3^ 
 
Digitized by tine Internet Archive 
 
 in 2007 with funding from 
 
 IVIicrosoft Corporation 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/fathersofcatholiOOwaggrich 
 
F^ATHEl^S 
 
 OP THE 
 
 CATHOLIC CHURCH 
 
 A BRIEF EXAMINATION OF THE 
 
 Tallihs Away" of the Church 
 
 IN THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES. 
 
 BY E. J. WAQQONEK- ^^^^^^^ 
 
 OF THF ' \ 
 
 UNIVERGHV t 
 
 ^^ 
 
 '.' To the law and to the testimony; 
 
 If they speak not according to this word, it is because there 
 
 is no light in them " Isa. 8 : 20. 
 
 Pacific Press Publishing Company 
 
 Oakland, Cal., 
 
 san francisco and new york. 
 
 1888. 
 
Entered according to Act of Congress in- the year j88S, by 
 
 ^pacific T?ress TJublishiag (Lo., 
 
 In the office of the Librarain of Congress, VVashingion, D. C. 
 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. 
 
 
PREKACE. 
 
 This book is the outgrowth of some extracts which I 
 copied into a pocket scrap-book a few years ago, thinking 
 that it would often be convenient to have at hand the exact 
 words of a few reUable historians, concerning the Fathers 
 and their work, when the histories themselves might not be 
 accessible. It soon occurred to me that something similar 
 would be of value to others, especially since the Fathers are 
 being appealed to more and more, and it is impossible for 
 the majority, even of ministers, always to have access to 
 their writings. Accordingly, extracts were made on a more 
 extensive scale, and were woven together, the result being 
 this book, which is in reality a brief account of the rise of 
 that antichristian structure called the papacy, which was 
 built on the foundation of the so-called Fathers^ the hea- 
 then philosopher Plato being the chief corner-stone. 
 
 If any apology is needed for removing the veil of sanctity 
 which has been thrown over the early church as a whole, 
 I will make it in the words of Rev. Ralph Emerson, D. 
 D., some time Professor of Ecclesiastical History in Andover 
 Theological Seminary: " The fact that deadly falsehoods were 
 circulated in the church by some men, and believed by mul- 
 titudes, is itself a most important historic truth; and to sup- 
 press such a truth, instead of being a merit, is a foult which 
 should rather crimson the cheek and set on fire the con- 
 science of a modest ♦and honest historian. It is itself but a 
 tacit repetition of the crime of pious frauds which so deeply 
 stained, not only heathen morality, but the early though 
 not the primitive character of the church." 
 
 Again, in the same article, which is on the " Early History 
 of Monasticism," Bibliotheca Sacra, May, 1844, after speaking 
 of the policy of covering up such things, he says: — 
 
 "This short-sighted and worldly policy, of late years so 
 
 (iu) 
 
iv Preface. 
 
 prevalent among the incautious Protestant churches, is in 
 truth the very policy of Romanism. The Romanists plead 
 that the full and fearless disclosures of the crimes and follies of 
 good men, in the Bible, will be perilous to the virtue of the 
 people, and will disparage religion itself in popular estima- 
 tion. And so they conceal the good book. And thus Prot- 
 estants fear that the uninspired disclosures of later crimes 
 and follies in, the church, may have a like effect. Such men 
 as the excellent Milner, one age ago, knew not for what 
 a crisis they were preparing the church by suppressing or 
 gilding over the more revolting features of her early his- 
 tory. Satan himself could not have prompted such men to 
 do him so great a service in any other way. He is not only 
 the father of lies, but the greatest suppressor of a knowledge 
 of those lies, when they come to be detected as lies; and for 
 this purpose, he comes to good men, in the guise of an angel 
 of light, and as the greatest friend to the church, and makes 
 them his ready and devoted tools in a cause seemingly so 
 charitable towards man and loyal towards God. And then, 
 if we suppose him to possess the power, what better thing 
 for his cause could the enemy of the church do, than just 
 bid her advocates to look at her early state as well-nigh im- 
 maculate, and fearlessly to follow in her perilous steps?" 
 
 This work is designed especially for people who have not 
 the time nor the means to become thoroughly informed in 
 matters of church history; and also for itinerant ministers 
 and Bible workers, who, even though they be well read, can- 
 not carry a theological library with them from which to 
 quote in time of need. It is hoped, also, that the book may 
 serve as an incentive to some to make a systematic study of 
 church history, and may aid them in so doing. And it is 
 not impossible that the grouping of subjects may suggest 
 new ideas, even to those who have read the entire history of 
 the early church. Indeed, the book is mainly suggestive, 
 the most exhaustive portion being the chapter on " Sun-wor- 
 ship and Sunday." History repeats itself; and only he who 
 knows the course of error in the past can be on his guard 
 against its insidious approaches in the future. 
 
Preface. v 
 
 Great care has been taken in verifying the historical refer- 
 ences, so that the disputant who uses this book might feel 
 as confident as though he had the origina. works. Never- 
 theless, infallibility is not an attribute of either author or 
 proof-readers, and"*if anyone detects an error in any refer- 
 ence, I shall esteem it a favor to be informed of it. In the 
 appendix will be found brief biographical sketches of some 
 of the men from whose writings extracts have been made. 
 It is thought that this addition will be of value to some who 
 will use the book. 
 
 I would not forget to acknowledge the service rendered by 
 my friends, Elders E. W. Farnsworth, W. C. White, and A. 
 T. Jones, who read the book in manuscript, and made valu- 
 able suggestions. 
 
 And now the book is sent forth with the prayers of the 
 writer that it may be instrumental in causing many to see 
 the folly of man's wisdom, and leading them to prize more 
 highly than ever before the unerring word of God, which 
 alone is able to make them wise unto salvation. 
 
 K J. w. 
 
 Oakland, Cal., August 5, 1888. 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS. 
 
 CHAPTEll I. 
 The Heathen World. 9-27 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 Heathen Philosophy. - 28-44 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 TliE Apostolic Church. ------ 45-56 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 The Fathers. - - 57-73 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 The "Epistle of Barnabas." ----- 74-83 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 Hermas' and Clement. 84-96 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 The "Epistles of Ignatius." ----- 97-112 
 
 CHAPTER VIII. 
 The "Teaching of the Apostles." - - - 113-124 
 
 CHAPTER IX. 
 Iren^us. - - 125-145 
 
 CHAPTER 
 Justin Martyr. - - " - - . - - 146-164 
 
 (VII) 
 
VIII Table of Contents. 
 
 CHAPTER XI. 
 Clement of Alexandria. l()5-18o 
 
 CHAPTER XII. 
 Tertullian. 184-216 
 
 CHAPTER XIII. 
 Obigen. 217-24] 
 
 CHAPTER XIV. 
 
 The Great Apostasy. — Heatlien and Catliolic Mys- 
 teries — Perversion of the Ordinance of Baptism 
 — Sign of the Cross, and Images. - - - 242^268 
 
 CHAPTER XV. 
 
 The Great Apostasy (Continued). — Purgatory and 
 Prayers for the Dead — " Pious" Frauds — Immo- 
 rality in the Church. 269-285 
 
 CHAPTER XVI. 
 
 The Great Apostasy (Continued). — Relic and Mar- 
 tyr Worship — Sunday and Christmas. - - 286-303 
 
 CHAPTER XVII. 
 
 The Great Apostasy (Continued). — Sun-Worship 
 
 and Sunday. 304-328 
 
 CHAPTER XVIII. 
 
 The Great Apostasy (Concluded).— Growth of Pa- 
 
 I)al Assumption. 329-345 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 The Tme and Abidifig Sabbath— The Apostles and 
 
 the First Day of the Week— Biographical Notes. 347-363 
 
CHAPTERI. 
 
 THE HEATHEN WORLD. 
 
 In order clearly to comprehend the peculiar dangers 
 of the early Christians, we must know the condition of 
 the heathen world in the time of Christ and his apostles, 
 since it was mainly from among the heathen that converts 
 to Christianity were obtained. If we know the beliefs 
 which men held, and the practices to which they w-ere 
 addicted before their conversion, we can readily tell what 
 errors they would be most likely to adopt if they should 
 in any degree turn from the faith; and we shall also 
 know what would be the state of the church if any con- 
 siderable number of its communicants were converted 
 only in name. 
 
 In the first chapter of Romans the apostle Paul has 
 given a brief but comprehensive view of the state of 
 morals among the heathen, and of the steps by which 
 they reached the depth of degradation which is there 
 revealed. He first notices the fact that at one time the 
 people did know God. Verse 21. From the Mosaic 
 record we learn the same thing. We know that in the 
 years immediately following the creation and the flood, 
 all the inhabitants of the earth had the knowledge of the 
 true God. Adam and Noah — the two fathers of the 
 race — served the Lord, and they would of course teach 
 their children about him and his requirements. There 
 could, therefore, be no excuse for the gross ignorance 
 which afterward prevailed. 
 
 (9) 
 
10 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 Even had this oral teaching been wanting, there would 
 have been no excuse for the abominable idolatry and the 
 ignorance of God, which characterized nearly all of the 
 inhabitants of the earth, because nature itself reveals 
 not only the existence, but also the power of God. In 
 speaking of the heathen, Paul indicates the justice of 
 God in pouring out his wrath upon them, " Because that 
 which may be known of God is manifest in [to] them ; 
 for God hath showed it unto them." Rom. 1:19. The 
 next verse tells how God revealed himself unto them. 
 As we quote it, we transpose the clauses, to save the 
 necessity of explanation by comment : " For from [i. e. 
 since] the creation of the world, the invisible things of 
 him [God], even his eternal power and Godhead, are 
 clearly seen, being understood by the things that are 
 made ; so that they [those who deny God] are without 
 excuse." More than this, the same apostle tells us that 
 God "left not himself without witness, in that he did 
 good, and gave us rain from heaven, and fruitful seasons, 
 filling our hearts with food and gladness." Acts 14:17. 
 The psalmist also tells us that " the heavens declare the 
 glory of God ; and the firmament showeth his handiwork." 
 Ps. 19 : 1. So plainly does nature teach the existence of 
 God, that he who even in his secret thought says, " There 
 is no God," is justly called a fool. Ps. 14:1. Such an 
 one may be said to be ignorant of the a b c of knowledge. 
 
 Nevertheless it is a fact that the nations did forget 
 God ; and Rom. 1 : 22-32 is an accurate description of 
 their condition in consequence. The truthfulness of this 
 description is attested by tlie heathen themselves. They 
 deified the most profligate men and women, and worshiped 
 vice instead of virtue. Their gods were male and female, 
 
The Heathen World. 11 
 
 and mythology, L c, the history of the gods, is little else 
 than a record of licentiousness. The Baal and Ashtoreth 
 of the Canaanites, were the Jupiter and Venus of the 
 Romans and Greeks, and every heathen nation had gods 
 corresponding to them. The temples erected to them 
 were magnificent brothels, and their priestesses were 
 prostitutes. Licentiousness was not simply allowed, but 
 it was commanded as an act of religion. Among the 
 Babylonians it is said that, "once at least in her life, 
 every woman was obliged to prostitute herself in the 
 tempel of Bgl." — American Cyclo2')edla, art. Babylon. 
 Heathenism "had made lust into a religion, and the 
 worship of its gods a school of vice, penetrating all 
 classes of society." 
 
 As it is not our object in this discussion to give simply 
 our views, but to give the reasons for the views which 
 we hold, we shall invariably quote from authorities, so 
 tliat the reader may examine for himself. Let the reader 
 first read Rom. 1 : 1 8-32, and then compare it with the 
 quotations that follow. Professor Stuart, in his " Com- 
 mentary on the Epistle to the Romans," says on the 
 twenty-seventh verse of the first chapter: — 
 
 " The evidences of the fact here stated by the apostle 
 are too numerous and prominent among the heathen 
 writers to need even a reference to them. Virgil himself, 
 'the chaste Virgil,' as he has been often called, has a 
 Corydon amabat Alexin [Corydon loving Alexis], with- 
 out seeming to feel the necessity of a blush for it. Such 
 a fact sets the whole matter in the open day. That 
 at Athens and Rome naahparrrta [sodomy] was a very 
 common and hal^itual thing, needs no pfoof to one who 
 has read the Greek and Latin classics, especially the 
 amatory poets, to any considerable extent. Plutarch 
 tells us that Solon practiced it ; and Diogenes Laertius 
 
12 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 says the same of the stoic Zeno. Need we be surprised, 
 then, if the same horrible vice was frequent in the more 
 barbarous parts of Greece and the Roman Empire ? " 
 
 In the heathen worship there were " mysteries," to 
 which only the initiated were admitted. These were 
 celebrated in the inner temples, and it is doubtless of 
 them that the apostle Paul speaks when he says : " For 
 it is a shame even to speak of those things which are 
 done of them in secret." Eph. 5:12. If the things 
 recorded in the first chapter of Romans were done openly, 
 what must have been the depth of the wickedness that was 
 done in secret, and of which it is a shame even to speak? 
 But let it be understood that the heathen themselves felt 
 no shame for any of their practices. They gloried in 
 them, as things which brought them nearer to the gods. 
 The more licentious they were, the more nearly they 
 resembled the gods which they worshiped. The worst 
 abominations were done in secret, not out of a sense of 
 shame, but to show that certain ones had advanced beyond 
 the common people in matters of " religion." On this 
 point. Professor Stuart, in commenting on Rom. 1 : 24, 
 says ; — 
 
 " The imputation is, that in apostatizing from the true 
 God, and betaking themselves to the worship of idols, 
 they had at the same time been the devoted slaves of 
 lust; which indeed seems here also, by implication, to be 
 assigned as the reason or ground of their apostasy. 
 Everyone knows, moreover, that among almost all the 
 various forms of heathenism, impurity has been either a 
 director indirect service in its pretended religious duties. 
 Witness the shocking law among the Babylonians, that 
 every woman should prostitute herself, at least once, before 
 the shrine of their Venus. It is needless to say, that the 
 worshipers of Venus in Greece and Rome practiced such 
 
The Heathen World. 13 
 
 rites; or that the mysteries of heathenism, of which 
 Paul says 'it is a shame even to speak/ allowed a still 
 greater latitude of indulgence. Nor is it necessary to 
 describe the obscene and bloody rites practiced in Hin- 
 dostan, in tlie South Sea and the Sandwich Islands, and 
 generally among the heathen. Polytheism and idolatry 
 have nearly always been a religion of obscenity and 
 blood." 
 
 Summing up the evidence against them, Paul says that 
 they were " filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, 
 wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, 
 murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, backbiters, 
 haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of 
 evil things, disobedient to parents, without understanding, 
 covenant breakers, without natural affection, implacable, 
 unmerciful." Rom. 1:29-31. And to crown all, he 
 adds that they not only did these things, but had pleasure 
 in those who did them. Nothing could exceed such 
 depravity. As Professor Stuart says : — 
 
 " It is often the case, that wicked men, whose consciences 
 have been enlightened, speak reproachfully of others who 
 practice such vices as they themselves indulge in. Few 
 profligate parents, for example, are "svilling that their 
 children should sustain the same character with them- 
 selves. But when we find, as in some cases we may do, 
 such parents encouraging and applauding their children 
 in acts of wickedness,* we justly consider it as evidence 
 of the very highest kind of depravity." 
 
 " It is of such depravity as this that the apostle accuses 
 the heathen. And justly; for even their philosophers 
 and the best educated among them, stood chargeable 
 with such an accusation. For example; both the Epi- 
 
 * Witness the well-known case of the Spartans, who made it 
 a business to teach their children to steal and lie, and among 
 whom the highest virtue known was skill in committing and 
 concealing what are ordinarily termed crimes. 
 
14 Fathers op the Catholic Church. 
 
 curenns and the Stoics allowed and defended r.aii^eftanria 
 [sodomy] and incest, numbering these horrid crimes 
 among the atitdcpopa^ things indifferent^ — Comment on 
 Rom. 1:32. 
 
 This was the state of morals, hot alone of the lower, 
 uneducated classes, but of the philosophers, — those who 
 instructed the youth in " virtue." That tlie apostle uses 
 the term, "without understanding," with respect to the 
 morals, and not the intellect, will be readily seen from 
 the following quotations: — 
 
 " From the ignorance and uncertainty, which (we have 
 seen) prevailed among some of the greatest teachers of 
 antiquity, concerning those fundamental truths which 
 are the greatest barriers of virtue and religion, it is 
 evident that the heathens had no perfect scheme of moral 
 rules for piety and good manners. . . . They 
 accounted revenge to be not only lawful, but commend- 
 able. Pride and the love of popular applause (the sub- 
 duing of which is the first principle of true virtue) were 
 esteemed the best and greatest incentives to virtue and 
 noble actions ; suicide was regarded as the strongest mark 
 of heroism, and the perpetrators of it, instead of being 
 branded with infamy, were commended and celebrated 
 as men of noble minds. But the interior acts of the soul, 
 — the adultery of the eye and the murder of the heart, — 
 were little regarded. On the contrary, the philosophers 
 countenanced, both by arguments and example, the most 
 flagitious practices. Thus theft, as is well known, was 
 permitted in Egypt and in Sparta ; Plato taught the expe- 
 diency and lawfulness of exposing children in particular 
 cases; and Aristotle, also, of abortion. The exposure of 
 infants, and the putting to death of children who were 
 weak or imperfect in form, was allowed at Sparta by 
 I^ycurgus; at Athens, the great seat and nursery of 
 philosophers, the women were treated and disposed of as 
 slaves, and it was enacted that 'infants, which appeared 
 to be maimed, should either be killed or exposed ;' and 
 
The Heathen World. 16 
 
 that * the Athenians might lawfully invade and enshive 
 any people, who, in their opinion, were fit to be made 
 slaves.' The infamous traffic in human blood was per- 
 mitted, to its utmost extent; and, on certain occasions, 
 the owners of slaves had full permission to kill them. 
 . . . Customary swearing was commended, if not by 
 the precepts, yet by the example of the best moralists 
 among the heathen philosophers, particularly Socrates, 
 Plato, Seneca, and the Emperor Julian. . . . The 
 gratification of the sensual appetites, and of the most 
 unnatural lusts, was openly taught and allowed. Aris- 
 tippus maintained that it was lawful for a wise man to 
 steal, commit adultery, and sacrilege, when opportunity 
 offered; for that none of these actions were naturally 
 evil, setting aside the vulgar opinion, which was introduced 
 by silly and illiterate people; and that a wise man might 
 publicly gratify his libidinous propensities." 
 
 " Truth was but of small account among many, even 
 of the best heathens ; for they taught that on many occa- 
 sions, a lie was to be preferred to the truth itself ! To 
 which we may add, that the unlimited gratification of 
 their sensual appetites, and the commission of unnatural 
 crimes, was common even among the most distinguished 
 teachers of i)hilosophy, and w^as practiced even by Soc- 
 rates himself. ... * The most notorious vices,' says 
 Quinctilian, speaking of the philosophers of his time, 
 'are screened under that name; and they do not labor 
 to maintain the character of philosophers by virtue and 
 study, but conceal the most vicious lives under an austere 
 look and singularity of dress.' " — Hornets Introduction, 
 val. Ij chap. 1, 
 
 111 confirmation of the statement that the philosophers 
 encouraged lying. Dr. Whitby collected many maxims 
 of the most eminent heathen sages, from which Dr. 
 Home quotes the following : — 
 
 " A lie is better than a hurtful truth." — Menander. 
 
 " Good is better than truth." — Proclus. 
 
16 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 " When telling a lie will be profitable, let it be told." — 
 DariuSy in IIerodotn.% lib. Hi, c. 62. 
 
 " He may lie, who knows how to do it, in a suitable 
 time." — Plato. 
 
 " There is nothing decorous in truth, but when it is 
 profitable; yea, sometimes truth is hurtful, and lying is 
 profitable to men." — Maximus Tyrius. 
 
 Mosheim says of the time just preceding the introduc- 
 tion of Christianity : — 
 
 " The lives of men of every class, from the highest to 
 the lowest, were consumed in the practice of the most 
 abominable and flagitious vices ; even crimes, the horrible 
 turpitude of which was such that it would be defiling the 
 ear of decency but to name them, were openly perpe- 
 trated with the greatest impunity." — Historical Com- 
 mentaries, vol. i, chap, i, sec. 21, of Introduction. 
 
 Notwithstanding the unpleasant nature of the theme, 
 we shall pursue it a little further, for it is absolutely 
 necessary that we understand that vice and immorality 
 everywhere prevailed. Speaking of the domestic life of 
 the heathen. Dr. Philip Schaff, in his " History of the 
 Christian Church" (vol. 1, sec. 91), says: — 
 
 "Monogamy was the rule both in Greece and in Rome, 
 but did not exclude illegitimate connections. Concubin- 
 age, in its proper legal sense, was a sort of secondary 
 marriage with a woman of servile or plebeian extraction, 
 standing below the dignity of a matron and above the 
 infamy of a prostitute. It was sanctioned and regulated 
 by law ; it prevailed both in the East and the West from 
 the age of Augustus to the tenth century, and was 
 preferred to regular marriage by Vespasian, and the two 
 Antonines, the best Roman emperors. Adultery was 
 severely punished, at times even with sudden destruction 
 of the offender ; but simply as an interference with the 
 rights and property of a free man. The wife had no 
 legal or social protection against the infidelity of her 
 
The Heathen World. 17 
 
 husband. The Romans worshiped a peculiar goddess of 
 domestic life ; but her name, Viriplaca, the appeaser of 
 husbands, indicates her partiality. Besities, it nmst be 
 remembered that the intercourse of a husband with the 
 slaves of his household and with public prostitutes was 
 excluded from the odium and punishment of adultery. . 
 . . The women, however, seem to have been as corrupt 
 as their husbands, at least in the imperial age. Juvenal 
 calls a chaste wife a Wara avis in terris' [a rare bird in 
 the earth]. Under Augustus, free-born daughters could 
 no longer be found for the service of Vesta, and even 
 the severest laws of Domitian could not prevent the six 
 priestesses of the pure gjoddess from breaking their vow. 
 Divorce is said to have been almost unknown in the 
 ancient days of the Roman republic. But the custom- 
 ary civil and religious rites of marriage were gradually 
 disused ; apparent open community of life between per- 
 sons of similar rank was taken as sufficient evidence 
 of their nuptials ; and marriage, after Augustus, fell to 
 the level of any partnership, which might be dissolved 
 by the abdication of one of the associates." 
 
 If the thoughtful reader has his mind almost involun- 
 tarily directed, by these statements, to the loose conditions 
 of society in our own time, it will not be a matter of 
 surprise. The last days, said our Saviour, will be as the 
 days before the flood, when men " took them wives of all 
 which they chose " (Gen. 6:2); and when we consider 
 the ease with which divorce may be obtained, the pleas- 
 ure that is taken in reading the details of scandal, as 
 indicated by the prominence given them by the press, 
 and the readiness with which men of known licentious- 
 ness are received in " good society," we see strong evidence 
 that the end is near at hand. 
 
 We have stated that the more licentious the people 
 were, the more nearly they resembled the gods whom 
 2 
 
18 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 they worshiped. A few quotations concerning the re- 
 ligion of heathenism will give us a still deeper insight 
 into the morals of the people. Says Schaff : — 
 
 "How could there be any proper conception and 
 abhorrence of the sin of licentiousness and adultery, if 
 the very gods, a Jupiter, a Mars, and a Venus, were 
 believed to be guilty of those crimes ? Modesty forbids 
 the mention of a still more odious vice, which even 
 depraved nature abhors, which yet was freely discussed 
 and praised by ancient poets and philosophers, practiced 
 with neither punishment nor dishonor, and likewise 
 divinely sanctioned by the lewdness of Jupiter with 
 Ganymede." — History of the Church, vol. 1, see. 91. 
 
 Another writer says : — 
 
 " As to the religion of heathenism, it is ' a wild growth 
 on the soil of fallen human nature, a darkening of the 
 original consciousness of God, a deification of the 
 rational and irrational creature, and a corresponding 
 corruption of the .moral sense, giving the sanction of 
 religion to natural and unnatural vices. . . . The 
 gods are involved by their marriages in perpetual jeal- 
 ousies and quarrels. Though called holy and just, they 
 are full of envy and wrath, hatred and lust, and provoke 
 each other to lying and cruelty, perjury and adultery.' " — 
 McClintock and Strong^ s Cyclopedia, art. Heathen. 
 
 Such being the nature of the gods, it cannot be expected 
 that the religion of the heathen could possess any high 
 moral tone. Says Gibbon : — 
 
 " The devotion of the pagans was not incompatible 
 with the most licentious skepticism. Instead of an indi- 
 visible and regular system, which occupies the whole 
 extent of the believing mind, the mythology of the 
 Greeks was composed of a thousand loose and flexible 
 parts, and the servant of the gods was at liberty to define 
 the degree and measure of his religious faith." — Decline 
 and Fall oj the Boman Empire, chap. 23, paragraph 3. 
 
The Heathen AVorld. 19 
 
 The same author, in the twelfth paragraph of the chap- 
 ter mentioned above, in speaking of the attempts of the 
 Emperor Julian to restore the ancient worship of the 
 gods, characterizes it as " a religion, which was destitute 
 of theological principles, of moral precepts, and of eccle- 
 siastical discipline." 
 
 In harmony with the quotation last made, Professor 
 Worman says : — 
 
 " Polytheism was always a religion of mere ceremony, 
 unassociated, as a religion, with any moral law. Hence 
 the most religious man in the sense of polytheism might 
 be a shameless profligate, emulating the gods to whom 
 he sacrificed, in their reputed licentiousness, and guilty 
 (as was Socrates) of crimes against which even nature 
 revolts." — McClintoek and Strong, art. Paganism. 
 
 Dr. Mosheim, in the introduction to his " Historical 
 Commentaries," gives us a view of the peculiar religion 
 of each of the various nations, and in summing up says: — 
 
 " None of these various systems of religion appear to 
 have contributed in the least towards an amendment of 
 the moral principle, a reformation of manners, or to the 
 exciting a love, or even a respect, for virtue of any sort. 
 The gods and goddesses, who were held up as objects of 
 adoration to the common people, instead of exhibiting in 
 themselves examples of a refined and supereminent virtue, 
 displayed in illustrious actions, stood forth to public view 
 the avowed authors of the most flagrant and enormous 
 crimes. The priests likewise took no sort of interest 
 whatever in the regulation of the public morals, neither 
 directing the people by their precepts, nor inviting them 
 by exhortation and example, to tlie pursuit of a wise and 
 honorable course of life; but on the contrary indulged 
 themselves in the most unwarrantable licentiousness, 
 maintaining that the whole of religion was comprised in 
 the rites and ceremonies instituted by their ancestors, and 
 
20 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 that every sort of sensual gratification was liberally 
 allowed by the gods to those who regularly ministered 
 to them in this way." — Chap. 1, sec. 20. 
 
 Although each nation had its own peculiar gods, the 
 gods of all other nations were respected, and their worship 
 was tolerated. Says Gibbon (chap. 2, paragraph 2): — 
 
 " The various modes of worship, which prevailed in the 
 Roman world, were all considered by the people, as 
 equally true ; by the philosopher, as equally false ; and 
 by the magistrate, as equally useful." 
 
 If it be objected to this statement that the Jews and 
 Christians were often persecuted with relentless severity, 
 and their religion proscribed, a sufilicient answer will be 
 found in the fact that the worshipers of the true God 
 abhorred the heathen worship, and would not counte- 
 nance it in any manner. Not content with worshiping 
 God in secret, they (especially the Christians) taught the 
 people that "they be no gods, which are made with 
 hands." Indeed the simple worship of Jehovah was a 
 standing rebuke to the licentious worship of the idolaters. 
 But idolatry was the State religion, and all who opposed 
 it were considered as plotting against the government. 
 In persecuting the Christians, the emperors did not con- 
 sider that they were warring against a religion, but 
 against treasonable fanaticism. Nothing but idolatry 
 was called religion, and the Jews and Christians were 
 persecuted as instigators of treason. 
 
 On this point Neander says : — 
 
 "All the ancient religions were national and State 
 religions, and this was especially the case with the 
 Romans, among whom the political point of view pre- 
 dominated in everything, not excepting religion. The 
 public apostasy of citizens from the State religion, and 
 
The Heathen World. ^1 
 
 the introduction of a foreign religion, or a new one not 
 legalized by tlie State (religio illicita), appeared as an 
 act of high treason. In this light was regarded the con- 
 version of Roman citizens or subjects to Christianity. 
 'Your religion is illegal' (noii licet esse -yos), was the 
 reproach commonly cast on Christians, without referring 
 to the contents of their religion." — Memorials of Christian 
 Life, chap, S, paragraph 2. 
 
 The fact, also, that the worship of Jehovah wouhl, if 
 tolerated, tend to check the free indulgence of their 
 passions, acted as an additional spur to the zeal of the 
 heathen persecutors. 
 
 The following quotation has quite an important bear- 
 ing on our future investigation. In speaking of the 
 sacrifices and other rites of the heathen, Mosheim says: — 
 
 '' Of the prayers of pagan worshipers, whether we re- 
 gard the matter or the mode of expression, it is impossi- 
 ble to speak favorably ; they were not only destitute in 
 general of everything allied to the spirit of genuine 
 piety, but were sometimes framed expressly for the pur- 
 pose of obtaining the countenance of Heaven to the most 
 abominable and flagitious undertakings. In fact, the 
 greater part of their religious observances were of an 
 absurd and ridiculous nature, and in many instances 
 strongly tinctured with the most disgraceful barbarism 
 and obscenity. Their festivals and other solemn days 
 were polluted by a licentious indulgence in every species 
 of libidinous excess ; and on these occasions they were 
 not prohibited even from making the sacred mansions of 
 their gods the scenes of vile and beastly gratification." — 
 Historical Commentaries, Introduction, chap. 1, sec. 11. 
 
 "When even the religion which men profess tends to 
 deepen their natural depravity, what good can be ex- 
 pected of them? No man can fully comprehend such 
 wickedness ; for the man who has had no experience in 
 
22 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 such debasing forms of sin cannot understand how any- 
 body can sink so low ; and the man who has descended 
 to the depths of vice has his moral sense so blunted that 
 sin no longer appears sinful. We might quote pages 
 upon pages of matter similar to the above, but we do not 
 wish to harrow the reader's mind with any more than is 
 actually necessary to impress upon it the condition of the 
 world into which the apostles were sent out as sheep 
 among wolves. As showing the degeneracy of the ancient 
 heathen, and also how sin can obliterate from the heart 
 all true conception of right and wrong, the following is 
 to the point : — 
 
 "One of the most formidable obstacles which Christian 
 missionaries have encountered in teaching the doctrines 
 and precepts of the gospel to the heathen, has been the 
 absence from their languages of a spiritual and ethical 
 nomenclature. It is in vain that the religious teachers of 
 a people present to them a doctrinal or ethical system in- 
 culcating virtues and addressed to faculties, whose very 
 existence their language, and consequently the conscious 
 self-knowledge of the people, do not recognize. The 
 Greeks and Romans, for example, had a clear conception 
 of a moral ideal, but the Christian idea of sm was utterly 
 unknown to the pagan mind. Vice they regarded as 
 simply a relaxed energy of the will, by which it yielded 
 to the allurements of sensual pleasure ; and virtue, literally 
 manliness, was the determined spirit, the courage and 
 vigor with wliich it resisted such temptations. But the 
 idea of holiness and the antithetic idea of sin were such 
 utter strangers to the pagan mind that it would have 
 been impossible to express them in eitlier of the classical 
 tongues of antiquity." — William Matthews, LL.D., in 
 " Words ; Their Use and Abuse," pp. 70, 71. 
 
 In leaving this part of the subject, we present a sum- 
 mary in the shaj^ of some extracts from Dr. Edersheim's 
 
The Heathen World. 23 
 
 great work, " The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah." 
 In it he has admirably portrayed the condition of the 
 Roman world in the time of Christ. Speaking of the 
 city of Rome, the mistress of the world, he says : — 
 
 " Of a population of about two millions, well-nigh one- 
 half were slaves; and, of the rest, the greater part either 
 freedmen and their descendants, or foreigners. Each 
 class contributed its share to the common decay. Slavery 
 was not even what we know it, but a seething mass of 
 cruelty and oppression on the one side, and of cunning 
 and corruption on the other. More than any other 
 cause, it contributed to the ruin of Roman society. The 
 freedmen, who had very often acquired their liberty by 
 the most disreputable courses, and had prospered in them, 
 combined in shameless manner the vices of the free with 
 the vileness of the slave. The foreigners — specially 
 Greeks and Syrians — who crowded the city, poisoned the 
 springs of its life by the corruption Avhich they brought. 
 The free citizens were idle, dissipated, sunken ; their chief 
 thoughts of the theater and the arena ; and they were 
 mostly supported at the public cost. AYhile, even in the 
 time of Augustus, more than two hundred thousand per- 
 sons were thus maintained by thq State, what of the old 
 Roman stock remained was rapidly decaying, partly from 
 corruption, but chiefly from the increasing cessation of 
 marriage, and the nameless abominations of what re- 
 mained of family life." — Vol. 1, book 2, chap. 2. 
 
 Again in the same chapter he says : — 
 
 "Without tracing the various phases of ancient 
 thought, it may be generally said that, in Rome at least, 
 the issue lay between Stoicism and Epicureanism. The 
 one flattered its pride, the other gratified its sensuality ; 
 the one was in accordance with the original national 
 character, the other with its later decay and corruption. 
 
24 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 Both ultimately led to atheism and despair — the one, by 
 turning all higher aspirations selfward, the other, by 
 quenching them in the enjoyment of the moment; the 
 one, by making the extinction of all feeling and self-deifi- 
 cation, tlie other, the indulgence of every passion and the 
 worship of matter, its ideal." 
 
 Lastly, from the same chapter from which the above 
 is taken, we quote the following: — 
 
 " Rome tolerated, and, indeed, incorporated, all national 
 ' rites. But among the populace, religion had degenerated 
 into abject superstition. In the East, much of it consisted 
 of the vilest rites ; while, among the philosophers, all 
 religions were considered equally false or equally true — 
 the outcome of ignorance, or else the unconscious modi- 
 fications of some one fundamental thought. The only 
 religion on which tlie State insisted was the deification 
 and worship of the emperor. These apotheoses attained 
 almost incredible development. Soon not only the em- 
 perors, but their wives, paramours, children, and the 
 creatures of their vilest lusts, were deified ; nay, any pri- 
 vate person might attain that distinction, if the survivors 
 possessed sufficient means. Mingled with all this was an 
 increasing amount of guperstition — by which term some 
 understood the worship of foreign gods, the most part the 
 existence of fear in religion. The ancient Roman relig- 
 ion had long given place to foreign rites, the more myste- 
 rious and unintelligible the more enticing. It was thus 
 that Judaism made its converts in Rome ; its chief recom- 
 mendation with many being its contrast to the old, and 
 the unknown possibilities which its seemingly incredible 
 doctrines opened. Among the most repulsive symptoms 
 of the general religious decay may be reckoned prayers 
 for the death of a rich relative, or even for the satisfac- 
 tion of unnatural lusts, along with horrible blasphemies 
 
The Heathen World. 25 
 
 when such prayers remained unanswered! We may here 
 contrast the spirit of the Old and New Testaments with 
 such sentiments as this, on the tomb of a child: *To the. 
 unjust gods who robbed me of life;' or on that of a girl 
 of twenty : ' I lift up my hands against the god who took 
 me away, innocent as I am.' 
 
 ''It would be unsavory to describe how far the worship 
 of indecency was carried ; how public morals were cor- 
 rupted by the mimic representations of everything that 
 was vile, and even by the pandering of a corrupt art. 
 The personation of gods, oracles, divination, dreams, 
 astrology, magic, necromancy, and theurgy,* all contrib- 
 uted to the general decay. It has been rightly said, that 
 the idea of conscience, as we understand it, was unknown 
 to heathenism. Absolute right did not exist. Might 
 was right. The social relations exhibited, if possible, 
 even deeper corruption. The sanctity of marriage had 
 ceased. Female dissipation and the general dissoluteness 
 led at last to an almost entire cessation of marriage. 
 Abortion, and the exposure and murder of newly-born 
 children, were common and tolerated ; unnatural vices, 
 which even the greatest philosophers practiced, if not 
 advocated, attained proportions which defy description." 
 
 The picture is not a pleasant one, yet it but faintly 
 represents tlie moral condition of the world when Christ 
 commissioned the apostles to preach the gospel. AVe say 
 the " moral condition oj the world" because the whole 
 
 *Iii a foot-note Dr. Ederslieim says: — 
 
 "A work has been preserved in which formal instructions are given, how 
 temples and altars are to be constructed in order to produce false miracles, 
 and by what means impostures of this kind may be successfully practiced. 
 (Comp. "The Pneumatics of Hero," translated by B. Woodcroft.) The worst 
 was,*that this kind of imposture on the ignorant populace was openly ap- 
 proved bv the educated . (Dollingcr, p. 647.)" 
 
 This will serve to explain many Roman Catholic miracles. The pagan 
 temples that in the time of Constantine fell into the Jiands of Christians, 
 were used as churches, and the old places of worship must have been, to the 
 new converts, very suggestive of old forms of worship. 
 
26 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 world was at that time essentially heathen. A compara- 
 tively small number of Jews formed the only exception, 
 and the greater part of them had been corrupted by the 
 speculations of heathen philosophers. The twenty-third 
 chapter of Matthew shows that the Jews, as a class, were 
 but little, if any, better than the Gentiles whom they 
 despised. 
 
 It was from this state of degradation that the gospel 
 essayed to lift men ; from people addicted to such prac- 
 tices, the early Christian churches were formed. When 
 we consider this, instead of wondering at the heresies 
 that crept into the church, and the disorderly conduct 
 that was sometimes tolerated even in the apostolic 
 churches (see 1 Cor. 5:1,2), we are amazed at the 
 heights of piety to which many attained. The fact that 
 even among that corrupt mass thousands were found 
 who would give, not only their property, but themselves 
 also for the advancement of the cause of truth and holi- 
 ness, is a wonderful monument to the regenerating power 
 of Christianity. 
 
 But great changes are not made instantaneously. 
 Even though men are converted, they need instruction, 
 since they are then but babes in the truth ; and this fact 
 shows that old habits of thought and practice cannot at 
 once be entirely forgotten. We do not mean to intimate 
 that the converted man has any license to sin, or any 
 excuse for it ; but pardon for sins is not sanctification ; 
 the one who has been pardoned^ is not perfect, but is to 
 ** go on to perfection ; " and he still needs an advocate 
 with the Father, that his imperfections may still be par- 
 doned and overcome. Now men are always tempted on 
 the side of their natural inclinations : if the converted 
 
The Heathen World. 27 
 
 man gives way to temptation, it will be his old sins that 
 he will commit; and when, as is too often the case, a 
 man joins the church without having been thoroughly 
 converted, of course the old habits will continue un- 
 changed. 
 
 Let the student of church history remember this, and 
 at the same time bear in mind what has been quoted 
 concerning the moral condition of the people among 
 whom the gospel gained its victories, and it will throw 
 light on many phases of professed Christianity. It will 
 also prevent him from attaching too much importance to 
 the precepts and practices of even the foremost of those 
 in the Christian church who had been brought up in 
 heathenism. He will always comjoare every act or saying 
 of those men with the Bible, to see to what extent their 
 early training was allowed to bias their course. 
 
CHAPTER II. 
 
 HEATHEN PHILOSOPHY. 
 
 In the preceding chapter we have briefly considered 
 the wickedness of the ancient heathen world ; in this we 
 sliall investigate the primary cause of that degradation. 
 In this investigation, the Bible must still be our guide. 
 After Paul had stated that all might know God from his 
 works, he thus set forth the cause of the blindness of the 
 heathen : " When they knew God, they glorified him not 
 as God, neither were thankful ; but became vain in their 
 imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 
 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, and 
 changed the glory of the uncorruptible -God into an 
 image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and 
 fourfooted beasts, and creeping things." Rom. 1 : 21-23. 
 
 " They became fools." That is, they lost that knowl- 
 edge of God, which they h'ad 2:)0ssessed ; for it is the fool 
 who says, " There is no God." The gods of the heathen 
 were of their own making, and had no influence over 
 them, to keep them from evil, and so, while the heathen 
 believed in the gods, and had forms of worship, they 
 acted as though there were no God. Now it is not nec- 
 essarily with his lips that the fool denies the existence of 
 God ; he may deny God in his heart, and actions are the 
 language of the heart. So, in the sight of Heaven, the 
 heathen, in spite of their philosophy, were fools. We 
 may here remind the reader that these words of the 
 apostle are not necessarily confined in their application 
 (28) 
 
Heathen Philosophy. 29 
 
 to people resident in heathen lands. The inhabitants of 
 so-called Christian countries, if when they know of God, 
 do not glorify him as God, but, professing themselves to 
 be wise, glorify only themselves, are, in the Bible sense, 
 heathen. And if they persist in their course, there is 
 nothing to prevent them from sinking to the same depths 
 of vice that the ancient heathen did. 
 
 We said above that the heathen, in spite of the wisdom 
 of their philosophers, were counted as fools. We should 
 say that their professed wisdom was the direct cause of 
 their foolish degradation. Paul says, " Professing them- 
 selves to be wise, they became fools." In order to dem- 
 onstrate this, it will be necessary to take a brief glance 
 at ancient heathen philosophy. In so doing we shall 
 take as a sample of the world, not the poorest, but that 
 which is universally acknowledged to be the most elevated 
 in its tone. Thus we shall avoid the imputation of in- 
 justice. 
 
 Plato was the most illustrious philosopher of ancient 
 times. He is regarded as, in a sense, the father of philos- 
 ophy, for he was the first philosopher who founded a 
 school. He was born about b. c. 427, and died about 
 B. c. 347, at the age of eighty. In his twentieth year he 
 formed the acquaintance of Socrates, whose disciple he 
 became. Plato continued with Socrates, until the death 
 of the latter, when he found it necessary to leave 
 Athens, lest he should share the fate of his master. For 
 a time he was the guest of Euclid, at Megara, whose 
 doctrines he imbibed to some extent. After several years' 
 wandering in various countries, he returned to Athens, 
 where he opened a school of philosophy. His school 
 was held in the grove of the hero Academus, for which 
 
30 Fathers of the Catholic Chitrch. 
 
 reason he called it the "Academy;" and subsequently his 
 system of philosophy became known as the " Academic 
 Philosophy." (Encyc. Brit., art. Academy.) After his 
 death he was worshiped as a god, and many of the 
 Athenians sacrificed to him. See Seneca's sixth letter, 
 quoted in McClintock and Strong's Encyclopedia, article 
 "Plato." 
 
 Although Plato is said to have developed and systemar 
 tized the philosophy of Socrates and of others who had 
 preceded him, it is well known that he himself had no 
 real "system." That is, he had no fixed principles of 
 truth by which he tested, and around which he gathered, 
 new ideas. Says Prof G. F. Holmes (McClintock and 
 Strong's Encyc, art. Plato) : " There is little in Plato of 
 a dogmatic character," and " much of tentative, skeptical, 
 and undefined exploration." Again we read, in the same 
 article : — 
 
 " Very few of the treatises of Plato are constructive or 
 dogmatical. Nearly all of them are simply negative or 
 inquisitorial. The latter do not seek to maintain any de- 
 pendence on the former. . . . His object was not the 
 establishment of a doctrine, but the stimulation of candid 
 investigation, in order to free his hearers from the stagna- 
 tion of thought and the obsession of vulgar or treach- 
 erous errors. He was not a doctrinaire, but an inquirer ; 
 or, rather, he taught the need and practice of investiga- 
 tion ; not a body of conclusions." 
 
 The testimony which we quote is from a source, preju- 
 diced, if in either direction, in favor of Plato, so our read- 
 ers may be sure that we are doing hhn no injustice. Now 
 let us notice the above paragraph. First, Plato's treatises 
 are nearly all negative. Second, there is no attempt at 
 uniformity. Third, as would naturally be supposed, he 
 
Heathen Philosophy. 31 
 
 did not seek to establish any doctrine, but only to stimu- 
 late inquiry. Now we would not appear to deprecate the 
 " stimulation of candid investigation ; " but when the " in- 
 vestigator " has no fixed principles of truth, as the basis 
 of his investigation, and his investigation leads to no defi- 
 nite conclusions ; when one thought is not in harmony 
 with that which preceded it, and is itself contradicted 
 by that which follows, — we cannot look upon it with 
 much respect. AVe cannot see that such investigation is 
 good for anything ; indeed, we think it can be shown that 
 it is worse than nothing. When a person is so " unprej u- 
 diced" that he regards everything as equally good, and is 
 not certain that anything is good, he certainly is not a 
 safe man to follow. The position of modern " agnostics " 
 is precisely the same as that of Plato. Indeed, he de- 
 serves the name of the " first great agnostic," rather than 
 that of "philosopher." While calling himself a philoso- 
 pher, " lover of wisdom," he did not profess to know any- 
 thing, and he held no idea with sufficient firmness to be 
 willing to be held responsible for its promulgation. Says 
 the author above quoted : — 
 
 " He never appears in propria persona [in his own per- 
 son]. There is nothing to connect him before the Athe- 
 nian dicasteries with any tenet in his writings. There is 
 a constant avoidance of definite doctriney a frequent cen- 
 sure of written instruction, a continual reference to the 
 * obstetrical procedure,' and a deliberate renunciation of 
 all responsibility." 
 
 This was the man who had the chief influence in mould- 
 ing the minds of the heathen for several hundred years. 
 How could it be expected that they would have any 
 fixed moral principles ? If the blind lead the blind, shall 
 they not both fall into the ditch ? What shall we say 
 
32 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 then, when we learn that, by multitudes of professed 
 Christians, Plato has been regarded as little less than in- 
 spired ? and that many of the Fath*. . of the first cent- 
 uries regarded the Platonic philosophy as preliminary 
 and even paramount to Christianity ? Must we not con- 
 clude that such "Christianity" would have radical de- 
 fects? We shall find that such was the case. We 
 might, even here, cite as proof of the demoralizing effect 
 of the writings of Plato and other philosophers, the condi- 
 tion of the church in the twelfth to the fifteenth centuries, 
 when philosophy took the place of the Bible in the theo- 
 logical schools. It was against this soul- withering "phi- 
 losophy" that Luther struck some of his hardest blows; 
 and, but for the influence it had gained in the church, the 
 Reformation would not have been necessary. It is be- 
 cause of Plato's great influence on the Christian church, 
 as well as on the heathen world, that we devote space to 
 the characteristics of his philosophy. Again we quote : — 
 
 " The subjects which he handled were not only deep, 
 but unfathomed by him ; not only dark, but undefined. 
 Their imperfect apprehension by himself was reflected by 
 the indistinctness of his utterances. There was also a 
 misguiding star by which he was often led astray, and 
 tempted into pathless intricacies. The imagination of 
 Plato was the commanding faculty of his intellect, and he 
 followed its beams too far." 
 
 "The •philosophy of Plato is essentially mystical, and 
 consequently unsubstantial; and, though mysticism may 
 inflame, spiritualize, and refine natures already spiritual 
 and refined, it is heady and intoxicating, and apt to 
 justify willful aberrations, and to place every fantastic 
 conviction on the same level with confirmed truth." — Me- 
 Clintock and Strong. 
 
 That Plato's mysticism had this effect, we shall see as 
 
Heathen Philosophy. 33 
 
 we proceed. It is impossible that mysticism should have 
 any positive influence for good ; but even allowing that it 
 can " spiritualize r/^^l refine natures already spiritual and 
 refined " (an unnecessary task), it can accomplish noth- 
 ing, since in this world such natures do not exist. What 
 more is needed to ^uow that Plato could not be a safe 
 guide in anything, than the statement that the controlling 
 part of his intellect was his imagination? Surely this 
 'Cannot afford a basis solid enough to elevate one to 
 Christ. But mystical as Plato was, we shall see in due 
 time that he was equaled, and even surpassed, by some 
 of his followers, who are honored by the appellation of 
 "Fathers of the Christian Church." 
 
 According to Plato, all things were not directly framed 
 and regulated by the Supreme Divinity. For the gov- 
 ernment of "the sensible universe" (that is, the portion 
 appreciable by the senses), he created a subordinate 
 deity, and placed it over the natural creation. This guid- 
 ing spirit, or demiurge, was a mixture of the ideal and 
 the natural. The world, he taught, was not made from 
 nothing, that is, not created, but formed from eternally 
 existing matter. 
 
 But the fatal defect in his philosophy was the position 
 he took concerning the mind, and its relation to the body 
 and to the whole universe. He held that the mind or 
 soul holds the same relation to the body that God does 
 to the world. The pre-existence of souls was a cardinal 
 point in his philosophy, and it is to him that the Mormons 
 are indebted for the theory which is the foundation of 
 their polygamy. Like the Mormons, he held that not 
 only men, but plants and all inaminate objects also, have 
 souls, which existed prior to themselves. Thus, Prof. W. 
 S. Tyler, of Amherst College, says : — 
 3 
 
34 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 " There is no doctrine on which Plato more frequently 
 or more strenuously insists than this, — that soul is not 
 only superior to body, but prior to it in order of time, and 
 that not merely as it exists in the being of God, but in 
 every order of existence. The soul of the world existed 
 first, and then it was clothed with a material body. The 
 souls which animate the sun, moon, and stars, existed be- 
 fore the bodies which they inhabit. The pre-existence of 
 human souls is one of the arguments on which he relies 
 to prove their immortality." — Schaff-Herzog Encyclope- 
 dia, art. Platonism. 
 
 And that was the only means by which he could prove 
 the immortality of the soul. If the soul is by nature 
 immortal, the doctrine of the pre-existence of souls must 
 be true. Like modern scientists, however, who invent a 
 hypothesis upon which they build a beautiful structure, 
 and then proceed as though their hypothesis were a ftict, 
 Plato did not bother himself with proving the pre-exist> 
 ence of souls. So, also, Christians who adopt from Plato 
 the doctrine of the natural immortality of the soul, have 
 conveniently lost sight of the absurd and atheistical doc- 
 trine on which it rests. Som-e of the most eminent of the 
 "Church Fathers," however, and especially Origen, ac- 
 cepted without question all the vagaries of Plato con- 
 cerning the pre-existence of souls. Proof of this will be 
 given later on. 
 
 In a preceding quotation, mention was made of Plato's 
 frequent reference in his treatises to the " obstetrical pro- 
 cedure." The following extract from McCliutock and 
 Strong (art. Platonic Philosophy) will serve to explain 
 that term: — 
 
 "The midwifery of the mind which Socrates professed, 
 and which Plato represented him as professing, necessi- 
 tated the assumption that truth was present potentially in 
 
Heathen Philoso1*hy. 35 
 
 the mind, and that it only required to be drawn from its 
 latent state by adroit handling. It could not be latent, 
 nor could it be brought forth, unless it lay there like a 
 chrysalis, and descended from an anterior condition of 
 being. It was in a superterrestrial and antemundane 
 existence that souls had acquired [etherial sens^'\, but 
 before their demission, or return to earth, they had 
 been steeped in oblivion. The acquisition of genuine 
 knowledge was thus the restoration of the obliterated 
 memories of supernal realities." 
 
 This theory was the logical outcome of his theory of 
 the pre-existence of souls. In their pre-existent state, 
 as a part of God, they knew all things ; in coming into 
 bodies, that knowledge was concealed ; it was. as though 
 they had been stunned; still the knowledge was there, 
 and the mind could of itself determine truth or error. 
 Thus the mind of man is, according to Plato, the crite- 
 rion to determine right and wrong. " It is the lord of 
 itself and of all the world besides." 
 
 It will not be denied that Plato uttered some truths. 
 It would be difficult, indeed, for any man to be a teacher 
 for so many years, and not occasionally stumble into 
 truth, especially when he had no scruples against receiv- 
 ing anything, provided it was new. But the theory 
 mentioned in the last quotation is more than sufficient 
 to overbalance any good that he might accidentally 
 teach. There is no abominable wickedness that could 
 not find shelter under it. It absolved the possessor of it 
 from all sense of obligation to God, or of necessity of 
 looking to him for wisdom ; every man thus became his 
 own god, his own lawgiver, and his own judge. The 
 consequence would most naturally be the conclusion that 
 whatever is, is right; and since "the heart is deceitful 
 
36 Fathers op the Catholic Church. 
 
 above all things, and desperately wicked," evil came to 
 be regarded as good. This theory and its results are di- 
 rectly pointed out by these words of the apostle : — 
 
 " Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, 
 and changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an 
 image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and 
 fourfooted beasts, and cree])ing things. Wherefore God 
 also gave them up to uncleanness, through the lusts of 
 their own hearts, to dishonor their own bodies between 
 themselves." Kom. 1 : 22-24. 
 
 Whoever reads the fifth book of Plato's " Republic " 
 will find sufiScient evidence of his blunted moral sense, 
 or, rather, his total lack of moral sense. In that book, 
 which, like all Plato's works, is in the form of conversa- 
 tions with the young men of Athens, he teaches that 
 women should engage in warfare and all other affairs, 
 equally with the men, and should go through the same 
 course of training as the men, and in the same manner, 
 namely, naked. Says he: "But as for the man who 
 laughs at the idea of undressed women going through 
 gymnastic exercises, as a means of utilizing what is most 
 perfect, his ridicule is but unripe fruit plucked from the 
 tree of wisdom." 
 
 He further teaches that in the model republic the 
 women, as well as all property, shall be held in common, 
 and he adds : " Ijt follows from what has been already 
 granted, that the best of both sexes ought to be brought 
 together as often as possible, and the worst as seldom as 
 possible, and that the issue of the former union ought to 
 be reared and that of the latter abandoned." 
 
 Those children tluit should be thought fit to be saved 
 alive, were to be brought up by the State, in a general 
 
Heathen Philosophy. 37 
 
 nursery, and were never to know their parents, neither 
 were the parents ever to have any further knowledge of 
 their own children. Thus the people were to he "with- 
 out natural affection." After people attained a certain 
 age, the State was to release its control of their "mar- 
 riages," and they were to be allowed promiscuous inter- 
 course, only the issue, if any resulted from such unions, 
 was to be destroyed. We beg the reader's pardon for in- 
 truding such things upon his notice, but it is absolutely 
 necessary in order to dispel the glamor that has been 
 thrown around Plato. There is a growing tendency to 
 regard Plato as almost a Christian, and as really a fore- 
 runner of Christianity. We wish to disabuse as many as 
 possible of this idea, for liis influence will be as fatal now 
 as it ever was, to whoever comes under its spell. 
 
 We have now all the data necessary to enable us to 
 understand how the "philosophy" of which Plato's is the 
 best sample, would naturally lead to the most absurd and 
 even abominable actions. In the first place we call to 
 mind the fact that the "philosophers" started out in their 
 "searchafter truth" with no preconceived. ideas concern-- 
 ing it, and with no standard but their own minds, by 
 which to test the truthfulness of what they might learn. 
 They professed to be perfectly unprejudiced. According 
 to the Scripture record, they " spent their time in nothing 
 else, but either to tell or to hear some new thing." Acts 
 17: 21. Like children with toys, they eagerly seized 
 upon each new thought, no matter how contrary it might 
 be to that which they had previously entertained. For 
 the time this new thought excluded everything else, and 
 then it gave place to another new idea. 
 
 Many so-called " scientists " of modern times are pur- 
 
38 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 suing a similar erratic course. As a consequence many 
 things that a few years ago were held by " scientists " as 
 sacried truth, are now by the same men scouted as folly ; 
 and there is no evidence that many " truths " which are 
 now so surely "demonstrated," may not a few years 
 henct; be regarded as palpable errors, and be replaced by 
 others equally erroneous. Indeed, there has never been 
 any agreement among " eminent scientists " even on the 
 most vital points, especially as to the formation and age 
 of the w^orld, and the means by which men and animals 
 were placed upon it. 
 
 We believe most heartily in true science and philoso- 
 phy. " Science is knowledge duly arranged and referred 
 to general truths and principles upon which it was 
 founded, and from which it is derived." This is a true 
 definition of true science. Anything which has not the 
 characteristics noted in this definition — anything into 
 which conjecture enters — is not properly science. Ac- 
 cording to the definition of science, there are certain well- 
 established truths and principles upon which the knowl- 
 edge which constitutes any science must be founded, and 
 with which it must agree. These principles, therefore, 
 must precede all investigation. They must be so clear to 
 the mind of the would-be scientist, and so firmly believed 
 by him, that they are regarded as self-evident. All doubt 
 concerning them must be settled before he can proceed. 
 They are the foundation of the structure which he is to 
 rear ; and no wise mechanic would proceed to lay timbers 
 and build a house upon a foundation of whose stability 
 he was doubtful. 
 
 Having settled tlie first princii)les, the scientist is ready 
 to investigate phenomena. A new thought is presented 
 
Heathen Philosophy. 39 
 
 to him. He grasps it, but in so doing he must not jump 
 oif from foundation principles. He must not forsake his 
 principles for the new thought, but must bring the new 
 idea to those well-established principles, that it may be 
 tested by them. If it is in harmony with them, he adopts 
 it; if it is antagonistic to those principles, he must un- 
 hesitatingly reject it, no matter how pleasing it may ap- 
 pear, or how strongly it may commend itself to his fancy. 
 He is not to measure it by his fancy, but by facts. In 
 this manner he must proceed with every new thought, 
 rejecting those which do not agree with fundamental 
 truth, and placing in their proper position those which 
 do so agree, until he has a beautiful, symmetrical, and 
 perfect structure. 
 
 The false scientist may be likened to a wild explorer 
 of new countries. He starts out into the dense forest, or 
 across the trackless waters, until he reaches a country 
 never before visited by man. But, unfortunately, he has 
 neglected to keep his bearings, and therefore has no idea 
 of the relation of this new discovery to the country 
 from which he started. Leaving this, he proceeds 
 to new explorations, but has no idea of their relation 
 to countries already settled. Of what value are his 
 discoveries ? Of no value whatever ; and the explorer 
 will be extremely fortunate if he ever finds his way back 
 to civilization. 
 
 Now the first great principle upon which all true 
 science must rest, is that there is a God who created all 
 things. This is a self-evident truth — a truth that is pa- 
 tent to the mind even of the uneducated savage. Pope's 
 familiar lines, 
 
 ** Lo the poor Indian! whose untutored mind 
 Sees Grod in clouds, or hears him in the wind," 
 
40 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 Express the fact that the existence and power of Go(i are 
 so plainly revealed in nature that the idolater is without 
 excuse, and so the psalmist justly calls the atheist a fool, 
 as one who cannot appreciate even the alphabet of evi- 
 dence. God, being the Creator of all, must necessarily 
 be the Ruler of all, and the one whom all should obey. 
 The Maker of all worlds must necessarily be superior to 
 all things created, and must be the standard of truth 
 and perfection. That being admitted (and none will 
 deny it ; for all who admit that there is a God, also ac- 
 knowledge his perfection), it follows that his will, — the 
 law by which he governs his creatures, — must also be 
 perfect. Now if we can find anything which, if followed, 
 will produce a perfect character, we shall know that it is 
 God's perfect will; for a perfect character can be formed 
 only by obedience to a perfect law. Such a thing is 
 found in the Bible. Even the atheist will allow that if 
 the Bible were strictly obeyed it would produce perfec- 
 tion of character. 
 
 The truth of the Bible may also be demonstrated in 
 another manner. Thus: "The things which are made" 
 reveal the fundamental truth that there is a God, and 
 that he is all-wise and all-powerful. But the Bible is 
 the only book that coincides with this revelation of nat- 
 ure, and makes known to us the existence of God, and 
 his characteristics as shown by his works. Therefore 
 since the Bible, and that alone, is correct on this great 
 fundamental truth, it must be regarded as the surest 
 guide, and as giving the only perfect revelation of the 
 will of Him whom it so accurately describes. 
 
 Thus briefly we have shown that tlie existence of God, 
 and the truthfulness of the Bible as the revelation of hi^ 
 
Heathen Philosophy. 41 
 
 will, are undeniable truths, — the first self-evident, and 
 the second a necessary consequence of the first. These 
 truths are fundamental, and must be the basis of all true 
 science. Instead, then, of testing the Bible by so-called 
 " science," everything must be brought to the test of the 
 Bible, to determine whether or not it is worthy to be 
 called science. And since God is the originator of all 
 things, it follows that true science is simply a study of 
 God, — a seeking to know his person and attributes. 
 Science, therefore, is endless, since God is infinite. We 
 would, not be understood as claiming that the Bible is 
 primarily a book of science, according to the common 
 acceptation of the term, and that from it we may learn 
 the facts of geography, mathematics, physiology, astron- 
 omy, etc. But we do mean that it. is the sure founda- 
 tion of all real science; that all of its statements are 
 scientffically correct; that everything may and should 
 be brought to its test ; and that whatever disagrees with 
 it, is to be unhesitatingly rejected as false. 
 *" From this standpoint it is easy to see why Plato and 
 all the other heathen philosophers did not succeed in 
 finding the truth, and why they did not have any well- 
 defined and systematic theory. In the very beginning 
 they departed from the only source of wisdom : " When 
 they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither 
 were thankful ; but became vain in their imaginations, 
 and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing them- 
 selves to be wise, they became fools." 
 
 It may be urged that Plato and the other philosophers 
 held some things that were in themselves true, even if 
 they were not systematically arranged with reference to 
 some great central truth, and therefore it may be asked 
 
42 Fathers of the Catholic Chuech. 
 
 how the horrible wickedness which is portrayed in the 
 first chapter of Romans can be directly chargeable to 
 the teachings of philosophy. A few quotations from 
 Scripture make this point clear, and complete the argu- 
 ment concerning heathen pliilosophy : — 
 
 " And you hath he quickened, who were dead in tres- 
 passes and sins ; wherein in time past ye walked according 
 to the course of this world, according to the prince of 
 the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the 
 children of disobedience ; among whom also ive all had 
 our conversation [manner of life] in times past in the 
 lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and 
 of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, 
 even as others." Eph. 2 : 1-3. 
 
 "l^ow the works of the flesh are manifest, which are 
 these: Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, 
 idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, 
 strife, seditions, heresies, envyings, murders, drunkenness, 
 revelings, and such like." Gal. 5 : 19-21. 
 
 " And the Lord said in his heart, I will not again - 
 curse the ground any more for man's sake ; for the imag- 
 ination of man's heart is evil from his youth." Gen. 
 8:21. 
 
 "The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately 
 wicked." Jer. 17:9. 
 
 " For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, 
 adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies : 
 these are the things which defile a man." Matt. 15:19, 
 20. 
 
 " Tlie carnal mind is enmity against God ; for it is not 
 subject to the law of God, neither indeed caii be." Rom. 
 8:7. 
 
Heathen Philosophy. . 43 
 
 These scriptures most clearly prove that man is by 
 nature corrupt and depraved. The evil things recorded 
 in Gal. 5: 18-21 are "the works of the flesh ;" not those 
 which man has acquired, but things which proceed out 
 of his heart ; things which are inlierent in his very 
 nature. This being the case, it will be seen at once that 
 whenever a person follows his natural inclination, and 
 makes his own mind the criterion of right and wrong, 
 he must inevitably do that which is evil. One of Bacon's 
 rules for guarding against certain forms of error, is based 
 on a recognition of this fact. He says : — 
 
 " In general let every student of nature take this as a 
 rule, that whatever his mind seizes and dwells upon with 
 particular satisfaction is. to be held in suspicion." 
 
 As we have already seen, Plato's philosophy made the 
 human mind the lord of itself and of all of the world 
 beside ; he held that the unaided human intellect was 
 competent to decide between truth and error. Therefore 
 his disciples, trusting in themselves alone — " professing 
 themselves to be wise " — could not fail to choose error, 
 and that of the worst description, because error is most 
 congenial to the human mind. The natural heart will 
 choose that which is most like itself; and, since "the 
 heart is deceitful above all things," when truth and error 
 are placed side by side, the heart that is not renewed by 
 divine grace, and completely subject to the law of God, 
 will turn away from the truth and cling to the error. 
 True, some things may be done that in themselves are all 
 right, but, being done from a selfish motive, they become 
 really evil. Love, — love to God and to our fellow-men, — 
 is the sum of all good. Whatever is not the result of 
 such love is only evil. We need not, therefore, be as- 
 
44 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 tonished at any error that is held or has been held by 
 mankind. Plato's positively immoral teaching was only 
 the logical result of his " philosophy." 
 
 By this time the reader will have no hesitancy in de- 
 ciding that the heathen philosophers were very unsafe 
 men to follow. Indeed, he will not be at all out of the 
 way if he concludes that any idea advanced by them is 
 to be held in suspicion ; that the very fact that Plato or 
 Socrates or Aristotle or Epicurus advocated a given 
 principle is to be considered as strong evidence that such 
 principle is incorrect ; and that whatever stands on the 
 sole authority of those philosophers, is to be rejected as 
 false. Not only will these conclusions hold good as re- 
 gards the heathen philosophers themselves, but also con- 
 cerning those who put great confidence in those philoso- 
 phers. And when we learn, as we shall very soon, that 
 many who professed Christianity, still adhered to tlie 
 pagan philosophy, and regarded it as the forerunner of 
 Christianity, we can better appreciate the earnestness 
 with which the apostle made this exhortation : — 
 
 " Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy 
 and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudi- 
 ments of the world, and not after Christ." Col. 2 : 8. 
 
CHAPTER III. 
 
 THE APOSTOLIC CHURCH. 
 
 In the second paragraph of his famous fifteenth chap- 
 ter, Gibbon uses the following language : — 
 
 "The theologian may indulge the pleasing task of 
 describing religion as she descended from Heaven, arrayed 
 in her native purity. A more melancholy duty is im- 
 posed on the historian. He must discover the inevitable 
 mixture of error and corruption which she contracted in 
 a long residence upon earth, among a weak and degener- 
 ate race of beings." 
 
 So far as the simple religion of Christ is concerned, 
 it is ever the same. The apostle James says: "Pure 
 religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, 
 To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and 
 to keep himself unspotted from the worlds James 1 : 27. 
 This is ever the characteristic of pure and undefiled re- 
 ligion ; but, unfortunately, every good thing is counter- 
 feited, and "among a weak and degenerate race of 
 beings," even though they may be sincere, religion often 
 fails of being correctly represented ; and it is therefore 
 the lot of the theologian, as well as of the historian, to 
 discover " the inevitable mixture of error and corruption." 
 
 From a failure properly to discriminate between pure 
 religion and the practices of many who professed religion, 
 two grave errors have arisen: 1. Infidels have concluded 
 that Christianity is but little, if any, in advance of many 
 forms of heathenism, or of atheism. Judging Christian- 
 ity by false professors thereof, they lose sight of the fact 
 
 (45) 
 
46 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 that there is such a thing as " pure religion." 2. Believ- 
 ers are in danger of thinking that whatever has been 
 done by " the church " must of necessity be in harmony 
 with religion. This second error is as bad as the first; 
 for in either case the individual will fall far short of the 
 true standard.^To know what true religion is, we must 
 look only at the Bible and the life of Christ as therein 
 portrayed.- Of all those who have trod this earth, he 
 alone had no sin ; in him religion was revealed pure and 
 undefiled. There have been men " of whom the world 
 was not worthy," and yet the record of their lives is not 
 altogether perfect. If we should take for a model the 
 most perfect mortal, we should be led into error ; how 
 much greater, then, must be our danger, if we follow 
 those whose lives were far below the standard of pure 
 and undefiled religion^ 
 
 It is not to be supposed, of course, that Christians 
 would think of taking the course of irreligious people as 
 models for their own lives ; but a chain is no stronger 
 than its weakest link, and since there have always been 
 irreligious and erring, even though conscientious, people 
 in the professed church, it is evident that whosoever fol- 
 lows " the church " instead of Christ will be led into er- 
 ror. That the professed church of Christ has always had 
 in it elements of corruption which would make it an un- 
 safe guide, is as evident as is the fact that Christ has a 
 church here on earth which is composed of frail, erring 
 mortals. 
 
 If we go back to the first followers of Christ, we find 
 one who was so utterly base as to sell his Lord for a pal- 
 try sum of money. Naturally avaricious, Judas yielded 
 little by little to the temptations of Satan, who always 
 
The Apostolic Church. 47 
 
 attacks men on the side of their natural inclination, un- 
 til the devil finally had complete control of him ; yet all 
 this time he was numbered among the followers of Christ. 
 
 But the weakness of the early disciples was not con- 
 fined to Judas. They were all men, and consequently 
 were liable to err even when full of zeal for the Master. 
 James and John wished to call down fire from heaven to 
 consume the Samaritans, because these people were not 
 willing to receive Christ. Jesus rebuked his rash follow- 
 ers, saying, " Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are 
 of" See Luke 9 : 51-56. Peter, who was so often re- 
 proved by Jesus for his hasty spirit, at one time denied 
 his Lord with oaths; and, stiil later, he u^ed dissimula- 
 tion to such a degree that Paul was forced to withstand 
 him to the face. Gal. 2:11-14. Even the grave and 
 upright Barnabas was carried away with this dissimula- 
 tion, which met with such a stern rebuke from Paul. 
 And later these two yoke- fellows, who had labored to- 
 gether under the direction of Heaven, showed that they 
 were still human, by falling into so sharp a contention 
 that they were obliged to separate. Acts 15 : 36-41. 
 
 Let no one think that we speak slightingly of these 
 men. They were divinely appointed to the work, and 
 we honor them as devoted men who hazarded their lives 
 for the sake of Christ, whose chosen servants they were. 
 We love them for what they were, as well as for their 
 work's sake. It was necessary that Christ should commit 
 to men the preaching of the gospel, and those to whom 
 he first committed it were men of like passions with 
 others. They were men who, like those to whom they 
 preached, had to depend on Christ and go on unto per- 
 fection. And we know of no reason why Inspiration has 
 
48 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 placed on record some of their failures, except tliat we 
 might learn not to look even to the best of men for an 
 example. The message which they bore was pure, but 
 they, in common with all mankind, stood in need of its 
 sanctifying influence ; and while they strove to be " en- 
 samples to the flock," they directed the minds of all only 
 to Jesus, the author and finisher of the faith. 
 
 If there were imperfections among the immediate dis- 
 ciples of Christ, it is no more than could be expected 
 that those who believed on him through their word 
 would also exhibit human imperfections before they were 
 perfectly sanctified through the truth. And if among 
 the twelve there was one who had a devil, why need we 
 wonder that hypocrites should continually contaminate 
 the church by their presence ? Said the apostle Peter, 
 in his letter to the church : " But there were false proph- 
 ets also among the people, even as there shall be false 
 teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damna- 
 ble heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, 
 and bring upon themselves swift destruction. And many 
 shall follow their pernicious ways ; by reason of whom 
 the way of truth shall be evil spoken of. And through 
 covetousness shall they with feigned words make mer- 
 chandise of you." 2 Peter 2 : 1-3. 
 
 Paul, in his address to the elders of the church at 
 Ephesus, said : " Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and 
 to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath 
 made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he 
 hath purchased with his own blood. For I know this, 
 that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in 
 among you, not sparing the flock. Also of your own 
 selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw 
 away disciples after them." Acts 20 : 28-30. 
 
The Apostolic Church. 49 
 
 These two scriptures show that the inspired apostles 
 knew that there would be not only imperfect, erring 
 members in the church, but also false teachers who, like 
 Judas, would deny the Lord, that bought them. Among 
 the elders of the church there were to arise unprincipled 
 men who would bring in "damnable heresies." We 
 need not be surprised, therefore, when we find the pro- 
 fessed church soon after the days of the apostles, largely 
 filled with the abominations of heathendom. 
 
 Even in the days of the apostles, while their straight 
 testimony was being delivered, this spirit of corruption 
 crept into the church. To the Thessalonians Paul wrote 
 that long before Christ's second advent there would come 
 a "falling away," and that the "man of sin" would be re- 
 vealed, sitting in the temple of God, virtually professing 
 to be God, and opposing all that pertains to God and 
 his true worship, and then he added that " the mystery 
 of iniquity doth already work." 2 Thess. 2 : 3-7. Paul 
 knew that even in the churches of his own planting there 
 were elements of corruption that would eventually con- 
 taminate the whole body. If we examine the record, we 
 can detect these incipient evils for ourselves. 
 
 The church at Corinth was raised up by the personal 
 labors of Paul, yet he was obliged to reprove the mem- 
 bers for the spirit of contention and division (1 Cor. 1 : 
 11-13), which was carried so far that they went to law 
 with one another in the heathen courts (1 Cor. 6 : 6-8). 
 So little spiritual discernment did they have that they 
 made the Lord's Supper an occasion for feasting and 
 drunkenness (1 Cor. 11 : 17-22); and they tolerated incest 
 of a kind that was disapproved even by the licentious 
 heathen (1 Cor. 5:1, 2), and did not feel that for it they 
 had any cause for shame^ 
 4 
 
50 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 In Paul's second letter to Timothy we find mention of 
 one of the "damnable heresies" which were brought into 
 the church. Says Paul : " But shun profane and vain 
 babblings ; for they will increase unto more ungodliness. 
 And their word will eat as doth a canker : of whom is 
 Hymenseus and Philetus; who concerning the truth 
 have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already ; 
 and overthrow the faith of some." 2 Tim. 2 : 16-18. 
 
 A single passage in Paul's letter to the churches in 
 Galatia shows the danger to which aU the converts from 
 among the heathen w^ere exposed. Said he : " When ye 
 knew not God, ye did service unto them which by nature 
 are no gods. But now, after that ye have known God, 
 or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the 
 weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again 
 to be in bondage? Ye observe davs, and months, and 
 times, and years. I am afraid of you, lest I have be- 
 stowed upon you labor in vain." Gal. 4: 8-11. We 
 have already noted some of the immoral practices and 
 senseless ceremonies in the worship of the heathen. Of 
 course the Galatians, in common with all heathen, were 
 given to these before their conversion. And as men 
 when they lose their faith and love, begin to go back 
 to the things to which they were addicted before conver- 
 sion, so the Galatians were on the point of going back 
 to the " weak and beggarly elements " to which they had 
 formerly been in bondage. They had gone so far back as 
 to "observe days, and months, and times [see Deut. 18: 
 10], and years," and Paul feared that his labor for them 
 had all been thrown away. 
 
 Still later the apostle John wrote : " For many de- 
 ceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that 
 
The Apostolic Church. 51 
 
 Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and 
 an antichrist." 2 John 7. 
 
 Again he wrote to the well-beloved Gains : " I wrote 
 unto the church ; but Diotrephes, who loveth to have the 
 pre-eminence among them, receiveth us not. Wherefore, 
 if I come, I will remember his deeds which he doeth, 
 prating against us with malicious words ; and not con- 
 tent therewith, neither doth he himself receive the breth- 
 ren, and forbiddeth them that would, and casteth them 
 out of the church." 3 John 9, 10. 
 
 Here was ^ man in the church setting himself in di- 
 rect opposition to the apostle John. He was not a pri- 
 vate member, but one who had to such a degree the pre- 
 eminence which he loved, that he could cause people to 
 be cast out of the church. This leader in the church 
 refused to receive the instruction which the apostle had 
 written, and cast out of the church those who were will- 
 ing to receive it. Not content with this, he railed against 
 the inspired servant of the Lord. Surely it cannot with 
 reason be claimed that "the church," even in the apos- 
 tolic age, ought to be taken as a model. 
 
 One more testimony concerning some in the early 
 church must suffice. Another apostle thought it neces- 
 sary to exhort the faithful to contend earnestly for the 
 faith which was once delivered unto the saints, and the 
 following is the reason: "For there are certain men 
 crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to 
 this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of 
 our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord 
 God, and our Lord Jesus Christ." Jude 4. Further on 
 he brings this fearful charge against these men : " But 
 these speak evil of those things which they know not ; 
 
52 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 but what they know naturally, as brute beasts, in those 
 things they corrupt themselves." Jude 10. And still 
 further on, the apostle plainly states that bribery was 
 practiced in the church. He says : , " These are mur- 
 murers, complainers, walking after their own lusts ; and 
 their mouth speaketh great swelling words, having men's 
 persons in admiration because of advantage." Verse 16- 
 
 Our object in quoting these passages has not been to 
 dwell upon the shortcomings of men in the early church, 
 but simply to make prominent the fact that bad men 
 were in the church from the earliest period. There were 
 many good men also in the church at that time ; but the 
 question is, How are we to decide as to who were bad and 
 who w^ere good ? " To the law and to the testimony; if 
 they speak not according to this word, it is because there 
 is no light in them." By comparing their lives with the 
 standard of the Bible, we readily ascertain what actions 
 were good and what were evil. 
 
 The true church is the body of Christ ; it is composed of 
 those who are indeed united to Christ, who draw strength 
 from him, and who walk as he walked. To the Ephesians 
 the apostle Paul wrote of the mighty power of God, 
 " which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from 
 the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly 
 places, far above all principality, and power, and might, 
 and dominion, and every name that is named, not only 
 in this world, but also in that which is to come; and 
 hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the 
 head over all things to tlie church, which is his body, the 
 fullness of him that HUeth all in all." Eph. 1 : 20-23. 
 
 To the Colossians he wrote thus concerning Christ: — 
 
 "And he is the head of the body, the church ; who is 
 
The Apostoi.tc Church. 153 
 
 the beginning, the first-born from the dead ; that in all 
 things he might have the pre-eminence." Col. 1:18. 
 
 To the Galatian brethren he wrote, " For as many of 
 you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ." 
 Gal. 3 : 27. And to the church at Corintli he wrote : — 
 
 "For as the body is one, and hath many members, 
 and all the members of that one body, being many, are 
 one body ; so also is Christ. For by one Spirit are we all 
 baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, 
 whether we be bond or free ; and have been all made to 
 drink into one Spirit." 1 Cor. 12 : 12, 13. 
 
 From this text it appears that although literal baptism 
 is the sign of union with the church of Christ, the out- 
 ward sign may exist without the reality, since the real 
 union is a spiritual union. The one who puts on Christ, 
 and thus becomes a son of God, must be born of the . 
 Si)irit as well as of water. John 3:5. " Now if any man 
 have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his " (Rom. 8 : 9), 
 no matter what his profession may be. Nor is it sufficient 
 to have once received the Spirit of God. Paul exhorts 
 us not to grieve the Spirit of God (Eph. 4 : 30) .and warns 
 us against doing despite to it (Heb. 10:29); and our 
 Saviour himself says : — 
 
 "Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot 
 bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine ; no more 
 can ye, except ye abide in me. I am the vine, ye are the 
 branches. He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same 
 bringeth forth much fruit; for without me ye can do 
 nothing." John 15:4, 5. 
 
 The fruit which the real member of Christ's body will 
 bear, is the same as that which characterized the life of 
 Christ, for the beloved disciple says : " He that saith 
 
54 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 he abideth in him [Christ] ought himself also so to walk, 
 even as he walked," 1 John 2:6. 
 
 Now it is evident from the texts which we have 
 quoted, that the 'professed church is not necessarily iden- 
 tical with the church which is the body of Christ. 
 There are many who j^rofess Christ, and who teach in his 
 name, whom Christ does not recognize. Matt. 7 : 21-23. 
 The gospel net is cast into the sea, and gathers " of every 
 kind." Matt. 13: 47. But it is not for us always to 
 decide who are and who are not really members of 
 Christ's body; and therefore for convenience' sake we 
 speak of the body of professed believers as " the church." 
 Let it be understood that when this term is used, it is not 
 necessarily synonymous with " Christians." 
 
 But tliese men of whom we have just read in the 
 Bible, were all in "the church;" the evil practices to 
 which they gave themselves were all performed in " the 
 church ; " and many of their false doctrines were put 
 forth as the doctrines of "the church" with which they 
 were connected. Now, if we set out to follow " the 
 church," we have no more right to reject the doctrines 
 and practices of these men, than we have to reject any 
 doctrine or practice of "the church." To be sure there 
 were many, at this time no doubt a majority, of those in 
 the church who condemned these men and their ways. 
 But these men also condemned the other class, even 
 casting them out of the church ; and all together helped 
 to form "the church." 
 
 It is true that our Saviour himself said (Matt. 18 : 17) 
 that whoever would not hear the church should be con- 
 sidered " as an heathen man and a publican." But this 
 does not in the least militate against what has just been 
 
The Apostolic Church. 65 
 
 said about following the church. The action of the 
 church of Christ is indeed ratified in Heaven, an(f no 
 man should lightly esteem its counsels ; yet this is an en- 
 tirely different thing from taking a human model. Christ 
 said to the apostles, "Neither be ye called masters; for 
 one is your Master, even Christ." Matt. 23:10. We 
 are not to follow " the example of the apostles," but the 
 example and words of Christ. He who would continue 
 in the Christian life must ever be " looking unto Jesus." 
 
 Jesus is our Pattern; the members of his church become 
 members of his church simply that they may learn of 
 him. A boy goes to school to learn to write, and his 
 teacher writes a line in a beautiful hand, at the top of a 
 page, for him to copy. AVhile he is making his first 
 line, he closely scans the master's line, and does very 
 well. The next time he looks less closely at the copy, 
 and that line is a little poorer than the other. With 
 each successive line he looks less at the copy, and more 
 at his own work, until by the time he is half way down 
 the page he is following, not the master's beautifully 
 written copy, but his own scarcely legible scrawl, and 
 each line is a little worse than the one preceding it. 
 Those lines are a fitting emblem of the lives of those who 
 follow the learners in the school of Christ, instead of 
 following only the life of the great Master himself. 
 
 But since there is no man whose life we may take as 
 a model, it is very evident that we cannot follow the 
 entire professed church. To do so woiild be an impossi- 
 bility, for even in apostolic times there were in some 
 churches factions that were directly opposed to one 
 another. Therefore if it were claimed that, although it 
 is not allowable to follow the practice of any man, we may 
 
56 Fathers op the Catholic Church, 
 
 follow the belief of the professed church in any age, one 
 important question would have to be settled, and that is, 
 which portion of the church shall be followed ? for the 
 entire professed church has never been a unit in matters 
 of belief We must know which portion has been in the 
 right, for we do not wish to be led astray. The Bible 
 alone can decide this matter. That alone can tell us 
 what is right and what is wrong. And since we must go 
 to the Bible to determine what part of the professed 
 church was following in the footsteps of Christ, and 
 what part was bringing in damnable heresies, it necessa- 
 rily follows that the Bible itself, and not " the church," 
 or any part of it, is our only guide. "Thy word is a 
 lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path." Ps. 119 : 
 105. And it is for the purpose of emphasizing this im- 
 portant truth that we have asked the reader to look for a 
 moment at the dark side of the church in the days of 
 the apostles. 
 
CHAPTER IV. 
 
 THE FATHERS. 
 
 In his epistle to the Galatians, the apostle Paul said : 
 "Though we, or an angel from Heaven, preach any 
 other gospel unto you than that which we have preached 
 unto you, let him be accursed," Gal. 1 : 8. Although 
 the apostles were fallible men, the gospel which they 
 preached, and which they have delivered to us, was per- 
 fect. The reason for this is thus given by Paul : "For 
 we preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord." 2 
 Cor. 4 : 5. The apostles in their teaching adhered closely 
 to the terms of their divine commission as uttered by 
 Christ, "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, . . . 
 teaching them to observe all things w^hatsoever I have 
 commanded you." Matt. 28 : 19, 20. So long as they 
 did this, they simply transmitted the light which came to 
 them direct from Heaven, and so their teaching could be 
 nothing other than perfect. If they had preached them- 
 selves, it would have been far different, for they were 
 human. 
 
