the Barbarians. 
 Anything between the death of St. John and the 
 Council of Nicaea, perhaps even of Chalcedon, is to 
 the ordinary Anglican student of historical theology 
 a fact belonging to "the Primitive Church," just as to 
 Scott and his imitators any time between the Norman 
 Conquest and the Reformation belonged to "the 
 Middle Ages." 
 
 On the other hand, we are so fully conscious of the 
 marked difference of character between the apostolic 
 and post-apostolic writings, that we find it difficult to 
 remember, even with St. Clement's help, that the 
 apostolic age must have passed insensibly into the 
 post-apostolic. All Christians before St. John's 
 death, or at least before St. Paul's, seem to us to live 
 in the atmosphere of the Acts of the Apostles ; while 
 all Christians after those events seem to live in that 
 of a chronic Diocletian persecution. 
 
 I have tried to state in these Lectures what is 
 known, or can fairly be inferred, as to the forms and 
 surroundings of Christian life at different periods, 
 without forgetting that the principle of Christian life 
 was continuous and unchangeable throughout. What 
 the forms and surroundings were is to be learnt by 
 the critical use of evidence, contemporary evidence 
 especially: whether that evidence be included in the 
 Canon of Scripture or no, it must be treated in a 
 purely critical spirit. But it is a matter not for 
 
viii PREFACE. 
 
 criticism but for faith, to discern what the pervading 
 principle of Christian life was. The claims on our 
 faith, no doubt, of scriptural and extra-scriptural 
 authorities are different ; but faith may serve to en- 
 lighten criticism as to both, by securing perfect 
 sympathy with the men exhibited to us by each. 
 Thus it would be not only an affectation, but a mis- 
 leading one, for a Christian to try to study the history 
 of Christianity as if he were not a Christian ; but it 
 is no less misleading if, in our study of the Primitive 
 Church, we judge everything according to its bearings 
 on the dogmatic theology or on the ecclesiastical 
 policy of our own day. Now and then, the bearing 
 of primitive belief or practice on contemporary ques- 
 tions is so obvious, that it is scarcely possible to treat 
 one without an allusion to the other ; I have not been 
 careful to avoid such allusions. But if the same 
 Spirit animated the Church of St. Paul's day, of St. 
 Ignatius' day, and of our own, there will be more 
 gained for Catholic principles if we can learn what 
 the principles of St. Paul and of St. Ignatius were 
 than by any discussion of the complicated question, 
 who are the truest representatives of the Apostles 
 and the Martyrs now. 
 
 Further, in writing in a historical, not a contro- 
 versial, form, it is our duty to do scrupulous justice to 
 the enemies of the Church — to treat them as persons, 
 not as embodiments of principles. It is a veiy cheap 
 form of charity, and a very fashionable disguise for 
 vanity, to undertake the rehabilitation of one of the 
 bad characters of history ; and we should suspect a 
 
PREFACE. ix 
 
 writer to be moved rather by vanity than by charity 
 who attempted the task for Nero or Domitian, or 
 even for Herod Agrippa or Simon Magus. But 
 these men were men, even if bad ones ; and had mo- 
 tives, even if bad ones, for what they did, and reasons, 
 even if insufficient ones, for what they thought. 
 Even with them, therefore, it is worth while to ask 
 what were their reasons and motives for hostihty 
 to Christianity, and not to accept as a solution of 
 the whole matter that they were wicked and the 
 Christians were good. And still more, when we re- 
 member that Christianity was persecuted by Jews 
 like Saul of Tarsus, and by Pagans like M. Aurelius, 
 it is impossible to make our condemnation of the 
 persecutor absolute. We must try to understand 
 the controversy as it presented itself from his point 
 of view : we may believe that the Christians were 
 absolutely and entirely right, but it is impossible to 
 pretend that such Jews or Pagans were manifestly or 
 wilfully wrong. 
 
 Septemhe}- loih, l88i. 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 LECTURE I. 
 
 TAGE 
 
 THE CHURCH AT JERUSALEM . ... I 
 
 LECTURE IL 
 THE JEWISH AND GENTILE CHURCHES . . . 45 
 
 LECTURE in. 
 THE CHURCH AND THE EMPIRE . . . . log 
 
 LECTURE IV. 
 THE CLOSE OF THE APOSTOLIC AGE . . . 150 
 
 LECTURE V. 
 THE SUB-APOSTOLIC CHURCH . ... I94 
 
 LECTURE VI. 
 
 THE SUCCESSORS OF THE APOSTLES . . . 245 
 
 LECTURE VII. 
 THE CHURCH OF THE APOLOGISTS . . . 277 
 
 LECTURE VIII. 
 THE CHURCH OF THE MARTYRS . ... 379 
 
ERRATA. 
 
 Page 64, line 3, for "raising" read "the raising." 
 
 Page 99, line 22, for "question" read "questions." 
 
 Page 147, note 2, for "Lect. VIII." read "the Note to Lect. VII. 
 
 Page 219, note i, line 2, for "the" read "this." 
 
 Page 228, notes i and 2 should be transposed. 
 
 Page 257, note i, for "continuously as it stands" read "as it stands 
 
 continuously." 
 Page 277, line 3, for "use" read "used." 
 Page 280, line 11, for "having" read "leaving." 
 Page 306, line 17, for "some places" read "one place." 
 Page 332, line i, for "made" read "make." 
 
[M^jff^-^ 
 
 
 I. 
 
 Sfte (2D]burcf) at Jjf^u^akm. 
 
 THE history of the Church of Christ, as a portion 
 of the history of humanity, may most properly 
 be reckoned to begin with the day of Pentecost. We 
 know indeed that preparations for the corporate life 
 of a Church had been made by the Lord, even during 
 His earthly ministry. Such were the selection of the 
 Twelve and of the Seventy whom He commissioned to 
 act in His Name; the ordinance of Baptism, which He 
 declared to be not only a symbol of the cleansing of 
 the penitent from past sin, but an introduction to a 
 new life ; and lastly the other ordinance which, at the 
 very close of His life, He appointed to keep His 
 followers in perpetual communion with Himself, and 
 by consequence with each other. And after His 
 resurrection He made even closer approaches to the 
 formation of a Church. He now not only promised, 
 but conferred, on St. Peter and the other apostles, 
 special powers and plenary authority for its govern- 
 ment and organisation. 
 
 But the exercise of these powers did not yet begin. 
 After the Ascension, it is true, the few scores of 
 believers who were to be found in Jerusalem, perhaps 
 
 B 
 
2 BEGINNIXGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 the few hundreds who were to be found in Gah'lee or 
 elsewhere, met together for common worship ; not im- 
 probably, they already began to recognize that the 
 day of the Lord's resurrection was a time when His 
 presence might especially be looked for by those who 
 sought Him in the assembly of the faithful. To this 
 extent the one body existed, but it was not yet a 
 living body ; God had not yet breathed into it the 
 Spirit of Life. The change from a lifeless body to 
 a living exactly illustrates what took place at Pente- 
 cost ; for the very test of physical life is the possession 
 of the power which the spiritual body then received — 
 the power to assimilate. The important event of 
 Pentecost was not merely the portent that struck the 
 hearers, nor even the spiritual exaltation of the 
 disciples themselves ; not merely that the number of 
 believers in Jesus was multiplied five times fivefold. 
 It lies in this, that the new believers were united and 
 amalgamated with the old — that the three thousand, 
 of whom some probably knew nothing of the Lord, 
 and some had acquiesced in His condemnation, were 
 now thoroughly and harmoniously set on an equal 
 footing with the hundred and twenty, who had, more 
 or less consistently, adhered to Him throughout. 
 
 But the Church thus born into the world, though 
 living, and powerful for all the necessary functions of 
 life, differed from the Church as we know it as much 
 as a babe wrapped in swaddling-clothes differs from 
 a man in or past the prime of life. The Church now 
 consisted, not of millions of men and women " of all 
 nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues," but 
 
THE CHURCH AT JERUSALEM. 3 
 
 of a few thousand Jews, mostly residents in Jerusalem,, 
 or at least occasional visitors there. The apostles, 
 Galileans as they were, made Jerusalem their head- 
 quarters, and do not appear for some years even to 
 have visited the outlying communities that grew up 
 in the various districts of Palestine. These were 
 probably more like detached fragments of the Church 
 of Jerusalem than separate organisms co-ordinate 
 with it. They no doubt met for their own daily or 
 weekly worship (besides that of the public synagogues), 
 and probably had their own recognised elders to 
 conduct it ; but their centre of religious life lay at 
 Jerusalem, not less than was the case of the unbelieving 
 Jews around them. For such questions as required 
 apostolic counsel or judgment, for such spiritual gifts 
 as depended on apostolic ministry, the members or 
 officers of these communities would resort to Jerusa- 
 lem, most hkely at the three great feasts. By this 
 means they maintained, not merely a religious com- 
 munion, but a practical unity, with the central Church. 
 And in the central Church itself as in the others, 
 the new community, though complete in itself, did 
 not detach itself from the national or religious life of 
 the Jewish people. The believers habitually attended 
 the temple daily, at the hours of the morning and 
 evening sacrifice, and took part in the solemn 
 worship then offered ; they crowded the temple 
 courts in such numbers, that the largest but one of its 
 colonnades, that called Solomon's Porch, was mono- 
 polized by them, and abandoned to them by general 
 consent. They had their private worship at home, in 
 
4 BEGIXMXGS OF THE CHRIST/AX CHURCH. 
 
 which they supplemented the temple and synagogue 
 services by more distinctly Christian observances, 
 especially by that which was now called by the 
 reverentially indefinite name, "the breaking of the 
 Bread." But these did not interfere with attendance 
 at the Jewish public worship, as they took place most 
 solemnly when the Sabbath was ended, and in all 
 cases, apparently, during the night, after the time for 
 public prayer was over. Of withdrawing from the 
 Jewish worship, as a thing no longer holy, the dis- 
 ciples had no thought. When, towards the end of 
 the period we are considering, " a great company of 
 the priests were obedient to the faith,'" we have not 
 a hint that they regarded their priestly functions as 
 obsolete or meaningless, or that they ceased to minis- 
 ter in the temple, each in the order of his course, 
 as Zacharias did some forty years before. And it is 
 even more certain, that the other believing Israelites 
 brought sacrifices to the temple * on all such occasions 
 as were commanded or encouraged by the law. 
 
 And as the disciples of Jesus had no inclination 
 to withdraw themselves from communion in the 
 Jewish worship, so neither was there any steady or 
 general effort to exclude them from it. The only 
 difference between them and other Jews was, that 
 they were so much better Jews than others ; and, as 
 the best Jews that were to be seen, they were accept- 
 able to the Jewish people. " The people of the land," 
 as the rabbis called them, did not feel obliged to join 
 the new sect of the Nazarenes (or Galileans, or what- 
 
 1 Acts vi. 7. - Acts xxi. 23, 26. 
 
THE CHURCH AT JERUSALEM. 5 
 
 ever name they bore) any more than to join the 
 Pharisees or Sadducees ; but they hked and respected 
 them a great deal more than the Pharisees or Sad- 
 ducees, or any other sect or party; and every now 
 and then some of them would make the discovery that 
 the new sect was not only nobler than the others, but 
 was less exclusive. "People of the land" as they were, 
 it was open to them not only to admire the Nazarenes, 
 but to join their number. This is the state of 
 things described in St. Luke's words, Acts v. 12-14: 
 " They were all with one accord in Solomon's porch. 
 And of the rest durst no man join himself to them : 
 but the people magnified them. And believers were 
 the more added to the Lord, multitudes both of men 
 and women." 
 
 These few words serve to describe the religious life 
 of the Church for a period, as it seems, of about 
 seven years. As a description of the main course of 
 its religious life, this sentence seems at least as impor- 
 tant as the longer and more striking passages in the 
 early chapters of the Acts, which describe the 
 miracles of the apostles, the persecutions endured by 
 them, or even the so-called " community of goods " 
 among the disciples. The silent, steady, and peaceful 
 growth of the Church was the end, to which the 
 miracles and the persecutions were the divinely- 
 appointed means ; while its social and economical 
 organisation was not, apparently, so much a matter 
 of definite and deliberate institution as the natural 
 outcome of the prevailing spirit of brotherly charity. 
 
 For it is possible to exaggerate the difference 
 
6 BEGJAA'INGS OF THE CHRISTIAX CHURCH. 
 
 between the social state of the Church of Jerusalem, 
 and that of other Churches where charity has 
 abounded, from the apostolic age downward ; and 
 certainly it is easy to overstate the novel and revolu- 
 tionary character that the social organization of the 
 primitive Church would bear in the eyes of a society 
 like that of Jerusalem in the first century. I believe 
 the view generally taken by sensible commentators 
 or readers — at least in England — is, if expressed 
 more clearly than they generally think it reverent to 
 express it, something like this : that the disciples in 
 a moment of enthusiasm adopted a communistic 
 mode of life, wherein private property was abolished; 
 that in consequence the Church of Jerusalem never 
 was truly self-supporting, but from the first lived on 
 its capital, and was pauperized when this was ex- 
 hausted ; and that other Churches, when they arose, 
 avoided imitating the generous mistake, and sought, 
 by liberal almsgiving, to remedy its consequences. 
 
 Now I think that injustice is done in this view to 
 the practical sagacity of the holy apostles, and that 
 the ideas of modern times and modern societies are 
 too hastily applied to the case of ancient Jerusalem. 
 Neither in its goodness nor in its difficulties was the 
 condition of the primitive Church, when "they had 
 all things common," so very different from that of the 
 world immediately around them. The spirit of 
 charity, the sense of brotherhood that Christians felt 
 towards their fellow-believers, differed from what 
 Jews felt for theirs rather in degree, in purit}', and in 
 width of range than in kind. " Thou shalt love thy 
 
THE CHURCH AT JERUSALEM. 7 
 
 neighbour as thyself" was no new commandment, 
 though in its original context it did not exclude the 
 question, "Who is my neighbour ? " but rather sup- 
 plied it with an answer — " any of the children of thy 
 people," ' The feelings of an Israelite to a fellow- 
 Israelite were, if he lived up to the highest standard 
 of his religion, not unworthy to be called by the name 
 of charity in its Christian sense. No doubt the 
 sacerdotal caste — at least the group of families, 
 mostly Sadducees, from which the high priests were 
 appointed — formed an exclusive and oppressive 
 aristocracy. No doubt also the clique of rabbis, 
 Scribes, and Pharisees had all the vices at once of an 
 intolerant clergy and of an unpractical professoriate, 
 and stood, in their own way, as far aloof from the 
 common people as the Sadducee priests stood in 
 theirs. But the existence of these exclusive castes 
 did not prevent the existence of a strong sense of 
 brotherhood, binding together all the social classes of 
 the nation. Of course there were selfish men in all 
 classes, in Israel as everywhere ; but the duty of 
 charity was recognized by almost all, if not prac- 
 tised by all, and the Pharisees, whatever their faults, 
 were not backward in almsgiving. We do hear in 
 the Gospels of the ostentation of their way of alms- 
 giving, but hardly of their assuming an offensive air 
 of patronage toward those to whom they gave; while, 
 on the other hand, several stories in the Talmud, and 
 one more or less authentic evangelical tradition," 
 
 ^ Lev. xix. 1 8. 
 
 '^ In a fragment of the "Gospel according to the Hebrews," the 
 
8 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 show that the normal recipients of charity were not 
 indolent mendicants, but retained their self-respect and 
 deserved respectful treatment from their benefactors. 
 But while the Jews were at once a charitable and 
 an industrious people, Jerusalem was a poor town. It 
 had become the capital from its strength as a fortress ; 
 it remained the capital from its associations as a 
 sanctuary. As a sanctuary, it was the centre of 
 national life to a nation whose life was based upon 
 their religion ; but it had none of the advantages 
 which make most capital cities the focus of the 
 national wealth. It was not in the days of St. Paul 
 and St. James alone that the population of Jerusalem 
 was largely dependent upon foreign charity ; it has 
 been the case from the days of Nehemiah to the 
 days of Sir Moses Montefiore. Nehemiah had re- 
 quired a -certain proportion of the nation ' to live at 
 Jerusalem beyond the number which it naturally 
 attracted, in order to serve at once as a garrison to 
 the fortress and a congregation to the sanctuary ; and 
 the latter cause, at least, had kept the place over- 
 populated ever since. ^ A large number of workmen 
 
 man witli the withered hand beseeches Jesus to heal him, "that I may 
 not basely beg my bread," his infirmity disabHng him from his trade 
 as a mason. We never hear in the New Testament of a beggar not 
 hopelessly blind or lame. The story in St. John ix. seems to show 
 that the feigning such an infirmity, though not inconceivable, was not 
 a common thing, or obvious to the imagination. 
 
 ^ Neh. xi. I. 
 
 ^ Rev. xi. 13 not improbably implies an estimate of the population 
 of the city at 70,000. Its present population — though still swollen to 
 some extent by the same causes as of old — is only estimated at 18,000, 
 or 24,000 when pilgrims come in. 
 
THE CHURCH AT JERUSALEM. 9 
 
 found employment on the temple and other public 
 buildings of the Herods ; but there were many no 
 doubt who found the struggle for life hard, and only 
 not hopeless if their earnings were supplemented by 
 the alms of their brethren, which was regarded, both 
 by givers and receivers, less as the dole of a pauper 
 than as the salary of a sacristan. 
 
 The Christian community of goods therefore, so 
 far as it went beyond the ordinary charity of average 
 Jews, must be regarded not as the cause of the 
 poverty of the Jerusalem society, but as a relief to it, 
 though only a temporary one. St. Barnabas and the 
 rest did, on the most heroic scale, what such people as 
 Queen Helena, of Adiabene, ' did on a tolerably 
 magnificent one ; nor did they do more than surpass 
 them in the degree of their munificence. In their 
 close sense of brotherhood, no one stood on his rights 
 to his neighbour's prejudice, " neither said any man 
 that aught of the things which he possessed was his 
 own;" but he did not cease to possess them if they 
 were not beyond what he required for his own reason- 
 able maintenance. " As many as were possessors of 
 lands or houses sold them . . . and distribution was 
 made to every man according as he had need." 
 There were no rich men living in affluence on the 
 savings of their ancestors, no poor in want of the 
 necessaries of life; but we have no hint that the artizans 
 or tradesmen — who, after all, formed perhaps the 
 majority of the Church — threw their earnings into a 
 common fund, and drew their maintenance from it. 
 ^ Jos. Ant. XX., ii. 5. 
 
lo BEG/NAVA'GS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 What the Church did was to maintain the poor in 
 comfort, by the rich sacrificing their accustomed 
 luxuries — not to make everyone dependent for neces- 
 saries on everybody else, instead of on themselves. 
 Moreover, it is to be noticed that while St. Barnabas 
 sold his estate, apparently in Cyprus, his aunt re- 
 tained her house at Jerusalem, and itsed it, instead of 
 parting Avith it, for the benefit of the community ; 
 while we are told that Ananias was under no com- 
 pulsion ' to emulate his charity, at least in the 
 entireness of its extent. 
 
 It remains to trace how the growth of the Church 
 was promoted by the other things recorded of this 
 period — the miracles performed by the apostles, and 
 the persecutions endured by them. As to the former, 
 it needs an effort for us to realize the light in which 
 they appeared to contemporaries. If we look at the 
 way in which we find men treat the miracles of the 
 New Testament (especially as recorded in the Acts 
 and in St. John's Gospel), we are surprised at their 
 not meeting either with more faith or with more in- 
 credulity. In the particular case of the miracle at 
 the Beautiful Gate, nothing can be more unlike the 
 temper either of believers or unbelievers in our time, 
 but nothing can be more characteristically Jewish, 
 
 ^ If we accept the generally-received translation of Acts v. 4. But 
 I am not sure that we should not render, " Did it not indeed remain thine 
 own, and though sold continue as before in thine own power?" If so, 
 the condemnation of Ananias was in part for keeping back any of the 
 money, not only for hypocrisy in pretending to give the whole. But if the 
 abdication of superfluous wealth was required of all converts who had 
 it, it still stopped short of the "vow of poverty " in the monastic 
 
THE CHURCH AT JERUSALEM. II 
 
 than the question put to the apostles by the high- 
 priestly party, " By what power or by what name have 
 ye done this ?" ' To a hostile mind, perhaps even to 
 an unprejudiced mind of our time, on hearing the 
 story that a lame beggar had been healed by a word, 
 the first thought would be, " The man was an im- 
 postor." If, however, the fact of his real lameness 
 and of his permanent cure were undeniably attested, 
 we should feel there was no alternative but to confess, 
 " This is the finger of God ; " unless we tried to escape 
 from that confession by some talk about the strange 
 effects of the mind upon the body — talk which may 
 not unfairly be translated, " Man can do miracles if 
 only he has faith, but God cannot." But to the 
 Sadducee high priests it never occurred to doubt the 
 fact of the miracle, nor yet, admitting the fact, to 
 submit to it as an evidence of divine authority. 
 
 We have, however, materials for explaining to our- 
 selves this attitude, strange as it seems to us. We 
 know that the Jews of that age thought it possible to 
 cast out evil spirits by the name, or at least by the 
 power, of their own evil ruler ; and they may have 
 thought that this cure was a case of that kind, that it 
 was effected by an idolatrous or magical invocation, 
 which of course was criminal according to the law of 
 Moses. On the other hand, all Jews believed that it 
 was possible to work miracles by the awful Name of 
 the Lord, which He revealed to Moses in Horeb — that 
 Name which in Hebrew, as substantially for the most 
 part in English use, is written Jehovah and read as 
 
 ^ Acts iv. 7. 
 
12 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 " the Lord." But reverence for this Name had been 
 carried to such a point of superstition that it was held 
 to be unlawful to pronounce it except upon the most 
 solemn occasions;' on the other hand, unlawful or 
 dangerous as it was to utter it, it would if uttered 
 work wonders. 
 
 It was at a somewhat later time the received ex- 
 planation among the Jews for our Lord's miracles 
 that He " had stolen the Unutterable Name out of 
 the temple." It is possible that even now that ex- 
 planation was applied to the works of His followers. 
 If then they owned to having done the miracle in the 
 Name of the Lord God of Israel, they would be 
 charged with blasphemy ; if, on the other hand, they 
 had done it in the name of any other god or devil, 
 they would — far more reasonably — have been charged 
 with idolatry or sorcery. The actual answer of SS. 
 Peter and John was more difficult to attack. They 
 said that they had done the miracle " in the Name of 
 Jesus Christ of Nazareth ;" and the high priests were 
 troubled, disappointed, but less astonished than we 
 might have expected. Jewish opinion recognized that 
 there were human "names to conjure with," and it 
 
 ^ Only when the high priest gave the benediction after the solemn 
 sacrifice of the Day of Atonement he was allowed "to give the blessing 
 of the Lord with his lips, and to rejoice in His Name " (Ecclus. 1. 20) ; 
 and even then care was taken to prevent anyone from overhearing it 
 except the few priests who were to keep up the tradition of its pronun- 
 ciation. In the last Jewish war under Bar-coziba, when it was believed 
 that the Christ had come, it is said that men ventured to utter the 
 Name, but afterwards, for want of the temple tradition, its true sound 
 has been forgotten, and is now at best a matter of precarious inference ; 
 it maj/ have been Jahveh. 
 
THE CHURCH A T JERUSALEM. 13 
 
 seems hardly to have been questioned whether it was 
 lawful to use such powers as these names gave/ It 
 was believed to be efficacious to adjure demons in 
 the name of Solomon, who, it was said, had himself 
 had power over them. Why not, then, also in the 
 name of Jesus ? a name, be it remembered, with at 
 least as sacred associations to a Jew as the other, and 
 in which moreover the Unutterable Name had been 
 solemnly embodied by Moses himself. Much more 
 it must be possible and lawful to work wonders in 
 the Name of the Christ of God, if only His Name 
 were indeed known to men. Accordingly they felt 
 unable to ground any criminal charge on the apostles' 
 profession ; they could only charge them never to 
 speak to any man in this Name. 
 
 But while miracles — manifest, unquestioned miracles 
 — were unable, in the state of general Jewish opinion, 
 to overpower unbelief, it would be a great mistake to 
 suppose they did nothing to promote belief. St. 
 Luke clearly intimates that they did much. A miracle 
 was not regarded as always or necessarily a direct 
 act of God ; but men might reason in the same way 
 that we are told Nicodemus did,- " No man can do 
 tJiese miracles which thou doest, except God be with 
 
 ^ A strange story is quoted from the Talmud, of which the point 
 seems to be that when St. James offered to heal by the Name of Jesus 
 a rabbi who had been bitten by a serpent, another rabbi, his uncle, 
 declared it was unlawful, and kept up the discussion till his opponent 
 died without admitting the apostle. But the story, if of any historical 
 value, belongs to a later period, when the relations between Jews and 
 Christians were more embittered. 
 
 ^ St. John iii. 2. 
 
14 BEGLVNIA'GS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 him." Other miracles might conceivably be wrought 
 by the name of Solomon, or by the power of Beelze- 
 bub, but not such as these, not so many, not so great, 
 above all, not characterized by such unvarying good- 
 ness : "can a devil open the eyes of the blind ?" In 
 this way the miracles served with all men to attract 
 attention, with all but the hopelessly prejudiced to 
 suggest the presence of divine power. But while 
 suggesting it to all or almost all, they proved it to 
 those only who had the gift of spiritual discernment, 
 who knew, so to speak, sympathetically what was 
 truly divine. " The Lord added together daily such 
 as were in the way of salvation ; " ' such as were not 
 in the way found it as natural as before to look on 
 the Church either with cold or distant respect, with 
 indifference, or with hostility. 
 
 However, natural as it was to Jews, the conduct of 
 the chief priests towards the apostles was unreason- 
 able from any point of view. It was injudicious from 
 their own ; it was providential from ours. After all, 
 common-sense would have pronounced that the works 
 of Jesus and His disciples proved either that heaven 
 or hell was on His side, and they ought, to be consis- 
 tent, to have treated them as in league either with one 
 or with the other. But they dared not and could not 
 be consistent. They had, indeed, made up their 
 minds that Jesus of Nazareth was not the Christ ; 
 they had a few months before put Him to death for 
 saying — or rather implying — that He was. If they 
 could have done the same to His apostles they 
 ^ Acts ii. 47. 
 
THE CHURCH AT JERUSALEM. 15 
 
 would, humanly speaking, have succeeded ; the work 
 of Jesus would have died, if not with Him, yet with 
 His immediate followers. But the priests had neither 
 the clear-sightedness nor, let us add, the resolute 
 wickedness for such a course. They were half-ashamed 
 of their conduct towards Jesus ; they felt that they 
 had strained if not perverted the law against Him ; 
 they were also half-awed by the fact of a miracle 
 being done in His name ; any way, they were not as 
 willing as they had been that His blood, and more 
 blood like His, should be on them and on their 
 children. Besides, knowing how hardly they had 
 obtained Pilate's assent to that one execution, it 
 would have been hopeless to apply to him for at least 
 a dozen more, when the evidence of guilt was, if 
 possible, less, and when they had no popular hero 
 like Barabbas to set off against the popularity of 
 those whom they sought to condemn. 
 
 So at first they contented themselves with censure 
 and discouragement ; afterwards they tried perse- 
 cution, but such feeble and petty persecution as always 
 strengthens rather than suppresses a religious move- 
 ment that has the least vitality. The apostles "de- 
 parted rejoicing from before the council, because they 
 were counted worthy to be put to shame for the 
 Name.'" Everybody must feel the moral grandeur of 
 that sentence; but it is well that we should also notice 
 the Providence of God in it. It had been physically 
 possible that the twelve apostles should all have been 
 put to death at once, and the work of the Gospel 
 ^ Acts V. 41. 
 
1 6 BEGLViVINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 nipped in the bud, but the opportunity had been lost. 
 Men who are in earnest for their faith will preach it 
 all the more when they are flogged for doing so ; but 
 you ca?i stop the preaching, if those who preach it are 
 promptly stoned or crucified. 
 
 We can trace one of the subsidiary causes which led 
 to this half-heartedness on the part of the persecutors 
 of the Church, during this time before it was too 
 strong to fear even hearty persecution. The leaders 
 in the attacks on the apostles were the Sadducee high 
 priests, who were "grieved that they . . . preached 
 through Jesus the resurrection from the dead.'" Then 
 the very fact that the Sadducees attacked the followers 
 of Jesus inclined the Pharisees, who after all had the 
 command of the council, to favour them. The Phari- 
 sees had indeed coalesced with the Sadducees in the 
 condemnation of Jesus, though even then it was the 
 Sadducees Annas and Caiaphas who had taken the 
 lead; but now, while all (as we have said) were inclined 
 to regret what they had then done, the Pharisees were 
 not unwilling to go a step further — to admit that He 
 who had been condemned was not only acknowledged 
 by God as innocent, but perhaps attested by Him as 
 having in truth been divinely commissioned. It was 
 less humiliatmg for them to have to make a personal 
 confession of a crime, than it was for their opponents 
 to concede to them the main point in controversy 
 between them — to confess that, since Jesus had risen, it 
 was proved that the dead could rise. We should prob- 
 ably have heard, if the great Rabban Gamaliel had 
 ^ Acts iv. 2. 
 
THE CHURCH AT JERUSALEM. 17 
 
 protested against the condemnation of the Lord. Pre- 
 sumably he had, at least tacitly, " consented to the 
 counsel and deed of them ;" but now he was disposed 
 to entertain, as at least possible, the view that "the 
 thing was of God," ' 
 
 It seems strange to our notions that there should 
 ever have been any practical prospect of a coalition 
 between the Pharisees and the followers of Jesus, the 
 great enemy of Pharisaism. And no doubt we are 
 right in regarding such a coalition as preposterous. 
 The Gospel in the hands of Pharisees would have 
 become something very different from the gospel of 
 Jesus. But none the less was the condition, humanly 
 speaking, possible, or even likely, at this time. We, 
 as Christians, ought not to feel interested in denying 
 that it was so, but in tracing the providential means 
 by which it was prevented. 
 
 Pharisaism approximated to Christianity by its 
 
 ^ Whether Gamaliel himself ever became a Christian is more than 
 uncertain. The Talmudic traditions, in which he and his family are 
 prominent figures, imply the contrary, though it seems it was not the 
 great Gamaliel, but his grandson and namesake, who sanctioned the in- 
 sertion in the liturgy of a savage curse on heretics, i.e. especially 
 Christians. The Christian story, that he and his fellow Rabbi Nicode- 
 mus were the "devout men ^who carried Stephen to his burial," rests 
 apparently not on a real tradition, but on inferences from this passage 
 itself. Gamaliel is first spoken of as a believer in a portion of the 
 Clementine Recognitions which seems to be an attempt to re- write the 
 story of the Acts from an Ebionite point of view ; and the form of the 
 story which finally prevailed has for its only evidence one of those 
 "inventions of relics," which St. Helena (whatever we may think of 
 her " invention ") had made suspiciously fashionable. Very few eccle- 
 siastical miracles are so well authenticated as those wrought by St. 
 Stephen's relics, and the authenticity of those relics necessarily involves 
 that of the legend of St. Gamaliel ; but the miracles are after all only 
 
 C 
 
1 8 BEGIXxVIXCS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 insistence on the doctrine of the resurrection ; the 
 Christianity of the period we are dealing with approxi- 
 imated to Pharisaism by its zealous yet peaceable 
 devotion to the Jewish national worship. The Chris- 
 tians probably were at first, to some extent, confounded 
 as "Galileans" with the Zealot followers of Judas 
 the Gaulonite ; very likely, indeed, they were largely 
 recruited from among that party; it had a representa- 
 tive, we know, among the apostles themselves.' But 
 the Church had now fully recognised that Christ's 
 kingdom was not of this world, nor one for which His 
 servants were to fight; and, to do the Pharisees justice, 
 the kingdom of God, as they understood it, was a 
 spiritual one, at least to this extent : they were content 
 to be politically subject to Rome, if only they might 
 have their own law strictly observed among them- 
 selves. They thus felt the Christians to be not very 
 far from themselves in their objects. The Christians 
 were also approximating to them in their habits. The 
 
 a very indirect attestation for the relics, and the best authenticated of 
 them, those that came personally under the observation of St. Augustine, 
 are of a class where the line is hard to draw between effects of imagina- 
 tion and those implying a real external cause. Even if we set aside (as 
 perhaps the character of some of the persons involved entitles us to do) 
 the hypothesis of wilful fraud, we have still to consider whether it is 
 likelier that God wrought a miracle to glorify His servant Gamaliel, or 
 that a devout priest of Palestine, after meditating at once on the 
 canonical Acts of the' Apostles, and on the fast-multiplying apocryphal 
 legends of the martyrs, more than once dreamt about St. Stephen and 
 Gamaliel, and connected them in his dreams with a neighbouring 
 cemetery ; and that, when the cemetery was examined, it was found to 
 contain the grave of one Gamaliel, and of two other persons whom it 
 was possible to identify with SS. Stephen and Nicodemus. 
 i St. Luke vi. 15, &c. 
 
THE CHURCH AT JERUSALEM. 19 
 
 Pharisees had regarded the disciples with religious 
 horror, because they offended them in what we 
 consider points of good manners ;' but the migration 
 from the provinces to the capital — still more, the habit 
 of constantly joining in the temple ritual — must have 
 tended to make them act as their neighbours and their 
 fellow-worshippers did ; and as the Christians very 
 properly conformed to the decencies both of public 
 worship and of social life, so the difference between 
 them and the Pharisees would diminish. 
 
 But it had not time to vanish ; Christianity was 
 saved from the danger of becoming Pharisaical by 
 ceasing to be Jewish. And in truth the one was as 
 important an escape as the other. As a Pharisaical 
 Christianity would not have deserved the world's 
 allegiance, so a Jewish Christianity, even if deserving 
 it, would never have obtained it. Things were rapidly 
 tending to the acceptance of the Gospel, or at least 
 of a Gospel, at once by the masses of the Jewish 
 people, and by the dominant section of its intellectual 
 upper class. There was no reason why it should not 
 be accepted by the Jewish people as a whole. The 
 Christ had come ; He had suffered, as was written of 
 Him ; He was to come again, as was written of Him 
 also, to restore the kingdom to Israel, and Himself to 
 reig-n over it. In the meanwhile Israelites were to 
 
 o 
 
 ^ We never hear that the Lord gave offence by not conforming to 
 the common-sense habit of "washing the hands before He ate bread." 
 He did once give offence by not taking a superfluous bath before a meal, 
 at a time when a Pharisee would have apprehended defilement from 
 contact with the "people of the land." (Compare St. Luke xi. 38 
 with St. Matt. .\v. 2 ; St. ]\Lirk vii. 2, 3.) 
 
20 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 repent of their sins, and to love one another. This 
 was not, indeed, the exact form of Messianic doctrine 
 generally received among the Jews ; neither, however 
 true and beautiful, is it an adequate statement of the 
 faith of the Christian Church ; but it was, so far as 
 we are told, all that the followers of Christ had as 
 yet openly preached, and it was rather a purification 
 than a contradiction of the popular doctrine — a 
 doctrine not too different from the popular one to be 
 insensibly substituted for it. There was a real danger, 
 therefore, of the Jewish nation becoming Christian. 
 I call it a danger, because if they had accepted the 
 Gospel no other nation would. Greeks and Romans 
 disliked and despised the Jews in much the same way 
 as Christians do or did in modern times. The saying, 
 as old as Haman, that their "laws were diverse from all 
 people,"' "contrary to all men," was at least as true, 
 and as widely felt, under the Roman empire as under 
 the Persian. The Jews were an odious, vagabond set 
 of people, with a national religion not worthy to be 
 called a religion ; for no one knew the name of their 
 god, no one had ever seen his image. It was impos- 
 sible to identify him with any inmate of any civilized 
 pantheon, and equally impossible to assimilate his 
 worship to the institutions of any civilized communit}-. 
 No doubt this strange religion made converts ; but 
 they were all very low people, contemptible before 
 their conversion, and contemned the more after it, both 
 by their new co-religionists and by their old. The con- 
 version of self-respecting Gentiles to a religion of the 
 ^ Esther iii. 8 ; i Thess. ii. 15 ; Tag. Hist. V., iv. i, &c. 
 
THE CHURCH AT JERUSALEM. 21 
 
 Jews was impossible ; and therefore, if Christianity- 
 was to be a religion for the world, it was necessary 
 that it should cease to be a religion of Jews. As St. 
 Paul says, it was only through the fall of Israel that 
 salvation could come to the Gentiles ; it was the 
 casting away of them that is the riches of the world. 
 Let us see how they came to be cast away. 
 
 We have seen already that the Christian "com- 
 munity of goods " did not amount to a revolution in 
 Jewish society ; but it did lead indirectly to a revolu- 
 tion in the relations of the Church to the Jewish 
 nation as a whole. It brought St. Stephen to the 
 front. Hitherto the twelve apostles had been practi- 
 cally the sole officers of the Church of Jerusalem. 
 We may conjecture, indeed, that the Seventy ordained 
 by the Lord before His death were recognized as 
 having a permanent commission to preach, and per- 
 haps to preside in assemblies for prayer and sacra- 
 ments. It is possible that the apostles had already 
 begun to grant similar commissions to others. But 
 for one thing many of these elders must have been 
 employed, at ordinary times, as vicars ministering to 
 the scattered communities throughout Palestine ; and 
 further, while the line between the " elder brethren " ' 
 and the other members of the Church was much less 
 strongly marked than that between clergy and laity 
 in any later age, the line between apostles and elders 
 
 ^ "Elder brethren," not "elders and brethren," is probably the 
 right reading in Acts xv. 23. And it seems better to take it as a modest 
 designation of the official eldersj, than to suppose that the whole Church 
 of Jerusalem claims the authority of "elder brethren" over "the 
 brethren which are of the Gentiles." 
 
22 BEGIXNIXGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 was much more strongly marked than that between 
 bishops and presbyters was, at least till secular dis- 
 tinctions came to accentuate the ecclesiastical. Any 
 way, it is plain that the apostles took the whole 
 responsibility of the business of the Church at 
 Jerusalem, until its dimensions became absolutely 
 unmanageable ; then they made over its more secular 
 affairs (so far as any of its afifairs were secular), not 
 to any of the existing elders, but to a new commis- 
 sion of Seven, who probably were from the first called 
 by a name equivalent to deacons. 
 
 But the extension of the Church, which led to this 
 differentiation of function among its officers, had even 
 earlier introduced differences among the elements com- 
 posing the body. It was indeed still composed of Jews 
 exclusively; but, whereas it had at first been composed 
 of Jews natives of Palestine, and frequent visitors if not 
 constant residents at Jerusalem, it had by this time re- 
 ceived accessions from the Greek-speaking Jews of the 
 Dispersion — men who were at Jerusalem practically 
 foreigners, though owned by the natives as orthodox 
 co-religionists. This new class of believers had grown 
 up insensibly ; the line between them and the 
 " Hebrews," or native Palestinians, was not a very 
 sharp one. Grecian as well as Oriental pilgrims had 
 been among the first converts on the Day of Pente- 
 cost ; and there were others, such as the Cypriot 
 Levite, "Joseph the Son of Prophecy,"' who were 
 
 ^ It woulil of course be premature to refer to his yet more famous 
 companion ; but of him we know yet more certainly that he was proud 
 both of being a " Hebrew" and a citizen of Tarsus. (Acts xxi. 39; 
 2 Cor. xi. 22 ; Phil. iii. 5.) 
 
THE CHURCH AT JERUSALEM. 23 
 
 half-Hellenised — natives and residents of foreign 
 places, perhaps enjoying the rights of citizenship 
 there, yet reckoning themselves as " Hebrews born 
 of Hebrews," though they spoke the Gentile lan- 
 guage at least as familiarly as the sacred one. 
 
 But by degrees the distinction between the Hebrew 
 and the Hellenistic elements in the Church became 
 unmistakeable, and the new element contained at 
 least as great diversities of social status as the old. 
 Many of the Hellenist converts no doubt would be 
 wealthy pilgrims, who had come to the Holy City, 
 and when there had found out what was truly the 
 holiest thing in it ; and some of these probably, like 
 St. Barnabas, when once at Jerusalem, sold their 
 property at home, and settled there permanently. 
 But there were at least as many poor pilgrims who 
 had been dependent on charity for the means of 
 making the journey, and still were dependent on 
 charity for the means of returning home, or of main- 
 taining themselves at Jerusalem if they did not return. 
 
 And many had never contemplated returning. In 
 particular, it would be a frequent case for a devout 
 widow, when her home in the land of her sojourning 
 was broken up, to return like Naomi to the land of 
 Israel, in order to end her days in the Holy City — 
 perhaps spending all her property upon the journey 
 thither, or when she arrived "casting into the offer- 
 ings of God all the living that she had." Many such 
 widows were attracted to the Gospel ; but, strangers 
 as they were in the city, it would be long before their 
 accession or their needs were reported to the apostles. 
 
24 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 It was the neglect of such cases that led to the ap- 
 pointment of the Seven, and the Seven were them- 
 selves all apparently' chosen from the Grecian section 
 of the Church; one of them was not even a Jew by 
 birth, but "a proselyte of Antioch." The basis of 
 the Church was already widening ; it was still a 
 Jewish society, but it was restricted to Judaism as a 
 religion, not as a nationality. 
 
 The utility of the new office showed itself at once, 
 not only (as we may presume) in the more efficient ad- 
 ministration of the charitable funds of the Church, but 
 in an increase to its rate of growth. The head of 
 the new body, the Archdeacon as the later Church 
 would have called him or indeed did call him, was 
 " a man full of the Holy Ghost and faith ; " and it 
 was impossible, when such a man was admitted to 
 office in the Church, to confine his office rigorously 
 to the serving of tables. He preached in the syna- 
 gogues frequented by Greek -speaking Jews like 
 himself, and apparently there was a new element in 
 the character of his preaching. In manner more 
 controversial than the earlier apostolic preaching, it 
 was in substance more liberal ; more Christian, of 
 course, it could hardly be, but it was less Jewish. 
 It would have been cruel, as it was for the present 
 needless, to disturb the mind of a simple Israelite, 
 who could understand no service of God but that 
 
 ' The inference from their Greek names, Acts vi. 5, is not ijtiite 
 convincing. Greek names were not unknown among Palestinian Jews; 
 but except Philip none of these six names (Nicolas is not in question) 
 was coiiuiion in Palestine. 
 
THE CHURCH A T JERUSALEM. 25 
 
 which he had seen all his life ; it was true, after all, 
 that to sing psalms in the temple, and break the 
 Bread at home, was as high a mode of worship as 
 could ever be devised on earth, and it was not neces- 
 sary to force on the question, which of these two 
 elements in worship was the more truly sacred and 
 divine. But the Hellenists — freedmen from Rome, 
 or residents in the great cities of the Levant, which 
 were centres of culture as well as commerce — were 
 fairly open to argument. To them, no less than to 
 the Palestinian Israelite, the law of Moses was the 
 embodiment, and the temple at Jerusalem was the 
 centre, of all that was holy ; but these things were 
 not to them as things taken for granted as self-evident 
 laws of nature ; they were rather matters of faith, 
 and it was desirable that their faith should be en- 
 lightened. They knew men who did not obey the 
 law, and yet were in some respects good men, had 
 even some knowledge of divine truth ; and as for the 
 temple, they had lived till now without seeing it or 
 sharing in its sacrifices ; they might therefore, one 
 would have thought, be brought to believe in some- 
 thing more divine than either law or temple. 
 
 But if the law and the temple were not, in the eyes 
 of the Hellenist as of the Hebrew, part of the un- 
 changing order of the universe, the abolition of which 
 was absolutely inconceivable, it does not follow that 
 they were less attached to them — rather, their attach- 
 ment was the fiercer, because they could conceive 
 someone denying their sacredness or their destined 
 eternity. While they were at their distant homes, 
 
26 BEGINiV/A'GS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 Jerusalem and the temple had been matters of faith ; 
 when they saw the things themselves, the sight might 
 produce on them one of two opposite results. In 
 some the sight of the sacrifices would produce — not 
 the sense of vulgar and almost ludicrous repulsiveness 
 which it might in ourselves — but a sense that these 
 ceremonies were essentially like those of the heathen 
 — that they had no spiritual virtue. " It was not 
 possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should 
 take away sin," or that burnt-offerings should " make 
 the comers thereunto perfect ; " still less that God 
 should "eat bulls' flesh, and drink the blood of goats," 
 or even that He should " smell a sweet savour " from 
 the burnt fat of a peace-offering, that refreshed Him 
 as the banquet on the flesh did the priests and wor- 
 shippers ; and the more men knew about the temple 
 services, the less could they believe in them. How 
 could a man like Stephen believe that the closest com- 
 munion with God was enjoyed by men like Annas 
 and his sons.-* To such men a visit to Jerusalem was 
 what the visit to Rome was to Luther ; they could 
 believe that St. Peter was the Vicar of God, but they 
 could no more believe it of these Sadducee sons of 
 Aaron than Luther could of the Pagan successors of 
 St. Peter. 
 
 On the other hand, other men — and these religious 
 men, and not necessarily fools — would see Jerusalem 
 in the light of their early belief in it, would idealize 
 all that was commonplace in what they saw, and be 
 resolutely blind to what was base and worldly. We 
 know how educated and intelligent Englishmen have 
 
THE CHURCH AT JERUSALEM. 27 
 
 found the Romanism of Rome attractive instead of 
 repulsive, though, if its moral evils are not what they 
 were in the days of Luther, its utter intellectual 
 falsity is greater and more obvious. We cannot then 
 wonder that a man like Saul of Tarsus was able to 
 be enthusiastic, not only for the creed of Gamaliel, 
 but for the pontificate of Caiaphas and Theophilus. 
 
 Thus there existed material for fierce theological 
 disputes between St. Stephen and men of similar in- 
 tellectual habits, but different religious temper. We 
 are told that St. Stephen had the best of the argu- 
 ment — " they were not able to resist the wisdom and 
 the Spirit by which he spake ;" but, unable to confute 
 his doctrines, they denounced them as blasphemous. 
 
 It is quite plain what the doctrines were that were 
 thus denounced. The " false witnesses," as they are 
 called, were not so very false ; at least when, under 
 examination, they came to detail, and testified to 
 definite words, the divergence of their evidence from 
 the truth was reduced to a minimum ; they may have 
 misrepresented the tone, but not the matter of his 
 real teaching. If St. Stephen said "that this Jesus 
 of Nazareth shall destroy this place, and change the 
 customs which Moses delivered us," he said no more 
 than was true, no more than "this Jesus of Nazareth" 
 had already said, or than He has since done. 
 
 It is true indeed even here, that there is presumably 
 a misrepresentation of the tone of his teaching. The 
 Lord Himself had been charged with blasphemy 
 against the temple, with having said, "/ will destroy 
 this temple;" in truth He had not, even in a figure, 
 
28 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 spoken of the destruction as His own act. His fol- 
 lower, we may believe, was misrepresented to just the 
 same extent. Of course he had not spoken " blas- 
 phemous words against Moses and against God," nor 
 even "against this holy place and against the law;" 
 but he had taught that "this holy place and the law" 
 were coming to an end, and it was not unnatural that 
 those who opposed this doctrine should say that Jesus 
 Christ was responsible for the threatened destruction. 
 Every one notices the " conformity " between St. 
 Stephen's dying words and his Master's; that between 
 the charges against them, and the degree of truth in 
 each, is as close and as instructive historically as the 
 other is spiritually. 
 
 The circumstances of the outside world favoured 
 Stephen's enemies. His trial is now generally sup- 
 posed to have taken place in the spring of A.D. 'X,'], 
 seven, perhaps more probably eight, years after the 
 resurrection. At that time there was a double inter- 
 regnum in Judaea; the Procuratorship was vacant, or 
 only filled provisionally, and the Emperor Tiberius 
 was just dead, so that there was a delay in appointing 
 a successor, and the policy that would be adopted was 
 uncertain. This supposition accounts for the two 
 facts, that the Sanhedrin were able to execute their 
 sentence without applying to the Procurator for sanc- 
 tion, and that they seem to have held their session 
 within the precincts of the temple, which the Roman 
 government had forbidden a few years earlier, because 
 the sanctity of the place prevented the intrusion of 
 Romans to control their actions. 
 
THE CHURCH AT JERUSALEM. 29 
 
 This fact is itself more important, as well as more 
 certain, than the inference from it as to the date — 
 that he was tried by a purely Jewish tribunal. And 
 there seems no reason to doubt that he was tried with 
 all Jewish legal forms, and, from a Jewish point of 
 view, with substantial fairness. Too much is some- 
 times said of the tumultuary character of his execu- 
 tion. It was apparently the avowed intention of 
 Jewish law that the death of a criminal should be the 
 expression of the national indignation at his crime. 
 It rather appears that his condemnation and his death 
 were the deliberate act of the Jewish senate and 
 people— that his death was, even more clearly and 
 finally than that of the Lord Himself, the national 
 repudiation of the faith of Christ by Israel. 
 
 I say even more than that, because it was a more 
 deliberate act. Talmudical scholars tell us' that the 
 secret nocturnal trial of Jesus was as illegal according 
 to Jewish traditions as the proposal of Caiaphas to 
 "sacrifice" Him (in the popular sense of the word) 
 was condemned by healthy Jewish morality; but there 
 seem to have been no such irregularities with St. 
 Stephen. When formally accused, he was formally 
 called upon for his defence, and was patiently heard,^ 
 
 ^ See especially an essay by Dr, Weiss, called The Marty7-do?H of 
 yesus of Nazareth. Being a Jew, Dr. Weiss of course does not write 
 like a Christian, indeed his tone is often painful to Christian feeling ; 
 but his illustration of the way that the death of Christ might appear 
 to a Jew are in the highest degree suggestive. 
 
 ^ It seems truer to the spirit of the narrative to regard the fierce 
 demonstrations of Acts vii. 54 as the effect than as the cause of the 
 change of tone in verse 51. 
 
30 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 SO long as he seemed to confine himself to the charge 
 before the court ; and this although the plan of his 
 defence was not to deny that he had used the expres- 
 sions inculpated, but to justify them as legitimate 
 developments of the principles of the Old Testament 
 revelation. The purport of his defence is well repre- 
 sented by the analysis at the head of the chapter in 
 our English Bible — he " showeth that Abraham wor- 
 shipped God rightly, and how God chose the Fathers 
 before Moses was born, and before the tabernacle and 
 temple were built ; that Moses himself witnessed of 
 Christ, and that all outward ceremonies were ordained 
 according to the heavenly pattern, to last but for a 
 time." 
 
 First of all we have the key-note of that theology 
 which we know as characteristic of St. Paul. God's 
 first election, His first covenant of grace, was inde- 
 pendent of the law; the blessing received by Abraham 
 was prior to that ofi"ered by Moses, and therefore not 
 dependent on the conditions of the other. There was 
 righteousness before the law ; there may therefore be 
 righteousness without the law. 
 
 Again, Moses had foretold the advent of a Prophet 
 of authority co-ordinate with his own. If therefore 
 the new revelation introduced by such a Prophet 
 superseded some parts of the old, that did not bring 
 the two into conflict, nor forbid men to regard both 
 as divine. The old law had itself provided for its 
 own supersession, and sanctioned the authority that 
 superseded it. St. Stephen does not appear to have 
 pressed this argument into detail; the Jewish exegesis 
 
THE CHURCH AT JERUSALEM. 31 
 
 of the time did not apparently regard the prophecy 
 of Deut. xviii. 15 as adequately fulfilled' by the 
 series of Old Testament prophets, but neither had it 
 determined whether the " Prophet like unto Moses " 
 was to be the Christ Himself or His companion and 
 forerunner, or perhaps independent of His appear- 
 ance ; and into these controversies he does not enter. 
 He does not put the Messiahship of Jesus in the fore- 
 front ; belief in this seems now to have been tacitly 
 tolerated ; what he has to prove is, that " the right- 
 eousness of God without the law is manifested, being 
 witnessed by the law and the prophets." 
 
 So far then we have the answer to the charge of 
 blaspheming the law. He held it to have been truly 
 divine and obligatory in its time, but to be now 
 superseded, or on the point of being superseded, by a 
 higher dispensation to which the law itself gave 
 sanction. As regards the charge of blasphemy 
 against the temple, there was more truth in it, if for 
 
 ^ The context shows that this was a fulfilment contemplated in the 
 promise ; the Israelites are forbidden to have recourse to diviners, and 
 bidden to put their trust in prophets instead. So much rational 
 criticism makes plain ; whether it proves any more against the New 
 Testament interpretation of the passage depends, not on criticism, but 
 on our belief or disbelief in the unity of the Spirit pervading the 
 various books of the Bible. If we do believe in it, we shall regard it 
 not as an inadvertence, but as a designed antithesis, that the same 
 book which promises a Prophet like unto Moses ends with the witness 
 that no Prophet like unto Moses had arisen, and that the last of the 
 prophets who did in their measure succeed to Moses' office, instead of 
 claiming authority co-ordinate with his, sends his hearers back to him 
 in the last resort until another Prophet should come. "Remember ye 
 the law of Moses my servant . . . Behold, I send you Elijah the 
 prophet." (Mai. iv. fin.) 
 
32 BEGLVAUNGS OF THE CHRIST/ AX CHURCH. 
 
 " blasphemy " we read " depreciation." Righteousness 
 had been before the law ; the law itself had been 
 before the temple, and was a step nearer to possess- 
 ing that divine unchangeableness which Jewish 
 popular religion claimed for both. The law came 
 directly from God — not quite directly, however, but 
 " b}' the disposition of angels — but the temple was a 
 human work, a copy at best, and that a second-hand 
 cop3^, of a heavenly original. If then there could be 
 righteousness and acceptance with God without the 
 law, much more could there be communion with God 
 without the temple. 
 
 No doubt as the law was divine in no untrue sense, 
 so the temple was divine in a true though a still 
 lower sense. Moses had been commanded by God 
 to make the tabernacle ; and it had been a commend- 
 able though not an obligatory act of devotion to 
 supersede the tabernacle by the temple. Nathan had 
 nevertheless declared beforehand to the builders of 
 the first temple, and Isaiah to those of the second, 
 that their work was in truth unnecessary, and its 
 avowed end, if strictly conceived, impossible. Men 
 cannot build a house for the Lord to dwell in ; they 
 can only aid their own faith by copying that house 
 built by Himself, wherein He dwells eternally. 
 Although, as the building of the tabernacle had been 
 commanded by God, so that of the two temples had 
 been blessed and sanctioned by Him, yet the sanctity 
 of the temple was but mediate and secondary, and 
 so might well be allowed to be temporary. 
 
 So far we have St. Stephen's repl}- to the two 
 
THE CHURCH A T JERUSALEM. 33 
 
 counts in his indictment — blasphemy against the law 
 and against the temple. He showed how far he con- 
 fessed their sacred ness ; he showed that the law itself 
 claimed no sacredness for the temple or for itself 
 beyond what he confessed. But there is another thread 
 of argument running through his speech. Were his 
 accusers, were his judges, really zealous for the 
 honour of the law and of the temple } If so, they 
 might acquit him : he had shown that he rendered 
 religious though not superstitious reverence to both. 
 But his object in showing this was not to secure his 
 acquittal ; he endeavours to convince his hearers not 
 for his own benefit, but for theirs. But he saw that 
 they were not to be convinced. Not the law, not the 
 temple, was the true object of the Jews' highest 
 devotion ; it was themselves — the people of Israel — 
 whom they regarded as essentially and indefeasibly 
 sacred. And here he did indeed differ from them 
 fundamentally, and hold doctrines which they would 
 regard as blasphemous. 
 
 For it is in this doctrine of the essential holiness of 
 Israel that the religion which we know as Judaism 
 differs from the religion taught in the Old Testament. 
 It is this that is the strength of Judaism as a living 
 religion of our days. This is the one article in which 
 faith survives when every other has given way before 
 the supposed force of critical or of physical dis- 
 coveries. Heine, for instance, held fast to this one 
 doctrine of the faith of his childhood, when on all 
 the matters which go with us to constitute religious 
 belief he was one-fourth a Christian and three-fourths 
 
 D 
 
34 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 a sceptic. George Eliot again, Gentile as she was, 
 was fascinated by this neo-Judaism, which is related 
 to the religion of humanity very nearly as biblical 
 Judaism is to Christianity. She has made the rich 
 sacrifice of a work of art,' not to the Lord God of 
 Israel, but to this creed of Israel which has outlived 
 their God. The germs of this self-worship may be traced 
 in the oldest monuments of post-biblical Judaism. 
 It is by the presence of this spirit, more perhaps than 
 by any other difference, that we can verify the opinion 
 of our Church, that the so-called Apocryphal Books 
 of the Old Testament have not in them the Spirit of 
 God in the same full sense as the Canonical. In the 
 Son of Sirach, indeed, the spirit, if present," is rarely 
 prominent, never offensive ; but compare the last four 
 chapters of the Wisdom of Solomon with the ninth 
 chapter of Deuteronomy, and the contrast becomes 
 obvious. 
 
 To this Jewish spirit, then, St. Stephen has to 
 address himself And as " Moses," in the chapter 
 just referred to, " dissuadeth them from the opinion 
 of their own righteousness by rehearsing their several 
 rebellions," so Stephen shows that the main body of 
 the children of Israel — who regarded themselves as 
 God's elect, often persecuted, but always in the end 
 
 ^ I suppose her greatest admirers will admit that Daniel Deronda 
 is, as a work of art, sacrificed to the expression of sympathy with a 
 cause. 
 
 ' Ecclus. xxiv. 8 is scarcely more than an acknowledgment of God's 
 favour in revealing Himself ; but xxxvii. 25, though probably meant as 
 a protest against a narrow selfishness, might be understood to deify the 
 larger self. 
 
THE CHURCH AT JERUSALEM. 35 
 
 triumphant — had been from the first the persecutors 
 of the true Elect, and had been saved at last only 
 by the triumph of him whom they had persecuted. 
 The Patriarchs, the original and literal Sons of 
 Israel, betrayed and, in their intent, murdered 
 Joseph ; but he, after sore sufferings, came to honour 
 among the Gentiles ; the Gentiles saw him set at 
 the King's right hand, bowed the knee before him, 
 and acknowledged him as the saviour of the world ; 
 and at last his treacherous brethren also were forced 
 to submit themselves to him, and accept their 
 salvation from him. In like manner Moses was re- 
 jected, perhaps betrayed to death,' by Israelites; 
 but was welcomed as a champion and deliverer by 
 the Gentiles to whom he fled, until at last he came 
 back as a saviour to his own people, and his de- 
 liverance was tardily accepted by those who had 
 refused him. 
 
 We are not told that St. Stephen had yet gone so 
 far as this, to proclaim the rejection of Israel and the 
 calling of the Gentiles ; but it is plain that he meant 
 to proclaim it, or at least to suggest it, now ; and by 
 foretelling these events he forced on their fulfilment. 
 He had tried to be persuasive, while he argued that 
 the temple and the law were less absolutely sacred 
 than Israel thought them ; but there was no hope of 
 convincing Israelites that they were less sacred them- 
 selves, that their election and vocation were less 
 absolute, and so he drops the persuasive tone. From 
 
 ^ So we may infer from Exodus ii. 12, 14, 15. The man rescued 
 by Moses told a fellow-countryman, and he told Pharaoh. 
 
36 BEGIAWhVGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 "brethren and fathers" he passes into' "ye stiff- 
 necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears." 
 
 Hellenist as Stephen was, his speech is thoroughly 
 Hebraic, in method as well as in subject ; but in one 
 respect it suggests a Hellenic parallel. If we give 
 the slightest historical weight to the evidence of 
 Plato's Apology of Socrates, it is evident that Socrates 
 might perhaps have avoided condemnation, might 
 certainly have avoided death, if he would have 
 adopted a more submissive and conciliatory tone 
 toward his judges. So, it is very possible, might St. 
 Stephen. But Socrates declared, after the verdict 
 and the sentence, that he knew that he had done well 
 in speaking as he had, because the " divine token " 
 had never checked him ; and in like manner Stephen 
 had no need to " take thought how or what he should 
 speak ; " for he knew that it was the Spirit of his 
 Father that spake in him. Throughout his object 
 had been, not to protect himself, but to " bear wit- 
 ness unto the truth ; " if his hearers were not of the 
 truth, and would not hear his voice, he would defy 
 them in the interest of truth, not conciliate them in 
 his own. They accepted his defiance, and showed 
 their hostility to his doctrine openly ; and then he 
 had done with them. He had, after his Master's 
 example, " witnessed a good confession ; " and he 
 could say, as was said in his Master's name, that if he 
 had spent his strength for nought, and in vain, " yet 
 
 ^ It is not necessary to assume that the transition was as abrupt in 
 the original speech as in St. Luke's report, but if not it is none the 
 less significant. See the note at the end, on the Speeches in the Acts 
 of the Apostles. 
 
THE CHURCH AT JERUSALEM. 37 
 
 surely my judgment is with the Lord, and my work 
 with my God." He turned his back on earth, and 
 " looked up steadfastly into heaven." 
 
 And as he would have no more of earth, so earth 
 would have no more of him. Like his Master, he 
 had been charged with blasphemy against the temple, 
 and it had proved impossible, even for hostile judges, 
 to declare that the charge was sustained ; but it was 
 accounted blasphemy in him, as in his Master, to 
 speak of the Son of man at the right hand of God.' 
 In the closest personal communion with Christ, in the 
 closest imitation of Christ's spirit, "he fell asleep." 
 
 Of him we need say no more ; but it is well 
 that we should understand how the dreadful work 
 of Israel's condemnation was done by this most 
 Christlike of men, whom God had "set over the 
 nations and over the kingdoms to root out, and to 
 pull down, and to destroy, and to throw down," as 
 well as "to build and to plant." ^ He had taught 
 that the Gospel was not meant exclusively for 
 the Jewish nation, that it was not to be held sub- 
 sidiary to the Jewish law, nor centre in the Jewish 
 temple ; and thereby he had made it impossible that 
 the Jewish nation should accept the Gospel so long as 
 they, their temple, and their law were what they were 
 in their own eyes. He had "made the heart of this 
 people fat, and made their ears heavy, and shut their 
 eyes ; lest they should see with their eyes, and hear 
 
 ^ Yet another parallel may be quoted, if there be any truth in the 
 legend that Isaiah was put to death on a charge of blasphemy, because 
 he said, "I saw the Lord sitting upon His throne." " Jer. i. lo. 
 
38 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 with their ears, and understand with their heart, and 
 be converted, and God should heal them." It was 
 God's decree that the Gospel should first be offered 
 to them, but that they as a nation should reject it ; 
 and it was by Stephen that His decree was executed. 
 This is why I have dwelt so long — I may almost say 
 why St. Luke forces us to dwell so long — on the 
 martyrdom of St. Stephen as compared with those of 
 the many who have "followed in his train." His 
 death was the close of the first act in the Church's 
 history, the "persecution which arose about Stephen" 
 was the beginning of the second. 
 
THE CHURCH A T JERUSALEM. 39 
 
 NOTE ON THE SPEECHES IN THE ACTS OF 
 THE APOSTLES. 
 
 It is quite consistent with the acceptance of the Acts of 
 the Apostles as a trustworthy historical authority, and even 
 a product of divine inspiration, to recognize two facts about 
 the book ; first, that it is a history written with a purpose, 
 to serve as a Harmonia Apostolica ; and secondly, that, as 
 a literary work, it b;ars the impress of the literary fashions 
 of the age which produced it. The former consideration — 
 which the Church really owes something to the Tiibingen 
 school for forcing upon it — suggests to us that we may often 
 be right in " reading between the lines," especially in the 
 period dealt with in the next lecture ; the second suggests 
 caution in grounding inferences on modes of verbal expres- 
 sion, and, more particularly, makes it questionable how far 
 the speeches inserted in the history are to be regarded as 
 anything like verbatim reports, or even abridgements, of the 
 speeches actually made. 
 
 We are apt to forget the immense prominence of the art 
 of Rhetoric, as an influence pervading the intellectual life, 
 and especially the education, of the ancient world, from the 
 days of Antiphon and Gorgias to the days of SS. Chrysostom 
 and Augustine. In particular, it had enforced a peculiar 
 method of historical composition, from the time when 
 scientific history began with Thucydides, the one surviving 
 representative of the schools of the great Sophists of the 
 fifth century. Herodotus had naively and spontaneously 
 reported the speeches of his characters in oratio recta, even 
 when they were too long to have been repeated to him ver- 
 batim ; once, and once only,^ he had deliberately composed 
 
 ^ III. lxxx.-Ixxxii. 
 
40 BECnvyiXGS OF THE CHRIST/ AX CHURCH. 
 
 speeches — those of the conspirators against the Magian — to 
 embody the arguments which might have been used in sup- 
 port of a cause which (so I doubt not he was honestly con- 
 vinced, though no doubt more or less wrongly) the speakers 
 had actually supported. Thucydides went a step further. 
 He professes (and most modern historians who have used 
 him seem to have believed him) that his speeches, though 
 not verbatim reports, and though some embellishments may 
 have been made, affecting even their substance as well as 
 style, still " keep as closely as possible to the general sense 
 of what was really said." (Thuc. I. xxii. i.) But internal 
 evidence scarcely makes good this promise. One could 
 easily believe in the speeches of the Corcyraean and Corin- 
 thian ambassadors, still more in those of Archidamus and 
 Sthenelaidas, but it is impossible to avoid a doubt as to the 
 Athenian embassy at Sparta, for some purpose or purposes 
 unknown, which replies in I. Ixxiii. sqq. to the indictment of 
 the Corinthians against Athens ; or to find the elaborate 
 counter-pleas of the Plataeans and Thebans in place between 
 III. lii. 6 and Ixviii. 2. In this last case, no doubt, there is 
 something in the fact that the Plataean speakers are named 
 ■ — it is not like Thucydides to lie with a circumstance ; and 
 from IV. cviii. 5 we are plainly to understand that Ixxxv. 5 
 is a statement of Brasidas', untrue in fact, but truly reported. 
 But speaking generally, it appears that, when Thucydides 
 desires to sum up the merits of a disputed case, the natural 
 method that occurs to him is to write two speeches, each of 
 which shall embody all the arguments on its own side which 
 he thinks worth advancing. It was but a step from this to 
 the practice of later historians, who composed speeches at 
 their discretion, either for mere rhetorical ornament, or at 
 best for intellectual disquisitions and half-disguised utterance 
 of their own sympathies. 
 
 The fashion of inserting these utterly unhistorical speeches 
 was, in St. Luke's day, at its very height. The question is, 
 how far he rose above it. His bo/ia fides as a historian is 
 
NOTE ON THE SPEECHES IN THE ACTS. 41 
 
 not affected by the answer. However much we may believe 
 in this, the paradoxical view is, not that he followed the 
 fashionable literary method of his time, but that he avoided 
 it. With some hesitation, and with some reservations, I 
 believe that he did avoid it. I have treated St. Stephen's 
 speech, in particular, as really being St. Stephen's and not 
 St. Luke's ; but I feel it necessary to justify such an assump- 
 tion by argument. 
 
 Short as St. Luke's writings are, their literary ability is 
 very great ; the Acts of the Apostles is the only one of the 
 books of the New Testament which anyone would think of 
 calling clever. 1 His skill as a literary artist is seen, not 
 only in the picturesqueness, which may be the cause that 
 has led to the legend of his having been a painter, and has 
 certainly caused his works to supply three-fourths of the 
 favourite subjects of Christian art; but not less in his silent 
 variations of style, in harmony with the varying local colour 
 of his subject. It is of course a brilliant tour deforce, when 
 Josepus^ embodies a not unfaithful paraphrase of the book 
 of Deuteronomy in a speech of Moses beginning "Ai/8p€s 
 o-uo-TpaTicuTat ; 2 but after all Josepus does not seem to have 
 succeeded in making his history go down with the Pagan 
 literary world ; and any way, there is a sounder literary 
 judgment in the transition from the elaborate Greek style of 
 the dedication to Theophilus, into the sentence that might 
 have come straight out of the Septuagint, 'Eye'vero Iv rais 
 ijixepai? 'UpwSov k. t. \. 
 
 It is naturally in the Acts rather than in the Gospel that 
 these variations of local colour are apparent ; and they 
 throw all the more light upon our subject, because the earlier 
 part of the Acts refers to the Gospel, and joins on to it. It 
 
 1 Except perhaps the Epistle to the Hebrews, which has considerable 
 affinities with St. Luke, though it is hardly likely that he was the actual 
 author. 
 
 * So he himself always spells his name ; and why should he not be 
 allowed his own way in such a matter? ^ Jos. Ant. IV. viii. 2, &c. 
 
42 BEGIA'X/A'GS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 therefore is natural to suppose that there is here a continua- 
 tion of its spirit, and even its method. Now in the Gospel 
 there is no doubt of the character of the speeches ; the 
 evangelist pledges his veracity to them, fully as much as to 
 the acts or events of the life of Him of whom he writes. 
 There at least the speeches have the character, not of those 
 imagined for a statesman or general by a rhetorical historian, 
 but of those reported from the lips of a wise Rabbi by the 
 memories of reverent disciples. St. Luke, therefore, was 
 not a stranger to the conception that it was a historian's 
 duty to report speeches, not to invent them. It is at least 
 conceivable that his speeches of the apostles may be as 
 authentic as those of their Master. 
 
 Or we may state the matter thus : St. Luke might com- 
 pose speeches in the Hellenising portions of his work ; but 
 where he felt it was bad taste to try to Hellenise in language, 
 it would be worse than bad taste to imitate the least desir- 
 able of Hellenic literary fashions. The account of St. 
 Paul's arrest at Jerusalem is none the less trustworthy, if we 
 suppose the speech of Tertullus, or even the letter of 
 Lysias, to be conventional accessories which the narrator 
 was expected to fill in ; but the sermons of St. Peter at 
 Jerusalem, and St. Paul at the Pisidian Antioch, are reported 
 for their own sake. They are not accessories in a narrative 
 which may be thoroughly trustworthy if they be imaginary; 
 they are, at the point where they occur, the main substance 
 of the narrative, the great event which it is the business of 
 the history to record, and, if they are not truly recorded, 
 the history is not merely conventional in manner, but is, so 
 far, untrustworthy. 
 
 Of course, to anyone who supposes the Acts not to be a 
 trustworthy history, this leaves it quite possible that speeches, 
 as well as events, were invented or transformed by the 
 narrator ; speeches, no doubt, would be invented or trans- 
 formed even more freely than events. But really there is 
 no argument against the veracity of the Acts, except the 
 
NOTE ON THE SPEECHES IN THE ACTS. 43 
 
 " vigorous and rigorous" theories of Baur and his followers; 
 and it may safely be left to the common-sense of English 
 students of history, whether this argument is sufficient. 
 
 If the general veracity of the book be admitted, the 
 question of the nature of its speeches ceases to be important, 
 except within very narrow limits. Gamaliel, we may suppose, 
 described the doctrine of Jesus as likely to fail, if it was 
 analogous to that of the many impostors or enthusiasts who 
 had arisen in his time. If there had been a Theudas before 
 the date of his speech, it is likely enough that he referred 
 to him by name ; if there was no Theudas but the later one, 
 St. Luke made a mistake in putting the name in, but the 
 general purport of the speech is not less faithfully given. 
 The only speeches on the more than literary character 
 of which we depend for our view of the main subject of the 
 book, are the defence of St. Stephen, and the debate of the 
 Apostohc Council on Circumcision. 
 
 The latter is discussed on occasion of the next lecture, 
 and it there appears that there is no reason to doubt the 
 faithfulness of the report of the speeches, though it may be 
 due to the conventional form of historical narrative, that 
 St. Luke tells us so much of the formal public debate, and 
 so little of the private conferences which preceded it, and 
 which St. Paul seems to have thought more important. 
 
 As to St. Stephen's speech, the a priori probability of 
 genuineness is greater than that of the other judicial speeches, 
 but perhaps hardly equal to that of the sermons. But the 
 internal evidence of its being, so to speak, written with the 
 Hebraic, not the Hellenising purpose, seems very strong. 
 Its length and elaboration show the importance St. Luke 
 attached to it ; on the other hand, its relevance to the 
 charge, and its significance in reference to that development 
 of doctrine, which it is the object of the whole book to 
 trace, would surely have been brought out more clearly, if 
 the reporter had felt himself at liberty to rearrange his 
 materials in a form more suited to the habits of himself and 
 
44 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRiSTIaN CHURCh. 
 
 his readers. Nor can it be supposed that it is his habits or 
 theirs that lead to the way the Old Testament history is 
 treated, the story in the canonical books being repeatedly 
 supplemented, or even modified, from what must have been 
 Jewish popular belief, unfamiliar to a Gentile, or probably 
 even to a Hellenist, unless one like Stephen himself, in 
 constant and direct contact with Jews of Jerusalem. 
 
 Altogether I conceive that we are justified in using the 
 speeches in the Acts, and that of St. Stephen in particular, 
 as historical authority to the extent that is done in the 
 preceding lecture ; but I do not think the case so clear as 
 to venture to do so without a statement of the reasons that 
 justify it. 
 
II. 
 ^f)e 3|EfcDisb anil €5 entile ^|)urct)cs. 
 
 THE execution of St. Stephen was not an isolated 
 event. We have seen that it is to be regarded, 
 not as a mere outbreak of popular fury, but as a 
 dehberate judicial act, though one executed with the 
 support of popular feeling : and rulers and people 
 combined to follow up the step that had been taken. 
 The disciplinary powers of the synagogues, which 
 included the use of stripes as well as purely spiritual 
 penalties, were systematically put forth against those 
 who called on "the name of the Lord Jesus ;" and as 
 these were in theory rather disciplinary measures 
 than exactly criminal punishments, the scourgings 
 were repeated unless the accused abjured " the way," 
 the abjuration being cast, as in later Pagan per- 
 secutions, in the peculiarly offensive form of re- 
 proachful words against Jesus personally. We do 
 not know how often abjuration was obtained.' We 
 never hear, as in later persecutions, of those who had 
 fallen repenting and seeking restoration to the brother- 
 
 ^ In Acts xxvi. ii, the imperfect TjvdyKa^ov can of course mean "I 
 tried to compel them," but being joined with other imperfects is more 
 naturally understood, " I repeatedly compelled them." 
 
46 BEG/XXINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 hood ; probably, if any did fall, it was not from mere 
 intimidation, but from real reluctance to oppose the 
 national religion of Israel. It is certain that many 
 were resolute, and that the persecutors were forced to 
 try severer measures. Numbers were arrested and 
 imprisoned, women as well as men, and some — we do 
 not know how many — were brought to trial, and put 
 to death like Stephen. 
 
 In one sense, the persecution was successful. The 
 Church at Jerusalem was broken up. It never again 
 became what it had been ; it might still be the centre 
 and the capital of Christendom, but it never again 
 could be its heart, from and to which the life of the 
 whole body circulated, Jerusalem was not, indeed, 
 absolutely deserted by the disciples ; the apostles 
 remained there, perhaps clinging to the hope that the 
 former happy state of things might be restored ; 
 perhaps also they felt they could not desert the 
 helpless and destitute, who were safer than others 
 through the obscurity of their poverty, though it 
 made flight impossible, but who still needed the 
 same relief as before to secure them from more 
 chronic troubles. But except the apostles, the active 
 members of the Church were dispersed, and "went 
 everywhere telling the good news of the Word." As 
 the persecution succeeded, from the Jewish point of 
 view, in purging the holy city from the new 
 blasphemous doctrine, so it was no less a triumph 
 for the cause of Christianity ; it drove the gospel 
 from its rest at Jerusalem to go out into all the 
 world. 
 
THE JEWISH AND GENTILE CHURCHES. 47 
 
 Stephen's colleagues, in particular, found not Jeru- 
 salem only, but all Judaea, too hot to hold them. 
 Philip, the most prominent of the seven next to 
 Stephen himself, "went down to a city of Samaria, 
 and preached Christ to them ;" several others were 
 dispersed through the Samaritan districts, and ap- 
 parently also preached there, without scruple at 
 communicating with outcasts. 
 
 Thus Stephen's ideas (if one may use the secular 
 phrase) triumphed in his death, and even in con- 
 sequence of it. The Gospel was already made 
 independent of the temple, if not of the law. 
 Philip's success in gathering converts at Samaria is 
 in some ways not surprising. Christians and Samari- 
 tans had this in common, that both claimed to be 
 Israelites, the true heirs to the faith of the Patriarchs, 
 and the promises which God made to them, though 
 both were condemned by the Jewish authorities as 
 apostates from the Jewish community and worship. 
 But if the two were to draw together, there was no 
 doubt which must approach the other. The Christian 
 exiles could not become proselytes to the Samaritan 
 worship, though they would no doubt have been 
 gladly received as such ; but, condemned as they 
 were at Jerusalem, they were not prepared to admit 
 that they had apostatised from the true spirit of 
 Judaism, or to deny its claims to a real sacredness in 
 the past. On the other hand, the Samaritans, though 
 their worship had long since purged itself from the 
 remains of Paganism in the sense of idolatry, were 
 still no better than Pagans intellectually. Their 
 
48 BEGLYNINCS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 religion, so far as it differed from the Jewish, rested 
 not on a claim to a historical revelation, but on a 
 mere tradition of national and local custom. Their 
 fathers worshipped on this mountain, and therefore so 
 would they ; but it was impossible to maintain, in 
 presence of even the most rudimentary criticism, 
 that Gerizim, and not Jerusalem, was " the place 
 which the Lord had chosen to place His name there," 
 and in consequence the Samaritans could not be, 
 like the Jews, " a people of the Book," though it is 
 certain that they had already their own version of 
 the law of Moses. But, just because their attach- 
 ment to their own local sanctuary was less elevated, 
 less intellectually defensible, than that of the Jews to 
 theirs, it offered all the less resistance to a wider and 
 more charitable faith, by which such local and 
 traditional distinctions were ignored. The Samari- 
 tans would not have consented to go up to Jerusalem 
 to worship — it is said that the Jews would not admit 
 them as proselytes, even if willing ; but the Samaritans 
 gave up less than the Jews, if they accepted the 
 doctrine, " Neither on this mountain, nor yet at 
 Jerusalem." We cannot tell how far St. Philip found 
 the ground prepared for, him by the two days the 
 Lord had spent at Sychar ; it is by the way quite as 
 possible that the " city of Samaria," where he 
 preached, ivas Sychar, as that it was Sebaste, the 
 ancient capital of Omri and Ahab, from which the 
 district and people of Samaria now took their name. 
 But whether the direct effect of the Lord's words had 
 been more or less permanent, it is likely that St. 
 
THE JEWISH AND GENTILE CHURCHES. 49 
 
 Philip and his companions — it is almost certain that 
 the apostles — must have been prepared to accept the 
 Samaritans as brethren in faith, by their Master's 
 language and conduct towards them, both then and 
 at other times. It does not appear that such 
 scruples were felt in admitting the Samaritans to 
 the Church as were afterwards felt before admitting 
 the Gentiles. The Church was still Jewish, but with 
 a spiritualised Judaism. It was recognised that the 
 Gospel brought salvation to the house of every son 
 of Abraham ; but the son of Abraham was as yet 
 identified, not by the test of faith only, but of 
 circumcision. 
 
 This extension of the Church, geographical as well 
 as ethnic, led to the apostles undertaking for the first 
 time what we may call distinctly episcopal functions, 
 in the sense fixed by the modern usage of that term. 
 I do not mean that they had never (in modern 
 phraseology) confirmed or ordained before ; they 
 had done the latter in the case of the Seven at least, 
 and probably in many ; and St. Luke does not give 
 the impression that the other was entirely a novelty. 
 But this was the first apostolic visitation — the first 
 act of oversight of a Church dependent on them, but 
 not directly administered by them. It was thus a 
 step to decentralization — a recognition that the 
 Church was too large to be managed from one local 
 centre, as the appointment of the Seven had been a 
 confession that it was, even then, too large to be ad- 
 ministered by twelve persons. The system of visita- 
 tions, by one or more of the Twelve, seems to have 
 
 E 
 
50 BEGhVNIXGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 been continued from this time onwards till the 
 Church became world-wide. We hear of " Peter 
 passing through all quarters " (Acts ix. 32) at one 
 time ; while at another (comparing Acts ix. 27 with 
 Gal. i. 19) it seems that St. Peter and St. James, the 
 Lord's brother,' were the only apostles at Jerusalem. 
 The latter, according to all our evidence, never left 
 the city, but gave, it is scarcely inaccurate to say, the 
 first example of a diocesan bishop. 
 
 In this way the internal development of the Church 
 kept pace with its extension in the world, and in a 
 certain sense the development was one of doctrine as 
 well as of discipline. The Church had already learnt 
 to know Christ, but it was only learning to state and 
 formulate its knowledge. No one can or ought to 
 wish to deny this development of doctrine within the 
 New Testament, whatever we may think of develop- 
 ments beyond it. St. John's Gospel is an advance in 
 systematic theology upon St. Peter's first sermon, far 
 more undeniably than the Nicene or Athanasian 
 Creed is an advance on St. John's Gospel. The time 
 came when the apostles hardly ventured to speak of 
 God's "holy Servant Jesus,"^ as they did during the 
 early days at Jerusalem, both in their preaching and 
 in their devotions. The expression is, of course, true 
 and scriptural, but as their point of view changed it 
 
 ^ I waive the vexed question whether he was one of the Twelve. 
 I myself hold what is really the traditional view, so ably advocated by 
 Bishop Lightfoot, that he was a son of St. Joseph by his first wife. 
 But in any case, it seems plain from Gal. /. c. that he was now recognized 
 as an apostle. 
 
 ■■* Acts iii. 13, 26 ; iv. 27, 30. 
 
THE JEWISH AND GENTILE CHURCHES. 51 
 
 ceased to be natural to use it habitually ; and to 
 make an cffor-t to use it was hardly reverent. We can 
 see how the Ebionite heresy could originate among 
 the Jewish Christians, who had not the wit to invent 
 an original heresy, but simply had " learnt nothing 
 and forgotten nothing " from the days before St. 
 Stephen ; while we are not to suppose that the 
 apostles, or even their hearers, were Ebionites in any 
 but the etymological sense of " poor men." 
 
 - I venture to suggest, though it is no more than a 
 conjecture, that it is to this period, when the removal 
 from Jerusalem was felt as an exile, that we are to 
 assign the adoption into Christian thought of what 
 one may call the most poetical conception in the New 
 Testament — that of the Heavenly Jerusalem. It 
 does not appear in the Gospels; there the fact that in 
 God's counsels "Jerusalem is the city of the Great 
 King," and the other fact that it is "Jerusalem which 
 killeth the prophets, and stoneth them that were sent 
 unto her," ' are stated independently, but not brought 
 into contrast, still less into harmony, with each other. 
 But we find that the conception belongs to the 
 common stock of Christian ideas with which the 
 authors of the Epistle to the Galatians and of the 
 Apocalyse started on their widely divergent works, 
 and though it appears that the conception had (in a 
 coarse materialistic form) been already formed among 
 the Jews, it is likelier that the two apostles drew 
 their spiritual conception from a common Christian 
 source than that they arrived at it by independent 
 ^ St. Matt. V. 35 ; xxiii. 37. 
 
52 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 processes of refinement from the materials presented 
 by Rabbinic tradition. 
 
 The doctrine of the heavenly Temple, referred to 
 by St. Stephen at his trial, and probably in the 
 preaching which provoked it, may be deduced — 
 perhaps legitimately, though not quite necessarily' — 
 from the Old Testament. Any way, it was fully recog- 
 nized now by the traditional Judaism of Palestine, as 
 well as by the philosophical Judaism of Alexandria, 
 to which it was commended by its harmony with the 
 Platonic doctrine of ideas or archetypal forms for all 
 material phenomena. Apparently Rabbinic tradition 
 had already drawn the further inference that this 
 heavenly Temple must have a heavenly Mount Zion 
 to stand on, a heavenly Jerusalem around it, though 
 these conceptions were, in the minds of the Rabbins, 
 unfruitful and not very important. But as St. Stephen, 
 from the received doctrine of the heavenly Temple, had 
 argued that the sanctity of the earthly one was neither 
 absolute nor eternal, so now it is not unlikely that 
 the exiles from the earthly Zion consoled themselves 
 with the thought that they remained citizens of the 
 heavenly city of God. And with them this thought 
 led to others: they gradually learnt that there must be 
 a spiritual Israel to fill that spiritual city, a spiritual 
 priesthood to minister in the spiritual sanctuary. 
 
 It is the growth of these last ideas that forms the 
 main thread of the history during the period which 
 
 ^ I Chron. xxviii. I2 would hardly suggest, and Exodus xxv. 40, 
 xxvi. 30, would hardly prove, the permanent existence of a heavenly 
 archetype, as distinct from the subjective exhibition, in vision, of a 
 pattern to Moses and to David. 
 
THE JEWISH AND GENTILE CHURCHES. 53 
 
 we are now studying. The real subject of the whole 
 Book of the Acts is this : it tells how the Church 
 learnt that the Gospel was meant for the spiritual 
 Israel, not for the literal Israel only. The first stage 
 in this progress towards Catholicity was gained when 
 the Samaritans were admitted into the Church ; the 
 story of the Ethiopian which follows marks a further 
 one. The Samaritans were, or claimed to be, Israelites 
 of a sort ; the Ethiopian was one who, according to 
 the law of Moses, might not " come into the congrega- 
 tion of the Lord."' An Israelite at heart indeed he 
 was ; he "had come to Jerusalem for to worship "the 
 Lord God of Israel, and now, on his way homeward, 
 he was reading aloud, in earnest and perplexed medi- 
 tation, the words of an Israelite prophet — the prophet, 
 we may remember, who had proclaimed to the son of 
 the stranger and to the eunuch, that the Lord had 
 not utterly separated them from His people.^ Under 
 special direction from the Spirit, St. Philip "preached 
 unto him Jesus," and baptized him in the name of 
 Jesus, and so the great principle was acknowledged, 
 that the promises of God extended to Israelites at 
 heart, as well as to those marked as Israelites by 
 circumcision in the flesh. 
 
 So far as this went, then, the principle involved in 
 the baptism of Cornelius had been conceded some 
 time before it ; but in truth that did involve a further 
 principle, and one which the existing Jewish believers 
 found it harder to receive. Admitting that the Gospel 
 extended to Israelites at heart, who were Israelites at 
 1 Deut. xxiii. i. ^ Isa. Ivi. 3. 
 