 From, the. preceding chapt er on the apostolic church, 
 by whiclivterm wq mean simply the church in the days of 
 the apostles, and not that part of the professed church 
 that adhered strictly to " the apostles' doctrine," we have 
 seen that the presence of the apostles themselves did not 
 insure perfection in the church. It insured perfect teach- 
 ing to the church; but the fact that men have perfect 
 teaching does not make them perfect unless they follow 
 
 (57) 
 
f( 
 
 58 F'athers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 W and nothing else. Now there are certain men who 
 have acquired great celebrity as "Church Fathers." 
 This term, strangely enough, is never applied to the 
 apostles, to whom it would seem to be more applicable 
 than to any other men, but to certain men who lived in 
 the first few centuries of the Christian era, and who ex- 
 erted a great influence on the church. As a matter of 
 fact, the true church has but one Father, even God ; 
 therefore whatever church recognizes any men as its 
 Fathers, must be a church of merely human planting, 
 having only human ordinances. 
 
 It is claimed that the " Fathers " must be competent 
 guides, since they lived so near the days of Christ and 
 the apostles. This is a tacit admission that the gospel 
 which was preached by Christ and the apostles is the 
 true standard. But that has been recorded in the New 
 Testament; and therefore, instead of being obliged to 
 depend on the testimony of any who lived this side of 
 their time, we can go direct to the fountain-head, and can 
 draw therefrom the gospel in as pure a state as though 
 we had listened in person to the teaching of inspired 
 men. The cases of Demas, of Hymenseus and Philetus, 
 of Diotrephes, and others, should be sufficient to teach 
 anybody that mere proximity to the apostles did not fill 
 people with the light of divine truth. Those men are 
 proofs that the light may shine in darkness, and the 
 darkness may not comprehend it. Therefore we must 
 judge of the so-called Fathers, not by the time in which 
 they lived, but by what they did and said, - fir s t, lu -j\¥- 
 ^vtiv, we-will heax what'-^putable men have to any ijf- 
 
 tJlOHTT 
 
 Pwhaps^ we can best begin - wit h the word o o^ Dr. 
 
The Fathers. 50 
 
 Adam Clarke, who, in his comment on Proverbs 8, speaks 
 of the Fathers as follows : — 
 
 " But of those we may safely state, that there is not a 
 truth in the most orthodox creed, that cannot be proved 
 by their authority, nor a heresy that has disgraced the 
 Romish Church, tliat may not challenge them as its 
 abettors. In points of doctrine their authority is, with 
 me, nothing." 
 
 It is this characteristic of the Fathers which makes them 
 so valuable to advocates of a cause which has no Script- 
 ure evidence in its support. Let a person once get the 
 idea that the testimony of the Fathers is of value, and 
 you may prove anything to him that you choose. In 
 the National Baptist, there appeared an article by the 
 " Rev. Levi Philetus Dobbs, D. D.,"— Dr. Wayland, the 
 editor, — ^in reply to a young minister who had asked how 
 he could prove a thing to his congregation when there 
 was nothing with which to prove it. Among other things 
 the writer said : — 
 
 " I regard, however, a judicious use of the Fathers as be- 
 ing on the whole the best reliance for anyone who is in the 
 situation of my querist. The advantages of the Fathers 
 are twofold: First, they carry a good deal of weight with 
 the masses; and secondly, you can find whatever you* 
 want in the Fathers. I do not believe that any opinion 
 could be advanced so foolish, so manifestly absurd, but 
 that you can find passages to sustain it pn the pages of 
 these venerable stagers. And to the common mind one 
 of these is just as good as another. If it happens that 
 the point that you want to prove is one that never 
 chanced to occur to the Fathers, why, you can easily 
 show that they would have taken your side if they had 
 only thought of the matter. And if, perchance, there is 
 nothing bearing even remotely or constructively on the 
 point, do not be discouraged; get a good, strong quota- 
 
60 Fathers op the Catholic Church. 
 
 tion, and put the name of the Fathers to it, and utter it 
 with an air of triumph; it will be all just as well; nine- 
 tenths of the people do not stop to ask whether a quota- 
 tion bears on the matter in hand. Yes, my brother, the 
 Fathers are your stronghold. They are Heaven's best 
 gift to the man who has a cause that cannot be sustained 
 in any other way." March 7, 1878. 
 
 While the above is written in a humorous vein, it is 
 strictly in harmony. with the quotation taken from Dr. 
 Clarke, and is in harmony with tlie fiicts in the case. 
 The-reader shall have a chance to judge~t#-tlris~nmtter- 
 for himself as we proceed. 
 
 We quote again from Mosheim. Speaking of certain 
 works by Clement, Justin Martyr, Tatian, Theophilus, 
 and others, he says that these works are lost, and adds: — 
 
 " But this loss is the less to be regretted, since it is cer- 
 tain that no one of these expositors could be pronounced 
 a good interpreter. They all believed the language of 
 Scripture to contain two meanings, the one obvious and 
 corresponding with the direct import of the words, the 
 other recondite and concealed under the words, like a 
 nut by the shell ; and neglecting the former, as being of 
 little value, they bestowed their chief attention on the 
 latter; that is, they were more intent on throwing ob- 
 scurity over the sacred writings by the fictions of their 
 own imaginations, than on searching out their true mean- 
 ing." — Ecclesiastical History ^ hook 1, cent. 2, part 2, chap. 
 3^ sec. 5. 
 
 In one of his latest works, " The History of Interpre- 
 tation," Archdeacon Farrar says of the Fathers: — 
 
 " There are but few of them whose pages are not rife 
 with errors, — errors of method, errors of fact, errors of 
 history, of grammar, and even of doctrine. This is tlie 
 language of simple truth, not of slighting disparage- 
 ment:^'—/^. 162, 163. 
 
The Fathers. 61 
 
 Again, on page 164 of the same book, Farrar says: — 
 
 " Without deep learning, without linguistic knowledge, 
 without literary culture, without any final principles 
 either as to the nature of the sacred writings or the 
 method by which they should be interpreted — sur- 
 rounded by Paganism, Judaism, and heresy of every de- 
 scription, and wholly dependent on a faulty translation — 
 the earliest Fathers and apologists add little or nothing 
 to our understanding of Scripture. . . . Their ac- 
 quaintance with the Old Testament is incorrect, popular, 
 ana full of mistakes; their scriptural arguments are 
 often l^aseless ; their exegesis — novel in application only 
 — is a ch^aos of elements unconsciously borrowed on the 
 one handfrom Philo, and on the other from Rabbis and 
 Kabbalists.x They claim 'a grace' of exposition, which 
 is not justif;ec^.by the results they offer, and they suppose 
 themselves to be in possession of a Christian Gnosis, of 
 which the specimens offered are for the most part entirely 
 untenable." 
 
 These quotations from Farrar should have more than 
 ordinary weight in this matter, for, besides the Catholic 
 Church, there is no other church that depends so much 
 upon the Fathers as does the Church of England, or 
 Episcopal Church. 
 
 In the last quotation from Farrar, this expression oc- 
 curs: "Surrounded by Paganism, Judaism, and heresy 
 of every description," etc. ^JJiis seems to be forgotten by 
 most people who laud the Fathers. They speak of them 
 as living near the time of the apostles, but overlook the 
 fact that they lived still nearer to another time, namely, 
 the time of gross i^aganism. B<^w if their character were 
 to be determined by the characteKof the people to whom 
 they were nearest in point of time,\we submit that the 
 antecedent probability that they would\ assume the color 
 
62 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 of paganism, is greater than that they \f6ttl^ assume the 
 color of Christianity. 
 
 *^* But," says one, " there is this element in their favor, 
 and against the idea that they were influenced more by 
 paganism than by Christianity : they professed Christian- 
 ity, and combated paganism ; they studied tlie works of 
 the apostles, and so took on their character." 
 
 This is a great mistake. As a matter of fact, the so- 
 called Fathers studied the works of pagan philosophers 
 far more than they did those of the apostles. They af- 
 fected to be philosophers themselves ; and while they did 
 indeed make a show of combating paganism, the weapons 
 which they used were drawn from pagan philosophy 
 more frequently than from the Bible.v And even when 
 they quoted from the Bible, their pag^n notions warped 
 their interpretation. So in their encounters with pagan- 
 ism, we have for the most part nothing but one form of 
 paganism arrayed against another form of paganism. 
 On this point De Quincey, in his essay on "The Pagan 
 Oracles," says: — 
 
 " But here and everywhere, speaking of the Fathers as 
 a body, we charge them with antichristian practices of 
 a twofold order: Sometimes as supporting their great 
 cause in a spirit alien to its own, retorting in a temper 
 not less uncharitable than that of their opponents; some- 
 times, again, as adopting arguments that are unchristian n 
 in their ultimate grounds ; resting upon errors tlie Tefuta-Sr 
 tion of errors, upon superstitions the overthrow of super- 
 stitions ; and drawing upon the armories of darkness for 
 weapons that, to be durable, ought to liave been of celes- 
 tial temper.^ Alternately, in slitjrt, the FatKiers trespass 
 against those affeccions which furnish to Christianity its | 
 moving powers, and against those truths which i^rnish to I 
 Christianity its guiding lights. Indeed, Milton's memo=-X- 
 
The Fathers. 63 
 
 rable attetnjit to characterize the Fathers as a body, con- / 
 tempj^Hous as it is, can hardly be challenged as over- 
 charged. 
 
 " Nevei? fu any instance were these aberrations of the 
 Father's more vividly exemplified than in tlieir theories 
 u^n the pagan, orm?!^.— On behalf of God, they were de- 
 termined to be wiser than God ; and, in demonstration of 
 scriptural power, to advance doctrines which the Script- 
 ures had nowhere warranted." 
 
 Mtich more~4iestimon.y: .io^Jiie- mme effect will be ad- 
 dueeel as ^re proceed. We will now listen to anothefr 
 statement-from Mosheim. In his account of the Christian 
 church in the second century^JiJfe say^^^^^-^^^^'SC^^^ 
 
 **^¥ke, cohti-oversial writers who distinguished them:^^ 
 (j^STves in this century, ei^countered either the Jews, or the 
 worshipers of idol gods, or the corrupters of the Christian 
 doctrine and the founders of new sects, that is, the here- 
 tics. With the Jews, contended in particular Justin 
 Martyr, in his dialogue with Trypho ; and likewise Ter- 
 tullian; but neither of them, in the best manner; because 
 they were not acquainted with the language and history 
 of the Hebrews, and ,did not duly consider the subject. 
 The pagans were assailed by those especially, who wrote 
 apologies for the Christians; as Athen^goras, Melito, 
 Quadratus, Miltiades, Aristides, Tatian, aii4 Justin Mar- 
 tyr; or who composed addresses to the pag^t^s; as Jus- 
 tki', Tertullian, Clement, and Theophilus of Anliech." 
 
 "A man of sound judgment who has due regard for 
 truth, cannot extol them highly. Most of them lacked 
 discernment, knowledge, application, good arrangement, 
 and force. They often advance very flimsy arguments, 
 and such as are suited rather to embarrass the mind than 
 to convince the understanding." — Ecclesiastical History, 
 book 1, cent. 2, part 2, chap. 3, sec. 7. 
 
 In the same chapter (section 10), Mosheim sums up 
 the case concerning the Fathers as follows ; — 
 
64 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 "To us it appears that their writings contain many 
 things excellent, well considered, and well calculated to 
 enkindle pious emotions; but also many things unduly rig- 
 orous, and derived from the stoic and academic philos- 
 ophy ; many things vague and indetermijiate ; and many 
 things positively false, and inconsistent with the precepts 
 of Christ. If one deserves the title of a bad master in 
 morals, who has no just ideas of the proper boundaries 
 and limitations of Christian duties, nor clear and distinct 
 conceptions of the different virtues and vices, nor a per- 
 ception of those general principles to which recurrence 
 should be had in all discussions respecting Christian 
 virtue, and therefore very, often talks at random, and 
 blunders in expounding the divine laws; though he 
 may say many excellent things, and excite in us consid- 
 erable emotion ; then I can readil}<admit that in strict 
 truth, this title belongs to many of the Fathers." 
 
 After reading the above, we are not surprised that, in 
 harmony with Dr. Clarke and the " Rev. Levi Philetus 
 Dobbs," Mosheim says : — 
 
 "It is therefore not strange, that all sects of Christians 
 can find in what are called the Fathers, something to 
 favor their own opinions and systems." 
 
 This is strictly true; but although "these venerable 
 stagers" sometimes stumbled upon the truth, they furnish 
 the most aid and comfort to those sects which pursue the 
 most unscriptural practices, as, for instance, the Catholics 
 and the Mormons. It is very seldom that their testi- 
 mony is quoted in behalf of any really scriptural doctrine 
 or custom. . < • 
 
 /^To show that these so-called Fathers are not only 
 faulty in matters of doctrine, but are also untrustworthy 
 as to matters of fact, we quote from Mosheim, who asserts 
 that, — 
 
TflE Fathers. 65 
 
 TH:^S: used F^SEHOOD^N their boNTROVERSIE^i' 
 
 Says yi«t\vriter >^' 
 
 " Bttt' it Tiuist by no means pass unnoticed, that tlie 
 
 discussions instituted against tlie opposers of Christianity 
 in this age, departed far from the primitive simplicity, 
 and the correct method of controversy. For the Chris- 
 tian doctors, who were in part educated in the schools of 
 rhetoricians and sophists, inconsiderately transferred the 
 arts of these teachers to the cause of Christianity; and 
 therefore considered it of no importance, whether an 
 antagonist were confounded by base artifices, or by solid 
 arguments. Thus that mode of disputing, which the 
 ancients called economical, and which had victory rather 
 than truth for its object, was almost universally approved. 
 And the Platonists contributed to the currency of the 
 practice, by asserting that it was no sin for a person to 
 employ falsehood and fallacies for the support of truth, 
 when it was in danger of being borne down." — Ecclesi- 
 astical History, hook 1, cent. 3, part 2, chap. 3, sec. 10. 
 
 In his "Ecclesiastical Commentaries," Mosheim also 
 says : — 
 
 " By some of the weaker brethren, in their anxiety to 
 assist God with all their might [in the propagation of the 
 Christian faith], such dishonest artifices were occasionally 
 resorted to, as could not, under any circumstances, admit 
 of excuse, and were utterly unworthy of that sacred cause 
 which they were unquestionably intended to support. 
 Perceiving, for instance, in what vast repute the poetical 
 effusions of those ancient pro])hetesses, termed Sybils, 
 were held by the Greeks and Romans, some Christian, 
 or rather, perhaps, an association of Christians, in the 
 reign of Antoninus Pius, composed eight books of Sybilline 
 verses, made up of prophecies respecting Christ and his 
 kingdom. . . . Many other deceptions of this sort, 
 to which custom has very imj)roperly given the denomi- 
 jiation of plouH frauds, are known to have been practiced 
 5 
 
66 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 ill this and the succeeding century. The authors of them 
 were, in all probability, actuated by no ill intention, but 
 this is all that can be said in their favor, for their conduct 
 in this respect was certainly most ill-advised and unwar- 
 rantable. Although the greater part of those who were 
 concerned in these forgeries on the public, undoubtedly 
 belonged to some heretical sect or other, and particularly 
 to that class which arrogated to itself the pompous denom- 
 ination of Gnostics, I yet cannot take upon me to acquit 
 even the most strictly orthodox from all participation in 
 this species of criminality; for it appears from evidence 
 superior to all exception, that a pernicious maxim, whicli 
 was current in the schools not only of the Egyptians, the 
 Platonists, and the Pythagoreans, but also of the Jews, 
 was very early recognized by the Christians, and soon 
 found amongst them numerous patrons, namely, that those 
 who made it their business to deceive with a view of pro- 
 moting the cause of truth, were deserving rather of com- 
 mendatidn than censure. — Century 2, sec. 7. 
 
 Let the reader refresh his memory with whjKt has been 
 written concerning heathen philosophy, and how it tended 
 directly toward a lax condition of morals, and then when 
 he learns that the so-called Christian Fathers made 
 this heathen philosophy their constant study, he will not 
 be surprised that they should have but little regard for 
 strict truth. That some of the most renowned Fathers 
 not only stutied philosophy, but also were known as 
 teachers of philosophy even after they professed Chris- 
 tianity, is not a matter of question. Mosheim, after show- 
 ing, as we have quoted, how rapidly the church degen- 
 erated, says : — 
 
 " The external change thus wrought in the constitution 
 of the church would have been, however, far less detri- 
 mental to the interests of Christianity, had it not been 
 accompanied by others of an internal nature, which 
 
The Fathers. 67 
 
 struck at the very vitals of religion, and tended, in no 
 small degree, to affect the credit of those sacred writings 
 on which the entire system of Christian discipline relies 
 for support. Of these the most considerable and im- 
 portant are to be attributed to a taste for the cultivation 
 of philosophy and human learning, which, during the 
 preceding century, if not altogether treated with neglect 
 and contempt by the Christians, had at least been wisely 
 kept under, and by no means permitted to blend itself 
 Avith religion^; but in the age of which we are now treat- 
 ing, burst forth on a sudden into a flame, and spread 
 itself with the utmost rapidity throughout a considerable 
 part of the church. This may be accounted for, in some 
 measure, from its having been the practice of the many 
 Greek philosophers, who, in the course of this century, 
 were induced to embrace Christianity, not only to retain 
 their pristine denomination, garb, and mode of living, 
 but also to persist in recommending the study of philos- 
 ophy, and initiating youth therein. In proof of this, we 
 may, from amidst numerous other examples, adduce in 
 particular that of Justin, the celebrated philosopher and 
 martyr. The immediate nursery and very cradle, as it 
 were, of Christian philosophy, must, however, be placed 
 in the celebrated seminary which long flourished at 
 Alexandria under the denomination of the catechetical 
 school. For the persons who presided therein, in the 
 course of the age of which we are treating, namely, 
 Pantrenus, Athenagoras, and Cvlement of Alexandria, 
 not only engaged with ardor in tlie cultivation of philos- 
 ophy themselves, but also exerted their influence in per- 
 suading those whom they were educating for the office of 
 teachers in the church, to follow their example in this 
 respect, and make it their practice to associate philosoph- 
 ical principles with those of religion." — Historical Com- 
 mentaries, cent. 2, sec. 25. 
 
 The same writer says of the Fathers of the second 
 century : — 
 
 " The philosophers and learned men, who came over to 
 
68 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 the Christians in this century, were no inconsiderahle 
 protection and ornament to this holy rehgion by their dis- 
 cussions, their writings, and their talents. But if any 
 are disposed to question whether the Christian cause re- 
 ceived more benefit than injury from these men, 1 nuist 
 confess myself unable to decide the point. For the noble 
 simplicity and the majestic dignity of the Christian re- 
 ligion were lost, or, at least, impaired when these philos- 
 opliers presumed to associate their dogmas with it, and 
 to bring faith and piety under the dominion of human 
 reason," — Mosheim's Ecclesiastical History, book 1, cent. 2, 
 part 1, chap. 1, sec. 12. 
 
 This is certainly a very mild view of the case. There 
 can be no question but that the philosophers who came 
 over to the church, bringing their philosophical dogmas 
 with them, were an unmitigated curse to Christianity. 
 "Dead flies cause the ointment of the apothecary to 
 send forth a stinking savor." So the heathen customs 
 and manners of thought which these men incorporated 
 into the Christian church, corrupted the whole body. 
 Their very learning made them the more detrimental 
 to true Christianity; for it caused them to be looked 
 up to as "leaders of Christian thought," and their phi- 
 losophy was but " vain deceit," and their science only 
 that which is "falsely so called." 
 
 This conclusion will be the more apparent when we 
 remember that these men were ignorant of the Bible just 
 about in proportion as they were skilled in "philosophy." 
 Dr. Killon gives a brief liistory of each one of the early 
 Fathers, and then a<lds: — 
 
 " The preceding account of the Fathers of the second 
 and tliird centuries may enable us to form some idea of 
 the value of these writers as ecclesiastical authorities. 
 Most of them luul reached maturity before they embraced 
 
The Fathers. 69 
 
 the faith of ths gosj^el, so that, with a few exceptions, 
 they wanted tlie advantages of an early Christian educa- 
 tion. Some of them, before their conversion, had be- 
 stowed nmch time and attention on the barren speculations 
 of the pagan philosophers; and, after their reception into 
 the bosom of the church, they still continued to pursue 
 the same unprofitable studies. Cyprian, one of the most 
 eloquent of these Fathers, had been baptized only about 
 two years before he was elected bishop of Carthage ; and, 
 during his comparatively shoit episcopate, he was gener- 
 ally in a turmoil of excitement, and had, consequently, 
 little leisure for reading or mental cultivation. Such a 
 writer is not entitled to command confidence as an expos- 
 itor of the faith once delivered to the saints. Even in 
 our own day, with all the fa^^ilities supplied by printing 
 for the rapid accumulation of knowledge, no one would 
 expect much spiritual instruction from an author who 
 would undertake the oflice of an interpreter of Scripture 
 two years after his conversion from heathenism. The 
 Fathers of the second and third centuries were not re- 
 garded as safe guides even by their Christian contempo- 
 raries. . . . Tertullian, who, in point of learning, 
 vigor, and genius, stands at the head of the Latin writers 
 of this period, was connected with a party of gloomy 
 fanatics. Origen, the most voluminous and erudite of the 
 Greek Fathers, was excommunicated as a heretic. If 
 we estimate these authors, as they were appreciated by 
 the early Church of Kome, we must pronounce their 
 writings of little value. Tertullian, as a Montanist, was 
 "under the ban of the Roman bishop. Hippolytus could 
 not have been a favorite with either Zephyrinus or Callis- 
 tiis, for he denounced both as heretics. Origen was 
 treated by the Roman Church as a man under sentence 
 of excommunication. Stephen deemed even Cyprian un- 
 worthy of ecclesiastical fellowship, because the Cartha- 
 ginian prelate maintained the propriety of rebaptizing 
 heretics." » * - 
 
70 Fathers of the Cathoijc ChurcM. 
 
 / -vagaries of the fathers. 
 
 " Nothing can be more unsatisfactory, or rather chikl- 
 ish, than the explanations of Holy Writ sometimes given 
 by these ancient expositors. According to TertuUian, 
 the two sparrows mentioned in the New Testament sig- 
 nify the soul and the body; and Clemens Alexandrinus 
 gravely pleads for marriage from the promise — 'Where 
 two or three are gathered together in my name, there am 
 I in the midst of them.' Cyprian produces as an argu- 
 ment in support of the doctrine of the Trinity, that the 
 Jews observed 'the third, sixth, and ninth hours' as 
 their 'fixed and lawful seasons for prayer.' Origen 
 represents the heavenly bodies as literally engaged in 
 acts of devotion. If these authorities are to be credited, 
 the Gihon, one of the rivers of Paradise, was no other 
 than the Nile. ifYery few of the Fathers of this period 
 were acquainted with Hebrew, so that, as a class, tliey 
 were miserably qualified for the interpretation of the 
 Scriptures. Even Origen himself must have Iiad a very 
 imperfect knowledge of the language of the Old Testa- 
 ment. In consequence of their literary deficiencies, the 
 Fathers of the second and third centuries occasionally 
 commit the most ridiculous blunders. Thus, Irenieus 
 tells us that the name Jestis in Hebrew consists of two 
 letters and a half, and describes it as signifying 'that 
 Lord who contains Heaven and earth'! This Father 
 asserts also that tlie Hebrew word adonai, or the Lord, 
 denotes ' utterable and wonderful.' Clemens Alexandri- 
 nus is not more successftd as an interpreter of the sacred 
 tongue of the chosen people ; for he asserts that Jacob 
 was called Israel ' because he had seen the Lord God,* 
 and he avers that Abraham means 'the elect father of a 
 sound!'" — Ancient Church, period 2, sec. 2, chap. 1, 
 paragrapJis 31, 32. 
 
 Upon this the same writer makes the following most 
 just comments, which make a fitting close to this collec- 
 tion of statements concerning tli£ Fathers : — • 
 
The Fathers. 71 
 
 " It would seem as if the great Head of the church 
 permitted these early writers to commit the grossest mis- 
 takes, and to propound the most foolish theories, for the 
 express purpose of teaching us that we are not implicitly 
 to follow their guidance. It might have been thought 
 that authors, who flourished on the borders of apostolic 
 times, knew more of the mind of the Spirit than others 
 who appeared in succeeding ages; but the truths of 
 Scripture, like the phenomena of the visible creation, are 
 equally intelligible to all generations. If we possess 
 spiritual discernment, the trees and the flowers mil dis- 
 play the msdom and the goodness of God as distinctly 
 to us as they did to our first parents ; and, if we have 
 the * unction from the Holy One,' we may enter into the 
 meaning of the Scriptures as fully as did Justin Martyr 
 or Irenseus [and to a far greater degree, for their minds 
 were blinded and fettered by their false philosophy]. 
 To assist us in the interpretation of the New Tasta- 
 ment, we have at command a critical apparatus of which 
 they were unable to avail themselves. Jehovah is jeal- 
 ous of the honor of his word, and he has inscribed in 
 letters of light over the labors of the most ancient inter- 
 preters — ' Cease ye from man/ The 'opening of the 
 Scriptures,' so as to exhibit their beauty, their consist- 
 ency, their purity, their wisdom, and their power, is the 
 clearest proof that the commentator is possessed of * the 
 key of knowledge.' When tried by this test, Thomas 
 Scott or Matthew Henry is better entitled to confidence 
 than either Origen or Gregory Thaumaturgus. The Bi- 
 ble is its own safest expositor. * The law of the Lord is 
 perfect, converting the soul; the testimony of the Lord 
 is sure, making wise the simple.' " — !Bft* Ancient Church, 
 sec. 2, chap. 1, last paragraph. 
 
 First in order come what are called 
 
 THE "APOSTOLIC FATHERS," - ^^^ 
 
 Concerning whom in particular a few words must be 
 said. The following from the< " Encyclopedia Britan- 
 
72 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 nica " will introduce and outline this part of the subject 
 better than anything that we could write: — 
 
 "The Apostolic Fathers is a name given to certain 
 writers in the earliest period of Christianity, who were 
 believed to have been the disciples of the apostles, and to 
 have had intercourse with them. Those generally in- 
 cluded under the title are Clemens Romanus, Ignatius, 
 Polycarp, Barnabas, and Hernias. Sometimes the name 
 is extended to Papias of Hierapolis, and the WTiter of 
 the epistle to Diognetus. A critical examination of the 
 writings attributed to these men, and a critical sifting of 
 the traditions which we have in relation to their history, 
 bring out the circumstance that the name is unsuitable. 
 Clemens Romanus, Barnabas, and Hermas were supposed 
 to be persons mentioned in the New Testament ; but crit- 
 icism proves conclusively that this is a mistake in regard 
 to Barnabas and Hermas, and possibly also in regard to 
 Clemens. Polycarp, in all probability, and according to 
 the best testimony, had intercourse with apostles, but 
 it was in his early youth; and his letter belongs to a 
 period considerably later than that of the apostles. The 
 epistles of Ignatius, as well as the personal history of 
 that martyr, are involved in great obscurity, and critics 
 differ widely in regard to both." 
 
 In his " Introductory Notice" to the " Apostolic Fath- 
 ers," Bishop Coxe says of them : — 
 
 "Disappointment may be the first emotion of the 
 student who comes down from the mount w^here he has 
 dwelt in the tabernacles of evangelifc-ts and apostles; for 
 these disciples are confessedly inferior to the masters; 
 they speak with the voices of infirm and fiillible men, 
 and not like the New Testament writers, with the fiery 
 tongues of the Holy Ghost." 
 
 "Their very mistakes enable us to attach a higher 
 value to the superiority of inspired writers. They were 
 not wiser than the naturalists of their day who taught 
 them the history of the Phoenix and other fables ; but 
 
The Fathers. 73 
 
 nothing of tliis sort is found in Scripture. The Fath- 
 ers are inferior in kind as well as degree." 
 
 ' Neander speaks of the writings attributed to the so- 
 called Apostolic Fathers, as follows: — 
 
 "The next ecclesiastical waiters who come after the 
 apostles, are the so-called Apostolic Fathers (^Patres 
 Apostolici), who come from the apostolic age, and must 
 have been the disciples of the apostles. The remarkable 
 difference between the writings of the apostles and those 
 of the Apostolic Fathers, who are yet so close upon the 
 former in point of time, is a remarkable phenomenon of 
 its kind. While in other cases such a transition is usu- 
 ally quite gradual, in this case we find a sudden one. 
 Here there is no gradual transition, but a sudden spring; 
 a remark which is calculated to lead us to a recognition 
 of the peculiar activity of the divine Spirit in the souls 
 of the apostles." — Rosens Neander, p. Jfil . 
 
 Again he says : — 
 
 " The writings of the so-called Apostolic Fathers are, 
 alas! come down to us, for the most part, in a very un- 
 certain condition ; partly, because in early times writings 
 were counterfeited under the name of those venerable 
 men of the church, in order to propagate certain opinions 
 or principles ; partly, because those writings which they 
 had really published were adulterated, and especially so 
 to serve a Judaso-hierarchical party, which would fain 
 crush the free evangelical spirit." — Ih, 
 
 It will be seen that Neander supposes that the writings 
 are partly, at least, the genuine productions of the men 
 whose names they bear ; but he acknowledges that, even 
 if genuine, they have been counterfeited and adulterated 
 till there is no confidence to be placed in them, either as 
 to matters of doctrine or matters of fact. ^This-tJonc^- 
 eion we may now verify, as we examine them in detail. 
 
CHAPTER V. 
 
 THE "EPISTLE OF BARNABAS." 
 
 The famous essay on " Snakes in Ireland " consisted 
 of but three words, namely, "There are none." In like 
 manner might we dispose of the so-called " Epistle of 
 Barnabas," for there is no such thing. In proof of this 
 statement we offer the following testimony : — 
 
 "An epistle has come down to lis bearing the name of 
 Barnabas, but clearly not written by him. . . . The 
 writer evidently was unacquainted with the Hebrew 
 Scriptures, and has committed the blunder of supposing 
 that Abraham was familiar ^\^th the Greek alphabet 
 some centuries before it existed." — McClintock and 
 Strong^s Encyclopedia, art. Barnabas, Epistle of. 
 
 The "Encyclopedia Britannica" says: — 
 
 " The internal evidence is conclusive against its genu- 
 ineness." 
 
 Mosheim says : — 
 
 " The ei^istle that has come down to us with the name 
 of Barnabas affixed to it, and which consists of two parts, 
 the one comprising proofs of the divinity of the Chris- 
 tian religion derived from the books of the Old Testa- 
 ment, the other, a collection of moral precepts, is un- 
 questionably a composition of great antiquity, but we are 
 left in uncertainty as to its author. For as to what is 
 suggested by some, of its having been written by that 
 Barnabas who was the friend and companion of St. Paul, 
 tlie futility of such a notion is easily to be made apparent 
 from the letter itself; several of the opinions and in- 
 terpretations of Scripture which it contains, liaving in 
 in them so little of either truth, dignity, or force, as to 
 
 (74) 
 
The Epistle of Barnabas. 75 
 
 render it impossible that tliey could ever have proceeded 
 from til e pen of a jnan divinely instructed." — Eccl. Co7n., 
 cent, ly sec. 53. 
 
 Neander says:^- 
 
 "It is impossible that we should acknowledge this 
 epistle to. belong to that Barnabas, who was worthy to be 
 the companion of the apostolic labors of St. Paul, and 
 had received his name from the power of his animated 
 discourses in the churches. We find a different spirit 
 breathing throughout it, than that of such an apostolic 
 man. We perceive in it a Jew of Alexandrian educa- 
 tion, who had embraced Christianity, who was prepared 
 by his Alexandrian education for a spiritual conception of 
 Christianity; but who set too high a value on his Alex- 
 andrian and Jewish Gnosis, who looked for especial wis- 
 dom in a mystical and fanciful interpretation of the Old 
 Testament, more resembling the spirit of Philo than that 
 of St. Paul, or even that of the epistle to the Hebrews, 
 and who indulged himself in such interpretations in a 
 silly manner.^'— P. 4(?7. 
 
 In his "Ecclesiastical History," Mosheim again 
 
 -7- 
 
 "The epistle of Barnabas as it is called, w^as, in my 
 judgment, the production of some Jewish Christian who 
 lived in this century [the first] or the next, who had no 
 bad intentions, but possessed little genius and was infected 
 with the fabulous opinions of the Jews. He was clearly 
 a different person from Barnabas, the companion of St. 
 Paul." — Book 1, cent. 1, part 2, chap. 2, sec. 21. 
 
 Yet so little is really known of the one who really 
 wrote this epistle that while these writers suppose him to 
 have been a Jew, and of the first century, the " Schaff- 
 Herzog Encyclopedia " says :-^)- 
 
 ~" The opinion to-day is, that Barnabas was not the au- 
 thor. The epistle was probably written in Alexandria, at 
 
76 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 the beginning of the second century, and by a Gentile 
 Christian." 
 
 Dr. Schaff, in his " History of the Christian Church " 
 (section 1 21), says : — • 
 
 "The writings which have come down to us under 
 the names of Barnabas and Hennas are of luicertain 
 origin,'^and inferior to the other productions of the Apos- 
 tolic Fathers in matter as well as in sound simplicity, and 
 contain many elements which we must ascribe to a later 
 generation." 
 
 "A genuine production of Barnabas would doubtless 
 have found a place in the Canon, with tlie writings of 
 Mark and Luke, and the e])istle to the Hebrews. Be- 
 sides, the contents of this epistle are not worthy of him. 
 It has many good ideas, and vahiable testimonies, such as 
 that in favor of the observance of the Christian Sabhatli. 
 But it goes to extremes in opposition to Ju'daism,and in- 
 dulges in all sorts of artificial, sometimes absurd, allegori- 
 cal fancies." 
 
 To be sure he does, but w^hat of it ? AVhat if the 
 epistle is a forgery made by some unknown and irrespon- 
 sible person ? What if its writer was an ignoramus who 
 indulged in the most absurd fancies? So long as it 
 gives "valuable testimonies " in favor of the observance of 
 the " Christian Sabbath," it will undoubtedly be consid- 
 ered worthy of an honored place in " Christian litera- 
 ture." The friends of the Sunday sabbath could not 
 make a more perfect exhibit of the scarcity of argument v 
 in its behalf, than by saying that the so-called "Epistle Si' 
 of Barnabas " contains " valuable testimonies " in its fa- ^' 
 vor. How valuable those testimonies are we shall soon 
 see. 
 
 Kitto's " Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge " (arti- 
 cle Barnabas) says of the writer of this epistle: — 
 
The Epistle of Barnabas. 77 
 
 " He makes unauthorized additions to various parts 
 of the Jewish Cultus; his views of the Old Economy are 
 confused and erroneous; and he adopts a mode of in- 
 terpretation countenanced by none of the inspired writers, 
 and to the Last degree puerile and absurd. The infer- 
 ence is unavoidable, that Barnabas, 'the son of prophecy,' 
 *the man full of tiie Holy Spirit and of faith,' was not the 
 author of. this epistle." 
 
 And in the article on " The Lord's Day," the so-called 
 'Epistle of Barnabas^is spoken of as " probably a forgery 
 of the second century." 
 
 Bishop Arthur Cleveland Coxe, in his introductory 
 note to the epistle as published by the Christian Litera- 
 ture Publishing Company, says : — 
 
 " The writer of this epistle is supposed to have been 
 an Alexandrian Jew of the times of Trajan and Hadrian. 
 He was a layman; but possibly he bore the name of 
 * Barnabas,' and so has been confounded with his holy 
 apostolic name-sire." 
 
 Andlhe original introductory note by the translators 
 of the epistle for the Edinburgh edition, contains ihe 
 
 ^* Nothing certain is known as to the author of the 
 ^feUo-wing epistle. The writer's name is Barnabas, but 
 scarcely any scholars now ascribe it to the illustrious 
 friend and companion of St. Paul.'^'^ ... On perus- 
 ing the epistle, the reader will be in circumstances to 
 judge of this matter for himself He will be led to con- 
 sider whether the spirit and tone of the writing, as so 
 decidedly opposed to all respect for Judaism — tlie nu- 
 merous inaccuracies which it contains with respect to 
 Mosaic enactments and observances — the absurd and 
 trifling interpretations of Scripture which it suggests — 
 and the many silly vaunts of superior knowledge in which 
 its writer indulges — can possibly comport with its ascrij> 
 
78 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 tion to the f^low-laborer of St. Paul. When it is re- 
 membered that iiOyone ascribes the epistle to the apos- 
 tolic Barnabas till the times of Clement of Alexandria, 
 and that it is ranked Iby Eiisebius among the 'spurious' 
 ^vritings, which, however much known and read in the 
 church, were never regarded as authoritative, little doubt 
 can remain that the external evidence is of itself we^k, 
 and should not make us hesitate for a moment in refusing 
 -to ascribe this writing to Barnabas the apostle. . . . 
 "In point of style, both as respects thought and expression, 
 a very low place must be assigned it. We know nothing 
 certain of the region in wliich tlie author lived, or where 
 the first readers were to be found." 
 
 It will now be in place to quote a few jmssages from the 
 famous document, that our readers may judge for them- 
 selves of its character. And first we shall quote the 
 " valuable testimonies " " in favor of the observance " of 
 Sunday. All that is said on this subject is contained in 
 chapter 15 of the epistle, which we quote entire: — 
 
 " Further, also, it is written concerning the Sabbath in 
 the decalogue whicli (the Lord) spoke, face to face, to 
 Moses on Mount Sinai, 'And sanctify ye the Sabbath of 
 the Lord with clean hands and a pure heart.' And he 
 says in another place, * If my sons keep the Sabbath, 
 then will I cause my mercy to rest upon them.' The 
 Sabbatli is mentioned at the beginning of the creation 
 (thus) : 'And God made in six days the works of his 
 hands, and made an end -on the seventh day, and rested 
 on it, and sanctified it.' Attend, my cliildren, to the 
 meanii^g of tliis expression, 'He finislied in six days.' 
 This implieth that the Lord will finisli all things in six 
 thousand years, for a day is with lu:^il.ii thousand years. 
 And lie himself testified, saying, ij^mold, to-day will be 
 as a thousand years.' Thereforj^Smy children, in six 
 days, that is, in six thousand years, all things will l)e 
 finished. 'And he rested on the seventh day.' This 
 
The Epistle of Barnabas. 79 
 
 ' meaneth: when his Son, coming (again), shall destroy the 
 time of the wicked man, and judge the ungodly, and 
 change the sun, and the moon, and the stars, then shall 
 he truly rest on the seventh day. Moreover, he says, 
 * Thou shalt sanctify it with pure hands and a pure heart.' 
 If, therefore, anyone can now sanctify the day which God 
 has sanctified, except he is pure in heart in all things, we 
 are deceived. Behold, therefore: certainly then one prop- 
 erly resting sanctifies it, when we ourselves, having re- 
 ceived the promise, wickedness no longer existing, and all 
 things having been made new by the Lord, shall be able 
 to work righteousness. Then we shall be able to sanctify 
 it, having been first sanctified ourselves. Further, he says 
 to them, ' Your new moons and your Sabbaths I cannot 
 endure.' Ye perceive how bespeaks: Your present Sab- 
 baths are not acceptable to me, but that is which I have 
 made (namely this), when, giving rest to all things, 1 
 shall make a beginning of the eighth day, that is, a be- 
 ginning of another world. Wherefore, also, we keep the 
 eighth day with joyfulness, the day also on which Jesus 
 rose again from the dead. And when he had manifested 
 himself, he ascended into the heavens." 
 
 That is the whole of it' ^- .^-is useless to try to analyze 
 it, because it doesn't mean anything. The writer mis- 
 quotes Scripture, and manufactures it when he doesn't find 
 any to suit his purpose. He also allegorizes the plainest 
 statements of fact, and strings words together in such a 
 way as to defy comprehension by the most acute gram- 
 marian. But all of this can be overlooked so long as he 
 mentions the " eighth day," and thus furnishes " valuable 
 testimony" for the observance of Sunday.^^^^-^. 
 
 This chapter alone sufiiciently proves the truth of the 
 statement that the epistle contains " absurd and trifling 
 interpretations of Scripture," but we will give a few more 
 instances. In the last part of chapter 9 there is some in- 
 
80 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 formation which the writer of the epistle considered the* 
 most valuable of any he had to bestow. We quote : — 
 
 " Learn then, my children, concerning all things richly, 
 that Abraham, the first who enjoined circumcision, look- 
 ing forward in spirit to Jesus, practiced that rite, having 
 received the mysteries of the three letters. For (the 
 Scripture) saith, 'And Abraham circumcised ten, and 
 eight, and three hundred men of his household.' What, 
 then, was the knowledge given to him in this ? Learn 
 the eighteen first, and then the three hundred. The ten 
 and the eight are thus donated — Ten by I, and eight by 
 H. You have (the initials of the name of) Jesus. And 
 because the cross was to express the grace (of our re- 
 demption) by the letter T, he says also, 'Three Hundred.' 
 He signifies, therefore, Jesus by two letters, and the cross 
 by one. He knows this, who has put within us the en- 
 grafted gift of his doctrine. No one has been admitted 
 by me to a more excellent piece of knowledge than this, 
 but I know that ye are worthy." 
 
 This is truly an astonishing and most excellent piece 
 of information ! Archdeacon Farrar says of it : — 
 
 " It never even occurred to Barnabas or to any who 
 adopted this singular specimen of exposition that there 
 was any absurdity in attributing to a Chaldean Emir an 
 application of mystic processes and numerical values to 
 the letters of an alphabet which had no existence till 
 hundreds of years after he had returned to dust." — His- 
 tory of Interpretation, p. 168. 
 
 But although the egotistical pseudo-Barnabas con- 
 sidered this the most " excellent piece of knowledge " 
 that he had condescended to share with the common 
 crowd, the chapter inunediately foHowing (chapter 10) 
 certainly surpasses it in that sort of Avisdom. Although 
 it is quite long, we quote the whole of it, that the vj^qt 
 may see the caliber of the man wJi^ wrote thi^ epistle. 
 
The Epistle of Barna.bas. 81 
 
 The chapter is entitled, "Spiritual Significance of the 
 Precepts of Moses Respecting Different Kinds of Food," 
 and reads as follows : — 
 
 " Now, wherefore did Moses say, ' Thou shalt not eat 
 the swine, nor the eagle, nor the hawk, nor the raven, 
 nor any fish which is not possessed of scales'? He em- 
 braced three doctrines in his mind (in doing so). More- 
 over, the Lord saith to them in Deuteronomy, 'And I 
 will establish my ordinances among this people.' Is there 
 then not a command of God that they should not eat 
 (these things) ? There is, but Moses spoke with a spirit- 
 ual reference. For this reason he named the swine, as 
 much as to say, * Thou shalt not join thyself to men who 
 resemble swine.' For when they live in pleasure, they for- 
 get their Lord; but when they come to want, they ac- 
 knowledge the Lord. And (in like manner) the swine, 
 when it has eaten, does not recognize its master; but 
 when hungry it cries out, and on receiving food is quiet 
 again. * Neither shalt thou eat,' says, he, 'the eagle, nor 
 the hawk, nor the kite, nor the raven.' ' Thou shalt not 
 join thyself,' he means, *to such men as know not how to 
 procure food for themselves by labor and sweat, but 
 seize on that of others in their iniquity, and although 
 wearing an aspect of simplicity, are on the watch to 
 plunder others.' So these birds, while they sit idle, in- 
 quire how they may devour the flesh of others, proving 
 themselves pests (to all) by their wickedness. *And 
 thou shalt not eat,' he says, 'the lamprey, or the polypus, 
 or the cuttle-fish.' He means, ' Thou shalt not join thy- 
 self or be like to such men as are ungodly to the end, 
 and are condemned to death.' In like manner as those 
 fishes, above accursed, float in the deep, not swimming (on 
 the surface) like the rest, but make their abode in the 
 mud which lies at the bottom. Moreover, ' Thou shalt 
 not,' he says, ' eat the hare.' Wherefore ? ' Thou shalt 
 not'be a corrupter of boys, nor like unto such.' Because 
 the hare multiplies, year by year, the places of its con- 
 
 6 
 
82 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 ception ; for as many years as it lives so many [places of 
 conception] it has. Moreover, *Thou shalt not eat the 
 hyena.' He means, 'Thou shalt not be an adulterer, 
 nor a corrupter, nor be like to them that are such.' 
 Wherefore? Because that animal annually changes its 
 sex, and is at one time male, and at another female. 
 Moreover, he has rightly detested the weasel. For he 
 means, ' Thou shalt not be like to those whom we hear of 
 as committing wickedness with the mouth, on account of 
 their uncleanness; nor shalt thou be joined to those im- 
 pure women who commit iniquity with the mouth. For 
 this animal conceives by the mouth.'*' Moses then is- 
 sued three doctrines concerning meats with a spiritual 
 significance; but they received them according to fleshly 
 desire, as if he ]iad merely spoken of (literal) meats. 
 David, however, comprehends the knowledge of the three 
 doctrines, and speacks in like manner; 'Blessed is the 
 man who hath not walked in the counsel of the ungodly,' 
 even as the fishes (referred to) go in darkness to the 
 depths (of the sea) ; * and hath not stood in the way of 
 sinners,' even as those who profess to fear the Lord, but 
 go astray like swine; *and hath not sat in the seat of 
 scorners,' even as those birds that lie in wait for prey. 
 Take a full and firm grasp of this spiritual knowledge. 
 But Moses says still further, * Ye shall eat every ani- 
 mal that is cloven-footed and ruminant.' What does he 
 mean? (The ruminant animal de^ote^ him) who, on re- 
 ceiving food, recognizes him that nourishes him, and be- 
 ing satisfied by him, is visibly made {^lad. Well S|)ake 
 (Moses), having respect to the commandment. What, 
 then, does he mean ? That we ought to join ourselves to 
 those that fear the Lord, those who meditate in their 
 heart on the commandment which they have received, 
 those who both utter the judgments of the Lord and 
 observe them, those who know that mediation is a 
 work of gladness, and who ruminate upon the word of 
 th^'Lord. But what means the cloven-footed,? That 
 the righteous man also walks in this world, yet looks 
 
The Epistle of Barnabas. 83 
 
 forward to the holy state (to come). Behold how well 
 Moses legislated. But how was it possible for them to 
 understand or comprehend these things? We then, 
 rightly understanding his commandments, explain them 
 as the Lord intended. For this purpose he circumcised 
 our ears and our hearts, that we might understand these 
 things." 
 
 Such Ts-the nature of this epistle^which even to-day is 
 quoted as containing ^Araluable testimony^'^in behalf of 
 Sunday observance. Certainly the thoughtful reader 
 cannot fail to see that scarcely any stronger indictment 
 could be brought against the Sunday institution than the 
 fact that it draws testimony for its support from such a 
 source. It is true that Sunday advocates say that they 
 do not depend upon this testimony; but we notice that 
 they never fail to quote it. The simple knowledge that 
 the so-called " Epistle of Barnabas " is quoted in behalf 
 of any doctrine or practice, should be sufficient evidence 
 that such doctrine or practice is unworthy of belief 
 With this we leave the pseudo-Barnabas. ^//^ 
 
 4 /^ ^ 
 
 J^f^ 
 
 u^^-^^ '^e^"'V 
 
 ■^ /^ 
 
 
CHAPTER VI. 
 
 HER MAS AND CLEMENT. 
 
 "pastor, (or SHErHERE^ of HERMAS." 
 
 This is the title of a collection of visions, command- 
 ments, and similitudes, which were written sometime in 
 the second century by some person not known. From 
 the fact that the writer calls himself Hernias, some have 
 jumped to the conclusion that the writer was the friend 
 of Paul (Rom. 16:14), but no one now attributes its 
 production to him. It is now quite generally supposed 
 that he was a brother of Pius L, who was bishop of Rome 
 from 143 to 157 A. D. Mosheim says: — 
 
 "The book entitled 'The Shepherd of Hermas' (so 
 called, because an angel, in the form and habit of a shep- 
 herd, is the leading cliaracter in the drama), was composed 
 in the second century by Hermas, the brother of Pius the 
 Roman bishop. The writer, if he was indeed sane, 
 deemed it proper to forge dialogues held with God and 
 angels in order to insinuate what he regarded as salutary 
 truths, more effectually into the minds of his readers. 
 But his celestial spirits talk more insipidly than our 
 scavengers and porters." — Ecclesiastical History, book i, 
 cent. 1, part 2, chap. 2^ sec. 21. 
 
 In the " Ecclesiastical Commentaries" (cent. 1, sec. 54) 
 he again says of the book: — 
 
 " There is such an admixture of folly and superstition 
 with piety, such a ridiculous association of the most 
 egregious nonsense with tilings momentous and useful, 
 not only in the celestial visions which constitute the sub- 
 stance of his first book, but also in the precepts and 
 (84) 
 
/ 
 / 
 
 / 
 Hermas and Clement. 85 
 
 parables which are put into the mouth of the angel in 
 the two others, as to render it a matter of astonishment 
 that men of learning should ever have thought of giving 
 Hermas a place amongst the inspired writers. To me it 
 appears clear that he must have been either a wild, disor- 
 dered fanatic, or else, as is more likely, a man who, by 
 way of more readily drawing the attention of his breth- 
 ren to certain maxims and precepts which he deemed 
 just and salutary, conceived himseLf to be warranted in 
 pretending to have derived them from conversations with 
 God and the angels." 
 
 In note 2 to the above section, Mosheim says :— 
 
 " Several things, which I cannot well enter into in this 
 place, conspire to impress -me with the opinion that 
 Hermas could never have been so far the dupe of an 
 overheated imagination, as to fancy that he saw and 
 heard things which in reality had no existence, but that 
 he knowingly and willfully was guilty of a cheat, and 
 invented those divine conversations and visions which he 
 asserts himself to have enjoyed, with a view to obtain a 
 more ready reception for certain precepts and admoni- 
 tions which he conceived would prove salutary to the 
 Koman Church. At the time when he wrote, it was an 
 established maxim with many of the Christians, that it 
 was pardonable in an advocate for religion to avail him- 
 self of fraud and deception, if it were likely that they 
 might conduce towards the attainment of any considerable 
 good." 
 
 And the note concludes as follows: — 
 
 " The * Pastor of Hermas ' is a fictitious work, of much 
 the same kind with what are termed the ' Clementina' and 
 the * Recognitions of Clement.' In its plan however it is 
 somewhat inferior to these, as instead of mortal characters 
 conversing, we have the Deity himself, and his ministers 
 or angels introduced on the scene." 
 
 There is no reference in the "Pastor of Hermas" to 
 
86 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 Sunday or to Sunday observance, but, as the translator 
 says in his introductory note — 
 
 "The work is very important in many respects; but 
 especially as reflecting the tone and style of books which 
 interested and instructed the Christians of the second 
 and third centuries." 
 
 Its importance in this respect will be more apparent, 
 after we have given a few specimens of its style. But 
 first we wish to show how it waa regarded by the churchqs 
 of that date. From the translator's introductory no- 
 tice we extract the following : — 
 
 " The * Pastor of Hermas ' was one of the most popu- 
 lar books, if not the most popular book, in the Christian 
 church during the second, third, and fourth centuries. 
 It occupied a position analogous in some respects to that 
 of Bunyan's 'Pilgrim's Progress' in modern times, and 
 critics have frequently compared the two works." 
 
 " The early writers are of opinion that it was really 
 inspired. Irenseus quotes it as Scripture ; Clemens Alex- 
 andrinus speaks of it as making its statements 'divinely;' 
 and Origen, though a few of his expressions are regarded, 
 by some as implying doubt, unquestionably gives it as his 
 opinion that it is 'divinely inspired.' Eusebius mentions 
 that difference of opinion prevailed in his day as to the in- 
 spiration of the book, some opposing its claims, and others 
 maintaining its divine origin, especially because it formed 
 an admirable introduction to the Christian faith. For 
 this latter reason it was read publicly, he tells us, in the 
 churches." 
 
 With this introduction, we will proceed to the book 
 itself It opens thus :^ 
 
 " He who had brought me up, sold me to one Rhode 
 in Rome. Many years after this I recognized her, and 
 I began t(j love her as ^ sister. Some time after, I saw 
 her bathe in the River Tiber ; and I gave her my hand, 
 and drew her out of the iiver. The sight of her beauty 
 
Hermas and Clement. 87 
 
 made me think with myself, ' I should be a happy man 
 if I could but get a wife as handsome and good as she 
 is.' This was the only thought that passed through me: 
 this and nothing more. — Book i, vision 1, chap. 1. 
 
 Since in the next chaj)ter but one the writer speaks of 
 his sons, and quite frequently afterwards qf his wife, we 
 cannot feel that his first appearance to us is to his credit. 
 The following will serve to show that the writer is justly 
 called by Mosheim " a wild, disordered fanatic." It is 
 from the first part of vision 3: — 
 
 "The vision which I saw, my brethren, was of the 
 following nature. Having fasted frequently, and having 
 prayed to the Lord that he would show me the revela- 
 tion which he promised to show me through that old 
 woman, the same night that old woman appeared to me, 
 and said to me, 'Since you are so anxious and eager to 
 know all things, go into the part of the country where 
 you tarry ; and about the fifth hour I shall appear unto 
 you, and show you all that you ought to see.' I asked 
 her, saying, ' Lady, into what part of the country am I 
 to go?' And she said, ' Into any part you wish.' Then 
 I chose a spot which was suitable, and retired. Before, 
 however, I began to speak and to mention the place, she 
 said to me, ' I will come where you wish.' Accordingly, 
 I went to the country, and counted the hours, and reached 
 the place where I had promised to meet her. And I see an 
 ivory seat ready placed, and on it a linen cushion, and above 
 the linen cushion was spread a covering of fine linen. 
 Seeing these laid out, and yet no one in the place, I began 
 to feel awe, and as it were a trembling seized hold of me, 
 and my hair stood on end, and as \\, were a horror came 
 upon me when I saw that I was all alone. But on com- 
 ing back to myself and calling to mind the glory of God, 
 I took ccnirage, bent my knees, and again confessed my sins 
 to God as I had done before. Whereupon the old woman 
 approached, accompanied by six young men whom I had 
 
88 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 also seen before; and she stood behind me, and listened 
 to me, as I prayed and confessed my sins to the Lord. 
 And touching me she said, * Hermas, cease praying con- 
 tinually for your siiis ; pray for righteousness, that you 
 may have a portion of it immediately in your house.' 
 On this, she took me up by the hand, and brought me to 
 the seat, and said to the young men, ' Go and build.' 
 When the young men had gone and we were alone, she 
 said to me, ' Sit here.' I say to her, ' Lady, permit my 
 elders to be seated first,' * Do what I bid you,' said she ; 
 *sit down.' When I would have sat down on her right, 
 she did not permit me, but with her hand beckoned to me 
 to sit down on the left. While I was thinking about 
 this, and feeling vexed that she did not let me sit on the 
 right, she said, ^Are you vexed, Hermas?' The place 
 to the right is for others who have already pleased God, 
 and have suffered for his name's sake ; and you have yet 
 much to accomplish before you can sit with them." 
 
 Passing by a great deal of nonsense, for the book con- 
 tains little else, we come to the seventh chapter of vision 
 3, where we find the following bit of teaching concerning 
 purgatory: — 
 
 "She finished her exposition of the tower. But I, 
 shameless as I yet was, asked her, ' Is repentance possi- 
 ble for all those stones which have been' cast away and 
 did not fit into the building of the tower, and will they 
 yet have a place in this tower ? ' * Repentance,' said she, 
 ' is yet possible, but in this tower they cannot find a suit- 
 able place. But in another and much inferior place 
 they will be laid, and that, too, only when they have been 
 tortured and completed the days pf their sins. And on 
 this account will they* be transferi[ed, because they have 
 partaken of the righteous Word.: And then only will 
 they be removed from their jnnii^hments when the thought 
 of repenting of the evil deeds which they have done has 
 come into their hearts. But if it does not come into their 
 hearfe, they will not be saved, on Recount of the hardness 
 of their heart.' " i 
 
Hermas and Clement. 89 
 
 Thus was the pagan notion of purgatory early intro- 
 duced into the church. 
 
 In book 2, commandment 3, this teacher, whose writ- 
 ings were read in the churches, and were considered in- 
 spired, represents himself as weeping because he had all 
 his life been guilty of falsehoods, and the angel gives him 
 the wonderful assurance that if he keeps the words of 
 truth which he hears, " even the falsehoods which you 
 formerly told in your transactions may come to be be- 
 lieved through the truthfulness of your present state- 
 ments." 
 
 In book 3, similitude 5, chapter 2, he is told a story of 
 a man who planted a portion of a field to vines, and left 
 one of his slaves to stake it, and to do nothing else while 
 the master was gone. The slave was to receive his free- 
 dom if he did as he was commanded. But after the slave 
 had done what the master had left for him to do, he 
 cleared the vineyard of weeds, and, digging up the re- 
 maining portion of the field, he planted that to vines also. 
 When the master returned, he made the slave his heir, 
 for having done so much more than he was commanded 
 to do. This parable is explained as follows in the next 
 obapter : — 
 
 " If you do any good beyond what is commanded by 
 God, you will gain for yourself more abundant glory, 
 and mil be more honored by God than you would other- 
 wise be. If, therefore, in keeping the commandments of 
 God, you do, in addition, these services, you will liave joy 
 if you observe them according to my command." 
 
 Bishop Coxe, who is the especial apologist for Hermas, 
 says that " to read into this passage the idea of supere- 
 rogatory merit is an unpardonable anachronism." That 
 
90 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 is, he claims that this passage cannot teach supererogatory 
 merit, because no such doctrine was held at that time ! 
 But we may not reason in that way. We can determine 
 what doctrines men believed at that time only by w^hat 
 they taught. The statement that men did not hold that 
 doctrine at that early date, is overthrown by this passage, 
 where it is clearly taught; for the unprejudiced reader 
 will see in it the Catholic dogma that men may be better 
 than the Lord requires them to be. This is the founda- 
 tion of the antichristian doctrine of indulgences ibr sin. 
 It is not at all surprising to find this doctrine taught by 
 a semi-heathen writer even in the second century, for it 
 is perfectly in keeping with heathen conceit. 
 
 The effect of the following childish, silly, and wicked 
 passage upon those who regarded the writings of Hernias 
 as inspired, can be better imagined than described. 
 When we come to consider the great apostasy, we shall 
 see that the reading of such stuff in the church bore its 
 legitimate fruit: — 
 
 " Having spoken tliese words he wished to depart; but 
 I laid hold of him by the wallet, and began to adjure him 
 by the Lord that he would explain what he had showed 
 me. He said to me, ' I must rest a little, and tlien I 
 shall explain to you everything; wait for me here until I 
 return.' I said to liim, *Sir, what can I do here alone?' 
 *You are not alone,' he said, *for these virgins are with 
 you.' 'Give me in charge to them, then,' I replied. 
 The Shepherd called them to him, and said to tliem, ' I 
 intrust him to you until I come,' and went away. And 
 I was alone with the virgins; and they were rather 
 merry, but were friendly to me, especially the four more 
 distinguished of them. 
 
 "The virgins said to me, * The Shepherd does not come 
 hereto-day.' 'What, then,' said I, 'am I to do?' They 
 
Hermas a^d Clement. 91 
 
 replied, 'Wait for him uiiiil he comes; and if he comes 
 he will converse with yoi^, and if he does not come you 
 will remain here with us until he does come.' I said to 
 them, 'I will wait for hiijii until it is late; and if he does 
 not arrive, I will go awaj^ into the house, and come back 
 early in the morning.'. /And they answered and said to 
 me, * You were intrusted to us ; you cannot go away from 
 us.' 'Where, then,' I said, 'am I to remain?' 'You 
 will sleep with us,' they| replied, ' as a brother, and not as 
 a husband: for you are our brother, and for the time to 
 come we intend to abide with you, for we love you ex- 
 ceedingly!' But I was ashamed to remain with them. 
 And she who seemed tq be the first among them began to 
 kiss me. (And the others seeing her kissing me, began 
 also to kiss me), and to lead me round the tower, and 
 to ])lay with me. An(i I, t^o, became like a young man, 
 and began to play with them : for some of them formed 
 a chorus, and others jdanced, and others sang; and I, 
 keeping silence, walked with them around the tower, and 
 was merry with them. , And when it grew late I wished 
 to go into the house ; and they would not let me, but de- 
 tained me. So I remained with them during the night, 
 and slept beside the to\ter. Now the virgins spread their 
 linen tunics on the ground, and made me lie down in the 
 midst of them; and tliiey did nothing at all but pray; 
 and I without ceasing prayed with them, and not less 
 than they. And the virgins rejoiced because I thus 
 prayed. And I remained tliere with the virgins until 
 the next day at the second hour. Then the Shepherd 
 returned, and said to the virgins, ' Did you offer him any 
 insult?' 'Ask him,' they said. I said to him, 'Sir, I 
 w^as delighted that I remained with them.'" — Book 3, 
 similitude 9, chap. 10, 11. 
 
 Our reason for placing this matter before the reader is 
 that he may judge for himself of the character of the 
 early writings wiiich are liauded so highly, and that he 
 may see the stuff upon which the early churches were 
 
92 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 fed. The translator says of the book that it " is very- 
 important in many respects ; but especially as reflecting 
 the tone and style of books which interested and in- 
 structed the Christians of the second and third centuries." 
 And it is to churches which were interested and in- 
 structed by such stuff, that we are urged to look for an 
 example of Christian faith and practice. We are told 
 that the Sunday sabbath is worthy of regard because it 
 originated in the early history of the church ; but when 
 we read that the " Pastor of Hermas " was " one of the 
 most popular books, if not the most popular book, in the 
 Christian church during the second, third, and fourth 
 centuries," and that "the em-ly writers are of opinion 
 that it was really inspired," we prefer to go elsewhere for 
 a model. And we can feel only pity for the blindness of 
 a man who in \thisage will defend such a work, as does 
 Bishop Coxe, by saying, " Blessed were the simple folk 
 . . . . who eagerly drank in the pure and searching 
 morality of the ' Shepherd.' " Pure and searching morality 
 indeed ! How vicious would their teaching have to be 
 before he would call it immoral ? 
 
 In speaking thus of the churches in the second, third, 
 and fourth centuries, tlie writer would not be understood 
 as liolding that there was then no pure and undefiled re- 
 ligion. There were as pure Christians then as there have 
 ever been before or since ; but they did not constitute tlie 
 bulk of the churches. Tliey were the few among whom 
 the Bible was the most popular book, and who followed 
 its clear light instead of the darkness of nominally con- 
 verted heathen pliilosophers, or of " wild, disordered fanat- 
 ics." If the reader wishes to know the customs of these 
 real Christians, he will find them clearly set forth in the 
 
Hermas^ and Clement. ^^ 
 
 teachings ot Christ and the apostles, as found in the 
 Bible, which is the onl}[ guide for the Christians of every 
 age. Y ' 
 
 THE "epistle of CLEMENT." 
 
 There are two epistles and several other productions 
 attributed to Clement of Rome, but as the first epistle is 
 the only one that is by anyone regarded as genuine, it is 
 the only one that we need to notice. This epistle opens 
 thus: "The church of God which sojourns at Rome, to 
 the church of God sojpurning at Corinth." This is the 
 only signature it has; but in the catalogue of contents 
 prefixed to the manuscript, the authorship is attributed 
 to one Clement. .AIL that is known of him is that he is 
 supposed to have been the one whom the Catholics claim 
 as the third (by son^e the fifth) pope of Rome. It is 
 therefore supposed that this epistle was written about 
 the close of the first century of the Christian era. Fol- 
 lowing is what Mosheim has to say of this matter : — 
 
 " Next after the apostles, Clepaent, the bishop of Rome, 
 obtained very high reputation as one of the writers of this 
 century. The accounts we have at this day of his life, 
 actions, and death, are, for the most part, uncertain. 
 There are still extant, two epistles to the Corinthians 
 bearing his name, written in Greek ; of these, it is gener- 
 ally supposed that the first is genuine, and that the 
 second is falsely palmed upon the holy man by some de- 
 ceiver. Yet even the first epistle seems to have been 
 corrupted by some indiscreet person, who was sorry to see 
 no more marks of erudition and genius in a production 
 of so great a man. 
 
 " The other works which bear the name of Clement, 
 namely, the 'Apostolic Canons,' the 'Apostolic Constitu- 
 tions,' the ' Recognitions of Clement,' and the ' Clementina,' 
 were fraudulently ascribed to this eminent Father, by 
 
94 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 some deceiver, for tlie purpose of procuring them greater 
 authority. This, all now concede. . . . The eight 
 books of 'Apostolical Constitutions' are the work of some 
 austere and melancholy author, who designed to reform 
 the worship and discipline of the church, which he thought 
 were fallen from their original purity and sanctity, and 
 who ventured to prefix the names of the ajDOstles to his 
 precepts and regulations, in order to give them currency. 
 The * Recognitions of Clement,' which differ but little from 
 the 'Clementina,' are ingenious and pretty fables." — Ec- 
 clesiastical History^ hook 1, ceiit. i, part 2, chap. 2, sec. 
 18, 19. 
 
 Neander says: — 
 
 "After Barnabas, we come to Clement, perhaps the 
 same whom Paul mentions (Phil. 4:3); he was at the 
 end of the first century bishop of Rome. Under his 
 name we have one epistle to the church of Corinth, and 
 the fragment of another. The first was read in the first 
 centuries aloud at divine service in many churches, even 
 with the writings of the New Testament; it contains an 
 exhortation to unity, interwoven with examples and gen- 
 eral reflections, addressed to the church at Corinth, which 
 was shaken by divisions. This letter, although, on the 
 whole, genuine, is, nevertheless, not free from important 
 interpolations." — P. j^08. 
 
 The object in making thi^ quotation is to show how 
 highly the epistle was regarded. There is really nothing 
 striking in the epistle; but when men depart from the 
 light of God's word, they are ii^ a condition to accept of 
 the most puerile stuff. We make only one extract from 
 this epistle, namely, Clement's proof of the resurrection : — 
 
 " Let us consider, beloved, how the Lord continually 
 proves to us that there shall be a future resurrection, of 
 which he has rendered the Lord Jesus Christ the first- 
 fruits by raising him from the dead. Let us contem- 
 plate, beloved, the resurrection which is at all times tak- 
 
I Hermas and Clement. ^95 
 
 ing place. Day and night declare to us a resurrection. 
 The night sinks to sleep, and the day arises; 'the day 
 (again) departs, and the night comes on. Let us be- 
 hold the fruits (of the earth), how the sowing of grain 
 takes place. The sower goes forth, and casts it into the 
 ground ; and the seed being thus scattered, though dry 
 and naked when it fell upon the earth, is gradually dis- 
 solved. Then out of its dissolution the mighty power 
 of the providence of the Lord raises it up again, and 
 from one seed many arise and bring forth fruit. 
 
 " Let us consider that wonderful sign (of the resurrec- 
 tion) which takes place in Eastern lands, that is, in 
 Arabia and the cc^untries round about. There is a cer- 
 tain bird which is <;al]ed a phoenix. This is the only one 
 of its kind, and lives five hundred years. And when 
 the time of its dissolution draws near that it must die, 
 it builds itself a nest of frankincense, and myrrh, and 
 other spices, into which, when the time is fulfilled, it en- 
 ters and dies. But as the flesh decays, a certain kind of 
 worm is produced, which, being nourished by the juices of 
 the dead bird, brings forth feathers. Then, when it has 
 acquired strength, it takes up that nest in which are the 
 bones of its parent, and bearing these it passes from the 
 land of Arabia into Egypt, to the city called Heliopolis. 
 And, in open day, flying in the sight of all men, it places 
 them on the altar of the sun, and having done this, 
 hastens back to its former abode. The priests then in- 
 spect the registers of the dates, and find that it has re- 
 turned exactly as th^ five hundredth year was com- 
 pleted. 
 
 " Do we then deem it any great and wonderful thing 
 for the Maker of all things to raise up again those that 
 have piously served hin^ in the assurance of a good faith, 
 when even by a bird hfe shows us the mightiness of his 
 power to fulfill his promise?" — Epistle 1, chap. 21^, 25, 
 and 26. 
 
 Every Bible student knows that both the Old Testa- 
 
96 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 ment and also the New, abound in references to tlie res- 
 urrection. With the apostle Paul, especially, it is a 
 prominent theme. Now we ask if it is at all probable 
 that any man who was familiar with the Bible would 
 pass by its wealth of testimony on the subject of the res- 
 urrection, and produce as proof of it only a ridiculous 
 fable? Whether this epistle was written by Clement, or 
 by somebody who lived later and who forged his name, 
 one thing is certain, and that is, that as a book of Chris- 
 tian doctrine it is not worth the paper on which it is 
 written. We are totally at a loss to understand the rev- 
 erence with which so many people regard this stuff. But 
 we would especially ask the reader to form in his mind a 
 picture of the condition of churches that took it down 
 week after week as inspired teaching. The inevitable re- 
 sult of feeding upon such vapid stuff, must have been 
 mental degeneration, and an inability to distinguish real 
 argument from fancy. 
 
 1 
 
CHAPTER VII. 
 
 THE "EPISTLES OF I GN A T 1 US."_.>^ 
 
 ■^ EFonil ^ve make any statements or quotations con- 
 cerning Ignatius or the epistles ascribed to him, we will 
 give the only passage in the epistles which is supposed to 
 teach the observance of Sunday. It is the ninth chapter 
 of the epistle to the Magnesians, and, as translated, reads 
 as follows: — 
 
 "If, therefore, those who were brought up in the an- 
 cient order of things have come to the possession of a new 
 hope, no longer observing the Sabbath, but living in the 
 observance of the Lord's day, on which also our life has 
 sprung up again by him and by his death — whom some 
 deny, by which mystery we have obtained faith, and 
 therefore endure, that we may be found the disciples of 
 Jesus Christ, our only Master — how shall we be able to 
 live apart from him, whose disciples the prophets them- 
 selves in the Spirit did wait for him as their teacher ? 
 And therefore he whom they rightly waited for, being 
 come, raised them from the dead." 
 
 The writer of the article, "The Lord's Day," in Kitto's 
 "Encyclopedia of Religious Literature," after mention- 
 ing several alleged testimonies in favor of Sunday, says : — 
 
 " We must here notice one other passage of earlier date 
 than any of these, which has often been referred to as 
 bearing on the subject of the Lord's day, though it cer- 
 tainly contains no mention of it. It occurs in the epistle 
 of Ignatius to the Magnesians (about A. d. 100). The 
 whole passage is confessedly obscure, and the text may 
 be corrupt. . . . The passage is as follows : — 
 
 7 (97) 
 
98 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 ^^Ei o5v ol iv 7zaAaio't(s Tzpayixaatv avaar patphre^ ^ £:? xai- 
 voTTjTa kX7zido<s ^XOov fxrjxiri ffai3(^aTiZovrs<s, dkld xard 
 xuptfjxrjv ^wrjV C^vre?' {kv tj xai ij Zioij rjiiib'^ dvireuev dV 
 aoToo xai too Oavdrou, etc. 
 
 "Now many commentators assume (on what ground 
 does not appear) that after xupt7]xij> the word i^/iipav is to 
 be understood. On this hypothesis they endeavor to 
 make the rest of the sentence accord with a reference to 
 the observance of the Lord's day, by further supposing 
 iv fj to refer to ijixipa understood, and the whole to be put 
 in contrast with (Tafij3ayp)>^£? in the former clause." 
 
 " Let us now look at the passage simply as it stands. 
 The defect of the sentence is the want of a substantive to 
 which aoTod can refer. This defect, so far from being 
 remedied, is rendered still more glaring by the introduc- 
 tion of y]!J.ipa. Now if we take xuptrjxij ^wij as simply 'the 
 life of the Lord,' having a more personal meaning, it cer- 
 tainly goes nearer to supplying the substantive to adrod. 
 Again, i> )f may well refer to Cwiy, and xuptT}xi) ^cuij mean- 
 ing our Lord's life, as emphatically including his resur- 
 rection (as in Kom. 5:10, etc.), presents precisely the 
 same analogy to the spiritual life of the Christian as is 
 conveyed both in Rom. 5, Col. 3:3, 4, and many other 
 passages. Thus upon the whole the meaning might be 
 given thus : — 
 
 " * If those who lived under the old dispensation have 
 come to the newness of hope, no longer keeping sabbaths, 
 but living according to our Lord's life (in which, as it 
 were, our life has risen again, through him, and his death 
 which some deny), . . . how shtill we be able to 
 live without him?' ... 
 
 " In this way (allowing for the involved style of the 
 whole) the meaning seems to us simple, consistent, and 
 grammatical, without any gratuitous introduction of 
 words understood ; and this view has been followed by 
 many, though it is a subject on which considerable con- 
 troversy has existed. On this view the passage does not 
 
 1 
 
. ufVIVERSiTY 
 
 Tfts E^££?^|[^^^pF^GNATIUS. 99 
 
 refer at all to the Lord's day ; but even on the opposite 
 supposition it cannot be regarded as affording any posi- 
 tive evidence to the early use of the term 'Lord's day' 
 (for which it is often cited), since the material word 
 ijixipa is purely conjectural." — Encyclopedia of Biblical 
 Literature, art. Lord's Day. 
 
 Thus we have the testimony of an unprejudiced wit- 
 ness, a scholar and critic, and an observer of the first 
 day of the week, to the effect that the oft-quoted passage 
 from Ignatius makes no reference whatever to the first 
 day of the week, sometimes erroneously called " Lord's 
 day." But whether it does or not is a matter of very 
 little importance, as we shall see when we have examined 
 all the witnesses in the case. We have given this ex- . 
 tract that the reader may see that, however the epistle be 
 regarded, it affords no aid or comfort to the adherents of 
 Sunday, since it makes no allusion whatever to the day. 
 But the candid man who knows the truth about the 
 writings of Ignatius would not consider the Sunday cause 
 strengthened in the least, even if they contained the most 
 explicit and unequivocal reference to it. We shall now 
 proceed to learn what we can of Ignatius and his 
 epistles. 
 
 The " Encyclopedia Britannica " says : — 
 
 " The information we get in regard to Ignatius, up to 
 the time of Eusebius, is exceedingly scanty." 
 
 " McClintock and Strong's Encyclopedia " says : — 
 
 " We have no trustworthy accounts of the life and 
 ministry of Ignatius. The chief authority is the ^Mar- 
 tyriuin Ignatii,' but even those Avho assert the genuine- 
 ness of that work admit that it is greatly interpolated." 
 
 Uhlhorn, in the " Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia," says :^ — 
 
100 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 " The only sources from which any information can be 
 drawn about this celebrated person are the epistles circu- 
 lating under his name. Eusebius knows nothing more 
 of him than what can be extracted from the epistles, 
 with the exception of a few short notices by Irenjeus and 
 by Origen, which he also knows. But the list which he 
 gives of the bishops of Antioch is doubtful with respect to 
 its chronology. . . . What tradition else has preserved 
 concerning Ignatius — :the story that he was the child 
 spoken of in Matt. 18:5, and other fictions by Simeon 
 Metaphrastes and Vincentius — is com})letely worthless. 
 Nor are the various 'Ada MartyrW of any historical value. 
 We have two which are completely independent of each 
 other. . . . But all these '^cto il/ar^!/m' are spurious; 
 they contradict the epistles; they swarm with unhistorical 
 statements ; they were not known to any old writer, not 
 even to Eusebius; they date, probably, from the fifth 
 century. Thus the epistles are the only source of infor- 
 mation left to us. They claim to have been written by 
 Ignatius, on his journey from Antioch (where he had been 
 condemned to death) to Rome, where he was to suflfer the 
 punishment of being torn to pieces by wild beasts." 
 
 And the "Encyclopedia Britannica" says still fur- 
 ther: — 
 
 " The letters of Ignatius cause great difficulty to the 
 critic." 
 
 From the above, then, it would seem as if not very 
 much would be known with certainty, since we get all 
 our information from the epistles, and the epistles them- 
 selves are of somewhat doubtful authority. But let us 
 hear more concerning them. In the introductory no- 
 tice to the epistles, we find the following statements by 
 the translator : — 
 
 "There are, in all, fifteen epistles which bear the name 
 of Ignatius. These are the following : One to the virgin 
 
The Epistles of Ignatius. 101 
 
 Mary, two to the apostle John, one to Mary of Casso- 
 belse, one to the Tarsians, one to the Antiochians, one to 
 Hero, a deacon of Antioch, one to the Philippians, one 
 to the Ephesians, one to the Magnesians, one to the Tral- 
 lians, one to the Romans, one to the Philadelphians, one 
 to the Smyrnseans, and one to Polycarp. The first 
 three exist only in Latin; all the rest are extant also in 
 Gi^eek. 
 
 " It is now the universal opinion of critics, that the 
 first eight of these professedly Ignatian letters are spuri- 
 ous. They bear in themselves indubitable proofs of being 
 the prodacti^ii of a later age than thatip which Ignatius 
 lived. Neither Eusebius nor Jerome makes the least 
 reference to'them; and they are now by common consent 
 set aside as forg^efies, which were at various dates, and to 
 serve special purposes, put forth under the name of the 
 celebrated bishop of Antioch. 
 
 " But after the question has been thus simplified, it still 
 remains sufficiently complex. Of the seven epistles which 
 are acknowledged by Eusebius fHist. Eccl. 3:36), we 
 possess two Greek recensions, a shorter and a longer. It 
 is plain that one or the other of these exhibits a corrupt 
 text, and scholars have for the most part agreed to accept 
 the shorter form as representing the genuine letters of 
 Ignatius." 
 
 " But although the shorter form of the Ignatian letters 
 had been generally accepted in preference to the longer, 
 t-bere was still a pretty prevalent opinion among scholars, 
 that even Tt could not be regarded as absolutely free from 
 interpolations, or as of undoubted authenticity. Thus 
 said Lardner, in his 'Credibility of the Gospel History' 
 (1743): * I have carefully compared the two editions, and 
 am very well satisfied, upon that comparison, that the 
 larger are an interpolation of the smaller, and not the 
 smaller an epitome or abridgment of the larger. . . . 
 But whether the smaller themselves are the genuine 
 writings of Ignatius, bishop of Antioch, is a question 
 that has been much disputed, and has employed the pens 
 
102 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 of the ablest critics. And whatever positiveiiess some 
 may have shown on either side, I must own I have found 
 it a very difficult question.' " 
 
 Dr. Killen thus briefly and clearly sets forth the history 
 of the Ignatian epistles : — 
 
 "The history of the Ignatian epistles may well re- 
 mind us of the story of the Sibylline books. A female 
 in strange attire is said to have appeared before Tarquin 
 of Rome, offering to sell nine manuscripts which she had 
 in her possession ; but the king, discouraged by the price, 
 declined the application. The woman withdrew ; de- 
 stroyed the one-third of her literary treasures ; and, re- 
 turning again into the royal presence, demanded the 
 same price for what were lefl.> The monarch once more 
 refused to come up to her terms ; and the mysterious 
 visitor retired again, and burnt the one-half of her 
 remaining store. Her extraordinary conduct excited 
 much astonishment ; and, on consulting with his augurs, 
 Tarquin was informed that the documents which she had 
 at her disposal were most valuable, and that he should 
 by all means endeavor to secure such a prize. The king 
 now willingly paid for the three books, not yet committed 
 to the flames, the full price originally demanded for all 
 the manuscripts. The Ignatian epistles have experienced 
 something like the fate of those Sibylline oracles. y^In the 
 sixteenth century, fifteen letters were brought out from 
 beneath the mantle of a hoary antiquity, and offered to 
 the world as the productions of the pastor of Antioch. 
 Scholars refused to receive them on the terms required, 
 and forthwith eight of them were admitted to be forgeries. 
 In the seventeenth century, the seven remaining letters, 
 in a somewhat altered form, again came forth from ob- 
 scurity, and claimed to be the works of Ignatius. Again, 
 discerning critics refused to acknowledge their preten- 
 sions ; but curiosity was roused by this second a})parition, 
 and many expressed an earnest desire to obtain a sight 
 of the real epistles. Greece, Syria, Palestine, and Egypt 
 
The Epistles of Ignatius. 103 
 
 were ransacked in search of them, and at length three 
 letters are found. The discovery creates general gratula- 
 tion; it is confessed that four of the epistles, so lately 
 asserted to be genuine, are apocryphal; and it is boldly 
 said that the three now forthcoming are above challenge. 
 But truth still refuses to be compromised, and sternly 
 disowns these claimants for her approbation. The in- 
 ternal evidence of these three epistles abundantly attests 
 that, like the last three books^of the Sibyl, they are only 
 the last shifts of a grave imposture. 
 
 "The candid investigator, who compares the Curetonian 
 version of the letters with that previously in circulation, 
 must acknowledge that Ignatius, in his new dress, has 
 lost nothing of his absurdity and extravagance. The 
 passages of the epistles, which were formerly felt to be so 
 objectionable, are yet to be found here in all their unmit- 
 igated folly. Ignatius is still the same anti-evangelical 
 formalist, the same puerile boaster, the same dreaming 
 mystic, and the same crazy fanatic. These are weighty 
 charges, and yet they can be substantiated." — Ancient 
 Church, period 2, sec. 2, chap. 3, paragraphs 1, 2. 
 
 Some may shake their heads at this last paragraph, 
 and say that they cannot believe that Ignatius was such 
 a man ; they have the idea firmly fixed in their minds 
 that Ignatius was a wise bishop and a holy man, and 
 they cannot give it up. Nor need they. Dr. Killen 
 makes no charge against Ignatius himself, but against 
 tlie Ignatius who is made to appear in the epistles which 
 are ascribed to him. 
 
 Let us get this matter clearly in our minds. But little 
 is known of Ignatius except what is learned from these 
 epistles, and it is charged that these epistles are spurious. 
 How, then, it may be asked, do we know that such a 
 person existed? 1. There is slight reference made to 
 him in one or two other documents. 2. If there had not 
 
104 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 been such a person, it is not probable that letters would 
 have been put forth bearing his name. The Catholic 
 Church has never hesitated to manufacture history or 
 doctrine when it could not find what it wanted already- 
 written. These documents have always been given the 
 name of some person of good repute, and they served the 
 purpose of the church as well as if they were genuine. 
 Now when we remember that this same " mystery of in- 
 iquity " was working even as far back as the days of Paul, 
 we need not be surprised that, less than a century later^ 
 writings already in existence w^ere garbled, and that de- 
 signing persons wrote epistles and signed the names of 
 eminent men to them, in order to give them currency. - — > 
 ^ — ^Ihdeed, we find..that this very thing was done in the 
 days of Paul, and that his own name was used to give 
 currency to false doctrine. In 2 Thess. 2 : 1-3 we read 
 his own wordaj " Now we beseech you, brethren, by the 
 coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering 
 together unto him, that ye be not soon shaken in mind, 
 or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by 
 letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is atj hand. 
 Let no man deceive you by any means ; for that day shall 
 not come, except there come a falling away first, aid that 
 man of sin be revealed," etc. 1 
 
 Here we find that the Thessalonians had received let- 
 ters purporting to come from Paul, which declared that 
 the coming of Christ was imminent. This was contrary 
 to his first epistle, and he himself, after telling what 
 should take place before the coming of the Lord, says : 
 " Remember ye not, that, when I was yet vnih you, I told 
 you these things ?" 2 The^. 2 : 5. Yet, notwithstanding 
 the instruction which Paul had given them, these letters 
 
The Epistles of Ignatius. 105 
 
 came so seemingly direct from Paul, that the Thessalo- 
 niaiis were g^reatly disturbed. Paul cautions them against 
 being deceiv^, and in closing this epistle,' he gives them 
 to understand how they may know that an epistle pur- 
 ^rting to come from him is genuine. When he comes 
 to th^ close, he says\ " The salutation of Paul ^vith mine 
 own hand, which is tlie token in every epistle ; so I write : 
 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. 
 Amen." 2 ^hess. 3/17, 18. From this we learn that 
 although Paul usually (probably always, Avith the excep- 
 tion of the epistle to the Galatians, see Gal. 6:11) em- 
 ployed an amanuensis, he always wrote the benediction 
 and signed his name with his own hand, so that none 
 need be deceived. Any letter bearing a signature other 
 tHan his might be known to be spurioiis. "" 
 
 Therefore while we may believe that such a man as 
 Ignatius lived, and that he suffered martyrdom for his 
 faith, we need not believe that he wrote the egotistical 
 trash that is attributed to him. Indeed, we cannot be- 
 lieve that he wrote it, if we regard him as a holy man. 
 
 We now proceed wikh the testimony. In the preface 
 to his " Ancient Churph," Dr. Killen says of the Ignatian 
 epistles : — 
 
 "If we accredit these documents, the history of the 
 early church is thrown into a state of hopeless confusion; 
 and men, taught and honored by the apostles themselves, 
 must have inculcated the most dangerous errors. But if 
 their claims vanish, when touched by the wand of truth- 
 ful criticism, many clouds which have hitherto darkened 
 the ecclesiastical atmosphere disappear ; and the progress 
 of corruption can be traced on scientific principles. The 
 special attention of all interested in the Ignatian contro- 
 versy is invited to the two chapters of this work in which 
 
106 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 the subject is investigated. Evidence is there produced 
 to prove that these Ignatian letters, even as edited by the 
 very learned and laborious Docior Cureton, are utterly 
 spurious, and that they should bej swept away from amon^ 
 the genuine remains of early church literature with thfc 
 besom of scorn." 
 Mosheim says : — 
 
 "There are extant several epistles with the name of 
 Ignatius prefixed to them; but a question having been 
 made as to their authenticity, a deal of learned and 
 elaborate discussion has taken place on the subject 
 amongst men of erudition, and the point has been con- 
 tested by them with considerable vehemence; some as- 
 serting them to be spurious, others insisting on it that 
 they are genuine. The most prevailing opinion appears to 
 be that the seven which are reputed to have been written 
 by him in the course of his journey to Rome, namely 
 those- respectively addressed to the Smyrnseans, to Poly- 
 carp, to the Ephesians, to the Magnesians, to the Philadel- 
 phians, and to the Trallians, as they stand in the edition 
 of them published in the seventeenth century, from a 
 manuscript in the Medicean library at Florence, are un- 
 questionably genuine, though there are not wanting those 
 who, on account of its dissimilitude of style, consider the 
 authenticity of the epistle to Polycarp as less to be de- 
 pended on than that of the other six. As for the rest of 
 these epistles, of which no mention whatever is made by 
 any of the early Christian writers, they are commonly re- 
 jected as altogether spurious. The distinction thus gen- 
 erally recognized in favor of the above-mentioned par- 
 ticular letters is grounded on reasons of no little force 
 and weight, but at the same time they are not of such a 
 conclusive nature as to silence all objection; on the con- 
 trary, a regard for truth requires it to be acknowledged, 
 that so considerable a degree of obscurity hangs over the 
 question respecting the authenticity of not only a part, 
 but the whole, of the epistles ascribed to Ignatius, as to 
 render it altogether a case of much intricacy and doubt." 
 — Ecclesiastical Commentaries, cent. 1, sec. 62. 
 
The 
 
 Epistles of Ignatius. 107 
 
 Neander says (if the socalled " Epistles of Ignatius :" 
 "Even the shorter and more trustworthy edition is very 
 mucli interpolate^." 
 
 Dr. Schaff (History of the Christian Church, vol. l/ 
 sec. 119) says:— I- 
 
 "The doctrinal and churchly views of the Ignatian 
 epistles are framed on a peculiar combination and some- 
 what materialistic apprehension of John's doctrine of the 
 incarnation, and Paul's idea of the church as the body of 
 Jesus Christ. In the 'Catholic Church' — an expression 
 introduced by him — that is, the Episcopal orthodox or- 
 ganization of his day, the author sees, as it were, the con- 
 tinuation of the mystery of the incarnation, on the reality 
 of which he laid great emphasis against the docetists ; and 
 in every bishop, a visible representative of Christ, and a 
 personal center of ecclesiastical unity, which he presses 
 home upon his readers with the greatest solicitude and 
 almost passionate zeal. He thus applies those ideas of 
 the apostles directly to the outward constitiltion, and 
 makes them subservient to the principle and institution 
 of the growing hierarchy. Here lies the chief importance 
 of these epistles; and in this respect we have found it 
 necessary to distinguish them already in the section on 
 the organization of the church. 
 
 " It is remarkable that the idea of the episcopal hier- 
 archy should be first clearly and boldly brought out, not * 
 by the contemporary Roman bishop, Clement, but by a 
 bishop of the Eastern church ; though it was transplanted 
 by him to the soil of Rome, and there sealed with his 
 martyr blood. Equally noticeable is the circumstance, 
 that these oldest documents of the hierarchy soon became 
 so interpolated, curtailed, and mutilated by pious fraud, 
 that it is to-day almost impossible to discover with cer- 
 tainty the genuine Ignatius of liistory under the hypfer 
 and pseudo-Ignatius of tradition .'' .^ ! 
 
 And Dr. Killen closes up his remarks on this-subjecL, 
 as follows : — ; 
 
108 Fathers of THte Catholic Church. 
 
 " It is no mean proof of the sagacity of the great Cal- 
 vin, that, upwards of three hundred years ago, he ])assed 
 a sweeping sentence of condemnation on these Ignatian 
 epistles, v At the time, many were startled by the bold- 
 ness of his language, and it was thought that he was 
 somewhat precipitate in pronouncing such a decisive 
 judgment. But he saw distinctly, and he therefore spoke 
 f fearlessly. Thi^re is a far more intimate connection than 
 many are disposal to believe between sound theology and 
 
 \^) sound criticism, mr a right knowledge of the word of God 
 strengthens the intellectual vision, and assists in the de- 
 
 fS tection of error wherever it may reveal itself . . . 
 
 ^ Calvin knew that an apostolic man nmst have been ac- 
 quainted with apostolicMoctrine, and he saw that these 
 letters must have been the productions of an age when 
 the pure light of Christianity was greatly obscured. 
 Hence he denounced them so emphatically; and time 
 has verified his deliverance.N His language respecting 
 them has been often quoted, but we feel we cannot more 
 appropriately close our observations on this subject tlian 
 by another repetition of it. ' There is nothing more 
 abominable than that trash which is in circulation under 
 the name of Ignatius.' " — Ancient Church, period 2, sec. 
 2, chap. 3, paragraph 12. 
 
 After these strong statements, the reader will doubt- 
 less have some curiosity to read a little of tliis " trash." 
 Accordingly, we give a few extracts from it. In the 
 epistle to the Ephesians, chapter 1, we find the follow- 
 ing:— 
 
 " On hearing that I came bound from Syria for the 
 common name and hope, trusting through your prayers 
 to l)e permitted to fight witli beasts at Rome, that so by 
 martyrdom I may indeed become the discij)le of him 'who 
 gave liimself for us, an offering and sacrifice to God' (ye 
 hastened to see me)." 
 
 The writer seems to have an idea that only by martyr- 
 
The Epistles of Ignatius. 109 
 
 dom could he be atriie disciple of the Lord, and he mani- 
 fests an unseemly haste for it, which we are sure would 
 not be the case with a holy man who was really expect- 
 ing martyrdom. Oa^his point we quote again :— 
 
 " For it is not my desire to act towards you as a man- 
 pleaser, but as pleasing God, even as also ye please him. 
 For neither shall I ever have such (another) opportu- 
 nity of attaining to God; npr will ye, if ye shall now be 
 silent, ever be entitled to th^ honor of a better work. For 
 if ye are silent coiicerning me, I shall become God's; 
 but if you show your love to my flesh, I shall again have 
 to run my race. Pray, then, do not seek to confer any 
 greater favor upon me thaii that I be sacrificed to God 
 while the altar is still prepared ; that, being gathered to- 
 gether in love, ye may sing praise to the Father, through 
 Christ Jesus, that God has deemed me, the bishop of 
 Syria, worthy to be sent for from the East untOvthe West. 
 It is good to set from the world unto God, that I may 
 rise again to him." — Epistle to the Bommh, chap. 2. 
 
 In the following paragraphs he again expresses his ar- 
 dent desire to be eaten up : — 
 
 " I write to the churches, and impress on them all, that 
 I shall willingly die for God, unless ye hinder me. Il)e- 
 seech of you not to show an unseasonable good-will to- 
 ward me. Suffer me to become food for the wild beasts, 
 through whose instrumentality it will be granted me to 
 attain to God. I am the wheat of God, and let me be 
 ground by the teeth of the wild beasts, that I may be 
 found the pure bread of Christ. Rather entice the wild 
 beasts, that they may became my tomb, and may leave 
 nothing of my body ; so that when I have fallen asleep 
 (in death), I may be no tt-ouble to anyone. Then shall 
 I truly be a disciple of Christ, when the world shall not 
 see so much as my body. Entreat Christ for me, that 
 by these instruments I ^ay be found a sacrifice (to 
 God)." \ 
 
110 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 " May I enjoy the wild beasts that are prepared for 
 me ; and I pray they may be found eager to rush upon 
 me, Avhich also I will entice to devour me speedily, and 
 not deal with me as with some, whom, out of fear, they 
 have not touched. But if they be unwilling to assail me, 
 I will compel them to do so. Pardon me (in this) : I 
 know what is for my benefit. Now I begin to be a dis- 
 ciple." — Epistle to the Romans, chap. ^, 5. 
 
 There are many passages similar to the above. They 
 prove, what we shall later on find from the most unex- 
 ceptionable testimony is the case, that the idea very early 
 began to prevail that a martyr was more sure of gaining 
 Heaven than one who simply lived a good life, and died 
 a natural death. The idea was that whatever sins the 
 individual had upon him were washed away by the shed- 
 ding of his own blood. As a consequence many fanat- 
 ical people eagerly sought martyrdom, and it came to be 
 considered as almost a mortal sin to flee in time of perse- 
 cution. The idea that the martyrs were cleansed from sin- 
 by their own blood finds its modern counterpart in the 
 famous " blood atonement " among 4lie Mormons. It is 
 unnecessary to do more than remind the reader of the 
 limited views of the atonement of Christ, which must 
 have been held by such people. 
 
 That the " Epistles of Ignatius " were written by some- 
 one who was anxious that the bishops should have a 
 cliance to lord it over God's heritage, is evident from the 
 following extracts: — 
 
 "AVherefore it is fitting that ye should run together in 
 accordance with the will of your bishop, which things 
 also ye do." 
 
 "I^et us be careful, then, not to set ourselves in opposi- 
 tion to the bisho]), in order that we may be subject to 
 God." 
 
The Epistles of Ignatius. Ill 
 
 "It is manifest, therefore, that we should look upon 
 the bishop even as we would upon the Lord himself." — 
 Epistle to the Ephesiaiis, chap. 4, ^, ^• 
 
 " It is well to reverence both God and the bishop. He 
 who honors the bishop has been honored of God ; he who 
 does anything without the knowledge of the bishop, does 
 (in reality) serve the devil." — Epistle to the Smyrnceans, 
 chap. 9. 
 
 " But it becomes both men and women who marry, to 
 form their union with the approval of the bishop, that 
 their marriage may be according to God, and not after 
 their own lust." 
 
 " Give ye heed to the bishop, that God also may give 
 heed to you. My soul be for theirs that are submissive 
 to the bishop, to the presbyters, and to the deacons, and 
 may my portion be along with th'em in God ! " — Epistle 
 to Polycarp, chap. S, 6. 
 
 The following "great mystery" which this pseudo- 
 Ignatius reveals, shows that the writer was a fit compan- 
 ion for Hernias and the pseudo-Barnabas : — 
 
 "Now the virginity of Mary was hidden from the 
 prince of this world, as was also her offspring, and the 
 death of the Lord ; three mysteries of renown, which were 
 wrought in silence by God. How, then, was he manifested 
 to the world ? A star shone forth in heaven above all 
 the other stars, the light of which was inexpressible, 
 'while its novelty struck men with astonishment. And 
 all the rest of the stars, with the sun and moon, formed a 
 chorus to this stiar, and its light was exceedingly great 
 above them all. And there was agitation felt as to 
 whence this new spectacle came, so unlike to everything 
 else (in the heavens). Hence every kind of magic was 
 destroyed, and dvery bond of wickedness disappeared; 
 ignorance was reinoved, and the old kingdom abolished, 
 God himself being manifested in human form for the re- 
 newal of eternal life. And now that took a beginning 
 which had been prepared by God. Henceforth all things 
 
112 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 were in a state of tumult, because he meditated the aboli- 
 tion of death." — Epldle to the Ephesians, chap. 19. 
 
 And, lastly, we qi|ote the following jargon as evidence 
 of the senseless egotism of the one who wrote this 
 « trash :"— j 
 
 "Am I not able J to write to you of heavenly things? 
 But I fear to do so, Jest I should inflict injury on you who 
 are but babes (in Christ). Pardon me in this respect, lest, 
 as not being able t|o receive (such doctrines), ye should 
 be strangled by them. For even I, though I am bound 
 (for Christ), yet am not on that account able to under- 
 stand heavenly thii gs, and the places of the angels, and 
 their gatherings under their respective princes, things 
 visible and invisible. Without reference to such ab- 
 struse subjects, I ambtill but a learner (in other respects); 
 for many things are ^vanting to us, that we come not short 
 of God." — Epistle to the Trallians, chap 5. 
 
 If this were the aae when insane persons were regarded 
 as sacred beings, andWs being possessed of divine inspira- 
 tion, we should not wonder at the great esteem with which 
 this stuff is held by many people ; but as it is, there is a 
 mystery about it. Wllen people who have access to the 
 works of the world's master-minds, to say nothing of the 
 sublime truths of the Bible, spend their precious time 
 studying the writings of the so-called Fathers, it seems as 
 though they must be possessed of something akin to tluft 
 mental and moral depravity which leads the school-boy 
 to devour the dime novel. \ nA/ ^ 
 
CHAPTER VIII. 
 
 "THE TEACHING OF THE APOSTLES." 
 
 All that is known of this document may be given, in 
 brief as follows: In 1873 Philotheos Bryennios, at that 
 time head master of the higher Greek school at Constanti- 
 nople, but now metropolitan at Nicomedia, discovered a 
 collection of manuscripts in the library of the "Jerusalem 
 Monastery of the Most Holy Sepulcher" at Constanti- 
 nople. The collection was bound in one volume, and 
 was all written by the same hand. It bore the significant 
 signature, "Leon, notary and sinner," and the Greek date 
 6564, which equals A. d. 1056. The manuscripts that 
 formed the remainder of the collection, are the follow- 
 ing:— 
 
 "Synopsis of the Old and New Testaments," by St. 
 Chrysostom ; " The Epistle of Barnabas ;" " The Two Epis- 
 tles of Clement to the Corinthians ;" " The Epistle of Mary 
 of Cassoboli to Ignatius;" "Twelve Epistles of Ignatius." 
 
 The matter was translated into German, and published 
 February 3, 1884; and was translated from the German 
 into English, and published in America, February 28, 
 1884. Archdeacon Farrar published in the Conteinpo- 
 rary Review, May, 1884, a version from the Greek. 
 
 These are the simple facts concerning the discovery 
 and publication of the "Teaching," as given in the intro- 
 ductory notice to the edition published by the Christian 
 Literature Company. The excitement which its first 
 appearance caused in the religious world was intense, 
 8 (113) 
 
114 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 equal at least to that which would be produced in the 
 Catholic Church by the discovery of one of the bones of 
 an apostle. The New York Independent said that it was 
 ** by all odds the most important writing, exterior to the 
 New Testament, now in the possession of the Christian 
 world;" and some other journals seemed to regard it as 
 fully equal to the New Testament. One thing is certain, 
 and that is that for a few months after the publication of 
 the "Teaching," they devoted more space and attention 
 to it than to the Bible. 
 
 Of course no one supposes that the apostles themselves 
 ever saw or heard of the so-called "Teaching of the 
 Apostles." Says Professor Riddle, in his introductory 
 notice: "Of apostolic origin no one should presume to 
 speak, since the text of the document makes no such 
 claim, and internal evidence is obviously against any 
 such suggestion." As to when it was written, nobody 
 knows, and there is no means of knowing. Some gue^s 
 that it was written as early as A. d. 80, while others, with 
 far more reason, place it much later, at dates varying 
 from 120 to 190 A. d. Concerning the character of the 
 work. Bishop Coxe, in his prefatory note, says: — 
 
 "Lactantius, in his ' Institutes,^ shapes his instructions to 
 Constantine by the Duce vice, which seem to have been 
 formulated in the earliest ages for the training of cate- 
 chumens. The elementary nature and the 'childishness' 
 of the work are thus accounted for, and I am sure that 
 the'mystagogic' teaching of Cyril receives light from this 
 view of the matter. This work was 'food for lambs;' it 
 was not meant to meet the wants of those *of full age.' It 
 may prove, as Dr. Riddle hints, that the teaching as we 
 have it, in the Bryennios document, is tainted by the 
 views of some nascent sect or heresy, or by the incompe- 
 tency of some obscure local church as yet unvisited by 
 
The Teaching of the Apostles. 115 
 
 learned teachers and evangelists. It seems to me not 
 improbably influenced by views of the charmnata, which 
 ripened into Montanism, and which are illustrated by the 
 warnings and admonitions of Herraas." 
 
 The question which would naturally arise is, Why 
 should we take this document as an exponent of the 
 belief and teaching of the apostles, rather than the 
 genuine writings of the apostles? The only possible an- 
 swer is. We should not. If w^e wish to become acquainted 
 with the teacliings and belief of John Wesley, we go to 
 his own published works, and not to what some anony- 
 mous writer may have said of him. So with the apostles. 
 The New Testament, and that alone, contains their doc- 
 trine, and upon that alone we must depend for our knowl- 
 edge of what they taught. Anything else purporting to 
 come from them is a base forgery. 
 
 We should not omit to state that that which recom- 
 mended the "Teaching" to the religious world, as some- 
 thing of great value, was the fact that it was discovered 
 in company with the "Epistle of Barnabas," and twelve 
 of the "Epistles of Ignatius." That might be a good 
 recommendation to some, but to one who has learned the 
 simple truth concerning those productions, it will be almost 
 sufficient ground on which to condemn the whole thing. 
 To be found in such company is prima facie evidence of 
 bad character. 
 
 There is no* more thorough student, and none better 
 acquainted with Patristic literature, than Professor 
 Harnack, of Berlin. It was he who first called the at- 
 tention of the western theological world to the discovery 
 of Bryennios, and he has carefully examined everything 
 of importance that has been said about that document 
 
116 Fathers OF THE Catholic Church. 
 
 In the Theologische lAteraturzeitung ,.of June 12, 1886, he 
 published the first of a series of articles on the character 
 and result of the discussions that have been published on 
 the " Teaching," and from that article the New York In- 
 dependent, of August 26, 1886, made a lengthy extract, 
 the greater part of which we reproduce. It puts together, 
 without comment, the conflicting opinions that are held 
 in regard to it. Says Harnack : — 
 
 " One investigator puts the newly discovered writing 
 before the Pauline letters, or even before tj;ie Council of 
 the Apostles (Sabatier) ; the second, in the name of Paul; 
 the third, soon after the destruction of Jerusalem (Besti- 
 nann); the fourth, in the last decades of the first century 
 (an idea that finds very much favor) ; the fifth, in the 
 days of Trajan (also a favorite idea); the sixth, in the 
 days of Bar-cochba; the seventh, in the time of Anto- 
 nines; the eighth, about the time of Commodus ; the ninth, 
 in the third century ; the tenth, in the fourth century ; 
 and there are some who favor the fifth or a later century. 
 So much in reference to the time of composition. 
 
 " In other points matters stand no better. On the 
 history of its transmission, one says that it is the book 
 known to the Fathers from the days of Clement ; others 
 deny this; a third party seeks a middle path. 
 
 " In regard to the integrity of the book, some say the 
 book is from one author, and original; others that it is a 
 compilation, and is crowded with interpolations; that it 
 consists of two or more parts that originally did not belong 
 together. In regard to the character of the book, some 
 claim that it is well arranged, others that it is poorly 
 arranged; some that in parts it is well arranged, and in 
 parts poorly arranged; some that the skill of the author 
 must be admired; others that the author has no idea of 
 the literary arts. 
 
 " With regard to the sources, some say that only the 
 Old Testament served as a source, and that all the rest 
 is original, because older than all other Christian writ- 
 
The Teaching of the Apostles. 1 1 7 
 
 ings; others say that there is nothing original in the 
 book, but tne whole is taken from other sources ; some 
 that the New Testament receives no witness from the 
 'Didache;' others that nearly all the New Testament 
 books are used in it, and that the book itself thereby 
 seems the best proof of its antiquity; some that Barnabas 
 and Hermas are used; others that Barnabas is used, but 
 that Hermas in turn used the 'Didache;' others, on the 
 other hand, that Hermas was used, and that Barnabas is 
 a later production ; others that Philo, the Sibylline books, 
 and the Gentile moralists w^ere used ; others that in prim- 
 itive apostolic simplicity the author has reproduced only 
 the pure gospel. 
 
 "In regard to the standpoint of the author, some claim 
 that it is primitive apostolic from the view of the Jewish- 
 Christians; others that it is a post-apostolic and Jewish- 
 Christian ; others, anti-Pauline ; others, that it is strongly 
 influenced by Paul; others, that it is Saddusaic; others, 
 vulgar, heathenish ; others, dangerously Ebionitic; others, 
 Marcionitic; others, Montanistic; others, Theodotian; 
 others, quite moralizing; others, encratistic; others, thor- 
 oughly Byzantine, but under a transparent mask ; others, 
 that the standpoint cannot be discovered, since the author 
 has not treated of his * faith ; ' others, classically evangelical. 
 
 " With regard to the importance of the book, some say 
 that it is the most important discovery of the century, 
 and should be received into the canon of the New Testa- 
 ment; that it is the whole Bible in mice; that it solves 
 the greatest problems ; that it is peculiar, and should be 
 used with care; that it shows the average Christianity; 
 that as a compilation it cannot be used in picturing any 
 period; that it shows poverty of contents; the Chris- 
 tianity of the author can only be lamented; that it is 
 rationalistic, barren, and flat, but nevertheless interesting; 
 that it is a miserable production, without any importance 
 for those or our times; the book is characteristic only of 
 the Byzantine forger. Places assigned for the writing : 
 Egypt, Greece, Syria, Jerusalem, Rome, Asia Minor, 
 Constantinople. . . . 
 
118 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 " Then some regard it as setting forth the Apostolic, 
 the Presbyterian, the Episcopal, or no system of church 
 government whatever. It is considered of great value 
 because it favors the Protestant, or the Catholic, or the 
 Baptist, or the anti-Baptist, or the Chiliastic, or the anii- 
 Chiliastic, or the Irvingian, or some other church party; 
 because it is still Apostolic and anti-Catholic, and at the 
 same time Catholic; because its prophets are still apostles 
 of the real primitive Christianity; others, then, claim 
 that they are new prophets, or no prophets at all, but 
 rather inventive swindlers and parasites; others that they 
 are no swindlers, but homunculi produced by a forger." 
 
 As the showman said, "You pays your money, and 
 you takes your choice." There are opinions enough here, 
 from which one can choose. We see no reason for re- 
 garding it any more highly than the matter ascribed to 
 Barnabas, Hernias, and Clement, or the " trash " attrib- 
 uted to Ignatius. That it contains some truth cannot be 
 questioned, but there is none that is not contained in far 
 better form in the New Testament, and so it is not worth 
 while to try to winnow it out from the error. It cannot 
 add anything to the light that shines from God's word; 
 its only effect can be to obscure it. 
 
 But why was it that the "Teaching" was received with 
 such enthusiasm ? It was chiefly because there was one 
 chapter in it which by judicious manipulation could be 
 made to do service in the Sunday cause. The passage 
 which was hailed with such joy was the fourteenth 
 chapter, which, in the edition published by the Christian 
 Literature Company, is translated as fallmvs : — >t.* t»AjUv»t " 
 
 " B\it every Lord's daydoy§/gather yourselves to- 
 gether, and break brea7Calld^^g^ve^:h1mksgmn^_after 
 having confessed your transgressions, that your sacmice~ 
 may be pure. But let no one that is at variance with his 
 
The Teaching of the Apostles. 119 
 
 fellow come together with you, until they be reconciled, 
 that your sacrifice may not be profaned. For this is 
 that which was spoken by the Lord. In every place and 
 time offer to me a pure sacrifice ; for T am a great king, 
 saith the Lord, and my name is wonderful among the 
 nations." 
 
 Now if this document is to be accepted as embodying 
 the correct teaching of the apostles, it must be accepted 
 as a whole. As soon as we discriminate against any 
 portion as being incorrect, we throw discredit upon the 
 w hole. If the above reference is to be taken as proof 
 that the apostles observed the first day of the week, and 
 thus marked out our duty for us, it also proves just as 
 conclusively that they partook of the communion every 
 first day of the week, and that all Christians should do 
 likewise. The fact that those who laud the " Teaching " 
 the most highly do not follow its injunction in this re- 
 spect is proof that they do not attach any real value to 
 the document. They will follow it just so far as it seems 
 to support their preconceived opinions ; ajid they find it 
 very convenient to have even a forgery to which to ap- 
 peal in support of the practices which they are determined 
 to follow. 
 
 But it will be noticed that the passage does not define 
 the Lord's day, and those who wish to find in it authority 
 for Sunday-keeping, must first prove that the Lord's day 
 is a proper term for the first day of the week, which they 
 cainiot do. It will not be necessary in this case, how- 
 ever, for them to try, for we have before us not only the 
 English translation of the text, but the Greek text itself, 
 and we know whereof we speak when we say that the 
 "word-ibf-ilday," namely hemera, does not once occur in 
 the en tire chapt er ; neither is there any word correspond- 
 
120 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 ing to it, nor anything to indicate that it, rather than 
 some other word, should be supplied. Why, then, was the 
 word " day " inserted by the translators ? We leave them 
 to answer. 
 
 It will be asked, "If you throw out the term 'Lord's 
 day,' what word or words should be supplied to make the 
 sense complete ? " Read the passage once more carefully, 
 and you will see. Of what does it treat ? Of the Lord's 
 Sug£er, and that alone. The Greek word for "table" 
 agrees with the adjective kuriaken, and if supplied makes 
 better sense than does the word " day." For while there 
 is reason in saying that those who are at variance should 
 not approach the Lord's table until they become recon- 
 ciled, there is none in saying that such should not observe 
 a certain day, or meet together on it. 
 
 But let this pass. It is not worth while to argue long 
 over the question whether or not the " Teaching of the 
 Apostles," so called, speaks of the Lord's day. When 
 the document first appeared, a prominent religious journal 
 said that it tended strongly to "make keepers of the first 
 day more confident of their position than heretofore." 
 What must have been their former confidence in their 
 position ? If a single casual expression in an anonymous 
 document that is known to be a forgery, and which was 
 found with some other forgeries that are worse than 
 trash, tends to make Sunday-keepers more confident of 
 their position, what becomes of their boasted New Testa- 
 ment authority for Sunday-keeping? Can it be that 
 they regard the "Teaching" as superior to the New 
 Testament, and therefore capable of strengthening its 
 positions? No; the statement was simply an admission* 
 of what everyone who can read may find out for himself, 
 
The Teaching of the Apostles. 121 
 
 namely, that the New Testament gives not the slightest 
 warrant for Sunday-keeping. Surely it would be a pity 
 to take from Sunday advocates the strong ground of 
 confidence that they have in the so-called " Teaching of 
 the Apostles"! We will not dispute the passage with 
 them any further. They are welcome to all that they 
 can get out of it. 
 
 A section from chapter 8 will serve to show the 
 proclivities of the unknown writer of this now famous 
 document. It is as follows ; " But let not your fasts be 
 with the hypocrites ; for they fast on the second and fifth 
 days of the week, but do ye_fast on the fo urth d ay and 
 the preparation (Friday)." 
 
 Now here is a plain command, and we wait to see 
 how many of those who are almost willing to swear by 
 the " Teaching " will obey it. As yet we have seen no 
 indication of any such design on the part of anyone. 
 Nobody seems to have any special interest in this portion 
 of the precious relic. And this again proves our state- 
 ment that nobody really believes that the " Teaching " 
 carries with it any weight of authority. It simply gives 
 the modern Athenians something new to talk about, and a 
 new chance to exercise their wits in finding excuses for 
 not obeying the commandment of the Lord. It would 
 be impossible to convince the religious world that they 
 ought to fast on Wednesdays and Fridays; if such a 
 thing were attempted they would immediately ask for 
 Scripture proof And yet there is as much reason for 
 fasting regularly on those days, or even for keeping them 
 holy, as there is for keeping Sunday. 
 
 If one were so disposed, he might show that the 
 " Teaching " recognizes the seventh day as the true Sab- 
 
122 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 bath ; for it calls Friday the preparation. But we hope 
 that no one who regards with reverence the command- 
 ment of Jehovah, will ever humiliate the Sabbath, which 
 has for its backing that sacred word, by quoting in its 
 behalf from such a source as the document now under 
 consideration. 
 
 In chapter 6 we have this comforting bit of advice : — 
 
 "If thou art able to bear all the yoke of the Lord, 
 thou wilt be perfect; but if thou art not able, what thou 
 art able that do." 
 
 Which strongly reminds us of the Quaker's reputed 
 counsel to his son. Said he : " John, thee must be honest ; 
 but if thee cannc^be honest, be as honest as thee can." 
 
 Dr. Riddle is ^the opinion that the "simplicity" of 
 the " Teaching," " almost amounting to childishness," is 
 proof that it is not a forgery, his idea evidently being 
 that a man who would forge a document, would try to 
 make it appear worthy of acceptance. However that 
 may be, its simplicity is apparent, and an instance of it 
 is herewith given : — 
 
 " Let every apostle that cometh to you be received as 
 the Lord. But he shall not remain except one day; but 
 if there be need, also the next ; but if he remain three 
 days, he is a false prophet." — Chap. 11. 
 
 The seventh chapter of the "Teaching " is as follows : — 
 
 "And concerning baptism, thus baptize ye: Having 
 first said all these things, baptize into the name of the 
 Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, in living 
 water. But if thou have not •living water, baptize into 
 other water; and if thou canst not in cold, in w^arm. 
 But if thou have not either, pour out water thrice upon 
 the head in the name of Father and Son and Holy Spirit. 
 But before the baptism let the baptizer f^^t, and the baj)- 
 
The Teaching of the Apostles. 123 
 
 tized,and whatever others can; but thou shalt order the 
 baptized to fast one or two days before." 
 
 The writer of this document was what would in these 
 days be called a very "liberal" man. His advice is, 
 " Baptize in running water if you can ; if you cannot, 
 then in some other ; if you can't get cold water, use warm ; 
 and if you can't baptize at all, do something else, and 
 it will do just as well." If we knew when this was 
 written, it might throw some light on the date at which 
 sprinkling or pouring came to be substituted for baptism. 
 But we have the best of evidence that as late as the 
 middle of the third century nothing but immersion was 
 regarded as baptism ; and therefore we know that at least 
 the seventh chapter of the so-called "Teaching of the 
 Apostles" was written not less than two hundred years 
 after the death of the apostles. 
 
 But the weakness or wickedness of the document is 
 evident in the very first chapter, which contains the fol- 
 lowing: — 
 
 "Woe to Kim that tgiketh ; for if one that is in need 
 taketh, he^hall_J)e_guiltI3^ ; but he that is not in need 
 shall give account whereforeMie took and whereunto ; and 
 being in durance shall be questioned touching what he 
 did, and he shall not go out ci^ence until he give back 
 the last farthing." 
 
 Here this precious " Teaching " t^ches that it is all right 
 for a man to steal if he is in need. \ The man who needs 
 clothes may steal them ; and the marw who needs a horse 
 may "take" it, and both "shall be Witless." Fortu- 
 nately for society, our laws have not bee\modeled after 
 the standard of this much prized " Teaching^ 
 
 It is but just to say that in the Christian EHerature 
 Company's edition, it says : " For if one having nee^ 
 
124 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 ceiveth, he is guiltless," etc., using the word " receive " in- 
 stead of " take." This is evidently out of sympathy for the 
 reputation of the writer of the " Teaching," for both the 
 original and the context show that nothing but stealing is 
 meant. For the next clause says of the one who " takes " 
 when he has no need, that " coming into straits (confine- 
 ment), he shall pay the penalty;" and Bishop Coxe calls 
 special attention to this, saying that it probably means 
 imprisonment. This shows that stealing is meant, and 
 not simply the receiving of a thing as a gift. 
 
 The following, however, is a fit accompaniment of the 
 instruction concerning stealing: — 
 
 "Be not a stretcher forth of the hands to receive and 
 a drawer of them back to give. If thou hast aught, 
 through thy hands thou shalt give ransom for thy sins." — 
 Chap. Jf. 
 
 Here we have the Roman Catholic doctrine of atoning 
 for sins by the payment of money. It is no wonder that 
 the writer of this document; holding such a doctrine as 
 this, should counsel a needy man to steal, «ince by pay- 
 ing to the priest a part of his ill-gotten gain he could free 
 himself from sin. 
 
 But what more need be said ? Enough has been given 
 to convince anybody who is open to conviction, that the so- 
 called " Teaching of the Apostles," like the writings attrib- 
 uted to Hermas, Barnabas, and Ignatius, is nothing but a 
 Catholic document, one of those writings which grew out 
 of the working of the "mystery of iniquity," and which 
 form the foundation of that "MYSTERY, BABYLON 
 THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND 
 ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH," 
 
CHAPTER IX. 
 
 IREN^US. 
 
 The birth of Irenseus is placed by some authors as 
 early as 67 a. d., and by others as late as 140 A. d. As 
 evidence that there is no exact knowledge in regard to the 
 matter, it is necessary only to state that the years 108 and 
 120 A. D., and several other dates, are also given. But 
 the exact date is a matter of little moment ; it is enough 
 to know that he lived sometime in the second century. 
 
 The writings of Irenseus are quite extensive, and are 
 very greatly lauded ; yet it has been well said that " their 
 preciousness bears no proportion to their bulk." A 
 writer in the British and Foreign Evangelical Review 
 (January, 1869), says: "It would be possible to com- 
 press into a very few pages all the statements of fact that 
 can be deemed really valuable to us at the present day." 
 In spite of all the praise that is lavished upon the Fa- 
 thers, the same thing may be said of all of them. Indeed, 
 we may go further, and say that although their writings 
 contain, as a matter of necessity, some statements of fact, 
 and some principles of truth, if not one of the so-called 
 Christian Fathers had ever written a line, the amount 
 of useful knowledge in the world would not be one iota 
 less than it now is, and the Christian church would be 
 far better off. 
 
 Killen speaks of Irenseus thus: — 
 
 "Irenseus is commonly called the disciple of Polycarp; 
 but it is reported that he was also under the tuition of 
 
 (125) 
 
126 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 a less intelligent preceptor, Piipias of Hierapolis. This 
 teacher .... is noted as the earliest ecclesiastical 
 writer who held the doctrine of the personal reign of 
 Christ at Jerusalem during the millennium. 'These 
 views/ says Eusebius, * he appears to have adopted in 
 consequence of having misunderstood the apostolic nar- 
 ratives. . . . For he was a man of very slender- 
 intellect, as is evident from his discourses.' His pupil 
 Irenaeus possessed a much superior capacity; but even 
 his writings are not destitute of puerilities ; and it is not 
 improbable that he derived some of the errors to be found 
 in them from his weak-minded teacher." — Ancient Church, 
 'period 2, sec. 2, chap. 1, paragraph 10. 
 
 It may be interesting to the reader to know a little 
 more of the weak-minded man whose instruction Irenasus 
 enjoyed. Dr. Schaff (History of the Christian Church, 
 vol. 1, sec. 121), says of him: — 
 
 " Papias, a disciple of John (?) and friend of Polycarp, 
 bishop of Hierapolis, in Phrygia, till towards the middle 
 of the second century, was a pious man, and well read 
 in the Scriptures, but credulous and weak-minded. He 
 entertained a grossly materialistic view of the millennium. 
 He collected with great zeal the oral traditions of the 
 apostles respecting the discourses and works of Jesus, and 
 published them under the title: 'Explanations of the 
 Lord's Discourses,'-in five books. Although this work 
 (according to Gallandi and Pitra) maintained itself down 
 to the thirteenth century, yet we possess only some frag- 
 ments of it in Irenseus and Eusebius, which, together 
 with a few valuable notices, in regard, for example, to 
 the Gospels of Matthew and Mark, contain perfectly 
 monstrous and fabulous inventions." 
 
 The truthfulness of this last remark is amply proved 
 by the following prophecy which Papias puts into the 
 mouth of the Lord : — 
 
 "As the elders who saw John the disciple of the Lord 
 
Iren^:us. 127 
 
 rc:iiembered that they had heard from him how the Lord 
 taught ill regard to those times, and said : ' The days 
 A'ill come in which vines shall grow, having each ten 
 thousand branches, and in each branch ten thousand 
 twigs, and in each true twig ten thousand shoots, and in 
 every one of the shoots ten thousand clusters, and on 
 every one of the clusters ten thousand grapes, and every 
 gi-ape when pressed will give five-and-twenty metretes of 
 wine. And when any one of the saints shall lay hold of 
 n cluster, another shall cry out, " I am a better cluster, 
 icike me; bless the Lord through me." In like manner, 
 (^lie said) that a grain of wheat would produce ten thou- 
 sand ears, and that every ear would have ten thousand 
 •grains, and every grain would yield ten pounds of clear, 
 ])ure, fine flour.' " — Fragment 4-. 
 
 It would perhaps be unjust to call Papias a phenome- 
 j al liar, but we can safely say that he gave unbounded 
 license to his imagination, and took great liberties with 
 the truth. Such was the character of the man who 
 assisted to prepare Iren^us for his position as a Father , 
 of the church. That Irenseus was a worthy pupil of 
 .^uch a master, is indicated by the following : — 
 
 " In theology Irenasus is the first who, if he be rightly 
 interpreted, suggests the disastrous view that Christ's 
 ransom of our race was paid to Satan-^a notion which 
 occurs in the writings of theologians almost unquestioned 
 till the days of Anselm. Even as regards events which 
 were then recent Irenseus is a most unsafe authority." — 
 History of Interpretation (Farrar)jp. 176. 
 
 Mosheim makes the following statement concerning the 
 number and condition of the writings of Irenseus, which 
 have reached us : — 
 
 "Of his writings in support of the Christian faith, 
 which were not a few, none besides his five books against 
 heresies have come down to our time ; and indeed these 
 
128 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 (with the exception of the first) have reached us merely- 
 through the medium of a wretchedly barbarous and ob- 
 scure Latin translation." — Ecclesiastical CommentarieSf 
 cent. 2, sec. 37. 
 
 On this last point the tr anslato rs of Irenseus have 
 made a very telling statement in their introductory 
 notice. It is one whicjr those who so highly extol the 
 value of his writings/^em to have entirely overlooked. 
 Here is what theyysay: — 
 
 "The great work of Irenseus, now for the first time 
 translated into English, is unfortunately no longer extant 
 in the original. It has come down to us only in an 
 ancient Latin version, with the exception of the greater 
 part of the first book, which has been preserved in the 
 original Greek, through means of copious quotations 
 made by Hippolytus and Epiphanius. The text, both 
 Latin and Greek, is often most uncertain. Only three 
 MMS. of the work 'Against Heresies' are at present 
 known to exist. Others, however, were used in the earli- 
 est printed editions put forth by Erasmus. And as these 
 codices were more ancient than any now available, it is 
 greatly to be regretted that they have disappeared or 
 perished. One of our difficulties throughout, has been 
 to fix the readings we should adopt, especially in the first 
 book. Varieties of reading, actual or conjectural, have 
 been noted only when some point of special importance 
 seemed to be involved. 
 
 " After the text has been settled, according to the best 
 judgment which can be formed, the work of translation 
 remains; and that is, in this case, a matter of no small 
 difficulty. Irenseus, ev^n in the original Greek, is often 
 a very obscure writer. At times he""expresses himself 
 with remarkable clearness and terseness ; but, upon the 
 whole, his style is very involved and prolix. And the 
 Latjn version ajids to these diflSculties of the original, by 
 being itself of the most barbarous character. In fact, it 
 iaoft^n nectary to make a conjectural re-translation of 
 
iRENiEUS. 129 
 
 it into Greek, in order to obtain some inkling of what 
 the author wrote. Dodwell supposes this Latin version 
 to have been made about the end of the fourth century; 
 but as Tertullian seems to have used it, we must rather 
 place it in the beginning of the third. Its author is un- 
 known, but he was certainly little qualified for his task. 
 We have endeavored to give as close and accurate a 
 translation of the work as possible, but there are not a 
 few passages in which a guess can only be made as to the 
 pro bable m eaning." 
 
 One way of arriving at a knowledge of an unknown 
 quantity is to guess what the half of it is, and then 
 multiply that by two. This process will invariably give 
 the correct result, provided you make no mistake in 
 guessing at the half We have also heard that when 
 farmers who live in the woods, far from civilization, wish 
 to ascertain the exact weight of a hog, and have no 
 scales, they lay a plank across a log, place the animal on 
 one end of the plank, pile stones on the other end until 
 they exactly balance the hog, and then they guess how 
 much the stones weigh. This has never been known to 
 fjiil to give the exact weight of a hog, unless a mistake 
 was made in guessing the weight of the stones. 
 
 Very similar to these methods was the means adopted 
 by the translators of Irenseus. The original of his writ- 
 ings (with a single exception) nowhere exists. The small 
 portion that has come to us in the original Greek, shows 
 that Irenseus could with difficulty express himself so as to 
 be understood. This obscurity is greatly increased by the 
 wretched Latin translation in which his writings are ex- 
 tant. So whenever the translators came to a passage out 
 of which they could not for their lives make any sense, 
 they wrote out a Greek sentence which they guessed 
 9 
 
130 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 might be what Irenaeus said, and then translated that into 
 English, and lo ! we have the writings of Irenaeus. When 
 writings may be reproduced in that way, there is cer- 
 tainly no reason for any man's writings to be lost. 
 
 Of course the above method was not pursued with all 
 of the works of Irenaeus, and there is no doubt but that 
 we have some things just as he wrote them; but the ques- 
 tion is. Which are the genuine and which are not ? The 
 guess-work of the translators throws doubt upon every- 
 thing. But it really makes very little difference. If it 
 were all conjecture, or if all were lost, the world would be 
 better off. No doubt the part which the translators 
 evolved from their own imagination, is better than what 
 Irenaeus actually wrote. 
 
 With the facts recorded in the last quotation before 
 us, it is scarcely worth while to make any extracts from 
 Irenaeus. Each reader might do a little guessing on his 
 own account, and produce the writings of that Father 
 in a style to suit his own individual taste. But that we 
 may know something of the character of that which is 
 generally credited to him, a few specimens are appended. 
 The following is from " Irenaeus against Heresies :" — 
 
 "Wherefore it is incumbent to obey the presbyters who 
 are in the church, — those who, as I have shown, possess 
 the succession from the apostles; those who, together with 
 the succession of the episcopate, have received the certain 
 gift of truth, according to the good-pleasure of the Fa- 
 ther. But (it is also incumbent) to hold in suspicion 
 others who depart from the primitive succession, and as- 
 semble themselves together in any place whatsoever, 
 (looking upon them) either as heretics of perverse minds, 
 or as schismatics puffed up and self-pleasing, or again as 
 hypocrites, acting thus for the sake of lucre and vain- 
 glory." — Book 4, cliap. 26, par. 2. 
 
Iren^eus. 131 
 
 This, it will be seen, tends solely to the up-building of 
 the hierarchy of the Catholic Church. While Origen 
 and Tertullian were very versatile, introducing many 
 heresies, Irenseus did his chief service to the Roman Cath- 
 olic Church in the line of establishing the Episcopal suc- 
 cession, and preparing the minds of the people for the 
 acceptance of one "universal bishop." 
 
 The following, which teaches obedience to the Church 
 of Rome, shows how early the Romish leaven began to 
 work: — 
 
 "Since, however, it would be very tedious, in such a 
 volume as this, to reckon up the successions of all the 
 churches, we do put to confusion all those who, in what- 
 ever manner, whether by an evil self-pleasing, by vain- 
 glory, or by blindness and perverse opinion, assemble in 
 unauthorized meetings; (we do this, I say) by indicating 
 that tradition derived from the apostles, of the very great, 
 the very ancient, and universally known church founded 
 and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, 
 Peter and Paul; as also (by pointing out) the faith 
 preached to men, which comes down to our time by 
 means of the successions of the bishops. For it is a mat- 
 ter of necessity that every church should agree with this 
 church, on account of its pre-eminent authority, that is, 
 the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the apostolic tradi- 
 tion has been preserved continuously by those (faithful 
 men) who exist everywhere. 
 
 "The blessed apostles, then, having founded and built 
 up the church, committed into the hands of Linus the 
 office of the episcopate. Of this Linus, Paul makes 
 mention in the epistles to Timothy. To him succeeded 
 Anacletus ; and after him, in the third place from the 
 apostles, Clement was allotted the bishopric. This man, 
 as he had seen the blessed apostles, and had been con- 
 versant with them, might be said to have the preaching 
 of the apostles still echoing (in his ears), and their tradi- 
 
132 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 tions before his eyes. Nor was he alone (in this), for 
 there were many still remaining who had received in- 
 structions from the apostles. In the time of this Clem- 
 ent, no small dissension having occurred among the 
 brethren at Corinth, the church in Rome dispatched a 
 most powerful letter to the Corinthians, exhorting them 
 to peace, renewing their faith, and declaring the tradi- 
 tion which it had lately received from the apostles, pro- 
 claiming the one God, omnipotent, the Maker of heaven 
 and earth, the Creator of man, who brought on the deluge, 
 and called Abraham, who led the people from the land 
 of Egypt, spake with Moses, set forth the law, sent the 
 prophets, and who has prepared fire for the devil and his 
 angels. From this document, whosoever chooses to do so, 
 may learn that he, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, 
 was preached by the churches, and may also understand 
 the apostolical tradition of the church, since this epistle 
 is of older date than these men who are now propagating 
 falsehood, and who conjure into existence another God 
 beyond the Creator and the Maker of all existing things. 
 To this Clement there succeeded Evaristus. Alexander 
 followed Evaristus ; then, sixth from the apostles, Sixtus 
 was appointed ; after him, Telephorus, who was gloriously 
 martyred; then Hyginus; after him, Pius; then after him, 
 Anicetus. Soter having succeeded Anicetus, Eleutherius 
 does now, in the twelfth place from the apostles, hold the 
 inheritance of the episcopate. In this order, and by this 
 succession, the ecclesiastical tradition from the apostles, 
 and the preaching of the truth, have come down to us. 
 And this is most abundant proof that there is one and 
 the same vivifying faith, which has been preserved in the 
 church from the apostles until now, and handed down 
 in truth." — Id, hook 3, chap. 3, paragrapJis 2, 3. 
 
 Still further we read to the same intent: — 
 
 " Since therefore we have such proofs, it is not neces- 
 sary to seek the truth among others which it is easy to 
 obtain from the church; since the apostles, like a rich 
 
TRENiEUS. 133 
 
 man (depositing his money) in a bank, lodged in her 
 hands most copiously all things pertaining to the truth : 
 so that every man, whosoever will, can draw from her the 
 water of life. For she is the entrance to life ; all others 
 are thieves and robbers. On this account are we bound 
 to avoid them,h\it to make choice of the things pertaining 
 to the church with the utmost diligence, and to lay hold 
 of the tradition of the truth. For how stands the case? 
 Suppose there arise a dispute relative to some important 
 question among us, should we not have recourse to the 
 most ancient churches with which the apostles held con- 
 stant intercourse, and learn from them what is certain 
 and clear in regard to the present question? For how 
 should it be if the apostles themselves hM not left us 
 writings? Would it not be necessary (in that case) to 
 follow the course of the tradition which they handed 
 down to those to whom they did commit the churches?" 
 — Id., chap. Jf., paragraph 1. 
 
 It may be claimed that Irenseus did not write this, but 
 that it is the work of someone who lived at a later date, 
 and who wished to have the weight of Irenseus's influence 
 in behalf of Roman supremacy. Of course the one who 
 makes that claim w^ill never be found quoting from 
 Irenseus in behalf of anything else, for i_f this is a forgery, 
 any other portion may be a forggry ajso. But the fact 
 remains that the writings of Irenieus, whoever produced 
 them, favor the Roman Catholic usurpation. Tradition 
 is by them exalted, and the people are exhorted to have 
 recourse to "the most ancient churches," instead of to 
 the Bible. 
 
 In proof of the statement made by Killen, that the 
 writings of Irenseus " are not destitute of puerilities," we 
 quote the following "reasons" which he gives to show 
 why there are only four Gospels '.— 
 
 " It is not possible that the Gospels can be either niore 
 
134 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 or fewer in number than they are. For, since there are 
 f our zon es of the world in which we live, and four princi- 
 p al win ds, while the church is scattered throughout all 
 the world, and the ' pillar and ground ' of the church is 
 the gospel and the spirit of life ; it is fitting that she 
 should have four pillars, breathing out immortality on 
 every side, and vivifying men afresh. From which fact, 
 it is evident that the Word, the Artificer of all, he that 
 sitteth upon the cherubim, and contains all things, he 
 who was manifested to men, has given us the gospel under 
 four aspects, but bound together by one Spirit. As also 
 David says, when entreating his manifestation, * Thou 
 that sittest between the cherubim, shine forth.' For the 
 cherubim, too, were four-faced, and their faces were 
 images of the dispensation of the Son of God. For (as 
 the Scripture) says, ' The first living creature was like a 
 lion,' symbolizing his efiectual working, his leadership, 
 and royal power ; the second (living creature) was like a 
 calf, signifiying (his) sacrificial and sacerdotal order; but 
 nhe third had, as it were, the face as of a man,' — an evi- 
 dent description of his advent as a human being; 'the 
 fourth was like a flying eagle,' pointing out the gift of 
 the Spirit hovering with his wings over the church. 
 And therefore the Gospels are in accord with these things, 
 among which Christ Jesus is seated." — Id., hook 3, 
 chap. 11, paragraph 8. 
 
 That is fanciful enough, but it is not so bad as the 
 following, which shows Irenseus to have been a fit com- 
 panion of the one who stole the name of Barnabas to 
 foist his idle imaginings upon the church : — 
 
 " Now the law has figuratively predicted all these, de- 
 lineating man by the (various) animals: whatsoever of 
 these, says (the Scripture), have a double hoof and rumi- 
 nate, it proclaims as clean; but whatsoever of them do 
 not possess one or other of these (properties), it sets aside by 
 themselves as unclean. AVho then are the clean ? Those 
 who make their way by faith steadily towards the Father 
 
iRENiEUS. 135 
 
 and the Son ; for this is denoted by the steadiness of those 
 which divide the hoof; and they meditate day and night 
 upon the words of God, that they may be adorned with 
 good works ; for this is the meaning of the ruminants. 
 The unclean, however, are those who do neither divide 
 the hoof nor ruminate; that is, those persons who have 
 neither faith in God, nor do meditate on his words ; and 
 such is the abomination of the Gentiles.' But as to those 
 animals which do indeed chew the cud, but have not the 
 double hoof, are themselves unclean, we have in them a 
 figurative description of the Jews, who certainly have the 
 words of God in their mouth, but who do not fix their 
 rooted steadfastness in the Father and in the Son ; where- 
 fore they are an unstable generation. For those animals 
 which have the hoof all in one piece easily slip; but 
 those which have it divided are more sure-footed, their 
 cleft hoofs succeeding each other as they advance, and 
 the ojie hoof supporting the other. In like manner, too, 
 those are unclean which have the double hoof but do not 
 •ruminate: this is plainly an indication of all heretics, 
 and of those who do not meditate on the words of God, 
 neither are adorned with works of righteousness ; to whom 
 also the Lord says, * Why call ye me Lord, Lord, and 
 do not the things which I say to you?' For men of this 
 stamp do indeed say that they believe in the Father and 
 the Son, but they never meditate as they should upon the 
 things of God, neither are they adorned with works of 
 righteousness; but, as I have already observed, they have 
 adopted the lives of swine and of dogs, giving themselves 
 over to filthiness, to gluttony, and recklessness of all sorts. 
 Justly, therefore, did the apostle call all such ' carnal ' 
 and * animal,' — (all those, namely) who through their own 
 unbelief and luxury do not receive the divine Spirit, and 
 in their various phases cast out from themselves the life- 
 giving word, and walk stupidly after their own lusts : the 
 prophets, too, spake of them as beasts of burden and wild 
 beasts; custom likewise has viewed them in the light of 
 cattle and irrational creatures; and the law has pro- 
 nounced them unclean."-^i(i., hook 5, chap. 8, par If. 
 
136 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 We are now prepared to listen to what Irenseus has to 
 say about the Sabbath and Sunday, although what we 
 have already read does not tend to make us listen with a 
 great deal of reverence either for his opinion or his prac- 
 tice.. In number 7 of the "Fragments from the Lost 
 Writings of Irenseus," we read : — 
 
 " This (custom), of not bending the knee upon Sunday, 
 is a symbol of the resurrection, through which we have 
 been set free, by the grace of Christ, from sins, and from 
 death, which has been put to death under him. Now 
 this custom took its rise from apostolic times, as the 
 blessed Irenseus, the martyr and bishop of Lyons, declares 
 in his treatise ' On Easter,' in which he makes mention of 
 Pentecost also ; \^n which (feast) we do not bend the 
 knee, because ibis of equal significance with the Lord's 
 day, for the reason already alleged concerning it." 
 
 No explanation of this passage is needed. Whoever 
 wishes to accept it along with all that Irenseas has writ- 
 ten, is welcome to do so. If it is not a forgery, and if it 
 was written at the time that Irenaeus is supposed to have 
 lived, then it simply shows that some slight reverence for 
 Sunday existed quite early in the church, together with 
 the other beginnings of apostasy from the Bible religion. 
 
 In a foot-note to fragment number 50, we find the 
 following : — 
 
 " This extract is introduced as follows : * For Irenaeus 
 bishop of Lyons, who was a contemporary of the disci- 
 ple of the apostle, Polycarp bishop of Smyrna, and 
 martyr, and for this reason is held in just estimation, 
 wrote to an Alexandrian to the effect that it is right, with 
 respect to the feast of the resurrection, that we should 
 celebrate it upon the first day of the week.' " 
 
 That is to say, that somebody says that Irenaeus, who 
 acquired great renown from the fact that he lived at the 
 
iRENiEUS. 137 
 
 same time that Polycarp did, wrote to somebody else to 
 the effect that the feast of the resurrection ought to be 
 celebrated on the first day of the week. How_he_found 
 out that any " feast of the^esurrection " should ever be 
 celebrated, this unknown deponent saith not. 
 
 Whether the following is favorable to the Sabbath of 
 the fourth commandment or opposed to it, the writer is 
 unable to determine. Whoever thinks that it is worth 
 anything, is welcome to it : — 
 
 "And therefore the Lord reproved those who un- 
 justly blamed him for having healed upon the Sabbath- 
 days. For he did not make void, but fulfilled the law, by 
 performing the offices of the high priest, propitiating God 
 for men, and cleansing the lepers, healing the sick, and 
 himself suffering death, that exiled man might go forth 
 from condemnation, and might return without fear to his 
 own inheritance. — Irenceus against Heresies, book ^, 
 chap. 8, paragraph 2. 
 
 The following, however, most clearly teaches the neces- 
 sity of obedience to all the commandments : — 
 
 "They (the Jews) had therefore a law, a course of dis- 
 cipline, and a prophecy of future things. For God at 
 the first, indeed, warning them by means of natural pre- 
 cepts, which from the beginning he had implanted in 
 mankind, that is, by means of the decalogue (which, if 
 anyone does not observe, he has no salvation), did then 
 demand nothing more of them. As Moses says in Deu- 
 teronomy, * These are all the words which the Lord spake 
 to the whole assembly of the sons of Israel on the mount, 
 and he added no more ; and he wrote them on two tables 
 of stone, and gave them to me.' For this reason (he did 
 so), that they who are willing to follow him might keep 
 these commandments." — Id., hook 4, chap 15, paror 
 graph 1. 
 
 And the following does most emphatically assert the 
 perpetuity of the law of God : — 
 
138 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 "Preparing man for this life, the Lord himself did 
 speak in his own person to all alike the words of the 
 decalogue; and therefore, in like manner, do they remain 
 permanently with us, receiving by means of his advent 
 in the flesh, extension and increase, but not abrogation." 
 — Id., hook Jf, chap. 16, paragraph Jf. 
 
 It is to be hoped that no commandment-keeper will 
 ever refer to these passages in Irenseus as evidence that 
 Christ did not abrogate the law of God, the ten com- 
 mandments. It is true that he did not abate one jot of 
 the law, but the testimony of Irena3us does not make that 
 fact any more certain. We know it because Christ him- 
 self has said so. We may not quote the Fathers as au- 
 thority even when they tell the truth, for that would oblige 
 us to accept their heresies. The above extracts are useful^ 
 however, to quote for the benefit of those who would fain 
 derive comfort from Irenseus for the custom of observing 
 Sunday, in opposition to the fourth precept of the deca- 
 logue. 
 
 Those who wish to take Irenseus as authority on any 
 point, must accept his teaching on all points, and so, in 
 addition to the exaltation of Rome, they must accept 
 the doctrine of purgatory, for Irenseus says : — 
 
 " It was for this reason, too, that the Lord descended 
 into the regions beneath the earth, preaching his advent 
 there also, and (declaring) the remission of sins received 
 by those who believe in him." — Id., chap. 27 , paragraph 2. 
 
 The above doctrine of purgatory and probation after 
 death is of course based upon the doctrine of the immor- 
 tality of the soul; yet the following is a virtual contra- 
 diction of that theory. It is at any rate a plain state- 
 ment of the fact that people do not go to Heaven at 
 death: — 
 
iREN^aEUS. 139 
 
 " If, then, the Lord observed the law of the dead, that 
 he might become the first-begotten from the dead, and 
 tarried until the third day *in the lower parts of the 
 earth;' then afterwards rising in the flesh, so that he 
 even showed the print of the nails to his disciples, he thus 
 ascended to the Father;— (if all these things occurred, 
 I say), how must these men not be put to confusion, 
 wdio allege that 'the lower parts' refer to this world of 
 ours, but that their inner man, leaving the body here, 
 ascends into the super-celestial place? For as the Lord 
 *went away in the midst of the shadow of death,' wdiere 
 the souls of the dead were, yet afterwards arose in the 
 body, and after the resurrection was taken up (into 
 Heaven), it is manifest that the souls of his disciples also, 
 upon whose account the Lord underwent these things, 
 shall go away into the invisible place allotted to them by 
 God, and there remain until the resurrection, awaiting 
 that event; then receiving their bodies, and rising in 
 their entirety, that is bodily, just as the Lord arose, they 
 shall come thus into the presence of God. * For no dis- 
 ciple is above the Master, but everyone that is perfect 
 shall be as his Master.' As our Master, therefore, did 
 not at once depart, taking flight (to Heaven), but awaited 
 the time of his resurrection prescribed by the Father, 
 which had been also shown forth through Jonas, and 
 rising again after three days was taken up (to Heaven), 
 so ought we also to await the time of our resurrection 
 prescribed by God and foretold by the prophets, and so, 
 rising, be taken up, as many as the Lord shall account 
 worthy of this (privilege)." — Id., hook 5, chap. 31, para- 
 graph 2. 
 
 The following extract is rather long, but it is a good 
 example of the style of Irenseus, and, although it may 
 be called a point of minor importance, it shows how read- 
 ily false theories obtain credence, and are propagated 
 among the people: — 
 
 " They, however, that they may establish their false 
 
140 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 opinion regarding that which is written, 'to proclaim the 
 acceptable year of the Lord/ maintain that he preached 
 for one year only, and then suffered in the twelfth month. 
 (In speaking thus), they are forgetful to their own disad- 
 vantage, destroying his whole work, and robbing him of 
 that age which is both more necessary and more honora- 
 ble than any other; that more advanced age, I mean, 
 during which also as a teacher he excelled all others. 
 For how could he have had disciples, if he did not teach ? 
 And how could he have taught, unless he had reached the 
 age of a master? For when he came to be baptized, he 
 had not yet completed his thirtieth year, but was begin- 
 ning to be about thirty years of age (for thus Luke, who 
 has mentioned his years, has expressed it : ' Now Jesus 
 was, as it were, beginning to be thirty years old,' when he 
 came to receive baptism); and (according to these men) 
 he preached only one year reckoning from his baptism. 
 On completing his thirtieth year he suffered, being in fact 
 still a young man, and who had by no means attained to 
 advanced age. Now, that the first stage of early life em- 
 braces thirty years, and that this extends onwards to the 
 fortieth year, everyone will admit; but from the fortieth 
 and fiflieth year a man begins to decline towards j)ld age, 
 whichjour^(Ord_gossesse^^ the ofhce 
 
 ofVteaS^rTeviiiasTIie gospel and aU the elders testify; 
 those who were conversant in Asia with John, the disci- 
 ple of the Lord, (affirnnug)^thatjJohn conv eyed to them 
 thato>_i nf()rmation. And he remained among them up t^ 
 the times of Trajan. Some of them, moreover, saw not 
 only John, ^utthe other apostles also, and heard the very 
 same accoui^ from them, and bear testhnony as to the 
 (validity of) the statement. Whom^^en should we 
 rather believe ? Whether such men as these, or Ptole- 
 mseus, who never saw the apostles, and who never even in 
 his dreams attained to the slightest trace of an apostle? 
 
 " But, besides this, those very Jews who then disputed 
 with the Lord Jesus Christ have most clearly indicated 
 the same thing. For when the Lord said to them 
 
Iren^us. 141 
 
 'Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day; and he 
 saw it, and was glad/ they answered him, 'Thou art not 
 yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham ? ' Now, 
 such language is fittingly applied to one who has already 
 passed the age of forty, without having as yet reached 
 his fiftieth year, yet is not far from this latter period. 
 But to one who is only thirty years old it would unques- 
 tionably be said, ' Thou art not yet forty years old.' For 
 those who wished to convict him of falsehood would 
 certainly not extend the number of his years far be- 
 yond the age which they saw he had attained ; but 
 they mentioned a period near his real age, whether they 
 had truly ascertained this out of the entry in the public 
 register, or simply made a conjecture from what they ob- 
 served that he was above forty years old, and that he cer- 
 tainly was not one of only thirty years of age. For it is 
 altogether unreasonable to suppose that they were mis- 
 taken by twenty years, when they wished to prove him 
 younger than the times of Abraham. For what the^ 
 saw, that they also expressed ; and he whom they beheld 
 was not a mere phantasm, but an actual being of flesh 
 and blood. He did not then want much of being fifty 
 ^^ars old ; and, in accordance with that fact, they said 
 to him, 'Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou 
 seen Abraham?' " — Id., book 2, chap. 22, paragraphs 5, 6. 
 
 With respect to the assertion of Irenseus that the 
 apostle John told the elders in Asia, that when Jesus 
 taught he was upwards of forty years old, Harvey, who 
 got out an edition of Irenseus, says : — 
 
 "The reader may here receive the unsatisfactory 
 character of tradition, where a mere fact is concerned. 
 From reasonings founded upon the evangelical history, 
 as well as from a preponderance of external testimony, it 
 is most certain that our Lord's ministry extended but 
 little over three years ; yet here Irenseus states that it in- 
 cluded more than ten years, and appeals^to a^jtraditioa 
 derived, as he says, from those who had c ^nversedTwith 
 ^an apostle/''*^ §i*o<ec? in afoot-note, by BisKop Coxe. 
 
142 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 And Bishop Coxe also adds a note to the statement 
 that Jesus did not ^ck much of being fifty years old 
 when the conversation occurred which is recorded in the 
 eiglith chapter of John. \He says : — 
 
 " This statement is simply astounding, and might seem 
 a providential illustration of the worthlessness of mere 
 tradition unsustained by the written word. No mere 
 tradition could be more c redit ably authorized than th,is." 
 
 It is a pity that the bishop and other admirers of the 
 ^Fathers have not always kept this fact in mind. If they 
 had, they would not have lauded the Fathers as they 
 have, for their writings are mostly tradition or specula- 
 tion. Since it is admitted that everything must be sus- 
 tained by the Bible, in order to be of any value, how 
 much better it would be to go to the Bible direct for our 
 information, without floundering through the bogs of pa- 
 tristic literature. 
 
 In his preface to the writings of Irenseus, Bishop Coxe 
 says : " Not a little of what is contained in the following 
 pages will seem almost unintelligible to the English 
 reader. And it is scarcely more comprehensible to those 
 who have pondered long on the original." Whoever 
 wades through the entire mass will be convinced of the 
 truth of that statement, and the following is one of the 
 passages which will serve to convince him : — 
 
 "Moreover, Jes^is, which is a word belonging to the 
 proper tongue of the Hebrews, contains, as the learned 
 among them declare, two letters and a half, and signifies 
 that Lord who contains heaven and earth ; for Jesus in 
 the ancient Hebrew language means 'heaven,' while 
 again ' earth ' is expressed by the words sura usser. The 
 word, therefore, which contains heaven and earth is just 
 Jesus." — Irenceus agaiiist Heresies^ book 2, cJiap ^4, par- 
 agraph 2. 
 
iRENiEUS. 143 
 
 The bishop truly says that nothing can be made of 
 these words. And the words ^' sura itsser" betray not 
 much more ignorance on the part of the writer than 
 does his attempt to handle the Hebrew. Such ignorance 
 and pedantry on the part of a modern writer would make 
 him the laucfhino^ stock of all who should take the trouble 
 to read his writings. But Irenseus is a " Father of the 
 church," and so, forsooth, his senseless jargon must be 
 looked upon with, reverence and awe. 
 
 It appears, moreover, that Irenseus was almost as ig- 
 norant of Greek as he was of Hebrew, although he wrote 
 in Greek. That is, he was an ignorant scribbler who 
 made great pretensions to knowledge. In book 2, chap- 
 ter 35, paragraph 3 of his work " Against Heresies," he 
 says : — 
 
 " Iq like manner also, Sabaoth, when it is spelled by a 
 Greek Omega in the last syllable (Sabaoth), denotes 'a 
 voluntary agent ; ' but when it is spelled with a Greek 
 Omicron— as, for instance, SabaOth — it expresses 'the 
 first heaven.' In the same Avay, too, the word Jadth, 
 when the last syllable is made long and aspirated, denotes 
 *a predetermined measure;' but when it is written 
 shortly by the Greek letter Omicron, namely, Jaoth, it 
 signifies 'one who puts evils to flight.'" 
 
 As Coxe says : " The author is here utterly mistaken. 
 . . . The term Sabaoth is never written with an 
 Omicron, either in the LXX., or by the Greek Fathers, 
 but always with an Omega (lajSawO')" But just think 
 of the absurdity of writing such stuff " against heresies." 
 
 With one more example of the expository skill of 
 Irenseus, we will take leave of him. It is from his won- 
 derful refutation of all heresies: — 
 
 " Moreover, by the words they used this fact was pointed 
 
144 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 out — that there is no other one who can confer upon the 
 elder and younger church the (power of) giving birth 
 to children, besides our Father. Now the father of the 
 human race is the Word of God, as Moses points out 
 when he says,. *Is not he thy father who hath obtained 
 thee (by generation), and formed thee, and created thee?' 
 At what time, then, did he pour out upon the human 
 race the life-giving seed — that is, the Spirit of the re- 
 mission of sins, through means of whom we are quick- 
 ened ? Was it not then, when he was eating with men, 
 and drinking wine upon the earth? For it is said, 'The 
 Son of man came eating and drinking;' and when he 
 had lain down, he fell asleep, and took repose. As he 
 does himself say in David, * I slept, and took repose.' 
 And because he used thus to act while he dwelt and 
 lived among us, he says again, 'And my sleep became 
 sweet unto me.' Now this whole matter was indicated 
 through Lot, that the seed of the Father of all — that is, 
 of the Spirit of God, by whom all things were made — 
 was commingled and united with flesh — that is, with his 
 own workmanship; by which commixture and unity the 
 two synagogues — that is, the two churches — produced 
 from their own father living sons to the lixdng God. 
 
 "And while these things were taking place, his wife 
 remained in (the territory of) Sodom, no longer corrupt- 
 ible flesh, but a pillar of salt which endures forever; and 
 by those natural processes which appertain to the human 
 race, indicating that the church also, which is the salt of 
 the earth, has been left behind within the confines of the 
 earth, and subject to human sufferings; and while entire 
 members are often taken away from it, the pillar of salt 
 still endures, thus typifying the foundation of tht faith 
 which maketh strong, and sends forward, children to their 
 Father." — Book 4, chap. 31, paragraphs 2, 3. 
 
 In this Irenseus shows himself worthy to rank with 
 the worst of the Fathers as a perverter of the simple 
 statements of the Bible. How true it is that " the world 
 
iRENiEUS. 145 
 
 by wisdom knew not God." Those men were so imbued 
 with the spirit of heathen philosophy, which consisted 
 simply in a show of learning, to mystify and awe the 
 simple-minded, that they could not come down to the 
 plain, common-sense teaching of the Bible. Lot's drink- 
 ing wine must needs be made a type of Christ ; the chil- 
 dren begotten by incestuous intercourse with his daugh- 
 ters is taken as a type of the church proceeding from 
 God ; and with the usual disregard of consistency, the 
 pillar of salt, into which Lot's wife was turned, is made 
 to represent the church which preserves the world, al- 
 though that did not preserve anything. And that is a 
 sample of the stuff that was written against heresies. 
 Such childish trifling with the sacred text is well adapted 
 to produce heresy and infidelity, and nothing else. And 
 therefore the same verdict will have to be pronounced 
 upon Irenseus as upon the other so-called Fathers. His 
 intentions may have been good, but whatever influence 
 his work has had, has been blighting to pure Christian- 
 ity and to reverence for " the sincere milk of the word." 
 No wonder he is an honored Father in the Catholic 
 Church. 
 
 10 
 
CHAPTER X. 
 
 JUSTIN MARTYE. '/^^ 
 
 But little is known about the life of this ni^, except 
 what is found in his own writings. That which is gen- 
 erally accepted is that he was born in the city of Shechem 
 (the modern Nablous), in Samaria, about 114 A. d. He 
 was a Gentile, however, and evidently from a family of 
 some wealth and social standing; for he traveled exten- 
 sively, and was liberally educated in the learning of 
 those times. Before adopting Christianity, he was a pro- 
 fessional heathen philosopher. According to Eusebius 
 and some other historians, he suffered martyrdom at 
 Rome, in a. d. 165, as the result of a plot laid for him 
 by the philosophers of that city. The following extracts 
 from reputable church historians give a good idea of his 
 character as a man, and as a professed leader of the 
 Christian religion. Bishop Coxe, in his introductory 
 note to the " First Apology," says : — 
 
 "Justin was a Gentile, but born in Samaria, near 
 Jacob's well. He must have been well educated : he had 
 traveled extensively, and he seems to have been a person 
 enjoying at least a competence. After trying all other 
 systems, his elevated tastes and refined perceptions made 
 him a disciple of Socrates and Plato." 
 
 It is to be hoped that few will indorse the statement 
 
 immediately following the above, that " so he climbed 
 
 towards Christ." If it is really true that Socrates and 
 
 Plato were the steps by which Justin climbed toward 
 
 (146) 
 
Justin Martyr. 147 
 
 Christ, then he never reached Christ ; for one might as 
 soon expect to reach the top of a mountain by going 
 down into a mine, or to reach Heaven by descending into 
 the bottondess pit, as to reach Christ by studying Socra- 
 tes and Plato. The great trouble witli Justin and the 
 others who are misnamed "Christian Fathers," is that 
 their Christianity consisted largely of heathen philosophy. 
 This it was that clouded their minds to the simple truth 
 of the gospel, and made them such blind leaders of the 
 blind. Whatever they learned of Christ, they learned 
 in spite of their study of philosophy, and not because 
 of it. 
 
 Bishop Coxe says further : — 
 
 " He wore his philosopher's gown after his conversion, 
 as a token that he had attained the only true philosophy. 
 And seeing, that, after the conflicts and tests of ages, it is 
 the only philosophy that lasts and lives and triumphs, 
 
 its discoverer deserves the homage of mankind." 
 t 
 The bishop's note on the philosopher's gown is worthy 
 
 of more than passing notice. He says : " It survives in 
 the pulpits of Christendom — Greek, Latin, Anglican, Lu- 
 theran, etc. — to this day, in slightly different forms." This 
 is a remarkable admission to come from a bishop of the 
 Anglican Church, — that the surplice of the Episcopal, 
 Catholic, or Lutheran clergyman is a link that connects 
 his religion with that of ancient paganism — a sign that he 
 is not fully emancipated from the bondage of supersti- 
 tion. Of course there are very few nowadays who stop 
 to think of the significance of the vestments of "the 
 church ; " but we may be sure that Justin Martyr had a 
 distinct purpose in retaining his philosopher's gown after 
 he professed Christianity. It was not a matter of con- 
 
148 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 venience merely, but it signified that he was a philoso- 
 pher still, but with a new idea. It signified that he 
 could discern no incompatibility between Christianity 
 and pagan philosophy. This conclusion is sustained by 
 Dr. Killen, who says : — 
 
 "Justin, even after his conversion, still wore the philoso- 
 pher's cloak, and continued to cherish an undue regard 
 for the wisdom of the pagan sages. His mind never was 
 completely emancipated from the influence of a system 
 •of false metaphysics; and thus it was that, whilst his 
 views of various doctrines of the gospel remained con- 
 fused, his allusions to them are equivocal, if not contra- 
 dictory." — Ancient Church, period 2, sec. 2, chap. 1, par- 
 agraph 6. 
 
 The learned Neander testifies as follows: — 
 
 " Justin Martyr is remarkable, as the first among these 
 apologists whose writings have reached us, and as the 
 first of those better known to us, who became a teacher 
 of the Christian church, in whom we observe an approx- 
 imation between Christianity and the Grecian, but es- 
 pecially the Platonic philosophy." — Rose's Neander, p. 
 410. 
 
 Mosheim says : — 
 
 " With the Jews, contended in particular Justin Mar- 
 tyr, in his dialogue with Trypho; and likewise Tertullian ; 
 but neither of them, in the best manner ; because they 
 were not acquainted with the language and history of the 
 Hebrews, and did not duly consider the subject." — 
 Mosheim, Ecclesiastical History, book 1, cent. 2, part 2, 
 chap. 3, sec. 7. 
 
 And SchafF bears the following testimony: — 
 
 "Justin was a man of very extensive reading, enormous 
 memory, inquiring spirit, and many profound ideas, but 
 wanting in critical discernment. His mode of reasoning 
 is often ingenious and convincing, but sometimes loose^and 
 
Justin Martyr. 149 
 
 rambling, fanciful and puerile. His style is easy and vi- 
 vacious, but diffuse and careless. He is the f^rst of the 
 church Fathers to bring classical scholarship and Pla- 
 tonic philosophy in contact with the Christian theology." 
 — Vol.1, sec. 122. 
 
 lu'view of these facts it is evident that Justin Martyr 
 is really as unsafe a guide in matters of religion as Plato, 
 or Socrates, or any other heathen philosopher. Nor can 
 it be said that, although he himself may not be a safe 
 teacher of theology, he may be relied on as a delineator 
 of church customs in the second century, which may be 
 followed; for, (1) The customs of the church at that time 
 must necessarily have been perverted by the influx of pa- 
 gans, and by the teaching and example of such men as 
 Justin ; and (2) Justin cannot be depended on as to mat- 
 ters of fact. Says Farrar : — 
 
 "Following in the footsteps of the rabbis he denies 
 the plainest historical facts." — History of Interpretation, 
 p. 173. 
 
 This being the case, it evidently will not do to place 
 much reliance upon his word, whatever he may say. 
 We can therefore rate the following as it deserves : — 
 
 " And on the day called Sunday, all who live in cities 
 or in the country gather together to one place, and the 
 memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets 
 are read, as long as time permits ; then, when the reader 
 has ceased, the president verbally instructs, and exhorts 
 to the imitation of these good things. Then we all rise 
 together and pray, and as w^e before said, when our 
 prayer is ended, bread and wine and water are brought, 
 and the president in like manner offers prayers and 
 thanksgivings, according to his ability, and the people as- 
 sent, saying Amen ; and there is a distribution to each, 
 and a participation of that over which thanks have been 
 
150 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 given, and to those who are absent a portion is sent by the 
 deacons. And they who are well to do, and willing, give 
 what each thinks fit ; and what is collected is deposited 
 with the president, who succors the orphans and widows, 
 and those who, through sickness or any other cause, are 
 in want, and those who are in bonds, and the strapgers 
 sojourning among us, and in a word takes care of all who 
 are in need. But Sunday is the day on which we all hold 
 our common assembly, because it is the first day on which 
 God, having wrought a change in the darkness and mat- 
 ter, made the world ; and Jesus Christ our Saviour on the 
 same day rose from the dead. For he was crucified on 
 the day before that of Saturn (Saturday); and on the day 
 after that of Saturn, which is the day of the sun, having 
 appeared to his apostles and disciples, he taught them 
 these things, which we have submitted to you also for 
 your consideration." — First Apology, chap. 67. 
 
 Although Justin is so unreliable as to matters of fact, 
 we may readily grant that this is a true statement of the 
 custom of worship by some professed Christians in the 
 latter part of the second century. Unfortunately Justin 
 was not the only heathen philosopher who came into the 
 church bringing his heathen philosophy and customs with 
 him, and very many common people would naturally fol- 
 low the lead of such men, so that the few who " continued 
 steadfastly in the apostles' doctrine and practice" were 
 lost to sight, and the church began to assume the color of 
 paganism. This was the case whenever and wherever 
 heathen philosophers accepted Christianity as merely 
 another phase of their old-time philosophy. In the above 
 account, the degeneration from primitive ordinances is 
 further seen in the addition of water to the wine of the 
 Lord's Sup])er. This perversion of the ordinance also 
 api)ears in the following : — 
 
Justin Martyr. 151 
 
 " Having ended the prayers, we salute one another 
 with a kiss. There is then brought to the president of the 
 brethren bread and a cup of wine mixed with water ; and 
 he taking them, gives praise and glory to the Father 
 of the universe, through the name of the Son and of the 
 Holy Ghost, and offers thanks at considerable length for 
 our being counted worthy to receive these things at 
 his hands. And when he has concluded the prayers and 
 thanksgivings, all the people present express their assent 
 by saying Amen. This word Amen answers in the He- 
 brew language to (so be it). And when the president 
 has given thanks, and all the people have expressed their 
 assent, those who are called by us deacons give to each 
 of those present to partake of the bread and wine mixed 
 with water over which the thanksgiving was pronounced, 
 and to those who are absent they carry away a portion." 
 — First Apology, chap. 65. 
 
 It will be seen, however, that Justin did not regard 
 Sunday as a rest day or a sacred day. He had always 
 been accustomed to regard the first day of the week as a 
 festival day, and had not changed his views when he 
 adopted the form of Christianity. Only instead of pagan 
 sacrifices on that day, he substituted the (perverted) 
 forms of Christian worship. But he well knew that there 
 was a difference between Sunday and Sabbath, as appears 
 from the following: — 
 
 "The command of circumcision, again, bidding (them) 
 always circumcise the children on the eighth day, was a 
 type of the true circumcision, by which we are circum- 
 cised from deceit and iniquity through him who rose 
 from the dead on the first day after the Sabbath (namely 
 through) our Lord Jesus Christ. For the first day after 
 the Sabbath, remaining the first of all the days, is called, 
 however, the eighth, according to the number of all the 
 days of the cycle, and (yet) remains the first." — Dialogue 
 with Trypho, chap. Jfl. 
 
152 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 The origin of the absurdity of calling Sunday the first 
 day and the eighth day also, may be learned from the 
 above. It is just such a piece of theological jugglery as 
 might be expeo{;ed from a semi-heathen philosopher. 
 
 Gibbon's statement that the philosophers 'Vegarded all 
 systems of philosophy as equally false, is corroborated by 
 the follomng three extracts from Justin's writings, which 
 show that although a professed Christian, he assumed the 
 right to dispense with all the requirements of the Bible. 
 In his talk with Trypho the Jew he says : — 
 
 "The newjaw requires you to keep perpetual Sabbath, 
 and you, because you are idle for one day, suppose you 
 are pious, not discerning why this has been commanded 
 you : and if you eat unleavened bread, you say the will 
 of God has been fulfilled. The Lord our God does not 
 take pleasure in such obser^nces ; if there is any per- 
 jured person or a thief among you, let him cease to be 
 so; if any adulterer, let him repent; then he has kept 
 the sweet and true Sabbaths of God. If anyone has im- 
 pure hands, let him wash and be pure." — Id., chap. 12. 
 
 This shows that although he recognized the difierence 
 between Sabbath and Sunday, as has already been 
 shown, he did not believe in keeping any Sabbath. The 
 same appears in the following : — 
 
 " For, tell me, did God wish the priests to sin when 
 they ofier the sacrifices on the Sabbaths? Or those to 
 sin, who are circumcised and do circumcise on the Sab- 
 baths ; since he commands that on the eighth day — even 
 though it happen to be a Sabbath — those who are born 
 shall be always circumcised ? or could not the infants be 
 operated upon one day previous or one day subsequent 
 to the Sabbath, if he knew that it is a sinful act upon the 
 Sabbath? Or why did he not teach those — who are 
 called righteous and pleasing to him, who lived before 
 Moses and Abraham, who were not circumcised in their 
 
Justin Martyr. 153 
 
 foreskin, and observed no Sabbaths — to keep these in- 
 stitutions?" — Id.y chap. 27. 
 
 Some may rejoice to learn that Justin declares that the 
 righteous ones who lived before Moses and Abraham did 
 liot keep Sabbath; but the more cautious ones, who -de- 
 sire only the truth, will ask where he obtained that in- 
 formation, and will question his right to set himself up as 
 one whose unsupported word must be accepted. In the 
 following he teaches the abolition of all law : — 
 
 " For the law promulga ted on Horeb is now ol d, and 
 belongs to yourselves alone; but this is for allTmiver- 
 sally. Now, law placed against law has al6rogated 
 that which, is before it, and a covenant whi<m comes 
 after in like manner has put an end to the pr/viousone; 
 and an e ternal and final law — namely, Christ — has been 
 given to us, and the covenant is trustworthy, after which 
 there shall be no law, no commandment, no ordinance." 
 — Id. J chap. 11. 
 
 Let no one presume to quote Justin Martyr as author- 
 ity for Sunday-keeping, unless he is willing also to ac- 
 cept his dictum that the law of God is abolished. 
 
 Compare the following with Eze. 14:14, and Justin's 
 untrustworthiness as a quoter of Scripture will be ap- 
 parent : — 
 
 nSome injunctions and acts were likewise mentioned in 
 reference to the mystery of Christ, on account of the 
 hardness of your people's hearts. And that this is so, 
 God makes known in Ezekiel, (when) he said concern- 
 ing it : * If Noah and Jacob and Daniel should beg either 
 sons or daughters, the request would not be granted 
 them.' " — Id., chap. JfJf.. 
 
 This is not an isolated instance. Surely a man who 
 cannot quote Scripture correctly is not to be trusted as a 
 teacher of it. 
 