54 BEGLXNIXCS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 heart? Was it a duty to enter into the closest brother- 
 hood with the earthly Israel that was physically 
 possible ? The Ethiopian had done so ; Cornelius 
 had not. Cornelius coidd have become a Jew, though 
 only at the price of resigning an office which, as things 
 went in the provinces, ranked as honourable and 
 lucrative, and of encountering the contempt and the 
 disapprobation of his own class. But sacrifices of 
 money, rank, and reputation were undoubtedly some- 
 times required to fit men for the profession of the 
 Gospel, and Cornelius had no right — he probably had 
 no will — to refuse such sacrifices if duty demanded 
 them. But to Cornelius it had not appeared a duty 
 to become a Jew, nor even (so far as we are told) to 
 conform to Jewish ways as closely as many Gentiles 
 did who "worshipped God" like him. He most likely 
 kept the Sabbath, not indeed with such strictness as 
 would have satisfied a Pharisee, for this would have 
 interfered with his military duties, but perhaps much 
 as a sensible Christian officer spends his Sundays in 
 a heathen country. So much would be easy, for in 
 this point Jewish practice had set an example which 
 was followed as a mere superstition by large classes 
 all over the Mediterranean world. But we do not 
 hear that he ever went up to Jerusalem, and it does 
 not appear that he observed the so-called precepts of 
 Noah, which co-ordinated with the elementary require- 
 ments of morality an obligation which practically 
 meant to deal only with a Jewish butcher. His 
 approximation to the faith of Israel was purely 
 spiritual ; he " gave much alms unto the people, and 
 
THE JEWISH AXD GENTILE CHURCHES. 55 
 
 prayed to God alwa}':" was that enough for salvation 
 without a single approach to the outward observance 
 of the law ? Could such a man be as good in God's 
 sight as if he ga\e up all to become one of God's 
 people ? 
 
 I have stated the case as fairly as I can, without 
 talking about "Jewish pride and narrowness." Just 
 because Judaism was not a mere nationality, but a 
 religion that admitted converts, it was possible to 
 conceive the Gospel as intended for Jews alone, 
 without involving the unscriptural absurdity that it 
 was addressed to a single nation. We cannot doubt 
 that Cornelius was right, in judging that he served 
 God as well without becoming a Jew as if he had 
 sacrificed everN'thing to become one; the event proved 
 that he was in the way of sah^ation as he was. But 
 no one can refuse his sympathy and admiration to a 
 man like King Izates of Adiabene,' who first thought 
 it enough to worship the God of Israel, but at last 
 was persuaded that, if his worship of Him was to be 
 sincere, he must not shrink from keeping His com- 
 mandments in all their rigour, even at the risk oi his 
 life or throne. The question solved b}- the Holy 
 Ghost for St. Peter was not a childish one with a self- 
 evident answer. But it was solved, and " they oi the 
 Circumcision," as they are called by a slight anachro- 
 nism, the rigid Jews of Jerusalem, were compelled to 
 own the unexpected discovery ' — " Then even to the 
 Gentiles God hath granted repentance unto life." 
 
 While Cornelius' baptism was a crucial case, it was 
 ^ Jos. Atit. XX. ii. 5. ' fi/xi. 
 
56 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 not, it seems, absolutely the first of its kind. " They 
 that were scattered from the trouble that arose over 
 Stephen," we are told, " passed as far as Phoenicia, and 
 Cyprus, and Antioch, speaking the Word to none but 
 to Jews only. But there were some of them, men of 
 Cyprus and Cyrene, who, when they came to Antioch, 
 spake also to the Greeks " — so there is little doubt 
 that we should read—" telling the good news of the 
 Lord Jesus." No doubt they spoke chiefly, and with 
 best chance of effect, to men like Cornelius, Avho 
 " worshipped God " already ; but for aught that 
 appears they had no objection to make the Gospel 
 known, even to an idolater, if he would attend to it. 
 Any way, " the hand of the Lord was with them," its 
 presence being shown, probably by miracles, certainly 
 by the fact that "great was the number that believed 
 and turned to the Lord." 
 
 " And the tidings were heard," the story goes on, 
 " in the ears of the Church which was in Jerusalem 
 concerning them ; and they sent forth Barnabas unto 
 Antioch," to judge of this phenomenon of the "grant 
 of repentance unto life," not to individual Gejitiles 
 only, already in some measure sanctified by the in- 
 direct influence of Judaism, but to a whole Gentile 
 population, which might soon outnumber the whole 
 body of believing Jews, and who were now pressing 
 in to the kingdom of God, with nothing to secure 
 even an honorary precedence to "the children of the 
 kingdom." I do not wish to infer that the Church at 
 Jerusalem disapproved of the conversions at Antioch, 
 or wished to check them, but it was natural that they 
 
THE JEWISH AND GENTILE CHURCHES. 57 
 
 should be startled at them. They must have seemed, 
 and indeed they were, the beginning of a great change 
 in the character of the Church. And this change 
 made discretion and watchfulness necessary on the 
 part of those who had to conduct it. The danger 
 was a real one, not from the Jewish point of view 
 only, that the new religion would lose its continuity 
 with the old as it passed into new hands. The strange 
 vagaries of Gnosticism in the next century show what 
 the Gospel could be turned into, when treated as 
 Levantine Greeks naturally did treat the ideas of an 
 Oriental religion. But St. Barnabas was exactly the 
 man required for the crisis. He was a thoroughly 
 trusted member of the original Jerusalem community, 
 a true representative of its spirit, both in his Levitical 
 birth and in his acts and character. While with ready 
 sympathy he accepted the extended and liberalised 
 platform of the Antiochian Church, he at the same 
 time established and confirmed their orthodoxy, both 
 by his direct exhortations, and indirectly by the as- 
 surance which his sanction gave them of their full 
 communion with the mother Church of Jerusalem. 
 
 We find that Church in this story re-established and 
 flourishing, almost as in the time before the death of 
 St. Stephen. The persecution was now at an end. 
 The removal of Saul from the conduct of it had prob- 
 ably caused it to slacken ; it is conjectured that the 
 threatened profanation of the temple by the emperor 
 Gains had led to a sort of reconciliation between Jews 
 and Christians, by diverting the dread and indignation 
 of the former to an object which the latter would 
 
58 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 regard with no less dread and indignation. " So the 
 Church had rest throughout all Judaea and Galilee 
 and Samaria, being edified and walking in the fear 
 of the Lord, and by the comfort of the Holy Ghost 
 was multiplied.'" But the new state of the Church, 
 even when peace and prosperity was restored, was not 
 exactly the same as the old. It is now a "Church 
 throughout all Judaea and Galilee and Samaria," not a 
 Church at Jerusalem only, with at most a few chapelries 
 (so to speak) in Judaea and Galilee. It appears indeed 
 to be a mistaken reading to speak, as our version does 
 in the words I have quoted, of " Churches " in the 
 plural ; but the mistake is significant — it originated 
 because it suited the sense. The Church at Jerusalem 
 had been one, visibly and organically ; " the Church 
 throughout Judaea and Galilee and Samaria" was 
 indeed one in spirit, one to faith, and so St. Luke still 
 speaks of it as one, but outwardly and visibly it was 
 no longer a Church but Churches. Henceforth, the 
 Church of Jerusalem is only one Church among man}'. 
 Every Church has its own separate and complete 
 organization, its own elders, and, more or less, its own 
 distinctive character. The Church at Jerusalem had 
 still, no doubt, an honorary primacy; it was, so to speak, 
 the sole apostolical see ; but Antioch was even now 
 beginning to rival it, was already a metropolitical one, 
 if we may allow ourselves to use the language of later 
 ages ; and it was soon exalted to the apostolic rank. 
 
 The anachronism would perhaps be really mislead- 
 ing, if we were to say that St. Barnabas was now the 
 ^ Acts ix. 31. 
 
THE JEWISH AND GENTILE CHURCHES. 59 
 
 Bishop or Patriarch of Antioch. He had, as we 
 have seen, been sent thither by the Church of Jeru- 
 salem with a special commission to guide the Church 
 there, and set it in order if defective ; and it is not 
 unlikely that the apostles symbolized their commit- 
 ting the charge to him by the imposition of their 
 hands ; but he was not, apparently, recognized as 
 holding any higher rank in the Church than other 
 " prophets and teachers." He may have received 
 authority to ordain elders, but we have no evidence 
 that he did not share this authority with others. But 
 though not holding a distinct office with a distinct 
 name, he was really and practically the Chief Priest 
 of the large and growing Church of Antioch. I use 
 the word " priest " advisedly ; for the Church had 
 reached such a stage of development as to feel that it 
 had a priesthood of its own. We do not find indeed 
 that the words " priest " or " sacrifice " are ever used 
 of Christian public or ceremonial worship ; it would 
 only have caused confusion, when " a great company 
 of the priests was obedient to the faith," to have said 
 that St. Barnabas was a priest, when he was in fact a 
 Levite. But local removal from the temple reminded 
 Christians that they had among them One greater 
 than the temple, and one consequence of this was to 
 make them recognize the sacerdotal character of the 
 Christian ministry — their being divinely-consecrated 
 representatives of the congregation, " taken from 
 among men and ordained for men in things pertain- 
 ing to God.'" It is just at this point of the history 
 1 Heb. V. I. 
 
6o BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 that the language of the New Testament bears wit- 
 ness directly (as it is often denied that it does bear 
 witness) to the Christian priesthood. St. Luke uses 
 of St. Barnabas and his colleagues, not the ordinary- 
 words for Jewish and Pagan priests and sacrifices, but 
 one no less distinctly sacerdotal,' that from which 
 the word " liturgy " is derived, which has passed into 
 the general use of the Church. 
 
 This marks the progress of the Church in three 
 ways. It shows an emancipation from Jewish notions 
 and habits, that the private and probably secret 
 worship of the disciples should be felt to be as sacred 
 as that of the temple — perhaps to surpass and super- 
 sede it ; " for, the priesthood being changed, there is 
 made of necessity a change also of the law." Again, 
 it shows that the Church had acquired a definite 
 organic structure, and had its distinct members 
 specially qualified to "act on behalf of the people ;" 
 and lastly, it shows how the mass of Christian people 
 had increased in numbers, that the pastoral care of 
 its actual members, and the conduct of their devo- 
 tions, fills as large a place among the duties of their 
 officers as the proclaiming of their principles to the 
 world outside, and the gathering of recruits from it. 
 
 And this increase at once in the numbers of the 
 Church, and in its distinctive character as something 
 
 ^ See St. Luke i. 23 ; Heb. viii. 6 ; ix. 21 ; x. II ; where this verb 
 and the cognate noun are used of the distinctive functions of Jewish 
 priests. Phil. ii. 17 is metaphorical, but the metaphor is sacrificial (as 
 in Rom. xv. 16). In Rom. xv. 27, Phil. ii. 30, these words are just 
 as much or as little metaphorical as "sacrifice" in Phil. iv. 18, 
 Heb. xiii. 16. 
 
THE JEWISH AND GENTILE CHURCHES. 6i 
 
 separable from Judaism, now began to be recognized 
 without as well as within the Church itself; the 
 heathens began to feel the want of a name for its 
 members. It has often been noticed that the term 
 " Christian " is never, in the New Testament, used or 
 claimed by Christians ; and that, as it is not their own 
 name for themselves, so it must have originated 
 among Gentiles, who, like Pilate, were quite content 
 that "Jesus" should be "called Christ" — not among 
 Jews, who could not so call Him without admitting 
 His claim to their allegiance. Less often,' I think, 
 has it been noticed that both the root and the 
 termination are suggestive as to the tone and cha- 
 racter of the " Christianity " which first received that 
 name. 
 
 In the first place the Christians preached " Christ;" 
 they habitually spoke of Him under that name, not 
 as " Jesus." This may have been merely a matter of 
 convenience — speaking in Greek and to Greeks a 
 Greek word came natural, and was secure against the 
 ridfcule that a " barbarous " one might meet with. 
 But it is perhaps probable that the habit arose from a 
 certain instinct of reverence, not exactly the senti- 
 ment (which I am very far from wishing to call 
 superstitious) which leads us to fence His human 
 name with such special reverence, but rather the con- 
 verse of it. We cannot use the name without 
 thinking of the condescension of "I AM the Saviour" 
 Who bore that name as Child and Man : they felt that 
 
 ^ First, so far as I know, by Mr. S. Cox ; and even he hardly sees 
 what the termination is not analogous with. 
 
62 BEGLVA'LVGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 to call Him "Jesus" was a familiarity, as though He 
 were no more than one of the thousands of Jews so 
 called. Just as in SS. Luke's and John's Gospels, 
 the "Jesus" of the earlier evangelical traditions' is 
 constantly called "the Lord," so the Christians of 
 this period called Him probably "the Lord" among 
 themselves, and " the Christ " in speaking to those 
 who did not yet own Him as their Lord. 
 
 But we observe also, not only the way that the 
 "Christians" spoke of Christ, but the aspect in 
 which their relation to Him appeared. They called 
 themselves His disciples ; but in fact they seemed to 
 be attached to Him, not as disciples to the founder 
 of a school, but rather as partisans to a leader and 
 commander. The name " Christie " or " Christeian " 
 (KpiiTTiKo? or Xpia-reco?) would have been good 
 Greek for a disciple of Christ, on the analogy of 
 " Socratic, Platonic, Epicurean ; " but instead of 
 either of these, the Latin hybrid "Christian"^ was 
 coined, not probably because Latin was the native 
 language of those who coined it, but because the 
 
 ^ This usage may perhaps be held to give us a measure of the early 
 date, not at which the two first canonical Gospels were composed in 
 their present form, but at which the "synoptical tradition" or Prote- 
 vangelium assumed a definite form, permanent, though no doubt still 
 oral ; and a measure also of the degree of exactitude with wliich the 
 extant Gospels reproduce that tradition. 
 
 * Strictly speaking, of course the correct Latin derivative from 
 Christus would be, not Chrisiianus, but Christanus. But this does not 
 prove that the name originated among men ignorant of Latin, nor (as 
 has been rashly argued) at a later date than this. Gallnaniis (Tac. 
 Hist. I. ii. 5) compared with SiiUantis shows the false analogy to have 
 prevailed in the West at least as early as a.d. 68, and Varianus (Id. 
 Ann. 1. X. 3) seems to carry it back to A.D. 10. 
 
THE JEWISH AND GENTILE CHURCHES. 63 
 
 analogy appeared more apposite of Roman party 
 names like "Marian, Pompeian, Caesarian," just as 
 the party name " Herodian " had been formed a 
 generation or two earlier. The Christians were not 
 merely people of a certain way of thinking, suggested 
 to them by Christ : they were a party who wanted 
 Christ to be King of the Jews at least ; — it began to 
 come out that they were putting forward His claim 
 to be Emperor of the whole world. 
 
 Just as we developed the short but suggestive de- 
 scription (Acts V. 12-14) of the religious habits of the 
 Church in its first home at Jerusalem, so I have tried 
 to bring out the new features of its second rest at 
 Antioch, from the still shorter notice that Barnabas 
 and Saul and the rest taught much people, and the 
 disciples were called Christians first at Antioch, and 
 that there they fasted and ministered as priests to the 
 Lord. (Acts xi. 26 ; xiii. 2.) 
 
 Before we go on to the great leap forwards that the 
 faith made from its second home, St. Luke recalls us 
 to what was going on at Jerusalem. The two metro- 
 politan Churches were brought into characteristic rela- 
 tions with one another. Judaea suffered from famine 
 for some time in the early years of the reign of 
 Claudius — the last years of Agrippa L, the grandson 
 of Herod the Great, who was now restored to the 
 entire dominions of his grandfather. We have seen 
 already how large a class there was at Jerusalem 
 habitually dependent on charity — a time like this 
 made the need too great for native charity to meet. 
 Foreign charity, however, was not wanting ; the prose- 
 
64 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 lyte princes of Adiabene came forward nobly,' while 
 the Christians of Antioch undertook, as their share 
 of the work, raising of a special fund for their own 
 brethren. 
 
 This relation between the Gentile and Jewish 
 Churches as givers and receivers of alms became, as 
 we have noticed, a characteristic one. From this one 
 contribution we can infer nothing, except that the 
 Church of Antioch did not consist of slaves or paupers 
 only ; it may suggest, but hardly prove, that it con- 
 tained some wealthy members. 
 
 The Church at Jerusalem needed this private gift 
 the more that they were again under the active dis- 
 pleasure of the national authorities. There was not 
 a general persecution like that seven years before, but 
 two of the apostles were condemned to death, and 
 the rest (including even St. James the Bishop) appa- 
 rently driven to flight or hiding, so that none were 
 able to meet the messengers from Antioch, or receive 
 and administer their gifts in person.^ The persecution 
 seems to have had its origin in the personal temper 
 of the king, though, if we may trust the legend of the 
 martyrdom of St. James, he did not formally take 
 the first step himself. We are told (and the story is 
 at latest of the second century) ^ that the apostle was 
 
 ' See Lect. i. p. 9. 
 
 ® This is inferred from the mention of the elders in Acts xi. 30. But 
 this term may include St. James ; and, any way, the fact may rather 
 indicate that the apostles had recognized that their proper function was 
 ecumenical, not local. It was not their business, but that of the officers 
 of the Jerusalem Church, to manage the local Jerusalem charities. 
 
 3 Clem. Alex. Hypotyp. VII. ap. Eus. H. E. II. ix. 2. 
 
THE JEWISH AND GENTILE CHURCHES. 65 
 
 denounced by a priv^ate accuser/ and that the latter 
 was so impressed by his demeanour at his trial, that 
 he professed himself also a believer, received the 
 saint's blessing, and was beheaded with him. 
 
 There is no need to describe the event of Agrippa's 
 other sentence. St. Luke is unsurpassed as a story- 
 teller, unapproached as a teller of sacred stories, and 
 he is a rash and impertinent commentator who 
 ventures to compete with him. But it may be worth 
 our while to say something of the king's character, 
 both in order to understand his motives for persecu- 
 tion, and also to avoid our natural temptation to do 
 him less than justice. 
 
 For he was really not a bad sort of man, compared 
 with Oriental princelings in general, and the house of 
 Herod in particular. He had spent much of his life 
 at Rome, either as a hostage, a guest, or a prisoner ; 
 but he had lived there till fifty without losing his faith 
 in two things, which it required a great deal of faith 
 to believe in at Rome — the law of Moses, and the 
 glory of the name of king. It had been the object 
 of his life to become king of the Jews, not merely for 
 the sake of the unfettered luxury which that position 
 would really secure (though Agrippa, who had been 
 extravagant in his youth, was probably not indifferent 
 to this), but what he cared for most was the thought 
 of being a real ruler of men — a king in the sense in 
 which David and Antiochus were kings. 
 
 ^ So 6 daa'^a.-yijiv aiirbv els diKacrrripLoi' is generally, and perhaps most 
 naturally, understood. But it may mean simply the constable in whose 
 charge he was brought up for trial. 
 
 F 
 
66 BEGINNIh'GS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 After all, this ambition, though an anachronism, did 
 not imply as much folly or vanity as we might think. 
 Agrippa was dependent on Gaius or Claudius to make 
 him king; but he might not untruly flatter himself 
 that it was he in his turn who had made Claudius 
 emperor. The real misfortune was, that he had not 
 made up his m.ind whether he was to be a king after 
 the model of David or of Antiochus, or rather he 
 wished to emulate both alike. He " obtained the 
 kingdom by flatteries," in a manner only too sugges- 
 tive of that Antiochus whose likeness was of worst 
 omen to a successor of David ; but it could hardly 
 be said that "they did not give unto him the honour 
 of the kingdom.'" A rather pathetic story is told, 
 that once at the Feast of Tabernacles he was publicly 
 reading the law in the temple ; when he came to the 
 passage regulating the election of a king, " Thou 
 mayest not set a stranger over thee, which is not thy 
 brother," "" he burst into tears. He had given his life, 
 he had done and borne much that was not honourable, 
 though perhaps not criminal, for the sake of becoming 
 king of Israel, and, behold, he, as an Edomite, could 
 never be a legitimate king of Israel after all. 
 
 He was, however, easily consoled ; the people cried 
 out, "Fear not, Agrippa, thou art our brother!" and 
 I conceive that they were right ; that he, as an Edomite 
 of at least the third generation,^ was a member of the 
 congregation of the Lord, entitled to all civil as well 
 
 * Daniel xi. 21. " Dent. xvii. 15. 
 
 3 Deut. xxiii. 7, 8. Antipater begat lierod, and Herod begat Aris- 
 tobulus, and Aristobulus begat Agrippa. 
 
THE JEWISH AND GENTILE CHURCHES. 67 
 
 as religious privileges as an Israelite, and so eligible 
 as king, unless the divine promise to the house of 
 David stood in the way. But no one seems to have 
 thought of the claims of that house, though it was 
 known not to be extinct ; no less a person than 
 Gamaliel belonged to it,' not to speak of St. James 
 and his brothers. Of more account in the practical 
 politics of the age was the fact that Agrippa himself 
 was, through his grandmother, Mariam, the represen- 
 tative of the later dynasty, the Maccabee or Hash- 
 monean High Priests. 
 
 It is thus quite conceivable that he may have felt 
 that he was acting like the son of Phinehas and Mat- 
 tathias,- the heir of Asa and Josiah, in cutting off 
 out of the land those whom he regarded as false 
 prophets. Only Asa and Josiah had acted from a 
 zeal that rose above policy ; they did not wait to see 
 which of the traitors to the Lord would be first 
 denounced, or what was the popular opinion of the 
 one first executed. Herod, after one execution, 
 allowed himself to be balked by a check that even 
 Caiaphas had overcome, and, tired of playing Josiah 
 at Jerusalem, he set off to play Antiochus at Caesarea. 
 In this he succeeded much better ; he played only 
 too well the part of Geo? 'E-Trt^a^j;? or 'ETTf/xaw/?, 
 and came to the same end as his original. 
 
 1 Only, however, in a female line, through his great grandmother, 
 the mother of Rabban Hillel. Still the fact that the descent was 
 remembered is significant. Hillel, it may be remembered, was a poor 
 man, poorer than we have any proof that St. Joseph ever was. 
 
 - Mattathias was of the house of Phinehas, I. Mac. ii. 54, though not 
 by birth the head of that house, with a hereditary claim to the high 
 priesthood. 
 
68 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 The death of Herod gives us the first of the few 
 certain landmarks we have for the chronology of this 
 period ; it took place in the spring of A.D. 44. Hitherto 
 all has been conjectural ; we can only say that it is 
 perhaps most likely that the Ascension took place in 
 A.D. 29 or 30, and the martyrdom of St. Stephen and 
 conversion of St. Paul in A.U. 36 or 37. From this 
 last event we get some later ones dated in the epistle 
 to the Galatians, and from these and other looser 
 notices of time in the Acts we are able to construct 
 an approximate system of chronology down to our 
 next certain date — the appointment of Festus to the 
 Procuratorship of Judaea in A.D. 60. During these 
 sixteen years — or indeed twenty, down to August, 64 
 — our knowledge, not of the chronology only, but of 
 the whole history of the Church, is confined to the 
 personal career of St. Paul. Some time, we cannot 
 tell how long, after the famine in Judaea and the 
 death of Herod, his call to the Apostolate was 
 officially recognised by the Church,' and he and St. 
 Barnabas set out from Antioch, as St. Philip and the 
 rest had set out from Jerusalem. The Gentile Church 
 began its own independent missionary work, though 
 the individual missionaries representing it were them- 
 selves Jews. 
 
 It was not, however, at once made evident how the 
 
 ^ We must not be misled by the ceremony of "laying on of hands" 
 to think of a consecration to the Apostolate like that to the Episcopate. 
 Symeon, Lucius, and Menahem were no more bishops, perhaps less so, 
 than St. Barnabas at least was already ; and St. Paul denies, not only 
 that his Apostolate was of human origin, but that he received it by 
 human ministry. (Gal. i. i.) 
 
THE JEWISH AND GENTILE CHURCHES. 69 
 
 elder brotherhood was to serve the younger, how 
 many more were to be the children of the desolate 
 than the children of the married wife. The Gospel 
 had spread already from Palestine to Syria and the 
 adjoining provinces of Cyprus and Cilicia. SS. Paul 
 and Barnabas carried it further west, but not beyond 
 Asia Minor, nor even as far as the most important 
 cities of that country. It is by their acting in entire 
 independence of the Church at Jerusalem, and of the 
 apostles of the Circumcision, not by their work 
 among the Gentiles differing from earlier work more 
 than in degree of extent, that the first journey of 
 St. Paul marks a new stage in the history of the 
 Church. 
 
 Nor is it certain that we ought to regard the 
 conversion of Sergius Paulus as a striking and un- 
 precedented event. Unprecedented indeed it was for 
 a man of his rank to become a member of the Church; 
 but it seems not quite clear whether he did so.' We 
 are told that he " believed," but not that he was 
 baptized ; we can only guess whether this silence im- 
 plies that he was so much a believer that his baptism 
 
 ^ The Sergii Pauli known to us from secular sources are (not counting 
 the Cypriote inscription dated in the proconsulate of Paulus, probably 
 referring to the Sergius of the Acts, but adding nothing to our know- 
 ledge of him) a friend of the elder Pliny, who, as far as dates go, may 
 be identical with the proconsul, a consul suffect in a.d. 94 (the year 
 before the martyr Flavius Clemens), and a consul in A.D. 168. The 
 last certainly, and the other two presumably, must have been Pagans ; 
 but the name of a Sergia Paulina has been found in a Christian 
 cemetery at Rome ; and it would prove more for the sincere Christi- 
 anity of the proconsul that some of his family became Christians, than 
 it would prove against it that all did not. 
 
70 BEG/NN/NGS OF THE CHRISTL4N CHURCH. 
 
 was a matter of course, or that he was not enough 
 of a believer to desire baptism or to be fit for it. 
 
 The key to the real significance of this expedition 
 — the measure of the extent both to which it was 
 and to which it was not a novelty— is supplied to us 
 by St. Paul's sermon in the synagogue of the Pisidian 
 Antioch. On the one hand, this sermon is, both in 
 matter and in method, closely similar to the speci- 
 mens given us of the early preaching of St. Peter ; 
 we are meant to see that the two apostles taught the 
 same Gospel, and commended it to the Jews on the 
 same grounds.' On the other hand, there are two new 
 ideas in the speech. It is from St. Stephen, rather 
 than from St. Peter, that he derives the conception 
 of a progressive development of God's reve- 
 lation through the whole course of Israelite histor\', 
 suggesting a further and final step in its development 
 into the kingdom of Christ. And the second idea is 
 still more characteristically Pauline — that while the 
 kingdom of Christ is in one aspect the end and 
 accomplishment of the design of the law, in another 
 its spirit is opposed to that of the law : " B}- Him all 
 that believe are justified from all things, from which 
 ye could not be justified by the law of Moses." 
 
 Apparently this doctrine was heard with patience.'' 
 It is likely that the Pisidian rulers of the synagogue 
 
 1 It may have been an idiosyncrasy of St. Paul, or a result of his 
 Rabbinical habits and training, if he took (as it M'as so plausibly 
 suggested by Dengel that he did take) the text of his sermon from the 
 two lessons of the July Sabbath when it was delivered. (Deut. i. i — iii. 
 22, and Isa. i. 1-27.) 
 
 ■^ The opposition of "the Jews" and "the Gentiles'' in Acts xiii. 
 42 does not appear in the true text. 
 
THE JEWISH AND GENTILE CHURCHES. 71 
 
 were less acute than Saul himself and his brother 
 Pharisees of Jerusalem had been, in seeing the full 
 practical issue involved in it ; it is possible also that 
 St. Paul was more guarded than St. Stephen in his 
 mode of stating it so as to give least offence. For 
 a whole week, it seems, the apostles were able to 
 teach with effect on many, and without offence to 
 any, even of the most rigid Jews who heard them. 
 But at heart the Jews of the Dispersion were like 
 those of Jerusalem ; they could bear to hear of their 
 law being superseded, but not of their being 
 superseded themselves. The work of Moses might 
 be swallowed up in the greater work of Christ ; but 
 they would not consent to be themselves swallowed 
 up in the greater unity of a Catholic Church. " Then 
 Paul and Barnabas spoke out,' and said," in effect, 
 that if they would not consent to take an honourable 
 but not exclusive place in the Catholic Church, they 
 might stay out of it ; but the Catholic Church could 
 and should be organised without them. And they 
 proceeded to organise one in Antioch and its neigh- 
 bourhood. 
 
 " But the Jews pushed on the respectable religious 
 ladies,"" and," by their means we may presume, " the 
 leading men of the city, and raised persecution 
 against Paul and Barnabas, and drove them out 
 
 ^ Acts xiii. 46. 
 
 ^ Acts xiii. 50. In my translation of passages cited from the Acts, 
 I modernise the language more than might be good taste in a version 
 intended to be read continuously ; I embody in the text what would 
 otherwise have to be expressed by a gloss. (The lectures were delivered, 
 and were partly in type, before the revised version of the New Testament 
 appeared. ) 
 
72 BEGIXAUKGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 of their borders." They went to Iconium, leaving 
 behind them an enthusiastic body of disciples, but 
 one as yet without regular ecclesiastical organisation. 
 At Iconium much the same thing happened, except 
 that there the respectable Gentiles stood aloof, and 
 the Jews were driven to look to the mob for material 
 support. At Lystra the same happened again, but 
 at Derbe they had apparently got beyond the region 
 where Jewish influence was formidable; even at Lystra 
 it is a sign that the Jews were few and lax, that a 
 devout Jewess should have married a heathen and 
 left her son to grow up uncircumcised. ' But the same 
 cause which prevented persecution perhaps indicated 
 that they had reached the limits where immediate 
 success was to be looked for. The Jews furnished a 
 nucleus for the formation of a Church, though when 
 the Church was formed they would not leave it in 
 peace. Either for this reason, or because St. Paul 
 received a divine intimation^ that his presence would 
 shortly be required at Jerusalem, or — most likely of 
 all — simply with the purpose of revisiting and setting 
 in order the Churches already founded, they retraced 
 their steps as far as the Pisidian Antioch. Apparently 
 they did not venture to risk fresh disturbances by 
 public preaching, but confined themselves to "estab- 
 lishing the souls of the disciples, and exhorting them 
 
 ^ Acts xvi. I, 3 ; see however 2 Tim. iii. 15. 
 
 ^ I ihink that Gal. ii. 2 imphes that St. Paul went to Jerusalem in 
 obedience to a revelation made to hiinsdf, not (as some suppose) to one 
 of the prophets at Antioch. But the narrative in Acts xiv. 28-xv. 2 
 points to that revelation having been received at Antioch rather than 
 earlier. 
 
THE JEWISH AND GENTILE CHURCHES. 73 
 
 to continue in their faith, and that it is through many 
 tribulations that we must enter into the kingdom of 
 God."' Having thus prepared them for the event of 
 a renewal of the persecution, they provided each 
 Church with a resident ministry (there had been some 
 months in which the Church could judge which of its 
 members were fittest for office) that would enable it to 
 subsist and to multiply, and then solemnly took leave of 
 them. A little missionary work was done on the way 
 home, but they were already en route for the Syrian 
 Antioch, the head-quarters of the Gentile Church. 
 
 On their arrival they assembled the whole Church, 
 and reported the success of their mission, a success 
 which to the Gentile Church of Antioch was matter 
 for unmixed rejoicing. But after some time it ap- 
 peared that there were other Churches which did not 
 regard it in the same light ; or at least held that the 
 work which the two apostles had done, though good as 
 far as it went, had stopped short in one important point. 
 "Some persons who came down from Judaea taught 
 the brethren, ' Except ye be circumcised after the 
 manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved '" (Acts xv. i) ; 
 and what was asserted of the long-established Gentile 
 Church of Antioch would, of course, apply to the 
 newly-founded Gentile Churches of Asia Minor. 
 
 It was now probably that St. Paul received, as he 
 tells us, a " revelation," commanding him to go up to 
 Jerusalem ; and he and St. Barnabas set out, with 
 commission from the whole Church of Antioch to act 
 in their name. Of what occurred we have St. Paul's 
 
 ^ Acts .\iv, 22. 
 
74 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 own account to compare with St. Luke's. The two 
 agree so well that it is strange that the identity of the 
 event described has ever been disputed ; but in some 
 respects the descriptions are mutually supplementary 
 rather than identical. 
 
 Parallel viczv of the narratives of the so-called Council of 
 Jerusalem in the Acts of the Apostles and in the Epistle 
 to the Galatians, in illustration of the view of events 
 taken in the folloioing pages : 
 
 St. Luke. St. Paul. 
 
 Acts xiv. 21-6 : They re- Galatians ii. i : Then after 
 turned* [from Derbe] unto fourteen years I again 
 Lj'stra, &c., and from thence 
 they sailed unto Antioch, 
 whence they were delivered to 
 the grace of God for the 
 work which they [had] ful- 
 filled. -'^ Awd having ar- 
 rived, and assembled the 
 Church, they proceeded to 
 report all that God [had] 
 wrought with them, and that 
 He [had] opened to the Gen- 
 tiles a door of faith. -^ And 
 they spent no small time 
 with the disciples. 
 
 XV. 1 : And certain having 
 comedown from J udaea began 
 to teach the brethren, Ex- 
 cept ye be circumcised after 
 the manner of Moses, ye can- 
 not be saved. ^ But when 
 no small strife and ques- 
 
 * Possibly "by revelation." (Gal. ii. 2.) 
 
THE JEWISH AND GENTILE CHURCHES. 
 
 75 
 
 St. Luke. 
 tioning had ensued to Paul 
 and Barnabas against them, 
 they-'' appointed that Paul 
 and Barnabas, and certain 
 other of them, should go up 
 to the apostles and elders at 
 Jerusalem about this ques- 
 tion. ^So they, being brought 
 on their way by the Church, 
 passed through Phoenice and 
 Samaria, declaring the con- 
 version of the Gentiles : and 
 they wrought great joy unto 
 all the brethren. ■^And when 
 they arrived at Jerusalem, 
 they were received by the 
 Church, and the apostles and 
 the elders, and reported all 
 that God had wrought with 
 them. 
 
 ^ But there rose up certain 
 of those from the sect of the 
 Pharisees who had believed, 
 saying, We must circumcise 
 them, and command them to 
 keep the law of Moses. 
 
 St. Paul. 
 
 went up to Jerusalem, having 
 taken Titus also with me. 
 -And I went up by revelation, 
 
 and I communicated \ unto 
 them the Gospel which I 
 preach among the Gentiles, 
 but privately to them that 
 seemed [to be somewhat], 
 lest by any means I should 
 be running, or had run, in 
 vain. ^ But neither was Titus, 
 who was with me, being a 
 Greek, compelled to be cir- 
 cumcised. 
 
 ^ But because of the pri- 
 vily brought in false brethren, 
 who came in privily to spy 
 out the liberty which we 
 have in Christ Jesus, that 
 they may]: enslave us (^to 
 
 * i.e. the Church of Antioch, acting probably on the suggestion of 
 the revelation made to Paul. 
 
 f Not the most obvious word to use here, but the only one suitable 
 both for this and for the cognate verb in verse 6. 
 
 j The use of "may" instead of "might" answers roughly to the 
 future indicative of the true text of the orisjinal. 
 
76 BEGIiVNTNGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 St. Luke. 
 
 St. Paul. 
 whom we not even for a 
 season gave way to the [re- 
 quired] submission, that the 
 truth of the Gospel might 
 remain for you) : — 
 
 *^ But on the part of those 
 who seemed to be somewhat 
 (whatsoever they were, it 
 matters not to me : God ac- 
 cepts not tlie person of man), 
 for to me they who seemed 
 [somewhat] communicated 
 nothing: further : 
 
 •'And the apostles and the 
 elders were assembled to see 
 about this matter. 
 
 " But when much discus- 
 sion had taken place, Peter 
 rose up, and said. Brethren, 
 ye know how that from an- 
 cient days God made choice 
 among you, that by my 
 mouth the Gentiles should 
 hear the word of the gospel, 
 and believe. *And God, which 
 knoweth the hearts, bare 
 them witness, giving them 
 the Holy Ghost, even as He 
 did unto us ; •' and put no 
 difference between us and 
 them, having cleansed their 
 hearts by faith. ^''Now there- 
 fore why tempt ye God, to 
 put a yoke upon the neck 
 of the disciples, which neither 
 our fathers nor we were able 
 to bear? ^^ But we believe 
 that through the grace of the 
 Lord Jesus we shall be saved, 
 even as they. 
 
 [A speech exactly in the sense of St. Paul, claiming 
 however, to have been the first apostle of the 
 Gentiles.] 
 
 ^'■^ And the whole multitude 
 held its peace, and they list- 
 
THE JEWISH AND GENTILE CHURCHES. 
 
 77 
 
 St, Luke. 
 ened to Barnabas and Paul 
 as they declared all the signs 
 and wonders which God did 
 among the Gentiles by their 
 means. ^^ And after they 
 had held their peace, James 
 answered, saying, Brethren, 
 hearken unto me : ^* Symeon 
 hath declared how God at 
 the first did visit the Gen- 
 tiles, to take out of them a 
 people for His name. ^^And 
 to this agree the words of 
 the prophets; as it is written, 
 ^^After this I will return, and 
 will build again the taber- 
 nacle of David, which is 
 fallen down ; and I will build 
 again the ruins thereof, and 
 I will set it up : ^" that the 
 residue of men may seek 
 after the Lord, and all the 
 Gentiles, upon whom my 
 name is called, ^^ saith the 
 Lord, who maketh these 
 things known from the begin- 
 ning of the world. ^^ Where- 
 fore I give my judgment that 
 we trouble not them, which 
 from among the Gentiles 
 turn to God : ^o but that we 
 charge them, that they ab- 
 stain from the pollutions of 
 idols, and from fornication, 
 and from things strangled, 
 
 St. Paul. 
 
 " but contrariwise, having 
 seen that I am entrusted 
 with the gospel of the un- 
 circumcision, as Peter of the 
 circumcision (^for He that 
 wrought in Peter for the 
 apostleship of the circum- 
 cision wrought also in me 
 for the Gentiles) ; ^and having 
 perceived the grace given to 
 me, James, and Cephas, and 
 John, who seemed to be pil- 
 lars, gave the right hands of 
 fellowship to Barnabas and 
 me, that we to the Gentiles 
 and they to the circumcision 
 — only that we should re- 
 member the poor, which, 
 in fact, was the very thing I 
 was anxious to do. 
 
yS BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 St. Luke. St. Paul. 
 
 and from blood. -^ For Moses 
 hath from ancient genera- 
 tions in every city them that 
 preach him, being read in 
 the synagogues every Sab- 
 bath day. 
 
 [He concedes that the Gentiles are to be converted, 
 as proved by ancient prophecy as well as the reve- 
 lation of Peter ; and pronounces against placing 
 obstacles in the way of their conversion. Let the law 
 speak for itself; let us insist on nothing from the 
 Gentile converts beyond what shall make fraternal 
 intercourse with them endurable to Jews.] 
 
 How, it may be asked, was it possible to reopen 
 the question of the circumcision of converts after the 
 decision come to in the case of Cornelius 1 The 
 answer seems to be, not that the case of Cornelius 
 was regarded as exceptional, but that a distinction 
 was drawn between the conversion of the uncircum- 
 cised and the tolerating uncircumcision in converts. 
 There really was a good deal of difference between 
 saying, " Preach the Gospel to Jews and proselytes, 
 who are your brethren, but to no one else," and 
 saying, " Preach the Gospel to every creature ; then, 
 as soon as anyone believes and is baptized, make him 
 a proselyte, that he may be your brother as a Jew." 
 The latter implied that faith in Christ did not of 
 itself make men brethren, but it did not directly 
 narrow the range of possible brotherhood. 
 
 Nevertheless, it would very soon have come to the 
 
THE JEWISH AND GENTILE CHURCHES. 79 
 
 same thing. The Gentile Christians of Antioch and 
 Cihcia (they, and not St. Paul's recent converts, were 
 now addressed) had come into the Church without 
 submitting to the law. If now the law were enforced 
 on them, they might submit to it, might become Jews 
 rather than cease to be Christians, but the chance 
 would be lost of their heathen neighbours joining 
 them. They would no more join a Jewish sect, or 
 one that, like the Jews, required circumcision of' all 
 adherents, than they would become Jews off-hand. 
 
 And the new doctrine was dishonourable to the 
 Gospel even more evidently than it was fatal to its 
 extension. It was thus a matter of course that SS. 
 Paul and Barnabas should oppose it. In preaching 
 to Gentiles untouched by Judaism, they had begun 
 with simple natural theism, and added, as matted of 
 revelation, the doctrines of the resurrection and the 
 judgment. To Jews, and others acquainted with the 
 Jewish Scriptures, they had represented Christ as the 
 fulfilment of prophecy, the accomplishment of the 
 hopes of Israel ; but they had taught that in His 
 presence the exclusive privileges of Israel vanished, 
 or at most became merely honorary, and that the free 
 salvation offered by Him was independent of, and 
 superseded, the effort to obtain righteousness by the 
 law. This was "the offence of the cross;" this was 
 what made it a stumbling-block to Jews, what led 
 them to persecute its preachers. It forbade them to 
 glory in anything but it, while they were accustomed 
 to glory in their law and in their race. Clearly then 
 either the two apostles were traitors to Judaism, or 
 
8o BEGIiVNlXGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 else the Judaisers were traitors to Christianity. The 
 one doctrine was unacceptable to men as men, the 
 other to Jews as Jews ; the one party or the other was 
 wrong, according as the Gospel was divinely intended 
 for the acceptance of men as men, or of Jews as Jews. 
 
 The visit of the apostles of the Gentiles to Jerusa- 
 lem is sometimes spoken of as the first General 
 Council of the Churcli, and the analogy is not alto- 
 gether a misleading one, if we remember that there 
 were at this time only two dioceses in Christendom, 
 the see of one being at Jerusalem, and of the other 
 at Antioch. This at least is the way in which St. 
 Paul seems to have conceived the situation. These 
 two Apostolic Churches formed one Catholic Church 
 between them, and therefore it'zvas certain that they 
 held the same faith. But some points in that common 
 faith having been called in question, or at least some 
 practical doubts having arisen as to their common 
 duties and interests, the two Churches were now to 
 meet in conference by their representatives, to confer 
 on equal terms, and in the first place to affirm and 
 define their common faith ; in the next, as a secondary 
 matter, to make such practical canons as might be 
 suitable for either Church or for both. 
 
 Now, as in later councils, the chief representatives 
 of each Church were the ex-officio ones, but elected, or 
 at least selected, ones were also appointed to attend. 
 On the part of the Church of Jerusalem, there were 
 the apostles now in residence there (we do not know 
 how many these were ; perhaps only three, SS. Peter, 
 John, and James, the Lord's brother), and further, the 
 
THE JEWISH AND GENTILE CHURCHES. 8i 
 
 elders of that and perhaps of other Jewish churches. 
 Of the Gentile or Antiochene Church, there were the 
 two apostles, Barnabas and Paul, and delegates from 
 Antioch and perhaps other Gentile churches. 
 
 But while this was St. Paul's view of the nature of 
 the conference, a different one was no doubt taken by 
 his opponents. According to the Jewish view, Jeru- 
 salem was " the mother and head of all the Churches 
 of [Judaea] and of the world ; " and any doubtful 
 case that might arise, in the Church of Antioch or 
 elsewhere, would come before " the apostles and elders 
 that were at Jerusalem," or rather before the Church 
 of Jerusalem itself, acting by these its representatives 
 as the sovereign tribunal and final court of appeal. 
 
 Now St. Luke's narrative is quite as consistent with 
 this view of the business done at Jerusalem as with the 
 other. I incline to think that it turned out formally 
 in this latter way, though St. Paul thinks it ought to 
 have been managed formally, and though it was 
 settled as regarded its practical spirit, in the other. 
 When he came to Jerusalem he received a friendly 
 greeting from the Church, which had at least no ani- 
 mosity against him. He had done good work for 
 Christ, and if his practice, or even his teaching, was 
 in any point defective, it might charitably be hoped 
 that he would amend on a brotherly admonition. The 
 mass of the Christians at Jerusalem were, as in the 
 old days before the first persecution, as thorough Jews 
 as ever, as zealous for the law and as devoted to the 
 temple as if St. Stephen had never lived or died ; but, 
 on the other hand, they had not ceased to live in the 
 
 G 
 
82 BEGLVNIiVGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 spirit of the Sermon on the Mount, which probably 
 most of them knew by heart, nearly as we read it in 
 St. Matthew's Gospel/ 
 
 But while St. Paul owned these Jewish Christians 
 as brethren, even as they owned him, he saw that it 
 would not be safe to bring before them the question 
 of the obligation of the law of Moses in the kingdom 
 of Christ. To the apostles he without reserve " com- 
 municated that gospel which he preached among the 
 Gentiles ;" but to allow it to become publicly known 
 how he set aside the law in preaching to Jews — still 
 more, how he ignored it in preaching to Gentiles — 
 would risk the spoiling of the whole of his past or of 
 his future work.^ The apostles, including St. James 
 as well as St. Peter, agreed that St. Paul had taught 
 and acted rightly. They acquiesced .even in a practical 
 exhibition which he made of his acknowledgment of 
 the equal brotherhood of the Gentiles. One of St. 
 Paul's personal converts, his "legitimate son according 
 to their common faith," as he called him long after- 
 wards, was a young man^ only known to us by the 
 
 ^ With perhaps a few clauses which are not preserved there ; e.g. 
 " Neither be ye glad except when ye see your brother walking in love ; " 
 " [They shall inherit the earth], and the male and the female shall 
 inherit alike." See Mr. Nicholson's edition of the fragments of the 
 Gospel according to the Hcbrcivs. 
 
 ^ So I understand Gal. ii. 2. The notion that St. Paul was doubtful 
 whether after all he had been preaching the true gospel, until he had 
 consulted the other apostles, seems utterly contrary to the spirit of the 
 passage, as well as to the apostle's character. 
 
 * Titus i. 4 does not prove that St. Paul was literally old enough to 
 have been his father, though a man under seventy would hardly use 
 such language to a man over fifty. But ii. 6, 7 seems to imply that 
 Titus was not past forty in A. D. 64-6, and therefore scarcely past 
 twenty-five now. 
 
THE JEWISH AND GENTILE CHURCHES. 83 
 
 name Titus. He was, perhaps most likely, a resident 
 of Antioch, but was almost certainly a Roman citizen, 
 and probably of pure Italian birth.' St. Paul had 
 taken him to Jerusalem as one of the representa- 
 tives of the Antiochene Church ; as such he would 
 naturally share, equally with St. Paul himself, in all 
 brotherly intercourse with the Church at Jerusalem. 
 And, uncircumcised Gentile as he was, it is evident 
 that his claim to such intercourse, even in Jerusalem 
 itself, was practically admitted by the apostles. No 
 doubt they and he took part in the breaking of the 
 bread the very night after he arrived with St. Paul, 
 and no demand was made on their part for his cir- 
 cumcision. 
 
 But St. Paul had not been able to keep his com- 
 munications with the apostles of the Circumcision as 
 private as he had desired. " Some converts to the 
 faith of those who came from the sect of the 
 Pharisees" had made their way in to these interviews, 
 or had become acquainted with their object, in a 
 manner which St. Paul bitterly resents. He calls 
 them "false brethren privily brought in, who came 
 in privily to spy out our liberty which we have in 
 Christ Jesus, that they may enslave us." 
 
 To do them justice, however, I do not think St. 
 Paul means to charge them with personal treachery, 
 with eavesdropping at his private conferences with 
 
 ^ From 2 Cor. viii. 18, xii. 18, one is led to conjecture that he was 
 an elder brother of St. Luke. That the two brothers should be known 
 as " Titus " and " Lucanus," would be analogous to the case of the two 
 sons of Vespasian, " Titus" and " Domitianus." 
 
84 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 the apostles ; he means to call them intruders, not 
 into the room where these were held, but into the 
 Church, whose true principles they did not accept. 
 They probably had the status of elders of the Churcli, 
 and as such had a more or less definite right to 
 demand that they should be consulted by the apostles 
 before any official decision was pronounced by them. 
 They reasserted in relation to St. Paul's recent con- 
 verts what had been asserted at Antioch concerning 
 the Gentile converts there, "that it was needful to 
 circumcise them, and command them to keep the 
 law ;" and it is likely enough they pressed the demand 
 in the crucial case of Titus, who was on the spot ; if 
 he were circumcised, it would follow that every con- 
 vert ought to be. 
 
 Now, "because of the false brethren" whom we 
 have heard so severely blamed by St. Paul, something 
 took place which he does not like to speak of He 
 tells us plainly enough that he made no concession 
 to them, to the submission demanded by them ; but 
 what he did do he does not tell — he leaves unfinished 
 the sentence which should have told us. Some have 
 actually imagined that he consented to the circum- 
 cision of Titus, hoping so to stave off an adverse 
 decision on the general question of the circumcision 
 of all converts. This would be the natural (though 
 not quite necessary) view, if we followed the reading, 
 " But because of the false brethren ... we did give 
 way for a season," instead of " to zu/wj/i we did not 
 give way, even for a season ;" but it is certain that 
 this reading, though very ancient, is wrong, being 
 
THE JEWISH AND GENTILE CHURCHES. 85 
 
 probably a correction to make the sentence gram- 
 matically complete. With the true text as it stands, 
 it is clear Titus cannot have been circumcised ; that 
 would have been at least a temporary concession to 
 the false brethren — there is little doubt that it would 
 have proved an irrevocable one. 
 
 But St. Paul's silence, I think, implies that he did 
 make some concession, though not to such submission 
 as the false brethren demanded. I believe that he 
 resolved to concede, not the liberty of his converts or 
 even of one of them, but his own dignity. Instead 
 of. entering on equal terms into conference with the 
 apostles of the Circumcision, he would submit to 
 plead before them. He always conceded an honorary 
 primacy to the Church at Jerusalem ; he would not 
 complain if for once it usurped something more. The 
 council was to have been a precedent (on a small 
 scale) for that of Nicaea ; it was turned into a 
 precedent for that of the Vatican — only we must 
 remember that it was St. James who was Pope ; St. 
 Peter was no more than a liberal Cardinal. 
 
 There is little doubt that this concession was used 
 as an argument against St. Paul afterwards ; he feels 
 it to be a sore subject ; but I do not think he was, or 
 had reason to be, ashamed of his conduct. The 
 ancient Church of Jerusalem was no more infallible 
 than the modern Church of Rome ; but St. James 
 was a much safer person than Pius IX. to be en- 
 trusted with the practical powers claimed for an 
 infallible pope ; for he was always guided by, and 
 was habituayy faithful to, the infallible Spirit. St. 
 
86 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 Paul knew that the apostles of the Circumcision 
 agreed with him, or rather with the Spirit that was 
 in him, as to the principles at issue ; and this justified 
 him in leaving the decision in their hands, instead of 
 asserting his right to keep one end of it in his own. 
 
 The elders, however, as well as the apostles, were 
 to take part in the decision — not that they acted as 
 junior members of the same tribunal, but rather as 
 assessors, competent to advise their superiors, but 
 liable to be overruled by them ;' apparently, even 
 the laity were present, but did not speak. Among 
 the elders there was much discussion, which implies 
 that they were not unanimous on the Judaising side, 
 though that was no doubt the strongest. At length 
 St. Peter made a weighty speech, taking strongly the 
 side of Gentile freedom, and even enunciating the 
 Pauline doctrine that the acceptance of the Gospel 
 involves the impotence of the law for salvation. 
 Jews — at least spiritual Jews, who felt which were 
 " the weightier matters of the law " — found its out- 
 ward observances a burden too heavy to be borne. 
 How could they then venture to impose them on 
 those who were naturally free from it .'' To do so 
 was "tempting God" — it was making the gigantic 
 
 ^ Secular precedents for the employment of such assessors were not 
 wanting. The supreme court of the empire at this period was of 
 exactly this character — the emperor heard causes with his advisers, 
 whose opinion he was expected to hear, but not obliged to follow. A 
 hardly less relevant illustration is the relation of the council, whether of 
 e'ders or nobles, to the king in the Homeric and ether primitive polities : 
 while the Christian eKK\r]crla bore much the same relation to either 
 as the Homeric dyopd. 
 
THE JEWISH AXD GENTILE CHURCHES. 87 
 
 work, which He was doing, the conversion of the 
 world to His service, more difficult than it was by 
 nature. 
 
 Impressed by St. Peter's words, the assembly gave 
 a silent and attentive hearing to SS. Paul and 
 Barnabas, who related how many Churches and souls 
 they had conquered for God, and how His approval 
 of their work had been attested by miracles. This 
 last argument seems to have had most weight with 
 the assembly ; they acquiesced in the decision pro- 
 nounced by St. James, their representative man ; and 
 the encyclical letter, probably drawn up by him, was 
 agreed to not only by the apostles and elders, but by 
 the whole Church. 
 
 St. James' decision was of the nature of a compro- 
 mise. On the main question the demand of the 
 Judaizers was rejected, and their claim to represent 
 the Apostolic Church repudiated. Gentile converts 
 were not to be required to be circumcised as a con- 
 dition of membership in the Church, or of enjoyment 
 of its spiritual blessings. But, on the other hand, it 
 was desired that they should be drawn as near as 
 possible, even in outward things, to their Jewish 
 brethren. St. James hints in his speech, that the 
 existing means of proselytism would go on — " Moses 
 hath in every city them that preach him " — but he 
 refuses to make the propagation of the Gospel wait 
 till the propagation of the law could overtake it. His 
 point of view is, " It is much to be wished, but 
 scarcely to be expected, that all mankind should turn 
 Jews; but meanwhile our duty is to persuade them 
 
88 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 all to turn Christians, and then, when they are 
 Christians, we will be satisfied if they live a life not 
 absolutely heathenish, nor disgusting to Jewish habits 
 of thought." 
 
 For this last object he and the Church of Jerusalem 
 required, not only that Christians should abstain from 
 the real pollutions of heathen idolatry and immorality, 
 but that they should conform, to some extent, to the 
 Jewish usages about food. Abstinence from swine's 
 flesh, indeed, was not insisted on ; that was, like cir- 
 cumcision, one of the peculiar institutions of the Jews, 
 and kindred or neighbouring races, and one impossible 
 to enforce on those who refused to submit to Jewish 
 institutions en masse. Besides, Jewish practice in that 
 matter was so notorious that no Gentile would, except 
 as an insult, offer such food to a Jewish guest ; 
 Gentiles must do without it, if they desired Jews to 
 eat with them. But it was less generally known, that 
 meat killed in the ordinary way was regarded with 
 scarcely less horror by every scrupulous Jew ; and 
 Gentiles, if social intercourse between them and Jews 
 was to be possible, must give security against the risk 
 of entrapping them into such defilement, perhaps 
 must abstain from rousing against themselves a 
 physical disgust which assimilated itself to a moral 
 horror. 
 
 The letter containing this decree was addressed to 
 "the brethren of the Gentiles throughout Antioch, 
 and Syria, and Cilicia," the new Churches of Asia 
 Minor not being formally included. The older 
 Churches had derived their faith and apostolic com- 
 
TFIE JEWISH AND GENTILE CHURCHES. 89 
 
 mission from the Church at Jerusalem, and the mother 
 Church assumed authority to command them ; but 
 since SS. Paul and Barnabas had received indepen- 
 dent apostolical authority, the apostles of the Cir- 
 cumcision, still more the local elders of Jerusalem, 
 could claim no authority over them. St. Paul was 
 fully satisfied with this recognition of his independent 
 apostolate, and was prepared to recommend in his own 
 diocese (as we may call it) the same compromise that 
 the Church of Jerusalem enforced in theirs. He was 
 perfectly willing, moreover, to recognise the seniority 
 and sanctity of the Church of Jerusalem, by the 
 Gentile Churches undertaking the payment of a 
 tribute to its charities, the contributions for this 
 purpose from native Jews being now apparently 
 exhausted, or at least inadequate.' This tribute St. 
 Paul regarded, almost equally with the concession of 
 Gentile liberty, not as a mere article in a compromise, 
 but as a matter of Christian duty ; the one was in 
 fact correlative to the other. " They are their debtors," 
 he wrote some years later ; " for if the Gentiles were 
 partakers in their spiritual benefits, they owe in return 
 a sacred tribute to them in carnal benefits." (Rom. 
 XV. 27.) 
 
 And as St. Paul was satisfied with the result of his 
 expedition to Jerusalem, so was the Church of Antioch. 
 Though the decree of the apostles was in some mea- 
 sure a compromise, it was practically a victory for the 
 
 ^ Probably the revulsion of Jewish feeling against St. Stephen had 
 put an end, not to conversions, but to conversions from the higher 
 classes. 
 
90 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 party of liberty. The question of principle was con- 
 ceded. The formal restrictions insisted on were least 
 vexatious in a large city where casJiar butchers were 
 plentiful ; and even these restrictions might be held 
 to involve a principle of Christian liberty : for what 
 was their object, but to allow Jewish and Gentile 
 Christians to eat at the same table as brethren — not 
 only in the eucharist, but at the love-feasts or conse- 
 crated social meals } This was the view encouraged 
 by the two prophets sent from Jerusalem as bearers 
 and interpreters of the letter. It was accepted and 
 acted on by St. Peter, who soon afterwards came 
 down to Antioch. 
 
 But after a while it appeared that there was a 
 section, at least, of the Church of Jerusalem that did 
 not accept this interpretation of the settlement. 
 "Certain persons came from James "^ — not, like the 
 former extreme Judaisers, merely from Judaea, but 
 from Jerusalem itself, and with some official sanction, 
 we can hardly doubt, from the head of the Church 
 there. These men, it seems, refused to eat with the 
 Gentiles, perhaps even with those who did eat with 
 them ; and St. Peter and the other Jews now residing 
 at Antioch, though not sharing their scruples, were 
 afraid to shock them — they " withdrew and separated 
 themselves." Apparently there were hardly any 
 Jews who adhered to their earlier practice; "even 
 Barnabas," we are told, " was carried away by their 
 dissimulation." 
 
 St. Paul, as we know, vehemently denounced this 
 
 1 Gal. ii. 12. 
 
THE JEWISH AND GENTILE CHURCHES. 91 
 
 conduct, but we must not exaggerate the difference 
 of principle between him and those he denounced. 
 What he charges them with is, not the holding false 
 principles, but the not being consistent to their true 
 ones. Their condemnation is, that they "dissemble," 
 that they are acting a part, behaving as if they were 
 Judaisers at heart when they were not. It perhaps 
 hardly follows that it is matter of faith that St. Paul 
 was right, because his view is stated, and St. Peter's is 
 not, in canonical Scripture ; but it is proved by the fact 
 that, from that day to this, people have been able to 
 misrepresent St. Peter as not holding the free Gospel 
 taught by St. Paul. St. Paul's rebuke to him takes 
 for granted that he did hold it : " If thou," he said, 
 "being a Jew to start with, livest in Gentile not 
 Jewish fashion, how canst thou put pressure upon the 
 Gentiles to conform to Judaism .''"' This shows what 
 St Peter's error was not, as well as what it was. He 
 did not scruple to break the law where charity 
 demanded it. He lived like a Gentile when left to 
 himself, but he would not do so in presence of more 
 scrupulous Jews ; he thought that charity to thcni 
 required him to become as a Jew to the Jews. 
 
 And no doubt he would have been right if his con- 
 duct had been open to the observation of Jews only. 
 But the Gentiles would see that he acted on the 
 Judaisers' view, and would naturally suppose that he 
 shared it ; and so he would give — in fact, he has given 
 — the weight of his name to gain them over to the 
 Judaising side. Not, perhaps, that he could have 
 1 Gal. ii. 14. 
 
92 BEGINNIiXGS OF THE CHRIST/AX CHURCH. 
 
 been quoted on behalf of the extreme thesis con- 
 demned b}' the council, " Except ye be circumcised 
 ... ye cannot be saved." But the new-comers from 
 Jerusalem seem to have held, that though baptized 
 but uncircumcised Gentiles might go to heaven with 
 themselves, they were not fit company for them on 
 earth. The circumcised and the uncircumcised might 
 be believers in the same religion, but they could not 
 be members of the same caste. (We may remember 
 that it was by a perfectly relevant appeal to this pas- 
 sage of St. Paul, that Bishop Wilson was led to his 
 decision against the maintenance of caste distinctions 
 among the converts of Southern India.) For a Gentile 
 to turn Jew was not necessar\- to salvation, but it was 
 a step of spiritual promotion. The convert began in 
 the Spirit — he believed and was baptized ; then, to be 
 made perfect, he must be circumcised in the flesh. 
 (Gal. iii. 3.) 
 
 Such a doctrine was, as St. Paul calls it, senseless 
 (Gal. iii. i) ; as Hooker well expresses it, it denies the 
 foundation of the Christian faith, not directly, but 
 " by consequent."' What was the meaning of telling a 
 Gentile Christian that it was desirable, though not 
 necessary to salvation, that he should be circumcised.'' 
 The Jew who told him so might conceivably only 
 mean, " It is a fine thing to be a Jew ; I am proud of 
 it, and I wish my Christian brother to share my 
 advantages." But to the Gentile, who had no desire 
 to be a Jew for the sake of national pride, but rather 
 
 ^ In his Sermon of Justification : taken up by Travel's in Art. 7 of 
 his objections, and by Hooker in Art. 5 of his reply. 
 
THE JEWISH AND GENTILE CHURCHES. 93 
 
 the reverse, the only possible motive for conformity 
 to Judaism was this, " Faith in Christ does something 
 for my salvation, but not everything. I am half saved 
 now ; let me be circumcised, and I shall be quite 
 saved." Thus, to "compel the Gentiles to Judaise," 
 as St. Peter and the rest were indirectly doing, was to 
 make Christ of none effect to them, to make them 
 fall from grace. 
 
 We are not told how far St. Peter assented to what 
 St. Paul said. I think the fact that we hear no more 
 of the dispute shows that it did not lead to any 
 breach between them ; but though St. Peter took the 
 remonstrance in good part, it is possible that he may 
 have adhered to his own point of view, that it was 
 his business to conciliate the Jews, and St. Paul's to 
 see that the Gentiles were not misled by them. After 
 all, it is not for us to judge those who " shall sit on 
 twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel;" 
 it is safer for us to say that St. Paul was right than 
 that St. Peter was wrong. Any way, if the latter was 
 wrong, it was an error of judgment, not of principle, 
 not even necessarily a weakness of character, 
 
 St. Barnabas disappears from history soon after 
 this time. His concession to the Judaisers had, per- 
 haps, somewhat shaken St. Paul's confidence in him ; 
 any way, they parted on a personal question, in which 
 we may practically say that both were right. The 
 Church generally seems to have sided with St. Paul, 
 but the two continued to work on the same lines apart 
 as they had together. They divided between them 
 the Churches they had founded in common, St. Bar- 
 
94 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH 
 
 nabas going to his native Cyprus, St. Paul through 
 his native CiHcia to the Churches, better known to us, 
 but not necessarily more important, of Asia Minor. 
 
 From a {q.\n notices in the epistles, we know that 
 St. Paul always maintained his friendship for his 
 fellow- apostle, and watched his later career with 
 interest. He implies that Barnabas, like himself, 
 made it a rule to maintain himself by manual labour,' 
 which is the more noticeable, because he had been a 
 man of independent property. But though St. Paul, 
 and probably St. Luke, knew what became of him, 
 we do not. If he wrote the Epistle to the Hebrews, 
 he probably survived St. Paul ; but perhaps the fact 
 of St. Mark's becoming independent of him, and 
 associating more with SS. Peter and Paul, points to 
 the conclusion that he died earlier. Any way, we may 
 confidently affirm that he did not write the very stupid 
 and not very orthodox Epistle which, for want of any 
 other title, we are obliged to call by his name. 
 
 Of St. Paul's career, on the contrary, we know, not 
 indeed everything, but a good deal more than it will 
 be possible for us now to follow. On his second 
 journey he took with him as his colleague one of the 
 prophets of Jerusalem, who, by his conduct at Antioch, 
 had shown himself to be sound on the question of 
 Gentile brotherhood. After visiting his old Churches 
 of Lycaonia — after being detained, apparently by 
 illness, on the borders of Galatia and Phrygia, and 
 founding more than one Church there — he was led by 
 "the Spirit of Jesus " ^ to hurry to the north-west of 
 ^ I Cor. ix. 6. ^ Acts xvi. 7. 
 
THE JEWISH AND GENTILE CHURCHES. 95 
 
 the peninsula, and thence to cross into Europe. In 
 Macedonia much the same happened to him as before 
 in Asia Minor; Churches, mostly Gentile, were founded, 
 but the Jews were too violent to allow long residence 
 among them. There are two new elements, however, 
 in this portion of the history; first, that St. Paul has 
 now the women on his side;' secondly, that the 
 Roman authority displays suspicion of him.^ 
 
 From Macedonia he went southwards into Greece 
 proper, where he failed in founding more than the 
 scantiest Church at Athens, but succeeded at Corinth. 
 The Jews there were too hopelessly outnumbered, 
 or too efficiently held in check, to attempt illegal 
 violence ; they did what they could by their tolerated 
 synagogue discipline ^ to persecute converts; but the 
 only result was that the converts from Judaism were 
 cut off from their old religion, and were absorbed 
 into the mass of their Gentile fellow-Christians. 
 
 From the two surviving Epistles to the Thessa- 
 lonians, we can see that St. Paul found no need, at 
 
 ^ I do not know how seriously to take Professor Plumptre's sugges- 
 tion, that St. Luke had a doctor's faculty for making himself agreeable 
 to ladies, or how much weight to give to Bp. Lightfoot's, that women 
 in Macedonia held a higher social position than elsewhere. 
 
 ^ The Pisidian Antioch was, like Philippi, a Roman colony ; but the 
 opposition to the Apostles there was apparently altogether of Jewish 
 origin, certainly not anti-Jewish, 
 
 ^ With the true reading in Acts xviii. 17, "Then they all," not 
 "Then all the Greeks," it becomes likely that the Sosthenes of that 
 passage is the Sosthenes of i Cor. i. i. The story will then be, not 
 that the mob persecuted the Jews for trying to persecute the Christians, 
 but that the Jews, failing to get the government to persecute the 
 Christians for them, were yet allowed, to a moderate extent, to per- 
 secute them themselves. 
 
96 BEGLVA'/NGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 this time, for anti-Jewish controversy. "The Churches 
 which are in Judaea in Christ Jesus '" are a safe model 
 for the Gentile Churches to follow — there is no fear 
 of their being corrupted by them ; it is the un- 
 believing Jews who are the enemies of both, trying 
 to keep the Gospel from these, and persecuting those 
 for believing it. The prominent object apparently in 
 St, Paul's teaching at this time — or at least the thing 
 with which his converts were most impressed — was 
 the Second Advent. ^ He finds it necessary, not to 
 stimulate, but rather to sober their faith in it. 
 
 From Greece St. Paul went to Jerusalem to fulfil 
 (as it seems) 3 a Nazarite's vow which he had taken at 
 Corinth — on what occasion we cannot tell ; but the 
 fact shows how little he felt himself to have broken 
 with Judaism or, still more, with the Church of 
 Jerusalem. What happened there is utterly unknown 
 to us ; probably his meeting with St. James and the 
 elders was friendly, but hardly more than formal. 
 After a somewhat longer visit to Antioch, he returned 
 nearly on the same line as before through Galatia ; 
 but now, instead of hurrying into Europe, he went 
 down to Ephesus, and made that his head-quarters 
 for two or three years. 
 
 The incident of the twelve disciples at Ephesus, 
 and their rebaptism and confirmation by St. Paul, is 
 told by St. Luke, probably, on account of its having a 
 
 ' I Thess. ii. 14. 
 
 ^ I Thess. iv. 15, v. 10 ; 2 Thess. ii. I-12. 
 
 ^ It is grammatically possible in Acts xviii. 18 to suppose that it was 
 Aquila who had a vow. But then why did not he go up to Jerusalem ? 
 
THE JEWISH AND GENTILE CHURCHES. 97 
 
 double doctrinal significance. In the first place, these 
 men " baptized unto John's baptism" were " instructed 
 in the way of the Lord," but needed to be brought on 
 to Christian perfection ; they were really in the position 
 in which the Judaisers supposed the Gentile converts 
 to be — believing, but not yet made perfect. It was 
 important, then, that St. Paul should be shown as 
 bringing them on to perfection. And further, the 
 way that he ministered to them is important ; any 
 duly-instructed Christian could have " baptized them 
 in the name of the Lord Jesus ;" but it was only by 
 the laying on of an apostle's hands that the Holy 
 Ghost was given. The Holy Ghost Himself attested 
 the apostolate of Paul, as surely as He had that of 
 Peter long ago at Samaria. 
 
 St. Luke does not tell us ivJiy these attestations of 
 St. Paul's apostolate, and the completeness of his 
 Gospel, were important ; he gives the facts which 
 proved them, without telling us why they needed 
 proof. And when our only history is silent, it is hard 
 to reconstruct facts out of the incidental allusions in 
 the epistles which are our only other authority. But 
 from the Epistles to the Galatians and Corinthians, 
 which were written about this time,' we can see that 
 the Judaisers were active in the Churches recently 
 founded by St. Paul. In Galatia they were repre- 
 sented or headed by some person whom St. Paul is 
 half afraid of attacking ;"" so great was, not only his 
 
 ^ I pass over the question of their order. I myself regard the 
 Galatians as the later, nearly contemporary with Romans. 
 2 Gal. V. 10, 
 
 H 
 
98 BEGIXXLVGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 personal reputation, but, apparently, his official position 
 in the Church and spiritual gifts. There the members 
 of the Church were pressed to accept circumcision — 
 whether it was put forward, as at Antioch before the 
 council, as absolutely necessary to salvation may be 
 d-oubtful ; but at any rate it was represented that no 
 man could be a perfect Christian unless he were cir- 
 cumcised, and kept the law of Moses. 
 
 At Corinth things do not seem to have gone so far. 
 There the question seems to have turned more on 
 personal considerations and less on principles. To 
 the Galatians the great question was, " Is the ob- 
 servance of the law necessary or helpful to salva- 
 tion.-'" It was a subordinate one, "Is Paul's 
 authority adequate for setting the law aside ? " But 
 at Corinth we hear nothing of circumcision, and little 
 of the law ; the great question is, " Is Paul an 
 apostle.''" In the first epistle he feels so sure of his 
 principles being held by all his readers, that he can 
 venture to censure his own partisans for being par- 
 tisans at all ; he could hardly have written as he does 
 if the so-called parties of Cephas and Christ had not 
 held "the truth of the Gospel " while the others did, 
 even if not in the most humble and charitable spirit. 
 
 From the second epistle,' I confess to finding it 
 
 1 Some have imagined that fragments of different epistles are em- 
 liodied in tliis. I should perhaps incline to a less extreme view — that 
 the successive sections were written at different times, perhaps at 
 different places, as the apostle, on his way through Macedonia, was 
 met by successive letters or messengers from Corinth. But I am not 
 sure that even this is necessary ; it may be that the want of connexion 
 between successive portions of the epistle are accounted for by the 
 excited and, to some extent, wounded state of the apostle's feelings. 
 
THE JEWISH AND GENTILE CHURCHES. 99 
 
 impossible to extract any coherent or definite history. 
 All we can say is, that he finds it necessary to defend, 
 not only his title to the apostolate, but his personal 
 honour. It had been insinuated, not only that he was 
 afraid to claim maintenance from his converts as an 
 apostle, but that he did obtain such maintenance 
 fraudulently; that, "being crafty, he caught them 
 with guile,'" — got money from them by calling on 
 them for contributions to the Church at Jerusalem. 
 It does not seem that the Corinthian Church at large 
 gave much attention to these attacks, but St. Paul 
 was hurt at its being possible to make them there. 
 
 However, when he visited Corinth he seems to 
 have found things satisfactory, or to have made them 
 so. Whether the leader (for there seems to have been 
 one conspicuous one,- as in Galatia) of the Judaising 
 party stayed to encounter him, and was overpowered 
 or submitted, or whether he withdrew, may be uncer- 
 tain ; all we know is, that St. Paul found three 
 months^ long enough for all he had to do in Greece, 
 and for writing the Epistle to the Romans too. 
 
 Into the theological question raised in that great 
 epistle we, of course, cannot enter; we can only 
 notice the evidence it gives as to the state of the 
 Roman Church. It must have been considerable in 
 numbers, and have been in existence for a con- 
 siderable time ; but we have no notice whatever of 
 the date or manner of its foundation. We cannot 
 absolutely disprove the legend that it was founded by 
 
 ^ 2 Cor. xii. 16, cf. viii. 20, 21. ''a Cor. x. 10, 11, 
 
 ^ Acts XX. %. 
 
lOO BEGIA'iVINGS OF THE CHRIST! AX CHURCH. 
 
 St. Peter, perhaps immediately after his miraculous 
 escape from prison ; but Ave should rather understand 
 that it had no definite founder, or date of foundation, 
 at all People flowed thither from all parts of the 
 empire ; and residents there often travelled eastwards, 
 and had the opportunity of picking up either the 
 worthier or the baser elements of Oriental religion. 
 We know that " Roman sojourners " in Jerusalem, 
 "both Jews and proselytes,"' were among the very 
 first converts to the Church ; Prisca and Aquila had 
 apparently become Christians before they left Rome. 
 On the other hand, the widow and son of Simon the 
 Cyrenian had settled there \^ so also had several rela- 
 tions or personal friends of St. Paul's own, some of 
 whom had been early and active members of the 
 Church at Jerusalem in its earliest period. ^ These 
 very early converts were, of course, Jews, though 
 mostly Hellenists, speaking Greek and perhaps a 
 little Latin, and bearing Greek or Latin names. But 
 the pure Jewish Church had been broken up by the 
 edict of Claudius, and probably only a few of its 
 members had yet returned ; while on the other hand 
 there had grown up, no doubt from the Jews as a 
 nucleus, a Church of Gentiles, largely Judaised in 
 feeling, but not much disposed to accept Judaism /// 
 toto. Such Judaising as there was among them was 
 rather the scrupulosity of a weak conscience, that was 
 
 1 Acts ii. lo. ' Rom. xvi. 13. 
 
 ^ Such is the inference from Rom. xvi. 7. I cannot believe, how- 
 ever, that Andronicus and Junia (which is almost certainly a female 
 name) are meant to be called apostles themselves. 
 
THE JEWISH AND GENTILE CHURCHES. loi 
 
 ready to erect anybody's practice into a duty, than 
 the sign of any false dogmatic teaching as to what 
 Christian duty was/ Hence it is that the epistle, 
 though even more dogmatic than that to the Gala- 
 tians, is less controversial. 
 
 While St. Paul was engaged in these painful con- 
 troversies with the Judaisers who attacked his con- 
 verts at Corinth and in Galatia, his relations with the 
 Church of Jerusalem continued to be as brotherly, at 
 least on his side, as before. Both in Galatia, in Mace- 
 donia, and in Greece, he received contributions for the 
 " poor of the holy people," " and continued to assert 
 the sacred duty of such charity towards them ; but 
 there are signs that he was afraid that his charity 
 might not be met in the same spirit. There cannot, 
 indeed, have been any official declaration of war on 
 their part ; if there had, it would have been hopeless 
 to buy off with tribute these zealots who gloried in 
 the name of " the Poor." The counter-missions to 
 Galatia and to Corinth were not the act of St. James 
 and his Church, but they indicated the temper of a 
 party in that Church, and a party that it did not 
 repudiate. Probably the " letters of commendation " 
 shown at Corinth by the anti-Pauline leader proceeded 
 from St. James, or some of the other apostles of the 
 
 ^ See especially chap. xiv. It is obvious that the epistle is 
 addressed to a Church at least mainly Gentile — that chap. ii. i"] eiseq. is 
 more of a rhetorical prosopopoeia than chap. xi. 13. 
 
 * Such must, in the mouth of a Jewish Christian, have been part of 
 the meaning of the phrase " poor saints." (Rom. xv. 26, &c.) I do not, 
 however, accept Ur. Irons' theory, that ayloi always in St. Paul stands 
 for Jewish Christians. 
 
102 BEGIXAViYCS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 Circumcision ; while in Galatia the leader is denounced 
 with so much awe as almost to make us guess that he 
 was one of St. James's own brothers — "a Brother of 
 the Lord " Himself in the same sense as he was. 
 
 Any way, St. Paul thought it necessary to stimulate 
 the contributions of the Corinthians by telling them ' 
 that "the ministration of this sacred service not on!}- 
 serves to fill up the wants of the holy people, but 
 also to overflow by many thanksgivings to God ; 
 while by the proof of this ministration they glorify 
 God for the submission of your confession to the 
 gospel of Christ, both in the liberality of your con- 
 tribution to them and to all, and in their pra}-ers for 
 you, as they long for you because of the exceeding 
 grace of God upon you." It serves, to express it 
 more shortly, not only to feed the hungry, but to 
 make you and the Jewish Church feel that you are 
 brethren ; to make thcj)i feel that you are a triumph 
 to the Gospel which they believe. To the Romans, 
 again, he sends a request for their earnest prayers, not 
 only " that I may be delivered from the unbelievers 
 in Judaea," but "that my ministration at Jerusalem 
 may prove acceptable to the saints."^ We know how 
 real the danger was of his not being delivered from 
 the unbelievers ; no doubt the danger of gifts from 
 him not being acceptable was as real. 
 
 For "the poor" of Jerusalem were rather a dangerous 
 class of people to have to deal with. We have seen how 
 
 ' 2 Cor. ix. 12, 13. The sentence is rather difficult grammatically, 
 probably for the same reason as Gal. ii. 5 — because St. Paul feels tlial 
 he has a delicate, not to say awkward, consideration to express. 
 
 " Rom. XV. 31. 
 
THE JEWISH AND GENTILE CHURCHES. 103 
 
 the earliest Church consisted of a compact body of 
 worshippers in the temple, worshippers by whom the 
 alms of their co-religionists, at Jerusalem or elsewhere, 
 were accepted as a sort of salary for their duties as 
 their representatives there. At first, however, the 
 Church had not consisted of receivers of alms exclu- 
 sively ; it had included givers of alms, and had been 
 governed by the apostles. But when both the apostles 
 and men like SS. Barnabas and Philip had gone else- 
 where, the Ebiotiim, the " poor men," had everything 
 their own way. The Church was reduced to a re- 
 siduum, by no means without much of its original 
 virtue, but with a great reduction of the soundness of 
 judgment and vigour of life which it originally had. 
 After all, the worshippers in the Jewish temple were a 
 mob, though their religious earnestness gave them a 
 more estimable character than most other mobs ; and 
 the Nazarene section of the temple mob, though the 
 most estimable section of it, had the faults of a mob 
 still. I am afraid when the disciples "were with one 
 accord in Solomon's Porch, and of the rest durst no 
 man join himself unto them," they looked outwardly 
 very like a mob capable of hustling an unsympathetic 
 intruder ; and what they then looked like they now 
 not improbably were. 
 
 It was these men that St. James had to keep in 
 order, and that St. Paul had at once to conciliate as a 
 duty of Christian charity, and to repel as a duty to 
 Christian liberty. When we understand this, we shall 
 find no difficulty in conceiving that, though SS. James 
 and Paul held essentially the same faith, yet their 
 
I04 BEGIN.VIXGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 ecclesiastical policy differed — the Churches which they 
 had respectively to represent and to manage were so 
 different. It is, I think, now generally admitted that 
 it is a mistake to suppose the paragraph in St. James's 
 Epistle about justification by works to be an attack, 
 if not upon St. Paul, upon an antinomian perversion 
 of St. Paul's language. The " faith " of which St. 
 James declares the insufficiency is a merely Jewish 
 faith, not Christian faith at all, not even that of a 
 fanatical or heretical Christianity. The truth seems 
 to be, that St. James denies the crude statement of a 
 Jewish mode of thought, which St. Paul spiritualizes 
 until it becomes a truth. But though the two apostles 
 did not engage in theological controversy wilii each 
 other, we have seen reason to believe that they did, 
 so to speak, come into conflict at second hand, on 
 questions of discipline that indirectly involved doctrine 
 —that St. Paul was obliged to denounce as heretics 
 men who were able, not untruly, to claim to have the 
 sanction of St. James. St. Paul had repelled these 
 intruders, from Greece at least if not from Asia, but 
 what satisfaction was there in that if they continued 
 to find a base of operations in Palestine .'* It was 
 admitting into the Church a civil war that could have 
 no triumph : — " if Christ were divided against Himself, 
 how could His kingdom stand.''" Not victory but 
 peace was what was necessary, and St. Paul saw that 
 peace could be made, or rather maintained, with James, 
 though it could not with the Jacobites. This was 
 why he persisted, in spite of all warnings, in going 
 up to Jerusalem. 
 
THE JEWISH AND GENTILE CHURCHES. 105 
 
 And it is important to observe that he succeeded 
 in his object. He was not "delivered from the un- 
 behevers in Judaea," but " the service which he had 
 for Jerusalem" zvas "accepted of the saints." It 
 needed management to secure its being so ; but St. 
 James, as at the council several years before, accepted 
 him as a brother and colleague himself, and helped 
 to manage his more prejudiced flock. (Acts xxi. 18 
 et scq.) 
 
 St. Paul made no more concession of principle than 
 at that former visit. He had then brought one Gen- 
 tile convert with him to force the. Jewish Church to 
 own him as a brother ; now he brought at least two — 
 St. Luke and Trophimus' — probably half-a-dozen.^ 
 These were representatives of the churches who had 
 contributed to the gift St. Paul was bringing with 
 him ; it was reasonable that they should go to look 
 after the application of the money — it was the more 
 important, because St. Paul's enemies had insinuated 
 that he was not to be trusted with it. Now, their 
 presence served him in another way. Without their 
 sanction, he might have hesitated to have applied his 
 funds to any object but the actual relief of distress; 
 but with their concurrence he adopted the suggestion 
 of St. James and the elders, that out of it he should 
 pay for the offerings of four Judeo-Christian Naza- 
 rites. 
 
 This St. Paul himself, we may be sure, had not the 
 
 ^ Acts xxi. 18, 29. 
 
 ^ Acts XX. 4 shows that St. Paul started with a large party ; 2 Cor. 
 viii. 19, that some members at least meant to go with him the whole way. 
 
io6 BEGIXNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 smallest objection to doing. We must always re- 
 member that the apostle of the Gentiles was person- 
 ally a Jew ; the law had ceased to be to him a burden 
 on the conscience, but it had by no means lost its 
 hold on his imagination or affections, scarcely upon 
 his habits. Any wa\-, it was his principle to become 
 to the Jews as a Jew, to them who were under the law 
 as under the law. He blamed no Jew, least of all a 
 Jew of Jerusalem, for observing the law ; he had even 
 decided in the Jewish sense the question who was a 
 Jew, in the case of St. Timothy. He would concede 
 to the Jews every point but one — that of the liberty, 
 equality, and brotherhood of the Gentiles. He had 
 condemned St. Peter for conceding that, and he did 
 not himself concede it now. He walked about Jeru- 
 salem with Trophimus, and then he shut himself up 
 in the Temple with the four Nazarites. The one fact 
 brought down on him the vengeance of the unbeliev- 
 ing section of the temple-mob ; but the other had 
 conciliated the believing. The danger of civil war in 
 the Church was at an end, though there might be 
 traitors to it. The Ebionites had finally to go out 
 from among the brethren, because they were not of 
 them. That was a loss to the Church, but nothing to 
 the loss that it would have been had they made good 
 their position as false brethren lording over the true. 
 
 Henceforth St. Paul's difficulties were of the same 
 kind as he had often encountered before ; he was a 
 Christian confessor in the hands of a Jewish mob. 
 The immediate danger was no greater than it had 
 been at Lystra ; it was, however, a less transient 
 
THE JEWISH AND GENTILE CHURCHES. 107 
 
 danger. The mob of the Temple had actually a 
 prescriptive right to lynch any Gentile who intruded 
 into the inner court.' If Trophimus had really been 
 where St. Paul was, he would have been justly liable 
 to death, and it was not unfair that St. Paul should 
 be held liable for bringing him. Lysias therefore was 
 less to blame than we might think, for supposing 
 that a man whom the Temple mob wanted to lynch 
 ought to be treated as a presumed criminal : he would 
 not allow him to be lynched, but he would bring him 
 to trial before the Sanhedrin. 
 
 Before the Sanhedrin St. Paul continued to make 
 an effort to keep the Jewish Christians on his side. 
 This at least I think to be the object of his proclaiming 
 himself a Pharisee ; he desired to avoid the question 
 whether he had violated the law (which he had not) 
 or disparaged it (which he had), and to bring matters 
 back to the old question on which the Church was at 
 one, whether faith in Jesus was of itself apostasy 
 from the law. 
 
 On this point the Pharisees supported him, as they 
 had St. Peter almost thirty years before. But theSaddu- 
 cee high priests now began dallying with the fanatical 
 zealots who were ultimately their ruin : Ananias him- 
 self was among their earliest victims. Even now the 
 unnatural coalition failed, but it had important indirect 
 results. St. Paul had gone to Jerusalem with the 
 
 1 The inscription engraved in Lewin's St. Paul, vol. ii. p. 133, is now 
 generally well known. Josepus tells us expressly (B. J., VI. ii. 4) that 
 it was recognised that Roman citizenship was not a protection from 
 death for this crime. 
 
io8 BEG/NNhYGS OF THE CHRISTIAN' CHURCH. 
 
 prospect of a trial and a death like St. Stephen's 
 consciously before him, and had been ready to risk 
 it for the sake of holding the Church together, and 
 raising once more a testimony before the rulers of 
 Israel to "Christ the end of the law for righteousness." 
 But now the one work was done, and the other proved 
 to be hopeless. Henceforth St. Paul was resolved 
 never to trust himself in Jerusalem again. Henceforth, 
 for good or evil, the outward fortune of the apostle 
 depends on the Roman government ; and henceforth, 
 moreover, the centre of the Church's life begins to 
 shift from Jerusalem, and even from Greece, and to 
 follow Paul to Rome. 
 
III. 
 
 '^\)t ODI^urc!) anti t\)t ©mpire. 
 
 THE great danger of the Church durhig the period 
 covered by the Acts of the Apostles was its 
 restriction to Jews or reabsorption in Judaism ; the 
 heathen world appeared rather as the field of the 
 Church's conquests than as the Church's oppressor or 
 threatened destroyer. From the time of the fall of 
 Jerusalem onwards the struggle changes its character; 
 the Pagan empire is the great persecuting power. 
 Judaism still exists as an external enemy to the 
 gospel, and the Judaising spirit as a possible corrup- 
 tion of it, but the strength of both is broken. It is 
 in the period between the Neronian persecution in 
 the autumn of A.D. 64, and the fall of Jerusalem six 
 years later, that this change takes place. After it has 
 taken place, the question is no longer whether the 
 Church shall be Catholic ; it is whether the world can 
 destroy the Catholic Church, or will enter it. 
 
 No doubt there had been long before this signs of 
 the world or the empire (whichev^er we like to call it) 
 threatening the Church. We mentioned the plausible 
 conjecture that the cessation of the first Jewish perse- 
 cution of the Christians was caused by the attempt of 
 
no IlEGIXXINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 the Emperor Gaius to place his statue in the temple. 
 Gaius (whom modern historians used until lately to 
 prefer calling by his pet name, or nickname, Caligula, 
 "Little Boots") had been the intimate friend of Herod 
 Agrippa, and had given him the first beginnings of 
 his kingdom ; and the two had done each other a 
 great deal of harm. Gaius had paganised the mind 
 of Agrippa, Agrippa had orientalised that of Gaius. 
 We are told that Gaius had always been a vicious 
 youth ; a few months after his accession he became, 
 there is little doubt, mad as well as bad. But he had 
 the faculty \yhich some madmen have of reasoning 
 rightly from wrong premises. From the oriental 
 fashion of paying divine honours to living sovereigns, — 
 from the recent Roman custom of deifying deceased 
 emperors, — it seemed to him to follow that he was a 
 god ; and if so, that he ought to be treated as one 
 by all his subjects. Some accidental circumstances 
 brought before him the fact that the Jews refused to 
 pay him divine honours, or to admit his statue into 
 their synagogues. He resolved on having it placed 
 in the temple at Jerusalem. Agrippa remonstrated 
 in vain ; an embassy headed by the Jewish philoso- 
 pher Philo gained little attention. The Jews of Pales- 
 tine professed that they were willing to die to avert 
 the profanation ; and we can hardly doubt that they 
 would have preferred dying with arms in their hands. 
 But the matter never came to such extremity. Vitel- 
 lius, the Legate of Syria, an able if not very highly 
 principled man, temporized, though at the risk of his 
 life, and at last Gaius was assassinated by a soldier 
 
THE CHURCFI AND THE EMPIRE. in 
 
 whom he had insulted, and the danger passed off. 
 Gaius's influence on the Christian Church was con- 
 fined to this : he perhaps secured to it a few years of 
 peace, and he certainly bequeathed to it the type of 
 an antichristian, or rather antitheistic, tyrant, "who 
 himself sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself 
 that he is God." 
 