154 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 Again compare the following with the Scripture rec- 
 ord : — 
 
 " Moreover, the prescription that twelve bells be at- 
 tached to the (robe) of the high priest, which hung down 
 to the feet, was a symbol of the twelve apostles, who de- 
 pend on the power of Christ, the eternal Priest; and 
 through their voice it is that all the earth has been filled 
 with the glory and grace of God and of his Christ." — 
 Id.f chap. 42. 
 
 Not content with making a far-fetched comment upon 
 Scripture, he has manipulated the text to accommodate 
 his proposed comment. The Scripture nowhere tells the 
 number of bells that were upon the high priest's robe. 
 
 Like all the Fathers, Justin was very shy of accept- 
 ing any part of the Bible as literal. Speaking of the ac- 
 count of the three angels who came to Abraham, and for 
 whom the patriarch prepared a meal, which they ate, 
 Justin says: — 
 
 " I would say that the Scripture which affirms they ate 
 bears the same meaning as when we would say about 
 fire that it has devoured all things; yet it is not cer- 
 tainly understood that they ate, masticating with teeth 
 and jaws. So that not even here should we be at a loss 
 about anything, if we are acquainted even slightly with 
 figurative modes of expression, and able to rise above 
 them." — Id., chap. 57. 
 
 Exactly ; not here nor anywhere else should we be at 
 a loss to interpret the Scriptures, if we adopted the 
 methods of Justin and the other Fathers. Just teach 
 that they mean something different from what they say, 
 and you will be all right ; and the farther you get from 
 the plain declaration of the text, the nearer right you 
 are, according to the Fathers. That method is a very 
 easy one, but it will ever fail to promote Christian 
 
Justin Martyr. 155 
 
 growth. The "sincere milk of the word" alone can 
 bring men up to " the measure x)f the stature of the full- 
 ness of Christ." 
 
 Following is another instance of Justin's speculative 
 exposition :— 
 
 " * You know, then, sirs,' I said, * that God has said in 
 Isaiah to Jerusalem : " I saved thee in the deluge of Noah." 
 By this which God said was meant that the mystery of 
 saved men appeared in the deluge. For righteous Noah, 
 along with the other mortals at the deluge, i. e., with his 
 own wife, his three sons and their wives, being eight in 
 number, were a symbol of the eighth day, wherein Christ 
 appeared when he arose from the dead, forever the first 
 in power. For Christ, being the first-born of every creat- 
 ure, became again the chief of another race regenerated 
 by himself through water, and faith, and wood, containing 
 the mystery of the cross ; even as Noah was saved by 
 wood when he rode over the waters with his household. 
 Accordingly, when the prophet says, " I saved thee in the 
 times of Noah," as I have already remarked, he addresses 
 the people who are equally faithful to God, and possess 
 the same signs.'" — Id., chap. 13S. 
 
 One hardly knows whether to be amused or indignant 
 at the cool assumption which this half-heathen philoso- 
 pher shows in attempting to give a Jew instruction out of 
 the Old Testament Scriptures. We may be quite sure 
 that his fanciful theories did not make any great impres- 
 sion on Trypho. But they served to puff up Justin with 
 a wondei-ful sense of his own importance, and have fur- 
 nished weak-kneed Protestants with material with which 
 to prove doctrines that cannot be found in the Bible. 
 
 The careful reader will see, however, that in the above 
 passage Justin has no reference whatever to the first day 
 of the week as a day of rest ; of such a thing he seems 
 
156 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 to have had no knowledge. But he is simply making 
 the best argument that he knows how to make to prove 
 that Jesus was the Christ. Of the prophecies which 
 directly foretold the coming of Christ, the character of 
 his work, and the time and object of his death and resur- 
 rection, he seems to have been ignorant, and all his inge- 
 nuity was expended in trying to make something out of 
 nothing. His argument amounts to this: "There were 
 eight persons saved in the ark ; therefore Christ rose on 
 the eighth day as the Saviour of men." Very profound, 
 isn't it? Whoever is at all familiar with Koman Catho- 
 lic controversial writings, will recognize the source whence 
 Catholic theologians learn to dispute. 
 
 But Justin finds in the ark two lines of proof con- 
 cerning Christ. The first is that the eight persons signi- 
 fied that Christ was to rise on the eighth day, and the 
 second is that the wood of which the ark was composed 
 symbolized the wood of the cross. In this also we dis- 
 cover the Roman Catholic devotion to the figure and 
 sign of the cross. The heathen had no knowledge of a 
 religion which changes man's nature; everything was 
 formal with them. So when they nominally accepted 
 Christianity, they looked upon the cross as the symbol of 
 the new religion, and practically substituted it for the 
 charms and shrines (see Acts 19:24), which they had 
 reverenced while professed pagans. To those who re- 
 gard Justin as so illustrious a Father, the following 
 four passages from his writings are recommended : — 
 
 « < 
 
 When the people,' replied I, 'waged war with 
 Amalek, and the son of Nave (Nun) by name Jesijs 
 (Joshua), led the fight, Moses himself prayed to God, 
 stretching out both hands, and Hup with Aaron supported 
 
Justin Martyr. 157 
 
 them during the whole day, so that they might not hang 
 down when he got wearied. For if^ he ga ve up any part 
 of this sign^ which was an im itation of the cr oss, the 
 people were beaten, as is recorded in the writings of 
 Moses ; but if he remained in this form, Amalek was 
 proportionally defeated, and he who prevailed prevailed 
 by the cros s. For it was not because Moses so prayed 
 that the people were stronger, but because, while one 
 w^ho bore the name of Jesus (Joshua) was in the forefront 
 of the battle, he himself made the sign _ of the cross. 
 For Avho of you knows not that the prayer of one who 
 accompanies it with lamentation and tears, with the body 
 prostrate, or with bended knees, propitiates God most of 
 all? But in such a manner neither he nor any other 
 one, while sitting on a stone, prayed. Nor even the stone 
 symbolized Christ, as I have shown.' " — Dialogue "with 
 Trypho, chap. 90. 
 
 That is to say that the army of Israel prevailed, not 
 because Moses prayed, but because he stretched out his 
 hands in the form of a cross. This is expressly stated in 
 the above, and also in the latter part of the following 
 passage : — 
 
 "'Let him be glorified among his brethren ; his beauty 
 is. (like) the firstling of a bullock; his horns the horns 
 of an unicorn ; with these shall lie push the nations from 
 one end of the earth to another.' Now, no one could say 
 or prove that the horns of an unicorn represent any other 
 fact or figure than the type w^hich portrays the cross. 
 For the one beam is placed upright, from which the 
 highest extremity is raised up into a horn, when the other 
 beam is fitted onto it, and the ends appear on both sides 
 as horns joined onto the one horn. And the part which 
 is fixed in the center, on which are suspended those who 
 are crucified, also stands out like a horn ; and it also 
 looks like a horn conjoined and fixed with the other 
 horns. And the expression, 'With these shall he push 
 as with horns the nations from one end of the earth to 
 
158 ■ Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 another/ is indicative of what is now the fact among all 
 the nations. For some out of all the nations, through the 
 power of this niystery, having been so pushed, that is, 
 pricked in their hearts, have turned from vain idols and 
 demons to serve God. But the same figure is revealed 
 for the destruction and condemnation of the unbelievers ; 
 even as Amalek Avas defeated and Israel victorious when 
 the people came out of Egypt, by means of the type of 
 the stretching out of Moses's hands, and the name of 
 Jesus (Joshua), by which the son of Nave (Nun) was 
 called." — Id., chap. 91. 
 
 The reader is requested to give special attention to the 
 first part of the above, which purports to be an exposi- 
 tion of the blessing which Moses pronounced upon 
 Joseph. (See Duet. 33 : 1 7.) No matter what the proph- 
 ecy, Justin could see nothing more in it than some like- 
 ness to the form of the material cross. Of the power of 
 the cross as standing for the atoning sacrifice of Christ, 
 he seems to have had little if any conception ; the mate- 
 rial cross was everything to him, taking the place of the 
 charms and images of his old heathen days. 
 
 It seems almost a waste of valuable space to quote so 
 much of this stuff, and yet it is only by so doing that the 
 reader can be able for himself properly to rate Justin as 
 an expositor. The following is a notable instance of 
 Justin's narrow view of the Scriptures, and of the feeble 
 arguments by which he and the best of his class attempted 
 to convince the Jews and the heathen: — 
 
 "And when I had quoted this, I added, * Hear, then, 
 how this man, of whom the Scriptures declare that he 
 will come again in glory after his crucifixion, was symbol- 
 ized both by the tree of life, which was said to have been 
 planted in Paradise, and by those events which should 
 happen to all the just. Moses was sent with a rod to 
 
Justin Martyr. 159 
 
 effect the redemption of the people; and with this in his 
 hands at the head of the people, he divided tlie sea. By 
 this he saw the water gushing oiit of the rock ; and when 
 he cast a tree into the waters of Marah, which were bitter, 
 he made them sweel;. Jacob, by putting rods into the 
 water-troughs, caused the sheep of his uncle to conceive, 
 BO that lie should obtain their young. With his rod the 
 same Jacob boasts that he had crossed the river. He 
 Baid that he had seen a ladder, and the Scripture has de- 
 clared that God stood above it. But that this was not 
 the Father, we have proved from the Scriptures. And 
 Jacob, having poured oil on a stone in the same place, is 
 testified to by the very God who appeared to him, that 
 he had anointed a pillar to the God who appeared to him. 
 And that the stone symbolically proclaimed Christ, we 
 have also proved by many scriptures; and that the un- 
 guent, whether it was of oil, or of stade, or of any other 
 compounded sweet balsams, had reference to him, we 
 have also proved, inasmuch as the word says : ** Therefore 
 God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of 
 gladness above thy fellows." For indeed all kings and 
 anointed persons obtained from him their share in the 
 names of kings and anointed: just as he himself received 
 from the Father the titles of King, and Christ, and Priest, 
 and Angel, and such like other titles which he bears or 
 did bear. Aaron's rod, which blossomed, declared him 
 to be the high priest, Isaiah prophesied that a rod would 
 come forth from the root of Jesse, (and this was) Christ. 
 And David says that the righteous man is " like the tree 
 that is planted by the channels of waters, which should 
 yield its fruit in it<i season, and whose leaf should not 
 fade." Again, the righteous is said to flourish like the 
 palm tree. God appeared from a tree to Abraham, as it 
 is written, near the oak in Mam re. The people found 
 seventy willows and twelve springs after crossing the 
 Jordan. David affirms that God comforted him with a 
 rod and staff. Elisha, by casting a stick into the River 
 Jordan, recovered the iron part of the ax with which the 
 
160 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 sons of the prophets had gone to cut down trees to build 
 the house in which they wished to read and study the law 
 and commandments of God ; even as our Christ, by be- 
 ing crucified on the tree, and by purifying (us) with 
 water, has redeemed us, though plunged in the direst of- 
 fenses which we have committed, and has made (us) a 
 house of prayer and adoration. Moreover, it was a rod 
 that pointed out Judah to be the father of Tamar's sons 
 by a great mystery.' " — Id., chap. 86. 
 
 One more extract shall suffice on the subject of the 
 cross. In this "apology" to the rulers, he made the fol- 
 lowing final appeal : — 
 
 "But in no instance, not even in any of those called 
 sons of Jupiter, did they intimate the being crucified ; for 
 it was not understood by them, all the things said of it 
 having been put symbolically. And this, as the prophet 
 foretold, is the greatest symbol of his power and rule ; as 
 is also proved by the things which fall under our observa- 
 tion. For consider all the things in the world, whether 
 without this form they could be administered or have any 
 community. For the sea is not traversed except that 
 trophy which is called a sail abide safe in the ship; and 
 the earth is not ploughed without it; diggers and me- 
 chanics do not their work except with tools which have 
 this shape. And the human form differs from that of the 
 irrational animals in nothing else than in its being erect 
 and having the hands extended, and having on the face 
 extending from the forehead what is called the nose, 
 through which there is respiration for the living creature ; 
 and this shows no other form than that of the cross. 
 And so it was said by the prophet, 'The breath before 
 our face is the Lord Christ.' And the power of this 
 form is shown by your own symbols on what are called 
 'vexilla' (banners) and trophies, with which all your 
 state processions are made, using these as the insignia of 
 your ])ower and government, even though you do so un- 
 wittingly. And with this form you consecrate the images 
 
Justin Martyr. 161 
 
 of your emperors Avhen they die, and you name them 
 gods by inscriptions. Since, therefore, we have urged 
 you both by reason and by an evident form, and to the 
 utmost of our ability, we know that now we are blame- 
 less even though you disbelieve ; for our part is done and 
 finished." — First Apology, chap. 55, 
 
 Surely that should have convinced them of the truth 
 of the Christian religion — as Justin understood it. In 
 fact, it was just such arguments that did bring the heathen 
 world over to the profession of Christianity. When the 
 Christian religion was narrowed down to the material 
 cross, and to the making of the sign of the cross, and 
 the heathen were told that this cross was represented 
 everywhere and in everytliing, and that whatever pros- 
 perity they had while heathen was due to the ubiquitous 
 figure of the cross, what was there to keep them from 
 adopting it? They were convinced that Christianity was 
 the universal religion — the religion of nature — and so 
 they turned their temples into churches; the image which 
 they had worshiped as Jupiter, they now worshiped as 
 Christ; the cross became their household god; the vestal 
 virgins gave place to nuns; the peripatetic philosophers 
 became mendicant friars, and so eventually paganism 
 became Roman Catholicism. 
 
 But Justin was not limited in his arguments to the sign 
 of the cross. He knew how to reach the minds of the 
 heathen. For example, read the following: — 
 
 "But since sensation remains to all who have ever 
 lived, and eternal punishment is laid up {i. e., for the 
 wicked), see that ye neglect not to be convinced, and to 
 hold as your belief, that these things are true. For let 
 even necromancy, and the divinations you practice by 
 immaculate children, and the evoking of departed hu- 
 ll 
 
162 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 man souls, and those who are called among the magi, 
 Dream-senders and Assistant-spirits (Familiars), and all 
 that is done by those who are skilled in such matters — 
 let these persuade you that even after death souls are in 
 a state of sensation ; and those who are seized and cast 
 about by the spirits of the dead, whom all call demoniacs 
 or madmen; and what you repute as oracles, both of 
 Amphilochus, Dodona, Pytho, and as many other such 
 as exist; and the opinions of your authors, Empedocles 
 and Pythagoras, Plato and Socrates, and the pit of 
 Homer, and the descent of Ulysses to inspect these 
 things, and all that has been uttered of a like kind." — 
 J(i., chap. 18. 
 
 Notice that in this, as in the other instances, he does 
 not argue from any high standard, but simply labors to 
 show that their old religion is practically the same as 
 Christianity. This quotation shows that Justin had never 
 given up his belief in necromancy, and it shows also that 
 the Christian church was even then being corrupted by 
 heathen magic, which is what was now seen in the mani- 
 festations of modern Spiritualism. Yet although Justin 
 thus speaks of the soul as surviving the body, and act- 
 ing consciously independent of it, the following is an 
 evidence of his inconsistency as a teacher. He was not 
 above taking positions that were directly contradictory: — 
 
 "For as in the case of a yoke of oxen, if one or other 
 is loosed from the yoke, neither of them can plough 
 alone ; so neither can soul or body alone effect anything, 
 if they be unyoked from their communion." — Justin on 
 the Resurrection^ chap. 8. 
 
 But if this is true, the other is not, and if he told the 
 truth when lie said that the dead are conscious and do 
 communicate with the living, then he did not tell the 
 truth here. Whichever view of the matter is taken. 
 
Justin Martyr. 163 
 
 Justin stands convicted of teaching contradictory views, 
 and therefore of being an unreliable man. As a matter 
 of fact, he told the truth in the latter instance; if he 
 had not taught anything inconsistent with that, he might 
 not have attained the dignity of a Father of the Roman 
 Catholic Church, but he might have had the higher 
 lionor of being a humble 'disciple — a doer of the word. 
 Lastly, as final proof that Justin used the Bible as a 
 curiosity box, and nothing more, we cite the following: — 
 
 "Attend therefore to what I say. The marriages of 
 Jacob were types of that which Christ was about to ac- 
 complish. For it was not lawful for Jacob to marry two 
 sisters at once. And he serves Laban for (one of) the 
 daughters; and being deceived in (the obtaining of) the 
 younger, .he again served seven years. Now Leah is 
 your people and synagogue; but Rachel is our church. 
 And for these, and for the servants in both, Christ even 
 now serves. For while Noah gave to the two sons the 
 seed of the third as servants, now on tlie other hand 
 Christ has come to restore both tlie free sons and the 
 servants amongst them, conferring the same honor on all 
 of them w^ho keep his commandments; even as the chil- 
 dren of the free women and the children of the bond>^ 
 women born to Jacob were all sons, and equal in dig- 
 nity. And it was foretold what each should.be accord- 
 ing to rank and according to foreknowledge. Jacob 
 served Laban for speckled and many-spotted sheep ; and 
 Christ served, even to the slavery of the cross, for the 
 various and many formed races of mankind, acquiring 
 them by the blood and mystery of the cross. Leah was 
 weak-eyed; for the eyes of your souls are excessively 
 weak. Rachel stole the gods of Laban, and has hid 
 them to this day; and we have lost our paternal and 
 material gods. Jacob was hated for all time by his 
 brother; and we now, and our Lord himself, are hated 
 by you and by all men, though we are brothers by nat- 
 
164 Fathers of the Catholk! Church. 
 
 lire. Jacob was called Israel; and Israel has been dem- 
 onstrated to be the Christ, who is, and is called, Jesus." 
 — Dialogue with Trypho, chap. 13J/.. 
 
 It is submitted in all candor, that if Justin had been 
 a real student of the Bible, and had had any real knowl- 
 edge of Christianity, he could not have thought to ad- 
 vance its claims by such fiimsy and childish arguments. 
 They are very interesting as an exhibition of his in- 
 genuity; but sharpness is neither deptli nor breadth. A 
 person of vivid imagination may see all manner of fig- 
 ures in the burning coals, and thus it was with Justin. 
 The Bible was to him only a book full of curiosities; 
 therefore the final verdict must be that while he surpasses 
 most of the other Fathers in knowledge of the ivords of 
 the Bible, he rarely quotes it in a sensible manner. He 
 quotes in a parrot-like manner what he had committed 
 to memory. Of the meaning of the Scripture he was 
 more ignorant than any child ten years of age would be, 
 that has had the benefit of Christian training. We may 
 not censure him or any other man for his ignorance ; but 
 we may justly censure those who set forth his ignorance 
 as wisdom, and who would have the people look to va- 
 cancy for substance, to ignorance for wisdom, to darkness 
 for light, and to error for righteousness. Justin must 
 stand as a striking example of the impossibility for any 
 man to fathom the deep things of God, by unaided 
 human reason. 
 
CHAPTER XI. 
 
 CLEMENT OF ALEXANDEIA. 
 
 This one of the Fathers was born about the middle 
 of the second century, although whether in Athens or 
 Alexandria is not known. It is most probable that he 
 was a Greek, but as a writer he is connected only with 
 Alexandria. Of his worthiness to be called one of the 
 Fathers of the Christian church, the reader can decide 
 for himself after reading what the best writers say of him, 
 in connection with a few extracts from his own writings. 
 The Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia says of him : — 
 
 "Though he never succeeds in defining the office of 
 reason on the field of authority, or in fully separating 
 that of pagan thought which Christianity can assimilate, 
 from that which it must reject, he is, nevertheless, ex- 
 ceedingly suggestive, and often eminently striking." 
 
 That is to say, he did not distinguish any difference 
 between paganism and Christianity. Now " exceedingly 
 suggestive " and " eminently striking " ideas may make 
 very interesting reading, but we want something more 
 than that alone in a leader of Christian thought. Nearly 
 all the pagan writings which have been preserved, con- 
 tain "exceedingly suggestive'' and "eminently striking" 
 ideas (some of them altogether too "suggestive"), but 
 shall we therefore call them Christian Fathers? Of 
 course not; and yet this is all the claim that Clement has 
 to that title, because, as the above quotation teaches, he 
 never became Christian enough to distinguish fairly be- 
 tween paganism and Christianity. 
 
 (165) 
 
166 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 It was this lack of perception in the so-called Chris- 
 tian Fathers that filled the church with pagan ideas, 
 and resulted in the great apostasy. No matter how 
 honest Clement's intentions may have been, his pagan 
 notions certainly made him most unfit to be a teacher in 
 the Christian church. 
 
 • McClintock and Strong's Encyclopedia says of Clem- 
 ent : — 
 
 " Of the early Christian writers, Clement was the most 
 learned in the history, philosophy, and science of the 
 nations of his day, and the influence of his studies is 
 apparent in his writings, which display rather the specu- 
 lative philosopher than the accurate theologian — more 
 the fanciful interpreter than the careful expounder of 
 the Scriptures on true exegetical principles." 
 
 Learning and Christianity are by no means identical, 
 nor is learning a substitute for Christianity. If a man 
 is indeed a Christian, thoroughly settled in the simple 
 principles of Christianity,* then the more learning he has 
 the better. But if a man is an opponent of Christianity, 
 his learning can be only a curse; and even though he be 
 friendly to Christianity, and a professed Christian, if he 
 is ignorant of the simple, fundamental principles of the 
 gospel, his learning is a curse to the cause which he pro- 
 fesses; for many will be dazzled by the splendor of his 
 genius, and will follow him into error ; his learning is the 
 ignis-fatuus which beguiles the confiding wayfarer to his 
 destruction. To show that this was tho case with Clem- 
 ent of Alexandria, we have only to quote the following 
 from Mosheim's "Ecclesiastical Commentaries:" — 
 
 " When once this passion for philosophizing had taken 
 possession of the minds of the Egyptian teachers and 
 certain others, and had been gradually diffused by them 
 
Clement of Alexandria. 167 
 
 in various directions throughout the church, the holy and 
 beautiful simplicity of early times very quickly disai> 
 peared, and was followed by a most remarkable and dis- 
 astrous alteration in nearly the whole system of Christian 
 discipline. This very important and deeply-to-be-regretted 
 change had its commencement in the century now under 
 review [the second], but it will be in the succeeding one 
 that we shall have to mark its chief progress. One of 
 the earliest evils that flowed from this immoderate attach- 
 ment to philosophy, was the violence to which it gave 
 rise in the interpretation of the Holy Scriptures. For, 
 whereas, the Christians had, from a very early period, 
 imbibed the notion that under the words, laws, and facts, 
 recorded in the sacred volume, there is a latent sense 
 concealed, an opinion which they appear to have derived 
 from the Jews, no sooner did this passion for philoso- 
 phizing take possession of their minds, than they began 
 with wonderful subtilty to press the Scriptures into their 
 service, in support of all such principles and maxims as 
 appeared to them consonant to reason ; and at the same 
 time most wretchedly to pervert and twist every part of 
 those divine oracles which opposed itself to their philo- 
 sophical tenets or notions. The greatest proficients in 
 this pernicious practice were those Egyptian teachers who 
 first directed the attention of the Christians towards 
 philosophy, namely, Pantsenus and Clement." — Gent. 2y 
 sec. S3. 
 
 In another place (Commentaries, cent. 2, sec. 25, 
 note 2) Mosheim speaks of Clement as blind and mis- 
 guided. Thus : — 
 
 "There can be no question, however, but that Clement 
 is to be ranked amongst the first and principal Christian 
 defenders and teachers of philosophic science; indeed that 
 he may even be placed at the head of those who devoted 
 themselves to the cultivation of philosophy with an ardor 
 that knew no bounds, and were so blind and misguided 
 as to engage in the hopeless attempt of producing an ac- 
 
168 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 commodation between the principles of philosophic sci- 
 ence and those of the Christian religion. He himself 
 expressly tells us in his 'Stromata/ that he would not hand 
 down Christian truth pure and unmixed, but ' associated 
 with, or rather veiled by, and shrouded under, the pre- 
 cepts of philosophy' For, according to him, the rudi- 
 ments or seeds of celestial wisdom communicated by 
 Christ to the world, lay hid in the philosophy of the 
 Greeks, after the same manner as the esculent part of a 
 nut lies concealed within a, shell. . . . For he appears 
 to have been firmly persuaded that the essence of the 
 Greek philosophy was sound, wholesome, and salutary. 
 In fact, that it was perfectly consonant to the spirit of 
 Christian wisdom, but that it was compassed about and 
 veiled from immediate observation by a cloud of super- 
 stition and idle fictions, just in the same way as the ker- 
 nel of a nut is concealed by the shell, and that we should, 
 therefore, make it our business industriously to penetrate 
 this exterior covering, so as to discover the true relation- 
 ship between human and divine wisdom. The origin of 
 the Greek philosophy he, without scruple, attributes to 
 the Deity himself." 
 
 Surely such an one cannot be a safe man to follow, for 
 all the ideas which he advances will be pagan ideas, and 
 whoever accepts them as representatives of Christianity, 
 will have a paganized Christianity, or a Christianized 
 paganism, whichever one chooses to call it. The thought- 
 ful reader can easily picture from the above quotation, 
 how the papacy (which has been aptly called " paganism 
 baptized ") arose upon the teaching of the Fathers. 
 But teaching from which the papacy was developed, is 
 not the teaching from which pure Christianity can be 
 developed. The same fountain cannot send forth both 
 sweet water and bitter. 
 
 Killen's idea of Clement as an expositor of Scripture 
 is expressed in the following paragraph : — 
 
Clement of Alexanbria. 169 
 
 "Clement, as is apparent from his writings, was exten- 
 sively acquainted with profane literature. But he formed 
 quite too high an estimate of the value of the heathen 
 philosophy, whilst he allegorized Scripture in a way as 
 dangerous as it was absurd. By the serpent which de- 
 ceived Eve, according to Clement, ^pleasure, an earthly 
 vice which creeps upon the belly, is allegorically repre- 
 sented.' Moses, speaking allegorically, if we may believe 
 this writer, called the divine wisdom the tree of life 
 planted in paradise ; by which' paradise we may under- 
 stand the world, in which all the works of creation were 
 called into being. He even interprets the ten command- 
 ments allegorically. Thus, by adultery, he understands 
 a departure from the true knowledge of the Most High, 
 and by murder, a violation of the truth respecting God 
 and his eternal existence. It is easy to see how Scripture, 
 by such a system of interpretation, might be tortured 
 into a witness for any extravagance." — Ancient Church, 
 part 2, see. 2, chap. 1, paragraph 15. 
 
 And Archdeacon Farrar shows in the following para- 
 graph, that although Clement possessed great learning, 
 he lacked the most essential wisdom — that of the Bible : — 
 
 " His attitude towards the inspired writings is that of 
 his age. He makes room for legends even in the New 
 Testament story. His quotations are loose and para- 
 phrastic, and are sometimes attributed to a wrong author. 
 He quotes verses which have no existence. He refers to 
 apocryphal writings as though they were inspired. He 
 attributes the book of Wisdom to Solomon, and the 
 book of Baruch to Jeremiah. He quotes even the 
 'Revelation' and 'Preaching' of Peter, as well as the 
 ' Epistle of Barnabas ' and the ' Teaching of the Twelve 
 Apostles ' as having scriptural authority. He believes 
 in the miraculous inspiration of the Septuagint, the 
 Sibyl, and Hystaspes, and he calls Plato 'all but an 
 evangelical prophet.' " — History of Interpretation, p. 18 J/.. 
 
 With this much by way of preliminary, we may intro- 
 
170 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 (luce our readers to Clement himself, as he appears in his 
 own writings. 
 
 The first quotation which we will give is from " The 
 Instructor," a series of homilies covering almost every 
 subject. The translator. Rev. William AVilson, ranks it 
 "among the most valuable remains of Christian an- 
 tiquity ; " and it cannot be denied that there are some 
 good things in it. There are some points concerning 
 hygiene and good manners that would not be out of 
 place in any book intended as a manual for the young, — 
 just such things as we may suppose were taught to the 
 children of all educated and refined heathen of ancient 
 times. But even in " The Instructor " the good things are 
 intermingled with so much that is utterly destitute of 
 sense, that one minute the reader will think that Clement 
 w^as a wise instructor of youth, and the next will be 
 ready to aver that he was a fool. In the first chapter of 
 book 2 he gives the following as a reason why people 
 should stint themselves in the quantity of food which 
 they eat: — 
 
 "And they say that the bodies of children, when 
 shooting up to their height, are made to grow right by 
 deficiency in nourishment. For then the spirit, which 
 pervades the body in order to its growth, is not checked 
 by abundance of food obstructing the freedom of its 
 course." 
 
 The proprietor of Dotheboy's Hall would have called 
 that sound gospel, but sensible people know that temper- 
 ate, healthful living is not starvation. 
 
 The following, from the same chapter, is a good 
 sample of the way in which he mixes with that which is 
 sensible, the allegorical, the fanciful,, and the nonsens- 
 ical : — 
 
Clement of Alexandria. l7l 
 
 " From all slavish habits and excess we must abstain, 
 and touch what is set before us in a decorous way ; keep- 
 ing the hand and couch and chin free of stains; i)reserv- 
 ing the grace of the countenance undisturbed, and com- 
 mitting no indecorum in the act of swallowing; but 
 stretching out the hand at intervals in an orderly man- 
 ner. We must guard against speaking anything while 
 eating ; for the voice becomes disagreeable and inarticu- 
 late when it is confined by full jaws; and the tongue, 
 pressed by the food and impeded in its natural energy, 
 gives forth a compressed utterance. Nor is it suitable to 
 eat and drink sinmltaneously. For it is the very extreme 
 of intemperance to confound the times whose uses are dis- 
 cordant. And * whether ye eat or drink, do all in the glory 
 of God,' aiming after true frugality, which the Lord also 
 seems to me to have hinted at wdien he blessed the loaves 
 and cooked fishes with which he feasted the disciples, in- 
 troducing a beautiful example of simple food. That fish 
 then which, at the command of the Lord, Peter caught, 
 points to digestible and God-given and moderate food. 
 And by those who rise from the water to the bait of 
 righteousness, he admonishes us to take away luxury and 
 avarice, as the coin from the fish ; in order that he might 
 displace vainglory ; and by giving the stater to the tax- 
 gatherers, and ' rendering to Csesar the things which are 
 Cseear's,' might preserve *to God the things which are 
 God's.' The stater is capable of other explanations not 
 unknown to us, but the present is not a suitable occasion 
 for their treatment. Let the mention we make for our 
 present purpose suffice, as it is not unsuitable to the 
 flowers of the Word ; and we have often done this, draw- 
 ing to the urgent point of the question the most beneficial 
 fountain, in order to water those who have been planted 
 by the Word." 
 
 From the above it will be seen that he had a wonder- 
 ful gift of imagination, which he exercised freely in the 
 interpretation of Scripture. As he intimates, this is only 
 
172 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 a small portion of the fancies that he has on the simple 
 matter of Peter's catching a fish. But we sliall note still 
 greater manifestations of his genius. Speaking of the 
 miracle of turning water into wine, he says of Christ: — 
 
 " He gave life to the watery element of the meaning 
 of the law, filling with his blood the doer of it who is of 
 Adam, that is, the whole world; supplying piety w^ith 
 drink from the vine of truth, the mixture of the old law 
 and of the new word, in order to the fulfillment of the pre- 
 destined time." — The Instructor, hook 2, chap. 2. 
 
 This is simply a collection of words w^ithout sense. 
 What edification sensible people can find in such stuff is 
 a mystery. And what we have quoted might be multi- 
 plied many times, if we had space to give long extracts. 
 
 The " Stromata," or " Miscellanies," is, as its title indi- 
 cates, of a miscellaneous character. According . to Euse- 
 bins, the full title was, " Titus Flavins Clement's Miscel- 
 laneous Collections of Speculative Notes, Bearing upon 
 the True Philosophy." Says the translator in his intro- 
 duction : — 
 
 " The aim of the work, in accordance with this title, is, 
 in opposition to gnosticism, to furnish the material for 
 the construction of a true gnosis, a Christian philosophy, 
 on the basis of faith, and to lead on to this higher knowl- 
 edge those who, by the discipline of the Fcedagogus [" The 
 
 Instructor"], liad been trained for it He 
 
 describes philosophy as a divinely ordered preparation of 
 the Greeks for faith in Christ, as the law was for the He- 
 brews; and shows the necessity and value of literature 
 and philosophic culture for the attainment of true Chris- 
 tian knowledge." 
 
 Again the translator says : — 
 
 " Clement's quotations from Scripture are made from 
 the Septuagint version, often inaccurately from memory, 
 
Clement of Alexandria. 173 
 
 sometimes from a different text from what we possess, 
 often with verbal adaptations ; and not rarely different 
 texts are blended together." 
 
 And it is to such a mixture as this, — of conjectural 
 Scripture "arranged" and " adapted " according to his 
 own ideas, and the speculations of heathen philosophy, — 
 that people are being directed for their knowledge of 
 Christianity. The man who gets his light from such a 
 fog bank is truly to be pitied. 
 
 But Bishop Coxe is willing to vouch for the orthodoxy 
 of Clement. In a foot-note to the paragraph last quoted, 
 after speaking of the supposition of Photius, that " one of 
 the works of Clement (now lost) contained many things 
 unworthy of his orthodoxy and piety," he says : — 
 
 " But his great repute in the Catholic Church after his 
 decease, is sufficient to place his character far above all 
 suspicions of his having ever swerved from the 'faith of 
 the church.' " 
 
 Ah, yes; just so; perhaps an apology will be expected 
 from those who have spoken slightingly of his value as a 
 teacher of Christianity. Who could doubt the orthodoxy 
 of a man who has always been held in high repute by the 
 Catholic Church? This is all the indorsement that 
 Clement really has. Let Protestants change their name 
 before they presume to quote Clement of Alexandria as 
 authority for anything. 
 
 The translators in their introductory note say further 
 of Clement's writings : — 
 
 " Of course there is throughout plenty of false science, 
 and frivolous and fanciful speculation." 
 
 Indeed there is, and without further ado we will let 
 our readers judge for themselves. The heading of the 
 
174 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 sixth chapter of book 5 is, " The Mystic Meaning of the 
 Tabernacle and its Furniture," and the following is part 
 of what he gives on that subject : — 
 
 "Again, there is the veil of the entrance into the holy of 
 holies. Four pillars there are, the sign of the sacred tetrad 
 of the ancient covenants. Furtfier, the mystic name of 
 four letters which was affixed to those alone to whom the 
 adytum was accessible is called Jave, which is inter- 
 preted, * who is and shall be.' The name of God, too, 
 among the Greeks contains four letters. 
 
 "Now the Lord, having come alone into the intellect- 
 ual world, enters by his sufferings, introduced " into the 
 knowledge of the ineffable, ascending above every name 
 which is known by sound. The lamp, too, was placed to 
 the south of the altar of incense ; and by it were shown 
 the motions of the seven planets, that perform their rev- 
 olutions toward the south. For three branches rose on 
 either side of the lamp, and lights on them ; since also 
 the sun, like the lamp, set in the midst of all the planets, 
 dispenses with a kind of divine music the light to those 
 above and to those below." 
 
 After the reader has pondered on the above to his 
 heart's content, he may proceed to this, which is from the 
 same chapter : — 
 
 " North of the altar of incense was placed a table, on 
 wliich there was ' the exhibition of the loaves ;' for the 
 most nourishing of the winds are those of the north. 
 And thus are signified certain seats of churches conspir- 
 ing so as to form one body and one assemblage. 
 
 " And tlie things recorded of the sacred ark signify the 
 properties of the world of thought, which is hidden and 
 closed to the many. * 
 
 "And those golden figures, each of them with six 
 wings, signify either the two bears, as some will have it, 
 or rather the two hemispheres. And the name cheru- 
 bim meant * much knowledge.' But both together have 
 
Clement op Alexandria. 175 
 
 twelve wings, and by the zodiac and time which moves on 
 it, point out the world of sense." 
 
 And when the reader has thoroughly assimilated all 
 the instruction conveyed in this, he may revel in the fol- 
 lowing wonderful elucidation of the " deep things " of the 
 Bible: — 
 
 "But I think it better to regard the ark, so called 
 from the Hebrew word Thebotha, as signifying something 
 else. It is interpreted, one instead of one in all places. 
 Whether, then, it is the eighth region and the world of 
 thought, or God, all-embracing, and without shape, and 
 invisible, that is indicated, we may for the present defer 
 saying. But it signifies the repose which dwells with the 
 adoring spirits, which are meant by the cherubim. 
 
 " For he who prohibited the making of a graven image, 
 would never himself have made an image in the likeness 
 of holy things. Nor is there at all any composite thing, 
 and creature endowed with sensation, of the sort in heaven. 
 But the face is a symbol of the rational soul, and the 
 wings are the lofty ministers and energies of powers 
 right and left; and the voice is delightsome glory in 
 ceaseless contemplation. Let it suffice that the mystic 
 interpretation has advanced so far. 
 
 "Now the high priest's robe is the symbol of the 
 world of sense. The seven planets are represented by 
 the five stones and the two carbuncles, for Saturn and the 
 moon. The former is southern, and moist, and earthy, 
 and heavy ; the latter serial, whence she is called by some 
 Artemis, as if Aerotomos (cutting the air) ; and the air 
 is cloudy. And co-operating as they did in the produc- 
 tion of things here below, those that by divine provi- 
 dence are set over the planets are rightly represented as 
 placed on the breast and shoulders; and by them was the 
 work of creation, the first week. And the breast is the 
 seat of the heart and soul." 
 
 " The twelve stones, set in four rows on the breast, de- 
 scribe for us the circle of the zodiac, in the four changes 
 of the year." 
 
176 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 Some may think that this is enough ; but we now have 
 to present the most valuable part of the whole book, — the 
 part which so many are anxiously longing to have in 
 convenient form for general circulation, in order to settle 
 the minds of doubters. It is what Clement has to say 
 concerning the observance of Sunday. In book 5, chap- 
 ter 14 of the "Stromata," he says: — 
 
 ^ "And the L ord's d ay Plato prophetically speaks of in 
 the tenth boo^ of the ' Republic,' in these words : 'And 
 when seven days have passed to each of them in the 
 meadow, on the eighth day they are to set out and arrive 
 in four days.' 'o By the meadow is to be understood the 
 fixed sphere, as being a mild and genial spot, and the 
 locality of the pious ; and by the seven days each motion 
 of the seven planets, and the whole practical art which 
 speeds to the end of rest. But after the wandering orbs 
 the journey leads to Heaven, that is, to the eighth motion 
 and day. And he says that souls are gone on the fourth 
 day, pointing out the passage through the four elements. 
 But the seventh day is recognized as sacred, not by the 
 Hebrews only, but also by the Greeks ; according to which 
 the whole world of all animals and planets revolve." 
 
 On this Bishop Coxe has the following in a foot-note: — 
 
 "The bearing of this passage on questions of Sabbat- 
 ical and dominical observances, needs only to be indi- 
 cated." 
 
 No doubt; but we cannot help wishing that the good 
 bishop had taken the trouble to indicate the bearing that 
 it has on those questions, for we don't see how common 
 people are going to find out for themselves. Truly the 
 Sunday institution must be reduced to desperate straits, 
 when it has to depend in any measure upon a "prophecy'' 
 uttered by a heathen philosopher, especially when neither 
 that "prophecy" nor its interpretation by the specula- 
 tive Clement contains any mention of Sunday. 
 
Clement of Alexandria. 1Y7 
 
 Again, in liis exposition of the ten commandments, 
 Clement says: — 
 
 "And the fourth word is that which intimates that the 
 world was created by God, and that he gave us the 
 seventh day as a rest, on account of the trouble that 
 there is in life. For God is incapable of weariness, and 
 suffering, and want. But we who bear flesh need rest. 
 The seventh day, therefore, is proclaimed a rest — ab- 
 straction from ills — preparing for the Primal Day, our 
 true rest ; which, in truth, is the first creation of light, in 
 which all things are viewed and possessed. From this 
 day the first wisdom and knowledge illuminate us. ^For 
 the light of truth — a light true, casting no shadow, is the 
 Spirit of God indivisibly divided to all, who are sanctified 
 by faith, holding the place of a luminary, in order to the 
 knowledge of real existences. By following him, there- 
 fore, through our whole life, we become impassible ; and 
 this is To rest." — Stromata, hook 6, chap. 16. 
 
 It really makes no difference what Clement says upon 
 any subject, but for the benefit of those who imagine that 
 in the above he throws his feeble influence in favor of 
 Sunday observance, we quote the following from the very 
 next paragraph: — 
 
 "Having reached this point, we must mention these 
 things by the way ; since the discourse has turned on the 
 seventh and the eighth. For the eighth may possibly 
 turn out to be properly the seventh, and the seventh mani- 
 festly the sixth, and the latter properly the Sabbath, and 
 the seventh a day of work. For the creation of the world 
 was concluded in six days." 
 
 It will be seen that by this hocus-pocus, Clement, if his 
 jumble of words can be said to have any meaning, jnakes 
 out that the seventh day is really the true Sabbath. 
 The statement seems to be that that which some call "the 
 eighth day," namely Sunday, may be the seventh day, 
 12 
 
178 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 and a day of work, and that the real seventh day may be 
 the sixth, and the true Sabbath, as it really is. That is 
 what his words mean, if they mean anything, which we 
 greatly doubt. If anyone, however, thinks that a dif- 
 ferent meaning should be attached to these words, we 
 shall not dispute with him, for it is one of those passages 
 so characteristic of the Fathers, to which each individual 
 may attach his own meaning, and all be equally correct. 
 There is just one more reference in Clement's writings 
 to the " Lord's day," and it is on this wise : — 
 
 "He [the gnosutij. in fulfillment of the precept, ac- 
 cording to the gospey^ eeps the Lord's da y, when lie 
 abandons an evil disposition, and assumes that of the 
 gnostic, glorifyiiig^The Xiord's resurrection in himself 
 Further, also, when he has received the comprehension of 
 scientific sj)eculation, he deems that he sees the Lord' di- 
 recting his eyes towards things invisible, although he seems 
 to look on what he does not wish to look on." — Id., hook 
 7, chap. 12. 
 
 Bishop Coxe thinks that the original of Clement's 
 argument seems to imply that he is here speaking of the 
 Paschal festival, instead of a weekly rest day. It makes 
 little difference. Those who wish to count it as evidence 
 in favor of Sunday-keeping are welcome to do so, but 
 tliey must also accept the follomng heathen interpreta- 
 tion of Scripture: — 
 
 " Wherefore the Lord preached the gospel to those in 
 liades.. Accordingly the Scripture says, ^ Hades says to 
 Destruction, we have not seen his form, but we have 
 heard* his voice.' It is not plainly the place, which, the 
 words above say, heard the voice, but those who have 
 been put in hades and have abandoned themselves to 
 destruction, as persons who have thrown themselves 
 voluntarily from a ship into the sea. Tliey, then, are 
 
Clement of Alexandria. 179 
 
 those that hear the divine power and voice. For who in 
 his senses can suppose the souls of the righteous and 
 those of sinners in the same condemnation, charging 
 Providence with injustice? 
 
 "But how? Do not (the Scriptures) show that the 
 Lord preached the gospel to those that perished in the 
 flood, or rather had been chained, and to those kept (in 
 ward and guard)? And it has been shown also, in the 
 second book ofthe'Stromata,'that the apostles, following 
 the Lord, preached the gospel to those in hades. For 
 it was requisite, in my opinion, that as here, so also there, 
 the best of the disciples should be imitators of the Mas- 
 ter; so that he should bring to repentance those belong- 
 ing to tlie Hebrews, and they the Gentiles ; that is, those 
 that had lived in righteousness according to the law and 
 philosophy, who had ended life not perfectly, but sinfully. 
 For it was suitable to the divine administration, that those 
 possessed of greater worth in righteousness, and whose 
 life had been pre-eminent, on repenting of their trans- 
 gressions, though found in another place, yet being confess- 
 edly of the number of the people of God Almighty, should 
 be saved, each one according to his individual knowledge." 
 — Id., hook 6, chap. 6. 
 
 From this we see that the "new theology" of a pro- 
 bation after death is very old. There is no doubt but 
 that many will be rejoiced to find in C'lement such testi- 
 mony for the "larger hope;" but let those who feel in- 
 clined to accept such teaching, make up their mind to 
 accept also that to which it leads, namely, purgatory and 
 prayers and masses for the dead. For if the dead are 
 on probation, it needs no argument to show that they 
 should be prayed for. This doctrine has been the means 
 of bringing a vast amount of treasure into the Roman 
 Catholic Church, and it is not to be wondered at that 
 that church has always held Clement in so great repute. 
 
180 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 We have just one more "excellent piece of knowledge " 
 to present from the writings of Clement. It is very long, 
 but it is so good an example of the "false science, and 
 frivolous and fanciful speculation," of which the transla- 
 tor rightly says there is a "plenty" throughout all Clem- 
 ent's writings, that we give it. If it were omitted, the 
 reader could not form a correct idea of the beauty and 
 clearness of Clement's style, and his value as a Christian 
 interpreter. It is chapter 11 of book 6 of the "Stro- 
 mata," and is entitled, " The Mystical ]\Ieanings in the Pro- 
 portions of Numbers, Geometrical Ratios, and Music : " — 
 
 "As then in astronomy we have Abraham as an in- 
 stance, so also in arithmetic we have the same Abraham. 
 'For, hearing tliat Lot was taken captive, and having 
 numbered his own servants, born in his house, 318 (rfi^'),' 
 he defeats a very great number of the enemy. 
 
 " They say, then, that the character representing 300 
 is, as to shape, the type of the Lord's sign, and that the 
 Iota and the Eta indicate the Saviour's name ; that it was 
 indicated, accordingly, that Abraham's domestics were 
 in salvation, who having fled to the sign and the name 
 became lords of the captives, and of the very many un- 
 believing nations that followed them. 
 
 "Now the number 300 is, 3 by 100. Ten is allowed 
 to be the perfect number. And 8 is the first cube, which 
 is equality in all the dimensions — length, breadth, depth. 
 * The days of men shall be,' it is said, * 1 20 (/>x) years.' 
 And the sum is made up of the numbers from 1 to 15 
 added together. And the moon at 15 days is full. 
 
 "On another principle, 120 is a triangular number, 
 and consists of the equality of the number 64 (which 
 consists of eight of the odd numbers beginning with 
 unity), the addition of which (1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15) 
 in succession generate squares ; and of the inequality of 
 tlie number 56, consisting of seven of the even numbers 
 beginning with 2 (2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14), which produce 
 the numbers that are not squares. 
 
Clement of Alexandria. 181 
 
 "Again, according to another way of indicating, the 
 number 120 consists of four numbers — of one triangle, 
 15 ; of another, a square, 25 ; of a third, a pentagon, 35; 
 and of a fourth, a hexagon, 45. The five is taken accord- 
 ing to the same ratio in each mode. For in triangular 
 numbers, from the unit 5 comes 15; and in squares, 25; 
 and of those in succession, proportionally. Now 25, 
 which is the number 5 from unity, is said to be the sym- 
 bol of the Levitical tribe, and the number 35 depends also 
 on the arithmetic, geometric, and harmonic scale of 
 doubles — 6, 8, 9, 12; the addition of which makes 35. 
 In these days, the Jews say that seven months' children 
 are formed. And the number 45 depends on the scale of 
 triples — 6, 9, 12, 18 — the addition of which makes 45; 
 and similarly, in these days they say that nine months' 
 children are formed. 
 
 " Such, then, is the style of the example in arithmetic. 
 And let the testimony of geometry be the tabernacle 
 that was constructed, and the ark that was fashioned, — 
 constructed in most regular proportions, and through di- 
 vine ideas, by the gift of understanding, which leads us 
 from things of sense to intellectual objects, or rather 
 from these to holy things, and to the holy of holies. For 
 the squares of wood indicate that the square form, pro- 
 ducing right angles, pervades all, and points out security. 
 And the length of the structure was three hundred 
 cubits, and the breadth fifty, and the height thirty ; and 
 above, the ark ends in a cubit, narrowing to a cubit from 
 the broad base like a pyramid, the symbol of those who 
 are purified and tested by fire. And this geometrical 
 proportion has a place, for the transport of those holy 
 abodes, whose differences are indicated by the differences 
 of the numbers set down below. 
 
 "And the numbers introduced are sixfold, as three 
 hundred is six times fifty; and tenfold, as three hundred 
 is ten times thirty ; and containing one and two-thirds 
 (iitidiixoipoi), for fifty is one and two-thirds of thirty. 
 
 "Now there are some who say three hundred cubits 
 
182 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 are the symbol of the Lord's sign ; and fifty, of hope and 
 of the remission given at Pentecost; and thirty, or as in 
 some, twelve, they say points out the preaching (of the 
 gospel); because the Lord preached in his thirtieth year; 
 and the apostles were twelve. And the structure's termi- 
 nating in a cubit is the symbol of the advancement of 
 the righteous to oneness and to ' the unity of the faith.' 
 
 "And the table which was in the temple w^as six 
 cubits ; and its four feet were about a cubit and a half. 
 
 " They add, then, the twelve cubits, agreeably to the 
 revolution of the twelve months, in the annual circle, 
 during which the earth produces and matures all things; 
 adapting itself to the four seasons. And the table, in 
 my opinion, exhibits the image of the earth, supported as 
 it is on four feet, summer, autumn, spring, winter, by 
 which the year travels. Wherefore also it is said that 
 the table has 'wavy chains;' either because the universe 
 revolves in the circuits of the times, or perhaps it indi- 
 cated the earth surrounded with ocean's tide." 
 
 And this is the man of whom Bishop Coxe says that 
 "after Justin and Irenaeus, he is to be reckolied the 
 founder of Christian literature." His writings are said 
 to introduce us " to a new stage of the church's progress." 
 Heaven save the mark! If this be "progress," let us 
 have retrogression. It does indeed show rapid progress 
 toward the sinks and quagmires of Romanism; and 
 only he who spurns all such " Christian literature " as 
 poison, and returns to the simple truths of the gospel, as 
 unfolded by Christ and his apostles, can hope to walk in 
 the light. But no one who quotes Clement in behalf of 
 Sunday-keeping, can consistently refuse to accept all the 
 heresy and trasli which Clement wrote. 
 
 In the following explanation we find Rome's authority 
 for withholding the Bible from the common people : — 
 
Clement of Alexandria. 183 
 
 "For many reasons, then, the Scriptures hide the 
 sense. First, that we may become inquisitive, and be 
 ever on the watch for the discovery of the words of sal- 
 vation. Then it was not suitable for all to understand, 
 so that they might not receive harm in consequence of 
 taking in another sense the things declared* for salvation 
 by the Holy Spirit." — Id., chap. 15. 
 
 That is to say, that the Scriptures are veiled in ob- 
 scurity, because people would be apt to misunderstand 
 them if they were written in simple language! And 
 Clement has the sublime egotism to suppose that his 
 insane ravings are an exposition of the " veiled " Script- 
 ures! Worse than all, scores and hundreds of professed 
 Protestant ministers are willing to concede his claim. 
 
 Again we say. Let no one who is not willing to write 
 himself down a Roman Catholic, presume to quote with 
 approval the writings of Clement of Alexandria. 
 
CHAPTER XII. 
 
 TERTULLIAN. 
 
 If I were asked which of the so-called Christian 
 Fathers is, in my judgment, the best, I should say, 
 Tertullian. He seems to have clearer ideas of things, 
 and he is certainly the most intelligible. Although he 
 is as unorthodox as any of the Fathers, one can under- 
 stand his heresy, and that is more than can be said of 
 the others. Yet notwithstanding his clearness as com- 
 pared with most of the other Fathers, Killen could truth- 
 fully say of him: — 
 
 "The extant productions of this writer are numerous; 
 and, if rendered into our language, would form a very 
 portly volume. But though several parts of them have 
 found translators, the whole have never yet appeared in 
 English; and, of some pieces, the most accomplished 
 scholar would scarcely undertake to furnish at once a 
 literal and an intelligible version. His style is harsh, his 
 transitions are abrupt, and his innuendoes and allusions 
 most perplexing. He must have been a man of very 
 bilious temperament, who could scarcely distinguish a 
 theological opponent from a personal enemy ; for he pours 
 forth upon those who differ from him whole torrents of 
 sarcasm and invective. His strong passion, acting upon 
 a fervid imagination, completely overpowered his judg- 
 ment; and hence he deals so largely in exaggeration, 
 that, as to many matters of fact, we cannot safely de- 
 pend upon his testimony. His tone is dictatorial and 
 dogmatic; and, though we cannot doubt his piety, we 
 must feel that his Hj)irit is somewluit repulsive and un- 
 genial. Whilst he was sadly deficient in sagacity, he 
 
 (184) 
 
Tertullian. 185 
 
 was very much the creature of impulse ; and thus it was 
 that he was so superstitious, so bigoted, and so choleric." 
 — Ancient Church, period 2, sec. 2, chap. 1, paragraph 11. 
 
 Tertullian exhibits also the most knowledge of Script- 
 ure, although, as Farrar says, he "practically makes 
 Scripture say exactly what he himself chooses." So that 
 after all that may be said in his favor, he cannot be de- 
 pended upon to any extent whatever as an expositor of 
 Scripture. Indeed, it is a truth that the "best" of the 
 Fathers are the worst. Whoever reads them dispassion- 
 ately, without his judgment warped by prejudice or a 
 determination to find support for some pet theory, will, 
 as a general , thing, conclude that each one is the worst 
 of all. 
 
 Tertullian was born at Carthage, about a. d. 160. He 
 is supposed to have been converted from heathenism 
 about the year 200 a. d., and he was afterward ordained 
 a presbyter of the church in Carthage. He was a very 
 prolific writer, and although there are many good things 
 in his writings, they are the greatest stronghold of Ko- 
 man Catholicism. The " Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia" 
 says that his writings form the " foundation of Latin the- 
 ology." That means that they form the foundation of 
 Roman Catholic theology. This statement alone should 
 make Protestants resolve to have nothing to do with 
 him. For it is certain that no pure Christianity can be 
 found in writings which form the foundation of Roman 
 Catholicism. We propose to give our readers a chance 
 to judge for themselves of the truth of the statement 
 that Tertullian's writings were largely instrumental in 
 developing the growth of that " mystery of iniquity " 
 which had begun to work in the days of Paul, and 
 
186 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 which resulted in " that man of sin, the son of perdi- 
 tion," — the antichristian papacy. But first we shall see 
 how he is regarded even by those who are willing to quote 
 from him in support of pet theories which cannot be sus- 
 tained by the Bible. 
 
 Archdeacon Farrar says of him: — 
 
 "The eloquent, fiery, uncompromising African prac- 
 tically makes Scripture say exactly what he himself 
 chooses." " Insisting on the verse, * God hath chosen 
 the weak things of the world to confound the strong,' he 
 adopted the paradox, Credo quia absurdum est [I believe 
 that which is absurd], and the wild conclusion that the 
 more repugnant to sound reason a statement was, it ought 
 so much the more to be deemed worthy of God." — His- 
 tory of Interpretatioiif pp. 178, 179, 180. 
 
 Following is the brief biography of Tertullian given 
 by Mosheim in his " Ecclesiastical History :" — 
 
 '' In the Latin language, scarcely any writer of this 
 century elucidated or defended the Christian religion, ex- 
 cept Tertullian. He was at first a jurisconsult, then a 
 presbyter at Carthage, and at last a follower of Mon- 
 tanus. We have various short works of his, which aim 
 either to explain and defend the truth, or to excite piety. 
 Which were the greatest, his excellencies or his defects, 
 it is difficult to say. He possessed great genius; but it 
 was wild and unchastened. His piety was active and 
 fervent ; but likewise gloomy and austere. He had much 
 learning and knowledge; but lacked discretion and judg- 
 ment ; he was more acute than solid." — Book 1, cent. 2, 
 part 2, chap. 2, see. 5. 
 
 Those who read nuich about Tertullian will find fre- 
 quent reference to his Montanism, and therefore it may 
 not be amiss in this introduction to learn something of the 
 teachings of Montanus, whose follower Tertullian became. 
 The following is from Killen's "Ancient Church:" — 
 
Tertullian. 187 
 
 "Shortly after the middle of the second century the 
 church began to be troubled by a heresy in some re- 
 spects very different from gnosticism. At that time the 
 persecuting spirit displayed by Marcus Aurelius filled the 
 Christians throughout the empire with alarm, and those of 
 them who were given to despondency began to entertain 
 the most gloomy anticipations. An individual, named 
 Montanus, who laid claim to prophetic endowments 
 now appeared in a village on the borders of Phrygia; 
 and though he seems to have possessed a rather mean 
 capacity, his discipline was so suited to the taste of many, 
 and the predictions which he uttered so accorded with 
 prevailing apprehensions, that he soon created a deep im- 
 pression. When he first came forward in the character 
 of a divine instructor, he had been recently converted to 
 Christianity; and he seems to have strangely misappre- 
 hended the nature of the gospel. When he delivered 
 his pretended communications from Heaven, he is said 
 to have wrought himself up into a state of frenzied ex- 
 citement. His countrymen, who had been accustomed 
 to witness the ecstasies of the priests of Bacchus arid 
 Cybele, saw proofs of a divine impulse in his bodily con- 
 tortions; and some of them at once acknowledged his 
 extraordinary mission. By means of two wealthy female 
 associates, named Priscilla and Maximilla, who also pro- 
 fessed to utter prophecies, Montanus was enabled raj^jidly 
 to extend his influence. His fame spread abroad on all 
 sides ; and, in a few years, he had followers in Europe 
 and in Africa, as well as in Asia. 
 
 " It cannot be said that this heresiarch attempted to 
 overturn the creed of the church. He was neither a 
 profound thinker nor a logical reasoner ; and he certainly 
 had not maturely studied the science of theology. But 
 he possessed an ardent temperament, and he seems to 
 have mistaken the suggestions of his own fanaticism for 
 the dictates of inspiration. The doctrine of the personal 
 reign of Christ during the millennium appears to have 
 formed a prominent topic in his ministrations. He main- 
 
188 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 tained that the discipline of the church had been left 
 incomplete by the apostles, and that he was empowered 
 to supply a better code of regulations. According to 
 some he proclaimed himself the Paraclete; but, if so, he 
 most grievously belied his assumed name, for his system 
 was far better fitted to induce despondency than to in- 
 spire comfort. All his precepts were conceived in the 
 sour and contracted spirit of mere ritualism. He in- 
 sisted upon long fasts; he condemned second marriages; 
 he inveighed against all who endeavored to save them- 
 selves by flight in times of persecution ; and he asserted 
 that such as had once been guilty of any heinous trans- 
 gression should never again be admitted to ecclesiasti- 
 cal fellowship. Whilst he promulgated this stern dis- 
 cipline, he at the same time delivered thQ most dismal 
 predictions, announcing, among other things, the speedy 
 catastrophe of the Roman Empire. He also gave out 
 that the Phrygian village where he ministered was to be- 
 come the New Jerusalem of renovated Christianity." — 
 Period 2, see. 2, cha]^. 4, paragraphs 8, 9. 
 
 "When we come to examine the writings of Tertullian, 
 we shall find that he was a worthy disciple of such a 
 master, and although his apologists claim that his writ- 
 ings were mostly completed before he became a Montanist, 
 there is very little if any difference in the spirit of his 
 earlier and his later productions; so that we are forced to 
 conclude that he became a Montanist simply because he 
 was such in reality from the beginning of his career. 
 The theology of Montanus found in Tertullian congenial 
 soil. 
 
 There can be no one who holds the Fathers in higher 
 esteem than does Bishop Coxe, yet in his introduction to 
 the " Pastor of Hermas," he speaks of Tertullian as, — 
 
 "The great founder of 'Latin Christianity,' whose very 
 ashes breathed contagion into the life of sucli as handled 
 
Tertulliai^. 189 
 
 his relics with affection, save only those, who, like Cyprian, 
 were gifted with a character as strong us his own. The 
 genius of Tertullian inspired his very insanity with power, 
 and, to the discipline of the Latin churches, he commu- 
 nicated something of the rigor of Montanism, with the 
 natural reactionary relaxation of morals in actual life. 
 Of this, we shall learn enough when we come to read th'e 
 fascinating pages of that splendid but infatuated author." 
 
 Surely such an author ought to be put into perpetual 
 quarantine. If it had been done centuries ago, it would 
 have saved Protestantism to a great extent from becom- 
 ing tainted with his Roman Catholic contagion ; for no 
 Father has done more than he to establish the Roman 
 Catholic Church. Indeed, as in the case of Clement of 
 Alexandria, Bishop Coxe seems exceedingly anxious to 
 vindicate Tertullian from the charge of being recreant to 
 the Catholic faith. In his introduction to Tertullian's 
 WTitings he says : — 
 
 "Let us reflect that St. Bernard and after him the 
 schoolmen, whom we so deservedly honor, separated 
 themselves far more absolutely than ever Tertullian did 
 from the orthodoxy of primitive Christendom. The 
 schism which withdrew the West from communion with 
 the original seats of Christendom and from Nicene Catho- 
 licity, was formidable beyond all expression, in compari- 
 son with Tertullian's entanglements with a delusion which 
 the see of Rome itself had momentarily patronized. . . 
 . . To Dollinger, with the ' Old Catholic ' remnant only, 
 is left the right to name the Montanists heretics, or to up- 
 braid Tertullian as a lapser from Catholicity." 
 
 That is to say thai Tertullian did not backslide from 
 Catholicism nearly so far as some other eminent Catho- 
 lics did. Let the reader bear in mind that the highest 
 recommendation that Tertullian's champion can give him 
 
 OFTH£ ^ 
 
190 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 is that he never strayed very far from the Roman Catho- 
 lic faith. There are still many Protestants with whom 
 such a recommendation would have little weight, except 
 in turning them against him. 
 
 ^ In keeping with the quotation, which charges Tertul- 
 lian with insanity, is the statement of the Western Church- 
 man (Denver, Col.), which, in an article entitled, "The 
 Right to Administer the Sacraments" (vol. 1, No. 23), 
 called Tertullian "this zealous, brilliant, illogical, un- 
 stable Father." Not a very good foundation to build on, 
 is it? 
 
 We have already read that Tertullian was the founder 
 of Latin (Roman Catholic) theology ; the following quota- 
 tions name some of the peculiar features of Catholicism 
 which were derived from him. Killen says : — 
 
 "Tertullian flourished at a period when ecclesiastical 
 usurpation was beginning to produce some of its bitter 
 fruits, and when religion was rapidly degenerating from 
 its primitive purity. His works, which treat of a great • 
 variety of topics interesting to the Christian student, 
 throw immense light on the state of the church in his 
 generation. . . . But the way of salvation by faith 
 seems to have been very indistinctly apprehended by 
 him, so that he cannot be safely trusted as a theolo- 
 gian. He had evidently no clear conception of the place 
 which works ought to occupy according to the scheme of 
 the gospel ; and hence he sometimes speaks as if pardon 
 could be purchased by penance, by fasting, or by martyr- 
 dom." — Period 2, sec. 2, chap. 1, paragraph 13. 
 
 Here is the cloven foot of antichrist. Salvation by 
 works is the doctrine which puts man on a level with 
 Jesus Christ, and so crowds Christ out altogether. With- 
 out this idea, Roman Catholicism could not exist. It is 
 the sand bank upon which that church is built. Notice 
 
Tertullian. 191 
 
 that while Tertullian's writings are said to throw great light 
 on the state of the church in his generation, it is declared 
 to be a generation when religion was rapidly degenerating 
 from its primitive purity. So while his writings may be 
 interesting as showing the degree of degeneration which 
 the church had reached within less than two hundred years 
 after the days of the apostles, they are worth nothing for 
 any other purpose. And, indeed, we cannot always 
 depend upon them for a knowledge of the customs of 
 the church in his days, for, as we have already quoted 
 from Dr. Killen, "he deals so largely in exaggeration 
 that, as to many matters of fact, we cannot safely depend 
 upon his testimony." 
 
 The following from Neander, as to Tertullian's " warm, 
 ungoverned imagination," corroborates the above : — 
 
 "Tertullian is a writer of peculiar importance, both as 
 the first representative of the theological character of the 
 North African Church, and as the representative of the 
 Montanistic opinions. He was a man of ardent mind, 
 warm disposition, and deeply serious character, accustomed 
 to give himself up with all his soul and strength to the 
 object of his love, and haughtily to reject all which was 
 uncongenial to that object. He ha(f a ftind of great and 
 multifarious knowledge, but it was confusedly heaped up 
 in his mind, without scientific arrangement. His depth 
 of thouglit was not united with logical clearness and 
 judgment; a warm, ungoverned imagination, that dwelt 
 in sensuous images, was his ruling power. His im- 
 petuous and haughty disposition, and his early educa-' 
 tion as an advocate or a rhetorician, were prone to carry 
 him, especially in controversy, to rhetorical exaggerations." 
 — Ease's Neander, sec. 5, edition of ISJ/S, pp. 4^4^ 4^^- 
 
 It is very evident, therefore, that Tertullian's testimony 
 will have to be regarded with suspicion. 
 
192 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 The following from Dr. Scliaff sets Tertiillian forth as 
 a father of monkery and the Roman Catholic distinction 
 between mortal and venial sins : — 
 
 "The heathen gnostic principle of separation from the 
 world and from the body as a means of self-redemption, 
 after being theoretically exterminated, stole into the 
 church by aback door of practice, directly in face of the 
 Christian doctrine of the high destiny of the body, and 
 perfect redemption through Christ. 
 
 "The Alexandrian Fathers first furnished a theoretical 
 basis for inis asceticism, in the distinction, suggested even 
 by the pastor Hermse, of a lower and a higher morality ; 
 a distinction, which, like that introduced at the same 
 period by Tertullian, of mortal and venial sins, gave rise to 
 many practical errors, and favored both mortal laxity and 
 ascetic extravagance." — Church History, vol. 1, sec. OJf. 
 
 Tertullian also stands as sponsor, or one of the spon- 
 sors, for the Roman Catholic doctrine of prayers to the 
 dead. This, as the reader doubtless well knows, was 
 simply the baptized form of the pagan custom of mak- 
 ing gods of departed heroes. Bingham (Antiquities of 
 the Christian Church, book 1, chap. 4) says: — 
 
 " Tertullian adds to these \i. e., the martyrs] the name 
 of chari Dei, the favorites of Heaven; because their 
 prayers and intercessions were powerful with God, to ob- 
 tain pardon for others, that should address Heaven by 
 them. Therefore, in his instructions to the penitents, he 
 bids them, charis Dei adgeniculari, fall down at the 
 feet of these favorites, and commend their suit to all the 
 brethren, desiring them to intercede with God for them." 
 
 And Killen, speaking of the exposition of Matt. 
 16: 16-18, which makes Peter the head of the church, 
 says : — 
 
 " Tertullian and Cyprian, in the third century the two 
 
• Tertullian. 193 
 
 most eminent Fathers of the West, countenanced the ex- 
 position ; and though both these writers were lamentably 
 deficient in critical sagacity, men of inferior standing 
 were slow to impugn the verdict of such champions of 
 the faith." — Ancient Church, period 2, sec. 1, chap. 5, par- 
 agraph 19. 
 
 That was the way that the papacy established itself; 
 certain men came to be looked upon as authorities, and 
 the people, leaving the plain declarations of the Bible, 
 blindly accepted their dictum. The bishops, many of 
 whom were pagan philosophers when chosen to preside 
 over the churches, came very naturally to occupy this 
 position, and the way was thus paved for the most pow- 
 erful bishop to become pope, exercising lordship over 
 men's consciences. 
 
 But the reader is doubtless anxious to be entertained 
 with some of Tertullian's peculiarities, fresh fi-om the 
 original source, and so he shall now be allowed to speak 
 for himself As a good example of his fiery impetuosity, 
 which coidd lead him to rejoice in anticipation of 
 w^itnessing the suflferings of the lost, we quote from 
 his treatise, "The Shows." After having spoken of 
 the wickedness of the shows, which many professed 
 Christians were very fond of attending, he likens (chap. 
 30) the Judgment-day to a vast show in which the actors 
 will be the illustrious men of earth, and he a delighted 
 spectator : — 
 
 "How vast a spectacle then bursts upon the eye! 
 What there excites my admiration? what my derision? 
 Which sight gives me joy? which rouses me to exulta- 
 tion? — as I see so many illustrious monarchs, whose re- 
 ception into the heavens was publicly announced, groan- 
 ing now in tke lowest darkness with great Jove himself, 
 
 13 
 
194 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 and those, too, who bore witness of their exultation ; gov- 
 ernors of provinces, too, who persecuted the Christian 
 name, in fires more fierce than those with which in the 
 days of their pride they raged against the followers of 
 Christ. What world's wise men besides, the very philos- 
 ophers, in fact, who taught their followers that God had 
 no concern in aught that is sublunary, and were wont to 
 assure them that either they had no souls, or that they 
 "would never return to the bodies which at death they 
 had left, now covered with shame before the poor deluded 
 ones, as one fire consumes them! Poets also, trembling 
 not before the judgment-seat of E-hadamanthus or Minos, 
 but of the unexpected Christ ! I shall have a better op- 
 portunity then of hearing the tragedians, louder-voiced 
 in their own calamity; of viewing the play-actors, much 
 more * dissolute ' in the dissolving flame, of looking upon 
 the charioteer, all glowing in his chariot of fire ; of be- 
 holding the wrestlers, not in their gymnasia, but tossing in 
 the fiery billows." 
 
 This certainly does not reveal Tertullian in a very 
 amiable aspect. 
 
 Since Turtullian is the Father who, perhaps to a 
 greater extent than any other, is depended on for author- 
 ity to uphold Sunday observance, we will at the outset 
 examine what he has to say on that subject. It may not 
 be amiss, however, again to remind the reader that Ter- 
 tullian is the great champion of Roman Catholicism, and 
 to recall the statements already quoted, that his " warm, 
 ungoverned imagination," acted upon by "strong pas- 
 sion," "completely overpowered his judgment," and that 
 " he deals so largely in exaggeration that, as to many 
 matters of fact, we cannot safely depend upon his testi- 
 mony." This being the case, we are perfectly wilHng 
 that Sunday advocates should have the full benefit of 
 Tertullian's testimony, always remembering that even 
 
Tertullian. 195 
 
 though it could be proved that Sunday was observed in 
 Tertullian's time, tliat would not connect the day with 
 the Bible, but only with the custom of a people only half 
 Cl:^^istian at best. 
 
 In his "Apology" (chap. 16), an address written to 
 the rulers and magistrates of the empire, he says: — 
 
 " Others, again, certainly with more information and 
 greater verisimilitude, believe that the sun is our god. 
 We shall be counted Persians perhaps, though we do 
 not worship the orb of day painted on a piece of linen 
 cloth, having himself everywhere in his own disk. The 
 idea no doubt has originated from our being known to 
 turn to the east in prayer. But you, many of you, also 
 under pretense sometimes of worshiping the heavenly 
 bodies, move your lips in the direction of the sunrise. 
 In tlie same way, if we devote Sun-day to rejoicing, from 
 a far different reason than Sun-worship, we have some 
 resemblance to tliose of you who devote the day of Sat- 
 urn to ease and luxury, though they too go far away 
 from Jewish ways, of which indeed they are ignorant." 
 
 Here he admits that there was considerable reason in 
 the charge that he, and Christians of his sort, worshiped 
 the sun. The Bible student who reads Tertullian's 
 declaration that they worshiped toward tlie east, and de- 
 voted the Sunday to rejoicing, will doubtless be reminded 
 of the passage in Ezekiel, where the prophet, after being 
 shown the women " weeping for Tammuz" — the Baby- 
 lonian Adonis — is told that he shall see greater abomi- 
 nations, which he describes thus:, "And he brought me 
 into the inner court of the Lord's house, and, behold, at 
 the door of the temple of the Lord, between the porch 
 and the altar, were about five and twenty men, with their 
 backs toward the temple of the Lord, and their faces 
 toward the east ; and they worshiped the sun toward 
 
1^6 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 the east." Eze. 8:16. Yet Tertullian's best excuse for 
 this custom is that it is no worse than what the heathen 
 themselves did. 
 
 Very similar to the last quotation is the following from 
 his address, "Ad Natlones" that is to the general public, 
 the heathen. He says : — 
 
 "Others, with greater regard to good manners, it must 
 be confessed, suppose that the sun is the god of the 
 Christians, because it is a well-known fact that we pray 
 towards the east, or because we make Sunday a day of fes- 
 tivity. What then? Do you do less than this ? Do not 
 many among you, with an affectation of sometimes worship- 
 ing the heavenly bodies likewise, move your lips in the di- 
 rection of the sunrise? It is you, at all events, who have 
 even admitted the sun into the calendar of the week; 
 and you have selected its day, in preference to the pre- 
 ceding day as the most suitable in the week for either an 
 entire abstinence from the bath, or for its postponement 
 until the evening, or for taking rest and for banqueting." — 
 Booh 1, chap. 13. 
 
 Here again he attempts to excuse himself by a retort, 
 but his defense is childish in its simplicity. To the 
 charge that the Christians worshiped the sun, a charge 
 made because they prayed toward the east and observed 
 the Sunday holiday, he replies that the heathen do the 
 same thing. It is as though a Christian, when charged by 
 a worldling with being a frequenter of tlje circus, should 
 say, "Well, you attend circuses too." We have here, 
 also, Tertullian's testimony as to the heathen origin of 
 Sunday celebration. He says to them : " It is you, at all 
 events, who have even admitted the sun into the calendar 
 of the week ; and you have selected its day, in preference 
 to the preceding day as the most suitable in the week . 
 . . . for taking rest and for banqueting." We do 
 
Tertullian. 197 
 
 not depend upon Tertullian for proof that the Sunday- 
 festival was borrowed by the professed Christian Church 
 from the heathen ; but a careful perusal of this testimony 
 may well be recommended to those who are fond of 
 quoting Tertullian in behalf of Sunday observance. He 
 declares that in devoting Sunday to festivity (they did 
 not rest upon it), the Christians were simply following 
 the example set them by the heathen. 
 
 In the following answer to the Jews we have Tertul- 
 lian's belief in regard to the keeping of the Sabbath: — 
 
 " It follows, accordingly, that, in so far as the abolition 
 of carnal circumcision and of the old law is demonstrated 
 as having been consummated at its specific times, so also 
 the observance of the Sabbath is demonstrated to have 
 been temporary. 
 
 " For the Jews say, that from the beginning God sancti- 
 fied the seventh day, by resting on it from all his works 
 which he made; and that thence it was, likewise, that 
 Moses said to the people: 'Remember the day of the 
 Sabbaths, to sanctify it; every servile work ye shall not 
 do therein, except what pertaineth unto life.' Whence 
 we (Christians) understand that we still more ought to 
 observe a Sabbath from all 'servile work' always, and 
 not only every seventh day, but th rough all time . And 
 tKrough this arises the question for us, what Sabbath God 
 willed us to keep. For the Scriptures point to a Sab- 
 bath_eterijal and a Sabbath temporal. For Isaiah the 
 prophet says, 'Your sabbaths my soul hateth;' and in 
 another place he says, 'My Sabbaths ye have profaned.' 
 Whence we discern that the temporal Sabbath is human, 
 and the eternal Sabbath is accounted divine, concerning 
 which he predicts through Isaiah : ' And there shall be,' 
 he says, 'month after month, and day after day, and Sab- 
 bath after Sabbath ; and all flesh shall come to adore in 
 Jerusalem, saith the Lord ;' which we understand to have 
 been fulfilled in the times of Christ, when 'all flesh' — that 
 
198 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 is, every nation — * came to adore in Jerusalem' God the 
 Father, through Jesus Christ his Son, as was predicted 
 through the prophet: 'Behold, proselytes through me 
 shall go unto thee.' Thus, therefore, before this temporal 
 Sabbath, there was withal an eternal Sabbath foreshown 
 and foretold; just as before the carnal circumcision there 
 was withal a spiritual circumcision foreshown. In short, 
 let them teach us, as we have already premised, that 
 Adam observed the Sabbath; or that Abel, when offer- 
 ing to God a holy victim, pleased him by a religious 
 reverence for the Sabbath; or that Enoch, when trans- 
 lated, had been a keeper of the Sabbath ; or that Noah 
 the ark-builder observed, on account of the deluge, an im- 
 mense Sabbath ; or that Abraham, in observance of the 
 Sabbath, offered Isaac his son; or that Melchizedek in 
 his priesthood received the law of the Sabbath." — An- 
 swer to the Jews, chap. Jf. 
 
 This, together with the quotation just preceding it, 
 shows that Tertullian did not believe in keeping any 
 Sabbath. He did not believe in a literal Sabbath-day, 
 but held that Sabbath-keeping consisted in doing any 
 act that is pleasing to God. As to Sunday, neither he 
 nor any other Christians of his day observed it as a Sab- 
 bath, nor with the idea that Sunday observance was in 
 harmony with the Sabbath law ; but they observed it as 
 a festival day which, as has already been shown, they 
 knew had its origin with the heathen. 
 
 The following quotation is very muc h to the same ef- 
 fect as the preceding, but it is given iii order that noth- 
 ing that Tertullian said of the Sabbath may be lack- 
 ing:— 
 
 "Thus Christ did not at all rescind the Sabbath: He 
 kept the law thereof, and both in the former case did a 
 work which was beneficial to the life of his disciples, for 
 he indulged them with the relief of food when they were 
 
Tertullian. 199 
 
 hungry, and in the present instance cured the withered 
 hand; in each case intimating by facts, *I came not to de- 
 stroy, the law, but to fulfill it,' although Marcion has 
 gagged his mouth by this word. For even in the case 
 before us he fulfilled the law, while interpreting its con- 
 dition : moreover, he exhibits in a clear light the different 
 kinds of work, while doing what the law excepts from 
 the sacredness of the Sabbath and while imparting to the 
 Sabbath-day itself, which from the beginning had been 
 consecrated by the benediction of the Father, an addi- 
 tional sanctity by his own beneficent action. For he 
 furnished to this day divine safeguards, — a course which 
 his adversary would have pursued for some other days, 
 to avoid honoring the Creator's Sabbath, and restoring to 
 the Sabbath the works which were proper for it. Since, 
 in like manner, the prophet Elisha on this day restored 
 to life the dead son of the Shunamite woman, you see, O 
 Pharisee, and you too, O Marcion, how that it was proper 
 employment for the Creator's Sabbaths of old to do good, 
 to save life, not to destroy it; how that Christ introduced 
 nothing new, which was not afler the example, the gen- 
 tleness, the mercy, and the prediction also of the Creator." 
 — Tertullian against Marcion, book Jf, chap. 12. 
 
 Tertullian's testimony on any point is of so little value 
 that it is not worth while to do more than refer to his 
 statement that " Christ did not at all rescind the law of 
 the Sabbath." That statement is true; but it is only 
 what the Scriptures tell us, and the Scripture statement 
 gains nothing from Tertullian's indorsement. We be- 
 lieve the Fathers when they agree with the Bible, but 
 we do not form or modify our opinions of the Bible from 
 their statements. This very quotation affords an illus- 
 tration of how we should be deceived if we did form our 
 opinions of Scripture from the Fathers, for Tertullian says 
 that Elisha restored the Shunamite's son to life on the 
 
200 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 Sabbath-day, whereas iu the Bible narrative it is plainly 
 stated that it was " neither new moon, nor Sabbath." 2 
 Kings 4:23. As a general thing the Fathers were either 
 ignorant of the Scriptures, or else they deliberately falsi- 
 fied to suit their own purposes. 
 
 There is only one more passage in Tertullian's writings 
 that could by any possibility be considered as giving aid 
 and comfort to the advocates of Sunday observance, and 
 they are certainly welcome to all that they can get out of 
 it. In his treatise, " De Corona/' chapter 3, he speaks as 
 follows concerning certain customs of the church : — 
 
 "To deal with this matter briefly, I shall begin with 
 baptism. When we are going to enter the water, but a 
 little before, in the presence of the congregation and un- 
 der the hand of the president, we solemnly profess that 
 We disown the devil, and his pomp, and his angels. 
 Hereupon we are t hrice i mmersed, making a somewhat 
 ampler pledge than the Lord has appointed in the gos- 
 pel. [That is to say, three times as large.] Then, when 
 we are taken up (as new-born children), we taste first 
 of all a mixture of milk and honey, and from that day 
 we refrain from the daily bath for a whole week. We 
 take also, in congregations before daybreak, and from the 
 hand of none but the presidents, the sacrament of the 
 Eucharist, which the Lord both commanded to be eaten 
 at meal-times, and enjoined to be taken by all alike. As 
 often as the anniversary comes roun d, _we make offerings 
 forjhfi^dead as birthday honore/"''^e count f asting or 
 kneehng m wor shi p on~tEe Lord's day to be unlawful!) 
 We rejoice inThe same privilege also fronf faster to 
 Whitsunday. We feel pained should any wine orXread, 
 even though our own, be cast upon the ground. At every 
 I forward step and movement, at every going in and, out, 
 when we put on our clothes and shoes, when we bathe, 
 when wesit^ table, when we light the lamps, on couch, 
 (on seat, in all the ordinary actions of daily life, we trace 
 
 )n the forehead the sign," na mely, of the cro ss. ^ 
 
-i^ 
 
 Tertullian. 201 
 
 It is quite possible that some zealous Sunday a^ivocate 
 may seize upon the above as authority for keeping Sun- 
 day, or at least as proof that Sunday was observed in the 
 church in the third century. But let that person stop to 
 consider that the Sunday "Lord's day" is not the only 
 thing mentioned by Tertullian. Whoever keeps Sunday 
 on the strength of Tertullian's testimony, must also prac- 
 tice trine immersion, and receive some milk and honey 
 after baptism, to keep the devil away ; he must also cele- 
 brate the sacrifice of the mass, making " oflferings for the 
 dead ; " and he must not under any circumstances omit 
 making the sign of the cross. In short, he must be a 
 "good (Greek) Catholic." Whoever quotes Tertullian as 
 authority for Sunday-keeping, and rejects trine immer- 
 sion, prayers for the dead, and the sign of the cross, 
 shows that he is either utterly inconsistent, or else that 
 he has never read Tertullian for himself. 
 * But Tertullian was well enough versed in the Scrip.>- 
 ures to know that they do not warrant any such practices. 
 He says that in trine immersion they made a "somewhat 
 ampler pledge than the Lord has appointed ;" and im- 
 mediately following the chapter in which he speaks of 
 this, of offerings for the dead, of Sunday observance, and 
 the sign of the cross, he adds: — 
 
 "If, for these and other such rules, you insist upon 
 having positive Scripture injunction, you will find none." 
 
 Then what was Tertullian doing but setting himself 
 and the church above the Bible? In other words, what 
 was he doing but helping to develop the Catholic Church? 
 
 And now that the " sign of the cross " has been intro- 
 duced, it will be well to trace it further, that we may 
 note the progress of superstition, and see by what means 
 
202 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 the Catholic custom of substituting meaningless forms for 
 realities, found a place in the church. In his address, 
 "Ad Nationes" (book 1, chap. 12), we find the following: — 
 
 "As for him who affirms that we are ' the priesthood of 
 a cross,' we shall claim him as our co-religionist. A cross 
 is, in its material, a sign of wood. Amongst yourselves 
 also the object of worship is a wooden figure. Only, 
 whilst with you the figure is a human one, with us the 
 wood is its own figure. Never mind for the present what 
 is the shape, provided the material is the. same; the form, 
 too, is of no importance, if so be it be. the actual body 
 of a god. If, however, there arises a question of differ- 
 ence on this point, what (let me ask) is the difference 
 between the Athenian Pallas, or the Pharian Ceres, and 
 wood formed into a cross, when each is represented by a 
 rough stock, without form, and by the merest rudiment of 
 a statue of unformed wood? Every piece of timber 
 which is fixed in the ground in an erect position is a 
 part of a cross, and indeed the greater portion of its mass. 
 But an entire cross is attributed to us, with its transverse 
 beam, of course, and its projecting seat. Now you have 
 the less to excuse you, for you dedicate to religion only a 
 mutilated, imperfect piece of wood, while others consecrate 
 to the sacred purpose a complete structure. The truth, 
 however, after all is, that your religion is all cross, as I 
 shall show. You are indeed unaware that your gods in 
 their origin have proceeded from this hated cross. Now, 
 every image, whether carved out of wood or stone, or 
 molten in metal, or produced out of any other richer ma- 
 terial, must needs have had plastic hands engaged in its 
 formation. Well, then, this modeler, before he did any- 
 thing else, hit upon the form of a wooden cross, because 
 even our own body assumes as its natural position the la- 
 tent and concealed outline of a cross. Since the head rises 
 { upwards, and the back takes a straight direction, and the 
 I shoulders project laterally, if you simply ])lace a man with 
 \his arms and hands outstretched, you will make the gen- 
 
Tertullian. 203 
 
 eral outline of a cross. Starting, then, from this rudi- 
 mental form and prop, as it were, he applies a cover- 
 ing of clay, and so gradually completes the limbs, and 
 forms the body, and covers the cross within with the 
 shape which he meant to impress upon the clay ; then 
 from this design, with the help of compasses and leaden 
 moulds, he has got all ready for his image which is to be 
 brought out into marble, or clay, or whatever the mate- 
 rial be of which he has determined to make his god. 
 (This, then, is the process;) after the cross-shaped frame, 
 the clay ; after the clay, the god. In a well-understood 
 routine, the cross passes into a god through the clayey 
 medium. The cross then you consecrate, and from it the 
 consecrated (deity) begins to derive its origin. By way 
 of example, let us take the case of a tree which grows 
 up into a system of branches and foliage, and is a re- 
 production of its own kind, wdiether it springs from the 
 kernel of an olive, or the stone of a peach, or a grain of 
 pepper which has been duly tempered under-ground. 
 Now, if you transplant it, or take a cutting off its branches 
 for another plant, to what will you attribute what is pro- 
 duced by the propagation? Will it not be to the grain, or 
 the stone, or the kernel? Because, as the third stage is 
 attributable to the second, and the second in like manner 
 to the first, so the third will have to be referred to the first, 
 through the second as the mean. We need not stay any 
 longer in the discussion of this point, since by a natural 
 law every kind of produce throughout nature refers back 
 its growth to its original source; and just as the product 
 is comprised in its primal cause, so does that cause agree 
 in character with the thing produced. Since, then, in 
 the production of your gods, you worship the cross which 
 originates them, here will be the original kernel and 
 grain, from which are propagated the wooden materials of 
 your idolatrous images. Examples are not far to seek. 
 Your victories you celebrate with religious ceremony as 
 deities ; and they are the more august in proportion to the 
 joy they bring you. The frames on which you hang up 
 
204 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 your trophies must be crosses : these are, as it were, the 
 very core of your pageants. Thus, in your victories, the 
 religion of your camp makes even crosses objects of 
 worship; your standards it adores, your standards are the 
 sanction of its oaths; your standards it prefers before 
 Jupiter himself But all that parade of images, and 
 that display of pure gold, are (as so many) necklaces of 
 the crosses. In like manner also, in the banners and en- 
 signs, which your soldiers guard with no less sacred care, 
 you have the streamers (and) vestments of your crosses. 
 You are ashamed, I suppose, to worship unadorned and 
 simple crosses." 
 
 In this, TertuUian's chief object seems to be to convince 
 the heathen that they all had the cross, and that they 
 made use of it both in religious and every-day affairs. 
 Now when we consider that entire tribes of heathen, as 
 in Africa and China, have been " converted " to Catholi- 
 cism, simply by accepting the sign of the cross, and bow- 
 ing before an image of the Virgin, it is very easy to see 
 how the Catholic Church made such wonderful growth in 
 the early centuries. It had only to convince the heathen 
 that they were already almost Christian, and that was 
 the most that there was to it. With Clement to teach 
 them that their philosophy was simply the preparation 
 for the gospel, with Tertullian to show them that they 
 were already in possession of the "sign" of Christianity 
 .and with "the church" ready to adopt the heathen Sun- 
 day festival and the custom of making libations for the 
 dead, it could not have been a difficult task for the 
 "mystery of iniquity" to develop into the "man of sin." 
 
 The following not only shows TertuUian's superstition 
 concerning the sign of the cross, but is also a good sample 
 of patristic Scripture "exposition:" — 
 
 " Joseph, again, himself was made a figure of Christ in 
 
Tertullian. 206 
 
 this point alone (to name no more, not to delay my own 
 course), that he suffered persecution at the hands of his 
 brethren, and was sold into Egypt, on account of the 
 favor of God; just as Christ was sold by Israel — (and 
 therefore), 'according to the flesh,' by his 'brethren' — 
 when he is betrayed by Judas. For Joseph is withal 
 blessed by his father after this form : ' His glory (is that) 
 of a bull; his horns, the horns of an unicorn ;on them shall 
 he toss nations alike unto the very extremity of the earth.' 
 Of course no one-horned rhinoceros was there pointed to, 
 nor any two-horned minotaur. But Christ was therein sig- 
 nified: 'bull,' by reason of each of his two characters, — to 
 some fierce, as Judge; to others gentle, as Saviour; whose 
 ' horns ' were to be the extremities of the cross. For even 
 in a ship's yard — which is part of a cross — ^this is the 
 name by which the extremities are called; while the 
 central pole of the mast is a ' unicorn.' By this power, 
 in fact, of the cross, and in this manner horned, he does 
 now, on the one hand, ' toss ' universal nations through 
 faith, wafting them away from earth to heaven ; and will 
 one day on the other ' toss ' them through judgment, cast- 
 ing them down from heaven to earth." — Answer to the 
 Jews, chap. 10. > 
 
 In the same chapter we have some more of the same : — 
 
 " But, to come now to Moses, why, I wonder, did he 
 merely at the time when Joshua was battling against 
 Amalek, pray sitting with hands expanded, when, in cir- 
 cumstances so critical, he ought rather, surely, to have 
 commended his prayer by knees bended, and hands beat- 
 ing his breast, and a face prostrate on the ground ; ex- 
 cept it was that there, where the name of the Lord 
 Jesus was the theme of speech — destined as he was to 
 enter the lists one day singly against the devil — the fig- 
 ure of the cross was also necessary (that figure), through 
 which Jesus was to win the victory?" 
 
 If anyone is still inclined to think that living near the 
 time of the apostles necessarily made one a better ex- 
 positor of Scripture, let him read the following: — 
 
206 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 "Again, the mystery of this ' tree ' we read as being 
 celebrated even in the Books of the Reigns. For when 
 the sons of the prophets were cutting ' wood ' with axes 
 on the bank of the river Jordan, the iron flew off and 
 sank in the stream ; and so, on Elisha the prophet's com- 
 ing up, the sons of the prophets beg of him to extract 
 from the stream the iron which had sunk. And accord- 
 ingly Elisha, having taken ' wood,' and cast it into that 
 place where the iron had been submerged, forthwith it 
 rose attd swam on the surface, and the ' wood ' sank, 
 which the sons of the prophets recovered. Whence they 
 understood that Elijah's spirit was presently conferred 
 upon him. What is more manifest than the mystery of 
 this 'wood,' — that the obduracy of this world had been 
 sunk in the profundity of error, and is freed in baptism 
 by the * wood ' of Christ, that is, of his passion ; in order 
 that what had formerly perished through the ' tree ' in 
 Adam, should be restored through the 'tree' in Christ? 
 while we, of course, who have succeeded to, and occupy, 
 the room of the prophets, at the present day sustain in 
 the world that treatment which the prophets always suf- 
 fered on account of divine religion : for some they stoned, 
 some they banished; more, however, they delivered to 
 mortal slaughter, — a fact which they cannot deny. 
 
 " This ' wood,' again, Isaac the son of Abraham per- 
 sonally carried for his own sacrifice, when God had en- 
 joined that he should be made a victim to himself. But, 
 because these had been mysteries which were being kept 
 for perfect fulfillment in the times of Christ, Isaac, on 
 the one hand, with his 'wood' was reserved, the ram 
 being offered which was caught by the horns in the 
 bramble; Christ, on the other hand, in his times, carried 
 his ' wood ' on his own shoulders, adhering to the horns 
 of the cross, with a thorny crown encircling his head," — 
 Id., cJiap. 13. 
 
 Surely "insanity" could not produce any more driveling 
 nonsense than this. Yet Protestant ministers take })re' 
 cious time to translate and circulate such stuff, and the 
 
Tertullian. 207 
 
 writers of it are reverenced as Fathers of the Christian 
 church. It seems as though people would surely rate 
 the Fathers as they deserve, if they would only read their 
 puerile writings; nevertheless, most of those who study 
 them are so eager to find something which will give them 
 a show of excuse for continuing some custom for which 
 they can find no authority in the Bible, that they are 
 willfully blind to the gross errors which they contain. 
 The great majority of people, however, have no chance 
 ever even to see the writings of the Fathers, and no time 
 or patience to read them if they should see them; and 
 so when they hear doctors of divinity gravely quoting 
 from the Fathers, they have a sort of vague idea that 
 those " venerable stagers " are the salt of the earth. 
 
 Following is Bishop Coxe's prefatory note to Tertul- 
 lian's " Treatise on the Soul : " — 
 
 " In this treatise we have TertuUian's speculations on 
 the origin, the nature, and the destiny of the human soul. 
 There are, no doubt, paradoxes startling to a modern 
 reader to be found in it, such as that of the soul's cor- 
 poreity ; and there are weak and inconclusive arguments. 
 But after all such drawbacks (and they are not more 
 than what constantly occur in the most renowned specu- 
 lative writers of antiquity), the reader will discover many 
 interesting proofs of our author's character for originality 
 of thought, width of information, firm grasp of his sub- 
 ject, and vivacious treatment of it, such as we have dis- 
 covered in other parts of his writings. If his subject 
 permits Tertullian less than usual of an appeal to his 
 favorite Holy Scriptui^e, he still makes room for occasional 
 illustration from it, and with his characteristic ability ; 
 if, however, there is less of this sacred learning in it, the 
 treatise teems with curious information drawn from the 
 secular literature of that early age." 
 
 And is this all that we can expect in the writings of 
 
208 Fathers of thd Catholic Church. 
 
 a Father of the church? Must we be content if he 
 doesn't present any more weak, inconclusive, and nonsens- 
 ical arguments than " constantly occur in the most re- 
 nowned speculative writers of antiquity"? Is it enough 
 if he shows his originality of thought, his " warm, ungov- 
 erned imagination," and his acquaintance with secular 
 literature ? If so, then why make any pretense of cling- 
 ing to so prosy a book as the Bible ? AVhy not take 
 Plato's writings direct? But read the following, and 
 strengthen your growing conviction that Tertullian as a 
 professed Christian writer and teacher, deserves all that 
 has been said of him, and much more : — 
 
 "I must also say something about the period of the 
 soul's birth, that I may omit nolhing incidental in the 
 whole process. A mature and regular birth takes place, 
 as a general rule, at the commencement of the tenth 
 month. They who theorize respecting numbers, honor 
 the number ten as the parent of all the others and as im- 
 parting perfection to the human nativity. For my own 
 part, I prefer viewing this measure of time in reference 
 to God, as if implying that the ten months rather initiated 
 man into the ten commandments ; so that the numerical 
 estimate of the time needed to consummate our natural 
 birth should correspond to the numerical classification 
 of the rulea of our regenerate life. But inasmuch as 
 birth is also completed with the seventh month, I more 
 readily recognize in this number than in the eighth the 
 honor of a numerical agreement with the sabbatical 
 period ; so that the month in which God's image is some- 
 times produced in a human birth, shall in its number 
 tally with the day on which God's creation was completed 
 aiid hallowed. Human nativity has sometimes been 
 allowed to be premature, and yet to occur iu fit and per- 
 fect accordance with an hebdomad or sevenfold number, 
 as an auspice of our r&surrection, and rest, and kingdom.'* 
 — Treatise on the Soul^ chap» 37. 
 
Tertullian. 209 
 
 Such childish nonsense is seldom seen under the head- 
 ing of reason. No one but a Catholic " theologian " could 
 have been guilty of putting it forth in sober earnest. 
 
 Tertullian is celebrated for his knowledge of "philos- 
 ophy," but the following extract shows that his knowledge 
 of natural science waa fully in keeping with his supersti- 
 tious nature and his ignorance of the real teaching of 
 Scripture : — _ 
 
 " Since, however, everything which is very attenuated 
 and transparent bears a strong resemblance to the air, 
 such would be the case with the soul, since in its material 
 nature it is wind and breath (or spirit); whence it is that 
 the belief of its corporeal quality is endangered, in conse- 
 quence of the extreme tenuity and subtility of its essence. 
 Likewise, as regards the figure of the human soul from 
 your own conception, you can well imagine that it is none 
 other than the human form ; indeed, none other than the 
 shape of that body which each individual soul animates 
 and moves about. This we may at once be induced to 
 admit from contemplating man's original formation. For 
 only carefully consider, after God hath breathed upon the 
 face of man the breath of life, and man had consequently 
 become a living soul, surely that breath must have passed 
 through the face at once into the interior structure, and 
 liave spread itself throughout all the spaces of the body ; 
 and as soon as by the divine inspiration it had become 
 condensed, it must have impressed itself on each internal 
 feature, which the condensation had filled in, and so have 
 been, as it were, congealed in shape (or stereotyped). 
 Hence, by this densifying process, there arose a fixing of 
 the soul's corporeity; and by the impression its figure was 
 formed and moulded. This is the inner man, difierent 
 from the outer, but yet one in the twofold condition. It, 
 too, has eyes and ears of its own, by means of which Paul 
 nmst have heard and seen the Lord ; it has, moreover all 
 the other members of the body by the help of which 
 14 
 
210 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 it effects all processes of thinking and all activity in 
 dreams." — Id., chap. 9. 
 
 In chapter 50 he says that although Enoch and Elijah 
 were translated without experiencing death, "they are 
 reserved for the suffering of death, that by their blood 
 they may extinguish antichrist." Every reader will 
 recognize in that saying the ravings of an insane man. 
 
 The following from his treatise, " On Baptism" (chap- 
 ter 1), will give a good idea of the cabalistic method of 
 interpretation, which was common among both Jews and 
 heathen, and which many professed Christian teachers 
 borrowed : — 
 
 "A viper of the Cainite heresy, lately conversant in 
 this quarter, has carried away a great number with 
 her most venomous doctrine, making it her first aim 
 to destroy baptism. Which is quite in accordance with 
 nature ; for vipers and asps and basilisks themselves gen- 
 erally do affect arid and waterless places. But we, little 
 fishes, after the example of our r/»96? Jesus Christ, are 
 born in water, nor have we safety in any other way, than 
 by permanently abiding in water; so that most monstrous 
 creature, who had no right to teach even sound doctrine, 
 knew full well how to kill the little fishes by taking them 
 away from the water ! " 
 
 The Greek word ^/'^o? (ichthus) means fish. Christ 
 was baptized, and we become united to him by baptism; 
 and so TertuUian calls him our ichthus (our fish), and 
 likens Christians to little fishes. The word, as applied to 
 Christ, was formed by taking the initial lettters of the 
 words in the sentence, 'Irjffoug Xpiard^s Seoo Yid<s Icorrjp, 
 "Jesus Christ, the Son of God, our Saviour." It was by 
 such methods that many professed Christian writers 
 "proved" the truth of their positions. 
 
Tertullian. 211 
 
 TertuUian seems to have known nothing of substitut- 
 ing anything for immersion, and it is quite evident that 
 in his day nothing but actual baptism — immersion — was 
 practiced. But this ordinance was even then grossly 
 perverted, as we have already seen, and as the following 
 from chapter 4 of his treatise, " On Baptism, " shows : — 
 
 " But it will suffice to have thus called at the outset 
 those points in which withal is recognized that primary 
 principle of baptism, — which was even then forenoted by 
 the very attitude assumed for a type of baptism, — that 
 the Spirit of God, who hovered over (the waters) from 
 the beginning, would continue to linger over the waters 
 of the baptized. But a holy thing, of course, hovered 
 over a holy; or else, from that which hovered over that 
 which was hovered over borrowed a holiness, since it is 
 necessary that in every case an underlying material sub- 
 stance should catch the quality of that which overhangs 
 it, most of all a corporeal of a spiritual, adapted (as the 
 spiritual is) through the subtleness of its substance, both 
 for penetrating and insinuating. Thus the nature of the 
 waters, sanctified by the Holy One, itself conceived withal 
 the power of sanctifying. Let no one say, ' Why then, 
 are we, pray, baptized with the very waters which then 
 existed in the first beginning?' Not with those waters, 
 of course, except in so far as the genus indeed is one, 
 but the species very many. But what is an attribute 
 to the genus re-appears likewise in the species. And ac- 
 cordingly it makes no difference whether a man be 
 washed in a sea or a pool, a stream or a fount, a lake or 
 a trough; nor is there any distinction between tliose 
 whom John baptized in the Jordan and those whom 
 Peter baptized in the Tiber, unless withal the eunuch 
 whom Philip baptized in the midst of his journeys with 
 chance water, derived (therefrom) more or less of salva- 
 tion than others. All waters, therefore, in virtue of the 
 pristine privilege of their origin, do, after invocation of 
 God, attain the sacramental power of sanctification ; for 
 
212 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 the spirit immediately supervenes from the heavens and 
 rests over the waters, sanctifying them from himself; and 
 being thus sanctified, they imbibe at the same time the 
 power of sanctifying." 
 
 From this it is evident that Tertullian thought that 
 the virtue of baptism lay in the quality of the water, and 
 this idea was perpetuated in the Catholic Church, so that 
 we find nothing but " holy water " used in all her cere- 
 monies. But Tertullian believed that all water was 
 sanctified by the brooding of tlie Spirit of God upon the 
 face of the waters in the beginning, so that it was not 
 necessary always to specially sanctify it. 
 
 In chapter 7 he bears testimony to the following per- 
 version of the simple ordinance of baptism as practiced 
 by the apostles : — 
 
 "After this, when we have issued from the font, we are 
 thoroughly anointed with the blessed unction, — (a prac- 
 tice derived) from the old discipline, wherein on entering 
 the priesthood, me?i were wont to be ancinted. with oil 
 from a horn, ever since Aaron was anointed by Moses. 
 Whence Aaron is called * Christ,' from the 'chrism,' 
 which is 'the unction;' which, when made spiritual, fur- 
 nished an appropriate name to the Lord, because he was 
 'anointed' with the Spirit by God the Father; as written 
 in the Acts: 'For truly they were gathered together in 
 this city against thy holy Son whom thou hast anointed. 
 Thus, too, in our case, the unction runs carnally (i e. on 
 the body), but profits spiritually ; in the same way as the 
 act of baptism itself too is carnal, in that we are plunged in 
 water, but the effect spiritual, in that we are freed from 
 sins." 
 
 The reader will later have the pleasure of reading 
 Bingham's reference to this custom, in which he says 
 that both men and women were often baptized naked, 
 
Tertullian. 21S 
 
 wlien it will be seen that tlie first false idea pref)are(l the 
 way for a second, and for a practice that, to say the least, 
 was not expedient. 
 
 Although Tertullian retained the primitive form of 
 some things, as in immersion, evidently because he did 
 not know of any other way, still his " warm, ungoverned 
 imagination " led him to run everything to an extreme. 
 Consequently, as with the cross, he found baptism in 
 everything. Witness the following: — 
 
 "How many, therefore, are the pleas of nature, how 
 many the privileges of grace, how many the solenniities 
 of discipline, the figures, the preparations, the prayers, 
 which have ordained the sanctity of water? First, in- 
 deed, when the people, set unconditionally free, escaped 
 the violence of the Egyptian king by crossing over 
 through water, it was loater that extinguished the king 
 himself, with his entire forces. What figure more mani- 
 festly fulfilled in the sacrament of baptism? The na- 
 tions are set free from the world by means of water, to 
 wit: and the devil, their old tyrant, they leave quite 
 behind, overwhelmed in the water. Again, water is re- 
 stored from its defect of ^bitterness' to its native grace of 
 * sweetness' by the tree of Moses. That tree was Christ, 
 restoring, to wit, of himself, the veins of sometime enven- 
 omed and bitter nature into the all-salutary waters of 
 baptism. This is the water which flowed continuously 
 down for the people from the * accompanying rock ; ' for if 
 Christ is ' the Rock,' without doubt we see baptism blest 
 by the water in Christ. How mighty is the grace of 
 water, in the sight of God and his Christ, for the confir- 
 mation of baptism! Never is Christ without water; if, 
 that is, he is himself baptized in water; inaugurates in 
 water the first rudimentary displays of his power, when 
 invited to the nuptials; invites the thirsty, when he makes 
 a discourse, to his own sempiternal water; approves, when 
 teaching concerning love, among works of charity, the 
 
214 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 cup of water offered to a poor (child); recruits his 
 strength at a well; walks over the water; willingly 
 crosses the sea; ministers water to his disciples. Onward 
 even to the passion does the witness of baptism last: 
 while he is being surrendered to the cross, tvater inter- 
 venes; witness Pilate's hands : when he is wounded, forth 
 from his side hursts ivater ; witness the soldiers' lance!" 
 — Id., chap. 9. 
 
 The following from his discourse, " On Prayer " (chap- 
 ter 29), may also be taken as an evidence of Tertullian's 
 " Catholicity," as well as of the childishness of his method 
 of reasoning:- — 
 
 " The angels, likewise, all pray ; every creature prays ; 
 cattle and wild beasts pray and bend their knees; and 
 wlien they issue from their layers and lairs, they look up 
 heavenward with no idle mouth, making their breath 
 vibrate after their own manner. Nay, the birds too, 
 rising out of the nest, upraise themselves heavenward, 
 and, instead of hands, expand the cross of their wnngs, 
 and say somewhat to seem like prayer. What more 
 then, touching the office of prayer?" 
 
 The next quotation, which will be the last from Ter- 
 tullian, is quite long, but it will be read with interest, as 
 showing how early in the Christian era the doctrine of 
 purgatory, and of deliverance therefrom by the prayers 
 of those still in the flesh, found a place in the church. 
 It is the second chapter of " The Passion of Perpetua," 
 and explains itself: — 
 
 "After a few days, whilst we were all praying, on a 
 sudden, in the middle of our prayer, there came to me 
 a word, and I named Dinocrates ; and I was amazed that 
 that name had never come into my mind until then, 
 and I was grieved as I remembered his misfortune. 
 And I felt myself immediately to be worthy, and to 
 be called on to ask on his behalf. And for him I 
 
Tertullian. 215 
 
 began earnestly to make supplication, and to cry with 
 groaning to the Lordo Without delay, on that very 
 night, this was shown to me in a vision. I saw Din- 
 ocrates going out from a gloomy place, where also there 
 were several others, and .he was parched and very 
 thirsty, with a filthy countenance and pallid color, and 
 the wound on his face which he had when he died. 
 This Dinocrates had been my brother after the flesh, 
 seven years of age, who died miserably with disease — his 
 face being so eaten out with cancer, that his death caused 
 repugnance to all men. For him I had made my prayer, 
 and between him and me there was a large interval, so 
 that neither of us could approach to the other. And 
 moreover, in the same place where Dinocrates was, there 
 was a pool full of water, having its brink higher than 
 was the stature of the boy; and Dinocrates raised him- 
 self up as if to drink. And I was grieved that, al- 
 though that pool held water, still, on account of the 
 height to its brink, he could not drink. And I was 
 aroused, and knew that my brother was in suffering. 
 But I trusted that my prayer would bring help to his 
 suffering; and I prayed for him every day until we passed 
 over into the prison of the camp, for we were to fight in 
 the camp-show. Then was the birthday of Geta Csesar, 
 and I made my prayer for my brother day and night, 
 groaning and weeping that he might be granted to me. 
 
 "Then, on the day on which we remained in fetters, 
 this was shown to me. I saw that that place which I 
 had formerly observed to be in gloom was now bright; 
 and Dinocrates, with a clean body well clad, was finding 
 refreshment. And where there had been a wound, I saw 
 a scar ; and that pool which I had before seen, I saw now 
 with its margin lowered even to the boy's navel. And 
 one drew water from the pool incessantly, and upon its 
 brink was a goblet filled with water; and Dinocrates 
 drew near and began to drink from it, and the goblet did 
 not fail. And when he was satisfied, he went away from 
 ;the water to play joyously, after the manner of children, 
 
 •' 
 
216 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 and I awoke. Then I understood that he was translated 
 from the place of punishment." 
 
 Whoever accepts Sunday as the Sabbath on the au- 
 thority of the early church, -is bound by all the laws of 
 consistency to accept the doctrine of purgatory, and all 
 that it employs. 
 
 And now that the reader has had a fair chance to 
 judge for himself of the character of Tertullian and his 
 writings, it will doubtless be a relief to him to give ex- 
 pression to his feelings in these words of Dean Mil- 
 man: — 
 
 " It would be wiser for Christianity, retreating upon 
 its genuine records in the New Testament, to disclaim 
 this fierce African, than to identify itself with, his furious 
 invectives by unsatisfactory apologies for their unchris- 
 tian fanaticism." — Note to chap. 15, paragraph 2^, of 
 Gibbon's Decline and Fall. 
 
 So say we. Let us take that upon which we can de- 
 pend. Whoever spends as much time as he ought in 
 studying the "genuine records in the New Testament," 
 will have no time in which to winnow the chaff of the 
 Fathers for the sake of a possible grain of truth. 
 
CHAPTER XIII. 
 
 ORIGEN. 
 
 There is no one of the Christian Fathers who is more 
 highly commended than the subject of this sketch ; and 
 it can be said with truth that there is none other whose 
 writings have had so blighting an influence. This is not 
 because he was a vicious man, for there is little doubt 
 but that, although misguided and fanatical in many 
 things, and tinctured with heathen speculative philoso- 
 phy, he was personally an upright man. But he was 
 the father of spiritualistic exposition of Scripture, and 
 by this, and also by teaching the Platonic philosophy to 
 his many followers, he did incalculable injury to the 
 church. 
 
 Origen was born at Alexandria about 185 or 186 A. d. 
 On this point there is quite general agreement. He was 
 an indefatigable worker, and produced more books than 
 any other of the so-called Fathers. Killen (Ancient 
 Church, period 2, sec. 2, chap. 1, paragraph 22) says: — 
 
 "Origen was a most prolific author; and, if all his 
 works w^ere still extant, they would be far more vol- 
 uminous than those of any other of the Fathers. But. 
 most of his writings have been lost; and, in not a few 
 instances, those which remain have reached us either, in 
 a very mutilated form, or in a garbled Latin version." 
 
 It would have been a blessing to the world if they had 
 all been lost, or, better still, if they had never been writ- 
 ten, for there is not a heresy that has ever existed in the 
 church, nor a false form of religion, that was not taught 
 
 (217) 
 
218 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 by this metaphysical dreamer. Professor Harnack says, 
 in the " Encyclopedia Britannica: " — 
 
 " By proclaiming the reconciliation of science with the 
 Christian faith, of the highest culture with the gospel, 
 Origen did more than any other man to win the Old 
 World to the Christian religion." 
 
 But this was fatal to the purity of the church. The 
 "science" which he attempted to reconcile with the 
 Christian religion, was heathen philosophy. Of course 
 he could show a harmony only by misrepresenting and 
 perverting the Christian religion, bringing it nearly 
 down to a level with that heathen philosophy. This, of 
 course, made it easy for great numbers of the heathen to 
 come into the church, since they did not have to give up 
 much, nor make much change in their belief; and this 
 in turn contributed immensely to the corruption of the 
 church. And so instead of winning the Old World to 
 the Christian religion, he lowered the Christian religion 
 to the standard of the Old World. This conclusion is 
 warranted by the following from Mosheim : — 
 
 " Gradually the friends of philosophy and literature 
 acquired the ascendency. To this issue Origen contrib- 
 uted very much; for having early imbibed the prin- 
 ciples of the new Platonism, he inauspiciously applied 
 them to theology, and earnestly recommended them to 
 the numerous youth who attended on his instructions. 
 And the greater the influence of this man, which quickly 
 spread over the whole Christian world, the more readily 
 was his method of explaining the sacred doctrines prop- 
 agated." — Ecclesiastical History, hook i, cent 3, part 2^ 
 chap. 1, sec. 5. 
 
 Following is the estimate placed upon Origen's teach- 
 ing, by Rev. Wm. Hogue, D. D., in the Watchman (Bos- 
 ton) of December 16, 1886:— 
 
Origen. 219 
 
 "He enthroned a metaphysical theology above the 
 supernatural revelation, and then took the role of a qual- 
 ified interpreter of that revelation; thus, by his wild style 
 of allegorizing, muddling the clearest teachings, and leav- 
 ing the reader in utter bewilderment." 
 
 The reader shall have a chance to verify every word of 
 this. In order, however, to obtain a better idea of the 
 baleful effect of the teaching of Origen, it is necessary to 
 know something of "the New Platonism" to which he 
 was so ardently devoted. The following from Mosheim 
 is probably as concise an account of this mixture of 
 heathen philosophy and Christian theology as we can 
 find:— 
 
 " Near the close of this century [the second], a new 
 philosophical sect suddenly started up, which in a short 
 time prevailed over a large part of the Roman Empire, 
 and not only nearly swallowed up the other sects, but 
 likewise did immense injury to Christianity. Egypt was 
 its birthplace, and particularly Alexandria, which for a 
 long time had been the seat of literature and every science. 
 Its followers chose to be called Platonics. Yet they did 
 not follow Plato implicitly, but collected from all sys- 
 tems whatever seemed to coincide with their own views. 
 And the ground of their preference for the name of 
 Platonics, w^as, that they conceived Plato had explained 
 more correctly than all thers, that most important 
 branch of philosophy which treats of God and super- 
 sensible things. 
 
 " That controversial spirit in philosophy, which obliges 
 everyone to swear allegiance to the dogmas of his master, 
 was disapproved by the more wise. Hence among the 
 lovers of truth, and the men of moderation, a new class 
 of philosophers had grown up in Egypt, who avoided 
 altercation and a sectarian spirit, and who professed sim- 
 ply to follow truth, gathering up whatever was accor- 
 dant with it in all the philosophic schools. They as- 
 
220 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 sumed therefore the name of Eclectics. But notwith- 
 standing these philosophers were really the partisans of 
 no sect, yet it appears from a variety of testimonies, that 
 they much preferred Plato, and embraced most of his 
 dogmas concerning God, the human soul, and the uni- 
 verse. 
 
 "This philosophy was adopted by such of the learned 
 at Alexandria, as wished to be accounted Christians, and 
 yet to retain the name, the garb, and the rank of philoso- 
 phers. In particular, all those who in this century pre- 
 sided in the schools of the Christians at Alexandria 
 (Athenagoras, Pantsenus, and Clemens Alexandrinus), 
 are said to have approved of it. These men were per- 
 suaded that true philosophy, the great and most sahitary 
 gift of God, lay in scattered fragments among all the 
 sects of philosophers; and therefore that it was the duty 
 of every wise man, and especially of a Christian teacher, 
 to collect those fragments from all quarters, and to use 
 them for the defense of religion and the confutation of 
 impiety. Yet this selection of opinions did not prevent 
 their regarding Plato as wiser than all others, and as 
 having advanced sentiments concerning God, the soul, and 
 supersensible things, more accordant with the principles 
 of Christianity than any other. 
 
 "This eclectic mode of philosophizing was changed 
 near the close of the century, when Ammonius Saccas 
 with great applause, opened a school at Alexandria, and 
 laid the foundation of that sect which is called the New 
 Platonic. This man was born and educated a Christian, 
 and perhaps made pretensions to Christianity all his life. 
 Being possessed of great fecundity of genius as well as 
 eloquence, he undertook to bring all systems of philoso- 
 phy and, religion into harmony ; or, in other words, to 
 teach a philosophy, by which all philosophers, and the 
 men of all religions, the Christian not excepted, might 
 unite together and have fellowship. And here espe- 
 cially, lies the difference between this new sect, and the 
 eclectic philosophy which had before flourished in Egypt. 
 
Orkjen. , 221 
 
 For the eclectics held that there was a mixture of good 
 and bad, true aud false, in all the systems; and therefore 
 they selected out of all, what appeared to them consonant 
 with reason, and rejected the rest. But Ammonius held 
 that all sects professed one and the same system of truth, 
 with only some difference in the mode of stating it, and 
 some minute difference in their conceptions ; so that by 
 means of suitable explanations, they might with little dif- 
 ficulty be brought into one body." 
 
 " The grand object of Ammonius, to bring all sects and 
 religions into harmony, required him to do nuich vio- 
 lence to the sentiments and opinions of all parties, phil- 
 osophers, priests, and Christians; and particularly, by 
 means of^Uegorical interpretations, to remove very many 
 impediments out of his way. The manner in which he 
 prosecuted his object, appears in the writings of his dis- 
 ciples and adherents ; which have come down to us in 
 great abundance. To make the arduous work more easy, 
 he assumed that philosophy was first produced and nur- 
 tured among the people of the East; that it was incul- 
 cated among the Egyptians by Hermes, and thence passed 
 to the Greeks; that it was a little obscured and deformed 
 by the disputatious Greeks; but still by Plato, the best 
 interpreter of the principles of Hermes and of the ancient 
 oriental sages, it was preserved for the most part entire 
 and unsidlied ; that the religions received by the various 
 nations of the world were not inconsistent with this most 
 ancient philosophy." 
 
 " To these assumptions he added the common doctrines 
 of the Egyptians (among whom he was born and edu- 
 cated), concerning the universe and the deity, as constitut- 
 ing one great whole (Pantheism); concerning the eternity 
 of the world, the nature of the soul, providence, the gov- 
 ernment of this world by demons, and other received 
 doctrines, all of which he considered as true and not to 
 be called in question. . . In the next place, with 
 
 these Egyptian notions he united the philosophy of Plato, 
 which he accomplished with little difficulty, by distorting 
 
222 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 some of the principles of Plato, and by putting a false 
 construction on his language. Finally, the dogmas of the 
 other sects he construed, as far as was possible, by means 
 of art, ingenuity, and the aid of allegories, into apparent 
 coincidence with these Egyptian and Platonic principles. 
 
 " To this Egyptiaco-Platonic philosophy, the ingenious 
 and fanatical man joined a system of moral discipline 
 aj)parently of high sanctity and austerity. He permitted 
 the common people, indeed, to live according to the laws 
 of their country and the dictates of nature; but he di- 
 rected the wise to elevate, by contemplation, their souls, 
 Avhich were the offspringof God, above all earthly things; 
 . . . so that they might in the present life, attain to 
 communion with the supreme Being, and mig^t ascend 
 after death, active and unencumbered, to the universal 
 })arent, and be forever united with him. And, being 
 born and educated among Christians, Ammonius was 
 accustomed to give elegance and dignity to these pre- 
 cepts by using forms of expression borrowed from the 
 sacred Scriptures; and hence these forms of expression 
 occur abundantly in the writings of his followers. To 
 this austere discipline, he superadded the art of so purg- 
 ing and improving the imaginative faculty, as to make 
 it capable of seeing the demons, and of performing many 
 wonderful things by their assistance. His followers 
 called this art Theurgy." 
 
 "That the prevailing religions, and particularly the 
 Christian, might not appear irreconcilable with his system, 
 Ammonius first turned the whole history of the pagan 
 gods into allegory, and maintained that those whom the 
 vulgar and the priests honored with the title of gods, were 
 only the ministers of God, to whom some homage might 
 and should be paid, yet such as would not derogate from 
 the superior homage due to the supreme God; and in the 
 next place he admitted that Christ was an extraordinary 
 man, the friend of God, and an admirable Theurge. He 
 denied that Christ aimed wholly to suppress the worship 
 of the demons, those ministers of divine providence; 
 
Origen. 223 
 
 that, on the contrary, he only sought to wipe away the 
 stains, contracted by the ancient religions; and that his 
 disciples had corrupted and vitiated the system of their 
 master." — Ecclesiastical History, book 1, cent. 2, part 2, 
 chap. 1, sec. If-11. 
 
 This medley formed the basis of Origen's theology. It 
 will be seen at once that Neo-Platonism was nothing else 
 but Spiritualism in its broadest sense. It could not be 
 anything else, since the ancient heathen philosophers 
 were all Spiritualists, if anything. It is a fact that the 
 principles of ancient heathenism and modern Spiritual- 
 ism are identical. The priests and priestesses of the an- 
 cient oracles were Spiritualist mediums, clairvoyants they 
 would be called nowadays. The Neo-Platonism was re- 
 fined Spiritualism, bearing the same relation to heathen 
 Spiritualism that the so-called "Christian Spiritualism" 
 of to-day does to the gross utterances of Spiritualists a 
 few years ago. To Origen belongs the unsavory honor of 
 bringing this Spiritualism into the church. When the 
 "true inwardness" of Neo-Platonism is fully realized, and 
 it is understood that it constituted Origen's religion, the 
 reader will wonder how Origen could ever be regarded 
 as a Christian. It was only because he lived in a time 
 when almost anything was allowed to pass as Christianity, 
 if it would only " draw " the masses. 
 
 Following his account of Neo-Platonism, Mosheim 
 says:-— 
 
 " This new species of philosophy, imprudently adopted 
 by Origen and other Christians, did immense harm to 
 Christianity. For it led the teachers of it to involve in 
 philosophic obscurity many parts of our religion, which 
 w^ere in themselves plain and easy to be understood ; and 
 to add to the precepts of the Saviour not a few things, of 
 
224 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 which not a word can be found in the holy Scriptures. It 
 also produced that gloomy set of men called mystics ; whose 
 system, if divested of its Platonic notions respecting the 
 origin and nature of the soul, will be a lifeless and sense- 
 less corpse. It laid a foundation, too, for that indolent 
 mode of life, which was afterwards adopted by many, and 
 particularly by numerous tribes of monks; and it rec- 
 ommended to Christians various foolish and useless rites, 
 suited only to nourish superstition, no small part of which 
 we see religiously observed by many even to the present 
 day. And finally, it alienated the minds of many in the 
 following centuries, from Christianity itself, and produced 
 a heterogeneous species of religion, consisting of Chris- 
 tian and Platonic principles combined." — Id., sec, 12. 
 
 How those who know these things can ever quote the 
 writings of Origen with approval, or can regard his ad- 
 vocacy even of a good cause as any help to it, is one of 
 the mysteries of human nature which we shall not at- 
 tempt to explain. 
 
 The following testimony is not needed to show Origen's 
 heathen proclivities, but the reader will find that it will 
 throw much light on the condition of the church in the 
 second and third centuries, and will help to show how 
 the great apostasy was brought about : — 
 
 " The spirit of philosophizing, however, so far from ex- 
 periencing any decline or abatement, continued to in- 
 crease and diffuse itself more and more, particularly to- 
 wards the close of this century, when a new sect sprung 
 up at Alexandria under the title of 'The Modern Pla- 
 tonists.' The founder of the sect was Ammonius Saccas, 
 a man of a subtile, penetrating genius, but prone to de- 
 viate, in many things, from right reason, and too much in- 
 clined to indulge in ridiculous flights of imagination. In 
 addition to a multitude of others who flocked to this man 
 for instruction, his lectures were constantly attended 
 by a great number of Christians, who were inflamed 
 
Origen. 225 
 
 with an eager desire after knowledge, and of whom two, 
 namely, Origen and Heraclas, became afterwards very- 
 distinguished characters, the former succeeding to the 
 presidency of the school, the latter to that of the church 
 of Alexandria. By the Christian disciples of Ammonius, 
 and more particularly by Origen, who in the succeeding 
 century attained to a degree of eminence scarcely credi- 
 ble, the doctrines which they had derived from their mas- 
 ter were sedulously instilled into the minds of the youth 
 with whose education they were intrusted, and by the 
 efforts of these again, who were subsequently, for the most 
 part, called to the ministry, the love of philosophy be- 
 came pretty generally diffused throughout a considerable 
 portion of the church." — Ecclesiastwal Commentaries, cent 
 2, sec. 27. 
 
 In the next section, Mosheim says of this new philoso- 
 phy, of which Origen was so enthusiastic a disciple: — 
 
 " This great design of bringing about an union of all 
 sects and religions, the offspring of a mind certainly not 
 destitute of genius, but distracted by fanaticism, and 
 scarcely at all under the dominion of reason, required, in 
 order to its execution, not only that the most strained 
 and unprincipled interpretations should be given to an- 
 cient sentiments, maxims, documents, and narratives, but 
 also that the assistance of frauds and fallacies should be 
 called in ; hence we find the works which the disciples of 
 Ammonius left behind them abounding in things of this 
 kind ; so much so indeed, that it is impossible for them 
 ever to be viewed in any other light than as deplorable 
 monuments of wisdom run mad." 
 
 In the " Encyclopedia Britannica," Professor Harnack 
 says of Plotinus, a prominent teacher of the new philos- 
 ophy:— 
 
 " A rigid monotheism appeared to Plotinus a miserable 
 conception. He gave a meaning to the myths of the 
 popular religions, and he had something to say even for 
 15 
 
226 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 magic, soothsaying, and prayer. In support of image- 
 worship he advanced arguments which were afterwards 
 adopted by the Christian image worshipers." 
 
 Archdeacon Farrar, who says of Origen that " it would 
 be impossible to speak in any terms but those of the 
 highest admiration and respect" of him, gives the fol- 
 lowing testimony concerning him : — 
 
 " In many passages he speaks disparagingly of the literal 
 truth of the Scripture narratives. This constitutes his 
 retrogressive and disastrous originality. He constantly 
 uses allegory where his own principles give him no ex- 
 cuse for doing so. He had so completely deadened in his 
 own mind the feeling of historic truth, that he allegorizes 
 not only such narratives as that of the creation, but even 
 the law, the histories, and the prophets. The acceptance of 
 the simple narrative becomes too commonplace for him ; 
 he compares it to the transgression of eating raw the 
 Paschal lamb." — History of Interpretation, pp. 197, 198, 
 
 And on page 201 of the same book he says that the 
 foundations of his exegetic system are based upon the 
 sand. This is literally true, in the light of our Saviour's 
 words in Matt. 26, 27. Therefore we say of Origen that 
 if the appellation " Father " be given him, it must be in- 
 terpreted to mean that he was the father of false doctrine 
 in the Christian church. 
 
 Speaking of the rise of monkery, Schaff shows to some 
 extent how Catholicism is indebted to Origen for that 
 abomination. He says : — 
 
 " The Alexandrian Fathers first furnished a theoretical 
 basis for this asceticism in the distinction, suggested even 
 by the Pastor Hermse, of a lower and a higher morality ; 
 a distinction, which, like that introduced at the same 
 period by Tertullian, of mortal and venial sins, gave 
 rise to many practical errors, and favored both moral 
 
Origen. 227 
 
 laxity and ascetic extravagance. . . ." Origen goes 
 still further, and propounds quite distinctly the Catholic 
 doctrine of works of supererogation, works not enjoined 
 indeed in the gospel, yet recommended, which were sup- 
 posed to establish a peculiar .merit and secure a higher 
 degree of blessedness." — History of Church, period 2, 
 sec. 9If. 
 
 In support of the statement that Origen was the father 
 of fiilse and pernicious doctrines in the church, we quote 
 again from Mosheim : — 
 
 " The same Origen, unquestionably, stands at the head 
 of the interpreters of the Bible in this century. But with 
 pain it must be added, he was first among those who have 
 found in the Scriptures a secure retreat for all errors and 
 idle fancies. As this most ingenious man could see no feasi- 
 ble method of vindicating all that is said in the Scriptures, 
 against the cavils of the heretics and the enemies of 
 Christianity, provided he interpreted the language of the 
 Bible literally, he concluded that he must expound the 
 sacred volume in the way in which the Platonists were 
 accustomed to explain the history of their gods. He 
 therefore taught, that the words, in many parts of the 
 Bible, convey no meaning at all ; and in some places, where 
 he acknowledged there was some meaning in the words, he 
 maintained that under the things there expressed, there 
 was contained a hidden and concealed sense, which was 
 much to be preferred to the literal meaning of the words. 
 And this hidden sense it is that he searches after in his 
 commentaries, ingeniously indeed, but perversely, and 
 generally to the entire neglect and contempt of the literal 
 meaning." — Ecclesiastical History, book 1, cent. 8, part 2, 
 chap. 3, sec. 5. 
 
 In note 7 to the above paragraph Mosheim says: — 
 
 "Origen perversely turned a large part of biblical 
 history into moral fables, and many of the laws inio alle- 
 gories. . . . But we must not forget his attachment 
 
228 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 to that system of philosophy which he embraced. Tliis 
 philosophy could not be reconciled Avith the Scriptures, 
 except by a resort to allegories ; and therefore the Script- 
 ures must be interpreted allegorically, that they might 
 not contradict his philosophy." 
 
 Let the reader stop a while to consider the last two 
 paragraphs, and then let him decide whether or not Ori- 
 gen is entitled in the slightest degree to the appellation, 
 *' Christian Father." He " found in the Scriptures a sure 
 retreat for all error and idle fancies." He "perversely 
 turned a large part of the biblical history into moral 
 fables," and knew no way of combating heresy except 
 by denying the Scriptures, and thus introducing worse 
 heresies. And " he stands at the head of the inter- 
 preters" in the third century. The reader can easily 
 judge from this of the standard of interpretation in those 
 days, and of the state of the church which " enjoyed " 
 such labors. 
 
 Bingham mentions the following false doctrines which 
 Origen transmitted to the Catholic Church : — 
 
 " Origen reckons up seven ways, whereby Christians 
 may obtain remission of sins, whereof five are apparently 
 private actions of private men. The first is baptism, 
 whereby men are baptized for the remission of sins. Tha 
 second is the sufiering of martyrdom. The third is alms- 
 deeds; for our Saviour says, Give alms, and behold all 
 things are clean unto you. The fourth is, forgiving the sins 
 of our brethren ; for our Lord and Saviour says, ' If ye 
 from your heart forgive your brethren their trespasses, 
 your Father will forgive your trespasses.' The fifth is, 
 when one converts a sinner from the error of his ways. 
 The sixth is, the abundance of charity, as our Lord says, 
 * Her sins, which are many, are forgiven, because she 
 loved much.' The seventh is, the hard and laborious way 
 of penance, when a man waters his couch with his tears, 
 
Origen. 229 
 
 and his tears are his bread day and night, and he is not 
 ashamed to dechire his sin to the priest of tlie Lord, and 
 seek a cure." — Antiquities, book 19, chap. 3. 
 
 It passes all comprehension how, in the face of all this 
 testimony, which is perfectly familiar to every scholar, 
 Professor Worman can say, as he does in McClintock and 
 Strong's Encyclopedia, " Origen may well be pronounced 
 one of the ablest and worthiest of the church Fathers — 
 indeed, one of the greatest moral prodigies of the human 
 race." It is difficult to retain any respect whatever for 
 the judgment of a man who can indulge in such gush 
 over Origen. And the matter is so much the worse be- 
 cause, in the very same article in which the above language 
 occurs, Professor Worman brings the identical charges 
 against Origen, which are made in the quotations from 
 Mosheim, Farrar, and Schaff. Such lavish and unmer- 
 ited praise is an indication that Origen 's influence is by 
 no means dead, and that the reviving interest in his 
 writings, and in patristic literature in general, augurs ill 
 for the future condition of the Christian church. Ori- 
 gen 's writings were largely instrumental in bringing about 
 the great apostasy which resulted in the establishment of 
 the papacy ; and if they are taken as the guide of the 
 theologian to-day, they must necessarily result in another 
 similar apostasy. The Reformation 'svas a protest against 
 the speculative dogmas of the schoolmen, and a move- 
 ment toward relying on the Bible as the only guide in 
 matters of faith and practice; and just in proportion as^ 
 the Fathers are esteemed, the Bible will be neglected, and 
 the work of the Keformation undone. 
 
 Like all the so-called Christian Fathers, Origen was so 
 intensely "liberal" that he could without scruple ad vo- 
 
230 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 cate exactly opposite views of the same subject; but this 
 characteristic is not so apparent in his writings as they 
 now exist, for Rufinus, the friend of Origen, states in his 
 prologue to " Origen de Principiis " that he consented to 
 translate the work only on the condition that he should, — 
 
 "Follow as far as possible the rule observed by my 
 predecessors, and especially by that distinguished man 
 wlioni I have mentioned above, who, after translating into 
 Latin more than seventy of those treatises of Origen 
 which are styled Homilies, and a considerable number 
 also of his writings on the apostles, in which a good many 
 stumbling-blocks are found in the original Greek, so 
 smoothed and corrected them in his translation, that a 
 Latin reader would meet with nothing which could ap- 
 pear discordant with our belief. His example, therefore, 
 we follow, to the best of our ability ; if not with equal 
 power of eloquence, yet at least with the same strictness 
 of rule, taking care not to reproduce those expressions oc- 
 curring in the works of Origen which are inconsistent 
 with and opposed to each other. The cause of these 
 variations we have explained more freely in the ^ Apolo- 
 getUms,' which Pamphilus wrote in defense of the works 
 of Origen, where we added a brief tract, in which we 
 showed, I think, by unmistakable proofs, that his books 
 had been corrupted in numerous places by heretics and 
 malevolent persons. . . . For he there discusses 
 tliose subjects with respect to which philosophers, after 
 spending all their lives upon them, have been unable to 
 discover anything." 
 
 The last sentence is very naively expressed. The 
 •reader of Origen's works will be likely to conclude tliat 
 Origen has not met with Better success than the philoso- 
 j)hersdid, in discussing things upon which no one has been 
 able to discover anything. 
 
 With one more testimony concerning Origen's heresies. 
 
Origen. 231 
 
 we will proceed to a closer examination of them. Says 
 Killen:— 
 
 "This learned writer cannot be trusted as an inter- 
 preter of the inspired oracles. Like the Jewish cabalists, 
 of whom Philo, whose works he had diligently studied, 
 is a remarkable specimen, he neglects the literal sense of 
 the word, and betakes himself to mystical expositions. 
 In this way the divine record may be made to support 
 any crotchet which happens to please the fancy of the 
 commentator. Origen may, in fact, be regarded as the 
 father of Christian mysticism ; and, in after ages, to a cer- 
 tain class of visionaries^ especially amongst the monks, 
 his writings long continued to present peculiar attrac- 
 tions. 
 
 " On doctrinal points his statements are not always 
 consistent, so that it is extremely difficult to form any- 
 thing like a correct idea of his theological sentiments. . 
 . . In his attempts to reconcile the gospel and his 
 philosophy, he miserably compromised some of the most 
 important truths of Scripture. The fall of man seems 
 to be not unfrequently repudiated in his religious system; 
 and yet, occasionally, it is distinctly recognized. He 
 maintained the pre-existence of human souls ; he held that 
 the stars are animated beings ; he taught that all men shall 
 ultimately attain happiness; and he believed that the 
 devils themselves shall eventually be saved." — Andeiit 
 Churchf period 2, sec. 2, chap. 1, paragraphs 23, 2Jf.. 
 
 We should not expect these statements to be believed 
 if they were made by prejudiced persons; but they all 
 come from those who often quote the Fathers in support 
 of some theory or custom. But that nothing has been 
 exaggerated concerning Origen, will now appear, as he is 
 permitted to testify for himself 
 
 The first thing to claim our attention shall be Origen's 
 views of the Sabbath, which are, in brief, as follows: — 
 
 "There are countless multitudes of believers who, al- 
 
232 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 though unable to unfold methodically and clearly the 
 results of their spiritual understanding, are nevertheless 
 most firmly persuaded that neither ought circumcision to 
 be understood literally, nor the rest of the Sabbath, nor 
 the pouring out of the blood of an animal, nor that an- 
 swers were given by God to Moses on these points." — De 
 Priiieipiis, book 2, chap. 7. 
 
 This shows that Origen was so far from teaching the 
 observance of Sunday, that he did not believe in any 
 literal Sabbath. This was in keeping with* his method 
 of allegorizing everything. 
 
 Writing to the heathen philosopher Celsus, concerning 
 the pagan festivals, Origen says: — 
 
 "If it be objected to us on this subject that we our- 
 selves are accustomed to observe certain days, as for ex- 
 ample the Lord's day, the Preparation, the Passover, 
 or Pentecost, I have to answer, that to the perfect Chris- 
 tian, who is ever in his thoughts, words, and deeds serving 
 his natural Lord, God the Word, all his days are the 
 Lord's, and he is always keeping the Lord's day. He 
 also who is unceasingly preparing himself for the true 
 life, and abstaining from the pleasures of this life which 
 lead astray so many, — who is notrindulging the lust of 
 the flesh, but * keeping under his body, and bringing it 
 into subjection,' — such an one is always keeping Prepara- 
 tion day." — Against Celsus^ booh 8, chap. 22. 
 
 This passage is generally quoted as evidence in favor 
 of Sunday-keeping. It is scarcely necessary at this point 
 to remind the reader that it is of very little consequence 
 to us what the church did in the third century, since it 
 was then pretty well paganized. But there is nothing in 
 favor of Sunday in the above extract. He speaks of the 
 Lord's day without telling whether he means the first or 
 seventh day; but from the connection it is quite. evident 
 
Origen. 283 
 
 that he means the seventh day of the week, the true 
 Lord's day. The sixth day of the week was universally 
 known as " the preparation," and moreover the term oc- 
 curs in connection with Passover and Pentecost. But 
 whether he has reference to the seventh day or the first, 
 he makes it plain that he did not believe in a literal ob- 
 servance of it. So his testimony concerning Sunday is a 
 negative quantity. 
 
 In this connection it will be well to hear what he has 
 to say of the Scriptures as a whole. In his discourse 
 about the fundamental principles he says : — 
 
 " Nor even do the law and the commandments wholly 
 convey what is agreeable to reason. For who that has 
 understanding will suppose that the first, and second, and 
 third day, and the evening and the morning, existed 
 without a sun, and moon, and stars? and the first day 
 was, as it were, also without a sky? And who is so 
 foolish as to suppose that God, after the manner of a 
 husbandman, planted a paradise in Eden, towards the 
 east, and placed in it a tree of life, visible and palpable, 
 so that one tasting of the fruit by the bodily teeth ob- 
 tained life? and again, that one was a partaker of good 
 and evil by masticating what was taken from the tree ? 
 And if God is said to walk in the paradise in the even- 
 ing, and Adam to hide himself under a tree, I do not 
 suppose that anyone doubts that these things figuratively 
 indicate certain mysteries, the history having taken place 
 in appearance, and not literally. . . . And what 
 need is there to say more, since those who are not alto- 
 gether blind can collect countless instances of a similar 
 kind recorded as having occurred, but which did not lit- 
 erally take place? Nay, the gospels themselves are filled 
 with the same kind of narratives ; e. g.^ the devil leading 
 Jesus up into a high mountain, in order to show him from 
 thence the kingdoms of the whole world, and the glory of 
 them. For who is there among those who do not read 
 
234 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 such accounts carelessly, that would not condemn those 
 who think that with the eye of the body — which requires 
 a lofty height in order that the parts lying (immediately) 
 under and adjacent may be seen — the kingdoms of the 
 Persians, and Scythians, and Indians, and Parthians, 
 were beheld, and the manner in which their princes are 
 glorified among men? And the attentive reader may 
 notice in the gospels innumerable other passages like 
 these, so that he will be convinced that in the histories 
 that are literally recorded, circumstances that did not 
 occur are inserted." — De Principiis, hook 4, chap. 1, sec, 
 16. 
 
 David and the apostles spoke because they believed. 
 (See Ps. 116 : 10 ; 2 Cor. 4:13.) Origen's claim to note 
 as a biblical expositor seems to be on the ground that 
 he did not believe. Surely he could not be expected, to 
 make Bible Christians of his followers, when he starts 
 out with the statement that much of the historical record 
 in the Bible is a fabrication, and that the law of God 
 itself is repugnant to reason. What more could an In- 
 gersoll or a Paine say? Every infidel will admit that 
 there are some true things in the Bible. Therefore, if 
 we take Origen's own statements, if we rank him as an 
 expositor of Scripture alongside of the noted modern 
 infidels, we shall be giving him all the credit he deserv^es. 
 When you hear professed ministers of the gospel making 
 light of the. record in the first chapters of Genesis, and 
 making a parade of the " new light " that has dawned 
 upon this century, remember that they are siuij^ly ad()i)t- 
 ing tlie views of the semi-pagan Origen. Not only does 
 he deny the truth of the Old Testament records, but of 
 tlie gospel narrative as well. In the section preceding 
 the one just quoted, he says: — 
 
OrigeiT. 285 
 
 " But since, if the usefulness of the legislation, and the 
 sequence and beauty of the history, were universally evi- 
 dent of itself, we should not believe that any other thing 
 could be understood in the Scriptures save what was 
 obvious, the word of God has arranged that certain 
 stumbling-blocks, as it were, and offenses, and impossi- 
 bilities, should be introduced into the midst of the law, 
 and the history, in order that we may not, through being 
 drawn away in all directions by the merely attractive 
 nature of the language, either altogether foil away from 
 the (true) doctrines, as learning nothing worthy of God, 
 or, by not departing from the letter, come to the knowl- 
 edge of nothing more divine. And this also we must 
 know, that the principal aim being to announce the * spir- 
 itual' connection in those things that are done, and that 
 ought to be done, where the Word found that things done 
 according to the history could be adapted to these mys- 
 tical senses, he made use of ]them, concealing from the 
 multitude the deeper meaning; but where, in the nar- 
 rative of the development of supersensual things, there 
 did not follow the performance of those certain events, 
 which was already indicated by the mystical meaning, 
 the Scripture interwove in the history (the account of) 
 some event that did not take place, sometimes what 
 could not have happened; sometimes what could, but 
 did not. And sometimes a few words are interpolated 
 which are not true in their literal acceptation, and 
 sometimes a larger number. And a similar practice also 
 is to be noticed with regard to the legislation, in which is 
 often to be found what is useful in itself, and appropriate 
 to the times of the legislation; and sometimes also what 
 does not appear to be of utility; and at other times im- 
 possibilities are recorded for the sakf of the more skillful 
 and inquisitive, in order that they may give themselves 
 to the toil of investigating what is written, and tluis 
 attain to a becoming conviction of the manner in which 
 a meaning worthy of God must be sought out in such 
 subjects." 
 
236 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 That is, impossibilities and untruths are recorded in 
 the Bible, in order to stimulate the student to closer in- 
 vestigation. But if the student were once convinced that 
 such is the case, he would cease to be a student, at least 
 of the Bible, and would turn away from it in disgust. 
 The whole tenor of Origen's teaching is in the direction 
 of infidelity. And his infidelity is of the worst type, 
 because it is put forth under cover of the name of Chris- 
 tianity. 
 
 The following paragraph exhibits not only his unbe- 
 lief of the simple statements of Scripture, but also his 
 fanciful method of interpretation : — 
 
 " But as there are certain passages of Scripture which 
 do not at all contain the 'corporeal* sense, as we shall 
 show in the follow'n^ (paragraphs), there are also places 
 where we must seek only for the 'soul,' as it were, and 
 * spirit ' of Scripture. And perhaps on this account the 
 water-vessels containing two or three firkins apiece are 
 said to lie for the purification of the Jews, as we read 
 in the gospel according to John: the expression darkly 
 intimating, with respect to those wlio, (are called) by the 
 apostle * Jews* secretly, that they are purified by the 
 word of Scripture, receiving sometimes two firkins, i. 6., 
 so to speak, the * psychical ' and * spiritual * sense ; and 
 sometimes three firkins, since some have, in addition to 
 those already mentioned, also the * corporeal' sense, which 
 is capable of (producing) edification. And six water- 
 vessels are reasonably (appropriate) to those who are 
 I)u rifled in the world, which was made in six days — the 
 perfect number." — Id., sec. 12. 
 
 Comment on the above is unnecessary. Much more 
 of a similar nature might be given directly on the sub-, 
 ject of the Scriptures as a whole, but the sauie spirit will 
 be noticed in what follows in regard to special i)oints of 
 the Scripture. 
 
Origen. 237 
 
 In "i)e PHncipiw" (book 1, chap. 7, sec. 2, 3) Ori- 
 gen makes the following theologico-philosoiDhical deliver- 
 ance : — 
 
 " In the first place, then, let us see what reason itself 
 can discover respecting sun, moon, and stars, — whether 
 the opinion, entertained by some, of their unchangeable- 
 ness be correct, — and let the declarations of holy Script- 
 ure, as far as possible, be first adduced. For Job ap- 
 pears to assert that not only may the stars be subject to 
 sin, but even that they are actually not clean from the 
 contagion of it. The following are his words: 'The stars 
 also are not clean in thy sight.' Nor is this to be under- 
 stood of the splendor of their physical substance, as if one 
 were to say, for example, of a garment, that it is not clean; 
 for if such were the meaning, then the accusation of a 
 want of cleanness in the splendor of their bodily- sub- 
 stance w^ould imply an injurious reflection upon their Crea- 
 tor. For if they are able, through their own diligent ef- 
 forts, either to acquire for themselves a body of greater 
 brightness, or through their sloth to make the one they 
 have less pure, how should they incur censure for being 
 stars that are not clean, if they receive no praise because 
 they are so? 
 
 "But to arrive at a clearer understanding on these 
 matters, we ought first to inquire after this point, whether 
 it is allowable to suppose that they are living and ra- 
 tional beings ; then, in the next place, whether their souls 
 came into existence at the same time with their bodies, or 
 seem to be anterior to them ; and also whether, after the 
 end of the world, we are to understand that they are to 
 be released from their bodies ; and whether, as we cease 
 to live, so they also will cease from illuminating the 
 world. Although this inquiry may seem to be somewdiat 
 bold, yet, as we are incited by the desire of ascertaining 
 the truth as far as possible, there seems no absurdity in 
 attempting an investigation of the subject agreeably to 
 the grace of the Holy Spirit. 
 
2tS8 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 " We think, then, that they may be designated as liv- 
 ing beings, for this reason, that they are said to receive 
 commandments from God, which is ordinarily the case 
 only with rational beings. 'I have given a command- 
 ment to all the stars,' says the Lord. What, now, are 
 these commandments? Those, namely, that each star, 
 in its order and course, should bestow upon the world 
 the amount of splendor which has been intrusted to it. 
 For those which are called ' planets ' move in orbits of 
 one kind, and those which are termed d-Xayel^ are dif- 
 ferent. Now it manifestly follows from this, that neither 
 can the nj^vement of that body take place without a 
 soul, nor can living things be at any time without mo- 
 tion. And seeing that the stars move with such order 
 and regularity, that their movements never appear to be 
 at any time subject to derangement, would it not be the 
 height of folly to say that so orderly an observance of 
 method and plan could be carried out or accomplished by 
 irrational beings?" 
 
 It cannot be said that there is in this anything wicked, 
 except that it leaves the overruling, upholding power of 
 God out of the question altogether. Not so much, how- 
 ever, can be said of what follows : — 
 
 "But whether any of these orders who act under the 
 government of the devil, and obey his wicked commands, 
 will in a future world be converted to righteousness because 
 of their possessing the faculty of freedom of will, or whether 
 persistent and invet©rate wickedness may be changed by 
 the power of habit into nature, is a result which you 
 yourself, reader, may approve of, if neither in these pres- 
 ent worlds which are seen and temporal, nor in those 
 which are unseen and are eternal, that portion is to differ 
 wholly from the final unity and fitness of things. But in 
 the meantime, both in those temporal worlds which are 
 seen, as well as in those eternal worlds which are invisi- 
 ble, all those beings are arranged, according to a regular 
 plan, in the order and degree of their merits; so that 
 
Origen. 239 
 
 some of them in the first, others in the second, some even 
 in the last times, after having undergone heavier and 
 severer punishments, endured for a lengthened period, 
 and for many ages, so to speak, improved by this stern 
 method of training, and restored at first by the instruc- 
 tion of the angels, and subsequently by the powers of a 
 higher grade, and thus advancing through each stage to 
 a better condition, reach even to that which is invisible 
 and eternal, having traveled through, by a kind of train- 
 ing, every single office of the heavenly powers. From 
 Avhich, I think, this will appear to follow as an inference, 
 that every rational nature may, in passing from one or- 
 der to another, go through each to all, and advance from 
 all to each, while made the subject of various degrees of 
 proficiency and failure according to its own actions and 
 endeavors, put forth in the enjoyment of its power of 
 freedom of will." — Id,, chap. 6, sec. 3. 
 
 The apostle Jude says " the angels which kept not their 
 first estate, but left their own habitation," have been " re- 
 served in everlasting chains under darkness unto the 
 Judgment of the great day" (Jude 6) ; but Origen teaches 
 that they will ultimately be restored to the favor of God. 
 The Bible teaches that souls are purified by faith in 
 Christ, and obedience to the truth through the Spirit; 
 but Origen teaches that souls will be purged from sin by 
 punishment. In the above extract we have the Koman 
 Catholic purgatory as clearly set forth as it could possi- 
 bly be; the only difference between Origen and other 
 Catholics is that they provide an eternal hell for certain 
 incorrigible ones, while Origen teaches the final restora- 
 tion not only of all men but of demons also. 
 
 In the following the reader will find a combination of 
 Universalism, Koman Catholicism, and Spiritualism: — 
 
 " I think, therefore, that all the saints who depart from 
 
240 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 this life will remain in some place situated on the earth, 
 which holy Scripture calls paradise, as in some place of 
 instruction, and, so to speak, class-room or school of 
 souls, in which they are to be instructed regarding all the 
 things which they had seen on earth, and are to receive 
 also some information respecting things that are to fol- 
 low in the future, as even w^hen in this life they had 
 obtained in some degree indications of future events, 
 although 'through a glass darkly,' all of which are re- 
 vealed more clearly and distinctly to the saints in their 
 proper time and place. If anyone indeed be pure in 
 heart, and holy in mind, and more practiced in perception, 
 he will, by making more rapid progress, quickly ascend 
 to a place in the air, and reach the kingdom of Heaven, 
 through those mansions, so to speak, in the various places 
 which the Greeks have termed spheres, i. e., globes, but 
 which holy Scripture has called heavens; in each of 
 which he will first see clearly what is done there, and in 
 the second place, will discover the reason why things are 
 so done: and thus he will in order pass through all gra- 
 dations, following Him who hath passed into the heavens, 
 Jesus the Son of God, who said, * I will that where I am, 
 these may be also.' " — Id.^ hook 2, chap. 12, sec. 6. 
 
 And the following is doctrine eminently adapted to 
 satisfy every hardened sinner: — 
 
 " We find in the prophet Isaiah, that the fire with which 
 each one is punished is described as his own ; for he says, 
 * Walk in the light of your own fire, and the flame which 
 ye have kindled.' By these words it seems to be indi- 
 cated that every sinner kindles for himself the flame of 
 his own fire, and is not plunged into some fire which has 
 been already kindled by anothor, or was in existence be- 
 fore himself. Of this fire the fuel and food are our sins, 
 which are called by the apostle Paul * wood, and hay, and 
 stubble.' . . . When the soul has gathered together _ 
 a nudtitude of evil works, and an abundance of sins 
 against itself, at a suitable time all that assembly of evil 
 
Origek. 241 
 
 boils up to punishment, and is set on fire to chastisements; 
 when the mind itself, or conscience, receiving by divine 
 power into the memory all those things of which it had 
 stamped on itself certain signs and forms at the moment 
 of sinning, wnll see a kind of history, as it were, of all 
 the foul, and shameful, and unholy deeds which it has 
 done, exposed before its eyes : then is the conscience itself 
 harassed, and, pierced by its own goads, becomes an ac- 
 cuser and a witness against itself" — Id., chap. 10, sec. Jf. 
 
 Here we have purgatory indeed, but it is a spiritual 
 purgatory. The sinner is to be purified by fire, but the 
 fire is to be simply his own sins. Stripped of the mass 
 of verbiage, Origen's teaching is simply to the effect that 
 all the punishment men will ever receive for their sins 
 will be the knowledge of those sins, — the remorse of con- 
 science constitutes the fire, and this remorse will eventu- 
 ally purge them from sin. In short, his teaching is that 
 men will be freed from their sins simply by thinking 
 about them. This, of course, leaves no room for salva- 
 tion through faith in Christ ; it leaves Christ entirely out 
 of the question, and therefore Origen was not a Christian 
 teacher. 
 
 Page after page might be filled with matter of the 
 same sort as that already given, but to what profit would 
 it be? If any are enamored of Origen's style, they can 
 procure his writings and surfeit themselves. But what 
 has been quoted about him and from him should be suf- 
 ficient to convince any candid person that Origen's 
 dreamy, fanciful, mystical, skeptical, and spiritualistic 
 rantings could never hav^e any other than a blighting 
 influence upon the church. 
 
 16 
 
CHAPTER XIV. 
 
 THE GEEAT APOSTASY. 
 
 In his second letter to the Thessalonians, the apostle 
 Paul warned the brethren of 'f a falling away " (Greek, 
 apostasia) from the truth, to result in the manifestation 
 of a phase of wickedness which he styled " that AVicked," 
 "that man of sin," "the son of perdition; who opposeth 
 and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that 
 is worshiped." 2 Thess. 2:3,4,8. He added, "For 
 the mystery of iniquity doth already work ; only he wjio 
 nowletteth [hindereth] will let [hinder], until he be taken 
 out of the way. And then shall that Wicked be re- 
 vealed." Verses 7, 8. That is to say that the great 
 apostasy was developing even in the days of Paul; he 
 could trace its insidious workings even in many churches 
 which he had planted ; but there was a hindering ele- 
 ment which for the time prevented its full development. 
 Iniquity could not assume such proportions in the Chris- 
 tian church as to exalt itself " above all that is called 
 God, or that is w^orshiped," so long as paganism was the 
 prevailing religion, and was upheld by the power which 
 ruled the world. The persecutions which the church 
 suffered from the heathen kept it comparatively pure; 
 but when Constantine elevated Christianity to the throne 
 of the world, all the errors which for nearly three cent- 
 uries liad been insinuating themselves into the church, 
 were given ample room for, exercise. 
 
 It is not our purpose to give a complete history of tlie 
 
 (242) 
 
The Great Apostasy. 243 
 
 progress of corruption in the church ; we wish only to 
 note briefly the progress of the apostasy until the time 
 of Constantine, since it was in this period that Jiearly all 
 the abominations of tlie Catholic Church had their birth. 
 As a preface to this study, let the reader review the quo- 
 tations which we have made from the writings of the 
 apostles, in the chapter entitled, " The Apostolic Church," 
 showing the evils that existed in the church even in their 
 4;ime. If such things existed when the churches had the 
 benefit of the instruction of men conmiissioned by Heaven, 
 and clothed with divine power, what might we not expect 
 to find in the years following the death of the apostles? 
 That which we have already quoted concerning the Fath- 
 ers, and from their writings, is sufficient to show that 
 there was an abundance of false teachers in the early 
 church ; w^e shall now see what was the legitimate result 
 of their teaching. 
 
 We cannot better introduce this part of the subject 
 than by the following quotation from Dr. Killen, con- 
 cerning the heresies within a hundred years after the 
 apostles : — 
 
 " But though the creed of the church was still to some 
 extend substantially sound, it must be admitted that it 
 was already beginning to suffer nuich from adulteration. 
 One hundred years after the death of the apostle John, 
 spiritual darkness was fast settling down upon the 
 Christian community; and the Fathers, who flourished 
 towards the commencement of the third century, fre- 
 quently employ language for which they would have 
 been sternly rebuked, had they lived in the days of the 
 apostles and evangelists. Thus, we find them speaking 
 of 'sins cleansed by repentance,' and of repentance as 
 Hlie price at which the Lord has determined to grant 
 forgiveness.' We read of 'sins cleansed by alms and 
 
244 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 faith,' and of the martyr, by his sufferings, 'washing 
 away his own iniquities.' We are told that by baptism 
 *we are cleansed from all our sins,' and * regain that 
 Spirit of God which Adam received at his creation and 
 lost by his transgression.' * The pertinacious wickedness 
 of the devil,' says Cyprian, 'has power up to the saving 
 water J but in baptism he loses all the poison of his wick- 
 edness.' The same writer insists upon the necessity of 
 'penance^ a species of discipline unknown to the apostolic 
 church, and denounces, with terrible severity, those Avho 
 discouraged its performance. 'By the deceitfulness of 
 their lies,' says he, they interfere, 'that satisfaction be not 
 given to God in his anger. . . . All pains are taken 
 that sins he not expiated by due satisfactions and lamenta- 
 tions, that wounds be not washed clean by tears.' It 
 may be said that some of these expressions are rhetorical, 
 and that those by whom they were employed did not 
 mean to deny the all-sufficiency of the great sacrifice; 
 but had these Fathers clearly apprehended the doctrine 
 of justification by faith in Christ, they w^ould have re- 
 coiled from the use of language so exceedingly objection- 
 able." — Ancient Church, period 2, sec. 2, chap. 5, par- 
 agraph 17. 
 
 In the preface to the "Ancient Church," Dr. Killen 
 says: — 
 
 " In the interval between the days of the apostles and 
 the conversion of Constantine, the Christian common- 
 wealth changed its aspect. The bishop of Kome — a per- 
 sonage unknown to the writers of the New Testament — 
 meanwhile rose into prominence, and at length took prec- 
 edence of all other churchmen. Rites and ceremonies, 
 of which neither Paul nor Peter ever heard, crept silently 
 into use, and then claimed the rank of divine institutions. 
 Officers, for whom the primitive disciples could have 
 found no place, and titles, which to them would have been 
 altogether unintelligible, began to challenge attention, 
 and to be named apostolic." 
 
The Great Apostasy. 245 
 
 The learned church historian, Mosheim, bears testi- 
 mony to the same effect, and he also tells how it came 
 to pass that unscriptural practices were introduced into 
 the church. He says : — 
 
 " It is certain that to religious worship, both public 
 and private, many rites were added, without necessity 
 and to the great offense of sober and good men. The 
 principal cause of this, I readily look for in the perverse- 
 ness of mankind, who are more delighted with the pomp 
 and splendor of external forms and pageantry, than with 
 the true devotion of the heart, and who despise whatever 
 dbes not gratify their eyes and ears. But other and 
 additional causes may be mentioned, which, though they 
 suppose no bad design, yet clearly betray indiscretion. 
 
 " First, There is good reason to suppose that the Chris- 
 tian bishops purposely multiplied sacred rites for tlie 
 sake of rendering the Jews and the pagans more friendly 
 to them. For both these classes had been accustomed 
 to numerous and splendid ceremonies from their infimcy, 
 and had made no question of their constituting an es- 
 sential part of religion. And hence, when they saw 
 the new religion to be destitute of such ceremonies, they 
 thought it too simple, and therefore despised it. To 
 obviate this objection, the rulers of the Christian churches 
 deemed it proper for them to be more formal and splen- 
 did in their public worship. 
 
 " Secondly, The simplicity of the worship which Chris- 
 tians offered to the Deity, had given occasion to certain 
 calumnies, maintained both by the Jews and the pagan 
 priests. The Christians were pronounced atheists, be- 
 cause they were destitute of temples, altars, victims, 
 priests, and all that pomp, in which the vulgar suppose 
 the essence of religion to consist. For unenlightened 
 persons are prone to estimate religion by what meets 
 their eyes. To silence this accusation, the Christian 
 doctors thought they must introduce some external rites, 
 which would strike the senses of people; so that they 
 
246 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 could maintain that they really had all those things of 
 which Christians were charged with being destitute, 
 though under different forms." 
 
 '^Fourthly, Among the Greeks and the people of the 
 East nothing was held more sacred than what were 
 called the 'mysteries.' This circumstance led the Chris- 
 tians, in order to impart dignity to their religion, to say, 
 that they also had similar mysteries, or certain holy rites 
 concealed from the vulgar; and they not only applied 
 the terms used in the pagan mysteries to the Christian 
 institutions, particularly baptism and the Lord's Supper, 
 but they gradually introduced also the rites which were 
 designated by those terms. This practice originated i^i 
 the Eastern provinces; and thence, after the times of 
 Adrian (who first introduced the Grecian mysteries among 
 the Latins), it spread among the Christians of the AVest. 
 A large part therefore of the Christian observances and 
 institutions, even in this century, had the asj^ect of the 
 pagan mysteries." — Ecclesiastical Historyy hook 1, cent. 2, 
 part 2, chap. ^, sec. 1—5. 
 
 In view of the above testimony, we think that no one 
 need be led astray by any practice which he may find 
 in the church. Let him first carefully and candidly 
 examine the Scriptures to see if they sanction the prac- 
 tice. If they do not, then of course he should have 
 nothing more to do with it. Then if he is anxious to 
 know how the practice came to be one of the customs 
 of the church, the quotations which we have made will 
 enlighten him. Every ceremony of the church, if it be 
 unscriptural, will be found to have been adopted from 
 the heathen, or else to have been invented by the bishops 
 of the early church, in order to catch the fancy of the 
 heatlien. By making the heathen believe that the Chris- 
 tian religion differed but very little from paganism, the 
 bishops were enabled to gain many "converts." For 
 
The Great Apostasy. 247 
 
 proof of this, the reader has only to review the extracts 
 from the writings of the Fathers that have been made in 
 previous chapters. 
 
 In a note to the paragraphs last quoted, Mosheim 
 says : — 
 
 " It will not be unsuitable to transcribe here, a very ap- 
 posite passage, which I accidentally met with, in Gregory 
 Nyssen's ' Life of Gregory Thaumaturgus,' in the 'Works 
 of Thaumaturgus,' as published by Vossius, p. 312, who 
 gives the Latin only: — 
 
 " ' When Gregory perceived that the ignorant and 
 simple multitude persisted in their idolatry, on account 
 of the sensitive pleasures and delights it afforded — he 
 allowed them in celebrating the memory of the holy 
 martyrs, to indulge themselves, and give a loose to pleas- 
 ure (i. 6., as the thing itself, and both what precedes and 
 what follows, place beyond all controversy, he allowed 
 them at the sepulchers of the martyrs on their feast days, 
 to dance, to use sports, to indulge conviviality, and to 
 do all things that the worshipers of idols were accustomed 
 to do in tlieir temples, on their festival days), hoping that 
 in process of time they would spontaneously come over 
 to a more becoming and more correct manner of life.' " 
 
 Head the above carefully. Mosheim says that Greg- 
 ory Thaumaturgus, one of the most highly esteemed of 
 the church Fathers, allowed his people, at their fes- 
 tivals in honor of the martyrs, not only "to dance, to 
 use sports, to indulge conviviality," but also " to do all 
 things that the worshipers of idols were accustomed to 
 do in their temples on their festival days." In order 
 to know what this latter expression implies, we have 
 only to read the following from the same author : — 
 
 " Of the prayers of pagan worshipers, whether we re- 
 gard the matter or the mode of expression, it is impos- 
 sible to speak favorably; they were not only destitute 
 
248 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 in general of everything allied to the spirit of genuine 
 piety, but were sometimes framed expressly for the pur- 
 pose of obtaining the countenance of Heaven to the most 
 abominable and flagitious undertakings. In fact, the 
 greater part of their religious observances were of an 
 absurd and ridiculous nature, and in many instances 
 strongly tinctured with the most disgraceful barbarism 
 and obscenity. Their festivals and other solemn days 
 were polluted by a licentious indulgence in every species 
 of libidinous excess; and on these occasions they were 
 not prohibited even from making the sacred mansions 
 of their gods the scenes of vile and beastly gratification." 
 — MosheiwJs Ecclesiastical Commentaries (introduction) ^ 
 chap. 1, sec. 2. 
 
 " Absurd and ridiculous " practices ; " disgraceful bar- 
 barism and obscenity;" "licentious indulgence in every 
 species of libidinous excess;" and "scenes of vile and 
 beastly gratification;" — such were the things in which 
 one of the most renowned church Fathers indulged his 
 parishioners, in order that they might not feel so much 
 inclined to shake off their " Christian bonds " and return 
 to heathenism. Surely this was doing evil that good 
 might come. But however astute the policy of Gregory 
 may have been, and we can easily believe that it would 
 be effectual in holding his "converts," we cannot give 
 him credit for great knowledge of human nature, if he 
 thought that people would by such means "spontane- 
 ously come over to a more becoming and more correct 
 mode of life." 
 
 Perhaps the reader may obtain a still clearer idea of 
 the way the early church was paganized, by reading the 
 fi)llowing extracts from an article in the Bihliotheca 
 Sacra, January, 1852, on " Roman Catholic Missions in the 
 Congo Free State," showing how in the seventeenth century 
 the Jesuits "converted" the natives; — 
 
The Great Apostasy. 249 
 
 "They introduced, as far as they could, all the rites 
 and ceremonies of the Romish Church. The mass was 
 celebrated with all due pomp; the confessional was erected 
 in ahnost every village; penances of all grades and kinds 
 were imposed ; children and adults alike were required to 
 perform the rosary, and the people en masse soon learned 
 to make the sign of the cross, and most readily did they 
 fall into the habit of wearing crucifixes, medals, and relics. 
 There were certain heathenish customs, however, which 
 the missionary Fathers found much difficulty in inducing 
 the people to abandon; and they were never entirely suc- 
 cessful until they substituted others of a similar character, 
 which the natives regarded as a sort of equivalent for 
 those they were required to give up." 
 
 The writer then gives an account of some of the super- 
 stitious rites which the Jesuits substituted for those which 
 the heathen had formerly practiced, and continues thus: 
 
 " Another custom of the country at the root of which 
 the ax was laid, was that of guarding their fruit trees 
 and patches of grain with feteiches, which were supposed 
 to possess themselves the power of punishing all tres- 
 passers. The practice was interdicted, but the people at 
 the same time were recommended 'to use consecrated 
 palm branches, and here and there in their patches of 
 corn to set up the sign of the cross.' These details 
 might be extended to almost any length, if it were nec- 
 essary. A Roman Catholic of discernment may possibly 
 see an essential difference between these heathenish cus- 
 toms that were abolished, and those that were substituted 
 in their place; but we seriously doubt whether the sim- 
 ple-minded people of Congo were ever conscious of any 
 material change in their code of superstitious rites, or 
 derived any essential advantage by the exchange." 
 
 The same course is pursued to-day by Roman Catholic 
 missionaries in heathen lands. It is very fitting that this 
 should be so, for it was by such means that the Roman 
 
250 Fathers op the Catholic Church. 
 
 Catholic Church came into existence. It is very doubt- 
 ful, also, if many simple-minded people in the early cent- 
 uries were ever conscious of any material change in 
 their code of superstitious rites, or derived any essential 
 advantage by the change. It is common to speak of the 
 "ruins of paganism," upon which "the church" was 
 built, but building upon those ruins was the ruin of 
 Christianity, so far as " the church " was concerned. A 
 church built of ruins will be a ruin from the start. 
 
 heathen and catholic mysteries. 
 We have already quoted Mosheim's statement that a 
 large part of the Christian observances and institutions, 
 even in the second century, had the aspect of pagan 
 mysteries. Let us now read something more about those 
 same mysteries. It will tally very well with what has 
 been said of Gregory Thaumaturgus. Says Mosheim : — 
 
 "In addition to the public service of the gods, at 
 which everyone was permitted to be present, the Egyp- 
 tians, Persians, Grecians, Indians, and some other nations, 
 had recourse to a species of dark and recondite worship, 
 under the name of mysteries. . . . None were admitted 
 to behold or partake in the celebration of these mysteries, 
 but those who had approved themselves worthy of such 
 distinction, by their fidelity and perseverance in the 
 practice of a long and severe course of initiatory forms. 
 . . . In the celebration of some of them, it is pretty 
 plain that many things were done in the highest degree 
 repugnant to virtue, modesty, and every finer feeling. . 
 . . It is certain that the highest veneration was en- 
 tertained by the people of every country for what were 
 termed the mysteries ; and the Christians, perceiving this, 
 were induced to make their religion conform in many re- 
 spects to this part of the heathen model, hoping that it 
 might thereby the more readily obtain a favorable re-* 
 
The Great Apostasy. 251 
 
 ception with those whom it was their object and their 
 hope to convert." — Eeclesiastical Commentaries (intr^o- 
 ductioii), ehap. 1, sec. IS. 
 