 His uncle and successor Claudius also came only 
 in indirect ways to have any influence on the Church. 
 Herod Agrippa had been brought up with him, 
 though he had thought it wiser to attach himself to 
 his nephew ; at the time of the death of Gaius it was 
 he who saved the life of the one surviving Caesar, or 
 who, at all events, secured his peaceful succession 
 to the throne. Claudius rewarded him by adding 
 Judaea to his dominions, and so brought the Church 
 of Jerusalem under the sovereign power of a Jew, 
 which served to prove that a Jewish sovereign power 
 would be sure to persecute the Church. The only 
 mention of Claudius in the New Testament,' except 
 as a mere note of date, is on occasion of his banish- 
 ment of the Jews from Rome. The reason of this 
 was, we are told, " repeated riots incited by one 
 Chrestus,"^ a statement which may be literally true, 
 but which has been interpreted as referring to riots 
 excited against the followers of Christ; or, perhaps 
 less arbitrarily, as indicating that the riots were in- 
 cited by a false Messiah. 
 
 Claudius reigned for fourteenyears. With some great 
 faults, he was scarcely a bad man ; at Rome it may be 
 ^ Acts xviii. 2; see xi. 28. ' Suet. Claud., 25. 
 
112 BEG/A'A'hVCS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 said that he was a bad because a weak ruler, but the 
 provinces found him decidedly a good one. And after 
 his death followed, in a political sense, the golden age 
 of the empire — the first five years of the reign of Nero. 
 The new emperor was a boy of seventeen, handsome, 
 accomplished but not clever, sentimental, and rather 
 amiable than otherwise. It is plain that he was no 
 monster to begin with ; it- is certain that he became 
 one. It would be unprofitable — perhaps impossible — 
 to study in detail the morbid physiology of the 
 process ; we had better pass it over in the spirit of 
 Keble's lines — 
 
 " Heaven's child and yours, uncharmed by prayer, 
 May prov^e perdition's son." 
 
 It was in Nero's worst days that he came into 
 direct contact with the Church ; but we ma}^ notice 
 that it was in his best that St. Paul wrote the Epistle 
 to the Romans, where the supreme power is not onh' 
 held up to reverence as God's ordinance, but repre- 
 sented as practically and visibly beneficent." The 
 fact is, he spoke of the empire as he found it. It was 
 not a perfect machine " for the punishment of e\-il- 
 doers and for the praise of them that do well," but it 
 was a machine that had this for its object, and that 
 answered its object approximately upon the whole. 
 St. Paul had had experience of what w^e call "justice's 
 justice" at Philippi and elsewhere, but he had found 
 no wrong without a remedy ; magistrates were often 
 hasty and sometimes corrupt, but cases of serious 
 
 ^ Rom. xiii. 4. 
 
THE CHURCH AXD THE EMPIRE. 113 
 
 wrong were exceptional, and the man (or at least the 
 citizen) wronged by them could get the wrong righted 
 in time. Gallio has, I think, been over-praised by 
 recent liberal writers for his rejection of the Jewish 
 accusations against St. Paul. It can scarcely be said 
 that he protected the Christians from persecution, 
 though he declined to be the instrument of it.' But 
 still St. Paul had found that he was safer — perhaps 
 more successful — in provincial capitals, where order 
 was preserved by the magistrates of highest rank, 
 than anywhere else. Even after his experience of 
 the- tyrannical and venal Felix (the most direct emis- 
 sary of the Emperor that he had had to do with), he 
 seems to have retained his faith in the imperial 
 justice, if only he could get at it at the source. At 
 such a distance from Rome, it was scarcely yet recog- 
 nized that the source itself had been corrupted ; 
 though the five years were now over, and the deterio- 
 ration, not of Nero's personal character only, but of 
 his government, was now unquestionable. 
 
 Felix had postponed St. Paul's trial from corrupt 
 motives. Festus seems to have honestly meant to do 
 him justice ; but further delay was caused by his 
 ignorance of Jewish matters, and still more by mere 
 mismanagement. He had been arrested in May, 
 A.D. 58. Festus arrived in the summer of A.D. 60, 
 and his first impulse was to get the case off his hands 
 at once. The means that first occurred to him for 
 doing this was the straightforward one of a prompt 
 trial and (if so it turned out) a prompt acquittal of 
 
 ^ See Lecture ii., p. 95, note 3. 
 I 
 
114 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH 
 
 the prisoner ; it was hardly discreditable that he was 
 willing to let the national tribunal act conjointly with 
 the imperial in the trial. But when, by the prisoner's 
 appeal, Festus was released from his responsibility, 
 he was far less energetic in providing that the prisoner 
 should have prompt justice. He let time run on, 
 waiting for the chance of a merchant ship that would 
 take him to Rome without expense,' until it was so 
 late in the season that, if they met with any adverse 
 winds, it was impossible to reach Rome that year. 
 Actually, the storm gained rather than lost time, 
 since the north-easterly gale carried St. Paul as far as 
 Malta, while the alternative was to wait in Crete till 
 spring. As it was, his arrival at Rome must have 
 been in the February or March of A.D. 6i. 
 
 We cannot tell why the trial was delayed for two 
 whole years. A few months are fairly accounted for 
 by the necessity of sending to Palestine and Asia for 
 witnesses, and perhaps of replacing documents lost 
 in the shipwreck. Possibly the accusers made these 
 delays last as long as possible, to postpone the deci- 
 sion of a case that they must have felt to be un- 
 tenable ; modern writers are generally content to 
 throw the blame on the Emperor, but it is not certain 
 that this is just. Nero was less neglectful of public 
 business, judicial and other, than might have been 
 expected from his youth, his tastes, and his character. 
 In fact, neglect of business did not come easy to a 
 
 1 The expense could not have been great of sending him by land to 
 Tyre or Alexandria, whence there iimsl have been ships earlier in the 
 year that would have taken him straight to Rome. 
 
THE CHURCH AND THE EMPIRE. 115 
 
 Roman of his time ; it required an effort. Every 
 Roman noble was, so to speak, born a lawyer ; he 
 had a number of cHents, in the old sense of family 
 dependents, and if these were involved in any lawsuit, 
 they had on him the claim of clients in the modern 
 sense — he was expected to put his knowledge of the 
 law, his political influence, and his powers as an advo- 
 cate, at their disposal. This system, which had 
 grown up under the Republic, survived under the 
 Empire, though it was beginning to be reduced to a 
 rather shadowy form ; however, it was a part of the 
 framework of Roman society, which a man would 
 have been indeed a revolutionist who thought to 
 change. Nero sat loose enough to the forms and 
 conventions of Roman social life, but he did not 
 venture to rebel against this ; he accepted the situa- 
 tion that, as every Roman noble was born a lawyer, so 
 the Roman chief magistrate, if hereditary, must be 
 assumed to be born a judge. His predecessor 
 Claudius had been zealously fond of judicial busi- 
 ness, but had a way of cutting it short, without hear- 
 ing all the speeches on both sides;' an arrangement 
 perhaps more wounding to the vanity of the pleaders 
 than to the substantial interests of the parties. Nero, 
 apparently, allowed the speakers to have their say 
 out ; but if there were various points involved in a 
 case, he had each discussed separately on different 
 days. He sat with assessors, and listened to their 
 
 ^ Compare Suet. Claud. 14, 15, with the dirge in Seneca's Apocolo- 
 cyntosis, p. 767 D. : 
 
 '' Quo non alius Potuit citius discere causas, 
 Una tantum parte audita, Saepe et neutra." 
 
Ii6 BECI.ViV/NGS OF THE CHRIST/ AN CHURCH. 
 
 advice before giving judgment ; but he did not always 
 follow the advice of the majorit}-, but used his own 
 discretion.' 
 
 During the two years that St. Paul's case was 
 deferred he lived in lodgings, subject to no restraint 
 except the constant presence of a soldier, to whom, 
 it is presumed from various notices of the usual practice, 
 he was chained by the arm. He had perfect liberty 
 to correspond by letter with his converts in the East, 
 and to receive visits from any of them who came to 
 Rome, or from any residents there who were interested 
 in him or in the religion he taught; though less active 
 than he would have been if he had visited Rome a 
 free man, he felt that he was not less useful. It was 
 early in this period, I do not doubt, that he wrote the 
 Epistle to the Philippians, in which he anticipates, 
 though with some hesitation, a release, and apparently 
 a speedy one.^ Those to the Ephesians, to the Laodi- 
 ceans (whether this was the same as the last, or one 
 now lost), to the Colossians, and to Philemon, must 
 be a good deal later ; the style in the Ephesians and 
 Colossians is so very different, and in Philemon ^ his 
 expectation of release is not only more confident than 
 before, but more immediately practical ; it seems as 
 if he expected to be at Colossae as soon as a room 
 was ready for him. We may defer the question 
 whether he did go there as soon as he expected, and 
 observe what information these epistles give us as to 
 the general Church history of the period. 
 
 From those to the Philippians and Colossians, we 
 ^ Suet. Ner. 15. ^ Phil. i. 25. ^ -^^^ 22. 
 
THE CHURCH AND THE EMPIRE. 117 
 
 may learn that the sect or party of Judaising Christians 
 who had come into controversy with St. Paul were not 
 extinct, though the controversy fills a smaller place in 
 his mind than formerly. At Rome he was content to 
 let the Judaisers go their own way. They preached 
 Christ of envy and strife, not sincerely, but supposing 
 to add affliction to his bonds.' Still they did preach 
 Christ, and to the millions who had not heard of Him 
 at all, it was a gain that they should hear of Him, 
 even if the message was encumbered by more or less 
 of superstitious accretions. More faithful preaching, 
 by men in perfect sympathy with St. Paul, went on 
 at the same time, so that there was no fear that Rome 
 would be preoccupied by a false Church. When the 
 Church in Rome grew great, he was confident that the 
 truth would prevail in it ; and for the present the 
 Church was so small that in great Rome there was 
 room for two Churches — one securely grounded on 
 the principles of the faith, and the other sincerely 
 attached to the faith, though adding some things 
 that, if pressed, would have been inconsistent with its 
 principles. 
 
 But in St. Paul's old Churches he maintains toward 
 the Judaisers the same tone as before. He warns the 
 Philippians against them in almost more bitter terms ^ 
 than he had denounced them in to the Galatians ; 
 whereby we see that they had attempted the fidelity of 
 the Churches in Macedonia, though apparently there 
 there was little danger of their success. In Asia 
 Minor there was more. We do not know how far the 
 
 ^ Phil. i. 15. 2 Phil ii;_ 2. 
 
Ii8 BEGINNINCS OF THE CHKISriAN CHURCH. 
 
 Epistle to the Galatians was successful in stopping 
 the mischief among them. If the party was strong 
 in the older Churches inland, it was natural that it 
 should spread westward to the great cities of Asia in 
 the narrower sense. Two things at least seem plain ; 
 first, that while St. Paul's friends, in Asia as in Rome, 
 went on preaching to the heathen, beyond the limits 
 of the cities in which he had himself founded Churches, 
 the Judaisers there did no fresh missionary work, but 
 confined themselves to aggressions on the Churches 
 founded by St. Paul and his associates.' The second 
 point is, that there was a change in the tone of the 
 Judaising teaching. The "senseless"- doctrine that 
 had endangered the faith of the Galatians was ex- 
 changed for a plausible and even dignified intellectual 
 system. The Judaism denounced in the Epistle to 
 the Galatians, and even in that to the Philippians, had 
 been Pharisaical — its object had been to observe the 
 law as an end in itself; but the Judaism that threat- 
 ened to make the Colossians its booty ^ was rather 
 that of the Essenes — circumcision, abstinence from 
 meats, and the like, were no longer conceived as 
 having a direct ceremonial virtue, but as forms of a 
 spiritualistic asceticism that was intended to free the 
 soul from the defilements of the flesh. And side by 
 
 ^ The proof of this is, that Smyrna, though a centre of Jewish 
 population, and the most important city of the Province after Ephesus, 
 had no Church at this time (Ep. S. Pol. c. ii), nor, apparently, till St. 
 John came to Asia five or six years later; while places more nearly 
 dependent on Ephesus, such as Laodicea and Colossae, received the 
 Gospel from St. Paul's friends and disciples. 
 
 » Gal. iii. I. 3 (joi_ ii_ s. 
 
THE CHURCH AND THE EMPIRE. 119 
 
 side with this ascetic teaching, there appeared a half 
 mythological mysticism, a doctrine of angels' con- 
 ceived as mediators between man and God, such as 
 developed among so-called Christians in the next 
 century into Gnosticism, and among the later Jews 
 into the Cabbala. 
 
 Plainly there was a real danger of this system 
 seducing the Christians among whom it was taught ; 
 it had, as St. Paul confesses, a show of wisdom both 
 in its zeal for humility and devotion, and in its 
 severity towards the body. But we must not 
 exaggerate the extent to which it did spread. St. 
 Paul, we may observe, does not denounce it as he 
 did the older Judaism — he counteracts it by showing 
 how the true Gospel provides the objects for thought, 
 and the safeguards for purity, which these teachers 
 were seeking in a mistaken way. Now it is likely 
 that those who sincerely sought these things — who 
 desired to know the deep things of God, to have 
 communion with Him while yet confessing their 
 unfitness to approach Him, and to purify themselves 
 from the world and the flesh — would see that St. 
 Paul showed them the true way to do so ; viz. by the 
 spirit of faith in Christ, not by rules of outward 
 observance ; and by meditation on the doctrine of 
 His Person and Mediation, instead of the imagination 
 of other semi-divine mediators. I think it probable 
 that during the time of St. Paul's imprisonment the 
 Church was making steady progress everywhere, 
 and that the Judaising party were becoming, in 
 1 Col. ii. 18. 
 
120 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 most parts, at once less powerful and more respect- 
 able. 
 
 There seems little doubt that in the course of the 
 year 63 St. Paul was tried before Nero, and acquitted, 
 as he expected. The only charge against him that 
 could be brought before a civil court was that of pro- 
 faning the temple at Jerusalem by bringing in Gen- 
 tiles. Now this was, on Roman principles, a serious 
 crime, no doubt a capital one," since Judaism, as a 
 lawful national religion, was protected from outrage, 
 though despised and unpopular. But the charge was 
 utterly false, and could not be sustained except by 
 downright perjury, and we have no need to suppose 
 that anyone was prepared to resort to this. The only 
 danger was, that it rested with Nero to decide the 
 question of law as well as of fact. He might have 
 conceded to the Jews that St. Paul's principles involved 
 a constructive profanation of the temple ; for we 
 know that he was under strong Jewish influence at 
 this time. He had divorced his wife Octavia, and 
 shortly afterwards put her to death, and had then 
 married a lady named Poppaea Sabina, of whom it 
 was said that she had every good gift except the gift 
 of goodness." Just at this time he had a daughter by 
 her, who, happily in all likelihood for herself and for 
 the world, only lived four months.^ Now Poppaea 
 was a Jewess by religion, or at all events a woman 
 that "worshipped God."'* She did not find her vices 
 incompatible with a sort of interest in religion, any 
 
 ^ See Lect. II. p. 107. " Tag. Ann. XIII. xlv. 2. 
 
 ^ Tag. Ann. XV. xxiii. i, 4. 
 
 * eeo(Te/37)s, Jos. Ant. XX. viii. II ; cf. Vit. 3. 
 
THE CHURCH AND THE EMPIRE. 121 
 
 more than did her contemporaries, the Jewish prin- 
 cesses Drusilla and Berenice, not to mention cases in 
 later history. Moreover, unprincipled as she was, 
 she had plenty of refinement and good taste. She 
 was always modest in her outward demeanour, and 
 in spite of her having got her second husband by a 
 scandalous divorce from her first, and her third by a 
 double divorce and a murder, she may have passed 
 for a virtuous matron in her own eyes and those of 
 her courtiers. At any rate, there is no doubt of her 
 favour to the Jews. She kept an ex-high priest at 
 her court ; and just at this very time Josepus, the 
 historian, was able to use her influence on behalf of 
 some Jewish priests, who, like St. Paul, had been kept 
 under arrest on some frivolous charges ever since the 
 time of Felix. It was thus quite possible that she 
 might have cared to influence Nero on the side of St. 
 Paul's accusers. 
 
 And if it were not for the three Pastoral Epistles 
 there would be little doubt that she did so, or at all 
 events that St. Paul never was released, but suffered 
 in the persecution a year after we last hear of him 
 in prison ; while the persecution might have been 
 Poppaea's work, or at least suggested by her malice 
 against him. But if the three epistles to Timothy 
 and Titus are really written by St. Paul,' it is utterly 
 impossible to date them at any time covered by the 
 
 ^ It would be beyond the limits of these lectures to discuss the 
 genuineness of the Pastoral Epistles, or any other of the works cited as 
 authorities. It is enough to say that my belief in their genuineness is 
 bona fide, and that after taking due account of the arguments against 
 them. 
 
122 BEG/NA'IXGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 history in the Acts ; while everything becomes intel- 
 h'gible, if we suppose that he was set at Hberty in 
 A.D. 6}^, and went, as he intended, to the province of 
 Asia. Perhaps Poppaea's sympathies were with the 
 Pharisees, and she wished to spite the Sadducee 
 enemies of St. Paul ; perhaps the softness of her 
 nature made her averse from cruelty, except when, 
 as with Octavia, her own passions or interests were 
 concerned ; perhaps Nero honestly decided the case 
 on its merits. Any way, I think we ma}' regard St. 
 Paul's acquittal as a fact, and date it immediately at 
 the end of the two years described in the last words 
 of the Acts ; i.e. in the spring or summer of A.D. 6^. 
 It is probable that the Book of the Acts was written 
 just before the trial, and it perhaps had for its im- 
 mediate object to conciliate to the Apostle the public 
 opinion of semi-Jewish circles.' It is quite certain 
 that the book is intended to be read between the 
 lines, that it is not only a history of the beginnings of 
 the Church, but a history with a purpose ; and that 
 purpose is, to serve as a Hannoiiia Apostolica — a 
 defence of St. Paul's principles from the charge of 
 disloyalty to the religion of the Old Testament, and 
 a proof that they were sanctioned b}' the apostles of 
 the Circumcision. In short, St. Luke, the only writer 
 of canonical Scripture who was himself a Gentile, 
 interested himself to prove that a Jew in becoming a 
 Christian did not cease to be a good Jew. The con- 
 trast between Jew and Christian is less, the desire to 
 fuse them greater, in the Acts than in any other book 
 ^ Was Theophilus a Judeo-Christian freedman of Poppaea's ? 
 
THE CHURCH AND THE EMPIRE. 123 
 
 of the New Testament, except the Epistle of St. 
 James.' The latter is, of course, an exception ; its 
 moral tone is that rather of a Hebrew prophet than 
 of a Christian apostle, though the tone of his pro- 
 phesying is heightened by his fuller knowledge of 
 Him whom the prophets desired to know. So long 
 as he lived, no one could doubt that it was possible to 
 be at once a perfect Jew and a perfect Christian. 
 There is no reason to doubt the tradition that he 
 continued to the last to enjoy " favour with all the 
 people," even outside the Church, as " a devout man 
 according to the law;" and, if they did not regard him 
 as an apostate, neither did he feel that he had parted 
 from their communion. He uses a significant word 
 in his well-known criticism on the legal maxim, "that 
 sittings should be allotted to parishioners in accor- 
 dance with their rank." " If there come," he says, 
 "into your synagogue a man with a gold ring," &c. 
 The Brethren of the Way, the Poor Saints, the 
 Nazarenes, or whatever we call them, have separate 
 synagogues of their own, but they go to the synagogue 
 like any other Jews; at most they have this peculiarity, 
 that they go not only on the Sabbath, but in the night 
 or morning after it.^ 
 
 ^ St. Luke's sympathies are especially strong with Ebionisvi in its 
 etymological sense of religious poverty. See not only Acts ii. 44 ; iv. 
 32, &c., but the way he reports the Lord's words in his Gospel; vi. 20, 
 compared with St. Matt. v. 3; xii. 32, et seq. 
 
 ^ The view is, howe%"er, rather ingenious than probable, that einavv- 
 ayujyr] in Heb. x. 25 means " sii/>J>/e»ien^a)y synagogue," as though 
 Judaising Christians were tempted to go to the synagogue on the Sab- 
 bath and neglect to do so on the Lord's-day. The word is used without 
 the possibility of this meaning in 2 Thess. ii. i, and the cognate verb 
 is not unfrequent. 
 
124 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 But the time was coming when Christianity and 
 Judaism were to part for ever, though St. James on 
 the one side and St. Luke on the other clasped their 
 hands so firmly. During St. Paul's imprisonment, 
 the Sadducee high priests, w^ho had slain Stephen 
 and sought to slay Paul, resolved not to spare even 
 James. We know that in this case, as is conjectured 
 in St. Stephen's, they seized the momentary indepen- 
 dence given them by the vacancy of the procurator- 
 ship (caused by the sudden death of the estimable 
 Festus) as an occasion for a persecution of the Church. 
 The high priest Hanan, a name variously Grecised as 
 Ananus and Annas, youngest son of the Annas of the 
 Gospels, brought St. James and some others before the 
 Sanhedrin, and had them condemned to death, pre- 
 sumably after the national mode by stoning. 
 
 This is the account of Josepus, who adds that sober 
 public opinion (that is, probably, the opinion of Phari- 
 sees like himself) disapproved of the high priest's act, 
 and that he was deprived of his office for what was re- 
 garded by the civil power as a usurpation. It seems best 
 to accept this story as it stands, though it is not easy 
 to reconcile it with the more detailed account of St. 
 James's martyrdom preserved to us by Eusebius' from 
 Hegesippus, a Jewish Christian of the next century. 
 Hegesippus was himself a Catholic, but it appears 
 probable that he accepted as historical an Ebionite 
 legend of St. James,^ which is known to have been 
 
 1 H. E. II. xxiii. 4-12. 
 
 ' Just as the apocryphal Gospels (of which one or two are probably 
 not much later than Hegesippus) and Acts of Apostles have made their 
 
THE CHURCH AND THE EMPIRE, 125 
 
 current, and was almost certainly untrustworthy. 
 Certainly in Hegesippus the saint is described accor- 
 ding to the Ebionite ideal, as an ascetic, abstaining 
 not only from strong drink, but from animal food ; 
 and it is apparently imagined that this sanctity gave 
 him the privileges of a priest, and allowed him to 
 be admitted to the most holy place of the Temple. 
 Now the ascetic observances described are credible, 
 perhaps probable ; the. difference between Ebionite 
 and Catholic ascetism was not that Ebionites were 
 more austere than Catholics, but that they rested 
 their austerities on a false basis, that they held the 
 things they rejected to be unclean in themselves ; 
 while CathoHcs held, like St. Paul, "All things are 
 lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the 
 power of any." But while St. James was perhaps 
 austere, certainly holy, according to a Jewish no less 
 than a Christian standard, Hegesippus' language 
 seems irreconcilable with the law or usage of the 
 Jews ; his details, to say the least, are incredible, and 
 I doubt if we can regard him as adding to our know- 
 ledge of the facts, beyond what Josepus tells us. It 
 probably is true that St. James was reverenced by the 
 Jews; it may be true that he was surnamed "the 
 Just," and even Obliam, "the Tower of the People;" 
 possibly that he was challenged to correct the growing 
 popular belief in Jesus, and agreed to address the 
 crowd in the courts of the T-emple at the Passover. 
 He is reported then to have said, " Why ask ye me 
 
 impress on the Catholic collection of legends, though the books tliem- 
 selves have always been rejected by the Church. 
 
126 BEGIX.VINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 concerning Jesus the Son of man ? He is sitting in 
 heaven at the right hand of the Great Power,' and 
 shall come with the clouds of heaven." Then the 
 leaders of the Jewish sects went up and threw him 
 down from where he stood, and as he lay praying in 
 the Lord's words for his murderers, he was stoned or 
 knocked on the head. 
 
 Whatever doubt there may be about the details of 
 St. James's martyrdom, there is no doubt of the fact, 
 nor, I think, does anyone question that he was suc- 
 ceeded by Symeon, the son of Clopas, who was the 
 Lord's first cousin, as St. James was His brother. 
 There was evidently a tendency in the Church of 
 Jerusalem to make its headship hereditary, or at least 
 dynastic. But St. James, though we gather from St, 
 Paul's language^ that he was married, seems to have 
 left no descendants : St. Jude did, and we shall hear 
 of their " becoming leaders of the Churches " a gene- 
 ration later. But though natural relationship to the 
 King of Israel was felt to be a qualification for the 
 post of His earthly representative, it does not appear 
 that anyone succeeded to the post as a matter of 
 course, but that the successor was designated by elec- 
 tion, and presumably inducted into his office by a 
 ceremonial consecration. We are told^ that the sur- 
 viving apostles and other disciples of the Lord, to- 
 gether with His kindred after the flesh, assembled 
 
 1 The use of this phrase, instead of a more personal divine name, 
 looks like a bit of Gnosticism. Compare Acts viii. lo (true text), 
 though of course the Ebionites did not apply the conception to self- 
 idolatry as Simon did. 
 
 2 I Cor. ix. 5. 3 Eus. H. E. III. .\i. i, xxxii. 3. 
 
THE CHURCH AND THE EMPIRE. 127 
 
 from all quarters to nominate St. James's successor, 
 and that St. Symeon was chosen unanimously by 
 these. If we are to trust Eusebius, who here still 
 follows Hegesippus, this designation did not take 
 place till after the capture of Jerusalem ; but as 
 Hegesippus wrongly makes the siege ensue immedi- 
 ately after St. James's martj'rdom, it is possible that 
 he is mistaken here also, and that St. Symeon was 
 consecrated immediately, or at least as soon as it 
 appeared that the persecution would not be allowed 
 to continue. 
 
 This, if any, is likely to have been the occasion of 
 the apostles resolving upon the establishment of 
 Episcopacy, in the modern sense, as the permanent 
 form of government for the Church. St. Clement of 
 Rome' does seem to ascribe to the apostles as a body 
 some measure providing for the ministerial succession ; 
 but both the reading and the grammar of the sentence 
 are doubtful, and the evidence is too slight to establish 
 so great an event as an Apostolic Council, legislating 
 for the whole Church.^ Perhaps it is likelier that the 
 apostles appointed their successors independently of 
 one another, following a common course without ever 
 having formally adopted a common resolution. Even 
 in the way of nature, it would not have been surpris- 
 ing that like causes should produce like effects in 
 different and unconnected Churches ; it is still less 
 
 ^ Ep. ad Cor. i. 44. See the passage discussed in Lect. V. 
 
 ^ If Hegesippus' date for the consecration of St. Symeon be right, 
 the theory would be more defensible in this form. The apostles had 
 already, independently, ordained what may be called an itinerant Epis- 
 copate ; the surviving apostles now in concert ordained a diocesan one. 
 
128 BEG/NA'I.VGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 unlikely that all the apostles should have been led to 
 do the same thing, when they were all led by the 
 same Spirit. St. Paul cannot have been present at 
 this second Council of Jerusalem, if there was one, 
 and if it was during his life ; for St. James's martyr- 
 dom falls a year before his release from prison. And 
 it is hardly likely that he would have felt bound by a 
 decree passed in his absence by the apostles of the 
 Circumcision ; yet we find him originating an episcopal 
 succession in the course of the next year, with the 
 one important difference that the epi.scopal jurisdiction 
 was not permanently localized. 
 
 For there is no reasonable doubt, I think, that the 
 commissions given by St. Paul to SS. Timothy and 
 Titus constituted a consecration to what it is con- 
 venient to call the Episcopate — at any rate, to the 
 office of successors to the apostles. If anyone thinks 
 it worth while to argue that the two saints addressed 
 in these epistles were not diocesan bishops, in the 
 sense that that term bears from St. Ignatius' time 
 to our own, he is probably right ; it needs no proof, 
 that they did not bear the title of bishops in a dis- 
 tinctive sense, as in the Epistle to Titus' the word 
 bishop is manifestly used as interchangeable with 
 presbyter. But it is not less manifest that they hold 
 a definite office corresponding closely to that after- 
 wards called the Episcopate, both as regards jurisdic- 
 tion and as regards power of order. They govern 
 and regulate the Churches Avhere for the time they 
 are stationed ; they have authority over the presbyters 
 1 Chap. i. 5, 7. 
 
THE CHURCH AND THE EMPIRE. 129 
 
 or (in the older sense) bishops themselves. Their 
 powers in this respect ar,e so great, that St. Paul 
 seems more afraid of their being rash in their use' 
 than of their being feeble or inefficient. And further, 
 they have an absolute power to judge of the qualifi- 
 cations of candidates for office in the Church, either 
 as presbyter or deacon. It may have rested with the 
 Church at large either to nominate a candidate or 
 (less probably) to confirm their nomination ; but it 
 was necessary that the candidate should be approved 
 by them before he was appointed to the office, neces- 
 sary that he should be ordained by them before he 
 was admitted to its actual exercise. In short, they 
 were to take the first place in the Churches where 
 they resided — the first place in their government, ad- 
 ministration, and worship — in exactly the same 
 official way that the apostle would have done, and 
 had done," when he himself was among them. I sa}- 
 that they were not diocesan bishops, because the 
 localising of their commission was on!}' temporary : 
 St. Timothy was to govern the Church at Ephesus 
 iintil St. Paul was able to come there ; Titus was to 
 set in order the Churches of Crete, and then to set oft' 
 to join St. Paul at Nicopolis.^ But though it may be 
 thought an anachronism, and even a misleading one, 
 to call them bishops, it seems plain that they were in 
 the fullest sense vicars — that they were intended to 
 be successors — of the apostles. 
 
 The year from the summer of a.d. 6^ to the 
 
 ^ I Tim. V. I, 19. * Acts xx. 7, seq. 
 
 •^ I Tim. i. 3 ; iii. 14 ; Titus iii. 12. 
 
 K 
 
130 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 summer of 64 was apparently a time of peace for the 
 Church — the calm before the storm, St. Peter's first 
 epistle was probably written during this interval, part 
 of its object being to prepare the Christians of Asia 
 Minor, to whom it was addressed, for what he calls 
 "the fiery trial that is to try you.'" Where the 
 epistle was written is uncertain ; some suppose that 
 it was at Babylon, which, though dismantled and 
 declining, does not appear to have been yet deserted, 
 but was still a great centre of Jewish population ; 
 while some think that Ctesiphon, the Parthian capital 
 in Babylonia, having succeeded to the imperial posi- 
 tion of the older city, might be called by its name, at 
 least by a Jew. Others suppose that the place of 
 composition was a town in Egypt called Babylon, and 
 others that it was Rome. The first and last views 
 seem the least arbitrary ; none can be called incom- 
 patible with the facts of history. It is quite possible 
 that St. Peter visited and preached among the Jews 
 of Babylonia, that he went thence to Jerusalem after 
 the death of St. James, and thence to the West ; and 
 the epistle may have been written either before his 
 visit to Jerusalem, or in Egypt just after it ; or lastly, 
 as it is certain that he died at Rome, it is possible 
 that he may have lived there for two or three years 
 before his death. We cannot decide the question 
 certainly. On behalf of the old Babylon is the 
 argument, that the provinces of Asia Minor are 
 enumerated, beginning with those most easterly, and 
 going on to the north-west. On the other side, the 
 ^ I Peter iv. 12. 
 
THE CHURCH AND THE EMPIRE. 131 
 
 obscurity of the phrase " your co-elect," or " the elect 
 sister in Babylon,'" looks rather as though the passage 
 were meant to bear an esoteric sense. And it is not 
 easy to imagine how in the far East St. Peter could 
 have become familiar with St. Paul's epistles, espe- 
 cially that to the Romans, which he unquestionably 
 borrows from in style as well as in thought \'' while at 
 Rome it was almost certain that he would see that, 
 and perfectly credible that he should see others. 
 
 But wherever the epistle was written, it shows what 
 was the general state of the Church at the time. It 
 was still, as a rule, governed by local presbyteries ; 
 for if diocesan bishops had existed, the apostle would 
 more naturally have addressed himself to them as a 
 colleague than to the presbyters : while he uses of the 
 duties of the latter the verb cognate with the title 
 "bishop," "taking the oversight of them."^ It seems 
 that he felt no need of warning the faithful against 
 false doctrine ; it was enough to assure them, " that 
 this is the true grace of God wherein ye stand ; " i.e. 
 that the Gospel that St. Paul had preached in Galatia 
 and Asia, and which had spread thence, no doubt, to 
 the neighbouring provinces, was the true Gospel, and 
 that they would be safe if they held fast to that. The 
 fact that Silvanus, St. Paul's old associate, was the 
 
 ^ 'H h BaSuXilJj't avv€K\€KTri, I Peter v. 13. 
 
 ^ Not only does the enumeration of civil and domestic duties in 
 I Peter ii. 13 — iii. 7 remind us of Rom. xiii. 1-7, Eph. v. 22 — vi. 9, 
 Col. iii. 18 — iv. I, but the series of participles and adjectives, standing 
 apparently for imperatives, are like the more ambiguous ones of Rom. 
 xii. 6-16. 
 
 ' HiVfJiirpea^uTepos . . . eTnaKOTroOires, I Peter v. I, 2, 
 
132 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 bearer of this letter was a sufficient refutation of 
 those who would still try to set Cephas against Paul. 
 
 But at least one great object of the epistle, I say, 
 is to prepare the Church for an imminent persecution. 
 The believers are to give no excuse for the hostility 
 of the world, either by any share in Pagan immorality 
 (which, if Pagan religion did not effectually check, 
 Pagan law was not in all cases unable to condemn , 
 or by political disaffection, for which it was only too 
 easy to find plausible excuse. St. Paul's old argu- 
 ments on the sacredness of civil government, and the 
 righteousness of its general working, are reproduced, 
 though with a slight difference of tone. We might 
 think that the Galilean working-man was more of a 
 liberal, and the educated Roman citizen more of an 
 imperialist, though both were equally far from en- 
 couraging revolution. But it is confessed that a time 
 may, or indeed will, come when the government will 
 be the oppressor, not the protector, of the righteous ; 
 and then the Christian freeman, who till then has 
 rendered to it a loyal obedience, will be forced to 
 meet it by a respectful defiance. That time, however, 
 has not come yet. Christian slaves are indeed liable 
 to suffer from Pagan masters ; Christian individuals 
 are looked on with suspicion and dislike by Pagan 
 mobs ; but a general persecution, officially sanctioned 
 by the government, though imminent, is as yet 
 future.' 
 
 How the general and official persecution was raised, 
 we know more from Pagan than from Christian 
 ^ Compare i Peter ii. 11-20 with iii. 12-16. 
 
THE CHURCH AND THE EMPIRE. 133 
 
 sources. On July 19th, A.D. 64/ a fire broke out at 
 Rome, and destroyed almost half the city. It was 
 checked after six days by pulling down buildings in 
 its course, but broke out a second time, though less 
 damage was done, at least to human life. Nero was 
 absent from Rome at the time ; he returned, it was 
 said, only when his own palace was endangered, and 
 then was not able to prevent its sustaining serious 
 damage. Obviously, he displayed none of the prompt 
 and benevolent energy that makes the fire of London 
 one of the few creditable episodes in the life of 
 Charles II.; but further than this negative blame, it 
 does not appear that he deserves any. The story 
 may be true, that he retired into his private theatre, 
 and chanted to the lyre a description of the burning 
 of Troy ; it is a bit of sentimentalism quite in har- 
 mony with those features in Nero's character that it 
 was possible to like. Of course we may think that 
 he ought to have found something more practical to 
 do at such a moment ; but if he could not do anything 
 practical to relieve individual suffering, it was hardly 
 a crime that he should indulge a pensive melancholy 
 on the subject of the general calamity. Any way, 
 the story that he himself ordered the fire, either for 
 mere wantonness, or in order to claim the glory of 
 rebuilding the city with greater magnificence, may 
 safely be dismissed as incredible. If Nero had been 
 capable of such a monstrous sacrifice of life and 
 property, he at any rate would never have risked the 
 loss of such treasures of Greek art and literature as 
 1 Tag. Ann. XV. 3S-41. 
 
134 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 actually, we are told, perished in the fire. Yet the 
 charge against him was, it seems, generally believed 
 at the time. It is asserted that while the fire was 
 raging, some men were forbidden to attempt to sav'e 
 their houses; others were seen throwing firebrands into 
 houses not yet alight, and declared " they had autho- 
 rity " for what they did. Whether this was a pretence 
 on the part of robbers, or whether the story originated 
 in the attempts to stay the fire by the destruction of 
 houses in its track, it attracted attention and obtained 
 belief, the rather, as the second outbreak began in the 
 grounds of Nero's favourite Tigellinus. If Nero had 
 been a very good man and a very good ruler, perhaps 
 no one would have heeded the accusation ; but it was 
 rather the fault of the age than his, that it was 
 advanced and believed now. For though he had not 
 been of any use during the crisis, when it was over 
 he did all that could be expected of him. He threw 
 open to the homeless crowds his own gardens, as well 
 as the public buildings and parks, sent to the neigh- 
 bouring towns for furniture, and had corn supplied 
 almost gratuitously. It was perhaps invidious that, 
 in the rebuilding of the city, he took occasion to 
 enlarge his palace and the grounds included in it. 
 But this was scarcely a crime, when he undertook to 
 remove the rubbish for the re-erection of private houses, 
 and subsidise their owners, besides- providing plans 
 for the works, and laying out colonnades in front of 
 each block of houses at his own cost. 
 
 "But neither the aid of men and the bounty of the 
 Emperor, nor his propitiation of the gods, availed to 
 
THE CHURCH AND THE EMPIRE. 135 
 
 remove the discredit of his being beheved to have 
 ordered the fire. Accordingly, in order to sweep 
 away this report, Nero put forward others to bear the 
 charge, and inflicted on them the most elaborate 
 punishments — the people, namely, who, detested for 
 their crimes, were commonly called Christians. The 
 founder of this name was one Christ, who, in the reign 
 of Tiberius, had been put to death by the Procurator 
 Pontius Pilate; and the deadly superstition, then re- 
 pressed for the moment, began to break out again, 
 not only throughout Judaea, where the evil began, but 
 in the city also, to which everything that is hideous 
 or shameful flows from all quarters, and finds ad- 
 herents. Accordingly, those were first seized who 
 confessed ; then, by their information, an immense 
 number were convicted, not so much on the charge of 
 the fire as from their hatred of the human race. And 
 mockery was added to their death — they were covered 
 in the skins of beasts, and torn in pieces alive by 
 dogs, or fastened to crosses, or arranged to be burnt, 
 and when the daylight failed set on fire to serve as 
 lamps for night. Nero had offered his own gardens 
 for the show, and exhibited there a chariot race, him- 
 self, in the dress of a jockey, mixing with the crowd 
 or taking his place on a chariot. The consequence 
 was, that though those thus treated were guilty, and 
 deserved the extremest punishments, a feeling of 
 pity arose, as though their destruction were not for 
 the public benefit, but to gratify the cruelty of one 
 man." 
 
 I have translated at length this description of the 
 
136 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 persecution by Tacitus {Ann. XV. 44), who was a boy 
 at the time, and must have known something of 
 Christianity in his manhood, not only because it is 
 the first notice we have of Christianity from an 
 author not -himself a Christian,' but because it is the 
 fullest account we have of the persecution from any 
 source. The only thing to be compared with it is a 
 passage from St. Clement of Rome {Ej^. ad Cor. 5, 6), 
 which I will also translate at full, postponing com- 
 ments or supplementary remarks on either. He is 
 speaking of the evil effects of jealousy, first as re- 
 corded in Old Testament history ; then he says : 
 " But, to leave ancient examples, let us come to the 
 champions that arose nearest to us ; let us take the 
 noble examples of our own generation. Through 
 jealousy and envy the greatest and most righteous 
 pillars were persecuted, and contended even to death. 
 Let us take before our eyes the good apostles — Peter, 
 who, through unjust jealousy, endured not one nor 
 two but many troubles, and having so borne witness 
 went to his due place of glory. Through jealousy and 
 strife Paul pointed out the prize of patience ; having 
 seven times borne chains, having been banished, 
 stoned, having been a preacher both in the east and 
 in the west, he received the noble glory of his faith, 
 having taught righteousness to the whole world, and 
 gone to the extremity of the west ; and having borne 
 
 ^ In Josepus, there is no reasonable doiibt that the notices of St. 
 John Baptist and of St. James are genuine, but it is agreed that that 
 of our Lord cannot be so ; and it is possible that even the designation 
 of St. James is interpolated to bring out the fact of his Christianity, 
 which Josepus ignores. 
 
THE CHURCH AND THE EMPIRE. 137 
 
 witness before the rulers, he so passed away from the 
 world and went to the holy place, haying become the 
 greatest pattern of patience. 
 
 " With these men of holy conversation were as- 
 sembled together a great multitude of the elect, who 
 in many despites and torments, having suffered 
 through jealousy, became a most glorious example 
 among us. Being persecuted through jealousy, women, 
 young maidens, and slave-girls,' having suffered dread- 
 ful and unholy tortures, made their way to the stead- 
 fast course of faith, and they that were weak in body 
 received a noble prize." 
 
 It was not a novelty, horrible as it appears to our 
 minds, to turn the execution of a criminal into an 
 exhibition for public amusement : to expose prisoners 
 to wild beasts, or to make them fight against each 
 other as gladiators, was a practice at Rome of some 
 centuries' standing. Nero was guilty, not of inventing 
 the practice, but of making it more elaborate. It was 
 apparently the old common law of Rome, that an 
 incendiary should be burnt alive ; it was done by 
 means of what was called "the painful coat" — the man 
 was covered with tar and other combustibles, and then 
 set on fire. Nero's refinement was, to make these 
 living torches serve as illumination for an evening 
 entertainment — to make the exposure of men to beasts 
 a kind of pageant of a hunting-scene — perhaps to 
 make scenes in a mythological tragedy more piquant 
 by making the actors really undergo the tortures 
 
 ' This seems on the whole the likeliest reading : no explanation can 
 make AawtSes /cat At'p/cat give a tolerable sense. 
 
138 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 ascribed to ancient tyrants or to the infernal powers. 
 It is probable that in these ways the age of Nero was 
 the precise moment when the treatment of criminals 
 became more cruel than at any time in the civilised 
 world, and the Christian martyrs came in for the full 
 fury of this new cruelty.' 
 
 And though Tacitus and St. Clement agree as to 
 the immense numbers of the sufferers, it does not 
 appear that the persecution was permanently and 
 systematically continued ; it rather seems to have 
 been an outburst of popular and official fury, that spent 
 itself, and was then assumed to have effected its object. 
 I see no reason to doubt that all the martyrs under 
 Nero suffered in the autumn of the year 64. St. 
 Clement seems clearly to associate the deaths of SS. 
 Peter and Paul with those of the other unnamed 
 martyrs ; and the " trophy " of St. Peter has been 
 shown, ever since the third century at least, on the 
 site of Nero's circus under the Vatican Hill, where 
 the hideous festival was held. It has been thought 
 indeed, both in ancient and in modern times, that 
 more room can be found for the events implied in the 
 Pastoral Epistles, if we suppose St. Paul's death to 
 have been later — some put it as late as the last year 
 of Nero's life ; and the conventionally accepted papal 
 legend of St. Peter makes both the apostles suffer on 
 
 ^ It is, however, a mistake to suppose that we have an allusion to 
 the sufferings of the Christians, in every allusion to these cruelties 
 made by writers of the period. Juv. I. 156 may refer to the martyrs, 
 but it is ridiculous to suppose that Mart. X. xxv. 6 can. Real criminals 
 were, no doubt, often treated as barbarously as the innocent saints. 
 
THE CHURCH AND THE EMPIRE. 139 
 
 June 29th/ A.D. 66 or 6^, or perhaps one in the earUer 
 year, and the other on the exact anniversary in the 
 next. It is certainly strange that the Pastoral 
 Epistles, with their marked mannerisms of style and 
 peculiarities of vocabulary, should have been written 
 within a few months of the Epistles of the imprison- 
 ment ; but there is really plenty of room for the facts 
 implied in them, between the date of the end of the 
 Acts and that of the persecution. If from St. 
 Clement's expression about St. Paul going " to the 
 extremity of the west" — combined with a corrupt and 
 obscure expression of an anonymous writer" of the 
 second century — we are to infer that the apostle did 
 visit Spain, as he intended before his arrest (Rom. xv. 
 24, 28), we may suppose that he was content with a 
 visit of a short twelvemonth, going eastward in the 
 spring of A.D. 64. Or if we infer from his asking 
 Philemon for a lodging that he went straight to the 
 east on his release, I think there is even less difficulty. 
 Sailing to Asia, whether from Italy or Spain, he 
 may have touched at Crete, have found or made 
 disciples there, and left St. Titus to organise them 
 in Churches. 
 
 ^ The traditional date of the " Birthday" of a martyr is usually the 
 most certain fact in his legend. But we cannot be sure that the usage 
 of observing the anniversary began as early as this ; and if the day of 
 the Feast of the Apostles really does represent a tradition dating from 
 their own times, it is likelier to have been the date of their translation 
 than of their martyrdom. Nero died on June 9th, A.D. 68; it is 
 likely that friends of his victims took the opportunity of the reaction of 
 public opinion to celebrate the last honours of the dead, and even the 
 Christians may have done so at the end of the month. 
 
 ' The so-called Muratorian Fragment, p. 106, 1. 8. 
 
I40 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 Then, we may presume, he went straight to Colossae, 
 Laodicea, and the neighbourhood ; then, going down 
 to Ephesus, he started for Macedonia,' lea\'ing St. 
 Timothy behind him, with full authority to act as his 
 delegate. It was probably in the course of his pro- 
 gress through Macedonia that he wrote the two 
 Epistles to direct his vicars apostolic (as we may call 
 them) in the exercise of their office. The two were 
 evidently written at the same time, and that to Titus 
 seemingly in the late summer, whether of the year 
 ^"^ or 64. St. Paul intended to spend the winter (and 
 if, disbelieving the voyage to Spain, we assign the 
 Epistles to the earlier year, he probably did spend it) 
 at Nicopolis, in Epirus, having by that time visited his 
 old friends in Asia and Macedonia, and made arrange- 
 ments for the Churches to go on without his personal 
 presence. Then in the late summer of A.D. 64 the 
 persecution broke out; in the autumn he was tracked, 
 arrested, and carried a second time a prisoner to 
 Rome. 
 
 As to St. Peter, we have not materials for tracing 
 his course within even such a margin of conjecture. 
 It is probable that he was at Jerusalem in A.D. 62 or 
 6'i^, to take part in the appointment of St. James' 
 successor, if that really took place in his lifetime. If 
 he did go there, whether from Babylon, from Egypt, 
 or from Rome, I think it likely that he went to Rome 
 from thence. That he died in Rome, I venture to say 
 no reasonable Christian can doubt. There are some 
 people, of course, who can get rid of any amount of 
 1 I Tim. i, 3. He may have gone by way of Troas. (2 Tim. iv. 13.) 
 
THE CHURCH AND THE EMPIRE. 141 
 
 evidence, scriptural or otherwise, by the simple pro- 
 cess of denying the genuineness or the veracity of 
 the authorities ; there are also some Protestants who 
 do not know what evidence means, and think that 
 they have a religious interest in believing that St. 
 Peter was never at Rome, just as there are more 
 Romanists who do not know what evidence means, 
 and think, more excusably, that they have a religious 
 interest in believing that he was Pope for twenty-five 
 years. But if two things can be asserted confidently 
 of the apostle's later years, they are : first, that he 
 did not live long at Rome ; and next, that he did die 
 there. He can hardly have been there in A.D. 58, 
 when the Epistle to the Romans was written ; nor in 
 61, when St. Paul arrived. It is less certain that he 
 was not there before St. Paul's release in' 6^ ; for 
 though St. Paul never mentions him, there might be 
 no occasion to do so in writing to the Colossians and 
 Ephesians, Gentile Churches with which he had no 
 such connection as he possibly had with Corinth.' 
 If St. Mark the Evangelist, who was with St, Peter 
 when he wrote his epistle, be the same person as St. 
 Barnabas' cousin, the John Mark of the Acts, it is 
 perhaps presumable that the two apostles were to- 
 gether in Rome in the spring of 63 ; and probably 
 St. Peter never left it, unless for a voyage to Jeru- 
 salem and back. 
 
 1 That he as well as St. Paul preached there is asserted by St. 
 Dionysius (ap. Eus. H. E. II. xxv. 5) ; and though it seems hard to 
 suppose that he can during the period covered by the Acts, it is quite 
 possible he may have later. 
 
142 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 Any way, whether at the outbreak of the persecu- 
 tion St. Peter had been a few years in Rome, or had 
 just arrived, or was brought there as a prisoner, it is 
 certain that he died there on the cross. It is plain 
 that St. Clement I. recognized the two apostles as the 
 heroes and patrons of his Church quite as confidently 
 as did St. Leo I. — I might almost say as confidently 
 as Leo XIIL He knew, and the Corinthians knew, 
 all about their deaths. Now it is absurd to suppose 
 that a fact which was notorious throughout Chris- 
 tendom at the end of the first century should have 
 been forgotten, and a fiction taking its place have 
 become equally notorious, by the end of the second. 
 If our Protestant friends will accept no evidence but 
 that of canonical Scripture, even that is not wanting. 
 St. John at the end of his Gospel assumes, equally 
 with St. Clement, that all his readers know b}- what 
 death St. Peter did actually glorify God ; and in the 
 Apocalypse' he denounces on Babylon, which here no 
 one doubts to mean Rome, God's vengeance for the 
 blood of " saints and apostles and prophets." Now 
 who were the apostles of whose blood she was guilty 
 if not SS. Peter and Paul } 
 
 I believe, then, that the two chiefs of the Christian 
 Church were among the sufferers in Nero's original 
 persecution. We should like to know more details 
 of their triumph than we do ; of St. Peter's we have 
 some traditions that seem to be authentic. It is 
 certain that he was crucified, almost certain that he 
 was crucified head downwards ; whether this was 
 
 ^ Chap, xviii. 20. 
 
THE CHURCH AND THE EMPIRE. 143 
 
 done merely as an extra torture, or to break the 
 monotony to the spectators of a row of crosses all 
 like one another, or whether, as came to be believed 
 among Christians,' the apostle himself asked for this 
 further torment, feeling himself unworthy to suffer 
 exactly the same death as his Lord. His wife suf- 
 fered with him ; they had apparently been kept apart 
 while in prison, but he saw her on the way to death, 
 and called out to her by name (her name is not 
 given, and the omission is a proof of good faith in 
 the reporter), bidding her "remember the Lord.'"' 
 
 So much I think is fairly well authenticated. I 
 hardly know what to say of the touching legend, 
 Doviine quo vadis ? There is no authority for it ^ 
 before St. Ambrose in the fourth century ; on the 
 other hand, it is utterly unlike the conventional 
 legends of saints that had begun to arise by his time. 
 It is a story that no one had any interest in inventing, 
 and that few can have had the spiritual genius to 
 imagine. The legend is, that St. Peter was persuaded 
 by the disciples to save himself by flight from Rome. 
 Later versions add, with loss I think to the dignity of 
 the story, that he was actually already a prisoner, but 
 that he had converted his guards, and thus was able 
 to escape. He had left the city, and had gone a mile 
 or two beyond the gates, when, at a corner of the 
 road, he met the Lord Jesus, walking as in the days 
 of His flesh, and bearing His cross. Peter said unto 
 Him, "Lord, whither goest thou V The Lord said, 
 
 1 Orig. ap. Eits. H. E. III. i. 2 Clem. Alex. Stro7)t. VII. xi. 
 ^ Unless 2 Peter i. 14 be conceived to allude to it. 
 
144 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 " I go to be crucified in Rome again." Peter re- 
 membered the word of the Lord — how, long before, 
 when he had asked the same question, Jesus said 
 unto him, " Whither I go thou canst not follow me 
 now, but thou shalt follow me afterwards." He 
 understood that now the hour was come ; now he 
 might follow Jesus whither He went — to the cross, 
 and from the cross to heaven. " Christ being raised 
 from the dead dieth no more : " if He was to be 
 crucified in Rome again, it must not be in Himself, 
 but in His members. Peter turned back to Rome, 
 and waited for the cross. 
 
 The detailed legend of St. Paul's death is late, and 
 much of it incredible. We can only say that, being 
 as a Roman citizen exempt from torture, he was 
 beheaded — perhaps, as tradition represents, with a 
 sword ; perhaps with an axe, according to ancient 
 Roman custom, which can hardly have been as obso- 
 lete as is sometimes supposed, since St. John speaks 
 of those who were "beheaded" {lit. "struck with the 
 axe ") " for the witness of Jesus and for the word of 
 God." (Rev. XX. 4.) 
 
 Of his martyrdom, as of St. Peter's, the probable 
 scene is on the spot where his tomb is now shown, in 
 the great church which bears his name, St. Paul's 
 Without the Walls. The " trophies " of the two 
 apostles were pointed to by Christians at these two 
 places within two hundred years of their death,' 
 before the race of martyrs had come to an end, and 
 the demand for their relics had given rise to a ques- 
 
 ' Gaius, ap. Ens. II. E. II. xxv. 3. 
 
THE CHURCH AND THE EMPIRE. 145 
 
 tionable supply. The places now shown as the scenes 
 of their martyrdom' seem to me almost incredible — 
 one is too nearly in the city, the other too far out of 
 the way; but, as it is certain that the martyrs were 
 crucified on the site of St. Peter's Church, so it is 
 likely that a public, but less sensational, execution 
 might take place on or close to St. Paul's — outside the 
 city, but on the most frequented highway, that lead- 
 ing to Ostia. It may be that it was assumed that the 
 apostles' bodies were buried on the spots where they 
 were known to have died, or there may be some truth 
 in the story of their being afterwards laid there by 
 the faithful — having been first removed, like their 
 Lord, to such a resting-place as could be found in 
 their haste, at a spot called, from a slight hollow in 
 the ground, by the bastard Greek word Cataciunbae ; 
 where afterwards a great Christian cemetery arose, 
 famous for the burial of martyrs and successors of 
 the apostles, and from which the word catacomb has 
 acquired its modern extended meaning. But honestly 
 I see no reason to doubt that the bodies of the two 
 apostles really sleep in the tombs under the high 
 altars of their respective Churches ; the less so, because 
 the legend does not disguise the offensive way in 
 which popes and others have been wont to pull about 
 the sacred bodies,- which one would wish to lie as the 
 persecutors left them until the resurrection. 
 
 ^ S. Pietro in Montorio, on the height of the Janiculum, and S. Paolo 
 alle Tre Fontane, in a valley of the Campagna, which no doubt was less 
 desolate and malarious then than now, but not less distant from the city. 
 
 ^ The heads of both apostles, it is said, are at the Lateran. Nero, 
 no doubt, cut off St. Paul's head ; but who cut off St. Peter's ? 
 
 L 
 
146 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH 
 
 We tell these stones of the martyrs with pride and 
 exultation ; we feel that their deeds and sufferings are 
 an honour to us as Christians, rather than that the 
 deeds of Nero and his companions are a disgrace to 
 our human nature. Yet it is just even to Nero to 
 suppose that he had some motive for selecting the 
 Christians as his victims, besides the mere fact that 
 his own works were evil and theirs righteous. It is to 
 be remembered that as long ago as St. Paul's first 
 imprisonment there were "saints in Caesar's house- 
 hold," so that he must have known something, if not 
 of the doctrines of the Gospel, at least of its practical 
 working ; and it is hardly likely that what he knew 
 would set him against it. One motive has been sug- 
 gested, honourable to the Church and dishonourable 
 to him, but still a human motive. According to St. 
 Chrysostom he was piqued by the conversion of one 
 of his concubines. Some moderns have been inclined 
 to hope the story is true — that Nero's first love Acta, 
 who seems to have been as nearly an honest woman 
 as could be expected of a Pagan slave,' and who was 
 among the few who attended to give him a decent 
 funeral after his miserable death, may have become a 
 Christian, and thus turned against the Church the 
 spite both of Nero and of Poppaea. But more 
 probably the converted mistress was meant to be 
 Poppaea herself; it was guessed that she might be a 
 
 ^ Tag. Ann. XIII. xiii. I seems to show that Nero had thorough 
 confidence in her fidelity. According to Suetonius {A^ei-. 28) he at 
 one time seriously thought of marrying her, which, if true at all, must 
 have been after the death of Poppaea. 
 
THE CHURCH AND THE EMPIRE. 147 
 
 Christian because there was evidence that she was a 
 Jewess. But we have no trace that her character was 
 at all improved toward the end of her life, while she 
 retained her influence over Nero to the last ; and, as 
 she was now his lawful wife (no matter how she be- 
 came so), she was under no obligation to abdicate her 
 influence.' This story therefore may be set aside. 
 
 A more popular and perhaps more probable story 
 is that of an encounter at Rome before Nero between 
 the two apostles and Simon, the Samaritan sorcerer. 
 The details of the legend seem to be taken from 
 other stories. We hear how Simon undertook to fly 
 through the air (whether by mechanical contrivance 
 or by the assistance of demons), but that at the 
 prayer of St. Peter he fell, and broke his legs. It 
 seems certain that Simon, after as well as before his 
 professed conversion to Christianity, preached a 
 strange religion, which in its final form is reckoned as 
 the first of Christian heresies, and of which we 
 shall have to give a fuller account in connexion with 
 those developed after it.^ It is quite possible that he 
 may have visited Rome, and that Nero and Poppaea 
 may have been interested in him. Nero certainly 
 was attracted to some forms of oriental superstition, 
 and his age and his court offered an unusually good 
 
 ^ According to the discipline of the later Church, even Acte might 
 have been admitted to baptism without renouncing her connexion with 
 her heathen lover and master, if (as there is every reason to believe) she 
 observed quasi-conjugal fidelity towards him on her own side. But it 
 is possible that the rule in the apostles' day was stricter, and it is likelier 
 that a concubine would be encouraged, though not obliged, to adopt a 
 life of continence on her conversion. ' See Lect. VIII. 
 
148 BEGh\NINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 career to a man like Simon, something between a 
 charlatan, a philosopher, and a religious enthusiast. 
 
 Simon was hardly enough of a Christian to discredit 
 the Christian name, even if it was he who first 
 suggested the persecution. But we ought not to 
 disguise the fact, that the best authenticated cause 
 for the persecution is the most painful — the denuncia- 
 tion of Christians by Christians. Tacitus tells us 
 that the "immense number" who suffered were con- 
 victed by the information of those first arrested on 
 their own confession. St. Clement says that the 
 martyrs, and the apostles especially, suffered "through 
 envy and jealousy," "unjust jealousy," "jealousy and 
 strife." Now Qwvy and jealousy are scarcely natural 
 terms to describe the feelings towards Christianity 
 either of Nero or of the Pagan population ; but one 
 is tempted to ask whether those who three years be- 
 fore "preached Christ even of envy and strife," can 
 now have begun to manifest their feelings of envy 
 and strife in a less incongruous way. From St. Peter's 
 epistle, we should understand that he was afraid that 
 earnest religious feeling, coupled with the conscious- 
 ness that besides Caesar " there is another King, one 
 Jesus," might lead to a dangerous revolutionary fa- 
 naticism, that would justify the dislike of the populace 
 and the suspicions of the magistrates against the 
 Church. The Christians who loyally obeyed the 
 apostles would, of course, be secured by their warn- 
 ings against such temptations ; but it is quite possible 
 that sectarians might give way to them, especially 
 those of Jewish birth, who regarded the existing order 
 
THE CHURCH AND THE EMPIRE. 149 
 
 of the world with the zeal, not only of a new religion, 
 but of an ancient nationality. I think it not unlikely 
 that some Jewish Christians had, before the fire, or 
 during its progress, used wild language about their 
 belief in the speedy conflagration of the world, that 
 made their neighbours think they rejoiced in the fire, 
 or even might have a hand in causing it ; that they 
 were arrested on suspicion, and then attempted (we 
 know not whether successfully) to save themselves 
 by denouncing the orthodox. Of course such fanatics 
 would hate St. Paul ; their predecessors had long 
 tried to shelter themselves under the name of St. 
 Peter, but it is quite possible that he had by this time 
 repudiated them unmistakeably, and so they may 
 have been no less bitter against him. 
 
IV. 
 ^|)e ©lose of t\)t Apostolic ^gc 
 
 "\ \ riTH the Neronian persecution we come to the 
 * ' end, not indeed of the apostolic period, but of 
 the period described to us in the New Testament. 
 The succeeding period is a perplexing and tantalizing 
 one to study, owing to the scantiness, still more the 
 vagueness and uncertainty, of our evidence for its 
 history. So long as the Acts of the Apostles last us, 
 we have authentic information as to one at least of 
 the main streams of Christian history. Even after 
 St. Luke fails us, we have notices of the fortunes of 
 Christianity from Jewish and Pagan as well as Chris- 
 tian writers, which enable us to trace the main course 
 of events, and so furnish a framework in which the 
 apostolic epistles may fall into their place. But for 
 the remainder of the time we propose to review in 
 these lectures, the century or so after the Neronian 
 persecution, we have no history of the Christian 
 Church at all, and very few materials for such a 
 history. We have a few Christian writings, in the 
 canon and beyond it ; a very few notices by Pagan 
 writers of Christianity as existing, and that is all. 
 We have to guess from the genuine writings of the 
 
THE CLOSE OF THE APOSTOLIC AGE. 151 
 
 time (and it is often a doubtful question which arc 
 genuine) what state of things they imply, and then to 
 judge as well as we can how far the traditions or 
 conjectures of later ages agree with this authentic but 
 indirect evidence. 
 
 I have said that I see no reason to believe that 
 Nero continued a systematic persecution of the 
 Church after the one savage outbreak in the autumn 
 of A.D. 64. It is probable, however, that he then 
 issued an edict against Christianity, and that the fact 
 was thus legally proclaimed that it had no status as a 
 recognized or legitimate religion. Tertullian com- 
 plains' that while the rest of Nero's acts were can- 
 celled and his memory execrated, his anti-Christian 
 legislation was still maintained ; and this is probably 
 true in this sense, that Nero called attention to 
 Christian worship being illegal, and it was never 
 legalized ; but it is not likely that one edict of his 
 was selected to receive special sanction when all 
 others were cancelled. Thus Nero made it still 
 possible for Pagan mobs to demand, or for Pagan 
 magistrates to order, the torture or execution of 
 Christians without any other crime than their religion 
 being alleged ; but no regular inquisition, like that of 
 Diocletian, seems to have been attempted till long 
 after this time. Perhaps we may gather that the 
 persecution very soon languished, from the single hint 
 given by the Epistle to the Hebrews as to the time 
 and circumstances when it was written. The con- 
 cluding verse suggests that St. Timothy, coming at 
 1 Ad. Aai. I. 7. 
 
152 BEGLVNLVGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 St. Paul's request to Rome, was himself arrested, but 
 was set at liberty after the apostle's death ; and that 
 when the epistle was written he had joined, or was 
 expected to join, the author, whoev^er the latter may 
 have been. But except for this conjecture, everything 
 about the Epistle to the Hebrews is too utterly un- 
 certain for it to contribute anything to our historical 
 knowledge. Precious as it is for theological and 
 devotional study, and high as is its literary interest, 
 we must pass it by as having little relation to our 
 present subject. 
 
 After the persecution of Nero, the first event 
 affecting the Church that is clearly known to us is the 
 Jewish war and the consequent destruction of Jeru- 
 salem. In the summer of A.D. 66 the Jews were 
 driven to revolt by the brutal tyranny of their Pro- 
 curator, Gessius Florus. Cestius Gallus, the Legate 
 of Syria, had been asked in vain to interfere with his 
 subordinate. He now was obliged to try to support 
 him by arms ; for the rebels had overpowered the 
 garrison regularly stationed in Jerusalem, and mas- 
 sacred them and the heads of the party averse to 
 revolt ; among the latter was the ex-high-priest 
 Ananias, the " whited wall" of the Acts. Cestius 
 acted with little vigour ; he was worsted, and lost 
 more than five hundred men, at Gibeon, though the 
 Jews, being destitute of cavalry, were unable to 
 maintain their ground in the open country. So he 
 advanced to the walls of Jerusalem, and might, 
 Josepus thinks, have forced his way into the city; 
 but he wasted time in negotiations, at last made a 
 
THE CLOSE OF THE APOSTOLIC AGE. 153 
 
 feeble and unsuccessful attack, and finally fell back. 
 The Jews harassed his rear : he was forced to abandon 
 his baggage, and was driven down the famous Pass of 
 Beth-horon with the loss of his eagle and nearly six 
 thousand men. He died soon afterwards, it was 
 thought from vexation at his disgraceful failure. 
 
 Nero sent three legions to Judaea, the remnants of 
 the defeated one being for the present withdrawn to 
 Syria, and gave the command to T. Flavins Vespa- 
 sianus, brother to his prefect of the city, and himself 
 a veteran soldier of reputation, chiefly gained twenty 
 years before, when he commanded under Claudius in 
 Britain, and reduced (SUET. Vcsp. 4) the Isle of Wight 
 and two British tribes, I suppose the two' who occu- 
 pied the country that is now Hampshire. Vespasian 
 reduced Galilee in the summer of A.D. 6^ ; the towns 
 of Jotapata, Gamala, and Gadara made a gallant re- 
 sistance — the story loses nothing, we may be sure, in 
 the hands of Josepus, who commanded at the first- 
 named place — but these were reduced without serious 
 loss to the Romans, and nothing else was done worth 
 mentioning. In another year the Romans were 
 entirely masters of the open country on both sides of 
 the Jordan ; nothing remained but the siege of Jeru- 
 salem and two strong but small fortresses in the 
 East. 
 
 How did this conquest of the country affect the 
 
 > The Belgae, whose town was Winchester, and the Segontiaci, 
 whose town was Silchester. Modern authorities name the Damnonii 
 (in Devon) instead of the latter ; but Tag. Ann. XII. xxxi. 2, indicates 
 that, at a later time in Claudius' reign, the Anton was the frontier of 
 the effective dominion of Rome. 
 
154 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 Jewish Churches ? Apparently much less than one 
 might think. We hear nothing of the sufferings of 
 Christians in Galilee or Samaria ; they probably were 
 numerous there, but if they avoided the fortified 
 towns, they avoided most of the risks of war. As to 
 the Christians of Jerusalem, we know how they es- 
 caped. Apparently the abortive siege of Cestius had 
 its providential purpose in warning them. They had 
 seen Jerusalem compassed about with armies, and 
 knew that the desolation thereof was nigh ; they, and 
 probably their fellow-believers throughout Judaea, 
 fled to the mountains beyond Jordan, to a place 
 called Pella,' where they waited peaceably till the war 
 was over. 
 
 We thus have no concern to follow in detail the 
 course of the remainder of the Jewish war. It belongs 
 to the history of the Jewish nation, not to that of the 
 Christian Church ; its effect was to separate decisively 
 the fortunes of these two bodies. Besides this, it must 
 have influenced Christian thought — we shall see traces 
 of its influence in the Christian Scriptures — in another 
 way. The Lord had combined His predictions of the 
 coming judgment on Jerusalem with those of His 
 final judgment on the whole world ; those who saw 
 the first would naturally expect the second to follow 
 it immediately, but w4ien it did not, their faith was 
 encouraged to a longer patience by the earnest of 
 fulfilment which they had already seen. 
 
 The fact that the fall of Jerusalem released the 
 growing Church from the encumbrance of the dying 
 1 St. Luke xxi. 20, 21 ; Eus. H. E. Ill, v. 2. 
 
THE CLOSE OF THE APOSTOLIC AGE. 155 
 
 body of Judaism gives a solemn irony to the following 
 account' of the destruction of the temple, which until 
 lately was generally ignored by historians, but is now 
 recognized as probably coming from the lost portion 
 of Tacitus' Histories, and as intrinsically more trust-, 
 worthy than Josepus' description of Titus' persistent 
 humanity, and his zealous efforts to save the temple, 
 even at the last. 
 
 "Titus summoned a council of war, and debated 
 whether to overthrow a temple of such grand struc- 
 ture ; for some thought that a consecrated building, 
 famous beyond all human works,^ ought not to be 
 destroyed ; if saved it would furnish an evidence of 
 the forbearance of Rome, if pulled down, an unend- 
 ing stigma of cruelt}-. On the contrary, others — and 
 Titus himself — pronounced it of the first importance 
 that the temple should be overthrown, in order more 
 completely to do away with the religion of the Jews 
 and Christians. For these religions, it was urged, 
 though contrary to each other, still arose from a 
 common origin : the Christians had appeared from 
 among the Jews ; when the root was destroyed the 
 branch would soon perish. So," continues the Chris- 
 
 ^ SuLP. Sever. Hist. Saa: ii. 30. Beinays, in his Essay on Severas, 
 suggests not only that he extracts the passage nearly verbatim from 
 Tacitus, hut that Tacitus' authority was probably Antonius Julianus, a 
 member of Titus' staff, and therefore as much an eye-witness as 
 Josepus himself. 
 
 - Bernays thinks this cannot have been said by Tacitus, and proposes 
 to tone down nlt7-a oninia viortalia illustrem into inter omnes mortales 
 nohile?n. But hardly any single Greek or Roman temple contained such 
 a mass of magnificent buildings as the Jewish, and few can have had 
 treasures greater or so conspicuous. 
 
156 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 tian historian, who has faithfully preserved for us the 
 point of view, and in part the words, of the great 
 Pagan, "by God's decree the spirits of all were stimu- 
 lated, and the temple pulled down." 
 
 While in these ways the secular fortunes of the 
 Jewish people had an influence, though an external one 
 only, on the development of Christianity, the secular 
 fortunes of the empire at large had scarcely less. In 
 summer of A.D. 6?> Nero was deposed, and killed him- 
 self; Galba, an aged and respectable noble, but of harsh 
 and unpopular manners, was proclaimed emperor, and 
 reached Rome from Spain (where he was governor at 
 the time of his revolt) at the end of the year. Almost 
 immediately there were revolts against his authority. 
 Some were suppressed, but two were successful. The 
 troops at Rome revolted in favour of Otho, a dissolute 
 courtier of Nero, husband before him of Poppaea ; 
 and Galba was killed, with Piso his adopted heir. 
 Meanwhile the troops on the German frontier had 
 mutinied, and proclaimed Vitellius, their newly- 
 appointed commander, as emperor. A war ensued 
 between the two pretenders ; in April, A.D. 69, Otho's 
 army was defeated, and he killed himself 
 
 Vespasian professed to acknowledge Galba, Otho, 
 and Vitellius in turn ; but he seems never to have 
 given sincere allegiance to the last two. In J.uly he was 
 proclaimed emperor himself, almost simultaneously 
 at Alexandria and by his own troops in Judaea. 
 He went himself to Alexandria, in order to be able 
 to coerce the capital by gaining the command of the 
 corn supplies. His elder son Titus was left in com- 
 
THE CLOSE OF THE APOSTOLIC AGE. 157 
 
 mand in Judaea, having a sufficient force, not for the 
 siege of Jerusalem, but for holding the country al- 
 ready conquered. The reduction of the Jews might 
 wait till the Roman civil war was over ; in fact, they 
 were engaged in a complex civil war of their own, 
 and might safely be left, in Prince Bismarck's phrase, 
 " to cook in their own juice." 
 
 Before winter the main army of Vitellius was routed, 
 and Flavius Sabinus, the elder brother of Vespasian, 
 undertook to negotiate for the peaceable abdication 
 of Vitellius and recognition of Vespasian as emperor. 
 Vitellius himself was perfectly willing to come to 
 terms, and did in fact formally abdicate ; but the 
 troops refused to acknowledge his act, and Sabinus 
 and those who sided with him were forced to intrench 
 themselves in the Capitol. There they were besieged 
 by the troops and populace on Vitellius' side. At 
 last an entrance was forced, and Sabinus killed ; and, 
 what was more important, the great national sanctuary 
 of Rome, the Temple of Juppiter Capitolinus, caught 
 fire in the struggle, and was completely burnt. 
 
 Sabinus' two sons, and Domitian, the younger son 
 of Vespasian, succeeded in escaping, and the victori- 
 ous army was already so near Rome, that the over- 
 throw of Sabinus might by good management have 
 been prevented, and was easily avenged. The Prae- 
 torian camp, Vitellius' last resource, was stormed, 
 and the troops slaughtered throughout the city ; 
 Vitellius himself was captured in hiding, and slain ; 
 and the Senate speedily assembled, and granted 
 to Vespasian all the imperial titles and powers 
 
158 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 that had been held by Augustus, Tiberius, and 
 Claudius.' 
 
 The empire was thus re-estabhshed, and the peace, 
 which it was the justification of the empire to main- 
 tain, was re-estabhshed when Jerusalem was captured, 
 in August, A.D. 70, and the last strongholds of the 
 Jews taken in the course of the next year. Vespasian 
 and Titus celebrated their triumph, of which we have 
 the record in the well-known triumphal arch of Titus; 
 and then the gates of Janus were closed, as they had 
 been four times during the reign of Augustus.- By 
 that time, all danger was over to the Church of a 
 Jewish corruption of the apostolic Gospel ; and all 
 danger was over, also, to the world of a dissolution of 
 society such as occupied the fourth century after this 
 time. But the Epistle to the Hebrews probably indi- 
 cates that the former danger had been a real one ; and 
 so, we may well believe, had the other — it had certainly 
 been acutely dreaded. The Jews were not the only 
 nation who, at this time of confusion, defied the dis- 
 tracted power of Rome, and indulged the hope that 
 that power would fall, together with the sanctuary 
 that symbolised it. The German tribe of the Batavi, 
 who occupied the delta of the Rhine, the southern 
 part of the modern Holland, had been led to revolt, 
 partly by personal grievances of their chief Civilis 
 and others, partly by the intrigues of Vespasian's 
 
 ^ We notice that the reigns of Gaius and Nero were regarded as 
 tyrannies not furnishing legal precedents. 
 
 " Nero had taken upon him to close them in A.D. 63 (Suet. Ner. 
 13; cf. Tag. Ann. XVI. xxviii. 5), but it was questioned whether it 
 was legitimately done. 
 
THE CLOSE OF THE APOSTOLIC AGE. 159 
 
 generals, who were willing to hamper, even by foster- 
 ing a foreign war, the most devoted of Vitellius' 
 armies. Civilis' revolt became serious ; it spread 
 through Gaul. A man who claimed descent from 
 Julius Caesar was proclaimed emperor of Gaul, and 
 actually some Roman legions were induced to swear 
 allegiance to him. 
 
 The bastard Caesar was soon overthrown, and in 
 the course of the next year Civilis was forced to 
 capitulate. Nevertheless, it was a significant fact 
 that the process had been begun by which the Roman 
 Empire was destined to be dissolved, three or four 
 centuries later. Teutonic invasions, revolts of frontier 
 Teutonic tribes in Roman pay, revolts of provinces, 
 asserting an independence of a character half national, 
 half imperial — all these elements of the dissolution 
 showed themselves now, and these became irresistible 
 when the military strength of Rome was exhausted, 
 as it was now near being, in civil wars of succession. 
 
 This danger to the empire concerns our subject the 
 more, because I believe that it was just at this crisis 
 that St. John saw the vision of which we have the 
 record in the Apocalypse. In saying this, I am aware 
 that I am contradicting not only the general tradition 
 of Christendom, but the direct and weighty evidence 
 on which that tradition rests. " It was seen," writes 
 St. Irenaeus,' "almost in our own days, at the end of 
 the reign of Domitian." Domitian was killed in A.D. 
 97. St. Irenaeus wrote about A.D. 180. He had in 
 his youth known St. Polycarp, who died in 154-5, 
 
 ^ Adv. Hacrt's. V. xxx. I. 
 
i6o BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 and the latter, who was converted in childhood, or 
 born of Christian parents, in 68-9, had known St. 
 John himself, and was consecrated by him Bishop of 
 Smyrna. Thus St. Irenaeus' testimony, though not 
 strictly that of a contemporary, is very far more than 
 that of a vague tradition ; the one life of St. Polycarp 
 bridges the interval between him and the Apostle. 
 If we could be sure that St. Irenaeus, in a statement 
 about St. John, was repeating what he had heard 
 from St. Polycarp, no one could venture to doubt its 
 truth ; it seems very audacious to do so, even if here 
 he is only repeating the report current in the circles 
 where St. Polycarp lived. 
 
 On the other hand, while most ecclesiastical writers, 
 in ancient as in modern times, repeat St. Irenaeus' 
 statement unquestioningly, there was an independent 
 stream of tradition ascribing the apostle's banishment 
 to Patmos not to Domitian but to Nero. Still more 
 steady and still longer lived was a traditional belief, 
 that Nero was in some mysterious way identical with 
 the Antichrist foretold by St. John — that either Nero 
 would actually rise from the dead and assume the 
 character of Antichrist, or at all events that Antichrist 
 would be a second Nero, in the same sense (if we may 
 illustrate " the mystery of iniquity " by the contrasting 
 " mystery of godliness ") as St. John Baptist is spoken 
 of in prophecy as Elijah, or our Lord Himself as 
 David. Now of course this interpretation, even if 
 sound, does not prove that St. John himself suffered 
 under Nero's persecution, but it gives a presumption 
 that his prophecy dates from a time when his mind, 
 
THE CLOSE OF THE APOSTOLIC AGE. i6i 
 
 and the minds of the readers whom he originally 
 addressed, were full of the thought of Nero. Nero, 
 with all his crimes and cruelties, was in a way popular 
 to the last ; and, as often happens after the obscure 
 and violent death of a popular prince, rumours were 
 spread that he was still alive, and would one day re- 
 appear. Now, when profligate heathens were looking 
 forward with hope to his return, or a return of times 
 like his under Otho or Vitellius, it was natural that 
 Christians should think of it as a real danger ; and it 
 is in harmony with the general custom of Old Testa- 
 ment prophecy, that the Holy Spirit should have 
 taught St. John to avail himself of this feeling, and 
 point it to its true object. It was true that there 
 would be a new Nero in the last times — indeed, we 
 shall see there was to be a new Nero, in his measure, 
 in times not very remote ; but Christians were not to 
 fear either the earlier or the later resurrection of their 
 oppressor. Christ would overcome xA.ntichrist himself, 
 much more Domitian or any other lesser antichrist 
 that might arise before the great one, as Antiochus 
 and Nero had arisen already, and had fallen already. 
 This s}'stem of interpretation of the book is gener- 
 ally adopted by critical scholars of our time, and 
 appears to be sanctioned by the oldest tradition, 
 though I cannot claim a preponderance of tradition 
 in favour of the inference here drawn as to the date. 
 But for the purpose of interpretation, tradition on 
 such a subject seems most valuable, because it appears 
 that the apostles left their written predictions far 
 more dependent for their interpretation on the 
 
 M 
 
1 62 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 memory of their oral teaching, than they did their 
 written expositions of Christian doctrine concerning 
 the present or the past. It is true St. John does not 
 here refer expressly to what his readers have heard 
 from him as explaining the further information he 
 has to communicate, in the way that St. Paul does 
 in his great prophecy of the coming Antichrist in 
 2 Thess. ii. ; but I think it plain, from his whole tone, 
 that he expects them to understand at least the 
 general significance of his communication— that he 
 does not expect the book to be found the insoluble 
 riddle which it has proved to be in the absence of 
 such a key to its interpretation as is provided by this 
 view of the typical relation of Nero to Antichrist. 
 
 Another argument for the early date of the Apoca- 
 lypse — perhaps a more convincing one — is that from 
 its style. It appears to me absolutely impossible 
 that the same author should have first written the 
 Gospel and Epistles, and then, a few years afterwards, 
 have written the Apocalypse just before he died of 
 old age. Allowing as much as we will for inspiration 
 giving powers to the mind that nature does not give, 
 I do not think that we have any indication, either in 
 the Old or New Testament, that inspiration overrode 
 or reversed the working in the inspired men of the 
 ordinary laws of the human mind ; and according to 
 those laws, the language of St. John's Epistle (this, 
 more than that of the Gospel, is personally his own) 
 is just such as a very old man might write, while that 
 of the Apocalypse is not. Still more decidedly, and 
 still more plainly, the Apocalypse is the work of a 
 
THE CLOSE OF THE APOSTOLIC AGE. 163 
 
 Jew who thinks in Hebrew. He writes in Greek after 
 a fashion, but he is anything but master of Greek 
 grammar. Not that the language is in the least 
 feeble ; it is the verj^ reverse, but its vigour displays 
 itself, among other things, in a daring disregard of 
 grammatical rules, sometimes with a real significance, 
 but sometimes apparently from pure ignorance or 
 heedlessness. Talleyrand is reported to have said 
 that the Duke of Wellington spoke French " with a 
 great deal of courage." The author of the Apocalypse 
 writes Greek with a great deal of courage, with a great 
 deal of effect too, but obtained by means that would 
 make a grammarian shudder. The language is just 
 such as one can imagine to come from the Galilean 
 apostle, the Son of Thunder, if he had spent his life in 
 Judaea up to fifty or sixty, and only then entered on a 
 wider field, for which some use of Greek was necessary. 
 On the other hand, the author of the Gospel and 
 Epistles writes Greek with perfect grammatical cor- 
 rectness, but not exactly as though he had a complete 
 mastery of the language. He does not go beyond 
 short sentences and simple constructions ; his sen- 
 tences are rather inartistically joined together; and 
 in the first epistle, at least, he is prone to repeat 
 himself The Greek, however, is less Hebraic in 
 construction than most of the other New Testament 
 books. The matter gives plenty of indications that 
 the author was a Jew of Palestine, but the language 
 hardly proves that he was a Jew at all. All becomes 
 plain if we suppose that he had not mixed, like St. 
 Paul or St. Mark, with Greek-speaking Jews who had 
 
1 64 BEGINNIA'GS OF THE CHRISTIAM CHURCH. 
 
 a Hellenistic dialect of their own ; but that he had 
 learnt Greek among Greeks — had learnt it rather late 
 in life, but in the course of twenty or thirty years had 
 mastered it sufficiently for all practical purposes. 
 
 In short, while it is as well attested as such a thing 
 can be, that St. John the Apostle wrote both the 
 Gospel and the Apocalypse, the style of the two 
 books seems to prove it impossible that they could be 
 written by the same author about the same time, and 
 almost equally impossible that the Apocalypse could 
 be written after the Gospel, while all is perfectly 
 natural if the Gospel were written twenty years after 
 the Apocalyse. We know that St. John died, in 
 extreme old age, about A.D. lOO ; ' tradition points to 
 his having written the Gospel some years earlier, but 
 on this I will not insist. However, if the Gospel date 
 between A.D. 80-1 00, the Apocalypse, if the work of 
 the same author, can hardly be placed later than A.D. 
 70. Have we any means for fixing its date more 
 precisely .-* I believe that we have, from two indica- 
 tions in its substance — one depending, and the other 
 not depending, on the view already mentioned — that 
 the prophecies of Antichrist in this book are con- 
 nected with the person of Nero. First, I think that 
 Jerusalem is conceived as still standing at the time of 
 the vision, though its overthrow is more or less clearly 
 foretold. It is generally understood, that in our Lord's 
 prophecy on the Mount of Olives, of which this book 
 contains so many reminiscences, the Fall of Jerusalem 
 and the Last Judgment are blended together; and the 
 
 ^ S. Iren. adv. Haeres. II. xxii. 5. 
 
THE CLOSE OF THE APOSTOLIC AGE. 165 
 
 latter is even spoken of as impending in the present 
 generation, because the former type and foretaste of it 
 is to take place then. Now there are several passages 
 in the Apocalypse, the force of which one could hardly 
 bring out in less than a commentary on the ^vhole book, 
 that indicate that in St. John's fuller repetition of the 
 Lord's prophecy there is the same double reference. 
 
 And secondly, there is one passage which is sup- 
 posed to fix accurately, or at least within very narrow 
 limits, the exact date of the vision. In c. xvii. the 
 seven heads of the beast are explained as representing 
 at once seven hills — meaning undoubtedly those of 
 Rome — and seven kings, of whom "five are fallen, 
 and one is, and the other is not yet come, and when 
 he Cometh he must continue a little space. And the 
 beast that -was and is not both himself is the eighth, 
 and is of the seven." This proves (it is alleged) that 
 the vision was seen, and probably the book written, 
 in the lifetime of the sixth Emperor of Rome ; it is 
 predicted that the seventh will have a short reign, and 
 that the eighth will be Antichrist himself, who will 
 be a revival of one of his predecessors. 
 
 This view has in modern times been for the most 
 part maintained by unbelievers; but we ought to have 
 no prejudice against it on that account, since I think 
 it scarcely doubtful that it was traditionally known 
 to St. Victorinus, a martyr under Diocletian, and 
 author of the earliest existing commentary on the 
 book ; though he, or (more probably)' a later editor of 
 
 ^ It is certain that the commentary has been altered by an editor to 
 exclude the millenarian views of the original author. 
 
1 66 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 his work, has modified it to suit the common view of 
 its date under Domitian. If the view was traditional 
 among martyrs, it plainly is not the interested inven- 
 tion of rationalists ; there is some presumption that 
 it commended itself to both on really rational grounds. 
 
 Let us, then, try how far this explanation suits the 
 facts. Who was the sixth Emperor of Rome ? Nero 
 is so called by Byron, because he is the sixth of the 
 Caesars whose lives were written by Suetonius ; and 
 in ancient times, as in modern, there was a tendency 
 to recognise Julius Caesar as not only the founder of 
 the Empire, which in a certain sense he was, but as 
 himself the first Emperor. But it does not appear 
 that he was generally so regarded in the first century, 
 nor is it correct that he should be. He did indeed 
 bear the title of Impcrator, as the later Emperors did ; 
 but he did not, like them, take the constitutional title 
 of Princcps, strictly the first man in the Senate. Nor 
 did he hold an authority recognised as legitimate or 
 permanent: he was killed as an usurper, and his death 
 regarded as just by the Senate, so long as it was free to 
 pronounce an opinion. At any rate his death, whether 
 just or unjust, was followed, not by the succession of 
 his heir, but by more than thirteen years of civil war. 
 Then, and then only, did the empire begin, as a legiti- 
 mate though almost despotic form of government. 
 