 In a note to the above we find the following : — 
 
 "They adopted, for instance, in common with the pa- 
 gan nations, the plan of dividing their sacred offices into 
 two classes : the one public, to which every person was 
 freely admitted ; the other secret or mysterious, from 
 which all the unprofessed were excluded. The initiated 
 were those who had been baptized ; the vmprofessed, the 
 catechumens. The mode of preparatory examination 
 also bore a strong resemblance, in many respects, to the 
 course of initiatory forms observed by the heathen nations, 
 in regard to their mysteries. In a word, many forms 
 and ceremonies, to pass over other things of the Chris- 
 tian w^orship, were evidently copied from these sacred 
 rites of paganism ; and we have only to lament that what 
 was thus done with unquestionably the best intentions, 
 should in some respects have been attended with an evil 
 result." 
 
 How anyone, after reading testimonies like these, can 
 complacently follow any practice on the ground that it 
 has been the custom of the church for centuries, is a 
 wonder to us. Well did Jeremiah say, "The customs of 
 the people are vain." Jer. 10:3. To claim that a prac- 
 tice must be correct because it is drawn from church 
 tradition, is about as logical as it would be to say that 
 certain viands must be wholesome, because they were res- 
 cued from the gutter. It is true that we may find a 
 wholesome article of food in the mire of the streets ; but 
 we should not regard the fact that it was found in such 
 a place as evidence that it was good ; so tradition may 
 bring to us some things that are good ; but the fact that 
 they come to us by tradition should not recommend 
 
252 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 them to us, but should, on the contrary, cause us to re- 
 gard them with suspicion. Says Dr. Archibald Bower, 
 in his " History of the Popes : " — 
 
 " To avoid being imposed upon, we ought to treat tra- 
 dition as we do a notorious and kno: ^n lia r, to whom we 
 give n^ credit, unless what he says is confirjiied to us by 
 some person of undoubted veracity. If it is affirmed by 
 him [i. e., by tradition] alone, we can at most but sus- 
 pend our belief, not rejectiug it as false, because a liar 
 may sometimes speak truth ; but we cannot, upon his 
 bare authority, admit it as true." — Vol. 1, p. 1. 
 
 So whenever we find a " custom " which rests on church 
 tradition, the "perso n of know n vgracity". to whom we 
 shall refer it is the Bible/ "To the law and to the 
 testimony ; if they speak not according to this word, it 
 is because there is no light in them." 
 
 Dr. Carson, in his great work on baptism, says: — 
 
 I " With respect to religious doctrines and institutions, 
 there is no antecedent probability that those in existence 
 at any time are actually in Scripture. The vast majority 
 of religious rites used under the Christian name are the 
 mere^nyention^ofjnen ; and not a sijigle institution of 
 the Lord Jesus, as it is recorded in the New Testament, 
 has been left unclianged; and it is no injustice to put 
 each of them to the proof, because, if they are in Script- 
 ure, proof is at itll times accessible." — Page 6. 
 
 This being the case, it is perfectly just to conclude, 
 when men appeal to " the custom of the church " in sup- 
 port of aiiy practice, that they are conscious that the 
 Bjble will not sustain their position. No one who can 
 support his cause by the Scriptures will ever appeal to 
 the Fathers or to tradition and custom. 
 
 But we have further direct testimony concerning the 
 perversion of Christian ordinances. We have seen how 
 
The Great Apostasy. 253 
 
 an eminent Father allowed the people to retain heathen 
 customs on their festival days. As early as in the second 
 century, within less than a hundred years after the death 
 of the last apostle, the Christian church had begun to 
 assume the color of heathenism. And as the heathen 
 "mysteries," which were accompanied by so much that 
 is pleasing to the natural heart, must have been that 
 which the heathen would be the most loth to give up, 
 the church Fathers, in the excess of their perverted 
 zeal, claimed that they too had " mysteries " connected 
 w4th their religion. Mosheim thus treats of this : — 
 
 " Religion having thus, in both its branches, the specu- 
 lative as well as the practical, assumed a twofold char- 
 acter, the one public or common, the other private or 
 mysterious, it was not long before a distinction of a 
 similar kind took place also in the Christian discipline, 
 and form of divine worship. For observing that in 
 Egypt, as well as in other countries, the heathen wor- 
 shipers, in addition to their public religious ceremonies, 
 to which everyone was admitted without distinction, had 
 certain secret and most sacred rites, to which they gave 
 the name of 'my Series,'' and at the celebration of which 
 none, except persons of tlie most approved faith and 
 discretion, were permitted to be present, the Alexandrian 
 Christians first, and after them others, were beguiled into 
 a notion that they could not do better than make the 
 Christian discipline accommodate itself to this model. 
 The multitude professing Christianity were therefore 
 divided by them into the 'profane,^ or those who were not 
 as yet admitted to the mysteries, and the 'initiated/ or 
 faithful and perfect. To the former belonged the 'cate- 
 ehwnens,' or those that had indeed enrolled themselves 
 under the Christian banner, but had never been regu- 
 larly received into the fellowship of Christ's flock by the 
 sacrament of baptism ; as also those who, for some trans- 
 gression or offense, had been expelled from communion 
 
254 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 with tlie faithful. The latter, who were properly termed 
 * the church,^ consisted of all such as had been regularly 
 admitted into the Christian community by baptism, and 
 had never forfeited their privileges, as well as of those 
 who, having by some misconduct incurred the penalty 
 of excommunication, had, upon tlieir repentance, been 
 again received into the bosom of the church. It became, 
 moreover, customary, even in this century, more espe- 
 cially in Egypt and the neighboring provinces, for persons 
 desirous of being admitted into either of these classes, to 
 be previously exercised and examined, we may even say 
 tormented, for a great length of time, with a variety of 
 ceremonies, for the most part nearly allied to those that 
 were observed in preparing people for a sight of the 
 heathen mysteries. Upon the same principle, a twofold 
 form was given to divine worship, the one general and 
 open to the people at large, the other special and con- 
 cealed from all, except the faithful or initiated. To the 
 latter belonged the common prayers, baptism, the agapw 
 or love-feasts, and the Lord's Supper; and as none were 
 permitted to be present at these ^ mysteries,^ as they were 
 termed, save those whose admission into the fellowship 
 of the church was perfect and complete, so likewise was 
 it expected that, as a matter of duty, the most sacred 
 silence should be observed in regard to everything con- 
 nected with the celebration of them, and nothing what- 
 ever relating thereto be committed to the ears of the 
 profane. From this constitution of things it came to 
 pass, not only that many terms and phrases made use of 
 in the heathen mysteries were transferred and applied 
 to different parts of the Christian worship, particularly 
 to the sacraments of baptism and the Lord's Supper, but 
 that, in not a few instances, the sacred rites of the church 
 were contaminated by the introduction of various pagan 
 forms and ceremonies." — Ecclesiastical ComtnentarieSy 
 cent. 2, sec. 36. 
 
 Comment on the above is unnecessary, and so we leave 
 it, to introduce a statement from Dr. Killen, concerning 
 the perversion of the comnumion : — 
 
The Great Apostasy. 255 
 
 " In the third century superstition already recognized 
 a mystery in tlie mixture p. e., of the cup]. ' We see/ 
 says Cyprian, * that in the water the 'people are repre- 
 sented, but that in the wine is exhibited the blood of 
 Christ. When, however, in the cup water is mingled 
 with wine, the people are united to Christ, and the mul- 
 titude of the faithful are coupled and conjoined to him 
 on whom they believe.' The bread was not put into the 
 mouth of the communicant by the administrator, but was 
 handed to him by a deacon ; and it is said that, the bet- 
 ter to show forth the unity of the church, all partook of 
 one loaf made of a size sufficient to supply the whole 
 congregation. The wine was administered separately, 
 and was drunk out of a cup or chalice. As early as the 
 third century an idea began to be entertained that the 
 eucharist was necessary to salvation, and it was, in con- 
 sequence, given to infants. None were now suffered to 
 be present at its celebration but those who were com- 
 municants; for even the catechumens, or candidates for 
 baptism, were obliged to withdraw before the elements 
 were consecrated." — Ancient Church, period 2, sec. 3, 
 chap. 3, paragraph 5. 
 
 Here we have the Roman Catholic mass fully devel- 
 oped within but little over a hundred years after the 
 death of the apostles. In some things, however, we must 
 allow that the ancients were more consistent than those 
 of later years. Infant baptism, so called, is at the present 
 time practiced by the greater part of Christendom. Now 
 nothing is more easily demonstrated than that baptism,^ 
 is the door unto the church. " By one spirit are we all J 
 baptized into one body." This is admitted by those who J 
 administer to infants what they term "bai)tism," for^ 
 Pedobaptists never baptize those who have been sprink- 
 led in infancy. But to join in the celebration of the 
 Lord's Supper is not a privilege only, but it is the duty 
 
256 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 of every member of the church. Therefore, if it is proper 
 and right to baptize infants, it is certainly as necessary 
 to administer to them the communion also. To deprive 
 any church-member of the blessings of the communion 
 is a grievous wrong. In this respect the ancients were 
 certainly consistent in their error. 
 
 PERVERSION OF THE ORDINANCE OF BAPTISM. 
 
 It was not till a later period than that of which we 
 are now writing, that sprinkling was substituted for 
 baptism. In proof of this we quote the following from 
 'McClintock and Strong's Cyclopedia,' concerning Nova- 
 tian, who lived in the middle of the third century : — 
 
 "It was altogether irregular and contrary to eccle- 
 siastical rules to admit a man to the priestly office who 
 had been baptized in bed ; that is, who had been merely 
 sprinkled, and had not been wholly immersed in water 
 in the ancient method. For by many, and especially by 
 the Roman Christians, the baptism of clinics (so they 
 called those who, lest they should die out of the church, 
 were baptized on a sick-bed) was accounted less perfect, 
 and indeed less valid, and not sufficient for the attain- 
 ment of salvation." 
 
 Thus we see that it was not till after the third century 
 that sprinkling was substituted for baptism. How it 
 finally came to take the place of baptism is very readily 
 seen; for since the Christians thought that if anyone 
 should die without baptism he could not enter Heaven, 
 they introduced " clinical baptism," that is, the sprink- 
 ling of those who were converted while on their death- 
 bed, and who could not leave their beds to be immersed. 
 But the thought would soon very naturally present itself, 
 that if sprinkling were valid baptism in one case it must 
 
The Great Apostasy. 257 
 
 be in every case, and so, being much more easily admin- 
 istered and received, it soon entirely superseded true bap- 
 tism. 
 
 But although in the period of which we are now writ- 
 ing (the second century) immersion was still practiced, 
 we must not suppose that the ordinance of baptism had 
 entirely escaped the prevailing contamination. After 
 speaking of the baptism of bells, Bingham says : — 
 
 " And here we meet with a practice a little more an- 
 cient, but not less superstitious, than the former ; which 
 was a custom that began to prevail among some weak 
 people in Africa, of, giving baptism to the dead. The 
 third council of Carthage [a. d. 252] speaks of it as a 
 thing that ignorant Christians were a little fond of, and 
 therefore gives a seasonable caution against it, to discour- 
 age the practice." — A^itiquities of the Christian Church, 
 booh 11, chap. Jf. 
 
 Killen (Ancient Church, period 2, sec. 3, chap. 2, 
 paragraphs 10, 12) gives the following additional tes- 
 timony as to how baptism was perverted from its original 
 simplicity : — 
 
 "The candidate, as early as the third century, wasea;- 
 orcised before baptism, with a view to the expulsion of 
 evil spirits ; and, in some places, after the application of 
 the water, when the kiss of peace was given to him, a mixt- 
 ure of milk and honey was administered. He was then 
 anointed, and marked on the forehead with the sign of 
 the cross." 
 
 "Baptism, as dispensed in apostolic simplicity, is a 
 most significant ordinance; but the original rite was soon 
 well-nigh hidden behind the rubbish of human inven- 
 tions. The milk and honey, the unction, the crossing, the 
 kiss of peace, and the imposition of hands, were all de- 
 signed to render it more imposing ; and, still farther to 
 deepen the impression, it was already administered in the 
 17 
 
258 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 presence of none save those who had themselves heen 
 thus initiated. But the foolishness of God is wiser than 
 man. Nothing is more to be deprecated than an attempt 
 to improve upon the institutions of Christ. Baptism, as 
 established by the divine founder of our religion, is a 
 visible exhibition of the gospel; but, as known in the 
 third century, it had much of the character of one of the 
 heathen mysteries. It was intended to confirm faith; 
 but it was now contributing to foster superstition. How 
 soon had the gold become dim, and the most fine gold 
 been chamged!" 
 
 Concerning another superstition connected with bai> 
 tism, Bingham speaks as follows : — . 
 
 "Immediately after the unction the minister proceeded 
 to consecrate the water, or the bishop, if he were present, 
 consecrated it, while the priests were finishing the unc- 
 tion. For so the author under the name of Dionysius 
 represents it. While the priests, says he, are finishing 
 the unction, the bishop comes to the mother of adoption, 
 so he calls the font, and by invocation sanctifies tlie water 
 in it, thrice pouring in some of the holy chrism in a man- 
 ner representing the sign of the cross. This invocation 
 or consecration of the water by prayer, is mentioned by 
 TertuUian ; for he says. The waters are made the sac- 
 rament of sanctification by invocation of God. The 
 Spirit immediately descends from Heaven, and resting 
 upon them sanctifies them by himself, and they, being so 
 sanctified, imbibe the power of sanctifying. And Cyp- 
 rian declares that the water must first be cleansed and 
 sanctified by the priest, that it may have power by bap- 
 tism to wash away the sins of man. And so the whole 
 council of Carthage, in the time of Cyprian, says, The 
 water is sanctified by the prayer of the priest to wash 
 away sin." — Antiquities, book 11, chap. 10. 
 
 Here again we have the "holy water" which plays so 
 important a part in all Catholic ceremonies. All these 
 ceremonies in connection with baptism were performed in 
 
The Great Apostasy. 259 
 
 order that the newly converted heathen might be im- 
 pressed with the idea that the new religion had as much 
 of pomp as the old. It was to Tertullian, as we have 
 already seen (pp. 211,212), that the Catholic Church is in- 
 debted for the superstition that the virtue of baptism lay 
 in the water, and that as a consequence it must be sanc- 
 tified. 
 
 In another place Bingham says of the superstitions 
 connected with baptism : — 
 
 " We find in some of the ancient ritualists, but not in 
 all, mention made of an unction preceding bajotism, and 
 used by way of preparation for it. . . . But the 
 writers of the following ages speak distinctly of two 
 unctions, the one before, the other after baptism ; which 
 they describe by different names and different ceremonies, 
 to distinguish them one from the other. . . . Dr. Cave 
 and some other learned persons are of opinion, that to- 
 gether with this unction, the sign of the cross was made 
 upon the forehead of the party baptized. ... To 
 understand this matter exactly, we are to distinguish at 
 least four several times, when the sign of the cross was 
 used, during the preparation or consummation of the 
 ceremonies of baptism. 1. At the admission of catechu- 
 mens to the state of catechumenship and the general 
 name of Christians. 2. In the time of exorcism and im- 
 position of hands, while they were passing through the 
 several stages of catechumens. 3. At the' time of this 
 unction before baptism. 4. And lastly, at the unction of 
 confirmation, which was then usually the conclusion of 
 baptism both in adult persons and infants; and many of 
 the passages which speak of the sign of the cross in bai> 
 tism, do plainly relate to this, as an appendage of baj> 
 tism, and closely joined to it, as the last ceremony and 
 consummation of it. ... The third use of it %as in 
 this unction before baptism. For so the author under 
 the name of Dionysius, describing the ceremony of anoint- 
 
260 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 ing tlie party before the consecration of the water, says, 
 The bishop begins tlie unction by thrice signing him with 
 the sign of the cross, and then commits him to the priests 
 to be anointed all over the body, whilst he goes and con- 
 secrates the water in the font." — Id., chap. 9. 
 
 Tliat this was done as early as the second century, is 
 evident from what has been quoted from Tertullian. (See 
 p. 212.) 
 
 The reader may wonder somewhat how the candidate 
 for baptism could be "anointed all over the body;" but 
 his wonder on this score may be set at rest, while his 
 amazement at the degradating superstition into which 
 men early fell, may be increased, by reading what Bing- 
 ham has to say further on this subject: — 
 
 "The ancients thought that immersion, or burying un- 
 der water, did more lively represent the death and burial 
 and resurrection of Christ, as well as our own death unto 
 sin, and rising again to righteousness ; and the divesting 
 or unclothing the person to be baptized, did also repre- 
 sent the putting off the body of sin, in order to put on 
 the new man, which is created in righteousness and true 
 holiness. For which reason they observed the way of 
 baptizing all persons naked and divested, by a total im- 
 mersion under water, except in some particular cases of 
 great exigence, wherein they allowed of sprinkling, as in 
 the case of clinic baptism, or where there was a scarcity 
 of water." — Id., chajj. 11. 
 
 Truly here were " mysteries " which should have com- 
 pensated the convert from heathenism for all that he had 
 left. For the person who can say that no scandalous 
 practices would necessarily result from the ordinance of 
 baptism thus administered to all classes of people, and in 
 secret, must first take leave of his senses. But Bingham 
 goes on in this same connection to state the reason which 
 they gave for baptizing people naked : — 
 
The Great Apostasy. 261 
 
 " St. Chrysostom, speaking of baptism, says, Men were 
 as naked as Adam in paradise, but with this difference: 
 Adam was naked because he had sinned, but in baptism, 
 a man was naked that he might be freed from sin; the 
 one was divested of his glory which he once had, but the 
 other put off the okl man, which he did as easily as his 
 clothes. St. Ambrose says, Men came as naked to the 
 font, as they came into the world; and thence he draws 
 an argument by way of allusion, to rich men, telling them 
 how absurd it was, that a man who w^as born naked of 
 his mother, and received naked by the church, should 
 think of going rich into Heaven. Cyril of Jerusalem 
 takes notice of this circumstance, together with the rea- 
 sons of it, when he thus addresses himself to persons 
 newly baptized : As soon as ye came into the inner part 
 of the baptistery, ye put off your clothes, which is an em- 
 blem of putting off the old man with his deeds; and 
 being thus divested, ye stood naked, imitating Christ, 
 that was naked upon the cross, who by his nakedness 
 spoiled principalities and powers, publicly triumphing 
 over them in the cross. O wonderful thing! ye were na- 
 ked in the sight of men, and were not ashamed, in this 
 truly imitating the first man Adam, wdio was naked in 
 paradise, and was not ashamed. . . . And Zeno 
 Veronensis, reminding persons of their baptism, bids them 
 rejoice, for they went down naked into the font, but rose 
 again clothed in a white and heavenly garment, which if 
 they did not defile, they might obtain the kingdom of 
 Heaven. Athanasius, in his invectives against the Ari- 
 ans, among other things, lays this to their charge, that 
 by their persuasions the Jews and Gentiles broke into the 
 baptistery, and there offered such abuses to the catechu- 
 mens as they stood with their naked bodies, as was 
 shameful and abominable to relate. And a like com- 
 plaint is brought against Peter, bishop of Apamea, in 
 the council of Constantinople, under Mennas, that he 
 cast out the neophytes, or persons newly baptized, out of 
 the baptistery, when they were without their clothes and 
 
262 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 shoes. All which are manifest proofs that persons were 
 baptized naked, either in imitation of Adam in paradise, 
 or our Saviour upon the cross, or to signify their put- 
 ting off the body of sin, and the old man with his deeds." 
 
 Benjamin Franklin, in his "Autobiography," tells how 
 he came to break his resolution not to eat anything that 
 had had life, and the conclusion which he draws seems 
 very appropriate here. He says: — 
 
 " I had been formerly a great lover of fish, and when 
 it came out of the frying-pan it smelt admirably well. I 
 balanced some time between principle and inclination, 
 till, recollecting that when the fish were opened I saw 
 smaller fish taken out of their stomachs, then, thought I, 
 * If you eat one another, I don't see why we may not eat 
 you ; ' so I dined upon cod very heartily, and have since 
 continued to eat as other people, returning only now and 
 then occasionally to a vegetable diet. So convenient a 
 thing it is to be a reasonable creature, since it enables one 
 to find or make a reason for everything one has a mind 
 to do." 
 
 Franklin's conclusion is very apt. When people de- 
 termine upon a certain course, there is never any lack of 
 "reasons" for so doing. These early Christians (?) had 
 determined to copy the heathen "mysteries" as closely as 
 possible, and consequently they were not at a loss to find 
 "scriptural" warrant for their course. But we have not 
 heard all of Bingham's testimony. Although he does 
 not accuse them of any licentious act, he gives evidence 
 which, taking human nature into the account, and espe- 
 cially human nature as it then was, leaves no room for 
 conjecture as to the eflfect. He continues : — 
 
 "And this practice was then so general, that we find no 
 exception made, either with respect to the tenderness 
 of infants, or the bashfulness of the female sex, save only 
 
Tft£:'(jREAT Apostasy. 263 
 
 where the case of sickness or disability made it necessary 
 to vary from the usual custom. St. Chrysostom is an 
 luideniable evidence in this matter. For writing about 
 the barbarous proceedings of his enemies against him on 
 the great Sabbath, or Saturday before Easter, among 
 other tragical things which they committed, he reports 
 this for one, That they came armed into the church, and 
 by violence expelled the clergy, killing many in the bap- 
 tistery, with which the women, who at that time were 
 divested in order to be baptized, were put into such a 
 terror that they fled away naked, and could not stay in 
 the fright to put on such clothes as the modesty of their 
 sex required." — Antiquities, book 11, chap. 11. 
 
 We will not disgust the reader with more of this at 
 present. We do not give this much with the idea that 
 it will give him pleasure, nor because we take pleasure 
 in dwelling upon the frailties of others. We do it in or- 
 der to show that a thing is not necessarily proper and 
 right because it was practiced in the church at a very 
 early period. It is a very common thing for people to 
 argue that, although we have no direct scriptural war- 
 rant for the observance of Sunday, it must be proper to 
 do so, because many of the early Christians kept it, and 
 they must have received the practice from the apostles. 
 But we think that no one will claim that the early 
 Christians received from the apostles the custom of bap- 
 tizing people naked; and therefore the argument from 
 the custom of "the church," in behalf of Sunday-keei> 
 ing, falls to the ground. We do not believe that all 
 professed Christians indulged in such shameful perver- 
 sions of a sacred ordinance. That there were those who 
 adhered to the gospel as delivered in its simplicity and 
 purity by our Saviour, there can be no doubt; but the 
 fact that abominable and heathenish things were done in 
 
264 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 the name of Christianity, should cause us unhesitatingly 
 to reject anything which we are urged to adopt on the 
 sole ground that it was practiced by the early church. 
 
 It may be well to add right here that the men from 
 whom we have quoted cannot be accused of being prej- 
 udiced against the early church, for, in spite of the evi- 
 dence which they give of its corruption, they blindly fol- 
 low the " custom " of the church in many particulars, 
 especially in the matter of Sunday observance, and seem 
 to imagine that "the custom of the church" can sanctify 
 any act to which they are inclined. " So convenient a 
 thing it is to be a reasonable creature^ 
 
 SIGN OF the cross, AND IMAGES. 
 
 In our brief study of the perversion of the ordinance 
 of baptism, we found frequent reference to the " sign of 
 the cross." This superstition, which is still retained in 
 the Catholic Church, was not confined to church cere- 
 monies, but was connected with almost every act of life. 
 Says Gibbon: — 
 
 "In all occasions of danger and distress, it was the prac- 
 tice of the primitive Christians to fortify their minds and 
 bodies by the sign of the cross, which they used, in all 
 their ecclesiastical rites, in all the daily occurrences of 
 life, as an infallible preservative against every species of 
 spiritual or temporal evil." — Decline and Fall, chap. 20, 
 paragraph 13. 
 
 That this is not a prejudiced statement appears from 
 the following from Mosheim, whose Christianity no one 
 will question : — 
 
 " In the sign of the cross, they supposed there was 
 great efficacy against all sorts of evils, and particularly 
 against the machinations of evil spirits ; and therefore no 
 one undertook anything of much moment, without first 
 
The Great Apostasy. 265 
 
 crossing himself." — Ecclesiastical History, book 1. cent. 3, 
 part 2, chaj}. 4, sec. 5. 
 
 Tertullian says that this was the custom in his day, 
 and both he and Justin Martyr taught that the sign of 
 the cross had great efficacy, an\was absolutely essential. 
 The reader will remember the extract from Ter tullian, in g^^^ 
 which he claims that the Israelite^^onqueped the Ama- 
 lekites, not because Moses prayed, but b^catfse he ex hibite d 
 th e form of the c ross. 
 
 For this custom, as for all others, there was, of course, 
 no difficulty in finding a valid "reason." But we find 
 that, like all other superstitions or abominable practices 
 that were foisted upon the Christian church, it had its 
 origin in heathenism. Says Dr. Killen : — 
 
 "It is a curious fact that the figure of the instrument 
 of torture on which our Lord was put to death, occupied 
 a prominent place among the symbols of the ancient 
 heathen worship. From the most remote antiquity the 
 cross was venerated in Egypt and Syria; it was held in 
 equal honor by the Buddhists of the East; and, what is 
 still more extraordinary, when the Spaniards first visited 
 America, the well-known sign was found among the ob- 
 jects of worship in the idol temples of Anahuac. It is 
 also remarkable that, about the commencement of our 
 era, the pagans were wont to make the sign of a cross 
 upon the forehead in the celebration of some of their 
 sacred mysteries. A satisfactory explanation of the 
 origin of such peculiarities in the ritual of idolatry can 
 now scarcely be expected ; but it certainly need not excite 
 surprise if the early Christians were impressed by them, 
 and if they viewed them as so many unintentional testi- 
 monies to the truth of their religion. The disciples dis- 
 played, indeed, no little ingenuity in their attempts to 
 discover the figure of a cross in almost every object 
 around them. They could recognize it in the trees and 
 
266 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 the flowers, in the fishes and the fowls, in the sails of a 
 ship and the structure of the human body; and if they 
 borrowed from their heathen neighbors the custom of 
 making a crpss upon the forehead, they would of course 
 be ready to maintain that they thus only redeemed the 
 holy sign from profanation. Some of them were, perh aps, 
 prepared, on prudential grounds, to plead for its intro- 
 duction. Heathenism was, to a considerable extent, a 
 religion of bowings and genuflections; its votaries were,, 
 ever and anon, attending to some little rite or form ; and, 
 because of the multitude of these diminutive acts of out- 
 ward devotion, its ceremonial was at once frivolous and 
 burdensome. When the pagan passed into the church, 
 he, no doubt, often felt, for a time, the awkwardness of 
 the change; and was frequently on the point of repeat- 
 ing, as it were automatically, the gestures of his old super- 
 stition. It may, therefore, have been deemed expedient to 
 supersede more objectionable forms by something of a 
 Christian complexion; and the use of the sign of the cross 
 here probably presented itself as an observance equally 
 familiar and convenient. But the disciples would have 
 acted more wisely had they boldly discarded all the 
 puerilities of paganism ; for credulity soon began to as- 
 cribe su])ernatural virtue to this vestige of the repudiated 
 worship. As early as the beginning of the third century, 
 it was believed to operate like a charm ; and it was ac- 
 cordingly employed on almost all occasions by many of 
 the Christians." — Ancient Church, period 2, sec. 1, chap.S, 
 paragra])h 6. 
 
 What Dr. Killen says on this point leaves very little 
 room for comment. Of course it must be understood 
 that when Dr. Killen speaks of " the disciples' " seeking 
 to find the sign of the cross in everything in nature, he 
 does not mean those who in the New Testament are called 
 disciples, but the professed Christians of a later day. 
 
 On the use of images in connection with the sign of 
 the cross Neander has the following: — 
 
The Great Apostasy. 267 
 
 '* The use of religious images among the Christians, did 
 not proceed from their ecclesiastical, but from their domes- 
 tic life. In the intercourse of daily life, the Christians 
 saw themselves everywhere surrounded by objects of 
 heathen mythology, or by such as shocked their moral 
 and Christian feelings. Similar objects adorned the 
 walls of chambers, the drinking vessels, and the signet 
 rings (on -which the heathen had constantly idolatrous 
 images), to which, whenever they pleased, they could ad- 
 dress their devotions; and the* Christians naturally felt 
 themselves obliged to replace these objects, which 
 wounded their moral and religious feelings, with others 
 more suited to those feelings. Therefore, they gladly put 
 the likeness of a shepherd, carrying a lamb upon his 
 shoulders, on their cups, as a symbol of the Redeemer, 
 who saves the sinners that return to him, according to 
 the parable in the gospel. And Clement of Alexandria 
 says, in reference to the signet rings of the Christians, 
 *Let our signet rings consist of a dove (tlie emblem of the 
 Holy Ghost); or a fish, or a ship sailing towards heaven 
 (the emblem of the Christian church, or of individual 
 Christian souls); or a lyre (the emblem of Christian joy); 
 or an anchor (the emblem of Christian hope) ; and he 
 who is a fisherman, let him remember the apostle, and the 
 children who are dragged out from the water; for those 
 men ought not to engrave idolatrous forms, to whom the 
 use of them is forbidden ; those can engrave no sword 
 and no bow, who seek for peace ; the friends of temper- 
 ance cannot engrave drinking cups.' And yet, perhaps, 
 religious images made their way from domestic life into 
 the churches, as early as the end of the third century, and 
 the walls of the churches were painted in the same way. 
 . . . It is probable that the visible representation of 
 the cross found its way very early into domestic and 
 ecclesiastical life. This token was remarkably common 
 among them; it was used to consecrate their rising and 
 their going to bed, their going out and their coming in, and 
 all the actions of daily life; it was the sign which Chris- 
 
268 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 tiaiis made involuntarily, whenever anything of a fearful 
 nature surprised them. This was a mode of expressing, 
 by means perceptible to the senses, the purely Christian 
 idea, that all the actions of Christians, as well as the 
 whole course of their life, nuist be sanctified by faith in 
 the crucified Jesus, and by dependence upon him, and 
 that this faith is the most powerful means of conquering 
 all evil, and preserving oneself against it. But .here also 
 again, men were apt to confuse the idea and the token 
 which represented it, and they attributed the effects of 
 faith in the crucified Redeemer to the outward sign, to 
 which they ascribed a supernatural, sanctifying, and 
 preservative power; an error of which we find traces as 
 early as the third century."— T-i^06'e's Neander,pp. 183, 18 If.. 
 
 And that is as early as there is any evidence of a 
 growing regard for the Sunday festival. The worship of 
 images and the observance of the Sunday festival came 
 into the church about the same time; but images were 
 regarded with reverence a long time before Sunday was 
 regarded as a sacred day. 
 
CHAPTER XV. 
 
 THE GREAT APOSTASY (Continued). 
 
 Closely connected with the sign of the cross as a 
 preservative against every form of evil, is the nse of 
 charms and divinations. This also was practiced by 
 very many of the early Christians. After mentioning the 
 various forms of auguries among the ancients, Bingham 
 says (book 16, chap. 5): — 
 
 " The old Romans were much given to these supersti- 
 tions, insomuch that they had their colleges of augurs, and 
 would neither fight, nor make war or peace, or do any- 
 thing of moment without consulting them. The squeak- 
 ing of a rat was sometimes the occasion of dissolving a 
 senate, or making a consul or dictator lay down his office, 
 as begun with an ill omen. Now, though Christianity 
 was a professed enemy to all such vanities, yet the re- 
 mains of such superstition continued in the hearts of 
 many after their conversion." 
 
 "But there was one sort of enchantment, which many 
 ignorant and su^^erstitious Christians, out of the remains 
 of heathen error, much aflTected; that was the use of 
 charms, and amulets, and spells, to cure diseases, or avert 
 dangers and mischiefs, both from themselves and the 
 fruits of the earth. For Constantine had allowed the 
 heathen, in the beginning of his reformation, for some 
 time, not only to consult their augurs in public, but also 
 to use charms by way of remedy for bodily distempers, 
 and to prevent storms of rain and hail from injuring the 
 ripe fruits, as appears from that very law where he con- 
 demns the other sort of magic, that tended to do mischief, 
 to be punished with death. And probably from this in- 
 
 (269) 
 
270 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 diligence granted to the heathen, many Christians, who 
 brought a tincture of heathenism with them into their re- 
 ligion, might take occasion to think there was no great 
 harm in such charms or enchantments, when the design 
 was only to do good, and not evil." 
 
 This custom prevails in the Catholic Church to-day. 
 It is true that Bingham places its introduction into the 
 church this side of the time of Constantine; but from 
 what we have already learned of the superstitious rev- 
 erence of the cross, and from wliat we shall yet learn of 
 their devotion to relics, it will be evident to all that the 
 use of charms and divination came into the church as 
 soon as the heathen began to come into it in very great 
 numbers. The reader will notice that all the jDcrversions 
 of gospel ordinances, and all the additions that were made 
 to the number of the ceremonies, were for the purpose of 
 attracting the heathen. This being the case, we would 
 naturally expect that considerable deference would be 
 paid to' heathen philosophy, and such we find was the 
 case. Mosheim says: — 
 
 "The Christian teachers were well aware of what es- 
 sential benefit it would be in promoting their cause, not 
 only with the multitude, but also amongst men of the 
 higher orders, could the philosophers, whose authority 
 and estimation with the world was unbounded, be brought 
 to embrace Christianity. With a view, therefore, of ac- 
 complishing this desirable object, they not only adopted 
 the study of philosophy themselves, but became loud in 
 their recommendation of it to others, declaring that the 
 difference ])etween Christianity and philosophy was but 
 trifling, and consisted merely in tlie former being of a 
 nature somewhat more perfect than the latter. And it 
 is most certain that this kind of conduct was so far pro- 
 ductive of tlie desired effect, as to cause not a few of tlie 
 philosophers to enroll themselves under the Christian 
 
The Great Apostasy. 271 
 
 banner. Those who have perused the various works 
 written by such of the ancient philosophers as had been 
 induced to embrace Christianity, cannot have failed to re- 
 mark, that the Christian discipline was regarded by all of 
 them in no other light than as a certain mode of philoso- 
 phizing." — Ecclesiastical Commentaries, cent. 2, see. 26, 
 note 2. 
 
 The writings of Justin Martyr, Clement, Tertullian, 
 and Origen afford ample evidence of this. 
 
 Prof J. H. Pettingell, in "The Gospel of Life in the 
 Syriac New Testament " (p. 9), says : — 
 
 " The Christian church came early, after the days of 
 the apostles, under the influence, not merely of the Greek 
 language, but of the philosophy of the Greeks. The tend- 
 ency in this direction was apparent even in the times of 
 the apostles. It was against this very influence that 
 Paul so often and earnestly warned the early Christians : 
 'Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and 
 vain deceit, after the tradition of men, and not after 
 Christ.' 'Avoid profane and vain babblings, and oppo- 
 sitions of science, falsely so called, which some professing, 
 have erred concerning the faith.' 'I fear lest by any 
 means, as the serpent beguiled Eve, through his subtility, 
 so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity 
 that is in Christ.' ... It was not long before the 
 Grecian philosophy had become dominant and control- 
 ling. Their schools of literature, and especially of theol- 
 ogy, were Grecian schools. Grecian philosophers became 
 their teachers and leaders." 
 
 Prof George Dunbar, in his Appendix to Potter's 
 "Antiquities of Greece," says of Plato: — 
 
 " His opinions were eagerly adopted by many of the 
 first Christian philosophers, and aided them in forming 
 those bold and whimsical theories about the economy of 
 the future world, which injured the simplicity and purity 
 of the Christian faith." 
 
272 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 If the reader will refer to what has been written con- 
 cerning the Greek philosophy and its demoralizing tend- 
 ency, its highest conception of good being depraved hu- 
 man nature, he will speedily arrive at the conclusion that 
 just to the extent that the study of philosophy, — "science 
 falsely so called," — was encouraged in the church, to the 
 same extent would heathen superstition and immorality 
 exist in the church, even if such things were not encour- 
 aged by any other means. 
 
 One of the errors which was brought into the church 
 as the direct result of the study of Greek philosophy, is 
 the doctrine of 
 
 purgatory and prayers for^he dead. 
 
 Says Killen : — 
 
 " The Platonic philosophy taught the necessity of a 
 state of purification after death ; and a modification of 
 this doctrine formed part of at least some of the systems 
 of gnosticism. It is inculcated by Tertullian, the great 
 champion of Montanism; and we have seen how, accord- 
 ing to Mani, departed souls must pass, first to the moon, 
 and then to the sun, that they may thus undergo a two- 
 fold purgation. Here, again, a tenet originally promul- 
 gated by the heretics, became at length a portion of the 
 creed of the church. The Manichseans, as well as the 
 gnostics, rejected the doctrine of the atonement, and as 
 faith in the perfection of the cleansing virtue of the blood 
 of Christ declined, a belief in purgatory became popular." 
 — Ancient Church, period 2, sec. 2, chap. 4, paragraph 15. 
 
 Of course an acceptance of the philosophy of Plato, 
 was an acceptance of the heathen dogma of the inherent 
 immortality of the soul, and from that the doctrine of 
 purgatory is a legitimate outgrowth. In the writings of 
 the Fathers themselves, we have already found all these 
 
The Great Apostasy. 273 
 
 errors and superstitious jilainly taught. See especially 
 Hermas and Tertullian. 
 
 Again we quote from Bingham : — 
 
 " Kext after prayer for kings, followed prayer for the 
 dead, that is, for all that were departed in the true faith 
 in Christ. . . . We have heard Arnobius say already, 
 that they prayed for the living and the dead in general. 
 And long before him Tertullian speaks of oblations for the 
 dead, for their birthdays, that is, the day of their death, 
 or a new birth unto happiness, in their annual commem- 
 orations. He says every woman prayed for the soul of 
 her deceased husband, desiring that he might find rest and 
 refreshment at present, and a j)art in the first resurrec- 
 tion, and offering an annual oblation for him on the day 
 of his death. In like manner he says the husband 
 prayed for the soul of his wife, and offered annual obla- 
 tions for her. . . . Cyril of Jerusalem [a. d. 315- 
 386], in describing the prayer after consecration, says. We 
 offer this sacrifice in memory of all those that are fallen 
 asleep before us, first patriarchs, prophets, apostles, and 
 martyrs, that God by their prayers and intercessions may 
 receive our supplications; and then we pray for our holy 
 fathers and bishops, and all that are fallen asleep before 
 us, believing it to be a considerable advantage to their 
 souls to be prayed for, whilst the holy and tremendous sac- 
 rifice lies upon the altar." — A7itiquitieSy book 15, chap. S. 
 
 When Paul warned the Colossians against being spoiled 
 "through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition 
 of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after 
 Christ," he mentions as connected with it " voluntary hu- 
 mility [asceticism] and worshiping of angels" (demons 
 under the name of departed men), a thing introduced by 
 men "vainly puffed up" by their "fleshly mind." Col. 
 2:8, 18. Whoever has given the matter any thought, 
 knows that the heathen religion was Spiritualism, and so 
 18 
 
274 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 when the church became paganized, she assumed a form 
 of Spiritualism; for purgatory, prayers to and for the 
 dead, and the worship of martyrs, are nothing else. Tliis 
 doctrine remains in the Catholic Church to-day ; but Prot- 
 estant denominations have generally repudiated it. Why 
 this ancient dogma of "the church" should be rejected, 
 while others no more ancient, and resting on no better 
 authority, are accepted, we cannot determine. There are 
 some things for which not even "a reasonable creature" 
 can give a reason. But it would seem from the following 
 that in the matter of purgatory, a part, at least, of the 
 ancient church was even more Catholic than Catholicism 
 itself:— 
 
 " Many of the ancients believed that there would be a 
 fire of probation, through which all must pass at the last 
 day, even the prophets and apostles, and even the Virgin 
 Mary herself not excepted. Which is asserted not only by 
 Origen, Irenseus, and Lactantius, but also by St. Ambrose, 
 who says after Origen, that all must pass through the 
 flames, though it be John the evangelist, though it be 
 Peter." — Bingham^s Antiquities, book 15, chap. 3. 
 
 "pious" frauds. 
 Referring again to the testimony which we quoted con- 
 cerning the kind of morality inculcated by the Greek 
 philosophy, the reader will find that lying was thought 
 to be a virtue, and often to be preferred to truth. AVhen 
 the early Christians accepted the Greek philosophy it 
 was not long before they adopted the heathen maxim 
 that "a lie is better than a hurtful truth," as is proved 
 by the following testimony: — 
 
 " The code of heathen morality supplied a ready apol- 
 ogy for falsehood, and its accommodating principles soon 
 found too much encouragement within the pale of the 
 
The Great Apostasy. 275 
 
 church. Hence the pious frauds which were now per- 
 petrated. Various works made their ajipearance with 
 the name of some apostolic man appended to them, their 
 fabricators thus hoping to give currency to opinions or 
 to practices which might otlierwise have encountered 
 much opposition. At the same time many evinced a dis- 
 position to supplement the silence of the written word by 
 the aid of tradition. . . . During this period the 
 uncertainty of any other guide than the inspired record 
 was repeatedly demonstrated; for, though Christians 
 were removed at so short a distance from apostolic 
 times, the traditions of one church sometimes diametric- 
 ally contradicted those of another." — Killen's Ancient 
 Church, period 2, sec. 2, chap. 5, paragraph 7. 
 
 It may be allowable to quote also in this place an 
 extract already quoted from Mosheim. It is this : — 
 
 " By some of the weaker brethren, in their anxiety to 
 assist God with all their might [in the propagation of 
 the Christian faith], such dishonest artifices were occa- 
 sionally resorted to, as could not, under any circumstances, 
 admit of excuse, and were utterly unworthy of that 
 sacred cause which they were unquestionably intended to 
 support. Perceiving, for instance, in what vast repute 
 the poetical effusions of those ancient prophetesses, 
 termed Sybils, were held by the Greeks and Komans, 
 some Christian, or rather, perhaps, an association of 
 Christians, in the reign of Antoninus Pius [a. d. 138- 
 161], composed eight books of Sybilline verses, made up 
 of prophecies respecting Christ and his kingdom. . . . 
 Many other deceptions of this sort, to which custom has 
 very improperly given the denomination of pious frauds, 
 are known to have been practiced in this and the suc- 
 ceeding century. The authors of them were, in all prob- 
 ability, actuated by no ill intention, but this is all that 
 can be said in their favor, for their conduct in this 
 respect was certainly most ill-advised and unwarrantable. 
 Although the greater part of those who were concerned 
 
276 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 ill these forgeries on the public, undoubtedly belonged to 
 some heretical sect or other, and particularly to that class 
 which arrogated to itself the pompous denomination of 
 gnostics, I yet cannot take upon me to acquit even the 
 most strictly orthodox from all participation in this spe- 
 cies of criminality ; for it appears from evidence superior 
 to all exception, that a pernicious maxim, which was 
 current in the schools not only of the Egyptians, the 
 Platonists, and the Pythagoreans, but. also of the Jews, 
 was very early recognized by the Christians, and soon 
 found amongst them numerous patrons, namely, that 
 those who made it their business to deceive with a view 
 of promoting the cause of truth, were deserving rather 
 of commendation than censure." — Commentaries, cent. 2, 
 sec. 7. 
 
 He says also that the disputing of the Fathers " had 
 victory rather than truth for its object." If this was 
 done by the teachers in the church, it is easy to imagine 
 wliat was the prevalent standard; and remember that 
 this was within less than fifty years after the death of 
 the last apostle, so rapidly did the "mystery of iniquity" 
 work. Now there is just as much reason for following 
 the custom of "tlie early church" in tlie matter of 
 "pious" frauds as in tlie matter of substituting Sunday 
 for Sabbath. Both were violations of the decalogue; 
 but tlie "pious" fraud has the advantage of the other on 
 the score of antiquity, since it was common long before 
 Sunday began to take the place of the Sabbath. People 
 should be consistent ; if they are going to adopt one , 
 practice of the early church, they should not reject 
 another which stands on the same authority, and which 
 is more ancient. 
 
 IMMORALITY IN THE CHURCH. 
 
 We have already learned how some, at least, of the 
 
The Great Apostasy. 277 
 
 bishops allowed the members of their flocks to emulate 
 in their feasts all the profligacy of the heathen; we are 
 therefore now prepared to believe that no bounds were 
 set to the corruption that was then overwhelming the 
 church. We introduce the testimony by the following 
 mild statement of the case by Killen : — 
 
 " There was a traitor among the twelve, and it is ap- 
 parent from the New Testament that, in the apostolic 
 clmrch, there were not a few unworthy members. ' Many 
 walk,' says Paul, 'of whom I have told you often, and 
 now tell you, even weeping, that they are the enemies of 
 the cross of Christ, whose end is destruction, whose god 
 is their belly, and whose glory is in their shame, who 
 mind earthly things.' In the second and third centuries 
 the number of such false brethren did not diminish. To 
 those who are ignorant of its saving power, Christianity 
 may commend itself, by its external evidences, as a rev- 
 elation from God; and many, who are not prepared to 
 submit to its authority, may seek admission to its privi- 
 leges. The superficial character of much of the evan- 
 gelism now current appeared in times of persecution; for, 
 on tlie first appearance of danger, multitudes abjured the 
 gospel, and returned to the heathen superstitions. It is, 
 besides, a fact which cannot be disputed that, in the third 
 century, the more zealous champions of the faith felt it 
 necessary to denounce the secularity of many of the 
 ministers of the church. Before the Decian persecution 
 [a. d. 250] not a few of the bishops were mere wx^rld- 
 lings, and such was their zeal for money-making, that 
 they left their parishes neglected, and traveled to remote 
 districts where, at certain seasons of the year, they might 
 carry on a profitable traffic. If we are to believe the 
 testimony of the most distinguished ecclesiastics of the 
 period, crimes were then perpetrated, to which it would 
 be diflicult to find anything like parallels in the darkest 
 pages of the history of modern Christianity. The chief 
 pastor of the largest church in the proconsular Africa 
 
278 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 tells, for instance, of one of his own presbyters who 
 robbed orphans and defrauded widows, who permitted his 
 father to die of hunger, and treated his pregnant wife 
 with horrid brutality. (Cyprian, Ad Cornelium, ejiis. 
 49.) Another ecclesiastic, of still higher position, speaks 
 of three bishops in his neighborhood who engaged, 
 when intoxicated, in the solemn rite of ordination. Such 
 excesses w^ere indignantly condemned by all right-hearted 
 disciples, but the fact, that those to whom they were im- 
 puted were not destitute of partisans, supplies clear yet 
 melancholy proof that neither the Christian people nor 
 the Christian ministry, even in the third century, pos- 
 sessed an unsullied reputation." — Ancient Church, period 
 2 J sec. 1, chap. S, paragraph 2. 
 
 This is not to be wondered at; if it was considered 
 right to lie when contending for the "truth" (!) what 
 could be expected of men in ordinary life? Robin- 
 son, in his "Ecclesiastical Researches" (p. 126), as quoted 
 by, " McClintock and Strong's Cyclopedia," art. "Nov^a- 
 tian," uses the following language concerning that eccle- 
 siastic and the church in his time : — 
 
 "He saw with extreme pain the intolerable depravity 
 of the church. Christians within the space, of a very 
 few years were caressed by one emperor and persecuted 
 by another. In seasons of prosperity many persons 
 rushed into the church for base purposes. In times of 
 adversity they denied the faith, and reverted again to 
 idolatry. When the squall was over, they came again 
 to the church, with all their vices, to deprave others by 
 their example. The bishops, fond of proselytes, encour- 
 aged all this, and transferred the attention of Christians 
 to vain shows at Easter, and other Jewish ceremonies, 
 adulterated too with paganism." 
 
 Novatian died about 255 A. d. ; therefore the church 
 reached the condition here described less than one hun- 
 
The Great Apostasy. 279 
 
 dred and fifty years after the death of the apostle John. 
 Certainly the degradation was rapid enough. 
 Bingham says : — 
 
 " There goes a decree under the name of Pope Eutych- 
 ian. which makes the habit of drunkenness matter of 
 excommunication to a layman also, till he break oif the 
 custom by reformation and amendment. But it must be 
 owned, this vice was sometimes so general and epidemical, 
 that the numbers of transgressors made the exactness of 
 the discipline impracticable. St. Austin complains and 
 laments, that it was so in Africa in his time. Though 
 the apostle had condemned three great and detestable 
 vices in one place, viz., rioting and drunkenness, cham- 
 bering and wantonness, strife and envying; yet mat- 
 ters were come to that pass -with men, that two of the 
 three, drunkenness and strife, were thought tolerable 
 things, whilst wantonness only was esteemed worthy of 
 excommunication; and there was some danger that in a 
 little time the other two might be reputed no vices at all. 
 For rioting and drunkenness was esteemed so harmless 
 and allowable a thing, that men not only practiced it in 
 their own houses every day, but in the memorials of the 
 holy martyrs on solemn festivals, and that in pretended 
 honor to the martyrs also." — Antiquities of the Christian 
 Church, book 16, chap. 11. 
 
 After quoting what Cyprian (who 'lived in the early 
 part of the third century) says of the condition of the 
 church, Bingham adds: — 
 
 " He was forced to endure these colleagues of his, who 
 were covetous, rapacious, extortioners, usurers, deserters, 
 fraudulent, and cruel. It was impossible to exercise 
 church censures with any good effect, when there were 
 such multitudes both of priests and people ready to op- 
 pose them, and distract the church into a thousand 
 schisms, rather than suffer themselves to be curbed or 
 reformed that way." — Id., cJmp. 3. 
 
280 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 In another place he gives the following, which shows 
 not only the depravity of the church in the third century, 
 but also how readily Scripture could be manufactured to 
 meet the emergency : — 
 
 "If a bishop, presbyter, or deacon, says one of the 
 apostolical canons, be taken in fornication, perjury, or 
 theft, he shall be deposed, but not excommunicated ; for 
 the Scripture says, * Thou shalt not punish twice for the 
 same crime.' [?] And the like rule is prescribed in tlie 
 canons of Peter, bishop of Alexandria, and those of St. 
 Basil." — Id.f book 17 ^ chap. 1. 
 
 If anything were yet lacking to show how rapidly the 
 church, as a whole, was becoming paganized, even in the 
 third century, the following from Dr. Killen most cer- 
 tainly supplies the lack v — 
 
 "Meanwhile the introduction of a false standard of 
 piety created much mischief It had long been received 
 as a maxim, among certain classes of philosophers, that 
 bodily abstinence is necessary to those who would attain 
 more exalted wisdom; and the Gentile theology, espe- 
 cially in Egypt and the East, had indorsed the principle. 
 It was not without advocates among the Jews, as is ap- 
 parent from the discipline of the Essenes and the Thera- 
 peutse. At an early period its influence was felt within 
 the pale of the church, and before the termination of the 
 second century, individual members here and there were 
 to be found who eschewed certain kinds of food, and ab- 
 stained from marriage. The pagan literati, who now 
 joined the disciples in considerable numbers, did much 
 to promote the credit of this adulterated Christianity. 
 Its votaries, who were designated ascetics and philos- 
 ophers, did not withdraw themselves from the world, but, 
 whilst adhering to their own regimen, still remained 
 mindful of their social obligations. Their self-imposed 
 mortification soon found admirers, and an opinion grad- 
 ually gained ground that these abstinent disciples cidti- 
 
The Great Apostasy. 281 
 
 vated a higher form of piety. The adherents of the new 
 discipline silently increased, and by the middle of the 
 third century, a class of females who led a single life, and 
 w^ho, by way of distinction, were called virgins, were in 
 some places regarded by the other church-members with 
 special veneration. Among the clergy also celibacy was 
 now considered a mark of superior holiness. Bui, in 
 various places, pietism about this time assumed a form 
 which disgusted all persons of sober judgment and ordinary 
 discretion. The unmarried clergy and the virgins deemed 
 it right to cultivate the communion of saints after a new 
 fashion, alleging that, in each others' society, they enjoyed 
 peculiar advantages for spiritual improvement. It was 
 not, therefore, uncommon to find a single ecclesiastic and 
 one of the sisterhood of virgins dwelling in the same 
 house and sharing the same bed! All the while the 
 parties repudiated the imputation of any improper in- 
 tercourse, but in some cases the proofs of profligacy wei'e 
 too plain to be concealed, and common sense refused to 
 credit the pretensions of such an absurd and suspicious 
 spiritualism. The ecclesiastical authorities felt it nec- 
 essary to interfere, and compel the professed virgins and 
 the single clergy to abstain from a degree of intimacy 
 which was unquestionably not free from the appearance 
 of evil." — Ancient Church, period 2, sec. 1, chap. 3, 
 paragraph 3. 
 
 If the reader will turn back to pages 90 and 91, he 
 w^ill there find that the " Shepherd of Hermas," which 
 was regarded as an inspired production, was responsible 
 for this vile j^ractice. The heathen Christians of the 
 early centuries were apt pupils of this " bad master in 
 morals." 
 
 Vice is the next neighbor to fanaticism ; that excessive 
 zeal for virtue, which leads men to despise and reject 
 that which the Lord has instituted and declared hon- 
 orable, is as sure to end in immorality as is open con- 
 
28^ Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 tempt of all moral law. Henry Charles Lea, in his 
 *• History of the Inquisition in the Middle Ages," says 
 that the practice of unnatural lusts " was a prevalent 
 vice of the Middle Ages, and" one to which monastic 
 communities were especially subject" (vol. 3, p. 2o5), 
 and he quotes as follows from Nicholas de Clemangis, a 
 Catholic writer of the fourteenth century, and secretary 
 to Pope Benedict XIII. : — 
 
 " As for monks, they specially avoid all to which their 
 vows oblige them — chastity, poverty, and obedience — and 
 are licentious and undisciplined vagabonds. The men- 
 dicants, who pretend to make amends for the neglect of 
 duty by the secular clergy, are Pharisees, and wolves iu 
 sheep's clothing. With incredible eagerness and infinite 
 deceit they seek everywhere for temporal gain; they 
 abandon themselves beyond all other men to tlie pleas- 
 ures of the flesh, feasting and drinking, and polluting all 
 tilings with their burning lusts. As for the nuns, mod- 
 esty forbids the description of the nunneries, which are 
 mere brothels; so that to take the veil is equivalent to 
 becoming a public prostitute." — History of the Inquisition, 
 vol. 3, pp. 630, 631. 
 
 And this state of things has always existed to the same 
 degree that ascetic fanaticism has existed. 
 
 Dr. Schaff certainly cannot be accused of lack of re- 
 spect for early traditions, yet he makes the following 
 general statement concerning the first three centuries of 
 the church's existence : — 
 
 " The Christian life of the period before Constantino 
 has certainly been often unwarrantably idealized. In a 
 huinau nature essentially the same, we could but expect 
 all sorts of the same faults and excrescences, which we 
 found even iu the apostolic churches. The epistles of 
 Cyprian afford incontestable evidence, that, especially in 
 the intervals of repose, an abatement of zeal soon showed 
 
The Great Apostasy. 283 
 
 itself, and, on the re-opening of persecution, the Christian 
 name was dishonored by whole hosts of apostates. And 
 not seldom did the most prominent virtues, courage in 
 death, and strictness of morals, degenerate to morbid 
 fanaticism and unnatural rigor." — History of the Chris- 
 tian Church, vol. 1, sec. 87. 
 
 The growth of asceticism can be traced through the 
 WTitings of the Fathers ; and the following from Mosheim, 
 touching upon the point, gives a brief outline of all that 
 we have noted in the history of the church, and prepares 
 the way for the last feature that we design to consider: — 
 
 ** Those idle fictions, which a regard for the Platonic 
 philosophy and for the prevailing opinions of the day 
 had induced most theologians to embrace even before the 
 times of Constantine, were now in various ways confirmed, 
 extended, and embellished. Hence it is that we see, on 
 every side, evident traces of excessive veneration for de- 
 parted saints, of a purifying fire for souls when separated 
 from the body, of the celibacy of the clergy, of the wor- 
 ship of images and relics, and of many other ojiinions, 
 which in process of time almost banished the true relig- 
 ion, or at least very much obscured and corrupted it. 
 
 "Genuine piety was supplanted by a long train of su- 
 perstitious observances, which originated partly from 
 opinions inconsiderately embraced, partly from a prepos- 
 terous disposition to adopt profane rites, and combine 
 them with Christian worship, and partly from the natural 
 predilection of mankind in general for a splendid and 
 ostentatious religion. At first, frequent pilgrimages were 
 undertaken to Palestine, and to the tombs of the mar- 
 tyrs; as if, thence men could bear away the radical prin- 
 ciples of holiness, and certain hopes of salvation. Next, 
 from Palestine and from places venerated for their sanc- 
 tity, portions of dust or of earth were brought; as if they 
 were the most powerful protection against the assaults of 
 evil spirits ; and these were bought and sold everywhere 
 at great prices. Further, the public supplications by 
 
284 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 whicli the pagans were accustomed to appease their gods, 
 were borrowed from tliem, and were celebrated in many 
 places with great pomp. To the temples, to water conse- 
 crated in due form, and to the images of holy men, the 
 same efficacy was ascribed and the same privileges as- 
 signed as had been attributed to the pagan temples, stat- 
 ues, and lustrations, before the advent of Christ. Images 
 indeed were as yet but rare, and statues did not exist. 
 And shameful as it may appear, it is beyond all doubt, 
 that the worship of the martyrs, — with no bad intentions 
 indeed, yet to the great injury of the Christian cause, — was 
 modeled by degrees into conformity with the worship 
 which the pagans had in former times paid to their gods. 
 From these specimens the intelligent reader will be able 
 to conceive how much injury resulted to Christianity from 
 the ])eace and repose procured by Constantine and from 
 an indiscreet eagerness to allure the pagans to embrace 
 this religion." 
 
 "This unenlightened piety of the common people 
 opened a wide door to the endless frauds of persons wlio 
 were base enough to take advantage of the ignorance and 
 errors of others, disingenuously to advance their own in- 
 terests. Rumors were artfully disseminated of prodigies 
 and wonders to be seen in certain edifices and places (a 
 trick before this time practiced by the pagan priests), 
 whereby the infatuated populace were .drawn together, 
 and the stupidity and ignorance of those who looked 
 upon everything new and unusual as a miracle, were 
 often wretchedly im[)osed upon. Graves of saints and 
 martyrs were supposed to be where they were not ; the list 
 of saints was enriched with fictitious names; and even 
 robbers were converted into martyrs. Some buried 
 blood-stained bones in retired places, and then gave out 
 that they had been informed in a dream, that the corpse 
 of some friend of God was there interred. Many, espe- 
 cially of the monks, traveled through the different prov- 
 inces, and not only shamelessly carried on a traffic in fic- 
 titious relics, but also deceived the eyes of the jnultitude 
 
The Great Apostasy. 285 
 
 with ludicrous combats with evil spirits. It w^ould re- 
 quire a volume to detail the various impositions which 
 were, for the most part successfully, practiced by artful 
 knaves, after genuine piety and true religion were com- 
 pelled to resign their dominion in great measure to super- 
 stition." — Ecclesiastical History, hook 2, cent. ^, part 2, 
 chap. 3, sec. 1-3. 
 
 Let not the reader imagine that this was Christianity, 
 although it bore that name. There is no reason what- 
 ever in the infidel charges that are brought against Chris- 
 tianity, because of the conduct of the apostate church. 
 Everybody recognizes the truthfulness of the saying that 
 "all is not gold that glitters." But in the days of which 
 we are writing there was not even the glitter of the gold 
 of Christianity. In its stead there was only the tinsel of 
 paganism. But it must not be supposed that there were 
 no Christians at that time. There were true Christians, 
 but their history is not accessible at present. They were 
 of little repute, for they were of the class "of whom the 
 world was not worthy," and so their history is preserved 
 only in the records of " the church of the First-born," in 
 Heaven. 
 
CHAPTER XVI. 
 
 THE GKEAT APOSTASY (Continued). 
 
 RELIC AND MARTYR WORSHIP. 
 
 The last particular which we design to notice in the 
 downward course of the church, is the introduction of 
 various heathen festival days. But as no error ever 
 stands alone, reference will necessarily be made in con- 
 nection with it to martyr and relic worship. It is a 
 matter of no little interest to trace the course of error. 
 The early Christians accepted the Platonic philosophy; 
 this led to the exaltation of the human, and the corre- 
 sponding depreciation of the divine ; and as a natural 
 consequence, the pagan notion of the natural immortality 
 of the soul was adopted. From this point it was but a 
 step to the doctrine of purgatory. The heathen philoso- 
 phy deified departed heroes, and it was but natural that 
 the professed Christians who imbibed that philosophy 
 should in a measure deify those who in their life-time had 
 borne a reputation for exalted piety. The only differ- 
 ence between the pagan and the Christian deification of 
 men was that the pagans called their departSl heroes 
 gods; while the Christians, who acknowledged only one 
 God, called their departed heroes "saints." Instead of 
 allowing that all righteous people are saints, they gave 
 the title of saint to only a few of those whom they be- 
 lieved were saved. 
 
 This distinction of "saints" and ordinarily righteous 
 persons, prepared the way for the worship of "saints," 
 (286) 
 
The Great Apostasy. 287 
 
 just as the heathen worshiped their demigods. For, they 
 reasoned, since all the good are saved, it must be that the 
 ''saints" would have been saved if they had not been so 
 good as they were ; that is, they were actually better than 
 the Lord wanted them to be, and consequently they must 
 have accumulated a.lot of good works which they do not 
 need, and which they cam impart to men in the flesh. 
 Thus the honor that belongs to Christ alone, was be- 
 stowed upon men. The doctrine of works of supereroga- 
 tion occurs in several of the Fathers. 
 
 But no one thought that the " saints " could accumu- 
 late this treasury of extra good works simply by ordinary 
 goodness. The humble peasant who faithfully discharged 
 the duties of life, unnoticed by any save God, whose ap- 
 probation was all he craved, could never attain to the 
 rank of a " saint." Such a life would barely suffice to 
 gain one an entrance into Heaven. He who would be a 
 "saint," must endure long fasts; he must scourge himself; 
 he must mortify the body in order that he might purify 
 the soul; he must go on long pilgrimages, and perform 
 some wonderful work. The " neglecting of the body " was 
 an essential characteristic of a Catholic "saint." The 
 ascetic who should take a bath might possibly get to 
 Heaven, but he would lose all claims to saintship. The 
 more filthy he was in his habits, the more his sanctity 
 was supposed to be increased. 
 
 The church historian, Socrates, relates a circumstance 
 which shows not only the character of the so-called 
 "saints," but also the senseless superstition of their ad- 
 mirers, and how much trust was placed in relics. Writ- 
 ing of Theodosius II. he says : — 
 
 " His piety was such that he had a reverential regard 
 
288 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 for all who were consecrated to the service of God ; and 
 honored in an especial manner those whom he knew to be 
 eminent for their sanctity of life. The bishop of Chebron 
 having died at Constantinople, the emperor is reported 
 to have expressed a wish to have his cassock of sack- 
 cloth of hair, which, although it was excessively filthy, 
 he wore as a cloak, hoping that thus he should become a 
 partaker in some degree of the sanctity of the deceased." 
 — Ecclesiastical History, book 7, chap. 22. 
 
 Whether the emperor partook of the sanctity of the 
 saint, or not, there can l^e little doubt that by wearing 
 the cassock he acquired at least the "odor of sanctity." 
 This circumstance, which is related by the historian as an 
 evidence of the emperor's superior piety, shows that in 
 the fifth century (when Socrates flourished) superstition 
 had fairly taken the place of religion in the church. 
 But long before this time, martyr worship had found a 
 place in the church, as the following extracts "will show: — 
 
 "We cannot, however, deny, that in the time of Cyp- 
 rian [about A. D. 250], and even earlier, the seeds of an 
 exaggerated honor to the martyrs, which had conse- 
 quences prejudical to the purity of Christianity, showed 
 themselves." — Neander's Church History (Rose's trans- 
 lation) p. 214.. 
 
 Dr. SchaflP (History of the Christian Church, sec. 59) 
 says: — 
 
 "The day of the death of a martyr was called his heav- 
 enly birthday, and was celebrated annually at his grave 
 (mostly in a cave or catacomb), by prayer, reading of a 
 history of his suflTering and victory, oblations, and cele- 
 bration of the holy supper. 
 
 "But the early church did not stop with this. Martyr- 
 dom was taken, after the end of the second century, not 
 only as a higher grade of Christian virtue, but at the 
 same time as a baptism of fire and blood, an ample substi- 
 
The Great Apostasy. 289 
 
 tiitioii for tlie baptism of water, as. purifying from sin, 
 and as securing an entrance into Heaven." 
 
 **The veneration thus shown for the persons of the 
 martyrs was transferred in smaller measure to their re- 
 mains. The church of Smyrna counted the bones of 
 Polycarp more precious than gold or diamonds. The re- 
 mains of Ignatius were held in equal veneration by the 
 Christians at Antioch. The friends of Cyprian gathered 
 his blood in handkerchiefs, and built a chapel over his 
 tomb." 
 
 AVriting of the fourth century, concerning new objects 
 of worship, the church historian Gieseler says : — 
 
 "Martyrdom, which presented so strong a contrast to 
 the lukewarmness of the present time, was the more 
 highly venerated in proportion to its remoteness. The 
 heathen converts naturally enough transferred to the 
 martyrs the honors they had been accustomed to pay 
 their heroes. This took place the more readily as the 
 scrupulous aversion to excessive veneration of the creat- 
 ure died away in the church after the victory over 
 heathenism ; and the despotic form of government became 
 accustomed to a slavish respect for the powerful. Thus 
 the old custom of holding meetings for public worship 
 at tlie graves of the martyrs now gave occasion to the 
 erection of altars and churches over them. In Egypt, 
 the Christians, following an old popular custom, began 
 to preserve the corpses of men reputed to be saints, in 
 their houses; and while the idea of communion with the 
 martyrs was always increasingly associated with the vicin- 
 ity of their mortal remains, the latter were draw^n forth 
 from their graves and placed in the churches, especially 
 under the altars. Thus respect for the martyrs received 
 a sensuous object to center itself on, and became in con- 
 sequence more extravagant and superstitious. To the 
 old idea of tlie efficacy of the martyr's intercession, was 
 now added the belief, that it was possible to communicate 
 the desires to them directly ; an opinion partly founded 
 
 19 
 
290 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 on the popular notion that departed souls still hovered 
 about the bodies they had once inhabited; partly on the 
 high views entertained of the glorified state of the mar- 
 tyrs who abide only with the Lord. As Origen first laid 
 the foundation of this new kind of respect for martyrs, 
 so the Origenists Were the first who addressed them in 
 their sermons, as if they were present, and besought 
 their intercession. But though the orators were some- 
 what extravagant in this respect, the poets, who soon 
 after seized upon the same theme, found no colors too 
 strong to describe the power and glory of the martyrs. 
 Even relics soon began to work miracles, and to become 
 valuable articles of commerce on this account, like the 
 old heathen instruments of magic." 
 
 " Martyrs before unknown announced themselves also 
 in visions; others revealed the places where their bodies 
 were buried. Till the fifth century, prayers had been 
 offered even for the dead saints; but at that time the 
 practice was discontinued as unsuitable. It is true that 
 the more enlightened Fathers of the church insisted on a 
 practical imitation of the saints in regard to morality as 
 the most important tiling in the new saint worship, nor 
 were exhortations to address prayer directly to God also 
 wanting; but yet the people attributed the highest value 
 to the intercession of the saints whose eflficacy was so 
 much prized. Many heathen customs were incorporated 
 with this saint worship. Churches, under whose altars 
 their bodies rested, were dedicated to their worship. As 
 gods and heroes were formerly chosen for patrons, so 
 patron-saints were now selected." — Ecclesiastical History^ 
 period 2^ division 1, chap. 5, sec. 99. 
 
 A previous quotation from Mosheim (see page 247) 
 has shown us how the Christians often celebrated these 
 "birthdays" of the martyrs. Of the incomparable bene- 
 fits supposed to be derived from martyrdom, the reader 
 has already had an opportunity to learn from the epistles 
 of Ignatius. 
 
The Great Apostasy. 291 
 
 On this siime subject Mosheim says: — 
 
 "Both martyrs and confessors* were looked upon as 
 being full of the Holy Spirit, and as acting under an 
 immediate divine inspiration. . . . Whatever might 
 have been the sins and offenses of the martyrs, it was 
 imagined tliat they were all atoned for and washed away 
 by their own blood, not by that of Christ. Being thus 
 restored to a state of absolute purity and innocence, it 
 was conceived that they were taken directly up into 
 Heaven, and admitted to a share in the divine councils 
 and administration; that they sat as judges with God, 
 enjoying the highest marks of his favor, and possessing 
 influence sufficient to obtain from him whatever they 
 might make the object of their prayers. . . . Those 
 who had acquired the title of confessors were maintained 
 at the public expense, and were on every occasion treated 
 with the utmost reverence. The interests and concerns 
 of the different religious assemblies to which they be- 
 longed were, for the most part, consigned to their care 
 and management;— insomuch, indeed, that they might 
 almost be termed the very souls of their respective 
 churches. Whenever the office of bishop or presbyter 
 became vacant, they were called to it as a matter of right, 
 in preference to everyone else, altliough there miglit be 
 others superior to them in point of talents and abilities. 
 Out of the exceedingly high opinion that w^as entertained 
 of the sanctity and exalted character of the martyrs, at 
 length sprung up the notion that their relics possessed 
 a divine virtue, efficacious in counteracting or remedying 
 any ills to which either our souls or bodies may be ex- 
 posed. From the same source arose the practice of 
 imploring their assistance and intercession in cases of 
 doubt or adversity, as also that of erecting statues to 
 their memory, and paying to these images divine wor- 
 ship; in fine, to such an height of vicious excess was this 
 veneration for the martyrs carried, that the Christians 
 
 *" Confessors" were those who had confessed Christ before the magistrate, 
 but who for some reason had escaped being put to death. 
 
292 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 came at last to manifest their reverence for these cham- 
 pions of the faith by honors nearly similar to those which 
 the heathens of old were accustomed to pay to their demi- 
 gods and heroes." — Ecclesiastical Commentaries^ cent 1, 
 sec. S2, note 2. 
 
 There is one other charge that we have to bring against 
 the early church, and we shall introduce it by repeating 
 a quotation already made from the preface to Killen's 
 "Ancient Church:"— 
 
 " In the interval between tlie days of the apostles and 
 the conversion of Constantine, the Christian common' 
 wealth changed its aspect. The bishop of Kome — a per- 
 sonage unknown to the writers of the New Testament — 
 meanwhile rose into prominence, and at length took 
 precedence of all other churchmen. Rites and cere- 
 monies, of which neither Paul nor Peter ever heard, crept 
 silently into use, and then claimed the rank of divine insti- 
 tutions." 
 
 SUNDAY AND CHRISTMAS. 
 
 Quite a number of customs that " crept silently into 
 use and then claimed the rank of divine institutions" 
 have already been noted, and there are still others ; but 
 the one which has obtained the strongest foothold, and 
 whose false claim to tiie rank of a divine institution is 
 most generally allowed, is the Sunday. We shall, in the 
 course of our investigation, have the benefit of the best 
 evidence that history has to offer in its behalf, and there- 
 fore begin with the following ofl-quoted testimony of 
 Mosheim: — 
 
 " The Christians of this century [the first], assembled 
 for the worship of God and for their advancement in 
 piety, on the first day of the week, the day on wliich 
 Christ re-assumed his life; for that this day was set apart 
 for religious worship by the apostles theraserves, and that, 
 
The Great Apostasy. 29S 
 
 after the example of* the church of Jerusalem, it was gen- 
 erally observed, we have unexceptionable testimony." — 
 Ecclesiastical History, book 1, cent. 1, part 2, chap. 4, 
 
 sec. 4- 
 
 Without doubt thousands have had their questionings 
 as to the correctness of Sunday observance quieted by 
 this brief statement by Dr. Mosheim; and many will 
 think it a presumptuous thing to class Sunday among 
 the institutions introduced without divine authority. 
 But it will do no harm to investigate its claims. We 
 shall find that when Mosheim penned the words just 
 quoted he wrote as a churchman and not as a historian. 
 When he writes on matters purely historical, we, in com- 
 mon with all Protestants, accept his testimony as re- 
 liable. He drew his information from sources that are 
 accessible to comparatively few, and we accept him as 
 a faithful transcriber of what he found. But when he 
 says of Sunday that it was set apart for religious worship 
 " by the apostles themselves," he is upon ground where 
 even the unlearned may safely challenge him. The New 
 Testament is the onlv source of information as to what 
 the apostles did, and that contains not a word about the 
 setting apart of Sunday by the apostles or by anybody 
 else. 
 
 If it were true, as Mosheim says, that the observance 
 of Sunday was sanctioned by divine authority, a child 
 fourteen years of age could read the evidence from the 
 New Testament just as readily as could a doctor of 
 divinity ; and in that case Sunday-keepers would, with- 
 out hesitation, refer to the Scripture record for the au- 
 thority for their ])ractice. We should then find no such 
 testimony as the following: — 
 
294 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 " Some plant the observance of the Sabbath [Sunday] 
 squarely on tlie fourth commandment, which was an 
 explicit injunction to observe Saturday, and no other 
 day, as a * holy day unto the Lord.' So some have tried 
 to build the observance of Sunday upon apostolic com- 
 mand, whereas the apostles gave no command on the 
 matter at all. . . . The truth is, so soon as we ai> 
 peal to the litera scripta [the plain text] of the Bible, 
 the Sabbatarians have the best of the argument." — Chris- 
 tian at Work, April 19, 1883. 
 
 In the same strain is the following from an article by 
 Dr. Charles S. Robinson, in the Sunday School Times of 
 January 14, 1882: — 
 
 " It is not wise to base the entire Sabbath [Sunday] 
 argument on the fourth precept of the decalogue. . . . 
 We shall become perplexed, if we attempt to rest our 
 case on simple legal enactment. Our safety in such dis- 
 cussions consists^in our fastening attention upon the gra- 
 cious and benevolent character of the divine institution." 
 
 That is to say, there is no trace of a di^pe command 
 for Sunday observance, and therefore when people ask 
 for something definite, something upon which they can 
 depend, their minds must be diverted by a pleasing fiction, 
 so that they may not discover the truth. Is there not in 
 this something akin to the "pious" fraud? 
 
 Lastly, we quote again from the Christian at Work: — 
 
 "We hear less than we used to about the apostolic 
 origin of the present Sunday observance, and for the 
 reason that while the Sabl)ath and Sabbath rest are woven 
 into the warp and woof of Scri])ture, it is now seen, as it 
 is admitted, that we must go to later than apostolic times 
 for the establishment of Sunday observance." — Christian 
 at Work, 1884.. 
 
 The fact that nearly a century and a half after 
 Mosheim wrote his history, editors of religious journals 
 
The Great Apostasy. 295 
 
 devoted to the Siinday-Sabbath should feel obliged to 
 make such admissions as those just quoted, should be ac- 
 cepted as evidence that the Bible affords no authority for 
 the keeping of Sunday. We are not concerned to show 
 that Sunday was not observed to some extent very early 
 in the Christian era. We are willing to give it a place 
 with " pious" frauds, purgatory, relic and "saint" worship, 
 etc.; our only point is that, like the things just mentioned, 
 it has no divine sanction. When it is once admitted that 
 the designation of Sunday as a Sabbath rests solely on 
 the authority of "the church" (and that is where all 
 Sunday argument finally ends) the Sabbatarian has only 
 the simple task of showing how much the " custom of 
 the church" is worth. From the testimonies already 
 cited he will have no difliculty in showing that it is worth 
 nothing. The testimony yet to be given will make this 
 still more evident. 
 
 Now that we have shown from the advocates of Sun- 
 day observance that the practice finds no sanction in 
 either the precept or the practice of the apostles, but that 
 " we must go to later than apostolic times for the estab- 
 lishment of Sunday observance," we may consider our- 
 selves justified in classing Sunday among those institu- 
 tions which " crept silently into use." The testimony of 
 the Rev. Dr. Scott, the eminent commentator, seems to 
 have been intended expressly for the purpose of estab- 
 lishing this point. He says: — 
 
 " The change, from the seventh to the first, appears to 
 have been gradually and silently introduced, by example 
 rather than by express precept." — Comment on Acts 
 20:7. 
 
 The following, also, from the Christian at Work of 
 
296 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 January 8, 1885, will be a good thing to keep in mind : — 
 
 " We rest the designation of Sunday [as a sacred day] 
 on the church having 'set it apart of its own authority.' 
 The seventh-day rest was commanded in the fourth com- 
 mandment. . . . The selection of Sunday, thus 
 changing the particular day designated in the fourth 
 commandment, was brought about by the gradual con- 
 currence of the early Christian church, and on this basis 
 and none other does the Christain Sabbath, the first day 
 of the week, rightly rest." 
 
 The setting apart of Sunday by the church, "of its 
 own authority," consisted in "gradually and silently" 
 falling into a heathen custom ; but why this custom should 
 be perpetuated, while others that rest on the same author- 
 ity are rejected, is one of the things for which not even 
 an excuse can be given. 
 
 While Mosheim's statement concerning the observance 
 of Sunday is very extensively quoted, there is something 
 in the immediate connection which we have never seen 
 quoted by first-day writers. It is the following: — 
 
 " Moreover, those congregations which either lived in- 
 termingled with Jews, or were composed in great measure 
 of Jews, were accustomed also to observe the seventh day 
 of the week, as a sacred day, for doing which the other 
 Christians taxed them with no wrong. As to annual re- 
 ligious days, they appear to have observed two ; the one, 
 in memory of Christ's resurrection ; the other, in com- 
 memoration of the descent of the Holy Spirit on the 
 apostles. To these may be added, those days on which 
 holy men met death for Christ's sake; which, it is most 
 ])r()bable, were sacred and solenui days, from the very 
 commencement of the Christian church." — Ecclesiastical 
 History, book 1, cent. l,2Jart 2, chap ^, sec. If. 
 
 This is from the same section a^ the other, and imme- 
 diately follows it. Here we find that tlie memorial days 
 
The Great Apostasy. 297 
 
 of the martyrs have as much chiim upon us as Sunday 
 has, for they have an equal phice in the customs of ther 
 church; but that they were of apostolic origin we think 
 few w^ill allow. Note 4 to the above quotation from 
 Mosheim says :— 
 
 " Perhaps, also (Good Friday), the Friday on which our 
 Saviour died, was, from the earliest times, regarded with 
 more respect than other days of the week." 
 
 just as is stated in the " Catholic Christian Instructed," 
 "Sundays and holy days all stand upon the same foun- 
 dation, namely, the authority of the church." 
 
 In harmony with what Mosheim has said, that the 
 seventh day of the week was also observed as a sacred day, 
 Bingham says : — 
 
 "Saturday also, or the Sabbath, in every week was 
 observed as a religious festival in many churches. And 
 therefore on this day likewise they generally received the 
 communion. ... I have already produced the 
 several testimonies of these writers at large upon another 
 occasion, and therefore it is sufficient here to make a brief 
 reference to them. By all this it appears undeniably, 
 that in many churches they had the communion four 
 times every week, on Wednesdays, Fridays, Saturdays, 
 and Sundays, besides incidental festivals, which were very 
 frequent, for, as Chrysostom tells us, there was scarce a 
 week passed in the year but they had one or two com- 
 memorations of martyrs." — Antiquities, book IS, chip. 9. 
 
 Concerning the seventh day of the week he again 
 says: — 
 
 " Next to the Lord's day the ancient Christians were 
 very careful in the observation of Saturday, or the 
 seventh day, which was the ancient Jewish Sabbath. 
 Some observed it as a fist, others as a festival ; but all 
 unanimously agreed in keeping it as a more solemn day 
 of religious worship and adoration." 
 
298 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 " Other authors are more particular in describing the 
 religious service of this day; and so far as concerns 
 ])ublic worship, they make it in all things conformable to 
 that of the Lord's day; which is a further evidence of 
 its being a festival." — Id., hook 20, chap. 3. 
 
 We do not quote this testimony concerning the Sab- 
 bath in the early church, with the idea of thereby 
 strengthening the Sabbath argument. The Bible, and 
 the Bible alone, is all the authority needed for the ob- 
 servance of the seventh day. If all the world kept that 
 day it would not be one whit more sacred, and if it were 
 universally violated by mankind, its sacredness would be 
 just as great as when in Eden the Lord blessed and sanc- 
 tified it. But the evidence in regard to Sunday would 
 not be complete if we omitted to mention the Sabbath. 
 As Dr. Scott said, Sunday observance came in "gradu- 
 ally and silently," and that would indicate that the 
 Sabbath was as gradually and silently robbed of its 
 rightful honor by the church. It was not until after 
 Constantine had made Sunday a legal holiday (a. d. 
 321), and the Council of Laodicea (a. d. 348-381) had 
 forbidden Christians to observe the "Jewish Sabbath," 
 that Sunday may be said to have fairly usurped the 
 place which the Sabbath had formerly occupied in the 
 church. But even in this council, allegiance to the 
 Sunday was carried no further than to enact that 
 Cliristians " shall, if possible, do no work on that day." 
 (See Hefele's History of the Church Councils, vol. 2, p. 
 316; also McClintock and Strong's Cyclopedia, art. 
 Sunday.) There has never been a time, however, when 
 there were not Christians who observed the Sabbath of 
 the Lord, but they were, of course, after the above-men- 
 
The Great Apostasy. 299 
 
 tioned council, regarded by "tlie church" as heretics. 
 
 Lest some should feel too nuich elated over the fact 
 that at the time of the Council of Laodicea, the church, 
 as a whole, was observing Sunday, it may not be amiss 
 to state that it was the twenty-ninth canon, or rule, of the 
 council which forbade Sabbath-keeping, and that the thir- 
 tieth canon forbade Christian men, especially the clergy, 
 from promiscuous bathing with women ! Doubtless such a 
 prohibition was necessary, or the council would not have 
 made it ; but the fact that Sunday was quite generally 
 observed in a church where such a prohibition was nec- 
 essary, will hardly be an addition to its prestige. 
 
 Concerning public worship, Mosheim, writing of the 
 third century, says: — 
 
 "All the monuments of this century which have come 
 down to us, show that there was a great increase of cer- 
 emonies. To the causes heretofore mentioned, may be 
 added the passion for Platonic philosophy, or rather, the 
 })opular sui:>erstition of the oriental nations respecting de- 
 mons, which was adopted by the Platonists, and received 
 from them by the Christian doctors. For from these 
 opinions concerning the nature and the propensities of evil 
 spirits, many of these rites evidently took their rise." 
 
 "That the Christians nmv had in most provinces cer- 
 tain e difices in which they assembled for religious wor- 
 ship, will be denied by no candid and impartial person. 
 Nor would I contend strenuously, against those who think 
 these edifices were frequently adorned with images and 
 other ornaments. As to the forms of public worship, 
 and the times set apart for it, it is unnecessary here to be 
 particular, as little alteration was made in this century. 
 Yet tw^o things deserve notice. First, the public dis- 
 co urses to the people underwent a change. For not to 
 mention Origen, who was the first so far as we know that 
 made long discourses in public, and in his discourses ex- 
 
300 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 pounded the sacred volume, there were certain bishops, 
 who being educated in the schools of the rhetoricians, 
 framed their addresses and exhortations according to tlie 
 rules of Grecian eloquence, and their example met the 
 most ready approbation. Secondly, the use of i ncense 
 was now introduced, at least inTo many churches. Wefy 
 learned men have denied this fact; but they do it in tlie 
 face of testimony which is altogether unexceptionable." — 
 Ecclesiastical History, book 1, cent. 3, part 2, chaj). ^, 
 sec. 1, 2. 
 