 Augustus then being the first Emperor, Tiberius 
 must be the second, Gaius the third, Claudius the 
 fourth, Nero the fifth, and Galba, if he be counted as 
 a real Emperor, the sixth. Some therefore assign the 
 Apocalypse to Galba's short reign, between June A.D. 
 
THE CLOSE OF THE APOSTOLIC AGE. 167 
 
 68 and January 69; the next reign was the still shorter 
 one of Otho, and the prediction of Antichrist would 
 be fulfilled, if at all, in Vitellius. 
 
 I confess to thinking this last point most unsatis- 
 factory. Otho was never undisputed Emperor, though 
 he was acknowledged as such at Rome for about 
 three months; he therefore could not be said to "con- 
 tinue," even "for a little space." Neither was Vitellius, 
 with all his faults and weaknesses, a man who could 
 be represented as an antichrist, or as a revival of Nero. 
 The latter would be far more plausible as a description 
 of Otho, who, however, though profligate and unscru- 
 pulous, does not seem to have been cruel, and gave 
 signs of a desire to reign better than he had lived. 
 
 But if Galba, Otho, and Vitellius be passed over as 
 claimants of empire (and not the only claimants) 
 rather than actual Emperors, the practical successor 
 of Nero will be Vespasian ; and then, on the view 
 under discussion, the book must be referred to the 
 interval between his proclamation in the July, or 
 perhaps his victory in the December, of A.D. 69, and 
 the fall of Jerusalem in August 70. Then we can 
 trace as complete a fulfilment of the predictions that 
 follow as can be expected with a prediction which, 
 whatever immediate and typical fulfilment it may 
 have had, certainly reaches on to the times of the end 
 of the world. Vespasian reigned for ten years, well 
 and peaceably on the whole; he was succeeded by 
 his son Titus, who "continued a little space" — ^just 
 over two years. Then followed Domitian, whose 
 cruelty and vices made both Pagans and Christians 
 
i68 BEGIXNIiVGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 recognise in him a revival of Nero. Like Nero, he 
 was a persecutor — less wantonly cruel, but with far 
 more deliberate hatred to the Church ; and, in fact, 
 while his character was even more destitute of estim- 
 able or amiable features, he had abilities and serious 
 aims that made him even a worthier representative 
 of the great enemy of righteousness. 
 
 It is of course impossible here to enter further into 
 the question of the interpretation of the visions or 
 predictions in the book ; these fall within our present 
 subject, only so far as they illustrate, or are illustrated 
 by, the history of the time when it was written. But 
 the book, like all Scriptural prophecy, contains not a 
 little besides prediction ; the epistles to the Seven 
 Churches are far more concerned with the past and 
 present than with the future, and we must make what 
 use we can of these as historical evidence. 
 
 We do not know how to connect the state of things 
 described or implied in these epistles with the history 
 as we traced it down to the death of St. Paul ; but 
 some connection there must be. Except as a matter 
 of deference to certain scholars, who have a claim to 
 deference for learning, if not for sound common-sense 
 or healthy Christian feeling, I need not allude to the 
 wild theory that St. Paul himself is referred to as one 
 of them " that say they are apostles, and are not ; "' as 
 
 1 Rev. ii. 2; iii. 9. Some give this interpretation even to ii, 20. 
 But neither does it seem necessary to suppose that these, or the other 
 heretics mentioned, quoted or perverted St. Paul's teaching. It is 
 possible that some may have done so ; but if the antinomianism of the 
 Nicolailans was dualistic, there is no need to suppose it was ultra- 
 Pauline. 
 
THE CLOSE OF THE APOSTOLIC AGE. 169 
 
 we said in the last lecture, he doubtless is alluded to 
 among the " saints and apostles and prophets " whose 
 blood God avenges upon Babylon. But neither do I 
 feel sure that in " those who say they are Jews and 
 are not, but do lie, and are the synagogue of Satan," 
 we have a denunciation of Judaising Christians, like 
 those whom we hear of in St. Paul's epistles. They 
 are probably Jews who do not profess to be anything 
 but Jews ; but St. John feels the name of Jew to be 
 still an honourable one, and he, or rather the Lord 
 and His Spirit, pronounces these unbelieving Jews to 
 be unworthy of it. 
 
 So far, the gap between St. Paul and St. John must 
 be left unfilled ; but in St. Paul's last epistles we had 
 traces of heresies in Asia of a philosophic type, like 
 that met with at Colossae, but not necessarily, like 
 that, of a Judaising type too. A wide prevalence of 
 heresy there was foretold by St. Paul in his farewell 
 speech at Miletus. It is implied in the melancholy 
 words,' "All they that be in Asia are turned away 
 from me," though we must not press the word "all" 
 too strictly, as though St. Timothy had no faithful 
 Church left for him to look after. 
 
 St. John also finds the Churches of Asia widely 
 infested with various heresies. Of these, apparently 
 the most widely spread, certainly the most deadly, 
 was that of the Nicolaitans ; and as to this we have 
 certain traditions,- not of the very earliest, but in my 
 opinion intrinsically probable. It is said that they 
 originated under the influence, and claimed the 
 ^ 2 Tim. i. 15. 2 Clem. Alex., Strom. III. iv. 
 
I70 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 authority, of Nicolaus or Nicholas of Antioch, one 
 of the original seven deacons of the Apostolic Church 
 of Jerusalem. It is added that he was not reall}^ 
 responsible for their immoralities, but that they 
 abused in a licentious sense language which he in- 
 tended in an ascetic. And this is, at any rate, ideall}- 
 true. The immoral heresies, both of this generation 
 and of the next, arose from the assumption that 
 the human body, and the whole material world, is 
 essentially unclean, and incapable of sanctification. 
 This principle was laid down in general by grave 
 religious teachers, such as Nicholas is said to have 
 been — men of serious and even exalted spiritual pur- 
 pose, and of austere habits. Reckoning the flesh as 
 evil, they sought resolutely to mortify the flesh ; but 
 when their principle fell into the hands of men of less 
 profound habits of thought, and less fixed moral 
 habits, the practical outcome of it was the very 
 reverse. The natural impulses of the flesh, it was 
 assumed by these as by the others, lead necessarily 
 to sin. " Never mind," said they, " let the sinful flesh 
 go its own way ; it is sinful, and cannot be otherwise. 
 Let the spirit prove its superiority to the flesh b}- 
 remaining unaffected by, and indiftcrent to, its defile- 
 ments." 
 
 Almost all the heresies of the first and second 
 centuries had more or less tendency to pervert the 
 moral life in one or other of these directions ; indeed, 
 we might perhaps say the same of almost all religious 
 errors in any age. On occasion of St. Paul's Epistle 
 to the Colossians, and of the Ebionite traditions on the 
 
THE CLOSE OF THE APOSTOLIC AGE. 171 
 
 character of St. James, we said something as to the 
 earlier and higher type of teaching, and the difference 
 between it and such asceticism as is recognized by 
 the orthodox Church. As to the reactionary or 
 licentious heresies, we find that the}' very speedil}' 
 reached the grossest possible form ; the Nicolaitans, 
 presumably the first, were as bad as any. It is they, 
 apparently, who are described' as "holding the 
 doctrine of Balaam," " teaching Christ's servants to 
 eat things sacrificed to idols, and to commit fornica- 
 tion." I see no reason, however, wh}' the excuses 
 made for Nicholas himself should not be quite true ; 
 the stories about him do not sound like inventions. 
 We are told that he had a beautiful wife, to whom he 
 was passionately attached, and that the apostles re- 
 buked him for his violent jealousy. He replied by 
 divorcing her in the face of the Church, and telling 
 her she was at liberty to marry any one she pleased, 
 while he himself thenceforth lived in strict continence. 
 The story is not a pleasant one, nor, however much 
 we may allow for the difference between ancient and 
 modern ideas about love and marriage, can we think 
 it other than discreditable to Nicholas. It is fully as 
 much opposed to the plain words of the Gospel as it 
 is to our sentiments of honour and decency. Yet if 
 we do allow for the diff"erence between ancient and 
 modern sentiment, our condemnation of Nicholas 
 may be qualified by a certain degree of respect. He 
 appears to have been a man of strong passions and 
 of strong but not sound sense of duty — able and 
 ^ Rev. ii. 14, 20. 
 
172 BEGIXXIXGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 willing, in his own phrase, to " do violence to the 
 flesh," but unhappily unable to conceive the higher 
 ideal of " the flesh being subdued to the Spirit." A 
 man of this type might be all the more dangerous as 
 a moral teacher, because his own moral character was 
 not such as men could despise or absolutely condemn. 
 So much, then, as to the historical teaching' of the 
 Apocalypse itself; let us return to its evidence as to 
 the life of the author. We saw reason, on the whole, 
 to believe that it was in the early part of the year 70, 
 or not long before, that the apostle John saw the 
 vision, in his place of banishment in the isle of Patmos. 
 That he was banished on account of his Christian 
 profession is, I have no doubt, the meaning of his 
 words,^ that he was there " for the word of God and 
 for the testimony of Jesus Christ," though some 
 imagine that this means only that he had gone there 
 to preach. But admitting that he was banished, the 
 question remains, by whom } Four answers are 
 possible — that he was sentenced by Nero, by Domi- 
 tian, or by a local authority either in Palestine or at 
 Ephesus. 
 
 ^ We can add nothing to what is' said in the text of the Revelation 
 as to the persecutions at Smyrna and at Thyatira. A legend of St. 
 Antipas was current in the fifth century, but it is hardly likely to have 
 been authentic. Neither do I think there is anything to be learnt as to 
 the history of Church offices from the mention of the "Angels of the 
 Chmxhes ; " I do not myself believe that these are human officers at 
 all, but rather a Christian form of what a Pagan contemporary would 
 have called the "genius" of each community. But if we do suppose 
 tlie angels to be human ministers, it remains totally uncertain what 
 their office or function was. 
 
 ^ Chap. i. 9. 
 
THE CLOSE OF THE APOSTOLIC AGE. 173 
 
 For the last-named view we have no direct evi- 
 dence, only, as we shall see reason to believe that St. 
 John was in Asia as early as A.D. 68-9, it seems to 
 have the advantage of simplicity. Even after Nero's 
 persecution, we have no proof that " a ringleader of 
 the sect of the Nazarenes " would be thought so im- 
 portant a personage that he must be sent to Rome 
 for trial, unless, like St. Paul, he was a Roman citizen. 
 All we can say is, that it is possible that the Pro- 
 consul of Asia, or some less exalted magistrate, may 
 have thought it worth while to put the apostle out of 
 the way in an island *; but the oldest tradition seems, 
 among all its divergencies, to ascribe the act to an 
 emperor. 
 
 No tradition names Vespasian as that emperor, nor 
 would it occur to any one to ascribe an act of persecu- 
 tion to him but for the fact, recorded by Hegesippus,' 
 that he ordered the arrest of all persons of the house 
 of David. As St. John was perhaps our Lord's 
 kinsman after the flesh, it is not unlikely that this 
 would affect him if he was in Palestine at the time ; 
 and we may imagine that Vespasian, if he found one 
 of the House of David personally innocent of an}- 
 political ambition, might nevertheless think it safest, 
 both for the State and for the scion of Jewish royalty 
 himself, that he should be sent out of the way to an 
 obscure and remote retreat. The only objection to 
 this view is, that if St. John had been thus banished 
 by Vespasian, Hegesippus would be sure to have 
 named him ; and Eusebius would probably have told 
 
 1 Ap. Eus. H. E. III. xii. 
 
174 BEGLVXIXGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH 
 
 US that he did, though it would have contradicted tlie 
 testimony he does quote from St. Irenaeus. 
 
 The belief that St. John was banished by Domitian 
 is not quite inconsistent with the behef in the early 
 date of the Apocalypse. At the close of the }'ear 
 69, when Vitellius was killed, Domitian — then a dis- 
 solute youth of eighteen — was the only representative 
 of the new imperial family at Rome. Vespasian and 
 Titus were made consuls for the ensuing year, and 
 Domitian praetor. Now if St. John were sent to 
 Rome as a political prisoner, either from Palestine or 
 from Asia, and arrived just then, Domitian would be 
 responsible (at least nominally ; for we are told that 
 he neglected the business of his office') for his trial 
 and sentence. 
 
 I know no objection to this view, except that it is a 
 trifle too ingenious. It accounts for the statement of 
 St. Irenaeus which we felt compelled to set aside. 
 St. Irenaeus knew, on this view, that the apostle was 
 banished by Domitian — he wrongly inferred that he 
 was among the many Christians banished by him 
 near the end of his reign ; and it helps us to under- 
 stand a legend which is generally, though perhaps 
 only conjecturally, connected with the apostle's 
 banishment. According to a tolerably early tradi- 
 tion,^ St. John was at Rome thrown into a cauldron 
 of boiling oil, and remained unhurt. Now we hear 
 
 1 Tag. Hist. IV. ii. i ; xxxix. 2, Suet. Doni. i. 
 
 - Tertullian {Pracscr. Hacr. 36), our oldest authority, gives no date for 
 the event, but fixes the place at Rome. Roman tradition or conjecture has 
 localized the legend still further, and it is popularly known as " the miracle 
 of the Latin Gate," where two ancient churches commemorate it. 
 
THE CLOSE OF THE APOSTOLIC AGE. 175 
 
 in the case of many martyrs of miracles saving them 
 from the death first intended for them ; but if the 
 persecutors persist, the death ahvays does ensue. It 
 seems as if God warned the persecutors to relent, but 
 would not force them. But we can imagine that 
 Domitian, or the person acting in his name, when a 
 Christian was brought before him as a criminal, 
 would first think of condemning him to one of the 
 horrible modes of death that had been practised 
 under Nero ; but if he were saved from this, by a 
 miracle or what looked like one, the people, who had 
 learnt to pity Nero's victims, may have interposed to 
 protect this new victim ; and the magistrate may have 
 thought it wise to commute his sentence to simple 
 banishment. 
 
 Lastly, it is possible that St. John's banishment to 
 Patmos took place under Nero, in virtue of his edict 
 against the Christians, which at Ephesus, or wherever 
 St. John then was, may have been carried out with 
 comparative mildness. If so, it is possible that St. 
 Irenaeus confounds St. John's banishment under 
 Nero with his attempted martyrdom, which may have 
 been under Domitian. 
 
 Though we cannot determine how long St. John 
 had been in exile before his vision, it seems plain 
 that he was set at liberty very soon after it. From 
 the terms in which he speaks of it, we should under- 
 stand that he had left Patmos when he wrote the 
 book of the Revelation ; and a unanimous and cohe- 
 rent tradition tells us, that after his release he spent 
 the remainder of his life in the province of Asia, 
 
176 BEG/XX/XGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 Ephesus being his head-quarters. As I have already 
 said, I beheve that he had been there before his 
 banishment ; the most direct evidence of this is, that 
 St. Irenaeus tells us that St. Polycarp was converted 
 by an apostle — literally " by apostles." Now, as he 
 had been a Christian for eighty-six years at his death 
 in A.D. 155, this brings his conversion back to A.D. 
 69, just before the probable date of the Apoca- 
 lypse. It harmonizes well enough with this, that St. 
 Polycarp, in his existing Epistle to the Philippians, 
 says that at the date when St. Paul wrote his epistle 
 to them "wt' had not yet believed." It may be 
 doubtful whether the word "we" refers to himself or 
 to the Smyrnaeans generally, but I think the latter 
 more likely; for if St. Polycarp was alive in A.D. 61, 
 he must have been a mere baby ; and so I regard A.D. 
 68-9 as the probable date of the foundation of the 
 Church of Smyrna by an apostle, presumably St. John. 
 I say presumably ; for other apostles appear to 
 have worked in these parts ; we have the clearest 
 notices of SS. Andrew and Philip. As to the latter 
 indeed there is some uncertainty ; some of the later 
 writers who speak of him, though calling him the 
 apostle, plainly confound him with his namesake, St. 
 Philip the Deacon. But there seems no proof that 
 this confusion existed in the oldest authorities,' onl}' if 
 these are right in speaking of the apostle, they estab- 
 lish the coincidence that he as well as the Deacon 
 had saintly daughters — not however four but three, 
 and one of them married. 
 
 1 S. POLYCRATES, ap. Eus. III. xxxi. 2; V. xxiv. 2, 3. 
 
THE CLOSE OF THE APOSTOLIC AGE. 177 
 
 St. Philip died — apparently a natural death — and 
 was buried at Hierapolis. St. Andrew, after his stay- 
 in Asia Minor, seems to have crossed the Euxine, or 
 at least the Bosporus, and preached in Scythia, or 
 the parts of Thrace far enough north to be called so. 
 The scene of his martyrdom, on a cross of the well- 
 known pattern, is laid in Greece ; but it seems 
 doubtful if the legend is authentic ; it probably comes 
 from an apocryphal book of his Acts which is men- 
 tioned with little respect by Eusebius,' though, of 
 course, it cannot be proved that it does not embody a 
 genuine tradition. His body is said to be buried at 
 Amalfi, while the head was taken to his brother's 
 church at Rome ; but I do not believe in the authen- 
 ticity of these relics, nor of those of St. Matthew at 
 Salerno. In St. Chrysostom's time the tombs of only 
 four of the apostles were authentically known — 
 those of SS. Peter and Paul at Rome, St. John at 
 Ephesus, and St. Thomas at Edessa in Syria. The 
 last saint, according to a tolerably unanimous tradi- 
 tion, preached in the Parthian empire — some say in 
 India, but the term is probably used in a vague sense, 
 meaning the far east — and finally suffered martyrdom 
 by a spear-thrust. 
 
 Besides SS. John, Andrew, and Philip, certain 
 other disciples of the Lord were living and active in 
 Asia at this time. Joseph Bar-Sabbas, who, if not 
 
 ^ H. E. III. XXV. 3. As he so completely rejects this book, 
 perhaps it is likely that he had some independent authority for the 
 statement of III. i. The extant Acts of SS. Andrew and Matthias 
 are supposed to be a Catholic recension of the heretical works rejected 
 by Eusebius. 
 
 N 
 
lyS BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 actually an apostle, had been considered fit for one 
 by the Eleven, seems to have lived there ; at any 
 rate, it was there that a tradition was current about 
 him,' forming a kind of pendent to that of St. John, 
 and in later times transferred to the latter — that he 
 had, without receiving any hurt, drunk a cup of 
 poison. We are not told whether it was given him 
 by judicial sentence or by private malice. It was 
 certainly in Asia that two men lived who are desig- 
 nated as disciples of the Lord," but who probably 
 had seen and heard Him when mere children, as they 
 seem to have survived St. John the apostle. Their 
 names were Aristion (who must have been a Greek, or 
 at least a Hellenist) and John, the latter distinguished 
 from the apostle as the elder or presbyter. It has 
 been supposed, and is not impossible, that some of 
 our notices of " John " at Ephesus refer to this John 
 rather than to the apostle; but we cannot call in 
 question the fact of the apostle's residence at 
 Ephesus, as some have attempted. It would imply 
 incredible stupidity on the part of St. Irenaeus, or 
 indeed of St. Polycarp, that the former should have 
 misunderstood the latter as to which John had been 
 his instructor. The most we can concede is, that the 
 conjectures both of ancient and modern critics may 
 possibly be right, that it was " the elder " who wrote 
 the second and third epistles bearing the name of St. 
 John. Their resemblance to the first epistle would 
 be then explained, not by unity of authorship, but by 
 
 1 Papias ap. Ens. H. E. III. xxxix. 7. 
 ^ Papias, ibid, §4. 
 
THE CLOSE OF THE APOSTOLIC AGE. 179 
 
 conscious imitation of what was already a sacred and 
 authoritative work — something in the same way as we 
 find in St. Clement of Rome echoes of the canonical 
 Epistle to the Hebrews. 
 
 In fact, our traditions as to St. John the apostle in 
 Asia are as definite as can be expected, when the 
 works of the original authorities are almost all lost : 
 and St. Polycarp was, to say the least, one great 
 transmitter of tradition concerning him. The special 
 connexion between him and St. John might be 
 accounted for by his having been made Bishop of 
 Smyrna by him when he was the sole surviving 
 apostle. However, it is likelier to have been St. John 
 than any other apostle who founded the Church of 
 Smyrna in A.D. 68-9, when the child Polycarp was, we 
 suppose, among the earliest converts. If so, and if the 
 Apocalypse dates in A.D. 69-70, the apostle's banish- 
 ment cannot have lasted very long. That he settled 
 in Asia immediately after it, and was actively engaged 
 in organizing the churches there, we know from the fol- 
 lowing beautiful history : — St. Clement of Alexandria, 
 who tells it us,' expressly forbids us to call it a legend. 
 
 "When, on the death of the tyrant, he came from 
 the Isle of Patmos to Ephesus, he went away also 
 when requested to the neighbouring parts of the 
 nations, in some places to establish bishops, in some 
 to arrange whole Churches, and in some to ordain 
 to the clergy one or more of those indicated b}' the 
 Spirit. So when he came also to one of the cities 
 
 1 In the essay, " Tts 6 <Tw^b^ivo% -rrXovaios," c. xlii., whence the story is 
 quoted in Eus. H. £., III. xxiii. 
 
iSo BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 not far off (of which some even tell the name), 
 and had otherwise refreshed the brethren, after all 
 was done, he looked at the bishop established there, 
 and seeing a young man of vigorous frame, comely 
 looks, and warm spirit, he said, ' I entrust to thee this 
 lad with all diligence, before the Church and Christ 
 as witness.' So when the other received the charge, 
 and promised everything, he again repeated his charge 
 and obtestation. Then the apostle went away to 
 Ephesus, and the elder, taking to his home the young 
 man entrusted to him, reared him, kept, cherished, 
 and at last baptized' him. And after this he relaxed 
 his greater care and watchfulness, thinking that he had 
 put on him the perfect protection of the seal of the 
 Lord. But when the youth had been left to himself 
 before the time, there met him in evil hour certain 
 idle and disorderly youths of his age, accustomed to 
 evil habits ; and at first they led him on by costly 
 feasts, then, going out with him by night, they led 
 him on to petty theft, and then called on him to help 
 them in some more serious crime. And he graduall}- 
 got used to such things ; and, through his vigorous 
 nature, like a strong hard-mouthed horse that has left 
 the right way, and taken the bit in his teeth, he 
 dashed with the greater force down the abysses ; and 
 having perfectly despaired of the salvation in God, 
 he no longer contemplated any small thing, but, 
 having committed some great crime, made up his 
 mind that, as he was ruined once for all, he would 
 take the same fortune with the rest. So he took these 
 ^ Lit. "enliirhtened." 
 
THE CLOSE OF THE APOSTOLIC AGE. iSi 
 
 men themselves with him, and associated them into a 
 troop of robbers, being ready to act as their captain, 
 the most violent, blood-stained, and cruel of them all. 
 " Time passed, and when some occasion arose they 
 again summoned John. But he, when he had arranged 
 the other matters for which he had come, said, ' Now 
 then, bishop, give us back the trust which the Saviour 
 and I committed to thee, under the witness of the 
 Church which thou presidest over.' But he at first 
 was astonished, thinking it was a swindling demand 
 for money that he had not received, and neither knew 
 how to believe a story about what he never had, nor 
 yet how to disbelieve John. But when he said, ' I 
 demand of thee the young man, and thy brother's 
 soul,' the old man gave a deep groan, and with some 
 tears said, ' He is dead.' ' How, and by what death }' 
 'He is dead to God,' he said; 'for he turned out 
 wicked, and went to ruin, and, to conclude, is a 
 robber ; and now, instead of the Church, he occupies 
 the mountains with an army of men like himself.' 
 Then the apostle rent his clothes, and with a loud cry 
 struck his head, and said, ' Truly I left a good guard 
 of my brother's soul ! But let me have a horse here 
 at once, and some one to show me the way ;' and he 
 rode off, as he was, straight from the Church. And 
 when he came to the place, he was taken by the out- 
 post of the robbers, neither attempting flight nor 
 remonstrance, but crying, ' This is what I came for ; 
 take me to your captain.' He at first waited for him, 
 armed as he was ; but when he recognized John 
 coming to him, he was ashamed, and took to flight. 
 
i82 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 The Other pursued him at full speed, forgetting his 
 old age, crying, ' Why dost thou fly from me, my 
 son ? from thy own father, an unarmed old man ? 
 Pity me, my son. Fear not, thou still hast hope of 
 life. I will answer to Christ for thee, if need be ; I 
 will willingly endure thy death, as the Lord endured 
 for us ; I will give my own soul for thine. Stay, 
 believe ; Christ has sent me.' He, when he heard, at 
 first stood looking downwards ; then threw away his 
 arms, then trembled, and wept bitterly. When the 
 old man came up to him he embraced him, making 
 such excuse as he could by his groans, and being 
 baptized a second time in his tears, only hiding his 
 right hand. But the other, assuring him by every 
 pledge and oath that he had obtained forgiveness for 
 him from the Saviour, entreating him, falling on his 
 knees, kissing repeatedly his right hand itself as 
 cleansed by his repentance, led him back to the 
 Church. And seeking his pardon with abundant 
 prayers, and striving to aid him by long-continued fast- 
 ings, and enchanting his spirit by all manner of speech 
 and exhortation, he did not go away, as they say, till 
 he had restored him to the Church, so affording us a 
 great example of true repentance, and a great proof 
 of regeneration — a trophy of a visible resurrection." 
 
 Of the human pathos of this story, or the picture 
 of apostolic charity, it would be superfluous to say 
 anything. I confess one naturally feels disposed to a 
 rebellious suggestion, that St. John was rather hard on 
 the bishop ; that the latter was justified in thinking that 
 if a well-trained Christian youth turned highwayman, 
 
THE CLOSE OF THE APOSTOLIC AGE. 1S3 
 
 it was more his own fault than his trainer's. But we 
 may beheve that the apostle had the gift of " discern- 
 ing of spirits;" that as he saw the youth's great 
 capacity for good or evil, and (as is evident) the im- 
 portance to him of careful training, so he saw that 
 he would not have gone wrong if his training had 
 been perfect ; and, any way, the bishop had never 
 done for him what the apostle did. 
 
 But without dwelling further on the central facts of 
 the story, incidental phrases in it throw a great deal 
 of light on the growing organization of the Church 
 at this obscure period. First, it seems quite plain that 
 St. John was the great organiser of the Churches of 
 Asia, and that they were in several important points 
 absolutely dependent on him for their organization. 
 He was the only person qualified to found a whole 
 Church, the only person who could consecrate a 
 bishop ; the principal and fittest person, if not the 
 only one, to ordain an individual to any clerical office. 
 The officers of the Church were still designated by 
 the Holy Ghost ; that is, I suppose, " by prophecy," 
 as St. Timothy was, and SS. Paul and Barnabas 
 before him. This is so characteristic of the apostolic 
 age that it seems to convince us that St. Clement re- 
 produces its usage faithfully, and does not carelessly 
 transfer to it the customs of his own time. But the pro- 
 phetic designation, though it called a man to the office, 
 did not confer it ; it was conferred, no doubt, " by the 
 laying on of the hands of the presbytery," but certainly 
 by the laying on of the apostle's hands in particular, 
 the presbytery being unable to act without him. 
 
1 84 BEGLVNLVGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 I say, however, that though the apostle is the chief 
 ordainer of clergy throughout the whole province, it 
 is not certain that he is the sole person qualified to 
 ordain. It seems as though there were now one 
 bishop established by him in every city, a bishop in 
 the modern sense, superior to the other presbyters, 
 though the line between him and them is not very 
 definite, and he is called a presbyter occasionally. 
 The usage of the names is thus intermediate between 
 that of the canonical books and St. Clement of Rome, 
 and that of St. Ignatius and the modern Church. 
 
 But we have seen and shall see a good deal more 
 evidence than this passage supplies as to the develop- 
 ment of the apostolic ordinance of Episcopacy. There 
 are two other points closely related in which this is, 
 I think, the only passage illustrating the growth of 
 the practice established in the Church when first 
 known to us ; these are the long period of catechetical 
 training, and the long period of penitential discipline. 
 
 In the Church of St. Paul's da}'s we never hear of 
 anyone not being baptized as soon as he sincerely 
 and avowedly believes ; and in the only case ' where 
 we hear of a member of the Church falling into 
 deadly sin and repenting, we find him restored, appa- 
 rently, to full Christian privileges as soon as ever his 
 repentance is sufficiently attested. But here we find 
 a young man, probably not, it is true, a member of a 
 Christian household, but a habitual attendant at the 
 Christian assemblies, and no doubt already a thorough 
 believer in Christ, yet unbaptized, and not treated as 
 ^ I Cor. V. ; 2 Cor, ii. 
 
THE CLOSE OF THE APOSTOLIC AGE. 1S5 
 
 being yet a fit subject for baptism. Before he can be 
 baptized he must undergo a careful and apparently a 
 rather protracted training ; then and then only is he 
 baptized, and the bishop officiates. St. Paul, we know, 
 did not do this,' except in the case of the first or 
 most important converts in a city : when once a 
 Church was constituted, he left to its elders the purely 
 ministerial act, and devoted himself to the work of 
 evangelization, which his special personal gifts and 
 calling marked as the work of his life. But now, 
 though perhaps the apostle still preaches the Gospel 
 oftener than he baptizes, the bishop, the apostle's 
 delegate, baptizes as well as preaches ; for to baptize 
 is no longer a matter of course, ensuing immediately 
 on a profession of desire to join the Church, but is 
 now a deliberate and responsible act, embodying and 
 recording indelibly a conviction that the catechumen 
 is sincere in his professions and perfect in his training. 
 Again, when the apostle has attested the robber's 
 penitence, and assured him of its acceptance, he is 
 not, like the offender at Corinth, immediately restored 
 to his place in the Church. This has to be sought by 
 a long course of prayers and fastings. It is a matter 
 too high for discussion in a purely historical work 
 like this, how fully the principle of the Communion of 
 Saints is carried out, the apostle's prayers and fastings 
 reinforcing those of the penitent ; but this makes it 
 all the more noteworthy, that even when he is thus 
 reinforced, his restoration is only granted after long 
 delay and with apparently some difficulty. The peni- 
 
 ^ I Cor. i. 14-16, 
 
iS6 BEGINiYINGS OF THE CHRISTLLV CHURCH. 
 
 tential discipline of the Church is not Novatian ; a 
 baptized sinner, even a murderer, may be restored 
 after adequate penance to the sacraments of the 
 Church on earth, as well as to the hope of final salva- 
 tion ; but the stern discipline already exists which 
 made Novatianism possible. 
 
 We have a few other anecdotes of this period of 
 St. John's life at Ephesus ; with two exceptions their 
 interest is chiefly personal. We are told, b\- a very 
 late authority it is true, that he kept a tame partridge, 
 and used to play with it in a way that uns}'mpathetic 
 people thought childish ; he defended himself on the 
 plea of the old fable, that every bow needs to be un- 
 strung, but there seems to be something characteristic 
 in his choice of a relaxation. A more important and 
 better authenticated story ' is, that once he was going 
 into a bath when he saw the heretic Cerinthus there ; 
 he immediately rushed out, saying that he was afraid 
 that the presence of "the enemy of the truth" might 
 make the roof fall in. The horror-struck shrinking 
 from social contact with a heretic is just such as is 
 commanded in St. John's epistles ; but it was a 
 stumbling-block to a later age that the saint should 
 have intended to indulge in the luxury of a bath.- 
 But this feature seems to harmonise well enough with 
 the last : the apostle's life was a genial as well as a 
 saintly one, and not particularly austere. To a man 
 
 1 S. IREN. III. iii. 4. 
 
 " That is, of course, what we should now call a Turkish bath ; for 
 copious ablutions with cold water were doubtless the rule with Chris- 
 tians as with Jews. 
 
THE CLOSE OF THE APOSTOLIC AGE. 1S7 
 
 of his age and habits moderate and simple physical 
 comforts were less likely to prove enervating or de- 
 moralising than to prolong the period of his life and 
 usefulness. His life was in fact prolonged to the 
 beginning of the reign of Trajan,' A.D. 98 or later, 
 when the apostle himself must have been nearer one 
 hundred than ninety. Everyone knows the beautiful 
 story - how, when he became too feeble to preach or 
 otherwise officiate, he still was carried to the assem- 
 blies of the Church, and there addressed to them the 
 one unvarying message, " Little children, love one 
 another." 
 
 One of the statements that I excepted as throwing 
 light rather on the general growth of the Church than 
 on St. John's private life, comes to us on the excellent 
 authority of Polycrates, Bishop of Ephesus, and is to 
 the effect that St. John " became a priest that wore 
 the mitre," ^ or, as some render it, the breastplate, 
 " and a witness [or martyr] and teacher." The sen- 
 tence has nothing in the context to explain it, and 
 any one who can see his way to toning down into a 
 metaphor the words about the mitre is at liberty to 
 do so. But it seems far more natural to acknowledge 
 that an apostle was in the time of Polycrates (the 
 end of the second century) recognized as being a 
 high priest under the new law ; even to acknowledge 
 further, that tradition represented St. John as having 
 claimed that character, and probably as having sym- 
 
 1 S. Irex. II. xxii. 5, III. iii. 4. " S. Jer. Comm. in Gal. vi. 10. 
 ^ Ap. Eus. H. E. III. xxxi. 2. n^raXov seems strictly to mean 
 \!a.& gold plate on the high priest's mitre. 
 
iSS BEGIXXIA-GS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 bolized the claim by the use of sacerdotal attire. 
 There would really be nothing petty or formal in his 
 having done so. On the fall of Jerusalem, or perhaps 
 before it, when we are told the voice of the Lord was 
 heard at the gates of the temple, saying, " Let us 
 depart hence!'" it would be both an encouragement 
 and a warning to Christian Jews to show to them by 
 a conspicuous act that they did not lose, but gained, 
 the ministrations of a priesthood acceptable to God. 
 And it might be hardly less useful to Gentile Chris- 
 tians to impress on them, by the assumption of Judaic 
 state, the continuity of life between God's new people 
 and His old. 
 
 But of course the most important act of St. John's 
 later life was the composition of his Gospel ; and of 
 this we have the following account, written, there is 
 little doubt, within less than a century of the time 
 referred to, but with nothing that we know of to 
 authenticate it, except the author's confidence of tone, 
 and the certainty that he wrote with a critical purpose, 
 " Of the fourth of the Gospels, John one of the 
 disciples. When his fellow -disciples and bishops 
 exhorted him, he said, ' Fast with me to-day for three 
 days, and let us tell to each other what shall be re- 
 vealed to each.' \\\ the same night it was revealed to 
 Andrew, one of the apostles, that, while all should 
 revise, John should write everything down in his own 
 name. And therefore, although various principles 
 are taught in the several books of the Gospels, it yet 
 makes no difference to the faith of believers, since by 
 ' Jos., B. J. VI. V. 3. 
 
THE CLOSE OF THE APOSTOLIC AGE. 189 
 
 one supreme Spirit there are declared in all all things 
 concerning the Nativity, the Passion, the Resurrec- 
 tion, the life with His disciples, and His double 
 Advent, the first time in humility, despised, which is 
 past ; the second glorious, according to kingly power, 
 which is to come. What is there then wonderful, if 
 John asserts so resolutely also in his epistles, saying 
 of himself, ' What we have seen with our eyes, and 
 heard with our ears, and our hands have handled, 
 these things we have written to you ' ? For so he 
 professes himself, not only a seer, but a hearer, but 
 also a writer of all the wonderful things of the Lord 
 in order.'" 
 
 There is no reason that I know of why this story 
 may not be true in all its details, but we want 
 evidence for it of more certain value before we can 
 feel any confidence in it. It may come from the 
 work of Papias, Bishop of Hierapolis, who had 
 known St. John personally ; and if so, though Papias 
 was a silly man, we have no reason at all for setting 
 his evidence aside. It may come from Hegesippus ; 
 and if so, its authority will be hardly less, as it mus.t 
 then have had more than a local notoriety. If ac- 
 cepted, the story points to the Gospel having been 
 written earlier than is generally supposed ; not when 
 St. John was the sole surviving apostle, but while St. 
 Andrew, and probably St. Philip and the other dis- 
 ciples of the Lord whom we mentioned, were still 
 alive. It rather confirms this story, that SS. Andrew 
 and Philip are the apostles of whom, next to SS. 
 ^ Murat. Frag., p. loa : cf. S. Jer. in S. Matt. P7-ol. 
 
1 90 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 Peter, John himself, and perhaps Thomas, we have 
 most personal anecdotes and characteristics recorded 
 by St. John ; it seems as if they had told or re- 
 minded the evangelist of conversations with the Lord 
 in which they had borne special part. 
 
 Nevertheless, I do not think the composition of the 
 Gospel can be placed very early. For one thing, the 
 mention of St. Andrew does not necessarily require 
 it. We have no proof that he was as much older 
 than St. John as he looks in Lionardo's picture, and 
 he may not have died very long before him ; more- 
 over, his residence in Asia may have been after, not 
 before, his preaching in Scythia, so that a date about 
 A.D. 90 is by no means excluded. Or again, the com- 
 position of the Gospel may have occupied St. John 
 for some years, so that though the plan was formed in 
 St. Andrew's lifetime, the work was not completed nor 
 published till long afterwards. The internal evidence 
 of the Gospel decidedly points to a late date. I 
 think we ought not to hesitate to reject the story 
 about St. Andrew, if it involved a very early one ; 
 but if not, there may be something in it. 
 
 So far as the internal evidence depends on st}'le we 
 have already said enough ; the unlikeness between 
 the Apocalypse and the Gospel is an argument, as on 
 the one hand for dating the first as early as possible, 
 so for dating the other as late. Moreover, the Gospel 
 and the Epistle are plainly written, not onl\- b}- the 
 same author, but in the same frame of mind, and 
 presumably about the same time ; and in the Epistle 
 at least there appear to be references to contemporary 
 
THE CLOSE OF THE APOSTOLIC AGE. 191 
 
 modes of thought, which are of a comparatively late 
 type. The so-called First Epistle of St. John seems 
 to be not an epistle so much as a companion to the 
 Gospel — something between a philosophical introduc- 
 tion to a history, and a sermon with the Gospel for its 
 text. Now even the Gospel seems to be written, as 
 it has generally been understood to be, with a tacit 
 reference to the heresies of the day ; it meets these 
 heresies, not by controversy, but by a lofty statement 
 of the absolute and eternal truth — either of truths 
 denied by the heretics, or of truths distorted and mis- 
 represented by them. But in the Epistle there is 
 something very like direct controversy against "the 
 antichrist that denieth the Father and the Son," and 
 against the spirits {i.e. utterances claiming to be in- 
 spired) that "confess not that Jesus Christ is come in 
 the flesh."' And our evidence proves pretty clearly 
 that at least one object of this controversy or denun- 
 ciation was a Judaizing heretic named Cerinthus — the 
 same whom, according to a tradition already men- 
 tioned, St. John fled from with horror as "the enemy 
 of the truth." His doctrine was, that Christ is a 
 heavenly and bodiless Being — Jesus, on the other 
 hand, is a mere man, the son of Joseph and Mary ; 
 Christ descended upon Jesus at his baptism, and left 
 him before his death, as was proved by the God- 
 forsaken cry that He uttered on the cross. Now we 
 can hardly doubt that St. John is pointedly replying 
 to this doctrine in the passage- which (discarding the 
 well-known interpolation) runs thus : " This is He 
 
 ^ St. John Ep. I. ii. 22 ; iv. 3. " Ep. I. v. 6-8. 
 
192 BEGIXX/XGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 that came by water and blood, even Jesus the Christ: 
 not by water only, but by water and blood : and it is 
 the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is 
 the truth. For they are three that bear witness, the 
 Spirit, and the Water, and the Blood : and the three 
 agree in one." That is, Jesus the Christ is one 
 Person, not two ; and He "came" by being born of 
 flesh and blood, as well as by being anointed with the 
 Spirit by the baptism of water. 
 
 This is proved, St. John adds, by a threefold wit- 
 ness, the nature of which we may understand if we 
 think how each witness of the three came home to 
 St. John himself He had the Spirit in him, by 
 which Jesus was both conceived in the Virgin's womb 
 and anointed at His baptism ; the knowledge he had 
 of Christ, either as an enlightened Christian or as an 
 inspired apostle, was to him the witness of the Spirit. 
 Again, he had perhaps been present at the Lord's 
 baptism — he had certainly heard the Baptist's testi- 
 mony to Him : that was the witness of the water. 
 And lastly, he had known and learnt, as a son from 
 a mother, the nature of Jesus' birth from her of 
 whose blood He was born ; and that was the witness 
 of the blood. 
 
 It seems to have been very near the end of the 
 first century that Cerinthus' heresies were developed ; 
 and thus the common view is probably right, that it 
 was near the end of the first century that St. John's 
 Gospel and Epistle were written ; probably not so late, 
 however, but that there was an interval between the 
 composition of the Gospel as a complete whole and 
 
THE CLOSE OF THE APOSTOLIC AGE. 193 
 
 the addition of the last chapter as an appendix. 
 From the time that these were written, the Gospel (in 
 the wide and primary sense of the word) is complete 
 — the revelation of God is finished. There is indeed 
 scope — infinite scope — for a science of theology, a 
 development and systematization of truths already 
 known ; but the truth, the whole truth, of which the 
 communication by God to man constitutes the Gos- 
 pel, has been now communicated — it is finally com- 
 pleted, so far as it can be said to be complete at any 
 time before the consummation of all thinsfs. 
 
V. 
 ^fte ^ub-apostolic CTIjuvcD. 
 
 ALTHOUGH the Church has rightly judged that 
 an all-important distinction must be drawn be- 
 tween the New Testament Scriptures and other 
 Christian writings — between the work that the Spirit 
 did by those of whom St. John was the last, and the 
 work that the same Spirit has been doing ever since — 
 yet it is not likely that the distinction was at once 
 apparent to the apostle's surviving contemporaries. 
 No doubt St. John in his last years held, and was 
 recognised as holding, a unique position in the Church 
 — one in which he had no equal, and could have no 
 successor. The saying which went abroad among the 
 brethren, that that disciple should not die' — still more 
 the superstition which, in spite of his own repudiation 
 of that report, refused to believe that he was really 
 dead — prove how loth the Church was to part with 
 the one man whom it was impossible to replace. But 
 this recognition of unequalled rank was paid, it seems, 
 rather to the apostle than to the evangelist — to the 
 eye-witness of the Lord's earthl}' life and works, 
 rather than to the last teacher of the Church endowed 
 
 ^ St. John xxi. 23. See St. Augustine in lac. 
 
THE SUB-APOSTOLIC CHURCH. 195 
 
 with a plenary inspiration. That the apostolic writings 
 were canonical Scripture, co-ordinate in authority 
 with those of the Old Testament, was only realized 
 in the Church very gradually ; and the conception of 
 a New Testament Canon — of a sharp line between 
 the works of inspired apostles and apostolic men, and 
 the works, perhaps of apostolic men, or at least of 
 saints, who yet were not inspired — this conception 
 was not formed at all till near the end of the period 
 treated in these lectures. It is a simple anachronism 
 — obvious when pointed out, but easily admitted in 
 thought, if not formally expressed — to imagine a 
 Christian of the last quarter of the first century reading, 
 or preaching on, a Bible consisting of an Old and New 
 Testament ; the latter having, one must suppose, a few 
 blank leaves at the end, on which St. John's latest 
 works might be set down as fast as they came out. 
 
 Not that we ought to hesitate to believe that the 
 later Church is right in its estimate of the canonical 
 Scriptures, and its decisive distinction between them 
 and other books. It is true that it took from fifty to 
 eighty years after St. John's death for the definite 
 conception of a New Testament Canon to be formed ; 
 it is true that it took another 200 years at least to 
 decide what books were to be included in the Canon ; 
 but the judgment of the Church, gradual, tentative, 
 and clumsy as it was, is yet justified by the result. 
 
 The uncertainty as to the limits of the Canon, 
 when the fact that there was, or ought to be, a New 
 Testament Canon was recognised, was twofold. On 
 the one hand, there were doubts as to the genuineness 
 
196 BEGI.ViVIAGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 — in some cases the orthodoxy — of some of the books 
 current under apostohc names, of which most were 
 finally pronounced canonical. There were, on the 
 other hand, books so ancient and so excellent, that it 
 was a question whether they ought not to be admitted 
 to canonical rank, as the work of apostolic men, if not 
 actually of apostles. These for some centuries ranked, 
 at least in local churches, as a kind of appendix to 
 the New Testament, holding the same relation to the 
 canonical books as what we call the Apocrypha do to 
 those of the Old Testament. 
 
 Of such a position some at least of these books 
 are not unworthy ; but criticism can only echo the 
 verdict of the Church as to their claim to canonical 
 rank. There is always a difference between the 
 canonical books and the merely ecclesiastical in one or 
 both of these ways — either the latter show a crotchety 
 and fanciful spirit alien to the apostles' soundness of 
 judgment, or if their spirit be sound and genuinely 
 apostolic, it is so confessedly because it is derived from 
 the apostles themselves. Their personal authority, 
 sometimes even that of their writings, is appealed to 
 as the only, but the sufficient, proof that their succes- 
 sors' words are in their measure authoritative. 
 
 The earliest, in all probability, of the non-canonical 
 Christian writings, the most important historically, 
 and perhaps on the whole the most valuable, is the 
 Epistle of the Church of Rome to the Church of 
 Corinth, which tradition, and almost all critics, con- 
 sider to be the work of St. Clement, the Bishop of 
 the former city. This, which came as near as any 
 
THE SUB-APOSTOLIC CHURCH. 197 
 
 post-apostolic writing to being recognised as Scripture, 
 illustrates as well as any what I say as to the differ- 
 ence between what really is the word of God and the 
 best of the words of men, even though men of God. 
 It is not our business, however, to examine the writ- 
 ings of the Fathers as literary or theological works, 
 but only to use them as historical documents, so far 
 as they tell us an\-thing about their authors, or the 
 age in which they lived. 
 
 As to the person of the author, St. Clement's 
 Epistle tells us nothing at all. We hear from St. 
 Irenaeus' that Clement had himself seen and heard 
 the apostles, and it has been usual to identify him 
 with St. Paul's fellow-labourer at Philippi ;- but this 
 last seems to be no more than a conjecture, and not 
 a very likely one. No doubt an inspired apostle was 
 not bound by the Solonian maxim to call no man 
 blessed till his death ; it was hardly a greater thing 
 to say that Clement's name was in the Book of Life 
 than to call Rufus "chosen in the Lord."^ Still I 
 think the Philippian Clement is spoken of as though 
 the work were over that he had shared with the 
 apostle, not as though he had forty years or more of 
 still more important work before him. Perhaps if St. 
 Clement of Rome had anything to do with St. 
 Clement of Philippi, he is likelier to have been his 
 son than himself, though I do not pretend that that 
 is likely either. There are various legends about St. 
 Clement's parentage, his conversion, &c., which we 
 
 1 Adv. Hacr. III. iii. 3. 2 phn. iv. 3. 
 
 ■* Rom. xvi. I X. 
 
198 BECnVNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 cannot now discuss.' As to his succession to the 
 episcopate at Rome, some suppose him to have been 
 consecrated by St. Peter, St. Paul, or both together, 
 immediately before their deaths, and to have written 
 his epistle very shortly after, as soon as Nero's per- 
 secution was over. But the more general belief, 
 better attested, and more in harmony with the 
 contents of the epistle, is that he wrote in or about 
 the year 97, just after the death of Doniitian ; and 
 that he was not the first bishop of Rome after the 
 death of the apostles, but the third, his two pre- 
 decessors being named Linus and Cletus, Anacletus, 
 or Anencletus. He himself, according to this view, 
 became bishop about a.d. 90. 
 
 The one certain thing in the date of the epistle is, 
 that it was written immediately after a persecution sus- 
 tained b}' the Church of Rome; this is intimated in the 
 opening sentence. Now Nero's persecution is referred 
 to, as we saw,^ in some detail, as a matter of com- 
 paratively recent memory ; but still not as though 
 it were only just at an end. Moreover, the bearers of 
 the epistle 3 are said to have "walked blamelessly 
 among us from youth to age," which implies that the 
 greater part of a long life had passed since the Church 
 of Rome was constituted. If on these accounts we 
 
 •* Those namely in the heretical romance, the Clementine Homilies 
 and Recognitions. Considerable as are the literary merits of that work, 
 and its importance to the history of dogma, I do not think it has any 
 claim at all to represent a genuine tradition as to events of the first 
 centmy. - Lect. III. p. 136. 
 
 ^ C. 63. Their names (c. 65) were Claudius Ephebus, and J'a/tTiiis 
 Bito, from the form of which it is almost certain that they were freed - 
 men, and freedmen, in all probability, of Claudius and Messalina. 
 
THE SUB-APOSTOLIC CHURCH. 199 
 
 decline to date the epistle immediately after Nero's 
 persecution, we must go on to the next persecution, 
 the only one severely felt at Rome which an im- 
 mediate disciple of the apostles could live to see, and 
 this was that of Domitian. 
 
 We mentioned the persecution of Domitian in con- 
 nection with the story of St. John's attempted martyr- 
 dom, and his banishment to Patmos. But if we reject 
 the evidence that assigns the latter to so late a date, 
 we cannot feel certain about the other. What we hear 
 of from secular historians is a persecution that seems 
 to have been confined, not only to Rome, but to the 
 persons of Roman citizens. Many of these were 
 banished, we are told, on the charges of " atheism," 
 "impiety," or "Jewish habits of life." (Dio LXVII. 14.) 
 
 Apparently the persecution did not last long. Ter- 
 tullian tells us' that "Domitian essayed one as being 
 a piece of Nero's cruelty ; but since he was still a 
 human being- he soon left it off, and even recalled 
 those whom he had banished." Others ascribe the 
 recall to his successor Nerva ; but we may be sure 
 that a man who left so bad a memory as Domitian 
 would not be credited with an act of mercy, unless 
 he had done something at least to deserve it. There 
 is, however, no doubt that some of those banished by 
 him remained in exile till his death ; these were 
 recalled by Nerva, and it is added that he forbade 
 prosecutions on the ground of impiety. 
 
 We know the names of very few of Domitian's 
 victims ; but those are the most illustrious, members of 
 ^ Apol. c. 5. ^ Does he mean that Nero was the beast ? 
 
200 BEGIXiVIXGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 the imperial family. He had already put to death 
 his first cousin, T. Flavius Sabinus, eldest son of the 
 prefect of the city of that name, who died with Jup- 
 piter Capitolinus in the civil war with Vitellius. We 
 are told that the charge against the younger Sabinus 
 was a perfectly frivolous one of treason/ and that 
 the real motive of his death was jealousy, whether 
 political or in the basest way personal. Nevertheless, 
 Domitian treated the slain man's younger brother, 
 Flavius Clemens, with marked confidence. Clemens 
 was married to the Emperor's niece, Flavia Domitilla, 
 and had two sons. Domitian, who had lost his only 
 child, recognised these boys as his heirs, changed their 
 names to the imperial ones of Vespasian and Domitian, 
 and entrusted their education to Quinctilian, the first 
 rhetorician of the age. In the year 95 Clemens was 
 nominated to the same dignity that had proved fatal 
 to his brother ; he was consul and Caesar's colleague. 
 Scarcely had his consulship expired (probably at the 
 end of April in the same year^) when he was put to 
 death, 
 
 ^ He was the Emperor's colleague in the consulship for a.d. 82, 
 and in proclaiming his accession to office, the herald repeated with his 
 name the title Ivipeyator, which formed part of the style of Domitian 
 when his consulship was proclaimed. (Suet. Dom. lo.) We may doubt 
 (or at ail events may excuse Domitian's doubting) whether the slip was 
 (as modern historians generally assume) a mere accident. Sabinus, the 
 son-in-law of Titus, and representative of the senior branch of the 
 Flavian house, might not unreasonably claim to be associated with his 
 cousin in the empire. And it is likely that a jealous man like Domitian 
 would both refuse such a claim, and treat as treasonable an attempt to 
 enforce it by a side wind. 
 
 ' According to a custom introduced liy Caesar, the consuls who gave 
 their name to the year held office only for a few months, and at this 
 precise time it is thought the term was usually four. 
 
THE SUB-APOSTOLIC CHURCH. 201 
 
 We are told very distinctly that the charge against 
 Clemens was religious, not political, or that at least 
 any political element that there was in it was quite 
 frivolous. He was, according to Suetonius, a man " of 
 the most contemptible want of energy," ' but for that 
 very reason incapable of dangerous ambition. And 
 though none of our authorities explicitly call him a 
 Christian, the coupling of "atheism" and "Jewish 
 mode of life" certainly suggests it : Christian tradition, 
 corroborated by very early inscriptions, makes it nearly 
 certain. M. Renan ^ thinks he cannot have been a 
 Christian in the full sense, or it would have been 
 impossible for him to accept the' consulship, which 
 involved the performance of pagan religious rites. 
 But to decline the office, or to avow such a reason for 
 declining it, would have been at least as dangerous as 
 to accept the civil dignity, and try to evade its religious 
 accessories; while Clemens' 'death, and the precise 
 time of it, are accounted for, if we suppose that he 
 failed to ev^ade^ the religious functions expected of 
 
 ^ Doni. 15. I see no reason to try to minimise this depreciatory 
 estimate. All we know of Clemens is consistent with his having been, 
 as a Christian should be, a good husband and father ; it decidedly indicates 
 that he was a good master, and a loyal, or at least a peaceable subject. If 
 his faith made him such as this, it need not disappoint us that it did not 
 make him a great or even an able man. Louis XVI. would have made a 
 very good martyr. ^ Origines du Christianisme, Book V. c. xx. p. 230. 
 
 ^ If 'L. Sergius Paulus, consul during part of the preceding year, 
 was a son of St. Paul's convert, and brought up in his faith, it is pos- 
 sible that he had evaded the religious functions of the office, by getting 
 his colleague to act for him or otherwise. We may guess that Domi- 
 tian's suspicions were aroused by this, and that Clemens was appointed 
 at once as a test of his suspected disloyalty to the national gods, and a 
 proof, in the extreme case of a favoured kinsman, of Domitian's reso- 
 lution to vindicate their honour. 
 
202 BEGIiVXI.VGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 him, and had avowedly to repudiate them, thus giving 
 the Emperor and the pagan world a plausible excuse 
 for regarding his religion as disloyalty to the state. 
 
 I believe therefore that we are justified in accepting 
 this St. Clement as a genuine Christian martyr ; but 
 there is no doubt that we must distinguish him from 
 his contemporary and namesake, St. Clement the 
 Bishop. We know nothing of the family of the latter, 
 but perhaps it is on the whole likeliest that he was of 
 Jewish birth, and that the identity of name with the 
 martyr is a mere accident.' As for the martyr, we 
 have no details of the place or manner of his death. 
 It is tempting to conjecture that the late and largely 
 mythical ^ legend of the bishop's martyrdom, that he 
 was tied to an anchor and thrown into the Black Sea, 
 may have originated from the real facts of his. It 
 would be just like Domitian, to feel scruples at shed- 
 ding the blood of a kinsman, and to dread the public 
 execution of a prince and a consul : he may quite 
 conceivably have ordered ostensibly that he should 
 be banished to the Scythian coast, and secretly that 
 he should be thrown overboard on the voyage, so that 
 
 ^ If the bishop were a freedman of the martyr, that would account 
 for his being called T. Flavins, but not Clemens ; his old slave's name, 
 whatever that was, would serve for a cognomen. Clemens was used as 
 a slave's name, and a Jewish slave's too (see Bp. Lightfoot's Si. Clement, 
 appendix, p. 264) ; but it was not likely to be so used in a household 
 where the master bore it. Indeed, if St. Paul took that name as a 
 client of Sergius Paulus, that would be a precedent for the bishop taking 
 the cognomen of the martyr, who may in like manner have become 
 his patron ; but I know of no analogous case to render either prol^able. 
 
 ^ E.g., the story of his calling, like Moses, a fountain out of the 
 rock for the benefit of his fellow-exiles plainly originates from a stupidly 
 literal interpretation of poetical phrases in the office for his festival. 
 
THE SUB-APOSTOLIC CHURCH. 203 
 
 his death might be ascribed to accident or suicide. 
 His wife, it is certain, was banished to one of the 
 islands off the Campanian coast ; so, according to 
 Eusebius and general ecclesiastical tradition, was a 
 niece and namesake of hers; but this is probably a 
 mere duplication of one person. Tradition is the sole 
 but, perhaps, a sufficient authority for the names of 
 two other martyrs — Nereus and Achilles — though the 
 detailed legends of their deaths are late and variable. 
 A small and ancient church commemorates their 
 graves, and the legend that the adjoining ground was 
 granted by Domitilla for a Christian cemetery is now 
 proved true by the discovery of Christian epitaphs of 
 the second century, or even the first, some of them of 
 members of the Flavian family. A large tomb, with 
 an exquisitely-painted ceiling, on which the figure of 
 the Good Shepherd is conspicuous, was very likely 
 intended for the martyred consul himself; but if the 
 resting-place of his remains can now be identified at 
 all, they lie with the supposed body of St. Clement 
 the Bishop in the ancient church, which is said to 
 occupy the site of the house and oratory of the 
 latter. 
 
 Tradition gives the names of three other Roman 
 lady saints of this period. SS. Praxedes and Puden- 
 tiana were daughters of St. Pudens, who is mentioned 
 by St. Paul in his last epistle, and who is said to have 
 been the host of St. Peter. Their Churches are so 
 ancient as to make me believe that there were such 
 persons — St. Pudentiana's was, in the third century, 
 almost the Cathedral Church of Rome, which perhaps 
 
204 BECIXiVIiVGS OF THE CHRIST/ AN CHURCH. 
 
 gives some support to the legend that St. Peter had 
 lived and worshipped there. Further than this, I 
 cannot say that we know anything of them. St. 
 Pudentiana may have been the daughter of St. 
 Pudens, but I cannot believe that the daughter of a 
 Roman citizen, much less a Senator, as tlie legend 
 calls him, had such a barbarous name as Praxedes. 
 Nor do I in the least believe that St. Pudens was 
 the same person as a centurion of the first rank, 
 a friend of Martial the epigrammatist. The latter 
 is very likely to have been the same as Pudens 
 the son of Pudentinus, who gave the site for a 
 pagan temple at Chichester in Nero's time : we 
 know that Martial's Pudens married Claudia Rufina, 
 a native of Britain (Ep. IV. xiii. ; XII. iii.), and 
 it is very likely that she was the daughter of Ti, 
 Claudius Cogidubnus, king of the Regni, who shared 
 in the erection of the Chichester temple. But 
 Martial's Pudens was a man of Pagan licence of 
 life,' at least before his marriage. And tradition, 
 if it be worth anything, gives the name of St. 
 Pudens' wife as Priscilla, not Claudia ; nor does 
 it hint that St. Linus, the first Bishop of Rome, was 
 his son and St. Pudentiana's brother ; and there is no 
 plausibility in connecting St. Paul's Pudens and 
 
 ■• Ep. I. xxxii. ; V. xlviii. The two epigrams were plainly alterna- 
 tive pieces on the same occasion, so that the early publication of one 
 proves the early date of both. But even if the shameful story belonged 
 to the time when Pudens was a bachelor and a Pagan, would he have 
 allowed Martial (with whom he had some real influence) to rake it up 
 again years afterwards to his disgrace and his wife's distress, and what 
 was worse, when it would allow his example to be quoted on the side 
 of vice? 
 
THE SUB-APOSTOLIC CHURCH. 205 
 
 Claudia with Martial's, unless we suppose St. Paul's 
 Linus to be their son.' 
 
 I pass over, then, as mere names the martyrs 
 Nereus and Achilles, and the virgin confessors Pu- 
 dentiana and Praxedes. The third lady saint we 
 mentioned was St. Petronilla, whose sarcophagus, 
 now at St. Peter's, proves her real existence : and 
 perhaps its early acceptance as a Christian tomb 
 proves her real Christianity. She belonged, no doubt, 
 to the house of Petronius, which attained under Nero 
 a high but not always creditable eminence. It is not 
 a tradition, but a mistaken inference that makes her a 
 daughter of St. Peter's own ; and so we have no 
 motive to rationalize that story, by supposing her to 
 be his convert or "spiritual daughter." She remains 
 a shadowy figure, whom we can at most doubtfully 
 believe to be a noble Roman Christian, perhaps a 
 confessor, of the first century. Of the other martyrs and 
 confessors of the period we know not even the names. 
 Only we gather that what happened to St. Domitilla 
 happened to every citizen or citizen's wife, or at least 
 to every one of senatorial rank, who was known to be 
 a Jew or Christian — the two being as yet hardly dis- 
 tinguished in the Pagan mind. All such persons 
 were banished — we hear of none but the consul St. 
 
 ^ Indeed, one ancient authority speaks of " Linus the son of Claudia," 
 and perhaps contemporary feeling would have made it natural to 
 enumerate a family in this order — father, son, and mother. But St. 
 Paul, in the opening of the Epistle to Philemon, addresses (we can 
 hardly doubt) father, mother, and son, in the same order as we should. 
 On the other hand, in Rom. xvi. 13, Rufus is named before his 
 mother. 
 
2o6 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 Clement being- put to death ; but if any of their 
 slaves were found to have encouraged or shared their 
 conversion, these, no doubt, would be executed 
 without scruple. 
 
 When we spoke of Nero's persecution, we enquired, 
 with no very positive result, what are likely to have 
 been his motives for it ; but those of Domitian are 
 too plain to need enquiry. Unlike Nero, he was sin- 
 cerely and fanatically devoted to the national religion 
 of Rome. He held that Juppiter had interposed to 
 save his life,' and we may presume that of his 
 cousins, the traitor and the apostate, when he failed 
 to save his own temple and image ; and in conse- 
 quence he regarded the god with a warmer and more 
 personal devotion than was frequent at Rome. More- 
 over, hideously vicious as his own life was, he strove 
 hard, and perhaps not unsuccessfully, to enforce a 
 moral reformation after the old Roman ideal ; and his 
 zeal for this made him hate those who proposed a 
 different ideal with a hatred such as is rarely felt by 
 those who have no moral ideal at all. In a fallen 
 world, " the good is the enemy of the best," unless 
 God's grace reconciles them, undoing the work of the 
 Fall ; but human nature, even when fallen, is rarely 
 so devilish as to hate goodness merely for being good. 
 I will not say it is impossible that Nero did so ; but 
 all the later imperial persecutors, even Domitian, who 
 was morally the worst of them, had a zeal, if not for 
 God, at least for goodness, though not according to 
 knowledge. 
 
 1 Tag. Hist. III. Ixxiv. 2. 
 
THE SUB -APOSTOLIC CHURCH. 207 
 
 Roman religion was, however, so entirely a matter 
 of state, that religious intolerance could hardly be 
 roused without suggesting political alarm. This ac- 
 counts for the only instance (unless the arrest of St. 
 John be another) in which the persecution extended 
 beyond Rome, or reached victims not belonging to 
 the houses of noble Romans. We are told' that 
 Domitian "feared the coming of the Lord, like 
 Herod : " he heard that Christians, and for that 
 matter Jews too, were looking for the Son of David 
 to appear, and the kingdom of the world to become 
 His ; and he enquired, as we are told in less detail 
 that his father had enquired before him, whether there 
 were actually any sons of David to be found, in whom 
 these hopes of the Oriental sectaries might centre. 
 Two were denounced to him, grandsons of St. Jude, 
 the Lord's brother. These were brought, we are told, 
 for trial before the Emperor in person ; but when it 
 appeared that they were simple, hard-working yeo- 
 men, owning between them a bit of land of twenty- 
 five English acres, valued at ^300, cultivating it with 
 their own hands, and paying taxes on it, he dis- 
 missed them as harmless and contemptible, and 
 stopped the persecution by edict. The two con- 
 fessors, Hegesippus adds, " come and take the lead of 
 every Church, as being both martyrs and of the 
 Lord's kindred ; and when thorough peace was 
 established in the whole Church, they continue till 
 Trajan was Caesar." 
 
 As I have said, I believe it to be true that the per- 
 
 ^ Heges. ap. Ens. H. E. III. xx. 1-4 ; xxxii. 3, 4. 
 
2oS BEGLVAVA'GS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 secution ceased before Domitian's death : it was, 
 however, connected with it. Domitian had ap- 
 proached nearer than any other Emperor, except 
 perhaps Tiberius, to the traditional type of the Greek 
 tyrant : we are assured that his death was caused by 
 one of the traditional — we may almost say conven- 
 tional — fates recognised as appropriate for tyrants. 
 He made notes of the people he meant to put to 
 death, and left them about : his wife and some mem- 
 bers of his household heard that their own names 
 were on the list, and they resolved to anticipate him. 
 The person selected to strike the blow was one 
 Stephen, the steward of the banished Domitilla. He 
 was charged with embezzlement — it does not appear 
 whether to the detriment of his mistress or, her 
 property being confiscated, of the emperor. Whether 
 the cliarge were true or false, it gave him a motive for 
 joining the conspiracy, beside the pious duty, as he 
 might more or less sincerely represent it, of avenging 
 the murder of his master Clement. No one alleges 
 either that Stephen was himself a Christian, or that 
 his mistress was cognizant of the plot. We therefore 
 have no call to wonder that he did not show the 
 meekness of a saint ; and from a Pagan point of 
 view, if Stephen were really an honest man, his act 
 deserved praise rather than blame. He must have 
 known he was risking his life — he actually lost it, in 
 confusion too great for us to know the circumstances 
 accurately ; and he may have thought, as every one 
 did around him, that the slaughter of a tyrant was a 
 work pleasing to gods and men, and that he owed far 
 
THE SUB-APOSTOLIC CHURCH. 209 
 
 more loyalty as a freedman to his patron than as a 
 subject to the head of the state. 
 
 It was probably not till a twelvemonth after 
 Domitian's death' that St. Clement, the Bishop, 
 wrote his epistle to the Corinthians. The troubles 
 and mutiny of the soldiers that soon followed it, in 
 which the conspirators against Domitian were killed, 
 had apparently prevented the Church from enjoying 
 peace as soon as the actual persecution ceased. The 
 Christians at Rome would no doubt, in time of 
 persecution no less than of peace, "steal an hour To 
 break the Bread of Life ; " but they could not 
 venture to hold a Synod. And the fact that St. 
 Clement's epistle is written, not in his own name but 
 in that of the whole Roman Church, seems to imply 
 perhaps that it was written at the instance of a 
 Synod, or at least that it was despatched with the 
 sanction of one. The presbyters may or may not 
 have encouraged the bishop to write ; but the letter 
 at least when written was submitted to and approved 
 by the presbyters, and was probably read to all the 
 faithful, and approved by them too before it was sent 
 to Corinth. 
 
 I talk of the bishop and the presbyters on the 
 
 ^ In c. 61 St. Clement prays for the " concord " of the rulers, which 
 implies (the mere use of the plui^al would not necessarily) that the 
 supreme power was shared at the time by more than one person. He 
 therefore must have written either under Vespasian, while his son Titus 
 was associated with him in the empire, or in the interval between the 
 adoption of Trajan and the death of Nerva. Even if the reading 
 yivofxivas be right in the first sentence of the Epistle, what is said in 
 the text will account for it, without supposing it written during 
 Domitian's life. 
 
 P 
 
2IO BEGINiMNGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 assumption that the distinctive Episcopate, which, as 
 we saw (Lect. IV. p. 183), was established by St. John 
 in Asia, existed also at Rome at this time ; for St. 
 Clement behaves as if he were every inch a bishop. 
 The marked style and character of this epistle of the 
 Church of Rome prove it to be the work of one man : 
 then there must have been one man entitled to speak 
 in the name of the Church of Rome, whose \vords 
 are the words of the whole Church. Nevertheless 
 some passages in St. Clement's epistle are the strong- 
 hold of the theory, not only that the primitive 
 government of the oldest Churches was Presbyterian, 
 which in a limited sense is undoubtedly true, but 
 that no other form of Church government can claim 
 an apostolic sanction. Bishop as St. Clement seems 
 to be, he says not a word, or not a word of unmis- 
 takeable meaning, about the Episcopate, and this 
 though the subject and occasion of his writing seemed 
 to demand it. 
 
 For the occasion of his writing was this. The 
 Church of Corinth had, we know not on what pre- 
 text, rebelled against its presbyters, and expelled 
 them and apparently the deacons also. There had 
 been no personal charge, or none that could be sus- 
 tained, against the holders of the offices ; but it 
 seems the main body of the Church thought they 
 could dispense with such officers altogether. St. 
 Clement rebukes them very severely ; not, in the 
 first instance, on the ground of violation of the 
 order of the Church, but because self-will, envy, and 
 emulation are of themselves unchristian qualities. 
 
THE SUB- APOSTOLIC CHURCH, 211 
 
 We have already quoted his description of Nero's 
 persecution ; it comes as the cHmax of a series of 
 instances from the whole course of sacred history,' to 
 prove that the persecutors of God's people are by 
 the fact of the persecution convicted as sinners. On 
 the other hand, self-denial, self-sacrifice, and humi- 
 lity are the part of saints,^ and these virtues are 
 illustrated further on in the epistle^ by the deeds, not 
 only of Christian charity, but of Gentile patriotism 
 and self-devotion. 
 
 Then follows the argument,"* which an ecclesiastic 
 of almost any later age would have been sure to put 
 first. " Order is heaven's first law : " nature proves it, 
 human societies prove it. The elaborate graduated 
 organization of the Roman army is one example -.^ 
 the graduated offices of the Jewish Church is 
 another.^ There the High Priest, the other Priests, 
 the Levites, and the laymen (the word here occurs 
 for the first time) had each their several places and 
 offices : and so, it is suggested, it is in the Christian 
 Church now. For here also there exists an organized 
 ministry or priesthood,^ of at least mediately divine 
 appointment. 
 
 " The apostles received the Gospel for us from the 
 Lord Jesus Christ : Jesus the Christ was sent forth 
 from God. Christ then is from God, and the apostles 
 from Christ : so both came in due order from the 
 
 1 C. 4 ; cf. c. 45. 2 Cc. 16-19. 'C. 55. 
 
 ^ C. 20 seq. 5 Q 27. « C. 40. 
 
 ' As in the N. T., XuTovp-^iiv and cognate words are applied to the 
 Christian ministry, though lepeLis and cognate words are not. See 
 Lect. II. p. 60. 
 
212 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 will of God. So having received commandments, 
 and being fully assured by the resurrection of our 
 Lord Jesus Christ, and being convinced by the word 
 of God, with full assurance of the Holy Ghost they 
 went forth, preaching the good news that the kingdom 
 of God was about to come. So in every country 
 and city as they preached they established the first- 
 fruits of them, when they had proved them by the 
 Spirit, as bishops and deacons of those who should 
 hereafter believe. And this was no new thing, for it 
 had long before been written concerning bishops and 
 deacons : for thus saith the Scripture in a certain 
 place, ' I will establish their bishops in righteousness, 
 and their deacons in faith.' "' (c. 42.) 
 
 Then follows the story (paraphrased, not directly 
 quoted from the book of Numbers) of Aaron's rod 
 that budded : then it is intimated that the apostles 
 had the same reason as Moses for preventing envious 
 or contentious claims to the priesthood. 
 
 "And our apostles knew through our Lord Jesus 
 Christ that there would be strife over the name of 
 the bishop's office. For this cause therefore, having 
 received perfect foreknowledge, they established the 
 aforesaid; and afterwards" — well, afterwards they did 
 something or other, but most unfortunately the word 
 is corrupt : probably either " they gave permanence 
 to the office " or " they gave a supplementary order, 
 that if they should fall asleep other approved men 
 
 ^ An inaccurate quotation of Isa. Ix. 17. There the word anghcised 
 as "bishops" does occur in the LXX., as a translation of "exactors" 
 or task-masters : " deacons " or " ministers " does not occur at all. 
 
THE SUB-APOSTOLIC CHURCH. 213 
 
 should succeed to their ministry. Those therefore 
 who were appointed by the apostles, or afterwards 
 by other men of reputation, with the approval of the 
 whole Church, and who had ministered blamelessly to 
 the flock of Christ, with humility, quietly and without 
 vulgarity, and who at many times received testimony 
 from all — these we judge not to be justly cast out 
 from their ministry. For it will be no small sin to 
 us if we cast out from the bishop's office ' those 
 who have blamelessly and holily offered the gifts." 
 
 (1. 44.) 
 
 Here it is plain that two orders and two only are 
 recognised by St. Clement as originally instituted by 
 the apostles — the two that we hear of in the Pastoral 
 Epistles of St. Paul, deacons, and those called in- 
 differently bishops or presbyters. But he ascribes to 
 the apostles something that seems like the establish- 
 ment of the Episcopate in the modern sense ; after 
 the establishment of these, they made some' provision 
 (it matters comparatively little how it was described) 
 " in case they should fall asleep." In case who should .-' 
 The apostles, or the original bishops and deacons } If 
 the blessed saint had known as well as he says the 
 apostles did how great " strife would arise over the 
 name of the bishop's office," he would doubtless have 
 given us a couple of pronouns^ that would have 
 
 ^ Bishop Lightfoot translates " cast out those who have . . . offered 
 \h& gifts of the bishop's office." But both the construction of the same 
 verb in the previous sentence, and (as it seems to me) the rhythm of 
 this is in favour of the rendering given above. 
 
 ^ Bishop Lightfoot, supposing the bishops and deacons to be the 
 subject of KOL/j,T]du.(TLv, translates, ^^i{ these should fall asleep." I accept. 
 
214 BEGIA^NIA'GS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 made everything clear ; as it is, I can only give a 
 doubtful opinion that he means that the apostles 
 provided " that if they, the apostles, should fall 
 asleep before the Lord's second coming, other 
 approved men might succeed to the ministry of the 
 bishops and deacons ordained by them." In other 
 words, he does not affirm directly the appointment of 
 successors of the apostles ; but he does imply that 
 whereas originally none but apostles had authority to 
 ordain bishops and deacons, afterwards certain other 
 " men of reputation " received this authority, presum- 
 ably from the apostles ; those, namely, whom %ve call 
 bishops, of whom St. Clement was doubtless one, but 
 for whom the Church of his age does not seem yet 
 to have felt the want of a distinctive official title.' 
 
 I therefore do not think we ought to regard the 
 introduction of the Episcopate as an unrecorded 
 revolution taking place in the first half of the second 
 century. Though it is certain that the Churches 
 founded by the apostles were originally presbyterian, 
 it appears that they became episcopal without any 
 revolution at all, by the localisation of an episcopal 
 order which had existed (in the persons of the 
 apostles and their delegates) before it was localised. 
 As we said in Lect. III., it seems that the apostles 
 
 not his opinion, but his instinct that, if that were meant, the emphatic 
 pronoun is wanted to express it. But, as I say, I wish St. Clement had 
 written kb.v avrol KOL/xTjducnv if he really did not mean iav o^ol ; and that 
 he had written rrji' eKdvuiv Xeirovpylav, if he did not mean rr^v eavTwv. 
 
 1 Unless possibly they were called presidents of the Church ; the 
 word 7r/)oe(TTUJS seems to be used, almost as a technical one, in St. Justin, 
 and even in St. Irenaeus. 
 
THE SUB-APOSTOLIC CHURCH. 215 
 
 conferred the commission to ordain elders and 
 deacons, and to preside over them — conferred, in 
 modern language, episcopal orders — independently 
 of each other, and without direct concert ; but the 
 system by which one person holding this episcopal 
 commission was settled in every city seems to have 
 been introduced by St. John in Asia,' and to have 
 spread, gradually but still rapidly, from thence to 
 other Churches. St. Clement, as we said, was every 
 inch a bishop ; but we have no proof that there were 
 in his time any other bishops in Italy. The epistle 
 goes as far as negative evidence can go to prove that 
 there was none at Corinth, and if so there was 
 probably none in Greece.' In Syria, as we shall see, 
 there was one;^ and there was one in Egypt, who 
 continued to be the sole bishop there till a time well 
 on in the third century.** But while St. Clement's 
 treatment of the schism at Corinth proves that the 
 fully developed Episcopate, which was universal half 
 
 ^ Lect. IV. p. 184. But the view that St. John was the founder 
 of diocesan Episcopacy gains little support from the passage sometimes 
 quoted, Tert. adv. Marc IV. 5. The context proves that what he 
 means is, not " the episcopal order [in generalj ultimately has John for 
 its founder," but ^^ their [the churches of Asia] episcopal succession, if 
 traced to its origin, has John for its founder." 
 
 ^ We are told on unusually good authority (that of St. Dionysius of 
 Corinth, ap. Eus. H.E. IV., xxiii. 2) that St. Dionysius the Areopagite 
 was ordahred bishop of Athens by St. Paul. But perhaps the Church 
 of Athens, which was evidently small, had only one " bishop " in the 
 older or presbyterian sense. 
 
 * Lect. VI. p. 249. 
 
 ^ Such at least was the tradition in the Church of Alexandria in the 
 tenth century, and it agrees fair.'y with the statement of St. Jerome, 
 Ep. c.xlvi. I. 
 
2i6 BEGJ.VXIXGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 a century later, did not yet exist, it proves equally 
 how desirable its existence was. We are told that 
 St. Clement succeeded in restoring peace ; probably 
 the way he did so was by ordaining a bishop, who 
 would do justice between the contending parties, and 
 whose authority neither would question any more 
 than they questioned St. Clement's own.' There is 
 no doubt that St. Clement does claim for himself, or 
 for the Church which he represents, an authority ^ 
 over the Church of Corinth, independent of the fact 
 that he was speaking in the cause of charity and 
 Christian duty; but the epistle contains nothing to 
 show whether the authority he claims was what we 
 should call papal or episcopal — whether the Roman 
 bishop or the Roman Church, as such, claimed 
 authority over other Churches, or whether St. Clement, 
 as a man who had received from the apostles a com- 
 mission to rule the Church, claimed authority over 
 men none of whom had any such commission. It 
 seems to me that the latter view harmonises much 
 better with the state of things in St. Clement's time, 
 and long after it ; still it is only fair to admit that the 
 phenomena of the epistle can be accounted for on the 
 papal hypothesis as well. 
 
 ^ I do not know if it is a very raih conjecture, that it was witli this 
 ol)ject that he asl<s (c. 68) to have Fortunatus sent back to him with 
 the bearers of the epistle. If he be the same person as the Fortunatus 
 mentioned by St. Paul, he was not improbably a son of Stephanas, 
 converted and baptized by the apostle himself, and so a very fit person 
 for continuing the apostolic tradition. 
 
 ^ He not only warns them that it will be a sin, aTreidelv, " not to 
 hearken to us," but calls upon them uTnjKooi yev^adai, "to become 
 obedient." (cc. 59, 63.) 
 
THE SUB-APOSTOLIC CHURCIL 217 
 
 One important expression occurs at the close of the 
 .passage we quoted on the Christian ministry — one of 
 the most essential functions of the bishop's office, the 
 due performance whereof is the test of his worthiness 
 of it, is to "offer the gifts." These "gifts," no doubt, 
 will include both the alms of the faithful and the 
 eucharistic oblations. The word can hardly be forced 
 to bear any doctrinal significance in relation to the 
 latter ; but the expression shows that the sacerdotal 
 character of the Christian ministry, which we have 
 seen to be verbally acknowledged both by St. Luke 
 and St. Clement, is not acknowledged merely as a 
 matter of habit or of analogy, but fills an important 
 place in the estimate formed of their duties. 
 
 And this leads up naturally to the question, What 
 was the nature and spirit of Christian worship at this 
 time .'' On this point St. Clement's epistle, since the 
 latter part of it has been recovered, throws more light 
 than any other extant work before St. Justin's 
 Apology ; for it contains a long intercessory prayer' 
 " for the whole state of Christ's Church militant here 
 in earth," and for the " peaceable ordering of the 
 course of this world." What is the relation between 
 this prayer and the similar prayers for the whole state 
 of Christ's Church, which are found in all liturgies^ in 
 close union with the Prayer of Consecration .'' 
 
 1 Cc. 59-61. 
 
 '^ The separation of this prayer from the Consecration in the modem 
 Anglican liturgy has, however, a precedent. It seems certain that, in 
 the primitive type of the Gallican group of liturgies, it came before the 
 Sursum corda nearly as with us. If the revisers of 1552 knew of this 
 fact, it was no doubt their motive for the arrangement. 
 
2i8 BEGhVNIXJS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 It can hardly be said that St. Clement's prayer is a 
 simple extract from the liturgy in use at Rome or 
 Corinth. Unless there be (as indeed most editors 
 suppose there is') a flaw in the text at its beginning, 
 it is intimately connected with the special exhorta- 
 tions to the Corinthians that have gone before ; in 
 any case, it is suggested by them. But that it has a 
 close relation with some of the liturgies of the ancient 
 but still later Church it is absolutely impossible to 
 doubt. It may be that the compilers of these de- 
 liberately and consciously borrowed from the language 
 of St. Clement, as of course they did (sometimes in 
 common with him), from that of canonical Scripture ; 
 but on the whole it seems the likeliest explanation of 
 the facts, that the later liturgies are a gradual and 
 continuous development from, or rather through, the 
 liturgy used by St. Clement — the prayer in which he 
 invites the Church of Corinth to join with him being, 
 not perhaps exactly an extract from the liturgy in use 
 at Rome, but full of reminiscences of it. 
 
 I say I regard the Christian liturgy of St. Clement's 
 time, not as the ultimate source of extant liturgies, 
 but only as marking one stage in their evolution. So 
 far as they had any ultimate source other than our 
 Lord's institution of the Eucharist, that source was, 
 in all probability, the existing Jewish liturgies — 
 
 ' I doubt if tlie supposition be necessary. The epistle was not 
 meant for private reading, but to be read aloud dind heard. When St. 
 Clement read it in the synod at Rome, or when Ephebus read it in the 
 assembly of the Church at Corinth, the transition between the third 
 and second persons would be smootlicil by changes in the voice, 
 expression, and perhaps attitude of the reader. 
 
THE SUB-APOSTOLIC CHURCH. 219 
 
 perhaps most especially the service of the Sabbath 
 evening and the New Moon. It is true that, in 
 talking of liturgies at this period, whether Jewish or 
 Christian, we must not think of prayer-books en- 
 forced by an Act of Uniformity, or even by a Canon. 
 It is almost certain that Jewish forms of prayer — 
 still more certain that Christian ones — were not yet 
 reduced to writing. If not, it must have been in- 
 evitable — it was probably not thought undesirable — 
 that the bishop or presiding elder should choose the 
 words of his prayer at his own discretion, or rather 
 " as the Spirit gave him utterance." But nevertheless 
 there was already, no doubt, a type of prayer tending 
 to become fixed and traditional ; tending to become 
 fixed, not only in the thoughts and in their order, but 
 in the expression and choice of words. Compare the 
 following extracts from the so-called Liturgy of St. 
 Mark — the form, that is, that lasted longest in Greek 
 of the Liturgy of the Church of Egypt — with St. 
 Clement on the one hand, and with the Jewish 
 liturgy' on the other; compare again St. Clement 
 with the Jewish liturgy, and it is scarcely possible to 
 doubt the connexion between the three to be a real 
 one, and to be one, moreover, not of imitation, but of 
 evolution. 
 
 ^ I do not pretend to any knowledge as to the history or origin of 
 the latter. I take Bishop Lightfoot"s word for the prayers I have trans- 
 lated being the oldest, and I extract them from a modern Hebrew 
 prayer-book. I do not know even whether his omission of several 
 clauses (lines 8-24) in Benediction XVII. is inadvertent, or whether 
 they are regarded as a later interpolation. 
 
220 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 
 « Si. 
 
 O 
 
 
 ^ ~ <u 
 
 „^--"tj uSrnOJ <i> --J O *-> O-t JIT rr 
 
 j; -^ 15 >S c.« •£ i ^ .-3 •- 
 
 hJ -t; -5 
 
 o 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 d 
 
 
 
 t-^ 
 
 
 fj 
 
 IT) 
 
 
 « 
 
 
 
 < 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 pq 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 O 
 
 O 
 
 iT 
 
 
 rt 'h 
 
 i. 
 
 ^ 
 
 1, 
 
 c 
 
 " 
 
 
 
 V 
 
 
 
 
 rt 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 n 
 
 •a 
 
 J= 
 
 
 (} 
 
 a, 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 <j 
 
 ^ 
 
 IC 
 
 o 
 
 ,^ 
 
 HH -5 ■s ^ 
 
 "-^ iT o >^ (lT ■a 
 
 >^ ^ 
 
 o 5 
 
 
 ^-. (U 
 
 
 
 
 
 rt 
 
 
 c3 
 
 tXI 
 
 p 
 
 
 1^ 
 
 
 
 tfi 
 
 
 <u 
 
 •t 1 
 
 
 
 C 
 
 o 
 
 ^ 
 
 O 
 
 
 pT^ 
 
 •r" 
 
 H-1 
 
 ci 
 
 ■71 
 
 
 bJ3 
 
 o 
 
 
 ;i< 
 
 O 
 
 "' 
 
 p 
 
 u 
 
 
 CO 
 
 o 
 
 ~ 
 
 
 o 
 
 3 
 O 
 
 p 
 
 -G 
 
 ^ 
 
 - w w 3i ■" = ■> J — >- 
 
 5 £ ^ J C? -o ;; ^.H (2 ^ ^ "^ -g -- ^ ■^■<-P 
 
 ^o^c^T, S5^ 
 
 9 -p ;:; ■= ■? « 7 
 
 
 N "^ tJ- W-) VO 
 
 o o 
 
THE SUB-APOSTOLIC CHURCH. 
 
 •a 
 
 '^ c 
 
 
 
 
 > 
 
 
 
 > 
 'to 
 
 
 X! 
 
 ° 'u 
 
 
 
 +J 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 u r 1 
 
 OJ 
 
 u 
 
 s 
 
 
 flj r^ 
 
 
 11 
 
 
 
 
 fl) 
 
 <u 
 
 
 
 
 
 o" 
 
 <u 
 
 
 
 a) 
 
 
 
 
 T3 
 
 o • 
 
 h-1 
 
 „ ., ;; c! jj ^ • ^ 
 
 s o 
 
 
 ;5 .s J J „- -^2 
 
 >~, <u m -^ < 
 
 bD ri S o j; 
 
 o 
 
 
 Ci, "^ 
 
 ,0 ,< -^ -a 
 S ■? :^ S> Sag 
 
222 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 c to >^ .r ti 
 
 <u •• '- ^ S. ■- '^^ 
 
 ;= '^ ^ -. ci, ii E ■- '^ 
 
 ^4-* ,aj o' — ^-— ^ 
 
 S " w ■£ ^ ;: ^ ;: ^ S 2 
 
 l: £ .S iJ i; .. S •• o' "^^ H 
 
 o S 
 
 o ^ 
 
 1) — "TO 
 
 o s ^ s 
 
 o -^ 
 
 
 J ^ 
 
 o Ji: ;i: 
 
 M M pq H W pq 
 
 -^^ H 
 
 i-H H 
 
 
 
 "-; ij 
 
 
 
 ;-j O ^ ^ ^ 
 
 O <— • OJ ^ "U 
 
 o 
 
 
 1) 
 
 o 
 
 
 ex 
 
 g 
 
 
 
 43 
 
 u 
 
 3 
 
 P-( 
 
 >^ 
 
 H 
 
 0) 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 >> 
 
 OJ 
 
 lU 
 
 G 
 
 n 
 
 3 
 
 g 
 
 o 
 
 
 r 
 
 (U 
 
 
 e-( 
 
 rn 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 1) 
 
 "r1 
 
 "rt 
 
 o 
 
 
 "? 
 
 H 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 ^- 
 
 
 
 
 
 "I M CO 
 
 OJ _G 
 
 c 
 
 OS . 
 
 
 u 
 o 
 
 rv. 
 1) 
 
 bTi 
 
 jj- 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 3 
 O 
 
 
 c3 
 
 •n 
 
 ^ 
 
 T^ 
 
 H 
 
 ^c 
 ^ 
 
 c 
 
 ^ 
 
 H 
 
 1) 
 
 
 C 
 
 
 O 
 
 
 
 
 < 
 
 
 
 N 
 
 
 (n 
 
 
 "5^ 
 
 
 lO 
 
 
 VO 
 
 D' 
 
THE SUB-APOSTOLIC CHURCH. 223 
 
 c 
 
 m x; 
 
 •u -^ T3 o y b: p Si ^ V •■: 
 
 := c § "^ c c— oslrtH^o 
 ^-5 rt _ s rt ^ ■- y E -s 2i CH ^ 
 
 
 
 
 ^ r^ 
 
 ;:3 o s o 
 
 a, ^d CTJ ? 
 
 ■S rt S 3 X ?J c ^ .e -^ 5i S -«, 
 
 X! 
 
 
 
 b/) X 
 
 5 S 
 
 sri 
 
 
 ^ i 
 
 & ?. ^ ." S -2 -S ^ -? -^ " ^ 
 
 ■5 ;^ :9 ^ §- 
 
 g 0) r^ q" -t^ 
 
 TJ tj ^ 9 
 
 h- 1 
 
 •s -^ 
 
 (/T 
 
 rt 
 
 rt 
 
 3 
 i3 
 
 
 til 
 c 
 
 43 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 _;g 
 
 5 
 
 a; 
 
 
 ■5 
 
 
 
 
 
 rt 
 
 
 
 _c 
 
 .£ 
 
 (U 
 
 .S 
 
 ^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 [3 
 
 ■TD 
 
 D 
 
 
 rt 
 
 T3 
 
 C 
 
 
 'p 
 
 5 
 
 3 
 
 c 
 
 "C 
 
 a 
 
 
 
 
 
 ' , 
 
 aj 
 
 >, 
 
 |_ 
 
 ^ 
 
 OJ 
 
 t/) 
 
 tZ) 
 
 :3 
 
 
 a 
 3 
 
 ^ 
 
 v2 
 
 %H 
 
 U( 
 
 tJ3 
 
 X. 
 
 S 
 
 _c 
 
 1) 
 
 13 
 
 rt 
 
 
 Oh 
 
 IS 
 
 
 
 iH 
 
 _c 
 
 
 
 .^ 
 
 C 
 
 J3 
 
 r^ 
 
 
 -C 
 
 -^ 
 
 
 H 
 
 • ^ 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 rt 
 
 
 ?; 
 
 rt 
 
 
 
 
 ' o ii • 
 
 ^E^^" ''^- C l5 rt &,:S^ irt'c-S'^^il'ort 
 
 o 
 
 •t^ „ t-i *j ^ - 
 
 OJ oj O 
 5 -^ "" 
 
 ^ P ^ 
 
 aj i: -d 0) 
 
 
 
 
 i 
 
 w 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 
 c3 u 
 
224 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 
 TJ 
 § 
 
 
 
 c 
 
 rt 
 
 
 
 
 
 tS 
 
 C 
 
 u:: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ri 
 
 
 C 
 rt 
 
 
 
 
 
 .S 
 
 
 
 
 
 5^ 
 
 
 
 tx 
 
 g 
 
 
 
 h-1 
 
 
 "o 
 
 
 
 a; 
 
 -— 
 
 rt 
 
 
 
 
 < 
 
 
 ■3 
 
 CJ 
 
 
 > 
 
 a; 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 t~- 
 
 rt 
 
 00 
 
 
 
 
 c 
 
 rt 
 
 1— t 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 c5 
 
 o 
 
 
 ^ 
 '^ 
 
 
 d 
 
 C5 
 
 
 
 
 
 (U 
 
 
 c 
 
 
 
 bo 
 
 
 
 js 
 
 rt 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 rt 
 
 
 
 
 "rt 
 
 
 
 X 
 
 "rt 
 
 OP 
 
 5 
 
 >< 
 o 
 
 (A 
 ^3 
 
 ^ 
 ■^ 
 
 6/3 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 g 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 rt 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 > 
 
 "So 
 
 "o 
 
 
 rt" 
 
 
 
 
 > 
 
 »3 
 
 
 <j: 
 
 
 
 ■^ 
 
 '5 
 
 'EJo 
 
 "> 
 
 rt 
 
 'cJo 
 
 '0 
 
 C/D 
 
 rt 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 < 
 
 
 
 '' 
 
 '0 
 
 
 tJ3 
 
 
 T3 t« 
 to 
 
 9. f n <A X 
 
 SI ■;''-feti .s.n^iuiH 00 -G„ -.^ 
 
 "^ 53r-r^iib 'o="rt^3 ^c .rt jJtij 
 
 T' rt 
 
 
 
 
 r U 
 
 Wrt2rtrt> -S rtrtO 
 
 ffi 
 
 ^ 
 
 K -^ 
 
 nC 
 
 b 
 
 
 
 
 
 -i^K 
 
 
 
 bjO 
 
 
 
 4= 
 
 
 E 
 
 H 
 
 
THE SUB-APOSTOLIC CHURCH. 225 
 
 ? >; 
 
 O 1— I o 
 
 h-l "^ M 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 .j;. 
 
 
 P! 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 -d 
 
 ^ ;■ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 rt 
 
 
 
 ..^ 
 
 c 
 
 "o 
 
 
 
 c/: 
 
 
 
 aj 
 
 
 0) 
 
 
 'Tj 
 
 
 oa 
 
 u 
 
 
 
 .:2 
 
 '.c 
 
 C 
 
 ?) 
 
 
 H 
 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 "ti 
 
 
 
 
 'o" 
 
 5£. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 c 
 
 1 — , 
 
 
 r; 
 
 
 
 
 
 i__t 
 
 u 
 
 
 
 
 rt 
 
 
 r^ 
 
 rt 
 
 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 >— 1 
 
 
 
 
 > 
 
 
 
 .2 
 
 
 Q 
 
 Ul 
 
 rt 
 
 1) 
 
 Q 
 
 3 
 
 
 p 
 
 <u 
 
 <1) 
 
 "> 
 
 x" 
 
 J 
 
 2 
 
 *"* 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 h-1 
 
 C 
 rt 
 
 
 
 
 1) 
 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 "o 
 
 
 
 
 
 a, 
 
 
 
 <U r-T 
 
 > -^ 
 
 <u -^ % 
 
 Ti 
 
 
 rn 
 
 
 -^ 
 
 
 X 
 
 OJ 
 
 u 
 
 T1 
 
 
 
 
 
 J3 
 
 3 
 
 1; 
 
 ci 
 
 
 <u 
 
 
 aj 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 "n 
 
 -G 
 
 lU 
 
 
 n 
 
 
 H 
 
 r^ 
 
 
 -Q 
 
 
 rt 
 
 ? 
 
 
 ^-^ >-'t^ „~3 
 
 
 
 
 U3 v^ 
 
 ■? 
 
 h-l 
 
 ^ >-H 
 
 
 
 Ci 1-H 
 
 >^ 
 
 ^~ 
 
 '^ > 
 
 H 
 
 ^ 
 
 -g xi 
 
 fc/} 
 
 tjj 
 
 o 
 
 2 S g o ^ H 
 
 ;:-S^^^ rt.Sn^ 
 
 
 O ~ -t; ^ 
 
 M ri 
 
 gOg3^C^g30 ^ ;^ 
 
 H -5 c -Ei, .S H ^ 
 
 0-3 ., ttr- =JCI !^ ".y 
 
 c S j; = u c- ^ 3 a 
 
 hJ •>, o a_^ ^'- <; G 2i ^ o 
 
 ^ — !3 " -" -^ "^B <" 
 
 •- = ^ "S JJ £ - 2-> 3 S- 'hJ2;'~-3.S 
 
 ■T-p c3 -C" ■" 2'^'t; ar, ■£^1) = "'^^'= 
 ii 2 2 r^ e; -" 2 c ^ 3-C.2 s £ 5-3 
 
 c S '-^ o k " r- '^ „'3 c c 
 
 1 ^i- --^-r2 30'^^55iT-i.T35§>>c-S'273a 
 
 
 
 F— 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 ^^H 
 
 n 
 
 M 
 
 u, 
 
 
 S-. 
 
 
 bjo 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 , 
 
 ffi 
 
 
 
 
 
 i~— 1 
 
 N 
 
 ■^ -3 
 
 ■vS 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 .-•- 
 
 n 
 
 > 
 
 s 
 
 
 >> 
 
 
 ■S^ rt 
 
 
 <^ 
 
 <i3 
 
 n 
 
 
 H 
 
 
 £ a 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 OS 
 
 
 
 
 _fl 
 
 'i^ 
 
 
 
 > _ 
 
 >^ ^3 
 
 
226 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 Jewish Liturgy. 
 XVI (i) Be propitious, O Lord 
 our God, 
 
 (2) to Thy People Israel, 
 
 (3) and look upon their prayers : 
 
 (4) and restore the service to the 
 
 Oracle of Thine House, 
 
 (5) and the fires of Israel, and 
 
 their prayer, 
 
 (6) do Thou speedily receive, in 
 
 love, propitiously; 
 
 (7) and continually acceptable 
 
 to Thee 
 
 (8) be the service of Israel Thy 
 
 People. 
 \Here foUo-dJS, 011 the Day of the 
 Neiv Aloon only,\ ^ 
 Our God, and the God of our 
 Fathers, let our memorial, and 
 the memorial of our Fathers, the 
 memorial of Jerusalem Thy City, 
 and the memorial of Christ, the Son 
 of David, Thy Servant, and the 
 memorial of all Thy People, the 
 House of Israel, ascend and come, 
 attain, be seen and be accepted, be 
 heard, visited, and remembered 
 before Thy face, for deliverance, 
 for good, for grace, for mercy, and 
 for compassion, on this day of the 
 
 Prayer of St. Clement. 
 
 (19) that they may administer the 
 
 rule 
 
 (20) given them by Thee without 
 
 offence. 
 
 (21) For Thou, O heavenly Lord, 
 
 King of ages, 
 
 (22) givest to the sons of men 
 
 glory and honour 
 
 (23) and power over the things 
 
 which are on earth. 
 
 (24) Do Thou, O Lord, direct their 
 
 counsel 
 
 (25) according to that which is good 
 
 and pleasing before Thee, 
 
 (26) that, piously administering in 
 
 peace and meekness 
 
 (27) the power given them by Thee, 
 
 (28) they may find Thee propitious. 
 
 (29) O Thou Who alone art able 
 
 to do these things 
 
 (30) and things more exceeding 
 
 good with us, 
 
 (31) unto Thee do we give thanks 
 
 [or " confess "] XVII (i) 
 
 (32) through the High Priest and 
 
 Patron of our souls, Jesus 
 Christ; 
 
 (33) by Whom unto Thee be the 
 
 glory and the majesty 
 
 (34) bothnowand to all generations 
 
 (35) and for ever and ever. Amen. 
 
 ' A tempting conjecture is suggested by this prayer. The /br/ft of the Christian 
 Prayer of Consecration was of course determined in part by our Lord's institution 
 (i Cor. xi. 23); but was its place in the liturgy determined by that of this Jewish 
 prayer ? And was the service of the first day of the month thought a closer analogy 
 than that of the Sabbath, for the Christian service for the first day of the week ? At 
 any rate, it is almost startling to find the Tcr Sanciics leading up to a prayer so 
 remarkably Christian in tone. We can scarcely imagine a reflex action of Christianity 
 on the Jewish prayer. Though the Sixteenth Benediction in its present form seems 
 to be later than the fall of the Temple, this prayer seems as though it were meant to 
 be said (whether in the Temple or the Synagogues) at the hour of the Sacrifice (cf. 
 St. Luke i. 10; Ecclus. i. 19 ; also i Kings viii. 29, 30, &c. ; xviii. 36.) Dan. ix. 21, 
 however, shows that this argument is not decisive. 
 
THE SUB-APOSTOLIC CHURCH. 227 
 
 Jewish Liturgy. 
 
 New Moon : to have mercy on us thereon, and to save us. Remember 
 us thereon, O Lord our God, for good, for blessing, and save us thereon 
 for good lives, with the word of salvation and compassion. Pity, and 
 be gracious unto us, and spare, and show mercy upon us, and save us, 
 for our eyes are upon Thee : for, O God, a King gracious and com- 
 passionate art Thou. 
 
 (9) And Thou in Thy great compassions 
 
 (10) Shalt incline and be propitious to us, 
 
 (11) and our eyes shall behold Thee 
 
 (12) at Thy return to Zion in compassion. 
 
 (13) Blessed art Thou, O Lord, 
 
 (14) Who restoreth His Shechinah to Zion. 
 
 XVII. (i) We confess unto Thee that Thou art He, 
 
 (2) The Lord our God 
 
 (3) and the God of our Fathers, for ever and ever. 
 
 (4) Our Rock, the Rock of our life, 
 
 (5) and Shield of our salvation, Thou art He. 
 
 (6) Throughout all generations we give thanks to Thee, 
 
 (7) and declare Thy praise 
 
 (8) for our lives, which are delivei^ed into Thy hand, 
 
 (9) and for our souls, which are entrusted to Thee, 
 
 (10) and for Thy signs, which are with us every day, 
 
 (11) and for Thy miracles, and for Thy goodness, which are at 
 
 all times, 
 
 (12) evening, and morning, and noon-day. 
 
 (13) The Good One, for Thy compassions fail not ; 
 
 (14) The Compassionate, for Thy mercies cease not : 
 
 (15) for from the beginning of the world we have trusted in Thee. 
 
 (16) And for all these things, blessed and exalted and extolled 
 
 (17) be Thy Name continually, 
 
 (18) our King, for ever and ever! 
 
 (19) And all the living shall give thanks to Thee, Selah. 
 
 (20) and shall praise and bless Thy great Name 
 
 (21) in truth, for ever, for it is good. 
 
 {22) The God of our salvation and our help, Selah. 
 
 (23) the Good God. 
 
 (24) Blessed art Thou, O Lord ; Thy Name is the Good, 
 
 (25) and to Thee it is meet to give thanks. 
 
 XVIII. (i) Grant peace, goodness, and blessing, 
 
 (2) life, grace, and mercy, 
 
 (3) righteousness, and compassions unto us 
 
22S BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 Jewish Liturgy. 
 
 (4) and unto all Israel Thy People. 
 
 (5) And bless us, our Father, all of us, with the light of Thy 
 
 countenance : 
 
 (6) for by the light of Thy countenance hast Thou given to us, 
 
 O Lord our God, 
 
 (7) the Law, and life, love, and mercy, 
 
 (8) righteousness and compassions, blessing and peace. 
 
 (9) And may it be good in Thine eyes 
 
 (10) to bless Thy People Israel with great strength and peace. 
 
 (11) Blessed art Thou, O Lord, 
 
 (12) Who blesseth His People Israel with peace. Amen. 
 
 Altogether, I think this evidence shows the liturgi- 
 cal character of St. Clement's prayer to be as marked 
 as from the nature of the case it could be. " The 
 prayer is not given as a quotation from an acknow- 
 ledged document, but as an immediate outpouring of 
 the heart, and yet it has all the appearance of a fixed 
 form.'" But St. Clement prayed "with all his power"^ 
 every Lord's-day at least ; he had already found out 
 what were the best words he could use to express his 
 heart's desires for the Christian Church, and so it was 
 natural to him to use, to a great extent, the same 
 words now. 
 
 But there is one consideration which proves that 
 the primitive Christian worship cannot have been 
 
 1 Bp. Ltghtfoot, St. Clement, Appendix I. p. 271. I should be dis- 
 posed to believe that there was more of an " authoritative liturgy " 
 (though not "written") "in use in the Church of Rome" than the 
 bishop seems to recognise ; e.g. that the Ter Sancius, and perhaps the 
 Sursum corda, were already fixed and invariable. The Dominus vobis- 
 cum is, by a late tradition, ascribed to St. Clement himself. But 
 the difference between Bishop Lightfoot's view and that here advocated 
 is only one of degree. 
 
 2 St. Just. Apol. I. 67. See Lect. VII. fin. 
 
THE SUB-APOSTOLIC CHURCH. 229 
 
 entirely liturgical, even if we understand by a liturgy 
 a traditional type of prayer, and not a written form. 
 The worship was not exclusively in the hands of the 
 official elders of the Church. Any member of the 
 congregation who had the gift of prayer might, on 
 certain occasions, and subject to certain regulations, 
 stand up and pray in his own words, and such prayers 
 would, of course, be more variable — we may add more 
 impassioned' — than the traditional ones of the elders. 
 We may surmise that the schism at Corinth had 
 originated in jealousy between those claiming to 
 exercise this gift and the elders, who doubtless claimed 
 to regulate its exercise. At any rate, the existence 
 of these free prayers in the recognised Christian wor- 
 ship makes it intelligible how such worship could go 
 on after the expulsion of the presbyters — something 
 like that of the modern Dissenters in Russia. It is, 
 however, possible that the Corinthians may have con- 
 tinued to have the Eucharist administered, even when 
 they had no duly-ordained presbyters to do it. St. 
 Clement is silent on the subject,^ and so we cannot be 
 
 ^ See St. Chrysostom on Rom. viii. 26, 27. It is tolerably certain 
 that he is right as to St. Paul's meaning, and it is therefore the more 
 probable that he follows a genuine tradition as to the transition between 
 the usage of St. Paul's day and of his own. In his time, the original free 
 prayers of a gifted member of the congregation were represented by the 
 (doubtless fixed or liturgical) prayers said by the deacon. We may see 
 the modern representatives of the "groanings which cannot be uttered" 
 in the modern Anglican Litany, and the confession in the Communion 
 Service — both properly said by a deacon, or under certain circumstances 
 by a layman. See the rubrics to the latter in the Prayer Books of 
 1549 and later editions. 
 
 - Unless, in the beginning of c. 41, euxapicrretTw be assumed to have 
 already exclusively the sacramental sense. 
 
230 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 sure whether they abstained from this extreme usur- 
 pation, or whether he did not consider it a more 
 extreme usurpation than the rest of their conduct. 
 
 This is as much as we can say about the manner of 
 pubhc worship in St. Clement's time; something must 
 be said also about the creed and the canon of Scripture 
 as recognised by him. On the former point it is 
 worth mentioning that Photius, the learned claimant 
 of the Patriarchate of Constantinople in the ninth 
 century, was struck by what he considered the inade- 
 quacy of his language as to our Lord's Person. He 
 calls Him frequently our High Priest; also by a title 
 not occurring in Scripture, which we may render 
 " Patron " or " Guardian," perhaps " Advocate " (see 
 the end of the prayer quoted above) ; but never 
 ascribes to Him any name distinctively divine. On 
 the other hand, St. Basil quotes St. Clement as giving, 
 though " with ancient simplicity," evidence as to the 
 primitive doctrine of the Holy Trinity: "For as God 
 liveth, and as the Lord Jesus Christ liveth, and the 
 Holy Ghost, and ' the faith and hope of the elect, he 
 who has done the statutes and judgments," &c, (C. 58.) 
 Here it is obvious that the expression is founded on 
 the Old Testament form of oath, "As the Lord liveth, 
 
 1 Bishop Lightfoot translates: " Who are the faith and hope," &c. 
 To me the translation given above seems a more natural meaning of the 
 Greek, and as explained in the text the thought is easier to account for, 
 and, I may add, tlie theological significance not less. I will not indeed 
 deny that the words might lend themselves to a high Arian doctrine of 
 the Trinity almost as well as to the Catholic ; it almost seems as if St. 
 Basil were afraid to quote the passage completely. But be its theology 
 Catholic or Arian, Unitarian it is not. 
 
THE SUB-APOSTOLIC CHURCH. 231 
 
 and as thy soul liveth ;" but the name of " the Lord " 
 is expanded into that of the three Divine Persons, 
 and that of the individual and merely human "soul" 
 into the common supernatural consciousness, the per- 
 vading " faith and hope," of the whole body of God's 
 chosen people. We may notice another passage 
 (c. 46), " Have we not one God, and one Christ, and 
 one Spirit of grace that is shed upon us ?" The fact 
 simply is, St. Clement had not read St. John ; it is just 
 possible that St. John had not yet written; and so his 
 theological language is not modelled upon St. John's, 
 but upon that of SS. Peter and Paul. The last pas- 
 sage which we quoted, for instance, goes on, " Is there 
 not one calling in Christ .?" making it quite plain that 
 St. Clement is thinking of Eph. iv. 4-6 ; while just 
 before we had a similar reminiscence of James iv. i. 
 Now SS. Peter, Paul, and James do not use exactly 
 the same language about our Lord as St. John does ; 
 but it is as easy to believe that St. Clement held th^ 
 faith taught by St. John as it is to believe that the 
 three other apostles did so. 
 
 As to the Old Testament Canon, it seems that St. 
 Clement had rather vague notions. Of confessedly 
 canonical books, he quotes considerable passages 
 from Genesis, from the Psalms, Proverbs, Job, and 
 Isaiah. Shorter quotations, or at least verbal refer- 
 ences, may be traced to the Books of Exodus, Deuter- 
 onomy, Daniel, Habakkuk, and Malachi ; and there 
 are plain references to the history, though not verbatim 
 quotations, of Numbers, Joshua, Samuel, Esther, and 
 Jonah. Of the Hellenistic books which we call 
 
232 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 Apocrypha, he quotes the Wisdom of Solomon, and 
 refers verbally to Ecclesiasticus and historically to 
 Judith (the earliest evidence we have of the existence 
 of the last-named book). But besides these, he quotes 
 some that must be apocryphal in the older sense, such 
 as were not received by the Church at large, even to 
 such secondary honour and use as have always been 
 allowed to these. There are three or four of these 
 apocryphal quotations. One (c. 8) seems to be an 
 interpolation in a prophecy of Ezekiel, where St. 
 Clement begins with the genuine words, and goes on 
 into the spurious, which are imitated from a passage 
 in Isaiah, which he also quotes. One (c. 29 fin.) seems 
 to be a fusion of a passage in Deuteronomy with some 
 from later books; wc cannot tell whether St. Clement 
 confused the passages in his memory, or quoted from 
 an author who had imitated both. Lastly, the follow- 
 ing passage (c. 23 ') has nothing corresponding to it 
 in canonical Scripture. 
 
 " Miserable are the double-minded, who doubt in 
 their soul, who say, ' These things have we heard 
 also in our fathers' days, and behold, we ha\e grown 
 old, and none of these things hath befallen us.' Ye 
 fools, compare yourselves unto a tree : take a vine. 
 First it casteth her leaves, then cometh a bud, then a 
 leaf, then a flower, and after these a sour berry, then 
 the ripe grape." 
 
 There is a likeness here to a passage in the Second 
 Epistle of St. Peter, and a slighter one to a parable 
 
 ^ The short quotation in c. 17 fin. is conjectured to be from the 
 Assumption of Moses. 
 
THE SUB-APOSTOLIC CHURCH. 233 
 
 of our Lord's in St. Mark ; but the likeness is in 
 the thought, not in the words, and we cannot 
 regard this as a quotation, however lax, from the 
 New Testament passages. It is hardly doubtful 
 that this, and probably the other apocryphal quota- 
 tions too, came from books of the same class as the 
 Book of Baruch in our Apocrypha — books written in 
 imitation of the style of the prophets of the Old 
 Testament, and usually in the name of some prophet 
 mentioned there : there is some reason to think that 
 the passage we have just quoted comes from a Book 
 of Eldad and Medad. Such names were perhaps 
 assumed without fraudulent intent, but in fact they 
 served to impose upon devout but uncritical readers. 
 
 More interesting is the question what acquaintance 
 St. Clement shows with the canonical books of the 
 New Testament. It cannot be said that he exactly 
 quotes any of the Gospels. We could hardly expect 
 him to show any acquaintance with St. John ; yet 
 there are two passages (cc. 43 fin., 59) where it is at 
 least possible that he is thinking of our Lord's great 
 prayer in the seventeenth chapter of that Gospel; but 
 the other apostles as well as St. John must have 
 heard that prayer, and St. Clement may, if he had 
 the Lord's words in his mind, have heard them from 
 a different source. Similarly, when he says (c. 13) 
 that the Lord Jesus said, "Be merciful, that ye may 
 obtain mercy ; forgive, that ye may be forgiven ; as 
 ye do, so shall it be done to you ; as ye give, so shall 
 it be given unto you ; as ye judge, so shall ye be 
 judged; as ye show kindness, so shall kindness be 
 
234 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 showed unto you ; with what measure ye mete, in it 
 shall it be measured to you " — we cannot be sure 
 whether he has the similar passages from SS. 
 Matthew and Luke in his mind, and quotes them 
 from memory, or whether he follows an oral tradition 
 of the Lord's words, or lastly, whether he quotes 
 from one of the many evangelical narratives which 
 St. Luke tells us were current when he wrote his own. 
 The saying quoted by St. Paul, " It is more blessed 
 to give than to receive," seems to be referred to by 
 St. Clement,' and here I do not think he can be 
 quoting the Acts ; but on the whole, in the other 
 place I do believe he is quoting the canonical Gospels 
 from memory. So again where he says (c. 46), "Woe 
 to that man ; it had been good for him if he had not 
 been born, rather than to offend one of mine elect : it 
 had been better for him that a millstone should be 
 put round him, and he be drowned in the sea, than 
 to pervert one of mine elect." But St. Clement's 
 evidence is a good deal clearer as to the consistent 
 tradition as to the substance of our Lord's teaching 
 than as to the existence, in his time, of our canonical 
 Gospels in a written form. 
 
 As to the Apostolic Epistles, his knowledge of them 
 is far more certain. St. Paul's First Epistle to the 
 Corinthians is, very naturally, referred to b)^ name 
 (c. 47) ; the second is not mentioned nor alluded to, 
 but there are plain reminiscences of passages in the 
 Epistles to the Romans,' Ephesians,^ possibly Gala- 
 tians^ and Thessalonians,^ probably Titus,^ certain!}- 
 ^C.2init. - Cc.32,35,47. :*C.46. ^ Cc. 2, 5, 56. ^ 0.381111. 6C.2. 
 
THE SUB-APOSTOLIC CHURCH. 235 
 
 the first of St. Peter/ and almost certainly St. James.^ 
 But St. Clement's favourite book is the I^pistle to the 
 Hebrews : he has saturated his mind with the thought 
 and language of this, and though he never avowedly 
 quotes it, characteristic words or passages of it are 
 embodied in his epistle not less than four times ;^ and 
 a great many of his Old Testament quotations are 
 plainly suggested by it. 
 
 After the despatch of St. Clement's epistle he dis- 
 appears from history. He died, apparently in the 
 course of nature,^ about A.D. 100, and was succeeded 
 as bishop by Euarestus, of whom we know nothing 
 at all. Our next notice of the history of the Church 
 is from a Pagan source. 
 
 C. Plinius Secundus — the younger Pliny, as we 
 commonly call him — was appointed by Trajan Pro- 
 consul of Bithynia, at a date variously fixed between 
 103-11 A.D. He was a humane, good-humoured 
 man — decidedly amiable and even attractive on the 
 whole, though an awful prig ; but we shall see that 
 his notions of humane administration were such as 
 would seem strange to us, and his notions of domestic 
 virtue, of which he considered himself a model, were 
 perhaps scarcely less so. However, we are con- 
 cerned not with his personal character but his 
 official ; and as to this we have evidence of the 
 highest historical interest, for secular as well as 
 1 C. 49. ^ C. 46. 
 
 ' Cc. 17, 19, 21, 36; not counting his use of apx'^^p^vs. 
 
 ^ St. Irenaeus [adv. Haer. III. iii. 3) stating, in his catalogue of the 
 Roman Bishops, that St. Telesphorus was a glorious martyr, plainly 
 implies that none of the others enumerated were so. 
 
236 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 ecclesiastical affairs. At the end of his private corre- 
 spondence, which he preserved and prepared for publi- 
 cation, his official correspondence with the emperor 
 during his tenure of office has come to us ; and 
 this is all the fuller of details of business, because 
 it appears that he had a temper of indecision, or a 
 fear of responsibility, that made him write to the 
 emperor for instructions on any matter in the least 
 doubtful. So in the 96-7th letter of the collection 
 he writes as follows : 
 
 "It is my regular custom, my lord, to refer to you 
 everything on which I am in doubt ; for who can 
 better either guide my hesitation, or supply my 
 ignorance .-' I never have been present at the trials 
 of Christians : in consequence I do not know what, 
 and to what extent, is usually either punished in 
 them or investigated. And I have been very much 
 at a loss whether any distinction is to be made as to 
 age, or whether very tender years differ from the 
 stronger : whether pardon is granted on repentance, 
 or whether it is no benefit to one who has been a 
 Christian at all to have ceased to be : whether it is 
 the name itself that is punished, or the crimes going 
 with the name. Meanwhile, in the case of those 
 denounced to me as Christians, I have followed this 
 method : I asked them themselves if they were 
 Christians : if they confessed it, I asked a second 
 and third time, threatening execution : if they per- 
 sisted, I ordered them to be led off; for I had no 
 doubt, whatever the nature of what they confessed, 
 that at all events their obstinacy and inflexible deter- 
 
THE SUB-APOSTOLIC CHURCH. 237 
 
 mination ought to be punished. There were others 
 also of Hke madness, whom, as they were Roman 
 citizens, I noted to be sent off to Rome. Afterwards, 
 from the mere course of time, as the charge spread 
 wider in the usual way, I met with more varied cases. 
 An anonymous paper was brought before me, con- 
 taining the names of many who say they are not 
 Christians, and never were ; since at my dictation 
 they called on the gods, and did homage with incense 
 and wine to your portrait (which I had ordered to be 
 brought for the purpose, with the images of the gods), 
 and further cursed Christ, none of which things they 
 say those who are really Christians can be compelled 
 to do. Others named by the informer said they were 
 Christians, and afterwards denied, saying they had 
 been, but had left off: some three years ago, some 
 more, one or two' even twenty years. All both wor- 
 shipped your portrait and the images of the gods, 
 and cursed Christ. But they asserted that the whole 
 of their fault or error had been this — that they had 
 been accustomed on a stated day to meet before light, 
 and say responsively among themselves a hymn to 
 Christ as to a god, and bind themselves by a solemn 
 vow, not to any crime, but that they would not 
 commit theft, robbery, or adultery, not break a 
 promise, nor deny a trust when called on. When 
 this was done, their custom had been to separate, 
 and again to come together to take food, but this 
 
 ^ A\vi nemo. This vague expression seems hardly to warrant the 
 belief that here we have men who had apostatized in Domitian's 
 persecution. 
 
238 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 of common sort, and harmless ; and even this they 
 had left off doing since my proclamation, by which, 
 according to your directions, I had forbidden the 
 existence of clubs. This made me think it the more 
 necessary to enquire what the truth was, even by 
 tortures, from two female slaves who were called 
 deaconesses {ministrae). But I found nothing but a 
 perverse and excessive superstition, and so I put off 
 the trial and had recourse to you. For it seemed to 
 me a thing worth consulting you on, especially on 
 account of the numbers of those involved in the 
 danger ; for many of every age, of every rank, even 
 of both sexes, are called, or will be, to take their 
 trial ; for the infection of this superstition has spread, 
 not only through the cities, but the villages and 
 country, though it seems it can be stopped and cured. 
 At all events, it is clear that temples almost aban- 
 doned have begun to be crowded, and sacrifices long 
 omitted to be resumed at the proper times : and 
 beasts for sacrifice are sold everywhere, for which 
 there was hardly a purchaser to be found, from which 
 it is easy to guess what a crowd of men are capable 
 of correction, if room of repentance be allowed 
 them." 
 
 Trajan replies : 
 
 " You have followed the course you ought, my dear 
 Secundus, in disposing of the causes of those reported 
 to you as Christians. For no universal rule can be 
 laid down to be followed as a fixed formula. They 
 ought not to be sought out ; if they are denounced 
 and convicted, they ought to be punished : with the 
 
THE SUB-APOSTOLIC CHURCH. 239 
 
 reservation, that whoever denies that he is a Chris- 
 tian, and proves this by his action, i.e. by worship to 
 our gods, although he may be suspected for the past, 
 yet shall obtain pardon on his repentance. But 
 anonymous writings brought before you ought to find 
 no admission on any charge : for it is a very bad 
 precedent, and not belonging to the character of our 
 age." 
 
 It has been said to be characteristic of Trajan 
 in this correspondence, that he never enunciates a 
 general principle — each point referred to him is 
 decided on its individual merits. I think this is an 
 over statement : not only have we the general rule 
 against anonymous accusations laid down at the end 
 of the letter we have just read ; but Pliny seems to 
 refer to, though he does not quote, an earlier letter 
 in the same series (Plin. Ep. x. 35-6) where a 
 principle is laid down which covers the case. Pliny 
 had asked the Emperor's sanction for the establish- 
 ment of a fire brigade at Nicomedia : Trajan replies, 
 that though it is quite proper that householders 
 should have facilities afforded them for quenching 
 fires, and securing the aid of the public when they 
 occur, yet such a corporate organization cannot be 
 allowed — it will be sure to become a political club. 
 Now the Christian Church was, prima facie, such a 
 club, and an unauthorized one. It tried to purge 
 itself of the character by giving up its weekly club- 
 suppers, when Pliny issued a proclamation embodying 
 Trojan's prohibition of clubs : but then, if not a club, 
 it became something worse — a secret society. No 
 
240 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 doubt, a man might be known by his neighbours to 
 be a Christian, just as now a man may be known by 
 his neighbours to be a Freemason ; but such occa- 
 sional knowledge of the fact of membership did not 
 make the society itself less of a secret to the outside 
 world. 
 
 Apparently then the attitude towards Christianity 
 of sober Roman opinion, as represented by Trajan, 
 was something like this. The Christian Church is a 
 secret society, affecting men's attitude toward the 
 religion of their country, perhaps even toward the 
 sovereign, and on either ground it is incompatible with 
 loyalty. It is therefore illegal, and any one convicted 
 of belonging to it must be treated as a criminal : but 
 it is not desirable to give the society importance, and 
 bring the law into disrepute, by a strict inquisition for 
 the detection of every private member of the society. 
 If we read " Fenian," or " Internationalist," or 
 " Nihilist " for " Christian," perhaps Trajan's polic}' 
 might seem not an unreasonable one to a modern 
 government. In theory you cannot regard belonging 
 to such a society as other than treasonable, but you 
 will not inflict the penalties of treason on more than 
 a few ringleaders : the rank and file of the conspirators 
 are most harmless if severely let alone. 
 
 While the letters of the Proconsul and the Emperor 
 thus serve to explain the attitude of the Roman 
 government towards Christianity, it cannot be ex- 
 pected that they should throw very much light upon 
 the internal organization and usages of the Christian 
 body ; but they do really throw some. The mention 
 
THE SUB-APOSTOLIC CHURCH. z\i 
 
 of the deaconesses proves no more than we knew 
 from the mention of Phoebe by St. Paul, or from 
 later church history : but the confused language 
 about those who were really Christians, and those 
 who had been Christians, but might cease to 
 be so, seems to correspond with the distinction be- 
 tween catechumens and the faithful or baptized. I 
 do not mean to say that it is not possible that some 
 of the latter might have apostatized when com- 
 manded to sacrifice on pain of death : such things 
 happened, we know, in later persecutions, and of 
 course may have happened now, even while faith was 
 fresher. But it is a thing that we never hear of, that 
 baptized Christians spontaneously went back to 
 heathen habits of life, and ignored their Christian 
 profession from mere indifference. I therefore think 
 it probable that what information Pliny gives about 
 the usages of the Church is what he got from cate- 
 chumens only ; the two deaconesses told more, but 
 what they said appeared absurd or unintelligible. 
 Hence, he tells us nothing about the sacramental 
 usages of the Church, but only about so much of its 
 worship as was accessible to outsiders. 
 
 As to this, I should be disposed to interpret his 
 language in this way. The primitive custom had 
 been for the faithful to meet after dark on Saturday 
 night (for we must remember that according to Jewish 
 usage the Sabbath ended, and "the first day of the 
 week " began, at sunset on Saturday) : they ate a 
 solemn supper together, preceded and followed by 
 prayers ; and the prayers at its conclusion passed 
 
 R 
 
242 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 gradually into the celebration of the Holy Com- 
 munion — which was not exactly "the Lord's Supper^' 
 but rather (if I may use the term without offence) a 
 dessert after it. But it was felt — St. Paul's first 
 Epistle to the Corinthians shows with how good 
 reason — that it led to irreverence to combine so 
 closely what was after all a common meal with the 
 sacred one. The prayers and exhortations between 
 the Supper and the Sacrament were lengthened, until 
 (as when St. Paul kept at Troas the second Sunday 
 after Easter) the latter was made to fall after midnight : 
 and the tradition of this practice survives in many 
 usages of even the modern Church : e.g. in the name 
 of the " Vigil " of feasts, and in the custom of the 
 midnight Mass on Christmas Eve in the West, and 
 on Easter' Eve in the East. But even when St. Paul 
 was at Troas it was proved that so long a service at 
 such an hour was too much for frail human nature : 
 and, except on great feasts, it was thought sufficient 
 for people to say their prayers at home on Saturday 
 night, go to bed, and get up in time for the Holy 
 Communion before daybreak. To prevent any ir- 
 reverence, it was very soon^ ruled that no food should 
 be taken before it, which was no hardship to the 
 
 1 In the Roman Liturgy also it is obvious that what is now the 
 forenoon service of Easter Eve was originally that of the Pdrvigilium. 
 It differs from other Roman eucharistic services in retaining the 
 " Prophecies " or Old Testament lections, which were certainly primi- 
 tive, but became so subordinate to the Epistle and Gospel that they 
 have been dropped on all other days, except a few where the Epistle 
 has been dropped to make room for them. 
 
 ^ At least by TertuUian's time, ad Uxor. ii. 5. 
 
THE SUB-APOSTOLIC CHURCH. 243 
 
 habits of the world that Hved round the Mediter- 
 ranean. Then on Sunday evening they assembled 
 for the ' Aya7r>7 or " Charity " — the feast postponed 
 from the previous night, or possibly, in some places 
 at least, duplicated on both Saturday and Sunday. 
 The catechumens (if my view be right that Pliny's 
 informants were such) were admitted to this supper, 
 and probably, as in later times, they attended at the 
 earlier part of the Eucharistic Service too, but were 
 sent out before the strictly sacramental part began. 
 They heard the reading of lessons, possibly from the 
 law of Moses (as in the Jewish synagogue), certainly 
 from the prophets, and from such apostolic or 
 evangelical writings as were known in that church. 
 They heard the sermon that followed from one or 
 more of the presbyters — we have a specimen of such 
 a sermon, probably of a rather later date, in the so- 
 called Second Epistle of St. Clement. Also they took 
 part in the hymn to Christ, possibly the Gloria in 
 Excelsis,'^ the oldest use of which was simply as a 
 morning hymn : when it was (in the west only) em- 
 bodied in the Eucharistic Service, it came near the 
 beginning, not (as with us) at the end. 
 
 It is more difficult to determine what is meant by 
 the " solemn oath of allegiance " {sacrameniiim), 
 whereby the attendants at Christian worship were 
 bound to keep the Ten Commandments. The 
 
 1 The Roman tradition ascribes to St. Telesphorus, martyred A.D. 
 138, not the composition of this hymn, but its introduction into the 
 Liturgy. There is, however, no proof that these so-called traditions 
 about the growth of the Liturgy are older than the ninth century. 
 
244 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 baptismal vow was not a thing repeated weekly, so 
 that even if Pliny's informants were baptized men 
 they could hardly have liad it in their minds. One 
 is tempted to suspect that the Ten Commandments 
 were read to the assembly every Lord's-day; perhaps 
 they took the place of the lesson from the Law of 
 the synagogue service, being regarded as the only part 
 of the law with which Christians were concerned. 
 
 Of the obscure period of Church history of which 
 we are treating, the obscurest part of all is what we 
 have just treated of, in this and the previous lecture. 
 It has been necessary to supplement by inference — 
 one must almost say by conjecture — the very scanty 
 information we have respecting this period ; hence- 
 forth, we gradually find direct and trustworthy 
 authorities more and more frequent. Gradually we 
 come to a state of things nearer and nearer to what 
 is commonly understood by the name of the Primitive 
 Church — the Church of the Decian and Diocletian 
 persecutions. It will have been seen already that I 
 hold the Church to have assumed the character it 
 bore then without any revolution, or any change in 
 its principles. But we still need to be on our guard 
 against assuming that the habits of the Church, and 
 its relation to the world outside it, were exactly the 
 same as then. The following lectures will show 
 something of the great men by whom, and of the 
 impersonal influences through which, the Apostolic 
 Church was developed into the Catholic. 
 
VI. 
 ^]bf .Successors of tl)c .Apostles. 
 
 WE saw that Pliny speaks of "the trials of 
 Christians" as a class of cases familiar, 
 perhaps frequent, in his time, though they had not 
 happened to come under his own notice before his 
 appointment to his province. It is evident from this 
 that Nerva's prohibition of prosecutions for impiety 
 did not amount to an edict of religious toleration. 
 It was not made lawful for men persistently and 
 wilfully to neglect the religious observances required 
 by the law and custom of their own nation, or of the 
 empire at large ; it was only directed that the law 
 should not be put in force against men, or at least 
 against Roman citizens, who were guilty of such 
 neglect. Strange and foolish as it seems to us, there 
 were plenty of Roman precedents for this course. It 
 had been the origin of the tribunate — men felt that 
 the primitive law of slavery for debt was iniquitous 
 in its working, and demanded a check upon it ; but 
 170 years passed before it was decided — seemingly 
 before it was attempted — to have the law altered. 
 And now at this very time the same course was 
 
246 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 pursued with the law of treason as with the law of 
 impiety. Under Tiberius and Claudius, as well as 
 under Nero and Domitian, the law of treason had 
 proved a fearful instrument of tyranny ; and of 
 tyranny, moreover, that pressed especially on the 
 class that had political influence. Yet emperors like 
 Titus and Nerva did not alter the law, nor apparently 
 were even asked to do so ; they simply administered 
 it mildly, and treated as criminals those who had lent 
 themselves to enforce its harshness. 
 
 And it was just this, apparently, that Nerva did in 
 the case of the laws under which Christians suft'ered ; 
 he granted them indulgence, but not toleration. 
 Trajan, perhaps we may guess, was less favourable 
 to them : it was in his power to be so, without 
 definitely reversing any act of his predecessor. 
 Domitian had been a bigot ; Nerva was the very 
 reverse ; Trajan, though no bigot, was a disciplinarian. 
 As we have seen, he did not wish the Christians to be 
 persecuted ; but he does not seem to have thought of 
 tolerating them : under certain circumstances he was 
 prepared to sentence them to death. 
 
 And while prosecutions for treason were unpopular, 
 and became rare when discouraged by the emperor, 
 it was otherwise with prosecutions for impiet}-. These 
 had a stimulus from public feeling, intermittent but 
 never entirely ceasing. Even if the educated classes 
 throughout the empire were as sceptical or as indiffer- 
 ent to religion as they had been a century and a half 
 earlier (and this is doubtful), there was, in most coun- 
 tries, a strong attachment on the part of the masses 
 
THE SUCCESSORS OF THE APOSTLES. 247 
 
 to their accustomed religious institutions, and a still 
 stronger belief that their neglect would bring ruin to 
 themselves. Thus persecution would not really come 
 to an end, as a consequence of Trajan's prohibition 
 of official inquisition. He left the Christian at the 
 mercy of a common informer, and such informers 
 were not likely to be wanting : it was not so much 
 any one that was likely to denounce a prominent 
 Christian as cvoj one. 
 
 But the policy of Trajan did something for the 
 moral elevation of the Christians, if not for their pro- 
 tection from material evils: he raised higher than 
 ever the dignity of martyrdom. It does not appear 
 that the martyrs under Nero and Domitian were 
 definitely offered their lives on condition of apostasy; 
 but from Trajan's time onward this was universally 
 done in the case of persecutions by the imperial 
 officials ; it seems even to have been accepted as the 
 proper course, by the mobs which were the real perse- 
 cuting power. Henceforth, to be a martyr proved, 
 not only that a man was willing to become a Christian 
 when his profession involved an appreciable risk of 
 death, but that he was resolved to remain a Christian, 
 — that he would not even falsely deny himself to be 
 a Christian, far less blaspheme Christ, or sin against 
 Christ by conformity to paganism, — even when death, 
 and in many cases death by torture, was the immediate 
 and certain consequence. We are so familiar with 
 this state of things from the later persecutions, 
 of whose history the outlines are popularly if not 
 accurately known, that it is worth while to point out 
 
248 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 that it was a new phenomenon not quite coeval with 
 the Church.' 
 
 Thus natural!}', from this time till persecution 
 ceased, the most glorious part of the history of 
 the Church is the history of its martyrs. Every 
 martyr was ipso facto proved to be a great saint ;. 
 almost every great saint was sure to be a martyr. 
 The Church very speedily recognised the fact : 
 what had been a paradox in SS. Peter's and Paul's 
 time'' became a commonplace. Whatsoever Chris- 
 tians suffered, they were not ashamed, but glorified 
 God on this behalf ; they took pleasure in dis- 
 tresses and persecutions, if only they were for Christ's 
 sake. 
 
 All that we have been saying of the characteristics 
 of the age of persecution, both as regards the attitude 
 of the government, of the populace, and of the 
 Christians themselves, is most conspicuously illus- 
 trated in the case of the greatest martyr of Tr^ijan's 
 reign, the only one whose name,^ character, and 
 history can be fairly considered as known to us. 
 This was Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch, or rather of 
 Syria ; for he seems to have been the only one 
 
 ^ It is true that the early y'lvish persecutions had for their object to 
 compel apostasy rather than to punish ; and it appears from the Epistle 
 to the Hebrews (xi. 35, si]q.) that the memory of the martyrs of Macca- 
 bean times, who had the choice of apostasy, was fresh and influential 
 in the Apostolic Church. But it seems, on the whole, that the hearty 
 recognition of the glory of martyrdonr did not become general till post- 
 apostolic times. 
 
 ■^ 2 Cor. xii. 10 ; 2 Tim. i. 12 ; I Peter iv. 16. 
 
 ■* We know only the names of SS. Zosimus and Rufus. — St. POLYC. 
 ad Phil. c. 9. 
 
THE SUCCESSORS OF THE APOSTLES. 249 
 
 in the province,' if Judaea be reckoned as distinct 
 from it. 
 
 In the winter of A.D. 1 14-5 '^ Trajan was at Antioch, 
 preparing for the brilliant campaigns by which he 
 gained possession of Armenia and Mesopotamia. In 
 January, 115, the city was ruined by a tremendous 
 earthquake ; the loss of life was enormous, and the 
 emperor himself had a narrow escape. We cannot 
 wonder that popular feeling was roused against the 
 Christians, whose impiety, it was no doubt believed, 
 had brought the wrath of the gods upon the city. 
 We hear of the expiatory rites that were performed 
 after the calamity : what could be said of men who 
 took no part in these, but that they rejoiced in the 
 city's overthrow, that they had almost wilfully and 
 consciously brought it to pass .'* 
 
 It was not likely that Trajan would sanction an 
 exterminating massacre of the Christians, if this was 
 what the populace demanded ; but it was perfectly in 
 harmony with the policy of his directions to Pliny, 
 that he should have done what tradition tells us he 
 did, and have become a persecutor on (so far as we 
 know) this one occasion only. We are told that St. 
 Ignatius " was led to Trajan of his own accord," and 
 
 ^ See St. Ign. ad Eph. c. 21, ad Mag. c. 13, ad Trail, c. 13, and 
 especially ad Rom. cc. 2, 9. 
 
 ^ The conflict of evidence as to the date of St. Ignatius' martyrdom 
 is well known. His Acts place it in Trajan's ninth year, a.D. 107-8 ; 
 but it is nearly certain that Trajan was not then in the east. But the 
 testimony of the Acts is worth more as to the saint's trial before the 
 emperor in person than as to the date ; and Malelas, late and confused 
 as his testimony is, may be taken as proving that the local tradition of 
 Antioch connected the martyrdom with the earthquake. 
 
250 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTL4N CHURCH. 
 
 what we have just said explains the statement. The 
 sober judgment of orthodox Christians did not 
 approve of men offering themselves to death, as 
 some soon began to do, for mere love of martyrdom. 
 But it was a perfectly sound and right policy for the 
 bishop to say, " You want to punish the Christians ; 
 well, here am I, the head of the Christians." He 
 might reasonably hope that he would thus save the 
 rest by the sacrifice of himself, and this actually 
 proved to be the case.' 
 
 St. Ignatius must now have been an old man. He 
 is represented in tradition as a personal disciple of the 
 apostles, more especially St. John.^ It is said, however, 
 that he was not the first bishop established there when 
 SS. Peter, Paul, and Barnabas left the city, but was 
 preceded by one Euhodius. Some again say that 
 Euhodius and Ignatius were made bishops at once 
 over the Jewish and Gentile churches in Antioch 
 respectively; but if so, it is agreed that St. Ignatius 
 was the survivor, and was now the sole bishop. 
 Further than this, we know nothing of his life ; but 
 his death, and his words and works just before it, arc 
 enough to give us one of the most perfect pictures 
 the world has ever seen of an ideal romantic hero of 
 the cross. 
 
 Besides the epistles professing to be St. Ignatius' 
 own work, we have a history of his condemnation 
 
 ' St. Ign. ad Phil. c. lo, ad .Siiiyi-n. c. II, ad Pol. c. 7. 
 
 - Acta Mart. St. Ign. c. 3. The story that he was the little child 
 called to our Lord as a type of humility seems to rest only on a mispro- 
 nunciation and consequent mistranslation of his title Geo^o/sos, as though 
 it meant " (jod-borne, " not " God-bearer." 
 
THE SUCCESSORS OF THE APOSTLES. 251 
 
 and martyrdom, professing to be written by a con- 
 temporary and eye-witness. This it almost certainly 
 was not, and this amount of fraud tends to discredit 
 its evidence. But I am disposed to think that it 
 embodies a genuine tradition : though the details of 
 the story are coloured by the feelings of the writer's 
 age, we may trust it where these do not mislead him 
 in reporting what he believed to be facts. The first 
 scene of the martyrdom — the saint's trial before the 
 emperor — seems to me to have a far more genuine 
 ring about it than any of what follows. 
 
 "And when he stood before the face of Trajan the 
 emperor, ' Who are you, you poor devil, who are so 
 eager to transgress our ordinances, besides persuading 
 others also, that they may come to a bad end.^' 
 Ignatius said, ' No one calls the God-bearer a poor 
 devil ; for the devils depart before the servants of 
 God. But if you call me evil towards the devils ' 
 [it is not so very farfetched to give that meaning to 
 the Greek word] ' because I am severe towards them, 
 I confess you are right. For having Christ for my 
 heavenly King, I overthrow their conspiracies.' 
 Trajan said, 'Who is the God-bearer.^' Ignatius 
 answered, ' He who has Christ in his breast.' Trajan 
 said, 'Then do you think that we have not gods in 
 our mind, whose assistance we employ against our 
 enemies .-*' Ignatius said, 'Thou callest the devils of 
 the Gentiles gods in error : for there is one God, Who 
 made the heaven and the earth and the sea, and all 
 things in them : and one Christ Jesus, the only- 
 begotten Son of God, whose kingdom may I enjoy!' 
 
252 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 Trajan said, ' Do you mean him who was crucified 
 under Pontius Pilate?' Ignatius said, 'Even Him 
 Who crucified my sin with the deviser thereof, and 
 condemned all error of the devils, and all vice under 
 the feet of them who bear Him in their heart.' Trajan 
 said, 'Then do you bear the Crucified in yourself?' 
 Ignatius said, 'Yea ; for it is written, " I will dwell in 
 them, and walk in them.'" Trajan proclaimed, 'We 
 give orders that Ignatius, who says that he carries 
 about the Crucified in himself, be put in chains and 
 led by soldiers to great Rome, to be made the food of 
 beasts for the pleasure' of the people.' The holy 
 martyr, when he heard this proclamation, cried out 
 with joy, ' I thank thee, O Lord, that Thou hast 
 deigned to honour me with the perfection of love 
 towards Thee, having bound me to Thine Apostle 
 Paul with bonds of iron."" 
 
 Why St. Ignatius was sent to Rome, instead of being 
 executed at Antioch, we cannot undertake to say, nor 
 yet why he was sent by a rather eccentric route ;^ first 
 by sea to the Hellespont, so that he spent some time 
 at Smyrna, and thence across Macedonia and Epirus 
 
 ^ I feel certain that this last phrase is that of St. Ignatius, not of 
 the compiler of the Acts ; it is one of his bold, quaint expressions, 
 which few modern writers have the courage to translate literally. Other 
 natural touches may be noticed throughout the dialogue. The rather 
 coarse good nature of KaKudaifioi' (no doubt it is h'ss coarse than the 
 only English equivalent that brings out the point) seems characteristic 
 of Trajan; and the contempt for "the Crucified," and for him who 
 claims union with Him, is what a heathen might feel, not what a 
 Christian could imagine. 
 
 ■^ St. Paul, however, was very near being sent the same way. (Acts 
 xxvii. 2.) 
 
THE SUCCESSORS OF THE APOSTLES. 253 
 
 to Epidamnus. But the fact of his martyrdom at Rome 
 is attested by Origen/ within httle more than a century; 
 and the route by which he w^ent thither (for which one 
 may imagine fifty reasons) is imphed in the existence 
 of his epistles, which are dated at different points on 
 the way. Hardly any reasonable critic doubts that 
 at least some of these are genuine, though it is a 
 very doubtful question how much. No one doubts 
 that they have been largely interpolated, and several 
 forged ; the question generally recognised as doubt- 
 ful is, whether the seven letters that were known to 
 Christian antiquity, which have come to us, clear 
 from proved interpolations, in one Greek MS., and in 
 old Latin and Armenian version.s, are at least sub- 
 stantially genuine, or whether these seven are an inter- 
 polated expansion from a genuine nucleus of three 
 letters only, which was recognised in St. Ignatius' 
 own Church of Syria. And again, some suppose 
 that the Epistle to the Romans, which is the grandest 
 of all, is the only really genuine one. 
 
 I speak of this as a very doubtful and difficult 
 question : to discuss it in detail would be quite 
 beyond the compass of these lectures. It must suf- 
 fice to say, that the tendency of the best critics seems 
 to be increasingly to admit that the seven letters are 
 all genuine ; the three being regarded as a selection or 
 abridgment, giving the finest and most edifying 
 passages, perhaps arranged for reading in church. 
 There seems no serious difficulty in accepting this 
 view, though positive arguments for the integrity of 
 
 ^ Horn. vi. in Liic, the second of the fragments preserved in Greek. 
 
254 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 the Syiiac recension are by no means wanting ; and 
 believing, as I do, in the genuineness of all the seven 
 letters, it would be an affectation to quote from the 
 three only : we should lose part of the means we 
 have, which I believe to be trustworthy, for learning 
 to know St. Ignatius' personal character.' 
 
 The chief thing that strikes us about him is, that 
 he is such a thorough Catholic — a word which he is 
 the first extant writer to use. This characteristic is 
 more prominent, I own, in the four disputed letters 
 than in the three of the Syriac version : still, it ap- 
 pears that even in these the supreme authority on all 
 spiritual matters is, to his mind, the Church — the 
 Church Universal, represented to the individual by 
 the local Church of which he is a member ; that local 
 Church being represented by its bishop, presbyters, 
 and deacons. The saint refers to the facts of the 
 Gospel as the foundations of the Catholic Church, he 
 refers to the authority of the apostles as its founders ; 
 but it never occurs to him as conceivable, that there 
 can be a conflict between them and the Church, that 
 it can ever be right or necessary to " go behind " the 
 fact of Catholic consent, and appeal from the judg- 
 ment of the Church to that of the apostles recorded 
 in the New Testament. If any one, whether Pro- 
 testant or Socinian, wishes to maintain the paradox, 
 that the mass of the Christian Church apostatized 
 
 ^ Of course, if the four letters are not the genuine works of the 
 martyr, they throw no light on this. But even then, the value of 
 their historical evidence as to the character and institutions of the age 
 is scarcely less ; for the forgery, if there be one, took place within forty 
 or fifty years of the time assigned to the work. 
 
THE SUCCESSORS OF THE APOSTLES. 255 
 
 from the truth of the Gospel, and formulated an un- 
 scriptural faith, different from the truly primitive and 
 apostolical one, it will not do to date the apostasy 
 from the days of Gregory the Great, or even of Con- 
 stantine : they must draw the line somewhere in the 
 eighteen years, or less, that lie between St. Clement 
 and St. Ignatius. Only then they will have to ac- 
 count for the fact that St. Polycarp is just as scriptural 
 and apostolical as St. Clement : yet he never suspects 
 or denounces St. Ignatius as an apostate, but lives 
 with him as a brother, and listens to his advice as 
 to one more nearly made perfect than himself It 
 seems to me far more in accordance with reason 
 and probability to admit that, as there was room 
 among the apostles for SS. Peter, Paul, John, and 
 James, so there was room for different tempers of 
 mind, different schools of thought, though not for 
 hostile parties, in the sub-apostolic Church too ; and 
 we may believe, as the disciples of the apostles did, 
 in one holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, which, 
 like the divine Wisdom which founded it, is justified 
 of all her children. 
 
 From Smyrna St. Ignatius wrote an Epistle to the 
 Ephesians, and, if we admit the genuineness of all the 
 seven, to the Churches of Magnesia and Tralles as 
 well. The two latter contain, like all the rest, exhor- 
 tations to unity, in obedience to the bishop, and in 
 faith in the true Gospel, not giving way to Jewish 
 superstitions, nor to spiritualistic fancies that ex- 
 plained away the reality of the earthly Life and 
 Death of the Lord Jesus : but they have less interest 
 
256 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 than that to the Ephesians. I will only quote one 
 passage from the Magnesians, which shows that St. 
 Ignatius knew indeed but disapproved of that theory 
 of the Episcopate, which regards the bishop as what 
 has been called a queen bee, or perhaps better still a 
 drone — an animal whose sole use is to transmit to 
 future generations a supply of validly ordained work- 
 ing priests. This theory of the Episcopate can claim 
 some sanction from St. Jerome :' it flourished in the 
 Celtic Churches of the fifth and following centuries, 
 where the great monasteries used each to keep a tame 
 bishop, to ordain, in strict subordination to the abbot, 
 as many priests as were wanted : some indeed say 
 the theory is not extinct in the British Islands, even 
 at the present day. However that may be, St. 
 Ignatius says (Magn. 4) : "It is therefore fitting, not 
 only to be called Christians, but also to be : as some 
 people call a man a bishop, but do all things without 
 him. But such men seem to me not to be of good 
 conscience, because they do not gather together 
 securely, after the commandment." 
 
 It is scarcely possible to translate much of the 
 Ephesians : the beginning can only be represented 
 by the phrase " after compliments," which the 
 India Office uses in reproducing Oriental State 
 papers. When St. Ignatius is expressing his affec- 
 tion for his fellow-believers, or his admiration for 
 their graces, he is apt to gush, and his style to grow 
 florid, not to say turgid, to an extent that a Western 
 taste can only tolerate in the original. But we ma}' 
 
 ^ Ep. cxlvi. I, &c. 
 
THE SUCCESSORS OF THE APOSTLES. 257 
 
 take opportunity here to give a specimen of the 
 Syriac recension, which differs from the longer one 
 more in this than in either of the other epistles 
 contained in it. 
 
 " It is better to say nothing and to be, than to 
 speak and not to be . . .' that a man may act by the 
 things he says, and be known by the silence he 
 keeps. . . . My spirit is an ofifscouring from the cross, 
 which is a stumbling-block to the unbelievers, but 
 to us is salvation and eternal life. . . . Unknown to 
 the Prince of this world was the virginity of Mary 
 and her Child-bearing, likewise also the Death of 
 the Lord : three mysteries of shouting, which were 
 wrought in the stillness of God." (Eph. cc. 15-19.) 
 
 These words we may confidently accept as St, 
 Ignatius' own, though they are certainly not a 
 favourable specimen of his style. The passage is far 
 less harsh and obscure in the common Greek or 
 Vossian text. If the saint really wrote it as we have 
 quoted it, one feels that the interpolator had some 
 excuse. The case was parallel to that of George 
 Fox, who, as it appeared to the unsympathetic com- 
 mon-sense of Macaulay, "wrote nonsense, and his 
 friends turned it into sense." But the passage is 
 obscure, even in its fuller form — obscure from a cause 
 which it is instructive to notice. St. Ignatius is 
 thoroughly orthodox on the subject of our Lord's 
 person and incarnation, but there is a mode of 
 thought common to him with the heretics he opposes, 
 
 ' The passage is given continuously as it stands in the Syriac. The 
 lacjinae mark places where there are additions in the Greek. 
 
 S 
 
258 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 and utterly unfamiliar to us. Our best chance of 
 understanding Gnosticism is to suppose that the 
 real faith of the Gnostics bore the same relation to 
 their strange mystical language that the Apostles' 
 Creed bears to this of St. Ignatius. 
 
 The curiously anomalous attitude of the govern- 
 ment towards Christianity explains the fact, which 
 would otherwise seem extraordinary, that St. Ignatius, 
 a criminal on his way to execution, was allowed free 
 intercourse, personally and by letter, with the ac- 
 complices in his godless conspiracy.' All along his 
 route the saint was visited and sometimes accom- 
 panied by deputations from the Churches he passed 
 through, and others within reach :'^ and it was by 
 means of these deputations that he was able to 
 transmit his epistles. Besides the three we have 
 mentioned, he wrote from Smyrna one to the Church 
 of Rome — his Christian visitors from Ephesus under- 
 taking to carry the letter home with them, and thence 
 to transmit it, no doubt by sea, so as to arrive there 
 before he did himself. 
 
 It would appear from this epistle that the Church 
 of Rome was now not only numerous and powerful, 
 but that it cannot have been unpopular. F"or St. 
 Ignatius' great fear is, that if they use their influence 
 on his behalf his life will be spared, and he will miss 
 the crown of martyrdom after all. But instead of 
 
 ^ In Rom. c. 5, evepyeTovixivoi. is supposed to hint, that his guards had 
 to be bribed to allow these privileges. But no doubt they considered 
 that they were bribed, not to neglect their duty, but only to execute it 
 with such mildness as was within their discretion. 
 
 - Ad. Rom. c. 9. 
 
THE SUCCESSORS OF THE APOSTLES. 259 
 
 analysing this glorious epistle, it will be best to quote 
 it in full. Nothing else can so effectively set before 
 us the living image of the saint.' 
 
 " Ignatius, who is also called God-bearer, to the 
 Church that has obtained mercy in the majesty of 
 the Most High Father and Jesus Christ His only 
 Son, beloved and enlightened by the will of Him 
 Who willed all things which are according to the love 
 of Jesus Christ our God, which sits at the head" in 
 the place of the region of the Romans, worthy of 
 God, of glory, of blessing, of praise, of success, of 
 purity, and sitting at the head of charity, named from 
 Christ and from the Father, which I also salute in 
 the name of Jesus Christ, the Son of the Father : to 
 you, who are in flesh and spirit united to every 
 commandment of His, filled inseparably with the 
 grace of God, and strained clean from any strange 
 colouring, I send my best blameless greeting in Jesus 
 Christ our God. 
 
 " Since after prayer to God I obtained that I might 
 see your God-worthy faces, as I asked to receive even 
 more, I hope to salute you bound in Christ Jesus, if 
 
 1 I follow the Greek text, from which the Syriac differs less than 
 usual, and for the integrity of which the internal and perhaps the 
 external evidence is stronger. 
 
 " Perhaps it is probable that St. Ignatius does mean by these phrases 
 to indicate a precedence of the Roman Church above others. It may 
 be doubted whether the second means " supreme in Christian love," or, 
 as Bishop Hefele takes it, " supreme in the Christian community, of 
 which love is the characteristic ; " but the first phrase is hardly 
 ambiguous. Both, however, are too obviously rhetorical to bear any 
 dogmatic weight. St. Ignatius is sure to make the most of anything 
 kind or honourable he has to say to a Chi-istian Church, 
 
26o BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 it be the will of God that I be thought worthy to 
 hold to the end. For the beginning is well ordered, 
 if only I may obtain grace, that I may receive my 
 lot without hindrance. For I fear your love, lest 
 even that may wrong me. For it is easy for you to 
 do what }-ou will : but for me it is hard to obtain 
 God, if you spare me. I would not have you be 
 men-pleasers, but please God, as indeed ye do. For 
 I never shall have such a time for obtaining God : nor 
 can you be inscribed with a better work than if you 
 keep silence. For if you keep silence from me, I 
 shall be God's : but if you be lovers of my flesh, 
 I shall again be a runner.' Do not offer me more 
 than to be offered to God, while yet the altar is 
 ready : that you may form a choir in love to sing to 
 the Father by Christ Jesus, that God counted the 
 Bishop of Syria worthy to be found, having sent for 
 him from the sun's rising to his setting. Good it is to 
 set from the world to God, that I may rise to Him. 
 
 " Never did ye envy any one ; ye were teachers of 
 others. But I desire those things to abide, which ye 
 command when ye instruct any. Only ask for me 
 power within and without, that I may not only say, 
 but may have the will, that I may not only be called 
 a Christian, but be found so. For if I be found, I 
 may also be called ; and may then be faithful, when 
 I appear not to the world. Nothing that appears is 
 
 ^ The reading is doubtful; but " I shall again be a sound" seems to 
 give no sense. Bishop Wordsworth's " I shall be a backslider" would 
 make excellent sense if the text were iaojiat iraXivrpix'^v , but seems 
 inadmissible for tvoXlv eao/j-ai Tpix^"- 
 
THE SUCCESSORS OF THE APOSTLES. 261 
 
 good. For our God Jesus Christ when He is in the 
 Father appears more. It is not a work of persuasion 
 but of greatness, is Christianity, most of all when it 
 is hated of the world. 
 
 " I write to the Churches, and give charge to all men 
 that I willingly die for God, if only ye do not hinder 
 me. I beseech you, be not ill-timed goodwill toward 
 me. Suffer me to become the food of the beasts, by 
 whom it is in my power to attain to God. I am 
 God's corn, and let me be ground by the beasts' 
 teeth that I may be found Christ's pure bread. Rather 
 court the beasts that they may be my grave, and 
 leave nothing of my body, that I may not, when 
 fallen asleep, be a burden to any one. Then shall I 
 be truly a disciple of Christ, when the world shall 
 not have the sight even of my body. Implore Christ 
 for me, that by these instruments I may be found a 
 sacrifice. I do not, like Peter and Paul, give orders 
 to you. They were apostles, I a condemned criminal ; 
 they were free, I to this hour a bondman ; but if I 
 suffer, Christ's freedman, and I shall arise in Him 
 free. Now I learn being bound to desire nothing. 
 
 " From Syria all the way to Rome I am fighting 
 with beasts, over land and sea, by night and day, 
 being bound to ten leopards ; that is, a detachment of 
 soldiers, who even when good is done them grow the 
 worse. But by their wrongs I am made more a dis- 
 ciple, yet I am not by this justified.' May I enjoy the 
 beasts that are made ready for me, and I pray that I 
 
 ^ St. Ignatius no doubt means to quote I Cor. iv. 4, though he uses 
 irapd TovTo instead of iv TovTip. 
 
262 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 may find them ready ; I will even court them, that 
 they may make haste and devour me, not like some 
 whom they were timid and did not touch. And if of 
 themselves they are unwilling, I will force them. 
 Forgive me ; I know what is expedient for myself 
 Now I begin to be a disciple. Let nothing grudge to 
 me, of things visible or invisible, that I may attain to 
 Jesus Christ. Come fire and cross, troops of beasts, dis- 
 locations of bones, hewing asunder of limbs, crushings 
 of the whole body, all evil punishments of the devil 
 against me, so that only I may attain to Jesus Christ. 
 
 " The pleasant things of the world shall profit me 
 nothing, nor the kingdoms of this present time. It 
 is good for me to die for Christ Jesus, rather than to 
 reign over the ends of the earth. Him do I seek 
 who died for us ; Him I desire who rose again for 
 our sake. But my travail is come upon me. Forgive 
 me, brethren ; do not hinder my living ; do not desire 
 me to die. When I desire to be God's, do not give 
 mc to the world, nor deceive me by matter. Suff"er 
 me to receive pure light ; when I am come thither I 
 shall be a man of God. Suffer me to become an 
 imitator of the passion of my God. If any man 
 have Him in himself let him understand what I 
 desire, and sympathise with me, knowing the things 
 that straiten me. 
 
 "The Prince of this world desires to snatch me away, 
 and to corrupt my purpose toward God. Let none, 
 therefore, of you who are present help him ; rather 
 be on my side, that is, on God's. Do not speak of 
 Jesus Christ while desiring the world. Let envy have 
 
THE SUCCESSORS OF THE APOSTLES. 263 
 
 no dwelling in you. Not even if I beseech you when 
 I come before you do ye hearken to me ; but rather 
 hearken to these things which I write to you. For I 
 write to you while living, being in love with death. 
 My heart's Love is crucified, and there is no fire in me 
 desirous of matter, but water living and speaking in 
 me, ' Come hither to the Father.' I have no pleasure 
 in the meat of corruption, nor in the pleasures of this 
 life. I desire God's bread, heavenly bread, the bread 
 of life, which is the flesh of Jesus Christ, the Son of 
 God, who was born in the latter time of the seed of 
 David and Abraham ; and I desire God's drink. His 
 blood, which is love incorruptible and ever-flowing 
 life. I no longer desire to live according to men. 
 And this shall be if ye so desire. Desire it, that ye 
 may be desired. In a short writing do I ask you ; 
 do ye believe me. And Jesus Christ shall manifest 
 these things to you, that I say them truly ; the mouth 
 that cannot lie, whereby the Father spake truly. Ask 
 for me that I may attain. I write to you not after 
 the flesh, but after the mind of God. If I suffer ye 
 have desired me ; if I be rejected ye have hated me. 
 
 " Remember in your prayer the Church in Syria, 
 which instead of me has God for a Shepherd. Jesus 
 Christ will be their only bishop, and your charity. 
 But I am ashamed to be called one of them ; for I 
 am not worthy, being the last of them, and one born 
 out of due time. But I have obtained mercy to be 
 somebody if I attain to God. My spirit saluteth you, 
 and the love of the Churches that have received me in 
 the name of Jesus Christ, not as a passer-by. For even 
 
264 BEG/AWLVGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 they that did not belong to the way I went according 
 to the flesh brought me on my way by every city. 
 
 " I write these things unto you from Smyrna, by the 
 Ephesians worthy of all blessedness. And there is with 
 me, besides many others, Crocus, the name I long for. 
 Concerning those who have gone before me from 
 Syria to Rome for the glory of God, I believe that 
 you have recognised them ; tell them that I am near. 
 For they are all worthy of God and of you, whom it 
 is fit that you should refresh in all things. I write 
 these things to you on the 23rd of August. Farewell 
 to the end, in the patience of Jesus Christ. Amen." 
 
 After these glorious words almost anything else 
 seems tame ; but the remaining letters of St. Ignatius 
 were written after this at Troas, the next stage after 
 Smyrna on his journey to Rome. The first, to the 
 Church of Philadelphia, is not in the Syriac ; but 
 from it we may best extract specimens of the spirit 
 of Catholicity or Churchmanship, which is, as I say, 
 so characteristic of all the epistles, except that to the 
 Romans, which is absorbed by the thought of the 
 writer's own martyrdom. 
 
 Even in the salutation or dedication he salutes the 
 Church, " which is joy eternal and abiding, especially 
 if they be in one with the bishop, and the presbyters 
 and deacons that are with him." In the second 
 paragraph he goes on, "As children therefore of light 
 and truth, flee from division and evil teaching ; but 
 where the Shepherd is there do ye follow as sheep. 
 P'or many trustworthy wolves [I translate literally his 
 quaint irony] by evil pleasure lead captive the run- 
 
THE SUCCESSORS OF THE APOSTLES. 265 
 
 ners of God ; but in your unity they will have no 
 place." Then follows a warning against heretics : 
 then " Be zealous therefore to use one Eucharist ; for 
 there is one Flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ, and one 
 Cup for union of His Blood, one Altar, as there is 
 one bishop, with the presbytery and deacons my 
 fellow-servants, that whatsoever ye do ye may do 
 according to God." Then immediately he goes on to 
 tell how the Scripture is to be used. He speaks of 
 himself as " having fled to the Gospel as to the Flesh 
 of Jesus, and to the Apostles as to the presbytery of 
 the Church. And let us love the prophets also, 
 because they also made proclamation for the Gospel, 
 and hoped in Him, and waited for Him, in whom 
 also they believed, and so were saved in the unity of 
 Jesus Christ, being saints worthy of love and admira- 
 tion, to whom Jesus Christ bore witness, and being 
 counted together in the Gospel of the common hope." 
 But from his praise of the Old Testament prophets, 
 he goes on into a warning against Judaism. The fact 
 of this being thought requisite is a proof of the early 
 date of the work ; indeed, to my mind, very nearly a 
 proof of its genuineness. " But if any interpret to 
 you Judaism, do not hear him; for it is better to hear 
 Christianity from a man having circumcision ' than 
 Judaism from one uncircumcised. But if both do not 
 speak to me of Jesus Christ, they are to me tomb- 
 stones and graves of the dead, whereon are written 
 
 ^ Probably this means an Old Testament prophet, not an orthodox 
 Christian teacher of Jewish birth and habits. The argument would, 
 however, provetheright of the latter to toleration. SeeLect. VII. p. 328. 
 
266 BEGIXAVNGS OF THE CHRIST! A A' CHURCH. 
 
 only the names of men." Then follow some allusions, 
 rather obscure to us, to some personal dispute in 
 which he had been engaged. In this it seems some 
 Judaiser tried to argue with him on the ground of 
 Scripture. St. Ignatius met him on that ground, but 
 declared that his religion did not rest on the Bible 
 and the Bible only. " When I heard some saying, 
 ' Unless I find it in the documents, I do not believe in 
 the Gospel,' and on my saying to them that it is 
 written, they answered me, ' That is the question,' 
 But my documents are Jesus Christ; the uncorrupted 
 documents are His Cross and Death, His Resurrec- 
 tion, and the Faith that is by Him, by all which I 
 desire to be justified by your prayers." He concludes 
 with personal messages. The most important thing in 
 them is, that the persecution at Antioch is at end. 
 
 To the Church at Smyrna he writes in much the 
 same strain, only the heresy he denounces is not that 
 of Judaism, but of Docctism,' the doctrine that our 
 Lord's Body, and by consequence His death, was 
 unreal and only an appearance. We notice that in 
 arguing against this he refers to the account of the 
 Lord's Baptism to the canonical St. Matthew ;" but 
 for the appearance after the Resurrection,^ not to the 
 canonical St. Luke, but to an apocryphal work, not 
 now extant, called the Doctrine of Peter : "When He 
 came to Peter and them that w^ere with him, He 
 said unto them, ' Take, handle Me, and see that I am 
 
 ^ It is not necessary to discuss whether the Judaizers and the Doce- 
 tists were the same persons. The doctrines were combined by some 
 heretics, opposed to each other by others. - C. i. ^ C. 3. 
 
THE SUCCESSORS OF THE APOSTLES. 267 
 
 not a bodiless demon.' And immediately they touched 
 Him, and believed, being convinced by His Flesh and 
 Spirit." The only other passage I need quote ' is one 
 noticeable as the earliest controversial statement 
 about Eucharistic doctrine. He says that the heretics 
 " abstain from Eucharist and Prayer, because they do 
 not confess that the Eucharist is the Flesh of our 
 Saviour Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins, which 
 by His goodness the Father raised up. They there- 
 fore who speak against the Gift of God perish in their 
 disputing. But it were expedient for them to keep 
 charity,- that they may also rise again." 
 
 Besides this letter to the Church of Smyrna, St. 
 Ignatius sent a more private one to St. Polycarp, the 
 bishop. It consists mostly of advice to him as to 
 the faithful discharge of his office ; though near the 
 end there are a few exhortations to the Church at 
 large, in the same tone as in the other letters, which 
 it is expected that the bishop will repeat in his ex- 
 hortations to them ; for, when a letter was sent to the 
 Church at large as well as one to the bishop, we can 
 hardly suppose that the latter was meant to be 
 publicly read like the former. St. Polycarp was not 
 now a young man : he must have been a Christian 
 for forty-six years, and a bishop for nearly twenty : 
 but St. Ignatius was probably old enough to have 
 been his father, and his approaching martyrdom gave 
 him a further right to adopt a tone which, though re- 
 spectful, is authoritative. The pastoral duties to which 
 
 1 C. 7. ■ 'A7a7ra>'; i.e. seemingly "to frequent the 'A7d7r7;," 
 
 which therefore is still closely united with the Eucharist. 
 
268 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 he exhorts him are such as these : " Let not widows be 
 neglected. After the Lord, do thou take thought for 
 them. Let nothing be done without thy judgement, 
 neither do thou aught without God's : as indeed thou 
 dost not, being stable. Let synagogues' be held 
 more frequently. Seek out all by name. Despise 
 not slaves,- male or female ; but neither let them be 
 puffed up, but let them live in service all the more, 
 to the glory of God, that they may obtain a better 
 liberty from God. Let them not long to be liberated 
 from the common fund, that they may not be found 
 the slaves of concupiscence. Flee from evil arts ; but 
 rather make discourse concerning these things. Speak 
 to my sisters, to love the Lord, and to be content 
 with their husbands in flesh and spirit. Likewise to 
 my brethren also give charge in the name of Jesus 
 Christ, to love their wives as the Lord the Church. 
 If any man is able to live in continence, to the 
 honour of the Lord of the flesh, let him abide with- 
 out boasting. If he boasts, he has perished ; or if 
 he thinks himself greater than the bishop,^ he is 
 corrupted. But it is fit that men and women con- 
 tracting marriage should make their union with the 
 approval of the bishop, that the marriage may be 
 according to God, not according to lust." Then 
 follows a request to the Smyrnaeans that they, as 
 
 ^ Notice the word used, as in St. James, of Christian assemblies, 
 even by this strongly anti-Judaic writer. 
 
 ^ It is hardly possible that St. Ignatius could have written this 
 sentence, if St. Polycarp had been a slave himself, redeemed by 
 Christian charity. See below, p. 270 iiiit. 
 
 ^ Therefore the bishop himself was married. 
 
THE SUCCESSORS OF THE APOSTLES. 269 
 
 well as the Philadelphians, would send an ambassador 
 to congratulate the Church of Antioch on the end of 
 the persecution. The Syriac translator seems to have 
 thought that St. Polycarp had been commissioned to 
 consecrate a successor to the see of Antioch ; but of 
 this there is no trace in the Greek text. 
 
 From Troas St. Ignatius crossed to Neapolis, 
 thence went overland through Macedonia and Epirus 
 to Dyrrhachium, and thence came to Rome — going 
 round the peninsula by sea, if we can trust the Acts ; 
 but it seems far more natural that he would cross to 
 Brundisium and go on by land, especially as he had 
 not left Smyrna till the end of August. However, 
 there is no doubt that he reached Rome, and that on 
 December 20th — nearly a year after his arrest — he 
 was exposed to the lions in the Flavian Amphitheatre, 
 commonly called the Colosseum. It is said that he 
 had his wish, and was entirely devoured ; only a few 
 fragmiCnts of bones were collected, and reverently 
 conveyed to Antioch. In later times a church was 
 built over them : it is said that at the Mohammedan 
 conquest, the relics were conveyed to Rome, and now 
 lie in the old church of St. Clement. 
 
 We mentioned St. Polycarp in an earlier lecture — 
 we shall have to mention him in a later : for he, like 
 Nestor, outlived two generations of mortal men, and 
 was king among the third.' His Christian life began, 
 as we saw, in or about A.D. 69, when we may presume 
 the whole household in which he lived believed, and 
 was baptized : or possibly he was then born in a 
 ^ li. I. 252. 
 
270 BEGLVNIxVGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 family already Christian.' A late legend says that 
 he was by birth a slav^e, bought, educated, and eman- 
 cipated by a charitable Christian lady : but this seems 
 hardly consistent either with the tone of his own 
 language, or, as we have seen, with that of St. 
 Ignatius to him. Under the instruction of St. John, 
 and perhaps of the other apostles settled in Asia, he 
 grew up in blameless Christian youth, giving no 
 occasion to the adversary to speak reproachfully, nor 
 bringing on himself unhappy memories that might 
 weaken him in the time of trial. If we are right in 
 the version given above of a passage in St. Ignatius,- 
 he was married — no doubt early in life ; for he was 
 made bishop when still young, and it would have 
 seemed indecent to Christian sentiment for a man to 
 marry after accession to that office. I am tempted 
 to conjecture that Alee — a Smyrnaean lady of rank^ 
 to whom St. Ignatius sends greetings in his private 
 as well as his public letter'' — was the bishop's wife : 
 if so, he was probably himself a man of good social 
 position.^ Tradition says he was not the first bishop 
 of Smyrna, his predecessor being named Bucolus. 
 
 ' His own words {Mart. c. 9) 6y^m-\K0VTa koI e^ ^rrj e'x'^ dovXevcov 
 avTw might most naturally be taken " I have Ih'cd to the age 0/S6 in His 
 service : " but St. John v. 5 shows that the construction may well bear 
 the meaning, " I have spejit 86 years in His service." And St. 
 Irenaeus' use of the word ixadrirevdels [adv. Haer. HI. iii. 4) seems 
 as if he were personally a convert — though no doubt at a very tender 
 age. The name YioKvKo.p-Ko-i proves nothing either way : it was con- 
 nected with Asiatic mythology (S. Hippol. Ref. Haer. V. 8, 9) ; but 
 Christians at this time had no scruple at using mythological names, and 
 it is capable of a Christian sense. 
 
 " Page 268, n. 3. ^ Mart. S. Pol. c. 17. 
 
 ■• Ad Siiiyrn. c. 13, ad Pol. c, 8. fin. 
 
THE SUCCESSORS OF THE APOSTLES. 271 
 
 But he certainly was made bishop by St. John him- 
 self:' he may have been forty, but hardly more, at the 
 apostle's death. We are told that he wrote several 
 epistles to different Churches, and to private persons : 
 but the most famous of these in ancient times, and 
 the only one that has reached us, is one to the Philip- 
 pians. This was written at the time of St. Ignatius' 
 martyrdom, of which he asks them for particulars. 
 
 He sends to them copies of St. Ignatius' letters 
 received by him ;- and the evidence of his letter goes 
 far to confirm the genuineness of the Ignatian ones. 
 Though it is, of course, as easy to deny the genuine- 
 ness of this as of those, the style is so utterly 
 different as to prove that they were not forged by 
 the same persons to support one another : con- 
 sequently, they do really support one another when 
 found to be in harmony in their mutual references. 
 
 St. Polycarp's epistle is in spiritual tone quite 
 worthy of its place among the Apostolic Fathers : 
 but it has neither the historical interest of St. 
 Clement's nor the personal interest of St. Ignatius'. 
 It begins in a form more individual than the former, 
 less so than the latter : " Polycarp and the elders that 
 are with him to the Church of God sojourning at 
 
 ^ S. Iren. 1. c. 
 
 ° C. 13. The mention of "epistles" in the plural does not, how- 
 ever, absolutely prove the genuineness of St. Ignatius' letter to the 
 Smyrnaeans as well as that to St. Polycarp. For in c. 3 St. Polycarp says 
 that St. Paul wrote " epistles " to the Philippians. Now no doubt St. 
 Paul may have written more than the one now extant : but if they had 
 been known down to St. Polycarp's time, we may be sure they would 
 not have been lost since. It therefore follows that the plural may be used 
 vaguely (perhaps on the analogy of the Latin literae) for one letter only. 
 
272 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 Philippi : mercy to you and peace from God Almighty 
 and the Lord Jesus Christ our Saviour be multipHed." 
 Perhaps the difference of form from St. Clement, by 
 whose epistle St. Polycarp was certainly influenced, 
 may indicate that the position, both of the bishop 
 and of the presbytery as an order, was more dis- 
 tinctive now than it had been twenty years earlier. 
 It is noticeable that, while the Philippians are ex- 
 horted, quite after St. Ignatius' manner, to be " subject 
 to the elders and deacons as to God and Christ," 
 nothing is said about the bishop ; and some suppose 
 that the office was not introduced there yet. 
 
 As for the matter and style of the epistle, it is 
 nearer than either of the earlier Christian writings to 
 a cento of texts, or at least a reproduction of scrip- 
 tural exhortations. There is one reference lO St. 
 John's first epistle,' a great many to almost all of St. 
 Paul's ; his writing to the Philippians themselves is 
 naturally expressly commemorated. The books of 
 which St. Polycarp's mind is fullest, however, are the 
 first epistle of St. Peter, and St. Paul's epistles to 
 Timothy, a fact of some importance in estimating the 
 evidence for the genuineness of the latter. A speech 
 of St. Peter's in the Acts ^ is also quoted, and several 
 sayings of our Lord's from the Gospels. Most of 
 these last are grouped together ^ in much the same 
 way as by St. Clement, and probably with a recollec- 
 tion of his quotation of the same sayings,^ and the 
 
 ' C. 7. To point out all the references to New Testament Scripture 
 would be to transcribe the whole epistle. 
 
 2 C. I. » C. 2, fin. ■• See Lect. V. p. 233. 
 
THE SUCCESSORS OF THE APOSTLES. 273 
 
 same question arises as with him, whether they are 
 derived from the canonical Gospels or from other 
 sources. With St. Polycarp the probabihty is rather 
 stronger than with St. Clement that the former is the 
 case, though either he uses a version of St. Matthew 
 differing somewhat from the Greek text now current, 
 or mixes up texts from SS. Matthew and Luke with- 
 out remembering or caring whether he is quoting 
 from one or both. 
 
 But though there is little doubt that SS. Clement, 
 Ignatius, and Polycarp were acquainted with our 
 canonical Gospels, there is some significance in the 
 ambiguity of their evidence on the point, compared 
 with that they bear to the apostolic epistles. The 
 words of the Lord were no doubt held more sacred 
 than those even of His greatest servants ; but less 
 importance was attached to their outward form. The 
 epistles were epistles of St. Paul, or St. Peter, or St. 
 John ; the words were those of a saint, and the 
 thoughts those of the Spirit of Holiness. But the 
 Gospel was the Gospel, not of Matthew, or Mark, or 
 Luke, but of the Lord Jesus Christ. So long as men 
 read His words, it was a minor matter whether they 
 read that Gospel according to Matthew, Mark, or 
 Luke, or even, as we saw St. Ignatius did, according 
 to a less authoritative informant, if only he reported 
 the Lord's words and deeds with tolerable fidelity. 
 