 In a note to the above, Von Einem says : — . 
 
 "The regular seasons for public worship were all Sun- 
 days, Good Friday, Easter and Whitsunday. The anni- 
 versaries of the local martyrdoms were also observed." \ 
 
 Schlegel, in another note to the above, says : — \ 
 
 " The Christians originally abhorred the use of i ncense j 
 in public worship, as being a part of the wors hip of ido ls. 
 Yet they permitted its use at funerals, against offensive 
 smells. Afterwards it was used at the induction of mag- 
 istrates and bishops, and also in public worship, to tem- 
 ])er the bad air of crowded assemblies in hot countries, 
 and at last it degenerated into a superstitious rite." 
 
 If, after all that has been given concerning the cus- 
 toms of the early church, the reader feels that the autlior- 
 ity of the church is sufficient ground to warrant his con- 
 tinued observance of Sunday, there is still another "holy 
 day" which he must by no means disregard, and that is 
 Christmas. 
 
 Concerning the origin of Christmas, " McClintock and 
 Strong's Cyclopedia" has the following: — 
 
 / "The observance of Christmas is not of divine appoint- 
 ( ment, nor is it of New Testament origin. The (hiy of 
 \ Christ's birtli cannot be ascertained from the New Testa- 
 ; nient, or, indeed, from any otlier source. The FatKers of 
 
The Great Apostasy. 301 
 
 the first three centuries do not speak of any special observ- 
 ance of the nativity. . . . ' Tlie institution may be 
 sufficiently exphiined by the circumstance that it was the 
 taste of the age to multiply festivals, and that the anal- 
 ogy of other events in our Saviour's history, which had 
 already been marked by a distinct celebration, may 
 naturally have pointed out the propriety of marking his 
 nativity with the same honored distinction. It was cele- 
 brated with all the marks of respect usually bestowed on 
 high festivals, and distinguished also by the custom, de- 
 rived probably from heathen antiquity, of interchanging 
 presents and making entertainments.' At the same time,, 
 the heathen w^inter holidays (Saturnalia, Juvenalia, Bi^vr 
 tnalia) were undoubtedly transformed, and, so to speak, j 
 sanctified by the establishment of the Christmas cycle of j 
 holidays; and the heathen customs, so far as they were > 
 harmless (e. g., the giving of presents, lighting of tapers,/ 
 etc ), were brought over into Christian use." '' 
 
 "Chambers' Encyclopedia " gives the following account 
 of the origin of Christmas: — 
 
 " It does not appear, however, that there was any uni-^ 
 formity in the period of observing the nativity among the \ 
 early churches; some held the festival in the month of 
 May or April, others in January. It is, neverthelesSj^x 
 almost certain that the 25th of December cannot be the \ , 
 nativity of the Saviour, for it is then the height of the';,' 
 rainy season in Judea, and shepherds could hardly be ^/ • 
 watching their flocks by night in the plains." -^ 
 
 "Not casually or arbitrarily was the festival of the na- 
 tivity celebrated on the 25th of December. Among the 
 causes that co-operated in fixing this period as the projx^r 
 
 /-one, perhaps the most powerful was, that almost all tlie W. 
 
 (^ heathen nations regarded the winter solstice as a mosi; 
 important point of the year, as the beginning of the re- ; 
 newed life and activity of the powers of nature, and of / 
 the gods, who were originally merely the symbolical per- 
 sonifications of these. In more northerly countries, this 
 
V 
 
 302 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 'act must have made itself peculiarly palpable — hence the 
 Celts and Germans, from the oldest times, celebrated the 
 season with the greatest festivities. At the winter sol- 
 stice the German held their great Yule-feast, in com- 
 memoration of the return of the fiery sun-wheel ; and be- 
 lieved that, during the twelve nights reaching from the 
 25th of December to the 6th January, they could trace 
 the personal movements and interferences on earth of 
 their great deities, Odin, Berchta, etc. Many of the be- 
 liefs and usages of the old Germans, and also of the Ro- 
 mans, relating to this matter, passed_over from he atheni sm 
 
 y^ to Christianity, and have partl y surv ived to the present 
 
 ^ day.' 
 
 Prof. J. G. Miiller, the author of the article on the wor- 
 ship of the sun, in the " SchafF-Herzog Encyclopediaj^after 
 mentioning that the sun was worshiped by the Persians, 
 under the form of Mithras, which finally became the Sol 
 Deus Invictus of the Romans, says : — 
 
 /'' " The Mithras-worship even exercised its influence upon 
 the fixing of the Christian Christmas festival in Decem- 
 ber. As the new birth of the s un-go d was celebrated at 
 the end of December, so, likewise, in Christ the new sun 
 in the field of spiritual life was adored." 
 
 And the " EncyclogediaBritannica," after mentioning 
 the obscurity in whichtlie origin of the Christmas festival 
 rests, proceeds thus: — 
 
 " By the fifth century, however, whether from the in- 
 fluence of some tradition, or from the de sire to suppla nt 
 Ji c ath cn fest ivals of that period of the year, such as tiie 
 Saturnalia, the 25th of December had been generally 
 agreed upon." 
 
 Bingham gives the fi)llowing account of the "Chris- 
 tian " method of kee])ing this heathen festival : — 
 
 "As to the manner of keeping this festival, we may ob- 
 serve, they did it with the greatest veneration. For they 
 
 \ 
 
The Great Apostasy. 303 
 
 always speak of it in the liighest terms, as the principal ^ 
 festival of Christians, from which all others took their j 
 original. Chrysostom styles it the most venerable and / 
 tremendous of all festivals, and the metropolis or mother / 
 of all festivals. . . . And we may observe, that the ' 
 day was kept with the same veneration and religious/ 
 solemnity as tlie Lord's day. . . . Neither did they^ 
 let this day ever pass without a solemn comnumion.'^ 
 
 "Finally, to show all possible honor to this day, the'^ 
 clnirch obliged all persons to frequent religious assem- ■_ 
 blies in the city chu rches, and not go to any of the lesser i 
 churches in the country, except some necessity of sick- I 
 ness or infirmity compelled them so to do. And tlie l aws ) 
 of the State prohibited all public games and shows on/ 
 this day, as on the Lord's day." — Book 20, chap. 4- 
 
 We seldom see statements of this character quoted by 
 first-day writers; but people who "rest the designation 
 of Sunday on the church having set it apart of its own 
 authority," should certainly keep Christmas more strictly 
 than they do Sunday, for so did " the church." 
 
 The same author says of the festivals adopted from the 
 heathen into the Christian church : — 
 
 " As to those festivals which were purely civil, we are 
 to observe that some of them were of long standing in 
 the Koman Empire, and no new institution of Christians, 
 but only reformed and regulated by them in some par- 
 ticulars, to cut off the idolatrous rites and other cor- 
 ruptions that sometimes attended them." — Antiquities, 
 book 20, chap. 1. 
 
 That Sunday was one of these festivals of long stand- 
 ing among all the ancient heathen, and that its adoption 
 by the Christian church was the adoption of heathenism, 
 will be clearly shown in the next chapter. 
 
CHAPTER XVII. 
 
 THE (IKEAT APOSTASY (CoxtixXUEd). 
 
 SUN-WORSHIP AND SUNDAY. 
 
 AVe have already seen that in the adoption of tlie 
 Christmas festival the ancient chnrch allied itself with 
 heathen sun-worship. We shall now proceed to show 
 how, in the adoption of the Sunday festival, the church 
 as a body became paganized, and reached the lowest 
 depth of apostasy. To do. this, it will be necessary 
 briefly to trace the worship of the sun from ancient 
 times. 
 
 That the worship of the sun was the most abominable 
 form of heathenism, is evident from the words of the 
 Lord to the prophet Ezekiel. While the prophet was 
 with the captives in Babylon, he was taken in vision to 
 Jerusalem, and shown the abominable deeds of the Jews 
 who still remained in that city. He was first shown the 
 " image of jealousy " at the door of the inner court of 
 the temple, and the Lord said to him: "Seest thou what 
 they do? even the great abominations that the house of 
 Israel committeth here, that I should go far off from my 
 sanctuary? but turn thee yet again, and thou shalt see 
 greater abominations." Eze. 8 : 6. 
 
 Then he was shown " every form of creeping things, 
 and abominable beasts, and all the idols of the house of 
 Israel, portrayed upon the wall " of the temple, and sev- 
 enty elders offering incense, and was again told that he 
 should see even greater abominations, 
 (304) 
 
The Great Apostasy. S05 
 
 Next he was brought to the door of the temple, and 
 there saw the women " weeping for Tammuz," the Baby- 
 lonian Adonis, whose worship was conducted with the 
 most, lascivious rites, but was told that he should be 
 shown greater abominations still. These last and great- 
 est abominations are thus described: — 
 
 " And he brought me into the inner court of the Lord's 
 house, and, behold, at the door of the temple of the Lord, 
 between the porch and the altar, were about five and 
 twenty men, with their backs toward the temple of the 
 Lord, and their faces toward the east ; and they worshiped 
 the sun toward the east." Verse 16. 
 
 From this we must conclude that the worship of the 
 sun was regarded by the Lord as the most abominable 
 form of idolatry. We shall see the reason for this, as 
 we trace the nature and extent of sun-worship. In the 
 Old Testament Student, January, 1886, there appeared 
 a valuable article by Talbot W. Ohambers, D. D., en- 
 titled, " Sun Images and the Sun of Righteousness," to 
 which we shall make frequent reference in this study. 
 The testimony of Dr. Chambers is that the worship of 
 the sun is "the oldest, the most widespread, and the 
 most enduring of all the forms of idolatry known te 
 man." He continues: — 
 
 " The universality of this form of idolatry is something 
 remarkable. It seems to have prevailed everywhere. 
 The chief object of worship among the Syrians was Baal 
 — the sun, considered as the giver of light and life, the 
 most active agent in all the operations of nature. But 
 as he sometimes revealed himself as a destroyer, drying 
 up the earth with summer heats and turning gardens 
 into deserts, he was in that view regarded with terror, 
 and appeased with human sacrifices. ... In Egypt 
 20 
 
S06 Fathers op the Catholic Church. 
 
 the sun was the kernel of the State religion. In various 
 forms lie stood at the head of each hierarchy. At 
 Memphis he was worshiped as Phtah, at Heliopolis as 
 Turn, at Thebes as Anum Ka. . Personified by Osiris, he 
 became the foundation of the Egyptian metempsychosis." 
 " In Babylon the same thing is observed as in Egypt. 
 Men were struck by the various stages of the daily 
 and yearly course of the sun, in which they saw the 
 most imposing manifestation of Deity. But they soon 
 came to confound the creature with the Creator, and 
 the host of heaven became objects of worship, with 
 the sun as chief. ... In Persia the w^orship of 
 Mithra, or the sun, is known to have been common from 
 an early period. No idols were made, but the inscrip- 
 tions show ever-recurring symbolic representations, usually 
 a disk or orb with outstretched wings, with the addition 
 sometimes of a human figure. The leading feature of 
 the Magian rites derived from ancient Media was the 
 worship of fire, performed on altars erected upon high 
 mountains, where a perpetual flame, supposed to have 
 been originally kindled from Heaven, was constantly 
 watched, and where solemn services were daily rendered. 
 The remnant of the ancient Persians who escaped sub- 
 jugation by Islam, now known as Parsees, unite with 
 their reverence for the holy fire equal reverence for the 
 sun as the emblem of Ormuzd." 
 
 The "Encyclopedia Britannica" (art. Baal) has the 
 following concerning sun-worship in ancient Assyria: — 
 
 " The Baal of the Syrians, Phoenicians, and heathen 
 Hebrews is a much less elevated conception than the 
 Babylonian Bel. He is properly the sun-god Baal- 
 Shamem, Baal (lord) of the heavens, the highest of 
 the heavenly bodies, but still a mere power of nature, 
 born like the other luminaries from the primitive cliaos. 
 As the sun-god he is conceived as the male principle 
 of life and reproduction in nature, and thus in some 
 forms of his worship is the patron of the grossest sensu- 
 
The Great Apostasy. 307 
 
 ality, and even of systematic prostitution. An example 
 of this is found in the worship of Baal-Peor (Numbers 25), 
 and in general in the Canaanitish high places, where 
 Baal, the male principle, was worshiped in association 
 with the unchaste goddess Ashera, the female principle 
 of nature. The frequent references to this form of re- 
 ligion in the Old Testament are obscured in the English 
 version by the rendering 'grove' for the word Ashera, 
 which sometimes denotes the goddess, sometimes the tree 
 or post which was her symbol. Baal himself was rep- 
 resented on the high places not by an image, but by 
 obelisks or pillars {Mae^ceboth E. V. wrongly 'images ), 
 sometimes called chammanim or sun pillars, a name which 
 is to be compared with the title Baal-Chamman, fre- 
 quently given to the god on Phoenician inscriptions." 
 
 Concerning Ashtoreth, or Astarte, the female coun- 
 terpart of Baal, Prof George Rawlinson says : — 
 
 " The especial place of her worship in Phoenicia was 
 Sidon. In one of her aspects she represented the moon, 
 and bore the head of a heifer with horns curving in a 
 crescent form, whence she seems to have been sometimes 
 called Ashtoreth Karnaim, or, 'Astarte of the two horns.' 
 But, more commonly, she was a nature goddess, ' the great 
 mother,' the representation of the female principle in nat- 
 ure, and hence presiding over the sexual relation, and 
 connected more or less with love and with voluptuousness. 
 The Greeks regarded their Aphorodite, and the Romans 
 their Venus, as her equivalent. One of her titles was, 
 * Queen of Heaven,' and under this title she was often wor- 
 shiped by the Israelites." — Religions of the Anciejit World 
 (John B. Alden), pp. 106, 107. 
 
 Enough has already been given to show why sun-wor- 
 ship was so great an abomination. It was simply the 
 w^orship of the reproductive function. All the sun images 
 had an obscene signification. While Baal, among the 
 Assyrians, was the emblem of the generative power of 
 
308 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 the sun, and was worshiped by lascivious rites, Moloch 
 was the emblem of the destructive heat of the sun, and 
 so human sacrifices were offered to him. The prohibi- 
 tions laid upon the Israelites, against making their chil- 
 dren pass through the fire, were simply injunctions against 
 this cruel form of sun-worship. 
 
 Professor Rawlinson has the following, concerning sun- 
 worship in Egypt: — 
 
 " Ra was the Egyptian sun-god, and was especially 
 worshiped at Heliopolis [city of the sun]. Obelisks, ac- 
 cording to some, represented his rays, and were always, 
 or usually, erected in his honor. Heliopolis was certainly 
 one of the places which were thus adorned, for one of the 
 few which still stand erect in Egypt is on the site of that 
 city. The kings for the most part considered Ra their 
 special patron and protector ; nay, they went so far as to 
 identify themselves with him, to use his titles as their own, 
 and to adopt his name as the ordinary prefix to their own 
 names and titles. This is believed by many to have been 
 the origin of the word Pharaoh, which was, it is thought, 
 the Hebrew rendering of Ph' Ra — 'the sun.'" — lb., j)- 
 20. 
 
 Those who have seen the obelisk in Central Park, New 
 York, which was brought from Egypt a few years ago, 
 have had the privilege of beholding one of the ancient 
 sun images. What those sun images signified, we shall 
 have to leave the reader to imagine from what has already 
 been said about the nature of sun-worship. 
 
 On page 21, Rawlinson says: "No part of the Egyp- 
 tian religion was so much developed and so multiplex as 
 their sun worship. Besides Ra and Osiris there were at 
 least six other deities who had a distinctly solar char- 
 acter." Concerning Osiris, the "Encyclopedia Britan- 
 nica" (art. Egypt), says: — 
 
The Great Apostasy. 309 
 
 " Abydos was the great seat of the worship of Osiris, 
 which spread all over Egypt, establishing itself in a re- 
 markable manner at Memphis. All the mysteries of the 
 Egyptians, and their whole doctrine of the future state, 
 attach themselves to this worship. Osiris was identified 
 with the sun. . . . Sun-worship was the primitive 
 form of the Egyptian religion, perhaps even pre-Egyp- 
 tian." 
 
 The bull, Apis, which was worshiped by the Egyptians 
 was simply a form of Osiris. On this we have the fol- 
 lowing testimony from the " Encyclopedia Britannica : — 
 
 " According to the Greek writers Apis was the image 
 of Osiris, and worshiped because Osiris was supposed to 
 have passed into a bull, and to have been soon after 
 manifested by a succession of these animals. The hiero- 
 glyphic inscriptions identify the Apis with Osiris, adorned 
 with horns or the head of a bull, and unite the two names 
 as Hapi-Osor, or Apis Osiris. According to this view the 
 Apis was the incarnation of Osiris manifested in the shape 
 of a bull." — Art Apis. 
 
 Whenever a sacred bull was discovered, and there 
 were t3ertain well-defined marks by which he was known, 
 he was conducted in state to the temple, and for forty 
 days was attended by nude women. When the reader 
 remembers that this animal was the representative of the 
 sun, and of the sun as the great generative power in 
 nature, he will readily see that Egyptian sun-worship 
 must have been a religion of licentiousness. 
 
 The following from "Anthon's Classical Dictionary " 
 (art. Hercules), gives in brief space as good an idea of 
 the nature and extent of sun-worship as anything that 
 can be found : — 
 
 " The mythology of Hercules is of a very mixed char- 
 acter in the fo.rm in which it has come down to us. There 
 
310 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 is in it the identification of one or more Grecian heroes 
 with Melcarth, the sun-god of the Phoenicians. Hence 
 we find Hercules so frequently represented as the sun- 
 god, and his twelve labors regarded as the passage of the 
 sun through the twelve signs of the zodiac. He is the 
 powerful planet which animates and imparts fecundity to 
 the universe, whose divinity has been honored in every 
 quarter by temples and altars, and consecrated in the 
 religious strains of all nations. From Meroe, in Ethio- 
 pia, and Thebes in Upper Egypt, even to Britain, and 
 the icy regions of Scythia ; from the ancient Taprobana 
 and Palibothra in India, to Cadiz and the shores of the 
 Atlantic; from the forests of Germany to the burning 
 sands of Africa ; everywhere, in short, where the benefits 
 of the luminary of day are experienced, there we find 
 established the name and worship of a Hercules. Many 
 ages before the period when Alcmena is said to have 
 lived, and the pretended Tyrinthian hero to have per- 
 formed his wonderful exploits, Egypt and Phoenicia, 
 which certainly did not borrow their divinities from 
 Greece, had raised temples to the sun, under a name anal- 
 ogous to that of Hercules, and had carried his worship 
 to Thasus and to Gades. Here was consecrated a temple 
 to the year, and to the months which divided it into twelve 
 parts, that is, to the twelve labors or victories which 
 conducted Hercules to immortality. It is under the name 
 of Hercules Adrochyton, or the god clothed with a mantle 
 of stars, that the poet Nonnus designates the sun, adored 
 by the Tyrians. * He is the same god,' observes the poet, 
 * whom different nations adore under a multitude of differ- 
 ent names: Belus on the banks of the Euphrates, Am- 
 nion in Libya, Apis in Memphis, Saturn in Arabia, 
 Jupiter in Assyria, Serapis in Egypt, Helios among the 
 Babylonians, Apollo at Delphi, jEsculapius through- 
 out Greece.' " 
 
 The same authority says also that " it is impossible to 
 deny the identity of Bacchus with Osiris," and a<lds 
 that " they both have for their symbols the head of a 
 
The Great Apostasy. 311 
 
 bull." From all these things, therefore, we learn that 
 sun-worship was the primitive form of idolatry, that no 
 matter what names were given to the gods of any coun- 
 try, they were simply different representatives of the sun, 
 or the host of heaven, and that all their worship was 
 nothing but the deification of lust. The following, also 
 from " Anthon's Classical Dictionary," bears directly on 
 the last point: — 
 
 "At ErythrsB, on the coast of Ionia, was to be seen a 
 statue of Hercules, of an aspect completely Egyptian. 
 The worship of the god was here celebrated by certain 
 Thracian females, because the females of the country were 
 said to have refused to make to the god an offering of their 
 locks on his arrival at Erythrse. The females of Byblos 
 sacrificed to Adonis their locks and their chastity at one 
 and the same time, and it is probable that the worship of 
 Ilercules was not more exempt, in v^ous parts of the 
 ancient world, from the same dissolute offerings. In 
 Lydia, particularly, it seems to have been marked by an 
 almost delirious sensuality. Married and unmarried fe- 
 males prostituted themselves at the festival of the god. 
 The two sexes changed their respective characters; and 
 tradition reported that Hercules himself had given an 
 example of this, when, assuming the vestments and occu- 
 pation of a female, he subjected himself to the service 
 of the voluptuous Omphale." 
 
 In the light of this, it is easy to see why the Lord said 
 to the Israelites : " The woman shall not wear that which 
 pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a 
 woman's garment ; for all that do so are an abomination 
 unto the Lord thy God." Deut. 22:5. 
 
 One more citation must suffice for the testimony con- 
 cerning the most ancient sun-worship. It is from the 
 " Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia," (art. Sun): — 
 
312 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 " The worship of the sun as the most prominent and 
 powerful agent in the kingdom of nature was widely dif- 
 fused throughout the countries adjacent to Palestine. 
 This worship was either direct, without the intervention 
 of any statue or symbol, or indirect. Among the Egyp- 
 tians the sun was worshiped under the title of Ra. . . . 
 Among the Phoenicians the sun was worshiped under the 
 title of Baal. At Tyre, Gaza, and Carthage, human sacri- 
 fices were offered to him. Among the Chaldeans the 
 sun was worshiped under the title of Tammuz; and that 
 the Arabians worshiped the sun we know from Theo- 
 phrastus. Still more propagated was the worship of the 
 sun among the Syrians (Aramseans). Famous temples 
 were at Heliopolis, Emesa, Palmyra, Hierapolis. Sun- 
 worship there was very old, and direct from the begin- 
 ning; and even in later times, sun and moon were wor- 
 shiped at Hierapolis without the intervention of any 
 image. Among the pure Semites, or Aryans, direct 
 worship to the sun« was paid from the beginning, and still 
 later. Thus among the Assyrians, and afterwards among 
 the Persians, whose sun-worship is one and the same. . 
 . . In later times the sun was w^orshiped among the 
 Persians under the form of Mithras, which finally be- 
 came the Sol Deus Invictus [the invincible sun-god] 
 throughout the West, especially through the Romans." 
 
 This brings us down to the time of the Romans, but 
 before we consider the worship of the sun in the Roman 
 Empire, we must stop to note the fact that when God's 
 ancient people apostatized, sun-worship, with its abomina- 
 tions, was always the form of idolatry into which they 
 fell. This was very natural, because they were sur- 
 rounded by it. 
 
 What has been given concerning the bull Apis as the 
 representative of Osiris, the Egyptian sun-god, is suf- 
 ficient to prove that when the Israelites made and wor- 
 shiped the golden calf, while Moses was in the mount, 
 
The Great Apostasy. 313 
 
 they were simply taking up the Egyptian sun-worship, 
 and its lascivious orgies, with which they must have been 
 so familiar. 
 
 In later times Jeroboam made two calves of gold, 
 setting one up in Bethel, and the other in Dan, in order 
 to keep the people from going to Jerusalem to worship 
 God. Knowing, as we do, the nature of sun-worship, we 
 can readily understand why he "made priests of the 
 lowest of the people," and how it was that he "made 
 Israel to sin." (See 1 Kings 1 2 : 26-31 ; 2 Kings 1 : 29.) 
 
 AVe have found out what Baal- worship was; and so 
 when we read that in the time of Ahab Elijah was the 
 only prophet of God, while Baal had four hundred and 
 fifty prophets, and that the people had gone after Baal so 
 generally that Elijah supposed himself to be the only man 
 in the nation who was loyal to God, we know that sun- 
 worship had at that time almost entirely supplanted the 
 worship of Jehovah. 
 
 Still later we find that Manasseh " reared up altars for 
 Baal, and made a grove [sun image]" and " worshiped 
 all the host of heaven," and placed the sun images and 
 altars in the house of the Lord. 2 Kings 21 : 1-7. AVe 
 also find that a part of Josiah's good works was to clear 
 the temple of the obscene images to the sun, and to take 
 from it the horses " that the kings of Judah had given 
 to the sun," and had stabled in the sacred building, thus 
 turning the house of the Lord into a temple for heathen 
 lewdness. (See 2 Kings 23 : 4-14.) 
 
 Many other scriptures might be cited, but these are 
 sufficient to show the form of idolatry with which the 
 true religion had to contend in the most ancient times. 
 We may now take a brief glance at sun-worship among 
 
314 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 the Romans, and how it affected the Christian church. 
 If we multiply evidence on any point, it is simply that 
 it may not be considered as one-sided. 
 
 Dr. T. W. Chambers, in the article previously referrert 
 to (^Old Testament Student, J smusiry, 1886), says that at 
 Baalbek, in the ancient Coele-Syria, "the most imposing of 
 the huge edifices erected upon a vast substruction, un- 
 equaled anywhere on earth in the size of its stones, some 
 of them being sixty feet long and twelve feet in both 
 diameters, is a great temple of the sun, two hundred and 
 ninety feet by one hundred and sixty, which was built 
 by Antoninus Pius.'' This emperor reigned from 138 
 to 160 A. D. . 
 
 Sun-worship in Rome, however, reached its highest 
 point under the reign of Elagabalus, a. d. 218-222. 
 Of him and his times Milraan says : — 
 
 "The pontiff of one of the wild forms of the nature 
 worship of the East, appeared in the city of Rome as 
 emperor. The ancient rites of Baal-Peor, but little 
 changed in the course of ages, intruded themselves into 
 the sanctuary of the Capitoline Jove, and offended at 
 once the religious majesty and the graver decency of Ro- 
 man manners. Elagabalus derived his name from the 
 Syrian appellative of the sun; he had been educated in the 
 precincts of the temple; and the emperor of Rome was lost 
 and absorbed in the priest of an effeminate superstition. 
 The new religion did not steal in under the modest de- 
 meanor of a stranger, claiming the common rights of 
 hospitality as the national faith of a Subject people: it 
 entered with a public pomp, as tiiough to supersede and 
 eclipse the ancestral deities of Rome. The god Elagaba- 
 lus was conveyed in solenm procession through the won- 
 dering provinces; his symbols were received with all the 
 honor of the Supreme Deity." 
 
 " It was openly asserted, that the worship of the sun, 
 
The Great ArosTASY. 315 
 
 under his name of Elagabalus, was to supersede all other 
 worship. If we may believe the biographies in the 
 Augustan history, a more ambitious scheme of a universal 
 religion had dawned upon the mind of the emperor. 
 The Jewish, the Samaritan, even the Christian, were to 
 be fused and recast into one great system, of which the 
 sun wa^ to be the central object of adoration^ — History 
 of Christianity, book 2, chap. 8. (See also Gibbon, De- 
 cline and Fall, chap. 6, paragraphs 20-25.) 
 
 The successors of Elagabalus had not, like him, been 
 brought up in a temple of the sun, and consequently the 
 worship of the sun received less attention after his death ; 
 but it always remained the prevailing idolatry in Rome. 
 The Emperor Aurelian (a. d. 270-274), however, gave 
 it a new impetus. Returning from his victory over 
 Zenobia, the queen of the East, he made magnificent 
 presents to the temple of the sun, which he had begun 
 to build in the first year of his reign. Says Gibbon : — 
 
 " A considerable portion of his oriental spoils was con- 
 secrated to the gods of Rome; the capitol, and every 
 other temple, glittered with the offerings of his ostenta- 
 tious piety; and the temple of the sun alone received 
 above fifteen thousand pounds of gold. This last was 
 a magnificent structure, erected by the emperor on the 
 side of the Quirinal hill, and dedicated, soon after tlie 
 triumph, to that deity whom Aurelian adored as the 
 parent of his life and fortunes. His mother had been 
 an inferior priestess in the chapel of the sun; a peculiar 
 devotion to the god of light was a sentiment which the 
 fortunate peasant imbibed in his infancy; and every 
 step of his elevation, every victory of his reign, fortified 
 superstition by gratitude." — Decline and Fall, chap. 11, 
 paragr'aph JfS. 
 
 To Aurelian the bishops of Syria appealed in their 
 contest with Paul of Samosata, an account of which is 
 
316 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 given by Milman, " History of Christianity," book 2, 
 chap. 8. In this appeal is seen the first open step toward 
 putting Christianity under the patronage of a sun-wor- 
 shiper. It was a step toward bringing about what Ehi- 
 gabalus desired,— a fusion of Christianity and paganism. 
 
 We pass to the time of Diocletian, who ascended the 
 throne in 284 A. d., under whose reign Constantino was 
 appointed Csesar. The first act of his reign showed his 
 devotion to the sun-god, and afforded evidence of the 
 fact that the sun was recognized by the Roman people 
 as the highest deity. It was thought that the Emperor 
 Numerian had been murdered, and Diocletian felt tliat 
 suspicion might attach to him, since he profited by the 
 vacancy that was thus made. Accordingly he "as- 
 cended the tribunal, and, raising his eyes towards the 
 sun, made a solemn profession • of his own innocence, in 
 the presence of that all-seeing deity." — Gihhon, chap. 12, 
 paragraph Jf-l. 
 
 In this connection Milman has a most suggestive pas- 
 sage. He says: — 
 
 "From Christianity, the new paganism had adopted 
 the unity of the Deity, and scrupled not to degrade all 
 the gods of the older world into subordinate demons or 
 ministers. . . . But the Jupiter Optimus Maximus 
 was not the great Supreme of the new system. The 
 universal deity of the East, the sun, to the philosophic 
 was the emblem or representative; to the vulgar, the 
 Deity. Diocletian himself, though he paid so much def- 
 erence to the older faith as to assume the title of Jovius, 
 as belonging to the Lord of the world, yet, on his ac- 
 cession, when he would exculpate himself from all con- 
 cern in the murder of his predecessor Numerian, ap- 
 pealed in the face of the army to the all-seeing deity of 
 the sun. It is the oracle of Apollo of Miletus, consulted 
 
The Great Apostasy. Si 7 
 
 by the hesitating emperor, which is to decide the fate of 
 Cliristianity. The metaphorical language of Christianity 
 had unconsciously lent strength to this new adversary; 
 and, in adoring the visible orb, some, no doubt, supposed 
 that they were not departing far from the worship of the 
 *Sun of Righteousness.'" — History of Christianity, book 
 2, chap. 9. 
 
 This passage is not simply suggestive ; it is quite ex- 
 plicit, showing that before the beginning of the fourth 
 century, Christianity had united with paganism on sun- 
 worship. After this testimony from so learned a prelate 
 as Dean Milman, we need not carry the subject much 
 farther, although it is full of interest. But we must not 
 omit Constantine from the list. We quote from Gibbon: 
 
 " Whatever symptoms of Christian piety might tran- 
 spire in the discourses or actions of Constantine, he per- 
 severed till he was near forty years of age in the practice 
 of the established religion; and the same conduct which 
 in the court of Nicomedia might be imputed to his fear, 
 could be ascribed only to the inclination or policy of the 
 sovereign of Gaul. His liberality restored and enriched 
 the temples of the gods; the medals which issued from 
 his imperial mine are impressed with the figures and 
 attributes of Jupiter and Apollo, of Mars and Hercules; 
 and his filial piety increased the council of Olympus by 
 the solemn apotheosis of his father Constantius. But 
 the devotion of Constantine was more peculiarly di- 
 rected to the genius of the sun, the Apollo of Greek and 
 Roman mythology; and he was pleased to be represented 
 with the symbols of the god of light and poetry. The 
 unerring shafts of that deity, the brightness of his eyes, 
 his laurel wreath, immortal beauty, and elegant accom- 
 plishments, seem to point him out as the patron of a 
 young hero. The altars of Apollo were crowned with 
 the votive offerings of Constantine; and the credulous 
 multitude were taught to believe that the emperor was 
 
318 Fathers op the Catholic Church. 
 
 permitted to behold with mortal eyes the visible majesty 
 of their tutelar deity ; and that, either waking or in a 
 vision, he was blessed with the aus])icious omens of a 
 long and victorious reign. The sun was universally 
 celebrated as the invincible guide and protector of Con- 
 stantine." — Decline and Fall, chap. 20, paragraph 3. 
 
 Dr. Talbot W. Chambers makes a brief statement 
 which covers the same ground as the above, and adds the 
 link which connects the Christianity of the Koman world 
 with pagan sun-worship. He testifies as follows : — 
 
 "The Emperor Constantine, before his conversion, 
 reverenced all the gods as mysterious powers, especially 
 Apollo, the god of the sun, to whom, in the year 308, he 
 presented munificent gifts ; and when he became a mono- 
 theist the god whom he worshiped was, as Uhlhorn says, 
 rather the * Unconquered Sun' than the Father of our 
 Lord Jesus Christ. And indeed, when he enjoined the 
 observance of the Lord's day, it was not under the name 
 of Sahhatum or Dies Domini, but under its old astronom- 
 ical and heathen title, Dies Soils, so that the law was as 
 applicable to the worshipers of Apollo and Mithras as to 
 the Christians." — Old Testament Student, January, 1886. 
 
 That in this Constantine was acting not as a disciple of 
 Christ, but as a worshiper of the sun, will presently be 
 made to appear. As proof that Sunday was the heathen 
 festival day, we quote from " Webster's Unabridged Dic- 
 tionary." That book says that Sunday is " so called be- 
 cause the day was anciently dedicated to the sun, or to 
 its worship." The North British Review (vol. 18, p. 409), 
 calls Sunday " the wild solar holiday of all pagan times." 
 And Gibbon, in a note to paragraph 2, chapter 20, says 
 that " Constantine styles the Lord's day Dies Solw [day 
 of the sun], a name which could not ofiend the ears of 
 his pagan subjects." Dr. Chambers, also, in the ])assage 
 
The Great Apostasy. 319 
 
 quoted above, says that Constantine's Sunday law " was 
 as applicable to the worshipers of Apollo and Mithras as 
 to the Christians." And the "Schaff-Herzog Encyclope- 
 dia" has the following on the sul)ject of "Sunday:" — 
 
 "Sunday (Dies Soils, of the Roman calendar; 'day of 
 the sun/ because dedicated to the sun), the first day of 
 the week, was adopted by the early Christians as a day 
 of worship. Tiie * sun ' of Latin adoration they inter- 
 preted as the ' Sun of Righteousness.' . . . No regu- 
 lations for its observance are laid down in the New Tes- 
 tament, nor, indeed, is its observance even enjoined." 
 
 Of course there are no regulations for its observance 
 laid down in the New Testament, for, as "Chambers's 
 Encyclopedia " truly says : — 
 
 " Unquestionably the first law, either ecclesiastical or 
 civil, by which the Sabbatical observance of that day 
 [Sunday] is known to have been ordained, is the edict 
 of Constantine, A. d. 321." 
 
 The above citations most clearly connect the Sunday 
 festival with pagan sun-worship. That it has no connec- 
 tion whatever with New Testament Christianity is evident 
 from the utter silence of the New Testament concerning 
 the day, with the exception of a few passing references to 
 " the first day of the week " as a secular day, and from the 
 fact that the Sabbath of creation and of the fourth com- 
 mandment, — the seventh day of the week, — is the only 
 Sabbath recognized by Christ or by any of the writers 
 either of the^ld Testament or the New. It only remains, 
 therefore, for us to show that when Constantine issued his 
 decree, and, indeed, ever after, he was a pagan, — a wor- 
 shiper of the sun and of himself. 
 
 Eusebius, who was the friend and eulogist of Constantine, 
 gives the following account of the church which he 
 erected to the memory of the apostles : — 
 
320 Fathers op the Catholic CnuRCEt. 
 
 " All these edifices the emperor consecrated with the 
 desire of perpetuating the memory of the apostles of our 
 Saviour. He had, however, another object in erecting 
 this building; an object at first unknown, but which 
 afterwards became evident to all. He had, in fact, made 
 choice of this spot in the prospect of his own death, an- 
 ticipating with extraordinary fervor of faith, that his 
 body would share their title with the apostles themselves, 
 and that he should thus even after death become the sub- 
 ject, with them, of the devotions which should be per- 
 formed to their honor in this place. He accordingly 
 caused twelve coffins to be set up in this church, like 
 sacred pillars in honor and memory of the apostolic 
 number, in the center of which his own was placed, hav- 
 ing six of theirs on either side of it. Thus, as I said, he 
 had provided with prudent foresight an honorable resting- 
 place for his body after death, and, having long before 
 secretly formed this resolution, he now consecrated this 
 church to the apostles, believing that this tribute to their 
 memory would be of no small advantage to his o^n soul." 
 — Life of Constantine, hook 4, chap. 60. 
 
 This, be it remembered, was long after Constantine's 
 Sunday edict, and after he is popularly supposed to have 
 embraced Christianity. What " extraordinary fervor of 
 faith" this "most Christian emperor" had — in himself — 
 to be sure. This act places him where he belongs, among 
 heathen rulers. Alexander, calling himself Hercules, 
 and desiring to be worshiped as a god, was not more 
 pagan than was Constantine, who expected that both 
 pagans and Christians w^ould pay hira divine honors after 
 his death. The man was utterly incapable of a thought 
 for anything outside of himself and his own selfish inter- 
 est. As proof that this is not a prej udiced conclusion, 
 read the following from a first-day observer: — 
 
 " Of religious convictions Constantine had none. But 
 
The Great Apostasy. 321 
 
 he possessed an intellect capable of penetrating the con- 
 dition of the world. He perceived the conclusion of the 
 great syllogism in the logic of events. He saw that Des- 
 tiny was about to write Finis at the bottom of the last 
 page of paganism. He had the ambition to avail him- 
 self of the forces of the new and old, which, playing on 
 the minds and consciences of men, were about to trans- 
 form the world. As yet the Christians were in the mi- 
 nority, but they had zeal and enthusiasm. The enthusi- 
 asm of paganism, on the contrary, had yielded to a cold 
 and formal assent quite unlike the pristine fervor which 
 had fired to human action in the time, 
 
 * When the world was new and the gods were young. ' 
 
 So, for policy, the emperor began to favor the Chris- 
 tians. There was now an eedesia, a church, compact, 
 well-organized, having definite purposes, ready for uni- 
 versal persuasion, and almost ready for universal battle. 
 Against this were opposed the warring philosophic sects 
 of paganism. While biding his time, watching the turns 
 of the imperial wheel, and awaiting the opportunity 
 which should make him supreme, he was careful to lay 
 hold of the sentiments and sympathies of budding Chris- 
 tendom, by favoring the sect in Gaul." 
 
 " In the same year of his triumph, the emperor issued 
 from Milan his famous decree in favor of the Christian 
 religion. The proclamation was in the nature of a 
 license to those professing the new faith to worship as 
 they would, under the imperial sanction and favor. Soon 
 afterwards he announced to the world that the reason for 
 his recognition of Christianity was a vision which he had 
 seen while marching from Gaul against Galerius. Gazing 
 into heaven, he had seen a tremendous and shining cross 
 with this inscription : * In Hoc Signo VinceSj * Under this 
 sign conquer.' The fiction served the purpose for which 
 it was invented. As a matter of fact, the double-dealing 
 moral nature of Constantino was incapable of any high 
 devotion to a faith either old or new. 
 21 
 
322 Fathers of the (!atjiolic Church. 
 
 "His insincerity was at once developed in his course 
 respecting the Koman Senate. That body was the strong- 
 hold of paganism. Any strong purpose to extinguish 
 heathenism would have led Constantine into irreconcilable 
 antagonism with whatever of senatorial power still re- 
 mained. Instead of hostility, however, he began to re- 
 store the ancient body to as much influence in the State 
 as was consistent with the unrestricted exercise of his own 
 authority. In order further to placate the perturbed 
 spirits of paganism, he himself assumed the office of 
 Pontifex Maximus; and when the triumphal arch was 
 reared commemorative of his victory, he was careful to 
 place thereon the statues of the old gods, as well as the 
 emblems of the new faith." — History of the World, by 
 John Clark Ridp'ath, LL.D., Prof, of History in De Pauw 
 University, vol. 1, chap. 63, pp. 881-883. 
 
 If this is true, and no one can deny it, then Constan- 
 tine was never a Christian emperor. Even so strict a 
 churchman as Bishop Arthur Cleveland Coxe, is con- 
 strained to say of Constantine : — 
 
 "He permitted heathenism, and while he did so, how 
 could he be received as a Christian? The Christian 
 church never became responsible for his life and charac- 
 ter, but strove to reform him and to prepare him for a 
 true coHfession of Christ at some * convenient season.' In 
 this, there seems to have been a great fault somewhere, 
 chargeable perhaps to Eusebius or to some other Christian 
 counselor; but, when could anyone say — 'The emperor is 
 sincere and humble and penitent, and ought now to be 
 received into the church.' It was a political conversion, 
 and as such was accepted, and Constantine was a heathen 
 till near his death. As to his final penitence and accept- 
 ance — 'Forbear to judge.' " — ''Elucidation'^ 2 of Tertullian 
 against Mardon, hook J/.. 
 
 Then let us never again hear of Constantine as the 
 first Christian emjieror. But we wish to add one more 
 
The Great Apostasy. . 323 
 
 testimony concerning his heathenism. The "Encyclope- 
 dia Britannica " says of him : — 
 
 "^Paganism must still have been an operative belief 
 with the man who, down almost to the close of his life, 
 retained so many pagan superstitions. He was at best 
 only half heathen, half Christian, who could seek to 
 combine the worship of Christ with the worship of 
 Apollo, having the name of the one and the figure of the 
 other impressed upon his coins, and ordaining the ob- 
 servance of Sunday under the name Dies Soils in his 
 celebrated decree of March 321, though such a combination 
 was far from uncommon in the first Christian centuries. 
 Perhaps the most significant illustration of the ambiguity 
 of his religious position is furnished by the fact that in 
 the same year in which he issued the Sunday decree he 
 gave orders that, if lightning struck the imperial palace 
 or any other public building, 'the haruspices, according 
 to ancient usage, should be consulted as to what it 
 might signify, and a careful report of the answer should 
 be drawn up for his use.' " 
 
 The original of this heathen Sunday edict is in the 
 library of Harvard College, and reads as follows: — 
 
 " Omnes Judiees, urbancequeplebes, et cunctarum artium 
 qfficia venerabili die soils quiescant. Ruri tamen positi 
 agrorum cultured liber e licenterque inserviant: quoniam 
 frequenter evenit, ut non aptius alio die frumenta sulcis, 
 aut vinecB serobibus mandentur, ne occasione momenti 
 pereat commodltas coelesti provinone concessa. Dat. Nonis 
 Mart. Crispo. 2 & Gotistantio 2. Coss. 321. Corpus Juris 
 Civllis Codlcis lib. Hi tit. 12. 3." 
 
 "Let all judges and town-people, and all artisans, rest 
 on the venerable day of the sun. But let those who 
 are situated in the country freely and at full liberty 
 attend to the cultivation of their fields: because it often 
 happens that no other day is so fit for sowing corn or 
 ])lanting vines ; lest, by neglecting the proper occasion, 
 they should lose the benefits granted by divine bounty." 
 
324 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 — Given the seventh day of March, 321, Crispus and Con- 
 stantine being consuls for the second time. 
 
 There can be no question but that the Christian church 
 as a body had been drawing toward j)aganism and sun- 
 worship before the days of Constantine, else that wily 
 politician would not have issued his Sunday edict 
 Many pages back we gave the passage in which Mosheim 
 says that the Christian bishops purposely multiplied rites 
 for the purpose of rendering the pagans more friendly to 
 them. This, together with the statement that a large 
 part of the Christian observances and institutions, even 
 in the second century, had the aspect of the pagan mys- 
 teries, is evidence that the bishops would very readily 
 adopt the most popular heathen festival day, in order to 
 gain the favor of the pagans. We have also learned 
 that Elagabalus designed to unite the Christian and 
 pagan religions around one common deity, the sun. In 
 the time of Diocletian the heathen sun-god and Christ, 
 the Sun of Righteousness, were confounded by b^th 
 pagans and Christians. 
 
 This blending of paganism and Christianity was, as we 
 have already seen, furthered by the heathen philosophers 
 who nominally accepted Christianity, and who are as a 
 consequence honored as Fathers of the Christian church. 
 We have quoted what Mosheim says of Ammonius 
 Saccas, but the attention of the reader must right here 
 be again directed to the statement that " being possessed 
 of great fecundity of genius as well as eloquence, he un- 
 dertook to bring all systems of philosophy and religion 
 into harmony; or, in other words, to teach a philosophy, 
 by which all philosophers, and the men of all religions, 
 the Christian not excepted, might unite together and 
 
The Great Apostasy. 325 
 
 have fellowsliip." Origen was the enthusiastic disciple 
 of Ammonius; and the writings of Justin Martyr and 
 Tertullian show that they likewise labored to show that 
 there was after all no difference in principle between 
 paganism and Christianity. Surely they well deserve 
 the title of Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 One* quotation from Milman, and one from Eusebius, 
 must close the case concerning the paganizing of Chris- 
 tianity. After speaking of the heathen ceremonies con- 
 nected with the dedication of Constantine's city, Con- 
 stantinople, Milman says : — 
 
 " The lingering attachment of Constantino to the fa- 
 vorite supei-stition of his earlier days may be traced on 
 still better authority. The Grecian worship of Apollo 
 had been exalted into the oriental veneration of the sun, 
 as the visible representative of the Deity ; and of all the 
 statues "which were introduced from different quarters, 
 none were received with greater honor than those of 
 Apollo. In one part of the city stood the Pythian, in 
 the other the Sminthian deity. The Delpliic Tripod, 
 which, according to Zosimus, contained au image of the 
 god, stood upon the column of the three twisted serpents, 
 supposed to represent the mythic Python. But on a still 
 loftier, tlie famous pillar of porphyry, stood an image in 
 which Constantine dared to mingle together the attributes 
 of the sun, of Christ, and of himself. According to one 
 tradition, this pillar was based, as it were, on another 
 superstition. The venerable Palladium itself, surrepti- 
 tiously conveyed from Rome, was buried beneath it, and 
 thus transferred the eternal destiny of the old to the new 
 capital. The pillar, formed of marble and of porphyry, 
 rose to the height of a hundred and twenty feet. The 
 colossal image on the top was that of Apollo, either from 
 Phrygia or from Athens. But the head of Constantine 
 had been substituted for that of the god. The scepter 
 proclaimed the dominion of the world ; and it held in its 
 
326 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 hand thie globe, emblematic of universal empire. Around 
 the head, instead of rays, were fixed the nails of the true 
 cross. Is this ^jja^anism approximating to Christianity, 
 or Christianity degenerating into paganism f" — Sistory 
 of Christianity, book 3, chap. 3. 
 
 Truly the learned prelate may be pardoned for asking 
 that question. It is plain, however, that the answer must 
 be that it was Cliristianity degenerating into paganism, 
 for which the Fathers had so assiduously worked. 
 
 And now in the light of all this testimony, can anybody 
 have a doubt as to what form of paganism degenerate 
 Christianity took ? When true religion degenerates, it 
 always assumes the form of error with which it is sur- 
 rounded. The history of the Jews shows that their apos- 
 tasy always took the form of sun-worship. But the pa- 
 ganism of Kome was devotion to the sun. How then 
 could apostate Christianity assume any other form than 
 that of sun-worship ? And that being the case, what else 
 but Sunday, " the wild solar holiday of all pagan times," 
 could be the grand connecting link between the two re- 
 ligions? The case would be clear, even without the posi- 
 tive testimony that has been adduced. 
 
 Having helped the bishops thus far in their attempts 
 to paganize Christianity, Constantine exerted himself to 
 root out the last vestige of the religion of Jehovah, by 
 toning down the wild solar holiday so as to make it 
 fully take the place of the true Sabbath. Says Euse- 
 bius: — 
 
 " He enjoined on all the subjects of the Roman Em- 
 pire to observe the Lord's day as a day of rest, and also 
 to lionor the day which precedes the Sabbath ; in memory, 
 I suppose, of what the Saviour of mankind is recorded to 
 liave achieved on that day. And since his desire was to 
 
The Great Apostasy. 327 
 
 teach his whole army zealously to honor the Saviour's 
 day (which derives its name from light and from the 
 sun), he freely granted to those among them who were 
 partakers of tlie divine faith, leisure for attendance on the 
 services of the church of God, in order that they might 
 be able, without impediment, to perform their religious 
 worship. 
 
 "With regard to those who were as yet ignorant of 
 divine truth, he provided by a second statute that they 
 should appear on each Lord's day on an open plain near 
 the city, and there, at a given signal, offer to God with 
 one accord a prayer which they had previously learned. 
 He admonished them that their confidence should not 
 rest in their spears, or armor, or bodily strength, but 
 that they should acknowledge the supreme God as the 
 giver of every good, and of victory itself; to whom they 
 were bound to offer their prayers with due regularity, 
 uplifting their hands toward heaven, and raising their 
 mental vision higher still to the King of Heaven, on 
 whom they should call as the author of victory, their pre- 
 server, guardian, and helper. The emperor himself pre- 
 scribed the prayer to be used by all his troops, command- 
 ing them to pronounce the following words in the Latin 
 tongue : — 
 
 '' 'We acknowledge thee the only God; we own thee as 
 our king, and implore thy succor. By thy favor have 
 Ave gotten the victory ; through thee are we mightier than 
 our enemies. We render thanks for thy past benefits, 
 and trust thee for future blessings. Together we pray to 
 thee, and beseech thee long to preserve to us, safe and tri- 
 umphant, our emperor and his pious sons.' 
 
 "Such was the duty to be performed on Sunday by 
 his troops, and such the prayer they were instructed to 
 ofifer up to God." — Life of Constantine, book 4, chap. 
 18-20. 
 
 This testimony is exceedingly valuable as showing how 
 Sunday was elevated from a heathen festival to the place 
 of the " Christian Sabbath," and also the wholesale man- 
 
328 Fathers of tuy. Catholic Church. 
 
 ner in which the heathen were made " Christian." One 
 god more or less made no difference to the heathen, who 
 were accustomed to follow the lead of the emperor in 
 matters of religion ; and so Constaiitine found no opposi- 
 tion in his scheme of making the religion of Rome just 
 Christian enough to please and bind to him his numerous 
 and powerful Christian subjects, and just pagan enough 
 to avoid displeasing his pagan subjects. As Bishop Coxe 
 says, it was a shrewd political move to preserve the unity 
 of his empire. 
 
 We have now shown : (1) That the fact that Sunday 
 was observed to a certain extent by many professed Chris- 
 tians very early in the Christian era, is in itself no evi- 
 dence that it was by divine sanction, since the same peo- 
 ple practiced many pagan abominations; and (2) That 
 the observance of Sunday was itself a pagan custom which 
 was brought into the church by "converts" from hea- 
 thenism; and was fostered, together with other pagan 
 customs, in order that the heathen might be the more 
 readily disposed to join the church. The worship which 
 had formerly been rendered to Apollo, the sun-god, was 
 transferred, together with the solar holiday, to the Sun 
 of Righteousness, and in this way the Christians pleased 
 the heathen by adopting their chief festival day, and at 
 the same time they satisfied their own consciences by 
 making the heathen holiday a ".Christian" institution. 
 Thus, when the papacy was fully established, it could be 
 truly said to be only "paganism baptized," and even tlu 
 "baptis 
 
C HAPTER XVIII. 
 
 THE GREAT APOSTASY (Concluded). 
 
 GROWTH OF PAPAL ASSUMPTION. 
 
 When the statement is made that the papacy effected 
 the change in the Sabbath from the seventh to the first 
 day of the week, the objection is raised that this change 
 was brought about before there was any papacy. If this 
 objection were valid, it would prove that the papacy never 
 introduced any corrupt practices, since, as we have seen. 
 every abomination of the papacy was in the church be- 
 fore the time of Constantine. But those who raise this 
 objection, forget that the "mystery of iniquity" which 
 culminated in the papacy, was working in the days of the 
 apostle Paul, and that it only waited the taking away 
 of paganism (which, as the ruling power, hindered its 
 full development) to be revealed as "that wicked." 
 
 Perhaps it would helj) some people to see the point, 
 if we should use the term Catholic Church, instead of 
 papacy. The Catholic Church was a growth — the growth 
 of error. It is true that that church has assumed the 
 term "Catholic," which means "general," or "the whole," 
 in order to indicate that it is the only and the original 
 church. But it became Catholic only by lowering the 
 standard of faith and morality so as to admit the heathen. 
 The true church of God has never been "Catholic," 
 for its principles are so pure that but few in any age have 
 been willing to accept them. So the growth of error 
 marks the rise of the Catholic Church. While the ma- 
 
 (329) 
 
330 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 jority of the people on the earth do not belong to its com- 
 munion, it may still with propriety retain its name, for its 
 principles are the principles of the world, and there is no 
 false system of religion that is not built upon the very 
 same foundation that it is built on. That foundation is 
 the opinions of man in opposition to the whole or a part 
 of the plain, literal teaching of the Bible. In the self- 
 styled Catholic Church this is not individual opinion, but 
 the opinion of one man. 
 
 The way for the acceptance of a pope, in whose in- 
 dividuality the mass of mankind should sink their own, 
 was prepared, as we have shown in previous chapters, by 
 the excessive veneration that was shown fOr the writings 
 of uninspired, and even unchristian, men. When men 
 accept the assertions of the Fathers, there is nothing to 
 hinder their acknowledging the pope of Rome, for he 
 simply reflects the opinions of the Fathers. This is why 
 he can contradict himself, and still be reckoned infallible. 
 There are no two of the Fathers who fully agree mih 
 each other, and there is no one of them who fully agrees with 
 himself. The Fathers are the real head of the Roman 
 Catholic Church, and the pope is simply their mouth-piece; 
 for it is more convenient for the people to have one man to 
 declare to them the teaching of the Fathers, than for the 
 people to find them out for themselves. To be sure, the 
 contradictions of many infallible Fathers appear a little 
 more incongruous when exhibited in the person of one 
 infallible pope, but one soon gets used to that. 
 
 To show that even from the second and third cent- 
 uries this essential element of the papacy was not lack- 
 ing, a few testimonies will be introduced concerning 
 episcopal and Romish arrogance. The following testi- 
 
The Great Apostasy. 331 
 
 niony from Dr. Killen shows the power of the bishop 
 even before Christianity was formally recognized by the 
 empire : — 
 
 "As early as the middle of the second century, the 
 bishop, at least in some places, was intrusted with the 
 chief management of the funds of the church ; and proba- 
 bly, about fifty years afterwards, a large share of its reve- 
 nues was appropriated to his personal maintenance. 
 His superior wealth soon added immensely to his influ- 
 ence. He was thus enabled to maintain a higher position 
 in society than any of his brethren ; and he was at length re- 
 garded as the great fountain of patronage and preferment. 
 Long before Christianity enjoyed the sanction of the 
 State, the chief pastors of the great cities began to at- 
 tract attention by their ostentatious display of secular 
 magnificence. ... In the third century the chief 
 pastor of the Western metropolis must have been known 
 to the great oflficers of government, and perhaps to the 
 emperor himself. Decius must have regarded the Ro- 
 man bishop as a somewhat formidable personage, when he 
 declared that he would sooner tolerate a rival candidate 
 for the throne, and when he proclaimed his determination 
 to annihilate the very office." — Ancient Church, period 
 2, sec. 3, chap. 10, paragraph 3. 
 
 This shows that it was not simply episcopal arrogance 
 in general, but Romish arrogance in particular, that be- 
 gan to be manifested so early. Milman says (History of 
 Latin Christianity, book 1, chap. 1), that "when the 
 Emperor Aurelian transferred the ecclesiastical judgment 
 over Paul of Samosata, a rebel against the empire as 
 against the church, from the bishops of Syria to those of 
 Rome and Italy," " Dionysius, as bishop of Rome, passed 
 sentence in this important controversy." This was in the 
 year 270 A. D. 
 
 Bingham bears testimony as follows, as to the manner 
 in which the bishop lorded it over God's heritage : — 
 
332 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 "That all the power of discipline was primarily lodged 
 in the hands of the bishop, as all other offices of the 
 church, is a matter uncontested, and evident from the 
 whole foregoing history and account of the practice of the 
 church. For the canons always speak of the bishop, at 
 least in conjunction with his ecclesiastical senate, his 
 presbytery, as cutting off offenders from the church, and 
 imposing penance upon them ; and then again examin- 
 ing their proficiency, and either lengthening their pen- 
 ance, or moderating it by his indulgence; and finally ad- 
 mitting them to the communion of the church by absolu- 
 tion."— J.?i^igwiYies, hook 19, chap. 3. 
 
 Again Milman says: — 
 
 "On the establishment of Christianity, as the religion 
 if not of the empire, of the emperor, the bishop of Rome 
 rises at once to the rank of a great accredited function- 
 ary; the bishops gradually, though still slowly, assume 
 the life of individual character. The bishop is the first 
 Christian in the first city of the world, and that city is 
 legally Christian. The supreme pontificate of heathen- 
 ism miglit still linger from ancient usage among the nu- 
 merous titles of the emperor; but so long as Constantine 
 was in Rome, the bishop of Rome, the head of the em- 
 peror's religion, became in public estimation the equal, 
 [and] in authority and influence immeasurably the su- 
 perior, to all of sacerdotal rank. The schisms and 
 factions of Christianity now become affairs of State. As 
 long as Rome is the imperial residence, an appeal to 
 the emperor is an appeal to the bishop of Rome. Tlie 
 bishop of Rome sits, by tlie imperial authority, at the 
 head of a synod of Italian prelates, to judge the disputes 
 with the African Donatists." — Hutory of Latin Chris- 
 tianity, hook 1, chap. 2. 
 
 Of course if this was the case while the emperor was 
 in Rome, it would be still hiore so when the bishop of 
 Rome became the only ruler in that city. In the state- 
 ment made above, that the bishops gradually assumed the 
 
The Great Apostasy. S3S 
 
 life of individual character, we have a parallel to the 
 rise of the Sunday as the rival of the Sabbath. People 
 sometimes say that if the Sabbath had been changed by 
 the Catholic Church, we ought to be able to point out 
 tlie very year in Avhich such change was made. But 
 changes from truth to error, from good to evil, are not 
 made in that way. Just as no man plunges at once from 
 virtue into vice, so no church changes from truth to error 
 in a day. Error is a growth. The Sunday, like all the 
 heathen customs adopted by the Catholic Church, came 
 in gradually and silently, and was pretty well established 
 before any laws were made in its behalf. The decrees of 
 councils have not as a general thing been arbitrary laws 
 telling what must be, so much as they have been the 
 formulation of the opinions and practices largely preva- 
 lent at the time. They have simply marked the growth of 
 error, instead of making error. Thus the papacy was 
 well formed before the bishop of Kome was declared to 
 be the supreme head. Infallibility had been attributed 
 to the pope hundreds of years before it became a dogma 
 of the church. 
 
 Speaking of the synod which Eusebius, bishop of 
 Csesarea, convened at Antioch, A. i). 342, the church 
 historian Socrates says: — 
 
 "Neither was Julitls bishop of ancient Rome there, 
 nor did he indeed send a representative; although the 
 ecclesiastical canon expressly commands that the churches 
 shall not make any ordinances, without the sanction of 
 the bishop of Rome." — Ecclesiastical History, book 2, 
 chap. 8. 
 
 In a note to the above, the translator says: — 
 
 " No such canon as that referred to here by Socrates 
 is known to be in existence as a written document: and 
 
334 Fathers of the Catholics Cht^rch. 
 
 consequently our author must be understood to refer here 
 to a principle, or unwritten law, existing, and universally 
 acknowledged as existing, prior to all positive enactment 
 on the subject." 
 
 In chapter 15 of the same book is found also the fol- 
 lowing: — 
 
 " After experiencing considerable difficulties, Athana- 
 sius at last reached Italy. The whole western division 
 of the empire was then under the power of Constans, 
 the youngest of Constantine's sons, his brother Constan- 
 tine having been slain by the soldiery, as was before 
 stated. At the same time also Paul bishop of Con- 
 stantinople, Asclepas of Gaza, Marcellus of Ancyra a 
 city of Galatia Minor, and Lucius of Adrianople, having 
 been expelled from their several churches on various 
 charges, arrived at the imperial city. There each laid 
 his case before Julius bishop of Rome, who sent them 
 back again into the East, restoring them to their re- 
 spective sees by virtue of his letters, in the exercise of 
 the Church of Rome's peculiar privilege; and at the 
 same time in the liberty of that prerogative, sharply 
 rebuking those by whom they had been deposed." 
 
 Eugene Lawrence gives the follov\ing brief and pointed 
 account of the manner in which the " man of sin " began 
 to exalt himself, as soon as Constantino removed the 
 covering which concealed him : — 
 
 " In the last great persecution under Diocletian [a. d. 
 303-306], the bishops of Rome probably fled once more 
 to the catacombs. Their churches were torn down, their 
 property confiscated, their sacred writings destroyed, and 
 a vigorous effort was made to extirpate the powerful sect. 
 But the effort was vain. Constantine soon afterward 
 became emperor, and the bishop of Rome emerged from 
 the catacombs to become one of the ruling powers of the 
 world. This sudden change was followed by an almost 
 total loss of the simi)licity and purity of the days of 
 
The Great Apostasy. 335 
 
 persecution. Magnificent churches were erected by the 
 emperor in Rome, adorned with images and pictures, 
 where the bishop sat on a lofty throne, encircled by in- 
 ferior priests, and performing rites borrowed from the 
 splendid ceremonial of the pagan temple. The bishop 
 of Rome became a prince of the empire, and lived in a 
 style of luxury and pomp that awakened the envy or 
 the just indignation of the heathen writer, Marcellinus. 
 The church was now enriched by the gifts and bequests 
 of the pious and the timid ; the bishop drew great rev- 
 enues from his farms in the Campagna and his rich 
 plantations in Sicily; he rode through the streets of 
 Rome in a stately chariot and clothed in gorgeous attire; 
 his table was supplied with a profusion niore~1:han im- 
 perial; the proudest women of Rome loaded him with 
 lavish donations, and followed him with their flatteries 
 and attentions; and his haughty bearing and profuse 
 luxury were remarked upon by both pagans and Chris- 
 tians as strangely inconsistent with the humility and 
 simplicity enjoined by the faith which he professed. 
 The bishopric of Rome now became a splendid prize, for 
 which the ambitious and unprincipled contended by force 
 or fraud." — Historical Studies, jyp- 1'^, 18. 
 
 But that all this arrogance existed in embryo before 
 Constantine picked the shell, appears from Milman's 
 statement that " the Christian hierarchy was completely 
 organized and established in the minds of men before 
 the great revolutions which, under Constantine, legalized 
 Christianity, and, under Theodosius and his successors, 
 identified the church and State." — History of Chris- 
 tianity, book Jf, chap. 1. If it had not been so, the 
 union of Church and State could not have been formed. 
 
 The following description of how bishops were elected, 
 shows that the episcopal chair must have been regarded 
 as a very exalted position, since it was so eagerly sought 
 
S36 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 after; and it shows, at the same time, how the corruption 
 that was in the church found ample scope for its exercise 
 as soon as the church became allied to the empire : — 
 
 " As soon as a bishop had closed his eyes, the metro- 
 politan issued a commission to one of his suffragans to 
 administer the vacant see, and prepare, within a limited 
 time, the future election. The right of voting was vested 
 in the inferior clergy, who were best qualified to judge 
 of the merit of the candidates ; in the senators or nobles 
 of the city, all those who were distinguished by their 
 rank or property; and finally in the whole body of 
 the people, who, on the appointed day, flocked in mul- 
 titudes from the most remote parts of the diocese, and 
 sometimes silenced, by their tumultuous acclamations, 
 the voice of reason and the laws of discipline. These 
 acclamations might accidentally fix on the head of the 
 most deserving competitor; of some ancient presbyter, 
 some holy monk, or some layman, conspicuous for his 
 zeal and piety. But the episcopal chair was solicited, 
 es|)ecially in the great and opulent cities of the empire, 
 as a temporal rather than as a spiritual dignity. The in- 
 terested views, the selfish and angry passions, the arts of 
 perfidy and dissimulation, the secret corruption, the open 
 and even bloody violence which had formerly disgraced 
 the freedom of election in the commonwealths of Greece 
 and Rome, too often influenced the choice of the suc- 
 cessors of the apostles. While one of the candidates 
 boasted the honors of his family, a second allured his 
 judges by the delicacies of a plentiful table, and a third, 
 more guilty than his rivals, offered to share the plunder 
 of the church among the accomplices of his sacrilegious 
 hopes." — Gibbon, cJiap, 20, 'paragraph 22. 
 
 In the quotations previously given, we have seen how 
 the " mystery of iniquity," even in the first centuries, had 
 all the depraved characteristics of the " man of sin." In 
 the few that follow we shall see how at the same time he 
 
The Great Apostasy. 337 
 
 was preparing to stand forth as the one " that opposeth 
 and exalteth himself against all that is called God or 
 that is worshiped; so that he sitteth in the temple of 
 God, setting himself forth as God." 2 Thess. 2 : 4, re- 
 vised version. Says the historian : — 
 
 " The bishop was the perpetual censor of the morals 
 of his people. The discipline of penance was digested 
 into a system of canonical jurisprudence, which accu- 
 rately defined the duty of private or public confession, 
 the rules of evidence, the degrees of guilt, and the meas- 
 ure of punishment. It was impossible to execute this 
 spiritual censure if the Christian pontiff, who punished 
 the obscure sins of the multitude, respected the conspic- 
 uous vices and destructive crimes of the magistrate; but 
 it was impossible to arraign the conduct of the magis- 
 trate, without controlling the administration of civil 
 government. Some considerations of religion, or loyalty, 
 or fear, protected the sacred persons of the emperors 
 from the zeal or resentment of the bishops; but they 
 boldly censured and excommunicated the subordinate 
 tyrants, who were not invested with the majesty of the 
 purple. St. Athanasius excommunicated one of the min- 
 isters of Egypt; and the interdict which he pronounced, 
 of fire and water, was solemnly transmitted to the 
 churches of Cappadocia. Under the reign of the younger 
 Theodosius, the polite and eloquent Synesius, one of the 
 descendants of Hercules, filled the episcopal seat of Ptol- 
 emais, near the ruins of ancient Gyrene, and the philo- 
 sophic bishop supported with dignity the character which 
 he had assumed with reluctance. He vanquished the 
 monster of Libya, the president Andronicus, who abused 
 the authority of a venal ofiSce, invented new modes of 
 rapine and torture, and aggravated the guilt of oppression 
 by that of sacrilege. After a fruitless attempt to reclaim 
 the haughty magistrate by mild and religious admonition, 
 Synesius proceeds to inflict the last sentence of ecclesi- 
 astical justice, which devotes Andronicus, with his as- 
 
 22 
 
338 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 sociates and their families, to the abhorrence of earth 
 and Heaven. The impenitent sinners, more cruel than 
 Phalaris or Sennacherib, more destructive than war, 
 pestilence, or a cloud of locusts, are deprived of the 
 name and privileges of Christians, of the participation of 
 the sacraments, and of the hope of Paradise. The bishop 
 exhorts the clergy, the magistrates, and the people, to 
 renounce all society with the enemies of Christ; to ex- 
 clude them from their houses and tables ; and to refuse 
 them the common offices of life, and the decent rites of 
 burial. The church of Ptolemais, obscure and con- 
 temptible as she may appear, addresses this declaration 
 to all her sister churches of the world ; and the profane 
 who reject her decrees, will be involved in the guilt and 
 punishment of Andronicus and his impious followers. 
 These spiritual terrors were enforced by a dextrous ap- 
 plication to the Byzantine court ; the trembling president 
 implored the mercy of the church ; and the descendant 
 of Hercules enjoyed the satisfaction of raising a prostrate 
 tyrant from the ground. Such principles and such ex- 
 am pies insensibly prepared the triumph of the Roman 
 pontiffs, who have trampled on the necks of kings." — 
 Decline and Fall, chap. 20, paragraph 26. 
 
 Let no one think that this statement of the case is 
 colored in the least, to the prejudice of the church. We 
 have quoted from Gibbon, because he summarizes the 
 matter in the most concise form ; if the reader will ex- 
 amine the "Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical 
 Cyclopedia," of McClintock and Strong, or the "Schaff- 
 Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge," he will 
 find all the above, and much more, given in detail. 
 
 The quotation last given shows the extent which eccle- 
 siastical arrogance had reached in the early part of the 
 fifth century ; but a few more facts must be stated, in 
 order more fully to emphasize the deplorable condition 
 
The Great Apostasy. 339 
 
 of the church at that time, which could: make such arro- 
 gance possible. This Synesius, of whom Gibbon speaks, 
 was a native of Cyrene, born about A. d. 375 ; he studied 
 philosophy and rhetoric at Alexandria, under Hypatia, 
 the famous female heathen philosopher. He returned to 
 his estate, where he devoted himself to the study of philos- 
 ophy, to writing verses, and to the chase, acting the part 
 of the elegant, wealthy gentleman of leisure. In 410 
 A. D., while still a pagan, he was elected bishop of Ptol- 
 emais, where he magnified his office in the way already 
 recorded. Schaif says: — 
 
 "In 409 or 410 the people of Ptolemais elected him — 
 the pagan philosopher, a married man — their bishop; 
 and after some hesitation he accepted.'X 
 
 But he never gave up his heathenism. " McClintock 
 and Strong's Cyclopedia," after speaking of the excellence 
 of his style as a writer, says: — 
 
 " His philosophy is without originality. Yet even his 
 philosophy merits attention, as illustrating the fine gra- 
 dations by which pagan speculation melted into the sem- 
 blance of Christianity without divesting itself of its 
 pagan phrase and spirit." 
 
 Mosheim calls him a "semi-Christian." 
 
 This is a specimen of those who were elected to rule 
 the church. When men who had never renounced pagan 
 manner of thought and pagan practices, were not only 
 admitted to communion in so-called Christian churches, 
 but were actually placed at the head of the church, is it 
 a misnomer to call the papacy which they formed, " pa- 
 ganism baptized " ? Who having a knowledge of these 
 facts, will be bold enough to quote the " custom of the 
 early church " as a reason for Sunday observance, or for 
 any other practice? 
 
340 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 The case of Synesius was not an isolated one. Among 
 ancient ecclesiastics, Ambrose, of Milan, stands at the 
 head. Yet the circumstances of liis elevation to the 
 episcopacy are thus concisely and accurately summarize'd 
 by the historian: — 
 
 "The palm of episcopal vigor and ability was justly 
 claimed by the intrepid Ambrose. He was descended 
 from a noble family of Romans ; his father had exercised 
 the important office of Praetorian prefect of Gaul; and 
 the son, after passing through the studies of a liberal 
 education, attained, in the regular gradation of civil 
 honors, the station of consular of Liguria, a province 
 which included the imperial residence of Milan. At the 
 age of thirty-four, and before he had received the sacra- 
 ment of baptism, Ambrose, to his own surprise, and to 
 that of the world, was suddenly transformed from a gov- 
 ernor to an archbishop. Without the least mixture, as 
 it is §aid, of art or intrigue, the whole body of the people 
 unanimously saluted him with the episcopal title; the 
 concord and perseverance of their acclamations were 
 ascribed to a preternatural impulse ; and the reluctant 
 magistrate was compelled to undertake a spiritual office, 
 for which he was not prepared by the habits and occupa- 
 tions of his former life. But the active force of his 
 genius soon qualified him to exercise, and with zeal and 
 prudence, the duties of his ecclesiastical jurisdiction ; and 
 while he cheerfully renounced the vain and s.plendid 
 trappings of temporal greatness, he condescended, for the 
 good of the church, to direct the conscience ofHhe em- 
 perors, and to control the administration of the empire." — 
 Decline and Fall, chap. 27 , paragraph 12. 
 
 These things will not occasion surprise to those who 
 have read the chapters in this book, upon the Fathers. 
 If the writings of "semi-Christian" (which means semi- 
 pagan) men could be accepted by the church as inspired, 
 it was a natural consequence for the same kind of men 
 
The Great Apostasy. 841 
 
 to be placed in positions of chief authority. It should 
 not be forgotten that a " semi-Christian " was one who 
 professed Christianity and practiced paganism, or who 
 melted pagan speculation "into the semblance of Chris- 
 tianity." 
 
 Speaking of Gregory, bishop of Constantinople, and 
 the way in which his successor was appointed. Gibbon 
 says : — 
 
 " His resignation was accepted by the synod, and by 
 the emperor, with more readiness than he seems to have 
 expected. At the time when he might have hoped to 
 enjoy the fruits of his victory, his episcopal throne was 
 filled by the senator Nectarius ; and the new archbisliop, 
 accidentally reconmiended by his easy temper and vener- 
 able aspect, was obliged to delay the ceremony of his 
 consecration, till he had previously dispatched the rites of 
 his baptism." — Decline and Fall, chap. 27, paragraph 9. 
 
 These are the men to whom we are directed to look 
 for guidance in matters of Christian faith and practice. 
 We prefer to look to a higher source. What could be 
 expected of a church which depended for its instruction 
 upon men who, up to the time of their consecration as 
 bishops, and, in fact, all their lives, were heathen philos- 
 ophers and politicians? "Can the blind lead the blind? 
 shall they not both fall into the ditch ? " Luke 6 : 39. 
 
 Of course persecution was the natural result of so 
 great power lodged in the hands of such men. Human 
 nature cannot brook restraint or opposition, and when 
 unconverted men stood at the liead of the church, they 
 would naturally, in combating heresy, employ the methods 
 of secular tyrants. And " heresy," be it understood, was 
 whatever differed from the ideas of these pagan-Christian 
 bishops. We should be remiss in our duty if we did not 
 
342 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 point out the fact that the union of Church and State 
 was responsible for tliis condition of things. As corrob- 
 orating the conclusion first stated in this paragraph, we 
 quote the following : — 
 
 " It was supposed, that the error of the heretics could 
 proceed only from the obstinate temper of their minds; 
 and that such a temper was a fit object of censure and 
 punishment. The anathemas of the church were fortified 
 by a sort of civil excommunication; which separated 
 them from their fellow-citizens, by a peculiar brand of 
 infamy; and this declaration of the supreme magistrate 
 tended to justify, or at least to excuse, the insults of a 
 fanatic populace. The sectaries were gradually dis- 
 qualified for the possession of honorable or lucrative em- 
 ployments; and Theodosius was satisfied with his own 
 justice, when he decreed, that, as the Eunomians distin- 
 guished the nature of the Son from that of the Father, 
 they should be incapable of making their wills, or of 
 receiving any advantage from testamentary donations. 
 The guilt of the Manichsean heresy was esteemed of such 
 magnitude, that it could be expiated only by the death 
 of the offender ; and the same capital punishment was 
 inflicted on the Audians, or Quartodecimans, who should 
 dare to perpetrate the atrocious crime of celebrating on 
 an improper day the festival of Easter. Every Roman 
 might exercise the right of public accusation; but the 
 ofliice of Inquisitors of the Faith, a name so deservedly 
 abhorred, was first instituted under the reign of Theodo- 
 sius." — Decline and Fall, chap. 27, paragraph 10. 
 
 And in behalf of the conclusion in regard to Church 
 and State the following is quoted : — 
 
 "The grateful a})[)lause of the clergy has consecrated 
 the memory of a prince who indulged iheir passions and 
 promoted their interest. Constantine gave them security, 
 wealth, honors, and revenge; and the support of the or- 
 thodox faith was considered as the most sacred and ira- 
 
The Great Apostasy. 343 
 
 portant duty of the civil magistrate. The edict of Milan, 
 the great charter of toleration, had confirmed to each in- 
 dividual of the Roman world the privilege of choosing 
 and professing his own religion. But this inestimable 
 privilege was soon violated ; with the knowledge of truth, 
 the emperor imbibed the maxims of persecution ; and the 
 sects which dissented from the Catholic Church were 
 afflicted and oppressed by the triumph of Christianity. 
 Constantine easily believed that the heretics, who pre- 
 sumed to dispute /lis opinions, or to oppose /m commands, 
 were guilty of the most absurd and criminal obstinacy ; 
 and that a seasonable application of moderate severities 
 might save those unhappy men from the danger of an 
 everlasting condemnation. Not a moment was lost in ex- 
 cluding the ministers and teachers of the separated con- 
 gregations from any share of the rewards and immunities 
 which the emperor had so liberally bestowed on the or- 
 thodox clergy. But as the sectaries might still exist un- 
 der the cloud of royal disgrace, the conquest of the East 
 was immediately followed by an edict which announced 
 their total destruction. After a preamble filled with 
 passion and reproach, Constantine absolutely prohibits 
 the assemblies of the heretics, and confiscates their public 
 property to the use either of the revenue or of the Catholic 
 Church. . . . The design of extirpating the name, 
 or at least of restraining the progress, of these odious her- 
 etics, was prosecuted with vigor and effect. Some of the 
 penal regulations were copied from the edicts of Diocle- 
 tian; and this method of conversion was applauded by 
 the same bishops w^ho had felt the hand of oppression, 
 and pleaded for the rights of humanity." — Id.^ chap. 21, 
 paragraph 1. 
 
 To show that this is a simple historical fact, and not 
 the harsh judgment of one who was biased in his opinions, 
 we quote a decree of Constantine, concerning the doc- 
 trines of Arius and those who held to them. It is taken 
 from the "Ecclesiastical History" of Socrates, book 1, 
 chap. 9, and reads as follows : — 
 
344 Fathers of the Catholic Church. 
 
 "Victor Constantine Maximus Augustus, to the bish- 
 ops and people. — Since Arius has imitated wicked and 
 impious persons, it is just that he should undergo the 
 like ignominy. Wherefore as Porphyry, that enemy of 
 piety, for having composed licentious treatises against re- 
 ligion, found a suitable recompense, and such as thence- 
 forth branded him with infamy, overwhelming him with 
 deserved reproach, his impious writings also having been 
 destroyed; so now it seems fit both that Arius and such 
 as hold his sentiments should be denominated Porphy- 
 rians, that they may take their appellation from those 
 whose conduct they have imitated. And in addition to 
 this, if any treatise composed by Arius should be dis- 
 covered, let it be consigned to the flames, in order that 
 not only his depraved doctrine may be .suppressed, but 
 also that no memorial of him may be by any means left. 
 This therefore I decree, that if anyone shall be detected 
 in concealing a book compiled by Arius, and shall not 
 instantly bring it forward and burn it, the penalty for 
 this offense shall be death ; for immediately after convic- 
 tion the criminal shall suffer capital punishment. May 
 God preserve you ! " 
 
 We have now shown the condition of the church in 
 the period in which Sunday observance originated among 
 Christians. We would by no means have the reader get 
 the idea that what has been described in the quotations 
 made, was Christianity in any sense of the term. It was 
 essentially paganism under the mask of Christianity, — 
 a mask which cannot in the least conceal the monster 
 beneath, from the eyes of one who is not blinded by un- 
 reasoning prejudice. True Christianity existed at the 
 same time, but it did not rear its head so loftily. True to 
 its nature, it occupied a lowly position. Its adherents 
 instead of being "the people" of the Roman Empire, were 
 only a very small minority of the subjects of that great 
 
The Great Apostasy. 345 
 
 power; "for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that 
 leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in 
 thereat; because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, 
 which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it." 
 Matt. 7:13, 14. True Christianity did not invoke the 
 aid of temporal power, but made its conquests by the 
 aid alone of the Spirit, and by its sword, which is the word 
 of God. Therefore those who wish to walk in the strait 
 and narrow way marked out by the great Founder of 
 Christianity, will not go for guidance to the customs of 
 that vast assemblage of heathen Christians which is 
 called the "church," but to the word of God, "which liv- 
 eth and abideth forever." 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 THE TRUE AND ABIDING SABBATH. 
 
 In the body of the book the reader has been shown the 
 foundation upon which the Sunday-sabbath rests; his at- 
 tention is now called to a very brief examination of the 
 foundation upon which the true Sabbath rests, that he 
 may contrast the baseless fabric of heathenism with that 
 which cannot be shaken. 
 
 * ' Kemember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days 
 shalt thou labor, and do all thy work; but the seventh day 
 is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God; in it thou shalt not 
 do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy 
 man-servant, nor thy maid-servant, nor thy cattle, nor 
 thy stranger that is within thy gates; for in six days the 
 Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them 
 is; and rested the seventh day; wherefore the Lord blessed 
 the Sabbath day, and hallowed it." Ex. 20 : 8-11. 
 
 The fourth commandment is the solid foundation upon 
 which Sabbath-keeping rests. They who trei^ble at the 
 word of God, can desire no other. If we analyze it, we 
 shall find that it consists of a simple command to keep 
 the Sabbath day holy, and then such an explicit defini- 
 tion of the Sabbath as distinguishes it from every other 
 day, so that no attentive person can fail to know what day 
 the Sabbath is. 
 
 " The seventh day is the Sabbath." What seventh day? 
 The most natural conclusion is that it is the seventh day 
 of the week; for the fact that six days of labor precede it, 
 shows that it is the last in a period of seven days; and the 
 only period of seven days is the week. Besides, the com- 
 
 (347) 
 
348 Appendix. 
 
 mandment specifies what is meant by saying, "For in six 
 days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all 
 that in them is; and rested the seventh day; wherefore 
 the Lord blessed the Sabbath day, and hallowed it." The 
 *' creation week " is a very common term to express the 
 time of God's creation and rest. The day on which God 
 rested was the seventh day of the creation week; the day 
 on which we are commanded to rest is the seventh day of 
 the week, which took its rise from the first week of time, 
 in which God created the heavens and the earth, and 
 rested. 
 
 That the seventh day of the week is the Sabbath, and 
 that this is what the commandment enjoins, is evident 
 from a passage in the New Testament. The writers of the 
 four Gospels all record with more or less minuteness the 
 events of the crucifixion and resurrection of Christ. They 
 all state that the crucifixion was on the preparation day, 
 that is, the day before the Sabbath. They likewise all 
 mention the fact that certain women came to the sepul- 
 cher very early on the first day of the week, and found it 
 empty. Luke says (24 :1) that they came " upon the first 
 day of the week, very early in the morning;" and Mark 
 says (16:1) that it was "when the Sabbath was past." 
 Now read in consecutive order what Luke says immedi- 
 ately following his account of the burial of Jesus: — 
 
 "And t\mi day was the preparation, and the Sabbath 
 drew on. And the women also which came with him from 
 Galilee, followed after, and beheld the sepulcher, and how 
 his body was laid. And they returned, and prepared spices 
 and ointments; and rested the Sabbath day according to 
 the commandment. Now upon the first day of the week, 
 very early in the morning, they came unto the sepulcher, 
 bringing the spices which they had prepared." Luke 23: 
 54-56; 24:1. 
 
 From this text we learn that the preparation day im- 
 mediately preceded the Sabbath day. Verse 54. We learn 
 
Appendix. 349 
 
 also that the first day of the week immediately followed 
 the Sabbath. Then since there are but seven days in the 
 week, that Sabbath day must have been the seventh day 
 of the week. *' Well," says one, ** nobody questions that; 
 what is the use of stating it so explicitly? " Simply be- 
 cause that Sabbath day which is proved beyond all possi- 
 bility of denial to have been the seventh day of the week, 
 was kept by the women, ^'according to the command- 
 ment.''^ Thus we have it most positively proved by an in- 
 spired writer that the Sabbath day which the fourth com- 
 mandment says we must remember to keep holy, is the 
 seventh day of the week. 
 