 There is another Christian document that seems to 
 date from about this time, which, though not compar- 
 able with the writings of SS. Clement and Polycarp, 
 either in intellectual or in spiritual value, nevertheless 
 
 T 
 
274 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 made its way, like them, into what we may call the 
 deutero-canonical supplement to the New Testament, 
 and has, on this ground at least, some historical im- 
 portance. 
 
 This is the so-called epistle of Barnabas. Few 
 critics believe, and it is strange that any sensible 
 person should believe, that it is the work of the 
 apostle so-called ; it is generally thought to have been 
 composed in the first quarter of the second century, 
 when he was almost certainly dead. It is hardly 
 likely that it is by another Barnabas, Barnabas being 
 not so much a name as a title, and a distinctively 
 apostolic one ; but we cannot say whether the author 
 deliberately forged St. Barnabas' name to his work 
 with a view to give it greater authority, or whether it 
 was attached to it accidentally. One might almost 
 imagine that his name may have been transferred to 
 it from the epistle to the Hebrews; whether the latter 
 be really St. Barnabas' work or no, it certainly was 
 ascribed to him ' in early times. And this Pseudo- 
 Barnabas is a sort of caricature of the epistle to the 
 Hebrews ; it is the work of a man who exaggerates 
 its characteristic doctrine— its exaltation of the Gospel 
 above the Jewish law — to the verge of heresy, and who 
 caricatures its method — the spiritual interpretation of 
 the details of the ceremonial law — to a point very far 
 beyond the verge of the grotesque. Some of the 
 illustrations of this latter characteristic are such as I 
 could not quote without profanity, some not without 
 indecency; but in his theory of the character and 
 1 Tert, dd Pud. 20. 
 
THE SUCCESSORS OF THE APOSTLES. z'ji, 
 
 purpose of the- Levitical law there is a certain inge- 
 nuity, perhaps even plausibility, if only it were stated 
 with more logical skill, and more accurate knowledge 
 of Scripture history. His view is, that God gave the 
 ten commandments to Israel, intending them to serve 
 as a real law of righteousness; but from the time that 
 they made the golden calf, the cessation of this law 
 was symbolised by Moses breaking the tables contain- 
 ing it, and the laws afterwards given, though no doubt 
 still given by God, come under Ezekiel's description 
 of " statutes that were not good, and judgments by 
 which they should not live." 
 
 I cannot now discuss the question whether there 
 may be anything in this theory. Both theologically 
 and critically, it seems a suggestion worth following 
 out ; but our Pseudo-Barnabas was nothing of a critic, 
 and not much of a theologian. The only real impor- 
 tance of the epistle is, it shows how strongly opposed 
 to Judaism was the feeling of one section, at least, of 
 the Church. We know that in the next generation 
 this anti-Jewish feeling grew still stronger ; heretics 
 denied the Jewish law to be in any sense the work of 
 the true God, and this seems to have been only the 
 exaggeration of a tendency that was at work in the 
 orthodox Church. But we cannot trace the growth 
 of that tendency in any detail. It may have some- 
 thing to do with the attitude of the Jewish nation 
 towards the imperial power. Rather early in Trajan's 
 reign, St. Symeon, the son of Clopas, who had suc- 
 ceeded his cousin St. James as bishop of Jerusalem, 
 was crucified by Atticus, the Roman governor ; he was. 
 
276 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 a hundred and twenty years old, and was denounced, 
 we are told, by heretics as being of the house of 
 David, and a Christian ; but his accusers were found 
 to be of the house of David too — it does not seem 
 clear whether they also were punished for presumed 
 treason, or whether they had first been arrested, and 
 denounced St. Symeon to save themselves. How- 
 ever, it seems that at Jerusalem, at least, the relations 
 between Christians and Jews were neither more nor 
 less hostile than they had been ; the former had more 
 to dread from the imperial feeling of Pagans than 
 from the national feeling of Jews. 
 
 But towards the end of the reign of Trajan the 
 Jews revolted, and a bloody war ensued — bloody 
 perhaps rather in massacres, first on one side then on 
 the other, than in open warfare. Though the reign 
 of Trajan is among the most interesting periods of 
 the Roman Empire, it is the one for which our 
 historical authorities are scantiest ; and we can say 
 little about this war, except that its chief scenes were 
 in Egypt, Libya, and Cyprus, and that the Jews 
 were at last crushed by O. Lusius Quietus, a Moorish 
 chief who had distinguished himself in the Dacian 
 wars. But it seems that from the time of the con- 
 quest by Titus onward, Jews were liable, at all events 
 when their co-religionists were in revolt, to be required 
 to give proof of their loyalty by confessing that Caesar 
 was their Lord. Now this confession was, or might be, 
 ambiguous. As Josepus puts it,' it would be no more 
 than such a confession that they were slaves of Caesar 
 
 ^ Using Ihc word Beffirorrjs, not Kvpio^, B.J. VII. x. i. 
 
THE SUCCESSORS OF THE APOSTLES. 277 
 
 as Nehemiah and his companions had made that they 
 were slaves of the Persian king. But Jews or Chris- 
 tians, who use the word " Lord " as a distinctly divine 
 title, a title veiling the holiest of all, could not bear 
 to apply it to any one but the Lord their God, or 
 the Lord their Saviour ; and thus there was a mis- 
 understanding that could not be called the fault of 
 either party — Jews and Christians would feel that a 
 demand was made on them to which they could not 
 yield without apostasy, while the Romans thought in 
 all honesty that they were requiring nothing beyond 
 a pledge of civil obedience. 
 
 Still the position of Jews and Christians was not 
 exactly the same ; the former did, and the latter did 
 not, look forward to a state of earthly politics in- 
 volving the cessation of the Roman Empire. We are 
 told that the grandsons of St. Jude succeeded in 
 explaining to Domitian that the kingdom of Christ 
 that they looked for was not an earthly one ; other 
 Christian confessors might say the same, though in 
 general with worse success in making themselves 
 understood or believed. But Jews could not deny 
 that, when their Christ came, he would overthrow the 
 kingdom of Rome, and restore the kingdom to Israel; 
 and therefore their only chance, and a sufficiently 
 desperate one, seemed to lie in a sullen submission 
 till the Christ came, and a conspiracy prepared for a 
 sudden revolt as soon as he should have come. It is 
 highly probable that it was a sense of this difference 
 between the Jewish and Christian attitude towards 
 the empire that prompted the Christians to such zeal 
 
278 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 in separating their cause from that of the Jews. They 
 felt themselves to be loyal subjects in a sense that 
 the Jews could not be ; they felt also more and 
 more keenly every year, that the Jews were resolute 
 in rejecting the Christ whom they believed in ; and 
 hence they deprecated being grouped with Jews in 
 the judgment of the civil power, and treated by it, 
 like the Jews, with intolerant and intolerable harsh- 
 ness. It is small blame to the Jews that they were 
 driven to revolt ; it is one of the glories of the 
 Christian Church that they remained, under what- 
 ever persecution, still heartily and actively loyal. 
 
VII. 
 ^jbf ©l)urt]^ of Hjt Apologists. 
 
 THE history of the Church at any period consists 
 of two elements — the history in the ordinary 
 sense, the narrative of events of visible importance, 
 and the more difficult, more subtle, but not less im- 
 portant history of opinion — the analysis of the modes 
 of thought working in men's minds, and the statement 
 of the relations between these. But in general the 
 two are closely connected: the great events of Church 
 history are the outcome of the great movements of 
 thought. If any one studies the ecclesiastical, or 
 indeed the secular, history of the fifth century, or 
 of the sixteenth, or of the seventeenth, he cannot 
 separate the history of events from that of opinion : 
 the growth and the working of certain opinions arc 
 the most important events of all, and the other 
 events are meaningless, except in relation to those 
 opinions. 
 
 There are, however, other periods when it is not so. 
 There are times, such as those of the early English 
 Church, described by the Ven. Bede, full of interesting 
 events and interesting figures, but where the tone of 
 
2So BEGIAuVINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 feeling and general line of thought is obscure/ and 
 where speculation seems hardly to have any history 
 at all. On the other hand, the middle of the second 
 century is a period when thought was exceedingly 
 active ; it is a period also full of great events, often 
 the work of great men. But the thoughts and the 
 events, the thinkers and the workers, seem each to have 
 their own separate history, and to come into little 
 contact with one another ; when they do, the contact 
 usually becomes collision. In this Lecture, we en- 
 deavour to trace the history of events, having on one 
 side the history of thought, which practically means 
 the history of Gnosticism.^ Gnosticism was, at best, 
 an intellectual system : the Church was primarily 
 spiritual, and thus it was saints not philosophers, 
 martyrs not indifferentists, in whose hands the des- 
 tiny of the Church must lie. 
 
 The anti-Jewish controversy which we observed in 
 Pseudo-Barnabas was one of the factors — the most 
 purely theological — in the controversies of this age. 
 The political attitude of Judaism, and of the empire 
 towards Judaism, was also one of the most active 
 influences that determined the external history of 
 the Church. It will be well for us first to trace this 
 external history down to the time w'hen the rivalry 
 
 ^ E.g. how could such good Christians as the Roman missionaries 
 consider uniformity important in such a point as the tonsure ? (The 
 question of Easter, no doubt, was one where it was at least desirable. ) 
 And how did St. Gregory's sensible advice to St. Augustine on the 
 marriage of Jirst cousins develope into the wretched state of ecclesi- 
 astical law which embittered the lives of Edwy of England and Robert 
 of France ? ^ See note at the end of this Lecture. 
 
THE CHURCH OF THE APOLOGISTS. 281 
 
 between Judaism and Christianity ceases. We may 
 then return, and see what efforts were made to deter- 
 mine intellectuahy the relations between them, com- 
 plicated, as such efforts almost always were, by 
 speculations on questions that were at least as much 
 metaphysical as theological. 
 
 Trajan died in A.D. 117, at the age of sixty-five. 
 On his deathbed he nominated — so, at least, it was 
 declared — his distant cousin P. Aelius Hadrianus as 
 his successor and adopted son. The new Emperor 
 abandoned to the Parthians the countries which 
 Trajan had overrun, and had prematurely organized 
 as provinces of the empire ; they were more or 
 less in revolt, and it was manifestly impossible to 
 retain them permanently. But concentrating his 
 troops, he crushed the last embers of the Jewish 
 revolt, and re - established peace within the old 
 limits of the empire. It cost an effort to retain 
 Trajan's earlier conquest of Dacia, but that was 
 done ; the Emperor, himself a competent soldier, 
 went there in person until called home by a con- 
 spiracy. 
 
 So far Hadrian appears as a Roman Emperor, a 
 Roman statesman and general, as an Emperor ought 
 to be ; but he was in truth an Emperor of a new 
 type. He was indeed a native of Rome, and ap- 
 parently of pure Italian descent, though born, like 
 Trajan, of a family long settled in Spain. But his 
 education was at least as much Greek as Roman, 
 and the bent of his mind more so ; and Greek in this 
 age meant cosmopolitan, whether for good or evil. 
 
2S2 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 Hadrian doubtless did well and wisely in spending 
 the greater part of his reign neither at Rome nor in 
 the field, but in successive visitations of all the pro- 
 vinces of the empire. Nor can we blame him for the 
 artistic tastes which Roman public opinion had so 
 bitterly condemned in Nero, but of which it was 
 more tolerant now ; and Hadrian did, at any rate, 
 much less than Nero to make them ridiculous by his 
 personal vanity. But he was not only a dilettante, 
 but a profligate — profligate, not in the way of the 
 coarse sensuality which Roman opinion had con- 
 doned in Trajan, and others of the best rulers, as an 
 almost necessary distraction from the cares of empire, 
 but aesthetically and sentimentally. He was not in 
 the least ashamed of his vices, but paraded them, 
 and demanded public sympathy for them, as offen- 
 sively as Nero himself: — as offensively, for while he 
 outraged good taste less, public opinion was probably 
 more sensitive than in Nero's day to the outrage on 
 morality. 
 
 With these tastes and habits, Hadrian had an 
 active and enquiring mind, interested at least as 
 much in the religious as in the philosophical systems 
 of his day. But he had not the seriousness of 
 purpose that would have enabled him to grasp the 
 idea of any one religious system ; still less was it 
 to be expected either that a Roman and an Emj^jcror, 
 or that a man of Greek and cosmopolitan culture, 
 should admit the claim of any to his exclusive 
 allegiance. 
 
 Both Jews and Christians asserted that Hadrian 
 
THE CHURCH OF THE APOLOGISTS. 2S3 
 
 had acknowledged the truth of their rehgion.' No 
 doubt he had really shown an interest in both, and a 
 certain sympathy for both. St. Justin has preserved 
 for US'" a letter of his to Minucius Fundanus, Pro- 
 consul of Asia, which, though not amounting to an 
 edict of toleration for Christianity, is far more favour- 
 able to its professors than Trajan's letter to Pliny. 
 It proves indeed that public opinion against the 
 Christians was stronger than in Trajan's time, or 
 perhaps that it was stronger in Asia than in Bithynia. 
 The accusations that came before Pliny were some- 
 times anonymous ; but, at any rate, they were 
 definite and formal accusations of a crime known to 
 the law. But it seems that Fundanus had reported 
 that the Provincials came before him simply with 
 requests that the Christians might be punished — 
 requests often enforced by the shouts of a mob, like 
 the proverbial one of " the Christians to the lions ! " 
 
 " I have received a letter written to me by your 
 predecessor, the illustrious Serenus Granianus, and I 
 do not wish to pass over the question he referred to 
 me in silence, lest both trouble be caused to harmless 
 persons and an opportunity be given to the spiteful 
 for malicious prosecution. So if the Provincials^ 
 
 ■^ Even among pagans the stoiy was current that he thought of ad- 
 mitting Christ among the gods, and built temples intended to be 
 dedicated to him. (Lampr. Alex. Sev., xliii. 6.) Probably the report, 
 even if untrue, was circulated in his own time ; and in Tertullian's 
 {Apol. 5) had taken the incredible form of ascribing the intention to 
 Tiberius. 
 
 " Appended to his First Apology. 
 
 •* The term seems to denote the local magistrates, not the populace. 
 
284 B£G/X.VIA'GS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 have clear materials to support this plea of theirs 
 against the Christians, so as to make good any charge 
 against them in your court, I do not interfere with 
 their taking action ; but I do not allow them to 
 employ mere requests for this object, or to support 
 them by outcries ; for it is far more just, if any one 
 wishes to prosecute, for you to take cognizance of the 
 charges. So if any one prosecutes, and proves that 
 the persons mentioned are doing anything against 
 the laws, as the offences deserve, you will appoint 
 punishments accordingly. You will be very sure to 
 attend to this point, that if any one brings a malicious 
 accusation against any of these people, you will do 
 severe justice on him as his villany deserves." 
 
 Thus Pliny's question was answered : the name of 
 Christian was not itself a crime, though it scarcely 
 ceased to be presumed that there were "crimes going 
 with the name." And a good deal would depend on 
 the discretion of magistrates as to what might be 
 considered a crime. Some might think it criminal to 
 refuse to sacrifice to the Emperor's genius, or to the 
 gods for his safety ; while others might let any 
 Christian alone until they received distinct proof that 
 he had eaten a baby or committed incest. 
 
 For these were, during the greater part of the 
 second century, the stock popular charges against the 
 Christians. It is remarkable that the former, at least, 
 has been revived in China in our own time. Both 
 were, probably, in part the causes and in part the 
 effects of the secrecy maintained as to Christian 
 worship — the late or early hours of their assemblies. 
 
THE CHURCH OF THE APOLOGISTS. 285 
 
 and the care taken to exclude the uninitiated. The 
 " hatred of the human race," which accordincr to 
 Tacitus was the crime really proved against the 
 Christians charged with burning Rome, may fairly 
 be translated, " We know that we are of God, and 
 the whole world lieth in wickedness." Now, though 
 that doctrine does not involve a hatred of the world, 
 it does make the warning necessary, " Marvel not, 
 my brethren, if the world hate you." The Christians 
 could not give that which was holy to the dogs, nor 
 cast their pearls before swine : the world not un- 
 naturally resented the being treated like dogs and 
 swine, and treated the Christians worse. The Chris- 
 tians were forced to be more exclusive than ever, even 
 as a measure of self-defence ; and yet the greater 
 their exclusiveness, the greater were the suspicions 
 against them — the world assumed that they must 
 have reason to be ashamed of the rites which they so 
 jealously forbade any one to know the nature of. As 
 to the two specific charges, that of cannibalism was 
 suggested, or at least encouraged, by the partial over- 
 hearing of Christian language about the Eucharist: 
 that of profligacy may probably have arisen from 
 the fact that there were professedly Christian bodies, 
 as we have seen and shall see, against which the 
 charge was true. Nor can we deny that there may 
 have been some foundation given for them by scandals 
 even in the Catholic Church. We know that there 
 was at least one scandalous case of incest in the 
 Church in St. Paul's own time — that even in the 
 blameless Church of Thessalonica he thought the 
 
286 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 injunction of chastity less superfluous than that of 
 brotherly love — one may suppose, because the breach 
 of one duty might easily disguise itself as the fulfil- 
 ment of the other.' Then, while the licentious sects, 
 from the Nicolaitans downwards, had no scruple 
 against protecting themselves from persecution by 
 outward conformity to pagan rites, an immoral 
 Catholic was sure to bring down persecution on the 
 body he or she belonged to — the outside world could 
 not know that body had excommunicated him, be- 
 cause they did not know the nature of the Com- 
 munion from which he was excluded. 
 
 But however either charge originated, both were 
 elaborated in loathsome detail by the popular imagi- 
 nation, till they ceased to have any such relation to 
 truth as they may have had to begin with. The 
 most virtuous Christians, living in the most orderly 
 Churches, found themselves charged with these un- 
 natural crimes by the mob ; and the magistrates, 
 though probably they did not often seriously believe 
 in the crimes charged, nevertheless treated the 
 Christians as criminals simply because they were 
 Christians. Now under Trajan the Christians had 
 endured this treatment in silence — they either sub- 
 mitted to death or apostatized ; and it was only from 
 those who took the latter course that any clear 
 
 1 TertuUian's language {De Jcj. 17) shows how easily a real scandal 
 might be described in words that would souvid worse than the reality. 
 It is even possible that a scandal might arise from the more than harm- 
 less custom of a Christian speaking of his wife as his sister. (See 
 Tobit vii. 16; viii. 4, 7. Herm. Vis. ii. 2 is ambiguous.) 
 
THE CHURCH OF THE APOLOGISTS. 2S7 
 
 Statement reached the Roman authorities of the real 
 innocence of the Christian faith and worship. But 
 under Hadrian the Christians began to raise their 
 voice in their own defence ; the age of the Apologists 
 begins. Men who often had the philosophic culture 
 and habits that Hadrian himself was making fashion- 
 able — who, at any rate, had literary training enough 
 to write plain readable books — began to compose 
 defences for the Christians, and addressed them to 
 the Emperor, or sometimes to some person influential 
 with him. 
 
 Perhaps the earliest of these Apologies which has 
 come down to us, and one of the best in a literary 
 sense, is an anonymous one, which we can only quote 
 as the Epistle to Diognetus.' We d^o not know who 
 Diognetus was ; perhaps probably a philosopher who 
 had access to the imperial circle. He is addressed as 
 " most excellent," like St. Luke's Theophilus, and the 
 writer appeals to his honour not to abuse his confi- 
 dence in addressing him by denouncing him as a 
 Christian. We may quote the opening sentence : 
 
 " Since I see, most excellent Diognetus, that you 
 have been most zealous to learn the religion of the 
 Christians, and enquire very accurately and carefully 
 about them — what God they trust in, and how they 
 worship Him, that it makes them all neglect the 
 world, and despise death ; and that they neither make 
 
 ' If the Epistle to Diognetus be really, as the MS. stated, by the 
 author of the address "to the Greeks," it appears that the author was 
 named Ambrose. But the style of the oration "to the Greeks" is more 
 ambitious, and its substance a good deal inferior, to that of the Epistle. 
 It does not read like the work of the same author or the same ace. 
 
288 BEGIXNIXGS OF THE CHRISTIA.Y CHURCH. 
 
 account of the gods recognized by the Greeks, nor 
 keep the religious worship of the Jews ; also what is 
 the warm love they have to each other, and why it 
 can be that this new race or practice has come into 
 life now and not sooner, — I approve of this earnest 
 desire of yours, and ask of God, who supplies to us 
 the power both to speak and to hear, both that I 
 may speak so that the hearer may become better in 
 the highest degree, and that you may so hear that no 
 harm may befall the speaker.'" 
 
 He then proceeds to say,' the Christians do not 
 worship the gods of the Greeks, because they are 
 lifeless idols : his argument being probably to some 
 extent suggested by Isa. xli., and the imitations of it 
 in the genuine prophecies and the apocryphal epistle 
 of Jeremiah. 
 
 Judaism, he then says,^ avoids the absurdity of 
 idolatry ; but the Jews share with idolators the 
 absurdity of treating God as if He needed material 
 offerings, or as if external ceremonies were meritorious 
 in His sight. The anti-Jewish feeling is in fact as 
 strong as in the epistle of Barnabas, and is one of 
 the chief reasons for referring this work to the same 
 early age ; the other being its literary excellence, 
 and purity of style. But the author shows less 
 sign than Pseudo - Barnabas of transgressing the 
 limits of orthodoxy in his depreciation of the Jewish 
 law. 
 
 ' It seems far-fetched to understand the last words, ' ' so that the 
 speaker {i.e. the Holy .'spirit speaking in me) may not be grieved." 
 
 - C. 2. 
 
 '■' C. 7,. 
 
THE CHURCH OF THE APOLOGISTS. 289 
 
 Then, having said why Christians differ from Pagans 
 and from Jews, he proceeds to explain what they are 
 in themselves. " For Christians are distinguished 
 from the rest of men neither by country, by language, 
 nor by habits. . . . But inhabiting Grecian or Bar- 
 barian cities, as is the fortune of each, and following 
 the local customs in dress and diet, and the rest of 
 life, they display the order of life enjoined by their 
 own community in a way wonderful and confessedly 
 surpassing belief They inhabit their own native 
 places, but as if sojourners : they take part in every- 
 thing like citizens, and endure everything like 
 strangers : every strange land is a native country to 
 them, and every native country strange. They marry 
 like all men, and beget children : but they do not cast 
 out the children born to them : they spread a table 
 common to all, but not 'common or unclean.' They 
 are in the flesh, but do not live after the flesh : they 
 spend their time on the earth, but their citizenship is 
 in heaven : they obey the duly-ordained laws, and by 
 their own lives they surpass the laws. They love all 
 men, and are persecuted by all. They are unknown, 
 and are condemned : they are killed, and are quickened. 
 They are poor, and make many rich : they are in 
 want of all things, and abound in all. They are dis- 
 honoured, and in their dishonours are glorified : they 
 are calumniated, and are justified. They are reviled, 
 and bless : they are used despitefully, and pay honour. 
 When doing good, they are punished as evil : when 
 punished, they rejoice as being quickened. By the 
 Jews they are assailed with war as aliens, and by the 
 
 U 
 
290 ££GLVN/.VGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 Greeks are persecuted : and they who hate them 
 cannot tell the cause of their enmity."' 
 
 The motive of this noble passage is of course 
 supplied by St. Paul, and there are several reminis- 
 cences of thoughts or expressions of his ; but there 
 are few Christians who have either the literary power 
 or the spiritual dignity to imitate St. Paul so well. 
 The next chapter, beginning, " In short, what the 
 soul is in the body, that Christians are in the world," 
 is less interesting. The argument is conducted in 
 terms of second-century Stoicism, a system of great 
 moral earnestness, but of little speculative depth, and 
 to us it sounds rather conventional and unreal. But 
 it is followed by a clear, devout, and eloquent 
 statement of the Christian faith, and of the claims of 
 the gospel as a divine revelation,' too long for insertion 
 here, but which is well worth reading. 
 
 It is very strange that this little masterpiece should 
 on the one hand have come down to modern times,^ 
 and on the other should have been, so far as we 
 know, absolutely unnoticed by Christian antiquity. 
 The earliest apologists whose names we know, and 
 with whom the writer of this epistle must have been 
 nearly contemporary, are Aristides and Ouadratus, 
 both of whom presented their works to Hadrian.^ 
 
 ^ c. 5. 
 
 ^ Cc. 7- 10. The lacuna in c. 7 was probably of considerable len<;th, 
 but what follows evidently belongs to the same work as what precedes. 
 The last two chapters, on the contrary, are obviously of later date. The 
 entire difference of their tone is not the least part of the evidence for 
 the extreme antiquity of the rest. 
 
 •* In a single Greek MS., which was lost in the burning of the 
 Strasburg Library during the German siege. 
 
 * Eus. H. E. IV. iii. 
 
THE CHURCH OF THE APOLOGISTS. 291 
 
 St. Ouadratus would be a person of almost equal 
 interest to St. Polycarp, if we could be sure that all 
 our notices of a Ouadratus early in the second cen- 
 tury refer to the same person. There was a Ouadratus 
 who lived in Asia Minor, perhaps probably at Phila- 
 delphia, who was a disciple of the Apostles/ and 
 himself a Prophet, mentioned in connexion with St. 
 Philip's daughters. And there was a Ouadratus 
 Bishop of Athens, no doubt identical with the apolo- 
 gist, whether he was already Bishop at the time he 
 addressed the Emperor, or succeeded to the office 
 later. His predecessor as Bishop was St. Publius, who 
 suffered martyrdom in a persecution — probably before 
 Hadrian's tenth year, when the Apology was pre- 
 sented to him ; and it may have been the effect of 
 this Apology that restored peace to the Church. 
 When made Bishop, we are told, Ouadratus found 
 the Church of Athens demoralised by the persecution, 
 " neglecting faith and conversation according to the 
 Gospel, so that they would almost have fallen away 
 from the Word'"" — not apparently that any had 
 actually formally apostatised, but all, or most, had 
 fallen into Pagan habits of life, such as were danger- 
 ously like apostasy. From this state of things, how- 
 ever, St. Ouadratus raised them, and rekindled their 
 faith. Now it is quite possible that the Asiatic 
 Prophet may have been called in by the Churches of 
 Greece as a fit man to "amend the things that are 
 wanting, and establish those that remain " in a Church 
 
 ^ Eus. H. E. III. xxxvi. I ; V. xvii. 3. 
 •'■ Eus. H. E. IV. xxiii. 2. 
 
292 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 that had left her first love. But it implies a wonder- 
 ful versatility, wonderful gifts of nature no less than 
 of grace, if the Asiatic Prophet was no sooner trans- 
 planted to Greece than he developed into the Greek 
 man of letters, able to write a book that Hadrian 
 might think worth reading. I do not say that this 
 is incredible. Eusebius says that the Apology of 
 Ouadratus did give "brilliant proofs of his own intel- 
 lect," as well as of his "apostolic orthodoxy." And 
 the one sentence he has preserved ' from it is such as 
 one could well imagine the Prophet to have written. 
 It is not over classical in style, but might occur in 
 the work of an able writer : " But the works of our 
 Saviour were always present, for they were true : 
 even those who were healed, those who were raised 
 from the dead, who were not only seen at the time 
 that they were healed, or raised, but also Avere seen 
 always present ; and that not only while the Saviour 
 was sojourning here, but also since His departure they 
 .lived for a long time, so that some of them came 
 even to our times." But while Eusebius mentions the 
 Prophet, the Apologist, and the Bishop, he nowhere 
 says they are all the same person. St. Jerome does,^ 
 but it is not certain whetlicr he had any first-hand 
 evidence, besides that of Eusebius. We need have 
 no hesitation in identifying the last two, but the 
 question of his identity with the first seems very 
 evenly balanced. The traditions of Ouadratus' pro- 
 phesying lived on in Asia, as though he had never 
 left the country ; there is however a story that is 
 1 //. E. IV. iii. 2. - De J'ir. III., 19. 
 
THE CHURCH OF THE APOLOGISTS. 293 
 
 barely possible, that implies his return thither from 
 Athens. And on the whole I am inclined to believe 
 that there was one Ouadratus — a man of whom we 
 would fain know more, and may perhaps cherish a 
 hope that one day we may, considering how many 
 treasures of Christian antiquity have been recovered 
 in our own time. But thinking of him and of the 
 author of Diognetus, we may apply to the Defenders 
 of the Faith in this age the words of the Son of 
 Sirach, " All these were honoured in their genera- 
 tions, and were the glory of their times. There 
 be of them that have left a name behind them, that 
 their praises might be reported. And some there 
 be which have no memorial, who are perished as 
 though they had never been. . . . But these were 
 merciful men, whose righteousness hath not been 
 forgotten." 
 
 Of Aristides we can say nothing but that he was a 
 native Athenian and a professed philosopher. His 
 work is totally lost ; but we are told that St. Justin 
 imitated it : St. Jerome speaks very highly of it. It 
 seems that Hadrian really read these two books, 
 and that it was their influence that made him so 
 far favourable to Christianit}^ as he was. His real 
 temper towards it may be illustrated by the following 
 passages in a letter to his brother-in-law Servianus.' 
 Its genuineness has been doubted, and there are 
 some real difficulties in fitting it into its place in 
 history ; but these are hardly fatal, if we regard the 
 letter, not as written immediately after the visit to 
 ^ Ap. Yopisc. Saturn., viii. 
 
294 BEGINAUNGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 Egypt/ but as describing old impressions. It seems 
 too clever for any one but Hadrian to have written, 
 and the fact that it is extracted from the works of his 
 freedman Phlegon seems sufficient external evidence. 
 " Egypt, which you were praising to me, my dearest 
 Servianus, I found altogether fickle, unstable, and 
 stirring at every impulse of rumour. There ' those 
 Avho worship Serapis are Christians, and those are 
 devoted to Serapis who call themselves Christ's 
 bishops.- There is there no Jewish ruler of a syna- 
 gogue, no Samaritan,^ no Christian presbyter, but is 
 an astrologer, a diviner, a trainer of athletes. The 
 great Patriarch ^ himself, when he comes to Egypt, is 
 forced by some to worship Serapis, by others, Christ." 
 Then he gives a description of the busy industry of 
 Alexandria, which to modern English minds seems 
 
 ^ Hadrian visited Egypt in or about a.d. 130; he adopted Ceionius 
 Commodus Varus A.D. 136. If the latter was with Hadrian as a young 
 man at the earher date he may have been satirised by the Alexandrians, 
 and Hadrian miglit speak as he does after the adoption, though he was 
 not his "son" at the time referred to. A greater difficulty is, that 
 Servianus' last known consulship (the letter is addressed Sa-oiano 
 conmli) was in 134, one or two years before the received date of the 
 adoption. 
 
 '^ Is this word still used in the Presbyterian sense? According to a 
 credible tradition, there was (in the later sense) only one "bishop" in 
 Egypt. But perhaps it is enough to say, that Hadrian writes loosely ; 
 he knew that in general the bishops were the great men among the 
 Christians, and did not care to know more. 
 
 •* The Samaritans were probably reinforced by converts to Simonian- 
 ism ; cf. S. JusT. Apol. I. 26. After Hadrian's time they are not 
 likely to have been as numerous as then, so the mention of them is in 
 favour of the genuineness of the letter. 
 
 ■* i.e. the Jewish Patriarch of Tiberias. The title would be an 
 anachronism if used of the Bishop or "Patriarch" of Alexandria, but 
 the mention of his coining to Egypt shows that this is not intended. 
 
THE CHURCH OF THE APOLOGISTS. 295 
 
 barely consistent with his bad character of the nation ; 
 but his own comment is, " Their one god is money : 
 him Christians, him Jews, him all nations worship 
 alike." And he goes on to complain, with some real 
 bitterness, but not too much to allow him to joke, of 
 the way that his benefits to them failed to keep them 
 from sneering at him and his favourites. 
 
 If this letter be genuine, it proves that in Hadrian's 
 time Christians, or rather semi-Christians, formed a 
 quite perceptible element of the population of 
 Alexandria. The quality, however, of Alexandrian 
 Christianity was plainly not proportioned to the 
 quantity ; and this agrees with what we know of the 
 rise at Alexandria, in Hadrian's reign or his suc- 
 cessor's, of the heresies of Basilides and Valentinus, 
 both of which sanctioned conformity to Pagan 
 Avorship, at least under persecution. If the letter be 
 spurious, it is probably these heretical Christians who 
 are described in it ; if genuine, it shows the state of 
 things that made the rise of such sects possible. 
 
 And a further thing to be noticed is, that the 
 Christians are so clearly distinguished from the Jews. 
 Even in Trajan's time there seems to have been no 
 such confusion between the two as in Domitian's : 
 just as St. Ignatius is less Jewish in feeling than St. 
 Clement, so is he less liable to be thought a Jew by 
 his persecutors. It was a Gentile Church, often 
 strongly hostile to Judaism, that caught the world's 
 eye : Tacitus ' sees as plainly the antagonism between 
 the two religions as their affinity ; and the inner 
 i Lect. IV. p. 155. 
 
296 BEGIN.VIiVGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 history of the Church shows how natural was this 
 change in its outward aspect. 
 
 All the Christians we have spoken of — with a barely 
 possible exception of Ouadratus — were members of 
 Gentile Churches, and some of them strongly anti- 
 Jewish in temper and feelings. But we must not 
 forget that there still was a considerable Jewish Church 
 that remained in Palestine after the conquest of Ves- 
 pasian and Titus, and apparently even ,re-occupied 
 the ruins of Jerusalem. St. Symeon was succeeded 
 by thirteen other bishops in thirty-one years — -evi- 
 dently, very old men were in general chosen for the 
 office : perhaps the effort was made, as long as possible, 
 to restrict it to those who had seen the Lord in the 
 flesh. Probably it was about this period that the 
 Judeo-Christian Church was divided into two sections. 
 On the one side were the rigid Jews, who had learnt 
 nothing and forgotten nothing since the days of the 
 purely Jewish Church of Jerusalem ; who still gloried 
 in the name of Ebionini, "the Poor Men," and who 
 sought to minimise their difference from other Jews, 
 believing that Jesus was the Christ, but that He was 
 only such a purely human Christ as the Jews looked 
 for. On the other side were the great mass, apparently, 
 of the Church — those who shared the belief of 
 Catholic Christendom on all points of doctrine, who 
 adhered indeed to the observance of the law of Moses 
 as a matter of national custom and sacred honour, 
 but who did not in general pretend it was essential 
 to salvation, or desire to exclude from their communion 
 those who rejected it. The latter were called Nazar- 
 
THE CHURCH OF THE APOLOGISTS. 297 
 
 enes, in the first instance, no doubt, by unbelieving 
 Jews. The name of Ebionites, at first claimed by 
 the others as a title of honour — " poor of this world, 
 and rich in faith " — was retorted on them by their 
 opponents, as applicable to their poor and mean con- 
 ception of the Saviour's person ; and at length, by 
 those who knew no Hebrew, the name was derived 
 from an imaginary heresiarch Ebion. We know that 
 the Nazarenes recognised the authority of St. Paul, 
 from a curious apocryphal work — The Testaments of 
 the Twelve Patriarchs — which must have proceeded 
 from them. There Benjamin is made to prophecy' the 
 works of his great descendant ; and the language 
 about our Lord is not inadequate,' though of course 
 not worded like that of the Nicene Creed. This 
 being so, it is difficult to see that they were in any 
 sense heretics, though they were so considered in 
 later ages, and even, as it seems, by some rigorous 
 theorists already; as though it followed from St. 
 Paul's principles that every one who was circumcised, 
 no matter from what motive, made Christ of none 
 eff"ect to him, and fell from grace. 
 
 Both Nazarenes and Ebionites seem to be grouped 
 in the Jewish legends of the Talmud under the 
 common name of Minim, which we may render 
 " Heretics," though we hear of one Rabbi who was 
 willing to attend the synagogues of the Ebionites, 
 but not of the Nazarenes. Others, more consistently, 
 avoided both ; but it is a question whether the Ebion- 
 ites were meant to be involved in the curse on the 
 ' Test. Ben. c. II, - E.g. Lrj. 4; jfiid. 24. 
 
298 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 Nazarenes, which was introduced into the synagogue 
 service with the sanction of the younger Gamaliel — 
 the grandson of St. Paul's master, who sometimes 
 gets the discredit of it. The Minini in general are 
 represented as believers in the Trinity/ whence we 
 may gather that the Ebionites were a minority ; but 
 both sects survived down to the fourth century or 
 later. They had a recension, or rather a group of re- 
 censions, of St. Matthew's Gospel in their own 
 language, differing more or less materially from the 
 text of the Greek version received by the Church at 
 large. The latter, according to the best authorities 
 that can be appealed to for St. Matthew's authorship, 
 is only a version from a Hebrew original, and so the 
 text retained by the Hebrew-speaking Christians 
 ought to have been the more trustworthy of the two. 
 But it seems quite plain that the " Gospel according 
 to the Hebrews " varied a great deal in different 
 copies, and all the texts that we hear of varied more 
 or less from anything that it is credible that St. 
 Matthew can have written. Although our Greek 
 text is only a translation, there is little doubt that the 
 change it underwent in the process of translation is 
 
 ^ E.g. we find one of them arguing against a Jew, that this doctrine 
 is involved in the use of the three divine names El Elokhn IHVH. 
 (A. V. not quite correctly "the Lord God of gods") in the oath of 
 the tribes in Josh. xxii. 22. The argument is as fair as that from the 
 threefold repetition of the name of "the Lord" in the priestly blessing 
 (Num. vi. 24-6), or from the "Holy, Holy, Holy," in Isaiah. But 
 the Jew replies that the oath proceeds, "He knoweth," not "they 
 know." One can hardly suppose that this would silence an orthodox 
 Christian, but it may encourage a charitable hope that the Jew only 
 rejected the faith because he honestly misunderstood it. 
 
THE CHURCH OF THE APOLOGISTS. 299 
 
 far less than the progressive changes undergone by 
 the original, in default of the check of Catholic con- 
 sent that prevented serious corruption of the version 
 in general circulation. Many of the peculiarities of 
 the Hebrew Gospel must have had their origin in a 
 distinctly heretical animus. The Ebionites, not be- 
 lieving in our Lord's supernatural Birth, omitted the 
 first two chapters altogether ; even what seems to 
 have been a Nazarene version makes Him all but 
 confess a sin of infirmity (in boasting of His sinless- 
 ness) that needed expiation by the Baptism of John. 
 On the other hand, one of the extant fragments 
 makes Him speak of " My Mother the Holy Spirit," 
 which no doubt implies that He was "conceived by 
 the Holy Ghost," but is scarcely reconcilable with 
 orthodox belief, and is certainly utterly unlike any- 
 thing in the Canonical Gospels.' 
 
 While the Christians of the Circumcision were in 
 this divided and rather unsettled state of mind, the 
 main stream of Jewish thought continued to pursue 
 the same lines as it had before the Gospel appeared. 
 The Law was the treasure of Israel, a treasure prized 
 the more now that the Temple was gone. The Rabbis 
 of the schools of Tiberias developed, further than 
 their predecessors had ever done, the art of making 
 the words of the Law mean anything ; and, as the 
 Sadducees had disappeared with the temple, these 
 
 ^ The word " Spirit," it should be remembered, is feminine in 
 Hebrew, though mascuHne in Latin, and neuter in Greek. Has this 
 passage anything to do with the expression which Mohammed makes 
 the prophet Isa repudiate, that he had taught his disciples "to take me 
 and my Mother for two gods beside God " ? 
 
300 BEGLVMIiVGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 neo-Pharisees had everything their own way : they 
 were the only power that could claim to be a centre 
 of the national and religious life of Israel. 
 
 The great man of this period of Judaism was Rabbi 
 Akiba : it is he who made the Jews what they have 
 been for 1750 years, so far as the impress of their 
 character can be ascribed to any one man. He had 
 grown up before the fall of Jerusalem ; he was the 
 leading spirit in the movement we have described, for 
 making more of the Law now that the Temple was 
 lost ; and he took the first steps towards the compila- 
 tion of the Talmud, the work which gives to modern 
 times a complete picture of the Rabbinism of this 
 age, but which must be- used with caution in recon- 
 structing the picture of Jewish life a century earlier. 
 
 While the Jewish national life was thus in a way 
 reviving, Hadrian attempted to ignore and supersede 
 it, by establishing a pagan city on the site of Jeru- 
 salem. It was to be a Roman colony, called Aelia 
 Capitolina ; it had its temples to the national Roman 
 deities, that of Juppiter being on the site of the 
 Jewish temple, and that of Venus, it is said, on that 
 of the Lord's sepulchre ;' and the figures that served 
 as standards to the legions, of which one was that of 
 a boar, were carved over the gates. It is said that at 
 the same time he prohibited the rite of circumcision ; 
 but this is a piece of gratuitous intolerance that 
 
 ^ Plainly the walls of the new city did not follow the line of the 
 walls of the Jewish kings and of Nehemiah ; possibly they did follow 
 the line of those built by Agrippa I. We have, therefore, no need to 
 discuss the authenticity of the traditional site of the Holy Sepulchre, 
 which was certainly included in the last-named wall. 
 
THE CHURCH OF THE APOLOGISTS. 301 
 
 seems in harmony neither with Hadrian's character 
 nor his poHcy. 
 
 Now the Jews had submitted, though sullenly, to 
 see Jerusalem lying desolate, with her wall broken 
 down, and the gates thereof burned with fire ; but it 
 was intolerable that it should become the home of 
 demon idols and of their uncircumcised worshippers 
 — that the abomination of desolation should stand, 
 permanently and triumphantly, in the Holy Place 
 itself. The Jews rose in revolt ; and in spite of their 
 overthrow in the wars of Titus and of Quietus, they 
 were now confident of victory. It was announced 
 that the Christ had come. 
 
 We have no evidence whatever as to who this false 
 Christ was : we do not even know his personal name. 
 In the Jewish legends he is called Bar-coziba, which 
 must mean " Son of a Lie ;" yet he is treated by his 
 generous countrymen, not as an impostor, but as an 
 unfortunate hero." However, it appears that he ex- 
 changed the ill-omened title for Bar-cocheba, " Son of 
 the Star," in allusion to the prophecy of Balaam. 
 Akiba came forward to play the part of Samuel to 
 this very spurious Son of David ; and immediately 
 Palestine was in a blaze. 
 
 We have no full account of the war that followed,' 
 no certain evidence of Bar-coziba's real character. 
 
 ^ A few details as to the career of the commander, Sex. Julius 
 Severus, come out from inscriptions. Publicius Marcellus, the legate 
 of Syria, took part in the war, but did not supersede Severus. He 
 left a Tiberiics [Julius ?] Severus in charge of his province, and there 
 resulted some confusion between the two, first pointed out by M. 
 Waddington, in his important paper on Aristides. 
 
 ^ Perhaps the name has a local origin ; cf. Mic. i. 14. 
 
302 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRIS TEA N CHURCH. 
 
 We hear he was a man of gigantic stature and 
 strength, a daring and in all likelihood an able 
 soldier, but in all other respects we get a bad im- 
 pression of him. There are stories that he conde- 
 scended to the mere conjurer's trick of breathing fire 
 out of his mouth. It is certain that he savagely 
 persecuted the Christians. The Jewish legends de- 
 scribe a war strangely unlike all former ones waged 
 by the nation — Bar-coziba scours the land with a 
 countless multitude of terrible horsemen. We can 
 only conceive of these as being patriotic brigands of 
 the type of Jesus Bar-Abbas and Simon Bar-Gioras, 
 probably not very diff"erent from the Bedouin of the 
 present day, and possibly quite as often of Idumaean 
 as of Israelite descent. But the war finally resolved 
 itself, like that of Titus, into a siege — the chief siege 
 being now not that of Jerusalem,' but of Bether, a 
 fortress in the maritime plain between Caesarea and 
 Lydda. It was at last stormed, and Bar-coziba slain. 
 The Roman loss was so heavy, that in reporting the 
 victory to the Senate, Hadrian omitted the accus- 
 tomed formula, " The Army and I are well." Akiba 
 was taken alive, and detained for some time as a 
 prisoner, with a scanty allowance of food and water ; 
 but severe as was his thirst, he persisted in keeping 
 enough water to wash his hands, according to the 
 tradition of the Elders. He was finally put to death 
 with horrible tortures, in the midst of which he kept 
 on repeating the words of the law, " The Lord our 
 
 1 It is doubtful whether tlie insurgents ever occupied tlie site ; at any 
 rale they could not have had time to fortify it. 
 
THE CHURCH OF THE APOLOGISTS. 303 
 
 God is One." I confess to thinking that "nothing in 
 his life became him hke the leaving of it." The war 
 had lasted, it seems, for three years, A.D. 132-5. The 
 Roman victory secured, of course, the establishment 
 of the Pagan city of Aelia, on the site of Jerusalem. 
 No Jews were allowed to enter it, but Christians, just 
 because they had been the object of the rebels' hatred, 
 were rather encouraged than otherwise : and a Gen- 
 tile Church was established and flourished, the first 
 Bishop being named Mark. Judas, the last Bishop of 
 the Circumcision, had probably died in the persecu- 
 tion. 
 
 Hadrian died in July, A.D. 138. In his latter years 
 his temper had been spoilt by ill health and unsatis- 
 factory domestic relations, and he seems to have been 
 guilty of some cruelties ; but it does not appear that 
 the Christians felt any share of them.' His adopted 
 son and successor, T. Aurelius Antoninus, who re- 
 ceived the title of Pius, was a far better man, and at 
 least as good a ruler, and as little disposed to play 
 the part of a persecutor. It must in fact have been 
 a tradition in his family that persecution did not 
 answer ; at least this seems to follow from a story 
 told of his maternal grandfather, Arrius Antoninus. 
 He had been Proconsul of Asia, presumably under 
 Trajan ; and his administration was so just, that it 
 was reported never to have been surpassed till his 
 grandson and namesake came to the same office. 
 But he prepared to persecute the Christians with 
 
 ^ It is however a question whether St. Telesphorus may not have 
 suiTered in his last years. See below, p. 307. 
 
304 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 vigour." Some were arrested, some it appears had 
 been put to death. But he was fairly frightened out 
 of his purpose. All the Christians of the town where 
 he was assembled in a body before his tribunal, and 
 declared that they were equally guilty with those 
 accused. Antoninus, like his sovereign,- though he 
 wished to suppress the illegal society, was not pre- 
 pared for a massacre of all its members. He sen- 
 tenced a few of those who came before him, and 
 dismissed the rest with contempt. " If you wish to 
 die," he said, "you can find plenty of cliffs to jump 
 down, or ropes to hang yourselves." 
 
 The Proconsul had the last word, and the sarcasm, 
 if not strictly original,"* was fairly good. But practi- 
 cally the Christians remained masters of the situation, 
 and probably Arrius, certainly his grandson, took care 
 never again to place themselves in so false a position. 
 According to St. Melito,-* Antoninus the Emperor 
 wrote repeatedly to various cities — Larissa, Thessa- 
 lonica, Athens, " and all the Greeks," are specially 
 mentioned — forbidding them to take any measure 
 against the Christians. One letter has been preserved 
 professing to be his, addressed " to the common coun- 
 cil of Asia," which, if genuine, proves that he went 
 a good deal further than Hadrian towards entire 
 toleration : 
 
 1 Tert. ad Scap., 5. 
 
 ^ Lect. V. p. 240, VI. p. 249. 
 
 ^ Juv. VI. 30-32. The precipices of Asia Minor take the place, not 
 only of the upstairs windows of the city, but of the bridge. The rivers 
 of Asia are torrents, too violent for britlges when full, too scanty at 
 other times to drown oneself in. 
 
 4 Ap. Eus. H. E. IV. xxvi. II. 
 
THE CHURCH OF THE APOLOGISTS. 305 
 
 " I thought that the Gods would see to it, that such 
 persons should not remain concealed ; for it is far 
 more proper that they should punish those who will 
 not worship them. But you, by bringing these men 
 into trouble, confirm them in their own views, when 
 you accuse them of atheism, and other things which 
 we cannot prove. It is the thing they choose of all 
 things, to be thought to die on this charge; and they 
 are victorious when they throw away their own lives 
 rather than comply with what you call upon them 
 to do. Nor is it unreasonable to remind you of the 
 earthquakes that have happened and are happening,' 
 when you are in despair at the time they happen, and 
 compare your own behaviour with theirs. They have 
 all the more confidence towards God, while you, as 
 long as you think they take no notice, neglect the 
 Gods and all other duties, and the worship of that 
 immortal Being, for worshipping Whom you persecute 
 the Christians to the death. Many governors of pro- 
 vinces have written to my divine father (Hadrian) 
 about these people, to whom he wrote in reply not to 
 molest them, unless they appear to be attempting 
 any treason against the Roman Empire. Many also 
 have given me information about them, to whom I 
 wrote in reply in the same sense as my father. But 
 if any one persists in bringing any to trial as belong- 
 ing to this class, let the accused be acquitted, even if 
 
 ^ It seems to have been in A.D. 152 that an earthquake ruined Mity- 
 lene and damaged Smyrna. In A.D. 180 the latter city suffered still 
 more. If spurious, this document probably was written soon after the 
 later earthquake ; if genuine, not very long after the earlier. 
 
 X 
 
3o6 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 it appear that he is so really; but the prosecutor shall 
 be liable to trial." 
 
 It seems worth while to quote this document, as 
 some competent critics believe it to be genuine. But, 
 on the whole, the best authorities are against it. The 
 strongest argument against its genuineness is the 
 silence of St. Melito.' Both he and the document 
 itself refer to despatches of Antoninus in the same 
 sense as that of Hadrian to Fundanus : if he had 
 said so much more than Hadrian in favour of the 
 Christians, the apologist would surely have mentioned 
 the fact. Moreover, the form in which the document 
 has reached us is suspicious ; ^ the date is certainly 
 incorrect or corrupt,^ and one of our authorities gives 
 the name of the Emperor as Marcus instead of Titus. 
 Opinions may differ as to the internal evidence ; the 
 language is in some places more Christian than we 
 should expect, but we cannot be sure that it goes 
 beyond what a man like Antoninus might say. 
 Though a devout pagan by habit, he was likely to be 
 a theist — almost a monotheist — by conviction; aiid 
 it is conceivable that he may have felt that devo- 
 
 ' It is, however, possible to identify the despatch to " all the Greeks" 
 with this to the common assembly of a Greek-speaking province. 
 
 ^ It is, however, no presumption against it that it has come to us in 
 two different forms (in Eus. H. E. IV. xiii. and in an appendix to the 
 Apology of Si. yusthi). Genuine or spurious, the original was no doubt 
 in Latin, and we have two independent Greek versions of it. The 
 above translation follows a somewhat eclectic text. 
 
 •^ That in Eusebius is clear, but cannot be right ; that in the MSS. 
 of St. Justin is corrupt, and the best correction is Mommsen's, which 
 would refer the document to A.n. 158, three years after the persecution 
 ceased, at least at Smyrna, with the tieath of St. Polycarp. 
 
THE CHURCH OF THE APOLOGISTS. 307 
 
 tion, in whatever form expressed, must be acceptable 
 to the Supreme Power of the universe ; and may have 
 felt, still more strongly, that if the personal gods of 
 the state religion had any real power, it was for them 
 to plead for themselves. 
 
 At all events, whatever the extent of the Emperor's 
 discouragement of persecution, he did not issue an 
 edict of toleration to the whole empire ; local perse- 
 cutions continued to take place, and apologies to. be 
 addressed to the Emperor, which describe the Chris- 
 tians as still suffering. We are surprised to find that 
 there were martyrdoms both at the beginning and 
 end of this reign in Rome itself It was in Antoninus' 
 first year, according to the common chronology,' that 
 St. Telesphorus, the bishop, "testified gloriously;"^ 
 but though the fact of his martyrdom be certain, we 
 know nothing of the circumstances ; it may have been 
 the act not of the law but of a mob. But the exe- 
 cutions described in St. Justin's second Apology were 
 under the authority of Urbicus, prefect of the city, and it 
 is almost equally difficult to suppose that the Emperor 
 had now reversed his 'tolerant policy,^ or that a subor- 
 dinate official ventured to act so directly against his will. 
 
 ^ But the common chronology of the succession of the bishops of 
 Rome cannot be right, if we accept the all but demonstrative arguments 
 of M. Waddington in favour of the early date of St. Polycarp's martyr- 
 dom. The common chronology makes St. Anicetus' episcopate begin 
 A.D. 158; but for him to be a contemporary of St. Polycarp we must 
 push it back at least to A.D. 154. And the presumption is, that his 
 predecessors must be pushed back also. 
 
 ^ S. I REN. adv. Haer. III. iii. 
 
 ^ St. Melito expressly ascribes his tolerant edicts to the time after 
 M. Aurelius was associated with him in the empire. 
 
3o8 BEGINiVnVGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 But the most important martyr of this reign was 
 not St. Telesphorus, but St. Polycarp, Bishop of 
 Smyrna ; and of his martyrdom we have a contem- 
 porary account, in great detail and of absolutely un- 
 questioned authenticity. It is written in the name of 
 the Church of Smyrna by Euarestus, presumably one 
 of the presbyters, perhaps the one elected to succeed 
 the saint as bishop ; and is addressed to the Church 
 of Philomelium, and " to all the dioceses in every part 
 of the holy Catholic Church." 
 
 Beyond what has been said already, we have no 
 record of the events of St. Polycarp's long life and 
 long episcopate, till just towards its close ; but then 
 we find him holding a position in the Church almost 
 comparable to that of St. John himself He was, if 
 not the only man living, at least the wisest and most 
 eminent of those who could remember at first hand 
 the words and doctrine of the apostles. He used to 
 tell publicly, perhaps in what we should call his 
 sermons in church, the story of St. John, of his inter- 
 course with him and others who had seen the Lord. 
 He told moreover some stories (apparently not many) 
 about the Lord Himself, " which he had heard from 
 them, both about His miracles and His doctrine, as 
 Polycarp, having received from them that were eye- 
 witnesses of the Word of Life, reported all — in 
 harmony with the Scriptures," but, we are probably 
 to understand, adding some things to what the Scrip- 
 tures told. St. Irenaeus, the future Bishop of Lyons, 
 the successor of the martyr St. Pothinus, and at last 
 a martyr himself, was a boy at this time. Writing to 
 
 I 
 
THE CHURCH OF THE APOLOGISTS. 309 
 
 Florinus, a companion who had fallen into heresy,' he 
 describes the life-long impression made on his mind 
 by these stories of St. Polycarp's, and deepened by 
 the sight of the majestic figure of the grand old man, 
 as he spoke seated (probably) on a sort of throne at 
 the upper end of the church, or marched to or from 
 his post, with undimmed eye and unabated vigour. 
 St. Irenaeus adds, that when surprised and shocked 
 he would cry out, " O good God ! what times Thou 
 hast kept me to see, that I should endure this ! " and 
 the word that I translate very inadequately by 
 "good" — "O beautiful" or "glorious God!" may 
 probably be taken as characteristic of the tone of 
 his devotion. 
 
 It must have been very near the close of his life — 
 perhaps in its last year, A.D. 154 — that St. Polycarp 
 visited Rome for a conference with St. Anicetus the 
 Bishop, in order to adjust some small differences 
 which had arisen, it seems, between themselves or 
 between the Churches that they represented. These 
 were easily settled between two Christian saints ; but 
 it was harder to decide a point of discipline which 
 they took occasion to discuss, and which, at no distant 
 time from this, greatly embittered the relations be- 
 tween Churches that were one in all points of faith ; 
 and for the first time gave a sort of image of what we 
 are only too familiar with in the later history of the 
 Church— the "disunion of Christendom," the rivalry 
 between the claims of the Roman Church to en- 
 force unity by a quasi-imperial authority, and those of 
 1 Ap. Eus. H. E. V. XX. 6-1 1. 
 
3IO BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 national Churches to enjoy a local independence, while 
 sharing in full communion with their brethren else- 
 where. This question was that of the day on which 
 the Christian Passover-feast should be observed. We 
 must say a iow words about the earlier stage of this, 
 but will interrupt our review of St. Polycarp's life as 
 little as possible ; happily, it is not till after the 
 period we are treating that the controversy fills a large 
 place in the history of the Church. 
 
 Whether our Lord kept the Feast of the Passover 
 at His Last Supper with His disciples, or whether He 
 suffered at the day and hour appointed for the killing 
 of the Paschal Lamb, is one of the most difficult 
 points in the harmonising of the different Gospels : 
 St. John, plainly understood, gives us the latter im- 
 pression, and the other Gospels the former. But it is 
 at least certain that His Death and Resurrection were 
 closely associated in point of time with the Feast of 
 the Passover ; and the consequence was, that the idea 
 grew up throughout the Church of a Christian Pass- 
 over, commemorating, not the deliverance from Egypt, 
 but the greater Redemption which that typified, and 
 thus rather superseding the Jewish Passover than 
 identical with it. The name of Passover was not 
 dropped : it is convenient to us Englishmen to use 
 the Teutonic name of Easter for the Christian feast 
 as distinct from the Jewish ; but we must remember, 
 if we are to understand the question under discussion, 
 that the ancient Church called them, and that most 
 Churches do still call them, by the same name. 
 
 Then the whole Church apparently concurred to a 
 
THE CHURCH OF THE APOLOGISTS. 311 
 
 certain extent as to the way the Christian Passover 
 should be kept. It was a joyous festival — the feast 
 of our Redemption ; but it could not be forgotten, 
 either that that Redemption presupposed sin, or that 
 it was only effected by suffering, and therefore the 
 Feast was preceded by a Fast. We know from St. 
 Justin ' how not only Catechumens fasted in prepara- 
 tion for their Baptism, but the whole Church fasted 
 with them. And the explanation apparently is, that 
 the Baptism was administered on the eve of the 
 Paschal Feast, so that the Catechumen's preparation 
 coincided with the pre-Paschal Fast — the individual 
 became partaker of the benefits of Redemption at 
 the same time that the Redemption was effected. 
 
 We may take Sf. Justin as, more than almost any- 
 one, a representative of the Catholic Church of his 
 age, in the literal and etymological sense of the 
 much-abused word Catholic. A native of Palestine, 
 of Gentile birth but unusually strong Jewish sym- 
 pathies, he had been at Ephesus, where lies the scene 
 of his Dialogue with Trypho, and he afterwards 
 settled at Rome. We cannot doubt that the Fast 
 indicated by him was, in principle, an absolutely 
 universal custom of the Church. But we know that 
 the details of it varied considerably. Some Churches 
 fasted for one day only, some for two, some more ; 
 some kept a continuous fast for forty hours, day and 
 night, from the noon or afternoon of Good Friday 
 till after their Communion at dawn or Sunrise on 
 Sunday morning. 
 
 1 Apol. I. 61. 
 
312 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 Now a point like this undoubtedly fell within the 
 province of every particular Church to regulate. As 
 St. Irenaeus said, " The difference of the fast estab- 
 lishes the agreement of the faith." But combined 
 with, though independent of, this difference as to the 
 length of the fast was a difference of more importance 
 as to the time when the fast should end and the feast 
 come. Was the Christian Passover to be observed 
 on the day of the Jewish Passover.-' or was it to be 
 celebrated indeed at the same season, but to be har- 
 monised with Christian usage, so that the Feast 
 should always be on the First Day of the Week } so 
 that the yearly commemoration of the Lord's victory 
 over sin and death should coincide with the weekly, 
 and the time of the fast should correspond exactly 
 with that of His sufferings. 
 
 No one can doubt that the latter arrangement is 
 by far the more suitable and edifying — that it is good 
 for us to keep, as was possible on this system, but not 
 on the other, the successive anniversaries, one after 
 another, of Maundy Thursday, Good Friday, Easter 
 Eve, and Easter Sunday. But in the second century 
 there were strong arguments on the other side. It is 
 obvious that the Jewish observance of the Passover 
 viiLst have been older than the distinctively Christian 
 one ; it is almost certain that the distinctively Chris- 
 tian observance of the Passover, and the recognition 
 of its distinctively Christian meaning, had begun 
 before any one altered the day of its observance. 
 
 It is perhaps probable that what we may call the 
 Catholic Easter was instituted by St. Paul. Some 
 
THE CHURCH OF THE APOLOGISTS. 313 
 
 expressions in the first epistle to the Corinthians ' 
 (which was written just at Easter-time) would have 
 a special force if the Christian Passover kept the 
 separate memory both of the day when " Christ our 
 Passover was sacrificed for us," and of " the morrow 
 after the Sabbath," the next day but one after the 
 slaying of the Lamb, when the Firstfruits, the Bread 
 of Life, was joyfully presented before God. But the 
 apostles of the Circumcision kept to the usage of the 
 Jews, though giving it a Christian sense ; their Pass- 
 over was always kept on the same day as the Jewish, 
 on whatever day of the week it might fall. Whether 
 they considered that this was the day of the Last 
 Supper or of the Passion, they made this the central 
 day of the festival. When SS. John and Philip came 
 into Asia, they observed the Feast there on the four- 
 teenth day of the first spring month,^ as they had 
 been accustomed to do in Palestine : they continued 
 to do so till the end of their lives, and bequeathed 
 the custom to the Churches founded or organised by 
 them. On the other hand, nearly all the Churches ^ 
 followed what we suppose to have been St. Paul's 
 rule : we may guess that St. Peter, if he spent any 
 
 ^ I Cor. V. 7, 8 ; xv. 20, 23. 
 
 ^ Spring, in the climate of the Mediterranean, begins in February. 
 We are told that the Jews regulated their festivals by the state of the 
 CTops, not by astronomical calculations ; and so it was, no doubt, with 
 the Quartodeciman Christians : their Passover might, if it so happened, 
 fall before the equinox. See Apost. Const. V. 17, in the form quoted by 
 St. Epiphanius, Adv. Haer. III. i., Hacr. Ixx. 10 sq. 
 
 •^ The Nazarenes were probably an exception, but they were isolated 
 by language as well as by usages, and their title to be recognised as 
 Catholics was not undisputed. The confessedly Catholic Churches of 
 Palestine kept the Sunday Easter. 
 
314 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 appreciable time at Rome, had sanctioned and con- 
 formed to it. 
 
 Now, we said that it never occurred to St. Ignatius 
 as possible that an appeal should lie from Catholic 
 consent to apostolic authority. He never conceived 
 that the two could differ. But on this point of the 
 observance of Easter the two sanctions could, appa- 
 rently, be alleged on opposite sides. There was no 
 doubt that the Sunday Easter was observed by the 
 whole Church everywhere, the fourteenth day of the 
 lunar month only by the Churches of Asia Minor ; 
 but there was as little doubt that those Churches had 
 learnt their observance from SS. Philip and John. 
 St. Polycarp could testify from his personal know- 
 ledge that the apostles had kept the Passover exactly 
 as he did, and there was no balancing evidence of 
 similar authority on the other side. As I have said, 
 I believe St. Paul's authority might have been quoted; 
 but St. Paul had been dead nearly ninety years, and 
 there was no one living who could testify to his prac- 
 tice as St. Polycarp did to St. John's. 
 
 Hence, when SS. Polycarp and Anicetus met at 
 Rome, the arguments appeared equally balanced, and 
 neither could persuade the other to accede to his 
 usage: St. Polycarp adhered to the apostolic prac- 
 tice, and St. Anicetus to the Catholic. But there 
 was no breach of communion or friendship between 
 them ; on the contrary, St. Anicetus gave precedence 
 to St. Polycarp in his own Church, asking him to 
 celebrate the Eucharist instead of doing so himself 
 ' S. Iren. ap. Eus. H. E. V. xxiv. 13. This is mentioned ap- 
 
THE CHURCH OF THE APOLOGISTS. 315 
 
 St. Polycarp requited his Christian courtesy by still 
 more substantial services : by his testimony to the 
 apostolic tradition, he was able to bring over to the 
 Church many heretics, especially followers of Valen- 
 tinus and Marcion. The latter heresiarch was a son 
 of the Catholic Bishop of Sinope, and seemingly an 
 old acquaintance of St. Pol}xarp:' meeting him in 
 the street at Rome, he asked him to recognise him. 
 St. Polycarp treated him as St. John had treated 
 Cerinthus : he answered, " I recognise the firstborn of 
 Satan." 
 
 St. Polycarp returned to his own Church, none the 
 worse for a journey which must have been a serious 
 undertaking for a man of his age. He probably 
 timed the journey so as to arrive before autumn, and 
 he was thus just in time to prepare the Church for a 
 great outbreak of persecution. Certain districts in 
 the province of Asia have always been liable to 
 earthquakes ; there was at this time a series of severe 
 ones, and we can hardly doubt that these, as at An- 
 tioch in St. Ignatius' time, furnished the occasion for 
 the recrudescence of persecution.' The initiative 
 seems to have been taken, not by the Proconsul, but 
 by the local civic magistrates, acting under pressure 
 from the populace, but themselves fully sharing in the 
 
 parently as a quite exceptional mark of respect ; but later it was pro- 
 nounced an obligatory courtesy towards an episcopal visitor. — Apost. 
 Const. II. 58. 
 
 ^ Being a merchant or sea-captain {naucleriis, Tert. adv. Marc. 
 I. 18, &c.), he must almost necessarily have visited Smyrna on business, 
 and would naturally bring a letter of commendation from his father to 
 the Church there. * See p. 249. 
 
3i6 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 popular prejudices. The Emperor's sanction does 
 not seem to have been asked, though we are surprised 
 to find his poHcy and that of his predecessor so 
 actively reversed by the Proconsul ; who was respon- 
 sible indeed in theory to the Senate, but practically 
 received his orders from the Emperor, as we saw that 
 Pliny and Fundanus did. It may have had something 
 to do with it, that the Emperor was now apparently 
 gone to Antioch, and was busy with a military 
 demonstration to support him in negotiations with the 
 Parthians : Statius Quadratus, the present Proconsul 
 of Asia, perhaps considered that when he had this 
 on his hands the Emperor must not be troubled with 
 petty matters of administration. 
 
 Euarestus' account of the martyrdom of St. Poly- 
 carp is very full, but he does not give a very clear 
 account of the persecution as a whole : we do not 
 know how long it lasted, nor how many suffered. 
 Perhaps only twelve were put to death' at Smyrna, 
 and these not all natives, but some from Philadelphia; 
 but the number was apparently a good deal larger of 
 those tortured, cut to pieces with scourging, or laid 
 naked on a bed set with sharp-pointed shells. We 
 hear the name of one only of the other martyrs, a 
 gallant young man named Germanicus, who did what 
 St. Ignatius talked of doing — forced the beast to 
 attack him, while the Proconsul was still urging him 
 
 1 Mart. S. Pol. 19. If with the MSS. of the martyrdom we read 
 StoS^Karos, it will follow that the martyrs were only twelve in all from 
 both cities ; if with those of Eusebius we read 8ib5eKa, it is probable 
 that there were twelve from Philadelphia alone, and an indefinite 
 number at Smyrna itself. 
 
THE CHURCH OF THE APOLOGISTS. 317 
 
 to apostatise. On the other hand, " one only, named 
 Quintus, a Phrygian, lately come from Phrygia,' when 
 he saw the beasts played the coward. But this was 
 he who had put force on himself and some others to 
 come forward of their own accord. Him the Pro- 
 consul, after many entreaties, persuaded to swear and 
 to sacrifice. — For this cause therefore, brethren," 
 proceeds Euarestus, "we do not commend those who 
 give themselves up ; for such is not the teaching of 
 the Gospel."^ But this miserable fanatic was appa- 
 rently the only one who failed.^ The constancy of 
 the rest, and of Germanicus in particular, inflamed 
 the fury of the mob, and they demanded the arrest 
 of Polycarp by name. He had been unwilling to 
 leave, his flock, though of course he must have 
 known that his own danger was greater than any 
 other man's; but he was persuaded to withdraw 
 from the city to a country-house not far off, where 
 he spent his time in intercession for the Churches of 
 the whole world. 
 
 It was now February, a.D. 155, and the early 
 Passover of the Jews and Asiatics was coming on ; 
 but St. Polycarp was to keep that Easter, not after 
 
 1 Plainly the fanatical temper was already at work there which, a 
 little later, took shape in Montanism. But we must remember that it 
 was not obvious where the line should be drawn between such rashness 
 and the self-devotion of St. Ignatius, or the brotherly charity of those 
 threatened by Arrius, which, as it proved, was really the soundest 
 policy. 2 St. Matt. X. 23. 
 
 ^ The eh of c. 4 seems to prove this, in spite of the less definite Karb. 
 irdvTiov ouK icTxvaev of c. 3. Perhaps one apostasy out of twelve 
 confessors was more than a Christian of that age could consider an 
 unqualified triumph. 
 
3i8 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 St. John's example, but in his company — to sing the 
 song of Moses and of the Lamb in a place undis- 
 turbed even by such brotherly controversy as his 
 with Anicetus. On Wednesday, February 20th, 
 while at his prayers, he seemed to see his pillow (or 
 perhaps more probably the cushion on which he 
 knelt) on fire. He turned, and said to the brethren 
 present, " I am to be burnt alive." Nevertheless, he 
 took reasonable precautions to save himself. He 
 withdrew to another farm-house just before his first 
 refuge was searched. But the persecutors had found 
 a clue ; they arrested two boys, perhaps slaves of his 
 own, certainly Christians ; and one of them under 
 torture consented to guide them to the place where 
 he was. One of the chief magistrates of the city, 
 named Herod, was active in directing the search. 
 Euarestus notices the name of the persecutor as one 
 of the points of " conformity " between the martyr's 
 death and his Lord's, though perhaps we may think, 
 with Bishop Lightfoot, that it was cruel to compare 
 the poor boy who betrayed him to Judas. Herod 
 was, we hear afterwards, the nephew of Alee, who 
 had been a Christian lady of high position in the 
 Church. I have mentioned ' the conjecture that she 
 was St. Polycarp's wife. If so, I am not sure that it 
 is not Herod who is meant to be the Judas, as a 
 traitor, not to his teacher, but to his kinsman. 
 
 It was two days after St. Polycarp's vision, on 
 I'^'iday evening, Februar}^ 22nd," when an armed and 
 
 ' Lect. VI. p. 270. 
 
 - The "Great Sabbath " of the modern Jews is not our Easter Eve, 
 
THE CHURCH OF THE APOLOGISTS. 319 
 
 partly mounted party set out "as against a thief," to 
 attack the house, taking the boy with them. Polycarp 
 was at supper when he had warning of their approach. 
 He could have again changed his hiding-place, but 
 he saw that it was only a question of time. As a 
 point of honour, the good soldier of Jesus Christ had 
 rather fall with his face to the enemy. He said, " The 
 Lord's will be done !" and as soon as they reached the 
 house, he went downstairs to meet them. They were 
 astonished at once at his age and his vigour, and felt 
 that it was a rather inglorious capture, and still more 
 when he ordered a good supper for them, and only 
 asked them to give him an hour for his prayers. So 
 he stood and prayed aloud for the whole Catholic 
 Church throughout all the world, mentioning by 
 name every person he had ever met. The hour 
 passed, but his captors had not the heart to interrupt 
 him, and he went on for another hour, while many of 
 them were ashamed " that they had come against 
 such a godly old man." It was apparently morning 
 before they started for the city. They put him on 
 an ass (another " conformity "), and led him with 
 them. On the way, Herod and his father Nicetes 
 met him in a carriage. They took him up to sit with 
 them, and asked, " What harm is it to say, ' Lord 
 Caesar," and sacrifice, and so on, and so save your 
 
 but the Sabbath before the Passover. I have seen it stated, I know not 
 on what authority, that this Great Sabbath was one seven weeks before 
 it. This would harmonise well enough with our Easter, which at that 
 i-ate would fall this year on April 14th. But probably the Jewish and 
 Asiatic Passover was earlier. Seep. 313, n. 2. 
 
 1 See Lect. VI. p. 276. The title had been applied to Domitian 
 
320 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 life?" He at first gave them no answer, but as they 
 continued, said, " I shall not do as you advise me." 
 They then reviled him brutally, and m-ade him get 
 down from the carriage with such haste that the front 
 of his leg was grazed against the wheel ; but he took 
 no notice of the hurt, and hurried on, apparently on 
 foot, but perhaps they gave him back his ass. 
 
 Trial and execution, it was arranged, were all to 
 take place under one head. He was taken straight 
 to the Stadium or Circus ; the Proconsul was already 
 there to conduct the trial, and the mob to witness 
 the execution. As he entered the Christians present 
 heard a voice from heaven, " Be strong, and play the 
 man, Polycarp!" The Proconsul asked him if he was 
 Polycarp: he confessed. He urged him to apostatise: 
 "Swear by the Fortune of Caesar; say, 'Away with 
 the godless ! ' " Polycarp sighed, stretched out his hand 
 towards the assembled crowd, looked up to heaven, 
 and said, "Away with the godless!" The Proconsul 
 urged him to swear, or to curse Christ ; he answered, 
 "I have spent eighty-six years in His service, and 
 He never did me wrong; and how can I blaspheme 
 my King, my Saviour.''" 
 
 Quadratus still urged him ; but he said, " If you 
 fancy that I will swear by the Fortune of Caesar, as 
 you say, or pretend not to know who I am, hear 
 plainly, I am a Christian. If j-ou wish to know what 
 
 in a distinctly idolatrous sense : as used by Pliny to Trajan, it was no 
 more than a piece of harmless court etiquette. But in the provinces it 
 was almost certain to be used in the higher sense, so that the Christians 
 were probably wise in refusing to allow it. 
 
THE CHURCH OF THE APOLOGISTS. 321 
 
 Christianity means, give me a day, and you shall 
 hear." The Proconsul said, " You must persuade the 
 people." Polycarp said, " I thought you had a right 
 to hear me ; for we are taught to pay fitting honour 
 to authorities and powers, as far as we can without 
 wrong to ourselves ; but I do not think they have 
 any right that I should make my defence to them." ' 
 He threatened him with being exposed to beasts, 
 then with being burnt alive. Polycarp said, " Thou 
 threatcnest the fire that burneth for an hour, and is 
 soon quenched ; for thou knowest not the fire of the 
 Judgment to come, and of eternal punishment that is 
 reserved for the ungodly. Why do you delay? Bring 
 what you will." 
 
 At last the Proconsul sent a herald to proclaim 
 three times, " Polycarp has confessed himself a Chris^ 
 tian ;" and the mob raised a cry, "This is the teacher 
 of Asia, the father of the Christians, the overthrower 
 of our gods, who teaches so many not to sacrifice nor 
 to worship the gods." They called on Philip, the 
 Asiarch or High Priest, who had the conduct of the 
 games, to turn out a lion ; but he said that would be 
 out of order, the beast-shows were finished.^ Then 
 
 ^ It was, of course, a base abdication of his judicial function, for 
 Quadratus to confess that a fair hearing of the case was a secondary 
 consideration to gratifying the desire of the mob to witness an execution. 
 But I do not think the blessed martyr would have spoken exactly as he 
 did, if he had not been by habits and sympathies a bit of an aristocrat. 
 See Lect. VI. p. 270 for the evidence of his social position. A freed- 
 man, however, might be a hearty aristocrat, and even be respected as 
 such by the aristocracy ; T.\c. Hist. I. iv. 3. 
 
 - This is the common translation. The late Rev. J. Riddell, of Balliol, 
 suggested (in the margin of his copy of Eusebius, now in my possession) 
 that it really means "they had fed the beasts." 
 
 Y 
 
322 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 they cried for him to be burnt alive, and that was 
 agreed to. The mob hurried off to the furnaces of 
 the neighbouring factories and baths for wood, and 
 made a pile. The Jews, we are told, were particularly 
 prominent in this, as they usually were in such cases ; 
 we need not ask how they reconciled it to their con- 
 sciences to bear burdens on the Sabbath-day. Mean- 
 while the martyr undressed himself, and tried to take 
 off his shoes, but seemingly in vain. We are told 
 with a touching naivete, that he had not been used to 
 do this for himself; for there were always disciples in 
 attendance, who were only too proud to be allowed 
 to touch him. The executioners wanted to nail him 
 to the stake — it does not seem clear whether through 
 the hands, or only through the links of the chain — 
 but he said, " Leave me as I am. He that gave me 
 power to abide the fire will give me power to stand 
 steady on the pile without your security of nails." 
 They, however, bound him to the stake, with his hands 
 behind him. He lifted up his eyes to heaven, and 
 said, 
 
 " Lord God Almighty, Father of Thy beloved and 
 blessed Son Jesus Christ, by Whom we have received 
 the knowledge of Thee ; God of Angels and Powers, 
 of the whole creation, and of all the race of the 
 righteous, who live before Thee ; I bless Thee for that 
 Thou hast counted me worthy of this day and this 
 hour, that I should receive part in the number of 
 Thy martyrs, in the Cup of Thy Christ, unto a resur- 
 rection of eternal life of soul and body in incorruption 
 of the Holy Ghost ; and among them may I be 
 
THE CHURCH OF THE APOLOGISTS. 323 
 
 accepted before Thee this day, as a sacrifice fat and 
 acceptable, even as Thou hast before prepared and 
 revealed, and hast brought it to pass, O true God 
 that canst not lie. For this cause and for all things 
 I praise Thee, I bless Thee, I glorify Thee, through 
 the eternal High Priest Jesus Christ, Thy beloved 
 Son, by Whom and with Whom be the glory to 
 Thee in the Holy Ghost,' both now and to the ages 
 to come. Amen." 
 
 The words were heard and remembered by the 
 Christians, who had heard very like words from him 
 every Lord's-day : they seem to have awed " the men 
 of the fire " themselves ; for not till " he had sent up 
 the Ajuen'' did they venture to light the pile. The 
 flame shot up high, but the eye-witnesses say, " The 
 fire took the form of an arch, like the sail of a ship 
 filled by the wind, and fenced the body of the martyr 
 round about ; and it was in the midst, not like burn- 
 ing flesh, but like bread baking, or like gold and 
 silver glowing in a furnace; for we perceived so sweet 
 an odour, as if incense or some other costly perfume 
 were breathing. At last the ungodly, seeing that his 
 body could not be destroyed by the fire, ordered an 
 executioner to go up and thrust in his dagger. When 
 he had done this, there came out^ a great quantity of 
 
 ^ I follow in the doxology the text of Eusebius in preference to that 
 of the MSS. of the Martyrdom. Eusebius was not of unimpeachable 
 orthodoxy, but he would not have falsified St. Polycarp's language in 
 an Arian direction ; while Catholic transcribers might, after the Arian 
 controversy had risen, have thought that the saint 7}mst have used 
 language that had come to be more distinctively Catholic. 
 
 - I omit the alleged portent, ' ' there came out a dove and a great 
 
324 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH 
 
 blood, SO as to put out the fire; and all the multitude 
 marvelled to see such a difference between the Un- 
 believers and the Elect : of whom this was one, the 
 most admirable Martyr Polycarp, who even in our 
 times was an Apostolic and Prophetic Teacher, and 
 Bishop of the Catholic Church in Smyrna." 
 
 Nicetes, whom we have seen reason to believe to 
 have been the saint's own brother-in-law, was per- 
 suaded by the Jews to ask the Proconsul to refuse to 
 give up the body for burial, " lest," he said, '' they 
 should leave the Crucified, and begin to worship 
 him." The Jews themselves had kept off the Chris- 
 tians who attempted to carry it off at once : the pile 
 was rekindled, and the body burnt. But the Chris- 
 tians watched their opportunity, and afterwards 
 carried off the bones. A church rose in time over 
 the place where they were laid, and has remained in 
 Christian hands to this day. 
 
 The most important Christian writer of this age — 
 the only one of whom wc have any considerable 
 remains — is St. Justin the Philosopher, better known 
 in modern times as the Martyr, since he suffered in 
 the next reign. He was a native of Flavia Neapolis, 
 the modern Nablus, the colony established by Ves- 
 pasian on or close to the site of the ancient Shechem. 
 But though born in Palestine, he was a thorough 
 pagan by birth and education — a Roman citizen, no 
 doubt, but probably of Greek descent, certainly a 
 
 &c.," because it seems plainly to be either corrupt or interpolated. I 
 am not careful to encjuire the limits of the natural and miraculous in 
 the authentic story. 
 
THE CHURCH OF THE APOLOGISTS. 325 
 
 Greek by language and culture. It was probably 
 only after his conversion to Christianity that he in- 
 terested himself either in the religion of the Jews or 
 in that of his own countryman, Simon Magus. Still 
 he had exceptional advantages for dealing intelli- 
 gently and sympathetically both with Jews and 
 pagans ; and we fortunately have preserved to us 
 works of his addressed to both. 
 
 His dialogue with Tryphon the Jew purports to 
 have been held, and I should think really was held, 
 at Ephesus in the latter years of Hadrian, either 
 during the Jewish war or immediately after it. 
 Tryphon identifies Justin as a philosopher by his 
 dress, and professes his respect for those who wear 
 it. Justin asks what need he has of philosophy, when 
 he has Moses and the prophets. Tryphon says, " Is 
 it not the work of philosophy to enquire into the 
 nature of the Deity.-'" 
 
 Justin replies by putting his finger on the weak 
 point of the philosophy of his day. It was 7iot an 
 inquiry into divine truth — it was a tradition of 
 moral earnestness. The moral standard of so-called 
 philosophers was often, though by no means al- 
 ways, high and noble ; but as for truth, they never 
 seriously sought it ; they assumed, without enquiry, 
 the theories of their teachers or teachers' teachers, 
 under whose influence they had learnt to seek good- 
 ness. ■ 
 
 He then passes into a very interesting passage of 
 autobiography. He had applied himself to philosophy 
 with the conviction that moral goodness must be the 
 
326 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 fruit of the true knowledge of God. But he felt that 
 that knowledge, and not moral goodness alone, was 
 the one great thing to be sought. He tried one sect 
 of philosophers after another. A Platonist was the 
 only one who even professed to direct him in this 
 right way ; and under his influence he went into 
 retirement, when he met with an aged man, appa- 
 rently a Christian Elder or Bishop, who had come 
 into the wilderness to seek for those of his brethren 
 who were in hiding or retirement there. They 
 entered into conversation, and the Elder convinced 
 Justin, by an argument in the Platonic method, that 
 the human soul has not life in itself,' nor such a 
 divine nature as enables it to comprehend God, but 
 that it is dependent on the free gift of God Himself, 
 both for the life that it has, and for the knowledge of 
 God which it seeks. Thus the necessity of a divine 
 revelation was suggested. Justin never saw his 
 teacher again, but he had heard enough to make him 
 study the writings of the prophets and of the friends 
 of Christ. 
 
 The mention of Christ turns the question from one 
 as to the value of speculative philosophy to one as to 
 the comparative truth of Judaism and Christianity, 
 as deductions from a confessedly divine revelation. 
 
 ' Passages may be quoted according to which Justin, or at least his 
 teacher, seems to hold the doctrine of "conditional immortality." 
 But I think it can be proved that Justin agreed with catholic Christen- 
 dom as to the actual destiny of the human soul, only he thinks it 
 important to maintain against the Platonists that it was not immortal 
 in its own naliire ; which on their principles (I do not ask whether he 
 might rightly have controverted these) would have involved its eternity 
 a parte ante also. 
 
THE CHURCH OF THE APOLOGISTS. 327 
 
 The Jews (for Tryphon is not alone) are, very charac- 
 teristically, quite willing to meet the Gentile in 
 friendly discussion on the former point, but are 
 inclined to be contemptuous when the latter is sug- 
 gested. Tryphon however promises to maintain the 
 argument with good temper, and on the whole keeps 
 his word. 
 
 The plan of a dialogue between a Jew and a 
 Christian was apparently suggested to St. Justin 
 by a somewhat earlier work of a Jewish Christian, 
 Ariston of Pella. His dialogue was, according to 
 Origen, by no means a contemptible work ; but 
 it seems neither to have been equal to Justin's in 
 literary merit, nor equally sober and rational in the 
 explanations of prophesy. For St Justin, though 
 his style is clumsy, is really a very sensible writer, 
 and an honest controversialist, though his ignorance 
 of Hebrew sometimes makes him accept unjust 
 charges against the Jews of falsifying their text of 
 Scripture. But though he had a literary model for 
 his work, I believe that the dialogue with Tryphon 
 was really held — among other reasons, because a 
 paper Tryphon would be sure to be converted (as 
 Ariston's Jew was), while it was no small victory 
 with a real one to have impressed him with so 
 much respect for the Gospel as he expresses at the 
 close. 
 
 The most important passage historically in the 
 dialogue is the account of the various sects or parties 
 among the Jewish Christians. St. Justin has been 
 explaining the difference between " the weightier 
 
328 BEGLVNINGS OF THE CHRISTLAN CHURCH. 
 
 matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith," and 
 the ceremonies temporarily ordained for the hardness 
 of the Jews' hearts. Then Tryphon asks, "But if a 
 man, knowing that these things are so, besides 
 knowing that this is the Christ, believing and obey- 
 ing Him, wishes also to keep these things, will he be 
 saved ?" 
 
 J2isiin. " In my own opinion, Trypho, I say that 
 such a man will be saved, if he does not strive at all 
 hazards to persuade other men, I mean those of the 
 Gentiles who have been by Christ circumcised from 
 their error, to keep the same observances with him, 
 saying that they will not be saved if they do not 
 keep these : as you also did at the beginning of our 
 discourse, declaring that I should not be saved if I do 
 not." 
 
 Tr. " Why then did you say, ' In my own opinion 
 such a man will be saved,' unless there are some who 
 say that such men will not .'' " 
 
 J. " There are some, Tryphon, and they do not 
 venture even to share in conversation or lodging with 
 such men ; but these I do not agree with. But if 
 they themselves, through their weakness of judg- 
 ment, wish to do as much as they can now' of the 
 commandrnents of Moses, which we understand were 
 ordered for the hardness of the People's hearts, to- 
 gether with hope upon this Christ, and observing the 
 deeds naturally just and pious ; if also they choose to 
 live with faithful Christians, as I said, not persuading 
 
 ^ He has made the point in the previous chapter, that since the 
 destruction of tlie temple no Jew can pretend lie fuUlls the whole law. 
 
THE CHURCH OF THE APOLOGISTS. 329 
 
 them to be circumcised like them, nor to keep the 
 Sabbath, nor observe other things of that sort, I give 
 judgment that we ought to receive and share in all 
 things with them as with our own natural born 
 brethren. But if those of your race who say that 
 they believe on this Christ, Tryphon, compel those of 
 the Gentiles who believe on Him to live wholly ac- 
 cording to the Law commanded by Moses, or else do 
 not choose to share in such intercourse with them, in 
 like manner I do not accept them. But those who 
 are induced by them to live under the law, together 
 with keeping their confession of the Christ of God, 
 will, I suppose, perhaps be saved. But those who 
 have confessed and acknowledged that this is the 
 Christ, and for whatsoever cause have gone over to 
 the life under the Law, denying that He is the Christ, 
 and not having repented before their death, will in 
 my judgment not be saved at all. And those of the 
 Seed of Abraham who live after the Law, and do not 
 believe on this Christ before their death, I likewise 
 judge will not be saved ; and especially' those who in 
 their synagogues have cursed and do curse those who 
 believe on this Christ Himself, that they may obtain 
 salvation, and be delivered from the punishment in the 
 fire." {Dial, c. 47.) 
 
 St. Justin, we here see, is orthodox but not in- 
 tolerant : he faithfully keeps to St. Paul's point of 
 view, distinguishing between weak brethren and false 
 
 ^ The curse iiisevted in the synagogue liturgy by Rabbis Samuel the 
 Less and Gamaliel II. was therefore now in use, but not in universal 
 use. It never was entirely incorporated in the eighteen Benedictions, 
 and of course is not used by the modern Jews. 
 
330 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHCRCH. 
 
 brethren ; but he will make no compromise with the 
 latter. Yet it seems that he thinks it better than 
 nothing for a Jew to turn Ebionite ; for a little while 
 after he says (c. 48 _/?;/.) that his proof from prophecy 
 that Jesus is the Christ would not fail, even if he 
 could not prove His pre-existence and divinity ; 
 " for," he says, " there are some of our race [some 
 would read 'your racc'\ who confess that He is 
 Christ, yet maintain that He is a Man born of men : 
 with whom I do not agree, nor would most of those 
 of my opinion say so, since we are taught by Christ 
 Himself not to hearken to the doctrines of men, but 
 to the things preached by the blessed prophets, and 
 taught by Himself" It is implied in these last words 
 that Ebionism was not a traditional creed, at least so 
 far as regards our Lord's Person, but rather a ration- 
 alistic one. 
 
 Justin's first or longer Apology is addressed to 
 Antoninus Pius and his two adopted sons. It states 
 with considerable ability, though in a rather heavy 
 style, what one may call the common places of all 
 apologists — the innocence of Christian belief and 
 practice, the high morality of Christ's teaching, and 
 the truth of His followers' belief regarding Him, 
 proved by His miracles and by prophecy. The 
 Christians, he says, are not atheists — they worship 
 the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, and believe 
 also in the angels :' they do indeed reject the absur- 
 
 ' In the passage referred to {Apol. I. 6) the angels arc mentioned 
 between the Son and the Holy Ghost, as though they were equally 
 objects of Christian worship. But in fact St. Justin's teaching about 
 the I\Ionare/iia of God is quite unmistakeable, far more so than about 
 
THE CHURCH OF THE APOLOGISTS. 331 
 
 dities of idolatry, but there philosophers will agree 
 with them. The atrocities charged against them may 
 possibly be in part true of some heretics, who, how- 
 ever, are not persecuted like the Catholics ; but it is 
 far more certain that pagans themselves are guilty 
 of the like ; and then follows a painful passage, 
 on the frequency of the exposure of children, and 
 its results. 
 
 The most interesting thing in the work to a modern 
 reader is the account of Christian worship, and 
 especially of the administration of the Sacraments, 
 which he gives towards the end of the Apology 
 (cc. 61-67). 
 
 " But in what way we dedicated ourselves to God 
 when renewed by Christ we will explain, lest if we 
 passed this over we should seem unfair in our state- 
 ment. All who are convinced and believe that these 
 things which are taught and said by us are true, and 
 who promise that they can live accordingly, are taught 
 to pray and ask with fasting from God the remission 
 of their former sins, while we pray and fast with 
 them. Then they are led by us to a place where 
 there is water,' and are regenerated by the same 
 means of regeneration that we were ourselves ; for 
 in the name of God the Father and Lord of all 
 things, and of our Saviour Jesus Christ, and of the 
 
 the coequal divinity of the Son. All that he says in his own person 
 on this latter subject is quite reconcilable with the Nicene faith ; but 
 he passes without rebuke language of Trypho's {Dial. 50 iiiit.) which 
 is Arian if not ditheist. 
 
 ^ Baptism is not, we see, administered in the Church, nor apparently 
 in a baptistery specially appropriated to the purpose. See Tert. 
 de Bapt. 4. 
 
332 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 Holy Ghost, they made their bath at this time in the 
 water. For even Christ said, ' Except ye be regener- 
 ate,' ye shall in no wise enter into the kingdom of 
 heaven.' But that it is impossible for those once born 
 to enter into the wombs of their mothers is manifest 
 to all. And by Isaiah the Prophet ... it is said in 
 what way they who have sinned and repent shall flee 
 from their sins. And it is spoken thus : ' Wash you, 
 make you clean : put away the evil from your souls : 
 learn to do well, judge the fatherless and plead for 
 the widow. Come now, and let us reason together, 
 saith the Lord ; and though your sins be as purple, 
 I will make them white as wool, and though they be 
 as scarlet, I will make them white as snow. But if 
 ye hearken not to Me the sword shall devour you : 
 for the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it' And we 
 have learnt this reason for this thing from the Apostles. 
 Since in our first birth we were born of necessity 
 without our knowledge [of our parents in the way of 
 nature], and grew in bad habits and evil nurture, in 
 order that we may not continue children of necessity 
 nor of ignorance, but of rational will and knowledge, 
 and may receive remission of the sins we had com- 
 mitted before, in the water there is named over him 
 who has chosen to be regenerated, and has repented 
 for his sins, the Name of God the Father and Lord 
 of all ; for this only is spoken by him who brings to 
 
 ^ There are some reasons for thinking our Lord's words were recorded 
 in this form in the Gospel according to the Hebrews. But there is little 
 doubt that St. Justin has the text in St. John in his mind ; it is hardly 
 likely that the Hebrew Gospel contained Nicodemus's rather stupid 
 
 reply. 
 
THE CHURCH OF THE APOLOGISTS. 333 
 
 the bath him who is to be bathed in it. For no one 
 can speak a name for the Unutterable God : if any 
 one should dare to say there is one, he is mad with 
 incurable madness. And this bath is called Illumina- 
 tion,' because those who learn these things have their 
 mind illuminated. And in the Name also of Jesus 
 Christ, Who was crucified under Pontius Pilate, and 
 in the Name of the Holy Ghost, Who by the Prophets 
 proclaimed before all things concerning Jesus, he that 
 is enlightened is bathed." Then, after a rather char- 
 acteristic argument against this being confounded 
 with similar heathen ablutions, and against Jewish 
 objections to the Trinity, he proceeds (c. 65) : " But 
 we, after we have thus bathed him that has been 
 convinced and has testified his assent, lead him to 
 those who are called the Brethren,' where they are 
 assembled to make with earnestness common prayers 
 both for ourselves and for him who is enlightened, 
 and for all other men everywhere, that we may be 
 found worthy, having learnt the truth, to be found of 
 good conversation by works also, and keepers of the 
 Commandments, that we may be saved with the ever- 
 . lasting salvation. We salute each other with a kiss 
 when we have ceased our prayers. Then there is 
 brought to the President^ of the Brethren Bread and 
 
 ^ So as early as the epistle to the Hebrews (vi. 4, x. 32). See 
 Lect. IV. p. 180. 
 
 ^ Again we see that the baptism had not taken place in their place of 
 assembly. 
 
 •* It almost seems as though this were a technical title in the second 
 century, equivalent to the modern " bishop " when " bishop " was not 
 yet clearly distinguished from " presbyter." 
 
334 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 a Cup of water and mixture, and he takes it, and 
 sends up praise and glory to the Father of all things 
 by the Name of the Son and the Holy Spirit," and 
 makes thanksgiving at much length for our being 
 counted worthy of these gifts from Him. When he 
 has finished the prayers and the thanksgiving, all the 
 people present join in the rite (e7rei;0>//jtet), saying 
 Amen. {Amen in the Hebrew language means ' So 
 be it.') But when the President has given thanks, 
 and all the people have joined in, those who are 
 called among us Deacons give to each of those 
 present to partake of the Bread and Wine and Water 
 over which the thanksgiving was said, and they carry 
 it away to those not present. 
 
 " And this Food is called among us Thanksgiving 
 [Eucharist], of which it is allowed to no one to par- 
 take except to him who believes that the things 
 taught among us are true, and has bathed in the 
 Bath that serves for remission of sin and for regenera- 
 tion, and lives according to what Christ delivered to 
 us. For we receive these things, not as common 
 bread nor common drink, but even as Jesus Christ 
 being incarnate by the Word of God took both flesh 
 and blood for our salvation, so we have been taught 
 that Food that has had the Thanksgiving said over it 
 by the prayer of the word that comes from Him is 
 the Flesh and Blood of the incarnate Jesus. For the 
 apostles in the Memoirs composed by them, which 
 
 ' Tlie reference may be to the prayer concluding with a doxology, 
 like St. Polycarp's, or perhaps more probably to the invocation of tlie 
 Holy Ghost that formed part of the Consecration Prayer. 
 
THE CHURCH OF THE APOLOGISTS. 335 
 
 are called Gospels, delivered to us that it was thus 
 commanded them r that Jesus took Bread, and gave 
 thanks, and said, ' Do this in remembrance of Me : 
 this is My Body ; ' and that He likewise took the 
 Cup, and gave thanks, and said, ' This is My Blood,' 
 
 and gave of it to them only And' we after 
 
 this thenceforward always put one another in mind 
 of these things ; and those of us who have means 
 succour those in want, and we always live with one 
 another. And over everything that is brought before 
 us, we bless the Maker of all things through His Son 
 Jesus Christ and through the Holy Ghost. And on 
 what is called the Day of the Sun an assembly takes 
 place of all who abide in cities or country, and the 
 Memoirs of the Apostles or the writings of the 
 Prophets'' are read, as long as time permits. Then, 
 when the reader has stopped, the President exhorts 
 and invites us by word to the imitation of these good 
 things. Then we stand up all in common, and send 
 our prayers. And as we said before, when we have 
 ceased our prayer,^ Bread is brought, and Wine and 
 Water ; and the President sends up prayers in like 
 1 C. 67. 
 
 ^ Comparing the first sentence of c. 65 with the sacrame^itiun of 
 Pliny's letter, we ask whether the Ten Commandments were always 
 read, instead of the Synagogue First Lesson from the Law — that being 
 the only part of the Law that concerned Christians ? Then followed 
 the Second Lesson from the Prophets, and a third from the New Tes- 
 tament — the latter being afterwards divided into the Epistle and 
 Gospel of the modern Church. 
 
 ^ What were the prayers said by "all in common," distinct from 
 that by the President alone ? They nuisi have been absolutely fixed in 
 form. Probably the chief among them was the " Holy, Holy, 
 Holy ! " The Lord's Prayer always comes after the Consecration. 
 
336 BEGJNN/iVGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 manner and thanksgivings, with all the power he 
 has/ and the People joins in saying Amen, and the 
 distribution and partaking takes place to each of the 
 things for which Thanks were given, and they are 
 sent to those not present by the Deacons. And those 
 who are wealthy and willing give each what he wishes 
 according to his own free will, and what is collected 
 is laid up with the President, and he succours the 
 fatherless and widows, and those in want through 
 sickness or any other cause, and the strangers away 
 from home, and in a word takes care of all those in 
 need. And we all make our common assembly on 
 the Day of the Sun, because it is the First Day, on 
 which God changed darkness and matter, and made 
 the world, and Jesus Christ our Saviour on the same 
 day rose from the dead ; for on the day before that 
 of Saturn they crucified Him, and on that after 
 Saturn's, which is the Sun's Day, He appeared to 
 His apostles and disciples, and taught these things, 
 which we have presented to you also for con- 
 sideration." 
 
 ^ This phrase oarj hvva\j.i% has been taken to prove that the precise 
 form of the Prayer of Consecration was dependent on the personal 
 powers of the Celebrant. Probably it was to some extent, but these 
 words do not prove it. At most they mean "with all his might," 
 which might be said of a man fervently uttering an absolutely fixed 
 prayer : it has been argued that they mean, " so far as human power is 
 adequate to so sublime a work." If liturgical forms were beginning to 
 be fixed in St. Clement's time, they must have been still more so now ; 
 but probably far from absolutely or finally. One change, however, has 
 come in : there are no free prayers l)y individual laymen, hut all are 
 said eitlier by the whole congregation or by the President. 
 
NOTE ON THE GNOSTIC HERESIES. 337 
 
 NOTE ON THE GNOSTIC HERESIES. 
 
 There were two main questions that specially exercised 
 Christian and semi-Christian thought during the second 
 century, and to some extent both before and after it. One 
 was, What is the relation between the Gospel — the doctrine 
 of the redemption and restoration of the world through 
 Jesus Christ — and the religion of the Jews which preceded 
 it, or the Law of Moses? This question was sometimes 
 extended, so as to include the relation of the Gospel to the 
 other religions of the world. 
 
 The other was, What is the relation — how can there be 
 any relation — between the supreme, holy, purely spiritual 
 God, and this world of gross matter and of ingrained sin ? 
 
 The first of these questions was one which the history of 
 the Christian revelation made it impossible to avoid asking : 
 it was inevitable that the Christian Church must provide an 
 answer. And the Church's answer was soon forthcoming. St. 
 Paul, though he had not formally answered it in its abstract 
 form, had dealt so decisively with its practical bearings as to 
 leave no doubt what the answer must be. The Gospel was 
 not a mere added perfection to the Law, a divine afterthought 
 crowning a divine work that was already perfect without it ; 
 nor indeed was the Law so absolutely divine that it must 
 co-exist with the Gospel, and those who looked to be saved 
 by the Gospel must submit to live under the Law. The 
 Gospel superseded the Law entirely; men who looked for 
 righteousness from the one could have no claim to the 
 righteousness provided or demanded by the other. On the 
 other hand, it never was questioned that the Law was of 
 divine origin. God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, 
 had given the Law by the hand of Moses, and had under 
 the Law revealed His will by the Prophets, in order to pre- 
 
 z 
 
33S BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 pare for the final, perfect revelation of His whole counsel, 
 and reconciliation of the world to Himself, by His Son 
 Jesus Christ. 
 
 The second question was not one that forced itself so 
 pressingly upon the Church ; in fact, neither the Apostles 
 nor the Church after them ever regarded it as a question at 
 all. God, they all confessed, was alone eternal, alone had 
 life in Himself He was the sole original Substance, the 
 sole original Power ; everything else that exists derives both 
 its being and its powers from Him. He, by His eternal, 
 substantial Word, created all things out of nothing. On 
 the nature of the creative Word the Apostles, and the 
 Church after them, spoke more and more clearly and 
 definitely as time went on ; but on the fact of the creation 
 of all spirits and of all matter by the One Uncreated, they 
 had left no doubt from the first. 
 
 And if people are content with a purely religious answer 
 to the question, this doctrine is sufficient. Any one can 
 believe in God the Father Almighty, Maker of Heaven and 
 Earth. But if the problem be conceived as one requiring a 
 metaphysical answer, not merely a theological, it is more 
 difficult of solution. Down to our own times the problem 
 still agitates men's minds, How can Spirit act upon Matter ? 
 Obviously the question is still more insoluble. How can 
 Spirit — why should Spirit — have called Matter into being ? 
 
 In modern times two solutions of the metaphysical 
 problem have been propounded — the Idealist and the 
 Materialist. Either Matter is conceived to be a function of 
 Mind, or Mind a function of Matter. Either view is 
 abstractedly easier to maintain than the common-sense 
 view of the essential distinction, and at the same time the 
 intimate connexion, of Matter and Spirit ; but the last re- 
 mains the common-sense view all the same. In the second 
 century no one had the audacity or the profundity, which- 
 ever we may call it, to question the distinction between the 
 two. 
 
NOTE ON THE GNOSTIC HERESIES. 339 
 
 Even as conceived in modern times, this metaphysical 
 problem can hardly be approached without affecting theo- 
 logical thought. Descartes tried to be orthodox, or at all 
 events to be thought so : Locke tried very sincerely to be 
 at least Christian ; and they recognised the dualism of 
 Matter and Mind in the fullest form. But of thinkers who 
 have tried to escape from it, Berkeley stands almost alone 
 as an honest and consistent Christian. All other idealists 
 show a more or less avowed tendency to Pantheism, and all 
 materialists are ipso facto atheists, according to the common 
 conception of what is meant by God ; though surely it would 
 be easier to maintain that Hobbes was not an atheist than 
 that Tertullian was. 
 
 But if the metaphysical problem has thus necessarily a 
 religious bearing, it was still further complicated with re- 
 ligious issues in the hands of the Gnostics, or metaphysicians 
 of the second century. They in general gave a directly 
 religious and ethical character to the ontological dualism 
 which they recognised. Pure Spirit, and Spirit alone, was 
 essentially good, or capable of goodness. Matter as such, 
 or at least the only matter which has close relations with 
 spirit, viz. the human body, was essentially evil. This 
 being assumed, it appeared not merely philosophically 
 inconceivable, but blasphemous in reUgion, to ascribe any 
 connexion with Matter, far more the original creation of 
 Matter, to the purest, holiest, and most perfect Spirit of 
 all. 
 
 And thus the second, primarily metaphysical, question was 
 entangled with the earlier and purely theological one. There 
 was no denying that the Lord, the God of Abraham, Isaac, 
 and Jacob, the Giver of the Law of Moses, was described as 
 the Creator of the Heaven and the Earth : He was so pro- 
 claimedin theveryfirst words of the Law. If then the Supreme, 
 the purely spiritual God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, 
 was not to be held responsible for the creation of gross and 
 sinful matter, it must follow that He was different from the 
 
340 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob : the latter must be a 
 far inferior, perhaps an antagonistic, power. Still more 
 decidedly, it was not to be believed that the Lord Jesus 
 Christ Himself had really taken upon Him anything so 
 essentially evil as a body of flesh. The Gospels told what 
 He had done on earth for the redemption of mankind, and, 
 with certain reservations, it was not denied that He had 
 done what was written of Him. But it was not to be 
 believed that He had done this in a real human body, con- 
 substantial with our sinful bodies. In particular, those 
 things which mark Him as truly human at the two ends of 
 His earthly life — His Birth and His Death — must of neces- 
 sity be denied or explained away. The Gnostics, in short, 
 did what we recognise as the supreme proof of Christ's 
 love that He did not do — they did abhor the Virgin's 
 womb, and they did shrink from the reproach of the 
 cross. 
 
 But when we talk of the Gnostics, it must be remem- 
 bered that we are not speaking of one sect, but of many ; 
 and of sects that were not all by any means affiliated to 
 each other by traceable and recognised links, nor in all 
 cases differentiated by a sectarian organisation, so that it 
 was possible to say who were members of the same sect 
 and who of different ones. The sects had indeed in general 
 something of an ecclesiastical organisation, apparently 
 imitated from that of the Catholic Church ; but it was 
 loosely constructed, and except among the Marcionites 
 there seems to have been little attempt at discipline.^ The 
 Valentinians, most of all, seem to have been without a 
 definite creed, but to have embraced among them a number 
 of schools of thought — some respectable, some immoral, 
 but all mutually tolerant, and sharing a few general ideas 
 and principles of method. At a somewhat later time the 
 sects seem to have united, not indeed in mutual com- 
 
 1 Tert. Praescr. Haer. 41. 
 
NOTE ON THE GNOSTIC HERESIES. 341 
 
 munion, but in an alliance sufficient to enable them to 
 co-operate against the Church.^ 
 
 Thus it is scarcely possible to give any answer to the ques- 
 tion, What were the numbers of these sects compared with 
 the contemporary Catholic Church? — not merely because 
 of the scantiness of our information, but because it never 
 was possible to say definitely who was a member of the sect 
 and who not. The Valentinians, of whom this was most 
 emphatically true, were the most numerous and widespread 
 of all ; but their prominence, and the noise that they made 
 in the world, would be out of proportion to their numbers. 
 This was not because they were anxious to make a noise, 
 but for a more respectable reason, at least on their own 
 principles ; identifying spiritual excellence with intellectual, 
 it was natural that they should secure more than their fair 
 proportion of clever men. It took only " an honest and 
 good heart " to qualify anybody to be a good Catholic ; but 
 a faculty for assimilating philosophical thought, or at least 
 for echoing philosophical phraseology, was needful to make 
 it worth while- — perhaps to make it possible — to become a 
 Valentinian. 
 
 Further we must remember that the Church was Catholic; 
 i.e. it was everywhere, while the sects were for the most part 
 local.^ In their own local centres they may some of them 
 have been numerous, perhaps able to compete with the 
 Catholics, though probably nowhere to outnumber them; 
 but on the whole they must have formed a minority among 
 professing Christians, but a minority quite considerable 
 enough to make the character of the Christian body appear 
 a very difterent thing, according as they were or were not 
 included in it by those judging of it. 
 
 ^ See St. Ephraim's metrical homily Against the Eternity of Matter, 
 Stanzas 10, 1 1 [Hotn. V. in Dr. Burgess' translation, Adv. Haer. xiv., 
 in the edition referred to by him). In the same Homily is a curiously 
 mode7-n passage on the social relations between Dissenters and the 
 Church clergy. 
 
 '^ No doubt however all, or nearly all, had representatives at Rome, 
 
342 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 The earliest of the heretics — probably the cleverest and 
 most original, the least Christian, but by no means the worst 
 morally — was Simon of Gitton in Samaria, the Simon 
 Magus of the canonical and apocryphal Acts of the Apostles. 
 As with the apostolic Church, so with the Gnostic sects, the 
 earliest period is by no means the most obscure. Amid the 
 fragmentary and in part mythical notices that we have of 
 Simon's career, we seem to discern in him far more of a 
 living human figure, a man of individual character, than in 
 his successors, Basilides, Saturnilus, Valentine, or even 
 Marcion. According to one very doubtful account ^ he had 
 been a disciple of St. John the Baptist ; we can at most 
 believe that his speculations and claims had some affinity 
 with the more mystical parts of the Baptist's teaching.^ 
 
 Simon, it is evident, was a man whose vanity and ambition 
 were absolutely gigantic. Like the old wife in the German 
 tale, it was too little for him to be king or pope ; he wanted 
 to be as de le^ve Gott, and he declared that he was. Yet in 
 a certain sense it is probable that he was sincere, though of 
 course not disinterestedly honest, in these monstrous pre- 
 tensions. Pantheism is a system that some men do sincerely 
 believe in. Now Pantheism means that the individual 
 mind is absolutely one with the universal or divine mind, 
 and that the mystic who comprehends the divine nature is 
 conscious of that unity. Simon could not have preached 
 himself as he did, if he had had the sublime unselfishness 
 of Spinoza, or of many of the thinkers — ancient Indians 
 and Greeks, modern Germans and Americans — who have 
 e.xcogitated systems more or less akin to his own ; but he 
 may have believed in the system, not less but more heartily 
 than better men, because he discerned more clearly than 
 they how flattering it was to his vanity. Besides, we must 
 
 ^ Clem. Horn. ii. 23 sqq. 
 
 "^ It perhaps is a legitimate inference from St. John's gospel that the 
 Baptist's teaching had a mystical side, besides the common-sense 
 morality of his public preaching. 
 
NOTE ON THE GNOSTIC HERESIES. 343 
 
 remember, he was no doubt an uneducated man ; he had 
 neither Hterary art nor the tradition of a school to teach him 
 to express his pretensions in a less crude and gross form.^ 
 
 Further, it is probable that Simon was cataleptic, perhaps 
 that he had the faculty, which it seems proved that some 
 few men have, of falling at will into the cataleptic trance. ^ 
 George Eliot observes^ that such trances are a temptation to 
 a religious enthusiast to lay claim to supernatural visitations 
 if he be not thoroughly honest and sober-minded \ it is 
 further probable that the liability to them is incidental to 
 the temperament disposed to religious enthusiasm, and to 
 the claim of prophetic powers. Both Mahomet and Joseph 
 Smith were epileptic, and Mahomet's first vision, in child- 
 hood, was no doubt quite bona fide, but quite unspiritual ; 
 some people stretch their charity so far as to think the same 
 of Joe Smith's. 
 
 There was a book current among Simon's followers, 
 at the beginning of the third century, called the Great 
 Announcement, the authorship of which was ascribed to 
 Simon himself. I really know no reason why it should 
 
 ^ Yet were Simon's pretensions much more audacious than these 
 lines of Emerson's ? 
 
 " I am ruler of the sphere, 
 Of the seven stars and the solar year, 
 Of Caesar's hand and Plato's brain, 
 Lord Christ's heart, and Shakspere's strain." 
 ^ The evidence for this is the story in St. Hippolytus {Ref. Haer. vi. 
 20) that Simon ordered himself to be buried alive, and declared that 
 he would rise again the third day. It is said that fakeers in India have 
 done the same with better success, and the fact (if it be one : of 
 course there is plenty of imposture mixed up with it) is explained as a 
 phenomenon of hypnotism, or voluntary catalepsy. It is of course 
 small wonder if Simon's disciples buried him too effectually, and he 
 was stifled ; or if he died in one of his fits, and that the one on which 
 he had staked his credit. I do not enter into the question how far Simon, 
 and some of the less respectable Indian mystics too, may have been 
 really under spiritual influences of a nature very far from divine. 
 ^ Silas Mai'ner, part I. c. i. 
 
344 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 not be his, though of course we have — probably St. 
 Hippolytus had — no means for testing its authenticity or 
 integrity. The style of the book itself (for St. Hippolytus 
 quotes passages extensive enough to enable us to judge of 
 it) seems rather to support belief in its genuineness. It 
 will serve as a specimen if we quote what seems to have 
 been the opening sentence : 
 
 " This is the writing of the announcement of the Voice 
 and Name from the Intelligence of the infinite Great Power.^ 
 Wherefore it shall be sealed, hidden, covered, lying in the 
 Dwelling, where the Root of all things is founded." - 
 
 Besides this, St. Hippolytus gives us a longer and more 
 important passage from the Great Announcement, an analysis 
 of the system taught in it, and several specimens of Simon's 
 method of interpreting special texts of Scripture, both of 
 the Old and New Testament. Combining these with the 
 account given, a little earlier but less fully, by St. Irenaeus,-^ 
 and with the indications afforded by less trustworthy 
 authorities,* we can get a fair idea of what Simon taught as 
 a living, working system. In its speculative aspect it is 
 summarised by St. Hippolytus as follows:^ "There is an 
 Unbounded Power : this is the Tap-root ^ of all things. The 
 Unbounded Power is, he says, Fire : which according to him 
 is in no wise simple, as most suppose Fire to be, like the 
 rest of the Four Elements : but the nature of Fire is double, 
 
 ^ Acts viii. lo. Did the "Great Power ' dictate to his "Intelli- 
 gence," or make her turn his Aramaic into Greek? If so, he imposed 
 on her no inadequate penance for all her sins of the flesh and of the 
 spirit. 
 
 * St. Hippol. Ref. Haer. VI. 9. 
 2 Adv. Haer. I. xxiii. 1-3. 
 
 * Such as the Clementine Homilies, which plainly deal with the 
 system of the real Simon, though meant, there is no doubt, to suggest 
 an identity or analogy between him and St. Paul. 
 
 5 Ref. Haer. X. 12. 
 
 ^ I suppose there is a distinction intended between the one ptj'wyu.a 
 and the six pl^ai. ; see line 8 of next page. 
 
NOTE ON THE GNOSTIC HERESIES. 345 
 
 and one element of the double nature he calls Hidden, the 
 other Manifest. The Hidden parts are hidden in the Mani- 
 fest parts of Fire, and the Manifest are sprung from the 
 Hidden. And all the parts of Fire, both visible and invisible, 
 are conceived, he says, to have reason. So, they say, the 
 world that had an origin is sprung from the unoriginated 
 Fire. And it began to spring thus •?■ the Originated having 
 taken the six first Roots of the principle of its origin from 
 the principle of that Fire. For these roots originated from 
 the Fire in couples : which he calls Mind and Intelligence, 
 Voice and Name, Reasoning and Thought. And in the 
 six Roots together is the Unbounded Power, which, he says, 
 is He who stands, stood, shall stand : Who, if He be 
 imaged in the six Powers,^ shall be in essence, power, 
 greatness, and perfection, one and the same with the Un- 
 originated and Unbounded Power, having absolutely nothing 
 inferior to that Unoriginated, Unchangeable, Unbounded 
 Power : but if He remain potentially only in the six Powers, 
 and be not imaged, He comes to nought, he says, and 
 perishes, as the power of grammar or geometry in a human 
 soul which pre-existed, if it have not received the help of 
 one learned in the art to teach it. And Simon says that he 
 himself is He who stands, stood, shall stand, being the 
 Power that is above all things :" and, we may add, that his 
 companion Helen was Intelligence, the first of the female 
 Root-Powers, and Mother of all being. 
 
 This Helen had been a harlot at Tyre, till Simon saw 
 her there, bought her, and kept her with him for the rest of 
 what seems to have been a wandering life. The story is not 
 a pretty one, but it is not unmixedly discreditable to Simon. 
 He had the precedent of the Prophet Hosea for thinking 
 that he typified the divine redemption by making an honest 
 
 ^ These passages seem to be verbatim quotations from the Great 
 Annoimcement, partly from the style, partly from their appearing twice 
 in St. Hippolytus in the same words. But the very Hellenic saying 
 about grammar and geometry can hardly be Simon's own. 
 
346 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 woman of a bad one ; and it seems that Helen behaved 
 better than Gomer did, after her marriage or quasi-marriage.^ 
 And really it is a more respectable form of idolatry for a 
 man to deify his mistress than to deify himself, though the 
 divinity ascribed to Helen was quite a subordinate one to 
 that of Simon. She was the Lost Sheep (Simon, like the 
 later Gnostics, found the Parables very useful for twisting 
 into illustrations of his system) whom he had come from 
 Heaven to redeem. She had, since first she was entangled 
 among the powers of the lower sensible world, been ill used 
 and degraded in all manner of ways — one of her avatars 
 had been that of Helen of Troy — till at last she had fallen 
 into the state from which he rescued her, and re-united her 
 to himself 
 
 These do not sound like the sentiments of an unmixed 
 villain or hypocrite, though they are not the acts of a man 
 of such angelic purity as to be able indeed to regenerate 
 the world. The mystical idealization of the relations of the 
 sexes is a fascinating subject, but except to men of angelic 
 purity it is a dangerous one;^ and the tone of Simon's 
 system made it natural to him to treat the subject on its 
 physical more than on its social side. Of his own morals 
 
 ^ It is really more important, as to the question of Simon's moral 
 character, to ask whether his connexion with Helen began before or 
 after his professed conversion to Christianity, than it is to ask whether 
 he married her according to a form that the law-courts of the province 
 of Syria would have recognised. It is not likely that he did this, 
 though it is not impossible ; but judging him by a heathen or even an 
 Old Testament standard, it cannot be called vicious for a man to make 
 his freed-woman his concubine. No doubt Simon, when he became a 
 Christian, was bound to conform to Christian rules both of faith and 
 morals ; but even then we must not blame him twice over for not con- 
 tinuing to be a Christian. 
 
 * In the New Testament it only appears in the writings of the celi- 
 bate apostles, SS. Paul and John, though on the practical sacredness 
 of marriage St. Peter's teaching is no less noble. If the Song of 
 Songs be the composition of Solomon, it is obvious that it proved a 
 dangerous subject for him. 
 
NOTE ON THE GXOSTIC HERESIES. 347 
 
 we hear nothing worse than what has been said ; but we 
 cannot be surprised at his followers finding excuse in his 
 language for the most hideous profligacy. He taught that 
 faith in him and Helen made the moral law a matter of 
 indifference ; he taught that erotic passion was a form of 
 faith or spirituaHty ; and the consequences may be imagined. 
 It seems more than possible that the popular charges 
 against the Christians may in part have been true of the 
 Simonians. 
 
 One remarkable point in Simon's system, of which we 
 have already seen a specimen in his identification of the 
 two Helens, was his attempt at a syncretism of Pagan 
 with Jewish, or rather Samaritan, religious ideas. We are 
 told by St. Hippolytus that a statue of Simon himself, 
 with the attributes of Juppiter, and one of Helen, with 
 those of Minerva, were reverenced by their followers ; and 
 on the still earlier authority of St. Justin^ we hear that 
 a public statue was erected to Simon at Rome, with the 
 inscription Simojii Deo Saiido. This last statement has 
 been generally disbelieved, since the pedestal of a statue 
 was found on the site indicated, with the inscription Semoni 
 Banco Deo Fidio, &c. It is thought that St. Justin simply 
 saw the inscription, and, never having heard of the ancient 
 Italian god Semo Sancus, jumped at the conclusion that 
 Semo must stand for Simon, and mean the only Simon 
 whose claims to deity he had ever heard of. But it seems 
 likelier that the confusion of Semo and Simo is not St. 
 Justin's, but Simon's own. It was just like him to say, 
 "You worship Semo Sancus: well, here am I, Simo 
 Sanctus : I am he 'whom ye ignorantly worship.'" Nor 
 is it incredible, as we have already said,- that Claudius, and 
 still more Nero, may have paid some attention to his claims, 
 and the statue to Semo Sancus may have been really erected 
 on occasion of the god's alleged appearance among men. 
 
 "' Afol. I. 27. 2 Lect. III. p. 147. 
 
348 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 A more serious aspect of his attempt to assimilate pagan- 
 ism to his own rehgion was this : he taught (or at least his 
 followers did) that " he had come down in Samaria as the 
 Father, had revealed himself to the Jews as the Son, and 
 visited other nations as the Holy Ghost." ^ Shockingly- 
 blasphemous as these words seem to us, especially if we 
 believe them to be Simon's own, they yet have a serious 
 meaning ; they even have a relation to a truth that Simon 
 meant in his coarse way to express. A Samaritan himself, 
 he regarded the Samaritans, not the Jews, as the heirs to 
 whatever was really divine- in the Old Testament revela- 
 tion. If the Lord God of Israel had ever come down 
 among men, it must have been among them. On the other 
 hand, he had learnt from St. Philip that the Son of God 
 had appeared among the Jews ; and this he did not deny, 
 though he shrank from " the offence of the Cross," and 
 taught that His suffering and death were only apparent. 
 And lastly, the conception that any elements of true re- 
 ligion, any true knowledge of God, that was to be found 
 among other nations, came from God's Spirit, is perfectly 
 sound, and is insisted on by the orthodox fathers of this 
 age ; though they ascribe such partial revelations, as well as 
 the completer one, to Moses and the Prophets, rather to the 
 Person of the Word. 
 
 Simon is called the first author of heresy ; and in fact it 
 seems that nearly all the heresies of this age — heresies 
 more deadly than any that in later times have been called 
 
 ^ S. Iren. I. xxiii. i; S. Hippol. VI. 19. The distinction "came 
 down . . . appeared . . . visited " is in St. Irenaeus, not in St. 
 Hippolytus ; but it is obviously significant, and borrowed from a 
 Simonian source, whether the Great Announcement itself, or one more 
 influenced by orthodox Christian thought. 
 
 * Perhaps, like the Samaritans in general, he acknowledged the 
 books of Moses as coming from the Supreme God, while, like them, he 
 rejected the Prophets. He taught that the latter were inspired by the 
 Angels who made the visible world, and who were responsible for the 
 degradation of the divine Intelligence, alias Helen. 
 
NOTE ON THE GNOSTIC HERESIES. 349 
 
 Christian at all — are more or less directly derived from his. 
 The only heretics, however, that are called his personal 
 disciples are his countrymen, Dositheus (who indeed is 
 represented as less a disciple than a contemporary and 
 possible rival) and Menander. The latter seems to have 
 been as audacious as Simon in his personal claims, and to 
 have professed to render his followers immortal. We have 
 no reason to suppose him to have been anything but a 
 vulgar impostor — an imitator of Simon, without the power 
 of appreciating the real elements of greatness that Simon 
 combined with his egotism and charlatanism ; but we cannot 
 really say that we know anything definite about him. 
 
 Still more shadowy, without the name of a founder or an 
 exponent, are the sects which seem to have arisen inde- 
 pendently of Simon's influence, and who first assumed the 
 name of Gnostic or Knowing ^ — the Naassenes or Ophites. 
 These were inventors not of a philosophy but of a 
 mythology, though their mythology was one which was 
 intended to serve as a " Key to all Mythologies." And the 
 Ophite mythology assumed something of a philosophic 
 tone, because the conception was already in the air that 
 was afterwards embodied in neo-Platonism, that a true 
 philosophy must furnish such a key. The Biblical story of 
 the Fall (with some mythical details, whether of Hebrew 
 or Babylonian origin-) was by the Ophites entwined with 
 stories belonging to the mythologies of Egypt, Assyria, 
 Phrygia, and Greece ; and all were made to converge in a 
 cosmogony in which the Serpjent (Heb. JVahask, Gr. Ophis) 
 
 ^ They claimed that ' ' they alone knew the depths " — language which 
 seems to be referred to in Rev. ii. 24. 
 
 They used texts from the Great Announcement (S. Hippol. V. 9), 
 as they did from the Old and New Testament, and from the Greek 
 poets. But the real spirit of their religion was no more Simonian than 
 it was Jewish, Christian, or classical. 
 
 ^ Their description of the Serpent that tempted Eve as having a 
 human, sometimes a female, bust, has made its way into the traditions 
 of Christian art. 
 
350 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 filled an important place. It is not worth while to dis- 
 entangle the various sects of this religion, or to guess at 
 the meaning of their names. Some were ascetic, some 
 licentious — all tended to be indecent in their imagery and 
 speculations. Some came near enough to Christian ideas 
 to be called blasphemous ; others were simply pagan and 
 absurd. 
 
 We do not know whether these sects originated as early 
 as Simon's ; they certainly continued to exist when his had 
 been, not extinguished, but overshadowed by later develop- 
 ments. Of the other heresies of the apostohc age, we have 
 already ^ said all that is known about the Nicolaitans, and 
 something about Cerinthus.- The latter is remarkable for 
 having combined his theological speculations with adher- 
 ence to the Jewish Law, though he taught that the Maker 
 of the world, and presumably the Giver of that Law, was a 
 being far inferior to the Supreme God, Who was first made 
 known by Christ.^ 
 
 The heretics of the second century made in general a 
 greater pretension than those of the first to philosophic 
 depth ; or at least they were more influenced by the 
 traditions of Greek philosophy and culture, though only 
 one of them — Basilides — seems to have been comparable 
 with Simon in real ability. Carpocrates, who was apparently 
 the earliest, may best be described as a Gentile Cerinthus — 
 a very thorough Gentile indeed, and an illustration of the 
 way that the Hellenic name came to indicate, not a man 
 possessing the highest 'intellectual culture, but a man reject- 
 ing the purest spiritual and moral doctrine. Cerinthus is 
 described as a self-indulgent, carnal-minded man, but not as 
 what could be called immoral. He had not shaken off" his 
 Jewish reverence for the moral Law, but still less was he 
 prepared to forego the temporal and sensible rewards pro- 
 
 1 Lect. IV. p. i6g sqq. ' lb. p. 191. 
 
 * S. Iren. I. xxvi. I. 
 
NOTE ON THE GNOSTIC HERESIES. 351 
 
 mised to those who kept it. Carpocrates had been " ahve 
 without the Law once," and dehberately pronounced life 
 without the Law, or, faihng that, in defiance of the Law, to 
 be the only hfe worth having. Jesus, he said, though a 
 mere man by nature, had excelled others by his perfect 
 memory of the things in the Heavens. (Here we have the 
 Platonic doctrine of " recollection " as the source of all ideal 
 knowledge, in especial reference it seems to the form in 
 which it was expressed in the Phaedrus.) But the use that 
 Jesus made of his superior knowledge, and righteousness 
 consisting in knowledge, was to defy the Jewish Law; and 
 men who were to benefit by his deliverance must defy it also. 
 They must violate every one of the commandments of the 
 Giver of that Law now in this present life, or else they would 
 not be set free from His world or His Law, but would be 
 imprisoned in other bodies, till in other lives they had worked 
 out their salvation by the requisite amount of sin. 
 
 One of Carpocrates' defiances of law, in which he was 
 aided by Alexandria, a woman of Same in Cephallenia, 
 resulted in the production of a boy, whom he named 
 Epiphanes — perhaps after the great Hellenic persecutor of 
 the subjects of the Jewish Law. The child of such a father 
 could not fail to grow up wrong-headed ; and it was prob- 
 ably no misfortune to himself or to the world that he died 
 at seventeen,^ before he had time to do anything worse than 
 write a good deal of pestilent nonsense — partly socialistic, 
 partly perhaps metaphysical. St. Clement of Alexandria 
 has preserved characteristic fragments ^ of his book "on 
 Justice," where he advocates community of goods and 
 wives; but he was so far better than his father, that he 
 grounds his doctrine primarily on the natural rights of men 
 at large, and only secondarily on the desires of the indi- 
 vidual as indicating the law of his being. Though trained 
 
 ' He was deified — perhaps it would be more accurate to say wor- 
 shipped as a hero — by his mother's countrymen. 
 2 Strom. III. 2. 
 
352 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 by his father in his reh'gion (if it can be called one) and in 
 the Platonic philosophy, he is said^ to have passed over 
 from the former to the school of Secundus the Valentinian. 
 If so, it was his system that, more than any other, 
 moved St. Irenaeus at once to laugh and to cry;^ and 
 certainly the arbitrary and complacent dogmatism which he 
 ridicules ^ sounds very like that of a clever schoolboy. But 
 it seems difficult to place the son of Carpocrates as late as 
 a disciple of Valentine ; and probably Epiphanes the 
 Valentinian is a different person, if indeed it be right to 
 take the word applied to him as a proper name, and not as 
 an epithet, as did Tertullian and the translator of St. 
 Irenaeus. 
 
 Saturnilus or Saturninus,* a native of Antioch, and 
 Basilides of Alexandria, are said by a late authority^ to 
 have been disciples of Menander ; but whether this be true 
 or no, they were certainly more distinctly Christian sectaries, 
 less preachers of a new religion with Christian elements 
 embodied in it. Saturnilus, we are told, taught much the 
 same system as Menander, only with a far more respectable 
 moral tone. According to him,^ the world was made by 
 seven angels, of whom the God of the Jews was one. 
 Satan was a rival angel, an enemy of the seven, and of that 
 one in particular. The true Supreme God sent Jesus, not 
 
 ^ St. Epiph. Adv. Haer. I. ii., Haer. xxxii. 3-5. 
 
 ^ Adv. Haer. I. xi. 4. 
 
 ^ The parody is really amusing, but untranslateable. Its point lies 
 in the words irpoapxh • • • T'po this and that, . . . irpoirpoKvXLi'So/j.^vr]. 
 
 * The first form of the name is given by St. Hippolytus, as well as 
 by the later Epiphanius and Theodoret. The second is used by St. 
 Irenaeus, or at least his translator ; but it is probable that he has 
 substituted the common name for the peculiar one. 
 
 ' Eus. H. E. IV. vii. 3 need not mean more than that they 
 succeeded Menander as the leading heretics of the age ; and St. 
 Epiphanius, who is more explicit, need not have had any authority 
 besides Eusebius. 
 
 8 S. Iren. I. xxiv. I, 2; S. HiPPOL. VII. 28. 
 
NOTE ON THE GNOSTIC HERESIES. 353 
 
 only to destroy the works of Satan, but even more to put 
 down the makers and rulers of the world ;^ though these 
 are conceived, so far as we can tell from our scanty notices, 
 rather as inferior than as hostile to the Supreme God. 
 Among the men made by these there is a good and an 
 evil race ; there is a conflict between these, in which the 
 latter are aided by demons, the former by Christ. The 
 makers of the world were at least so far good, that their 
 enemy Satan was absolutely evil ; he and all his works, 
 including marriage, were to be abhorred of all faithful 
 Christians. In all points the sect professed an austere 
 standard of morality, and they seem to have fully lived up 
 to their professions. 
 
 Saturnilus' contemporary Basilides taught a system of 
 greater intellectual pretensions. It begins with a full-fledged 
 philosophy of the Absolute ; it passes into something no 
 better than a mythology, and that a mythology based, for 
 the most part, not on moral abstractions, but on physical 
 speculations, and elaborated by the help of a childish mys- 
 ticism about numbers and the letters representing them. 
 The earlier part is easy to laugh at ; but really the self- 
 stultifying attempt to make words and thought express the 
 complete absence of either is as successful as it can be. 
 
 " There was when there was Nothing : but even that 
 Nothing was not a thing that was, but plainly and absolutely, 
 without any refinement, there was nothing at all. But when 
 I say * was,' I don't mean that it was, but that I may indi- 
 cate what I want to prove — I mean, that there wasn't any- 
 thing.'"^ "For that is not absolutely unspeakable which is 
 
 ^ There is little doubt that St. Irenaeus' translator has transposed 
 subject and object in this sentence, and that the true meaning is that 
 given by St. Hippolytus. 
 
 * The italics can hardly be said to be in St. Hippolytus, unless 
 ovSk iv be regarded as an italicised ovS^v. But I feel sure that Basilides 
 ■would have put lots of italics, if they had been invented in his time ; 
 they are great favourites with strivers after the unutterable. One is 
 obliged to guess when (py^aLv represents the beginning of a new quota- 
 tion, or is Greek, so to speak, for inverted commas. 
 
 2 A 
 
354 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 named : we at all events call it ' Unspeakable,' and that is 
 not unspeakable : for even ' Not even unspeakable ' is a 
 name not unspeakable : but it is ' above every name that is 
 named.' (Eph. i. 21.)" ^ 
 
 " When therefore there was Nothing — no matter, no sub- 
 stance, no unsubstantial, no simple, no compound, no 
 unconceived, no unperceived, no man, no angel, no God — 
 absolutely none of the things named or contained in sense 
 or thought . . . the non-existent God . . . without thought, 
 without sense, without wish, without purpose, without pas- 
 sion, without desire, willed to make a world. But I say 
 willed for the sake of clearness, without will and without 
 thought and without sense ; and by zuorld I mean not that 
 made afterwards in breadth and distinction, and separated ; 
 but it was a seed of a world. Now the seed of the world 
 had all things in itself, as the grain of mustard-seed (Matt, 
 xiii. 31)-^ has everything at once comprised in the smallest 
 space — the roots, the stem, the branches, the leaves, the 
 countless number of the grains that grow from the plant, to 
 be seeds of other plants shed again and again. So non- 
 existent God made a non-existent world out of non-existent 
 things " — and so on. 
 
 In the world-seed there was "a tripartite Sonship, in all 
 things consubstantial - with the non-existent God,'' consist- 
 ing of a subtle element, a gross, and one needing purifica- 
 tion. The first, as soon as it was created, flew up " ' like a 
 wing or a thought' (Horn. Od. iii. 36) to the Non-existent; 
 for Him., oil account of the excess of His beauty and lovelitiess, 
 every tuiture craves for, each in its own way !" (The italics 
 are ours.) The grosser element, unable to take a similar 
 
 ^ Again, if chapters and verses had been invented, Basilides ivould 
 have put in the references in parentheses. 
 
 ^ We notice the first appearance in theology of this important word. 
 But really it is less noticeable for its relation to the Nicene Creed than 
 for the proof it gives that Basilides has not yet got out of the sphere of 
 the self-contradictory, 6/j.oou(tlos rep ovk 6vti. 
 
NOTE ON THE GNOSTIC HERESIES. 355 
 
 flight, received from the subtler an organ for so doing 
 (which, one is pained to have to say, BasiUdes called the 
 Holy Ghost), and so flew up to the neighbourhood of the 
 Non-existent. Thus the second Sonship attains to the same 
 glory as the first ; the third still remains in the universal 
 seed. But the Holy Ghost, which served to exalt the Son- 
 ship to the region of the Non-existent, was itself unable to 
 remain there. It felt, we are told, like a fish out of water 
 (Plat. Phaed. 58 p. no), and sank down till it became the 
 Firmament (Gen. i. 6) between the world and the things 
 above the world ; still retaining, however, the scent of the 
 Sonship and Non-existence, with which it had for a moment 
 been in contact. 
 
 This is nonsense, but there is an element of the sub- 
 lime in it. The upward flight of the Sonship reminded 
 St. Hippolytus of the glorious allegory in Plato's Phadriis ; 
 to us there seems a closer analogy to the flight of Southey's 
 Glendoveer to Siva's throne, and the genuine Hindoo myths 
 upon which that was founded. And in the supreme loveli- 
 ness of the Non-existent, we have a thought which, in 
 Buddhism, has proved neither intellectually nor morally 
 barren. But as the story goes on the metaphysics are less 
 profound, the mythology less spiritual, and the incorporation 
 of Christian or scriptural language more offensively perverse. 
 In the ascent of the Sonship there was perhaps a physical 
 meaning ; in what follows the physics seem to count for 
 more than the theology, or even the metaphysics. There 
 is introduced a Great Ruler, who by his still greater Son 
 made and governs the visible Heaven, beneath the spiritual 
 Firmament, but above the Moon : his world has some un- 
 explained relation to the number 8. The number 7, and the 
 world of air or sense below the moon, belongs to another 
 Ruler, called Abraxas, or Abrasax; the numerical value of 
 the letters in either name is 365, the meaning of which is 
 obvious. He is also great, but far inferior to the Great 
 Ruler properly so called ; like him he had a Son of his 
 
356 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 own. The Great Ruler thinks himself God, and is the God 
 of the Old Testament ; but he is enlightened, to his great 
 sorrow, by the really divine Sonship. The light from this 
 descends, through the two Rulers or rather their Sons, upon 
 Jesus the Son of Mary, in order to make a way to the 
 Heaven of the Non-existent for the element of Sonship 
 still remaining in the lower world. 
 
 The facts of the Gospel history were all acknowledged ; 
 but the explanation of the Passion and Resurrection varied 
 among the different teachers of the school. According to 
 the account of St. Irenaeus, a docetism was taught of the 
 most unchristian and immoral form of all ; Jesus at the 
 Cross changed shapes with Simon the Cyrenian, and allowed 
 him to be crucified by mistake, while He Himself stood by 
 mocking His deluded enemies. But according to St. Hip- 
 polytus, the bodily part of Jesus alone suffered, and was 
 destroyed ; the soul, the animal or natural part, rose to the 
 throne of the Ruler of the lower world, while the Sonship 
 hitherto left below was restored to union with that already 
 in the supramundane region ; — the relation between the sense 
 in which this was completed in the Ascension of Jesus, and 
 that in which it is to be completed in His followers, being 
 conceived nearly as in the orthodox creed. The Great 
 Ruler, and the rest of the world from which the Sonship 
 was thus separated, or to be separated, were to be delivered 
 from vain and unnatural desire by the merciful veil of 
 Great Ignorance. 
 
 This account of Basilides' system is abridged from St. 
 Hippolytus, the abridgment being chiefly in the silly mys- 
 ticism about numbers and the letters representing them, 
 and about the Rulers of the world, which seems to have 
 obscure relations to oriental paganism. The account given 
 by St. Irenaeus is more sketchy, and gives the impression 
 of something far less intellectually respectable : he adds 
 that the sect claimed licence for immorality. But for this 
 it is certain they had not the authority of their founders. 
 
NOTE ON THE GNOSTIC HERESIES. 357 
 
 St. Clement of Alexandria quotes^ a passage from Isidore's 
 Ethics^ where he quotes Matt. xix. 12, and explains it quite 
 in the spirit of I. Cor. vii. ; adding something obscure, but 
 plainly well-intentioned, about the very real moral difficul- 
 ties of a man not fit for celibacy, but too young or too poor 
 to marry : apparently the cure suggested for these is frank 
 confession on his part to a brother, and frank sympathy on 
 the part of the latter. Probably, in this as in other points, 
 the cause of the difference between our different accounts 
 is, that St. Irenaeus describes the practical working belief 
 of the sect as it was in his time, while St. Hippolytus 
 derives his account from the works of Basilides himself and 
 his son Isidore. Between these two he does not dis- 
 tinguish : they probably taught substantially the same 
 doctrines;^ but it would be interesting to us to know 
 whether the extensive quotations from various books of the 
 New Testament as well as the Old were made by Basilides 
 as early as the reign of Hadrian, or were only used as illus- 
 trations of his system a generation later. We know that 
 Basilides was not dependent entirely on the canonical New 
 Testament for his authorities. He perhaps had a written 
 Gospel of his own : he also claimed to find his system 
 taught in the writings of two Prophets, Bar-Cabbas and 
 Bar-Coph,^ and to have oral traditions from one Glaucia, 
 an interpreter of St. Peter; and — what was still more — to 
 have received secret instruction from St. Matthias as to 
 what he had heard from the Saviour Himself. But the fact 
 
 ^ Strom. III. I. 
 
 ^ It is probably to indicate this, that St. Hippolytus insists on 
 Isidore being his legitimate son (as St. Paul gives the title to SS. 
 Timothy and Titus). But he may mean to contrast the relationship 
 between Basilides and Isidore with that between Carpocrates and 
 Epiphanes, especially as some of the Basilidians were as bad as the 
 Carpocratians. 
 
 3 Eus. H. E. IV. vii. 7. But the latter name is uncertain : St. 
 Clement of Alexandria writes it as Farchor. If Bar-Coph is right, it 
 would be capable of meaning " Son of a Monkey." 
 
358 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 that he, or even his son, thought it worth wliile to quote St. 
 John as they did, in support of a system that liis words 
 had nothing to do with, is not the least of the proofs how 
 early and how unhesitating must have been the acceptance 
 of the Gospel as St. John's work by all who claimed to be 
 Christians. 
 
 In Basilides' system as above expounded, we see some- 
 thing of one method by which it was attempted to bridge 
 the gulf between the Infinite and the Finite, or between 
 Spirit and Matter. Basilides refused to describe God as 
 making the world out of independent and coeternal Matter: 
 he also refused to allow that it arose by "projection" or 
 emanation from the Divine Essence. But he did really in 
 substance admit something like the latter : the Great Ruler 
 and the other Ruler served to fill the place of gods in this 
 world, without bringing the Non-existent or (as we should 
 say) the Absolute into direct relations with the earth, or 
 even the heavens. In St. Irenaeus' account of the Basil- 
 idian views, this characteristic is further developed : a whole 
 string of half-personified emanations, one after another, 
 serve to disguise the fact of the Absolute being the 
 ultimate source and cause of the Conditioned. 
 
 Now Valentine, Basilides' countryman and younger con- 
 temporary, combined this doctrine of successive emanations 
 with that derived from Simon of the fall of the Divine 
 Wisdom. He had little indeed in common with Simon's 
 moral temper : he was more of a Christian, more of a theo- 
 logian, and, with far less philosophical genius, he had more 
 philosophical culture — he had been a Platonist before his 
 conversion to Christianity. But though in a more refined 
 form, it seems plain that Valentine shared the characteristic 
 evil of the Gnostic temper — its making spiritual enlighten- 
 ment dependent on intellectual insight instead of moral 
 purity. He was, we are told, one of the Presbyters of the 
 Church of Alexandria-— ^one of the twelve, no doubt, who 
 formed wliat would in modern times be called the Cathedral 
 
NOTE ON THE GNOSTIC HERESIES. 359 
 
 Chapter, who elected the Bishop out of their own number.^ 
 His enemies said that he seceded from the Church from 
 pique : being the great preacher of the city, he expected to 
 be elected Bishop on a vacancy, but another candidate was 
 
 ^ In Lectures III. and V. the history of episcopacy was designedly 
 treated without the mention of this Alexandrine institution, which, 
 from the time of Selden, has been the stronghold of Presbyterianism. 
 The reason is, that the exact facts are so uncertain, that it is almost 
 useless to discuss our evidence ; and even if the alleged facts be taken 
 as proved, they are so exceptional that it is fair to interpret them in the 
 light of general usage, rather than to interpret the general usage in the 
 light thrown by them. We may fully accept St. Jerome's testimony {Ep. 
 146, In Tit. i. 5), that down to the times of Bishops Heraclas and 
 Dionysius (a.d. 233-265) the Bishop of Alexandria was appointed by 
 these twelve Presbyters. It has been suggested by strict Episcopalians, 
 that the twelve Presbyters only elected the Bishop, and that he had to 
 be consecrated afterwards, by the Bishops of Palestine or of the 
 Cyrenaica. This hypothesis is not absolutely excluded by St. Jerome's 
 language : it is by that of Eutychius, who in the tenth century wrote a 
 history of the world, and who distinctly describes the eleven Presbyters 
 laying their hands on the Bishop elect. Eutychius had some authority 
 other than St. Jerome, but where he goes beyond him he is untrust- 
 worthy. According to him, three Bishops were appointed by Deme- 
 trius, the predecessor of Heraclas, and twenty more by Heraclas, from 
 which time the Patriarch took the title of Pope or Grandfather. But 
 the Presbyters ordained down to the time of St. Alexander, " who was 
 one of the 318." But people who attach importance to this testimony 
 ought to know who the so-called Eutychius was. His real name was 
 Said, and he was an Arab by language and culture. He was an ortho- 
 dox Patriarch of Alexandria, and as such took the name of Aftisius, an 
 Arabic transliteration of Eutyches or Eutychius. But no one who has 
 looked at Aftisius' work can regard him as inheriting a tradition from the 
 Greek Church of the third century : our evidence of the fact remains 
 where St. Jerome left it. 
 
 But though St. Jerome's language does not expressly affirm a conse- 
 cration by the Presbyters, it certainly suggests it : if they simply 
 elected, what was the difference between the use of Alexandria and 
 that of other Churches ? I confess to not regarding the question as im- 
 portant. The twelve Presbyters, if they did ordain, had at their own 
 Ordination received the commission to ordain in a particular case, and 
 were pro tanto in episcopal Orders. Their action is not parallel to that 
 of Presbyters who, in the sixteenth, seventeenth, or eighteenth centuuy. 
 
36o BEGIA'NIAGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 preferred on account of his merits as a " martyr." ^ The 
 story is hkely to be true in all its details — we may at any 
 rate take it to prove as much as this, that he did volun- 
 tarily secede from the Church and form a sect, unlike Mar- 
 cion, who was cast out of the Church, justly and inevitably, 
 but very much against his will. 
 
 One could wish that we knew what was the vacancy of 
 the see of Alexandria that he hoped to fill, which would 
 supply us with a definite date for his first separation from 
 the Church. As it is, we must content ourselves with the 
 knowledge that he " flourished " in the days of Antoninus 
 Pius ; and reconcile this as best we can with the statement 
 of TertuUian {Praescr. Haer. 30) that he, as well as Mar- 
 cion, were members of the Roman Church down to the 
 days of St. Eleutherus, a.d. cir. 171. 
 
 According to Valentine, there existed in the infinite 
 Divine Mind certain powers, motions, or affections, to which 
 he gave the name of Worlds or Ages : the Greek word 
 Aeon is, in relation to his system, naturalized in Latin, and 
 almost in English. This word, and the names of most of 
 the Aeons, are derived from the more mystical parts of the 
 New Testament: the first chapter of St. John's Gospel, 
 and the Epistles to the Ephesians and Colossians, contain 
 most of the words that he built up into a system, and even 
 perhaps some of the ideas. Like Easilides, and probably 
 under his influence, Valentine attached importance to the 
 number of the groups in which his Aeons were arranged, 
 the Eight, the Ten, and the Twelve, making up thirty in all; 
 so when scriptural names ran short, a {qw derivatives were 
 coined from some of those previously used, in order to 
 complete the number. Most ancient and modern historians 
 of Gnosticism think it necessary to enumerate these thirty 
 
 assumed the power of ordaining Presbyters or Bishops, when at tlieir 
 own Ordination they had received only the commission to administer 
 the Sacraments. 
 
 ^ Tert. adv. Val. 4 ; cf. Praescr. 30. 
 
NOTE ON THE GNOSTIC HERESIES. 361 
 
 names \ most readers of their histories find them impossible 
 to remember or to conceive distinctly.^ Valentine's school 
 found it easier to remember the names than to grasp the 
 idea of the abstractions indicated by them. Beginning with 
 Ptolemy, one apparently of his immediate personal disciples, 
 they erected the Aeons into distinct substances. Valentine 
 had, apparently, conceived them as something like what 
 Sabellians suppose the Persons of the Christian Trinity to 
 be : Ptolemy constructed out of them a weird and shadowy 
 Pantheon, of thirty gods and goddesses. One Axionicus 
 of Antioch preserved the original teaching of Valentine 
 down to, at least, the end of the second century ; but 
 except for him, TertuUian says' that "Valentine was no- 
 where, but the Valentinians everywhere." The world could 
 receive readily enough a new form of paganism, with a 
 supposed philosophical basis ; those who were chosen out of 
 the world could receive genuine Christianity; but Valentine's 
 system was neither one thing nor the other — it remained 
 
 A Dio spiacente ed a' nemici suoi. 
 
 The first of the Valentinian Aeons — the Supreme and 
 Eternal — was called Bv^oj, the Depth or the Abyss : it is 
 not clear whether, in Valentine's own system, this was 
 identical with the Divine Father Himself, or whether, like 
 the rest, it was only one aspect of the Divine Mind or 
 Nature. Some of his disciples left the Depth in his solitary 
 and absolute state ; some gave him a partner Silence ; the 
 successive generations or emanations of the Aeons, at all 
 events, were arranged in pairs as husbands and wives. The 
 thirtieth and last of these was Wisdom (Gr. Sophia, Heb. 
 KhocJimah or Khochmbth, written in Greek as AchambtJi) : 
 she transgressed the limits of her nature, and thereby she, 
 or rather her inordinate passion, hypostatized as her double, 
 came to be entangled in the material world. From this 
 
 ' If any one wishes to try, as clear an account as any, with a genea- 
 logical tree, is given in Blunt's Dktionary of Sects and Heresies, Art. 
 Valentinians. "^ Adv. Val. 4. 
 
362 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 entanglement she was to be redeemed by a process which 
 the true " Knowledge" explained to man. 
 
 This doctrine of the fall and redemption of the Divine 
 Wisdom was no doubt borrowed, directly and consciously, 
 from Simon or his school. But Valentine's account of the 
 redemption was a Httle less remote than Simon's from the 
 doctrine of the Gospel, or at all events embodied more of 
 scriptural and evangelical phraseology. Nor did he, like 
 Simon, discredit his system by turning it to the personal 
 glorification of himself or his mistress : no one insinuates, 
 indeed, that he had a mistress at all, or that his practice or 
 teaching was in any way licentious. But that of some of his 
 followers was, and he must be held to some extent responsible 
 for it; like Simon, he had brought erotic or at least sexual 
 mysticism into a dangerous prominence in his theosophy, 
 and had taught men to aim at a so-called spirituality which, 
 as it was held to transcend morality, and had no necessary 
 relation to it, so might easily be thought to supersede it. 
 
 Ptolemy seems to have been the most popular and in- 
 fluential of Valentine's disciples, and the account given of 
 the school as a whole by SS. Irenaeus, Hippolytus, and 
 Epiphanius perhaps represents his teaching more accurately 
 than that of his master. The last-named of the great 
 Catholic controversialists is the least critical, least accurate, 
 and least original, and where he differs from his predecessors 
 we have no hesitation in preferring their testimony; but we 
 owe to him the preservation of our most authentic materials 
 for studying this subject — considerable passages^ of a work 
 either of Valentinus himself or of an early Valentinian, and 
 the whole of a letter of Ptolemy's to a lady named Flora.- 
 
 ^ Haer. ,\xxi. 5, 6. 
 
 ^ Haer. xxxiii. 3-7. He addresses her as "my fair sister Flora." 
 Was she his sister really? If not, the language would be rather too 
 warm to suit ancient notions of propriety. Ptolemy's morals are not 
 censured ; but if the heads of a sect indulged in spiritual flirtations, it 
 is less wonder that the tail fell into very unspiritual ones. 
 
NOTE ON THE GNOSTIC HERESIES. 363 
 
 The former is as foggy as the second-hand descriptions of 
 the system usually are ; but the latter shows that the Valen- 
 tinians could write sensibly and intelligibly, when they were 
 writing about things that can be understood, or using words 
 that have a meaning. The letter is on the relation of the 
 Old Testament to the New : one may read the greater part 
 of it without seeing that it is not meant to be orthodox, 
 though rather rationalistic in temper; but by degrees one 
 discovers that all is working up to the inference, that the 
 two Testaments did not proceed from the same God. 
 
 By far the worst of the Valentinian sects, perhaps of all 
 the Gnostics, were the Markosians, as they are always called, 
 instead of the more natural form Marcians. Markos, or 
 Mark, their founder, is the only one of the heresiarchs, 
 except perhaps Menander, who seems to have been a mere 
 impostor and villain. Carpocrates was bad enough, but he 
 at least had principles : Mark seems to have had no aims 
 but purely selfish ones. St. Irenaeus gives circumstantial 
 details of his vulgar conjuring tricks, and of the vile uses 
 he made of the influence gained by these, and by such 
 cleverness as no doubt he had. He seems to have had no 
 real ideas to contribute to the Valentinian system, but only 
 to have made it more complicated and bewildering, by 
 playing tricks with the letters of the Greek alphabet and 
 their numerical values. 
 
 This childish mysticism had received some sanction from 
 the great Basilides, or at all events from his followers ; it, 
 and perhaps some more worthy ideas, were incorporated 
 with Valentinianism by Secundus and Epiphanes.^ They 
 went on inventing more and more abstract names, and 
 calling them first principles, in hopes of getting at what was 
 "before the beginning;" but really, as St. Irenaeus said,^ 
 they no more made their religions philosophical by calling 
 
 1 If this Epiphanes be a real person ; see above, p. 352. 
 ^ Adv. Ilaer. I. xi. 4. 
 
364 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 their gods Unities and Solities than if they had called them 
 by the more rational names of Pumpkins and Cucumbers. 
 The fact was, Gnosticism, as an intellectual system, had 
 run its course. A few more Gnostic sects arose, but these 
 were simply religious sects, with few pretensions to a philo- 
 sophical character. Of these later sects, those of Tatian,^ 
 a disciple of St. Justin, who after his death fell into heresy, 
 and founded an austere sect called the Encratite, and of 
 Bardesanes, a Valentinian who made some approximations 
 to orthodoxy, lie beyond our chronological limits ; but there 
 are two that we must mention, of which one, at least, was 
 very important. 
 
 This was that of Marcion, which apparently was, next to 
 the Valentinian, the most numerous of the heretical sects, 
 and the one that filled the largest space in the eyes of 
 Churchmen ; it was also the most morally respectable, and 
 almost the only one of the Gnostic communities that pro- 
 duced martyrs. The Valentinians, even when not immoral, 
 were never austere. Self-sacrifice, according to them, 
 showed a want of faith in the sufficiency of the Sacrifice of 
 Christ : He died for us, and did not need that we should 
 die for Him. Basilides, if he did not directly discourage 
 martyrdom, at least denied the glory of it. He held that 
 the martyrs suffered justly for their unknown sins,- or if 
 not, that their sufferings were at best analogous to those of 
 innocent infants. His followers, if not he himself, drew the 
 inference that, if suffering were a presumptive proof of sin, 
 it was doubly desirable to avoid suffering. 
 
 With Marcion, on the contrary, the first principle of all was 
 the sacredness of Christian virtue, as well in the confession 
 of the Faith as in other matters. Anything falling short of 
 the highest Christian perfection was by him ruthlessly 
 
 ^ He was the author of a Diatessaron or Harmony of the Gospels, 
 which has lately been substantially recovered. 
 
 ^ Vet the thought of I Peter iv. 17 is not very different. 
 
NOTE ON THE GNOSTIC HERESIES. 365 
 
 anathematized. For instance, the Church honoured ceU- 
 bacy : Marcion condemned marriage. He refused to admit 
 married people to his baptism : ^ they must either separate, 
 or wait for widowhood. But it is only fair to say that the 
 Marcionites were as free as the Shakers from the scandals 
 that one would expect to follow from their overstrained 
 pretensions. We hear only of one man falling short of 
 them, and he was promptly expelled. Also, the sect had 
 more vitality than could be expected, when it was only its 
 half-hearted members who could have children to bring up 
 in it ; it was widely spread and fairly numerous in St. Epiph- 
 anius' time, and did not die out till the seventh century. 
 
 Marcion's system of theology, and his general hne of 
 argument in support of it, are pretty thoroughly known to 
 us ; but his personal history is obscure, owing rather to the 
 inconsistencies than to the scantiness of our authorities. 
 What is certain is, that he was a native of Pontus, captain 
 of a merchant vessel, and a man of considerable wealth, 
 Tertullian, our best authority, seems to imply - that he had 
 been a Stoic philosopher before his conversion; but the 
 profession of philosophy was barely consistent with the life 
 of a sailor or trader; and perhaps we are to understand 
 only that Tertullian considered his theory akin to the 
 Stoical, which, according to the not very fair assumption of 
 many controversialists of that age, notably of St. Hippolytus, 
 proved it to be inconsistent with Christianity. We need 
 not, therefore, reject the statement of St. Epiphanius,^ that 
 Marcion was the son of the Bishop of Sinope. It is even 
 just possible to reconcile this statement with the natural 
 sense of TertuUian's, by supposing that Marcion, like M. 
 Aurelius, professed himself a Stoic from boyhood ; that he 
 
 1 He allowed baptism to be repeated as often as three times; that is, 
 it took the place of penance for deadly sin, which the most liberal 
 Churches at this time allowed only twice after baptism. 
 
 * Fraescr. Haei: 7, 30. 
 
 * Haer. xlii. i. 
 
366 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 and his father were converted together, in time for the 
 latter to pass through his novitiate, and become quahfied 
 for a bishop \ while he himself, no longer hampered by the 
 pride of Stoicism, went to sea and made his fortune. It 
 is at any rate certain that Marcion was originally a Catholic. 
 It may be true that he was first excommunicated by his own 
 father. But it must be a misunderstanding or a calumny 
 that the ground of his excommunication was, in the first 
 instance, not heresy, but immorality. The story is found, 
 not only in St. Epiphanius, but in the probably earlier 
 author of the appendix to Tertullian's de Praescriptione 
 Haei-eticorum ;^ but Tertullian's own silence (indeed he is 
 more than silent) is decisive against it. The most bitter of 
 controversialists, but one of the most honest, he was equally 
 incapable of inventing or circulating a false charge against 
 an opponent, and of omitting to make the most of a true 
 one. 2 
 
 Perhaps it was after this excommunication that Marcion 
 went to Rome, where he settled, and taught his peculiar 
 doctrines. Yet even at Rome he lived for some time as a 
 member of the Church. On his arrival he applied for 
 admission to communion, and probably the Roman clergy 
 did not feel bound by the Pontic excommunication.^ But 
 when the character of his teaching became known he was 
 excommunicated again, ^ not finally however, we are sur- 
 
 * If we choose to guess at the origin of the story, it may have been 
 from a misunderstanding of figurative language {cf. Tert. Praescr. 
 Haer. 44) about his "defiling the Virgin of Christ," i.e. the Church. 
 Or some one may have got hold by the wrong end of the story of 
 Apelles, who was excommunicated by Alarcion for immorality. 
 
 ' St. Epiphanius says they did, but this applies only to the time 
 when the Roman bishopric was vacant. Any Romanist who chooses 
 may say that Marcion appealed to the Pope from the sentence of his 
 own Bishop. If we put it so, the case is not much to the credit of the 
 Holy See. 
 
 * Semel atque itenim. Tert. Praescr. Haer. 30. 
 
NOTE ON THE GNOSTIC HERESIES. 367 
 
 prised to hear, till the episcopate of St. Eleutherus, some 
 twenty years after his condemnation by St. Polycarp.^ He 
 had brought into the Church (whether of Rome or Sinope 
 is not quite clear) a gift of some ^2,000 sterling. This 
 was honourably restored to him at his excommunication, 
 and must have been useful to him in organising his sect. 
 
 For when cut off from the Church he did submit to the 
 necessity of organising a sect, with Presbyters of its own : 
 we do not hear of Bishops, though probably there were 
 some so called. But he was not happy in schism.^ His 
 appeal to St. Polycarp shows how he craved for Christian 
 fellowship ; and at last he resolved to escape from schism, 
 even at the price of renouncing his heresy. He applied for 
 restoration to the peace of the Church : he was told that 
 he should receive it if he would bring back those whom he 
 had perverted. Apparently he honestly tried to do this, but 
 died before he succeeded. Absolution in articulo mortis 
 was not yet the rule of even the Roman Church ;2 but it 
 was recognised that the Divine Mercy might dispense with 
 the severe tests of penitence which its human ministers 
 required ; and of that mercy Marcion might surely have 
 good hope. 
 
 For he really must have been a very good Christian in 
 all practical respects, for a moment's toleration to have been 
 extended to a man whose theories were so utterly un- 
 christian. All the Gnostics were practically polytheists, 
 inasmuch as they introduced beings ruling over the world 
 and over man, yet distinct from the Most High God, and 
 excluding Him from the world which Catholics call His ; 
 
 1 Lect. VII. p. 315. 
 
 - His relations to the Church (of course not to the Church's Creed) 
 may be compared to Wesley's, only the Church of the second century 
 knew better tlian the Church of the eighteenth whether a man was in 
 it or out of it. 
 
 '^ Which, it is plain from Tertullian and St. Hippolytus, was fore- 
 most in all relaxations of the primitive penitential discipline. 
 
368 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 but Marcion was more openly a polytheist than any. He 
 avowedly taught that there are two Gods — one the Maker 
 of Heaven and Earth, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and 
 Jacob, and the Giver of the Law ; the other, the Father of 
 our Lord Jesus Christ, and never revealed till He appeared 
 on earth. Co-eternal with these, and independent of either, 
 was the Matter of which the heaven and earth were made,^ 
 though this last doctrine was less insisted on, perhaps was 
 less essential to his system. This Matter Marcion regarded 
 as essentially evil; whether he recognised an Evil Spirit as 
 a fourth independent principle is uncertain. Yet he did 
 not, like the Manicliaeans afterwards, oppose Spirit and 
 Matter to each other as good and evil. His practical 
 dualism consisted in the opposition between his two gods, 
 "the Just God" and "the Good God," as he called them 
 respectively. Each of these Gods had his own Christ — the 
 Christ of the just God being the carnal Messiah of Jewish 
 belief, the only one (according to Marcion) who was fore- 
 told by the Prophets. He was to come some time, it does 
 not appear clearly what for; for he was not distinctly 
 identified, as he might have been, with the Antichrist of 
 Catholic belief But the Christ of the good God had 
 appeared already, in order to reveal his previously un- 
 known Father. It is not certain whether he was personally 
 distinct from him, or whether in this respect Marcion's 
 doctrine was quasi-Sabellian.^ He had appeared suddenly 
 in human form, but without substance of human flesh, and 
 without even the appearance of a human birth. ^ He had 
 
 1 Tert. Adv. Marc. I. 15. 
 
 ' It is not clear whether the reading in the opening verse of Marcion's 
 Gospel was, ' ' In the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, 
 yesus came down to Capernaum," &c., or '■^ God came down." The 
 former is more probable, and if so, Marcion may have agreed with the 
 Church on the relation between God and Christ. 
 
 2 The words, "Who are My Mother and My Brethren?" which by 
 the way are not in our text of St. Luke at all, were interpreted as 
 implying an indignant denial that He had a Mother. 
 
NOTE ON THE GNOSTIC HERESIES. 369 
 
 submitted to the appearance, but the appearance only, of 
 death, and he gave eternal life to the spirits (not to the 
 bodies) of those who believed in him, and learnt from him 
 to mortify the deeds of the body. Austere as was Marcion's 
 moral teaching, he indulged in one bit of speculative anti- 
 nomianism. Christ had, he confessed, descended into hell, 
 and preached to the spirits in prison ; but only those which 
 sometime were disobedient listened to him. He saved the 
 sinners of the Old Testament through faith in Him — Cain, 
 Esau, Korah, and the like ; but the Patriarchs and Prophets 
 refused to listen to him, and remained under the dominion 
 of their own God. 
 
 Here we have a strange resemblance to the doctrine of 
 the Cainites, the worst of the Ophite sects, though Marcion, 
 by throwing his antinomianism into the unseen world, 
 makes it less practically dangerous to morality. But in fact 
 his system was directly affiliated to the older Gnosticism, as 
 well as suggested by the working, in his own mind, of both 
 those tendencies of thought which we named as producing 
 Gnosticism in general. He had come under the influence 
 of Cerdon, a Syrian Gnostic belonging to the school of 
 Saturnilus, in that lax sense in which any Gnostic teacher 
 could be said to belong to any school but his own.^ Partly 
 from Cerdon, partly no doubt from his own natural temper, 
 Marcion learnt to regard as essentially evil, first the human 
 flesh, and then the material creation to which it belonged ; 
 and the same influences encouraged, and carried to an ex- 
 treme, the anti-Jewish feeling, which he probably had learnt 
 
 ^ Cerdon, according to St. Irenaeus (III. iv. 3), came to Rome in 
 the episcopate of Hyginus. St. Epiphanius adds that he taught there 
 for a short time only. It was doubtless there that Marcion met with 
 him, but, according to the latter authority, after Hyginus' death. 
 Cerdon, like Marcion, was reconciled off and on to the Church. This 
 gives a partial measure of the time of Marcion's fall into definite 
 heresy, less ambiguous than the mention of him as a heretic by St. 
 Justin {Aj>ol. I. 26), since the date of the Apology is disputed. 
 2 B 
 
370 BEGINiVIiVGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 in the orthodox circles to which he had belonged, and had 
 fostered by his own studies and meditations in the Bible. 
 We have seen^ how strong this feeling was among some 
 people who continued orthodox ; but it was an obvious 
 temptation to those who regarded the Judaism of their day 
 as the rival or corruption of the Gospel to forget or deny 
 that Judaism had been its divinely ordained precursor. 
 Marcion denied this, and devoted his principal work, the 
 Antitheses, as he called it, to bringing out the opposition 
 between the spirit of the Old and of the New Testaments. 
 
 And here we are struck, not so much with Marcion's 
 ability — he seems to have been rather unintelligent, though 
 not without a certain rude common-sense — as with the 
 Diodern tone of his mind. His objections to the morality 
 of the Old Testament, to the accounts given in it of God's 
 dealings with men and commands to men, are just in the 
 spirit of the Deists of the last century ; only, as he confessed 
 that the God of the Old Testament was "just" — not abso- 
 lutely evil, any more than He was in the highest sense 
 "good" — he was under less temptation than the Deists to 
 misrepresent the higher element in the Old Testament 
 teaching. 
 
 But if here he did not go beyond what our age regards 
 as a shallow rationalism, his antithesis of "justice" and 
 "goodness" anticipated not more the humanitarianism of 
 the last century than the soft-hearted optimism and univer- 
 salism of our own day. Only here Marcion showed himself 
 both more clear-headed and more audacious than his modern 
 representatives. Like them, he thought that the God of love 
 of the New Testament could never finally condemn even 
 the worst sinners; but he could not deny that a God of love 
 in this sense was a very different being from the Lord God 
 Who, though " merciful and gracious, . . . forgiving iniquity 
 and transgression and sin," yet "will by no means clear the 
 guilty 3" and that a great deal even of the New Testament 
 1 Pp. 275, 288. 
 
NOTE ON THE GNOSTIC HERESIES. 371 
 
 must be cut out, if it was to reveal not a God such as this, 
 but the God of love that he wanted. 
 
 Having thus assumed that the true Gospel must be a 
 Gospel of pure benevolence, and a Gospel opposed to the 
 Law, Marcion had to choose among the New Testament 
 writings where he could find the nearest approach to these. 
 The latter motive, of course, drew him to St. Paul ; the 
 former to the Pauline Gospel of St. Luke ; and these two, 
 or rather certain portions of them, formed the whole of 
 Marcion's New Testament canon. Indeed it is not certain 
 that he was altogether arbitrary or interested, in the first 
 instance, in his selection of these books. All ^ the books 
 of the New Testament were now in use in some churches, 
 all the longer and more important ones- were recognised by 
 the Church at large ; but it is possible that in places oft" the 
 main lines of communication, and remote from the main 
 centres of thought, there may have been Churches whose 
 Christian faith was sound, but whose Christian literature 
 was very scanty. It may be that the good Bishop of Sinope 
 had never heard of St. Paul's three latest Epistles : it may 
 be even that he knew no Gospel but St. Luke's, and this 
 without St. Luke's name. Possibly even the Churches of 
 Pontus may have had an edition of St. Luke without the 
 first two chapters, beginning, like St. Mark, with the Lord's 
 Baptism ' and His first appearance in the synagogue of 
 Capernaum. 
 
 It is thus possible that to Marcion, from his first conver- 
 sion, " the Gospel " meant St. Luke : it is certain that to 
 him, and to the Church at large, "the Apostle" meant St. 
 
 ' The only doubtful case is the second epistle of St. Peter. And if 
 the Syriac Apology of St. Melito be genuine, he was probably ac- 
 quainted with this. 
 
 * Except perhaps the Epistle to the Hebrews. 
 
 •^ This was omitted in Marcion's Gospel, but cannot have been in 
 the one that formed its basis. The omission of the Incarnation was 
 still more essential to his system, so that no one would doubt that that 
 omission also was arbitrary, but for the analogy of St. Mark. 
 
372 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 Paul. Where Marcion's heresy began was in the assumption 
 that he had mastered the whole counsel of God as revealed 
 in the Gospel and the Apostle, that any doctrines taught by 
 the Church, whether in the canonical books ^ or beyond 
 them, were to be rejected unhesitatingly if they taught any 
 other doctrine than what he gathered from these. Marcion, 
 not any Pope, was "the first Protestant, the founder of 
 German rationalism ;" - like Luther, he opposed the doctrine 
 of St. Paul to that of the Church ; and like Baur, he traced 
 the opposition in the days of the apostolic Church, no less 
 than in the Church of his own day. 
 
 Indeed the Tiibingen school have done justice, or more 
 than justice, to Marcion as a precursor of their own. He 
 found in the Epistle to the Galatians that there had been 
 in the primitive Church men who corrupted the Gospel by 
 the introduction of Jewish elements ; he found that even 
 St. Peter had incurred St. Paul's censure for sanctioning 
 that corruption. He jumped to the conclusion that it was 
 the corrupted Gospel, not the genuine Pauline one, which 
 St. Peter and the rest of the Apostles had spread through- 
 out the world. As TertuUian puts it,^ " When the Gospel 
 had been perverted from the times of Tiberius to those of 
 Antoninus, Marcion was the first and only man who ap- 
 peared to set it right, though all that time Christ was 
 
 ^ For he must have been acquainted with some canonical books 
 besides these. The first Epistle of St. Peter cannot have been un- 
 known in Pontus, and Marcion himself plainly borrowed one doctrine 
 from it. (See p. 369.) 
 
 ^ Quelques Mots, par un Chretien OrtJiodoxe, ap. Stanley, Eastern 
 CImtch, Lect. I. ad. fin. 
 
 3 Adv. Marc. iv. 4. I would apologise for quoting a piece of such 
 audacious irony, but it may be said that the audacity is Marcion's, and 
 that TertuUian only answers a fool according to his folly. If it be 
 thought that he does so in the forbidden not the bidden sense, one can 
 only observe the advantage it was to the Church, to have an "orthodox 
 dissenter" to do her dirty work of controversy without compromising 
 her delicacy of reverence. 
 
NOTE ON THE GNOSTIC HERESIES. 373 
 
 waiting for him, and beginning to regret that He had been 
 in too great a hurry to send out His Apostles before they 
 had a Marcion to take care of them." 
 
 But Marcion's method in restoring the genuine or PauUne 
 Gospel was too purely a priori for even a German critic to 
 think it scientific. No doubt, he to some extent followed 
 a tradition about the Epistles different from that prevalent 
 in the Catholic Church, and worth comparing with it. He 
 called the Epistle to the Ephesians that to the Laodiceans, 
 and here he was not impossibly right; and he arranged the 
 ten Epistles which he acknowledged in a different order 
 from the common one, for which he can have had none but 
 an honest motive. Then as now, they were usually 
 arranged (like the chapters in the Koran) with the longest 
 first ; while Marcion perhaps followed a sound tradition, or 
 plausible conjecture, as to their chronological order. First 
 came the group of longer Epistles, which his modern suc- 
 cessors suppose to be the only genuine ones, and in conse- 
 quence the first recognised by the Church ; the Galatians, 
 Corinthians (2), and Romans. Then came what may be 
 called the minor Epistles — Thessalonians (2), Laodiceans, 
 Colossians, Philippians, Philemon.^ The Pastoral Epistles 
 were ignored altogether- — perhaps because they denounce 
 the first beginnings of a system like Marcion's. But this 
 would equally have condemned the Colossians, and it may 
 well be that Marcion had really not learnt to receive them 
 as St. Paul's work, whatever degree of weight we may attach 
 to the fact. But all the ten acknowledged Epistles (except 
 the last, which was protected, as Tertullian says, by its 
 brevity) were mutijated by the excision of everything that 
 stated too obviously the continuity and community of 
 divine origin between the Old and New Testament. And 
 the same was done, even more unsparingly, with St. Luke. 
 We need not charge Marcion with conscious dishonesty : 
 he was no doubt sincerely convinced that " the Gospel and 
 ^ St. Epiphanius transposes the two last ; Haer. xlii. 4. 
 
374 BEGIXNIXGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 the Apostle," as originally written, taught what he con- 
 sidered the true Gospel, and that everything inconsistent 
 with that must be an interpolation. But it is quite plain 
 that his omissions were determined on dogmatic grounds, 
 not on critical ; and the consequence is, that his testimony 
 to a reading is almost worthless, whereas, it he had left the 
 text as he found it, an independent recension not assimi- 
 lated to that in general use would be invaluable to the 
 modern critic. 
 
 And yet, mutilate SS. Luke and Paul as you will, you 
 cannot really make them teach dualism. Tertullian had no 
 difficulty in refuting Marcion out of his own scanty Scrip- 
 tures ; and Marcion had to put forced interpretations on 
 simple phrases, till his exegesis, rationalistic as it was in a 
 sense, was no more rational than the mosaic ^ of scriptural 
 words and phrases by which Basilides and Valentine tried 
 to pass off their systems as Christian. It would be rash for 
 anyone but a Saint like Polycarp to speak as he did of a 
 man so saintly as Marcion ; but when the Saint's judgment is 
 pronounced, we can see that it is right. We only may hope 
 that "the Firstborn of Satan" lived to be disinherited. 
 
 Contemporary, so far as we can guess, with Marcion, and 
 perhaps encouraged by the protests of the Church against 
 his ultra-Paulinism, was a revival of the Ebionite or Judaising 
 heresy, in a form which may be called Gnostic, though less 
 grossly heretical than most of that class. For among the 
 Judaising Christians also the tendency to Gnosticism was 
 extensively at work. In the Essenes before the Gospel was 
 revealed, in the heresy taught at Colossae in St. Paul's day, 
 in the worse heresy of Cerinthus afterwards, in the Cabbala, 
 which did not take its final shape till far on in the middle 
 
 ^ See the witty passage, S. Iren. adv. Hacj: I. viii. i. St. John 
 wrought a noble portrait of a King : Valentine picked the mosaic to 
 pieces, rearranged them in the form of a fox, and that badly d)-a7V7i, 
 and then proclaimed, " Behold the royal portrait, the work of the great 
 artist John." 
 
NOTE ON THE GNOSTIC HERESIES. 375 
 
 ages, we see that the reign of Jewish legalism did not 
 prevent considerable licence of theosophic speculation. 
 Indeed, it encouraged it. The more Judaism and the 
 Jewish standard of holiness was made to consist in outward 
 observances, the more free was any man wlio would to 
 indulge in the boldest speculations, without ceasing to be a 
 Jew, and a good Jew, if he obeyed the Law. 
 