 "Eemember the Sabbath day to keep it holy," not to 
 m,ake it holy. Man cannot make anything holy; God 
 alone has that power. It is an unwarrantable, almost a 
 blasphemous, assumption, to say that men can sanctify as 
 the Sabbath any day on which they may choose to rest. 
 The Lord made the Sabbath day holy, and he requires man 
 to keep it holy, and not to pollute it by unholy words and 
 deeds. 
 
 But the Sabbath did not originate with the giving of 
 the commandment from Sinai. At that time God only de- 
 clared the law which already existed. The sacredness of 
 the Sabbath, which is guarded by the fourth command- 
 ment, did not begin at that time, any more than the sa- 
 credness of human life, which is guarded by the sixth 
 commandment, began at that time. The commandment 
 itself refers us to creation. Why are we commanded to 
 keep the Sabbath day holy? "For [because] in six days 
 the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in 
 them is; and rested the seventh day; wherefore the Lord 
 blessed the Sabbath day, and hallowed it." 
 
 The statement that God blessed and hallowed the Sab- 
 bath day, is equivalent to saying that he blessed and hal- 
 lowed the seventh day, for " the seventh day is the Sab- 
 bath." It became the Sabbath from the time when God 
 
350 Appendix. 
 
 rested upon it. The Sabbath is the name of the seventh 
 day of the week, which God sanctified. That God did 
 bless and sanctify, or make holy, the seventh day in par- 
 ticular, arid not merely the Sabbath institution in general, 
 is plainly declared in the record to which the command- 
 ment refers. 
 
 "Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all 
 the host of them. And on the seventh day God ended his 
 work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh 
 day from all his work which he had made. And Ood 
 blessed the seventh day and sanctified it; because that in 
 it he had rested from all his work which God created and 
 made." 
 
 This statement that God sanctified the seventh day, 
 because that in it he had rested, upsets the theory that 
 God's Sabbath is an immensely long time; that the Sab- 
 bath which he begun when he finished the work of crea- 
 tion, is not yet completed. Such a theory makes nonsense 
 of the fourth commandment, which enjoins upon us the 
 day on which God rested; but if it were true that God's 
 Sabbath has continued since creation, and is even now 
 going on, a command for us to keep the Sabbath of the 
 Lord would be the same as a command for us never to do 
 any work! But the fact is clearly stated, that when God 
 blessed and sanctified the seventh day, his rest upon it 
 was in the past. He blessed and sanctified it, not because 
 he was resting in it, but because he had rested in it. 
 
 Notice now the steps by which the Sabbath was made: 
 First, God made the heavens and the earth in six days, — 
 six days such as we are familiar with, composed of a dark 
 part and a light part, caused by the revolution of the 
 earth upon its axis, and each completed in twenty-four 
 hours. Second, God rested on the seventh day. Third, 
 he blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because that 
 in it he had rested. Then it became God's holy Sabbath 
 day. 
 
Appendix. 351 
 
 At the close of God's rest upon the seventh day, he 
 sanctified it. To sanctify means to appoint, to set apart 
 by specific directions and injunctions. Thus the Lord 
 says: "Sanctify ye a fast, call a solemn assembly." Joel 
 1 : 14. The children of Israel appointed (margin, sancti- 
 fied) six cities as places of refuge. (See Joshua 20:7.) 
 They sanctified them by setting them apart for that pur- 
 pose, and letting everybody know it. Still more clear is 
 the evidence in the nineteenth of Exodus. When the 
 Lord would come down upon Mount Sinai, he said to 
 Moses: "And thou shalt set bounds unto the people round 
 about, saying. Take heed to yourselves, that ye go not up 
 into the mount, or touch the border of it." Ex. 19 : 12. 
 And afterwards Moses said unto the Lord: "The people 
 cannot come up to Mount Sinai; for thou chargedst us, 
 saying, Set bounds about the mount, and sanctify it." 
 Verse 23. So God sanctified the Sabbath, by placing 
 around it the sanctions of his word, and commanding the 
 people then living — Adam and Eve — and through tkem 
 their descendants, not to step over those bounds. 
 
 On these three facts the Sabbath rests: God created the 
 heavens and the earth in six days; he rested on the sev- 
 enth day; he blessed and sanctified, or appointed as sacred, 
 the seventh day. Before the Sabbath can be changed, 
 the facts of creation must be changed. But a fact is that 
 which has been done, "and a fact cannot be changed. Even 
 if the heavens and the earth were destroyed, it would still 
 remain a fact that God created them, and that he rested 
 upon and blessed and hallowed the seventh day, as a me- 
 morial of his creation; and upon these facts the Sabbath 
 rests. To abolish the Sabbath, or to change it to another 
 day than the seventh, it would be necessary to annihilate 
 the heavens and the earth, and not only so, but to annihi- 
 late the fact that they were ever created, so as to make it 
 a truth that they never had an existence. But this even 
 omnipotence cannot do. 
 
352 Appendix. 
 
 What stability there is to the works of God! "The 
 works of his hands are verity and judo;ment; all his com- 
 mandments are sure. They stand fast forever and ever, 
 and are done in truth and uprightness." Ps. Ill ; 7, 8. 
 Therefore "it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than 
 one tittle of the law to fail." Luke 16 : 17. 
 
 THE APOSTLES AND THE FIRST DAY OF THE WEEK. 
 
 In the chapter on " Sun-worship and Sunday " it is shown 
 that Sunday was from the most ancient times a heathen 
 festival day, devoted to the licentious sun-worship, and 
 that the adaption of it by the early church was a link 
 which joined the church to paganism. Its existence in 
 the church to-day, although it has been clothed with 
 something of the semblance of the Sabbath, whose place it 
 has usurped, is a standing reminder of the great apostasy, 
 and a proof that the Reformation did not entirely clear 
 the church from pagan corruption. This being the case, 
 it is evident that there can be no authority for it in the 
 Bible, and this has been expressly stated. It may, however, 
 be well to note those passages which mention the first day of 
 the week, since if there were any sacredness attached to 
 the day, it would there be at least intimated. The argu- 
 ment must, as a matter of course, be negative. 
 
 Our task is not very great, for the first day of the week 
 
 ^ is mentioned only eight times in the New Testament, and 
 
 ^six of these instances of its occurrence have reference to 
 
 a single first day,— the day on which Christ rose from the 
 
 tomb. Thesesix texts are MijJitr^STl; Mark 16:2, 9; Luke 
 
 24:1; John 20:1, 19. They read, in order, as follows:— 
 
 " In the end of the Sabb^]JJ»f-g^tnEie'gah*t?Hk i^q;i to^a:a;g3 
 the first day of the>^(5e1c7came Mary Magdalene and the 
 other Mary to sd^he sepulcher.'' Matt. 28: 1. 
 
 "And when the Sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, 
 
Appendix. 353 
 
 and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, had brought 
 sweet spices, that they might come and anoint him. And 
 very early in the morning the first day of the week, they 
 came unto the sepulcher at the rising of the sun." Mark 
 16:1,2. 
 
 "Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the 
 week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom 
 he had cast seven devils." Mark 16: 9. 
 
 "Now upon the first day of the week, very early in the 
 morning, they came unto the sepulcher, bringing the spices 
 which they had prepared." Luke 24: 1. 
 
 "The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene 
 early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulcher, and seeth 
 the stone taken away from the sepulcher." John 20: 1. 
 
 "Then the same day at evening, being the first day of 
 the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples 
 were assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood 
 in the midst, and said unto them, Peace be unto you." 
 John 20: 19. 
 
 In none of these texts is there the least hint that the 
 day was sacred, or was henceforth to be considered so. 
 They simply state that Jesus met with certain of his disci- 
 ples on the day of his resurrection. Those incidents are 
 mentioned to show that Christ did really rise from the 
 dead the third day, as he had said. That he should show 
 himself at once to his disciples, was the most natural thing 
 in the world, in order to relieve their sorrow. The meeting 
 referred to in John 20 : 19 was not a religious meeting, not 
 a gathering for prayer, or to celebrate the resurrection, 
 but simply such a meeting as Jesus had with Mary in the 
 garden, with the other women, and with Peter, being one 
 of the " many infallible proofs " of his resurrection. That 
 this is so, is evident from the fact that the eleven had one 
 common abode (Acts 1: 13), and that just before Jesus came 
 into the room where they were, the two disciples to whom 
 Jesus appeared "as they walked, and went into the 
 23 
 
354 Appendix. 
 
 country " had returned and told the eleven that Jesus was 
 risen, but their story was not believed Mark 16: 12, 13. 
 Moreover, when Jesus himself appeared unto them, they 
 were sitt ing at mea i, and he " upbraided them with their 
 unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not 
 them which had seen him after he was risen." Mark 
 16:14. They could not hav e celebrated his resurrection, 
 when they did no t beli eve that he had risen. A compari- 
 son of Acts 1: 13 with Mark 16 : 14, and Luke 24 : 36-43, is 
 sufficient to show that when;^Jesus met with his disciples 
 //on the evening of the da/ of "his resurrection, they were 
 (( simply eati ng their sup per a t hom e, and did n ot bel ieve 
 vjthat he had risen. 
 
 When Jesus met with them he did not tell them that 
 thenceforth they must observe the first day of the week in 
 honor of his resurrection, nor did he pronounce any bless- 
 ing on that day. In short, he made no reference what- 
 ever to the day. To the disciples he gave the salutation 
 of peace, saying, " Peace be unto you," and he breathed 
 on them, and said, "Eeceive ye the Holy Ghost;" but that 
 affected the disciples, and not the day. Thus we see that 
 in connection with the resurrection of Jesus there is not 
 the r emotest hin t of Sunday sacredness. 
 
 The next reference to the first day of the week is in 
 Acts 20:7, and there we find that a meeting was held on 
 that day. And here one thing may be noted, namely, 
 that this is the o^ly direct mention in the New Testament 
 of a religious meeting on the first day of the week. Jf 
 there were the record of fifty meetings on that day, how- 
 ever, that would not in the least affect its standing, for 
 meetings were held e ver y day in the week. The New 
 Testament contains an account of m^iiiy meetings held on 
 the Sabbath, but that is no reason wliy the Sabbath should 
 be kept. The Sabbath stands on a different foundation 
 than that, even on the unchanging word of God. 
 
 But what of this one meeting on the first day of the 
 
Appendix. 355 
 
 week. We note first that it was in the night, for "tliore 
 were many lights in the upper chamber, where they were 
 gathered together" (verse 8); and Paul j>reached until 
 midnight (verse 7), and then, after a brief intermission, 
 until break of day, when he departed. Verse 11". But 
 every day, according to the Bible method of reckoning 
 time, ends at the setting of the sun. (See Gen. 1: 5, 8, 13, 
 19, 23, 31; Lev. 23:32; Mark 1:32.) Therefore, since this 
 meeting at T^oas was in the dark part of the first day of 
 the week, it could not have been at the close of that day, 
 but must have been at the beginning, corresponding to 
 what is popularly designated as " Saturday night." 
 
 Now note what immediately followed that Saturday 
 night meeting. As soon as it was break of day, on Sun- 
 day morning, Paul's companions went to the ship, and re- 
 sumed their journey to Jerusalem, while Paul himself chose 
 to walk across the country and join the ship's company at 
 Assos. The distance from Troas to Assos was about sixty 
 miles by water, but only about nineteen by land, so that 
 Paul could easily reach that place before the ship did. 
 That this trip was taken on the first day of the week is so 
 evident that few, if any, commentators suggest any differ- 
 ent view. The Scriptures need no indorsement from men; 
 but it may help some minds to know that this view of the 
 text is not a peculiar one. *' Conybeare and Howson's Life 
 of Paul" says of this trip of Paul's : — 
 
 "Strength and peace were surely sought and'obtained 
 by the apostle, from the Redeemer, as he pursued his 
 lonely road that Sunday afternoon in spring among the 
 oak woods and the streams of Ida."— Chapter 20, para- 
 graph 11. 
 
 So far, then, as the example of the apostles goes, Sunday 
 is to be used in secular employment. 
 
 One more text completes the list of references to the first 
 day. It is 1 Cor. 16: 2, and, together with the preceding 
 verse, reads as follows: — 
 \ 
 
356 Appendix. 
 
 "Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I have 
 given order to the churches of Galatia, even so do yc. 
 Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay 
 by him in store, as God hath prospered him, that there, be 
 no gatherings when I come." 
 
 A literal rendering of this would be, " Let each one of 
 you lay by himself at home, treasuring up in store, as God 
 hath prospered him," and that Paul's injunction has refer- 
 ence to private stores and not to public collections is evident 
 from the language, as well as from what the apostle wrote 
 in his second epistle, in which he says: " I thought it nec- 
 essary to exhort the brethren, that they would go before 
 unto you, and make up beforehand your bounty, whereof 
 ye had notice before, that the same might be ready, as 
 a matter of bounty, and not as of covetousncss." 2 Cor. 
 9:5. But if their offerings had been cast into the col- 
 lection box, and so kept all together in the treasury 
 of the church, there would have been no need of sending 
 the brethren ahead to make up b( forehand their bounty. 
 
 These are all the texts that speak of the first day of the 
 week, and not one of them intimates that it was in any 
 sense a sacred day. Indeed, at the time the New Testa- 
 ment was written, no one in the world had ever heard of 
 "the day of the sun " being kept as a sacred day, for the 
 heathen observed it only as a Avild festival day. 
 
 But throughout the New Testament the seventh day of 
 the week is called the Sabbath — the same title that is 
 given to it in the commandment. This is not because the 
 New Testament writers were Jews, for they did not write 
 as Jews, but as men inspired by the Holy Spirit. They 
 were Christians, Writing, under guidance of the Spirit of 
 God, for the comfort, encouragement, and instruction of 
 Christians until the end of time. If the seventh day 
 were not the Sabbath for Christians and for all men, then 
 the Holy Spirit would not have given it that name. But 
 the truth is, as shown before, that the seventh day is the 
 
Appendix. 357 
 
 Sabbath — made so by the unchangeable act of the Creator 
 — and no other day can ever be the Sabbath. And so we 
 see that Dr. Scott and the Christian at Work told the exact 
 truth when they said that we must go to later than apos- 
 tolic times to find Sunday observance, and that it came in 
 gradually and silently. But for everything that came 
 into the church after the days of Christ, the church is 
 indebted to paganism. 
 
BIOGRAPHICAL NOTES. 
 
 Johann August Wilhelm Neander was born in Gottin- 
 gen, Germany, January 15, 1789, and died July 14, 1850. 
 He was by birth a Jew, but in 1806 he renounced Judaism. 
 His name was originally Mendel, but upon his baptism he 
 adopted the name Neander, from two Greek words sig- 
 nifying "new man." He was at various times professor 
 in the Universities of Heidelberg and Berlin. He was the 
 author of numerous works, the greatest of which was his 
 " Church History." He is universally conceded to be by far 
 the greatest of ecclesiastical historians, and is commonly 
 called " the father of modern church history." 
 
 Archibald Bower was born at Dundee, Scotland, Janu- 
 ary 17, 1686, and died in London, September 3, 1766. In 
 early life he was a Catholic, and became a Jesuit. In 1726 
 he became a member of the Established Church of En- 
 gland, and was made librarian to the ^ueen in 1747. His 
 ''History of the Popes" (London, 1750) contains the most 
 copious account of the popes that has ever appeared in 
 the English language. 
 
 Eusebius of Caesarea, called the "father of church 
 history," was born A. D. 270. He was the first to collect 
 the scattered annals of the first three centuries of the 
 Christian church, in his "Ecclesiastical History,". which 
 covers the ground from the birth of Christ to the defeat of 
 Licinius, A. D. 324. He was very prominent in the Trinita- 
 rian controversy, though just which side he espoused in the 
 Council of Nice it is difiicult to decide, as his policy 
 through life was to be on the winning side. This led him 
 to be the eulogist of Constantine, whose intimate friend 
 he became, and whose life he wrote, completing it just 
 before his death, which occurred A. d. 340. 
 (358) 
 
Appendix. 359 
 
 • 
 
 John Karl Ludwi^ Gieseler was born at Petersliagen 
 near Minden, Prussia, March 3, 1793; he died at Gottin- 
 gen, July 8, 1854. He was appointed director of the gym- 
 nasium of Cleve, in 1818, and professor of theology in 
 Bonn University, in 1819. In 1831 he accepted a call to 
 the University of Gottingcn, where he spent the remainder 
 of his life. His reputation rests chiefly on his " Church 
 History." The "Schaff-PIerzog Encyclopedia " says that 
 this work is in its kind "one of the most remarkable produc- 
 tions of German learning, distinguished by its immense 
 erudition, accuracy, and careful selection of passages." 
 And " McClintock and Strong's Encyclopedia" declares it to 
 be "beyond question, the most learned, faithful, and im- 
 partial compendium of church history that has ever ap- 
 peared." 
 
 Philip Schaff, D. D., LL. D,, was born at Coire, Switzer- 
 land, January 1, 1819. He studied at Coire, in the gym- 
 nasium at Stuttgart, and in the universities of Tiibingen, 
 Halle, and Berlin. After traveling through Europe as 
 tutor to a Prussian nobleman, he became lecturer on exe- 
 gesis and church history in the University of Berlin. 
 From 1843 until 1863 he was a professor in the German Re- 
 formed Theological Seminary at Mercersburg, Pennsylva- 
 nia. Afterwards he lectured on church history in the 
 theological seminaries at Andover, Hartford, and New 
 York, and since 1869 has been a professor in the Union 
 Theological Seminary, New York. He is one of the 
 founders of the American branch of the Evangelical Alli- 
 ance, and has been prominent in the councils of that body, 
 both in this and foreign countries. He was president of 
 the American Bible Revision Committee, and attended 
 several meetings of the British Committee, in the Jerusa- 
 lem Chamber, London. He is the author of very many 
 works, both in German and English, and some of his works 
 have been translated into French, Dutch, Greek, Russian, 
 Chinese, Japanese, Syriac, and Arabic. 
 
360 Appendix. 
 
 Frederic William Farrar, D. D., was born in Bombay, 
 India, August 7, 1831. He was educated at King Will- 
 iam's College, Isle of Man, King's College, London, Uni- 
 versity of London, and Trinity College, Cambridge. He 
 was ordained deacon of the Church of England in 1854, 
 and priest in 1857; in 1876 he became canon, and in 1883 
 archdeacon, of Westminster. He is quite prominent as an 
 educator and a temperance worker, and is the author of 
 very many works. 
 
 Thomas De Quincey was born in Manchester, England, 
 August 15, 1785, and died December 8, 1859. He was 
 noted for his conversational powers, and his rare and 
 varied stock of information. He became so proficient in 
 Greek at an early age that his teacher said he could ha- 
 rangue an Athenian mob. His published works are nu- 
 merous, and stored with information, which is conveyed iu 
 a most interesting manner. 
 
 William D. Killen, D. D. (Presbyterian), was born at 
 Ballymena, County Antrim, Ireland, April 5, 1806. He 
 was educated at the Royal Academical Institution in 
 Belfast, and in 1829 became minister of Raphoe, County 
 Donegal, Ireland. In 1841 he was called to Belfast, be- 
 came Professor of Ecclesiastical History and Pastoral 
 Theology to the General Assembly of the Presbyterian 
 Church in Ireland, and in 1869 he became president of 
 the faculty. 
 
 John Lawrence von Mosheim, or Johann Lorenz, was 
 an eminent German theologian, pulpit orator, and histo- 
 rian. He was born at Lubeck, in 1694, and died in 1755. 
 He was educated at Kiel, and at the age of thirty-one be- 
 came professor of theology at Helmstedt, where he ob- 
 tained a wide celebrity as a teacher. In 1747 he was 
 called to the chair of theology in the university at Got- 
 tingen, with the title of chancellor. Though not a pro- 
 lific writer, he was an able one, and his great work, 
 ** Institutes of Ecclesiastical History," originally wr^ten 
 
Appendix. 361 
 
 in Latin, has been translated into German, French, and 
 English. Besides the work already mentioned, Mosheim 
 wrote "Commentaries on Christianity before the Time of 
 Constantine the Great " (referred to in this work as *' Lc- 
 clesiastical Commentaries"), and " Morality of the Holy 
 Scriptures," a work in nine volumes, besides other works 
 of minor importance. He also translated Cudworth's '* In- 
 tellectual System " into Latin. 
 
 Alexander Carson, LL.B., a man eminent for^his learn- 
 ing and for his ability as a writer, was born in Ireland in 
 1776, and died in his native land in 1844. He was edu-, 
 cated in Scotland at the Glasgow University, and was for 
 a time a Presbyterian minister, but his allegiance to the 
 plain reading of the Bible caused him to become a Baptist. 
 He was a prolific writer, and the author of numerous re- 
 ligious and theological works, '"prominent among which 
 is his able and exhaustive work entitled, " Baptism, Its 
 Mode and Subjects." 
 
 Joseph Bingham was one of the most learned divines 
 that the Church of England ever produced. He was born 
 in Wakefield, England, in 1668, and received his educa- 
 tion at Oxford. He afterwards became a fellow of the 
 University College, but being called upon to preach before 
 the University, he expressed some opinions upon the Trin- 
 ity, which, being regarded as heretical, raised a great 
 storm, which induced him to leave the University. His 
 opinions did not, however, place him under the ban of the 
 church, and he afterwards received the rectory of Havant, 
 in Hampshire, where he continued until his death, in 1723. 
 The great work of his life w.as his "Antiquities of the 
 Christian Church," comprising eight volumes, the last of 
 which appeared in 1722. Of this work, McClintock and 
 Strong's " Biblical, Theological and Ecclesiastical Cyclo- 
 pedia "says: ''This great work is a perfect repertory of 
 facts in ecclesiastical archaeology, and has not been super- 
 seded or even approached in its own line by any book 
 
362 Appendix. 
 
 since produced." It has been translated and printed in 
 German by the Catholics. 
 
 Henry Hart Milman, D.D., a distinguished ecclesiastic 
 of the English Church, was born in London in 1791, and 
 died in the same city in 1868. He was educated at Eton 
 and at Oxford, where he took the degrees of B. A. and 
 M. A. Mr. Milman was the author of quite a number of 
 works, but it is to his historical works that his fame as a 
 scholar is mostly due. His "History of the Jews" was 
 first published in 1829, and still later, his "History of 
 Christianity from the Birth of Christ to the Abolition of 
 Paganism in the Roman Empire." The work, however, 
 which has made for him the greatest reputation, is his 
 " History of Latin Christianity, Including that of the 
 Popes to the Pontificate of Nicholas V." This work con- 
 sists of eight volumes, and was published in both London 
 and New York in 1854. Though complete in itself, it is 
 really a continuation of the author's " History of Chris- 
 tianity." Among Milman's other works are ''Life of 
 Keats" and "Hebrew Prophecy." In 1849 Mr. Milman 
 was appointed dean of St. Paul's, a position which he 
 held till his death. He had previously been rector of St. 
 Margaret's, and rector and canon of Westminster. 
 
 Socrates Scholasticus, the ecclesiastical historian, was 
 born in Constantinople, near the close of the fifth century. 
 He was educated in Alexandria, where for a time he prac- 
 ticed law and taught philosophy. Finally, however, he 
 seems to have devoted himself entirely to the study of 
 ecclesiastical history, and in the latter part of his life un- 
 dertook to write a history of the church from A. D. 309, 
 where Eusebius's history ends, down to his own time; the 
 work, which comprises seven books, was completed, how- 
 ever, down only to A. d. 440. It is said of Socrates that 
 " he is generally considered the most exact and judicious 
 of the three continuators of the history of Eusebius, be- 
 ing less florid in his style and more careful in his state- 
 
Appendix. 3G3 
 
 ments than Sozomen, and less credulous than Theodoret." 
 Like all the early church historians, he was a Catholic, 
 yet "his impartiality is so strikingly displayed," says 
 Waddington, " as to make his orthodoxy questionable to 
 Baronius, the celebrated Roman Catholic historian; but 
 Valesius, in his life, has shown that there is no reason for 
 such suspicion;" and he is now held in high esteem by 
 Romanists generally. 
 
 Adolph Harnack, D. D., Ph. D,, was born at Dorpat, 
 Russia, May 7, 1854. He studied in the famous university 
 of his native town from 1869-1872; became tutor at Leip- 
 sic in 1874, and professor in 1876. In 1879 he became pro- 
 fessor of church history at Giessen. and in 1886 at Marburg. 
 His reputation as a scholar and author is very high in the 
 theological world. 
 
APPENDIX B. 
 
 BAPTISM IN THE EARLY CHURCH. 
 
 The references that have been made to baptism, in the body 
 of this book, show that there was less perversion of that ordi- 
 nance, in the early centuries, than of any other. Of course, in 
 the general religious declension of the age, the real spirit of this 
 ordinance, as of every other, was largely lost. When faith gave 
 way to form, as it did when the pagans, with whom religion was 
 nothing but form, came into the church in droves, the church in 
 general lost sight of the fact that it is faith that saves, and at- 
 tached saving virtue to the water of baptism. Of this we have 
 evidence in the writings of Tertullian. Various additions to the 
 rite were made, but the act of baptism itself remained unchanged. 
 Some testimony to this eflfect has been given ; but since the fore- 
 going pages were put in type, a book has been issued, which 
 gives so plain a statement of the case that we insert it here for 
 the benefit of our readers. The book is entitled " Christian 
 Archaeology," by Chas. W. Bennett, D. D., Professor of Histori- 
 cal Theology in Garrett Biblical Institute, Evanston, Illinois, 
 with an introductory commendation by Dr Ferdinand Piper, of 
 the University of Berlin. It is the fourth volume of the " Bib- 
 lical and Theological Library, "edited by George R. Crooks, D. D., 
 and Bis!) op John F. Hurst, D. D., of the Methodist Epi?co- 
 pal Church, and is very highly recommended by the religious 
 press. Both the author and the editors are fully committed to 
 the custom of spri ikling, and of administering the rite t > infants, 
 and therefore their testimony is of the more value, since it is 
 directly opposed to their practice, and to their argument in the 
 book itself. On page 392 of "Christian Archaeology" we find 
 the following: — 
 
 " While no positive statement relative to infant baptism is mot 
 in the Scriptures, or in the writings of any Fathers earlier than 
 Irenaeus and Tertullian, l)y the end of the second century men- 
 
 (364) 
 
Appendix. 365 
 
 tiou is made of the baptism of children, and in the third, of in- 
 fants. But even in the fourth, the practice of infant baptism is 
 not general, since eminent Fathers, whose parents were Chris- 
 tians, did not receive baptism till adult age. . . . From the 
 fourth century the propriety of the baptism of infants was un- 
 (^uestioned, and the practice was not unusual ; nevertheless, 
 adult baptism was the more common practice for the first six 
 centuries. " 
 
 On page 396, under the heading of ** The Mode of Baptism," 
 we find the fo' lowing statement: — 
 
 "There is not the slightest evidence that, during the apostolic 
 period, the mere mode of administration underwent any change. 
 The customary mode was used by the apostles in the baptism of 
 the first converts. They were familiar with the baptism of 
 John's disciples, and of the Jewish proselytes. This was ordi- 
 narily by dipping or immersion. This is indicated not only by 
 tne words used in describing the rite, but the earliest testimony 
 of the documents which have been preserved gives preference to 
 this mode. " 
 
 Finally, on page 407, we find the following: — 
 
 "We are compelled to believe that while immersion was the 
 usual mode of administering baptism from the first to the twelfth 
 century, there was very early a large measure of Christian lib- 
 erty a lowed in the church, by which the mode of baptism could 
 be readily adjusted to the peculiar circumstances. " 
 
 Our readers will know how much value to place on the 
 " Christian liberty" that existed in the early centuries of the 
 church, and which consisted in the unchristian practice of per- 
 verting the plainest precepts of the Bible, to suit the notions of 
 the interpreter. This is not liberty at all, but license, and 
 most unwarranted license. Christian liberty lies in only one 
 direction, and that is, liberty to do right ; and right is nothing 
 else than what the Bible enjoins. When men take the liberty 
 to depart from the rules laid down in the Bible, they cease to be 
 Christian, and their acts are not to be followed. Therefore that 
 which in the preceding paragraph is called ' * Christian liberty" 
 was nothing but pagan license. 
 
 Another feature of the book is very interesting as corroborat- 
 ing some of the testimony given in the preceding pages. On 
 pages 399^06 there are ten cuts, which are copied from ancient 
 frescoes representing (or rather caricaturing) baptismal scenes, 
 
366 Appendix. 
 
 some of them evidently intended to represent the baptism of 
 Christ. The author has inserted these pictures in order to coun- 
 teract as much as possible the testimony which truth compelled 
 him to give concerning baptism; for in none of them is the 
 candidate represented as being immersed. In some of them, the 
 candidate is represented as just coming out of the water, so that 
 it is impossible to tell whether the rite that had evidently just 
 been performed was immersion or pouring. In others, however, 
 the administrator is represented as laying his hand on the candi- 
 date's head, or e'se pouring water upon it from a vessel. 
 From these cuts the author finds authority enough to warrant 
 the substitution of sprinkling or pouring for immersion. This is 
 what might be termed pictorial theology. 
 
 But in these very pictures the inconsistency of those who 
 appeal to custom instead of to the Bible is most clearly revealed. 
 We quote the author's own description of the first caricature : — 
 
 '* Christ stands in the Jordan, whose waters reach to about the 
 middle of the body, while John, standing on the land, and holding 
 in his left hand a jeweled cross, is pouring water from a shell held 
 in the Baptist's right hand. The symbolic dove, descending di- 
 rectly upon the head of Jesus, completes the baptismal represen- 
 tation. The Jordan, lORD, symbolized by a river-god hearing a 
 reed, introduces into the scene a heathen element. ^^ — P. 404- 
 
 The italics are ours. It is passiig strange, and a wonderful 
 instance of the blindness which custom induces, that a Chris- 
 tian author can put forth as authority for the practice of Chris- 
 tians, B. picture in which he acknowledges th it there are heathen 
 elements, and this too in the face of his previ .us acknowledg- 
 ment that the scriptural and apostolic baptism is immersion. 
 
 This, however, is not all. In all of these ancient caricatures, 
 (with two exceptions), the candidate who is being sprinkled or 
 poured is perfectly nude. In the two exceptions he has on a sin- 
 gle garment. Therefore, according to the testimony of these pict- 
 ures, there is the same authority for spri ikling instead of im- 
 mersing that thero is for stripping t'le candidate of his clothes. 
 As a matter of fact, which is attested by Bingliam, in the pas- 
 sages which we have citod from him, paoide were baptized naked 
 before sprinkling was substituted for bapti-sm. 
 
 To sum up the case : Immersion is the only baptism known to 
 
Appendix. 367 
 
 the Bible writers. Sprinkling, and the administration of the rite 
 to infants, was not known in the church until the third century, 
 and did not become common before the sixth century. It is 
 therefore a:i institution of the Citholic Church. All the author- 
 ity that Protestants can claim for it is the custom of that church. 
 Some pictures, however, have been found, which represent the 
 candidate for church-membership as being sprinkled ; and in 
 order to get sprinkling as near apostolic times as possible, some 
 archaeologists a -e quoted as supposing that these pictures were 
 made in the second century, notwithstanding the statement of 
 the author that sprinkling was not known so early in the church. 
 But however this may be, the pictures represent the candidate 
 as nakid, and introduce a confessedly heathen element. So 
 that whoever cites them as *^arrant for the practice of Chris- 
 tians stultifies hi nself. To such contemptible shifts doei custom 
 force its devotees to resort. How much better to acknowledge 
 the Scripture truth that "the customs of the people are vain," 
 and follow the Bible and that alone. 
 
 Erratum. — On page 62, eighth line from bottom of page, for 
 reputation read refutation. 
 
INDEX OF SCRIPTURES QUOTED. 
 
 Text. Page. 
 
 GENESIS. 
 
 6:2 17 
 
 8:21 ... 42 
 
 2:1-3 350 
 
 1:5,8,13, 19,23,31 . ..355 
 
 EXODUS. 
 
 20:8-11 347,348,349 
 
 19 : 12, 23 351 
 
 LEVITICUS. 
 23:32 355 
 
 DEUTERONOMY. 
 
 18:10... 50 
 
 33:17 158 
 
 22:5 311 
 
 JOSHUA. 
 20:7 351 
 
 1 KINGS. 
 12:26-31 313 
 
 2 KINGS. 
 
 4 : 23 200 
 
 10:29 313 
 
 21:1-7 313 
 
 23:4-14 313 
 
 PSALMS. 
 
 14:1 10 
 
 19:1 10 
 
 119:105 56 
 
 116:10 234 
 
 111:7,8 352 
 
 ECCLESIASTES. 
 10:1 6S 
 
 ISAIAH. 
 8:20 52 
 
 JEREMIAH. 
 
 17:9 42 
 
 10:3 251 
 
 EZEKIEL. 
 
 U:14 1.53 
 
 8:16 195, 305 
 
 8:6 304 
 
 24 
 
 Tkxt. Paqk. 
 
 JOEL. 
 
 1:14 351 
 
 MATTHEW. 
 
 15:19,20 42 
 
 7 : 21-23 54 
 
 13:47 54 
 
 18:17 54 
 
 23:10 55 
 
 28:19, 20 57 
 
 28:1 352 
 
 MARK. 
 
 16:1 348 
 
 16:1, 2 352 
 
 16:9 353 
 
 16:12, 13, 14 354 
 
 1:32 355 
 
 LUKE. . 
 
 9:51-56 47 
 
 24:1 348, 353 
 
 23:54-.56 348 
 
 16:17 352 
 
 24:36-43 354 
 
 JOHN. 
 
 3:5 53 
 
 15:4,5 53 
 
 20 : 1 353 
 
 20:19... 353 
 
 ACTS. 
 
 14:17 10 
 
 17:21 37 
 
 15:36-41 .. 47 
 
 20:28-30 48 
 
 19:24 156 
 
 1:13 354 
 
 20:7 354 
 
 20 : 7, 8, 11 355 
 
 ROMANS. 
 
 1:21 9 
 
 1:19 10 
 
 1 : 22-32 10, 28 
 
 1:18-32 11 
 
 1:29-31 J3 
 
 1:22-24 36 
 
 8:7 42 
 
 8:9 53 
 
 16:14 84 
 
 (369) 
 
870 
 
 Index of Scriptures Quoted. 
 
 Text. 
 
 Page 
 
 1 CORINTHIANS. 
 
 
 5:1,2 
 
 1:11-13 
 
 5:1, 2 
 
 26 
 49 
 4"? 
 
 6:6-S 
 
 11:17-22 
 
 49 
 4q 
 
 12:12, 13 
 
 12:13 
 
 16:2 
 
 53 
 
 255 
 3S6 
 
 2 CORINTHIANS. 
 
 
 4:5 
 
 4:13 
 
 9:5 
 
 57 
 234 
 306 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 
 5:19-21 42 
 
 2:11-14 
 
 43 
 
 47 
 
 4 : 8-11 
 
 50 
 
 3 : 27 
 
 S8 
 
 1:8 
 
 6:11 
 
 57 
 105 
 
 EPHESIANS. 
 
 
 5:12 
 
 12 
 
 2:1-3 
 
 1:20-23 
 
 4:30 
 
 42 
 52 
 53 
 
 COLOSSIANS. 
 
 
 2:8 
 
 1:18 
 
 44 
 5t? 
 
 Text. Paok. 
 
 2 THESSALONIANS. 
 
 2:3-7 
 2:1-3 
 
 
 . 49 
 104 
 
 2:5... 
 3:17, 
 2:3,4 
 2:4... 
 
 18 .V.V .'.'.'." .'.!!". 
 7, 8 
 
 2 TIMOTHY. 
 
 . 104 
 . 105 
 . 242 
 . 337 
 
 2:16-18 
 
 50 
 
 
 HEBREWS. 
 
 
 10:29 
 
 2 PETER. 
 
 . 53 
 
 1:1-3 
 
 1 JOHN. 
 
 . 48 
 
 9 -Q 
 
 
 53 
 
 
 2 JOHN. 
 
 
 r. 
 
 
 . 50 
 
 
 3 JOHN. 
 
 
 9, 10 
 
 
 . 51 
 
 
 JUDE. 
 
 
 4,10 
 
 
 51 
 
 18 ... 
 
 
 52 
 
 6 . 
 
 
 ?39 
 
 
 REVELATION. 
 
 
 17:5. 
 
 
 . 124 
 
INDEX OF AUTHORS QUOTED. 
 
 Anthon's Classical Dictionary, 809, 310, 311. 
 
 Bacon, 43. 
 
 Barnabas, 78, 80, 81-83. 
 
 Bibliotheca Sacra, 249. 
 
 Bingham, 192, 228, 2o7, 258, 259, 260, 20^ 262, 269, 273, 274, 
 279, 280, 297, 302, 303, 332. 
 
 Bower, 252. 
 
 Chamber's Encyclopedia, 301, 319. 
 
 Chambers, Talbot W., 305, 314, 318, 319. " , 
 
 Christian at Work, 294, 296. 
 
 Carson, 252. 
 
 Catholic Christian Instructed, 297. 
 
 Clement of Alexandria, 170, 171, 172, 174, 175, 176, 177, 178, 
 180-182, 183. 
 
 (. larke, Adam, 59. 
 
 ConStantine, 323. 
 
 Clement of Eome, 91. 
 
 Coxe, Bishop A. C, 72, 77, 92, 114, 142, 14.3, 146, 147, 173, 
 176, 182, 188, 189, 207, 322. 
 
 De Clemangis, 282. 
 
 De Quincey, 62. 
 
 Dunbar, 271. 
 
 Edersheim, 23, 24, 25. 
 
 Encyclopedia Britannica, 30, 72, 74, 99, 100, 302, 306, 309, 323. 
 
 Eusebius, 320, 326. 
 
 Evangelical Review, British and Foreign, 125. 
 
 Farrar, 60, 61, 80, 127, 149, 169, 18(5, 226. 
 
 Franklin, Benjamin, 262. 
 
 Gibbon, 18, 20, 45, 264, 315, 316, 317, 318, 33;j, 3:7, 340, 341, 
 34>. 
 
 Gieseler, 289. 
 
 Harnack, 116-118, 218, 225. 
 
 Hermas, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90. 
 
 Holmes, G. F., 30,31, 32. 
 
 Home, 14. 
 
 Hogue, 219. 
 
 Herodotus, 16. 
 
 Irena^us, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 136, 137, 138, 139, 141, 142, 
 143. 
 
 Ignatius, 97, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112. 
 
 Independent, New York, 114. 
 
 (371) 
 
372 Index of Authors Quoted. 
 
 Justin Martyr, 14D, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 
 160, 161, 162, 163. 
 
 Kitto, 77, 97-99. 
 
 Killen, 68-71, 102, 105, 108, 125, 148, 169, 184, 187, 190, 191, 
 192, 217, 231, 243, 244, 255, 257, 265, 272, 274, 277, 'iSO, 292, 331. 
 
 Lawrence, Eugene, 334. 
 
 Lea, H. C, 282. 
 
 Matthews, William, 22. 
 
 Maximus Tyrius, 16. 
 
 Milman, Dean. 216, 314, 316, 325, 331, 332, 335. 
 
 McClintock and Strong, 18, 19, 30, 31, 32, 34, 74, 99, 166, 256, 
 300, 339. 
 
 Mosheim, 16, 19, 21, 60, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 74, 75, 84, 85, 93, 
 106, 127, 148, 166, 167, 186, 218, 219-223, 224, 225, 227, 245, 
 247, 250, 251, 253, 264, 270, 275, 283, 291, 292, 296, 297, 299, 
 339 
 
 Muller, 302. 
 
 Neander, 15, 20, 73, 75, 94, 107, 148, 191, 267, 288. 
 
 North British Remnv, 318. - 
 
 Origen, 231, 232, 233, 235, 236, 237, 238, 239, 249. 
 
 Papias, 126. 
 
 Pettengill, J. H., 271. 
 
 Plato, 16, 36. 
 
 Pope, 39. 
 
 Proclus, 15. 
 
 Pawlinson, 307, 308. 
 
 Ridpath, 320-322. 
 
 Robinson, 278. 
 
 Robinson, Charles S., 294. 
 
 Rufinus, 2.30. 
 
 Schaff, 16, 18, 76, 107, 126, 148, 192, 226, 282, 288. 
 
 Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia, 34, 75, 100, 165, 185, 312, 319, 
 339. 
 
 Scott, 295. 
 
 Schlegel, 300. 
 
 Socrates Scholaaticus, 287, 333, 334, 344 . 
 
 Stuart, Moses, 11, 12, 13. 
 
 Teaching of the Apostles, 118, 121, 122, 123, 124. 
 
 Tertullian, 193, 195, 196, 197, 198, 200, 201, 202-2tM, 205, 
 208, 209, 210, 211, 212, 213, 214-216. 
 
 Tyler, W. S., 34. 
 
 Von Einem, 300. 
 
 Webster, Noah, 318. 
 
 Way land. Dr., 59, 
 
 Western Churchm<m, 190. 
 
 Worman, 19, 229. 
 
INDEX, 
 
 Agnostics, Modem, Followers of Plato 31 
 
 Ammonius Saccas, Fanatical philosophy of 220-225 
 
 Ammonius Saccas, Christian teachers, especially Origen, fol- 
 lowers of •• 224, 225 
 
 Ammonius Saccas, Philosophy of, wisdom run mad 225 
 
 Ammonius Saccas, Frauds necessary to philosophy of 225 
 
 Apostles, Their testimony rejected by some in the churches . . 51 
 
 Apostles, Teaching of the 113-124 
 
 Apostles, Teaching of the, History of 113, 114 
 
 Apostles, Teaching of the. Not aposto ic 114 
 
 Apostles, Teaching of the, When written 114, 116 
 
 Apostles, Teaching of the. Childishness of 114, 122 
 
 Apostles, Teaching of the. Tainted by heresy and incompe- 
 tency 114 
 
 Apostles, Teaching of the. Conflicting opinions concerning 
 
 llG-118 
 
 Apostles, Teaching of the. Summary of opinions of llG-118 
 
 Apostles, Teaching of the, Lord's day, supposed mention of, 118 
 
 Apostles, Teaching of the, Extracts from 118-124 
 
 Apostles, Teaching of the, Inconsistency of those who credit, 1 19 
 Apostles, Teaching of the, Actually no mentioning of Lord's 
 
 day in 119 
 
 Apostles, Teaching of the, Fasting on Wednesday and Fri- 
 day commanded by 121 
 
 Ap sties. Teaching of the. Its perversion of baptism 122 
 
 A »()stles. Teaching of the, Stealing recommended by 123 
 
 Apostles, Teaching of the, Atonement for sin by money 
 
 taught in 124 
 
 Apostasy, Pauls prediction of 212 
 
 Apostasy, Pro;^res3 of in first cantury after apostles. . . .243, 244 
 
 Aristotle, Taught the expediency of aborti >n 14 
 
 Asceticism, Growtli of ia the church 280 
 
 (373) 
 
374 Index. 
 
 Asceticism, Vice a result of 281 , 282 
 
 Asceticism, Growth of 283 
 
 Asceticism, Platonic philosophy responsible for 283 
 
 Atonement, Supposed to be gained by martyrdom 109, 110 
 
 Aurelian, Sun-worship in time of 315 
 
 Babylonians, Prostituti m required by 11, 12 
 
 Bacon, Kule of for guarding against error 43 
 
 Baptism, Perverted in Teaching cf the Apostles *. . . . 122 
 
 Baptism, Perversion of in Tertullian s time 200 
 
 Baptism, Tertullian on 200, 210-213 
 
 Baptism, Perversion of 256-C63 
 
 Baptism of the dead 257 
 
 Baptism, Character of heathen mysteries given to it. . . .257, 258 
 
 Baptism, Water of consecrated 258 
 
 Baptism, Sanctifying power attributed to waters of 258 
 
 Baptism, Sign of cross in connection with 257-259 
 
 Baptism, Candidates undressed for 260-263 
 
 Barnabas, Epistle of 74-83 
 
 Barnabas, Epistle of, a forgery 74 
 
 Barnabas, Epistle of, uncertainty of authorship 74, 75 
 
 Barnabas, Epistle of, statement concerning Sabbath 78 
 
 Barnabas, Epistle of, about unclean beasts 81 
 
 Bible, How shown to be true 40 
 
 Bible, The only standard of light and wrong 56 
 
 Bible, Precepts of, neglected by Justin Martyr 152, 153 
 
 Bible, Justin Martyr's figurative interpretation of 154, 155 
 
 Bishop of Rome, Exaltation of 292, 331-336 
 
 Bishops of Rome, Extravagantly lauded by Ignatius 110, 111 
 
 Bishop of Rome, Rival of Emperor 331, 3 2 
 
 Bishop of Rome, Opulence of 335 
 
 Bishop of Rome, Method of electing 338 
 
 Bishop, Power of 337 
 
 Bishop, Heathen elected to office of 338-341 
 
 Blindness of heathen. Cause of 28 
 
 Blood atonement. Origin of Mormon doctrine of 109, 110 
 
 Calf- worship by Israelites,— Sun-worship 300, 312, 313 
 
 Carson, Existing religious customs. Statement concerning. . 252 
 Catholic Church, Clement of Alexandria highly esteemed by, 173 
 
Index. 375 
 
 Catholic Church, Clement of Alexandria never swerved from, 173 
 
 Catholic Church, a growth of error 329, 330 
 
 Catholic Chu» ch. Fathers, the Jiead of 330 
 
 Ceremonies, Great increase of 299 
 
 Charms and Divination, Use of in church 269 
 
 Christians taken from depraved heathenism 26 
 
 Christian converts. Dangers to which they were exposed 50 
 
 Christian Ordinances, Perversion of in 2nd century 253-255 
 
 Christian Religion, Impaired by philosophy 68 
 
 Christ, The only true pattern 55 
 
 Church, The True, Christ the head of 52, 53 
 
 Church, Who constitute the true 53, 54 
 
 Church, Influence of Fathers upon 66 
 
 Church, Early, Shepherd of Hermas inspired book 86 
 
 Church, Early, immorality in 276-281 
 
 Christmas, Not of divine appointment 300 
 
 Christmas, How introduced into the church 301-303 
 
 Christmas, Heathen origin of , 301, 302 
 
 Christmas, How observed 302 
 
 Christmas, Chief of festivals 303 
 
 Christmas, Sunday of less importance than 303 
 
 Clarke, Adam, Testimony concerning the Fathers 59 
 
 Clement, A poor expositor of Scripture 60 
 
 Clement of Alexandria 165-183 
 
 Clement of Alexandria, Statements concerning.. 165-169, 172-174 
 Clement of Alexandria, Paganism and Christianity con- 
 founded by 165, 168 
 
 Clement of Alexandri'i, Fanciful interpreter 166-169 
 
 Clement of Alexandria, Speculative philosopher 166, 167 
 
 Clement of Alexandria, Scriptures, wretched perverter of 
 
 167, 168 
 
 Clement < f Alexandria, Philosophy, chief defender of 167 
 
 Clement of Alexandria, Taught identity of Christianity and 
 
 Greek philosophy 168 
 
 Clement of Alexandria, Absurdly allegorized Scripture 169 
 
 Clement of Alexandria, Ten commandments allegorized by.. 169 
 
 Clement of Alexandria, Ignorant of Scripture 169 
 
 Clement of Alexandria, Plato, called a prophet by 169 
 
876 Index. 
 
 Clement of Alexandria, Extracts from 170-183 
 
 Clement of Alexandria, Starving of children, an advocate of, 170 
 Clement of Alexandria, Senseless interpretation, specimens 
 
 of 171, 172, 174, 175 
 
 Clement of Alexandria, Peter's tribute money, absurd expo- 
 sition of 171 
 
 Clement of Alexandria, Claimed philosophy to be prepara- 
 tion for faith in Christ 172 
 
 Clement of Alexandria, Quoted Scripture inaccurately 172 
 
 Clement of Alexandria, Great repute of in Catholic Church 
 
 173, 179 
 
 Clement of Alexandria, False science in writings of 173 
 
 Clement of Alexandria, Frivolous and fanciful speculation in 
 
 writings of 173 
 
 Clement of Alexandria, Tabernacle mystically explained by 
 
 174, 175 
 
 Clement of Alexandria, Lord's day, statement concerning 
 
 176, 178 
 
 Clement of Alexandria, Sabbath, statement concerning 177 
 
 Clement of Alexandria, Words without sense, use of 177 
 
 Clement of Alexandria, Probation after death, teacher of 
 
 178, 179 
 
 Clement of Alexandria, Fanciful speculation, specimen of . 180-182 
 
 Clement of Alexandria, Christian literature. Founder of 182 
 
 Clement of Alexandria, Scripture meaning declared hidden 
 
 by 183 
 
 Clement of Rome, Epistle of 93-96 
 
 Clement of Rome on Resurr<^ction, Fooliih argument for. .94, 95 
 
 Community of Women, Plato's teaching concerning 36 
 
 Confessors, Defiui:ion of ... 291 
 
 Confessors, Veneration paid to 291 
 
 Corinth, Errors in church of 49 
 
 Constantine, Sun-worship of 317, 318, 325 
 
 Constantiue, Sunday edict of 318, 319, 323, 326 
 
 Constantine 's Edict, Fir^^t Law for Sunday 319 
 
 Constantine, Desired to b j worshiped 320, 325 
 
 Constantine, Religious convictions, lack of 320 
 
 Constantine, Double-dealing nature of 321, 322 
 
Index. 877 
 
 Constantine, Heathenism of 322, 323, 325 
 
 Constantiiie's Sunday edict. Pagan nature of 318, 323 
 
 Constantine, Prayer composed by, for his soldiers 327 
 
 Constantine, Edict of concerning Arius 344 
 
 Controversy, Fathers used falsehoods in 65 
 
 Council of Laodicea, Canou of concerning Sunday 298 
 
 Council of Laodicea, Canon of concerning promiscuous bath- 
 ings 299 
 
 Coxe Bishop, Opinion of apostolic Fathers 72 
 
 Dead, Prayers to in second century 273 
 
 Deception, Practiced by Fathers 65. 66 
 
 Diocletian, Sun-worship in time of 316 
 
 Elagabalus, Design of, to make the sun the central object of 
 
 adoration 315 
 
 Episcopal Chair, Methods of obtaining 336 
 
 Epistles Forged ia Paul's day 104 
 
 Epistle of Barnabas 74-83 
 
 EpisLla of Barnabas, A forgery 74-77 
 
 Epistle of Barnabas, Authorship uncertain 74-77 
 
 Epistle of Barnabas, The apostle not author of 75-78 
 
 Epistle of Barnabas, All sorts of absurd fancies found in. . . . 76 
 
 Epistle of Barnabas, Author of possessed little genius 75 
 
 Epistle of Barnabas, Silly interpretations in 75, 80-82 
 
 Epistle of Barnabas, Interpretation puerile and absurd 77 
 
 Epistle of Barnabas, Extracts from 73-83 
 
 Epistle of Barnabas, Testimony concerning Sabbath 73, 73 
 
 Epistle of Barnabas, Egotism of author of SO 
 
 Epistle of Barnabas, Fanciful and absurd intrepretation of 
 
 Scripture 81, 82 
 
 Epistle of Barnabas, Absurd fancy concerning the hyena. . . 82 
 
 Epistle of Clement 93-96 
 
 Epistles of Ignatius 97-112 
 
 Epistles of Ignatius, Cause perplexities to critics ICO 
 
 Epistles of Ignatius, number 100 
 
 Epistles of Ignatius, Eijht universally admitted to be for- 
 geries 101 
 
 Epistles of Ignatius, Authenticity and genuineness doubt- 
 ful 101, 106 
 
378 Index. 
 
 Epistles of Ignatius, All frauds 103 
 
 Epistles of Ignatius, Condemned by Calvin 108 
 
 Epistks of Ignatius, More trustworthy edition very much 
 
 interpolated 107 
 
 Epistles of Ignatius, Mutilxted by "pious" frauds 107 
 
 Epistles of Ignatius, Abominable trash 1C8 
 
 Epistles of Ignatius, Extracts from 108-112 
 
 Error, Natural to human heart 42 
 
 Error, Bacon's rule for guarding against 43 
 
 Error in church at Corinth 43 
 
 Errors of fact and doctrine in Fathers 60 
 
 Exorcism, Baptism preceded by C37, 258 
 
 Facts, Historical, denied by Justin Martyr. 149 
 
 Falsehoods, Writings of Fathers contai 04, G5, 85 
 
 Fasting on Wednesday and Frida}' comm iiidcid by teaching 
 
 of the apostles 121 
 
 Fathers, Who so called 58 
 
 Fathers, Claim made for them 58 
 
 Fathers, How their teachings should be judged 58 
 
 Fathers, The abettors of every heresy in church 59 
 
 Fathers, Most foolish opinions sustained by 59 
 
 Fathers, To whom they are valuable GO 
 
 Fathers, Loss of their writings not to be deplored CO 
 
 Fathers, Direct meaning of Scriptures neglected by 60 
 
 Fathers, To obscure true meaning of Scripture their chief 
 
 study 60 
 
 Fathers, Wridngs rife with errors 60 
 
 Fathers, Writings of, unreliable as to matters of fact and 
 
 of doctrine 60 
 
 Fathers, Add nothing to our understanding of Scripture ... 61 
 
 Fathers, Ignorant of Scripture 61 
 
 Fathers, Their intrepretation warped by Paganism 61 
 
 Fathers, Antichristian practices of 62 
 
 Fathers, Refuted error and superstition by error and super- 
 stition 62. 
 
 Fathers, Advanced doctrines unwarranted by Scripture 63 
 
 Fathers, Determined to be wiser than God 63 
 
 Fathers, Flimsy arguments of 63 
 
Index. 879 
 
 Fathers, Bad masters in morals 64 
 
 Fathers, Had no clear conception of virtue and vice 64 
 
 Fathers, Things positively false in writings of 64 
 
 Fathers, Opinions of all sects sustained by 64 
 
 Fathers, Falsehoods used in controversies' of 65 
 
 Fathers, Taught that deception was commendable 66 
 
 Fathers, Desired victory rather than truth 65 
 
 Fathers, Exalted heathen philosophy 67 
 
 Fathers, Study of philosophy recommended by 67 
 
 Fathers, Their expositions of Scripture childish 70 
 
 Fathers, Vagaries of 70 
 
 Fathers, Apostolic, Who so called. 72 
 
 Fathers, Apostolic, Unlike New Testament writers 7z, 73 
 
 Fathers, Apostolic, Uncertainty of wi itings 73 
 
 Fathers, The Pope the mouthpiece of 330 
 
 Festivals, Pagan, Christian festivals modeled after 247 
 
 Festivals, Pagan, Character of 248 
 
 Festivals, Henthen, why adopted by the church 303 
 
 Figurative Interpretation of Bible by Justin Martyr. , ..154, 155 
 
 Forgeries, Practiced by the most orthodox 66 
 
 Forgery, Epistle of Barnabas a 74-77 
 
 Forgery of Paul's name in epistle to Thessalonians 104 
 
 Frauds, " Pious " used by Fathers 65, 85 
 
 Frauds, "Pious" use of by Christian teachers 274, 275 
 
 Friday, Observed as holiday by early churches 297 
 
 G-ods of Heathen, Patterns of vice, 18, 19; Disrespect to 
 
 them was treason -. 20, 21 
 
 Good Friday, Observed by early church 297, 300 
 
 Gospels, Four, Puerile reason for by Irenaeus 133, 134 
 
 Greek Philosophy, Church controlled by 271 
 
 Gregory Thaumaturgus, Church corrupted by 247 
 
 Heathen, Desciibed by Paul 9-13 
 
 Heathen Mysteries 12, 13 
 
 Heathen, Taught their children vice 13 
 
 Heathen Philosophers, Immorality of 14-16 
 
 Heathen of all classes consumed in practice of abominable 
 
 and unnamable vice 16 
 
 He'athen, Licentiousness of, 11-19, 25; No real conception 
 
 of sin or holiness 22 
 
380 Index. 
 
 Hejithenism, A school of vice, 11; State religion 20 
 
 Heathenism, Prostitution a part of its worship 12 
 
 Heathen Customs, introduced into church 247, 250, 251 
 
 Heathen P'.jilosophy, adopted in order to attract heathen 
 
 , 270, 271 
 
 Heathen Festivals, Why adopted by church 303 
 
 Heathen Marriage, Corruption of 17, 23, 25 
 
 Heathen, Deified emperors and vile persons 24 
 
 Heathen, Cause of their blindness 28 
 
 Hercules, Ancient sun-god 309-31 1 
 
 Hermas, What is knovi^n of 84, 85 
 
 Hermas, Shepherd of 81-92 
 
 Hermas, Shepheid of. Foolish and insipid 8 1 
 
 Hennas, Wild disordered fanatic 85 
 
 Hermas, Shepherd of, immorality inculcated by S6, 91 
 
 Holidays of the church 296,297 
 
 Holidays, How celebrated at first 247 
 
 Holiness an unmeaning term to heathen 22 
 
 Idolatry a religion of obscenity 13 
 
 Igniitian Epistles, All frauds 103 
 
 Ignatian Epistles, More trustworthy edition very much in- 
 terpolated 107 
 
 Ignatian Epistles, Mutilated by pious fraud 1C7 
 
 Ignatian Epistles, All condemned by Calvin 108 
 
 Ignatian Epistles, Abominable trash lOS 
 
 Ignatian Epistles, Extracts from 108-1 12 
 
 Ignatius, Epistles of 97-1 12 
 
 Ignatius, Supposed testimony concerning Sabbath 97 
 
 Ignatius, Information concerning, very meager 99 
 
 Ign tins, Letters of cause great perplexity to critics 100 
 
 Ignatius, Epistles of. How many ^ 100 
 
 Ignatius, Crazy fanatic, puerile boaster 103 
 
 Ignatius, Epistles of. Eight universally regarded as spuri- 
 ous 101 
 
 Ignatius, Epistles of. Authenticity and genuineness doubt- 
 ful 101,106 
 
 Ignatius, Desire of for martyrdom 108-110 
 
 Ignatius, Extravagant praise of bishop 110, HI 
 
Index. S81 
 
 Ignatius, Absurd idea of concerning Virgin Mary Ill 
 
 Ignatius, senseless egotism, specimen of 112 
 
 Images, use of, among Christians 2li7 
 
 Imagination, The commanding feature oi Plato's intellect. . 32 
 
 Immorality of heathen philosophers 14 
 
 Immorality in early church 49, 50, 51, 276-281 
 
 Incense, Use of in church ^ , - 300 
 
 Irenieus 125-145 
 
 Irenseus, Testimonies concerning 125-130 
 
 Irenaeus, Ignorance of 142, 143 
 
 Irenseus, Absurd interpretation of Scripture by 143, 144 
 
 Irenseus, Influence of blighting to Christianity 145 
 
 Irenseus, Uncertainty of information cozicerning 125 
 
 Irenseus, Writings of, of very little value 125 
 
 Irenseus, Puerilities in writings of 126 
 
 Irenseus, Pupil of Papias 126 
 
 Irengeus, Folly of Papias, preceptor of 126, 127 
 
 Irenjeus, Most unsafe authority 127 
 
 Irenseus, Writings of, wretchedly translated 128 
 
 Ircn^us, Writings of, very involved and prolix 128 
 
 Irenseus, Conjectural translation of writings of 128, 129 
 
 Irenseus, Exaltation of ecclesiastics by 130 
 
 Irenasus, Upbuilding of Roman hierarchy 130, 131 
 
 Irenseus, Obedience to Church of Rome taught by. 131-133 
 
 Irenseus, Puerile reasoning about four gospels 133, 1C4 
 
 Irenseus, Fit companion f r Barnabas 134 
 
 Ireflseus, Ridiculous interpretation of commands concerning 
 
 clean and unclean beasts 134, 135 
 
 Irenseus, Testimony of, concerning Sunday 136 
 
 Irenseus, The Sabbath, uncertain reference to 137 
 
 Irenseus, Perpetuity of the law taught by 137, 138 
 
 Irenseus, Purgatory, doctrine of taught by 138 
 
 Irenseus, Scripture authority not enhanced by. 138 
 
 .Irenseus, Resurrection and immortality, testimony on 139 
 
 Irenteus, Speculation concerning age of Jesus 139-141 
 
 Irenseus, Writings of almost unintelligible 142 
 
 Irenseus, Senseless theory of , concerning name of Jesus.... 142 
 Justin Martyr 146-164 
 
382 Index. 
 
 Justin Martyr, Testimony concerning 60, 63, 146-149 
 
 Justin Martyr, Extracts from 149-163 
 
 Justin Martyr, Personal history of 146 
 
 Justin Martyr, Philosopher's gown worn after professed con- 
 version 147 
 
 Justin Martyr, Always a pagan 147, 148, 149 
 
 Justin Martyr, Equivocal and contradictory allusions to 
 
 Christian doctrine 148 
 
 Justin Martyr, Confused views of gospel doctrines 148 
 
 Justin Martyr, Sought to harmonize Christianity with Pla- 
 tonic philosophy 148 
 
 Justin Martyr, Ignorance of 148 
 
 Justin Martyr, Wanting in discernment 148 
 
 Justin Martyr, Loose, fanciful, and puerile reasoning of. .148, 149 
 Justin Martyr, First to bring Platonic philosophy and Chris- 
 tianity in contact 149 
 
 Jastin Martyr, Historical facts denied by 149 
 
 Justin Martyr, Testimony concerning Sunday 149, 15U 
 
 Justin Martyr, Perversion of Lord's Supper 151 
 
 Justin Martyr, Not a believer in Sunday sacredness 151 
 
 Justin Martyr, A no-Sabbath man 151-153 
 
 Justin Martyr, Scripture precepts denied by 152, 153 
 
 Justin Martyr, Sabbath observance, his idea of 152, 153 
 
 Justin Martyr, Abolition of law, taught by 153 
 
 Juslin Martyr, Incorrect quoter of the Scripture 153, 154 
 
 Justin Martyr, Interpretation of Bible, mode of 154, 155 
 
 Justin Martyr, Direct Scripture statements denied by • 154 
 
 Justin Martyr, Sunday argument, a sample of 155 
 
 Justin Martyr, Ark, eight persons in tho, a type of "eight 
 
 days" 155, 156 
 
 Justin Martyr, Sign of cross, all power ascribed to by. . . 156-161 
 Justin Martyr, Statement that Amalek was conquered, not 
 
 through prayer of Moses, but by sign of cross 156, 157 
 
 Justin Martyr, Prophecy concerning Joseph, exposition of 
 
 * 157, 158 
 
 Justin Martyr, Scripture, narrow view of. 158-161, 163 
 
 Justin Martyr, Sign of cross, claimed that all heathen rev- 
 erenced 160 
 
Index. 383 
 
 Justin Martyr, Heathen, his puerile methods of arguing with 
 
 160, 161 
 
 Justin Martyr, Necromancy, a believer in 161, 162 
 
 Justin Martyr, Contradictory positions taken by 161-163 
 
 Justin Martyr, Soul and body, necessity of each other, 
 
 shown by. . . , . 1 62 
 
 Justin Martin, Far-fetched and absurd figures of Christ 163 
 
 Justin Martyr, Jacob's marriage a type of Christ, claimed 
 
 by 163 
 
 Justin Martyr, Evidently not Bible student 164 
 
 Killen on Igaatian epistles 102, 105, 108 
 
 Language of Heathen incapable of expressing moral ideas. . 22 
 
 Laodicea, Council of, canon concerning Sunday 298 
 
 Laodicea, Council of, canon on promiscuous bathing 2D9 
 
 Law of God, Abolition of, taught by Justin Martyr 153 
 
 Law, Perpetuity of, taught by Irena3us 137, 1 38 
 
 Lord's Day, The, in epistles of Ignatius 97-99 
 
 Lord's Day, The, really no mention of by Ignatius 97-99 
 
 Lord's Day, Supposed mention of in Teaching of Apostles 
 
 118 
 
 Lord's Day, Actually not found in Teaching of Apostles . . 119 
 Lord's Day, Clement of Alexandria's statement concern- 
 ing 176, 178 
 
 Lord's Day, Origen's mention of 232 
 
 Lord's Supper, Perversion of in time of Justin Martyr 151 
 
 Lor I's Supper, Justin Martyr's statement concerning cele- 
 bration of. 151 
 
 Lycurgus, Allowed the exposure of children 14 
 
 Marriage, Loosaness of relation among lieathen 17, 23, 25 
 
 Martyrdom, Dosire for by Ignatius 108-1 10 
 
 Martyrdom, Fan itical idea concerning 109, 1 10 
 
 Martyrdom, Substituted for baptism 288 
 
 Martyrdom, Atonement for sins obtained by 288, 289 
 
 Martyrs, Pilgrimages to tombs of 283, 284 
 
 Martyrs, Worship of 284 
 
 Martyrs, Prayers addressed to 291 
 
 Martyrs, Elevated to place of heathen demi-gods 286-292 
 
 Martyrs, Exaggerated honor paid to 288 
 
384 Index. 
 
 Midwifery of the mind 34 
 
 Miracles, False, produced by relics 290 
 
 Monkery, Turtullian an abettor of 192 
 
 Monkery, A promoter of vice 281 
 
 Montanus, Sketch of . 187 
 
 Montanism, Description of 187 
 
 Montanus, TertuUian a follower of 191 
 
 Natural Inclination, Depravity of.. ... 42, 43 
 
 Necromancy, Justin Martyr a believer in 161, 162 
 
 Neo-Platonism, Origan a devotee of .•.218, 223 
 
 Neo-Platonism, Account of 219-223 
 
 Neo-Platonism, Religion obscured by 223 
 
 Neo-Platonism, Spiritualism idantical with 223 
 
 Neo-Platonism, Superstition nourished by 224 
 
 Neo-Platonism, Monkery fostered by 224 
 
 Obstotriccl Procedure, Plato's theory of 35 
 
 Origen 217-241 
 
 Origen, Statements concerning 217-231 
 
 Origen, Birth of 217 
 
 Origen, Writings of, mutilated and garbled 217 
 
 Origen, Neo-Platonism, devotee of 218 
 
 Origen, Heathen science and Christian faith reconciled by. . 218 
 
 Origen, A wild allegorizjr 219 
 
 Origen, Clearest teachings muddled by 219 
 
 Origen, Spiritualism introduced iato the church by 223 
 
 Origen, Church filled with false philosopliy by. 225 
 
 Origen, Quotations from 231-241 
 
 Origen, Literal Scripture narrative disparaged by 226 
 
 Origen, The law allegorized by 226 
 
 Origen, Doctrine of works of supererogation taught by 2-7 
 
 Origen, Chief of Christian interpreters of third century 227 
 
 Origen, Found in Scripture retreat for all errors and idle fan- 
 cies 227 
 
 Origen, Biblical history, turned into fabLs by 227 
 
 Origen, Contradictory nature of works of 230, 231 
 
 Origen, Untrustworthy interpreter 231 
 
 Origen, Christian mysticism, father of 231 
 
 Origin, Pre-existence of souls taught by 231 
 
Index. 385 
 
 Origen, Sabbath, statement concerning 232 
 
 Origen, Sabbath, allegorized by 232 
 
 Origen, Lord's day, mentioned by 232 
 
 Origen, Reasonableness of Scripture denied by 233 
 
 Origen, Scripture declared to contain falsehood by 234, 235 
 
 Origen, Infidelity of worst type upheld by 233-236 
 
 Origen, Scripture allegorizing specimen of. . 236 
 
 Origen, False science, specimen of 237, 238 
 
 Origen, Conversion of the devil foretold by 237 
 
 Origen, Purgatory, doctrine of taught by 239, 240 
 
 Origen, Father of Universalism 239, 240 
 
 Origen, Punishment of wicked spiritualized by 240, 241 
 
 Pagan Temples mere brothels 11, 21 
 
 Pagan Festivals, Scenes of licentiousness 21 
 
 Pagan Prayers 21 
 
 Pagan Ideas in church, how brought in 165, 166 
 
 Pagan Literati, Influence of in church 280 
 
 Pagan Festivals, Character of 248 
 
 Pagan Mysteries, How brought into the church 245, 246 
 
 Papal Assumption, Growth of 329-344 
 
 Papal Hierarchy, Established before time of Constantine . . . 335 
 
 Papias, Preceptor of Iren^us 126 
 
 Papias, Monstrous and fabulous inventions of 126, 127 
 
 Papias, Egregious liar 127 
 
 Persecution of Jews and Christians, reason of 20, 21 
 
 Persecution, Religious, sanctioned by Constantine 343, 344 
 
 Perversion of Christian ordinances 253-255 
 
 Philosophy, Pagan, Clement of Alexandria addicted to. .166, 167 
 
 Philosophizing, Passion for by Christian teachers 166 
 
 Philosophy, Chiefly defended by Clement of Alexandria.. . . 167 
 Philosophy, Greek, identified with Christianity by Clement 
 
 of Alexandria 168 
 
 Philosophers Countenanced vicious practices, 11, 13, 14-18; 
 lived most vicious lives, 15; considered all religions 
 
 equally false or equally true 24 
 
 Philosophy of Heathen, Led to atheism and despair 24 
 
 Philosophy of Plato, Negative 30 
 
 Philosophy, Greek, church controlled by 271 
 
 25 
 
886 Index. 
 
 Philosophy of Plato, Church corrupted by 271 
 
 Philosophy, Claimed by Clement of Alexandria to be prep- 
 aration for faith in Christ 172 
 
 Philosophy, Necessary to Christianity, claimed by Clement 
 
 of Alexandria 172 
 
 Philosophy, Heathen, adopted by church to attract the 
 
 heathen 269, 270 
 
 Philosophy, Church filled with by Origen 225 
 
 Philosophy, Platonic, interwoven with Christianity by Justin 
 
 Martyr 148, 149 
 
 Philosopher's Gown, Worn by Justin Martyr 147, 148 
 
 Philosopher's Gown, Signification of 147 
 
 Philosopher's Gown, Survival of in Christian pulpits 147 
 
 Philosophers, Why they missed the truth 41 
 
 Philosophers, Heathen, exalted by Fathers 67 
 
 Philosophers, Christianity impaired by 68 
 
 "Pious" Frauds, Adoption of by church teachers 274, 275 
 
 Platonic Philosophy, Asceticism fostered by 281 
 
 Plato, Called evangelical prophet by Clement of Alexandria 
 
 169 
 
 Platonic Philosophy, Acceptance of resulted in doctrine of 
 
 purgatory 272 
 
 Plato, Quoted as prophet by Clement of Alexandria 176 
 
 Plato, Advocated child murder, 14, 37 ; commended swear- 
 ing, 15; advocated lying, 16; the father of philosophy, 
 29; birth and education of, 29; worshiped after death 
 as a god, 30; his treatises all negative, 30; had no fixed 
 principles, 31 ; imagination the chief faculty of intellect, 
 31 ; taught the pre-existence of souls, 33, 34 ; his 
 "Republic," immorality in, 35, 36; taught commu- 
 nity of women, 36; advocated promiscuous intercourse 
 
 of sexes, 37 ; why he missed the truth 41 
 
 Plato, Philosophy of, adopted by Christian teachers 148 
 
 Plato, His philosophy adhered to by Justin Martyr 148 
 
 Pope, The mouthpiece of the Fathers 330 
 
 Priests of Heathenism openly taught licentiousness, 19 ; 
 
 taught that the gods allowed sensual gratification 20 
 
 Prayers, of Heathen , 21 
 
Index. 387 
 
 Prostitution, Commanded by law 12 
 
 Probation after Death, Clement of Alexandria advocate of 
 
 ; 178, 179 
 
 Pre-existence of Souls, Taught by Plato 33, 34 
 
 Purgatory, Doctrine of, taught in Shepherd of Hermas 88 
 
 Purgatory, Doctrine- of, taught by Irenjieus 138 
 
 Purgatory, TertuUian taught doctrine of 214, 215 
 
 Purgatory, Origan taught doctrine of 239, 240 
 
 Purgatory and Prayers for Dead, Popularity of in church in 
 
 second century 272-274 
 
 Religious Kites, Nearly all of human invention 252 
 
 Relics, Traffic in '284 
 
 Religion, Displaced by superstition 284, 285 
 
 Relic and Martyr Worship 286-291 
 
 Relics, Worship of 290 
 
 Relics, Miracles worked by 290 
 
 Resurrection, Phoenix, adduced by Clement of Rome as 
 
 proof of 94, 95 
 
 Rome, Moral condition of in time of Christ 23, 24 
 
 Rome, Supremacy of bishop of 331-336 
 
 Rome, Obedience to church of, taught by Irenseus 131-133 
 
 Rome, Withholding Scripture from people, authority for. . . . 183 
 
 Sabbath, Supposed testimony of Ignatius on 97 
 
 Sabbath, Origen's views of 232 
 
 Sabbath, Literal nature of disbelieved by Origen 232 
 
 Sabbath, Existence of any denied by Justin Martyr 151-153 
 
 Sabbath Observance, Justin Martyr's ideas of 152, 153 
 
 Sabbath, Uncertain reference to by Irenseus 137 
 
 Sabbath, Tertullian's testimony on 197-199 
 
 Sabbath, Clement of Alexandria's statement concerning . 177 
 
 Sabbath, Change of gradually brought about 295, 296 
 
 Sabbath, Observed by early Christians 296, 297 
 
 Saints, Catholic, character of 287, 288 
 
 Saints, Catholic, filthiness of .287, 288 
 
 Science, Definition of true 37 
 
 Science, What is it ? 38 ; Science, foundation of 39 
 
 Scripture, True meaning of obscured by Fathers 60 
 
 Scripture, Double meaning of taught by Fathers. . 60 
 
388 Index. 
 
 Scripture, Knowledge of not increased by Fathers 62 
 
 Scriptures, Childish expositions of Fathers 70 
 
 Scripture, TertuUian a slighter of 201 
 
 Scripture, Tertullian's fanciful interpretation of 205, 206 
 
 Scripture, Origen denied reasonableness of 233 
 
 Scripture, Said by Origen to contain falsehoods 234, 235 
 
 Scripture, Misquotation of by Justin Martyr 153, 154 
 
 Scripture Statements, Justin Martyr's denial of 154 
 
 Scripture, Narrow view of by Justin Martyr 158-160 
 
 Scriptures, Perverted by philosophizing teachers 167 
 
 Scripture, Inaccurately quoted by Clement ef Alexandria. . . 172 
 Scripture, Meaning of declared to be hidden, by Clement, . . 183 
 
 Scripture, TertuUian a perverter of 185, 1 86 
 
 Shepherd of Hermas 84-92 
 
 Shepherd of Hermas, Author of forged dialogues 84 
 
 Shepherd of Hermas, Full of folly, superstition, and non- 
 sense 84 
 
 Shepherd of Hermas, Author a willful cheat 85 
 
 Shepherd of Hermas, Author a wild, disordered fanatic .... 86 
 
 Shepherd of Hermas, A fictitious work 85 
 
 Shepherd of Hermas, Tone of Christianity in first centuries 
 
 reflected by 86 
 
 Shepherd of Hermas, Opinion of early church concerning. . 86 
 
 Shepherd of Hermas, Quoted as Scripture by Fathers 88 
 
 Shepherd of Hermas, Extracts from 86-91 
 
 Shepherd of Hermas, Immorality inculcated by 86, 90, 91 
 
 Shepherd of Hermas, Taught doctrine of purgatory 88 
 
 Shepherd of Hermas, Doctrine of works of supererogation 
 
 found in 89 
 
 Shepherd of Hermas, Study of tended to foster licentious- 
 ness 90-92 
 
 Shepherd of Hermas, One result of his teaching 281 
 
 Sign of the Cross, All power ascribed to by Justin Martyr 
 
 156-161 
 
 Sign of the Cross, Justin Martyr's claim that the Israelites 
 
 conquered by it 157, 158 
 
 Sign of the Cross, TertuUian on 200, 202-206 
 
 Sign of the Cross, Baptism preceded by 257-259 
 
Index. 389 
 
 of the Cross, Frequency of its use 264 
 
 SigQ of the Cross, Considered as charm 264, 265 
 
 Sign of the Cross, Pagan Origin of 265, 266 
 
 Slavery among the heathen 15, 23 
 
 Socrates, Commended profanity, 15; practiced unnatural 
 
 crimes 15, 19 
 
 Sodomy practiced even by the philosophers 1 1-15 
 
 Spiritualism, Brought into church by Origen 223 
 
 Spiritualism, Early adoption of by the church 273 
 
 Sunday, Testimony of Justin Martyr concerning 149, 150 
 
 Sunday, Testimony concerning by Irenseus 136 
 
 Sunday, Refraining from kneeling on 136 
 
 Sunday, Tertullian's statements concerning 195, 196 
 
 Sunday, Mosheim's statement concerning 292, 293 
 
 Sunday, Christian at Work on 294, 293 
 
 Sunday, .S'. ^S'. Times on 295 
 
 Sunday, Wild holiday of Pagan times 318 
 
 Sunday Law, Constantine's, pagan nature of , 318 
 
 Sunday as a Holiday, Origin of 196 
 
 Sunday, Not of apostolic origin 294 
 
 Sunday, Gradually and silently introduced 295 
 
 Sunday, Dr. Scott's testimony concerning , 295 
 
 Sunday, Decree of council of Laodicea concerning 298 
 
 Sunday, Devoted to sun by pagans 318, 319 
 
 Sunday, Christmas more highly esteemed than 303 
 
 Sunday, First law in favor of ; 319 
 
 Sunday, Constantine's relation to 318-327 
 
 Sun-worship, TertuUian authority for 195, 196 
 
 Sun-worship and Sunday 304-328 
 
 Sun-worship, Scripture mention of 305, 313 
 
 Sun-worsnip, How regarded by the Lord 305 
 
 Sun-worship, Universality of 305-312 
 
 Sun-worship, Abominations of 306, 307, 309, 311, 312 
 
 Sun-worship, Religion of licentiousness 307, 309, 311 
 
 Sun-worship among Romans 312, 314-319 
 
 Sun-worship in time of Elagabalus 314, 315 
 
 Sun-worship in time of Aurelian 315 
 
 Sun-worship in time of Diocletian 316 
 
390 Index. 
 
 Sun-worship by Constantine 317. 318, 325 
 
 Sun, Confounded by Christians with Son of Righteousness 
 
 • 317, 319 
 
 Sun-god, Various representations of 306-312 
 
 Superstition, Religion displaced by 284, 285 
 
 Supererogatory Merit, Doctrine of taught in Shepherd of 
 
 Hennas 89 
 
 Supererogation, Doctrine of works of, taught by Origen, . . . 227 
 
 "Teaching of the Apostles " 113-124 
 
 Teaching of the Apostles, History of 1 13, 114 
 
 Teaching of the Apostles, Not apostolic 114 
 
 Teaching of the Apostles, When written 114, 116 
 
 Teaching of the Apostles, Childishness of 114, 122 
 
 Teaching of the Apostles, Tainted by heresy and incompe- 
 tency 114 
 
 Teaching of the Apostles, Summary of opinions on 116-118 
 
 Teaching of the Apostles, Conflicting opinions concerning 
 
 116-118 
 
 Teaching of the Apostles, Lord's day, supposed mention of, 118 
 
 Teaching of the Apostles, Extracts from 118-124 
 
 Teaching of the Apostles, Inconsistency of those who credit 
 
 119 
 
 Teaching of the Apostles, Actually no mention of Lord's day 
 
 in 119 
 
 Teaching of the Apostles, Fasting on Friday and Wednes- 
 day commanded by 121 
 
 Teaching of the Apostles, On baptism 122 
 
 Teaching of the Apostles, Stealing recommended by 123 
 
 Teaching of the Apostles, Atonement of sins by money 
 
 taught in 124 
 
 Tertullian, Gloomy fanatic 69 
 
 Tertullian, Voluminous writer 184 
 
 Tertullian, Personal characteristics of 184, 186 
 
 Tertullian, Passionate nature of 184 
 
 Tertullian, Exaggeration dealt in by 184, 191 
 
 Tertullian, Untrustworthy as to matters of fact 184 
 
 Tertullian, Superstitious and bigoted 1 85 
 
 Tertullian, Scrijjture perverted by 185, 186 
 
Index. 391 
 
 Tertuilian, Birth and conversion of 185 
 
 Tertullian, Catholic theology founded by 185 
 
 Tertuilian, Absurdity preferred to reason, by 186 
 
 Tertullian, Illogical 100 
 
 Tertullian, Untrustworthiness of 190 
 
 Tertullian, Salvation by faith not understood by 190 
 
 Tertullian, Ungoverned imagination of 191 
 
 Tertullian, Monkery, a father of 192 
 
 Tertullian, Moral laxity favored by 192 
 
 Tertullian, Prayers to dead, taught by 192 
 
 Tertullian, Critical sagacity lacked by 193 
 
 Tertullian, Fiery nature of 193 
 
 Tertullian, Sunday, statements concerning 195, 196 
 
 Tertullian, Sun-worshiper 195, 196 
 
 Tertullian, Sabbath-keeping, statements concerning... .197-199 
 
 Tertullian, Sabbath, disbeliever in a 197 
 
 Tertullian, Sabbath law not abolished, testimony to 198 
 
 Tertullian, Scripture perverted by 198, 199 
 
 Tertullian, Trine immersion taught by 200 
 
 Tertullian, Statements concerning 69, 148, 184-192 
 
 Tertullian Quotations from 192-215 
 
 Tertullian, A Montanist 186, 191 
 
 Tertullian, Insanity of 189 
 
 Tertullian, An infatuated author 189 
 
 Tertullian, Catholicity of 189 
 
 Tertullian, Baptism, statement concerning perversion of . . . . 200 
 
 Tertullian, Oflferings for the dead, practiced by 200 
 
 Tertullian, Sign of the cross, used by 200, 202-206 
 
 Tertullian, Scripture ignored by 201 
 
 Tertullian, Heathenism and Christianity, identified by. .204, 205 
 Tertullian, Scripture, fanciful interpretation of . . . .205, 206, 208 
 
 Tertullian, Material Cross, his devotion to .204-206, 213 
 
 Tertullian, Speculative writer 207 
 
 Tertullian, Soul, belief concerning 207, 208, 209 
 
 Tertullian, Childish nonsense of . . . . 208, 209 
 
 Tertullian, Science, ignorance of 209 
 
 Tertullian, Holy water, believer in 21 1-213 
 
 Tertullian, Baptism, fanciful ideas of 211-213 
 
392 Index. 
 
 Tertullian, Ignorance of 148 
 
 Tertullian, On prayer 214 
 
 Tertullian, Doctrine of Purgatory taught by 214, 215 
 
 Tertullian, Unchristian fanaticism of 216 
 
 Tlieodosius, Superstition of 287 
 
 Trjidition, False concerning age of Jesus 139-141 
 
 Tradition, Unsatisfactory nature of 141, 142 
 
 Tradition, Bower's statement of the value of 252 
 
 Trine Immersion, Taught by Tertullian 200 
 
 Truth of the Bible, How demonstrated 40 
 
 Universalism taught by Origen 230, 240 
 
 Victory, Rather than truth, the object of Fathers G5 
 
 Vagaries, Indulged in by Fathers 70 
 
 Women, Immorality of, among heathen 17 
 
 Women, Community of taught by Plato 30 
 
 Wickedness of heathen world chargeable to the philosophers 
 
 i. 42 
 
 Works of Supererogation, Taught in Shepherd of Hermas. . 89 
 
 ^ O? THE. 
 
 UNIVERSITY 
 
 OF 
 
M^ 
 
 m 
 
 M 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 
VB 12863 i