 Thus it is likely enough that the Ebionites, perhaps even 
 the Nazarenes,^ had a form of Gnosticism of their own, 
 which they opposed emphatically to the more unchristian 
 doctrine of Simon. This controversy, combined in an 
 uncertain proportion with the traditional hostility of the 
 extreme Judaisers to St. Paul, furnishes the leading motive 
 to a curious and puzzling book — we might almost say a 
 literature — which has reached us from probably the second 
 century, and is known as the Clementines. We have it in 
 two forms, besides an Epitome. ^Vhat is called the Recog- 
 nitions exists only in a Latin translation by Rufinus, who 
 owns to having suppressed a good deal of the heresy ; the 
 other, the Homilies., contains more controversial matter, and 
 in a more original form. It is questioned which of these 
 two recensions is the older ; perhaps, in different senses, we 
 may pronounce in favour of both. The Recognitions must, 
 one would think, have been softened and catholicised a 
 good deal, even before Rufinus' suppressions ; but they 
 embody stories ^ that are probably the oldest part of all. 
 
 ^ There is no actually heretical doctrine in the Testaments of the 
 Twelve Patriarchs ; but the demonology, the personification of Belial, 
 and the importance assigned to him, and even some points in the 
 language about the divine nature, seem to show the Gnostic tendency 
 at work. 
 
 ^ E.g., probably, in I. 55, sqq., the early Ebionite Ascensions of St. 
 James. See Lect. I. p. 17 ; III. p. 124. In a later book (ix. ig, sqq.) is 
 inserted a passage against astrology and fatalism by the Syrian catho- 
 licising Gnostic Bardesanes. And almost certainly the IleptoSot JI^Tpou, 
 quoted by Origen {In Gen. iii. 14), are incorporated with more or less 
 change. 
 
376 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 The main story, common to both, is a supposed auto- 
 biography of St. Clement of Rome, describing his conver- 
 sion by St. Peter, and the controversy between the latter 
 and Simon Magus; several of the attacks upon the latter 
 being so contrived as to condemn not only the real Simon, 
 but Marcion, and even St. Paul. As against Simon and 
 Marcion, the unity of God and His creation of the world 
 are asserted, but in a form very far from orthodox. Christ's 
 divinity is expressly denied ; His pre-existence is admitted, 
 but in a sense not even Arian. He has been manifested in 
 all the Prophets, from Adam onwards, apparently not less 
 truly or completely than in Jesus, though the last manifes- 
 tation is the highest in degree. And while the Divine 
 origin of the Old Testament is asserted, it is treated as 
 recklessly as the New was by Marcion, anything of which 
 the writer disapproves being cut out of it without scruple. 
 
 We do not hear of any sect being organised on the basis 
 of this doctrine, and indeed it is not certain that its author 
 was excluded from the Catholic communion. Unlike the 
 other sects, who had no claim to a succession of Bishops 
 from the Apostles, and no definitely organised clerical order, 
 the writer of the Hotnilies is a strong episcopalian. St. Peter 
 establishes bishops in the different churches of Palestine ; 
 St. James of Jerusalem is a sort of Pope, and to him St. 
 Clement reports, in a letter prefixed to the work, his own 
 ordination to the Bishopric of Rome. 
 
 Being thus in a sense Catholic, and yet unscripturally 
 Jewish and anti-Pauline, this book has been coordinate with 
 Marcion as a support to the modern Marcionites of Tiibin- 
 gen. Their view would be really plausible if there were no 
 Church history and no Christian literature between, on the 
 one hand, St. Paul's four Epistles and Marcion, on the other 
 hand, St. John's Revelation and the Clementines. We 
 might then believe (though if we did we could hardly be 
 Christians — certainly not Catholics) that St. Paul's churches 
 and the other Apostolic churches differed in their first 
 
NOTE ON THE GNOSTIC HERESIES. 377 
 
 principles ; that it was the latter that developed into the 
 Catholic Church ; and that though that Church tardily ad- 
 mitted Paul's name to honour, and received his writings 
 into the canon, when duly diluted with forgeries, yet it 
 never held his principles, but left them buried in his books, 
 till revived first in a grotesque and corrupt form by Marcion, 
 and then in a more rational by Luther. But we have seen 
 that the century between St. Paul and Marcion, though an 
 obscure period, is not an absolutely blank one. The un- 
 doubted writings of SS. Clement and Justin, the all but 
 undoubted ones of SS. Peter and Polycarp, leave us no 
 room to fill up the period by h priori conjecture. We are 
 left to consider the authorship of St. John's Gospel and St. 
 Ignatius' Epistles, not as though the whole history depended 
 on their genuineness, but in the light that history throws on 
 them ; and, when we find history to support them, they 
 harmonise with the rest in their testimony to the one 
 Catholic and Apostolic Church as older than sects or 
 heresies. 
 
 Thus it is not possible to attach much importance his- 
 torically to the Clementines, but their hterary interest is 
 considerable. The work is rather a romance than a forgery; 
 perhaps the author felt safer in broaching his unsound 
 opinions in a form that did not make him directly respon- 
 sible for them.^ Judged as a romance, it is not a bad one. 
 The story indeed is slight and clumsy ; it is a modernised 
 and moralised adaptation from the stock plot of the New 
 Comedy,- the restoration to parents of a long-lost child, or 
 rather to a son of long-lost parents. But what story there 
 is is well told; the characters, if not very strikingly con- 
 ceived, are interesting ; and the style is easy and readable, 
 
 ' Yet the forger of the far more harmless Acts of Paul and Thecla 
 was deposed from the priesthood.— Tert. de Bapt. 17. 
 
 * In one place [Rec. vii. 19 ; Horn. xv. 19) there seems to be a 
 direct confession of a suggestion from Plautus' MenaecJnni or its Greek 
 original. 
 
37S BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 even in the most abstruse parts of the argument. Judaic 
 as is the theology, the author fully appreciates Hellenic 
 culture ; it is a bit of liberality that we should really hardly 
 have expected of the real St. Peter, to take his disciples to 
 a heathen temple to look at some statues by Phidias. And 
 the moral tone is healthy enough, with one important 
 reservation : nobody, from St. Peter downwards, has the 
 slightest sense of the moral value of truthfulness. It is 
 well that the book does not reflect the spirit of the Church; 
 for a Church such as this would never have converted the 
 world, in an age when the great saint of paganism earned in 
 boyhood the title of Verissimus. 
 
VIII. 
 ^Se (Ejburcjb of tl)c iltlaitins. 
 
 SHORTLY before St. Polycarp's death, perhaps 
 (though this is doubtful) before St. Justin's 
 Apology, there was written the last of what we have 
 called the deutero-canonical books of the New Testa- 
 ment, the last of what are now reckoned as works of 
 the Apostolical Fathers. The Martyr St. Telesphorus 
 was succeeded as Bishop of Rome by Hyginus, he by 
 Pius, and he by Anicetus, in whose days St. Polycarp 
 came there. It was during Pius' episcopate, that his 
 brother Hernias wrote the book called the Shepherd, 
 a series of allegorical visions, with a slight story to 
 connect them. 
 
 Hermas, the hero of the story and seer of the 
 visions, bears the same name as the author of the 
 book ; but he is represented as living and writing in 
 the time of St. Clement, some fifty years before the 
 real date of composition : and he appears then as a 
 married man, with grown-up sons. The author there- 
 fore can hardly be relating his own personal history. 
 It is possible that Hermas the author may have 
 selected as his hero the Hermas whose name, and 
 nothing more, is mentioned in the Epistle to the 
 
3So BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 Romans : it is just possible that he may have been a 
 descendant of his, and have embodied some family 
 traditions ; but the story need not be founded on fact 
 at all.i More important, but equally uncertain, is the 
 question whether he intended his work to be accepted 
 as more ancient than his own time, or as written under 
 divine direction. My own feeling is, that while the 
 book has certainly no claim to rank as inspired 
 Scripture, the moral tone is too healthy to make it 
 likely that it is the result of an intentional fraud ; but 
 we must remember, that an honest and in some 
 respects sober-minded man might be liable to see 
 visions, and to over-value them as Divine revelations. 
 Hermas, we are told, had been the slave of a lady 
 named Rhoda : he had been emancipated, had ap- 
 parently grown rich, and was married, but not 
 happily. He is described as a good, kindly man, and 
 his domestic troubles are all his wife's fault : on the 
 other hand he is held responsible for the sins of his 
 sons, who have apostatised, perhaps under persecu- 
 tion, and denounced their parents. These however 
 do not seem to have suffered anything serious in con- 
 sequence. One day, he meets his old mistress Rhoda 
 
 ^ Do the first words of the Shepherd, 6 dpi\pas fj.e, mean that Hermas 
 had been a foundling? Knowing what St. Justin tells us usually 
 became of such children, we see that it was a much-needed form of 
 charity for Christians to take and rear them, and that they deserved no 
 blame if they made the charity self-supporting, by selling the children, 
 when old enough to be useful, into service in some Christian or at least 
 respectable household. If this is the origin ascribed to Hermas the 
 seer, he cannot have been, nor have been supposed by contemporaries 
 to be, the same as Hermas the author ; for the latter had an acknow- 
 ledged brother, and therefore known parents. 
 
THE CHURCH OF THE MARTYRS. 381 
 
 — as some think, saves her from drowning ; and the 
 thought comes into his mind, that it would be well 
 for him if he had a wife like her. His thoughts 
 never went further than this ; but even this was a sin 
 against Christian purity and conjugal duty/ Some 
 time after, he goes to Cumae on business; and his 
 spirit is stirred to devotion by the lovely Campanian 
 scenery.^ He falls asleep as he walks, and the Spirit 
 carries him over a wild mountain country to a plain, 
 where he kneels down and prays. Then the Heaven 
 is opened, and he sees Rhoda looking down upon 
 him, and rebuking him for his evil thoughts towards 
 her : promising nevertheless that on his prayer, not 
 only his own sins, but those of his house, shall be 
 forgiven. 
 
 This is pretty nearly all the story there is : after 
 the appearance of the Lady in Heaven, whom one 
 may conceive as a very remote ancestress of Dante's 
 Beatrice, there appears on earth an aged woman, who 
 is afterwards explained to be the Church ; and then 
 come three more "Visions," making up the first 
 Book. In the second Book, he sees a venerable 
 Shepherd, apparently his Guardian Angel, and re- 
 ceives from him twelve " Mandates : " in the third, 
 the Shepherd shows him ten " Similitudes " — some- 
 times setting the things before his eyes, like the In- 
 terpreter in the Pilgrinis Progress, sometimes simply 
 
 1 Compare S. Ign. ad Pol. c. 5, quoted in Lect. V., p. 268, "to be 
 content with their partners in flesh mid spirit." 
 
 ^ A very noticeable sentiment. Its rarity in ancient literature has 
 been exaggerated, but it is rare in such a pure and ideal form as this. 
 
3S2 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 telling the story, in a way more like the " Sacred 
 Allegories " that used to be so common in the days 
 of our own childhood. I suppose that both these 
 and the Pilgrijiis Progress itself may be regarded 
 also as remote descendants of Hermas' work : he 
 founded a tradition of the semi-romantic way of ex- 
 pressing religious ideas, and this lived on through the 
 Middle Ages, even when the SJiepherd itself was 
 completely forgotten. 
 
 In this way the Shepherd has a real literary in- 
 terest : for its own sake, I cannot say that it has. The 
 literary form is clumsy in the extreme : the moral 
 tone is excellent, and the thoughts just, but generally 
 commonplace. The images are sometimes pretty, if 
 you look at one by itself; but the succession of them 
 is very tedious : it is neither an easy nor a remunera- 
 tive task to read the whole book through. 
 
 In Hermas, feeble as he is in comparison with the 
 Apostles and their immediate followers, we still are 
 conscious that the spirit of the Apostolic Church sur- 
 vives, as something more than a tradition. Indeed, 
 the last personal links with the apostolic age had 
 not yet quite disappeared. St. Polycarp was probably 
 the last survivor of those who had really known and 
 learnt from St. John ; but there must have been still 
 several men living in the different Churches of Asia 
 who had seen him in their boyhood, and had been 
 able, as they grew up, to collect traditions of his 
 words. Such a collection was made and published 
 by Papias or Pappias, Bishop of Hierapolis, a con- 
 temporary but probably a younger contemporary of 
 
THE CHURCH OF THE MARTYRS. 383 
 
 St. Polycarp, and, it is said, a Martyr in the same 
 persecution.' It seems doubtful to what extent he 
 had known St. John himself. St. Irenaeus says he 
 had, but in his own Introduction to his Five Books of 
 Expositions of tJie Lord's Sayings or Oracles he does 
 not mention it. I should think the likeliest case is 
 what I say — that he had seen and heard St. John in 
 his childhood, but had not received a tradition from 
 him at first hand, as St. Polycarp had. His collec- 
 tion was made, he tells us, on the principle of re- 
 ceiving first-hand evidence only, and he preferred oral 
 evidence to written. " If any came who had attended 
 closely on the Elders, I asked him the sayings of the 
 Elders : ' What did Andrew, or what did Peter say .-" ' 
 or ' What did Philip, or Thomas, or James } ' or 
 * What did John, or Matthias, or some other of the 
 Disciples of the Lord ?' and the things which Aristion 
 and the Elder John, the Disciples of the Lord, say; 
 for I did not think what I learnt from books so 
 profitable to me as what I received from a living and 
 abiding voice." 
 
 We can understand the feeling expressed in these 
 last words — Papias felt himself brought nearer to the 
 Lord or to His Apostles by personal conversation 
 with those who had known them than by merely 
 reading about them — perhaps even nearer than by 
 reading their own writings. But he did not reflect 
 that, whatever his own feelings might be, to his readers 
 a written report of oral evidence would give no more 
 
 ^ Or perhaps rather in the persecution under M. Aurelius, to which 
 the death of St. Polycarp has been commonly referred. 
 
384 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 immediate or personal knowledge of the Saints than 
 a transcript of written evidence, while it might be 
 much less trustworthy. Papias was probably a Saint 
 — it is certain that he was made a Bishop in a time 
 and country where Saints were plentiful, and it is 
 possible that he was a Martyr. But he was not a 
 wise man, nor of sound judgment even in spiritual 
 matters. It is he who was responsible for ascribing 
 to our Lord a ridiculous saying about a good time 
 coming, when every vine should bear 10,000 branches, 
 every branch 10,000 twigs, and grapes in proportion ; 
 and when we hear a tale like this, we feel that the 
 age of Evangelists is indeed past. On the other 
 hand, it is from him that we, and probably all our 
 later authorities, know what we know of the author- 
 ship of the first two Gospels. It is probably he who 
 secured the preservation of the story of the Woman 
 taken in adultery, now interpolated in St. John's 
 Gospel ; though this was also recorded in the Gospel 
 according to the Hebrews, and may have been trans- 
 ferred from it. Evidently, it is much to be regretted 
 that his work is lost, though it contained materials of 
 very unequal value. We learn that he accepted 
 literally St. John's prophecy of the 1000 years' reign 
 of Christ and His Saints ; but knowing what were 
 Papias' powers of critical judgment, we cannot take 
 his opinion as proof of a local tradition on the point 
 derived from St. John himself; on the contrary, he 
 was quite capable of giving way to the gross fancies 
 about the Millennium which, in the judgment of the 
 later Catholic Church, discredited the literal interpre- 
 
THE CHURCH OF THE MARTYRS. 385 
 
 tation. St. Justin adopted it, but confesses that even 
 in his time the Church was not unanimous on the 
 point : I suppose it is not now. 
 
 T. Antoninus Pius died A.D. 161, and was succeeded 
 by his adopted sons Marcus, who took the names of 
 AureHus Antoninus, and L. Verus ; the latter had the 
 good sense to make himself practically subordinate 
 to his colleague, though we do not know much good 
 of him in any other way. Marcus was as good a man 
 and as good a ruler as his predecessor, and his good- 
 ness rested, one might say, on a surer basis — it was 
 less a matter of mere temperament, more a reasoned 
 conviction of duty, gained by self-knowledge and 
 carried out by self- discipline. But, however we 
 account for the fact, it is certain that M. Aurelius, 
 perhaps the best Pagan that ever lived, was at least 
 as cruel a persecutor of Christianity as Nero ; the vile 
 Domitian was not to be compared with him. We 
 cannot trace his exact motives for thus reversing the 
 policy of his two predecessors ; but we cannot make 
 the excuse for him that we can, at least in most cases, 
 for the elder Antoninus, that what persecution took 
 place in his reign was without his personal sanction. 
 In his private Meditations ' he turns aside from the 
 contemplation of the Stoic ideal of virtue which he 
 sought to realise, to contrast it with what he considers 
 the vulgar imitation of it offered by the Christians ; 
 and he condemns as theatrical their triumph at mar- 
 tyrdom, compared with the departure from life of the 
 Stoic sage, on which we often feel tempted to retort 
 
 1 xi. 3. 
 2 C 
 
3S6 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 the same censure. And there is httle doubt that he 
 not only sanctioned, but in some cases directly ordered 
 the persecutions. Eusebius seems to ascribe the 
 treatment of the Martyrs of Lyons to his colleague 
 Lucius, but the latter died in A.D. 169, and the perse- 
 cution is assigned to 177 by Eusebius himself, so there 
 can be little doubt that Marcus is the " Caesar " men- 
 tioned, who ordered all who confessed themselves 
 Christians (including, as he knew officially, some 
 Roman citizens) to be cudgelled to death. 
 
 Apologies were still written, but without effect. 
 The Second Apology of St. Justin is addressed, not to 
 the Emperor, but to the Senate, and its whole tone is 
 conspicuously different from the former one. In spite 
 of the arguments of that, and of the declared policy 
 of Pius, several martyrdoms ' had taken place in 
 Rome itself, under Urbicus, Prefect of the City. In 
 this new work Justin protests against the way the 
 Christians were treated, and demands that at least his 
 statement of their principles shall be published, with 
 what comment the Government likes. But he does 
 not expect his protest to be attended to ; on the 
 contrary, he is prepared for death himself 
 
 The event was as he expected ; a Cynic philosopher 
 of vain and dissolute character, named Crescens, 
 
 ^ They arose out of the quarrel of a pagan husband with a Christian 
 wife, who divorced him. The case does not come under St. Paul's 
 rule (I Cor. vii. 15), but though St. Justin uses delicate language in 
 expressing what her grievance was, it seems plain that the poor woman 
 showed more respect for the sanctity of marriage by renouncing such a 
 nion than by continuing it. It is not hinted that she married again, 
 which on St. Paul's principles she ought not to do. 
 
THE CHURCH OF THE MARTYRS. 387 
 
 had in some way become his personal enemy or 
 rival, and he now denounced him as a Christian. St. 
 Justin, at the date of his earlier works, seems to have 
 been a layman, and was not a resident in Rome. But 
 he was now there on a visit (the second, he says, in 
 his life), probably with the object of presenting his 
 Apology, and he seems to have been a priest ; for he 
 became the centre of a small Christian congregation. 
 It appears that the persecution made it impossible for 
 the Church to hold large gatherings ; congregations 
 were formed of such size as could assemble without 
 suspicion in a private room. When St. Justin was 
 arrested, and with him five men and a woman (all 
 apparently slaves or foreigners) of his congregation, 
 nothing could be elicited from them about the pro- 
 ceedings of the Church at large. 
 
 This is disappointing to us, but it was obviously 
 proper and necessary. Every Christian required to 
 know, in time of persecution, a place where he and 
 his family might resort for Christian worship and in- 
 struction ; but it saved him from much embarrass- 
 ment, perhaps from danger and temptation, if he took 
 care to know nothing of the arrangements of the 
 Church elsewhere. Thus St. Justin, in his examina- 
 tion before Rusticus the Prefect, was able to be quite 
 candid in his statement of facts. He knew everything 
 about the little congregation that met at his lodgings, 
 in an upstair room attached to a public bath ; but he 
 told the Prefect it was absurd to suppose that all the 
 Christians in Rome came there, and he knew nothing 
 of any other place where they did come. He was a 
 
388 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 Christian ; so, said his companions, were they — some 
 of them, unlike Justin, from childhood. Nothing more 
 could be made out of them ; all seven were scourged 
 and beheaded. 
 
 Another apologist of this reign was Athenagoras, 
 a "philosopher" like Aristides and Justin. His work 
 is extant : it is not much more than a shorter and 
 feebler replica of Justin's earlier one. We have 
 another book of his, on the Resurrection, which may 
 be called hyper-orthodox. In his zeal to maintain 
 the reality of the resurrection of the flesh, he goes 
 into unscriptural and unscientific speculations as to 
 "how the dead are raised up, and with what body 
 they come." 
 
 Another Apology — perhaps more than one' — was 
 by St. Melito, Bishop of Sardis. Eusebius only men- 
 tions one, from which he gives a few extracts :^ they 
 give the impression that it was an able, well-written 
 piece, perhaps more courtier-like in tone than we 
 might have expected. But there has been recently 
 published the " Oration of Melito to the Emperor 
 Antoninus," found in a Syriac version ; and if this 
 be genuine, it is probably a distinct work from the 
 Eusebian Apology, not merely a longer extract from 
 it. It is a plea, not (as we should gather from Euse- 
 bius' extracts that the one he quotes was) for the 
 toleration of the Christians as harmless, but for the 
 
 ^ The Alexandrine or Paschal Chronicle makes him present an 
 Apology to the Emperor in A. D. 165, and again a.d. 169. At the 
 earlier date it quotes a sentence from him, and that sentence seems to 
 be a fusion or abridgement of two passages in the Syriac " Oration. " 
 
 2 H. E. IV. xxvi. S-il. 
 
THE CHURCH OF THE MARTYRS. 389 
 
 absolute truth of their belief about the Deity. But 
 there is less distinct statement of Christian doctrine, 
 as something more than natural theism, than in St. 
 Justin or even in the writer to Diognetus. We need 
 not discuss the genuineness of this piece : it has been 
 much questioned, but on the whole competent critics 
 seem disposed to believe in it ; but even if genuine, 
 it is not of supreme excellence.' But there are other 
 fragments of St. Melito's works, mostly also extant 
 only in Syriac versions, and for some of which the 
 external evidence is much worse than for this, which 
 yet appear sufficiently authenticated by their merit, 
 and by their style of thought and language. 
 
 For Melito was undoubtedly one of the chief theo- 
 logians of his age, and one of the most honoured 
 persons in the Church. He led a celibate life,^ a 
 thing highly esteemed, but apparently not common, 
 even among the clergy.^ And he made a nearer 
 
 ^ Near the end is a stoiy, of great interest to the comparative 
 mythologist, of a " flood of wind " destroying sinful men, as the flood 
 of water had done, and as the flood of fire will do. 
 
 ' This is no doubt all that Polycrates means by calling him rhv 
 evpovxov. (Eus. H. E. V. xxiv. 4.) 
 
 ' The Epistles to Virgins, ascribed as early as SS. Epiphanius and 
 Jerome to St. Clement of Rome, are now thought likely to be of about 
 this date. Their editor, Cardinal Clement Villecourt, maintaining 
 them to be the genuine work of his patron saint, argued that the clergy 
 are all included in the class addressed, because they are exhorted to 
 duties that may be regarded as clerical. But more probably the infer- 
 ence is the other way. Virgins (of either sex) were so honoured in the 
 Church that they were admitted to teach and judge in it, though not 
 ordained. We know that Martyrs came to hold such a position, and 
 that their claims came into unpleasant conflict with the disciplinary 
 jurisdiction of the clergy ; and we have a hint, as early as St. Ignatius 
 {ad Pol. 5, already quoted), that the same was the case with the claims 
 of virgins. 
 
390 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 approach to biblical criticism than any writer we 
 have yet heard of. He made a journey to Palestine' 
 in order to ascertain what were the authentic books 
 of the Old Testament canon, and he gives a list of 
 them, identical with that recognised by us, except 
 that he omits Esther.^ Perhaps the most character- 
 istic passage, and the best worth quoting, is the 
 following ; it is one of those only preserved in Syriac, 
 but one where there is no reason to doubt (as there 
 is with some) that the translator meant to ascribe it 
 to the Bishop of Sardis of the second century ■? 
 
 " We have made collections from the Law and the 
 Prophets relative to those things which have been 
 declared respecting our Lord Jesus Christ, that we 
 may prove to your love, that He is perfect reason, 
 the Word of God ; who was begotten before the 
 light ; who was Creator together with the Father ; 
 who was the fashioner of man ; who was all in all ; 
 who among the Patriarchs was Patriarch ; who in the 
 law was the Law ; among the priests Chief Priest ; 
 among kings Governor ; among prophets the Pro- 
 phet ; among the angels Archangel ; in the voice the 
 Word ; among spirits Spirit ; in the Father the Son ; 
 in God God — the king for ever and ever. For this 
 
 ^ Eus. H. E. IV. xxvi. 12-14. 
 
 ' Possibly it was grouped under one title with Ezra, as Nehemiah 
 doubtless was ; or possibly it was discredited by the well-grounded re- 
 jection of the apocryphal additions. But there are some grounds for 
 thinking that it was not yet definitely admitted into the Jewish canon. 
 
 ^ It is quoted from the book "on Faith," which appears in some 
 catalogues of St. Melito's works. It may or may not be the same as 
 that on " the Obedience of Faith " in the list in Eusebius. The version 
 given is Canon Cureton's, in his Spicilegium Syriacum. 
 
THE CHURCH OF THE MARTYRS. 391 
 
 is He who was pilot to Noah ; who conducted Abra- 
 ham ; who was bound with Isaac/ who was in exile 
 with Jacob, who was sold with Joseph, who was 
 captain with Moses, who was the divider of the in- 
 heritance with Jesus the Son of Nun, who in David 
 and the prophets foretold his own sufferings, who 
 was incarnate in the Virgin, who was born in Bethle- 
 hem, who was wrapped in swaddling-clothes in the 
 manger, who was seen of the shepherds, who was 
 glorified of the angels, who was worshipped by the 
 Magi, who was pointed out by John, who assembled 
 the Apostles, who preached the kingdom, who healed 
 the maimed, who gave light to the blind, who raised 
 the dead, who appeared in the temple, who was not 
 believed on by the people, who was betrayed by 
 Judas, who was laid hold on by the priests, who was 
 condemned by Pilate, who was transfixed in the flesh, 
 who was hanged upon the tree, who was buried in 
 the earth, who rose from the dead, who appeared to 
 the Apostles, who ascended to heaven, who sitteth 
 on the right hand of the Father, who is the rest of 
 those that are departed, the recoverer of those who 
 were lost, the light of those who are in darkness, the 
 deliverer of those who are captives, the guide of 
 those who have gone astray, the refuge of the afflicted, 
 the bridegroom of the Church, the charioteer of the 
 Cherubim, the captain of the Angels, God who is of 
 God, the Son who is of the Father, Jesus Christ, the 
 King for ever and ever. Amen." 
 
 ^ St. Melito worked out this type in detail, as has been usual with 
 later theologians. He dwells on it in more than one of the extant 
 fragments. 
 
392 BEGINaYINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 This is not only orthodox theology — it is second- 
 century theology. The thought of the Divine Word 
 pervading the Old Testament — appearing in the 
 revelations made to the Patriarchs and Prophets, and 
 foretold by their typical deeds and sufferings, as well 
 as by their inspired words — is one that has never 
 indeed ceased to influence Christian theology ; but 
 it has in later ages been less insisted on, indeed less 
 clearly conceived. The reason is, that the second 
 century was the time when it was necessary to main- 
 tain, against both Jews and anti-Jewish heretics, that 
 " the Old Testament is not contrary to the New ; for 
 both in the Old and New Testament everlasting life 
 is offered to Mankind by Christ, who is the only 
 Mediator between God and Man, being both God 
 and Man." As other controversies arose, the faith 
 was expressed in other forms ; but the old form 
 never entirely passed out of memory. A frequent 
 feature in Oriental liturgies is a commemoration of 
 the whole course of God's grace, from creation to the 
 consummation of redemption ; and though there are 
 not as marked resemblances of verbal detail to St. 
 Melito's language as there are to St. Clement's,' the 
 resemblance of the matter is such as to warrant the 
 belief that the liturgies, in their essential structure, 
 date from St. Melito's day. Indeed, it is not unlikely 
 that his language approximates, to at least the same 
 extent as St. Clement's, to that of the liturgy he 
 habitually used. 
 
 Contemporary with St. Melito, and not far inferior 
 ^ Lect. V. p. 219, sq(2. 
 
THE CHURCH OF THE MARTYRS. 393 
 
 in eminence, were St. Apollinaris, Bishop of Hier- 
 apolis, St. Theophilus of Antioch, and St. Dionysius 
 of Corinth. The only writings left by the last, how- 
 ever, were epistles to churches and to private Chris- 
 tians ; and their interest, though great, seems to have 
 been chiefly historical. The most important of those 
 of Theophilus were devoted to controversy with the 
 Gnostics : Eusebius praises them in a rather per- 
 functory way.' Towards the close of his life he wrote 
 a defence of the Christian faith, addressed to one 
 Autolycus, and still extant ; its date brings it beyond 
 our limits. Claudius Apollinaris, equally with Melito, 
 seems to have covered in his writings the whole 
 range of theology. He also wrote an Apology to 
 the Emperor, and works advocating Christianity ad- 
 dressed both to Jews and to Pagans ; and besides 
 these, he entered into the special controversies of his 
 own country. He wrote on the Paschal controversy,^ 
 on which, if he did not take the side opposed to the 
 usage of his own Church, he decided the harmonistic 
 question involved ^ in the way we should suppose to 
 be unfavourable to it, placing the Crucifixion, not the 
 Last Supper, on the actual day of the Passover. And 
 he wrote against Montanism, the fanatical and more 
 or less heretical movement that arose just at this time 
 in the more barbarous parts of the Asiatic Church. 
 
 ^ Oy/c aYecctDs, H. E. IV. xxiv. 3. 
 
 ^ Vid. fragg. ap, Chron. Pasch., Praef. There seems no sufficient 
 reason for denying the genuineness of these fragments. The Paschal 
 Chronicle is a late and stupid work, but the writer had a good acquain- 
 tance with the literature of his subject. 
 
 ^ Lect. VII. p. 310. 
 
394 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 That Church was still reaping the benefit of St, 
 John's long residence with it. It was at once a centre, 
 to which Rome itself was hardly more than second, 
 of authentic apostolic tradition, and a centre of 
 active Christian thought and theological science, 
 unapproached as yet, though soon to be outstripped 
 by Alexandria. But the latter characteristic was 
 necessary, to prevent the former being a very doubt- 
 ful blessing. If not checked by critical theologians, 
 there might easily have arisen a "corrupt following 
 of the Apostles " in Asia, as there had in Palestine. 
 Indeed, the Quartodeciman schism which did actually 
 arise may be regarded as a milder form of the Naza- 
 rene ; and there were tendencies to Monarchian here- 
 sies that were one-sided developments of St. John's 
 doctrine, just as Ebionism was a one-sided develop- 
 ment of St. James'. Praxeas and Noetus were both 
 Asiatics. 
 
 But whatever might be the developments or the 
 corruptions of St. John's doctrine on the mysteries of 
 the faith, they were sure to be the work of the Greek- 
 speaking Churches of the west of the Province. The 
 inland tribes, imperfectly if at all Hellenised, were 
 incapable of refining upon the Faith. If they re- 
 ceived it in its fulness, they would receive it in 
 simplicity ; if they mutilated or corrupted it, it was 
 likelier to be through blind zeal, or mere ignorance, 
 than through rationalizing curiosity. It was not so 
 much apostolic doctrine as apostolic order, we may 
 believe, that won the assent of barbarians ; and it 
 was not so much the desire to develope apostolic 
 
THE CHURCH OF THE MARTYRS. 395 
 
 doctrine as to continue apostolic practices that was 
 at once their strength and their danger. 
 
 Now one characteristic of the Apostolic Church 
 had been Prophecy ; and this, as a permanent gift 
 and a permanent power in the Church, lingered late 
 in Asia, where the Church had so long remained 
 under apostolic government. We have seen that SS. 
 Quadratus and Polycarp ' were recognised as Pro- 
 phets ; so was a woman named Ammia, of Phila- 
 delphia : the character was ascribed by some to 
 St. Melito.^ It was hardly natural that the faithful 
 should expect the gift to die out. It was certainly 
 no heresy if they were ready to believe that new 
 Prophets appeared among them. 
 
 But the warning was needed, at least as much now 
 as in St. John's days, " Believe not every spirit." 
 Phrygia was the home of the darkest fanaticism of 
 the classical world, the orgiastic worship of Cybele 
 or Cybebe. Repulsive as this religion was, there was 
 a certain fascination about it. It was sanctioned at 
 Rome as early as B.C. 204, and was adopted as a 
 national religion by the Celtic immigrants of Galatia ; 
 and it had vitality enough now to threaten to mix 
 
 ^ Lect. VII. pp. 291, 324. The daughters of St. Philip the Deacon 
 were all grown up in a.d. 58; and if the Asiatic prophetesses (see 
 Lect. IV. p. 176) were daughters of the Apostle, they would presumably 
 be of about the same age. Some of them were born, it is assumed by 
 St. Clement of Alexandria, after his call to the Apostleship {Strotn. 
 III. vi. p. 192) ; but presumably not very long after his marriage, which 
 must have been before it. Two of them lived to old age ; so if the 
 youngest was born A.D. 40, she may have died A.D. 120, and men 
 of this generation may have remembered her. 
 
 " Tert. ap. S. HiERON. De Fir. III. 24. 
 
396 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 the spirit of Catullus' Attis with the spirit of the 
 Gospel. 
 
 About the year 172, perhaps earlier,' it was believed 
 that a group of Prophets and Prophetesses had arisen 
 in Phrygia, or rather in Mysia on the Phrj-gian 
 borders, at a place called Ardabau. Their leader, it 
 is hinted by a late but well-informed authority,^ had 
 himself, before his conversion, been one of the eunuch 
 priests of Cybele. His name was Montanus. The 
 sharers in his prophetic gifts were two women named 
 Prisca and Maximilla. Among their principal com- 
 panions were Theodotus and Alcibiades. The two 
 women were married ; but it is said that they left 
 their husbands ^ when they had received the call to 
 the higher life. 
 
 The teaching of these professed Prophets as to 
 the Trinity and the Incarnation was privia facie 
 thoroughly sound, and thus it appeared that their 
 inspiration must be genuinely divine, according to 
 St. John's test, Ep. I. iv. 2, 3.'* But the character and 
 manner of their prophesying seemed different from 
 that of Prophets whom all confessed to be genuine. 
 
 ^ In the proconsulate of Gratus (Eus. //. E. V. xvi. 6), the twelfth year 
 of M. Aurelius. {Id. Chron.) Eusebius may fairly be trusted to have 
 known that these dates coincided : but St. Epiphanius refers the rise of 
 the sect to a.d. 156. (See p. 317, n. i.) 
 
 ^ St. Jerome {Ep. xli. 4.) We know that he used Tertullian's 
 De Ecstasi {De Vir. 111. 40), and other good books on Montanism. 
 And the statement has a probability, which yet can hardly have sug- 
 gested it to St. Jerome ; it agrees with Montanus' hysterical temper 
 and alleged suicide. 
 
 * This may mean no more than that any woman leaves her home who 
 takes to running about preaching. But Prisca was asserted to be a virgin. 
 Was she a St. Etheldreda? Vide Apollon. ap. Eus. H. E. V. xviii. 3. 
 
 * Tert. De Jej. i. 
 
THE CHURCH OF THE MARTYRS. 397 
 
 St. Paul says/ " The spirits of the Prophets are subject 
 unto the Prophets." He means, as the context shows, 
 that they have the control over their inspired utter- 
 ances ; that it was in their power to hold their peace 
 for a few minutes, to avoid interrupting one another, 
 perhaps even to postpone the message entrusted to 
 them till another meeting of the Church. But he 
 has been understood to mean that the prophets, even 
 when speaking by the Spirit, remained subject to the 
 rule of faith given by previous revelations ; that they 
 not only might not contradict these, but could not 
 even supersede them ; and this, though not correct 
 exegesis, is sound theology. Now the spirits of the 
 Montanist prophets were not subject unto the pro- 
 phets in either sense of the words. They spoke in an 
 ecstasy, which is thus described by a believer in its 
 divine character.^ 
 
 " There is at this day a sister among us who has 
 received the gifts of revelations, which she undergoes ^ 
 through an ecstasy in the Spirit, in the Church during 
 the rites of the Lord's Day,'' She converses with 
 Angels, sometimes even with the Lord,^ and sees and 
 
 ^ I Cor. xiv. 32. 
 
 * Tert. De An. 9. It is curious that there seems to have been no 
 trace of the Prophets "speaking with tongues," which apparently was 
 ecstatic, uncontrollable, and all but unconscious (i Cor. xiv. 14), in the 
 case of the genuine utterances, whose nature St. Paul was fully 
 acquainted with {ibid 18), as well as in that of the physical excitement 
 which led the Corinthians to say (probably in Hebrew) what meant 
 'Ai'ddefxa 'Itjaovs as often as Kvptos 'Irjcrovs (id. xii. 3); and which, one 
 can hardly doubt, led them sometimes to utter mere meaningless cries, 
 like those of the modern Irvingites. 
 
 ' Patitur, a significant word. * Or "House." 
 
 5 One cannot help thinking of St. Catherine of Siena. 
 
398 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 hears mysteries, and discerns the hearts of some, and 
 suppHes medicines to those in need. But further, 
 materials are supplied for her visions according to the 
 Scriptures that are being read, the Psalms chanted, the 
 addresses delivered, or the petitions offered in the name 
 of the Church.' It happened that we had just been 
 holding some discourse^ about the soul while this 
 sister was in her ecstasy. When the service was over, 
 and the congregation dismissed, according to her cus- 
 tom of reporting to us what she has seen (for it is all 
 most carefully set out, tliat it may also be tested), 
 she said, 'Among other things a soul was shown to 
 me, and a spirit was seen ; but not imsiibstantial and 
 of empty quality ; on the contrary, such as promised 
 you that you could grasp it — soft and brilliant, and of 
 the colour of air'" (whatever that is) '"and its shape 
 in all points human.' This is the vision." 
 
 This is plainly all bona fide, but it is all as un- 
 
 ^ Anyone who has been delirious in a fever may remember liow the 
 conversation of those present, or objects that catch the eye, are worked 
 up into their dreams or delusions. Readers of that pretty novelette, 
 A Very Young Couple, will remember how the heroine in her delirium 
 developes slight hints and associations into what seems like clairvoy- 
 ance ; and I can testify from my own experience to the truthfulness of 
 this. Or again, I once when a boy was playing chess with a school- 
 fellow who was subject to fits, and had just said something about a 
 castle, or as I called it a rook, when a fit came on him. He caught 
 up the piece, and tossed it into the air, saying, "A rook ! It 's black ; 
 let it fly ! " This poor boy's convulsive utterances are not unlike those 
 of Maximilla (ap. Eus. H. E. V. xvi. l6), when Asterius Urbanus, 
 apparently a Catholic Bishop, came to examine her: " I am persecuted 
 like a wolf from among the sheep. I 'm not a wolf ! I 'm a word, and 
 a spirit, and a power !" Only she was egotistical, and used religious 
 phrases. 
 
 * Probably one would say in English, "I had been preaching." 
 
THE CHURCH OF THE MARTYRS. 399 
 
 spiritual as can be. Tragical as it is, to find the 
 greatest intellect that the Church produced for three 
 centuries listening reverently to such rubbish, we are 
 thankful to have a sympathetic description of the 
 phenomena to compare with the slighter sketches of 
 opponents ; and we have ample grounds for setting 
 down Montanism as a delusion to which there have 
 been several parallels in later times, and as a subject 
 for the study quite as much of the mental physiologist 
 as of the theologian. 
 
 But it had a theological significance too : originally 
 a mere fanaticism, it speedily developed itself into a 
 heresy, though a far less unchristian one than the 
 various forms of Gnostic polytheism that were ordi- 
 narily known by the name, and against which the 
 Montanists vigorously asserted the creed of the 
 Church. The Montanists asserted that this new 
 influx of spiritual gifts, not that in apostolic times, 
 beginning on the Day of Pentecost, was the coming 
 of the Paraclete promised by our Lord ; and they 
 drew from this the inference, that with Montanus 
 there began a new dispensation, rising as much above 
 that of the Gospel as the Gospel above the Law.' 
 Perhaps this was one form of the ultra-Trinitarianism 
 of Asia, of which the shortly subsequent heresy of 
 Praxeas was another : they felt that each Person of 
 the Holy Trinity ought to have, so to speak. His turn 
 as ruler of the Church,- or else they were not really 
 
 ^ Tert. de Monog. 14, &c. 
 
 ' This notion was repeatedly revived by the Fraticelli and other 
 mediaeval fanatics. 
 
40O BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 coequal. Indeed, one section of the sect, headed by 
 Aeschines, and apparently as time went on the main 
 body, fell into Sabellianism,' which may have been 
 the cause of the TertuUianists of Africa separating 
 from them : the latter were restored to the Church in 
 St. Augustine's time.^ It seems that these later 
 Montanists conceived the blasphemous notion that 
 the Paraclete was, so to speak, incarnate in Mon- 
 tanus, or that Montanus was personally identical with 
 Him : it has even been inferred,^ though probably 
 unfairly, that they substituted his name for that of 
 the Holy Ghost in the form of Baptism. 
 
 It is of these later Montanists only that we 
 have the statement,^ that the new dispensation was 
 ordained because the old had proved a failure, in 
 which respect they remind us of the modern heresy 
 of the Plymouth Brethren, as in others of the con- 
 temporary sect of the Irvingites. But whether the 
 primitive Montanists put it in this way or no, their 
 doctrine necessarily involved a depreciation of the 
 Divine work in the Church up to their time : if the 
 Paraclete came to the Church in the days of Mon- 
 tanus, it followed that He had not been in it before. 
 They called the Catholics, not indeed heretics, for 
 they earnestly maintained that they held the same 
 creed with them, but "Natural men,"^ while they 
 
 ^ Ps. Tert. Praescr. Haer. 52; S. Hieron. Ep. 54. 
 
 * S. Aug. Haer. 86. 
 
 3 From S. Bas. Ep. 188, (Canon, i.) p. 268-9. 
 
 * S. Hieron. Ep. xli. 4. 
 
 ^ ^vxiKoL The name was already applied to the Church by the 
 Valentinians and other more tolerant Gnostic sects. 
 
THE CHURCH OF THE MARTYRS. 401 
 
 themselves were " Spiritual ; " and the command, 
 " Come out of them, and be ye separate," was given 
 in relation to the Church very early.' They organised 
 a ministry of their own, with a Patriarch at Pepuza 
 (a little town in Phrygia, which they proclaimed as 
 the New Jerusalem) : bishops were with them very 
 subordinate officers. We do not know if they had a 
 valid episcopal succession : presbyters of the Church 
 certainly joined them, but we do not hear of any 
 bishops doing so. Tertullian, who had been a 
 thorough Catholic, after he embraced Montanism 
 still uses Catholic language, as though he had not 
 left the Church, but only joined a society within it ; 
 but he taunts the Catholics with the faults of " your " 
 bishops and clergy, so as to prove that their own 
 were quite distinct from them. Once^ he opposes 
 " the Church of the Spirit " or " the Church that is 
 the Spirit " to " the Church that is a number of 
 Bishops," as though his own were not episcopalian, 
 in what he regarded ^ as the true sense, of having 
 bishops representing an apostolic founder. 
 
 Montanus is charged with avarice and love of 
 power,"* but the only evidence alleged is the arrange- 
 ments he made for the organisation and payment of 
 his itinerant preachers ; and no one would charge 
 John Wesley with the first fault, whatever might be 
 
 1 Aiict. ad Avircium Marcellnm ap. Eus. H. E. V. xvi. 10. It 
 seems they denounced the Church first, and only afterwards were 
 excluded from it, ib. 1 1 . 
 
 2 De Pud. 21 fin. 
 
 ^ Pracscr. Haer. 32. 
 ■* Apollon. ap. Eus. H. E. V. xviii. 2. 
 2 D 
 
402 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 the case with the other. He very likely showed a 
 want of refinement, to which ancient feeling would be 
 very sensitive, in his demands for money ; but there 
 is no proof that he or his associates had any selfish 
 aims/ Certainly he and they did not attempt to 
 purchase influence by prophesying smooth things, or 
 alluring through the lusts of the flesh ; on all points 
 of morality their teaching was only too austere. They 
 condemned second marriages as no better than adul- 
 tery ; they imposed as obligatory severe and frequent 
 times of fasting and abstinence;- they forbade the 
 avoidance of persecution, whether by flight or by 
 bribery ;^ and they refused to allow reconciliation to 
 the Church after deadly sin, even though followed by 
 the severest penance. 
 
 In the two first points — perhaps in all — the Mon- 
 tanist practice approximated to that of the austere 
 sects of Gnostics ; but in truth they did not proceed 
 here on a heretical principle, they applied a Catholic 
 one, though their application was such as Christian 
 wisdom would condemn, and the matter one in which 
 Catholic consent shows where Christian wisdom lies. 
 
 Though it be something of a digression, it is worth 
 while to explain how this is so. As to the first point, 
 contemporary Christian feeling on the subject is well 
 represented by Tertullian's book to his Wife. Jewish 
 
 ^ In St. Jer. Ep. cxxxiii. 4 he is charged with a wrong spending, not 
 a wrong getting, of money. 
 
 ^ Using the latter term in the technical sense that it has in the modern 
 Roman Church. The ancient and Montanist term was ^rjpo^ayia. 
 
 '■* Some forms of the latter (the libelli) were very properly denounced 
 by the Church also. 
 
THE CHURCH OF THE MARTYRS. 403 
 
 and Roman opinion recognised, at least in the case 
 of women/ that constancy to the memory of a lost 
 husband or wife is virtuous. St. Paul taught that the 
 two sexes were to be placed on the same level — that 
 as unchastity is a sin in both, as marriage is honour- 
 able in both, and imposes correlative obligations on 
 both, so when marriage is dissolved by death, con- 
 tinued widowhood is in both more honourable than 
 even an honourable second marriage. While he per- 
 mitted, in some cases encouraged,^ second marriages, 
 he yet so far treated them as unideal that he made 
 them a bar to office in the Church.^ 
 
 But St. Paul also taught that virginity was an estate 
 yet more honourable than matrimony for those who 
 were "able to receive this saying;" and the honour 
 of widowhood compared with a second marriage came 
 to be rested less on the ground of conjugal fidelity, 
 than on the analogy of virginity as compared with 
 any marriage at all. The analogy was natural, 
 probably legitimate ; but the habit of regarding 
 
 ^ And the story of Galba's short married life in Suetonius seems to 
 show that men sometimes felt the same. The inference would hardly 
 be lessened, if we believed the scandalous stories Suetonius tells about 
 him after his widowhood ; but indeed they are so confessedly improbable 
 that they seem the mere product of a vicious imagination that cannot 
 believe in virtue. 
 
 * I Tim. v. 14. 
 
 ^ No one would ever have dreamt of doubting what e^os dvdpbs ywrj 
 must mean, in i Tim. v. 9, if it were not clear that fnas ywaiKos &v5pes 
 (ib. iii. 2, 12) means the same, which digamous clerks do not like to 
 believe. Whether St. Paul's rule is one of obligation on the Church for 
 all time, is another question ; but the generations nearest him seem to 
 have understood that it was, and the most conservative Churches do so 
 still. 
 
404 BEGLVNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 widowhood as a form of continence encouraged the 
 regarding a second marriage as a fall, as it hardly 
 could have been while widowhood was regarded as 
 fidelity to the deceased partner.' Athenagoras, who 
 was no doubt a Catholic, though a rather rash and 
 crotchety one, is as absolute in his condemnation as 
 Montanus. Now it was not heresy to use strong and 
 rash or even uncharitable language, with a general 
 good purpose; but it was heresy to insist on such 
 language being made a rule for all men, far more to 
 claim for it the authority of a divine revelation. 
 
 The case of the fasts was nearly the same. No one 
 doubted that fasting was a good thing, but men were 
 to fast as they could and would, and Montanus in- 
 sisted on certain fasts as obligatory for all. No doubt 
 it might be assumed to be the duty of every one not 
 physically unable^ to keep the fast of Passion-tide 
 (we can hardly yet call it Lent). A man who refused 
 to observe that could hardly have the feelings of a 
 Christian ; he certainly had no respect for Catholic 
 practice. But the new fasts of Montanus had the 
 sanction neither of universal custom nor (so far as we 
 
 1 Tertullian begins his book to his Wife by repudiating the suspicion 
 of being actuated hy post-mortem jealousy in asking her not to marry 
 again if she survived him. But in his Montanist works [Exh, Cast. 
 11 • De Monog. lo), written probably after her death (he speaks of his 
 aiming at continence in De Res. Cam. 59), a higher form of the human 
 feeling, and one touched by religion, is very prominent. In the fine 
 and often-quoted passage at the end of the Ad Uxorem, the religious 
 feeling absorbs the human, but these later works prove that it was 
 there. 
 
 * Less is said in the controversy than we might expect about allow- 
 ance for such inability. Perhaps the Montanists admitted it. 
 
THE CHURCH OF THE MARTYRS. 405 
 
 know) of sentimental fitness.' Anyone was at liberty 
 to keep them, but to make them a law for every one 
 showed a misconception of the nature of the Law of 
 Christ. 
 
 And while on these two points the Montanist 
 doctrines were overstrained, we need hardly prove that 
 on the other two they were positively wrong. On 
 flight in persecution, indeed, they ingeniously met the 
 obvious scriptural argument by saying that St. Matt. 
 X. 23 was a rule for the Apostles only on their first 
 journey, as x. 5 certainly was. But here again there 
 was the secret assumption that the business of the 
 Gospel is to give cast-iron rules, and not living 
 principles. The believers in the false Paraclete showed 
 their want of appreciation of the true. 
 
 And on the treatment of the penitent they still 
 more plainly " knew not what manner of spirit they 
 were of." No doubt they began (as St, Augustine 
 says^ of a less extreme but similar rule) non despcra- 
 tiojie indulgeiitiae, sed rigor c disciplinac. It was ad- 
 mitted that God might forgive a sinner.^ It was a 
 question for Christian discretion which was the more 
 important, the terrible severity of lifelong penance to 
 
 ^ They kept a second Lent immediately after Pentecost ; i.e., as near 
 as they dared to Ascension-tide. They grounded this on St. Mark ii. 
 20— showing a spirit the very reverse of the Cathohc and ApostoHc one. 
 (St. Luke xxiv. 52.) 
 
 ' Ep. clxxxv. 45, dc Corr. Don. 
 
 ' One of the prophets said, " The Church can forgive trespasses, but 
 I will not do it, lest others trespass also." (Tert. de Pud. 21.) It 
 appears that in Tertullian's time even Catholics did not admit murderers 
 or apostates to absolution. But it cannot have been an innovation to 
 admit adulterers. See Herm. Past., Maud. iv. i ; and it is implied 
 there that the case of idolaters was the same. 
 
4o6 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 the offender, " that others also might fear," or the 
 offering to him a hope of reconcih'ation to the 
 Church, even on earth, " lest perhaps such an one 
 should be swallowed up with over much sorrow." 
 But the sense of the Church decided which con- 
 sideration ought to prevail. " Mercy glorieth over 
 judgment." Those who not only decided otherwise, 
 but condemned the Church for deciding so, proved 
 themselves unchristian. 
 
 While the Montanist prophets encouraged their 
 followers to even an excessive readiness for martyr- 
 dom, they are taunted, not perhaps quite fairly, with 
 the fact that none of themselves suffered. The charge 
 is not even absolutely true. We shall see that, in the 
 interval while their position in the Church or out of 
 it was still undecided, one of their leaders did suffer 
 gloriously ;' but he was a Catholic at heart, and sub- 
 mitted to abandon his peculiarities at the last. Stories 
 are told of the ends of the others, which it was found 
 impossible to verify within thirteen years of the 
 events ; but they seem likelier to be true than to 
 have been invented : if true, they were certain to be 
 hushed up. Theodotus, it was said, announced that 
 he was going to ascend into Heaven, and (probably) 
 went up a mountain for the purpose : he leapt into 
 the air, was hurled down, and killed. Montanus and 
 Maximilla hanged themselves : we hear nothing of 
 Priscilla. Fanaticism so often leads to insanity, and 
 
 ^ See below, p. 420. It seems probable that the Alcibiades men- 
 tioned in Eus. H. E. V. iii. 3 is the same as the Martyr described in 
 the same chapter. lb. xvii. i, the name is no doubt a mistake for 
 Miltiades. 
 
THE CHURCH OF THE MARTYRS. 407 
 
 religious mania so often becomes suicidal, that both 
 stories are a priori probable. 
 
 There is a well-known legend of the relations of 
 M. Aurelius to the Christians, which it seems worth 
 while to mention, though the element of truth in it is 
 probably slight. It is a fact that in the Emperor's 
 campaign against the Ouadi, in A.D. 174, the army- 
 suffered terribly from drought, when they were re- 
 lieved by a sudden thunder-storm. Both Christians 
 and Pagans naturally and properly considered this a 
 special providence. The latter ascribed it to the 
 favour of the gods to the good Emperor, or to the 
 arts of an enchanter ; the former to the prayers of 
 the Christians who happened to be serving in the 
 army.' It is interesting to know that there zvere 
 Christians serving in the army ; that they thought it 
 no sin to do so, not only on home police duty," but 
 on an active campaign. But further than that we do 
 not learn very much. 
 
 But the story was developed and improved, till it 
 was said that a whole legion, the Melitene, consisted 
 of Christians ; that they knelt down in their ranks, 
 in face of the enemy, and prayed ; and that then the 
 storm came, the lightning driving the enemy to flight, 
 
 ^ Tert. Apol. 5. It is hardly likely that the Emperor can have 
 ascribed it to the prayers of the Christians ; but the despatch referred 
 to by TertuUian, even if a forgery, can hardly have been as detailed or 
 as clumsy a one as that now appended to St. Justin's Apology. Was a 
 genuine despatch copied and interpolated? or was it a fact that the 
 Emperor described the storm, and an inference that he must have 
 ascribed it to the prayers of the Christians ? 
 
 * Tert. de Idol. 18, 19 shows that some drew the line between these 
 two cases. 
 
4o8 jBEG/NNLVGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 while the rain reheved the Romans. The Emperor 
 conferred on the legion the title of Fubninatrix, " the 
 Thundering Legion," or rather " the Lightning- 
 hurling;" and, it was added, issued an edict for- 
 bidding persecution of the Christians. 
 
 All this is quite incredible ; but the tale seems to 
 have grown very fast. \\\ Claudius Apollinaris' 
 Apology^ a strictly contemporary work, and addressed 
 to the Emperor himself, at least as much was told as 
 this, that the title was then granted to the Legion. 
 It is possible to reduce this to the limits of the 
 credible ; to suppose that the Legion mentioned 
 distinguished itself in the thunder-storm battle, and 
 received the title, and further, that the Christians 
 were in it, to whose prayers the thunder-storm was 
 due. If we had St. Apollinaris' own words, and 
 knew whether he said more than this, we should 
 know whether to believe this ; as it is, even this is not 
 very easy to reconcile with known facts. We know 
 nothing of a Legio Fidminatrix, and the Legio 
 Fuhninata (bearing the cognisance of a thunderbolt 
 on their shields) had the name before this time. 
 
 It is certain at any rate that the deliverance of the 
 Emperor did not win his favour for the Christians. 
 Three years afterwards occurred the most savage act 
 of persecution of his reign, and one for which he was 
 in part directly responsible. 
 
 This event stands, indeed, on the very outside 
 limits of our subject ; the Christian Church, as it is 
 known to friends and enemies, is no longer beginning 
 1 Eus. V. V. 4. 
 
THE CHURCH OF THE MARTYRS. 409 
 
 but begun. The books of the New Testament are 
 already in the hands of Christians, familiar to their 
 minds and cherished in their hearts as they have 
 been ever since : the generation that witnessed the 
 grozvth of the New Testament has passed away. Or 
 perhaps we may say, it is in the very act of passing 
 away. St. Pothinus, the martyr Bishop of Lyons, 
 was over ninety at his death, in A.D. 177 ; he there- 
 fore must have been something like thirteen at the 
 death of St. John. If then he was, like so many of 
 his flock — SS. Attains, Alexander, Alcibiades, and 
 Irenaeus, among them — a native of Asia ;' and if, like 
 St. Polycarp before him and St. Irenaeus after him, 
 he had been a Christian from childhood, he would 
 probably have heard St. John say, " Little children, 
 love one another;" he might even be as well able to 
 remember his looks and manner, as St. Irenaeus to 
 remember St. Polycarp's. We have indeed no evi- 
 dence to make either supposition more than possible ; 
 but we may be excused for straining a point to find 
 room for a story such as this.^ 
 
 1 What was the cause of the close connexion between the two 
 Churches ? The Christians of Gaul seem like an Asiatic and Greek- 
 speaking colony. It is hardly possible that the Galilean Church was 
 only just founded by Asiatic missionaries ; more probably there were 
 causes independent of Christianity that made emigration frequent from 
 one place to the other. Were these causes only commercial, or in some 
 way ethnical? Marseilles, be it remembered, was from the first an 
 Asiatic Greek colony. 
 
 2 The Epistle is not extant entire, only the extracts in Eus. H. E. 
 V. i.-iii. But comparing his similar abridgment of the Martyrdom of 
 St. Polycarp, we may guess that we have not lost very much, except 
 the comments on Montanism, which perhaps were so tolerant as to 
 seem to him dangerous. 
 
4IO BEGIiViVINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 "The servants of Christ sojourning at Vienna and 
 Lyons in Gaul, to the brethren throughout Asia and 
 Phrygia, having the same faith and hope of the 
 redemption with us, peace and grace and glory from 
 God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord." 
 
 The persecution had begun, they say, with an 
 excitement of popular feeling against the Christians, 
 which made it unsafe for them to frequent the market 
 or the baths, or show themselves in public anywhere. 
 At length a mob assembled, and violently assailed all 
 that they could find. The city magistrates and the 
 officers then appeared, arrested the accused, and 
 examined them in the presence of the mob, who 
 seem to have been quite satisfied now that their 
 victims were in custody. They all confessed their 
 faith, and were remanded to prison till the Governor 
 of the Province could attend to try them. The letter 
 does not state, at least in its extant parts,' how many 
 were arrested, or what proportion they bore to the 
 whole Church ; but the tradition that the whole 
 number of the Martyrs was forty-eight is no doubt 
 trustworthy. The names recorded are — Sanctus, a 
 Deacon of Vienne ; Attains, a native of Pergamus ; 
 Alcibiades, the Phrygian Montanist, who was now 
 settled in Gaul ; Maturus, a convert lately baptised ; 
 Ponticus, a boy of fifteen ; and two women named 
 Biblias and Blandina. The last was a slave of a 
 
 ^ From Eus. V. iv. 3, 4, it appears that when complete it included a 
 list of all those killed, with the manner of their deaths. This must 
 have served to check local tradition, till it was fixed past the risk of 
 corruption. 
 
THE CHURCH OF THE MARTYRS. 411 
 
 Christian lady, herself among the Martyrs, but her 
 name is not given.' 
 
 The Governor soon arrived, and the prisoners were 
 brought before him ; he treated them brutally, and 
 offered them nothing like a fair trial. A young 
 lawyer named Vettius Epagathus was present : he 
 was a Christian, of blameless life and warm charity ; 
 and the proceedings wounded, not only his sense of 
 justice and Christian sympathy, but his professional 
 instincts too. He rose, and demanded to be heard 
 for the defence : he was prepared to prove that the 
 charges of atheism and impiety were false. A cry 
 was raised against him by the people surrounding the 
 judgment-seat ; and the Governor, instead of granting 
 or even refusing his request for a hearing, simply 
 asked him if he were a Christian too. He answered 
 distinctly that he was ; and " he also was taken up 
 into the lot of the Martyrs, being called the advocate 
 (paraclete) of the Christians, and having the Paraclete 
 in himself, the Spirit more abundantly than Zacha- 
 rias."^ " He was and is a genuine disciple of Christ, 
 ' following the Lamb whithersoever He goeth.' " 
 
 ^ Pothinus, Bishop of Lyons, was not arrested till afterwards. The 
 Bishop of Vienne seems to have escaped altogether. Did he write the 
 letter? 
 
 * He had before been compared, young as he was, to the old 
 Zacharias, as " walking in all the commandments and ordinances of 
 the Lord blameless." This preference of him to Zacharias (St. Luke 
 i. 67) shocks some people, who -cannot conceive a Saint who is not in 
 the Bible being greater than a Saint who is. But Zacharias was not as 
 great as his son : " he that is least in the Kingdom of Heaven is 
 greater than he ; " and it is promised that such men as Epagathus 
 " shall be called great in the Kingdom of Heaven." 
 
412 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 Those before accused were then examined in the 
 same off-hand style, and those who confessed were 
 condemned. " But there appeared also those who 
 were unready and untrained, and weak as yet, unable 
 to bear the strain of the great contest : of whom they 
 wounded about ten," the woman Biblias among them; 
 but we shall see that few even of the " wounded " 
 missed their share in the final victory. Arrests con- 
 tinued to be made, for the Governor ordered search 
 to be made for all Christians : among others Pothinus, 
 the aged Bishop of Lyons, was seized ; and we are 
 told " there were collected together all the good men 
 of the two Churches." But the letter itself is a proof 
 that this is a modest exaggeration : the writer and 
 others escaped, though, undeterred by the fate of 
 Epagathus, they attended in the Court itself, watching 
 anxiously the success of their comrades. 
 
 Meanwhile, those previously accused were sent 
 back to prison. Among those arrested on suspicion 
 were a few pagan slaves in Christian families : they, 
 for fear of torture, and at the suggestion of the 
 police,' bore witness against their masters, and de- 
 clared the truth of the common stories of cannibalism 
 and incest among the Christians. The mob honestly 
 believed these charges, and grew more furious than 
 ever. The writer of the Epistle says, " The saying 
 of our Lord was fulfilled, that 'a time shall come, in 
 which whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth 
 God service.' " Possibly even the magistrates be- 
 lieved the stories ; at any rate, they had to act as if 
 ^ A fair translation of crrpaTiuTuiv in a peaceable province like Gaul. 
 
THE CHURCH OF THE MARTYRS. 413 
 
 they did. It had been settled since Trajan's time, 
 that a person accused of Christianity was to be re- 
 leased, if he proved himself no Christian by an act of 
 idolatry ; but it did not follow that a murderer was to 
 be pardoned, on his abandoning the society that had 
 led him into murder. So the confessors and apos- 
 tates alike were taken back to prison, the former on 
 the charge of Christianity, the latter on that of 
 murder. 
 
 Further examinations of the accused were held, 
 usually accompanied with torture ; whether in hopes 
 of extracting more trustworthy evidence of the 
 alleged atrocities, or merely to gratify the popular 
 hatred. Certainly it was the special objects of the 
 popular hatred who were selected for special tortures 
 — Sanctus, Maturus, Attalus, and Blandina, Blan- 
 dina was a mere common household servant — neither 
 clever, nor young,' nor pretty, and apparently in 
 feeble health, altogether a most uninteresting person ; 
 but by her " Christ showed that the things held 
 cheap and uncomely and contemptible among men 
 are counted with God worthy of great glory, because 
 of the love to Him that is displayed in power, and 
 boasteth not in appearance." Her mistress, and other 
 Christians present, were afraid she would be too weak 
 to confess audibly ; but strength came with the need 
 for it. She was racked and otherwise tortured all 
 day long, till the relays of executioners were tired, 
 
 ^ It is sometimes assumed that she was a sister of St. Ponticus (Eus. 
 H. E. V. i. 50), and so presumably not much older. But probably 
 she is called his " sister " only in the general Christian sense, else why 
 should she be likened to a mother ? 
 
414 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 and confessed themselves beaten : one such racking, 
 they said, would have been enough to kill any ordinary 
 woman ; but she, after each, seemed to be revived 
 and cheered as she repeated, " I am a Christian, and 
 among us no evil is done." Glorious as were the deeds 
 of all, the apia-reux seem to be assigned to her. 
 
 Sanctus in like manner was tortured repeatedly, 
 and interrogated in the hope of extorting the con- 
 fession of some of the crimes alleged. But he to every 
 question — even when asked his name, birthplace, or 
 condition — would answer nothing but " I am a Chris- 
 tian," speaking in Latin, which was probably the 
 language most generally used in Gaul, though Greek 
 was more familiar to the half-Asiatic Christian 
 colony.' His resolution provoked the Governor and 
 the torturers the more : " when they had no longer 
 anything more that they could do to him, they at last 
 fastened red-hot plates of brass to the tenderest parts 
 of his body. So these burned, but he remained un- 
 bending and unyielding, firm in his confession, be- 
 dewed and strengthened by the heavenly fountain of 
 the Water of Life, that proceedeth out of the stomach 
 of Christ."- Helpless and disfigured, his body all 
 one wound, he was carried back to the prison. A few 
 days after he was taken out for fresh tortures, which it 
 was hoped would overpower him, when enfeebled by 
 
 ^ The aboriginal Gaelic was by no means extinct : St. Irenaeus 
 preached in it so frequently, that he thinks his Greek style must be 
 injured by it. See adv. Haer. Praef. 3. 
 
 ^ A fusion of St. John vii. 38 and Rev. xxii. I. It is impertinent to 
 criticise the taste of the passage as it stands here. One hardly knows 
 which is more charming, this writer's saintliness, which quite absorbs 
 his sense of the ridiculous, or St. Irenaeus', which does not. 
 
THE CHURCH OF THE MARTYRS. 415 
 
 the former ones. But, strange to say, the new tortures 
 acted as a sort of rough surgery : ' " he recovered his 
 former appearance, and the use of his Hmbs." 
 
 At last in despair they turned to poor BibUas; they 
 hoped that she, having renounced Christianity, would 
 " turn Caesar's evidence," and bear the requisite testi- 
 mony to the crimes of the Christians, at least under 
 torture. " But she on the rack recovered her senses, 
 and so to speak awoke out of a deep sleep, being 
 reminded by the punishment for a time of the eternal 
 chastisement^ in Hell: and answered contrariwise to 
 the blasphemers, ' How can such men eat children, to 
 whom it is not lawful to eat the blood even of brute 
 animals.''' And thenceforth she confessed herself a 
 Christian, and was added to the lot of the Martyrs." 
 
 Torture failing, the Martyrs were taken back to 
 prison, and thrown into the darkest and foulest dun- 
 geon — practically the sink of the building^ — and here 
 
 ^ It does not seem to be regarded as a miracle. It is conceivable 
 that the rack might set a dislocated limb ; and the complete rest in the 
 prison, and the fresh air on coming out, may account for the rest. 
 
 ^ The words are the same as in St. Matt. xxv. 46. 
 
 * The prisons traditionally shown can hardly be authentic. I have 
 not seen them, but they are described by Dr. Neale (in his Deeds of 
 Faitli) as "a little cell cut out in the rock. Right and left of this were 
 two other little cells, with entrances so small that I could only crawl in 
 like a worm, and so low when I had entered that I could hardly raise 
 myself from a lying posture." It must have been physically impossible 
 to get fifty people into such a place as this, and it is plainly implied 
 that the Martyrs and the apostates were all confined together. Neale's 
 Triut/iphs of the Cross and Deeds of Faith are the most charming of 
 children's Sunday books : I have known the former as long as I can 
 remember, and the latter ever since my eighth birthday. But I wish 
 their historical accuracy were equal to their picturesqueness of style and 
 holiness of tone. 
 
4i6 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 some, if not all of them, were fastened in the stocks 
 with their legs stretched five holes apart. The nine 
 apostates — Biblias can no longer be reckoned so — 
 were treated no better than the rest, and suffered far 
 more, not having the same peace and hope to comfort 
 them. They were ridiculed even by the heathen for 
 their cowardice. This spectacle — for the public, 
 Christians included, were allowed access to the prison 
 — seemed to show that nothing was to be gained by 
 apostasy, and made it easier for those afterwards 
 arrested to stand firm. These were all, after their 
 confession, thrown into prison with their forerunners ; 
 and the increased crowding made the air more deadly. 
 It was noticed, and is a curious fact, that those last 
 arrested died of the foul air, while the former ones, 
 though exhausted by tortures to begin with, all en- 
 dured till the time came for their public execution. 
 
 It is small wonder that the old Bishop Pothinus 
 was among those who died in the prison. He was ill 
 when the persecution broke out, but his failing 
 strength revived at his arrest, with the joy of finding 
 that he was to die, not of sickness or old age, but by 
 martyrdom. He was carried under escort of the city 
 magistrates before the Governor, amid the clamours 
 of the mob, who thought that this, the chief man of 
 the Christians, must be Christ Himself. Apparently, 
 like St. Polycarp, he was charged first with atheism, 
 and denied that. When questioned further, he fol- 
 lowed (probably consciously) St. Polycarp's example 
 in his reply ; he would neither refuse to answer an 
 enquirer about the Gospel, nor profane its mysteries 
 
THE CHURCH OF THE MARTYRS. 417 
 
 before unbelievers. So when asked who was the 
 Christians' God, he answered, "If thou be worthy, 
 thou shalt know." 
 
 But the Governor was as little "worthy" of his 
 secular office as of spiritual enlightenment. He did 
 not attempt to protect his prisoner from the mob ; 
 those within reach kicked and beat him as he stood 
 before the tribunal, and the rest pelted him with 
 whatever came to hand. Still the old man was not 
 actually killed ; he was thrown into the prison, and 
 there lingered two days. Thus passed away the last 
 (if he were so) of those who had looked on the face 
 of one of the Lord's Apostles, Like St. John himself, 
 he endured martyrdom, and yet, like St. John, he 
 died in a certain sense in peace, in the midst of his 
 brethren. But he was not allowed, like St. John, a 
 peaceful burial where Christians might worship at his 
 grave, " Those who were suffocated in the prison 
 they threw to dogs, keeping watch carefully night and 
 day that none might be tended by us." Touro ^r] 
 oiKTicTTOv ireXeTui SeiXoicri jSpoTOicrii/.^ 
 
 With the usual inconsistency of the administration, 
 or perhaps by the mere carelessness of the police, the 
 surviving Martyrs were able to receive visits and 
 letters from their brethren. We are told that when, 
 in any of these, any one addressed them as Martyrs,^ 
 "they rebuked them bitterly. For they gladly con- 
 ceded the name of witness (martyrdom) to Christ, 
 
 ^ //. xxii. 76. 
 
 ^ The passage is tke decisive one for the true sense of Phil. ii. 6. 
 The Martyrs are said to be imitators of Christ's spirit as there described, 
 in not claiming the title which they might claim, 
 
 2 E 
 
4iS BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 ' the faithful and true Witness ' and ' Firstborn from 
 the dead,' and 'Author of the Hfe' of God ;' and they 
 remembered the Martyrs already departed, and said, 
 ' They are Martyrs, whom Christ has counted worthy 
 to be already taken up^ in their confession, having 
 sealed their witness (martyrdom) by its close ; but we 
 are poor humble Confessors.' " Instead of congratu- 
 lations on their being Martyrs, they asked with tears ■• 
 for prayers that they might be found so indeed. They 
 showed equal humility and charity towards their 
 fallen fellow- prisoners. "For this was their very 
 greatest battle with him (the Devil), through the 
 genuineness of their love, that the Beast being choked 
 might vomit up alive those whom he seemed to have 
 swallowed up. For they took no boasting over the 
 fallen, but supplied to those wanting that wherein 
 they abounded themselves, having a mother's bowels, 
 and pouring forth many tears for them to the Father. 
 They asked life, and He gave it them ; which they 
 communicated also to their neighbours." 
 
 After some days of monotonous imprisonment, the 
 fate of the Martyrs was varied. " For, having woven 
 one crown of various colours and of all manner of 
 flowers, they offered it to the Father." The four most 
 abhorred — Sanctus, Attalus, Maturus, and Blandina 
 — were brought out to be exposed to the beasts, at 
 an exhibition organized on purpose. Maturus and 
 
 ^ A fusion, probably inadvertent, of Acts iii. 14 with Rev. i. 5, iii. 14. 
 
 * We have had the word used already of Epagathus. But in this 
 context it surely implies an immediate ascension of the Martyrs to 
 Heaven, in a fuller sense than was believed of the departed generally 
 before the Resurrection. 
 
THE CHURCH OF THE MARTYRS. 419 
 
 Sanctus were tortured publicly in the amphitheatre. 
 They endured the torture through the whole day, 
 in spite of what they had previously undergone — 
 Sanctus, as before, repeating his unvarying formula, 
 Christiafius sum. After tortures sufficiently varied 
 to keep the spectators amused the whole time, they 
 were fastened on an iron chair, and fried alive. They 
 survived even this ; and at last they were slaughtered 
 in the evening. 
 
 Blandina was hung on a post, to be torn in pieces 
 by beasts. Strictly speaking, she was not crucified ; 
 but as she prayed without ceasing, she stretched out 
 her arms in the usual devotional attitude of the early 
 Christians;' so that her fellow-sufferers "saw amid 
 their conflict, even with their outward eyes, in their 
 sister Him Who was crucified for them, that He 
 might persuade them that believe in Him, that every 
 one who has suffered for the glory of Christ has 
 always communion with the living God." None of 
 the beasts touched Blandina p and after hanging for 
 some time, she was " taken down from the tree," and 
 carried back to prison. 
 
 Attalus was the one whom the people were most 
 anxious to see tortured ; he was apparently a lay- 
 man, but a prominent and active member of the 
 ChurclV and known as such even to outsiders. He 
 
 ^ Familiar from the pictures of oranti in the Catacombs. 
 
 " Cf. S. IGN. ad. Rom. 5. 
 
 ' He is called "the pillar and ground of those in these parts," Eus. 
 H. E. V. i. 14. As before, the way that these early Christians under- 
 stand St. Paul's words (i Tim. iii. 15) is surely decisive as to their true 
 sense. 
 
420 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 was taken round the amphitheatre, with a placard 
 carried before him, "This is Attalus the Christian ;" 
 but he was a Roman citizen, and the Governor did 
 not venture to have him tortured yet. He had written 
 to the Emperor to ask what was to be done with 
 those still in prison, and he ordered Attalus to be 
 taken back there till the answer came. 
 
 He had a good work to do there. Alcibiades 
 carried to an extreme the austerities which the 
 Montanists encouraged, and to a certain extent en- 
 forced. He had been accustomed never to take any 
 food but bread and water. Now whatever the suffer- 
 ings of the prisoners, their free communications with 
 their brethren were a security that they should not 
 starve. They had wholesome food, and in some 
 variety.' But Alcibiades had scruples about relaxing 
 his former rule of life, till " it was revealed to Attalus," 
 apparently in a dream, " that Alcibiades did not well 
 in not using the creatures of God, and leaving to 
 others an example of scandal."^ Alcibiades, though 
 an enthusiast, was not a sectarian. If too ready to 
 believe in Divine revelations, he did not pick and 
 
 ^ Christian charity in this matter sometimes outran discretion. Ter- 
 tuUian, in a Montanist work {De Jej. 12), tells a painful story of a 
 Catholic confessor named Pristinus, who was so plentifully supplied 
 with drugged wine, that he was unconscious, not to say drunk, under 
 torture. At last, roused by the pain of an iron hook, he apostatised, 
 and died immediately from the injuries he had received without feeling 
 them. 
 
 * Abstinence from animal food being the rule with certain Gnostic 
 sects, it is probably meant that he would seem to sanction these. Of 
 course generous diet was needed to support life in the foul air of the 
 prison. 
 
THE CHURCH OF THE MARTYRS. 421 
 
 choose such only as suited his preconceived fancies ; 
 and thenceforth "he partook freely of all things, and 
 gave God thanks." The painful spectacle was spared 
 which was sometimes seen not long afterwards, of 
 Catholic and Montanist martyrs suffering together, 
 but refusing to communicate with each other to the 
 last' It was probably on occasion of this difference 
 with Alcibiades, whether before or after its happy 
 settlement, that the Martyrs "while still in bonds 
 wrote divers letters to the Brethren in Asia and 
 Phrygia, and also to Eleutherus, the then Bishop of 
 Rome, sending embassies on behalf of the peace of 
 the Churches;" that is, probably, maintaining that, 
 whatever the character of the Montanist manifesta- 
 tions, they were not a matter for Churches to part 
 communion upon. 
 
 The letter to Rome, and perhaps those to Asia 
 afterwards, were carried by St. Irenaeus, one of the 
 Presbyters of the Church of Lyons, who was not in 
 custody. He had a separate letter, commending him, 
 as in communion with the Church, from the Martyrs 
 to their " Father Eleutherus." This is quoted by 
 Eusebius ; he also found the letters on Montanism 
 subjoined to the one describing the martyrdoms ; and 
 the writers of the last gave their own judgment on 
 the subject, which he calls "cautious^ and most 
 orthodox," but does not quote. We cannot but regret 
 this ; a strictly contemporary estimate of Montanism, 
 sober and Catholic but not unfriendly, would be 
 invaluable material for history. The loss of the 
 
 1 Eus. H. E. V. xii. I. ^ Or "pious," evXa^r}. 
 
422 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 Martyrs' letters is to be regretted less. Judging from 
 the one extant, they knew better how to die than 
 how to write. They are barely intelligible in their 
 expression of the simple fact that St. Irenaeus was 
 not only a member but a Presbyter of their Church,' 
 
 While awaiting the Emperor's decision on their 
 case, the charity of the Martyrs bore fruit in another 
 way. " For by means of the living the dead were 
 quickened, and martyrs gave grace to those who 
 were not martyrs. And great joy arose to the Virgin 
 Mother,^ as she received those back living whom she 
 had cast forth as dead abortions. For by means of 
 them most of those who had denied retraced their 
 steps, and were re -conceived and rekindled, and 
 learnt to confess ; God, who would not the death of 
 a sinner, but is merciful unto repentance, showing 
 His sweetness, that they should again be questioned 
 by the Governor." For the Emperor had ordered 
 that apostates should be released, while the rest were 
 to be cudgelled to death. He was prepared to per- 
 secute, even with torture, but probably had no liking 
 for the barbarous practice of making executions and 
 tortures a show for public amusement. The Governor, 
 however, felt free to use his discretion on this point. 
 
 ^ ["For if we thought" (lit. "knew")] "that rank gives anyone 
 worth, as priest of our Church, which in fact he is, we would have 
 begun by commending him to you." Except the words in brackets, 
 this is Mr. Riddell's translation. Even this is less crabbed than the 
 original. 
 
 * Of course this means the Church ; but it is hard to suppose that 
 there is not suggested, here as in Rev. xii. , an analogy between the 
 Mother of Christ and "the Mother of us all." Cf. St. John i. 13, 
 and its use in the Christmas Gospel. 
 
THE CHURCH OF THE MARTYRS. 423 
 
 A great public festival was coming on, and the 
 Martyrs could be utilised for this. 
 
 The prisoners accordingly were all brought up for 
 a fresh examination ; the nine or ten apostates (we 
 do not know if Biblias was grouped with them) being 
 brought up separately from the rest, as no fun was 
 expected from them. But to the surprise of the 
 heathen, all " confessed, and were added to the lot of 
 the Martyrs," " added to the Church," except two or 
 three' " sons of perdition," who never, we are told, had 
 been true Christians, but always of scandalous life. As 
 they were questioned one by one, a physician named 
 Alexander stood close to the judgment-seat, and by 
 his looks and gestures encouraged them to confess. 
 The crowd noticed him, and, provoked by their un- 
 expected confession, denounced Alexander. The 
 Governor asked him who he was. He answered, " A 
 Christian," and he was instantly condemned to the 
 beasts. He was a Phrygian, but settled for many 
 years in Gaul, and was "known almost to all for his 
 love to God and boldness in the Word ; for he was 
 not without a share of the apostolic gift." ^ 
 
 Those who had confessed before were questioned 
 digdiXn pro formd, and of course confessed again. They 
 were then sentenced — those who were Roman citizens 
 
 ^ "Most" of nine (Biblias was no longer counted as an apostate by 
 the Church, whatever the heathen thought of her) cannot be less than 
 five ; and the tone of the passage seems to imply that there was more 
 than a bare majority. 
 
 * Does this mean that he was in orders, or that he was a prophet ? 
 or only that he was zealous, and perhaps successful, in making known 
 the Gospel to Pagans ? 
 
424 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 to be beheaded, the rest to be exposed to the beasts ; 
 and the simple executions, and the beast-show with 
 the common herd of the Martyrs, occupied the first 
 day of the festival. 
 
 But the mob clamoured against the detested 
 Attalus being let off so easily as was promised ; and, 
 Roman as he was, the Governor agreed to send him 
 to the beasts next day with Alexander.' And when 
 the law was broken to satisfy the popular will, it was 
 as well to satisfy it thoroughly. The two martyrs 
 were not simply exposed to the beasts, but subjected 
 to the same varied tortures as Sanctus and Maturus 
 before. Alexander never uttered a word or a groan, 
 " but in his heart conversed with God." Attalus had 
 a fiercer spirit. When he was being fried in the iron 
 chair, and smelt (or recollected how he smelt from 
 his comrades) the savour of the cooking flesh, he 
 cried in Latin to the crowd, that they, not the Chris- 
 tians, were the real cannibals. Some one asked him 
 "What is the name of God.^" perhaps to give him a 
 last chance of apostasy. He answered, " God has not a 
 name like a man."^ Like their predecessors, the two 
 seem to have lived through all their tortures, and at 
 last to have been slaughtered ^ by confectorcs. 
 
 Blandina was reserved for the last day of the shows, 
 
 1 Life in the Empire of the Antonines cannot have been as Elysian 
 as is sometimes supposed, when members of a privileged order had 
 their rights no better secured than SS. Epagathus and Attalus. No 
 doubt things were better in the second century than the first ; but a 
 good Emperor could secure little more than leges sine moribus. 
 
 * Cf. S. Just. Apol. I. 63, quoted above p. 333. 
 
THE CHURCH OF THE MARTYRS. 425 
 
 and so was little Ponticus : they were brought in 
 every day to see the tortures of the others, and every 
 day called on to swear by the gods. Their resolution 
 provoked the people, till they were as savage with 
 the boy as with the woman. All sorts of tortures 
 were applied to both, and the oath repeatedly offered 
 to them, but in vain ; " for Ponticus, being encouraged 
 by his sister, so that even the Gentiles could see that 
 it was she that set him on and confirmed him, after 
 enduring every punishment nobly, gave up his spirit. 
 
 " But the blessed Blandina last of all, having like a 
 mother encouraged her sons, and sent them on vic- 
 torious to the King, having traversed herself also all 
 her children's conflicts, hastened to them rejoicing 
 and exulting at her departure, as though bidden to a 
 marriage supper instead of thrown to the beasts. 
 And after the scourges, after the beasts, after the 
 frying, she was finally put in a net and thrown before 
 a bull ; and having been repeatedly tossed by the 
 creature, not even conscious of what happened to her, 
 through her hope and expectation of what she be- 
 lieved, and converse with Christ,' she too was 
 slaughtered, even the Gentiles confessing, that never 
 among them had a woman suffered so frequent and so 
 great tortures." 
 
 The relics of the Martyrs — heads and bodies, bones 
 left by beasts or fire — were carefully collected, and 
 watched day and night. Their friends at large be- 
 
 ' Perhaps we are to understand that she was heard to speak, so as to 
 show that she was not absolutely and physically insensible. If she 
 was, her glory was not the less, but the mercy showed her more. 
 
426 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 sought the guards to let them carry them off: they 
 offered bribes ; they tried (at what must have been an 
 enormous risk) to steal them by night ; but all in 
 vain. The attempt indeed had been abandoned to 
 exterminate all the Christians in the two cities : some 
 even of those who had publicly confessed survived. 
 But if the Church was not to be exterminated, it was 
 to be insulted, and its faith refuted : after six days, 
 the remains of the bodies were burnt to ashes, and 
 thrown into the Rhone. "And this they did, as 
 though they were able to conquer God, and take 
 away from them the Regeneration, that, as the enemy 
 said, they might have no hope of resurrection." Of 
 course, however, the faith of the surviving Church 
 was not shaken : at most, people like Athenagoras, 
 who were disposed to bind up the Christian creed 
 with crude physiological theories, may have seen cause 
 to reconsider the latter. 
 
 With these martyrdoms we conclude our sketch of 
 the Beginnings of the Christian Church. The subject 
 cannot receive a better epilogue than the last sentence 
 (apparently) of their brethren's Epistle — " Having 
 gone to God victorious over all, having loved peace 
 always, and secured peace to us, with peace they de- 
 parted to God, not leaving behind them trouble to 
 their Mother, nor party warfare to their brethren,' but 
 joy and peace and concord and charity." Their 
 
 ^ This probably means that the treatment of the lapsed was already 
 becoming a party question, as it afterwards occasioned the Novatian 
 and Doiiatist schisms. Here the Martyrs had decided the question for 
 all who wished to return to the Church at all. 
 
THE CHURCH OF THE MARTYRS. 427 
 
 legacy of peace was taken up by the well-named ' 
 Irenaeus, who has been introduced to us already. He 
 succeeded St. Pothinus as Bishop,'' and lived through 
 a generation when the Church had rest, to become 
 himself a Martyr in the next great persecution, some 
 twenty-five years later. From him, directly or in- 
 directly, we know most of what we do know of the 
 period between the Apostles' times and his own. Of 
 his many works only one has reached us entire ; but 
 that is probably the most important — the Refutatioji 
 of Science (^voauii) falsely so called, usually quoted 
 under the name of "St. Irenaeus against Heresies." ^ 
 He is scarcely a great writer, but he is one of those 
 men who are so good that their goodness makes them 
 great ; and even apart from his goodness he has a 
 great deal of sober sense, and no lack of literary 
 culture. He knows his Homer* as well as if he be- 
 
 1 Eus. H. E. V. xxiv. 14. 
 
 ^ Very likely he was, on the Martyrs' recommendation, consecrated 
 by St. Eleutherus, so as to spare the Church of Lyons the trouble of a 
 vacancy and the dangers of an election. The most stalwart champion 
 of Galilean or Anglican liberties will not object to such an instance of 
 " Papal Provision." 
 
 * The greater part of this is only extant in a Latin translation — 
 clumsy, but very faithful, and nearly contemporary. 
 
 * I. ix. 4. In the Epistle on the Martyrs the allusion to Thyestes 
 and Oedipus seem similarly to imply a familiar acquaintance with 
 classical literature, both in the writers and readers ; for the horrible 
 legends referred to were literary rather than popular. If the minister 
 of an obscure sect talked of " the part of Hamlet left out," or "taking 
 arms against a sea of troubles," we should merely think that he used 
 the phrases as they had passed into proverbs ; but if he talked of 
 poison poured into the ears, we should suppose that he had read 
 Shakespere. And so it is likely that the writer of this Epistle had read 
 the Greek tragedians, but not that St. Clement had. 
 
428 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 
 
 Heved in the gods of Hellas ; he half regrets that his 
 episcopal duties leave him no time to keep up his 
 classics,' and he sees nothing profane or carnal in 
 making or enjoying a joke, even in the midst of a 
 controversy into which he throws himself most seri- 
 ously. But it is beyond our subject to describe his 
 life or his works ; in his days the Church has passed 
 the first period of her life, and has entered, for good 
 or evil, on the second. 
 
 1 Praef. 3. 
 
 THE END. 
 
 \:i 
 

 Date Due 
 
 •"--"*«.,.__„ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 lfiK»a«(ffl«SWM»*^ 
 
 r 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ^