>sa«^^fl/'

^^ ^>^.^>s':

^- *f\^~*'

anCfl-^'7

^m

&Kg&*$3P3P!»

I*lh

HERESY

CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE.

E. DE PRESSENSE, D.D.,
Author of "Jesus Christ; His Times, Life, and Work,'

TRANSLATED BY

ANNIE HARWOOD.

Hontion:
HODDER AND STOUGHTON,
27, PATERNOSTER ROW.
MDCCCLXXIII.

osg) mm &^:?BH3fl^ffVi>c'|1['W0HTH^>Q

I'NWIN BROTHERS,
PRINTERS BY WATER-POWER

TRANSLATOR'S PREFACE.

This Volume — " Heresy and Christian Doctrine," now
introduced for the first time to the English public, is
the third in a consecutive series, intended to present
a complete picture, from the Author's point of view,
of the spiritual life and history of the Church during
the first three centuries of the Christian era. The
two previous volumes — " Early Years of Christianity."
and " Martyrs and Apologists " — delineated chiefly the
extensive growth of the Church and its conflicts with
enemies without. The present volume treats rather
of its intensive development and the history of its
doctrines. The concluding volume of the series will appear
simultaneously in English and in French. The recent
pressure of political, in addition to pastoral duties,
has prevented Dr. Pressense, as yet, from arranging
his accumulated materials for this work. He has,
however, engaged to prepare it for publication with the
least possible delay.
Annie Harwood.

Great Shelford, Cambridge,
December loth, 1872.

CONTENTS.

Book jFtrjst*
HERESY.
CHAPTER I.
Gnosticism 
I. The General Characteristics of Gnosticism

PAGB I

II. The Gnostics of the First School. Valentinus and his
followers ... -22
III. The Gnostics of the Second School. The Ophites.
Marcion .........29

CHAPTER II.
Manichjeism .... .... 51
CHAPTER III.
Judaising Heresy in the Second and Third Cen
turies  74
I. The Elkesaites and the Ebionites  74
II. The Clementines -  85

VI CONTENTS.
CHAPTER IV. PAGE
MONTANISM ... . IOI
CHAPTER V.
The First Unitarians - 125
I. The First School of Unitarians 125
II. The Second School of Unitarians 138
CHAPTER VI.
The Apocryphal Literature of the Second and
Third Centuries, and its Influence upon the
Formation of Oral Tradition 151
I. Apocryphal Writings positively Heretical 153
II. The Apocrypha not positively Heretical - 173

»>ecottti 3Boofe.
THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE
IN THE SECOND AND THIRD CENTURIES.
CHAPTER I.
General Considerations  Ig3
I. The Universal Faith of the Church in the Second and
Third Centuries - " 193
II. The Various Schools and Tendencies in the Dogmatic
Development of the Second and Third Centuries - 208

CONTENTS. Vll
CHAPTER II. PAGE
The Greco- Asiatic School 221
I. The Letter to Diognetus - - - 221
II. The Theology of Justin Martyr - - 227
III. Athenagoras, Theophilus of Antioch, Tatian 250
CHAPTER III.
The Theology of the Alexandrine School. Clement
of Alexandria - 255
I. The Theodicy of Clement of Alexandria 256
II.' Creation and Redemption 264
III. Christian Morals. Authority. The Doctrine of the
Church and of the Sacraments. The Closing Dispen
sation - 276
CHAPTER IV.
Continuation of the Alexandrine School. The
System of Origen 296
I. The Theodicy of Origen - 299
II. The Creation and the Fall 308
III. Redemption - 321
IV. Conversion and the Christian Life 338
V. The Church. Worship. The Sacrament. The End of
all things  - 346
CHAPTER V.
Continuation of the Alexandrine School. The
Disciples of Origen - 356
I. Pierius, Gregory Thaumaturgus, Theognostus 357

Vlll CONTENTS.
CHAPTER V.— Continued.

PAGE

II. Dionysius of Alexandria  360
III. Julius Africanus, Methodius, Pamphylus the Martyr 368
CHAPTER VI.
The Greco-Roman School - 374
I. The Theology of Irenaeus - 375
II. St. Hippolytus. Dionysius of Rome - - - 4°5
CHAPTER VII.
The School of Carthage - - - 4r9
I. The System of Tertullian - - - - - 419
II. Cyprian - - - 456
Conclusion - - - 463
Index. 473

THE
HISTORY OF DOCTRINE.

BOOK FIRST— HERESY.
CHAPTER I.
GNOSTICISM.
(a) The General Characteristics of Gnosticism.
In the two preceding volumes of this work we have
described the great conflicts of the Church of Christ
during the first three centuries of our era. The history
of primitive Christianity is the history of a desperate
struggle between the old world and the new faith just
cradled in Judaea. This warfare was not confined to
any one sphere ; it was universal. Persecution was
the first and inevitable manifestation of this deadly
hostility. Not only was the new religion opposed
to all the constituent principles of Pagan society, and
repugnant to the prejudices of degenerate Judaism,
but it was essentially an aggressive and victorious
power. It was not content to be an alien in the midst
of the brilliant and corrupt civilisation into which
it was born, and to pass upon it only the silent con-
'*- 2

2 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
demnation of its own pure presence ; it lifted up its
voice in protest against its vileness and deceptive
lustre. It did not merely refuse to offer incense to
the idol; it unmasked the false god and denounced
the abominations of the idol-Worship.
The humblest of its representatives was a witness
for Christ — His soldier, His missionary. In all places
and in all seasons Christianity carried on a mission,
ever active and aggressive. Between it and the ancient
world the opposition was radical and absolute. Doubt
less, on the part of the Christians, all was gentleness
and resignation, but this very gentleness under the
fire of persecution, had the effect of an irritating
provocation in a society, the only recognised basis
of which was violence. Martyrdom, blending sublime
resignation with unconquerable fidelity, was the holy
challenge of the soul to brute force, and the fiercest
resistance would have been better tolerated than this
triumphant weakness, which revealed the indomitable
energy of conscience.
This terrible conflict, which lasted for three
centuries, we have traced through its various phases,
till the day when the sword fell from the hand
of the persecutors.* But the struggle was not con
fined to arenas and torture-prisons ; it was carried
on also in the domain of thought. Paganism assailed
Christian doctrine by all the voices at its command —
by popular clamour, by public calumny, by the sar
casms of fine satirists like Lucian, by the formal
philosophy of a Celsus and a Porphyry. Nay, it even
* See "Martyrs and Apologists." The great conflict between
Christianity and Paganism.

BOOK I. — GNOSTICISM. 3
devised new systems, by which it sought to vanquish
the Gospel with its own weapons, borrowing from it
the methods for the assault. We have endeavoured
to reproduce the learned and eloquent replies to these
various assailants, which were presented by the
Christian apology of the first ages, as it found ex
ponents at Carthage, at Alexandria, and at Rome.
We have now to deal with more dangerous and
treacherous attacks, those, namely, of heresy, which
added, as it were, the perils of intestine and civil war
to these formidable assaults from without. In reality,
the enemy is always the same, but more subtle and
disguised ; the adversary is still the ancient world,
but now the attempt is to stifle the new religion
by embracing it. If Christianity could not release
itself from this deadly clasp, it was, indeed, doomed,
for it would have lost that which constituted its
essence and vital principle. I know that some
question our right thus to characterise the ten
dencies which were so keenly combated by the early
Fathers. The very name of heresy is regarded as
an attack levelled at liberty of conscience and of
thought. We cannot share these scruples, the logical
issue of which must be to deprive Christianity of all
distinctive character.
Doubtless, in subsequent times, when the Church — •
transformed into a hierarchy, and incorporated with the
Empire — committed to the civil power the guardianship
of her creed, the designation heresy acquired a new
import ; it was the dictum of an arbitrary, often
tyrannical authority, and too often carried in its train
forcible and material repression. But this was not the
2 *

4 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
case in the period preceding the great Councils, when
no civil penalties were attached to spiritual errors. The
Church was then a free association ; and it was open
to any, without detriment, to separate from it. The
argument against error was enforced only by moral
and intellectual suasion. One uniform type of doctrine
had not yet been produced ; secondary differences found
free expression in the East and West ; theology was
not fettered by invariable formulas. If, in the midst
of this diversity, we still discover a common basis of
faith, we must surely regard this, not as a system
composed and formulated by the authority of a school,
but as the faith itself, in its truest instinct and most
spontaneous manifestation. If this same unanimity,
which is apparent in the essentials of the faith, is also
displayed in the repudiation of certain other influences,
may we not fairly conclude that those influences were
in flagrant controversion of the fundamental principles
of Christianity ? This presumption becomes a certainty
if we recognise, in the doctrine thus universally rejected
by the Church, the characteristic features of one of the
religions of the past. It is impossible to maintain that
Gnosticism and Ebionitism are legitimate forms of
Christian thought, unless we are prepared to admit
that Christian thought has no individuality, no specific
character by which it may be recognised. Otherwise,
under pretext of giving it greater breadth, it is reduced
to a nullity. No one, in the time of Plato, would have
dared to attach his name to any doctrine which would
have been incompatible with the theory of ideas, and
anyone would have excited the just ridicule of Greece,
who should have spoken of Epicurus or of Zeno as a

BOOK I. ---GNOSTICISM. 5
disciple of the Academy. Let us admit then, that if
there exists a religion or doctrine known as Christianity,
the existence of heresies in connection with it is a
necessary possibility.
The word heresy has properly a very noble meaning,
since it signifies free choice applied to a doctrine.
From the first the new religion was called a heresy
by the Jews,* who were accustomed to designate by this
name various parties or divers sects. To the orthodoxy
of the synagogue indeed, Christianity could not but-
seem worthy of excommunication, since it assailed its
very vital principle. The Apostles applied the same
designation to the tendencies which, whether from the
Jewish point of view or from that of Pagan speculation,
impinged upon and imperilled the true faith in Jesus
Christ.t The Fathers used the word heresy in the
same manner. We, like them, must understand it to
apply to doctrines which, upon some capital point, are
in direct contradiction to primitive Christianity. In
the second and third centuries, heresy is always a
reaction, either in the direction of Judaism or Paganism.
Thus it carries on, in an inner and more vital sphere,
the same conflict which was waged between the Gospel
and the ancient world, in the realms of fact and of
thought. The Pagan reaction was by far the most
important. The heresy which, sprang from Judaism
was a timid and insignificant t*hing, or, at least, was
far outweighed and outrun by the heresy which was
born of Paganism. The latter therefore will claim
our first attention. 1 We have already indicated its
* Acts xxiv. 14. f Gal. v. 20 ; Titus iii. 10.
J The principal books of reference for the VJ(i|d.y of Gnosticism
'*'¦..' N

6 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
obscure beginnings in the portion of this book devoted
to the Apostolic age. In the second century, it emerges
from the formative period as a great school, and sets
up its own altar in opposition to that of primitive
Christianity. The time is come for us to characterise
this important spiritual movement, so rife with perils
to the Church.
However numerous the schools into which Gnosti
cism is divided, it has one dominant trait, which is
never effaced, and which is sufficiently indicated by
its very name. The term knowledge occurs in the
writings of the Apostles, but it there designates simply
the more profound apprehension of Christian truth.*
In the Epistle of Barnabas it acquires a sense more
nearly allied to the new meaning, which became
attached to it in the second century, for it there
represents an allegorical interpretation of the Old
Testament, superseding the literal import. t It is but
are : 1st. The writings of Irenasus, Epiphanius, and Theodoret (" De
Hasretic. Fabulis") against heresies. 2nd. The writings of the Fathers,
and primarily those of the Alexandrine Fathers. Eusebius' History
is very important, because of its quotations. 3rd. The " Philosophou-
mena" (Ed. Dunker and Schneidewin, Gottingen, 1855), in which we
find, for the first time, the genuine text of Basilides and Valentinus.
This is a document of the first moment, to which we shall con
stantly refer. 4th. The " Pistis Sophia," a sort of Gnostic poem,
recently discovered (Ed. Petermann, Berlin, 1853). 5th. Among
modern writings, beside the general histories of the Church and of
doctrine from which we may quote, we refer to Neandert monograph,
"Genetische Entwickel. der Vornehmst. Gnostisch. Systeme," 1818 ;
the remarkable essay of his disciple Rossel, published in his
posthumous works (" Theol. Schrift," Berlin, 1847); Baur's great
book, " Die Christliche Gnosis," Tubingen, 1835 > and "l'Histoire
Critique du Gnosticisme," by M. Matter, 1828- 1845. All these works
of reference are inadequate, because so many new sources have been
opened up.
* 1 Cor. viii. 1 ; 3 Cor. viii. 7. \ " Ep. Barnab.," chap. ii. ix. x.

BOOK I. — GNOSTICISM. 7
a step beyond this to the daring speculation which
arbitrarily tampers with the texts. The tendency of
Gnosticism is always to make the element of knowledge
predominate over that of the moral life ; it changes
religion into theosophy. If it had confined itself to
seeking the satisfaction of the intellectual faculties
by the searching study of revelation, the attempt would
have been perfectly justifiable. Christianity is not
a religion that stultifies the mental faculties ; on the
contrary, it gives a powerful impetus to thought, and
enlarges its domain by opening to it the realm
of the infinite, the invisible, the divine ; and if the
mind is indeed overwhelmed by truths which are as
high above its grasp as the heavens are above the
earth, it sinks only under the weight of unsearchable
riches. Faith leads to knowledge, for it is not possible
that the whole nature of the man — head, heart, and
conscience — should not strive to apprehend the divine
object of his faith. There is a genuine Christian
knowledge, which has taken an important part in
the development of the Church ; theology is the very
knowledge which, according to Apostolic precept, is
to be added to faith. But, in order to preserve its
true character, it must never be allowed to become
pure speculation, or to fall into the esoterism which
makes its doctrines a mystery to all but the select
initiate. Christianity is a divine manifestation, a free
and sovereign intervention of God in history ; it is a
fact before it is an idea ; its history is the basis of
its system. It is a positive rather than a theoretical
religion, — a glorious remedy for a desperate evil, a
grand restoration. On the awful reality of the Fall,

8 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
it rears the sublime reality of Redemption. Hence its
eminently moral character; it moves in the living
sphere of free and personal influences, over which logic
has no rigid or restrictive power. It starts with the
statement of great facts, which are not the product
of a syllogism, since liberty, whether in God or man,
eludes the restraints of reasoning, and by its very
essence reveals itself as a spontaneous force. This
moral and historical character of Christianity is just
that which brings it within the reach of all men,
whatever their diversities of intellectual culture, since
it makes its appeal primarily to the heart and con
science — to that which is fundamental and universal
in the soul. This is the key to that grand and trium
phant exclamation of Jesus : " I thank thee, O Father,
Lord of heaven and earth, that thou hast hid these
things from the wise and prudent, and revealed them
unto babes." A religion which should be for the wise
and thoughtful only, would be but an abstract specula
tion, fit to delight the finer spirits capable of rising
to those rarefied heights ; it would be no divine mani
festation, coming within the grasp, or commending
itself to the direct intuition of the human heart,
whether that heart beat in hut or palace, under the
peasant's smock or the philosopher's mantle. Jesus
Christ might well glory in the divine popularity of
His teaching, for this was a fact entirely new. Until
He came, every system which had been raised above
the gross superstitions of Paganism, had been only an
abstract and obscure philosophy, reserved for a little
company of disciples.
It was this eclecticism which the teaching of the

BOOK I. — GNOSTICISM. 9
Gnostics sought to revive in the Church. Knowledge
was with them everything; Christianity, therefore,
was a matter of knowledge, a science reserved to the
initiate. This was a complete inversion of the Gospel
method, and involved far more than an exclusive
predominance granted to one element over another.
In truth, religion cannot be transformed into a rigid
science, except by laying at its basis the fatalistic
conception of the universe. If everything is regulated
by, and transpires according to inflexible laws, we have
but to learn the construction of the machine, and the
place in it assigned to us. But if, on the contrary,
there exists a moral world, if the divine freedom
appeals to the human, knowledge is comparatively
insignificant ; obedience, surrender, is the essential.
Assuredly, the opposition between these two concep
tions of religion is absolute ; it is, in truth, the
opposition between the fatalistic speculation of Pagan
naturalism, and the free and living faith of a true
religion. Thus we see that by its exclusively intellectual
tendency, Gnosticism abandons the noble banner of
Christian spirituality, and returns to the dualism
which was the curse of the ancient world. We shall
observe how faithful it was to its principle, and with
what often treacherous art it revived the old errors
which had brought to ruin the most brilliant civilisation
of the world. From this primary and purely specu
lative character, there resulted the haughty esoterism
which reconstituted the aristocracy of intellect, and
placed its barrier in the way of the young and the
simple-hearted. It was found, in the end, that this

10 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
privilege turned to the detriment of those who gloried
in it, for the rare fruit which they had thus strained
upwards to gather from the topmost branches of the
tree of science, proved but a dry husk in their hands.
Better a thousand times the homely bread broken so
freely to the multitudes who gathered round the feet
of Christ!
The predominance of the intellectual and speculative
element in Gnosticism, must not, however, lead us to
conceive of it as a mere philosophical school, at least
in the modern meaning of that term. It is erroneous
to regard it as simply a philosophy of religion.* Such
a conception belongs to later modes of thought, and is
not in character with the troubled era which produced,
beside the so-called Christian Gnosticism, so many
analogous systems. Philosophy, especially since the
time of Descartes, presents itself to us as entirely
distinct from poetry, by the severity of its methods and
the rigour of its deductions. It may indeed seek to
bring into conformity with its systems, the symbols of
an already established and well-defined religion. This
is the attempt which has been made by the Hegelianism
of our day, with singular boldness of interpretation.
But philosophy does not create new symbols, or if it
did, it would treat them as simple metaphors not to be
seriously accepted. The various provinces of the mind
of man are as distinct as the various countries of the
world ; their boundaries are sharply marked. Imagina
tion finds no place in modern speculation, or, at least,
it only lends to it types more or less transparent. It
was far otherwise in the earliest age of the Christian era.
* This is Baurs idea in his remarkable work on Gnosticism.

BOOK I. — GNOSTICISM. II
The religion and philosophy of Paganism — both resting,
it is true, on one and the same basis — were constantly
confounded. The classic style, with its chaste and lucid
forms, had vanished from the intellectual world, no less
than from the realm of art. The East overspread the
entire West with its myths, its sublime poetry, its
heterogeneous faiths. Hence resulted a mental condi
tion not easily to be apprehended by us. In the world
of ideas, the impossible had become the ordinary and
familiar ; men's minds were intoxicated with the philter
of the great goddess, who, under the name of Isis, or
Cybele, or Diana of Ephesus, was simply nature deified.
Placing the infinite beneath, and not above, men strove
at any cost to discover it, to animate the idol they had
made, as Pygmalion strove to chafe his marble into the
warmth of life ; to nature was ascribed the creative power;
it was supposed to contain hidden, mysterious forces,
capable of producing universal life. These forces the
eye of the imagination watches at work, like those
primordial spirits which Faust beheld, " weaving the
living robe of divinity upon the rushing loom of time."
Thus does the most absolute naturalism merge into
magic and theurgy, and lose itself in a fantastic dream,
in which the strangest visions are taken for realities,
and form the sequel to a close and abstract argument.
A knowledge of what may be called the intellectual
pathology of this period — a period unique in history —
is necessary to enable us to appreciate, or even to under
stand, the appearance of such a phenomenon as Gnos
ticism. This is only one of the special manifestations
of a far more extensive movement, or rather, it is the
reaction of that movement on the heart of Christianity.

12 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
The second and third centuries of our era came, to a
large extent, under these combined influences of philo
sophy and religion, and the result was a sort of mystical
naturalism, the development of which requires explana
tion. The religions of nature,* after having opened
the cycle of Paganism, must needs close it again ;
for, unaided, man can never wholly free himself
from this circle ; the soul seeks and yearns after
a higher and holier God; sometimes it may even
rise to Him with a sudden soaring impulse, but it
cannot sustain itself at such a giddy height ; it
soon falls back under the dominion of natural forces,
and returns to its former worship, but with a soul rest
less and dissatisfied. The old religion has lost that
fresh and artless enchantment which breathes in the
songs of the Yedas. The melancholy strain predomi
nates, as at the close of a gay festival at Rome or
Athens, when the crowns of the guests fall faded at
their feet. Man is no more content with the natural
phenomena of the bright and fruitful dawning, of the
fertilising rain, and the fire "which quivers on the
hearth like a bird of golden wing." Beneath the out
ward manifestation, he seeks the deep, hidden, bound
less cause of all ; he falls into a crushing pantheism,
which brings him into the presence, not of a living
God, but of a yawning abyss, in which there is neither
beginning nor end, where everything is moving in one
incessant process of evolution. The religion of India
especially in its final form of Buddhism, had given the
most perfect expression to pantheistic naturalism ; this
was its final utterance. Its influence was therefore
great in an age when the ancient barriers, by which

BOOK I. — GNOSTICISM. 13
nations were divided, were everywhere falling. It
exercised an unquestionably wider sway than Parseeism,
which was less inclined to asceticism and ecstacy — the
two wings, as they were increasingly regarded, by which
the soul might be raised above the changing and perish
able. Again, the religion of Zoroaster itself had a
tendency to modification, as we have seen in tracing
out the development of the worship of Mithra. The
Greco-Roman religion, especially in Asia Minor and in
Egypt, was largely transfused with oriental pantheism,
which, with its elastic mythology, would bear any
translation. Judaism had not escaped the influence
of this wide-spread movement ; even in the land of the
prophets, in view of the sanctuary where all the
national traditions were deposited, it had breathed the
air which had swept over the great forests of India.
Essenism was a sort of Jewish Buddhism, which carried
into the burning solitudes of the Dead Sea, the same
craving for self-annihilation.
The philosophy of the time- — that philosophy, at least,
which was not satisfied either with Epicureanism, or
with the universal scepticism of the new Academy —
endeavoured to reduce this naturalistic Pantheism to
a system, and it had at its disposal the marvellous
instrument of the logic of Plato and Aristotle, the bequest
to it of the great classic school. We have already
described elsewhere, the great Alexandrine movement,
which issued in Neo-Platonism, and which may be
regarded as parallel with Gnosticism, since it sprang
from the same influences, and reveals the same ten
dency. This is to Platonism what Gnosticism is to
Christianity, with this difference : that the system of

14 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
Plato lent itself far more readily than the Gospel to
such an interpretation, because of the oriental element
which so strongly pervaded it ; nothing was needed, but
the withdrawal of the moral character, to transform it
into a purely Asiatic theosophy. Plutarch himself
belonged to the same school. This son of Greece, who
seems to have made it his task to collect assiduously all
the treasures of the East, is in reality a deserter from
the West, who has retained only the glorious memories
and the luminous language of his country. From a
philosophical point of view, he is in truth a perfect
Eastern. The true God is to him a God hidden, incom
prehensible, whom no creature can know, so much so
that a mediating divinity, symbolised in his view by
the goddess Isis, was necessary to effect the organisa
tion of matter. The soul attains to the Deity only by
means of ecstacy or contemplation, thus emancipating
itself from all that is corporeal.* We know what
development Plutarch gave to the theory of secondary
deities and of demons. Even the Stoics, those apostles
of stern resistance, who seem at the very antipodes of
the despotic East, did not fail to work out, in their own
way, the theme of pantheistic naturalism, and to
supply elements for the lucubrations of Gnosticism.
By uniting matter and reason in the first principle of
things, they opened the way for all the combinations
of the doctrine of emanation. But the great precursor
of Gnosticism was Philo, who, himself the adherent
of a monotheistic religion — the very religion which had
prepared the way for Christianity — was obliged to
* Ritter, " Histoire de la Philosophie Ancienne," Tissot's transla
tion, Vol. IV. pp. 416, 417.

BOOK I. — GNOSTICISM. 15
submit his creed, as a Jew, to the same process of
elaboration, which was necessary for translating the
Gospel into an oriental theosophy. It is needless
for us to dwell here upon a doctrine, the principal
outlines of which we have already traced. Starting
from the idea of a hidden, incomprehensible God, who
has no contact with the finite, it developed most pro
minently the theory of intermediary divinities, who, by
means of emanation, were able to produce the lower
world, which the supreme God could not even touch.
This was the world of the Word, or of ideas, which
never reaches the reality of personal existence, notwith
standing all the striking and sublime metaphors of Philo.
His final goal, like that of the whole East, was asceti
cism ; he would that " as the cicada feeds on the dew,
so the soul should live by ecstacy." In vain did he
exhaust the sacred texts, and borrow from the Old
Testament its most lofty images ; he none the less
belied its essence, by substituting salvation by means
of knowledge and contemplation, for the moral recon
ciliation proclaimed in doctrine and figure, by all the
voices of the prophets. The system of Philo was a
true Jewish Gnosticism ; and in combination with the
various elements we have rapidly indicated, it reappears
substantially in all the various forms of Gnosticism.
If we seek to distinguish in these various forms the
several constituent elements, we discover the three
great schools of thought of the period — Hellenism,
Orientalism, and Christianity. From the first of these,
Gnosticism derived its name, and that purely intel
lectual character which reduces religion to a mere
speculation of the reason. From the second, it borrowed

l6 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
its pantheistic naturalism, full of a sombre sadness
and a bitter despair. From the third, it derived, in
a changed and mutilated form, the notion of redemp
tion; and this is the distinguishing point between
Christian Gnosticism and the Gnosticism of Philo.
We are conscious that the great crisis of the Gospel
has intervened between the two doctrines : it is no
longer possible to rest satisfied with a simple expla
nation of the universe, such as is given in the books
of the Alexandrine Jew. The work of Christ has
produced a great convulsion in the minds of men. It
must, at any cost, find a place in a system which
makes any claim to interpret the Gospel, and if that
system still bears the blemish of an ineffaceable Pan
theism, it must spend its strength in vain efforts to
despoil the religion of Jove and liberty of its true cha
racter. Redemption must be treated as Philo treated
the free creation ; it must be reduced to a mere cos-
mological fact.
Before entering on the classification and exposition
of the various systems of Gnosticism, we must first
point out two general principles common to them all.
They all incline to Docetism ; they have a tendency
to resolve a tangible reality into a mere semblance
(Aoga). This is a natural consequence of the prin
ciples of dualism. Associating evil with the corporeal
element, they cannot admit that the Redeemer can
have had any true contact with matter; they hold that
He can only have assumed a seeming, impalpable,
finer than aerial form, the shadow of a shade. Neither
the incarnation, nor the crucifixion can enter as actual
facts into the Gnostic theory. Nor is it the corporeal

BOOK I. — GNOSTICISM. 17
element alone which is opposed to the absolute good ;
all that is finite, limited, transitory, is placed in the
same category. Contingent realities are of no value ;
individual beings are as the foam formed on the ocean
and melting into it again. The one essential is the
idea, the knowledge, the key of the universal enigma ;
history is but its fluctuating, fleeting expression. Hence
the second trait, common to all Gnostic systems, the
contempt of history, which becomes a sort of parable
or mythology, designed to translate the ideal world into
visible symbols. This explains the really wild licence
of Gnostic symbolism. It imagines it has exalted the
Gospel, because it has given it an illimitable sphere, and
made the universe its arena ; it does not see that it has
lowered it by all the distance which separates the
moral from the physical; since it reduces it to a mere
theogony after the manner of Hesiod. Not only does
it appropriate the facts in order to mould them at its
will, but it takes no less liberty with the texts, by
means of a perpetual system of allegorising, which
gives full play to the imagination. When words are
treated merely as the medium of preconceived ideas,
they lend themselves to every invention of the mind ;
they may be played with like the pieces on a
draught-board. In employing so arbitrary an exegesis, the Gnostics,
as Irenaeus complained, " tore the truth limb from
limb."* "They are," he adds, "like a man, who,
possessing the likeness of a king made by a great
artist with precious stones, should remove those pre
cious stones, and, readjusting them, should clumsily
* Avovtcc to. pk\ri Trie akriOtiag. (" Contra Hseres.," I. I.)
3

l8 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
produce the image of a fox or of a dog, all the while
pretending to have preserved the noble outline, because
the same jewels still sparkle before our eyes."
Faithful to the eclecticism of the time, Gnosticism
gathered symbols and allegories on all hands ; it drew
from Pagan sources no less than from the sacred books
of the Jews and the Christians. The fundamental
theme of all these systems is the production of finite
and contingent existence by means of emanation, or
again by the blending of the Divine principle with
eternal matter ; the multiplied lives thus generated
all return to the original unity; the Divine spark within
them seeks its source again. Between the sphere
of the Divine and the sphere of matter, lies the
region of the intermediary powers, which serve as
links between the two worlds ; this is the region
of the psychical. Naturalistic Pantheism has an
infinite variety of forms, but these are its fundamental
principles. The main symbols designed to embody this universal
element of Gnosticism may be classed under a few
dominant types. The religions of Nature first of
all deified the stars, because of the great influence
they exert upon our planet; the sun was long the great
divinity of Asia, the burning focus, as it were, whence
emanated both death and life. The sidereal myths
also play an important part in Gnosticism ; the stars
represent in that system the inferior gods presiding
over the world of change and of matter. Number
is the most elementary and obvious principle of order
and harmony in the life of Nature ; it expresses the
measure and almost the idea itself. Oriental Paganism

BOOK I. — GNOSTICISM. ig
was led into the complicated calculations of astrology,
whence it thought itself capable of deducing the law
of our destinies. Pythagorean philosophy was entirely
constructed on this basis. We shall see how the
Gnostics have developed that which may be called the
mythology of numbers, and what place was occupied
in their systems by the Ogdoas, the Hebdomas, and
all the numerical combinations. Anthropomorphism
is the most natural of all symbols ; hence it filled a
prominent place in almost all idolatrous religions, long
before it received the brilliant and poetic transfor
mation of Greek humanism. Pantheistic naturalism,
moreover, may be said to be perpetually under the
spell of a voluptuous enchantment ; it gravitates
altogether towards material pleasures, and delights in
representing these to itself by the coarsest symbols.
Transferring the relations of the sexes to the sphere
of the gods, it always conceives of its divinities by
couples or Syzygice. Whatever attempts are made
to refine it in the course of ages, it undergoes no
true change. It reappears in the so-called Christian
Gnosticism with the same tendencies, filling the void
regions of the absolute with those sensual conceptions
which had degraded all the ancient mythologies; nor
does Gnosticism scruple yet further to draw largely
from these mythologies, both from the pure and impure,
to enrich and adorn its allegories. From Judaism
it borrows the ladder of light, on which the angels
ascend and descend, setting up, in the immensities
of space, that scale of emanations, which reaches from
the infinite heights of silence down to the manifold
forms of material existence. The Old Testament also
3*

20 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
supplies elements for its unworthy travesty of the God
who formed our world and all the lower orders of beings
which live on the dust of the earth. The notion of
redemption, not less distorted than that of creation,
is taken from the Gospel, and the history of Jesus
becomes the most fruitful and also the most strangely
falsified of the Gnostic symbols.* Thus the four
principal sources of the symbolism of the Gnostics are
astrology, numerical combinations, anthropomorphism,
and the history of religions.
Such, in its general characteristics, is the language
used in the schools, which are at the same time
sanctuaries, for the symbols are not mere metaphors ;
they are accepted literally; the heated imagination
lays hold of them ; the mind surrendered to unhealthy
excitement, no longer distinguishes between the con
ventional sign and the thing signified ; Gnosticism
believes in the sign, as the Canaanite believed in
his Baal, and the Egyptian in his bull Apis.
Many attempts have been made to classify rigorously
the various Gnostic systems. Some have sought the
principle by which to distinguish them in their historical
and national origin ;t but in an age of universal syn
cretism, when all barriers were broken down, a
difference of nationality did not suffice to constitute
a difference of tendency, so much the less as Gnosticism
only came into being in countries which were all alike
under the influence of the East. Others, identifying
Gnosticism with the philosophy of religion, have
* See Baur's " Die Christliche Gnosis," on this symbolism of
Gnosticism, pp. 230-240.
| This is the theory of M. Matter's learned work.

BOOK I. — GNOSTICISM. 21
divided it into three principal schools, according to the
place assigned by each to one of the three great forms
of the religion of the past. We have first the systems,
like those of Basilides and Valentinus, which acknow
ledged some kind of legitimacy in the old faiths, and
a gradual evolution of the religious consciousness.
Next come those which accept only one form of the
ancient religions, namely, Judaism ; this is the Gnos
ticism of the Clementines. Lastly, we have the doctrine
of the Ophites, and the far higher teaching of Mar-
cion, who holds that truth finds its final expression in
Jesus Christ, and that all that went before was but
frightful error.* This classification errs by considering
Gnosticism too exclusively as a philosophical move
ment, and not enough as a combination of religion
and speculation. The most reasonable division of the
Gnostic systems seems to us that which takes as its
basis the position assumed by them towards the God
of the Old Testament. t The question is twofold. It
comprehends not only the degree of respect with which
the revelations and institutions of Judaism are regarded,
but also the more or less absolute character of the
dualism of the system. In truth, the God of the Old
Testament is the God who created the heavens and the
earth. If He is regarded not as a God hostile to the
supreme Deity, but simply as a subordinate divinity,
as in the " Timasus" of Plato, the world which is His
creation is not under the ban of a positive curse ; there
is still something good in it ; its history, before Christ, is
* This is Baurt classification. (" Die Christliche Gnosis," 97-121.
f This is Neandei^s classification. (" Genetische Entwickelung
der Vornehmsten Gnostischen Systeme, Kirchengeschichte," p. 430.)

22 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
not of necessity a tissue of unrelieved and unmitigated
evil. On the other hand, if the God who created the
earth and the heavens, is a God absolutely evil, and at
war with the higher world, then creation is in itself a
curse, and His reign is but the continuous evolution
of evil. In the former systems, the world is not the
product of an eternal principle, opposed to the supreme
Being ; it is itself contained in the depths of the primal
abyss ; it is produced, doubtless, by a series of down
ward steps, but obviously it is not in itself absolutely
evil, as it is in the second class of Gnostic systems, in
which it is treated as the issue of a principle eternally
distinct from the supreme Deity.
We see that the notion of the Creator God, or the
Demiurgos, marks with great distinctness the line of
demarcation between the various schools, although
there is no radical difference between them, because
no Gnostic school recognises a free creation.
§ I. The Gnostics of the First School. Valentinus and
his Followers.
In this sketch of Gnosticism, we pass by scarcely-
developed systems, like that of Basilides, which compare
the first principle to a confused germ, from which all
the various substances are successively evolved by
a sort of mysterious disintegration.
With Valentinus, Gnosticism assumes the form of
a complete system, coherent in all its parts ; the fusion
between the Christian and Pagan elements is effected
with profound art. All the lines of revelation are pro
longed into indefinite perspective ; behind the foreground

BOOK I. — GNOSTICISM. 23
of the Gospel narrative, extends a radiant and receding
distance, which affects the mind, and especially the
imagination, with a sense of dizziness. The Christian
consciousness is indeed soon able to dispel the illusion ;
it is not slow to recognise that this brilliant metaphy
sical vista minifies that which it pretends to magnify,
since it destroys the distinction between the creation
and the Creator; but let that voice of the Christian
soul be but silent, and the illusion is complete. It is
easy to understand how, from these giddy heights, the
son of the East or of Egypt might look down with
pitying contempt on the doctrine of the Church, with
its sharply-drawn and simple outlines. Valentinus
knew how to cast over his philosophy the veil of a false
and flowery poetry, in perfect harmony with the taste
of an age of decline, which could no longer appreciate
the pure and quiet beauty of high art. In the same
manner, he transfused into all his teaching, that sense
of the bitter and tragic in existence, which was the
distinctive feature of the Roman decadence ; the over
whelming sadness of this period of universal decline,
which seemed to close for ever the age of strength
and health and youth, embodied itself in cunning
symbols, and lent to them a morbid charm. Valentinus
was, after his manner, a great lyric poet, expressing
the sorrows of his time in the eccentric form which
pleased him best. Moreover, all this sadness might
be lightly accepted, because it did not lead to humility,
nor call for repentance ; it left erect the great idol of
Paganism — humanity, which could behold itself deified
upon the naked summits of the Valentinian metaphysics,
no less than upon the golden heights of Olympus. Man

24 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
was still set forth as the most perfect realisation of the
divine ; the fall was only a necessary transition from
the divine infinite to the human finite ; redemption
required neither repentance nor sacrifice, but simply
the return of the finite to the infinite, and especially
the knowledge of that return, which is Gnosticism.
Salvation is then here also a matter of knowledge. The
Pagan of yesterday might find such a reconstruction
of his theories cheap, and easier a hundred times than
the inward renewal, the baptism of water and fire,
which begins with penitent tears, and is perfected
under the consuming action of the spirit of holiness.
It was more convenient, while, at the same time, it
seemed more poetical, to transfer the drama of redemp
tion to the realms of the infinite, than to give it our
sinful earth as its theatre, and as its actors free moral
beings, called to a death to self at the foot of the Cross.
We know but little about Valentinus himself. Ac
cording to Epiphanius, he was a native of the shores
of Egypt,* and received his philosophical training at
Alexandria. Thence he is supposed to have come to
Rome under Antoninus Pius, and only established
himself as the head of a school in Cyprus. Tertullian
asserts that he sought the episcopate, and that the
check given to his ambition drove him into the
ranks of the enemies of the Church. There is nothing
to sustain this accusation, which the fiery African may
easily have accepted in the heat of passion. There is
no necessity for assigning petty spleen as the cause of
the direction taken by the mind of Valentinus. He
followed what has been one of the most enticing tracks
* Epiphanius, "Contra Hseres.," I. 31.

BOOK I. — GNOSTICISM. 25
of speculation in all ages, and was led into it by the
bent of his own genius. There is no injustice in ac
cusing him of a lofty pride of intellect. The textual
fragment of one of his letters, which Epiphanius has
preserved, breathes the most arrogant contempt for
simple faith. " I come to speak to you," he says, "of
things ineffable, secret, higher than the heavens, which
cannot be understood by principalities or powers, nor
by anything beneath, nor by any creature, unless it be
by those whose intelligence can know no change."*
We can fancy we see this man, as Tertullian shows
him to us, knitting his brow, and saying, with an air
of mystery, " This is profound. "t
The doctrine of Valentinus is far more easily epito
mised than that of most of the Gnostics, because it
forms one systematic whole, J It is not, properly
speaking, dualistic, since his great aim is to show by
what process of degeneracy, matter proceeds from the
first principle ; it is also moderate in its estimate of
Judaism and of its God, and consequently in the
sentence it passes upon creation. It is Platonist rather
than Aristotelian, for it attaches great importance to
the ideal world. Human history, before it is enacted
* Epiphanius, "Contra Ha^res., adv. Valentin.," I. 31.
f " Hoc altum est." (Tertullian, " Adv. Valentin.," I. 37.)
| The first book of Irenffius' treatise, "Contra Haeres.," is an
important authority, as is also the passage of Epiphanius (I. 31), and
that of Theodoret, which is very clear. But the " Philosophoumena"
(VI. 29-39) supply on this point also the desiderated light with
a distinctness that leaves nothing to be desired. Naturally, the
exponents of the Valentinian system, who were not able to
avail themselves of this incomparable authority, must be henceforth
inadequate, though much may be gained from the works of Baur
and Neander, already quoted.

26 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
in our world of mire and darkness, is unfolded in the
higher sphere of the ideal. The tragedy of existence
is played in three acts: first, in the highest region,
which is called the Pleroma; then in the intermediate
sphere ; and lastly, upon earth. It is in substance the
same drama throughout ; since it always treats of the
trouble under which the universe groans, by reason
of the aspiration of the finite after the infinite, trouble
which resolves itself into the universal harmony, of
which knowledge is the master-key; it is Gnosticism
which reveals to every creature his true rank and
destiny. The originality of the Valentinian teaching
consists in its having depicted, with impassioned elo
quence, the agony and ardent yearning of creatures
separated from the absolute principle of their being,
and in its having thus brought the pantheistic theosophy
as close as possible to the idea of redemption, while
yet failing to reach it. It is strange to see a system,
idealist at its commencement, yielding to the influence
of the grossest mythologies of the East, to such a
degree as to borrow from them the. idea of those
pairings, or Syzygics, which in these occupy such a
conspicuous place; nor is even the semblance of
a metaphor retained ; the allegory is carried to its
furthest limits, and offers dangerous food for sensual
imaginations. Thus the most purely ethereal and the
most coarsely material elements are blended in these
half-philosophical, half-legendary conceptions.
The principle of all things — the Immortal, the Inef
fable, He who deserves the name of Father in the
absolute sense — is an unfathomable abyss.* He is
* Movae ayivvriToe atydaproQ, yovt/ios irarfip. (" Phil.," VI. 29.)

BOOK I. — GNOSTICISM. 27
linked neither to space nor time ; He is above all
thought, and, as it were, shut up within Himself.
Around Him is eternal silence. The Father is not
willing to remain in solitude, for He is all love, and
love can only exist where it has an object.* Thus He
produced by emanation the Intellect and the Truth.
The Intellect is the consciousness which the Father
has of Himself; it is the only Son, His living image,
who alone makes known the Father. The Intellect is
at the same time the Truth, because of this identity.
The Intellect and the Truth produce the Word and the
Life. This is the great quaternion of the absolute.
The Intellect finds its perfect expression in .the Word;
that expression is not a mere symbol, since it is also
the Life. The Word and the Life produce Man and
the Church. What does this mean, if not that the
absolute can only be fully manifested in humanity ?
The transcendently divine blends with the essentially
human. The Intellect and the Truth produce for the
glory of the Father ten emanations, which are called
JEons or Eternities. The Word and the Life produce
twelve emanations, a number less perfect than the ten.
The supernal sphere of the Pleroma is then complete. t
Thus there rises into the infinite that ladder of emana
tions which Tertullian called, in his powerful language,
the gemonicz of the Deity. \ Even into this highest
and ideal sphere, discord enters. This is inevitable,
unless perfect equilibrium be maintained between the
twofold force which animates the Mons, which are,
on the one hand, drawn towards their centre — that is,
* 'Ayairri r)v o\o£, r) Se aycmr) ovk eanv &ycmr), lav fir) r] 7-0 ayaTriifUvov.
("Phil.," VI. 39.) + Ibid. VI. 30. { Tertullian, "Adv. Valentin.," I. 36.

28 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
to the abyss from which they spring ; and, on the other
hand, are subject to the centrifugal power of projection
or emanation. They proceed from the infinite and tend
to it, yet they are not the infinite, and are not to be
confounded with it. The moment that the equili
brium of the two forces ceases, the harmony of the
Pleroma is broken. This catastrophe is brought about
by the last of the twelve yEons, produced by the Word
and the Life, which is the twenty-eighth emanation.
This /Eon, finding herself on the confines of the region
of light, is consumed with the desire to be reunited to
the Father ; she is not content with the portion of the
divine essence which has been allotted to her as her
share ; she compares it with the infinite, the absolute,
and deems it a poor and miserable heritage ; she aspires
therefore to lose herself in the silent abyss of the first
principle. This last of the /Eons of the Pleroma,
which is called Sophia, or Wisdom, has yet larger
ambitions ; she is desirous, in imitation of the first
principle, to become herself a producer, but to produce
alone, without the aid of the /Eon, which forms with
her a Syzygia, or divine couple.* But the uncreated
can alone produce under such conditions ; for all
inferior orders of being, two elements are required
for the production of anything — the feminine element,
or the vague and formless substance, and the masculine
or formative element. t Hence the necessity of Syzygia.
Now, the Sophia is the feminine /Eon. She is therefore
capable of producing only a formless being — an abor-
* 'H0£Xt)<Tf fitfir)aaa9aL rbv Traripa Kal yivvijaai k<x9' iavrijv £<'%« rovovZiyov.
(" Phil.," VI. 30.)
f "Ev rots yivvrjT07c to p.iv Offkv tanv oiiaiac TrpoXrinKov, to Sb apptv
poptjiurmov. (Ibid., VI. 30.)

BOOK I. — GNOSTICISM. 29
tion.* In her rashness, she has broken the harmony
of the Pleroma; discord has entered, and it is impossible
to tell where it may end. All the /Eons supplicate the
Father to arrest it by consoling Sophia, who bursts
into tears and groans at sight of the shapeless being
to which, in her isolation and impotence, she has given
birth. t The salvation of the Pleroma is contingent
on the production of a new emanation. The Intellect
and the Truth give birth to the Christ and the Holy
Spirit; the number of the /Eons being thus raised to
thirty. These two new /Eons represent the power of
restoration of harmony, and order. They begin by
ejecting from the Pleroma the mal-formed product of
Wisdom ; the Father sets up the boundary, called also
the Cross; He places it between the higher world and
the lower, to which belongs the wretched abortion of
which Wisdom is the parent; this abortion is designated
by the name Achamoth. The Christ and the Holy
Spirit give it a form, and save it from losing itself in
utter confusion.} Then they return to the Pleroma,
and instruct the /Eons in the eternal order of things
and the grandeur of their origin, for they all proceed
from the same principle. The Pleroma, thus delivered
from rash ambitions, is restored to harmony, and praises
the Father. All the /Eons together produce, as a pledge
of this harmony, and as a testimony of their gratitude,
one last /Eon, who is called Jesus, or the Saviour,
and who is the fruit of the Pleroma. § Thus is
completed the first part of this trilogy, which com-
* Ovalav dpoptpov. (" Phil.," VI. 30.)
t "EicXaic yap Kat KartiiSvpiTO. (Ibid., VI. 31.)
J "Hv 6 xpurrbg f.p.bptpu)ff€. (Ibid.)
§ '0 KOivbg tov v\rip(i>p.aroa KapiroQ 6 'Irjaovg. (Ibid., VI. 32.)

30 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
prehends three worlds, like the poem of Dante, and
which only reproduces the same drama under different
forms. Let us attempt to translate all this ontological
mythology into the exact style of metaphysics, bearing
in mind that Gnosticism never separated ideas from
the legendary tissue in which it embodied them. The
absolute must necessarily emerge from its state of
immobility ; a hidden principle is at work in the dark
abyss, and elicits from it the universal life, which
developes itself by successive stages. But this mani
festation of the absolute issues of necessity in an
imperfect life ; from this fatal imperfection results a
sorrowful yearning after the infinite, and this aspiration
only finds its goal and satisfaction in the knowledge of
the eternal and normal relation of all beings with
the absolute, as derived from it, and still constituting
a part of it. The absolute is found again in them,
or rather they are found in it ; it follows that the finite
and imperfect existence appears in the brightness of
the Pleroma, "like a little spot upon a white tunic."
Thus salvation in this higher sphere of life proceeds
from knowledge {gnosis). The Christ is the deter
mining, formative power, the revealer by pre-eminence.
Let us pass on to the second act which is played
in the vague regions bordering on the Pleroma. Here
the poetic and metaphysical genius of Valentinus
is most fully manifested. Creation and redemption are
one and the same to him, for our world was only
produced for the consolation and restoration of that
unhappy son of Wisdom who, cut off from the region
of light, yet could not lose the recollection of it. The

BOOK I. — GNOSTICISM. 31
Christ of the Pleroma, and the Holy Spirit, have
left him to himself, after giving him a definite form ;
he cannot be consoled for the loss of that bright
vision ; the sweet fragrance of their presence abides
with him, and he cries with tears for their return.
The Sophia of the Pleroma has communicated all
the fire which consumed her to Achamoth, that shape
less product of her daring aspirations ; he again,
following her example, darts upwards towards the
infinite, painfully beating his wings against the im
passable boundary, and crying out passionately for the
Divine light and life.* He is the meanest creature
upon our world, and yet there is none more noble
by reason of his ardent longing after God, and that
ceaseless, sacred yearning which will not let him rest.
Sometimes a bright smile breaks through his tears ; it
comes at the recollection of the brief glimpse that
was granted him of the Pleroma. t How can we fail
to recognise in him, the image or personification of that
race of fallen gods who, as they move on earth, carry
with them the memory of their heavenly origin ? Never
was the exile of the soul, the daughter of the
light, described in grander poetry. Our world is born
of the agonies of Achamoth ; of these the tissue
of earthly existence is woven ; his broken heart throbs
in all nature. Hence the universal sigh which seems
to swell the bosom of earth as sobs upheave the heart
of a weeping child.
The Pleroma has compassion on Achamoth. It
* 'EXv7ri)dri Kai iv awop'ia iyivsTO. (" Phil.," VI. 32.)
f All that relates to the sadness of Achamoth is fully treated by
Irenaeus. (" Contra Ha?res.," I. chap. 1, edit. Feuardentius, p. 20.)
HoTt [ikv iicXatE ttoH 8' av k&Xlv BtpoGuTO, ttotb tftf^aro KaL i[tXa.

32 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
sends him Jesus, or the Saviour — that blessed fruit
of its own harmony. Jesus delivers Achamoth from
the burden of his griefs, and after having drawn these
from his breast, he gives them the form of a concrete
substance. Thus is produced the lower world, which
will become in its turn the scene of the same sorrows
and deliverances as the two higher regions. The
sombre sadness of Achamoth becomes the material
element; his despair is the dernonaical essence; his
fear and aspiration give birth to the intermediate or
psychical element, which is neither matter nor spirit.*
Nothing could be more ingenious than this attempt
to resolve the dualism, which had so long weighed
upon the thought of the ancients, by means of this
sort of crystallisation or petrifaction of the feelings
of the exiled /Eon. According to Irenasus, Valentinus
carried this poetical theory of the creation still further.
The streams and fountains which we behold are the
tears of Achamoth, while the soft light which gladdens
us is the radiation of his joy, when he recalls the
visit of the heavenly emanations. t The Demiurgos has
a place in this system ; he is born of the terror of the
/Eon, the salutary fear which is the beginning of
wisdom, since it accompanies the ardent supplication
which is granted by the Pleroma. While Achamoth
occupies the Ogdoas, or the heavenly Jerusalem, the
Demiurgos is consigned to the Hebdomas, composed
of seven gods, which are themselves seven /Eons.
These symbolical figures mark the difference of the
* 'Ettoiijow iKaTr)vai ra irdQjj air avrrjg Kai BTroirjo-cv avra ii7ro<rraruca<;
oiioiag, Kai tov \ilv ^o6ov \j/vxtK:r)v STroirjatv ovaiav, tt)v Si Xvirrjv iXadjv,
Tr)v U airopiav daifiovwv. (" Phil.," VI. 33.)
f Irenaaus, " Contra Hffires.," I. chap. 1.

BOOK I. — GNOSTICISM. 33
two regions, for the Ogdoas is the sphere where dwells
the Spirit, raised immeasurably above the psychical,
who has produced seventy beings which share in his
spiritual essence. The Demiurgus, as his name indi
cates, is the creator and organiser of our world ; he
believes himself to be its supreme God, and so declares
himself to Moses and to all the men of the Old
Testament. " I am God," he says, " and there is none
beside me."* Men were created by the Demiurgus;
their body is composed of material elements, but their
soul is of psychical essence, t Achamoth, unknown to
the earth-god, communicates some sparks of the Spirit
to a select number of men. These constitute the
moral aristocracy of mankind ; they are the spiritual
in opposition to the psychical and material beings.
Men are thus classed by the predominance in their
nature of one or other of the three elements which
constitute this sphere of existence.J
The prophets of the Old Testament were only the
organs of the Demiurgus. In the fulness of time the
Redeemer appeared ; He is the third manifestation
of the power of restoration and of harmony, conse
quently, the third Saviour. The school of Valentinus
is divided on the question of the nature of His body.
The Westerns ascribed it to a psychical origin ; they
supposed it to have been formed by the Demiurgus, and
held that the spirit only entered into it at His baptism.
The Easterns, on the contrary, pronounced the body
to be, from its origin, of spiritual essence. Absolute doce-
tism was the consequence of this conception. Both
*OiVtr ou'tr o fij/uovpyoe 8\ii>e. ("Phil.," vi. jj.)
t Ibid., vi. 33. t Ibid., vi. 34.
4

34 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
schools, however, admitted the miraculous birth of the
Saviour. Messiah passed through the womb of Mary, " as
water through a channel."* He enlightened the Demi
urgus as to the existence of the Pleroma, and then
carried the true light to the spiritual portion of
mankind, which was destined to receive it. Achamoth
sees the gates of everlasting light open before him, and
forgets his long distress. The Demiurgus takes his
place in the Ogdoas; the spiritual men — the true
Gnostics — united to the beings emanated from Acha
moth, are delivered for ever from that which is
perishable, and enter into the ineffable blessedness
of the Pleroma. Matter vanishes, consumed by fire.
It is no longer more than a shadow upon the bright
substance of supreme felicity.t In all the schools
of Gnosticism we see that illumination is the substitute
for redemption. Sacrifice, in any true sense, has no
place where sin has no reality. Everything hinges
on the relations of the finite with the infinite, and
not on those of the moral creature with the Holy
God. Thus all this brilliant metaphysical speculation
is hung over an empty place ; it issues in a hopeless
fatalism, in an absolute and capricious predestination,
which limits salvation to the chosen ones of Wisdom,
the sons of light. It is indeed worthy of observation,
that predestination made its first appearance in
Christianity under the garb of heresy. It was the very
soul of Gnosticism. "The Valentinians," says Irengeus,
"feel themselves under no necessity to attain by
* Ttyivvr)Tai 6 'Iqcrofe ' Sid Napiag. (" Phil.," vi. 35.) 'lr]aovv ha
Mapiag we did cuXijvog. (Epiphanius, " Contra Ha;res.," 31.)
f " Phil.," vi. 36.

BOOK I. — GNOSTICISM. 35
their deeds to the spiritual nature ; they possess it
inherently, and regard themselves as perfectly saved
by divine right. Just as gold, which has been buried
in clay, does not thus forfeit its beauty, but retains
its true nature unalloyed, so do these men receive no
hurt from all the sensual indulgences which they allow
themselves, but preserve their spiritual essence."*
The Old Testament, and the God whom it reveals,
are not treated by Valentinus with much reverence.
The Demiurgus, however, sins only through ignorance ;
he possesses a relative truth. He himself is to be
raised to the borders of the Pleroma. There is not,
then, positive and absolute opposition between the two
Testaments, notwithstanding the scorn of the sect
with regard to Hebrew prophecy.
So bold and poetical a system as that of Valentinus,
opened a large career for inventive and subtle imagina
tions. The fundamental theme was variously modified,
according to the caprice of each. We need not enter
in detail into these idle vagaries of the mind, carried
about by every passing wind, without the steadying
ballast of the moral life. Among the chief disciples
of Valentinus, may be named Bardesanes .of Edessa,
Marcus, Ptolemy, and Heracleon. These confined
themselves to making variations on the theme of
these tortuous metaplvysics. These systems passed
by the most sublime and original portion of the
doctrine of Valentinus, that which relates to the fall
and the aspirations of Achamoth, that child of Wisdom
placed on the borders of the Pleroma, as the poetical
* M>) Sid Trpdifcog aXXd Sid to fvaei TrvsvpariKoii; dvai. (Irena?us,
I. I. p. 26.) 4*

36 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
personification of our fall, and who is ever divided
between bitter memories and ardent longings. This
gap is filled by a curious anonymous document in
the Coptic language, lately discovered. The date
is doubtful ; it evidently belongs to the period when
Valentinian Gnosticism had reached its full develop
ment, — about the close, therefore, of the second century.
It is entitled " Pistis Sophia," the Believing Wisdom.*
The general dogmas of the Valentinian system are
found in it, though half buried in a luxurious and
monotonous vegetation. The theme is always the
same — a gnosis, or hidden doctrine, which brings
salvation by simple illumination. Jesus Christ returns
from the heavens into which He had reascended,
and appears to His disciples on the Mount of Olives,
to reveal to them the sublime mysteries of the truth.
They form around Him the inner and privileged circle
pf the spiritual ones, whose charge it is to transmit
this hidden manna to the pneumatic men of future
generations. All these revelations revolve around the
destiny of Sophia, who here symbolises, far more
clearly than among the early Valentinians, the melan
choly condition of the human soul, which, as the
punishment for having sought to overpass the limits
of its original sphere, is tormented by the cosmical
powers, among which we recognise the Demiurgus.
He produces, by emanation, a terrible power with a lion
face, which, surrounded by other similar emanations,
terrifies the noble and ardent exiled Sophia, even
in the dark regions of matter, flashing before her
* "Pistis Sophia." "Opus gnosticum e codice manuscripto coptico
latine vertit Schwartz." (Ed. I. H. Petermann, Berlin, 1853.)

BOOK I. — GNOSTICISM. 37
eyes a false and misguiding brightness1. Nevertheless,
she does not lose courage ; she still hopes and believes.
Hence she deserves the name of the Believing Wisdom.
Twelve times she invokes the Deliverer in strains
of passionate and truly sublime supplication ; these
are her twelve repentances.* Her deliverance is
accomplished by means of an equal number of inter
ventions on the part of Jesus. As the fall, or sin,
is nothing more than an obscuration produced by
matter, so salvation is simply a return to the light.
This division of the lamentations of Sophia and the
interventions of Jesus, produces a wearisome amount
of repetition ; the aspirations of the soul are, however,
rendered with a force, all the more poetic, because
so largely derived from the Old Testament. In
particular, all the penitential Psalms are applied to
Sophia, being wrested from their natural meaning.
" 0 Light of lights," she exclaims, " thou whom I have
seen from the beginning, listen to the cry of my
repenting. t Save me, 0 Light, from my own thoughts,
which are evil. I have fallen into the infernal regions.
False lights have led me astray, and now I am lost
in these chaotic depths. I cannot spread my wings
and return to my place, for the evil powers sent forth
by my enemy, and most of all this lion-faced power,
hold me captive. I have cried for help, but my voice
dies in the night. I have lifted up my eyes to the
heights, that thou mayest come to my aid, O Light.
* "Nunc cujus Trvevfia alacre, progreditor, ut dicat solutionem
duodecimal ptrdvoiaQ Trio-reuig o-o<piag." (" Pist. Soph.," p. 70.)
| "Lumen luminum, cui lirianvaa inde ab initio, audi igitur nunc,
lumen, meam iitrdvoiav." (Ibid., p. 33.)

38 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
But I have found none but hostile powers, who rejoice
in my affliction, and seek to increase it, by putting
out the spark of thine which is in me. Now, O
Light of truth, in the simplicity of my heart I have
followed the false brightness which I mistook for
thine. My sin is wholly before thee. Leave me not
to suffer longer, for I have cried to thee from the
beginning. It is for thee that I am plunged into this
affliction. Behold me in this place weeping, crying
out again for the light, which I have seen upon
the heights. Hence the rage of those who keep
the doors of my prison. If thou wilt come and
save me, great is thy mercy; grant my supplica
tion. Deliver me from this dark matter, lest I be,
as it were, swallowed up in it."* " O Light, cast upon
me the flame of thy compassion, for I am in bitter
anguish. Haste thee, hear me. I have waited for
my spouse that he might come and fight for me,
and he comes not. Instead of light, I have received
darkness and matter. I will praise thee, I will glorify
thy name ; let my hymn rise with acceptance to
thee at the gates of light. Let my whole soul be
purified from matter, and dwell in the divine city.
Let all souls which receive the mystery be admitted
therein. "t The same cry rises twelve times to the
Deliverer. " I am become," says Sophia again, " like
the demon who dwells in matter, in whom all light
is extinct. I am myself become matter. My
strength is turned to stone in me. J I have set my
* "Libera me e SAphujus caliginis." ("Pist. Soph.," p. 34.)
f " Vvxai horum qui suscipient mysterium." (Ibid., p. 36.)
J " Atque mea vis congelascuit in me." (Ibid., p. 43.)

BOOK I. — GNOSTICISM. 39
love in thee, O Light, leave me not in the chaos.
Deliver me by thy knowledge.* My trust is in thee ;
I will rejoice, I will sing praise to thy glory, because
thou hast had pity on me. Give me thy baptism, and
wash away my sins." This mythology, full of poetic
sadness, was skilfully spread as a veil over the abstrac
tions of Gnosticism, and adapted them to the taste
of subtle and unhealthy minds. The dialogue between
jesus and His disciples, in spite of its uniformity,
pleased the readers of the apocryphal Gospels, and
satisfied those feverish imaginations which had lost
the sense of true beauty. Pride found its gratification
in these new mysteries, which emulated in every
respect those of Eleusis or of Mithra.
§ III. The Gnostics of the Second School.
(a) The Ophites. Marcion.
The special feature of the second Gnostic school
is that in its teachings the Demiurgus appears as
a decidedly maleficent being, instead of simply belong
ing to an inferior order, ignoring the Pleroma, as in
the systems of Basilides and the earlier Valentinians.
This school is inaugurated by some heretics called
Ophites, because they made the serpent a beneficent
being, in order the better to mark their opposition
o the God of the Old Testament. His foe was, in
heir view, a deliverer. They indulged in all sorts
<f fanciful inventions to explain the origin of the
\orld. The first Ophites make their appearance at the
ommencement of the second century, but they had suc-
* " Libera me in tua cognitione." (" Pist. Soph.," p. 56.)

40 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
cessors in the time of Irenseus, who added fresh absur
dities to their system. We simply mention them here.
The most eminent representative of the second
school of Gnosticism is Marcion. If it is always
difficult to separate a system from the person of its
author, this is especially the case with the doctrine
of this famous heretic, for it bears so distinctly the
impress of his ardent but narrow soul, passionately
attached to Christianity, but unjust (as passion itself
even when its object is the most noble and elevated);
enamoured of the highest moral ideal, but finding
means to falsify it by unsound exaggeration. Grave,
however, as were these errors of Marcion, he never
theless commands our respect by the nobleness of his
character and the grandeur of some of his thoughts,
which have become causes of discord only because
he has presented them without the qualifications which
would have completed them. Marcion possessed the
genius of a reformer. He was a Saul of Tarsus, ever
abiding under the burning brightness of the revealing-
flash on the road to Damascus, never attaining to the
full and calm light of a settled faith. An impetuous
disciple of St. Paul, he compromises the cause he
has embraced, by disregarding the grand and suggestive,
synthesis of the Apostolic preaching, and giving promii
nence only to its negative and polemical side. H^
believes himself called to renew perpetually the seem
at Antioch ; he treats the Church like anpther Cephas
whose attachment to Judaism demands a reprimand
and, under the name of Judaism, he comprehend
all which is more or less remotely connected wip
the religion of the Old Testament. This was a

BOOK I. — GNOSTICISM. 4I
deviation from the broad and profound views of the
Apostle of the Gentiles, with regard to the relations
of the two covenants, and in particular of the prepara
tory province of the law. Thus did this ultra Paulinist
fail to fulfil the noble mission devolved upon him,
for nothing was more opportune in his day than a
reaction against Judaising tendencies, which were the
more dangerous, that they were disguised under new
names. The spirit of reformation is distinguished
from the spirit of revolution in this — that it destroys
only the parasitic growths, without touching the vital
parts of the tree.
To be just, we must bear in mind the circumstances
under which Marcion grew up. A native of the shores
of the Euxine, born in the year 120, he was educated
amidst a school which borrowed from the apocryphal
literature of the Jews the warm and vivid tints with
which it depicted the future of the Church, and was
thus led into positive materialism. Marcion's tenden
cies were altogether in an opposite direction. The
son of a devout bishop, he was distinguished by an
exalted piety, verging on asceticism ; one of his first
steps was to make a gift to the Church of a large
sum of money.* We cannot admit the serious charge
made by Tertullian against his moral character; it
was so common to compare heresy to spiritual adultery,
that a bold figure, interpreted by inveterate malignity,
may easily have grown into a calumny not intended.
Probably the opposition offered by Marcion to Judaising
Christianity was fierce and immoderate, as might be
expected from such a man. In consequence of some
* Tertullian, " De prascriptionibus," c. xxx.

42 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
differences, in which his father seems to have taken
part against him, Marcion repaired to Rome.* This
was the great theatre upon which every inventor of
a new thing sought to enact his part, well knowing
that there was no surer way of gaining publicity for
his ideas. Marcion had occupied himself very little
with metaphysics up to this time ; he had no taste
for all the subtleties of Valentinian Gnosticism. The
bent of his mind was far more to Christian practice
than to theosophy. In his keen antipathy to the
Judaisers, he included the Old Testament itself, without
embodying his views in any definite system. It was
necessary, however, that he should give a speculative
basis to his ideas, for they could not exercise any
important influence while they remained in a frag
mentary form. This necessity explains the subsequent
reconciliation between Marcion and Gnosticism. At
Rome he met a moderate Gnostic, who had abandoned
the learned and poetic ontology of the Valentinians,
and who shared Marcion's violent antipathy to Judaism.
This man was named Cerdo, and was a Syrian by
birth. Discarding the elaborate genealogy of the
.Eons, he was satisfied with recognising a visible
and inferior God in addition to the supreme and
invisible Being; the latter represented goodness, the
former justice. The opposition between the Gospel
and the Old Testament was thus vindicated. Cerdo
combined with these views a very decided tendency
to asceticism. t Marcion's predispositions were all
* Tertullian, " De prascriptionibus," c. li. »
f "Phil.," vii. 37. Comp. Eusebius, " H. E.," IV. 11 ; Irenaws,
" Contra Hasres.," i. 27.

BOOK I. — GNOSTICISM. 43
in favour of such a system ; he supplemented it, and
imparted to it the fervour and boldness of his own
nature. Thus he made it a really powerful doctrine,
which gathered many adherents.
He seems to have always dreaded schism. When
Polycarp came to Rome he sought his friendship, but
the patriarch of the churches of Asia Minor repelled
him with the words, " I know thee : thou art the first
born of Satan."* Addressing himself one day to the
elders of the Church of Rome, Marcion asked them
what Jesus had meant when He spoke of the piece of
new cloth, which, being put in, rends the old garment.
Not content with their answer, which was full of
wisdom, he boldly applied these words to the Old
Testament, which he likened to the worn-out vesture :
"And I also," he exclaimed, "will rend the Church,
and the rent shall be for ever."t It is difficult to believe,
with Tertullian, that such a man should have sought,
at the close of his life, reconciliation with orthodoxy.!
Marcion is distinguished' from the other Gnostics,
first, by his strong repudiation of that sort of intellec
tual aristocracy, so scornful of the profanum vidgum,
which set up between the learned and the ignorant the
very barrier which the Lord had cast down. Marcion
did not even sanction the distinction commonly made
in public worship, between the members of the Church
and the catechumens, so fully was he taken up with
the desire to popularise the truth. § He also entirely
* Eusebius, " H. E.," IV. 14. f Epiphanius, " Contra Ha?res.," 42.
| Tertullian, " De prescript," 30.
§ " Marcion hunc locum (Gal., vi. 6) ita interpretatus est, ut
putaret fideles et catechumenos simul orare debere." (Jerome,
" Comment, in ep. ad Gal.")

44 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
rejected the method of allegorical interpretations, and
argued for an adherence to the natural meaning of the
texts, without recourse to a compliant exegesis, which
avoided all the real difficulties, merging them in an
arbitrary symbolism. Refusing to adopt the artifices
by which difficult texts, or those which gave occasion
for scandal, were disposed of, he preferred to set aside
that which he could not interpret, and he made a sacred
book for his own use, which contained, according to
him, the true tradition of the teaching of Jesus Christ.
He found this pure tradition only in the writings of
St. Paul' and in the Gospel of Luke, which he
ascribed to the direct influence of the Apostle of the
Gentiles. Even this he accepted only with reserva
tions, and eliminated from it all that was incompatible
with his system. Thus Marcion became the father of
purely internal and subjective criticism.
There has been much discussion as to whether he
recognised two or three essential principles of things.
It is certain that he established an eternal opposition
between the supreme God and uncreated matter, the
source of all evil. The moot point is, whether the
Demiurgus, or the inferior God, who created the world,
was raised by him to the rank of a third principle.
It seems that such was really his idea, for the
opposition between the Demiurgus and the supreme
God is too radical to admit the supposition that the
former proceeded from the latter. Again, matter is
clearly distinguished from the Demiurgus,* since the
* "Erepoi St KaBuig Kai b vavTTjg MapKiW, Sio apxdg eitrriyovvTai.
("Rhodos apud Eusebius," "H. E.," V. 13.) Avo apxdg tov iravrbg
vmfoTO. (" Phil.," vii. 29.)

BOOK I. — GNOSTICISM. 45
first man was condemned for this very offence of
having violated the law of his Creator under the
influence of matter. It is better to adhere to the
co-existence of three distinct principles, with this
reservation, that the material principle, being essentially
negative, cannot be compared with the two others ;
the system, after all, therefore, is essentially dualistic*
We shall not attempt to introduce rigorous exactness
into the metaphysics of a school which makes practical
religion its absorbing theme. Marcion does not en
deavour to connect the created world with the higher
sphere by a long chain of emanations or iEons. The
supreme God of his system remains motionless through
all eternity ; He only emerges from this state of
quiescence at the time of salvation. The Demiurgus
creates the world without any suspicion of the existence
of a power higher than his own; he fashions incoherent
matter, and forms from it the human body, into which
he breathes life. He gives man a law, but without
rendering him capable of fulfilling it. The fall of man
is laid to the charge of the Demiurgus. t It is not
* Tertullian enumerates, three principles in Marcion's system :
" Et materia enim deus secundum formam divinitatis, innata
scilicet et infecta et sterna. Atque ita tres interim mihi deos
numera Marcionis." ("Adv. Marc," i. 15.) Neander ("Kirch.
Gesch.," i. 521 ; " Gnostisch. Syst," 287, et sea.), in his admirable
exposition of Marcion's system, has fallen into the mistake of
attempting to trace back the Demiurgus to the supreme God, while
Baur, also aiming at an impossible symmetry, has identified him
with the material and visible cause. (" Christlische Gnosis,"
276-282.) There is opposition, however, between the Demiurgus
and Nature, as is proved by the fall of man. This opposition
is clearly shown from the fragment of the Armenian book of Esnik,
quoted by Mceller (" Gesch. der Kosmologis," p. 378, et set/.), in
which matter struggles with the Demiurgus for the possession
of man. f Tertullian, "Adv. Marc," ii. 5.

46 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
simply the visible God, as opposed to the invisible ;
he represents further, strict, implacable justice, which
deals with the external alone, recognises only a mer
cenary and imperfect virtue, and takes vengeance for
evil rather than punishes it.* The Demiurgus is the
evil tree of the parable, which is known by its fruit.t
The Old Testament is the monument of this maleficent
activity, the Jewish people is the people of the
Demiurgus, the law is the emanation of his cruel
justice, and the miserable destinies of Israel reveal
the impotence of a God who could not even secure
the happy fortunes of his favourites. I Paganism
belongs to matter and to the demons, as Judaism
to the Demiurgus. Such is the state of the world
up to the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius.
Suddenly, without transition or preparation, like
the lightning clearing the cloud, the supreme God
appears in the person of Jesus Christ. § This supreme,
invisible, unknown God is sovereign goodness, love,
as opposed to justice. He is never angry ; He can only
pity and pardon. Thus He grants salvation not to
a legal righteousness, but to the trusting faith which
surrenders to Him. 11 Here is the echo of one of the
grandest utterances of Paul. Unhappily, it is wrested
from its true meaning, for love, apart from righteousness,
is but blind kindness, weak indulgence. The merciful,
apart from the holy God, is no longer the Most High.
* "Quo ore constitues divinitatemduorum Deorum, separationem
seorsum deputans Deum bonum et seorsum Deum justum." (Ter
tullian, "Adv. Marc," ii. 12.)
f " Phil., Epitome," x. 19. J "Contra Marc," ii. 18-29.
§ " Subito Christus." (Ibid, iv. 11, 17.)
11 Ibid., iv, 20-24 ; Irenasus, i. 27.

BOOK I. — GNOSTICISM. 47
Marcion attempted to intensify the contrast between
the Demiurgus and the supreme God, by drawing
up a long list of antitheses between the Old and
New Testaments. While the Messiah of the Demi
urgus is a national and local Messiah, Jesus belongs
to all mankind. The former promises only earthly
good ; the latter speaks altogether of heaven. The
Demiurgus commands the children of Israel to carry
away the treasures of Egypt ; Jesus directs His
disciples not to take so much as a staff in their hand.
The Jewish God sends a bear to devour the children
who had mocked Elisha, and calls down fire from
heaven upon his enemies ; the Gospel teaches only
kindness and forgiveness. Lastly, the merciful Saviour
chose as His disciples the outcasts from Judaism.
These antitheses he sums up in these eloquent words :
" While Moses lifts up his hands to heaven, invoking
the slaughter of the enemies of Israel, Jesus stretches
out His hands upon the cross for the salvation of
all mankind." On the one side, is the spirit of
revenge ; on the other, is the triumph of love.*
Jesus is the direct manifestation of the good and in
visible God. In the fifteenth year of Tiberius it pleased
God to come down to Nazareth, a city of Galilee.
It was not possible for Him to come into contact with
matter; Marcion, therefore, holds the most positive
docetism. The birth of Jesus was only apparent, His
body only a phantom. He took nothing from the
world of the Demiurgus, t unless it were the name
* Tertullian, "Adv. Marc," ii. 25, 29.
•|- " Phantasma vindicans Christum, non erat quod videbatur, caro
nee caro, homo nee homo." (Tertullian, " Contra Hseres.," 3, 8.)
'AyivvriTog '0 'Iij<rof'£. (" Phil.," vii. 34.)

48 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
of Messiah, for the God of the Old Testament
proclaimed the coming of a Jewish Saviour, and His
prophets, one after another, predicted it. This inferior
Saviour will indeed come, but only for the chosen
people ; to them He will bring a salvation worthy
of them — one, namely, that is purely material and
earthly.* Meanwhile, the Demiurgus stirs up the
hatred of the Jews, against this rival power which
has arisen in Jerusalem. Jesus is sacrificed under
his influence. The death of the Redeemer may indeed
have been only apparent, like the rest of His mani
festations on earth ; it yet points out to us the way to
be made free by the breaking of material bonds. The
Christ of Marcion does not rise again, but He goes
down into Hades, not to seek the saints of the Old
Testament, who are destined to the material joys of
the paradise of the Demiurgus, but the unhappy Pagans,
the sons of matter, who can be saved only by Him.t
According to the Armenian Esnik, an encounter
takes place between Christ and the Demiurgus, on
the confines of the higher world. The Crucified shuts
the mouth of His adversary by confounding him from
his own law, which forbids the shedding of innocent
blood. He wrests from him the avowal of his
inferiority, and delivers those of his subordinates,
who have placed their trust in him, leaving the
obstinate Jews to the harsh treatment of the Demi
urgus. Jesus returns into heaven ; thither He draws
after Him, by the stern path of asceticism, all who
believe in His word; their soul is to break through
* Tertullian, "Adv. Marc," iii. 21.
f Irenasus, "Adv. Hasres.," i. 27.

BOOK I. — GNOSTICISM. 49
its material shroud, as the bird breaks the egg, or the
ripe ear the straw which encloses it.* They are to
prepare for the glories of the invisible by renouncing
all material pleasures, and breaking all carnal bonds.
Marcion imposed on his disciples absolute chastity ;
he condemned marriage, and required his catechumens
to forsake family ties, and to renounce all earthly pos
sessions. So far from fearing reproach and martyrdom,
he exulted in both as the sure means of purification.
" 'We are devoted," he says, " to hatred and to grief."
It is easy to understand the influence exercised by
such a s3Tstem, for he was full of spiritual energy,
of ardent love for Christ, and of a profound convic
tion of the unquestionable superiorit}- of Christianity
over all that had preceded it. His errors, the part he
assigned to legendary metaphysics, and to oriental
asceticism, gained him many sympathies in an age, the
most decided tendencies of which found their satis
faction in him. Thus, in spite of sharp opposition, in
spite of the passionate invectives of Tertullian, Mar-
cionism gathered numerous adherents, and constituted
a true schismatic church. His influence was felt
even in the time of Theodoret, as we learn from his
account of the savage old man he met, who washed
his face with his 6wn saliva, that he might not borrow
even a drop of water from the accursed world of the
Demiurgus.t Among the Marcionites we ma)' mention Preps, who
insisted upon the existence of the third principle, and
Apelles, who had an enthusiastic disciple in a woman
* Baur, " Christliche Gnosis.'' p. 273.
f Theodoret, " De hayetic. fabulis.," i. 24.

50 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
named Philomela ; he admitted four principles, making
a sort of distinct personification of evil. He was as
severe as Marcion upon the Old Testament ; his
docetism, however, appears to have been less pro
nounced ; for, in his view, Christ, in reascending to
heaven, gave back the various particles of His flesh
to the elements to which they severally belonged.
Having made a long sojourn in Alexandria, he blended
with the system of Marcion many elements of the
doctrine of Valentinus. The fable of Sophia reappears
in his notion of the Demiurgus, who sighs after the
higher world, of which he has had a glimpse. A
system which loses its definite outlines is bending
to its fall. The school of Marcion was soon to be
dissolved in the ever-heated crucible of fanatic
speculation.

CHAPTER II.
MANICH^EISM.
Gnosticism, combated during nearly two centuries
by the highest Christian genius of the East and West,
was so much the more surely vanquished because
it encountered a purely moral resistance, which did not
dishonour itself by any appeal to force. Nevertheless,
it reappeared in Persia, at the close of the third
century, under a new form, which betrays the lassitude
of the speculative spirit. The logical power 'displayed
is much less than in the systems of Basilides and
Valentinus, and the veil of legend, used to cloak the
metaphysical construction under brilliant images, and
to give it life and colour, has lost all originality.
Manichasism is a translation into Christian language
of the ideas which lie at the basis of the religion
of Zoroaster, in combination with elements derived
from the early heretics. As it touches the soil of
Persia, however, Gnosticism springs into new life;
if its creations are less bold, they are also less com
plicated, and more popular. Thus this impoverished
version restored to it a measure of its forfeited credit,
though it never made the same mark as the earlier
forms of Gnosticism upon the thought of the Church ;
it neither became identified with it, nor stimulated
it by the necessity of a vigorous resistance.
Manichseism arose in the midst of the religion which
5*

52 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
had been the clearest exponent of dualism, which
had raised that principle to the very border of the
spiritual world, but no higher, for it had never left
behind the somewhat idealised opposition between
darkness and light. We have seen that Christianity
had early gathered many adherents in Persia. It
had even exerted a deep influence upon the devotees
of Zoroaster, who had borrowed from it the weapons
with which they opposed it. The new sacred books
composed at this period in Iran, bear the plain impress
of Christian thought ; the idea of redemption, though
strangely distorted, occupies an important place. The
development given by the Bundehesch to the myths,
which concern the heroic conqueror of evil, — who bears
the name sometimes of Sosiosch, sometimes of Mithra, —
can be explained only by the indirect influence of
the new religion. The famous mysteries of Mithra
derived from the Gospel their fundamental idea of
the renewal of the nature by means of death. The
rites celebrated by their votaries were imitated from
Baptism and the Lord's Supper. When we find
a religion so ancient and so glorious as that of
Zoroaster, thus seeking a compromise with a faith
so long ignored and despised, we have a sure proof
that Christianity must have grown up in juxtaposition
with it with amazing rapidity, and must have made
itself formidable as a rival. Manichasism is the counter
part, as it were, of these attempts at fusion ; the new
religion, ill-understood, and already corrupted in its
essence, seeks alliance with the religion of the past,
and endeavours to rejuvenate it by baptising it in
its own name. It leaves its doctrines untouched,

BOOK I. — MANICH^EISM. 53
and endeavours only to modify their expression. Mani
is still a Magian, while he calls himself a Christian ;
herein lay the peril and also the inanity of the attempt.*
We have two series of documents relating to Mani,
the one accredited in the East, the other derived
from the historians of Persia. The former consist
merely of an account of a supposed public discussion
at Cascar, in Mesopotamia, between the heresiarch
and a bishop named Archelaus. Not only do they
abound in details as to the doctrine of Mani, but
they also retrace his history. They suppose him to
have had two immediate forerunners. The true founder
of the sect is said to have been Scythianus, a rich
Arab, well versed in all the sciences of Egypt, which
he had made the country of his adoption. He has
a disciple, named Terebinthus, who establishes himself
* The sources from which we have derived this exposition of
Manichasism are, beside the modern historians of the Church :
1st. "The Dispute of Archelaus," contained in the fifth volume
of Routh's " Reliquiae," of the historical value of which we shall
presently state our views. 2nd. The polemical writing of Titus
of Botsra (" Contra Manichaeos," Book IV., apud Henrici Canisii
lection, antiq., Edit. Basnages, Vol. I.) 3rd. The fragments of
Letters of Manes, collected by Fabricius (" Bibliotheca grasca,"
Vol. VIII. p. 315) ; those collected by Augustine, especially in the
"Opus imperfectum." 4th. A precious fragment of Agapius, a
disciple of Manes, in Photius, "Bibliotheca," cod. 179. 5th. Alex
ander of Lycopolis, an Alexandrine philosopher, who lived between
the fourth and fifth centuries, and who has given an exact exposition
of Manichaeism, at least in all that relates to the metaphysical
part of the system. This valuable fragment is found in Combefil's
collection, entitled, "Auctarium nov. Biblioth. Patrum," Part II.
We may quote also Epiphanius, " Hasres.," 66, which is only
a compilation of "The Dispute of Archelaus;" Theodoret, "De
haeretic fabulis.," i. 25. See, finally, " L'Histoire critique du
Maniche'isme," by Beausobre (Vols. I. and II.), a vast repertory of
exhaustive information.

54 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
in Persia, and edits, in four books, the doctrine of his
master. Mani, adopted by the widow of Terebinthus,
gives a powerful impetus to the new heresy, enriching
it by numerous additions from the sacred books of
the Christians. He obtains great credit with the
King, Sapores, but is ignominiously driven from the
court, after having vainly attempted the miraculous
cure of the King's son. He travels over the far East,
but finally returns to Persia; he holds sharp contro
versies with the bishop Archelaus, in the public
assemblies. Shamefully defeated, he escapes with
difficulty the popular fury, and soon falls under the
stroke of the prince whom he had deceived.
This legend, unsupported by any contemporary
writer, has no other interest than that of showing
clearly the eclectic character of the heresy of Mani,
who aimed at nothing higher than a fusion of ideas,
derived from all schools. The " Dispute" itself sup
plies more than one valuable and reliable light upon
his doctrine.* The oriental version of the origin of
Manichseism has in its favour the surest testimonies
borrowed from the national history of Persia, and it
commends itself by a great semblance of probability.
It is from this source we derive the biography of the
founder of Manichseism.t
* The " Dispute of Archelaus" can only be regarded as an
unauthentic anti-Manichean compilation. Neither Eusebius nor
Ephreus, who lived in Mesopotamia, make any mention of it. It
is, moreover, full of inaccuracies. No such river is known as the
Stranga, nor any such castle as Arabion, both of which appear in
this narrative. The town of Cascar, which it places in the Roman
Empire, belonged to the Persians. (See Beausobre, I., 133-139.)
The " Dispute of Archelaus" is, nevertheless, of great value in a
doctrinal aspect.
f The oriental version of the history of Manes is found in the

BOOK I. — MANICHAEISM. 55
The dynasty of the Sassanidas had just inaugurated
in Persia an era of restoration, which had reinstated
the national worship in an honourable position. The
Persian historians speak of a sort of solemn council,
held by the Magi, under King Artaxerxes, to fix the
canon of doctrine. There was naturally much per
turbation of mind in a period of universal renovation,
in which the blending . of peoples and races no longer
made it possible for belief to be restricted within the
narrow limits of a particular country. Christianity
had gathered enough adherents to excite universal
opposition, and to teach the world that the time of
purely national creeds was irrevocably past. Thus
the religion of Zoroaster, in commencing its new
career, was constrained to have regard to this
character of universality ; but to this end, it must
needs enlarge its historical basis, and enter into com
bination more or less close with the Gospel. This
was the attempt, made in the year 240, by a young
Persian named Mani, who seems to have united
speculative genius with a brilliant imagination. It
has been asserted that he belonged to one of those
priestly families, which preserved the pure tradition
of the Avesta, as the true sacred fire. It is very
possible that he may himself have been one of the
Magi, although we have no positive information on this
point. His learning was vast ; he surpassed all his
countrymen. A mathematician, astronomer, musician,
and painter, he was a man born to exert a great in
fluence upon his contemporaries. It is doubtful if he
Persian historian Mirkhoud. (De Sacy, " Me"moires sur diverses
antiquite"s de la Perse." Paris, 1793, p. 289, et sea.)

56 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
ever really connected himself with the Church, though
it has been asserted that he for some time exercised
the priestly office.
He never recognised the authority of Holy Scripture ;
he treated this like his own religion, retaining only that
which was convenient. In reality, all he borrowed
from Christianity was the name of Christ, and the
words sin and redemption, which he translated in his
own manner, although he preserved the notion of a
new and final revelation, destined for the whole human
race. In the time and country in which he lived, no
system could succeed without the aid of the marvellous.
Had he not the example of Zoroaster himself, who had
spoken only of- visions and ecstasies ? A Magian, his
contemporary, in repute for his holiness, was held to
have been carried up into heaven during many days ;
there he had beheld, with his own eyes, the mysteries
of the unknown world, and had been enabled, by the
accounts he brought, to dispel the doubts of his sove
reign as to the future life. Mani aspired to play a similar
part ; he sought to become another Daniel at the Court
of Persia ; to obtain the royal favour seemed to him
the best means for securing the triumph of his doctrine.
Thus he soon began to relate his visions and to play
the prophet. He set himself forth as pre-eminently
the Apostle of Jesus Christ, the true interpreter of His
teachings, directly inspired by Heaven. He assumed
the name and the office of the Paraclete,* a convenient
* He declared himself to be the Paraclete promised by Jesus.
He pretended to have received the gift of prophecy ; he wrote a
book which he said had come clown from Heaven. (" Mirkhoud
apud Sacy," p. 294.) In the " Dispute of Archelaus," Manes thus
speaks of himself : " Sum quidem ego Paracletus qui ab Jesu mitti

BOOK I. — MANICH^EISM. 57
artifice for misrepresenting primitive Christianity, by
applying to himself the promises of the Master with
reference to the revelations of the Holy Spirit, by which
His teachings were to be made plain. With, however,
much prudence, he sought to preserve the ideas of
Zoroaster under Christian names ; he yet laid too bold
a hand upon the ancient worship of his country, not to
provoke lively opposition. The King, whose favour he
had at first won, withdrew it so soon as he saw Mani
had formed a sect properly so-called, and that he had
sent forth disciples to preach the new doctrine, without
confining themselves to the national practices. This
kind of innovation is in truth more dangerous than any
doctrinal novelties ; it needs more courage to attack
the customs of a people than its theories, custom being
the sensible form, the vesture of the idea which
strikes all ages. His death was determined. He
retired beyond the eastern frontier of Persia, and went
even as far as India ; he could not but feel himself
drawn towards that land of boundless asceticism and
sublime pantheism. Using every means to obtain
popularity, he employed his talent as a painter, to cover
with brilliant images the temples of the cities through
which he passed. Strange apostleship, which, to secure
prasdictus sum." (Routh, V. 73.) According to Augustine, he
represented himself as the Apostle of Jesus Christ, that is, the
Apostle by pre-eminence, who had received the fulness of the Holy
Spirit. Augustine, " Contra Faustum," lib. xiii. c. iv., which is
quite in harmony with his claim to personify the Paraclete. This
may be judged from these words in the " Dispute of Archelaus " :
" Sicut et qui ante me missus est Paulus ex parte scire et ex parte
prophetare se dixit, mihi reservans quod perfectum est." (" Disput,"
Routh, V. 74.) Manes sends out twelve disciples, as did Jesus
Christ. (Augustine, " Liber de Haares.," c. 46.)

58 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
its reception, commenced by patronising the supersti
tions encountered on its way ! At length Mani decided
to strike his great blow. He retired into a cave, which,
according to the testimony of his enemies, was only a
mere grotto, opening out on to a fertile plain, where he
found all that was needful for his sustenance. There
he pretended to have been honoured with the most
ecstatic visions, and to have been caught up into
heaven. In this retreat he composed a book which he
calls his Gospel, and which he adorns with magnificent
symbolical paintings. He brings it back to Persia, as
the work of God Himself. Surrounded with the halo of
the marvellous, he is received as a new Zoroaster; his
disciples rapidly multiply, and he finds great favour
with the new King, Hormuz, the son of Sapores, who
embraces his doctrine with enthusiasm. He even ap
pears to have provided Mani with a place of refuge, a
sort of citadel, where he might hide from the hatred of
the Magi, and the opposition of the Christians, for he
offended equally the adherents of both the old and the
new religion by endeavouring to fuse them in a hybrid
alliance which corrupted both. Unhappily for Mani,
Hormuz only reigned two years, and Behram, his .
successor, was the sworn foe of Manichasism. After
tolerating the sect, for prudential reasons, at the com
mencement of his reign, he soon displayed his true
feeling by compelling Mani to accept the challenge of
one of those public discussions, the issue of which is
certain when a King presides. In the end he caused
the death of the heretic, but he could not thus extin
guish the heresy, which was too much in accordance
with the tendencies .of the period, to die with its

BOOK I. — MANICHiEISM. 59
apostle, and which indeed gained from persecution a
moral dignity lacking to it before. The torture of
Mani displays extraordinary barbarity ; he was flayed
aliye ; his disciples, nevertheless, remained faithful to
him, and, scattered far and wide by the persecution,
they went everywhere carrying his doctrine, and thus
gained for it an importance far outweighing its in
trinsic worth. The Christians, alarmed at his influ
ence, said of Mani, that he had opened his mouth like
a sepulchre.* The Manichasan system, which we gather from the
writings of the immediate disciples as well as in the
fragments of the master's book, makes no attempt to
cloak the absolute dualism which is its fundamental
principle. t Mani finds himself under no necessity to
observe the ascending scale of fine gradations so skil
fully devised by the Gnostic emanatists, and to assign
to matter a metaphysical origin. From the commence
ment, he places the world of mind and the world of
matter in direct opposition to each other, and allows
them no point of contact. Titus of Botsra says :
" Mani, in his anxiety to show that God was in no way
the cause of evil, places uncreated evil in opposition to
the uncreate divine essence."! "I recognise," said
Mani, " two natures, the one good, the other evil ; that
which is good is found only in some parts of the world,
that which is evil comprehends the whole world. §
This evil principle, which is at war with God from all
* 'O Se tbg Ta<pov dvtipypkvov 'ixhiv r0 GTopa. (Routh, v. 99.)
f " Homo astutus ccepit in nostris libris occasiones inquirere
dualitatis suae." (Ibid., 193.)
\ KaKiav dvTS(7TTj(TBv avTifi dykvrjTOv dyevfiTqi. (Tit. Botsra, " Contra
Manichasos," Bk. I. p. 60.) § "Archel. Disput.," Routh, v. 76.

60 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
eternity, is called sometimes Nature, sometimes Matter,
sometimes the Prince of this World, sometimes Satan."*
The element of disorder, which is in all things, is what
Mani calls Matter.t Thus he confined himself to
stating, broadly and simply, the opposition of Ormuz
to Ahrimum — of the kingdom of light to the kingdom
of darkness. Light is not in his theory the brilliant
symbol of the good and the true ; however ethereal and
impalpable it is, it still belongs to the inferior world,
and it is vain for him to compare it to the spiritual
element. Nevertheless he constantly contrasts the
kingdom of darkness and the kingdom of light, as mat
ter with spirit. This kingdom of light is governed by a
first principle, who calls himself the Good— the God par
excellence, but whose personality is less distinct than
that of Ormuz, and loses itself, or is merged in the
eternal light, which is essentially diffused ; he is identi
fied with every luminous substance. Matter, personi
fied in the same way, in the wicked one or the devil,
is normally in a state of confusion, of incoherence, of
truly chaotic disorder. It follows its impetuous im
pulses like the sea, the waves of which are uplifted with
every stormy wind; its unrestrained forces are in per
petual warfare with each other. In one of its wild and
lawless leaps, it catches a glimpse of the region of
light, and is strangely enamoured of it. " There was a
time," says Titus of Botsra, " when matter moved in
chaos. It conceived and brought forth many powers
without having itself any intuition of good. But in its
struggles, it discerned the light of good, and strove to
* " Phot. Codex," 179.
t "AraKTov dvrjaiv. (Alex. Lycop., Combefil's " Auctar.," p. 4.)

BOOK I. — MANICH^EISM. 6l
rise to that region in which it had no right.* The
darkness, crossing its own limits, entered into contest
with the light. "t The system is strangely inconsistent
throughout ; for if matter is in reality the opposite of
light, how should it feel for that which is its radical
opposite, an attraction which would imply a certain
affinity ?
The luminous principle, in the calm region where it
reigns, dreads this invasion of incoherent matter. In
order to repel it, it produces by emanation, a protective
power, destined to raise a boundary between the two
empires I This protective power is called the Mother
of Life, and is nothing else than the creative force. In
its turn it gives birth to primeval man ;§ it arms him
with the five elements, which are water, light, air, fire,
and earth, that he may wage war with chaotic matter.
In this gigantic struggle he loses something of his
luminous nature. || The princes of matter devour a
portion of his armour, which is the soul. Thus, when
he is released from the tumults of conflict, by being
introduced into the higher region of the good God, he
leaves behind him particles of light which blend with
matter. But that which appears a defeat is in reality
a triumph, for it is just by this combination that the
principle of good succeeds in tempering and subduing
the chaotic forces of matter. Matter was bound, like a
* 'Emtijvai roig fir) iSloig emxtipti. (Tit. Botsra, i. 65.)
t "Disput. Archel.," Routh, v. 19.
J Avvafuv diroaTiXXti rivd (pvXd^ovaav rovg opovg. (Tit. Botsra, i.
p. 68.)
§ Aeyofisvrjv MtfTspa rrjg Zwrjg Kai avTrjv Trpo£t&Xr[Kfvai tov rrp&Tov
dv9po)Trov. (" Disput.," Routh, v. 30.) Alexander of Lycopolis likened
the spiritual power which conquers matter to the soul. (Combefil's
" Auctarium," p. 41.) || " Disput. Archel.," Routh, v. 49.

62 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
wild beast, by the spiritual element it had absorbed,
and the result was the production of a compound nature,
which prevents the letting loose of the material
powers.* The divine hero, however, does not consent
to suffer the substance which has emanated from him,
and which is part of himself, to perish. He seeks to
disengage it by degrees, and to reabsorb it in himself.t
For this purpose he produces a new .Eon, which is the
Holy Spirit, the organising power 'of creation, whose
work is to set free the elements of light, buried, as it
were, in matter. The Manichseans represented this
entire work of defence and deliverance, by a familiar
and expressive comparison. When the hunters will
take a fierce lion, they put a kid of the flock in a
ditch ; its cries attract the savage beast, who falls into
the snare, while the kid is released by the shepherd, t
The devouring lion is raging matter ; the ram which
allures it and reduces it to impotence, is the luminous
element from the higher region ; it is a treacherous
bait for the great adversary, according to the expres
sion of Theodoret. § But it is itself to be finally
saved, and this is the object of creation and of history.
We here discern again the fundamental idea of all
the Gnostic systems, according to which creation is
confounded with redemption. In Manichasism, how
ever, the redemption is of God Himself, rather than
of an inferior being. This luminous substance, which
the good God will defend from the invasion of matter,
* 'ESs9ri Hairip 9r/piov .... ytyove Toipvv fil%ig Kai Kpdmg. (Tit Botsra
Bk. I. p. 68.)
t Tors ?w Trvevpa iktwb tov icoarfov. (" Disput.," Routh, v. 51.)
J Ibid., v. 99. § Theodoret, " De haeretic. fabulis.," i. 25.

BOOK I. — MANICHiEISM. 63
is confounded with His own nature. "The good prin
ciple," said the Manichasans, " created the world, not
because he desired to create it, but in order to resist
evil."* The world, the Cosmos, is only matter disci
plined for the .defence of the divine essence, for it is
only organised by the transfusion of the luminous into
the material element ; order results from the union,
and this combination is the one grand means of quiet
ing the inferior region, which, left to itself, would be a
prey to incessant and stormy dissensions. The boun
dary which divides the luminous from the higher sphere,
is not a particular Mori, which repels, like a rock, the
attempt of the powers beneath : it is rather, as in the
philosophy of Aristotle, an internal force, a controlling
energy, resulting from the skilful combination of con
trary elements.
The mother of life and the original man, enact in
Manichaeism the part of Sophia in the system of
Valentinus, but with less grandeur and poetry. No
trace remains of the generous and ardent aspiration
of the inferior .Eon, who sighs after complete union
with the mysterious principle of her being. We have
the mere vulgar necessity of personal defence as the
first principle, and an inexplicable defeat of the ^Eon,
who is its champion. This champion is removed from
the dark and stormy scene of the conflict, as is the
Sophia of the Valentinians. The portion of his sub
stance, which he leaves behind him, recalls Achamoth,
that sorrowful offspring of the pangs of Wisdom.
With Valentinus, at least, the redemption of Achamoth
is, on the part of the first principle, a work of love, since
* Tit. Botsra, Bk. I. p. 69.

64 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
that unhappy being is distinct from himself, and is
born of the rebellion of Sophia. In Manichasism the
good God only redeems Himself, for the luminous
substance, which is diffused in the universe, is His
own substance ; He seeks His own in all beings,
and nothing else. Thus the system never rises
to the conception of love. It is dark and cold as
pantheism. Let us now follow this work of creation and of
redemption through its successive phases. The Holy
Spirit, being the organising power which governs the
beneficent and tranquillising union of light and dark
ness, and subjects it to fixed laws, begins by forming
the firmament in which the higher powers of nature are
joined to the luminous element.* The sun and moon
are in the highest part of the firmament, and belong
to the upper region, or at least these stars are the
first intermediaries between it and our world. The
luminous element is found at every step of the scale
of beings ; it is even present in the plant. It suffers
acutely in being thus made subject to material bonds.
This represents, according to a bold and poetic image
of the Manichasans, the universal crucifixion of the
Eternal Christ, whom they identify with the divine
and luminous principle. " What," says St. Augustine,
" is that cross of light of which the Manichasans
speak ? The members of God, say they, are scattered
throughout the whole world, engaged in the universal
conflict. They are in the stars, in herbs, in fruits.
To tear up the soil by the ploughshare is to wound
the members of God ; so also is it to pull up a vege-
* "Disput," Routh., v. 51.

BOOK I. — MANICH.EISM. 65
table or gather a fruit. Jesus Christ is thus crucified
in the whole world."* The development of life in
the world, rising from kingdom to kingdom, is a
progressive enfranchisement of the divine element.
Thus, only to speak of the vegetable kingdom1; it takes
up a portion of the soil with its roots, then transforms
itself into leaf and flower, and diffuses itself in the
air, returning to its source in the sphere of light.
Animal life appears, in a sense, inferior to vegetable,
because it is subject to the law of reproduction ; thus
Mani made it to proceed directly from the powers of
darkness. The ardent rays of the sun hasten the
liberation of the divine element from the bosom of
earth. The aim of the good principle is to deliver the
soul from the fetters of evil, and to lead it to exhale
itself in some way from the heart of matter. t The
Manichasans had a new version of the fable of the giant
Atlas; they pretended that, a powerful giant, the son
of matter, carried the world upon his shoulders, and
that earthquakes were caused by his movements. J
They had a strange explanation of the creation of
man. According to them, the maleficent powers of
matter were greatly alarmed at seeing to what an
extent natural life, in its constant evolution, was
losing all the divine germs contained in it. Anxious
to retain these germs, that they might not fall back
into a state of chaos, they produced beings who bore
the impress of their spiritual nature. Satan, who is
* " Et ipse est Christus crucifixus in toto mundo." (Augustine,
" Enarratio in Psalm cxl." § 12. Edit. Migne, iv. p. 1823.)
¦f- Tavrrfv dvTXrjaai Tpoirov Tiva lie Tijg vXrjQ. (Tit. Botsra, Lib. i.
p. 69.) I " Disput," Routh, v. 52.

66 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
the king of these ephemeral creations, then destroyed
them in order to gather together in one all these
luminous particles. This being, who thus concen
trates the life of the world, and who is at once soul
and body, is man.* His soul is the concentration of
the luminous elements scattered abroad in the universal
life. His body is the material element, but is subdued
and kept in subjection by the union with the spiritual.
According to another Manichasan tradition, the powers
of matter, after having seen in vision the primeval
man, who was translated into the region of light,
attempted to create a being in his likeness, and thus
produced Adam, the father of our race.t But it is
found in the end that the demons have miscalculated,
and that in concentrating the divine life in a being'
who is the image of the world — a complete micro
cosm — they have accelerated that sort of evapora
tion of the light, after which there will remain only
the dead body of the universe, or chaotic matter.
The divine work will consist in withdrawing man
from the power of his creator, who is no other than
the demon. The influence of the Gnostic sect of the
Ophites is plainly recognisable in this part of the
system. The fall in Eden is the starting-point of the
restoration, since it breaks the yoke of the powers of
darkness, personified in the God of creation. By
violating their command, and gathering the fruit of
knowledge, man lays the foundation of his liberty.
* " Disput.," Routh, v. 65, 66.
t To 5 fiiv <pu>Tos tlvai fiepog rr)v iv dvBptairoig Tpvxr)v, tov Si OKorovg to
auifia. (Ibid., v. 49.) 'Opi&Tai Kai ipvxnv awaaav tivai fitpiSog
tov dyaOov tfCbfia Kai aapKa rr)g iiXjj. (Tit. Botsra, Lib. i. 69.
Comp. St. Augustine, "Contra Julian.," iii. 185, ddit. Migne, x. 1325.)

BOOK I. — MANICH^EISM. 67
The tree of knowledge of good and evil is called
Jesus.* Is it not in truth the emblem of salvation,
since it gives the knowledge which saves the soul ?t
Unhappily Eve, under the influence of the demons,
leads Adam astray, and wins him over to a life of
sensual indulgence. This surrender to the senses is his
true fall. The Manichasans assumed towards the Old
Testament the attitude of extreme Gnosticism. They
used violent animadversions against the God of Israel
and His law, which they declared to be implacable ;
they saw in His prophets, organs of the spirit of dark
ness. The " Dispute of Archelaus" shows that this
was one of the fundamental points of their system. J
According to Photius, Agapius, the faithful disciple of
Mani, openly mocked at Moses and the prophets, and
ascribed to the power of evil all that was said or done
under the first covenant. The Manichasans explained
the death of man by a strange fable, which was a new
distortion of the myth of Sophia. They asserted that
the powers of darkness, which dwelt in the firma
ment, once saw the image of the higher life appearing
upon the features of a virgin of celestial beauty.
They were at once filled with ardent love for her, and
in their painful and impotent efforts to reach her, their
sweat and tears fell to the ground, and engendered
plagues and mortal sicknesses. Death thus originated
in a fervent aspiration baffled. § We can attach no
importance to this incoherent legend. It is certain
* T6 Si Iv irapaSuaip fVTOv, dvro ion b 'Irfoovg. ("Disput.," Routh,
v. 62.) + Ibid., 66.
J Hr)v Si TraXaia'v ypa(pr)v KuifiipSei. (Photius, "Codex," 1 79. Comp.
Tit. Botsra, iii. p. 36. § " Disput.," Routh, v. 56, 57.
6 *

68 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
that in the view of the Manichseans, death is to man
the liberation of the spiritual part, which is carried
away by the moon, as by a heavenly vessel, up to the
regions of eternal and unclouded light. The waxing
of the moon corresponds with the moment when it
opens to receive emancipated souls ; its waning marks
the time when it has deposited its sacred burden safe
in the heavenly haven.* Without recognising moral
freedom, Mani requires man to do battle with the
material element which lives in him, and to strengthen
his spiritual nature. He admits, like other Gnostics,
a certain predetermination of nature, which establishes
the hierarchy of souls. This .is apparent from the
terms in which he addresses himself to a female dis
ciple, in whom he recognises the offspring of a divine
race.t Salvation, in this system, can only consist in
deliverance from the bonds of matter : it is accom
plished at the death of every man, by the extinction
of all corporeal life. We are to prepare ourselves for
it, by a knowledge of the true principles and by
asceticism. Mani has expressed very clearly this
purely intellectual conception of salvation, in a frag
ment of a letter which St. Augustine has preserved.
" Thou hast been inundated with light," he writes to
an adept of his sect, " by learning to know what
thou wast originally, from what class of beings thou
dost emanate, by understanding that which mingles
itself with all bodies, with all substances, and diffuses
• XiXola yap f)roi wop9fitia elvai Xtyu Tovg Svo foio-njpag. (" Disput. "
Routh, v. 54.)
f " Quia es divinae stirpis fructus." (St. Augustine, " Opus
imperfect.," iii. 172. Edit. Migne, x. 1318.)

BOOK I. — MANICHiEISM. 69
itself through all species. Just as souls are born of
other souls, so does the bodily element proceed from
the body. That which is born of the flesh is flesh,
and that which is born of the spirit is spirit. Spirit
is the soul which proceeds from the soul, as the flesh
from the flesh."*
When redemption is once confounded with the mere
evolution of creation, the part of the Saviour neces
sarily becomes insignificant. He comes simply to
reveal to us the true idea of things, and to stimulate
us to saintly self-mortifications ; He is, like Mithra, the
spirit of the sun, the primary representative of the
luminous principle ; He is that very primeval man,
who entered into conflict with darkness, and who was
separate from all material life ; His birth and His death
alike are but semblances without reality, and His
body itself is a phantom. "The nature of light," says
Mani, " being simple and true, it could not enter into
contact with the material essence. "t In Jesus, the light
took the form of flesh, becoming as it were its impalpa
ble shadow, but incapable of suffering, for it would be
absurd to speak of the crucifixion of the shadow of the
flesh. J The Son of light revealed His essence upon the
Mount of Transfiguration.! He appeared in human form
without being man ; He never knew the humiliation of
human birth. || St. Augustine declares in his " Con-
* " Splendida reddita es agnoscendo." (Saint Augustine, " Opus
imperfect.," iii. 172. Edit. Migne, x. 1318.)
f Ov yap ovaiag rf^aTO uapKog dXXd Sfioiu>fj.aTt Kai o~xvi*art oapxbg
IcKidaQr). (Fragments of Mani in Fabricius, " Biblioth. Graeca," Vol.
viii. p. 315.) \ Fabricius, toe. cit. § Ibid.
|| "Apparuit quidem in hominis specie nee tamen fuit homo."
("Disput.," Routh, i. 169.)

70 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
fessions," that at the time when he was a Manichasan,
he regarded Jesus only as the son of the sun.*
The world is destined gradually to lose all that it
contains of the divine ; at the end of time the pri
meval man will appear ; matter will then be only an
inert mass consumed by fire, and the souls which shall
have lost their divine substance by succumbing to the
flesh, will be confounded with it, while the ascetic
saints will triumph in the fulness of divine light. t
This cannot be the final utterance of the system, for
matter, as it had no beginning, cannot consistently
have any end. We may suppose then that the same
evolution will recommence, and that this succession
of mythical facts represents the successive phases, or to
speak more correctly, the permament laws, of uni
versal life. It is certain that the doctrine of metem
psychosis entered into the Manichasan theory ;| the
souls which had not preserved their purity saw await
ing them a series of ordeals through which they were
to attain final deliverance. The notion of moral free
dom, and the idea of providence, were wholly absent
from this grossly dualistic system. § Mani supported
his doctrine by an exegesis which carried the arbitrary
to the furthest limits. We know that he rejected
without scruple the whole of the Old Testament. In
the New, he did not allow himself to be fettered by
anything in the letter ; was he not the Paraclete, the
depositary of the higher and final revelations ? He
* " Ipsum quoque Salvatorem nostrum tanquam de massa luci-
dissimaa molis porrectum ad nostram salutem, ita putabam."
" Confess. Sancti August.," Lib. vi. x. 20. Edit. Migne, i. 706.
T " Disput.," Routh, v. 67, 68. J Photius, " Codex," 179.
§ " Tit. Botsra," Lib. ii. p. 101.

BOOK I. — MANICHiEISM. 71
adopted Christian words, while he totally altered their
meaning.* The sect made use of several apocryphal
writings, which it interpreted so as to support its own
tenets.t Morality was with the Manichasans identical
with asceticism. They professed contempt for a life
of laborious industry, and, in this respect, diverged
from the oldest traditions of the " Avesta," which re
garded fruitful toil in every department as the holy
work of Ormuz. The disciple of Mani was to pass
through material life without touching anything that
enhanced or embellished existence. " When they are
about to eat bread," says Epiphanius, " they first pray
and pronounce these words : ' I have not gathered in
nor ground the grain, neither have I sent it to the
mill. Another has done these things, and has brought
thee to me. I eat thee without reproaches, for he
who reaps shall himself be reaped, and he who sends
corn to the mill shall himself be ground to powder.' "J
It was not possible to express more clearly the inter
diction of all work, lest unwitting injury should be
done to the luminous particles diffused throughout
the material universe. The sect had two stages of
initiation. The mere hearers were not admitted to the
sacred mysteries, and might continue their common
life.§ The elect, on the contrary, broke all the bonds
of society and of marriage, gave themselves up to
macerations of the body, and submitted to three rites,
* Photius, " Codex," 179.
I The Manicheans used chiefly the "Acta Thomas," the HipioSoi
of Lucius Charinus, and the "Acti Pauli et Theclae."
I Epiphanius, " Hasres.," 66. The union of the sexes was vehe
mently denounced. " Disput.," Routh, v. yy.
§ Augustine, "Epistol. Class.," iv. ep. 136, 2.

72 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
which were the seal of perfectness.* The sign of the
mouth indicated pureness of language and abstinence
from all animal food ; the sign of the hand implied a
renunciation of all manual labour, which might enrich
and adorn an accursed world ; and, lastly, the sign of
the bosom — signaculum sinus — was a vow of perpetual
chastity. The Manichasans regarded baptism as a purification
of the defilements of material birth ; it was, however,
only in exceptional use among them.t They set apart
the Sabbath for fasting. Their great festival was the
anniversary of the death of Mani, which they cele
brated by a sort of mystic passover. A splendid seat,
covered with precious fabrics, was set up in the midst
of the building in which they assembled ; this was to
bring to mind the teaching of the master and the doc
trine of deliverance which he had preached. J The
Manichasans had no temples, properly so called;
prayer and the singing of hymns constituted a great
part of their worship. Their hymns, judging by the
fragments which have come down to us, consisted
chiefly of brilliant descriptions of the abode of light
and of its inhabitants, the children of the sun.§
Such is this system, which exerted a far more im
portant influence than is accounted for by its logical or
religious value. It presents, with a degree of clear
ness which must have contributed to its success, the
* " Quas sunt ista signacula ? Oris certe et manuum et sinus."
Augustine, " De Morib. Manich.," Lib. ii. c. 10.
t Neander, " Kirch. Geschichte," i. p. 568, 569.
I Augustine, " Contra Epist. Fondament," c. 8.
§ See Basnages, work quoted. Vol. ii. p. 701-728.

BOOK I. — MANICH^EISM. 73
residue of all the speculative errors, which had from
the first attempted to transform Christianity.* It is
evident that its triumph would have led to a restora
tion of Persian dualism, pure and simple, which would
not have differed much from the mysteries of Mithra,
and that the Pagan idea, in its most essential element
— the glorification of nature — would have been empha
tically reasserted by its means. We may observe, in
conclusion, that there is no more decisive refutation'
of Gnosticism, than the reductio ab absurdum which
results from its own free development.
* Our exposition of the Manichasan system sufficiently shows
how false is the hypothesis on which Baur has based his book on
the subject ; namely, that Mani had no thought of connecting his
doctrine with Christianity.

CHAPTER III.
JUDAISING HERESY IN THE SECOND AND THIRD
CENTURIES.
§ I. The Elkesaites and the Ebionites.
While nothing could be more untrue to fact than to
identify primitive Christianity with Judaism, and to
regard as simple progress that which was in reality a
vast revolution, it is certain that very close bonds
attached the new religion to that of the Old Testa
ment, by which it had been initiated and proclaimed.
These bonds might be either broken altogether, or
clenched so tightly as to arrest all further develop
ment, either error being fraught with fatal conse
quences. While Gnosticism tends to place a deep
gulf between the two Testaments, Judaising heresy
seeks to confound them ; but even in its reactionary
movement against Gnosticism, it comes under its
influence, and produces a strangely deformed and per
verted Judaism, upon which has passed the blasting,
withering breath of oriental dualism.
From the times of the Apostles, there are three
distinctly-marked sections in the Judaso-Christian
community. The first remains closely attached to the
nucleus of apostolic Christianity ; it is, indeed, an im-

BOOK I. — JUDAISING HERESY. 75
portant branch of it, and can claim the highest antiquity,
for it dates from the upper chamber at Jerusalem ; its
representative and head was James, the brother of the
Lord, and it continued invariably faithful to the wise
and conciliatory decisions of the Council of Jerusalem.
It did not cease to live in perfect harmony with that
freer section known as the Pauline party, which, after
all, represented more faithfully the thought of Christ,
by putting the new wine into a new vessel. The second
type of Judaso-Christianity is the narrow and intractable
Pharisaic school, which was eager to transfer to the
Church all the practices and prejudices of Judaism,
making circumcision a necessary condition of salva
tion, and endeavouring to bring all the converts from
paganism into bondage under legal forms. St. Paul
had no more determined and deadly enemies than
these, either in Galatia or in Greece.
The third party was the eclectic school, which,
according to the current tendency of the time, mingled
oriental with Jewish ideas. At Corinth, as in Crete,
at Colosse and at Ephesus, the great Apostle had to
contend strenuously against a false spiritualism, which
identified evil with matter, forbade marriage, and
rejected the resurrection of the body, denying first the
resurrection of Jesus Himself. Cerinthus was the
fullest exponent of this bastard Judaism, which united
and combined the gravest errors of the time ; and we
have seen how St. John had this in view in almost all
his writings, because it was the gravest danger then
threatening the Church.
These three schools of Judaso-Christianity reap
peared in the second century, but strangely modified

76 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
by the course of events. The destruction of Jerusalem
made a still more important revolution in the religious
than in the political sphere.* Moderate Judaso-
Christianity saw in the overthrow of the Temple,
the condemnation of the ancient worship, and began
accordingly to seek fusion with the Church composed
of Gentile converts. This coalescent movement,
which commenced at Pella, where the Christians had
taken refuge, went on much more rapidly during the
short and violent reign of Barcocheba, who shed in
floods the blood of those who were called Nazarenes,
and who excited, more even than the Romans, the
animosity of the Jewish fanatics. The eclectic faction
of Judaso-Christianity only escaped proscription by an
adherence to the synagogue, which was equivalent to
a rupture with the Church. This rupture was inevi
table when, after the building of .ZElia Gapitolina by
Adrian, upon the very site of Jerusalem, an imperial
decree forbade any adherents of Judaism to dwell in a
city, all the local associations of which would have
been incitements to revolt. Thus, the Church which
quickly established itself in the new city, was com
posed, in great part, of Christian converts from
paganism; to these a considerable number of Chris
tians previously belonging to the Judaising party,
attracted by the love of country, joined themselves,
abandoning the observance of their ancient worship.
The Jewish Christians, who remained faithful to their
national customs, no longer had, in the eyes of the
Church, the prestige of representing the great tradition
of Palestine, since they no longer inhabited sacred
* See " Early Years of Christianity," p. 366 and following.

BOOK I. — JUDAISING HERESY. 77
soil; moreover, they could no more appeal to the
decrees of the Council of Jerusalem, since the de
struction of the Temple had in fact abrogated them,
rendering impossible the greater part of the obser
vances of the ceremonial law, and in particular all that
related to the sacrifices. To seek to perpetuate the
practice of Judaism under such circumstances, was to
transform a transitional measure into a permanent
and universal principle. In this way a conflict became
inevitable, and observances which had been legitimate
a few years before, were transmuted by degrees into
positive heresy. The moderate school of Judaso-
Christianity was not proscribed, however, till much
later, at the time when the union of the Church and
the Empire, and the decisions of the first great
Councils, superseded liberty by uniformity. The
fathers of the fourth and fifth centuries confounded, in
one common sentence of reprobation, all the sections
of Judaso-Christianity, taking no account of their dif
ferences, however important. It was not so in the
second and third centuries : moderate Judaso-Chris
tianity was still in existence in the time of Justin
Martyr, who carefully distinguished it from the second
school, which we have called the Pharisaic. If he
thought it his own duty to receive circumcision, he
nevertheless acknowledged that no such observance
was obligatory on the converts from paganism, and,
consequently, that it was not indispensable to salvation.
Justin declares plainly" that the Judaso-Christian of
this school has his part in eternal life as well as other
believers. He says : " He will be saved, if 'he does
not compel Gentiles by birth, who have been circum-

78 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
cised in heart, to observe the Mosaic law."* He speaks
differently of the Judaisers, who place all the legal
observances above the Gospel. "As for the Jews,"
says Justin, " who, professing to believe in Christ, would
yet compel the converts from paganism to adhere to
the whole law of Moses, under pain of perdition,
I cannot recognise them as belonging to the Church. "t
The name of Nazarenes was given to the moderate
Judaso-Christians, but they gradually became con
founded with the second school, that from which
Justin had distinguished them, and which was cha
racterised by its exclusive Judaism. This, in its turn,
was, to a large extent, absorbed in the third school,
for the reasons we have indicated. Epiphanius, how
ever, gives it a separate place, side by side, with the
half-Gnostic Ebionites of the " Clementines ;" J it
preserved its distinctness, like a little streamlet by
the side of a broad current, owing to its peculiar and
strongly-marked colour. It involved the Nazarenes
in its own condemnation ; so that, in the time of
Irenasus, moderate Judaism, which, for a long time,
had been regarded as accredited by the Jerusalem
Council, ceased to occupy any place in the spot which
had been the nursery of the Church.§ That which
* 2w0ijtrerat 6 TOiovrog lav pr) roig aXXovg dvBpii-jrovg. . . . irtiQuv
dytaviliTai Taitrd avrif (pvXdoaeiv. (Justin, " Dial, contra Tryph.," 47.
"Opera," p. 265, 266.)
f 'Edv Si oi dwb tov yivovg tov vfifripov mo-TBiteuv XiyovTtg kiri tovtov
tov xpiOTOV Ik iravrbg Kara rbv Sid Maiasiog Siarax9ivTa vbpov avayKa^wa'
Zfiv roig I9v&v iriGTtvovTag. . . . TovTOvg ovk diroSixopai. (Ibid.)
\ Epiphanius, "Advers. Hasres.," 29. Augustine, ", De baptism.
contra Donat.," vii. 1, and Jerome, " Ad Esaiam," edit. Migne, iv.
357, speaks also of the Nazarenes.
§ Irenaeus, in his list of heresies, mentions only the Ebionites
confounding the Nazarenes with them.

BOOK I. — JUDAISING HERESY. 79
tended most to alienate the Church from Judaso-Chris
tianity, was its categorical repudiation of the divinity
of Jesus Christ.* It held very extreme millenarian
views, and of the Gospels accepted only that of
Matthew in the Hebrew text.t
The third school — that which is imbued with oriental
Gnosticism — excites far more attention, and provokes
far more discussion, than the other two sections of
Judaso-Christianity, because it is not a mere phantom
of the past, reviving an old controversy virtually closed
by St. Paul, and at this time practically unimportant.
It was in harmony with the spirit of the time, and
shared in the favour so readily accorded in that day
to everything bearing the impress of theosophy. It
arose first in the same countries which had given birth
to Essenism, on the grandly desolate shores of the
Dead Sea, where everything speaks of sadness and the
curse ; — in that desert of Judasa, which, in the language
of a great writer, seems to have kept solemn silence
ever since it heard the voice of Jehovah. The strange
and melancholy sect which had separated from official
Mosaism, under the same sense of the overwhelming
pressure of existence, which in India produced the
fanatic asceticism of the Buddhists, naturally received
a fresh impulse, after the terrible calamities of the
Roman «Conquest.| These anchorites alone remained
* Tltpi xPtaT0^ 4"^-°v &v9p<inrov vopiZovatv. (Epiphanius, " Contra
Hasres.," xxix.)
f St. Jerome, " In Esaiam," Lib. xviii. c. 66. (Vol. iv. p. 672.)
X I cannot subscribe to Ritschl's opinion (" Altcatholisch.
Kirche," 2nd edit., p. 179, adopted and elaborated by M. ReVille
" Nouvelle Revue de The"ologie," Vol. v. 3rd issue,) as to the purely
Hebraic origin of Essenism. It is impossible to see in the pro
hibition of marriage and the suppression of the sacrifices, a simple

80 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
unharmed in the midst of so many reeking ruins, for
having already abandoned animal sacrifices, they lost
nothing by the abolition of the Levitical worship. Had
they not still the most fitting. altar for the mystic offer
ings of their prayers in that land of death, where
nature, barren and joyless, seems herself the sternest
of ascetic votaries, on the borders of those gloomy
regions, where, according to the dreams of the Budd
hists, all tone, colour, form, everything that has life
in it, dies away ? The excited Judaso-Christians, who
took refuge in the wilds of Judasa, would inevitably
assimilate with all that remained of Essenism ; this
was the only bond by which they could yet attach
themselves to Judaism, since they found in the prac
tices of this party a substitute for temple and altar.
From this union sprang a singular sect, called the Elke-
saites, who, in their turn, were to give birth to Gnostic
Ebionitism.* The name Elkesaites was derived from
the supposed founder of the sect, who, according to
vague traditions, received, in the third year of
Trajan's reign, a mysterious book, containing the true
doctrine. t This book was said to have been committed
to him by a gigantic angel, accompanied by a woman,
development of priestly purism. We here trace an oriental influ
ence, the more easily to be accepted that there is no need to suppose
any transplantation of ideas, whether from Alexandria or India.
The whole atmosphere was saturated with these elatnents of
Gnosticism and Asceticism. .
* With reference to the sect of the Elkesaites, see " Phil.," ix.
17, 18; Epiphanius, "Contra Harres.," xix. ; Ritschl, "Altcatho-
lisch. Kirche," p. 231. Eusebius, " H. E.," vi. 38, quotes a fragment
of a homily of Origen, delivered at Cassarea against this sect.
|- Origen (apud Eusebius " H. E.," vi. 38), Epiphanius xix. reduce
the celestial origin of this book to a simply prophetic character-
The " Philosophoumena " alone speak of the angel.

BOOK I. — JUDAISING HERESY. 8l
whose stature in like manner surpassed all ordinary
proportions.* The angel is intended for the Son of
God, the woman for the Holy Spirit.t Evidently, we
have in this legend a rough outline of the dualism
which forms the basis of Gnosticism, and which we
shall find fully developed in the " Clementines." The
person of Elxai belongs itself to metaphysical my
thology. The name indeed signifies hidden power, and
is made symbolical of the mysterious influence of the
Divinity, or the Holy Spirit, from whom all revelation
proceeds.! The doctrine of the Elkesaites is still in
an indistinct and undeveloped state. Oriental Gnos
ticism and Jewish or Christian elements have not yet
become thoroughly amalgamated with it. From Gnos
ticism is borrowed the conception of a great masculine
and feminine duality, placed at the zenith of the
universe. The prohibition of animal food is also
derived from Oriental asceticism. The celebration of
baptism reveals the influence of Christianity, but this
rite loses all moral significance ; it becomes a magical
ceremony, which purifies from all sin, even the greatest. §
"O ye who have committed adultery! " say the ad
herents of this sect, " or who have prophesied falsely, if
you will be converted and receive the remission of sins,
you will obtain peace, and your lot will be with the
just, if, after having heard our books, you plunge into
the water, clothed in all your garments." || This baptism
* 'T7ro ayyiXov, iivai Si aiiv aiiTip Kai 9rjXtiav. (" Phil.," ix. 1 3.)
•\ Tbv fikv apatva vibv elvai tov 9bov, tt)v Si BrjXzav KaXeia9at dyiov
TrvBVfia. (Ibid., ix. 13.)
| Epiphanius, " Contra Hasres.," xix.
§ "Phil.," ix. 15. Ba7rTiGfiaTi Xaptdveiv dipBaiv dpapTiaiv. (Ibid.,
ix. 13. Comp. Eusebius, vi. 38.) || " Phil.," ix. 15.
7

82 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
is not merely administered in the name of the Father
and the Son, it is further accompanied with the invoca
tion of seven witnesses, which are heaven, the water,
holy spirits, the angels of prayer, oil, salt, and earth.*
Clearly these seven spirits are the equivalent of the
Holy Spirit, whose name was invoked, after that of the
Father and the Son, in the ordinary baptismal formula.
It follows that the elements of the world form part
of the Deity, and we are thus brought back to Oriental
naturalism. The oil and the salt point to the com
munion as it was observed in this sect. Christ is only
a mere man. He is nevertheless born of a virgin, but
He has appeared many times in history under various
forms. t It is impossible to form any clear idea of His
mission, unless He is one of the manifestations of the
giant-angel, who brought the book of revelation.
Probably the sect shared in the anthropomorphic ideas
of the Jewish mysteries, and supposed a complete
resemblance between man and the Son of God. The
Jewish impress is seen in the maintenance of cir
cumcision and of legal observances, so far at least
as they were compatible with the condition of things
after the overthrow of the Temple. Marriage was
held in high esteem. J The sect was naturally
addicted to the chimeras of astrology and magic.
It made no pretension to Christian heroism, for it
attached no importance to apostasy. § Incoherent
* XpiovTai Si EiraoiSaig Kai fiaTTTiafiao'iv iTri Ty tuiv gtoixbiiov bfioXoyiq.
" Phil.," x. 29.)
+ Ibid., ix. 14. According to Epiphanius, they called Christ
the Great King. (Epiphanius, " Hasres.," xix.)
X Ibid. Aiiv Kara vbpov Z,r)v. (" Phil.," ix. 14.)
§ Epiphanius, " Contra Hasres.," xix. Origen apud Eusebius,
" H. E.," vi. 38.

BOOK I.— JUDAISING HERESY. 83
as it was, this doctrine lived for a considerable
length of time, and endeavoured to disseminate itself
beyond its obscure nursery, for Origen met one of
its missionaries at Cassarea in 231, and St. Hippolytus
found another in Rome at the commencement of the
third century.
Gnostic Ebionitism, which had its origin in the
sect of the Elkesaites, carries the Oriental and ascetic
tendency to its furthest limits. It gives it an elaborate
and piquant form, well adapted to please sickly imagi
nations, and minds greedy of empty speculations.*
The very name of this sect bespeaks its character.
Some have sought to trace in-it the name of its founder,
but Ebio, like Elxai, can be found in the nimbus of
legend alone. The meaning of the term is plain. In
Hebrew it signifies poor. The Ebionites were then
called the poor, not, as has been asserted, on account
of the poverty of their conception of Christ, whom
they regarded as a mere man,t but because they
pretended to realise the ideal of the beatitudes, that
poverty of spirit, that absolute renunciation of all
things, which was inseparable in their view from the
most exaggerated asceticism. The name may have
been sometimes given in Palestine to all the Christians
indiscriminately,! but after the rupture of the exclusive
Judaso-Christians with the Church, it was applied to
the latter only, and perhaps also by some of the
Fathers to the Nazarenes, a sect which might easily
be confounded by the ill-informed observer with those
* On Ebionitism, see Irenaeus, "Adv. Haeres.," i. 26 ; Epiphanius,
" Hasres.," xxx. ; " Phil.," vii. 34 ; Ritschl, work quoted, p. 204.
f This was Gieseleris idea (" Tschirner Archiv.," iv. 307).
X Minut. Felix, " Octav.," 36. 7*

84 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
of more pronounced opinions. We shall indicate the
general features of the Ebionite doctrine before its more
learned elaboration in the "Clementines." According
to Irenasus and Hippolytus, its adherents admitted that
the world had been created by God.* They thus dis
pensed with the intermediary link of the Demiurgus,
but made no true return to Christian theism, as is clear
from the pantheism of the " Clementines." They
were agreed as to the necessity of circumcision, and
the observance of the law.t St. Paul was the object
of their animadversion, and they treated him as an
apostate. They formally denied the divinity of Jesus
Christ, and regarded Him as a mere man, born of
Joseph and Mary. His perfect piety had raised Him
to the high dignity He had attained, while there was
no derogation of the law of Moses. Each one of
His disciples, therefore, by following in His footsteps,
might hope to become in his turn a Christ. I
According to the testimony of Origen, some of the
Ebionites admitted the supernatural birth of Jesus, but
without paying Him homage as the Son of God.§ It
is probable that Epiphanius has applied to them in
discriminately the system of the " Clementines." We
must receive, therefore, with much reservation, that
which he attributes to the sect as a whole. It cannot
be denied, however, that the theosophic development
assumed by it was in harmony with its original
tendency. It is certain that the Ebionites very
* Tbv Koapov vtto tov SvTing 0£oS yeyovivai. (" Phil. " vii." 34.)
t "E9tmv 'lovSaiKoig Z,&ai. (Ibid., vii. 35.)
% Avvto9ai xpiorovg ytvia9ai. (Ibid., vii. 34.)
§ Origen, " Contra Cels.," ii. 1.

BOOK I. — JUDAISING HERESY. 85
early delighted in the elaborate metaphysical theories
of Essenism, and entered into speculations as to the
relations between the world and God. In all likeli
hood the transcendental mysticism of Judaism, which
already contained the germs of the Kabbala, exerted a
great influence over them. They derived from it the
notion of the ideal and eternal man, — that Adam
Cadmon, who is the very representative of God.

§ II. The "Clementines."
The development of the great Gnostic systems
gave a powerful impulse to Ebionitism. The visions
of the Elkesaites tended in the same direction, and
under these combined influences there was produced
an entire literature, half-Romanesque, half-meta
physical, of which we have the oldest and most
authentic expression in the " Clementine Homilies,"
written about the )Tear 150, — not at Rome, as the
Tubingen school has asserted, but in Oriental Syria,
which had become the meeting-point of Jewish ideas
with the phantasmagoria of Gnosticism. Let us
attempt to give an idea of this singular book before
we endeavour to unfold the system it contains, and
to ' mark the place it occupies in the history of
heresies.* * This name, the " Clementines," comprehends an entire litera
ture, having one theme — the pretended relations of Clement of
Rome with the Apostle Peter. Christian antiquity recognised the
following works, which may be all placed in the same category :
1st. The " Homilies," of which we possess the complete text, since
the discovery made by Dressel, of Homily xx., in a manuscript of
the Vatican Library. It is from this edition I quote. 2nd. The

86 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
The " Homilies " are prefaced by a letter from Peter
to James, the Lord's brother, notifying him of the
despatch of the genuine account of his disputes with
Simon Magus, and urging him to transmit his teaching
only to intimate disciples, and thus to found a secret
tradition. This letter is followed by the attestation
that all had really 'transpired as said by the Apostle.
Then comes an epistle from Clement of Rome to
James, announcing the death of Peter, and containing
his dying wish for the transmission of his charge to
Clement. These three documents have, as we shall see pre
sently, a very important bearing on the ecclesiastical
question, for, in spite of their heretical origin, they
reveal a sacerdotal vein of thought, which found only
"Recognitiones," a Latin translation of Rufinus, the original of
which is lost. 3rd. The " Epitome," published first by Turnebus
(1553), and afterwards by Cotelier. This is a meagre extract from
the " Homilies." 4th. Several orthodox or expurgated editions of
the " Homilies " and " Recognitiones." We cannot enter into the
voluminous discussion as to the respective dates of the " Homilies"
and " Recognitiones ;" and as to the place of their composition,
Baur and his school will hear of no place but Rome for their
authorship, in order that they may make these writings play the
part of conciliation in the fusion of the Jewish and Pauline ele
ments, from which they hold the Catholic Church to have resulted.
They affirm also the priority of the " Recognitiones." We shall
confine ourselves to sustaining the contrary opinion on these two
main points. We admit with Ulhorn, in his excellent monograph
upon the " Clementines" (" Homil. Recogund.," Tubingen, 1854),
that the " Homilies," which themselves show some traces of inter
polation, are anterior to the "Recognitiones" for the following
reasons: — 1st. The quotations from the canonical Gospels in the
" Clementines " are more free, less textual than in the " Recog
nitiones." 2nd. The letter of Clement which heads the " Homilies"
is an evident recasting of the close of the third homily. Now,
according to Rufinus (" Ep. ad Gaudentium "), this formed part of
the " Recognitiones." These, then, were themselves a recon-

BOOK I. — JUDAISING HERESY. 87
too susceptible a medium in the Church. The
"Homilies" themselves turn upon the marvellous
incidents of the meeting between Clement and Peter,
and upon the memorable dispute between the Apostle
and Simon Magus.
The commencement of the book is very fine. It
describes eloquently the sufferings of Clement, when,
consumed with the thirst for truth, he went about
seeking it at the doors .of all the schools, till at
Alexandria he met Barnabas, who led him to St. Peter
in Palestine. Arrived at Csesarea, he was speedily
convinced by the Apostle, who proposes to him that
he shall assist at the great public controversies which
are about to take place between himself and the leader
of heresy- — the famous Simon of Samaria.
Peter employs the time gained by the adjournment
struction of the " Homilies." 3rd. The Simon of the " Homilies ''
resembles in all points the Simon of the " Philosophoumena." In
the "Recognitiones" his doctrine is a confused medley, making
large use of the Roman tradition, which was of much later date
than that preserved by St. Hippolytus. 4th, The doctrine of the
"Homilies" is uniform and consistent with itself; that of the
"Recognitiones" is without coherence, and is dependent on the
earlier type. As to the place of their composition, there is no
thing in the " Homilies " to suggest Rome. The analogies with
Elkesaism are obvious, and point to the same birthplace, — namely,
to Oriental Syria. It is certain that the " Clementines " as a whole
were of an earlier date than Origen (235 A.D.), for in his com
mentary on Matthew he borrows from them, if not in words at
least in ideas (Orig., "Ad Matth.," xxvi. 6). The precise date of
the "Homilies" is subsequent to Marcion (150), since their polemics
are directed against him. The date of the " Recognitiones "
cannot have been earlier than the year 170, since it contains
a fragment of Bardesanes' book, " De fato," which, according to
Eusebius, was extant at that time (" H. E.," iv. 30). We are
thus brought to the year 1 80 for the later writing, and may fix the
former ten years earlier.

88 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
of this debate, to instruct Clement in the nature
of true prophecy, on the authority of the Scriptures,
and on the errors which are blended with truth in
the sacred books. The "Clementines" contain two
great controversies between the Apostle and the heretic,
the one at Cassarea, which lasts three days and turns
mainly upon the interpretation of the Bible; the other
at Laodicea, upon lying visions, upon the supreme
God, and the nature of good. In the interval, other
discussions on Paganism, on astrology, and on the
devil, are raised by various speakers. All these
discussions are held in the different towns where
Peter is represented as carrying on his apostolic
mission, founding Churches, baptising converts, ap
pointing bishops, and ever in pursuit of Simon,
who — worthy founder of Gnosticism — seems, like his
doctrines, perpetually to elude the seeker. In these
wanderings, Clement meets with his parents, of whom
he had long lost all traces ; his mother receives holy
baptism at Laodicea ; his brothers were already among
Peter's disciples, though he had not known it. His
father offers more resistance. Clement is himself
the subject of a very singular adventure. Simon,
by his sorceries, has given him an extraordinary
resemblance to himself; but he is caught in his own
snare, for Peter sends the false Simon to Antioch,
where heresy had gained much ground, to make
a sort of public abjuration, which all the witnesses
ascribe to the magician himself. The apostle of the
"Clementines" does not scruple thus to use a pious
fraud. It is in this framework, adorned not unskilfully

BOOK I. — JUDAISING HERESY. 89
according to the taste of the time, that the system
of Ebionite-Gnosticism unfolds its endless intricacies.
That which first of all impresses the reader is a certain
expansion of Judaism. Just as Paganism, before be
coming extinct, endeavoured to renew its youth by
borrowing from Christianity, in the mysteries of Mithra
for example, so the Judaising tendency strives to catch
the Gospel character of universality. It will abate
nothing in reality from its pretensions, but it will cloak
them under a Christian garb. Intractable in substance,
it is ready to make concessions in form, and does not
hesitate to substitute baptism for circumcision, doubt
less under the influence of the sect of the Elkesaites.
But it rejects, none the less, all that constitutes the
originality of the new religion, the doctrine of grace in
particular, in order to substitute for it a legal system.
Thus it directs its most severe assaults against
the great Apostle of the Gentiles, who is evidently in
tended in Simon Magus. In fact, Peter in the seven
teenth Homily, occupies exactly the stand-point taken
by those Judaising teachers of Corinth and Galatia,
who refused to Paul the title of apostle, on the ground
that he had not seen Jesus Christ with his own eyes
in the days of His flesh, and could appeal only to the
vision on the road to Damascus. " Thou dost exalt
thyself," says Simon to Peter, " affirming that thou
hast a true understanding of the words of the Master,
because thou hast seen Him with thine eyes, and
heard Him with thine ears, and that he who has only
had a vision or a dream cannot have the same as
surance. But thou dost err, for it is not enough to
have heard any one in order to have a full assurance.

90 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
It may be asked if one who presents himself to us
in a human form may not deceive us ? A vision, on
the contrary, is a direct revelation of the Deity."
" He who believes in a vision, or in an apparition,
or a dream," replies the Apostle, " is sure of nothing,
for it may be he has only seen a demon or a lying
spirit, which feigns to be that it is not."*
It is moreover obvious that Simon Magus in many
respects recalls Marcion, for the "Clementines" are
directed essentially against his system ; but as Marcion
claims to be a disciple of St. Paul, his doctrine is
virtually assailed in the person of the great Apostle.
He is, then, constantly the object of Peter's attacks.
The fundamental principle of the " Clementines "
is the identity of Christianity with Judaism. There
is only one Divine religion, ever the same in sub
stance, which from Adam to Jesus has been per
petuated in the world. " Both doctrines," says Peter,
" are one.t God accepts alike the believer in either."
This religion has had as its organs the great prophets,
whose testimony is preserved in Holy Scripture, but
not uncorruptedly, for false prophecy, always at war
with the true, has found means to introduce lying
oracles into the Book of God.J It cannot, therefore,
be accepted without reserve. We must be able to
distinguish between error and truth. The Scriptures
contain much that is false about God. Paganism is
absolutely bad. It had no conception whatever of the
* "Homil.," xvii. 13, 14.
f Midg yap Si dpipoTBpatv SiSaGKaXLag ovarjg. (Ibid. viii. 6.)
J IloWa yap. \pevSr) Kard tov 9eov irpoaiXatov al ypatyai Xoyip TOVTip.
(Ibid., ii. 38.)

BOOK I. — JUDAISING HERESY. gi
Deity, and lost itself in darkness.* Nevertheless,
by a strange inconsistency, a certain sense of things
divine is accorded to the human soul. It can discern
and hail the true divine prophecy by a rapid and
spontaneous intuition. "Truth," says Peter, "is
deposited in germ in our heart. "t
The " Clementines" bear the impress of the purely
intellectual character of Gnosticism. Religion is only
teaching, prophecy, never redemption ; it is a divine
word, not a divine work. Jesus Christ is a teacher. He
is the true Prophet, not a Saviour. Truth can only be
found by the true prophet of truth. The true prophet
is he who knows all things and all thoughts, and who
is without sin. J
He came to dissipate the dark clouds which hung
about His house, and to fill it with the pure light of
day, not to rebuild it. His perfect holiness is ad
mitted, but He is none the less shorn of His divinity.
He Himself is said to have declined this high dignity,
" The Lord did not set Himself forth as God."§ He
is not, however, a man like any other man. He has
appeared on various occasions in history under different
names. He is the ideal man, the primeval man,
realising perfectly the image of God, the Adam of
Paradise, who was the great manifestation of true
prophecy, which is identical with spiritual power, or
the Son of God. This true prophecy was manifested
first partially by Moses, then completely in Jesus, who
* "Homil.," ii. 7. | Ibid., xvii. 18.
J Tlpotprfrrig Si dXr)9r)g Iotiv 6 iravra irdvTOTt siSihg, avafiaprrfTog.
(Ibid., iii. 11.)
§ Ovtb iavTbv 9tbv ilvai dvrfyopevatv. (Ibid., xvi. 1 5.)

92 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
is its most perfect representative since Adam, or rather
who is Adam himself. We quote the very text of the
" Clementines " : " Piety is evidenced pre-eminently
in the recognition of the Spirit of Christ in the man
formed by God at the commencement of this economy.
Under various forms and names,* He has come down
through all the ages, till at length He obtains repose,
and receives the anointing of the Divine love, in re
compense for the work which He has accomplished.
He it is who has been the universal ruler."
This identification of a slightly Christianised Judaism
with ideal humanity, gave the basis for the uni
versality of the " Clementines," without making any
real concession to the essential principles of the
Gospel. Salvation was always connected with legal
observances. The substitution of baptism for circum
cision was only a change of form. The Christian
sacrament was celebrated on purely Jewish principles,
since it incorporated the convert with the people of
God by an outward act in the same way as circum
cision. The notion of pardon and of justifying faith
was merged in that of works. " God has granted both
to the Hebrews and to the Gentiles," says Peter, in the
" Clementines," " the faculty of believing in the masters
of truth. Each has been able by his own judgment
to perform good works, and the recompense is in
justice awarded to the doers. They would have had
no need either of Moses or of Jesus Christ, if they had
been willing themselves to be guided by their own
reason. "t There could be no more explicit denial
* Mopifidg aXXdaatov rbv aiuiva rpexti. (" Homil. " iii. 20.)
f- Ibid., viii. 5.

BOOK I. — JUDAISING HERESY. 93
of the fall, and the necessity of redemption. It is
always a frigid and false pharisaic virtue, which
claims heaven as its reward, while allowing that the
pains of the other life will cover the arrears of the
debt. Chastisement is enough to effect deliverance.*
Devotion to vain observances will outweigh the
eternal claims of morality. Religion is a matter of
rites and ceremonies ; only the necessities of the
time and the influence of Essenism have modified the
rituaK Ablutions take the place of sacrifices, but
the principle remains the same. It is still the sort
of bargaining which will purchase, not accept, the
gifts of God. " The Divine religion," we read in the
" Clementines," " consists in these points : to worship
God alone, to believe only in the prophet of the truth,
to receive baptism for the forgiveness of sins, to be
thus born again in the purifying stream of saving
water ;t to abstain from the table of demons, — that
is to say, from meats offered to idols, from beasts
strangled or slain by other beasts, or still holding
the blood; to live in purity, and to perform ablutions
after the sexual relations. Women are bound to ob
serve carefully the purifications prescribed by the law.
All are to be sober, to do good, to avoid injustice,
to look for life eternal from the Almighty God, and
to obtain His favour by incessant prayers and suppli
cations." Charity and forgiveness of sins find no
place in this meagre morality. The " Clementines "
thus openly assail the doctrine of St. Paul, as well
* " Homil.," xi. 16.
f Ei'c dtpeaiv dfiapTiUjv j3aTTTie9r)vai, dvayevvr)9r\vai 9eq> Sid tov otAt&VTog
vSarog. (Ibid., vii. 8.)

94 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
as the exaggerated interpretation put upon it by
Marcion in his vehement opposition to Judaism.
The speculative part of the system is especially
directed against the positive dualism of the famous
Gnostic. The "Clementines" endeavour to get rid
of the Demiurgus, and to formulate a rigid mono
theism. They do not succeed, because they thus
abandon the moral ground, and have recourse to
theosophy, to explain the origin of evil. The cardinal
point of the " Clementines " is the unity of God.
" Know before all things that His power is shared
with none."* This one God bears no resemblance to
the bottomless abyss of the Valentinians, nor to the
ineffable One of Philo. He has a bodily form, and
as all form must have its limitation, He is enclosed
in the vast void as in His dwelling-place. t He is
the heart of the universe, from which all proceeds,
to which all returns. I If the "Clementines" insist
upon this strange theory of the form of God, it is
to establish one of their favourite doctrines — the
perfect resemblance of man to his Creator. It is
again for the same reason that the Divine wisdom,
which is, as it were, the productive virtue of the
Most High, — " His creative hand opened to give birth to
universal life," — is assimilated to the female element. §
Thus God, like the first man, contains in Himself
the male and female element. This is the basis of
that law of duality which applies to the whole uni-
* Tlpb irdvTUiv ivvoov 'on oiScig airip avvdpxii. (" Homil. " iii. 37.)
t Qeov TOTrog lo-ri to pr) bv. (Ibid., xvii. 8.) \ Ibid., xvii. 9.
§ 'H Si o-ofia ijviorai piv wg ipi>xr) Tip 9eui, (mivcrai Si air airov, u>g
Xlip, Sr)fiiovpyovaa rb icav' Sid tovto Si Kai eig avQponrog lykviro aw airov
Si TrpoifXBe Kai rb BrjXv. (Ibid., xvii. 12.)

BOOK I. — JUDAISING HERESY. , 95
verse, only in God it does not destroy the essential
and eternal unity. That Sophia, who is also called
the child of God, is to God that which Eve was to
Adam. She evidently represents the inferior element,
designated in ordinary Gnosticism under the name
of the Demiurgus, and we thus find invincible dualism
carried even into this exalted sphere of the Divine
unity. By an inconsistency, which would be strange
in a more logical system, this Divine wisdom, which
is the inferior element in God, becomes the good
element in the world. This is easy to comprehend.
The Divine wisdom, in so far as it is the direct cause
of the material creation, may be an inferior element
compared to the one God, but is none the less superior
to matter, as the pure ideal is above its actual rea
lisation. Wisdom becomes the right hand of God,
while the prince of the material world, who is its
personification, is His left hand.* He is called Satan,
or the Devil. Thus we find in creation the great law
of dualities. t It may be traced through all orders
of existences, always giving the preference to good
over evil till the creation of man, who is the point
of junction of the two series, and who inaugurates the
reverse order, for in the human sphere evil always
takes precedence of good. J
Let us look more closely into the mode of the
world's creation. The Sophia brings into operation
the eternal matter, which is before virtually in ex
istence, and is, as it were, the body of God. This
matter is essentially flexible and susceptible of any
* 'Apwripd tov 9cov Svvapig. (" Homil.," vii. 2.)
t Tbv Kavova rr)g av'Cvyiag. (Ibid., ii. 18.) X Ibid., ii. 16.

96 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
transformation, so that, under the action of the Divine
breath of the Sophia, the air is changed into water,
and the water again, becoming solidified, is changed
into stone and earth ; the stones striking together
produce fire. " Did not God change the rod of Moses
into a serpent, that is to say, into an animated being,
which subsequently became a rod again ? Did not
that same rod turn the water of the Nile into blood,
and then the blood again to water ? Thus is it with
man ; the spirit breathed into the dust made it flesh,
which returns to dust again."* The four elements,
which are the dry, the moist, air, and fire, are neuter
or indifferent in a moral point of view, being neither
good nor bad at the time of their production. They
are endowed, however, with a kind of spontaneity or
liberty ; they combine at will,t and from this com
bination results the devil, called also the prince of
this world. He is the soul of this great body of the
universe. He represents justice, while the Sophia
represents love;+ he is the king of the present world,
while the Sophia reigns over the world to come. The
dualities succeed each other in the order indicated :
earth, then heaven ; day, then night. Adam is made
* " Homil.," xx. 6.
f 'Arrb tov 9ioi piv irpoSlSXriVTai rd irpwrio-ra (Troi^aa riaaapa, oBtv Sr)
Kai Trarrip rvyxdvti 7rd<nje ovaiag, ov rr)g yvuiprfg rr)g Kara tt)v Kpaoiv.
(Ibid., xx. 9.) The text of Dressel had ovo-rfg yvoiprfg. Mceller's
correction (" Gesch. der Kosmolog.," p. 465) seems to me ex
cellent. God is the father of the elements, but He is not the
cause of the thought which determines their combination. That
is the province of liberty.
J Qsbg dirtvsipe fiao-iXuag Sio Svaiv naiv, dya9ifj re Kai vovr/poj, Soiig Tip
piv KaKip rov Trapovrog Koapov pird vopov rr)v ffaotXtiav, wot' dv 'ixav
ifyvtsiav KoXd'Ctiv Tobg dSiKovvrag' np Si dyaBip tov laopevov diSiov alipva.
(Ibid., xv. 7.)

BOOK I. — JUDAISING HERESY. 97
in the image of God.* He is His living representative,
the great prophet of the truth, but he contains in
himself the female element, or Eve, which is false
prophecy. Human history is divided between the
true prophecy and the false. Both are found in Holy
Scripture, on which we are to exercise the elective
faculty. The male element, the element of the good
and true, appears in the true Jewish prophecy, and
is concentrated in Jesus, the prophet by pre-eminence.
The female and evil element, which has corrupted
the sacred book itself, has its full development in
Paganism. t Idolatry was brought to earth by the
fallen angels changed into demons ; their coming to
earth was designed for a good end, namely, to chastise
the ingratitude of men towards God, by impelling
those who had been guilty of it to the most shameless
passions, and inflicting on them the deepest dishonour.
To gratify their covetousness, they had changed them
selves into diamonds and all sorts of precious stones.
Finally, they allowed themselves to be inflamed with
the basest desires. Enamoured of female beauty,
they fell into various adulteries, which gave birth to
giants. These, gratifying by vast massacres their
bloodthirsty souls, caused malarious vapours to arise
from the sodden soil, which produced sicknesses.
The demons led mankind into idolatry, and taught
man the arts of magic, t This absurd legend was
designed to pour contempt upon the pagan nations.
Since the time of Christ the two conflicting dominions
* Eikuiv yap Qtov b av9pwwog. ("Homil.," xi. 4.)
f '0 dparfv oXwg dXrf9cia, rf 9r\Xiia oXrf irXdvr). (Ibid., iii. 27.)
I Ibid., viii. 12, et sea.

98 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
are still in active opposition. The present age, the
world with its shows and seductions, leads astray the
majority of men. The true disciples of Jesus are
the humble and the poor, who live for the age to come,
under the guidance of eternal wisdom, and practising
all the prescribed ordinances. If the "Clementines"
seem at first to recognise the free-will of man,* they
soon withdraw the concession, for according to the
system, evil no less than good is in conformity with
the will of God.t He uses His left as well as His
right hand, and is as adorable when He smites and
punishes as when He blesses and rewards. The
devil, who thus represents justice, is His servant in
a manner. He carries out His designs no less than
the Sophia. The false prophecy is as necessary as
the true.J We are surprised, after such declarations,
to hear of the punishment of the wicked, but it is
only a seeming punishment, for hell is the paradise
of the demon, who finds there an abode in harmony
with his nature. As for the good, they are to be
absorbed in God, "as the vapours of the mountain
are absorbed by the sun."§ Other passages suggest
the idea that the entire visible universe will be lost
in the Divine unity, the final centre of eternal repose,
as it was the focus from which all life proceeded.
It is evident that this attempt to resolve Gnosticism
into an idealised Judaism is not successful. The
"Clementines" cannot get rid of the Demiurgus;
* "EKaiTTog s£ovcriav ix11 wti9trr9ai wpbg to irpdaativ dyaQd r) xaKa
(" Homil.," xx. 3.)
f Toiv Si Sio TOVTbiv 0 'inpog rbv srspov t/cgid&rrai, Beoii KiXtvaavTog.
(Ibid., xx. 3.)
X Ibid., xx. 3. § Ibid., xx. 9.

BOOK I. — JUDAISING HERESY. 99
their attempt to merge it in God is vain. It is still
present as the eternal limitation of the Divine unity
and goodness. By a bold stroke they proclaim that
evil is only a name, and that in substance it is identical
with good ; but a change of appellation is not a change
of essence. Evil remains no less evil to the con
science. The claim of this complex system to respect
lies in its very contradictions, in that assertion of
liberty, which is absurd from the logical point of
view, but which is the true voice of conscience. The
system resolves itself none the less into an idealistic
pantheism, which only moderates the excesses of as
ceticism by virtue of its Jewish origin. A doctrine born
in the land of the patriarchs could not defame mar
riage like an Indian sect. Gnostic dualism, though
far from being vanquished by Ebionitism, reappears
under a new disguise in the " Clementines," and both
schools are soon submerged in the naturalistic current
which carries them away, and which is no other than
ancient paganism itself.
An accurate study of the history of Judaso-Chris
tianity in the course of the second century, enables us
to estimate justly the value of Hegesippus' testimony
to the general state of the Church. That Father
declared, in the year 160, " that he found it every
where in perfect accordance with the law, the prophets,
and the commandments of the Lord."* Some have
concluded from these words that the Jewish tendency
was predominant in all the Christianity of that time.
But this is attaching to the word a meaning far too
* 'Ev BKaoTy Si SiaSoxy Kai iv BKaory ttoXu ovrivg exei tog b vbpog
K-qpvTTti Kai 01 Trpoprjrai Kai b TLipiog. (Hegesippus apud Eusebius,
"H. E.," iv. 22.)

100 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
exact. Hegesippus appeals simply to the authority
of the Scriptures taken as a whole, and as they were
ordinarily placed in opposition to Gnosticism. As the
Gnostics assailed mainly the Old Testament, they must
be met on that ground, and it naturally played an
important part in the controversy. Nothing can be
argued from the portrait of James drawn by Hegesip
pus, which in many features recalls the ideas of the
Nazarenes, for that description corresponds perfectly
to the state of the Church at Jerusalem in its first
period, and to the particular place filled by the brother
of the Lord. This is history, not doctrine. As to
the Jewish origin of Hegesippus himself, nothing is
less sustained by evidence.* Unless then we put a
forced construction on his language, no conclusion
can be drawn from it contrary to the reality of the
facts -as gathered from the general history of the
second century. Judaso-Christianity held on an obscure
existence under the name of Nazareneism wherever
it did not coalesce with Oriental and Gnostic ideas.
It nevertheless exerted an indirect influence upon the
Church, diffusing through the general atmosphere ideas
and influences, the traces of which we shall discover
again and again.
* See Ritschl, " Altcat. Kirche," 2nd edit., p. 268.

CHAPTER IV.

MONTANISM.

We place Montanism in the category of Judaising
heresies, although it is not, like Ebionitism, connected
in its origin with the Synagogue. It is none the less
a retrogression towards Mosaism, both in its general
tendency and in the forms and ceremonies adopted
by it. Judaising heresy, considered in its principle,
arises out of the defalcations of Christian spirituality.
Nothing is more difficult to maintain than the reign
of true liberty. The law of the letter, with its
numberless precepts, is more limited than the law
of the spirit, which embraces the entire life. Hence
that constant tendency of the human heart, to ex
change the yoke of an inconvenient and exacting
freedom for a definite and therefore limited law of
commandments. Evangelical morality, which makes
love the best reward of love, places man at a height
where he can with difficulty sustain himself. He
prefers the glories of a theocracy to the purely ideal
paradise of St. John and St. Paul, which is briefly
contained in the grand words : "It doth not yet appear
what we shall be, but we know that when he shall
appear we shall be like him, for we shall see him
as he is."* Again, for those who shrink from evil
* i John iii. 2.

102 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
and its pollutions, asceticism seems singularly to facili
tate the moral strife ; for, by assimilating the corporeal
element with sin, it gives them the hope of overcoming
it. Legalism, apocalyptic visions, asceticism — these are
the three main elements of that Judaso-Christianity
which has reappeared so often in the Church under
various names, but never with more power than
in Montanism. This has exercised no unimportant
influence upon official orthodoxy, and the condemna
tion that has been repeatedly passed upon it has not
prevented it from leaving in the Church a hidden
leaven easy to discover.
Montanism differed markedly from primitive Judaso-
Christianity in this respect — that it recognised without
reservation the superiority of the Gospel over all the
religious institutions which had preceded it. It even
displayed on one main point a spirit of greater liberality
than the Church ; it repudiated strongly the sacer
dotalism which was gaining ground on all sides. We
have then to deal here with a tendency, not with a
school of Judaism ; but that tendency, with the reser
vations we have noted, was clearly a step backward,
a deviation from the ways of spiritual Christianity,
although Montanism assumes to be the highest mani
festation of the new spirit. The manner in which
it favours and formulates legalism, its apocalyptic
visions, its extravagant asceticism, all mark it as
Jewish in spirit, if not by origin and tradition.
The very antipodes of Gnosticism, Montanism
waged the sternest warfare with it, yet it did not
find grace in the eyes of the Church, which cast
it away from her, though it had produced the most

BOOK I. — MONTANISM. IO3
brilliant and eloquent of her apologists. This sen
tence of exclusion was pronounced before the great
Councils and the union of the Church with the em
pire: it was the spontaneous verdict of the Christian
conscience, singularly modified in the case of Ter
tullian, who, in spite of all his passionate extrava
gances remains a venerated Father of the Church.
It is just to recognise that Montanism was more
than a mere difference of opinion ; it was not com
patible with a Church which was to live and assume
an organised form ; it opened the door to all that
was visionary, to all the vagaries of the imagination,
and left no basis for a religious association. The
exposition of its doctrine will show that even
when it remained in harmony with the Church on
the fundamental points of doctrine, it fell into such
extremes of exaggeration, that it could not be con
tained within any existing forms. It cannot, however,
be treated as heresy in the same way as Gnosticism,
for it maintains the substance of the faith. "The
Cataphrygians, or Montanists," says Epiphanius, " ac
cept the whole of sacred Scripture, both the Old
and New Testament, and confess also the resurrection
of the dead ; they hold the same views as the Holy
Catholic Church with regard to the Father, Son, and
Holy Spirit."* Tertullian fought against Gnosticism
with the same weapon as the orthodox defenders of
the Church; his views on the person of Jesus Christ
participate in the more or less vague and fluctuating
character of the theology of the time, without in
curring in any respect the charge of heresy, which
* Epiphanius, " Hasres.," 48.

104 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
would doubtless have been brought against them two
centuries later. This orthodoxy in the substance of its
doctrine did not, however, give Montanism the right
to claim its place in evangelical catholicity, for it
was itself a principle of implacable and irreconcilable
exclusion. We must bear in mind this complexity
of the situation, in order to appreciate justly this
great movement. On the one hand, it connects
itself with the orthodoxy of its time ; we shall not
therefore hesitate to place Tertullian, as he is placed
by all the historians of doctrine, among the most
illustrious theologians of the Church, by virtue of that
great portion of his work which is free from any
sectarian impress. It is just this agreement on fun
damental points, which enabled Montanism to exert
so much influence over the Church before its repu
diation by it. There is an entire period of its history,
during which it is only a party, or school, treated with
other parties on a footing of equality. For the present
we have to occupy ourselves with Montanism only
in that later stage, when it had become a doctrine
or sect apart, placing itself outside the bounds of
the evangelical catholicity of the early ages. It
flung itself, so to speak, into a cross-road which
could lead nowhere, for it diverged from the normal
development of religious thought and Christian society,
although on. more than one point it was more in the
right than its adversaries, and received its first im
pulse from a nobler inspiration.
That inspiration was the pursuit of the most elevated
and austere ideal ; an ideal, however, so conceived
that the Church could no longer find a footing upon

BOOK I. — MONTANISM. I05
earth, but must be necessarily reduced to an asso
ciation of latter-day saints. The fundamental error
which marred this grand inspiration, was the failure
to comprehend the operation of Christianity except
under the form of a permanent miracle ; it did not
recognise the supernatural as taking possession of the
natural order, penetrating and transforming it ; it
marked out the two domains as in direct and con
stant opposition. The Christian life was not merely
referred to a miraculous beginning, the intervention
in history of a reparative and saving power, inaugu
rating a- new and final historical development. No,
there must be nothing less than a perpetual miracle ;
everything would be lost if the concurrence of natural
activity, of patient labour, were for a moment admitted,
if the conditions of a slowly progressive development
were in any degree recognised. The religion of the
Spirit is not a new sun which has arisen on the
horizon of humanity, and which is to run its regular
course after the primary miracle of its appearance ;
it is to retain ever the brilliance of the lightning;
it is to be one long flashing storm, rather than the
quiet shining of the sun. The_ divine does not har
monise with the human element ; it always descends
upon it as on its prey, overcoming and subverting
it. This tendency has often been manifested in the
history of Christianity, under various names, but it
is well deserving of study in its earliest form, which
was also the most remarkable, because it shared in
the grandeur of a heroic age.
In substance, Montanism was only a strong re
action against established order, which has ever a

106 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
tendency to fall into routine ; it partook of the fanatic
temperament of the race which fostered it, and of the
passionate genius of its most illustrious representative.
It might justly, however, make its boast in the most
glorious past of Christianity. In fact, the Church
of Jerusalem, immediately after the feast of Pentecost,
does present the character of the purely supernatural
triumphing over all the conditions of common life.
She is awaiting the solemn midnight cry, which shall
announce the return of the mystic Bridegroom : she
believes herself to be on the threshold of the King's
palace, in which the eternal marriage shall be con
summated ; with loins girt about, and lamps burning,
her members seem no longer conscious of any
ties of earth ; all private ownership of property is
well-nigh merged in the first fervour of the new
charity. The Church is in a state of ecstasy, with
eyes lifted to heaven, whence the fiery tongues of
the Spirit came down upon her. Miracles are mul
tiplied in her midst; the divine thoughts, like the
new wine which breaks the imprisoning vessel, cannot
be contained within the ordinary forms of speech.
This strange and sublime condition must of necessity
be transitory ; even in the age of the Apostles, the
stream which had burst from its source, at first in
such impetuous floods, hollowed out for itself a quiet
channel and began to flow between determined bounds.
Later in the first century, both ecstasy and miracles
diminished ; calm and thoughtful teaching took the
place of those burning effusions of the gift of pro
phecy ; ecclesiastical organisation began to develop
itself; and the Divine Spirit transformed and utilised,

BOOK I. — MONTANISM. 107
instead of suppressing human activity. In the next
century, the commingling of the natural and super
natural element was still more apparent. Supernatural
gifts, properly so called, do not wholly disappear ; the
Fathers of that age still speak of gifts of miracle and
prophecy, but these are the exceptions. The divine
operation, always supernatural in its origin, blends
more and more with human action, leaving, however,
full play to the free agency of man, and consequently
often hindered, fettered, and even stifled by it. The
Church, realising that it is to rear something more
than the structure of a day, seeks durability and
extension; like every other society destined to live,
it begins to organise. The possible acquires more
importance in its eyes than the ideal ; it is led on
to make concessions, compromises, changes in the
primitive type. Nothing can be more legitimate than
a reaction against these alterations, if only it be regu
lated by the established laws of history, and carried
out by patient effort ; not by recourse to prodigy and
ecstasy, which are no longer the religious conditions
of the time. The error of Montanism consists then,
not in its protest against the enervation of holiness
and Christian liberty in the Church, but in the ex
aggeration of the reaction, and in the refusal to recog
nise any other type of Christianity than that of the
upper chamber of Jerusalem. It sought to perpetuate
and resuscitate that which was only transitory, and
mistook the chimerical and the impossible for the ideal.
The early history of Montanism is obscure.* It is
* The principal works to be consulted on Montanism are : 1st,
" Philosophoumena," viii. 19. 2nd, Epiphanius, "Contra Hasres.,"

108 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
certain that it took its rise about the middle of the
second century in Phrygia, in the midst of a people
naturally fanatical and credulous. Its founder, Mon-
tanus, is known to us only by vague reports, and by
the calumnies of his adversaries.* He appears to
have taught the fundamental doctrine of the sect on
the development of revelation by the Paraclete.
Two women, his compatriots, Maximilla and Priscilla,
were his acolytes; they were regarded as the chosen
organs of the Holy Spirit. t Eusebius mentions
among his adherents in Asia Minor, Theodotus,
Alcibiades, Themison, and Proculus, who took an
important part in the controversies respecting the
determination of Easter.} It is probable that the sect
assumed, even at this date, an attitude of opposition
to the episcopacy, if we may judge by the keen
ness of the polemics used against it by some of
the Bishops of Asia Minor. Claudius Apollinaris,
Bishop of Hierapolis,§ and Miltiades, the author of a
xlviii. 3rd, Eusebius, "H. E." v. 16-20. 4th, Tertullian's Mon-
tanist treatises. Among modern writers, beside the historians of
doctrine that have been already quoted, we place foremost Ritschl's
admirable chapter on Montanism ("Altcat. Kirche," p. 462 et
sea.) See also Baur, "Der. Christ der drei ersten Jahrhund.,"
p. 264 et sea.
* Eusebius mentions these calumnies, ascribing them to an
ecclesiastical writer of unknown name. (" H. E.,'' v. 16.)
f Tertullian names Montanus (" De jejuniis," i.). He mentions
with him also the two Phrygian prophetesses : " Prophetjas Mon-
tani, Priscas, Maximillae." (" Adv. Prax.," i.) See also the " Philoso-
phoumena :" "Erspoi TrpoXrf<p9svTBg vtto yvvaUiov rfiraTrfvrax, TlpioKiXXrig
nvbg Kai MagipiXXrfg KaXovpivmv, iv rairaig to TrapaKXrjrov irvtvpa
KCx^priKivaiXiyovreg. (" Phil.," viii. 1 9.)
.{ Eusebius, " H. E.," v. 16, 18. Tertullian speaks in high terms
of praise of Proculus : " Proculus noster, virginis senectas et Chris
tianas eloquentia; dignitas." (" Adv. Valent," 5.)
§ Ibid., iv. 27.

BOOK I. — MONTANISM. IO9
book against ecstatic prophecy,* Serapion, Bishop of
Antioch,t . and subsequently Clement of Alexandria,
took part in this discussion.! At Rome Montanism
found well-prepared soil in a Church which had
produced such a man as Hermas. The book of the
" Pastor" is entirely filled with visions, inculcating
ascetic rigour ; it abounds in protests against the
enervation of piety, and it opposes vehemently the
aggressions of the clergy. It speaks also of the
coming end of the world, but it does not raise the
vision to the height of a dogmatic statement ; it
stops short at the point where the shade would tone
into a decided colour. It is only a tendency, not an
organised party. This tendency, however, was singu
larly favourable to the propagation of Montanism. It
is not surprising then that Montanism should have
found large development in Rome, and even secured
the momentary adherence of a Bishop, who can be no
other than Eleutherus (170-185). §
It was openly condemned subsequently, on the
denunciation of Praxeas, who came from Asia Minor.
The decided conflict only commenced after the Bishop
of Rome had advanced his claim to pardon the gravest
* "Adv. Valent," v. 17. f Ibid., v. 17.
X Clement of Alexandria, "Strom.," iv. 13, 95 ; vi. 8, 66.
§ " Idem Praxasas tunc episcopum romanum coegit litteras pacis
jam emissas revocare." (Tertull. "Adv. Prax.," i.) This bishop is,
in all probability, Eleutherus, for Victor, who distinguished himself
by his intolerance towards the Asiatics on the subject of the cele
bration of Easter, would not have been likely to show even a
momentary indulgence towards a sect altogether opposed to the
practice he enjoined. Soter (157-161) and Anicetus (161-170) both
lived at a time too early in the history of Montanism to allow the
supposition that during their episcopate there could have arisen
a quarrel needing to b e thus appeased.

IIO THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
sins, such as adultery.* At Lyons, Montanism had
found access through the relations subsisting between
that city and the Christians of Asia Minor, but the
character of the sect was not definitely known there.
Irenasus was sent to the capital of the empire as the
bearer of a letter asking for explanations and informa
tion, t The attitude assumed by him towards Mon
tanism, the keen polemics in which he engaged to
oppose it, show plainly what was the " nature of the
reply from Rome. J
Montanism gathered the largest number of adherents
in proconsular Africa. We see from the "Acts of
the Martyrdom " of Felicitas and Perpetua, that it
had attracted to itself some of the noblest confessors
of the faith. § Tertullian, in embracing it, gave it all
the prestige and power of his marvellous eloquence.
The success of Montanism was as brief as it was
brilliant. The credit enjoyed by the great apologist
of Carthage with Cyprian, the apostle of rule and
authority, is sufficient evidence that, after his death,
the great schismatic ceased to create alarm, and that
his high qualities received the estimation they deserved.
Let us now consider the Montanist doctrine in itself.
It draws its primary inspiration from the lively con
viction of the approaching end of all things. Mon
tanism is not content with insisting upon the duty of
the Christians to be perpetually looking for the glorious
* The reference is, no doubt, to the facts with which Zephyrinus
was reproached by Hippolytus. (" Phil.," Bk. ix.) " Audio edictum
esse propositum et quidem peremptorium. Pontifex scilicet maxi-
mus, episcopus episcoporum edicit : Ego et moechia; et fornicationis
delicta poenitentia functis demitto." (Tertullian, " De pudic," i.)
t Eusebius, v. 3. ! Ibid., v. 20. § "Acta Perpetuas et Felicit."

BOOK I.  MONTANISM. Ill
return of Christ. It fixes a date beyond which it does
not admit the possibility of the continuance of human
history. "After me," exclaims one of its prophet
esses, " there will be no more prophets."* Tertullian
paints, in fiery colours, the great scenes of the last
judgment, which he is awaiting from hour to hour.
His excited imagination delights in representing to
itself the millennium in the most gorgeous hues.
" We are expecting our promised reign upon- earth ;
before we are transported to the skies our condition
will be made entirely new. After the resurrection we
shall live for a thousand years in the city built by the
hand of God, which is that heavenly Jerusalem called
by the apostle — our mother.? There the saints will
dwell, enriched with all spiritual treasures, in com
pensation for those which we have contemned or sacri
ficed in this present life."
The saints will be raised each in his own order, an
order determined by merit. The conflagration of the
world, and the last judgment, will be the final act of
the drama. The Asiatic Montanists went so far as to
point out the spot on which the heavenly Jerusalem
would come down; they fixed on Pepuza in Phrygia.J
Montanism pretends to have received special reve
lations as to the end of the world. These revelations
have been made to it alone ; its founders received
them directly from the Holy Spirit or the Paraclete.
If it be objected that the Church at large has had
" Mtr' ifii ~po<piJTig ovukri to-Tai, aXXd rn^vTiXua eCTai. (Epiphanius,
" Haeres.," xlviii. 2.)
f " Confitemur in terra nobis regnum repromissum, in mille
annos, in civitate divini operis Hierusalem de coelo delata."
(Tertullian, " C. Marc," iii. 24.) | Epiphanius, " Hasres.," 48.

112 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
no part in them, and therefore cannot recognise
them, Montanism replies by claiming for itself a
position above the organisation and regular powers of
the Church, and asserting, as its own monopoly, the
continuity of revelation. Thus the doctrine of the
Paraclete is developed. Anterior revelations are not
set aside ; they are regarded as initiatory steps. The
Old Testament retains its claims, but the New Testa
ment suffers depreciation, inasmuch as it is no longer
the final utterance of the Divine teaching. It has
not brought revelation to perfection ; it has made,
especially in the teaching of the apostles, more than
one concession to human weakness, and, like Moses,
it has allowed certain practices because of the hard
ness of men's hearts. " The Lord," says Tertullian,
"has sent the Paraclete, because human weakness
was not capable of receiving the truth all at once ; it
was necessary that the discipline should be regulated
and progressively ordered, until it was carried to
perfection by the Holy Spirit."* Paul gave certain
instructions rather by permission than in the name of
God ; he tolerated marriage because of the weakness
of the flesh, in the same manner as Moses permitted
divorce. " If Christ has abolished that which Moses
had commanded, why should not the Paraclete forbid
that which Paul allows ?"t
In fine, the Holy Spirit is rather a restorer than an
innovator.! Was not the new development of the reve-
* Tertullian, " De virg. veland.," i.
f " Si Christus abstulit quod Moyses prascepit, cur non et Para-
cletus abstulerit, quod Paulus indulsit ?" (" De monogam.," i. 4.)
} "Ut Paracletum restitutorem potius sentias disciplines quam
institutorcm.' (Ibid., i. 4.)

BOOK I. — MONTANISM. 113
lations given foreseen and declared by Jesus Christ?
The final and glorious economy of the Paraclete may in
deed have commenced at Pentecost, but it only reached
its culminating point with the appearance of Mon-
tanus and the prophetesses of Phrygia ; none can tell
where its developments may end. It was impossible to
make a more serious assault than this upon apostolic
Christianity. When revelation is regarded, not as a doctrine or a
law, but as a fact — the fact of redemption — the apostolic
testimony retains its supreme, unique, incomparable
value. The fact cannot be changed ; it is what it is,
and the original witnesses chosen by God to preserve
its memory, endowed with the gifts necessary for so
grand a mission, cannot be either replaced or sur
passed. Revelation must then be complete when re
demption is accomplished. But it is otherwise when
revelation is considered essentially as a doctrine or
law; then the protocol remains open as it were, and
progress is always possible. This was the ground
taken by Montanism, and most of its errors and ex
aggerations arise out of this false conception of revela
tion. By attributing to the Paraclete the power of
indefinitely adding to revelation, by placing still con
tinuous revelation above that which was written,
Montanism gave scope for all that was visionary, for
all the hallucinations of diseased minds. When the
exercise of prophecy in the Church ceased to consist
simply in the prediction of a particular event, or in
the vindication of an old truth with new power ; when
in addition to this it implied the possibility of modi
fying or adding to that truth, it ceased to offer anything
9

114 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
definite, any firm and immovable foundation, any rock
on which to build. Religion lost the definitive character
which belongs to that which is absolute. The danger
was so much the greater, since the inspiration which
thus had power to change everything was exempted
from the restraint of all the rules of reason, as well as
from the authority of the Holy Scriptures. It was
admitted to be a sort of ecstasy, and its great merit,
according to the sect, consisted in its bringing man
into a state of complete passivity. " Ecstasy seized the
inspired man ; this is the power of the Holy Spirit
which produces prophecy."* It is a sort of God-sent
madness, which constitutes the spiritual faculty called
by us, prophecy. The soul is no longer self-possessed
when it prophesies ; it is in a state of delirium ; a power
not its own masters it.t Dreams and visions occupy
the principal place in the inspiration of the Montanists.
Inspiration is only the harp which vibrates as it is
touched by the player's finger.! "Man sleeps; I
alone am walking," says the Paraclete. § In such a
conception of inspiration, flexible natures, susceptible
of keen and rapid impressions, were the chosen organs
of revelation. Thus woman occupied the place of
honour in Montanism. The prophetess Priscilla as
serted that Jesus Christ had appeared to her in a
feminine garb.|| Perpetua had an ecstatic vision of
the same kind. " There is among us," says Tertullian,
" a sister who has the gift of revelations. On the
Sabbath, in the assembly, she is seized with ecstasy,
* " Extasis, Sancti Spiritus vis operatrix prophetias." (Tertullian,
" De anima," 1 1.) f In spiritu patitur. (Ibid., 9.)
J "AvBputirog aaei Xipa. (Epiphanius, "Hasres.," xlviii. 4.)
§ Ibid. || Ibid., xlix. 1.

BOOK I. — MONTANISM. 115
and holds converse with the angels, and often with the
Lord Himself. She sometimes reads hearts and tells
the needed remedies to those who ask her."*
The Montanist Pythoness was quite as liable to be
wrought upon by extreme nervous and spiritual excite
ment, as the priestess of Apollo, divinely intoxicated
on her Delphic tripod. Ambiguous and lying oracles
could thus be substituted for the clear and exact pre
scriptions of the sacred books. It is obvious that
the whole of Christianity was imperilled by this doc
trine of the Paraclete. This was the fundamental
heresy of Montanism, and infinitely more serious than
the particular errors into which it might be led.
Those errors, as we have already observed, do not
relate so much to doctrine as discipline, although the
sect may be fairly charged with changing the Gospel,
or at least falsifying its spirit, by its purely legal
conception of the new religion. The view which the
Montanists took of divine inspiration led them not to
recognise the demands of the ecclesiastical order.
They were undoubtedly right in their resistance to
the encroachments of the hierarchy, and to the re
laxation of discipline. But they went too far on this
point, as on every other — insisting upon a Church of
saints and perfect men, as if the secrets of the heart
could ever be judged of in a human society, which is
constrained to conduct itself with that which is ex
ternal. " The Church," said Tertullian, " is not con
stituted by the number of bishops ; it is the Holy
Spirit in the spiritual man."t
* Tertullian, " De anima," 9.
f " Ecclesia Spiritus per spiritalem hominem, non Ecclesia nu-
merus episcoporum." (Tertullian, "De pudicit," 21.)
9 *

Il6 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
This declaration would be correct if it applied to
the invisible Church, which is composed of all true
Christians, and of all that is truly Christian in them.
But it becomes false and dangerous when applied to
any one visible Church, which cannot be the adequate
expression of the invisible, in which the tares grow
with the good wheat, and their separation is impossible.
The evil is not excluded by making a profession of
the faith the personal condition of membership ; there
is no guarantee that this profession will be in all
cases sincere, and even were it so, there is no re
ligious community in which it is not incomplete. It
follows that no one such community can claim to be
itself, to the exclusion of all others, the Temple of
the Holy Ghost ; else it becomes at once an exclusive
sect, like the Montanists, who called themselves the
perfect, the spiritual men, speaking scornfully of
all other Christians as carnal. Their conception of
inspiration, as never final and complete, moreover,
rendered any fixed order impossible, and destroyed
ecclesiastical authority. All the elements of the faith
were daily liable to change. It was impossible to
divine what strange answers to spiritual questions
might fall from heaven.
The Montanist revelations related especially to
questions of discipline and morals. This imparted to
the system the legal character of which we have
already spoken. The distinction between the two
covenants was lost sight of. " The Church," says
Tertullian, " blends the law and the prophets with
the Gospels and the writings of the apostles."* The
* "Ecclesia legem et prophetas cum evangelicis et apostolicis
scriptis miscet." (Tertullian, " De prescript.," 36.)

BOOK I. — MONTANISM. IIJ
Gospel was a code, no less than Mosaism, especially
with the amplifications given to it by the Paraclete.
The law of liberty is replaced by precepts of the
minutest detail. All that was not permissible was laid
under a stern interdict ;* and thus vanished that noble
Christian liberty, which enlarges the domain of the
moral principle instead of narrowing it, and takes
possession of the entire life, to bring it all under one
direction, and to animate it with the inspiration of love
as with the breath of life. Montanism tended to a
system of growing severity, and it laid special stress
upon three points. First, it exalted martyrdom with
solemn fervour. Martyrdom satisfied its favourite
aspirations by breaking all the bonds of earth, tramp
ling under foot the present life, and lifting the eager
soul at once into the heavenly sphere, and to a share
in the kingdom of Jesus Christ. The Church assuredly
gave to martyrdom no niggard honour, but Montanism
went further, and severely condemned ever}- measure
of prudence in times of proscription. The Treatise of
Tertullian on " Flight and Persecution," expresses
perfectly the ideas of the sect. " The Spirit,*' he says,
" urges us all to martyrdom, not to flight. "t The
Montanists gloried in the great number of confessors
who had come forth from their ranks.!
The same severity characterises their practice of
fasting. Christians are enjoined to fast until the
evening on the •• dies stationum," Wednesday and
Friday. During two weeks of each year they are to
* •• Imo prohibetur quod non ultro e5t permissum." (Tertullian,
" De corona milit.,*' 2.)
| " Spirirus omnes pa'ne ad martyrium exhon.irur. non ad fugam."1
Tertullian, " De fug. in persecut." 9.) j Eusebius. " H. E..' v. 16.

Il8 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
abstain from meat, wine, fruits, and also from the baths
so highly esteemed by the ancients. This time of self-
mortification is called Xerophagiai. Tertullian has
written an entire treatise in defence of fasting. The
objections brought against the sect on this point show
clearly the exaggerated legalism by which it was
estranged from the true Christian tradition. The law
and the prophets, it was said to the Montanists, were
until John ; fasting thenceforward should be a volun
tary, not an enjoined act. The apostles themselves
observed it, without laying it as a yoke upon any: we
must not return to legal prescriptions. The prophets
showed great contempt for all that is merely outward
observance.* Tertullian replies that nothing is more
adapted to give large licence to the flesh, than the
reducing of the law to the great commandment of love.
He maintains the necessity of fasting — first, on the
ground that self-indulgence led to the fall. " It is
necessary," he says, " that man should give satisfac
tion to God with the same element by which he
offended, and that he should deny himself food, which
caused his fall."t That fasting is agreeable to God is
proved by the words full of tenderness addressed to
Elijah, when he was fasting in the desert of Horeb,
especially as compared with the severe tone of the call
to Adam, when he had been eating the forbidden fruit.
Fasting facilitates holy visions, as is proved by sacred
history from Daniel to Peter, and it prepares for
martyrdom ; while the neglect of such abstinence leads
* Tertullian, "Dejejuniis," 2.
\ " Ut homo per eamdem materiam causae satis Deo faciat, per
quam offenderat." (Ibid., 3.)

BOOK I. — MONTANISM. II9
to apostacy, by fostering the love for material plea
sures. To the objections drawn from Holy Scripture,
Tertullian replies by the revelations of the Paraclete,
which legitimately give expansion to its application.
In this treatise he recognises no distinction between
the Old and New Testament, as is indeed natural from
his strictly legal standpoint.* Let the athletes who
fight with the wild beasts, feed and grow fat, if they
will ; but such is not the calling of the Christian,
who is to wrestle, not against flesh and blood, but
against the powers of the air. The gate of Heaven
is narrow ; an attenuated body will enter more easily
than one puffed up with fleshly indulgence. t
Montanism, like all ascetic doctrines, enters its
strongest protest against the union of the sexes.
It seems to object only to second marriages, which it
imperatively forbids, but in fact it deprecates and
denounces marriage altogether, and urges absolute
continence. Tertullian, in his treatise on " Mono
gamy," contents himself with prohibiting second
marriages, taking his stand on Scripture, when he can
make it sustain his view, appealing to the higher power
of the Paraclete when he has to deal with the exact
texts of St. Paul. The Apostle, according to him,
gave sanction to second marriages, but with a marked
tone of antipathy. The Paraclete, however, in his
new revelation, always acts in conformity with Jesus
Christ and His promises. " We acknowledge," said
Tertullian, " only one marriage, as we acknowledge
* Tertullian, " De jejuniis," c. 6, 7, 8.
f " Facilius, si forte per angustam salutis januam introibit caro
exilior," (Ibid., 17.)

120 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
only one God.* Jesus Christ has had only one bride,
which is the Church. By His example, and by the
explicit command revealed by the Paraclete, He has
restored the true nature; for monogamy dates from
Eden."f The priests were to have only one wife.
Now, under the new economy, every Christian is a
priest of Christ. No difference should be made, in a
moral point of view, between the clergy and the
laity, for the former are taken from among Christian
people.! Beside, how can marriage, which makes of
the man and woman one flesh, be renewed. Is such
an assimilation capable of repetition ? Beside, the
bonds between husband and wife continue in death ; §
they have only become more sacred by becoming more
spiritual. Tertullian goes even further in his treatise,
his " Exhortation to Chastity." He avows the prin
ciples of false asceticism. He recognises a morality
of perfection which rises above the ordinary standard.
Permanent virginity is its highest point ; abstinence
from the sexual relations in marriage is akin to it in
virtue. || Let monogamy, at least, be the Christian
rule, and a chaste widowhood be faithfully maintained.
The various degrees of virtue correspond to the dif
ferent attitudes of the mind of God Himself, the one
of tolerance, the other of preference. 11 Thus we are
* " Unum matrimonium novimus, sicut unum Deum." (" De
monogam.," I.)
t " In Christo omnia revocantur ad initium." (" De mono-
gam.," 5.) ! Ibid., 12.
§ "Ergo hoc magis ei juncta est, cum quo habet apud Deum
causam." (Ibid., io.) || Tertullian, " De exhortat. castitatis," I.
IT " Etsi quasdam videntur voluntatem Dei sapere, dum a Deo
permittantur, non statim omne quod permittitur, ex mera et tota
voluntate procedit ejus qui permittit." ( Ibid., 3.) •

BOOK I. — MONTANISM. I.2I
brought to the very doctrine of the Romish counsels
of the Gospel perfection— the natural issue of every
legal tendency which abandons the unity of the
moral principle. Tertullian does not hesitate to com
pare the conjugal union to adultery, forgetting his
own beautiful words about the perpetuity of marriage
after death. The union of the sexes has always for
its cause an impulse of lust. " Thus, then," he sug
gests as an objection urged, "you set a brand even on
first marriages." " And rightly," he replies, " since
they consist in the same act as adultery."' Thus it
is good for a man not to touch a woman : virginity is
the highest holiness, since it is furthest removed from
adultery."* Thus we see Montanism reaching, by a
different path, the very same extravagant asceticism
advocated by the Gnostics, and falling into the same
dualism, at least in a moral point of view.
Legalism of necessity develops into casualty, for
as no place is to be left to liberty, prescriptions must
be multiplied. The treatises of Tertullian on " The
Philosopher's Mantle," on " The Veil of the Virgin,"
and on the " Crown of the Soldier." give sufficient
evidence of this tendency. He urges that the virgin
be veiled like the married woman, so as not to kindle
the flame of passion. " I entreat thee. O woman, be
thou mother, daughter, or virgin, veil thy head: as
mother, veil it for the sake of thy son: as sister, for
thy brother ; as daughter, for thy father. For thou
dost imperil men of every age. Put on the armour
of modesty: encircle thee with a rampart of chastity.
* " ldev> virginis principalis sanctitas, quia caret stupri affini-
Ute." {" IV exhornt. castit.uis,' <).)

122 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
Set a guard over thine own eyes and over those
of others. Art thou not married to Christ ?"* If the
Christian wears the mantle at all, it is to be the
severe garb of the censor who denounces the luxury
of the world. " Glory in thy mantle, for since
thou hast become a Christian, thou hast been initiated
into the best of all philosophies."? The soldier may
not accept the military crown, under pain of tampering
with idolatry; the military service is altogether con
demned by Tertullian, as incompatible with the
Christian calling.
The perversion of the doctrine of redemption, which
is the source of all this legalism, casuistry, and extreme
asceticism, is especially notable in the arbitrary dis
tinction made by Montanism between various kinds
of sins. In the same manner as it recognises two
orders of perfection, and thus does violence to the
true idea of good, so does it tamper with the idea of
evil. The adherents of the sect made a difference
between sins venial and mortal, and denied that the
Church had power to pardon the latter. They placed
adultery and apostacy at the head of this black cata
logue. They did not deny that God could pardon
them directly, or through the medium of an exceptional
revelation; but on this side the grave no restoration
was possible for those who had been guilty of such
sins, even though they gave the strongest pledges of
their repentance. This stern sentence is carried by
Tertullian to its furthest issues. His treatise on
* " Nupsisti enim Christo." (" De virg. veland.," 16.)
¦|- " Gaude pallium et exsulta, melior jam te philosophia dignata
est, ex quo Christianum vestire ccepisti." (" De pallio," 6.)

BOOK I. — MONTANISM. 123
" Modesty," called forth by the decree of the Bishop
of Rome, who had assumed the right to pardon the
gravest sins, expresses the Montanist theory with
perfect clearness. He does not dwell for an instant
on the very real difficulty of obtaining sufficient proof
of true repentance after such grievous falls ; he speaks
only of the comparative gravity of different sins.
" Some," he says, " are pardonable ; others, on the con
trary, are beyond remission ; some merit punishment,
others deserve damnation. From this difference in
the offences comes the difference in the penitence,
which varies according as it is exercised on account
of a pardonable or unpardonable sin."* Nothing can
be more arbitrary than such a distinction ; sin is no
doubt more or less heinous in proportion to its wilful
ness and determinateness. But every violation of the
law of God, small or great, demands alike the full
mercy of God. The Church is the depository of the
mercy of grace and pardon. What right has it to
exclude from its bosom one class of sinners more than
another, when once it has received all the assurance
possible of an earnest repentance ? It is not reason
able to grant an equal pardon for all sins in the Divine
order, and to decree irrevocable exclusions from mercy
in the order of the Church. Such exclusions can only
be intended to compel the sinner to make expiation
upon earth for the gravest offences. It follows then
that the work of redemption is insufficient, and that,
in addition to repentance, a certain satisfaction is
* " Causas pcenitentiae delicta condicimus ; haec dividimus in
duos exitus, alia erunt remissibilia, alia irremissibilia." (" De
pudiq.," 2.)

124 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
demanded of the sinner. We here reach the root of
the error of Montanism, from which grows its legalism
and its asceticism. We shall see how the Church,
which repudiated the sect as heretical, has itself fallen
under the influence of this capital mistake, and has
ultimately adopted, with slight modifications, several
of its favourite doctrines. It is to Montanism that it
owes the idea of the infallibility of its Councils, which
attempt in the same way to add to revelation. From
the same source, too, it has derived its " counsels of
perfection," and the distinction between venial and
mortal sins. Let us, nevertheless, acknowledge that
Montanism left also, as a heritage to the Church, its
noble ecclesiastical liberalism, and its strong vindica
tion of the priesthood of all Christians.

CHAPTER V.
THE FIRST UNITARIANS.
Montanism was no pioneer in theology ; its doctrine
of the Trinity has no more precision than had the
orthodoxy of the age on this most dark and difficult
point. Its general tendency, however, is to strengthen
the Trinitarian position. The importance which it
attaches to the mission of the Paraclete, or of the
Holy Spirit, in the Christian economy, evidently im
plies the distinction of the Divine persons. It is easy
therefore to understand how the adversaries of Mon
tanism were led, in their reactionary movement against
it, to multiply their attacks on Trinitarian ideas, and
to constitute themselves the fervent apostles of the
unity of God. In fact, let it once be established that
there is no distinction of persons in the Godhead, and
it could no longer be possible to attribute to the
Paraclete the powers with which He was accredited by
Montanism. Under the influence of this new school
extraordinary inspirations and new revelations ceased.
A state of quiescence succeeded to the tumultuous
excitement which, throughout, the prophets and pro
phetesses fostered as the normal condition of the
Church's life. This gain, however, was dearly bought
at the cost of the fundamental principle of Christian

126 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
theology — that living conception of the Deity, which
neither removes Him to the height of a frozen abstrac
tion, nor lowers, by confounding Him with His own
creation ; and which enables us to recognise the eternal
realisation of love before the world was in the holy
union of the Father and the Son. Doubtless clouds
and darkness gather around this lofty conception, as
around all that is truly sublime and exalted; but when
the mind descends to lower ground, it finds only the
cold divinity of deism, which is nothing more than an
idea, or the diffused divinity of pantheism, which is
only another name for the world. For the most part,
the former of these two erroneous conceptions merges
into the latter, finding it impossible to sustain itself
in the void created by pure deism.
Such is in fact the process of transmutation which
we have traced in Ebionitism, which, starting from
abstract Monotheism, loses itself at last in the gnostic
pantheism of the " Clementines." There must indeed
be a logical necessity simply irresistible in this trans
formation of doctrine, since we find Unitarianism
passing through the same phases, under the most
various conditions, whether originating in the Church
itself, or produced by the narrow teachings of the
synagogue. It is an interesting study to observe how
directly this tendency ran counter to the Christian
conscience, since in an age when ecclesiastical authority
was far more lax in its constitution than after Nicasa,
and when the theological creed was in many points
still unformed, Christianity did not hesitate to give
emphatic repudiation to systems which assailed the
Divinity of Christ.

BOOK I. — THE FIRST UNITARIANS. 127
§ I. The First School of Unitarians.*
At the starting-point of the Unitarian movement we
find a sect called the Alogians, whose opinions cannot
be ascertained with exactness on any point except that
which gives it its name. The Alogians. or deniers of
the Word, rejected the central doctrines of the writings
of St. John.t and repudiated his Gospel on purely
theoretic grounds, in the name of a strictly internal
and arbitrary criticism, which altogether ignored
history. Sworn enemies to Montanism, as Irenasus
tells us, they thought they discovered in the book of
the Revelation, and in the fourth Gospel, a confirmation
of the tendency to which the}- were so determinate!}'
opposed. '' Not willing," says Irenasus, •• to recognise
the gift of the Holy Spirit, shed forth upon mankind
according to the good pleasure of the Father, they
repudiate the Gospel of John, in which the Lord
promises the Paraclete, and they deny in the same
manner the spirit of prophecy.'*! The Alogians en
deavoured to place the fourth Gospel in contradiction
with the synoptics. The prologue of John seemed
to them incompatible with the commencement of the
other three Gospels. They noted the differences in
* The reader may consult with profit on this subject the portion
of Pooler's book which refers to it : " Lehre von der Person
Christi." pp. 40--562, 008 ; Baur, " Christlische Lehre der Dreieinig-
keit." p. 253 and foil. . "Das Christeiuh. der drei erst. Jahrhund.,"
p. ^08 and foil. I need not enumerate the general works on the
history of doctrine, nor the authorities to which I refer in ,W\>.
See also "l'Histoiro du dogme do la divinite de Jesus-Christ." by
Albeit Keville. Paris. iSoo.
+ 'Rrrti oh' ror Xi>) or oi< i'Jyoit.h rvr -i.\) Tw.inw i-fdjoin ufivv
'.v\oy» tVln'i™. (.Kpiph.. " H.vres.. "Ii.) X Irerueus, " Hares.." iii.

128 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
chronology, specially in the time assigned to the
ministry of Jesus Christ, which, according to their view
of the first three Gospels, could have included only one
Passover feast. For the rest, they lent their own
confirmation to the antiquity of the document which
they sought to repudiate, for they fixed upon Cerinthus
as its author. They got rid of the book of the
Apocalypse in a more summary manner, by asking
what end was answered by this revelation of super-
terrestrial things.* The Alogians were narrow sec
taries, who were governed by the spirit of system,
and forced facts into compliance with their precon
ceived ideas. They pursued the dangerous method
in theological controversies, which consists in taking
on every point a position counter to that of their
opponents; not perceiving that in this way they really
placed themselves in subjection to them, and sur
rendered their own freedom of conviction by abandon
ing an unbiassed investigation of the question at issue.
They do not appear to have constructed a system,
properly so-called. Their attachment to the synoptics
doubtless prevented them from rejecting the miraculous
conception of Jesus. They admitted His close union
with the Deity, while they emphatically denied the
distinction of the Divine persons.
The Unitarian doctrine took a more definite form
with the two Theodotuses. The first was a currier
from Bysance, who came to Rome about the close of
the second century ; the second was a money-changer
in the same city. Among their disciples may be
named Asclepiades, Hermophiles, and ApoUonides.t
* Epiphanius, " Hasres.," Ii. f Eusebius, " H. E." v. 28.

BOOK I. — THE FIRST UNITARIANS. 129
Men of hard and logical mind, geometricians and
grammarians by taste, they carried into the greatest
problems of Christian metaphysics the methods of
their rigorous dialectics, and, under pretext of unity,
sacrificed the complex elements of the problems they
treated.* While admitting the supernatural birth of
Jesus.t they rejected the incarnation properly so-called.
They gave their own interpretation to the declaration
of the angel to Mary: "The power of the highest
shall overshadow thee." It implied, in their view,
simply a moral union between the divinity and
humanity in the person of Jesus, else it would have
been said to Mary that the Holy Spirit should be
born of her. They supported their opinion further
by the Old Testament prophecies, which declared that
Messiah should be born of a woman, and laid great
stress on the declarations of the Gospel concerning
the human nature of Christ.! They acknowledged no
difference between Him and other men, except that of
moral superiority. § Starting from such a basis, re
demption could find no place in their system. Jesus
had come simply to give in His own person and in His
life an exceptional manifestation of the Divine prin
ciple, wakening into consciousness the higher element
lying dormant within us. The first Theodotus was
* KaraX«?r<SiTfC rdg d'/iag rofi 9eov ypaijidg, yetofUTpiav tiririjiV'oi'ffii'.
(Eusebius, " H. E.." v. 28.)
f Epiphanius wrongly asserts that they deny the miraculous
conception of Jesus. (" Hxres.." liv.) J Epiphanius, " Haares.," liv.
§ "Theodotus hasreticus Bysantius doctrinam inU-oduxit, qua
Christum hominem tantummodo diceret, deum autem ilium negaret,
ex spiritu quidem sancto natum ex virgine, sed hominem solitarium
atque nudum, nulla alia prae ceteris nisi sola justitias auctoritate."
(Tertullian, " De prescript," c 53.) 10

I30 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
condemned by Bishop Victor, although he had suc
ceeded in winning to his doctrine a holy confessor
named Natalis — a man more devout than enlightened.
This convert did not persist in his error, and withdrew
his support from the sect after a vision, which left
an ineffaceable impression of terror on his feeble
mind. Theodoret accuses him of having sold himself
to the heretics for money.* But this sort of imputa
tion on the false teachers must be received with much
caution, as coming from adversaries eager to believe
anything that could blacken the character of those
they hated.
The Fathers mention a Unitarian sect, which sup
posed the existence of a mysterious link between Jesus
and the head of the angelic hosts, who is designated
by the name Melchisedec. The second 'Theodotus
appears to have embraced this opinion, which is
evidently of Gnostic origin, and betrays the influence
of mystic Ebionitism upon the Unitarianism of the
west.t Artemon adhered to the purely rationalistic
character of the sect. Without repudiating the super
natural birth of Jesus, he categorically denies His
divinity, recognising only His spiritual oneness with
the Father. He took skilful advantage of the absence
of any exact Trinitarian formula during the whole
of the second century in the west, to maintain that
the doctrine of the divinity of Christ had never been
held at Rome previous to the bishopric of Zephyrinus,
who was the first to give the dignity of a dogma to
* Theodoret, " Haeretic fabul.," ii. 5.
+ Toiif Si MeXxio-tStKiavovg Tprjpa piv iivai rovnav $am. Ibid., ii. 6.)
QcoSoTog, TpaweZiTrfg n)v TBxyrfV, Xiyti Sivapiv Tiva tov MeXxto-tSie elvai
fityioTrfv. (" Phil.," vii. 36.)

BOOK I. — THE FIRST UNITARIANS. 131
that which was only a recent invention.* This was
to misconceive the deep and universal character of
Christian thought from the beginning, and like a jurist,
to balance the imperfectness of the formula against
the substantial reality of the faith. Probably Artemon
also found support for his assertion in the vacillations
of the bishop Zephyrinus, a man of weak mind, carried
about with every wind of doctrine, under the influence
of the cunning Callisthus, who was first his maire du
palais and then his successor. It is certain that
Callisthus also had encouraged the Theodotian sect,
making advances to it, as he did in turn to all the
other religious factions. t But the inconsistency and
rogueries of an individual cannot prevail to shake the
living tradition of the Church's faith.
The most brilliant representative of the School of
Artemon was Paul of Samosata, who filled the episco
pal chair at Antioch from the year 260 to 270.! Thanks
to the favour of Queen Zenobia, who showed herself
very favourably inclined towards Judaism and all that
was akin to it, he enjoyed extraordinary credit, and was
the first type of those courtly bishops whom the union
of the Church with the Empire multiplied rapidly
during the following century. The Church of Antioch
was an influential one ; the Christians could lend large
* Theodoret, "Hasretic fabul.," ii. 11. Eusebius, " H. E.,'
v. 28. + "Phil.,"ix. 12.
! Beside the ordinary writers on heresies, the principal authorities
for Paul of Samosata are : 1st. The fragments of his writings, col
lected by John of Byzance (" Contra Nestor, et Eutych.," lib. hi.),
reproduced from a MS. at Oxford by Ehrlich. "Dissertatio de er-
roribus Paul Samos." Leipzig, 1745. (To be seen in the Imperial
Library of Paris.) 2nd. Collection of the Councils of Mansi (i. 1033,
v. 393). "Epist. episc. ad Paul." 3rd. Mai, "Nova collectio," vii. 1.

10

*

132 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
support to the party they chose to sustain. Hence
their leader was an important personage, especially in
the formidable contests which frequently imperilled the
power of the queen. Paul of Samosata made large use
of his influence in a luxurious and worldly city. He
even obtained a public office, that of ducenarius, or
receiver of the public moneys, a post which brought
him some revenue. Surrounding himself with all the
splendour of oriental affluence, he endeavoured to bring
all the neighbouring churches under his control. He
acted the metropolitan ;* his episcopal chair resembled
a throne.t He even claimed the right of exercising a
civil jurisdiction, citing to his tribunal all legal cases
among Christians. Large sums of money accrued to
him through this imprudent interference in questions
of litigation.! He went about escorted by a magni
ficent cortege. It was a spectacle equally novel and
lamentable, to see the representative of a persecuted
and still proscribed Church rivalling in pomp and
arrogance the magistrates of the highest rank. Was
it possible that a life which had so cast off all austerity
could remain pure ? The doubt was in all minds. The
charge of immorality, without being distinctly stated,
hung over the brilliant bishop. § He was too often seen
surrounded by elegant women, for his morals to be
above suspicion. The rumour soon spread that his
doctrine was as unsound as his practice. He had
ventured to expurgate from the service the hymns of
adoration sung to the praise of Jesus Christ, while he
* 'Yi//i;\d ippovii. (Eusebius, " H. E.," vii. 30.)
t Hfjpa piv Kai 9povov viprfXbv kavnp KaTaOKevaodpcvog (Ibid., vii, 30.)
! Ibid., vii. 30. § Ibid., vii. 30.

BOOK I. — THE FIRST UNITARIANS. 133
tolerated anthems in his own honour.* Such an inno
vation seemed sufficiently indicative of his tendencies.
Firmilianus, the most influential bishop of Cappadocia,
had come twice to Antioch to certify himself of the
opinions held by Paul of Samosata. The latter had
justified himself in ambiguous language, and been
lavish of fair promises ; but he showed no inclination to
keep them, and again asserted, with even more open
ness than before, his peculiar doctrines. The pertur
bation was great in all the Churches. Many efforts at
conciliation were made in vain. Paul of Samosata
resisted all the advice and all the arguments brought
to bear upon him.
Three councils were held at Antioch : the last, which
was decisive, assembled in the year 269.T Paul of
Samosata could not meet the cogent reasonings of
Malchion, who was only a presbyter ; ! he was con
strained to lift the mask, and declare himself fully
as a Unitarian. His condemnation was pronounced;
another bishop was put in his place, but he only
yielded in the last extremity, after the defeat of Ze
nobia. The bishops, in order to give to their decision
the force of law, called in the support of the Emperor
Aurelian, who declared them to be in the right. § We
shall have occasion subsequently to investigate all the
incidents of this matter, which had an important bearing
on the organisation of the Church. For the present,
we confine ourselves strictly to the exposition of the
* taXpovg roig piv elg rbv Kvpiov ripwv 'Irjoovv Xptarbv iravaag.
(Eusebius, "H. E.," vii. 30.)
t Ibid., vii. 30. J Ibid., vii. 29.
§ 'Ettu dvTBTtiVB Kai Tt)v rrjg iKKXrfaiag KaTBix^v i)yBpoviav, Avpr/Xiavvv
tirtiaav l&Xciaai fijg UxXriaiag. (Theodoret, " Hasretic fabul," i'.. C.)

134 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY. ^ .
doctrine of Paul of Samosata, as it is made knoWn to
us by the fragments of his writings which have been
preserved by his contemporaries.
The Bishop of Antioch carried out the principles of
Theodotus and Artemon to their extreme consequences.
He lowered the dignity of Christ So far as to liken Him
to a mere man* Denying His pre-existence, he ad
mitted no distinction of persons in the Godhead.t The
Word was, for him, simply the consciousness which
God has of Himself; it is to the Father what the mind
of man is to man himself, not a separate person, but the
simple consciousness of his own personality.! In this
sense man is the image of God, but he can never attain
to a unity of essence with the Divine Being, not even
by Jesus Christ. Paul of Samosata did not, however,
as has been asserted, make the divinity of Jesus Christ
to consist in a mere psychological resemblance with
God. He recognised a positive action of the Word upon
the man Jesus; the Spirit of God had descended upon
Him,§ but this action was merely an influence, and did
not imply unity of essence. || Jesus Christ was indeed
born of a Virgin, but He was none the less in His nature
a man like other men, with this difference, that He
realised holiness, IT and thus merited the grace of God in
* Taireivd irtpl tov Xpiorov <ppovr)vavTOQ, tag koivov rr)v fpvvcv avQptdirov
ysvopivov. (Eusebius, " H. E.," vii. 27.)
t 'O Sapooarivg iippbva piv prf ilvai wpb Mapiag rbv vibv. (AthanashlS,
" De syn. Arim. et Seleuc," ii. 920. Paris Edition.)
X 'Ev Btip Si oUi bvTa tSv avTOV Xoyov Kai tS nvzvfia avrov, unnrtp iv
dvdpinrov KapSio} b ISiog Xoyog. (Epiphanius, " Haeres.," 65.)
§ See Baur, " Dreieinig.," i. 304.
|| 'EX96vTa Si rbv Xoyov Kai yovv oucrfffavra iv 'Iijaov av9pb)irip ovti.
(Epiphanius, " Hasres.," 65.)
% 'Atp' 011 7rpor)X9BV cl-ko rf)g aTrtipaydpov irapBivou, airb tote i)u)g
&XPW*Tl<>iv- (Athanasius, " Contra omnes hasres.,"- i. 10S1.)

BOOK I. — THE FIRST UNITARIANS. I35
extraordinary measure.* The Divine Word animated
Him by inspiration, but was not incarnate in Him.
" Wisdom," said Paul of Samosata, " did not enter into
substantial union with fiuman nature. "t Thus the
difference between Jesus Christ and other men is rela
tive only. Wisdom simply dwelt in Him in an ex
ceptional manner, and it was by the measure of this
Divine communication alone, that He was raised above
ourselves.! How indeed can it be maintained that
Jesus is the Son of God ? Is not that name already
given to the Eternal Wisdom ? It would follow then
that there must be two Sons of God § in the absolute
sense, which is impossible. Jesus was not, therefore,
the Son of God when He was born of the Virgin, but
acquired that high dignity by virtue of His holiness.
The Word was greater than Jesus, but Jesus was
exaltedbywisdom.|| "There is," says Paul of Samosata,
" no other mode of union between various natures and
various persons, except that which proceeds from the
will."H Remaining pure from sin, Christ enjoyed
union with God. He became our holy and righteous
Saviour, having triumphed in His conflict and agony
over the sin of our forefather.** This oneness of the
* Quag xdpiTog Siafcpovrug r)Siii>pivov. (Theod., " Hasretic fabul.," ii. 8.)
f Ov yap avyyBy&vr)tr9ai Tip dv9pitiTtivip rr)v aoipiav ovtriuSuig dXXd Kard
¦xowrr\Ta. (Ehrlich, p. 23.)
X T6 ivoxrjaai iv ainp Tr)v aoipiav Xiyeiv wg iv oiiSsvi dXXtp, tov piv
Tpbirov Tr\g ivoucrfeewg SrfXoi fiBTpip Si Kai irXr)9ei vnepipipEiv. (Ibid., 23.)
§ Ibid., 23.
|| 'O Xoyog peiZtov r)v tov Xpiotov, XpiOTog Sia aoQiag piyag iyevtro.
(Text of Paul of Samosata. Mai, " Nova coll.," vii. 299.)
Tf At Sidijtopai ifrvotig Kai Ta Sidtpopa Trpouutira eva Kai povov ivitiTBtog
bxoviti rpoTrov rr)v Kara Trjv SiXr^fftv mtpftairiv. (Ibid., vii. 68.)
** Mtivag Ka9apbg dpapnag r)vii9i] avrip, liyiog Kai SUaiog ykyovtv i)puii'
b auiTtfp. ("Ex Pauli sermonib. ad Sabinum." Ibid., vii. 1.)

136 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
will in love is far higher than mere unity of nature. It
is thus Jesus was raised into intimate union with God,
and that the Divine Spirit rested upon Him in far larger
measure than upon the prophets, dwelling in Him as in
a temple.* Paul of Samosata substituted an apotheosis
for the incarnation, suggesting that Jesus from man
became God, always however in a relative sense.t Re
demption no less than incarnation is sacrificed by such
a doctrine. In short, Jesus is the ideal man, who
flashes before our eyes the purest rays of Divine
wisdom. The distance between such a system and the
Christianity of the apostles was indeed so great, that
the Church rejected it without hesitation, as soon as it
was able to form a true estimate of it. It was not
needful to have recourse to a pagan emperor for the
verdict ; the sentence pronounced by the Christian
conscience was itself decisive. It is curious to observe
that the Fathers of the Council of Antioch rejected the
expression consubstantiality, which was to find so much
favour at Nicasa.J They feared that it might be taken
in an equivocal sense, which would sacrifice the dis
tinction of the Divine persons.
Beryllus, Bishop of Botsra, belonged to this class of
Unitarians, until he was brought back by Origen to
the general faith of the Church, as the result of a free
discussion of opinions. § We are made acquainted with
his system only by a short passage in Eusebius, of
which the most various interpretations are given. It
runs thus : " Beryllus maintained that our Lord and
* 'Qg Iv vaip 9eov. (Mai, " Nova collect.,'' vii. 299.)
t ' E£ dv9pio7nov ysyove 9t6g. (Athanasius, i. 920.)
! Ibid., i. 920. § Eusebius, " H. E.," vi. 33.

BOOK I. — THE FIRST UNITARIANS. I37
Saviour did not exist in the proper determination of His
being before His manifestation among men ; that He
did not possess Divinity, but that the Divine paternity
only took up its abode in Him."* Some have attempted
to derive from this text the idea of a Divine hypostasis
taking place at the birth of Christ. The very being of
God is supposed then to have undergone a change, or
rather He of His own will then modified His mode of
existence. The determination of His being must be
referred to the absolute and transcendent One, that is to
God. We can discern no such indication in this famous
passage. To us it seems to assert simply the personality
of Jesus. Before His birth He did not exist as the per
sonal Word. He had no distinct pre-natal existence
more than other men. The principle of His higher life
was in God, as is the principle of all moral existence, or
as the light which is concentrated in the central lumi
nary. He only entered on a personal and determinate
* BrjpvXXogTbvoidTijpaXiyeivroXfiuiv prjTrpovipeo-Tdvat Kar' iSiav ovo-iag
irtpiypatyr)v irpb Trjg eig dv9pwTrovg iTriSrjpiag prfSi pr)v Beorrjra iSiav lxuv
dXX' ipiroXiTcvopAvrfv ai)Tij> povtfv rr)v ¦KaTpudyv. (Eusebius, " H. E.,"
vi. 33.) We shall not enter into the controversy raised by the
interpretation of this passage. Schleiermacher erroneously dis
covers in it a determination of the being of God dating from the
incarnation. We adhere fully to the opinion of Baur, who dis
covers in it simply the negation of the individual pre-existence of
Jesus Christ. He quotes on this subject a very positive passage of
Origen, who reproaches a class of Unitarians, in whom it is easy
to recognise the school of Beryllus, with denying the divinity of the
Son, while asserting for Him a determinate existence entirely
distinct from the Father — that is to say, absolutely human : TiBkvrag
Si avTOv tt)v ISibrriTa, Kai rr)v ovaiav Kard 7repiypatpr)v rvyxdvovaav iripav
tov iraTpog. (Origen, " In Johann.," vol. ii. chap. 2.) There is no
question, then, of a new determination of the very being of God,
since the result of such teaching is the negation of the divinity
of Christ. Dorner does not seem to have given sufficient weight
to this passage of Origen. (Work quoted, p. 553, and following.)

I38 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
existence at His birth; the Divine element which He
possesses comes to Him from the Father, or the one
God. He did not receive it by the medium of emana
tion, as if He were Himself a feebler ray of the Eternal
Light: it became His as the result of a purely moral
union. The Divinity took up its abode in the heart of
Jesus, as in a holy dwelling-place, truly worthy of it,
and where it was made a welcome guest. Beryllus,
while a heretic, far from being at issue with the first
principle of the Unitarians, represents it with greater
clearness than any other teacher.
§ II. The Second School of Unitarians.
The apotheosis of the man Jesus was the final utter
ance of the first school of Unitarians. This is also
the motto of Western Paganism, which is epitomised
in humanism. We have seen how vain and illusory
is this hypothesis : man remains what he is, and true
union with God is not realised. Do we find this want
more fully met in the second school, that which pro
ceeds rather from the East than the West, and which
absorbs the human in the Divine element ? We know
already what is the scope of the pantheistic religions
of Asia Minor and India : they recognise only an im
personal infinity, in which all reality is absorbed and
lost. The God of the East is the great devourer.
When He reveals Himself it is not like Jehovah speak
ing to Moses from the midst of a bush, which burns
without being consumed. He is Himself a terrible fire,
which consumes the prophet and the bush ; He reduces
to annihilation both the world through which He mani-

BOOK I. — THE FIRST UNITARIANS. 139 .
fests Himself and the man who seeks to hear His voice.
Nay, more, He Himself disappears in the void of a
pantheism which denies to Him any self-consciousness.
Thus does all idolatry in the end break its own idol.
Neither God nor man is safe in religions or in systems
which sacrifice the human or the Divine element by
absorbing the one in the other. The second form of
primitive Unitarianism, embodied in the school of
Praxeas, Noetus, and Sabellius, is a reaction of the
old oriental genius ; it is Gnosticism, without its elabo
rate and fantastic symbolism, adhering more closely to
historic realities and to the letter of the sacred texts.
Praxeas was the first representative of this school at
Rome. He came from Asia, and bore in his body the
glorious stigmata of the Confessors. Thus he gained at
first much credit with the Bishop Victor, and obtained
from him the condemnation of Montanism. At the
same time he began to propagate his peculiar doctrines,
the issue of which was such an absolute identification
of God the Father with Jesus Christ, that, in his own
energetic manner, Tertullian says of him : " He has
driven prophecy from Rome and has brought in heresy;
he has put to flight the Paraclete, and crucified the
Father."* In other words, he condemned Montanism,
and attributed to God the sufferings of the Cross. This
last accusation, which may be accepted only with cer
tain qualifications, gained for the doctrine of Praxeas
the name of Patripassianism. The head of the sect pro
bably expressed himself in subtle and metaphysical
language ; he was not therefore at once understood by
* " Paracletum fugavit et Pattern crucifixit" (Tertullian, '• Adv.
Prax. " chap. 1.}

I40 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
the leaders of the Church at Rome, who were always
somewhat inapt at religious philosophy. We thus ac
count for the favour which he at first found, and by
which even his subsequent adherents profited. He began
by enunciating the dogma of the Divine unity with
great energy, establishing the monarchy in the absolute
sense.* The dogma of the Trinity, to judge by his re
presentations, broke the primordial unity, and proposed
three Gods for Christian worship, while there is in
truth but one. Praxeas took his stand chiefly on the
well-known text : " I am God, and there is none beside
Me." He explained this by the saying of Jesus : " I
and the Father are one. He who hath seen Me hath
seen the Father."! He also cited, in support of his
thesis, all the declarations of the Old Testament against
polytheism.! Praxeas thus admitted no distinction of
persons in God ; he saw in Him only the Father or ab
solute principle of the universe. In the incarnation,
the Most High united Himself to the human flesh of
Jesus. Thus was established, for the first time, the
distinction between the Father and the Son. The
Father is in Jesus as the Divine principle; the Son re
presents the flesh. But the union of the two elements
is so close that the Father shares the sufferings of the
Son in His crucified body. " It was announced," says
Praxeas, " by the angel to Mary, that that holy thing
which should be born of her should be called the Son
of God. Now it was the flesh which was born ; it is
the flesh then which is the Son of God."§ It follows
* "Monarchiam, inquiunt, tenemus." (Tertullian, chap. 3.)
f Tertullian, "Adv. Prax.," 20. J Ibid., 18.
§ " Eccc, inquiunt, ab angelo prasdicatum est : propterea quod

BOOK I.  THE FIRST UNITARIANS. I4I
that this humanity is a mere semblance : it is but the
corporeal covering of the Divine Spirit, which is at once
the Word and the Father. Doubtless the Father does
not suffer directly, but He suffers in the flesh which is
united to Him, in His strange identification with the
Son, who has no existence apart from Him, since He
has no personality.* It is difficult to conceive what
redemption can be on such a theory, except the final
absorption of the finite in the infinite, and this is, in
fact, the logical conclusion of the system.
The doctrine of Praxeas underwent numerous mo
difications before it assumed its final form. We
have very incomplete documents upon the system of
Bero.t He appears to have been the first to attempt to
explain the transfusion of the Divine and the human in
the person of Jesus, by the doctrine of the humiliation.
The Divine stooped, and the human was raised and
glorified by its participation with the higher element.
Unhappily, Bero, refusing to accept the distinction of
the Divine persons, could only recognise a very in
complete union between humanity and Deity. Apart
from the doctrine of the incarnation of the Word, there
were but two alternatives ; either the total absorption of
the Divine in the human, or a partial communication
of the Divine nature to man ; for it is simply impossible
to conceive that the Father, in all the glory of His God
head, can have been enshrined in Jesus, leaving, as it
were, the throne of heaven empty.
nascetur sanctum, vocabitur Filius Dei. Caro itaque nata est, caro
utique erit Filius Dei." (Ibid., 27.)
* Tertullian, " Adv. Prax.," 29.
t See Dorner, " Lehre von der Pers. Jesu," v. ii. 543.

I42 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
Noetus, of Smyrna, who came to Rome at the be
ginning of the third century, skilfully elaborated the
doctrine of Praxeas, which had been already modified
by Cleomenes. According to him there is but one
God, who is called the Father, and who is the Creator
of the universe. His will determines the mode of His
existence, by which He becomes now visible, now in
visible.* He determined to emerge from the absolute
mode of uncreated existence, and submitted Himself to
the law of birth in the person of Jesus, the offspring of
the Virgin Mary. He thus appears as at once im
passible and subject to suffering, immortal and mortal,
since, exempt from pain by His own nature, He volun
tarily endures the cross. He is called sometimes the
Father, sometimes the Son, according as He is desig
nated by one or other aspect of His nature. In this way
the theophanies of the Old Testament are explained.
The Father appeared as the Son to the saints and
prophets, rendering Himself visible to them.t Noetus
thought to maintain thus the Divine unity. The
Father and Son are absolutely one, the latter does not
proceed from the former ; it is always God who pro
ceeds from God, only changing His name according to
the divers conditions of His manifestation. He was
the Son during His earthly career after He was born of
the Virgin, and yet He was also the Father of all intelli
gent spirits.J In short, it is the great God of heaven
* "Eva ipaaiv iivai 9ibv Kai Tvaripa, dfavr) piv orav i9iXy, tjiaivoptvov Se
ainKa dv fiovXrfTai. (Theodoret, "Hasretic. fabul.," iii. 3.)
\ EvSotcrfoavTa Si TTtfrfvivai Toig dpxr)9iv Sucaioig ovra dapaTOV. (" Phil.,"
ix. IO.)
J "Ev Kai rb airb ipaHKiav inrdpxitv Tvarkpa Kai niov KaXoipevov. (Ibid.,
ix. IO.)

BOOK I. — THE FIRST UNITARIANS. I43
who was nailed upon the cross, pierced by the soldier's
spear, laid in the new sepulchre, and raised again from
the dead.
The merit of Cleomenes and Noetus consists in this
— that they referred to the sovereign freedom of God the
different modes of His being. He has the capacity of
assuming a finite nature, and in so doing He performs
an act of the will, and consequently of power. On the
other hand, the doctrine of Noetus necessarily issued in
pantheism, since it made finite existence only the chang
ing manifestation of the Godhead. This was a return to
the incarnations of Vishnu. Did he complete his sys
tem by metempsychosis, as asserted by Epiphanius,
who charges him with setting himself forth as Moses,
returned to the land of the living?* It is possible.
Jesus is after all, on this system, only the type of hu
manity ; His personality is but one of the guises as
sumed by the great Divine Actor in the long drama of
the incarnation, if we may borrow the language of
Indian legends ; there is nothing positive in it. Nor
can our individuality be anything more defined. The
same divine element which was in Moses reappears in
Noetus, as he who is called the angel of the Lord in the
Old Testament takes the name of Jesus in the Gospel.
This is a logical deduction.
Noetus, cited before the elders of the Church of Rome,
to give account of his doctrine, refused at first to reply.
Then, emboldened by success, he expressed himself
with a clearness which left no possibility of doubt. On
a second accusation, he boldly answered his adversaries :
" What evil have I then done ? I glorify the one God ;
* Epiphanius, " Hasres.," 57.

144 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
I own no other ; it is He who was born, who suffered,
who died." These sectaries, like Praxeas, took their
stand on the texts of Scripture which refute polytheism,
and especially upon the declaration of God to Moses: "I
am the God of thy fathers, there is no other God after
me." "This," said they, "is what we believe. Therefore,
when Jesus Christ comes to be born upon earth, we say
it is the same God, Father and Son, who has been from
the beginning, and who now comes down to us."*
The oriental monarchical school might think for a
moment that it was about to triumph through the
intrigues of the former slave Callisthus, who made use
of his influence over the old Bishop Zephyrinus, in
order to secure his own election. Faithful to the
maxim that those who will receive court must pay
court, he favoured in turns all the existing sects,
that he might gather adherents on all hands; and
he was ever ready to condemn one day those whom he
had flattered and caught by his artifices the day before.
He appears to have given substantial encouragement
to the heresy of Cleomenes and Noetus, and even to
have espoused for some time their favourite ideas, for
he defended them vigorously against Hippolytus,
Bishop of Ostia. Callisthus had gained such a hold of
the mind of Zephyrinus, that he dictated to him lan
guage which was the simple reproduction of the heresy
of Noetus. The Church of Rome, with amazement,
heard its bishop thus express himself in a public
assembly: "I acknowledge only one God, Jesus Christ,
and no other beside Him, who was born and died."t
* Epiphanius, " Hasres.," 57.
f 'Ey(i olSa 'iva 9eov Xpiarbv 'lifaovv Kai nXr)v airov 'irtpov ovSiva
ytvrfTbv Kai iradrjTov. (" Phil.," ix. II.)

BOOK I. — THE FIRST UNITARIANS. I45
It is true that Callisthus covered his retreat by such
ambiguous words as these : " It is not the Father who
died, but the Son,"* thus designating the flesh of the
Crucified, according to the terminology of Praxeas.
This equivocal attitude did not prevent him from
charging Christians, who, like Hippolytus, were faith
ful to the great traditions of the Church, with being
ditheists, or worshippers of two Gods.t
Callisthus subsequently endeavoured to modify some
what the form of Noetus' doctrine : he preserved its
essential ideas, while combining them with those of
Praxeas and Sabellius. According to him, the first
principle is called the Word, and manifests itself under
the three aspects of Father, Son, and Spirit. The
universe is filled with the Divine Spirit ; that Spirit
who is identical with the Father, because incarnate in
the womb of the Virgin. Thus Jesus could say, with
reason : " Believest thou not that I am in the Father,
and the Father in Me." The Spirit, invisible in the
person of Jesus Christ, is the Father; the visible
humanity is the Son. We have then but one God, and
escape all duality. The Christ is only one God, a
single person. His flesh has been deified by union with
the Divine element ; and the Father, by His union
with the flesh, had a sympathetic part in the sufferings
on the Cross.! Thus, in the heretical phase of his
career, Callisthus practised a true electicism, and
sought to combine all the elements of monarchism.
He did not found a school, in the strict sense of the
* " Phil.," ix. 1 1. t 'A-icd\n i)pag SiChvg. (Ibid., ix. II.)
J To fiiv ydp pXtrtoptvoy, OTrep iariv SfCpui-og, 5-0 Fro eirai ro>' vibv, ro
Si iv Tip viip xcdpFjOi)*" Trvivfia rouro flvtu tov -areoa. 'O ira-))o ti)v adpxa
eflfoffoiijofv — tov n-aripa (TWjujrt— orCsvat nf ui^i. (Ibid., ix. 12.)
II

146 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
word, but simply a faction, a party, in which intrigues
were of more importance than ideas. Originality was
not so much desiderated as finesse. As soon as Callis
thus had attained his ends, he condemned his late
allies, and declared himself on the side of rigid ortho
doxy. Sabellius of Lybia, a contemporary of Callisthus,
since he died in the year 260, gave to monarchism
a much more definite form, and endeavoured to re
concile it with the Trinitarian doctrines which had
acquired new precision in the Church.* He landed,
nevertheless, only in positive pantheism. Returning
to the philosophical language of Alexandria, he desig
nated the first principle under the name of Monas, or
Unity.t This is the Supreme Being of Philo, motion
less and silent. He does not remain, however, in
absolute repose, and creation does not proceed from
him by the way of emanation. He Himself produces
or organises the world ; His activity is like the hand
or the arm stretched out. It is ever the same arm,
but in stretching itself forth, it works. The Eternal
Being breaks silence ; He speaks. The word He utters
is the Logos. J We must set aside here all idea of
a distinct substance, of hypostasis and personality.
The Logos is only a new mode of the Divine Being;
* On the doctrine of Sabellius, see Athanasius, " Contra Arianos
oratio," iv., c. 2, 9, 13, 14-25; " Exposit fidei," 2; Epiphanius
" Hasres.," 62 ; Eusebius, " H. E.," vii. 6 ; Theodoret, " Haeretic.
fabul.," ii. 9.
+ Mr'ai' vrroaTaaiv ilvai tov Tranpa Kai tov v\6v Kai to liyiov Trvtvpa.
(Theodoret, " Haeretic. fabul.," ii. 9.)
X Tov 9e6v oiWTrujvra piv dvtvipyriTOvXaXovvTa Si iaxieiv. (Athanasius,
"Contra Arian. orat." iv. II.) Efyc auoirwv piv ouk riSivaTo iroulv
XaXwv Si KriZttv ijpZaro. (Ibid., 25.)

BOOK I. — THE FIRST UNITARIANS. I47
it is that Being diffusing Himself abroad, passing
from inaction to activity. Was this active operation
the producing cause of the world, or merely that
which gave organisation to it ? Are we confronted
here with a Platonist dualism, or with a complete
pantheism, which regards all created life as only the
expansion of the life divine ? The contemporary
systems of Noetus and Callisthus lead us to interpret
the system of Sabellius in the latter sense. Creation,
then, is nothing else than the extended hand of God,
His word, His manifestation.
The action of God in relation to the world assumes
three new forms, which do not help to suggest the
idea of personality. He reveals Himself alternately
as the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.* The Father
has often been confounded with the original Monas.
It is easy to understand how Christian thought, ac
customed to see in the Father the first person of the
Trinity, should with some difficulty have disabused
itself of this idea. But, evidently, Sabellius himself
did not so confound the two. It is not possible that
the Father should appear twice in His system, first
as the Monas before the world, and then as the first
mode of the divine activity in creation. t In the
same manner the Word must be carefully distin
guished from the Son, since the Word designates
the transition in God from silence to speech, from
* '0 warfip TrXaTvvtTai Si tig vlov Kai wvevpa. (Athanasius, " Contra
Arian. orat," iv. 25.) 'H povdg wXaTVv9e~iaa ykyove rpiag. (Ibid., 1 3.)
f Athanasius, who has more than once confounded the Monas
with the Father, yet himself preserved the distinction : Et p-r) r/
Movdc dXXo n ian itapd tov iraripa. He adds : n povdg Tpiwv TrotqriKi].
(Ibid., iv. 13.) He calls the Monas, vioirdropa. (Athanasius, " De
synodis," 16.) II *

I48 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
repose to creative activity, while the Son has His
part only in the world already created, and after the
commencement of human history.* This deviation
from the received language of the Church attaching
a new sense to consecrated words, did much to bring
obscurity upon the system of Sabellius, which in a
constructive point of view was singularly clear. He
compares the three modes of divine action sometimes
to the sun, which is at once the focus of light, the
beam which irradiates, and the flame which warms ;t
sometimes to the faculties of the human soul, some
times to the divine gifts of the Holy Spirit.:]: The
primeval and eternal Monas lives again entirely in
its various manifestations. Each of these returns
to its source and is there absorbed, just as the solar
ray returns to its focus. God revealed Himself as
the Father in the giving of the law; this is the
period of the Old Covenant. He revealed Himself
as the Son in the incarnation of Jesus, in whom all
His fulness dwells. Lastly, He reveals Himself as
the Spirit in the illumination of the Apostles and of
the Church. § His manifestation as the Father ended
* The distinction between the Word and the Son appears^
already in this passage of Athanasius : *a<ri p,r) el.pija9ai Iv ry iraXaiq
•KBpi viov dXXd irtpi Xoyov, Kai Sid tovto VBtitTBpov vttovouv tov Xoyov tov
viov SiatetaiovvTai. (Athanasius, " Contra Arian.," iv. 22.) " They
say that the Son is not spoken of in the Old Testament, but only
the Word. Hence the Son is, according to them, posterior to the
Word." Athanasius says plainly that Sabellius dared to dis
tinguish the Son from the Word : ToXpwv Siaipiiv Xoyov Kai viov.
(Athanasius, "De synodis.," 15.) f Epiphanius, "Hasres.," 62.
X "Q<77rfp Siaipkaug xapiapdnDv. (Athanasius, " Contra Arian.," iv.
25-) § Kai iv piv ry iraXaiq wc iraTBpa vopoQeTijoai, Iv Ty~ Kaivy wg viov
lvav9pu)iri)oai, uig irvtufia Si liyiov roXg diroaroXoig lm<j>oirijcrai. (Theodoret,
" Hasretic fabul.," ii. 9.)

BOOK I. — THE FIRST UNITARIANS. I49
with the Old Testament, otherwise He would not
have been fully manifested in the Son. It follows
that the incarnation was itself but a temporary fact,
which ceased so soon as its end was attained. The
Christ-God has not retained any distinct personality.
Sabellius, therefore, falls as far short as Ebionitism
of the recognition of His true dignity. The Holy
Spirit, who is the existing form of the divine operation
in the world, and who is the soul of the present
economy, will be in the same manner reabsorbed in the
primeval Monas; and with Him, it seems, all finite
existence will cease. Although Sabellius does not
express himself clearly upon this point, it is so fully in
harmony with the logic of his system, that we may
regard it as established.* He appears to have very
slightly handled the doctrine of sin and of redemp
tion. Evidently, in his view, salvation is absorption
in God; redemption is a mere cosmological develop
ment ; religious history is the history of the Deity
Himself, and not the relations of the created with
the Creator. Sabellianism is, on this point, entirely
in accordance with oriental religious and gnostic
doctrines. The drama of the universe has but one
sole actor — the transcendent, infinite, impersonal God
— who by the expansion of His own being produces
the world, and annihilates it by a corresponding pro-
* According to Epiphanius, the Son is reabsorbed in the
primeval Monas so soon as the work of redemption is achieved.
Hence it may be concluded that the Holy Spirit and the mode of
existence which He represents will terminate in the same way.
(See Epiphanius, " Hasres.," 62.) Moreover, Athanasius tells us
that Sabellius taught formally the extinction in God of the crea
tion : "Oo-irep yap Sid to Kriaai iTrXaTvv9rf, ovrui ¦wavopkvov tov TrXarvapov
-iravatrai Kai y Knaig. (Athanasius, " Contra Arian.," iv. 13.)

150 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
cess of contraction. Only Sabellius, warned by the
condemnation of the Gnostics, speaks in guarded
language, and endeavours as far as possible to bring
his doctrine into conformity with the formulas of the
Church, which is at this time beginning to accept
Trinitarian ideas.
Let us remark, in closing this chapter, that Uni-
tarianism pursued the same course as Ebionitism,
and proved itself equally incapable of adhering to an
abstract deism. The yearning after a living God is
so deep and ardent in the human soul, that when
it sees upon the throne of heaven only a distant
Deity, who is nothing more than a cold idea, it falls
inevitably — or rather, it flings itself instinctively — into
the arms of a pantheism more or less subtle or
materialistic. This tendency is especially irresistible
when the general current of the reigning philosophy
is in that direction, as in the age of Neo-Platonism
and Gnosticism. In fine, the heresy most fraught
with peril at this time for Christian theology was
naturalistic speculation, the heir of ancient Paganism.

CHAPTER VI.
THE APOCRYPHAL LITERATURE OF THE SECOND AND
THIRD CENTURIES, AND ITS INFLUENCE UPON THE
FORMATION OF ORAL TRADITION.
Beside the writings in which the principal heretics
formulated their systems, we have, in the second and
third centuries, a whole fictitious sacred literature,
which shelters under the most revered names of pri
mitive Christianity the favourite ideas of Gnosticism,
or the legends created by the popular imagination.
The "Clementines" form a sort of intermediary link
between the exposition of the heretical systems and
the apocryphal legends, for they present the most
singular blending of dialectic treatises with arbitrarily
invented fables. They make no pretension to add to
the sacred books ; the work is a mere romance, em
bodying the views of a certain school. It is otherwise
with the apocryphal literature, which advances positive
claims to form part of primitive revelation. In spite
of its intellectual poverty, barely concealed beneath
the brilliant mantle of legendary inventions, this litera
ture possesses no small interest for us. In the first
place, it was the most rapid vehicle of heresy. Again,
it enables us to trace, with some degree of certainty,
in the Church itself, the current of popular tradition,

152 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
and to recognise what were the elements it carried
along in its course, and what was its own bent and
tendency. A very inadequate notion will be formed
of the movement of religious ideas in any age, if it
is regarded only in its highest achievements, and
studied only in the profound works of illustrious
teachers. We need to know also how these great
truths present themselves to the masses of the people,
and what form they assume in their receptive and
somewhat sensuous imagination. Numberless super
stitions, like parasitic plants, quickly overspread the
vigorous stem of revelation. In their unhealthy bril
liance, they remind one of the luxuriant tropical
creepers of Indian forests, and they exhale indeed
the same atmosphere; for in the early ages of Chris
tianity it was always from the far East that those
influences were derived which tended most largely
to sophisticate the faith of the gospel.
That which is most strange, is the ascendency
gradually obtained by this popular superstition. At
first it excited only contempt, and was even formally
anathematized. Nevertheless, it won its way into the
minds of men, and went on circulating noiselessly
among the lower classes, who never trouble themselves
about the controversies of the schools, till it acquired
a moral authority which makes it an important ele
ment in the Church's history. That which is pro
scribed and denounced as superstition in one century
often becomes the authorised doctrine of another, and
its circulation is not only suffered, but sanctioned. The
doctors of these changed times find excellent reasons
for its adoption, and frame for it an illustrious pedigree,

BOOK I. — THE APOCRYPHAL LITERATURE. 153
as a heraldic emblem is made to cover some flaw in a
title of nobility. Popular tradition is like the persistent
waves, which, by their ceaseless breaking on the shore,
gradually change its form under their slow but resistless
action. In the same manner has tradition wrought
imperceptibly upon the solid strata of the Christian
religion, and it is at its hand we must seek the ex
planation of the great changes we shall observe in the
doctrine and morality of Christianity from age to age.
It is important, then, to trace the singular and often
utterly strange forms assumed by Christian facts and
ideas in the numerous apocryphal writings which
critical science has placed at our disposal.
Apocryphal literature divides itself into two branches,
the one decidedly heretical, the other only legendary
in its origin ; though heresy has made many attempts
to engraft itself upon it, and has modified it to suit
its own purposes.
The writings which belong to the first class have
almost all disappeared ; they have followed the fortune
of an exploded and vanished theory. On the other
hand, the greater part of the apocryphal writings, which
are only legendary, not having excited such keen oppo
sition, have survived : they were the favourite reading
of the simple and the ignorant, and they have been
preserved with the tenacity inherent in all truly popular
literature. § I. Apocryphal Writings positively Heretical.
Mention is made of a number of Gospels attributed
to the heretics. No one of these has come down to
us in its integrity. The fragmentary quotations of these

154 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
Gospels, scattered through the writings of the Fathers,
suffice to make us acquainted with their general cha
racter. They are almost all derived from a primitive
type, which they have altered or overlaid according
to their several systems. The Gospel of Matthew has
been most largely manipulated by Juda^o-Christians
of every shade of opinion, and these amended versions
have been distinguished by various names. The so-
called Gospel of the Hebrews, spoken of by Clement of
Alexandria, Origen, Eusebius, and Jerome, is the most
important of these versions. * It was written in the
Aramean tongue : the Nazarenes and Ebionites made
use of it exclusively. t It may possibly have undergone
some modifications in passing from the one to the other
sect. In any case, a comparison of this Gospel of the
Hebrews with our first Gospel is fully sufficient to
show that it has none of the characters of an original
writing.! The narrative is overlaid with legendary
incidents. § It is sometimes corrected, with the evident
* Hegesippus apud Eusebius, " H. E.," iv. 22 ; Eusebius, " H. E.,"
iii. 25, 27 ; Clement of Alexandria, " Strom.," ii. 9, 45 ; Origen,
" In Joann.," ii. 6 (voL iv. 63). " Quod Chaldaico quidem Syroque
sermone sed Hebraicis litteris scriptum est" (Saint Jerome, " Adv.
Pelag.," lib. iii. c 1.) See on this question of the apocryphal
Gospels, M. Nicolas' book. (Michel Le"vy.)
f There is no ground for making a distinction, as M. Nicolas
does (" Evangiles apocryphes," p. 60), between the Gospel of the
Hebrews and that of the Nazarenes, when it is once admitted that
the former underwent some changes in passing from one sect to
the other. The Gospel of the twelve apostles (Origen " Homil. i. in
Luke") is identical with the Gospel of the Hebrews.
X M. Nicolas maintains the contrary opinion. We do not think
that he says anything to contravene the strong reasoning of Bleck
in his Introduction to the New Testament (p. 106, and following).
§ We may mention the incident quoted by Origen, that the
Holy Spirit transported Jesus on to Mount Tabor by lifting Him

BOOK I. — THE APOCRYPHAL LITERATURE. 155
intention of getting rid of a chronological difficulty.*
Both the additions and suppressions by which the
canonical text is modified, bear the impress of a pre
conceived system. The suppression of the first two
chapters, which contain the account of the miraculous
conception, is characteristic of the school which would
not acknowledge the eternal Godhead of Jesus. t For
the same reason, the Gospel of the Hebrews, on the
occasion of the baptism of Jesus, puts into the mouth
of the Father the words, " To-day have I begotten
Thee." The place given to this text in such a con
nection was evidently designed to confirm the idea that
the divinity of Christ dated from His solemn conse
cration by the Baptist.! The influence of Gnostic
or Essenian Ebionitism is easy to discern in the
curious passage in which the Spirit is spoken of as
the mother of Jesus. § Undoubtedly we have here that
by one hair of His head (Origen, " In Joann.," vol. ii. ch. 6). The
Gospel of the Hebrews "sometimes combines also the Gospel of
Matthew with that of Luke. The fragment on the Resurrection,
quoted in the Epistle of Ignatius to the Smyrneans (c. 3), is an
imitation of Luke xxiv. 39.
* The Gospel of the Hebrews does away with the great difficulty
relating to Zachariah, whom our Matthew erroneously calls the son
of Barachia or Baruch (Matt, xxiii. 35), while he was in truth the
son of Jehoiada. He is so spoken of in the apocryphal Gospel
(Jerome, "Comm. in Matt.," xxiii. 35). We have another clear
proof that the apocryphal Gospel is subsequent to our Greek Gospel.
It mentions that John the Baptist's food in the wilderness was
cakes of honey, not locusts. (Epiphanius " Hasres.," xxx. 13.)
Evidently the interpolater read in Matt. iii. 4, lyKpiStg instead of
dKpiStg. This confusion of words implies the antecedence of the
Greek to that of the first Gospel.
t Epiphanius, " Hasres.," xxx. 14.
! Ibid., xxx. 13.
§ "Apn tXa€k pe r) pffTrfp pov to uyiov Trvtvpa. (Origen, " Homil.
xv. in Jeremiah," 4, vol. iii. 224.)

156 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
eternal female element which formed part of the
primordial duality of the Elkasaites, and which they
likened to the Holy Spirit. The Gospel of the
Hebrews considerably modifies the declaration which
at the commencement of the Sermon on the Mount
asserts the permanence of the law of the prophets.
It makes Christ say : " I am come to abrogate the
sacrifices,"* thus sanctioning one of the most important
innovations of Gnostic Judaism, which insisted on the
abolition of the sacrifices of blood. At the time of
instituting the Lord's Supper, Jesus, according to this
same Gospel, pronounced these words : " Have I then
indeed desired to eat with you the flesh of the paschal
lamb." I Here we note the strong antipathy of the
Essenian Ebionites to all animal food. Clearly a very
definite system can be traced through all these emen
dations of the Gospel history.
The modifications are still more considerable in
the " Gospel of the Egyptians," which appears to
have been in the same manner based upon the
Gospel of Matthew!. This is known to us chiefly
through Clement of Alexandria, and by the second
(apocryphal) letter of Clement of Rome. The passages
which have been preserved have an odour of ascetic
theosophy which cannot be mistaken, in spite of the
effort made by Clement of Alexandria to construe them
in an orthodox sense. Let us cite the leading passages.
"The Lord replied to one who asked Him when
His kingdom should come, ' It shall come when two
shall be one ; when the external shall be identified with
* Epiphanius, " Hasres.," xxx. 16. f Ibid., xxx. 22.
J Ibid., Ixii. ; Origen, " Homil. i. in Luke."

BOOK I. — THE APOCRYPHAL LITERATURE. 157
the internal, and the male with the female, so that
there shall be neither male nor female.' "* The allu
sion here is clearly to the suppression of all dis
tinction between the body and soul ; the body is
that which is external, the soul that which is internal.
We know also that in the symbolic language of
Gnosticism, the material element is represented by
the feminine, and the spiritual by the masculine.
Clement of Alexandria thus supplemented this strange
text : "It shall come when you shall have thrown
off the garb of modesty." t The garments of skins
in which God clothed Adam and Eve in Eden, to
hide their nakedness, were likened to the body by
all the Jewish theosophists. Matter, corporeality, is
then to be dissolved, in order that the kingdom of
Jesus may be set up. The same idea underlies another
passage, not less enigmatical. " When Salome asked
the Lord how long death should reign, ' It shall
reign,' He replied, ' so long as you women bring
forth children.' ' I rejoice, then,' said Salome, ' never
to have brought forth.' The Lord replied, ' Eat of
every herb, but take not that which is bitter.' " J
The bitter herb which produces death is evidently
marriage. There can be no doubt that this is the
meaning of this injunction, when we compare it
with another saying ascribed to Jesus : " I am come
to destroy the work of the woman." § The woman is
that earthly Eve who in Gnosticism represents the
* "Orav ykvrjTai rd Svo iv Kai to dppev perd rrjg 9tXeiag. (Clement,
" Strom.," iii. 13, 92.) Clement of Rome, 2nd ep., ch. cxcii.)
t "Orav to rrjg aiaxvvrfg ivSvpa itarr\aBTB. (" Strom.," iii. 13, 92.)
M. Nicolas' interpretation is conclusive on this point.
X Clement of Alexandria, " Strom.," iii. 6, 45. § Ibid., iii. 9, 63.

158 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
material element, that seductive maid of Indian fables
who encompasses the soul and consumes the life of
the spirit. The Gospel of the Egyptians was rightly
named, for the land of Egypt, close to the syna
gogue where Philo had taught, was the fitting birth
place for this hybrid product of modified Judseo-
Christianity and modified Gnosticism. We hear again
of a Gospel of Peter, of which the only known spe
ciality was its supposition of a previous marriage of
Joseph, the offspring of which were the brothers and
sisters of the Lord. This tradition was designed to
guarantee the perpetual virginity of Mary, and to place
her outside the pale of the ordinary conditions of hu
manity.* The Gospel of Peter was another version of
that of Matthew. The " Preaching of Peter," of which
so much is said in the " Clementines," was probably a
legendary account of the controversies between Peter
and Simon Magus. This is very apparent from the
analysis given of it in the " Recognitions." t The
Gnostics, properly so called, have not failed to
mutilate at pleasure the sacred writings. Basilides
had contented himself with writing a commentary,
for it is false to accuse him of having sought to
make a gospel of his own. ! The Valentinians and
Manichseans were less scrupulous. They boldly com
posed gospels, making use of the narratives of Luke
and John, which they completely remoulded. The
Fathers refer to a gospel, called the gospel of truih,%
* Eusebuis, " H. E.," vi. 12. Serapion, bishop of Antioch in 170,
had found it in use in the Church of Rhossus in Cilicia. He at
once perceived that it favoured docetism.
t "Recognitions," vol. iii. c. 75. J Origen, "Preface to Luke."
§ Irenasus, "Adv. hasres.," iii. 11.

BOOK I. — THE APOCRYPHAL LITERATURE. I50.
in which Valentine embodied the most absolute
pantheism, as may be gathered from this fragment :
" I halted upon a high mountain, and heard a voice
like thunder saying to me, ' I am thou, and thou
art I ; wherever thou art. I am. I am shed abroad
in all.'"* We may further mention the ^ns/v' of per-
feeiicn. as it was called, and " the Great and Small
Interrogatories of Mary." Lastly, also, the gospel
ascribed to Philip. All these writings had the same
pantheistic basis: the theme was only varied by the
diversity of the symbols, which were often obscure.
The following fragment from the so-called Gospel
of Philip seems to allude to the rites of initiation
in some Valentinian sect : " The Lord has revealed
that which the soul ought to say when it rises to
the heavens, and how it ought to reply to the celestial
powers. " I have come to know myself," it shall say.
* I have not engendered sons of Archon. but I have torn
up my roots and gathered together my scattered mem
bers, and I have learned to know what thou art.'"t
These words ascribe salvation to knowledge and
asceticism. In them is a remembrance of the famous
mysteries of Bacchus, in which the torn members of
the young god represented the dispersion of beings
at the moment of creation, while the resurrection
symbolised the universal palingenesis by the return
to unity.
The Gospel of Marcion is simply an expurgated
edition of the Gospel of Luke. All the narratives.
all the words even, which might in any degree favour
Judaism, are omitted. The question of authenticity
* Epiphanius. " H.vres.." \\vi. 3. f Ibid., xxvi. 13.

l6o THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
is completely merged in that of doctrine : it is the
most arbitrary, the most audaciously subjective criti
cism that could be conceived. The first two chapters
of the third gospel are omitted. Marcion sets aside
the account of the baptism of Jesus, of His temp
tations, His genealogy, and a multitude of sayings
which refer to the bond between the two covenants,
and represent the manifestation of Jesus as the ful
filment of prophecy. The parable of the vine, which
speaks of the prophets as the precursors of the Son;
the teaching which ascribes to divine justice the falling
of the Tower of Siloam ; the triumphal entry into
Jerusalem ; the agony in Gethsemane, and the Ascen
sion ; all these are rejected for preconceived reasons.
The same system of elimination is applied to points
of detail. Thus, Marcion will not recognise the appeal
of Jesus to the example of Jonas and of the Queen
of Sheba (Luke xi. 30-33) ; or His words reproaching
the Jews with having shed the blood of the prophets
(xi. 47) ; or His invocation of the testimony of Moses
to the resurrection of the dead (xx. 37) ; or His allu
sions to the Passover (xxii. 15, 16) ; or to the twelve
tribes of Israel (xxii. 30). He would also, without
scruple, entirely change anything that was offensive to
him in the fragments preserved. He modified in the
following manner the declarations of the Lord as
to the immutability of the law (Luke xvi. 17) :
" Heaven and earth shall pass away, as shall also the
law and the prophets, but not one jot or tittle of my
words shall fail." These examples suffice to justify
Tertullian's assertion with regard to Marcion : " He
suppressed all that was contrary to his opinion, and

BOOK I. — THE APOCRYPHAL LITERATURE. l6l
retained only that which was in harmony with it."
If he did not always succeed in logically carrying
out his idea, this slight inconsistency in no way
affects the general and dominant fact.*
The apocryphal gospels which we have just men
tioned were for the most part simply falsifications of
our canonical gospels. Like the false colours with
which some master-pieces of painting have been over
laid, they were quickly to disappear under the influence
of time. The productions of heresy, which were not
mere parasitic overgrowths, were to be more durable.
The creation offered more resistance to the destroy
ing hand of time when the canvas had been care
fully fabricated as well as the design upon it.t We
have in this class first a curious gospel ascribed to
Thomas, which is based entirely on the docetist
stand-point.! It treats of the childhood of Jesus,
and so piles up prodigies in that period of His life,
that it is altogether withdrawn from the laws of
gradual and truly human development. The child
* All the fragments of the Gospel of Marcion are found collected
in De Wette's " Introduction to the New Testament." See Bleck's
treatment of the same subject ("Einlant. in N. T.," p. 122 and
following). M. Nicolas (" Evan, apocr.," p. 147 and following)
concludes, as we think, erroneously, from some inconsistencies of
Marcion, that he did not change the Gospel of Luke to suit his
own school.
f For the apocryphal gospels, the reader is referred to the
collection published by Tischendorf (" Evang. apocryph.," Leipzig,
1853). See also Thilo, " Codex apocryph. N. T.," Leipzig, 1832.
X The antiquity of the Gospel of Thomas is beyond question.
It is mentioned in Irenasus, " Adv. Hasres.," i. 17. See Origen,
" Homil. I. in Lucam." "Scio evangelium quod appellatur secun
dum Thomam." See also " Phil.," vol. vii. p. 141. We cite this
Gospel according to Tischendorf ("Evang. apocryph.," Leipzig,
1853): He gives three manuscripts — two Greek and one Latin.
12

1 62 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
Jesus is a sort of capricious and all-powerful genius,
who deals with matter as He will, and multiplies
miracles to gratify His anger or His fancy. For ex
ample, He gives life to little clay figures of birds
which He has amused Himself by making, and they
take wing and fly away. He destroys as easily as
He creates. A child falls down stark dead, because
he has jumped upon Christ's shoulders. Another
turns aside the little water channels which Jesus
has been hollowing out in play, and his hand is at
once dried up in punishment of his daring. These
chastisements again call for fresh miracles, for Jesus
consents to undo the work of His own revenge, and
raises to life again those whom He had killed. His
chief characteristic is an implacable spirit. Thus
the inhabitants of Nazareth come to Joseph and
say : — " With such a child, thou canst' not dwell in
the same town with us, unless thou teach Him to
bless instead of cursing, for he slays our children."*
This not unreasonable remonstrance is roughly re
buked. The miraculous power of the Divine child
is displayed on the most trifling occasions. If He
goes to draw water for His mother, He brings it back
in the skirt of His garment. He has no need of
tools in order to plane the planks of which a yoke
is to be made in Joseph's workshop ; and when He
sows His father's field, the crop is so abundant that
He can feed all the poor of the place. But the
prodigy most insisted on in the Gospel of Thomas
is the marvellous wisdom of the child, who instructs
* Si toiovtov waiSiov eywv ou Sivaaai ptff r)pwv oikcXv. ("Evang.
Thomas.," A, c. 4.)

BOOK I. — THE APOCRYPHAL LITERATURE. 163
all his masters, and chastises them without mercy,
when they do not yield to Him. Thus is formed
in the popular legend the notion of a terrible child-
Christ, whom none but His mother can appease.
The first of His masters is called Zaccheus. He is
anxious to teach the boy all that childhood should
know, and seeks to instil, as his first lesson,
respect for old age. But the result proves that it
is he who needs to be instructed. When the child
questions him upon the meaning of the first letter
of the alphabet, he is silent. " Thou knowest not
the nature of the Alpha," says Jesus to him,
"and how then canst thou teach others the Beta?"*
These words indicate to us the origin of this
gospel, for they betray the influence of the famous
Gnostic Marcus. It is known that he based his
incoherent system on a symbolical explanation of
the letters of the alphabet. Nothing could more
favour the development of the chimeras of Gnosti
cism than this atmosphere of the pseudo-marvellous,
which took away from the childhood of Jesus all
human reality, and made him descend from Heaven
as a pure ray of light and power enshrouded in an
earthly form. Beholding His miracles, the inhabi
tants of Nazareth exclaim : " This child is not
made like one of us, for He can subdue even fire.
He was before the creation of the world. What
sublime being is He then ? a God or an angel ? He
is a heavenly child. Whence is it that every word
spoken by Him becomes at once an act ?"f
* Sv to dXipa py dStbg Kard tyvaiv, to (3r}ra nwg dXXovg SiSaOKBig.
(" Evang. Thomas.," A, c. 6.)
+ Oirog n piya iariv r) dyytXog. (Ibid., A, C. 7.)
12 *

164 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
We find in the title of one of the editions of this
curious writing this very significant saying : " As Jesus
was in his body at Nazareth."* This is pure docetism.
Heresy has found a still more congenial soil in
the legendary accounts of the apostles than in the
apocryphal gospels. The substance of these narra
tives was in existence antecedently to heresy, and
co-ordinately with it, as we may know from the
" Apostolic Acts," the falsification of which cannot
be laid to its account. It is even probable that
it has only added a few bold touches. Chris
tian antiquity charged these falsifications on a
Gnostic named Lucius Charinus, who lived on the
borders of the second or third century, but whose
particular school of doctrine is unknown.! The
falsifications for which he is held responsible can
not be all from his hand. Grave and numerous as
they were, and condemned officially by the Church,
they nevertheless exercised a great influence upon
it, silently preparing the way for the triumph of
more than one error and superstition. The "Apos
tolic Acts " most obviously accepted, or modified by
the Gnostic and Manichasan heresies, were "The
Acts of Andrew and Matthew," " The Martyrdom
of Matthew, and " The Acts of Thomas." The first-
named do not bear the impress of any particular
system ; they belong rather to the category of popular
* ' ' Avaorpttpoptvog auiparucug iv ttoXei >~o£apfr. (" Evang. Thomas,"
B, 1.)
t In actibus conscriptis a Leucio. August. " De Actis cum
Felice Manich.," ii. 6. Photius, " Bibliotheca. Codex.," 1 14. On
the great number of these apocryphal acts, see Eusebius, " H. E.,"
iii. 25 ; Epiphanius, " Hasres.," 61. We quote from Tischendorf,
" Acta apostol. apocrypha." 1S51.

BOOK I. — THE APOCRYPHAL LITERATURE. 165
legends, which have contributed directly to the for
mation of oral tradition. " The Acts of Andrew and
of Matthew " turn on the mission of these two
apostles among the " Anthropophagi."* The narra
tive, which is a tissue of gross fables, concludes
with the description of the martyrdom of Andrew,
tortured at once by demons and Anthropophagi,
who finally decapitate him. Every bleeding shred
of his flesh becomes a living tree. The murder
ous city is engulfed in floods of water, and is only
saved by a speedy repentance. Andrew raises the
dead and builds a temple on this inhospitable shore.
Among other strange miracles, it is recorded that
the very sphinxes poured forth from their stony
mouths anthems of praise to Christ. That which
is more serious in this ridiculous writing, and that
which gained it so much favour among the Gnostics,
was its account of the manifold transformations of
Jesus, who appears now under the form of a ship's
captain, to command Andrew to rejoin Matthew,
now under the form of a little child.t His incar
nation is thus placed on a par with the fanciful
metamorphoses of Indian mythology, which all tend
to sustain docetism. " The Martyrdom of Matthew "
presents the same characteristics, only more pro-
nounced.J Jesus Christ appears to His apostle as
* The "Acts of Andrew and Matthew" belong to the same
period as those of Andrew, mentioned by Eusebius and Epiphanius
("loc cit"). The Gnostics and the Manichasans made use
of them.
\ ~"&v iiawep dv9punrog irpuptig. (" Acts of Andrew and Mat
thew," c. 5.)
! The "Acts and Martyrdom of Matthew" are the continua
tion of the " Acts of Andrew and Matthew."

l66 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
an angel from Paradise, and speaks to him in the
language of very decided Gnosticism, with a voice
soft as the myrrh of love. " I am," he says, " Para
dise, the Paraclete, the representative of the heavenly
powers, the strength of men of chastity, the crown
of virgins, the foundation of the Church."* Trans
cendent asceticism is thus glorified with a mys
tical exaltation. Matthew lives by mortification;
he fasts during forty days before setting forth on
his mission, which is to plant the tree of life in
the city of the Anthropophagi. These savages have
no sooner eaten of it than they become civilized
and cover their nakedness; they are baptized in the
fountain which springs from the foot of the sacred
tree, around which cling the branches of a vine.
Clearly the whole narrative had a symbolic mean
ing. The martyrdom of Matthew, who falls a victim
to the wrath of the savage king, is described
with great detail. The fire which is to consume,
falls as dew over the apostle, but is transformed
into a furious dragon to devour his enemies. The
apostle succumbs in the end, but his body and his
garments are unharmed, and the sick who touch his
bed are healed. t
The " Acts of Thomas " transport us into that mys
terious land of India, to which Gnosticism was ever
drawn as to its cradle. J The preaching of the Apostle
Thomas there is indeed useless, for the Christianity
* 'H Svvapig riov dvio Svvaruiv iyto, b ariipavog riov tzap9'BvtiiV. (" Acts
and Martyrdom of Matthew," 2.)
f 'A\j/dpevoi povov rrjg KXivrfg InMr/rrav. (Ibid., 23.)
! Their antiquity is not questioned. (Eusebius, " H. E.," iii. 25 ;
Epiphanius, "Hasres.," 61.)

BOOK I. — THE APOCRYPHAL LITERATURE. 167
which he proclaims is worthy of the Brahmins and
the disciples of Buddah ; it is a stream which flows
back to its source. Thomas has received his mission
from Jesus Christ. Faithful to his character, he first
declines it through lack of faith, but afterwards sets
out disguised as a carpenter, having hired himself
to a servant of the king of the town of Gundaphora,
who is seeking workmen from all parts to build him
a palace. Thomas, as soon as he lands upon the
Indian continent, enters, with his companion, a town
where a feast is being held. It is the celebration of
the marriage of the king's daughter. According to
the customs of oriental hospitality, all who arrive are
bidden to the feast. Thomas refuses to conform to the
pagan customs of the country ; a servant strikes him
On the face, and is immediately after devoured by a
lion, when he goes to draw water from the stream. A
flute-player, a Jewess by birth, appears at the close
of the feast. She alone understands the symbolic
hymn sung by Thomas to the praise of the bride. The
young spouse is, in the eyes of the apostle, the per
sonification of that feminine element which plays so
important a part in the Gnostic systems, and which
is confounded in them with the Holy Spirit. He cele
brates her beauty in the strain of a hierophant, making
her the type of the mysteries of the Pleroma. He
compared the slopes of her neck to the lower steps of
the scale of emanations. Her two hands represent the
choir of happy .Eons. The number of the friends of
the bride and bridegroom has also a symbolic meaning,
recalling the use of the Hebdomas and Ogdoas in Gnos
ticism. Thomas sees, in their evolutions, the eternal

1 68 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
cycle of the Mons, when they drink the mystic wine
which quenches all thirst and hunger, and when they
celebrate the father of truth and the mother of
wisdom.* We must not expect to find in this song the pre
cision of a system, but its general tone is obviously
mystic. Thomas, solicited by the king to bless the
young pair upon the threshold of their nuptial cham
ber, preaches absolute asceticism to them in words
which are the echo of the Buddhist precepts. He
pronounces a woe upon marriage, which produces only
suffering, vice, and death ; and he persuades the young
man and woman to be content with a purely spiritual
union, t The next day the parents of the bride ask
her the reason of the joy which beams in her face.
" I have refused," she says, " the work of shame and
ignominy." The young man thanks Thomas for hav
ing revealed to him the mystery of his being, and
rendered him capable of becoming again what he was
before his descent into the region of matter and of
change. The king seeks out the fatal magician who
has turned the wedding feast for him into a bitter
mourning; but the apostle has already quitted this
barbarous shore. He soon reaches his destination,
and practises the severest asceticism, eating only rice
bread and drinking nothing but water.
Charged by the King of Gundaphora to build him
a palace, he receives for that purpose large sums of
gold and silver, but he hastens to distribute them
among the poor. When the king comes to inspect
* Tbv iraripa rr)g aXr)9iiag Kai rr)v ptfrkpa rrjg aoipiag. (" Acts of
Thomas," p. 7.)
t 'Edv diraXXayfiTt r!jg pvirapdg Koiviaviag ravrrfg. (Ibid. 12.)

BOOK I. — THE APOCRYPHAL LITERATURE. 169
the new building, he finds only the bare ground. " I
have built thy palace in heaven," says Thomas.* This
palace of charity seems to the king a poor substitute
for the pillars of marble and gold which he had thought
to dwell amongst. He casts the apostle into prison
till he shall ascertain whether this palace of charity
has any real existence. The soul of his brother appears
to him, to ask him for a place in the celestial mansion
to which the angels had carried him immediately after
his death. The king then understands that the
apostle had given him a dwelling far preferable to
that which he had desired. t Nothing could embody
more distinctly than this legend the idea of a purely
external method of salvation, since it was made the
reward of almsgiving that was not even intended. It
is on this very same principle that pious endowments
have been lavishly made by princes whose names
are sullied by the darkest crimes. It was convenient
to them to build a mansion in the heavens with the
fruit of their rapacious robberies on earth. In none
of the discourses of Thomas, moreover, do we find any
trace of the doctrine of redemption. The great essen
tial is a knowledge of the mysteries and the practice
of asceticism. Exaggerated importance is attached
to baptism and the anointing with oil. The baptismal
formula is modified to suit the Gnostic sense. The
apostle says to the neophyte : " May there come upon
thee the name of Christ, which is above every name ;
may there come upon thee the power of the Most High
and His perfect mercy ; may there come upon thee the
sublime anointing and the compassionate mother ;
* "Acts of Thomas," 20, 21. f Ibid., 23-25.

170 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
may there come upon thee the economy of the male,
the revelation of the hidden mysteries, the mother of
the seven abodes, who shall give thee the repose of
the eighth."* We trace here the syzygies or couples
of the emanation theory, the Hebdomas, the Ogdoas —
in a word, all the complicated and confused techni
calities of Gnosticism. The " Acts of Thomas " enrich
Christian mythology with a vast number of fanciful
prodigies wrought by the apostle : he seems to try
to rival the magicians of India. He interlards his
raisings of the dead with ascetic discourses, which
issue in the celebration of baptism according to the
rites of heresy. The Lord's Supper assumes the same
character. The stress laid upon the material element
is very significant. The bread of the Eucharist is
fashioned into the form of a cross.! The baptismal
water is impregnated with a Divine virtue, which im
parts to it a purifying influence. " Come," says the
apostle, " come, healing force, and dwell in these wa
ters, and let the anointing of the Holy Spirit be thus
realised in them."! The Holy Spirit is always likened
to the feminine element ; it is the mystic dove, which
brings rest to the soul by the revelation of the great
mysteries. The abode of the dead is described by one
raised from the grave in the most gloomy colours. The
account of the death of the apostle is treated in that
symbolic manner which found so much favour with
the Gnostics. The four soldiers who led him to his
* 'EX91 r) prfrnp r) ivoTrXayxyog' iX9i r) ohovopia tov dpvevog' iX9i r)
ra pvarfipia drroKaXvirTOvaa rd AiroKpvipa. (" Acts of Thomas.," 27.)
f AieXaPa& T(& dpnp rbv aravpov. (Ibid., 47.)
X 'H Svpapig rijc awrrfp'iag iX9i Kai rrKrjvbjaov iv roig vSaai rovroig, 'iva
rb xa)0i<r/ia tov dyiov irvtvparog reXtiiag iv airoXg TeXeii»9y. (Ibid., 49.)

BOOK I. — THE APOCRYPHAL LITERATURE. 171
torture are compared to the four elements.* The dust
in which his body is laid works great miracles.! This
curious writing shows us Gnostic heresy emerging
from the clouds of metaphysics, and endeavouring to
arrive at a tangible and attractive form for diseased
imaginations. Heresy did not fail to invent revelations, of which
it made Adam,]: Abraham, or Elijah to be the
medium. It also assigned some of its prophetic wri
tings to Zoroaster.§ The names only of these apoca
lypses have come down to us. Mention is further made
of an Apocalypse of Cerinthus.|| Lastly, we may cite a
kind of half Jewish, half Gnostic apocalypse, entitled
"The Rapture of Isaiah, "1[ and composed of several
parts, of which the dates vary. The oldest portion
treats of the vision with which the prophet was
honoured in the presence of King Hezekiah. The
glory of heaven is suddenly revealed to him ; he falls
* " Consummatio Thomas," 6. j- Ibid., 11.
! Epiphanius, " Hasres.," xxvi. 8, 6 ; xxxix. 5, 7.
§ Porphyry, " Vita Plotini," 16. || Eusebius, " H. E.," iii. 28.
IT The title of this curious apocalypse is 'Avataruntf opamg 'Ruaioy.
It consists of two distinct parts, of which the first (chap. i. to v.) is
the least ancient ; for the state of the Church therein referred to
only existed subsequent to the Council of Nice. It comprehends
the narrative of the appearing of Isaiah at the court of Hezekiah,
to denounce the impiety of Manasseh, and then records the perse
cution of which he is the object, and his martyrdom. This frag
ment is probably based on a Jewish apocryphal writing. The
second part, the Latin translation of which was found in Venice by
Cardinal Mai, relates the translation of Isaiah into heaven. It
clearly shows the influence of Gnosticism. Epiphanius refers to it
[" Hasres.," xl. 2). See also Origen (" Homil. i. in Isaiah," 5).
The second fragment dates from the third century. The entire
work, discovered in Ethiopian, was translated into English, and
published by Laurence (1829). See Lucke "Offenbar. des Johann,"
i. p. 274 and following.

172 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
speechless and overwhelmed before the splendours of
the Invisible. He traverses the seven heavens which
are above the earth. With the exception of the first,
which is Hades, and the last, which is the abode of
the Most High, they all present the same spectacle.
In the centre is a throne, on which an archangel is
seated, and on either side the angels stand in pairs,
an arrangement which recalls at once the Valentinian
Syzygies. In the seventh heaven God dwells with
His well-beloved Son and with the Holy Spirit.
He gives His Son the command to pass through all
the heavens, assuming in each the form of the angel
whose abode it is. Finally He is to appear on earth
in the form of a man, born of the Virgin Mary, there
to perform great miracles, to be rejected and crucified
by the Jews, then to return to the seventh heaven, and
sit down at the Father's right hand. This vision is evi
dently strongly tinged with docetism. The Christ does
not assume humanity in any more real sense than He
has assumed the nature of the angels in His successive
metamorphoses. The vision of Isaiah is preceded in
the Ethiopian book in which these fragments are
preserved, by an account of that which took place at
the court of Hezekiah when the prophet announced
to the king the shameful fall of his son Manasseh.
The pious monarch was only prevented from sacrificing
his successor by the intercessions of Isaiah. Never
theless, Manasseh vowed deadly hatred to the prophet ;
and on the instigation of the demon whom he obeyed,
he caused Isaiah to be seized upon the mountain of
Bethlehem, and commanded that he should be put to
death for his sinister predictions to Hezekiah of the

BOOK I. — THE APOCRYPHAL LITERATURE. 173
future of the world and of Manasseh himself. The
visions of the prophet contain an entire apocalypse,
which traces the ministry, the death, resurrection,
and glorious ascension of Jesus Christ, who is described
under the name of the well-beloved. The triumphs of
the apostolate are described at length ; they are to
be followed by a period of decadence in the Church ;
the Holy Spirit will depart, and there will be no more
faith in the sacred oracles. The demon will descend
from the firmament in the person of Nero, and will
receive as antichrist the adoration of the earth, till
the well-beloved shall descend from the seventh heaven
and destroy the empire of Satan. The reign of the
just and the last judgment are the conclusion of this
vision, which belongs evidently to the fourth century,
and does not come therefore within our limits.

§ II. The Apocrypha not positively heretical.
Let us give a rapid enumeration of the apocryphal
writings which hover between heresy and orthodoxy.
We have, in the first place, a very curious writing,
entitled " The Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs,"
which, in spite of its Judaeo-Christian character, does
not bear any of the marks of heresy.* The sons of
Jacob are shown us each on his death-bed, in the pro
phetic hour when the future unveils itself before the
gaze of the dying patriarch. Each of them in turn
* "The Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs" is found in the
" Spicilegium" of Grabe, vol. i. p. 145 and following. It dates from
the second century. Origen quotes it repeatedly. ("Comment, in
Genesis," ad cap. i. v. 14. Huet edition, vol. ii. p. 15.)

174 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
takes the last farewell of his children. All these dis
courses have a strong similarity, and pass from moral
exhortation to prophecy. These prophetic words all
have reference to the glorious descendant of the holy
race, to whom the world will owe its salvation. His
divinity, His oneness with God, are asserted with
perfect clearness. He is hailed as the offspring of '
Judah and Levi, the heir at once of the kingship
and the priesthood. " God," it is said, " will raise up
the priest in the tribe of Levi, the king in the tribe
of Judah. He will be at once God and man ; His
priesthood will be exercised in all nations, and will be
a new priesthood."* The idea of redemption is still
very vague in this writing, which confines itself tc
declaring that the wicked shall be stopped in theii
impiety, when the righteous shall rest in Christ.t It
presents none of the extravagances of the apocryphal
literature, though it bears a very decided impress of
asceticism. It does not merely forbid incontinence ; it
enjoins that a man should not touch a woman.!
It is curious to find in the "Testament of the Twelve
Patriarchs " the theocratic idea of the middle ages,
expressed in the very same terms employed by such
men as Gregory VII. and Innocent III. " The Lord,"
says Judah, " has given to me the kingdom, and to
Levi the priesthood, and He has placed the kingdom in
subjection to the priestly power. He has given to me
the things of earth, and to him the things of heaven.
As the heaven is higher than the earth, so the divine
* Hotlfou Updrciav viav. (Grabe, p. 164.)
f 01 dvopoi KaTarravoovrnv iig KaKa. 01 Si SiKaioi KaraTravaovaiv Iv
avnp. (Ibid., p. 172.)
X $vXd£ai rdg aia9r)attg dirb 7rd(7ijc 9riXciag. (Ibid., p. 151.)

BOOK I. — THE APOCRYPHAL LITERATURE. 175
priesthood is higher than the kinghood.* The "Testa
ment of the Twelve Patriarchs" proclaims the destruc
tion of Judaism, and in the end of time the triumphant
return of Christ, the universal resurrection, the con
demnation of the wicked, and the reign of the saints,
that is, of those who have been poor and afflicted in
this present life.t Although it draws its inspiration
from the book of Enoch, from which it makes many
quotations, it is free from the excesses of millenarian
materialism. The two oldest narratives of the Gospel history
belonging to the category of the apocrypha, and
not tainted with heresy, are the " Protevangel of
James"! and the "Acts of Pilate." The latter consists
of two distinct parts: the one treats of the scenes in the
pretorium, the other describes the descent of Jesus into
hell. These two parts do not bear the same date ; the
first is earlier than the second, though both belong to a
remote Christian antiquity. They were subsequently
put together under the name of the " Gospel of Nico
demus^ The "Protevangel of James" narrates the
circumstances which preceded the birth of Mary, the
• Grabe, p. 186. + Ibid., p. 188.
J Justin Martyr alludes to the "Protevangel of James" (" Dial.
cum Tryph.," c. 78): he has at least borrowed from it the incident of
the birth of Jesus in a cavern. Origen (in Matt. vol. x. 17, vol. iii.
462) actually mentions this apocrypha.
§The "Acts of Pilate" come before the "Descensus ad inferos."
The two writings are always separated in old MSS. The same
facts are differently narrated in them. Then the words of the thief
upon the cross are not the same in both. (Tischendorf, "Prole
gomena," p. 56.) The name of Nicodemus, given to the completion
of these two writings, dates from the middle ages. We have two
editions of the " Acts of Pilate." The first 'is the oldest. Justin
Martyr quotes from it directly. (" Apol.," i. 35 ; i. 48. See also Ter
tullian, "Apol.," 21.)

176 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
mother of Christ. The narrative is a parody on the
birth of John the Baptist. Joachim and Anna, two
pious Israelites advanced in years, are made, by the
special favour of God, fruitful in their hoar age.* This
miracle is the foreshadowing of the high destiny await
ing the child, who is none other-than Mary. She grows
up like a lily beneath the shadow of the altar, in the
midst of young companions pure as herself. She is the
favourite of the priests, who watch over her education
till the day of her marriage. In order to ascertain to
whom she is to be entrusted, the high priest assembles a
number of pious Israelites. A white dove springs from
the rod of the old carpenter Joseph, who is marked out
by this miraculous sign as the chaste guardian of the
young virgin, t The annunciation takes place as in the
Gospel. The circumstances of the birth of Christ are
borrowed from St. Luke, with this difference, that Mary
brings forth the divine Child in a cavern and not in a
stable. The sole design of the narrative is to give
emphasis to the dignity and virginity of Mary. We
have in it the first attempt to draw her out of the wise
obscurity in which she is enveloped in the canonical
Gospels, an attempt characterised by the asceticism
which pervades all the sacred legends.
The apocryphal Gospels of the following age, such as
the "Pseudo-Matthew;" the "Coptic Gospel of the
carpenter Joseph;" the "Arabic Gospel of the Child
hood of Mary," and lastly that of the Nativity, enlarge
upon those of the earlier period, and exalt more and
more the part assigned to the mother of Jesus. We
mention them only to show in what direction the
* " Protevang. Jacobi," c. 6. f Ibid., c. 9.

BOOK I. — THE APOCRYPHAL LITERATURE. 177
Christian legend was tending from its very first essay
in the "Protevangel of James."
The "Acts of Pilate" do not bear the stamp of any
particular school. The anonymous writers endeavour
to make the Jews, Christ's contemporaries, also His
apologists. His trial before the Roman proconsul is
expanded by the addition of a multitude of details.
The sick whom he has healed appear at the bar of the
tribunal, and one after another make their depositions
in His favour, relating what He has done for them.
His resurrection is afterwards established by the tes
timony of the soldiers placed as a guard around the
sepulchre, and further by the witness of Joseph of
Arimathea, to whom Christ appeared in the prison into
which the Jews had thrown him, and from which he
was delivered by miracle. This outline is filled up in
a very ingenious manner. It is just possible that some
true incidents of the trial of Jesus may have been pre
served by tradition, but it is impossible to distinguish
with any certainty the true from the false. Nicodemus
plays in all these scenes the part of the impartial judge
— the character assigned to him in the fourth Gospel.
The second part of this curious writing is occupied with
the events that took place in the abode of the dead,
during Christ's descent into it. This narrative is as
cribed to the two sons of the aged Simeon, who came
out of their tombs in the train of the risen Redeemer.
While hell and its king are confounded and crushed
beneath the foot of the Redeemer, the saints of the old
covenant hail Him with rapture ; each one of them,
from Adam to John the Baptist, recognising Him as
the long-expected object of their hope. The great pro-
13

178 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
phets repeat in His presence their most sublime oracles,
in order to show how in Him all are fulfilled. All the
scenes of the invisible world are described in strains of
glowing grandeur, almost Dantesque. The writing
closes with a juridical comparison made by Pilate be
tween the sacred writings of the Old Testament and
the events which have just taken place at Jerusalem.
This is the legal apology ; the question of Christianity
is debated after the fashion of an ordinary law case.
The legends relating to the apostles have obtained
no less credit in the Church than those bearing on the
life of Jesus. The "Acts of Peter and Paul" must
have been written shortly after the " Clementines," for
their object is to bring into prominence the radical
agreement between the two apostles, and their common
opposition to Simon Magus. Thus are exposed the
false inventions by which St. Paul had been identified
with Simon, and both sacrificed to Peter, for the honour
and glory of Essenian Judaso-Christianity.* Peter is
said to have preceded Paul to Rome. The latter was
on his way to the capital of the empire. There he
arrived, in spite of the prohibition which Nero had
issued in consequence of the intrigues of the Jews, who
had found an auxiliary in Simon Magus. The father
of heresy undertakes to confound the disciples of Christ
by his sorceries, and to demonstrate that he is the very
Son of God, the incarnation of truth. An imposing
spectacle is prepared. The magician causes a funeral
pile to be raised, from the top of which he promises to
rise into the arms of the angels. The emperor, who
* The "Acts of Peter and Paul" are quoted in Eusebius, "H.E.,"
iii. 3.

BOOK I. — THE APOCRYPHAL LITERATURE. 179
devoutly preaches brotherly love to the apostles and
Simon, presides on the occasion. It ends in the con
fusion of the impostor, who, by the aid of demons, does
indeed rise at first into the air, but is speedily preci
pitated to the earth at the word of Peter. Religious
truth is thus staked upon an idle prodigy. Everything
hinges on the marvellous ; he who can do the boldest
stroke is vindicated against his adversaries. The "Acts
of Peter and Paul" mark out Peter as the first of the
apostles.* The bread of the Eucharist is represented
in this work as possessing magical virtue, for it is
merely shown to the furious dogs let loose upon Peter by
Simon, and they are instantly tamed.t The writing
concludes with the martyrdom of Paul and of Peter. It
contains in its original form the beautiful legend of the
quo vadis, which we have already quoted in a previous
volume. The "Acts of Paul and Thekla" date from the
second century.! This is the romance of asceticism.
The apostle in the course of his missionary travels
arrives in Iconia, accompanied by Demas, who is
already playing the part of a traitor. Paul's appearance
is minutely described. He is low in stature, bald, and
bent : sadness is the prevailing expression of his fea
tures, though they are also full of a heavenly sweet
ness^ Like Thomas in India, he preaches asceticism.
"Happy," says he, "are they who have kept their body
undefiled." His gospel is called the gospel of vir-
* 'AStXipi Uirpov tov irpw-ou tuiv diroo-roXuiv. ("Acts of Peter and
Paul," c. 5.) f Ibid., c. 48.
! The "Acts of Paul and Thekla'' are quoted by Tertullian
(" De baptismo," 17). See St. Jerome, " De script, eccles.," c. 7.
§ Ibid., c. 2. 13 *

l80 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
ginity.* He makes Thekla, the daughter of his hosts, a
convert to his views. Dragged before the magistrates
by the father of the young Christian, he openly avows
his doctrine, and assigns a far more important place to
asceticism than to redemption in the work of Jesus
Christ. Compelled to evade punishment by a hasty
flight, he is soon joined in his retreat by Thekla, who
follows him "as a lamb follows the shepherd."? The
young girl is herself brought before the judges. Con
demned to be burned, the flames refuse to touch her.
Paul consents to baptise her. Again menaced at
Antioch, she finds shelter with a woman of the city,
who has seen in a dream the soul of her daughter ap
pearing to her, and asking her to protect the Christian
virgin, who, by her prayers, will bring her to heaven.!
Thus, according to this legend, the intercession of saints
opens the gates of Paradise. Thekla has other adven
tures no less marvellous. The fierce beasts to whom
she has been thrown come and lick her feet in the
circus ; and at Seleucia, where she lives as an anchorite,
a rock opens to hide her from the brutal attacks of
licentious pagans. Thekla is the anticipated glorifica
tion of conventual virginity.
The " Acts of Andrew " found much favour with the
heretics, § though they did not, any more than those
of which we have been speaking, owe their authorship
to them. They narrate the missions of the Apostle
* Maxdpioi ot dyvijv n)v adpKa rrfprfpavng. ("De Script, eccles.,"
C. 5-) Toy rrjg rrapOeviag Xoyov. (Ibid., 7.)
+ 'Qg dpvbg iv ipripip tov iroipkva. (The "Acts of Paul and
Thekla," 21.)
X "iva fCJijrat mpi ipov Kai ptTaTt9ui tig rbv tCiv Sixaitiiv roirov.
(Ibid., 28.)
§ Eusebius, " H. E.," iii. 25 ; Epiphanius, " Hasres," xlvii. 1.

BOOK I. — THE APOCRYPHAL LITERATURE. IOI
Andrew in the proconsulate of Achaia, and his appearing
before the pagan tribunal. Christianity assumes, undei
his presentation of it, a purely material guise. He
makes the cross of Calvary the material opposite to
the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, and is thus
led to speak of the cross in terms of the most abject
superstition.* When the apostle himself is crucified,
he addresses the instrument of his torture in the
language of ecstasy. " I hail thee, 0 cross !" he ex
claims, " thee whom the body of Christ has conse
crated, and whom His limbs adorned like precious
jewels ! I come to thee without fear, that thou mayest
receive me with joy, me, the disciple of the Crucified.
O blessed cross, on whom the wounded body of the
Lord has set such beauty, I have ardently desired and
earnestly sought thee. Receive me out of the throng of
men, and present me to thy Master, so that through thee,
He who has purified may take me to Himself !"t The
sacrament of the Lord's Supper is also represented
in such a manner as to foster the growth of all later
superstitions. " Every day," says Andrew, " I offer
a sacrifice, but no more with the smoke of incense
and the blood of slain bulls or goats. No. I offer day
by day the spotless Lamb upon the altar of the cross.
His body is truly eaten and His blood truly drunk by
His people."! Andrew dies, like Stephen, in a holy
ecstasy. His ashes are carefully gathered up, while
the proconsul who has condemned him to death is
cast down from the top of a rock.
* "Acts of Andrew," chap. v. f Ibid., chap. x.
X "Apiopoi' dpvbv Kaff iKdtmjv i)pkpav iv rip 9vo'iatmjpiip rov arcaipov
iepovpyuiv, dXi}9uig to Ptxtpa avror rrapd rov Xaov fiiGpto&Ktrai Kai rb alpa
avroio bpoiiog irifirai. (Ibid., chap, vi.)

182 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
The " Acts of St. John " bear probably the same
date as those of Andrew.* They place before us the
Emperor Domitian, who, on the denunciation of the
Jews, opens the fire of persecution upon the Christians.
Having heard that John proclaimed the end of the
Roman empire and the inauguration of a new reign,
he sought him out at Ephesus. His inquiries only
elicited a repetition of his prophecies as to the coming
of the Saviour. To accredit his oracles, the apostle
drinks a cup of mortal poison and feels no ill effects :
a like potion kills, before the eyes of the emperor,
another unhappy man, whom John at once restores
to life. John is banished to Patmos, whence he returns
to Ephesus before his death, and commits the charge
of his church to Polycarp. The divinity of Christ
occupies a large place in his last discourses. Asceti
cism is also highly exalted. The dying apostle lays
•himself down in his tomb, from which there springs
a fountain of living water, the faithful figure of the
immortal youth of his teaching, t We may cite, last
of all, the " Acts of Thaddeus," which bear a strong
Jewish impress. They contain the letter in which
Abgar, King of Edessa, asks Jesus to cure him of a
mortal malady. Eusebius gives, in his history, a
similar letter, with the supposed reply of Jesus Christ. J
The tradition which forms the basis of the "Acts
* Eusebius, "H.E.," iii. 25 ; Epiphanius, "Hasres.," xlvii. 1.
t " Acts of John," chap. xxii. The other apocryphal " Acts,"
published by Tischendorf, do not belong to the period before us.
Neither the " Acts of Barnabas " nor those of Philip are men
tioned by Eusebius. The " Acts of Bartholomew " are also of a
later date. The mythical and melodramatic element acquires a
growing ascendency.-
! Eusebius, " H. E.," i. 13.

BOOK I. — THE APOCRYPHAL LITERATURE. 183
of Thaddeus " is therefore very ancient, and indicates
the desire felt by the Christians to have a document
written by the hand of Jesus. The legendary story
of the healing of Abgar, by means of the image of
Christ impressed upon the handkerchief with which
he wiped the drops from his brow, belongs to a much
later date. The pretended missions of Thaddeus to
Edessa and into Mesopotamia, as also the fable of the
first appearing of Jesus Christ to his mother, supposed
to be antecedent to all the rest, are inventions of a
still more modern date.
Several apocryphal epistles came into circulation
in the course of the second century, among others,
an epistle to the Laodiceans, and a correspondence
between St. Paul and Seneca ; but they do not present
any doctrinal speciality. The apocryphal apocalypses
have been recently published.* Two of these are of
high Christian antiquity, though their precise date
cannot be determined. The " Apocalypse of Moses "
is a mythical narrative of the sickness and death of
Adam and Eve, who are called the protoplastsA This
writing is of importance, on account of its exaltation
of the dignity and grandeur of the primitive man,
made in the likeness of God. Adam appears as the
king of creation — a fallen king indeed, but great even
* Tischendorf has published a collection of the apocryphal apoca
lypses, under the title. "Apocalypses Apocrypha;." Leipzig, 1866.
t The "Apocalypse of Moses" is probably only a fragment of
a larger work. This fragment may date from the second century,
for it contains the legend of Setli going to seek in Paradise the
oil of consolation for his dying father. Allusion is made to this
legend in tire part of the Gospel of Nicodemus which is called
" Descensus ad inferos." It seems that we have, in the " Apocalypse
of Moses," the hrst foundation of this legend.

184 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
in his decadence, and destined to be restored to his
high dignity. The whole narrative is full of sublime
poetry. The character of Eve appears as the ideal
of womanhood. When Adam is attacked with his last
sickness, Eve exclaims, " 0 my lord, Adam, give me
the half of thy pain, that I may bear it with thee,
for it is for my fault thou art thus smitten ! It is I
who have brought on thee this sorrow and anguish !"*
As he is dying, Eve says to him, " Wherefore diest
thou, while I live ?"t " Be not troubled at this,"
Adam replies; "thou shalt soon follow me ; we shall
die both in one day." Does not this description bring
before us the Adam and Eve of Milton's poem, treading
together the path of exile with bitter tears and hands
clasped in each other's ? Eve tells her children how
she was led to fall in her great ordeal. She concludes
the story with some noble words, full of the mingled
regrets, high aspirations, and poetic feelings of the
human heart, upon the threshold of Eden, at the
moment of quitting the abode of glory and purity.
Adam turns to the seraphim and says: "Suffer me
to carry away with me the perfume of Paradise."!
God suffers it, and he receives that pure aroma of
Eden which is to be the incense of the sacrifices, and
to represent the whole ideal and celestial aspect of his
life. The chief episode in the " Apocalypse of Moses "
is the mission given by Adam to his son Seth, to go
and seek the oil of consolation, which flows from the
tree of life in Paradise. This favour is refused him,
* A6g poi rb ijpiov rrjg voaov gov. (" Apocalypse of Moses," chap. 9,)
t Aid n ail diro9vr)o-KEig Ktiyii. (Ibid., chap. 31.)
X Aiopai iip&v, dftrk p£ apai BviuSiag Ik tov irapaSeiaov. (Ibid., chap.
ag.)

BOOK I. — THE APOCRYPHAL LITERATURE. 185
because he is to die ; but scarcely has he breathed his
last, when his soul is carried away by angels, and his
body borne into Eden, there to await the resurrection
day. The death of him who was created for eternal
life, and was not to die, produces a deep tremor of
awe throughout the universe. The earth refuses to
bear the body of its king ; the sun and moon cover
themselves with a veil, and mourn over him till he
has been laid in the glorious sepulchre prepared for
him and for the first woman.* The "Apocalypse of
Moses " contains one of the most beautiful legends of
Christian antiquity. We place in the same category
a very curious writing, composed of various fragments,
entitled the " Apocalypse of Adam,"t or, the " Testa
ment of our father Adam." The first fragment, in
which we can trace the influence of Persian thought,
represents to us the adoration of various orders of
beings in the different hours of the night. The first
hour is the time of the adoration of the demons, who
cease to do evil ; the second belongs to the fishes and
reptiles ; the third to the lower depths ; the fourth to
the seraphim. " Before my sin," says Adam, " I used
to hear the sound of their wings in Paradise." At five
o'clock it is the hour of the sea. " The great waves
are heard lifting up their voices to bless God." At
six o'clock the clouds are gathered together : this is
a moment of religious awe. At seven all the powers
* " Apocalypse of Moses," chap. xxxv.
f In the " Asiatic Journal," 3rd series, vol. ii. p. 427 and follow
ing, is a translation of the " Apocalypse of Adam," by M. Renan.
It is made from the Syriac MSS. of the Vatican and of Paris.
This writing is identical with the fragment entitled, " Pcenitentias
Adas," condemned by the decree of Gelasius.

l86 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
of the earth rest. If at this instant water is taken,
and holy oil poured into it, the sick are instantly cured
by being anointed with this mixture. At eight o'clock
the earth, which receives the dew from heaven and
sees the grass grow on its bosom, breaks forth into
praises. Lastly, we have the adoration of men. The
doors of heaven open to allow their prayers to pass :
these are humbly presented, and bring down all that
they seek. When the sun rises, the earth trembles
with solemn joy ; all beings keep silence till the incense
of adoration has ascended to heaven ; then the powers
separate. The order of prayer during the hours of
the day resembles that of the night. Let us cite the
following remarkable words : " The Holy Spirit de
scends and moves upon the waters and the springs.
If the Spirit of the Lord did not descend and hover
thus over the waters and the fountains, the race of man
would be lost, and the demons would destroy with a
glance whom they would." We see how the material
notion of the sacrament was already forming itself on
the obscure basis of these legends.
A third fragment contains the prediction of the Christ
given to Adam after the Fall. It is repeated by the
patriarch to his son Seth. We here meet with this
remarkable passage : " Fear nothing, thou hast desired
to be God, I will make thee God. Having created thee
in mine own image, I will not suffer thee to remain in
Shehol. After three days passed in the tomb, I will
resume the body of thy race which I have taken upon
me; then ascending to heaven, I will make thee sit
down at the right hand of my Godhead." The testa
ment concludes with this declaration of Seth: "I, Seth,

BOOK I. — THE APOCRYPHAL LITERATURE. 187
have written this testament after the death of my
father Adam. We buried him — my brother and I — at
the east side of Paradise. And the angels and the
powers of the heavens assisted at his funeral, because
he had been created in the image of God. We buried
by him, in the same cave, called the Cave of Trea
sures, his testament, and the incense and myrrh from
Paradise. To this spot the magi came to seek the
perfumes which they brought to the child Jesus." This
singular writing, which contains, as will be seen, great
beauties, closes with a classification of the orders and
powers, made wholly on the model of the Avesta.
We may mention yet further the book of John on the
"Death of Mary," which forms part of the apocalypses
recently published, and which is dedicated to the glori
fication of the mother of the Saviour. All the apostles
are mysteriously assembled from the various countries
where they are carrying on their mission, in order to be
present at the death of Mary. They celebrate her
praises in terms which, doubtless, did not form part of the
original text, but are later additions and interpolations.
Mary becomes a sort of mediator between men and her
Son. The instant she has breathed her last her body
is carried away by angels : this is, even at this early
date, spoken of as her assumption. Although the pre
cise time of this writing is not certain, it is impossible
to suppose that in its present form it goes further back
than the third century.* We find in it the full de-
* The date of the writing called " De Dormitione Marias" (to
which must be appended " Transitus Marias A, Transitus Marias
B.) is difficult to fix. It is certain that the legends which it con
tains arose in the first century of the Christian era, since they are
reproduced by Gregory of Tours (Beda venerabilis, "Retract in Act.

1 88 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
velopment and efflorescence of a tradition which was
formed only by slow degrees, and the precise starting-
point of which cannot be known. We may place in
the class of apocalyptic literature the so-called book of
Hystaspis, the old Median king, who is mentioned by
Justin Martyr, and who proclaims the destruction of
the world by fire ;* also the " Apocalypse of Peter,"
who foretels the terrible judgments of the future in
strange terms.t The milk of women coagulating, will
form worms which will devour their bosom, and flames
will dart from the eyes of their children to consume
them. The Christians thus imitated the Jews in
introducing interpolations into the Sibylline oracles.!
Some of these interpolations are of very early date.
The first forms part of Book IV. The Sibyl, after
proclaiming herself the priestess of the Most High God,
who desires not temples of stone, describes in vivid
colours the fearful persecutions inflicted on the pious.
The day of punishment draws near. Nero, the anti
christ, has retired into Asia, deeply stained with innocent
blood. He intends to return after the destruction of
app." c. vii.). The decree of Gelasius condemned this apocrypha.
With reference to the other apocalypses, edited by Tischendorf, we
may say that of Paul belongs to the time of Theodosius, and that
of John is not mentioned till the ninth century. The "Apocalyypse
of Esdras" is uncertain in date, and of no importance as regards
Christian doctrine. See Tischendorf's " Prolegomena."
* Kai HSuXXa Si Kai 'Yardrrmg ytvr)oBo9ai riov <j>9apru>v dvaXiotriv Sid
¦Kvpbg ifaaav. (Justin Martyr, "Apol.," i. 20.)
f Eusebius, " H.E.," iii. 25. Clement of Alexandria knew the
" Apocalypse of Peter," as given by Eusebius, " H.E.," vi. 14. Grabe,
" Spicileg.," i. 74.
! " Oracula Sibyllina," edit. Alexandria, 1869. See remarks in
the " Life, Times, and Works of Jesus Christ," in the Sibylline books,
and in particular on the Jewish interpolations.

BOOK I. — THE APOCRYPHAL LITERATURE. 189
the temple by Titus, and to unchain all the fury of
antichrist. But terrible signs announce the last judg
ment : the earth will be shaken and Vesuvius will vomit
fire. Nero will be destroyed, and from the ashes of the
now existing world will come forth a new earth, in
which the righteous — that is, those who have been
baptised in time — shall reign.* The second oracle, with
which Book V. opens, is more Judaising in tone. It
proclaims the same judgments, and connects them also
with the return of Nero. It is of Alexandrine origin,
for it speaks chiefly of the judgment of Egypt. t The
visions of the millenarians thus gained currency, and
borrowed their ardent hues from the ancient apoca
lypses of the Jews.
We have endeavoured to give a complete idea of that
apocryphal literature which exerted in the end so great
an influence upon the development of Christian thought,
diffusing itself throughout the whole intellectual atmo
sphere. We have now before us the data for more than
mere hypothetical inferences as to the progress of that
oral tradition of which this literature was sometimes the
inspiration, sometimes the echo. And first of all we
recognise that imperious desire of the popular imagina
tion to clothe religious ideas in a living and visible
form — that mythological instinct which rapidly trans
figures facts, and fills up all the interstices of history, as
the moss creeps with its tufted crests into the crevices
of a wall. Thus, if there is a period in the history of
Jesus, upon which the canonical Gospels have kept a
guarded silence, it is that of His childhood ; and
it is this very period which the legend has mainly
* Book iv. + Book v. 1.

I90 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
sought to transfigure. A scarcely perceptible basis of
actual fact suffices as its starting point. That which is
brought out most prominently by all this apocryphal
literature, is the tendency to merge more and more the
distinctively spiritual character of Christianity, and to
transform it into a religion of outward authority, resting
solely upon prodigies and issuing in a narrow morality.
The doctrine of redemption is either absent, or distorted
in the gradual growth of tradition. Nowhere is the
sacrifice of Christ presented in its moral virtue, as
reconciling the world to God, and imparting a new life
to the pardoned soul. Justification by faith has no
place in any of these lucubrations of current and
popular dogmatism. External performances are the
great essential. The heavenly abode is built by every
man for himself, by his self-mortification and alms
givings. Thus does the spirit of Judaism insinuate
itself into the souls of the Christians. The person of
the Redeemer is no less changed than His work.
All the human and progressive side of his earthly
career, all that shows the reality of His self-abasement,
is suppressed. He is made to work miracles without
number, from His very cradle ; and then is originated
that dry and lifeless metaphysical theory which puts
in the place of the Christ of the Gospels the Byzantine
Christ, as He is defined by the council of Chalcedony.
The Christian life is no less shorn of the characters of
normal humanity ; the fantastic perfection of asceticism
is substituted for the simple and manly performance of
duty; and the descent is thus begun to the Romish
counsels of perfection and the deterioration of sound
morality. While the fathers of Alexandria are inau-

BOOK I. — THE APOCRYPHAL LITERATURE. igi
gurating with brilliant powers the great Christian
apology which bases our certainty in matters of
religion on the harmony of the Gospel with the con
science, the ignorant masses choose a shorter way, and a
less elevated demonstration, that namely of the Jews, of
whom Paul speaks — "They seek after a sign." Hence
comes that prodigality of miracles of which we have
spoken, and which were designed to establish the divine
origin of the new religion. The same tendency led to
the attempt to multiply apostolic documents. Exagge
rating beyond measure the value of the written title,
if we may so express it, they forgot the spirit in the
letter, and were far less concerned to base their belief
upon a rational interpretation of the canonical Scrip
tures, than to add to their number. When the name
of an apostle had been attached to any doctrine what
soever, even were it in flagrant opposition to the New
Testament, they considered the point established
beyond appeal. Such at least was the vulgar opinion.
Hence false teachers were under strong temptation to
put in circulation a host of apocryphal scriptures. They
would not have done so if such endeavours had been
rendered futile by a true conception of Christian au
thority, which would have attached importance to the
general scope of the revelation, rather than to isolated
texts, or the invocation of some honoured name. When
once the production of an apostolic signature is ac
cepted as decisive, there is every inducement to fabricate
false documents. Absolutely false, moreover, they are
not. There is always a larger or less nucleus of truth
in the tradition. An insignificant fact, a word miscon
strued, will suffice to originate an entire new growth of

192 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
legends, and inventions are placed without scruple under
the same sacred shelter of an apostolic name. It was
by the same influences that the materialistic notion of
sacramental virtue was formed and fostered. More and
more importance came to be attached to the outward
rite ; baptism became identified with the pagan lustra
tions ; and language was used in reference to the Lord's
Supper which gave authority to every superstition.
Finally, men began to people this sort of Christian
Olympus, in which the creature would soon find a niche
for self-worship, and the Virgin-mother was already
placed on its highest summit, the first step in an
apotheosis not yet complete. Such is beyond question
the direction of this current of oral tradition, which for
the time runs parallel with the public teaching of the
Church, and accommodates itself to the tendencies of
the ignorant classes, while the great theology of Alex
andria is established upon the somewhat cloudy heights
of speculation. Oral tradition is a sort of obscure uni
versal suffrage, which will in the end make its will
paramount, and gain the sanction of the official autho
rities.

BOOK SECOND.
THE DE VELOPMENT OF CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE
IN THE SECOND AND THIRD CENTURIES.
CHAPTER I.
GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS.
§ I. The Universal Faith of the Church in the Second
and Third Centuries.
Christian theology finds in this period of intense
piety and incessant conflict its fullest and most various
development. We observe great schools, not opposed
to one another, but differing widely, and all treating
with perfect freedom the fundamental statements of
the Gospel. There is no central power ; the synods
are accidental and quite subordinate assemblies. The
more the State manifests its intolerance, the more
firmly does the Church maintain its moral inde
pendence. For ever at issue with brute force, it
cannot accept its complicity even in the proscription
of error. The picture we shall draw of the develop
ment of Christian thought at this time will make very
evident the vigour and freedom of its methods. It
14

194 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
remained nevertheless profoundly and stedfastly Chris
tian, and in willing .subjection to the general tenor
of apostolic teaching. Theological speculation never
impaired, if I may so speak, the rock of fundamental
truths ; it ever respected the corner-stone of the build
ing. It often encompassed it, no doubt, with daring
and darkening conceits, but the same substantial
reality of the faith underlay them all. This is ex
plained by the fact that the faith of the Church was
not at the mercy of the speculations and possible errors
of religious science. It was the inalienable possession
of the Christian heart, guaranteed by experience, and
it constituted a living and indestructible bond between
all the Churches. Thus the much controverted dis
tinction between the fundamental and secondary points
of faith sprang up of itself from the unfailing instinct
of piety.
Fully assured that the treasure of sacred truth, that
which the apostles called " the faith once delivered
to the saints," could not be lost, the Church granted
all latitude to the researches of theology, so long as
this did not, as in the case of Gnosticism, compromise
Christian theism. An earnest contending for essential
points coincided with a generous breadth in minor
matters. Men did not imagine in those days that all
was compromised by the slightest divergence in the
conception of the same fact, accepted alike by both
sides. The calm assurance of faith banished the
senseless terrors which lead to constant reactions ; for
there is no surer way of bringing bondage upon the
mind than the fear of inquiry, which betrays doubt
rather than strength of conviction. Serious and well-

BOOK II. — GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS. I95
founded beliefs are tolerant just because they are not
afraid of being shipwrecked in the first storm. The
more deeply religious they are, the more directly they
rest upon the inner life of the soul, the more they
respect the rights of thought, and avoid infringing
upon its domain. On the other hand, the dry scholas
ticism which transforms Christianity into a mere in
tellectual system, keeps a jealous watch over every
link in its chain of deductions. The doctrinal formula
being in its view the essential, the slightest deviation
wounds it to the heart, or, to speak more correctly,
touches it on its most sensitive point.
Let us embrace, in a rapid glance, that which con
stituted the faith of the Church in the second and
third centuries. I do not think that in an age of
earnest resistance to Gnosticism the Christian faith
would have been designated by the name of orthodoxy,
for this word would have seemed to favour a purely
scientific notion of religion. Christians were then
specially anxious that religion should not be regarded
as consisting in a correct opinion with regard to
God. Religion was to them essentially a moral
and living principle, without, however, as we shall
show, being on that account vague and uncertain.
We shall confine ourselves here to a slight outline of
the facts, and to a few broad indications, for the
demonstration, properly so called, will be amply con
tained in the picture we shall presently give of the
worship of the Church, and of the Christian life.
The Christian faith at this time, as always, has for
its great object Jesus Christ, the Son of God and the
Saviour of the world. The whole of Christianity
14 *

I96 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
centres in His person. How could it be other
wise, since He is the Mediator between earth and
heaven, the One who has restored the broken link
between humanity and God ? Is not this link the
essential condition of this sacred relation between
man and his Creator which is called religion ? Jesus
Christ is not regarded simply as the initiator of a new
worship, or a perfect model of religion. No. He is
the very object of the religion He has founded ; He
is the centre and source of life and piety. Nothing
can be further removed from the universal sentiment
of the Church than Unitarian notions. If, as we
shall see, theology, even when animated by an evan
gelical spirit, does not find sufficient and always correct
explanation of this adoration of Christ, the fact never
theless remains, and its catholicity cannot be im
pugned. In order to be convinced of this, we need
only remember the part which faith in Jesus fills in
the roll of martyrdom. The Christian who is cast
into prison, and brought before the tribunal of the
proconsul, thence to be taken to the stake, or led into
the arena, endures all this hardness and suffering for
the Redeemer's sake. It is with that name upon
his lips he stands unabashed before his judges, and
does not flinch in view of his executioners. He is
ready, as said the young martyr girl of Lyons, to
" follow the Lamb whithersoever He leadeth." Any
one familiar with the story of the long and bloody
contest between imperial Rome and the Church, will
be fully assured that every confessor had the deep
conviction that he belonged — body, soul, and spirit —
to his Divine Master; that Christ had a supreme

BOOK II. — GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS. Ig7.
right over his life, over his most cherished affections,
over his entire being. Martyrdom is in itself a
confession of faith — the powerful proclamation of the
duty of leaving all for Jesus, and it is at His feet
the martyr's palms are cast adoringly. The motto of
Ignatius is that of every confessor : " All I lay down,
may I but win Christ!"* To share His cup is the
highest happiness. t If the dungeon becomes luminous
it is when the Christian in raptured vision sees the
bright form of the Crucified One rising over the shadow
that surrounds him. We have already shown how his
ardent, unquestioning faith in Christ, which implies that
He is all in all to the soul, lives again in the expres
sive symbols traced with sublime simplicity upon the
gloomy walls of the catacombs. Here we find the
confession of faith of the persecuted Church drawn
by trembling hands amidst the lurid flashes of the
stake. While the perpetually recurring image of the
Good Shepherd, bearing home on His shoulders the
lost sheep, points to the redeeming love which is the
central fact of the Gospel, the presence of the Son
of God in the furnace seven times heated records that
which was the highest consolation, the triumphant
joy of the confessors of the new covenant. Number
less inscriptions, accompanied with speaking symbols,
give praise to Christ for the peace of those whose dust
has been piously laid beside the ashes of the martyrs.
The monogram of His name, the fish, the anchor
beneath the cross, traced in hurried and mysterious
outline, fill with the memory of Christ this sleeping-
* Ignatius, " Epist. ad Roman.," 4.
f " Acta martyr. Polyc," c. 14.

I98 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
place of the dead. Lastly, the child Jesus in the arms
of His mother, is often held forth to the eyes of the
worshipper.* The manifestation of faith, when it is involuntary and
blends with the life of every day, carries with it a
peculiar strength of conviction. Now it is certain that
the whole life of the Christian is linked with the
thought and memory of the Redeemer; it bears His
image stamped upon it. The first day of the week, the
observance of which was freely substituted for the
Sabbath, to meet the necessities of worship as well as
those of individual piety, bears His name ; Sunday is
the Lord's day, the perpetual memorial of His resur
rection. t Wednesday and Friday soon came to be set
apart by the Church in special remembrance of His
humiliation and death ; these were called stations. A
similar change passed upon the year. The great Jewish
feasts, all commemorative of mighty miracles wrought
by Jehovah for His people, were replaced by the
Christian festivals, the original cycle of which consisted
of the anniversary of the birth of Christ, Easter, and
Pentecost.! So much importance was attached to
these, that one of the most serious controversies
between the Christian East and West hinges on the
determination of the time at which Easter should be
celebrated. The "Apostolical Constitutions" go farther
still ; they divide the day, like the week and the year,
into sacred periods, each hour on the dial marked by
* We shall have to speak again more in detail on this subject
in the last volume, which will treat in part of worship and the
Christian life.
t "Epist. ad Barnab.," CIS; Justin Martyr, "Apol.," i. 67.
! Gieseler, "Kirchen-Geschichte," vol, i. c. ii. s. 53 ; c. iv. s. 70.

BOOK. II. — GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS. I99
some holy memory.* We simply mention here these
practices of the ancient Church, the complete descrip
tion of which will come in due course. We draw from
this only one inference, namely, that the adoration of
Christ is the basis of the general life of the Church, and
sets its seal upon the whole.
This is no less manifest in the worship of the Chris
tians, if for one moment we turn our attention to this in
its more general aspect. Where shall we find a clearer
confession of faith than in the two great sacraments
of the Church. Baptism is the enrolment in the sacred
militia ; it takes the place of circumcision, and incor
porates the convert with the people of God, in the name
of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. Sometimes
even the baptismal formula contains the name of Christ
alone, so intimately is that associated with the two
other names. The double act of baptism, the burying
beneath the water, and the rising again into the light,
points to the death and resurrection of the Redeemer :
thus its very administration contains a full confession
of the entire Gospel. The communion, celebrated as
the great Christian mystery, is the Holy of Holies of
the worship. All the fragments of liturgies that have
come down to us are found to be full of the acknow
ledgment of redemption by the blood of the cross, and
of adoration of the atoning Victim. It is not possible
even for the boldest systematisers to derive any other
teaching from the table of the eucharist, or to deprive
this rite of its mystical character. " This meal," says
Justin, "is called the eucharist, because it is not per-
* "Constit. Eccl. JEgypt," canon 62. In the " Analecta Ante-
nicasna of Bunsen," vol. ii. p. 473.

200 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY. *
mitted to any to partake of it except those who believe
in that which is taught by us, and who have received
baptism for the remission of sins and the new birth."*
The prayers and hymns, which occupy a large place in
the worship, and which we find in the liturgical docu
ments, pour out in swelling floods their strains of
adoration for the Saviour-God, retracing, with all the
fervour of the lyric muse, the work of redemption in its
leading features. I will quote only one fragment from
the Alexandrine liturgy : "We thank Thee, 0 Lord, by
Thy well-beloved Son Jesus Christ, whom Thou hast
sent in these last days to be our Saviour and Redeemer.
He is the Word who comes from Thee, and by whom
Thou hast made all things. He was made flesh, and
declared to be Thy Son by the Holy Ghost." The
doxology runs thus: "Grant us Thy Holy Spirit for
the confirmation of our faith in the truth, that Thy
saints may praise and magnify Thee in Thy Son Jesus
Christ, in whom Thou hast the glory and the power in
Thy holy Church, world without end. Amen." The
prayer concludes with these words: "In the name of
Thine only Son, in whom to Thee, with Him and the
Holy Spirit, be honour and power for ever." Elsewhere
in this same liturgy the invocation is openly addressed
to Jesus Christ. " We praise Thee, we adore Thee,
O God, the King of heaven, Almighty Father. O Lord,
the only Son, Jesus Christ, Lamb of God, Son of the
Father, have pity on us, receive our prayer."
Even the adversaries of the Church bear testimony
to its faith, as in the famous passage of Pliny's letter
* THc odSsvi dXXip pBraffxBiv l%6v itrriv, r) np TciarBvovn. (Justin,
" Apol.," ii. 97.) See " The Liturgy of the Church of Alexandria ;"
Bunsen, " Analecta Antenicasna," vol. iii. p. 101.

BOOK II. — GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS. 201
on the hymns which Christians address to Christ as
their God. We call to mind, moreover, the attacks of
the Jew Trypho, and of the pagan philosopher Celsus,
directed against the idea that the Nazarene was the
Son of the Most High God, and more especially against
the incarnation.* Besides this implied confession of the
faith of the Church, which is more decisive than any
other, we have formal and exact testimony given again
and again as to the beliefs common to all Christians.
We have not to inquire here what were the influences
which helped to originate the idea of a rule of faith
more or less obligatory. This would be to enter pre
maturely into the question of the dogmatic development
of the idea of authority, a question which is determined
by the whole character of the Christian thought of the
age. But apart from this special and delicate point of
inquiry, the declarations of the Fathers suffice to show,
with no ambiguity, what constituted the universal faith
of Christendom in the second and third centuries.
Justin Martyr gives us a very clear epitome of that
which the Church of his day recognised as the fulfilment
of the prophecies. "The holy oracles," he says, "de
clare Him, who, born of a virgin, was, on attaining to
man's estate, to heal all manner of sickness and disease,
and to raise the dead ; then, alike hated and misunder
stood, to be crucified, to die, rise again, and return into
heaven. This is our Jesus Christ, who is called the
Son of God, as in reality He is."+ The following
passage from Irenseus is still more explicit as to the
faith common to all the Churches.
* Pliny, "Epist." lib. x. ep.46. Justin, " Dial. cum. Tryph.," p. 250
(Paris edition). Origen, "Contra Celsus," iv. 3, and following.
"Opera," i. 503-506. t Justin, "Apol.," ii. p. 73-

202 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
" The apostles and their disciples transmitted to the
Church, which is spread abroad over the whole earth,
the faith in one God, the Father Almighty", maker of
heaven and earth, the sea, and all things that are
therein ; and in Jesus Christ, the Son of God, incarnate
for our salvation ; and in the Holy Ghost, who by the
prophets foretold the divine dispensation, the coming of
the Son, His passion and resurrect:: n from the dead,
His ascension in His body into heaven, and His second
coming from heaven, from the g!:ry of the Father, to
restore all things, t: raise all the dead, and to make every
knee, bcth in heaven and in earth, bow before Jesus
Christ, our Lord, our God, our Saviour, and our King,
according to the good pleasure of the invisible Father;
and to ma_-te everv tongue contess Him. all iips pav Him
homage, and that Ke should reign in righteousness and
sit in judgment upon all flesh. He will condemn to
eternal fire the perverse spirits, rebellious angels, and
apostates, as also the impious, the unjust, the dis
obedient, and blasphemous among men. But for the
just and the saints, for those who shall have kept His
commandments and continued in His love, whether
from the first or alter their repentance, for them He
has prepared immortality and eternal glory."* Such is
the faith of the latter half of the second century.
Let us hear the testimony of Tertullian, at the com
mencement of the third centurv. He gives us three
summaries of the common, faith. We quote the shortest
and most exact. "There is one only rule of faith. It
consists in believing in one God, the Almighty Creator
* T<w-: to crjfiv-fpa ecu rornyv —71 — - — :i if -cz'~~ji wxuzip \v t&m ry
c --"'-- :-=-i-ivV«i-; ;-«.V; fvXatnm. .[Irenif'-S,. " HasTes.," L 3.

BOOK II. — GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS. 203
of the world, and in His Son Jesus Christ, born of the
virgin Mary, crucified under Pontius Pilate, raised from
the dead the third day, received up into heaven, and
now sitting at the right hand of God, whence He shall
come to judge the quick and the dead by the resur
rection of the body."* Hear again Origen. " This is
the substance of all that has come down to us by the
preaching of the apostles. First, there is one God,
the Former and Creator of all things, who made all
that exists out of nothing; the God of all the righteous
from the creation and formation of the world, the God
of Adam, of Abel, of Seth, of Enoch, of Noah, Shem,
Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, of the twelve patriarchs,
of Moses and the prophets. This God, as He has fore
told by the prophets, hath sent forth in these last times
our Lord Jesus Christ, to call Israel first to Himself,
and then the Gentiles, after the faithlessness of the
children of Israel. This just and good God is the
Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. He gave the law,
the prophets, and the gospels. He- is the God of the
apostles ; the God of the Old and New Testaments.
Jesus Christ, who came into the world, was born of the
Father before every creature. After working with His
Father in the creation of the universe (for all things
were made by Him), in these last times He humbled
Himself and became incarnate, and was made man ;
He who was God, and who still remained God, even
* "Regula fidei una omnino est sola immobilis et irreformabilis,
credendi scilicet in unicum Deum omnipotentem mundi creatorem,
et filium ejus Jesum Christum, natum ex virgine Maria, crucifixum
sub Pontio Pilato, tertia die resuscitatum a mortuis, receptum in
ccelis, sedentem nunc ad dexteram Patris, venturum judicare vivos
et mortuos per carnis etiam resurrectionem." (Tertullian, "De virg.
vel." chap, i.)

204 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
in taking upon Him human nature. He assumed a
body like our own, differing only that He was
born of a virgin and of the Holy Spirit. The birth and
the suffering of this Jesus were both actual facts. He
did not pass through a mere semblance of our common
death ; He really died, and truly rose again from the
dead, and held intercourse with His disciples after His
resurrection. According to this same apostolic tra
dition, the Holy Spirit is joined in honour and dignity
with the Father and the Son."*
At that period the catechumens of Alexandria were
taught to express their faith in these terms : "I believe
in the one true God, the Father Almighty, and in His
only Son, our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, and in
the Holy Spirit who gives life." t This was the first
development of the simple baptismal formula which
had so long satisfied the Church. At the close of
the third century this simple profession of faith had
become much overlaid, as may be seen from the creed
contained in the seventh book of the " Apostolical Con
stitutions," which belongs to this period. It is thus
expressed : "I pledge myself to Christ, and I am
baptised in the faith of the One Supreme Uncreated
God, in Jesus Christ, by whom the universe was
created and formed, and from whom all things proceed.
I believe in the Lord Jesus, His only Son, the first-born
* Origen, "De princip.," i.; " Prarfatio," 4.
t Hiotbvuj Big rov pbvov dXrf9ivbv 9bov, 9buv rov -rrarkpa tov —avroKparopa,
Kai Big rov povoytvij avrov vibv 'Irjo-oirv \OLirrdi' rov Ki'piov xal G-iarrjpa r)pwv,
Kai Big rb iryiov xrtvpa to i^oio^oiovv. " Constit. Eccl. ^Egypt," ii. 46.
(Bunsen, " Antenicaaia," iii. 91.) The words which follow, bpooimov
rpiaca, are an interpolation of the fourth century. The third
century as yet rejected the expression opooioiog, as is proved
by the condemnation of Paul of Samosata.

BOOK II. — GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS. 205
of all creation, begotten before the ages by the good
pleasure of the Father, not created, by whom all things
in heaven and earth were made, visible and invisible.
In the last times He descended from heaven and took
upon Him our flesh. He was born of the virgin Mary.
He lived holily and blamelessly in the world, walking
in all the commandments of His God and Father. He
was crucified under Pontius Pilate. He died for us, and
after His passion He was raised again for us the third
day, and ascended into heaven, where He is set down
at the right hand of the Father. Thence He will come
again with glory in the fulness of time to judge the
quick and the dead, and His kingdom will have no end.
I am baptised into the Holy Spirit, who is the Paraclete,
who has been working from the beginning of the world
in all the saints, who was then sent down upon the
apostles, according to the promise of our Lord Jesus
Christ; and after the apostles, upon all those who
believe in the name of the holy Church, the resurrec
tion of the body, the forgiveness of sins, the kingdom
of heaven, and the life everlasting."*
Here we find, in a somewhat prolix form, all the
essential points of the formula known as the Apostles'
Creed. The analogy is more striking in the concise
formula which was used in the Church of Africa in the
time of Cyprian. With the exception of the two last
articles, this is precisely the creed now in use among
us. It is evident that it was compiled from the for
mula of baptism, in which was intercalated the rule
of faith as we see in Tertullian. t No one at that time
made any pretence of tracing it to the apostles, as was
* " Constit. Apost.," vii. 4. f Cyprian, " Epist.," 697.

206 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
successfully done from the close of the fourth century.
It was recognised in early times to be a simple and
natural expansion of the primitive confession of faith
made by the converts, which was just an epitome of the
general belief of the Church during three centuries.*
We may then regard it as the true creed of the primi
tive times. It expresses with simplicity, under the form
of a material statement, but not without reference to
the great Gnostic heresies which had so profoundly
agitated the minds of men, the beliefs which formed the
joy and strength of primitive Christianity. The creed
is raised far above all theology, of which it is grandly
independent ; it is indestructible, and is found in sub
stance in all the great systems which attempt to give
a satisfactory explanation of saving truth after it has
been grasped and apprehended by the heart of the
believer. Beyond this the fathers are fully cognizant of the
difference which exists between simple faith and re
ligious science. They are careful that the former be
not involved in the obscurities and uncertainties of the
latter. Justin Martyr declares that the fact of the
divinity of Christ abides unmoved, if the explanations
of it are found inadequate. "OTrypho!" he says,
" Jesus Christ will not cease to be the Son of God, even
if I fail to prove that He pre-exists as the Son of Him
from whom all things proceed. It may then be fairly
said that I have fallen into some error, but not that He
* See M. Nicholas's book : '• Le Symbole des Apotres. Essai
historique," Paris, 1867, c. iv. See also the admirable pamphlet
of M. Viguier, on the same subject, and " L'histoire du Credo," by
A. Coquerel, fil- ; also Germer-Bailliere, 1869 ; though we hold the
right of differing on some points from these honourable writers.

BOOK II. — GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS. 207
is not the Christ."* Thus we are warned that spe
culative errors are of no force to shake the faith of the
heart, since that stands firm through all the often mis
taken efforts of science. Origen traces with a no less
steady hand the line of demarcation between faith and
theology. After giving an epitome of the universal
faith of Christians, he adds: " It is not clearly perceived
whether we must admit that the Son of God was or
was not begotten. But such questions must be re
solved by the study of Holy Scripture and by wise
research."+ Thus the claims of faith, which should be
no uncertain thing, are reconciled with those of Chris
tian science, which within the limits of revelation
should have free scope. No system of the schools, no
scholastic formula can be drawn from the simple docu
ments which represent primitive Christianity. Hence
it lends itself with facility to the onward movement of
thought, and to its investigation, made with holy bold
ness. It does not arrest inquiries by blind anathemas,
and if it does not guarantee freedom from error, it does
at least guide the seeker after truth, and guard him
from a fatal fall. No power is comparable to that of a
faith so sure of itself, so strict and severe on essential
points, but so broad and tolerant on all matters coming
within the range of science proper. It is true that as
we approach the close of this period the Church mani
fests a growing tendency to forge the yoke of tradition
and ecclesiastical authority; but that yoke did not
press with all its weight upon theology till it had been
* O/jk inriXXvrai r'u toututov i-jvou. XPMT0V T"" Qfov, lav dirooBi'£ai pif
StjviDfua '6n Kai wpmjTrrjpx'V vi'ng rov rroirirno roiv "iXidv fjti'rv. (Justin,
" Dial, cum Tryph.," 267.)
t Origen " De princip." i. ; " I'rcfatio," 4.

208 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
placed upon the imperial anvil. The liberty at first
enjoyed was only lost by degrees ; it needed the com
bined effort of great councils and of crowned patrons
of the Church to suppress it altogether.

§ II. The various Schools and Tendencies in the Dogmatic
Development of the Second and Third Centuries.
We have now to describe the development of Chris
tian theology in the second and third centuries, passing
by the question of apologies, already treated, and the
ecclesiastical controversies, which we reserve for the
conclusion of our book. The men who exercised the
preponderating influence in this development are known
to us. We have not to deal with abstractions or
creations of the reason. It is easy to trace in each
system the mind of him who originated and developed
it, and to recognise, as it were, his moral physiognomy.
We have now to deal only with the doctrines them
selves. Two rocks must be avoided. We must guard against
the spirit of system which applies its bold generalisa
tions to facts, and moulds them to its own purposes,
reducing them to a mutilated and fractional condition,
in which ideas lose their true significance by being
detached from their connection, or from their parent
thought. The generalising process was pushed to
the furthest hmits in the history of Christian doctrine
by two schools directly opposed to each other in every
thing except this question of method. The school of
ultra-orthodoxy has made quite as bold use of it as the
extreme speculative school." Both remodel the history,

BOOK II. — GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS. 20O.
instead of making it their guide, and commence by
inserting that which they desire to discover in it.
This arbitrary mode of interpretation has been freely
followed by both parties in forming the doctrine of the
second and third centuries. Subsequently theology
assumes a fixed and rigorously defined form, which
could not easily be made the subject of so complete
a metamorphosis. This is not the case at the time
when theology is, so to speak, in process of formation.
With some effort and determination, refractory ideas
are brought to conform to the required standard ; but,
at the same time, in the eager seeking after a pre
determined creed, the sense of reality is lost, and the
history is distorted.
This is the great reproach which we make against
that which we have called ultra-orthodoxy, whether
in the Catholic or Protestant sense of the word. The
most moderate among the historians of dogma in the
Catholic community is one of the oldest and most
erudite. Father Petau makes an attempt, in his great
book on " Dogmatic Theology,"* to establish the una
nimity of all the doctors of the early ages, in order to
adhere to the principle of Vincent de L6rins, as to
the traditional orthodoxy which is to be found in all
places, in all times, and among all teachers.t Never
theless, in relation to the doctrine of the Trinity, he
admits more than one divergence among the early
Fathers. He seeks to modify these differences, de
claring sometimes that they are insignificant, and arise
only out of the defectiveness of theological speech ;
* " De theologicis dogmatibus." Paris Edition, 1644.
t " Quod ab omnibus, quod ubique, quod semper."
15

210 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTL\NITY.
sometimes that they result from the demands and diffi
culties of the Christian apology.* When, however,
he comes to the actual exposition of the doctrine of
these Fathers, he owns that Justin, Athenagoras, and
Theophilus of Antioch taught the subordination of the
Son to the Father.! Bossuet, in his polemics against
Jurieu, on the occasion of his " Histoire des variations,"
carefully guards against making this concession. In
an admirable paper, full of lumlnousness and nervous
eloquence, he attempts to set aside every- doubtful
meaning of the most difficult texts of Justin Martyr
or Athenagoras, and to bring them into conformity
with the orthodoxy of Nicaea. His argument is very
vague and general, however, in spite of its semblance
of power. His noble language cannot conceal the
weakness of his exegesis. He constantly reverts to
the assertion that it is not possible that great saints,
martyrs of Christ, should have derogated in thought
from His eternal divinity. With such a method, there
ceases to he any true inquiry into things as thev are,
and we note in its stead, the constant endeavour to
discover that which, from the point of view adopted.
should have been there.* Unhappily, this method
is still followed by a large number of historians, both
in Germany and France. Its draw-backs are very ap
parent in the history of doctrine by Henri Klee,§ a
* " De theologicis d o^inatibns,H voL ii. Preface, sec 12.
X Ibid., voL ii. chap. 3.
X '' Advertissements aux Protestants sur Ies lettres da ministre
Jurieu. lEuvres de Bossuet" Didot edition, voL iv. p. 29S. and
following. § " Manuel de l"histoire des dogmes Chretiens," by Henri Klee.
Translated from the German by Abbe Mabiie. Paris : Lecoffie,
1848.

BOOK II. — GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS. 211
work otherwise of no slight merit, which merges the
divergence of doctrines in the fundamental agreement
of the tradition, and attaches less importance than is
due to the many discrepancies which do present them
selves. " The general belief," he says, " is expressed
by the particular creeds." From this stage it is but
another step to do violence to the sense of the par
ticular creeds, and that step is repeatedly taken by
the author. The " History of Doctrine previous to the
time of the Nicaaan Council," by Schwane, displays
more science in arriving at the same result, while it
also makes some concessions with regard to the im-
perfectness of the doctrinal formulae of the Fathers
of the second century.* Mcehler, in his " Patrology,"
maintains the unblemished orthodoxy of the first apo
logists; and, in spite of his great learning and felicitous
mode of expression, he shows from the first that deter
mined preconception which prevents the impartial study
of the facts, t We find the same fault with kindred
works published in France within the last few years.
Under the designation of a " Cours d'eloquence sacree,' '
M. l'Abbe Freppel, canon of S. Genevieve, presents
a complete picture of Christian literature up to the
close of the third century. He there displays vast
erudition, and his exposition — always lucid — is full of
interest. It is lacking, however, in the high im
partiality which seeks only that which history can
fairly give, for he also violently coerces the often
* " Dogmengeschichte der vornicsnischen Zeit." By Jos.
Schwane. Miinster, 1862.
t " La Patrologie, ou Histoire litteVaire des trois premiers siecles
de l'Eglise Chre"tienne." Posthumous work of J. Mcehler. 2 vols.
Translated by Jean Cohen. Paris, 1842,
15*

212 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
vague thoughts of the Fathers of the earlier age into
conformity with the orthodox standard of the fourth
century.* The most important work treating of the
history of doctrine before Xicaea, is the learned book of
Mgr. Ginoulhac, bishop of Grenoble, entitled " Histoire
du dogme catholique pendant les trois premiers siecles
de l'Eglise."t The title indicates the method pursued.
The author seeks to discover the Catholic dogma in
all its rigour, as early as the second century. He
commences by setting forth that doctrine as officially
promulgated on each article, and thus he brings all
the texts, even the most recalcitrant, into harmony
with the orthodox formula, without allowing a mo
ment's hesitation or any space for a gradual develop
ment. Justin Martyr, Athenagoras, and Tertullian are
made to hold views as definite as those of Athanasius
on the Trinity. It is not possible to do greater violence
to the most elementary conditions of science, though
the learning of the writer cannot be disputed. We
shall have more than one occasion to adduce conclu
sive proofs of the statement just made, in our exami
nation of ante-Xicasan theology.
All the schools of narrow orthodoxy agree in this
a priori method, which imposes its own tenets on the
history, instead of submitting to its teaching. We
know how the idea of the smallest possible latitude
of thought prevailing in Christian antiquity in -rela
tion to redemption and the Trinity, was repudiated by
the English Evangelical school, which contributed so
* " Cours d'eloquence sacree " (comprising the Apostolic Fathers,
the Apologists, Tertullian). Paris. Bray, editor.
f Paris : Durand, 1866. 1st edition.

BOOK II. — GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS. 213
much to the reawakening of faith at the beginning
of this century, but which has for a long time laid
its yoke upon the religious thought of our French
speaking countries. The mere mention of a history
of doctrine would have been a scandal to this class
of religionists, who claim to have found a faultless
tradition, which, from the Reformation to the Vaudois,
and from the Vaudois to the primitive times of Chris
tianity, forms one unbroken chain of pure doctrine.
Milner's " Church History," one of the most popular
books of this school, shows how, under such treatment,
the great sections of the primitive Church in the East
and West may be deprived of all their suggestive
originality.* Every diversified hue is merged in a
common greyness. The dry Protestant scholasticism
of the seventeenth century is carried back to the
time of Irenasus, of Hippolytus, and Origen.
Thus does the spirit of system falsify history no less
under the banner of the Reformation than under that
of Catholicism. It is just to acknowledge that the
scientific movement of the nineteenth century helped
to widen the mental range of both parties. It is un
necessary to dwell here on the great labours of the
German evangelical school, those vast and conscien
tious histories of doctrine to which we have had occa
sion again and again to refer our readers. They were
* "History of the Christian Church up to the middle of the six
teenth century," by J. Milncr. Note especially vol. i. chap. 2, in
which the author discovers the entire orthodoxy of his school in
the three primitive ages. Clement of Alexandria and Origen are
alone held worthy of severe mention, for having recognised some
elements of good in the pagan philosophy, but substantially they
are as orthodox as the rest. This book is a masterpiece of bigoted
ignorance.

214 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
preceded by the polemical writings of Jurieu, in oppo
sition to Bossuet, Basnages, in his learned work on
the " History of the Church and its Succession," shows
fairly the divergences between the Fathers; but even
he is too much inclined to seek, side by side with the
broad current, a thin stream of pure doctrine true to
the tradition of the apostles. Dr. Newman, in his
remarkable book on " The Development of Christian
Doctrine,"* has attempted to lead contemporary Catho
licism into this liberal and scientific track. The in
genious author admits without hesitation the varia
tions of primitive theology. He distinguishes between
the original and sacred fact, which he regards as the
immutable essence of Christianity, and the explana
tions of that fact, which are susceptible of progress
and expansion, and of a growing approximation to the
divine realities. It is vain for Dr. Newman to pretend
that this process of development has been carried on
in one direct line in the Catholic Church, under the
direction of an infallible authority, which was itself
at first vague and indefinite. He retains, nevertheless,
the right to note the divergences of the early Fathers,
without feeling himself bound to cloak them under
a garb of unity, and he may remain therefore an im
partial and sincere historian. This scientific attempt,
made with great learning and rare intellectual skill,
is worthy of special note. It indicates to the Catholic
theologians the only way of entering seriously and
fairly upon the history of doctrine. It must be said,
however, that Dr. Newman's is an isolated attempt,
* " History of the Development of Christian Doctrine," by J. H.
Newman.

BOOK II. — GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS. 215
and that the historical method of absolute tradition
alism, of which Vincent de Lerins is the representa
tive, still predominates in a way very detrimental to
the true interests of religious science.
The a priori tendency reappears also in the school
most directly opposed to strict Catholic and Protestant
orthodoxy. Here it speaks in the name of transcen
dental philosophy, and is honourably represented by
the illustrious Baur, who has placed his vast scholar
ship and close dialectic power at the service of Hegel's
philosophy. As we read his work on the first three
centuries, we can but admire the marvellous keenness
of analytic power in the exposition of the various sys
tems. He represents the succession of doctrines as
the fatal development of a metaphysical theorem, which
he considers self-evident. It is the perpetual evolution
of the infinite mind, which from an affirmation draws
a negation, itself to become the parent of a new series
of similar evolutions. Thus Judaeo-Christianity and
Paulinism form the first antithesis, which resolves itself
into the broad speculation of the fourth gospel. Hence
we have the opposition of Gnosticism and Montanism
issuing in a fresh synthesis, which is the catholicity
of the third century, at once speculative at Alexandria
and realistic at Rome. This a priori philosophy, in
spite of the superior talent and learning of the his
torian, produces a very phantasmagoria.*
* This system is embodied in the 'various works of Baur, and
more especially in his " Discourses on the History of Doctrine,"
published after his death. With the exception of some interesting
monographs, Protestant France has produced of late years only
one important book on the " History of Doctrine," the work of M.
Eugene Haag. (Paris : Cherbuliez, 1862.) This is rather a huge

2l6 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
If the history of doctrine is bound to avoid the
generalisations of the spirit of system, it is not jus
tified in going to the other extreme, by following the
method of indefinite subdivisions, an opposite error
into which it has too often fallen. How many books
there are, held in high estimation, in which the doctrinal
history of an entire period is placed under the titles
of general chapters, such as the inspiration of the
Scriptures, the Trinity, redemption. Quotations from the
Fathers are given heterogeneously, as if all had laboured
together at the same theological weft and woof ! Such
an arrangement is altogether misleading. In truth,
a doctrine receives its significance from the atmosphere
in which it originates, and from its relation to the
system of which it forms a part. We admit that the
theologians are ranged in schools and groups when
the affinity between them is plain ; but nothing but
confusion is the result, when the plan is so enlarged
as to comprehend all the various tendencies of a great
epoch. Our first care, then, will be to mark out clearly
the different schools of thought, and next to seek in
their most illustrious representatives, in those who may
be regarded as their leaders, the central idea around
which all the other parts of the system are grouped.
This central thought we shall find to lie always in
the conception of the relation between man and God,
which is, in fact, the essential idea of religion; for
compilation than a history, strictly speaking : it takes the stand
point of pure rationalism. It is very unsatisfactory, especially in
relation to the first centuries. We wonder to find, for example,
a chapter on Gnosticism, which altogether ignores sources of infor
mation recently opened. Evidently the writer has not carried into
this great subject that thoroughness of scientific study which is the
glory of Protestant France.

BOOK II. — GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS. 217
religion is but the name for the mode of the relation
between the creature and his Creator. According as
this conception implies more or less the harmony
between the human and the divine, or rather the res
toration of that harmony, the entire system will be
modified in its scope and tendency. The idea of re
demption exerts a profound influence upon the whole
of theology. It is this which determines the notions
entertained of the person of Christ, and of the union
of the human and the divine in Him. The great
question between justification by faith or works, the
question of the sacraments, and of ecclesiastical autho
rity, all depend on the solution given to the first pro
blem. In truth, if man is really reconciled to God by
the sacrifice of Christ, he is delivered from all that
rose as a barrier between him and heaven. Religion
works henceforth from within rather than from without.
The nature of religious authority is changed, and the
moral and spiritual influence becomes the great factor.
If, on the other hand, there is no such thing as re
demption, man is still in bondage in every sense. It
is plain, then, that the doctrine of redemption is the
main spring, the great motive power of the whole dog
matic and ecclesiastical organism. The slightest de
flection of this centre of gravity is felt throughout the
entire sphere of religious thought.
It will be needful for us to consider, in our esti
mate of the various religious systems, the influence
of anterior philosophies. Whether philosophy be re
garded with distrust or not, it is still true that it exerts
an important influence in spiritual things. It creates
the intellectual language of an age, and introduces

2l8 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
more or less its own formulae. It is of the utmost
importance to distinguish in the theology of the
Fathers, between that which they derive from the
gospel and that which they have retained from the
great masters of ancient wisdom.* If, in the ripe age
of Christianity, Cartesianism could set its stamp upon
the theology of an entire century, it is not surprising
that Platonism in its various forms, more or less
modified, should have pressed heavily upon early
Christian thought, without, however, absorbing it,
unless in the form of heresy.! Heresy again is in
its manner a factor of dogma, or at least of theology,
whether by the reaction it calls forth, or b\r the secret
influence it exercises, subtly diffusing itself through the
moral atmosphere of the time. Gnostic heresy has
contributed powerfully by its attacks to strengthen the
theistic tendency, but it did not escape the influence
of those too intellectual conceptions of Christianity,
which transformed it at Alexandria into a divine Gnos
ticism, animated indeed with the vital breath of freedom,
but not preserving sufficiently the character of a work
of redemption and restoration. The exclusive pre
tensions of J udaeo- Christianity led Christian theology
to express, in all its beauty, the grand Christian idea of
humanity; but without dwelling on the more or less
rapid retrogression to sacerdotal and theocratic in
stitutions, it is clearly to the Judaising spirit we must
attribute the legal tendency which takes away the sim-
* See on this subject Ritter's " Histoire de la Philosophic
Chrerienne," vol. vi.
[ M. Vacherot, in his learned work, "Histoire de l'dcole d'Alex-
andrie," greatly exaggerates this influence of Platonist philosophy
on Christian doctrine.

BOOK II. — GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS. 2IO.
plicity of pardon. These transformations and devia
tions, however, only become manifest in gradual and
unequal progression, and do not hinder a large and
fruitful development of Christian thought, which on
many points has never been surpassed. As long as the
Church maintains its original freedom, error finds its
own correction. It is with religious society as with
those political systems which acknowledge no irreme
diable political evils. Absolutism alone is incurable
in every sphere, because it sets upon evil the seal of
an indisputable authority.
The Church is split up into two great sections.
The East, which comprehends Greece and Egypt,
is the country of speculation and of transcendental
idealism. Here the great schools of philosophy take
their rise. Here also is the cradle of theology, and
hence it derives that blending of the speculative with
the symbolical element by which it is specially cha
racterised. The West, which comprises proconsular
Africa, bears, both in its theology and practice, the
strong and rough impress of Rome. We shall have
first to note the antitheses, or, at least, the strongly
marked differences in the genius of these two great
Churches. But this division is not adequate to re
produce all the variety of theological schools in the
second and third centuries. Of these we may mention
four which were of primary importance. In the first
place we have the Greco-Asiatic school, with Justin
Martyr at its head ; in the second, the school of Alex
andrine Christianity, rendered illustrious by Clement
and Origen ; thirdly, the Gallio-Asiatic school of
Irenseus and Hippolytus, which forms the transition

220 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
between the East and West ; and, lastly, the African
school, which, after the declamations of its fervid
apostle, Tertullian, assumes its definite form under
Cyprian. In this order we shall present the history
of Christian theology, from Justin Martyr to the paci
fication of the Church.

CHAPTER II.
THE GRECO-ASIATIC SCHOOL.
The first group of theologians forming a school, or
at least presenting such a degree of intellectual kin
ship as may warrant us in classing them in one cate
gory, belongs at once to Asia and Greece. Asiatics by
birth, they speak the philosophical language of Pla-
tonism, which exercises a most powerful influence upon
their mode of thought, without casting doubt on their
sincerity as Christians. They are distinguished from
the Alexandrine school, only as the sketch is distin
guished from the finished work; they hold in truth,
in principle, and in germ, the grand ideas which were
developed in the writings of Clement and of Origen.
They have also the same imperfections in common, as
we shall show, after giving an exposition of their
system. § I. The Letter to Diognetus.
On the threshold of this period we meet with a most
remarkable work, which lifts us above the formulae
of religious science into the domain of direct intuition.
The " Letter to Diognetus," which has come down to
us without the name of the writer, is one of the most
precious treasures of Christian antiquity. It evidently
does not belong to the first century, for it has not the

222 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
apostolic impress; and the manner in which Judaism
is condemned in toto, is characteristic of the conflicts
of the following age. We might suppose the writer
to be a Marcionite, having cast off the vain specula
tions of Gnosticism ; a Paulinist, somewhat extreme
in his reaction against the synagogue, who failed to
distinguish, as Paul did, between the Judaism of
the prophets and that of the rabbis. The ardent en
thusiasm of the unknown writer for the new religion,
renders him unjust to that which preceded it. He thus
bears to us a sublime echo of the school of Ephesus,
of that doctrine of love which was the final utterance,
and, as it were, the legacy of the apostolic age, but
without the character of moderation which belongs
only to the truly creative era in the history of the
Church. That which constitutes the charm, the in
comparable beauty of the " Letter to Diognetus," is
its entire avoidance of the language of the schools ; its
thought and feeling spring from a common source.
Hence the simplicity and freshness of the exposition.
We seem to breathe in the pure, luminous atmosphere
of early morning, at the dawning of a day whose sky
will be often overcast with mists and clouds. And yet
this letter is the introduction to the theology of the
second century. The spirit of Justin Martjr is so
strongly marked in these pages, that they have been
often attributed to him, a supposition which, however,
cannot be really sustained, not only because of the
difference of the style, but also on account of many
very characteristic divergences of doctrine.*
* We do not refer to the last two chapters, which are an evident
interpolation.

BOOK II. — THE GRECO-ASIATIC SCHOOL. 223
The " Letter to Diognetus " was designed to estab
lish the claims of Evangelical religion in the pagan
mind. The writer pursues a historical method. He
shows what was the part filled by this religion in the
history of humanity, and how it was the divinely pre
pared climax of the long and obscure period extending
from the fall of man to the coming of Christ. Passing
by the apologetic point of view, and all that relates
to the delineation of the Christian life, we shall en
deavour to show what was the doctrinal idea of this
writing. Religion is presented to us in the twofold
character of a revelation and a redemption. True to
the genius of Greece, the writer dwells mainly on the
first character. To dispel the darkness of ignorance,
to enlighten the human mind by the true knowledge
of God, is the essential object of the Gospel and of the
Word, of whom the divine book is the perfect mani
festation. Truth is for Christians neither an earthly
discovery nor a perishable doctrine ; nor, again, is it the
depository of mere human mysteries. " The Almighty
God, Creator of all things, the invisible God, has sent
it down from heaven. His holy and incomprehensible
Word has come among men, and sought a fixed abode
in their hearts."* Before His coming none had suc
ceeded in finding the knowledge of God, as is proved
by the gross worship of idolatrous nations, and by the
vain imaginations of the philosophers.! Judaism re
ceives no higher meed than paganism, for if it had
some knowledge of the true God, it yet imagined that
He had need of material gifts, and offered to Him
* 'EyKarearripi^E raig KapSiaig airwv. (" Letter to Diognetus," ch. 7.
Hefele edition. Tubingen, 1847.) f Ibid., chap. 8.

224 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
sacrifices of blood. The true light, then, came only
with Jesus Christ. This light does not merely illu
minate the reason, it warms the heart and saves the
lost sinner. Christianity is a redemption, while it is also
a revelation, or rather it is the revelation of redemption.
"God has not hated us ; He has not been mindful of our
wickedness ; He has borne with our sins, and has given
His own Son as the price of our redemption — 'the
just for the unjust.' Righteousness alone could cover
sin. O sweet exchange, by which the iniquity of many
is hidden by One who is righteous, and the righteous
ness of one justifies many sinners !"t No exact doc
trinal statement can be drawn from these words ; they
contain the simple affirmation of the salvation of man
kind by the work of Jesus Christ. His righteousness
has covered our sins, and has redeemed us. The writer
goes no further. There is no trace in the "Letter to
Diognetus " of a satisfaction of the Divine anger ; for
God, it is said, did not hate us. The Son, then, had
not to endure a curse which had no existence ; He has
simply covered us with His holiness as with a shield.
The idea of sacrifice, properly so called, is not grasped
by the author. Hence the severity of his condemna
tion of the Jewish sacrifices. He even goes so far
as to regard them as superstitious acts, by which the
Jews sought to purchase by a gift the favour of God.*
Evidently, if the writer had admitted an expiation in
the true sense, he would have connected the work of
Christ with the sanguinary rites of the old covenant.
It is not possible to fill up this gap in the system
except by additions from other sources. The substitu-
* " Letter to Diognetus," chap. 9. f Ibid., chap. 3.

BOOK II. — THE GRECO-ASIATIC SCHOOL. 225
tion of the Righteous One for sinners is clearly taught,
but not His direct condemnation by God in the sinner's
stead. The death of the Son is a proof of the love
of the Father for us, and nothing more. The Cross
speaks only of love and of holiness. We do not pre
tend that this explanation is adequate, but it is the
explanation given by the " Epistle to Diognetus."
The idea of God is therein developed altogether
according to the thought of St. John. Omnipotence
and omniscience are not the primary attributes of the
Deity. God is more than the Most High and the All-
Wise. He is, in His essence, love. " To gain the
mastery over one's neighbour, to crush him in his
weakness, to acquire wealth and do violence to in
feriors, none of these things bring happiness to man ;
it is not thus he can imitate God. These things
have no affinity with the Divine Majesty. If thou
lovest thou shalt be the imitator of His mercy."* In
creating, He has no other motive than the good of His
creature ; the creature is therefore a work of His love,
and His glory is to be loved. He has been ever the
same ; He cannot change now or in any future time ;
He will be always kind, good, incapable of anger ; He
alone is good.t
The " Letter to Diognetus " affirms in explicit terms
that the Word is neither an angel, nor one of those
beings who govern terrestrial things, or to whom is
entrusted the administration of the heavenly world;
but that He is the Creator of heaven and earth. I The
* " Letter to Diognetus," chap. 10.
t Ovrog r)v piv dti roiovrog, Kai ian, Kai iarai, xpjjffroc Kai dya9bg Kai
dopytjrog Kai dXrf9r)g. (Ibid., chap. 8.)
X Avrov rov TByyirriv Kai Srjpiovpybv tuiv oXwv. (Ibid., chap. J.)
16

226 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
Word is thus distinct from every creature. The writer
does not enter further into the Divine ontology, and he
even seems to confound the second and third persons
of the Trinity in the passage which we have quoted
as to the dwelling of the Word in the human heart.
The Son knew the purpose of the Father to save the
world; He was one with Him in the mystery of the
eternal love. Although, as we have seen, the " Letter
to Diognetus " rejects all the culture of the ancients,
not recognising in it one gleam of truth, it does not
nevertheless assume a radical opposition between the
human and divine nature. No ; man is a divine being,
who, by love, has such a participation in the character
of his Creator, that he becomes God. Every be
nefactor is in truth the God of those whom he has
benefited.* Faith is the inward eye which sees God.
Moral freedom is eloquently asserted, in opposition to
Gnostic fatalism. "The Son was not sent, as might
be thought, to rule with a rod of iron, and to inaugurate
a reign of terror. No ; He came in clemency and
gentleness. God sent Him, like a king sending his
son, who is also a king; for He sent Him as a God
among men to save, and to persuade, not to. do violence,
for violence is not of God."t How, in truth, can love
be other than liberty ? This respect for human freedom
explains the delay in the mission of the Redeemer.
A moral correspondence was needed to be established
between Him and the race of man. He came when
mankind had had time to prove experimentally its
own wretchedness and powerlessness to save itself.
* Oeoc ylverai twv XaptavovTiov. (" Letter to Diognetus," chap. 10.)
f Ibid., chap. 7.

BOOK II. — THE GRECO-ASIATIC SCHOOL. 227
Such a theology cannot favour a system of external
authority. Hence all the episcopal pretensions so
largely advanced at this period are not even adverted
to. The whole Christian life is placed under the law
of liberty. The writer has formed too poor a concep
tion of the providential character of the old law, to
desire to assign it any place in the gospel economy.
He treats with ridicule the prescriptive observance of
Sabbath and fast. The current of his thought, as
well in its weakness and faultiness as in its truth and
strength, is such as to alienate him absolutely from
all hierarchical and sacramental tendencies : he is
rather led to a mysticism full of stern moral purpose.
This pure and gentle breeze was not strong enough
to fill the sails of the vessel. The paramount influence
must necessarily belong to more positive and aggres
sive schools. The " Letter to Diognetus " remains an
isolated monument, towering grandly over all that
surrounds it.
§ II. The Theology of Justin Martyr.*
That which is rightly called the theology of Justin
presents singular contrasts, as we may have anticipated
from the imperfectness of his apologetic method. This
generous thinker, who establishes so clearly the re
lationship between the human soul and God, and sets
aside dualistic fatalism in all its stages, falls neverthe
less under the influence of Platonism, and even adopts,
in some measure, the allegorical exegesis of the rabbis.
If he had followed the truly scriptural inspiration of
• * See Semisch's admirable monograph, "Justin der Mart.,"
vol. ii. Breslau, 1840. 16*

228 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
the " Letter to Diognetus," while disengaging its
thought from the fetters of the Greek philosophy, he
would have been led, by the most simple process of
deduction, to place the eternity of the Word on its true
basis. In fact, if God is by His very essence eternal
love, He must needs have an object to love apart from
and above the world, and this object can be no other
than the Word. Thus understood, the Word appears
as the necessary complement of the divine life. With
out the Son, God would not be the Father; He would
not be essential love. The " Letter to Diognetus " did
not draw this conclusion, because it was in no way me
taphysical ; but the idea would have forced itself upon
a mind so logical as that of Justin, if he had only
followed out this precious clue. Unhappily, while
acknowledging fully that the gospel is the manifesta
tion of the Divine mercy, he has not given to love
a central place in his theology. God is to him, as to
the more or less modified Platonism of his time, essen
tially the Absolute, the Incomprehensible. Hence the
Logos is the revealing organ, the Word, or the utter
ance of the Divine mind, rather than the only and
well-beloved Son. The Incomprehensible Absolute is
complete in Himself; He needed nothing but to know
Himself. He is under no necessity to seek His own
manifestation in a being distinct from Himself. He
may at will produce or beget such a being, or He may
remain self-contained. The distinction of the Divine
Persons is not, then, an eternal necessity of the abso
lute existence ; it is, as it were, an accidental circum
stance, having a beginning. His origin may indeed
be traced back to far distant ages, before the cceation

BOOK II. — THE GRECO-ASIATIC SCHOOL. 229
of the world, but He is not eternal. This is the first
error of the system. We shall see how long it weighed
upon Christian theology. This is the explanation of
the too intellectual character of the whole doctrine of
Justin, and of his depreciation of the redemption. The
Word being in its essence a revealer, the essential point
is the manifestation of the incomprehensible, and re
ligion is thus, primarily, a transcendental science.
The too abstract theodicy of Justin comes out in
passages like the following : " The ineffable Father,
who is the Lord of the universe, abides in the region
where He dwells, and nothing escapes Him of all that
may be seen and heard: not that He uses eyes or ears,
but by His indescribable power He perceives and is
cognisant of all things. He knows no such thing as
movement. No place, not the whole world itself can
contain Him, who is before the world was. How,
then, being such an One, could He speak to a man,
or be seen by him on an imperceptible point of earth ?*
The people could not behold His glory on Sinai, even
when it was only reflected from His servant Moses.
The priest dared not stand erect before the temple
built by Solomon, when the Ark had been placed in it.
Not Abraham, Isaac, or Jacob, nor any man has seen
the Father, the ineffable Lord of the universe, and
of Jesus Christ Himself."? He alone has been visible
who, according to the counsel and pleasure of God,
is at once God and the Son, and is called also the
Angel of the Lord fulfilling His will. He is named
* Uiog av ovv r) XaXr)oBiB irpog riva r) bipBBirf Tivi. (Justin, " Dial, cum
Tryph.," chap. 127. " Opera," p. 357. Cologne Edition, 1688.)
t "Ovre aXXog dv9punrojv tlSe rov rraripa Kai dppjjrov Kvpiov r&v iravruiv.
(Ibid., chap. 127.)

230 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
the Word, because He conveys to men the mind of
God.* Thus does Justin formulate with all possible
clearness the fundamental distinction made by Philo
between the invisible and the manifested God. The
hidden, ineffable God is alone the absolute, the first
principle, the Most High.
Decided and exact as Justin is in his affirmation of
the divinity of Jesus Christ, he does not admit either
His complete equality with the Father, nor even His
eternal pre-existence, at least as a distinct person. He
affirms His subordination in the most positive manner.
The Son is in the second rank.t He converses with
Abraham under the oak at Mamre, as the messenger
of the Most High God, who is in heaven, and fulfils
the charge entrusted to Him.J He it is again who
appears to Moses in the burning bush.§ The supreme
God could not appear in one corner of the world. He
manifests Himself by His Son, who is the ever ready
and obedient executor of His will/! All the theophanies
of the Old Testament refer to Him, since He is the
revealed God, the Word of the hidden and ineffable
Jehovah. If He is one with His Father in will, He
is, so to speak, numerically distinguished from Him.H
This subordination is the more readily to be understood
since the distinct and personal existence of the Son
had a beginning. God, before He called any creatures
into being, begat of Himself a power, which is called
* Justin, " Dial, cum Tryph.," chap. 128.
t 'Ev (tvrcpa x&pq. (" Apol.," ii. p. 70.) Mgr. Ginouilhac vainly
endeavours to weaken the force of this expression (ii. p. 115).
X 'O Kai &Bog Kai Kipiog rip Iv Toig ovpavolg VTrrfpBTwv. (" Dial, cum
Tryph.," chap. 56, p. 279.)
§ "Apol.," ii. p. 95. || " Dial, cum Tryph.," chap. 127.
*H 'ApSpip dXXd ov yvupy. (Ibid., chap. 86, p. 276.)

BOOK II. — THE GRECO-ASIATIC SCHOOL. 231
by the Holy Spirit the glory of the Lord, or the
Son, or Wisdom, or the Angel of the Lord, or God ;
or again, the Lord and the Word, sometimes again, the
Head over all things. He it is who appeared in human
form to Joshua, the son of Nun. He may bear these
various names, because He is ever fulfilling the will
of the Father, and because He was begotten by the
will of the Father.* Justin compares this generation
to the production of language by the lips of man,
which in no way diminishes the inward power from
which it proceeds, while it gives it nevertheless a dis
tinct form. The Word is likened again to fire, which
diminishes in nothing the central source from which
it springs, though it shoots upwards in a vivid flame. t
The Word is the Son truly produced by the Father,
and who was with the Father before any created life
began. To Him, as to the creative power, the words
were addressed : " Let us make man in our own
image." Solomon recognised Him as the Wisdom or
the reason of God. I Does it then follow that this
Word, who was from all eternity hidden with God,
was only called into distinct existence at the moment
of creation, or for the purpose of creation ? Such
seems to be the drift of the following words : " The
Father of the universe has no name, not having
been begotten. But it is not thus with His Son,
with Him who is called the Son by way of pre-emi-
* 'Apx>)v rrpb wdvnrv ruiv KriTpdrmv b Osbg yBykvvvKB Sivapiv rivd t?
iavrov XoyiKyv, rrori Si vibg, rrori Si ~2.o$ia, irori Si "AyyeXog, rrori Si &Bbg,
irori Si Kipiog Kai Aoyog " ixu ydp rrdvra rrpoaovopd'CeaBat, Ik tov vrrrjpBrelv
rip irarpiKip fSovXr)pan, Kai Ik tov drrb rov irarpbg 9BXr)iTBi yByBvrja9ai.
(" Dial, cum Tryph.," chap. 62, p. 284.) t Ibid-> chaP- 6f> P- 284-
X Touro to rip bvn d-rrb rov -rrarpbg TrpoGXrfBiv ykvvr\pa, wpb irdvrwv tuv
¦KOir\pdnnv ovvrjv rip narpi. (Ibid., chap. 62, p. 285O

232 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTLVNITY.
nence. This Word, who was one with the Father
before the creation, and alio n-as begotten nhen
in the beginning God created and formed all things by
Hir,: — this Word has a name."* Evidently the God
without a name, the Incomprehensible Absolute, only
emerged from the mysterious obscurity of His being
at the moment of creation. Then the Word within
took an outward and distinct form, at once calling
beings into life, and revealing to them the ineffable
Father. This doctrine is developed with incomparably
greater clearness by the successor of Justin, but it is
an inherent part of his system. He carefully avoided
everything approaching the idea of emanation, by as
cribing the generation of the Word to an act of the
Divine will, and not to a sort of metaphysical neces
sity. The doctrine of the Holy Spirit is mentioned
rather than developed by Justin. He places Him in
the third rank, and thus marks His subordination still
more decidedly.* He even goes so far as to identify
Him with the Word. X In a paragraph of a text of
Isaiah, which runs thus : " I am the Lord, and my
glory- will I not give to another" Tsa. xiii. S\. Justin
* 'O Xcr.oc — go riov —caifiaTurv Kai svrJjr ad -;*ii J-uevoo. ore tt)v doyriff
ci avrov —di-ra amai Kai ir.VuijTE. (" Dial cum Tryph.," chap.
62.) Domer seems to us not to give to the word ore its true
meaning, and arbitrarily changes it into on. in disputing the coinci
dence between the hypostatic production of the Word and the
creation. (Work cited, p. 423. These texts are decisive in setting
aside the absolutely Athanasian interpretation given to the system
of Justin by the writers we have quoted. We have here not a
mere apologetic accommodation, but a positive affirmation of the
subordination of the Son to the Father, in connection with the
formal negation of the eternal pre-existence of the Word as a
person. f " ApoL," ii. p. 60.
X Tu m zi'pa ot v oixbv d\Xo voij'ju Okpic. r) riiv \6yov. (Ibid.. 11 •
; 750

BOOK II. — THE GRECO-ASIATIC SCHOOL. 233
shows that God can only give His honour to Him who
is the Light of the nations, that is, to Jesus Christ.*
If he had believed in the distinct divinity of the
Holy Spirit, he would not have used such language
as this, which excludes the adoration of any divine
being save the Father and the Son. We see how
vague is as yet the Trinitarian idea.
The universe is the work of the Word of God. The
moral creature is its Alpha and Omega. Our world
was made with a view to man,+ a being in whose
nature we may, with St. Paul, distinguish three com
pact parts — body, soul, and spirit. J He stands in an
altogether peculiar relation to God and His Son, for
he participates in the Divine nature ; the higher life
in him is the germ of the Word, that spermatic Word
which is the most original and suggestive trait in
Justin's " Apology."§ Liberty is his appanage; it is,
moreover, the very law of the moral world — its essen
tial condition. || Evil is not traced to a natural fatality,
as by the Gnostics, nor is it identified with matter ;
it is a revolt of the will, an act of disobedience, the
abuse of liberty. "We do not allow," says Justin,
" that fate rules the actions of men, or the events of
their life. Good and evil alike depend on every man's
free choice." The angels were also created free and
responsible beings like men. Those who have become
demons have only themselves and the determinations
* " Dial, cum Tryph.," p. 289. f "Apol.," i. 43.
t " Frag, de Resurrect.," sec. 13. (Grabe, " Spicileg.," ii. p. 192.)
§ Ti ipipvrov wavri ykvBi dv9pu>Tru>v orrippa tov Xoyou. (" Apol.," ii.
P-46.) || ' AvteZoihtwv tujv ayyeXwv yevoQ, Kai rwv av0(joj7rojv H\v &px*)v l^otrjaev
0 Qebg. (Ibid., i. p. 45.)

234 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
of their own will to blame. If liberty be denied, there
can be no longer good or evil, merit or demerit, virtue
or vice. How, then, can it be explained that the same
man often changes his course of conduct? God has not
created man like animals or trees, which have no free
dom of choice; neither rewards nor punishments would
have any application to actions which are mechanical
or compulsory.* The moral law, however obscured by
the darkness of hell, still asserts its universal sway, and
every upright conscience bows before it.
It is the violation of this sacred law which has
formed the dark kingdom of evil oppressing us on
every side. Justin attaches the greatest importance
to the part taken by the demons in the history of
humanity. Without at all calling in question the fall
of Adam,t he dwells far more upon the deplorable
degradation which has followed in the track of idolatry,
and this he ascribes to the power of demons born of
adulterous relations between the angels and the
daughters of men. Thus has a great catastrophe been
brought upon our earth, for these angels were charged
by God with the guardianship of earth and of mankind.
They were His delegates and vicegerents. Their cor
ruption has made a radical revolution in the spiritual
order. The demons are beings endowed with a mys
terious but real power, who are capable of troubling
the imaginations of men by means of visions and
sorceries. They have thus brought men into bondage,
and succeeded in securing their worship for themselves,
as the false gods of the ancient world. Paganism is
Ou ydp iv-yrrBp rd dXXa, oTov SivSpa Kai mrpdiroSa, prjSiv SwdpBva
irpoaipkcBi wpdrrBiv, irroirjaBv 6 9ebg rbv dv9pumov. ("Apol.," ii. p. 8l.)
t " Dial, cum Tryph.," chap. 124, p. 352. •

BOOK II. — THE GRECO-ASIATIC SCHOOL. 235
therefore an infernal power, full of reality, working
upon our world for its destruction.*
In idolatry that power of evil is concentrated which
exercises so odious a tyranny over the human race.
Mankind, as a whole, is, as it were, the prey of a de
moniacal power, whose mysterious influence is to be
cancelled by another no less mysterious. Herein con
sists mainly the work of redemption. It is, first of all,
a glorious victory over the demons, and consequently
over sin ; its results are the emancipation and sancti-
fication of the human soul. In order to effect this, the
Word became incarnate in Jesus, born by miracle of
the Virgin. This appearing is not transitory, like the
theophanies of the Old Testament, but final. t It is
not partial, as in the individuals of human race
who have the germ of the Word within them. It is
absolute; the whole Word was manifested in Christ. I
There exists indeed a real affinity between Him and
humanity, for He renders it truly divine: "Just as
from one man, Jacob — surnamed Israel — one whole race
has received its name, so have we received ours from
Jesus, by whom we are born unto God. We are called,
and in truth we are, the children of God."§ In order
to give more precision to this thought, he quotes Psalm
Ixxxii., in which men are called gods, and concludes
with these words : " Power has been granted to men
to become gods and the sons of the Most High."|| It
follows that the incarnate Word realises in all its
* " Apol.," i. pp. 44, 56. f " Dial, cum Tryph.," chaps. 30-32.
X ToS rravrbg Xoyov. ("Apol.," i. p. 46.)
§ Kai ypeig dtrb tov yBvr)aavrog rjpdg tig 9bvv Xpmrov 9eov rixva d\t]9ivd
KaXovpB9a Kai lopkv. (" Dial, cum Tryph.," chap. 123, p. 353.)
|| Ibid., chap. 124.

236 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
fulness the idea or ideal of humanity. Justin does not
enter into any explanation of the union of the divine
and human in the Redeemer ; he simply affirms it. He
acknowledges Him as the complete representative of
the new humanity ; so that His death is the death
of the power of corruption, which clings to our
body since the Fall, and His resurrection becomes
our resurrection also. Corruption having crept into
human nature, it was necessary that the Redeemer
should put away the polluting substance. Now this
could only be done on condition that He who was
essential life should join Himself to the element which
had been thus polluted, and should destroy the corrup
tion, that so the presence of the immortal element
might preserve that which had been defiled.* " The
Word therefore assumed a body, in order to deliver us
from the corruption which had fastened itself upon our
nature. Thus upon the cross Jesus vanquished death.
Rising again, He gave us in His own person the resur
rection and eternal life."t We are truly identified
with Him, and become bone of His bone and flesh of
His flesh.
Upon the nature of the work of redemption itself,
Justin's views are indistinct. He commences by recog
nising the reality of the humiliation of the Word, His
conformity to our nature, in all save sin, by His sub
jection to the conditions of gradual development and
suffering. He, like all the fathers, quotes the prin-
* 'H Kara ipvoiv Zuji) rrpocB—XaKr/ rip rifv tp9opdv SB^apkvip, dipaviZovaa ph>
rt)v ip9opdv. (Grabe, " Spicileg.," ii. p. 172. "Ex Sermone contra
Gentes.") t Aifoi'e >)fili' iv iavnp tt)v Ik veKpuiv avdaraaiv. (Ibid., i. p. 178.
" De resurrect.")

BOOK II. — THE GRECO-ASIATIC SCHOOL. 237
cipal texts in which St. Paul speaks of the efficacy
of the death of Jesus ; but that death really signifies,
in his view, nothing more than a victory over the
powers of darkness. This is what he calls the mystery
of the Cross, the indication of which he traces not only
in the types of the Old Testament, but also in the most
simple popular usages.* " We ask of God," he says
to Trypho, "to keep us by Jesus Christ from the
power of the demons, to whom we once rendered
homage. We invoke His aid as our Redeemer, and
the demons tremble before the power of His name.
Adjured by this name of Jesus, who was crucified under
Pontius Pilate, the procurator of the Jews, they obey
us, so that it may be evident to all that the Father
has given us the power to bring the demons into sub
jection to the economy of His passion." t
Upon the cross the type of the brazen serpent found
its antitype. The holy Victim there vanquished the
old serpent. Here is the profound mystery of the
defeat of the serpent who caused the revolt of Adam.j
Justin calls it the mystery of the wood of the cross. §
There the powers of darkness were exorcised, the spell
of their sorceries was broken. The cross is again
compared to the wood by which Elisha drew up the
axe which had fallen into the water : it draws Us
up out of the deep, into which our sins had plunged

* "Dial, cum Tryph.," chaps. 90, 91.
f "Qffrc Kai rd Saipovia vrrordirijeoBai rip bvbpan avrov Kai ry rov
yBvopkvov ndBovg avrov oiKovopiif. (Ibid., chap. 30, p. 247.)
X Mvorr)piov iKrjpvffOE, Si ov KaraXvBiv piv rrjv Siivapiv rov o$Btog rov Kai
rrjv rrapa&aaiv vrrb tov ASdp yBvka9ai Ipyaaapkvov, iKrjpvaot. (Ibid., chap.
91, p. 322.) ,
§ BiXov rovrb pvarr/piov rov aravpov. (Ibid., chap. 138, p. 367.)

238 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
us.* Justin contents himself with only affirming the
triumph of Jesus over Satan ; the idea of a ransom paid
to our tyrant has not yet presented itself, nor does he
speak of a ransom demanded by God. If he dwells
upon the sufferings of the Redeemer, if, to use his
own beautiful expression, he sees in these the charac
teristic mark of the Christ, those sufferings are not
in his view a sacrifice for sin ; the death of Christ
is not an expiation, properly so called. His interpre
tation of the Jewish sacrifices, in which he sees only
the punishment of the idolatry of the chosen people,
shows that he has not understood the deep need of
reparation, which will net let the human conscience
rest, and of which the Levitical worship was the
sublime expression ; while, at the same time, it held
forth to view, under a transparent veil, the great
expiation of Calvary. "The sacrifices," said Justin,
" were on account of the sins of the people and their
idolatry; but no real necessity could be urged in sup
port of them." t It was the adoration of the golden
calf, in his view, which led to the distinction between
animals clean and unclean. All is then accidental,
external, in these fundamental institutions of Mo-
saism, which had, however, no meaning at all, except
as expressing the need of reparation and expiation. If
he makes an exception in the case of the paschal
lamb, he does not regard even that as a victim in
the proper sense of the word, but as a figure of the
Christ-deliverer, whose blood saves us because it was
shed in His victorious conflict with the demons. J He
only compares Him to the goat Azazel, because
* " Dial, cum Tryph-," ch. 86. f Ibid., ch. 22. J Ibid., ch. 40.

BOOK II. — THE GRECO-ASIATIC SCHOOL. 239
upon Him rested the execration of the Jewish people.*
Nothing more can be drawn from his declaration that
Christ is a sacrifice for all those who repent. t The
crucifixion is indeed an immolation, which brings sal
vation to us, but that immolation is not a debt paid to
God and to Satan ; it is a victory over hell. In order
to achieve this triumph and to heal us, Jesus must
needs take part in our griefs, I and primarily in that
death whose dart was broken in His breast. But in
achieving this conquest over hell, He never descended
into hell for a single instant, nor did He, in any true
sense, so experience the anger of His Father, that
His sufferings might be set in the balance against
our sins. Justin plainly asserts that God gave His
Son up to endure cruel anguish for us. The most
bitter drop in this cup of anguish was that of which
Paul speaks, when he says : " Cursed is every one that
hangeth on a tree." But the curse which rested upon
this holy Victim in no way resembled that which falls
upon the violator of the law. "Just as God did not
contradict Himself, when He ordered the serpent of
brass to be made (though He had forbidden the making
of images in a general manner), so there is no contra
diction between the declaration of the law, that every
one that hangeth on a tree is accursed, and the fact
that no curse is pronounced on the Christ of God, who
was to be the Saviour of all those who had committed
acts worthy of condemnation." § All men, Gentiles and
* 'Qc drroiropTraiov avrov TrapBiripTpavro ol rrpBotvTBpoi. (" Dial, cum
Tryph.," chap. 40, p. 259.)
t Ilpoo-ipopd irv irrip rrdvnov rdv ptravoBiv /3ovXopivtnv. (Ibid., ch. 40.)
{ Ibid., chap. 103.
§ 'Ouic in Si Kai Kara rov Xptorov tov 9eov Kardpa KB'irai, Si ov aioZ,> 1
irdvrag roig Kardpag d£ia rrpd%avTag. (Ibid., chap. 95, p. 322.)

24O THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
Jews, have justly incurred the Divine malediction. If
upon Jesus a curse was laid for them, it was assuredly
not that which would have justly come upon them by
direct visitation of God.
" These words of the law, Cursed is every one that
hangeth on a tree," Justin expressly says, "do not
confirm our hope in the Crucified One in this sense,
that the curse which visits Him comes from God ;
but they are a declaration in the name of God
that you all, and those who are like you, will fail
to recognise in the crucified One, Him who is before
all else, the eternal priest of God, destined to be
both King and Christ. You may see with your own
eyes the fulfilment of this prophecy, for in your syna
gogues you call all those accursed who bear the name
of Jesus ; while the Gentiles, passing from insults to
injuries, put to death any one who simply says, ' I
am a Christian.' If Jesus Christ then has borne the
curse of all men, it is in the sense of being made the
object of universal execration."* After this commentary
on the words of Justin, given by himself, there is no
more room for doubt. t The cry of mysterious deso
lation uttered by Jesus on the cross, has no more
special meaning than the other expressions of His
* Kai ydp rd BiprjpBva Iv rip vopip, o-t i—iKardparog irag b KpBpdpevog
irri £iXov, ovx w£ rov Bbov Karapoipkvov rovrov rov io-rai'potpki'ov, dXX' big
TrpoBirrovTog rov Bbov to vip' vpuv — ajvwr Kai rojv bpo'nov vfiiv pi) iiriGrapkvov,
rovrov Eivai rbv rrpb rrdvruiv bvra. (" Dial, cum Tryph.," chap. 96,
p. 323.)
X The quotations already given suffice to foil absolutely the
attempt made by M. Pozzy, in his historical work on the " Doctrine
of Redemption," to connect Justin's idea with the traditional ortho
doxy of our own day. Justin emphatically denies that Jesus was
in any sense whatever the object of the Father's curse ; the curse
of man is all that is intended by the expressions used.

BOOK II. — THE GRECO-ASIATIC SCHOOL. 24I
soul's anguish; and the prayer which mingles with His
groans is only a sublime lesson, teaching us to flee
to God in the hour of death, and to ask Him to deliver
us from the dark and evil angel.* It follows that,
in his view, redemption is the great and mysterious
battle gained by the incarnate and crucified Word over
Satan and his armies, in the dark night of Calvary.
Salvation preserves indeed its character of reality ; it
is not simply a declaration, it is dependent on the
death of Christ, which is not a mere symbol, but a real
work of Divine love. Justin thus holds the great fact
of the Gospel faith, incomplete as is his conception
of it; but this does not justify any in attributing to
him ideas which do not belong to him, and which
did not make their appearance in theology until a much
later period.
The resurrection of Christ occupies a large place
in the writings of Justin. t Although he uses freely
the texts of St. Paul on the appropriation of salvation,
it is certain that he uses them in a strangely altered
sense. How could it be otherwise ? The inadequacy
of his conception of redemption must necessarily be
manifested in his idea of faith. When the work of
Christ is considered as the complete re-establishment
of our relation with God, by the redeeming sacrifice,
nothing remains for man but to ratify that which has
been accomplished for him on the cross, and to unite
himself with this new humanity which has found grace
in the eyes of the Lord. The act of faith which, to
use the expression of St. Paul, plants us together with
Jesus in His crucifixion and resurrection, makes our
* " Dial, cum Tryph.," chap. 105. f Ibid., chaps. 106, 107.
17

242 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
own all that He has endured and achieved for us.
But this is not so when His work is conceived as a
simple victory over the powrers of darkness. We are
indeed freed from their yoke ; but we have, by our own
efforts, to win the favour of God for ourselves. Jewish
legalism enters by this breach made in the Christian
system of morality. Justin Martyr is upheld on this
slippery foothold by his true Christian feeling, and -he
joyfully repeats the grand statements of justifying faith
which abound in the epistles of the apostle of the
Gentiles. Nevertheless the discrepancy of thought is
patent.* It is especially manifest in the view taken by
Justin of the relations of the Old and New Covenant.
Judging of his system from without, and superfi
cially, we should be ready to say none ever carried
further than he the opposition to Judaso-Christianity.
He energetically repudiates all that belongs to the
rites and observances of Judaism ; he professes the
broadest universalism, lowers all national barriers, and
openly avows that the children of Abraham have no
longer any peculiar religious prerogative, but that
the Church is the Israel of God. He as strongly denies
the existence of any special priesthood, declaring that
every man is a priest of Jesus Christ ; he will not
recognise any holy day, any more than he will admit
a holy caste. The Lord's day has never, in his view,
been hallowed in lieu of the Jewish Sabbath. The
sanctuary, where alone sacrifice might be offered, has
for ever perished. Christians are the temple of God,
and all ordinances concerning purifications and wash
ings are among the old things passed away. Spiritual
* See on this point Ritschl's " AltcathoL Kirche," p. 228, et sea.

EOOK II. — THE GRECO-ASIATIC SCHOOL. 243
fasting, which consists in abstinence from evil, has
taken the place of the material fast, and sacrifices
of blood have vanished before the living sacrifice of
the soul, as circumcision has given place to baptism.
On all these points Justin asserts the supremacy of
evangelical spirituality. "We are," he says, "the spi
ritual Israel, brought to God by the crucified Christ.*
A new circumcision has become necessary, and you
glory only in that which is in the flesh. The new law
teaches us to observe a perpetual Sabbath, and you
only consecrate to God a single day.t When you have
eaten unleavened bread you think you have fulfilled
the law of God; yet the Lord our God takes no pleasure
in such observances. If there is among you a false
swearer, a thief, who forsakes his evil way ; if an
adulterer repents and turns to God, then may you have
a true and joyful Sabbath-keeping to the Lord. Put
away from you all wrath, and envy, and covetousness.ji
Eat that unleavened bread which consists in ceasing
from sin."
After such utterances as these, it may well be asked,
where was the Judaising spirit in such a man ? With
regard to outward institutions, beyond question he was
absolutely free from it ; but in the tenor and governing
principle of his doctrine it was no less evident. In
truth, he presents Christianity rather as a new law
than as the covenant of grace and free pardon. Doubt
less moral obligation is not relaxed by the gospel, since
* 'lo-purfXiTiKbv rh dXr\Bivov, irvEVfiariKov. (" Dial, cum Tryph.," chap.
II, p. 229.)
f "ZakGariZEiv iipdg b Kaivbg vipog Siarravrbg IBiXei, Kai ipEig piav
dpyovvrtg r'/pipav, tvit-Mtiv SokbItb. (Ibid., chap. 12.)
{ Ibid., chap. 12, pp. 18-25. 17 *

244 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
it demands of us holiness. The law of liberty is the
perfect law, but it is distinguished from the old law, in
that it connects the moral life with a salvation already
accomplished, and does not require it as, in any sense
or degree, the discharge of our debt towards God ;
a discharge which the sinner has no power to
offer, and the futile endeavour after which will only
plunge him into deep distress. This was the point
on which Justin failed. Jesus Christ, according to his
teaching, came rather to reveal to us a new law, by
fulfilling which we may make ourselves acceptable to
God, than to bring us a full deliverance. He is the
second and divine Moses, the legislator who initiates
a purified Judaism ; but as this second Judaism was
already contained in principle in the Decalogue, and
needed only to be freed from the ceremonial additions
and later institutions, added because of the sins of the
people, the line of demarcation in the moral point of
view fluctuates dubiously between the Old and New
Testament. " The law proclaimed on Horeb," says
Justin, " has grown old, and is for you alone ; our law
is for all men everywhere. It is new and eternal, and
has been given to us by Christ, who is our legislator."*
The idea of human merit already reasserts itself,
though with diffidence. The chief end of the sacrifice
of Christ is to place us in a condition in which we may
achieve some merit of our own, the power of Satan
being broken, and death vanquished, and, as it were,
swallowed up in victory by the resurrection of the
Word. Among these possible merits Justin mentions
repentance, a theoretical knowledge of Jesus Christ
* nopEo-riv 6 vopoBirrig- (" Dial, cum Tryph.," chap, ii.)

BOOK II. — THE GRECO-ASIATIC SCHOOL. 245
and of His work, and the practice of that which is
good. " If you repent of your sins," he says, " if you
recognise Jesus as the Christ, and if, in keeping His
commandments, you own that it was the Father's will
that He should suffer these things, in order that you
might be healed by His wounds, you will obtain the
pardon of sin."* The true and the false are subtly
blended in this statement, for doing good is made one
of the conditions of forgiveness. Christians and the
saints of the Old Covenant have, in fact, one and the
same path of salvation set before them. The law of
Moses enjoins on its followers to fulfil that which is
essentially in harmony with goodness and piety. Thus
all those who have realised the essential good, general
and eternal, are agreeable to God, and will be saved
by Christ in the resurrection day ; alike the Jews who
lived before the law, Noah, Enoch, and Jacob, and the
Gentiles, with those Jews who have acknowledged
Jesus as the Son of God.t This passage is decisive,
and it strongly limits the significance of the other
declaration already quoted : " He was to suffer, to
purify by His blood those who believe in Him." I
Justin nevertheless holds a position raised above all
the various schools of Judseo-Christianity, by the ele
vation of his doctrine of the Divine Word. The idea of
the sacrament occupies small place in his writings. He
attaches great importance to baptism ; he contrasts it
* Ei piv ovv pEravoovvrtg irri roig r)paprr\pkvoig Kai ImyvbvrBg rovrov
Aval rov Xparrbv Kai tpvXdoaovrBg avrov rag tvroXdg ravra ipyaBTB on (o
rrarffp avrov yBiXr/ae ravra rraOtiv, 'iva rip piiiXuiin airov 'iaaig ykvrjrai
rip ykvBi riov dv9pt!nro)v) , dipEoig vpTv rwv dpapnuiv iarai. (" Dial, cum
Tryph.," chap. 95, p. 323.) f Ibid., chap. 45.
J 'tovg maTBiovrag pvatrai Ik 9avdrov to aipa rov %fyioro5. (Ibid.,
chap, in, p. 3380

246 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
with natural birth, which has a character of necessity,
and leaves us in ignorance, while baptism renders us
the chosen children of God by the forgiveness of our
sins* But it only produces its glorious results by
virtue of a living faith ; it bears no resemblance to
the Jewish purifications, for all the waters of a flood
would not wash away our sins ; it purifies us by faith
in the crucified Christ. Baptism is only beneficial to a
repenting sinner ;t then it becomes the source of life,
and may well be called illumination, because of the
truth which has been taught to the convert, and which
it symbolises,} Justin does not speak of the baptism
of children, but only of their instruction^ On the
Lord's Supper his language is less exact. He seems
to suppose a union of the Word with the eucharistic
elements, which are no longer ordinary bread and wine.
Just as the Word assumed our flesh, so does He
become incarnate again in these elements, which, by
a sort of transmutation, form food for the soul.|| Else
where, however, Justin insists upon the idea that the
Lord's Supper is a memorial of redemption. The
bread is offered in memory of the body of Christ, and
the wine of His blood. IT No exact or clear result can
be drawn from this mystical language. Justin adopts
the principle of an absolute theopneusty in the inspira-
* "Omirg pi) dvdymjg ritcva pifSi dyvoiag pkvioptv, dXXd rrpoaipBOEug Kai
imarljpric, dipiatidg rs dpapnwv rixiaptv iv rip 'vSari. ("Apol.," i. p. 94.)
f Touro ikbU'O rb rrwrrjpiov Xovrpbv r)vf o nirriTO roig fxtrayivGiGKOVGi.
("Dial, cum Tryph." chap. 13.) J "Apol.," i. p. 94.
§ Oi IpaBrfTBvBrfGuv Ik iraiSwv. (Ibid., ii. p. 62.)
|| Tr)v St tvxrjg Xbyov tvxaptorrj9iio'av rpo$r)v t£ rjg aTpa Kai adpKtg Kard
pi:ra€oXi)v rpiipovrai ijpittv, Ike'ivov 'Irfaov Kai odpKa Kai aTpa iSiSdx9r]pBV
iivai. (Ibid., ii. p. 98.)
^T Uepi too aprov tig dvdpvnaiv rov Gitiparorroir\aaa9ai avrbv, rov rrorr\piov
tig dvdpvifoiv rov a'iparog avrov. (" Dial, cum Tryph.," chap. 70.)

BOOK II. — THE GRECO-ASIATIC SCHOOL. 247
tion of the Scriptures. The prophets received their
utterances directly from the Word.* It must not be
forgotten, however, that he is speaking only of the Old
Testament, and that he holds that particular prophecy
closed with Jesus Christ, in whom it found its con
summation. Thenceforth it becomes, like the priest
hood, a gift common to all Christians. This evidently
implies a remarkable extension of inspiration under the
New Covenant. To the objection made by Trypho,
that if the Christ, according to the prophet Isaiah, was
to receive the Holy Spirit, He could not be possessed
of the Godhead, which has need of no gift — Justin
thus replies : " The gifts of the Spirit are not bestowed
on the Word as if they were necessary to Him, but
because they were to find their permanent abode in Him,
so that no prophet was any more to arise from among
men from that time, which is a fact patent to all." The
Spirit then rested from His work, at the coming of
Him who was to bring to a close the ancient economy
for the men of His time. These gifts having thus
found their culminating point in Him, are diffused
according to the sacred oracles, by the power of the
Holy Spirit among all believers, according as they are
judged worthy of it. This is the miracle foretold by
the prophets when they put into the lips of the glorified
Christ the words : " Behold, I will pour out my Spirit
upon all flesh, and your sons and your daughters shall
prophesy." Justin adds : " Men and women may be
seen among us possessing these virtues of the Holy
Spirit. "t Thus Justin recognises no specific difference
* Tov Kivovvrog airoig Btiov Xoyov. (" Apol.," i. p. 76.)
+ ' ' AverravaaTO oiv (to rrvtvpu) iX96vrog Ikb'ivov, iv roinp dvdrravaiv

24S THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
in the inspiration of Christians. He does not de
preciate the authority of the apostles. He frequently
appeals to their reminiscences or their writings as the
basis of his teaching, but he does not claim for them
the monopoly of the prophetic gifts, which belong to the
whole Church. Nowhere does he refer to any rule of
faith, any constituted tradition, nor does he enter in
any degree into questions of internal organisation. His
conception of the universal priesthood is clearly con
trary to the episcopal monarchy, of which he makes
no mention. He places Peter and the sons of Zebedee
exactly on the same level, in speaking of the surnames
given to them by the Master.* The noble confession
of Cephas wins for him his glorious name. Justin
proclaims the second coming of Jesus Christ to break
the power of antichrist, and depicts His reign on
earth in the glowing colours of the millenarians. He
believes in an earthly Jerusalem, and does not admit
the restoration of the Jews.t With the whole ancient
Church, he holds that there is an intermediate state, in
which souls are placed under the guardianship of a
mysterious power ; but as he does not ascribe to their
sufferings any expiatory virtue, there is a broad gulf
between his idea and that of purgatory." The resur
rection of the body is presented by him in a purely
materialistic sense, vers- unlike the lofty spirituality
of St. Paul. He seems to admit the eternity of suffer-
\a(<vra copara a ro'ig i-' dvrbv ¦mcrrsvovm Sicumv, £>g d£iov traffrov
i—tara rat, Kai -no' riplv iar'tv icuv Kai BijXtiag, Kai apatvag xaoio-fiara d~b
rod m-tvparog rov 9tov iXovrag. (•• DiaL cum Tryph./' ch. 87, p. 315.)
* Ibid., chap. 106, p. 333.
t Ibid., chaps. 80, Si. He acknowledges, however, that upon this
point Christians differ. ; Ibid., chap. 105.

BOOK II. — THE GRECO-ASIATIC SCHOOL. 249
ing ; at least, he uses the Greek term, which gives
occasion to so much ambiguity, without any suggestion
of a final restoration.*
Such is this system, abounding in contradictions,
incomplete, as was to be expected from a first essay at
theological elaboration. Neither the idea of God, that
of the Word, or of redemption, is apprehended in its
true character. Platonist and Jewish elements blend
with the immortal truth of the Gospel, and obscure it.
It beams forth nevertheless at frequent intervals, like
the sun piercing the clouds. The adoration of Christ,
as the great centre of religion and the Saviour of the
world, throbs and glows in his fervid words. Recollec
tions of the Greek philosophy do not prevent the grand
idea of the Divine Word and of His moral affinity with
humanity, from shining forth in all its splendour. Moral
freedom, the vivifying breath of the system, excludes
all pantheistic dualism, and the indefeasible claims of
the New Covenant, and of those whom Christ has
made free, are maintained with admirable spirituality,
notwithstanding the too evident intrusion of a new
legalism. Through all hisverbosity and forced typology,
we recognise the noble martyr whose dying words
were : " I am too little to say anything great of Christ !"
He felt himself overwhelmed by the Divine truth which
he sought to define, and he was the first to consign
to the testing fire all the hay and straw that had
mingled with the marble and gold in the construction
of his system. Justin deserves to occupy an honour
able place in this perilous but necessary work of re
ligious science. * Aioiviov vvp. ("Apol.," ii. 87.)

250 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
§ III. Athenagoras, Theophilus of Antioch, Tatian.
The influence of Platonism is more manifest in
Athenagoras than in Justin. He also starts from the
idea of the ineffable, impassible God, enveloped in
light inaccessible.* The Word is the eternal reason of
God ; He is in the Father and the Father in Him.
The Holy Spirit is the Divine Wisdom, the bond of
unity between the Father and the Son, who shone in
the soul of the prophets as a ray proceeding from the
sun. The Godhead thus conceived forms a perfect
world. t The Word is inseparable from God, as thought
is inseparable from mind.t Creation was not, then,
a necessity ; the world was formed solely by the good
pleasure of God and of His free love. This is the
truly Christian feature in the system of Athenagoras.
The Word was called into distinct existence in order
to give organisation to chaotic matter, and to impart
to it form and harmony. The universe finds in Him
its active principle and idea. Thus he could say:
" The Lord possessed me in the beginning of His way,
before His works of old."^
The Word possesses, then, an ideal existence, before
the creation of the world ; but the idea only enters
on a complete existence, and becomes an energy, a
force, a positive power, at creation. He is not, however,
simply the idea of the world, since the world is not
* AiSiov doparov Kai drra9ij Kai aKaraXifrrrov Kai ay(up//roi', 0wri Kai
KdXXti dvBKSiriyi'iTip irtpii\opivov. (Athenag., " Leg. pro Christ.," p. 10.)
t TldvTa ydp b Btog iartv avrbg aiinp Koapog r^Xtiogj Trvtvpa, fvvapig,
Xoyog. (Ibid., p. 15.) X Ibid., p. 17.
§ UpCJTOV yivvi}pa ilvai rip rrarpi, ovx org ytvoptvov (e£ dpxijg ydp 6
Btbg voi'g aiSiog ail', e!\ei' avrbg iv iavnp rov Xoyov) dU' tjg ruv vXikuiv
tiia Kai ivipytta th'ai irpoBXBiov. (Ibid., p. IO.)

BOOK II. — THE GRECO-ASIATIC SCHOOL. 25 1
necessary to His being; but when God has once
determined to create the world, it is He who gives
shape to formless matter, and makes it express the
thought of God. Of the origin of this formless matter,
Athenagoras gives no explanation. He certainly does
not identify it with evil, since evil has no existence in
primeval creation ; but it has, at least, a strong native
propensity to sin, for after the angels have been placed
in charge of the various spheres of existence, it is
the angel of matter who is the first to be led astray, and
who entices the world into evil.* Sin consists entirely
in sensuality. Thus the doctrine of Athenagoras tends
to asceticism, though he keeps it within moderately
reasonable limits. He tolerates marriage only for the
sake of the multiplication of the race. By a curious
contradiction, however, he holds the resurrection of
the body in the most material sense.t His views are
identical with those of Justin on the subject of idolatry
and of the inspiration of the prophets. He absolutely
repudiates sacrifices of blood, even under the Jewish
covenant, and nowhere gives any theory of redemption.
Theophilus of Antioch establishes a closer relation
than Athenagoras between the creation of the world
and the external or hypostatic production of the
Word. Like his predecessors, he insists upon the
incomprehensibility of God, who can never be known
in Himself, but only by His works.J The great design
of the material creation is to reveal God to man,
and man himself has been called into existence for the
knowledge of God, who, without him, would have been
* "Leg. pro Christ.," p. 27. + Ibid., pp. 42, 43.
X 'Axarpnrog. (Theophilus of Antioch, " Contra Antolyc," p. 71.)

252 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
as a ra\- of light without a reflector.* The Word
was, until the time of creation, in the bosom of God,
simply in a virtual state. The Father produced Him
by His wisdom or His spirit, and made Him His organ
for the creation of the world. He is the principle,
the beginning of which Moses spoke, when he said:
"In the beginning God created the heavens and the
earth." t He is called also the Wisdom, the Spirit,
and by Him the soul cf the prophets was illuminated.
Such a notion of the Trinity is utterly vague and con
fused, though the word itself is employed for the Srst
time by Theophilus. All the theophanies since that
of the Garden of Eden are ascribed to the Word, who
represents the Father, the absolute God, of whom
He is ever the eternal reason. Theophilus expressly
recognises that the world was created out of nothing.
Man is a being truly divine, as is shown by the solem
nity of the act of his creation. Before calling h™ into
existence, indeed, God holds converse with the Word,
and says: " Let us make man in our likeness."^ He,
like all the world, of which he is the king, came pure
from the hands of God, but he afterwards involved
the whole in his fall. The ordeal of Eden was not
intended to prove his ruin, but, on the contrary, to
raise him by obedience to the height of God. Had he
obeyed, he would have been declared God, and raised
to heaven.§ His rebellion is the sole cause of his present
* "ITftlXjTGW orQpurm- anym y yroeQp. (a Opera,3 p. 88.)
¦f "EgMr ov* o &o£ Tor toiT-r Xeyov hrtKofkr.: a ^ rote iime o^Xnjj^ms,
t-iEj'r^bu' arrinr pfza rqg coftw C80ia£ cSanCBpEM£ Tpo rvm SXmt .we.wm
riw Xf^or, &xaP ("zwpfw rim rs"* arrxm jeyangtEmi - Acycro aaXVs «v
irajH &m. (Ibid, p. SS. ' 2 Ibid, p. 96.
5 "Ozw£ nXitos y/fvifsmee, in cm Ose£ muajfiac, orrur aa a£ rim
stfnjw am%. (Ibid, p. IOI.)

BOOK II. — THE GRECO-ASIATIC SCHOOL. 253
wretchedness. The doctrine of redemption is scarcely
indicated ; the rejection of idolatry and the practice of
good works set us in the way of salvation.* Theo
philus of Antioch does not fall into the errors of a
false asceticism ; he holds that marriage is not to be
despised, for in such a case a man pours contempt on
his own father and mother.t
We find the Greco-Asiatic school descending rapidly
the steep incline which ends in the confusion of the
Word with the world. The " Exhortation against the
Greeks," by Tatian, who was at first a disciple of Justin,
marks a sensible advance in this direction. According
to him, God was absolutely alone before the creation
of the world. Nevertheless everything existed in Him
potentially, things visible as well as invisible ; they
were latent, so to speak, in the virtual existence of
the Word.} We are thus brought very near to the
Alexandrine idea of emanation. The Word was
brought into distinct existence by a positive act of
the Divine will.§ He is the first-born of the Spirit,
and He becomes the Creator of the world, which He
educes from nothing. He is born not by division, but
by communication of the essence of the Father. Thus
He takes nothing from the Father, as one torch being
lighted from another does not diminish the parent
flame. || Does not the word spoken leave intact the
thought of which it is the expression ? Tatian allows
that matter was created by God, and that consequently
it is not identical with evil. He also enunciates, as
* " Opera," p. 1 10. f Ibid., p. 104.
X Tr)v dpxrjv Xoyov Siivapiv, — avv avnp Blip rd rravrd. (" Contra
Gryec. orat.," p. 145.) § OiXnpan, p. 145. || Ibid.

254 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
plainly as Justin, the doctrine of moral freedom. Never
theless, matter is ultimately the source from which
the evil influence proceeds. This influence fascinates
the human soul, which is not of divine race, and by
nature immortal ;* hence matter will never be restored.
From this point to gnostic dualism there was but
a step. Conversion is represented as simply a return
to good. The creating hides from view the redeeming
Word. It is easy to understand that the author of
such a system should have readily confounded the
moral drama with cosmology. It would be unjust to
interpret this as the necessary consequence of Justin's
teaching. Tatian brings into prominence its dangerous
aspect, without destroying its germs of fruitfulness
and beauty. * " Contra Grasc. orat,," p. 1 52.

CHAPTER III.
THE THEOLOGY OF THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL.
CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA.*
Our present task is greatly abridged by the full ex
position we have already given of the apologetic portion
of the theology of Clement and Origen, which is their
most lasting title to fame.t The school of Alexandria
was devoted primarily to the defence of Christianity.
It pleaded this great cause before the tribunal of high
culture, and it may be said that it pleaded successfully.
Its method may have been long forgotten ; it has
not grown obsolete. We could not, even in this
nineteenth century, find higher or safer ground than
its broad and beautiful demonstrations of the deep
harmony existing between the Gospel and the spi
ritual needs of the soul, of the legitimacy of religious
assurance founded upon faith, of the preparation for
the Gospel carried on amidst all the darkness of
paganism. We need not go again over this ground,
previously trodden. We have already brought into clear
* Beside the works already quoted, I may mention the book
of the Abb6 Cognat, upon Clement of Alexandria : " Clement
d'Alexandrie, sa doctrine et sa polemique." Paris : Dentu, 1859.
The writer there treats almost exclusively of the question of tra
ditionalism. t See "Martyrs and Apologists;" the second volume of this
work.

256 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
light both the great merit and the grave defect of the
Alexandrine theology. It cannot be too highly extolled
for the absolute triumph it gains over dualism, by its
insistance on the essential harmony existing between
the human and the divine, and in a more general
manner, between nature and God. But it is never
theless open to objection for its exaggeration of the
intellectual element in the conception of religion, and
for its too close adherence to the principles of Pla
tonism. We shall trace this twofold character through
out the whole of the system developed by these illus
trious and liberal thinkers.
§ I. The Tlieodicy of Clement of Alexandria.
The idea of God seems at first to be even more
purely an abstraction in the mind of Clement than
of Justin. Judging only by certain passages in his
writings, we should say that he accepts the absolute
idealism of the neo-Platonists, and rests in a pure
negation. He desires that the Christian Gnostic, who
aspires to true knowledge, should not be like ordinary
men, whom we see circumscribed by the material, as the
snail in his shell, or moved only by their carnal passions,
as the hedgehog revolves on his quills.* He wills that
the Christian gnostic should free himself from all
lower ideas ; that he should regard as only figurative
those texts of Scripture which speak of God as though,
like man, he occupied a particular place, or possessed
eyes, arms, and a mouth ; as though he had passions
* Clement of Alexandria, " Opera." Leipzig Edition (Schwikert,
1832,. " Stromates,"' voL v. chap. 11, sec 69.

BOOK II. — THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 257
like our own, indignation and wrath. Let the Chris
tian gnostic rise till he be initiated into the great
divine mystery, leaving beneath him all inferior degrees,
and abstracting from being all its material qualities,
and in the first place that of dimension. Let him
thus attain to the indivisible point ; then rising one step
higher he shall reach the true* unity, the great first
cause, who is above space and time, whom neither
word can express nor thought conceive. t It is because
God is the absolute Spirit, that He remains inacces
sible to all finite beings, and cannot be apprehended
in His fulness by those whose intelligence fails to rise
above the limitations of time and space. But while
Clement thus borrows from Alexandrine Platonism
its most emphatic terms, while he calls God the great
abyss,! the infinite being whom none can attain unto,
who has neither gender, differentiality, species, indivi
duality, number, or accident ; while he declares that
no attribute, however sublime, can fitly set Him forth ;
that He is the boundless ocean which lies beyond
the world ; it is nevertheless impossible to him to be
satisfied with this pure abstraction, the great unity,
inert and void, of Philo. In truth, the first principle
is not absolutely incomprehensible, since He does
reveal Himself in His fulness to the Word.§ God
is then incomprehensible only in a relative sense,
as is conveyed in that grand saying of the old poet,
quoted by Clement: "I see Him not, for He dwells
* ~Soiirai povdg. (" Strom.," v. 11,72.)
T OiiKovv iv romp rb rrpjirov a'inov dXX' virtpdvia Kai rbrrov Kai xp°vov
Kai dvoparog Kai vor\<"o>g. (Ibid., v. II, 72.)
X MaBiv. (Ibid., v. 12, 82.)
§ ObSiv UKaraXrfTrrov rip v'tip rov 9iou. (Ibid., vi. 8, 70.)

258 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
above the clouds, and the feeble orbs of human vision
cannot pierce into those depths, for we are but flesh
and bone." * Nevertheless, we have in our reason
an intuition of the Divine being, since that reason
is itself a ray of the Word. When the Word reveals
Himself fully to us we possess the true knowledge.!
Nothing is incomprehensible to the Son of God, nor,
through the Son of God, to the Christian gnostic,
the man of true knowledge. The Word is not a dimin
ished emanation from God. He is His perfect image ;
He reproduces Him in His fulness from all eternity.
" God, not being in Himself demonstrable, cannot be
the object of science. The Son is wisdom, science,
truth, and everything of the same order. Thus He
is the demonstration and explanation of truth." All
the powers of the mind find in Him their centre.
He includes them all in the circle of His being.
He is the Alpha and Omega, the eternal and universal
idea, the One which comprehends the multiples. t
Evidently the Word is here represented after the
manner of Philo, as the ideal world, or rather as the
idea of the world, but with this twofold difference, that
before He is the idea of the world, He is the idea
or the perfect expression of God, and that instead of
being a simple idea, or the uniting bond of ideas,
as Philo expresses it, He is a personal, living being,
the express image of the Father. " Our teacher is
like God the Father, of whom He is the Son most
holy, free from all stain, free from all passion; the
* "Strom./' v. 12, 79. f Ibid., v. 11, 75.
X 'ArrbSti^iv ixti Kai SiiZoSov dXtpa Kai ivpkya . . . log rrdvra bv. (Ibid.,
iv. 25, 158, 159.)

BOOK II. — THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 259
God- Word, who is in the Father, at the right hand of
God, truly in the form of God." * This resemblance
of the Son to the Father is complete. "Of all natures
the most perfect, the most holy, the most sovereign,
mighty, royal, beneficent, the nearest to the Most
High, is that of the Son."-! He has ordered all things
according to the will of the Father, and He governs
the universe with excellent wisdom. He does all
things with untiring" and ever effectual power, His
gaze being fixed on the depths of the divine. The Son
of God never removes from His absolutely indivisible
centre ; He does not go from place to place ; He is
everywhere at once, free from all the limitations of
space. He is all spirit, all divine light, all eye, J seeing
all, hearing and knowing all, penetrating all force by
His higher force. The host of angels and of gods obeys
this Word of the Father, who has only assumed this
universal sovereignty in the name of Him who has
committed it to Him.§ " The Word shares in the
divine eternity, for the Father is not without the Son."||
He it is by whom the world was created. IT He was
the first begotten ; He had no beginning, and He reveals
the cause anterior to all others, the most beneficent
of all, whom no lips dare name, but who is worshipped
in sacred silence, in the holy awe of adoration.** The
Word of the Creator of all things is not only His
* "Eoikbv Tip rrarpi airov rip .BbS oinrsp iariv vibg dvapdprr\Tog Xbyog
9Bog, b iv Tip rrarpi, b Ik Sb^wjv tov rrarpog. (" Pagdag.," i. 2, 4.)
t TBXtiuirdrrf Srf Kai dyaordrrf Kai Kvpiiiirdrr] r) uioS ipvaig r) rip povip
iravroKparopi TrpoatXBO-rarrf. (" Strom.," vii. 2, 5.)
X "OXog vovg, 'oXog fiog rrarpifov, oXog 6f9aXp6g. (Ibid., vii. 2, 5O
§ Aid rov vrrordZavra. (Ibid., vii. 2, 5.)
|| Ovdi 0 rrarrjp dvtv viov. (Ibid., V. I, I.)
T Ar/piovpyiag ainog. (Ibid., v. 3, 16.) ** Ibid., vii. I, 2.

260 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
outward expression ; He is the wisdom and goodness
of God in their full manifestation, a truly divine power,
universally intelligible, the supreme will.* To know
Him is to know the truth by the truth.t
We see to what a height Clement raises the Word,
while still maintaining His subordination as having
been begotten of the Father. Nevertheless, He has
a distinct personal existence from all eternity. The
transcendent attributes belong to Him as to the Father.
We inquire in what then is He distinguished from the
Father? How is He less ineffable, less incompre
hensible ? Clement has some perception of the answer
when he says that the Father cannot be without the
Son, and when He regards the Word as the perfect
expression of the Divine goodness.
It was needful to go further, and show that the Word
must be in truth from all eternity the object of the
love of the Father, if the Father was absolute love.
Thus the distinction of persons was finall}7 obtained.
But Clement is satisfied with affirming the perfect
resemblance of the Word with the Father. He does
not give us a sufficient reason for His distinct existence,
for he does not show how He is not to be confounded
with Him whose exact image He bears. He does not
raise a rampart against Sabellianism, at least from a
logical point of view.
Let us acknowledge, nevertheless, that Clement gave
life and warmth to the Alexandrine abstractions by his
broad conception of the love of God. This he makes
* " Strom.," v. I, 6.
+ Tvuoig ci ulou iiaXipf/ig ioriv aXt}9tiag cid r;j£ dXj]9eiag. (Ibid,
V. I, 1.)

BOOK II. — THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 26l
the essential attribute of the Godhead. He does not
hesitate to identify goodness with God. " God," he
says, "is by nature good ;* before the creation He was
God, that is, He was good."t He is not only good, as
He is just and wise, or as He possesses other perfec
tions. Love is His very being. " Goodness in Him
is not a mere virtue ; it is not one of the qualities of
righteousness ; no, the essence of His righteousness is
goodness. I God is good in Himself; He is just to
wards us because of His goodness. "§ Clement en
deavours to establish, in opposition to the gnostics,
this identity of righteousness with love. " Righteous
ness is good," he says, "and goodness is righteous."[|
He traces the love of God even in His sternest dealings.
If He strikes or threatens the sinner, it is to bring him
to repentance. He alarms, that He may not be con
strained to punish. Chastisement is the sharp touch
that awakens out of a deathly sleep. Goodness im
plies hatred of the vice which is our ruin ; it punishes
the sinner, but the punishment is always for the good
of the guilty one, for it tends to his restoration. H God
never takes vengeance; that which we call His ven
geance is His chastisement for evil committed, and its
sole end is the recovery of the sinner on whom it is
* Qio-ti dya9bg 9tog. (" Paedag.," i. 9, 82.)
t Xipiv yap kt'ioiv ytvho9ai 9tbg r)v, dya9bg rjv. (Ibid., i. 9, 88.)
t Ibid., i. 8, 63.
§ "Q<rr6 dya9bg piv b 9Bog St iavrbv SiKaiog t'b f\Sr\ Si npdg, Kai tovto on
dya9bg. (Ibid., i. 9, 88.)
|| 'Aya9r) yap rj tov 9tov SiKaioavvrf Kai SiKaia iariv r) dyaBorrjg avrov.
(" Strom.," vi. 14, 109.) _
TT Tiporpia Sk iariv avra-rroSoaig KaKov irri to tov npwpovvrog avp^'tpov
dvairspirofiivri. (" Paedag.," i. 8, 70.) See the whole of this beautiful
chapter and the following.

262 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
inflicted. How could the God who has commanded us
to pray for our enemies be Himself an avenging God ?
His wrath and His mercy both tend to the same end —
the salvation of men.* A warning, moreover, is not a
message of wrath. t In the eleventh chapter of the first
book of the "Pedagogue," Clement shows His merci
ful righteousness in operation, seeking the salvation
of the sinner. Whether it warns or wounds, its remedies
are proportioned to the gravity of the evil, and He only
makes them more severe in order that they may be
more efficacious. Chastening is the fan which separates
the chaff in us from the pure wheat. It is also the
hammer and anvil by means of which the heart of man
is broken under the hand of God. The curse itself
coming from His lips is changed into a means of help
and healing. | Thus God always assigns a curative
virtue to His rebukes. Clement does not fail, however,
to acknowledge that evil necessarily produces suffer
ing, and that the wicked man who hardens his heart
is lost. All the efforts to deliver us from the power
of sin which he ascribes to Divine love, imply the
gravity of the evil. " Every one of us," he says, " in
choosing evil, chooses his own misery."§ It would be
unjust, then, to ascribe to Clement such a low concep
tion of the Divine goodness, as would in fact transform
it into indifference to good or evil. If sorrow follows
sin, it is because the Most High has so willed it, for
nothing escapes His power. It is He who has estab-
* 'EXiovg ydp Kai IXkyxov aKorrbg r) ruv IXtyxoptvinv awrrfpia. (" Paedag.,"
i. 8, 72.) f. Ibid., 10,94.
J <S/apfiaKiia Ioikbv 6 ovBiSiapog. (Ibid., i. 8, 65.)
§ AiptXrai Si tKaarog i)puiv rag ripwpiag avrbg bkiov apaprdvoiv. (Ibid.,
i. 8, 69.)

BOOK II. — THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 263
lished the connection between sin and suffering. His
correction, however, is administered without anger,
for the Divine Being is a stranger to wrath.* This
characteristic Clement describes as His apatheia, the
absence, that is, of all passion. t But this Divine
apathy is compatible with ardent love for the fallen
creature, and the woe, which was primarily the mere
result of sin, becomes a merciful means of restoration,
the goad which pierces the heart to drive it back to
God. All that Clement says of the Father applies
equally to the Son, who is in all respects like unto
Him. We shall see what are the consequences re
lating to the doctrine of redemption, which he draws
from this sublime but incomplete theodicy. Clement
himself thus epitomises them : " God is love. While
He is the ineffable Father, His sympathy with us is
that of a mother ; so that in loving us, the Father
assumes something of the feminine nature."! Such a
presentation of God as this is far enough removed from
the abstract unity of Gnosticism, which some have
declared to be the true idea of Clement's theodicy.§
With reference to the Holy Spirit, Clement speaks
with the utmost vagueness. " O glorious mystery !"
he exclaims : " the Father of all beings is One, the
* Oxjk bpyiltrai to 9b~iov. (" Paedag.," i. 8, 68.)
t Qebg ydp drra9r)g. (" Strom.," vi. 16, 1 37.)
X "Eon Si Kai airbg b 9tbg aydrrrf • rb piv dpprfrov avrov rrarrjp, rb Si
rjplv avp7ra9ig ykyovt pyrrip. (" De div. serv.," 37.)
§ See Baur, " Dreieinigkeit," i. 192, 193; "Die Christliche
Gnosis," 512. Baur is wrong in his assertion that the God of
Clement can only become a reality by means of a series of neces
sary media. The doctrine of the Word in the writings of this
Father has no analogy with the emanations. When he speaks
of the Hebdomas and Ogdoas, he is using symbolical language.
(" Strom.," vi. 16; vii. 10.)

264 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
universal Word is One, and One likewise is the Holy
Spirit !"" The distinction between the second and
third persons of the Trinity is, with him, very vague
and variable, as is shown by the following text : " The
Word is the Spirit made flesh."t The doctrine of the
Trinity is not more fully developed in the writings of
Clement than of his predecessors. He repeats the
formula of baptism, but in common with all the theo
logians of his age, his doctrine is widely removed from
that of Nicaea. § II. Creation and Redemption.
The creation, the work of the Father and the Son,
is a manifestation of the divine love. Created existence
has, as its principle, a free act of the eternal goodness.
It is because God is good that He chose to become
the Creator, that is, the Father.; The Word is the
central idea or the idea of the universe, — a living,
acting idea, which calls forth the universe from
nothing. § Before the creation of the world time was
not, for time is the mode of life of created beings. ||
It follows that the world is not eternal, that it has
not always existed. Clement declares distinctly that
God was good in Himself before creation.*" Creation
* " Paedag.," i. 6, 42.
t '0 \6yog rov Bbov rrvevpa aapKovptvov. (Ibid., i. 6, 43.)
X ' ' AyaBbg i)v Kai cid rovro Kai Srjpiovpyog livai Kai rrarrjp r)9kXrfGBv.
(Ibid., i. 9, SS.; § " Strom.," iv. 25. 168.
|| Uojg S* av xpdvtp yivoiro Krimg, rrvrytvofikvov roig ovgi Kai rov xPovo^'
(Ibid., vi. 16, 142.)
r Tlpiv ktigiv ytvkaSau ("Paedag.," i. 9, 88.) Mceller ("Gesch.
der Cosmogon.," p. 311) has passed over this important text in
his exposition of the doctrine of Clement regarding creation, and
has thus been led to attribute to him the idea of an eternal creation.

BOOK II. — THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 265
is a harmonious symphony of which the Word is the
Choraegus.* One being above all others upon earth
was the object of this kindness of heaven. That being
was man, who may be regarded as the end, the goal,
the idea of creation.t He is filled with the light of the
Word ; his higher life is, as it were, a breath of the
divine life ;% and thus the God who has so highly
endowed him is called, with reason, the Divine Friend
of man.§ It is upon this spiritual relationship between
humanity and the Word, that Clement founds his whole
demonstration of Christianity, of which we have given
the outline. He is careful to avoid any approach to
pantheism, declaring that man is not a part of the
Deity, and is not consubstantial with Him. The only
affinity between him and God is a purely spiritual
one, which belongs to him only by the merciful
kindness of the Creator. No finite being can in truth
be regarded as a fraction of or emanation from the
Divinity. || The divine element is imparted to him with
the moral life, by the Word. Liberty is the natural
appanage of a being made in the likeness of God.
The will is the inner spring on which all depends,
and primarily the intelligence and reasoning facul
ties. f The prescience of God is not predestination.
The Word knew well who would be disobedient ;
obedience, nevertheless, is within our power. Grace
and free-will, in fact, coincide. The spiritual exer-
* " Protrept," i. 5.
1 Man is the lyre of the universal harmony. He is the temple
of God (KiBdpa, vaorj. (Ibid., i. 8.)
J 'Efufwarffia Xiyirai Bbov (" Paedag.," i. 3, 7.)
§ 4>tXuv9po>Trov. (" Protrept.," i. 6.) || " Strom.," 16, 74.
IT Ai ydp Xoyucai cvvd/itii 'oil fiovXtoBai Siukovol impvKan. (Ibid.,
ii. 17, 77.)

266 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
cise which is to produce temperance is enjoined upon
us, although temperance itself be a divine gift. *
Clement strongly opposes the fatalistic gnosticism
which made the salvation of perfect men depend upon
an arbitrary election of God, as though they had been
formed of purer clay than the rest of mankind. Faith
in such a system is no longer the highest fulfilment
of our destiny ; it becomes a privilege conferred by
nature, and unbelief ceases to be a thing for which
men can be held accountable. We are then only
machines moved by our appetites as by a system of
wheels. " What a mere animal I am then ! " exclaims
the noble thinker. " Where is the room for repentance,
for the goodness of God and His Word, for the whole
work of salvation ?"t
Evil is not then a necessary consequence of creation;
it is not an essential and primordial thing, like matter;
it is only an accident, the result of the estrangement
of the will, and cannot be regarded as in any degree
the work of God. X According to this fundamental
principle, evil in all the spheres of existence proceeds
from the rebellion of the creature. The demons were
not by nature spirits of evil ; they became so ; they
are angels fallen. Clement shared in the opinions
of his age as to the extraordinary power of the angels.
He speaks of them as the rulers of provinces, appointed
to the administration of the various parts of the uni
verse.! Some of them have fallen in love with the
* ''ABXov (Sapii, Swpov rov Bbov piyiarov aioippoovvrf. (" Strom.," ii. 20,
126.) t Ibid., ii. 3, II.
X To dpaprdvBiv ivspytia kbItui ovKovaiay Sib oiiSi ipyov 9tov. (Ibid., iv.
13,95-) _
§ Kara rt yap rd i9vrj Kai 7r6Xtig VBvipjjvrai rwv dyykXiov at rrpocraGiai.
(Ibid., vi. 17, 157.)

BOOK II. — THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 267
daughters of men, and have revealed to them the divine
mysteries.* Others howl in the air, as evil genii, and
call for bloody sacrifices. Paganism has derived from
them at once the fragment of truth which it has pre
served, and its barbarous sanguinary ritual. Clement
attributes, however, a simply human origin to many
of the gods of Olympus.t He does not really give
to the doctrine of demons the importance which was
attached to it by Justin before, and by Origen after
him. He accepts the current idea, but does not dwell
much upon it ;J and does not, like some other Fathers,
make it one of the fundamental points of the doctrine
of the Fall and of redemption.
The Fall is ascribed by Clement to pride rather than
to selfishness. He sees in the serpent which crawls
upon the earth the symbol of the carnal inclination. §
Sin is in every man,,, and yet our nature cannot be
said to be absolutely corrupt, because it has the Word
shining within and giving it light. He denounces
emphatically the idea that a child just born can be
liable to the slightest chastisement. "Wherein," he
says, "has such a child sinned? How can it, having
itself done nothing, be brought under the condemna
tion of Adam ?"1T Clement acknowledges, however, that
man, being once fallen, has no power to raise himself.
Religious history is not in his view a mere evolu
tion — a progressive development, but a restoration.
* " Strom.," v. 1, 10. f " Protrept," ii. 40. X Ibid-> *»• 44, 45-
§ 'Oipig dXXrfyoptirai rfSovr). (Ibid., xi. III.)
|' To pkv ydp iiapaprdviiv rrdaiv 'ip^vrov Kai koivov. (" Paedag.," iii.
12,93-) 
¦" now i-bpvivGev to yBwr\9tv -aiSiov ; rf mug vrro rr/v rov At up
VTronkirruiKtv apdv rb prrBiv ivtpviJGav. (" Strom.," iii. 16, IO0.)

268 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
Human nature could never bloom again but for the
coming of Jesus Christ.* Jesus is indeed the very
Word incarnate ; His was not a merely partial posses
sion of the Word, like that of other men, who have all
a ray of the uncreated light ; He possessed it in its
plenitude, in its totality. Truth has been torn to
pieces by heresies, as the body of Pentheus by the
worshippers of Bacchus. It finds its unity only in
Jesus, for He is the perfect Word.f He who took
upon Him a nature like our own is the very Son
of God : His Word, His wisdom, the Saviour and
Lord of all. I He assumed the form of. a servant,
in order to conform to the conditions of our life.
Doubtless, by the power of the divine virtue which was
in Him, He could emancipate Himself from the neces
sities of ordinary physical life,§ but this was a triumph
of His liberty, which in no way impaired the reality
of that fife in Him. Clement had too decidedly repu
diated Platonistic dualism to fall into docetism, which
moreover he positively repudiates in the somewhat para
doxical passage we have just quoted, which certainly does
detract something from the perfect humanity of the
Saviour. When he says that Jesus came under the
mask of corporeal humanity, to play His part in the
drama of our redemption, \, he only uses these words
as a vivid figure, not implying in them any of the
favourite doctrines of gnosticism. The sufferings of
* "Strom.," v. i. 3. f Ibid., L 13, 57.
X Aivapig rov Btov 6 vibg apxinararog Xoyog tov -aroot, og ye Kai tt)v
GapKa-rnv iprraBrj pi'ffEi yBvopkvrfv avaXaiiav tig i-iv airaBeiag iiraicivGBV.
(Ibid., vii. 2, 7.)
§ 'EQaycv ydp oi' Sid rb Gwpa Svvdpei Gwexppivov dyia, (Ibid. vi. 0,
71.) || To dvQpurrrov Trpoaunrtiov dvaXatmv. (" Protrept " X. IIO.)

BOOK II. — THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 269
the Redeemer were not apparent only but real, for
He had assumed a body like our own, and truly shed
His blood upon the Cross. "Believe," he says, "in
the living God, who has suffered ; believe in Him who
has died."* "The Son of Man," he said elsewhere,
"came not be ministered unto, but to minister. He
knew what it was to be weary. He gave His life
a ransom for many, and called Himself our brother."t
Clement does not appear to have recognised in Jesus
a humanity distinct from the Word. Humanity is so
closely related to the Word, that it needs only to be
raised to a state of perfection in order to be truly
divine. From Clement's point of view redemption cannot
be an expiation. He does not admit that God punishes,
except with a view to heal and save. If suffering
follows sin, it is by a natural sequence ; but let
the actual evil cease, and the suffering will at once
cease with it. There is no debt to pay, no reparation
to offer to God, who waits only for the repentance
of the guilty before reinstating him in his. original
condition. Pardon is not even a fresh act, on which
He decides of His own free will. It is, in a manner,
a necessary consequence of the love which is the very
essence of the Godhead, although the right to forgive
sins belongs to God alone. The necessity or room
for sacrifice is entirely ignored. Like his predecessors,
Clement altogether misapprehends the deep meaning
of the Mosaic institutions. Like Philo, he regards them
* Tliarrtvoov Tip rraBbvn Blip. (" Protrept.,'' x. 106.) See, on this
delicate point, Dorner, work quoted, vol. i. pp. 459-461.
t " Paedag.," i. 9, 85.

270 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
only as types of the cosmogony. The various adorn
ments of the flowing robe of the high priest are the
emblems of the heavenly phenomena. The altar of
incense,- placed between the first and second veil, is
the symbol of the earth occupying the centre of the
world. The sanctuary represents the intermediate
region between heaven and earth. The candlestick
with the seven branches is the image of the seven
celestial luminaries. The entering of the high priest
into the holy of holies, symbolises the initiation of the
purified soul into the mysteries of the Word. This
latter figure, although belonging to a higher order than .
those preceding, does not reach the idea of redemption.
The sacrifices express the consecration of our soul to
God, and not the deep need of an expiation. " The
sacrifices, according to the law," he says, " symbolise
the piety which is incumbent upon us."* The offering
of goats and of doves for sin, represents that purifica
tion of the irrational part of the soul which renders
it agreeable to God.
Everything turns then on moral purification, without
our having to offer any expiation for the past. If the
sacrifices under the Mosaic economy express nothing
more than the return to holiness, then the great sacri
fice of Calvary can have no other purpose than to bring
us back to good. This is, in truth, the essential work
of Jesus Christ. Clement admits that it became Him
to achieve the victory over sin and death by His suffer
ings, but he offers no sufficient explanation of those
sufferings. "The Lord," he says, "came to break
* Ai piv ydp Kara rbv vopov Bvoiai rr)v rrtpi r)pag ei/aittiav dXXrfyopovai.
(" Strom.," vii. 6, 32.)

BOOK II. — THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 271
the bonds which held man captive. He was the
incarnation of the divine mystery; He thus bruised
the serpent's head, and led into captivity the tyrant
death. Marvel of marvels ! By those hands nailed to
the accursed tree, He sets free the man who is devoted
to sinful pleasure, the slave of pollution and sin. O,
glorious mystery ! The Lord sinks and man rises ; he
who had been driven from paradise receives the highest
reward of obedience, even heaven itself." * The suffer
ings of Christ had then some positive value ; the
cross is not the simple declaration of pardon, it is
a victory. When the texts are pressed, however, while
they mark the recognition on the part of their author
of the mystery which is at the basis of the redeeming
act, they yield nothing at all approaching the idea of
an expiatory sacrifice.
The Word incarnate is primarily the perfect legis
lator, whose sovereign power is exerted over the soul
which He has made in His own likeness, and, as it
were, of His own substance : this He purifies and
delivers from evil. Justification is entirely confounded
with purification. Thus, no clear line of demarcation
can be traced in the writings of Clement, any more
than in those of Justin, between the two economies.
The Word was the angel of the Old Covenant, under a
veil of severity, but of a severity full of mercy. This veil
is taken away in the Gospel. The work then is one and
the same, the difference is one of degree merely. Moses,
under the inspiration of the Word, brought souls back
to that which is good by instruction and by chastise-
* "Q 9avparog pvariKov- kbkXitoi. piv b Kvpiog, dviaTHf Si dv9pumog.
("Protrept.," xi. 111.)

272 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
ment. He also was thus a good shepherd, leading men
to virtue, and fanning to a flame the almost extinct
spark in their souls.* Did Jesus do anything else?
If the power He displayed was incomparable, this was
because He was the Word incarnate, who had perfect
knowledge of the true good. A divine legislator, He
promulgated the law which saves.t The law has the
same end in view as the Gospel ; it corrects us by
chastisement, and places us under the authority of God.
The Gospel completes the work commenced, inspiring
us with the fear of offending the heavenly Father.
Love is the complement of holiness. At this exalted
degree of virtue we are the sons of God; love covers
our sins, and we are judged worthy to be admitted into
the heavenly kingdom.! God's will is that man should
become God.§
Thus salvation still appears as the reward of re
acquired holiness. The part of Jesus in this work
of purification is very clearly defined in the following
passage: "In the present life we are the unhealthy
victims of depraved desires and infamous lusts : inflamed
with a thousand passions, we have need of a Saviour.
The Saviour sent to us is the bearer, not only of
pleasant but of painful remedies. Fear is a salutary
influence, bitter as it is. As diseased creatures, we
need a physician; as wanderers, we need a leader;
as blind, we want one to give us light ; as perishing of
thirst, we need the living spring of which, if a man
* " Strom.," i. 26, 168.
t To Gwrrjpior -ooGraypa. (Ibid., i. 26, 169.)
X Ibid., i. 27, 173.
§ Sibg cb iaXvog 6 dvOpunrog yivtrai on fioiXErai 6 Beog. (" Paedag.,"
iii. I, I.)

BOOK II. — THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 273
drink, he thirsts no more; as dead, we require life.
The sheep look for the shepherd, the children for one
who shall teach them aright. Yes, all mankind cries
aloud for Jesus,* that its sins and wanderings may not
issue in final condemnation ; but that, delivered by
Him from the pollution of sin, men may be gathered
into the heavenly garner." " Every man will be judged
by his works." t Salvation thus understood is simply
conversion wrought in us by the Word.
When Clement uses the term ransom, or when he
says that the Word by His crown of thorns bare upon
His head all our crimes, and delivered us from them,
these are only figures which he borrows from Bible
language.! The general principles of his system forbid
us to attach the sense of a more modern orthodoxy to
the following passage : " Jesus died as the victim of
the most fearful of human crimes. He bore it upon
Him, and by His very agony overcame death and the
devil." §
There is, however, one text of Clement which goes
beyond his general point of view. He puts into the
mouth of Jesus these touching words as addressed to
the sinner : " I am the master of heavenly wisdom ; I
have wrestled with death for thee. I have abolished that
death which was thy due, on account of thy sins and
unbelief." |j We have seen that Clement always re-
* Tlaxra r) avBpiaTrorrig etoptBa 'Irfaov, "iva pt) dvayoryoi Kai dpaprujXoi tig
riXog t$ Karai'my lpwkao>pBv, oiwcpu9ojpt.v ii tow dxvppiurv Kai eig rrjv
varpipav drroBrfiarv Tuptv9oifUV. (" Paedag.," i. 9, 83.)
t Ibid., i. 8, 71. X IWi, »• 8, 74-
§ Tlovrfpd does not here signify the punishment of sin, but sin
itself. || Tov abv i&rwa 9dvarov ov o"jipii\Bg. (" De div. serv.," 23.)
19

274 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
gards suffering as the offspring of sin. Jesus, in dying,
has overcome sin, and hence also death, which is the
consequence of sin. But between this general idea
and the payment of a debt to God, involving the endur
ance of His direct curse, there is a wide interval ; that
gulf is not and could not be bridged over by the system
we have set forth.
This theory of redemption does not give an adequate
account either of the texts of Scripture or of the deep
needs of the human soul. The revelation of Scripture,
like that of conscience, demands a reparation which
should be made by the representative of man. This di
vine reparation brings pardon, and is the basis of holi
ness, the latter being realised by the progressive appro
priation of an already finished salvation. The sinner,
who casts himself at the foot of the cross, is raised again
justified by the work of Christ, which he has accepted
and ratified. Grasped by faith, that work becomes
to him a treasury of grace, from which he can draw
fresh supplies day by day. Clement is satisfied with
making salvation contingent on amelioration, on the
fulfilment of the divine law, as that was revealed by
Jesus Christ, while attaching great importance to His
victory over death and to the aid given us by Him.
He does not succeed, however, in placing in this way
the restoration of man on an immovable basis. He
carefully distinguishes between sins committed before
and after repentance. The first repentance obtains the
forgiveness of sins, because it is a purifying principle.*
The second repentance, which is caused by the falls of
* MBrdvoia »/ Ka9aipovaa rbv rbrrov rrjg \pvxfjg. (" Stromata " ii.
13, 56.)

BOOK II. — THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 275
the believer, cannot claim directly a part in the remis
sion of sins proclaimed by baptism.* Clement does
not explain himself very clearly as to this difference,
but it is plain that he regards the work of Christ as not
sufficient of itself in all cases, and that he deems
something more to be necessary than the remission of
sins. Repentance thus defined approaches very nearly
to penitence possessing more or less of expiatory virtue.
The faults committed after baptism are excluded from
the scope of the forgiveness granted in the name of
Christ at the time of first repentance ; they must be
atoned for by the endurance of chastisement. t From
this there results logically the necessity of a painful
and gradual purification, which may be prolonged even
beyond the present life, in order to raise us by slow
degrees to that perfect holiness which is confounded
with salvation. " When we read in the Scripture,"
says Clement, " ' Thy faith hath saved thee;' we do not
understand these words to mean that we are saved by
any faith whatsoever that is not followed by works."
These words, moreover, were addressed only to Jews,
who were living irreproachably according to the law,
and to whom faith in the Saviour was the one thing
lacking. " When thou shalt have quitted this body
thou must needs put away all the passions which
animated it, before thou canst enter the abode prepared
for thee ; for to know is more than to believe, and to
be judged worthy of the highest honours of heaven is
more than simply to be saved. The faithful Christian
who, by means of severe discipline, has subdued his
passions, undergoes in a higher stage of being heavier
* " Strom.," ii. 13, 58. f "De div. serv.," 39.
19 *

276 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
chastisement.* He experiences the special repentance
which follows on sins committed after baptism. He
grieves not to have yet attained, or to be incapable of
ever attaining, the high degree of perfection in which
he sees his brethren." Heaven is a spiritual hierarchy,
in which every man takes his place according to his
deserts.t § III. Christian Morals. Authority. The Doctrine of
the Church and of the Sacraments. The closing
Dispensation.
Errors in the conception of redemption generally
find their counterpart in other spheres of theology.
It is not possible to revert to Jewish legalism, with
regard to the relation of man to God, without return
ing more or less to sacerdotal principles, and sacri
ficing Christian liberty ; for the characteristic insti
tutions of the Old Covenant are all based on the
peculiar condition of man prior to redemption, when
the way of free access to the Father was not yet
opened to him. In precisely the same measure in
which the old barrier is raised again between man
and God, and salvation is shorn of its freeness, is
man brought again into bondage, or rather placed
afresh under the yoke of those religious forms, the
design of which was to impress upon his mind the
distance which divided him from heaven. Thus it is
we find the distinction of men and of days reintro
duced into the very midst of the Christianity of our own
days. The sanctuary is rebuilt ; the spiritual life is
* '0 marbg phtiGiv irri rr)v (SBXriova rijg wporipag povfjg pBy'iGryv
KoXaaiv. (" Strom.," vi. 14, 109.) f Ibid., vi. 13, 106.

BOOK II. — THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 277
placed under the yoke of a minute ritualism; and an at
tempt is made to renew the expiatory sacrifice in the cele
bration of the Lord's Supper itself. How is it, then,
that we see Clement of Alexandria standing steadfast
upon the heights of Christian spirituality, without taking
one backward step, though he had thus enfeebled the
conception of redemption ? We account for it on this
ground ; that he made the love of God the very heart
and centre of his doctrine, in such a way as few theo
logians have done since. Doubtless he failed to show
the harmony between this infinite love and absolute
holiness. This is the failure in his system, and we
do not attempt to disguise its importance ; nay, we
hold that his errors on this essential point, neutralised
as they were in his own teaching by the pure and
generous current of his leading thought, have never
theless had a melancholy effect upon the Church,
and have done much to bring it back into the bondage
of Jewish institutions. Clement himself, however, as
the illustrious head of the Alexandrian school, was
exempt from any such tendency. The idea of God
entertained by him is indeed widely different from
that of Mosaism ; it must even be acknowledged that
he failed to perceive the true intention of that dis
pensation. He idealised and transformed Judaism,
instead of recognising that which was its true basis —
I mean that conception of justice so deeply graven
on the conscience ; for he makes justice vanish into
love. By a path, however, which is not the true one,
because it is not sprinkled with the blood of a truly
atoning sacrifice, he arrives at the same result as the
Gospel, the full reconciliation of man with God by

278 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
the incarnate Word; and he derives from it all the
consequences which Paul had deduced, with a logic
never since surpassed.
There is no trace in the teaching of Clement of that
dualism or of that opposition between the human and
divine element, which is the parent in morals of asceti
cism and casuistry, and which gives the predominance
to ritualism in the religious life ; neither does his
doctrine tend to sacramental materialism, nor give any
impulse to a purely external authority. We have seen
him, in his apology for Christianity, denying the
existence of any opposition between faith and reason,
and showing how they meet and harmonise in the
Word. Nature and grace are never exhibited in his
system as radically opposed, for man is made for God ;
he is divine in the essence of his being. Perfection
is not beyond or above humanity : it is the complete
realisation of man's destiny. It follows that Christian
morality must be profoundly human ; that it cannot
require the sacrifice of any element of our true nature ;
and that it will issue in the union of our soul with
God and with His Word. The great moral principle
of Clement, that which includes all precepts, is this :
" Be ye imitators of God."* Now, God is to Clement
supreme love, free from all passion. This, then, is
the ideal proposed to the Christian. The true Christian
whom Clement calls the gnostic — that is to say, one
who is raised to that perfect knowledge which cannot
be distinguished from love — reflects this sublime apatheia.
He desires no reward, not even heaven.t By this
* Qtbv xpi) pipB~w9ai. ("Strom.," iv. 26, 173.)
\ Ibid., iv. 22, 139, 140.

BOOK II. — THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 279
perfection to which he is gradually elevated, he is
transformed into the likeness of the Word, who is
Himself the glorious image of the Father. " The
only Son, the type of the Father's glory, of the
supreme, most high God, impressed His image on
the soul of the gnostic- by pure contemplation. Thus
his soul becomes, as it were, the third reflex of the
divine life."*
All Christian morality consists in the imitation of
God, which is rendered possible to us by the help
of the Word. Its first duty is piety, properly so called;
that is, mystic union with God — contemplation. It
then teaches us to glorify Him by a well-regulated
activity in the various spheres of life. The perfect
Christian, or the gnostic, has intercourse with God by
the Great High Priest, and he cultivates as far as pos
sible likeness to the Lord, by his piety, which impels
him to labour for the salvation of men.t
The numerous details into which Clement enters,
upon the Christian's manner of life, have no analogy
with a rigid ritualism. They are the manifold applica
tions of one principle, ever maintaining its inflexible
unity. He does not recognise two codes of morality,
the one for ordinary life, the other for a life of per
fection. "The morality of Christ," he says, with
a wealth of wit, "does not sing above the key."!
It requires only that which may be demanded strictly
of all those who consent to bear Christ's yoke. The
"counsels of perfection" are thus expressly excluded.
* 'Of Aval rpirrfv -r)Srf rrjv Bbiuv tUova. (" Strom.," vii. 3, 16.)
t Ibid., vii. 3, 13.
X Obx WC vrrkprovov. (Ibid., ii. 20, 1 23.)

280 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
Nor does Clement sanction one moral code for the
Church and another for the world ; neither evil nor
good changes its character by changing surroundings.
The soul is not to resemble a polypus, which takes
the colour of the stones on to which it fixes itself.*
The simple and ignorant in the Church are not bound
to a less rigorous holiness than those who are versed
in religious knowledge. Love is not a thing acquired
by science ; it is a divine seal, which may be set upon
all hearts.! The entire life of each Christian ought
to bear its impress, t
Clement does not place a bar upon any calling
or condition in life. He declares plainly that diligent
attention to public affairs is compatible with devotion
to divine wisdom. § The gnostic, if he attains to a
position of eminence in the state, will devote himself
unreservedly to the general good. He is another
Moses, marching at the head of the people for their
common salvation. || The affairs of the world or of
ordinary life can be conducted honourably, and in the
spirit of God.H From this point of view, marriage
is not a state of inferiority. Clement vindicates its
dignity with equal poetry and purity, when he applies
to father, mother, and child, the promise of Jesus :
" Where two or three are gathered together in my
name, there am I in the midst of them."** Children
are compared to flowers, which the Divine Gardener
* "Paedag.," iii. 1 1, 80. f Ibid., iii. 11, 78.
X Ibid., iii. 1 1, 80.
§ 'AXXd Kai rcoXiTBvGaaBai iS,ov. (Ibid., iii. 11, 78.)
|| " Strom.," vii. 3, 16.
^f Tii iv Koapip KOGpiiog Kard Btbv drrdyBiv ov KtKiiAvrai. (" Paedag.,"
iii. 11, 78.) ** "Strom.," iii. 10, 68.

BOOK II. — THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 28l
gathers in living fields.* Much moderation is no doubt
necessary in all that relates to the life of the senses,
but the sanctity of the family is openly avowed, and
even extolled. Incontinence is a sin, not marriage.t
Let us not be more modest than the Creator, who
has appointed the preservation of the human species
by this means. Clement makes no exception in the
case of bishops. He appeals to the apostolic precept,
according to which the bishop, before being promoted
to his office, should be prepared for the government
of the Church by the charge of the family.]: Mar
riage, no less than virginity, has its ministry and its
work appointed by the Lord, namely, the care of the
woman and children. § The father is the providence
of the house. Second marriages are allowed in the
spirit of St. Paul. || Clement is naturally led to reject
extreme asceticism by his doctrine of the creation.
The corporeal element comes from God ; it is not then
evil in itself. The flesh which must be mortified is not
simply the physical part of our nature ; it is all that
is evil and defiled by sin. In his paraphrase of
Romans vii., Clement shows that if our body is too
often the tomb of the soul, it is none the less designed
to be the temple of the Spirit, IF and he urges the
gnostic to make it a sanctuary by temperance and
consecration to God. The Christian has a right to
admire the beauty of the outer world, provided he
* 'AvBrf Si rov ydpov r<i riicva. (" Paedag.," ii. 8, 71.)
t "Strom.," iii. 12, 86. X lh[d-> *"• 12, 79.
§ "Exti ydp ibawtp >; tvvovxia ovrui Kai 6 ydpog iSiag Xtirovpytiag Kai
SiaKoviag. (" Strom.," iii. 1 2, 79.) See also on this same subject,
"Paedag.," ii. 10, 11. II "Strom.," iii. 1, 4.
IT Ibid., iii. 11, 77.

282 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
does not become absorbed in it, and fall into an
idolatrous worship of the beautiful, like the Grecians,
but seeks in it the glory of the Creator.* Poverty
has no more merit in itself than celibacy. Sin does
not consist in possessing but in abusing.t The treatise
entitled, " How the rich man can be saved," gives
expansion to this thought. That which God requires
is not poverty of outward condition but poverty of spirit.
The despoiling of the outward life is of no virtue : it
is the proud spirit, covetousness, over-carefulness,
ambition, the lusts which choke the good seed, which
must be eradicated from the heart; it is the soul that
needs to realise its poverty. I How, if it is heavily
weighted with gold, with the anxious care of property,
can it spread its wings and fly heavenwards ?§ D oes
not St. Paul say that men can use the world as not
abusing it ? and possess riches, yet be as though they
possessed them not ? The treasury of Christianity
will richly supply all wants, and the best defence
with which we can be surrounded will be the love of
the poor comforted by us. Yes ; widows, orphans, the
indigent, — these are the glorious, unarmed bodyguard
of love. ||
Clement takes a no less elevated point of view in
his estimate of martyrdom. He does not exalt it
beyond measure, nor pay to it an idolatrous and peri
lous homage. He condemns it whenever it is a kind
of suicide, and is sought for its own sake, when it
* " Strom.," iv. 18, 118.
t KaXug ovv TrXovrslv ov kbkSXvkbv, dXXd ydp rb dSiKtog Kai aTrXrjGruig
rrXovrtiv. (Ibid., iii. 6, 56.)
X Tr)v \pvxvv avrrjv yvpviooai tuiv Tra9dv. (" De div. serv. " 12.)
§ Ibid., 17. || Srparbv dorrXov. (" Strom.," 34.)

BOOK II. — THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 283
might have been avoided by the exercise of rational
prudence.* The cowardice which flinches from the
duty of confession is indeed inexcusable,t and nothing
is more beautiful than suffering bravely borne for Jesus
Christ at the call of duty. The true Christian, as he
dies a death of ignominy, is assured of the royal friend
ship of God. No man can rob him of his liberty, or of
the love that fills his heart. I Yet he is not placed on
a higher platform than his brethren, for all suffering
endured in the name of Christ is martyrdom and
confession. § Thus is maintained the unity of that
great morality of love which is independent of circum
stances and outward differences, and which is never
more truly realised than in the wide propagation of the
truth and of the divine life, for he who becomes the
generous dispenser of these so far resembles God. He
reproduces the charity of which he himself has been
the subject. ||
The high spirituality of Clement manifests itself in
his conception of the religious life, properly so called.
He does not admit any of those distinctions which
were the special peculiarities of Judaism. He does
not recognise the wide separation between the sacred
and the profane, between the human and the divine
element, which characterised the period of the law.
Neither does he acknowledge any special priesthood,
or any essential difference among Christians. Ecclesi
astical offices are maintained ; the bishop is not so
completely identified with the elder as in the previous
* " Strom.," iv. 4, 17. f Ibid., iv. 4, 16. J Ibid., iv. 7, 53.
§ Ei roivvv r) 7rpbg Bbov bpoXoyia paprvpia lari, rrdaa r) KaBapaig ttoXitbv-
aapkvrf i//y%?) pBr iTTiyvtvGBwg rov Bbov r) raig ivroXdig iivaKr}Kovia pdprvg
lari Kai piip Kai Xoyip. (Ibid., iv. 4, 15.) || Ibid., vii. 9, 42.

284 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
epoch,* but Clement's views are nevertheless as far
as possible from favouring the idea of a hierarchy.!
" There is but one Master, and He is in heaven ; hence
all Christians are alike disciples."! "The true rela
tion between Him and us consists in this, that perfect
truth belongs only to the Lord our Master, and that
our feebleness and ignorance constrain us to come to
Him for all wisdom." All Christians are children placed
under the teaching of the Divine Schoolmaster. They
form the flock which, like a shepherd, He guides by His
crook. § " He who teaches, and he who is taught, have
both but one Master, from whom proceed both the
word and the understanding." || There is no other
apostolic succession than that of faith and piety. "The
true gnostic, in other words, the complete Christian,
supplies the absence of the apostles by the purity of
his life and knowledge. "1T After all, the great apostle,
the great witness of Christ, who instructs us and leads
us to Him, is the Church,** and the Church is composed
of those "new creatures" in whose heart the new
law has been engraven as on a living tablet.tt
In opposition to this broad conception of the uni
versal priesthood, we may perhaps be reminded of
* " Paedag.," hi. 12, 97.
t " Strom.," vii. 3, I. In this passage the elders are contrasted
with the deacons, as invested with the higher office : they are there
fore really likened to the bishops.
X Elg SiSdmaXog iv ovpavoig' oi E7ri yijg EiVdrwf Hv rravrtg KBKXr\GOVTai
paBrirai. (" Paedag.," i. 5, 17.) § Ibid., i. 5, 17.
|| Eig ydp b SiSdoKaXog Kai tov Xkyovrog Kai tov dKpoiapkvov. (" Strom.,"
i. I, 12.)
IT 'O yj/fcJOTiKOf; ovroc rijv dwonroXiKijv airovniav dvravairXrfpoT fiiobg
SpBiog, yiyviiiaKivv dKpiKiog. (Ibid., vii. 12, 77.)
** 'II tKKXtfaia ijSt Kai 6 vvptytbg & povog SiSaaKaXog. (" Paedag.," iii.
12, 98.) ff Ibid., iii. 12, 94.

BOOK II. — THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 285
Clement's singular theories as to the mysteries of
religious knowledge which are to be revealed only to
the elect — the true gnostics. But the modifications
with which he qualifies this esoteric theory, so opposed
to the true spirit of the gospel, take away from it all
analogy with a priestly caste. In substance all that
he maintains is this, that scientific theology, the
heights and depths of religious knowledge, are not
directly accessible to all.* He commends the presen
tation of the higher truths in symbolic language, on
the ground that it stimulates indolent thought, and
tends to incite and arouse it by the very charm of mys
tery. t On the other hand, it hides sacred things from
souls profane, so that pearls are not cast before swine,
to the greater condemnation of the impious.! Clement
lays stress on the typical and parabolic character of
Scripture, § and he is certainly not wholly wrong.
There was danger, however, in marking out such a
track at a time when all the traditions of ancient
philosophy tended to foster the proud aristocracy of
intellect. It was easy to arrive by such a path at
a sort of doctrinal priesthood, which should attach to
religious science an overwhelming privilege. Clement
desires a guide, a well-known catechist, who should
be the teacher of truth in the Church. || He does not
make it sufficiently clear that the human master ought
himself to be amenable to those whom he instructs,
and to that universal faith of the Church which the
Divine Teacher imparts to every one of His members.
* "• Strom.." i. 1. 13.
t 'lni ZirnirtK-oi hrap\«/psv. (Ibid., vi. 1 5, 120.)
t Ibid., v. 9. 58. § Ibid., vi. 15. 126.
|| Kiij)ijroC ru^s mi KaBriyiinn' \ptiav i\nv. (Ibid., v. 9, 5;.)

286 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
Science can never interpose as a necessary medium
between the soul and the Word, in matters relating to
the divine life, that is to say, in truths which are
essential. In his excessive desire to represent truth
as accessible by successive steps, Clement goes so far
as to .confound allegory with a sort of dissimulation.
He consents to the partial veiling, in teaching, of even
the highest truths.* We must bear in mind, however,
that initiation into the deepest mysteries of knowledge
is not made the peculiar privilege of any one caste,
but belongs to all who are willing to ascend, step by
step, the ladder of light. While, therefore, we reject
esoterism even in this form, we are bound to admit that
in Clement's system it has no analogy with priestcraft.
That which is clearly conclusive on this point is
the repudiation of all outward sacrifice, for there can
be no true priesthood where there is no sacrifice. We
have seen how far Clement's views led him in an
opposite direction. He was not prepared to admit the
necessity of sacrifice even in the Old Covenant, or its
full significance in the cross of Christ. How then
could he desire its perpetuity ? The daily sacrifices
of the Christian are prayer, the reading of Holy Scrip
ture, praise, and the generous charity which is exercised
both in the communication of the knowledge of God
to the ignorant, and in the breaking of bread to the
hungry.! This is the sacrifice most excellent and
acceptable to God.t The true Christian who realises
this ideal of piety is the truly royal man, the sacred
* " Strom.," vii. 9, 53.
j AvriKa 9vGtai piv avnp evxai, ivrkv^ttg riov ypafiZv, ipaXpoi. oil Kai rvv
dXXrfv Bvffiav rrjv Kard roig SBopkvovg liriSoaiv Kai Soypdrutv Kai xpripdruiif
yiyvuoKti. (Ibid., vii. 7, 49.) J Ibid., vii. 6, 31.

BOOK II. — THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 287
priest of the Godhead.* Such a conception of Christi
anity is altogether alien from the idea of a hierarchy.
The Church is the temple of God; the earthly altar,
into which enter as living stones all those who are
of one heart and of one soul in prayer.t This true
Church is no outward institution, a petrified catholicity ;
it is distinct from all its partial realisations. Those
alone who have fulfilled the divine commands deserve
to be admitted among the apostolic elect. The true
deacon, the true elder, is not the man who has received
the imposition of hands, but he who has fulfilled the
conditions of his office. J It is plain that the same
principles apply to private Christians, and we have
thus, in an implicit form, the distinction between the
visible and invisible Church.
The distinction of days Clement repudiates in prin
ciple not less strongly than the distinctions of religious
caste, although he allows the observance of the Lord's
day and of the Christian festivals, as he allows the
existence of various offices in the Church. " We must
needs," he says, " honour and worship Him whom
we believe to be the Word, the Saviour, the Master;
and by Him we must worship the Father, not on
certain chosen days, as some imagine, but in every
possible manner, and through the whole course of
our life. The gnostic, or the true Christian, does not
worship God in a consecrated place, in a sanctuary
set apart, nor on certain festival and appointed days,
but always, and in every place. He believes that God
* 'Itptig oGiog rov 9tov, (HaGiXiKog av9po>Trog. (" Strom.," vii. 7, 36.)
f "Eori yoijv rb Trap r)piv 9vaiaGrf)piov rb Imyeiov rb a9poiGpa ruiv raig
ibxdig dvaKBipivtiiv piav iliarrBp ixov $o>vr)v rr)v Koivrjv Kai piav yviifUfV.
(Ibid., vii. 6, 31.) % Ibid., vi. 13, 105.

288 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
is everywhere, that He is not confined within sacred
enclosures. We who believe in His universal presence
make our entire life a festival ; we sing His praises as
we work, as we sail on the sea, or go about any of our
various occupations.* All places, all times in which
the thought of God occupies our minds, are alike
sacred." Prayer is not merely the utterance of articu
late words, it is the close converse of our soul with
God. Our secret thoughts are the prayer which He
hears. t
Such a system as that we have set forth, which
had its basis in the original harmony between the
human soul and the Word, could not recognise any
purely external authority in the realm of religious
thought. It is doubtless very necessary that the Word
should be known by us, and exhibited in His true
character. Hence the importance of revelation, which
finds its most perfect expression in the Incarnation.
We must needs know where we can find the true
Christ. The Holy Scriptures are invested in this
respect with the highest authority. They are the
standard of truth, J for they echo in our ears the very
voice of the Word, which our heart acknowledges,
and to which it must respond. § They are truly in
spired of God, || and we should be very guilty were
we to mutilate them after the manner of the heretics.
Clement's ideas with regard to the canon of Scripture
are not, however, very exact ; for he frequently quotes
the apocryphal writings of both the Old and New
* TLdvra roivvv rbv piov iopnjv dyovreg. (" Strom.," vii. 7, 35, 36.)
t Ibid., vii. 7, 4°-43- X Ibid., vii. 16, 94. § Ibid., vii. 16, 95.
|| Tiif flE07rvfi)oTOUs; ypatjtdg. (Ibid., vii. 16, IOI.)

BOOK II.  THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 289
Testaments.* He affirms the inspiration of the former,
but without defining with any precision his view of
that inspiration. He does not hold that the super
natural gifts of prophecy ceased with the sacred
writers, since he asserts for himself a sort of inspi
ration of God, declaring that he will be guided
in all his statements of doctrine by the Spirit of God.t
He does not, then, recognise any essential difference
between the inspiration of the apostles and that of
Christians of all ages. Scripture, nevertheless, main
tains the supreme authority, for it alone leads us direct
to the fountain of wisdom ; but for its due under
standing we need to make use of our own rational
and reflective powers. Clement objects to the purely
literal interpretations, which were often given by rab
binical Gnosticism. J He himself falls into the opposite
extreme, and advocates the theory of the threefold
meaning. He discovers in each sacred text at once
a sign of the truth, a commandment, and a prophecy. §
He dwells constantly upon the mysterious and alle
gorical character of revelation, which makes it a duty
for us to lift the veil of the primary meaning. The
Book of God is not a cold, inert monument of the
past ; it is not even like a stream, which flows, as it
* Clement quotes, as Holy Scripture, the " Pastor Hermas "
(" Strom.," i. 17, 85 ; Ibid., ii. 9, 43) ; the " Gospel of the Egyptians"
(Ibid., iii. 9, 63); the "Epistle of Clement of Rome" (Ibid., iv. 17,
107) ; the works of Maccabeus and Tobias (" Strom.," i. 21, 123).
f T£\£iw0£iff7j£ roivvv rijg TrpoBtGBwg yfiiv drrdarig Iv olg idv BtXyGy rb
rrvBvpa vrropvr)fiaai. (Ibid., iv. I, 31.) We shall complete our task
(of unfolding the subject of the book) by the help of the explana
tion which the Holy Spirit shall be pleased to suggest to us.
X Ibid., vii. 16, 99.
§ 'Qg arjpiTov, org ivroXrjv, org Trpo<j>r)Ttiav. (Ibid., i. 28, 179.)
20

290 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
were, spontaneously from its source. No; the heavenly
virtue is constantly infused afresh into it, as the milk
fills the breasts of the mother.* Revelation is ever
living. Is not holiness also a divine inscription, graven
by the hand of the Lord, not upon tables of stone, but
upon the heart ?t
Clement recognises oral tradition, but only as a source
of history, never pretending that it is an infallible
authority. Scripture does not contain the whole of
revelation, either under the Old Covenant or the New.?
The higher knowledge, the true wisdom (gnosis), was
transmitted orally by the apostles, § for there is an
essential part of revelation which cannot be written.
These passages, isolated as they are, contain the
principle of a grave error, by placing an anonymous
and irresponsible authority on a par with that of the
written revelation. Clement is led into this doctrine,
so full of danger, by the aristocratic pride of intel
lect, which was not wholly subdued in him. Happily,
he formed no organisation for the perpetuation of oral
tradition ; he acknowledges no authority as decisive
but that of Scripture; he does not entrust the care
of this to a hierarchy, but to the Christian conscience,
which has an aptitude for discerning the fundamental
articles of doctrine, the immovable foundations upon
which every one should build.
Chapters fourteen and fifteen of the seventh book
of the " Stromata," contain the development of these
grand ideas. Timid minds, which need the help of
* " Paedag.," i. 6, 41. f Ibid., iii. 12, 94. } " Strom.," v. 10, 63.
§ 'H yvwoig ii ain) >'/ Kara ciaSoxdg tig bXiyovg Ik tuiv aTroaroXwv
dypdipatg rrapaSo9eioa KareXr;\vBiv. (Ibid., vi. 7, 61.)

BOOK II. — THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 291
an external authority to give fixity to their fluctuating
views, urge, in objection to Clement, the divisions
which have arisen in the heart of Christendom. How
is truth to be known in the midst of so much diversity ?
Do not the variations of doctrinal teaching prevent
its recognition, and submerge it beneath their opposing
currents ? * This is the very thesis maintained by
Bossuet against the Reformation. Clearly, if the
Church had at this early time possessed a recognised
authority in matters of doctrine, to which final appeal
should be made in questions of the faith, Clement
would have invoked it, as did the great French apo
logist ; and all these objectors would have been at once
silenced. He does nothing of the kind. ¦ He replies,
first, that it is the glory as well as the peril of all
great principles that they stir up warm controversy :
opposition is sure to attend all that is grand and good.t
None will say that because there are many physicians
belonging to various schools of medicine, therefore the
path of wisdom is to consult pone : on the contrary, men
will carefully inquire which is the best. The traveller
who finds himself at the junction of several cross roads —
some leading to a precipice, others to a rushing river
— will not on that account stand still where he is, but
will set himself to seek out the path which will bring
him in safety to his destination. X If two fruits be
offered to us — the one fresh and sweet, and the other
a mere imitation in wax- — we shall be at no loss to
make our choice. But this choice must be made in
all seriousness and good faith, and we must not shrink
* "Strom.," vii. 15, 89.
t Havri np KaXip pupog 'intrai. (Ibid., vii. 15, 89.) X Ibid., vii. 15, 91.
20 *

292 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
from the toil of a manly investigation. Truth is worth
all it costs. It is a laborious and difficult acquisition,
and in order to find it we must use all the powers of
our mind. It cannot be either discovered or retained
without determined effort.* Heresy increases the
arduousness of the task. We are called, then, to
distinguish between the true and the false. We have
an inward criterion, which discovers that which is
opposed to our true nature. t
But the great criterion is Holy Scripture, which
shows us whence heresies arise, and enables us to
recognise the pure doctrine in the true Church. J
Thus, the supreme tribunal is Scripture, and not the
Church, with this proviso — that Scripture be not con
sulted in isolated passages, but in its perfection as a
whole. § We have seen, in the Apology of Clement,
that in his view faith in the Divine Book is based
upon faith in the person of Jesus : we believe in the
Holy Scriptures because our hearts have heard the
voice of the living Christ. We must not ask of them
more than they are able to give, seeking in them a
fully developed theology, for this would be to confound
faith with science. No; there is no -other basis for
a true catholicity than the unanimity of believers upon
* Aid vXeiovog roivvv tjipovriSog ipivvifrkov n)v rip" i"»ti iiXif(hua>,
("Strom.," vii. 15, 91.)
t T6 dwpnrtg Kai Trap d tj> v o i i>. (Ibid., vii. 15, 91.)
X AC aiiriov rCiv ypatyiov iKpiti'ih'tvtiv drroStiKriKuig, ottioq piv <»7ritT0(iA?/ffmJ
a! aipiasig, limoc Si iv p&vy rjj d\i)ihia tK-KXtjir/p t) rt 1'iKpi^tGTiiTii yi'iufflf.
(Ibid., vii. 15, 92.) "The Scriptures teach us demonstratively
how heresies have deviated from the truth, and how exact know
ledge is found only in the true Church." Thus the Holy Scriptures
are placed explicitly above the Church, since they alone arc the
warrant for its doctrine. The importance of this plain passage
cannot be overstated. (Ibid., vii. 15. 92.) § 1 bid., vii. 16, 96.

BOOK II. — THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 293
the essential articles of belief. This is the true canon
of the Church.* By virtue of this distinction between
faith and theology, Clement maintains the universal
Credo, while he- yet leaves the necessary latitude to the
spirit of investigation and scientific progress. He in
sists, as he always does, upon the moral aspect of
knowledge. Heresy, which leads us back into the
speculations of the world, is like Lot's wife looking
back upon Sodom. Let us look upward and onward, t
Clearly, these exhortations refer only to the appro
priation of truth in its moral and living character,
and do not apply to its scientific element. It is by the
light of these principles we must interpret the seven
teenth chapter, in which he appeals to the antiquity
and unity of the Church in support of his views. " The
true Church," he says, "is one of great antiquity;
God is here, the Lord is here. It is one in its essence,
in its thought, in its principle, in its excellence ; it is
both ancient and universal. All its members tend to this
unity of the faith founded on the two particular Testa
ments — or let us rather say on the Testament — which
remains one and the same through all the diversity
of times, by the will of the one God and Saviour."!
Thus the foundation of this unity and of this antiquity of
the Church is ever the Book of God. To appeal to anti
quity, as Clement does, is simply to appeal to the primi
tive type of the faith. The unity which he vindicates
holds good, as he has himself said, only of funda
mentals. It is, moreover, progressive, a height towards
* Ovrtog Kai rjpdg Kara pifiiva rpbrrov rbv iKKXrfGiaariKbv rrapataivetv
¦rrpoarjKBi Kavova, Kai pdXiara rr)v rrepi tuiv pByianov opoXoyiav iffuig
QvXdrTou.iv. (" Strom.," vii. 15,90.)
f Ibid., vii. 16, 93. t Ibid-> vii- J7, i°7-

294 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
which the members of the Church are bound to be ever
pressing onward. From all these statements it follows
that Clement was one of the most faithful representa
tives of liberalism in the Church, at a time when the
hierarchical system was seeking to consolidate itself.
His idea of the sacrament bears the same character
istic impress. If he regards baptism as the illumination
of the Christian, he nevertheless sets aside any idea
of magical virtue in the ordinance, when he declares
that Jesus Christ, the type of the Christian, became
perfect in baptism because then the Holy Spirit de
scended upon Him.* Again, we must ever bear in
mind Clement's beautiful exposition of the manner in
which salvation is appropriated by the Christian by the
act of faith, which he conceives to be the freest and
most personal act that can be performed. The impar-
tation of the Holy Spirit then is that which attaches
value to the sacrament. The baptism which brings
illumination is a rational or spiritual act.t The Lord's
Supper cannot be regarded as a sacrifice in a system
which recognises only the offering of the heart and
lips. The material element has no place in it. "Often,"
says Clement, " the Lord uses allegorically the terms
food, flesh, bread, blood, milk." J The mixing of wine
and water in the communion, is supposed sometimes to
set forth the union in man of the earthly and the
* TEXEiourm Si rip Xovrpip fiovtp Kai tov rrvtvparog rrj Ka96Sip dyidZerai.
(" Paedag.," i. 6, 25.) The Holy Spirit is not in the water ; He
comes down from heaven. The spiritual act alone gives value to
the material act.
t AoyiKip jBarrnapan. (Ibid., i. 6, 29.)
J IToXXaxwe dXXrfyoptTrai b Xoyog Kai fipiopa Kai adpi] Kai rpotjrr) Kai
dprog Kai alpa Kai ydXa, dwavra 6 Kvpiog eig diroXavaiv rinuv. (Ibid., i.
6, 47-)

BOOK II. — THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 295
spiritual element,* sometimes the union of the law and
the Gospel.t A symbol of which the significations are
so various, cannot be regarded in any aspect as con
taining the body of Christ. Clement says distinctly,
that when Jesus pronounced the words, " This is my
blood, drink ye all of it," this blood of the vine was the
Word Himself, whose blood was shed for many for the
remission of sins. It allegorically represented the sacred
draught of salvation. J In other words, the eucharistic
cup is the symbol of salvation. Elsewhere he declares
that it is by knowledge that men eat and drink the
divine Word. §
The doctrine of the consummation of all things is
not exhibited at all in this system ; we find no trace
of millenarianism. Clement admits a continuation of
progress in faith and love beyond the grave, since
the work of purification is to be carried on after the
present life. ]|
The ultimate salvation of all, though not formally
stated, is the logical conclusion of a doctrine which
recognises in punishment no other design than the
merciful one of healing and restoration.
* 'Ara\6y**G apvarai 6 fikv ohrog3 ry vSan, r^J fe av9pw5T^> rd TrvsvfMa.
(a Paedag.," iL 2. 2a) t Ibid., ii. 2, 29.
J Kai Ei'X«yifOO» je rov ohuv, eiVw ¦ XoSete, jtiet-e ¦ rovro poi bgtiv to
mpa, alpa rqe dprriXov, riv Xoyov tov trfpi —oXXwv tr^eo/iETOH B£ a^teaiv
ifiapniv Bvppoovvqs aywv aXXijyopel vaauu (Ibid., ii. 2, 32-)
§ fywoi£yap Kai — oaic tov (kiov Xoyou i| yvwtrig irrri rijs Oeiatg ovma£.
(" Strom.," v. 10, 67.) ]| Ibid,, vi. 14, 109.

CHAPTER IV.
CONTINUATION OF THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL.
THE SYSTEM OF ORIGEN.*
Hitherto we have met with only fragmentary expo
sitions of Christian doctrine. Origen is the first the
ologian who elaborates a complete system. This was
at once his glory and his peril — a peril worthily and
nobly braved by the Christian thinker, who, rising
above mere isolated ideas, seeks to grasp the ruling
principle of revelation. All science worthy of the name
must aim at unity. If this were not a lawful object of
aspiration in the domain of religion, why should the
human mind so intuitively aspire to it ? Doubtless,
it is not lawful to purchase it at the price of an arbitrary
treatment of the problem, and to imagine that unity is
attained when those refractory ideas, which will not
lend themselves to an incomplete or premature syn
thesis, have been brought into subjection or set aside
altogether. But theology and philosophy only enter
truly into the scientific movement when they rise from
the fragmentary to an organic condition, when they not
only gather together the materials for the building, but
embrace the plan which gives unity to the structure.
* Beside the books already quoted, we may refer to Redepenning's
beautiful monograph on Origen ("Origenes. Eine Darstellung seines
Lebens und seiner Lehre.," vol. ii., Bonn, 1843).

BOOK II. — THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 297
Then only does science progress. The explanations
given, as they one after another betray their inadequacy,
stimulate the spirit of research, while the simple state
ment of particular truths leaves the mind stationary
and inert. The attempt made by Origen to systematise
religious truth, marks therefore an important era in
the history of Christian thought. He claimed to find
in the Gospel the key to all mysteries, that is, the
highest philosophy, without impairing in any way its
true evangelical character. In fact, he openly declares
himself a believer. He acknowledges at the very
outset the authority of Scripture, and explicitly accepts
the universal faith of the Church of his time. But this
faith has not been received by him passively as a dead
tradition ; it is with him the experience of the heart
and the logical conviction of the mind. Hence, when he
expounds it to his contemporaries, the proportions he
gives to it of a system so comprehensive and scientific,
that the loftiest genius may delight to contemplate it.
And yet the inspiration of this grand philosophy, which
is inferior to none in boldness, is always humble and
fervent love to Jesus. Christian science is in Origen's
view the full faith or knowledge, which rises to the
direct contemplation of its object, and ascends from the
visible Christ, " known after the flesh," to the Eternal
Word. He falls into the same error as Clement,
in thinking too lightly of the foundation of this trans
cendent knowledge — that historical Gospel which is
the very substance of the truth — and in treating the
letter of the Scriptures as a seal that needs to be
broken. It remains none the less true that speculation
is never with him a mere mental feat ; that it is rather

298 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
the aspiration of the entire being after the living and
complete possession of the truth.
Origen spoke the philosophical language of his time.
He resolutely dealt with the problems which occupied
the minds of his contemporaries. In order rightly to
estimate and understand him, we must bear constantly
in mind that sublime and subtle pantheism which
was the primary inspiration both of Valentinian
Gnosticism and of Platonism. If his mind frequently
forsakes the solid ground of psychological observation
and exact history, to soar into vague regions which
are neither heaven nor earth, it is because he is de
sirous to occupy a sphere as wide as that of his adver
saries. Anxious to excel them in science, no less than
in faith, he will not abandon to them any vantage
ground. Like them, he peoples the infinite void with
the creations of his imagination. To the iEons he
opposes good and bad angels ; he does not hesitate to
invent a sort of mythology, of which the inspiration is
Christian, but which in its bold additions to the posi
tive statements of revelation, necessarily becomes vision
ary. Herein is not the strength and beauty of his sys
tem. These are found in that bold vindication of liberty,
which is its central and vital principle. It may be said
that the vast theological edifice reared by him is, as it
were, the temple of liberty. Liberty is its foundation and
its topstone ; nay, it is more, it is the animating soul
of the whole doctrine taught therein. Pantheistic
naturalism had struck the whole world with a death-
chill. Origen reawakens it with the breath of liberty,
restores it to life, and snatches it from the petrifying
grasp of fatalism. In the boldness of his thought he

BOOK II. — THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 299
denies the existence of necessity altogether. All the
phenomena of the material world are free acts. Bodies
owe their existence to the motions of the will. If
matter gravitates or ascends, it is not by a simple
physical law, but is connected with moral action.
Liberty is the explanation of all things.
The great merit of Origen is his endeavour to trace
back all the diversity of things to one and the same idea.
Unhappily his conception of liberty was incomplete, as
we shall see, and his error on this fundamental point
produced results all the more serious, because of the
close logical coherence of his system.
§ I. The Theodicy of Origen.
Origen, like his master Clement, does not escape the
influence of Platonist abstraction, in his conception of
the first principle. God dwells in light inaccessible,
glorious ; He cannot be known by His works, which
are but feeble radiations of His majesty.* He is the
essential Being, the sole possessor of life absolute and
immutable, and therefore free from every material
element, for matter is the subject of perpetual change. t
He is Spirit, uncomposed, simple, the Supreme One,
the Monas. t He cannot be designated by any attribute,
nor by any name.§ He is known perfectly only to
Himself. Even the Word does not know Him as He
* "De Principiis," book i., chaps. 1, 6, vol. i. Delarue's edition,
P- Si-
f TLav aSifia vXikov £%£i ipvaiv dXXoturrrjv Kai Si oXuv ptTatXrfrnv. (" In
Joann.," book xiii. 21, vol. iv. 231.)
X " Intellectualis natura, simplex, sed ut sit ex omni parte povdg,
et ut ita dicam, ivdg." ("De Princip.," i. 1, 6.)
§ " Contra Cels.," book vii. 38.

300 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
knows Himself. " His own contemplation of Himself
is higher than that of the Son.* Thus the Absolute
has no true existence except in the first person of the
Trinity. Even in the matter of self-knowledge He is under
no necessity to seek His manifestation in a second person
like unto Himself; indeed, no manifestation of Him
can be adequate. He remains the One who can neither
be named nor defined, and who alone is cognisant of the
entire mystery of His own being. The Godhead is
complete in the Father. The Word and the Holy
Spirit are necessary only for the purposes of creation,
though they are themselves infinitely above all created
life. Without the creation, the Monas would be self-
sufficing in the unfathomable depth of His essence.
This is again the old leaven of Platonism, from which
the Christian theology of that age could not free itself,
when it entered on the formation of its theodicy.
Origen dwells by preference on the immutability of
God. Nothing can make Him change. Hence it is
wrong to speak of His anger or his indignation. t
Justice and love are indissolubly united in Him. He
is not taking vengeance when He condemns, and mercy
blends with all His severity. All the expressions of
Scripture which do not harmonise with this immuta
bility of His essence are pure anthropomorphisms.!
Let us observe that love is here presented rather as the
guarantee of the immutability of God, than as the
essence of His being ; it is the attribute rather than the
substance. * Ty iavrov BBiapio} ovay uAZovi rrjg iv v'ap Btwpiag. (" In Joann.,"
book xxxii. 18, vol. iv. 449.)
t 'AXrj9uig ovk bpyiltrai. (" In Jerem. Homil.," 18, 6, vol. iii. 249.)
| " In Genes. Homil.," iii. 2, vol. ii. 67.

BOOK II. — THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 3OI
It is in virtue also of this immutability that Origen
declares the creation to have neither beginning nor end.
It cannot be conceived that the goodness of God should
ever be inactive, for this would suppose a change at
some period in the Divine life. It must then have ever
had an object on which to expend itself, and this object
has always been produced for its own good. Creation
is an eternal act of the Divine love. We arrive at this
result, because as the will and power of God are eternal,
so we cannot suppose the existence of any cause at any
time preventing Him from producing the good He
desired. Just as He could not be a Father if there
were no Son, nor a ruler if there were nothing to govern,
so He could not be called Almighty if there were no
scope for the exercise of His almightiness. " Since God
shows Himself truly to us as the All-Powerful, it is
necessary that the universe should exist."* If we can
suppose a time when the universe was not, it is obvious
that God must have undergone a change, passing from
a state of inaction to the creative act. It follows that
it is not possible to say that the world is not, like God,
without beginning or end.t
Origen does not intend to say that the world shares
absolutely in the eternity of God ; for the peculiar
characteristic of the eternal is not endless duration, but
immutable existence. God is beyond all space and all
time ;% herein consists His omnipresence and omnis-
* " Ideo ut omnipotens ostendatur Deus, omnia subsistere ne-
cesse est." (" De Princip.," i. 2, 10, vol. i. 57-)
t Oiik apa Svvarbv XiyBiv pr) Aval dvapxov Kai awatSiov rip 9tip rb rzdv.
(Photius, " Codex," 235. Huet, vol. i. p. 57, note /. Comp. " De
Princip.," iii. 5 3.) " Nullam habuit aliam creandi causam nisi
propter se ipsum, id est bonitatem suam." (Ibid., ii. 9, 6.)
X " Homil. in Exod.," vi. 14, vol. ii. 151.

302 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
cience. This omniscience, however, is not absolutely un
limited, for God cannot foresee evil, which is a nonen
tity.* Though the world is under the dominion of pro
gression and change, it has no more a beginning than
the creative act from which it emanates. In fact, Origen
contradicts himself on this important point. If creation
is indeed necessary to the immutability of the Divine
Being, it was not called into existence solely for its own
good. God had a motive to creation in Himself and for
Himself; the world is in a manner the complement of
Himself. This is the fatal consequence of every doctrine
which does not find in the very sphere of the Divine,
the supreme realisation of love. There is no other
means of preserving unimpaired the full freedom of the
creative act.
We have spoken hitherto of the act of creation
only in its relation to the Divine immutability ;
in so far, that is, as it belongs to theodicy. We
shall consider presently creation itself in its various
phases. The doctrine of the Trinity, as taught by
Origen, receives its true character from this conception
of the origin of the world. Without doubt the Word
is the glory of the uncreated light, His eternal radi
ation, inseparable from its source ; and in this sense
the Father cannot be conceived of apart from the Son.
" We acknowledge that God has always been the
Father of His only Son, begotten of Him, deriving
from Him all that He is, having no beginning." t
Let us bear in mind, however, that God knows
* " Omne quod malum est, scientia ejus vel prajscientia habetur
indignum." (" Comm. in Epist. ad Rom.," vii. vol. iv. 603.)
f " Sine initio." (" De Princip.," i. 2, 2, vol. i. 54.)

BOOK II. — THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 303
Himself better than He is known by the Son, and
that consequently the Absolute is in an emphatic
manner unique. God has in Himself greater glory
than in the Son. In the contemplation of Himself
He arrives at a truer knowledge of His own being
than is possessed by the Son.* If the Father cannot
be separated from the Son, it is because the perpetuity
of the creative act is essential to the conception of
His immutability. This is the great contradiction
of the system. Creation is on the one hand the
guarantee of the Divine immutability ; and on the
other hand its necessity impinges on the perfection
of the Absolute, which cannot be linked to a con
tingent existence. What, in truth, is the Word if it
be not the eternal idea of multiple being ? God is the
Monas in its absolute simplicity ; the Word is the
personification, the rryppstasis of the Divine reason,
in so far as it is applied to the multiple, the prin
ciple of all development, the bond uniting the various
component parts of the universe, the unity of all ideas. t
Language which is composed of various connected
propositions, represents perfectly the nature of the
Word.t He is the archetype of the manifold images,
the prototype of the truth diffused in reasonable souls,
which carry His impress stamped upon their thoughts ;
the central, primordial idea, containing in itself all
subordinate and particular ideas. §
* " In Joahn./' xxxii. 18.
t Svcraoig rr)g rrBpi ruiv oXoiv 9to>piag Kai vorfpdroiv. (Ibid., tome. i.
vol. iv. 20.) '0 9Bog piv ovv 'iv ian Kai arrXovv, b au>rr)p rjpSv Sid rd
rroXXa. (Ibid., 21.)
X Ibid., tome v. fragm., vol. iv. 96.
§ 'Apxknnrog bikoiv ttXbiovidv eikovo)v. (Ibid., tome ii. 2 ; vol. iv. 51.)

304 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
The relation between the Son and creation is brought
out very clearly in these expressions : it is as patent
in the system of Origen as in the writings of Justin,
Athenagoras, and Tertullian. It is true that Origen
further holds the pre-existence of the Word ; but as
creation itself has no beginning, this in no way destroys
the essential correlation between the Son of God and
the world. We might be tempted on this ground to
identify the doctrine of Origen with that of Philo or of
Neoplatonism, and to see in the Word only an imper
sonal idea — the symbol of the eternal creation — and
thus to destroy all true distinction between Him and
the world. This would be an error. If it cannot be
denied that in Origen's system the Word has a distinct
existence only in view of creation, it must nevertheless
be acknowledged that the Word is not confounded with
the creation. He alone is the complete and adequate
image of the Father. No creature, not even that
which occupies the highest place in the hierarchy of
being, can claim the same filial relation as the Son
to the Deity. The Word is not external to God, but is
God Himself.* He has received the full communi
cation of the glory, the power, the knowledge of the
first principle. He does not only share in wisdom,
reason, truth ; He is wisdom itself, truth itself, reason
itself, t The only difference between Him and the
Father is that the knowledge of God is original, that
of the Son is derived. God produces that which He
knows ; His omniscience is only another term for His
omnipotence. With Him, to foresee or to predetermine
* " Contra Cels.," i. 57 ; viii. 12.
T AiiroGoipia, avroaXr)Btia3 avroXoyog. (Ibid., iii. 41.)

BOOK II. — THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 305
is to lay down the principle of the future event, which
beyond this depends on the free choice of His creatures.*
He does not merely know all things by virtue of His
wisdom and prescience, but He keeps all in His own
power, t
God alone knows all things, and has a perfect know
ledge of Himself, in which not even the Son shares
to the same degree ; for the Word has only a derived
and passive knowledge of the Father. He is not the
Absolute God, but simply God ; He has not the im
mutable existence which belongs only to the supreme
Monas. "God only is God by His own nature."! Thus
the Saviour says in His prayer, " That they may know
Thee, the only true God." The Being, then, who is
not by His own nature God, becomes a sharer in the
Deity. He is made God; He is not the God with the
article, but simply God without the article, § the first
born of every creature, who is above all gods. He
only preserves His divinity by abiding in the con
templation of the Father. It follows that He is not
the simple, essential, unchangeable good ; He does not
possess immutability. The Father is above Him, as
the Son is above all other beings. This inferiority
made it possible that He should humble Himself for
the salvation of the world. Since He was not the im-
* " Quod autem prasfinit, praefinit principium praefiniendi faciens."
(" Comment. Series in Matth.," 55, vol. iii. 874.)
\ " Sin autem comprehensionem earn dicimus, ut non solum
sensu quis et sapientia comprehendat, sed et virtute et potentia
cuncta teneat quas cognovit, non possumus dicere, quod compre
hendat Filius Patrem, Pater vero omnia comprehendit." (" De
Princip.," iv. 35.)
X 'AvroBtog b 0£oc ion. (" In Joann.," ii. 2. Comp. " De Princip.,"
i.2, 13.)
§ QBorroiovpBvov, ovx " dtbg, dXXd 0f6f. (Ibid.)
21

306 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
mutable One, He could come down into the region
of death and of change.* But this very clear subordi
nation detracts nothing from His divine nature. He
is distinguished from all created beings, first, because
He was not created but eternally begotten by the
Father; He is born of the will of God. That will
is the eternal germ of the Word.t He is not then
the product of an emanation, but of a moral act, in
which all the divine energy is concentrated, and which
is its plenary manifestation ; for the will is the very
essence of the free Deity. Thus the Son is of the same
essence as the Father.J He remains closely united
to Him in love ; the two wills form but one.§ In the
second place, He is not only above creation — He is its
first cause. He it is who has called all beings into
existence, imparting the higher life to all who are
endowed with reason and liberty, and establishing
the order and harmony of the universe. || Lastly,
goodness is His as a part of His very essence, and
He cannot lose it, while the creature possesses it not
as an element of his very being, but as the result
of a moral determination. It is therefore possible
for him to lose it. IT The Word thus defined is widely
different from the mere abstraction of Platonism,
* "In Joann.," ii. 21.
\ " Velut quaedam voluntas ejus ex mente procedens." (" De
Princip.," i. 2, 6.)
, X " Communionem substantias, bpooiaiog videtur." (" Fragm. in
Hebraeos/'vol. iv. 699.)
§ "Ovra Sio rij viroaraGti rrpaypara, 'iv ry ravrorriTi rov /3ovXr)parbg.
(" Contra Cels.," viii. 12. Corhp. " In Joann.," xiii. 36.)
|| 'Avrovpybv rov Koapov. (" Contra Cels.," vi. 60.)
IT " Immaculatum autem esse praeter Patrem et Filium et Spiritum
Sanctum, nulli substantialiter inest, sed sanctitas in omni creatura
accidens res est." (" De Princip.," i. 5, 5.)

BOOK II. — THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 307
in which the Word is nothing more than the virtual
idea of the world. We have here presented to us a
living hypostasis,* an active and creative cause, which,
while it occupies a subordinate place in reference to
the absolute, is nevertheless at an infinite distance
from mere created beings. The strength of the Christian
sentiment in Origen overpowered his logic, which would
else certainly have led him to break down the barrier
between the Word and creation ; for strictly speaking,
and from a metaphysical point of view, His Word
is rather the idea of creation than the revelation
of the Father. But there are elements in every argu
ment higher than mere logic, and no one has a right
to press a doctrine beyond the point marked by such
limitations. Origen is a Christian philosopher, and he
does not move simply in the region of abstractions. He
must needs include in his synthesis the great religious
facts which have been apprehended by his heart and
conscience, and hence he is obliged to give it notable
extension. The doctrine of the Holy Spirit is but slightly
touched upon by Origen. He very distinctly recognises
the third person in the Trinity, but he regards His
existence as derived from the Son, and therefore as
subordinate in a still more marked degree.! The Holy
Spirit is called the first-fruits of the creation, since He
is produced by the Word, who is in a manner the
medium of creative action. J He is distinguished from
* 'TrroGraaiv Z.Siiav. (" In Joann.," i. 39.)
T 'EXdrruiv rrpbg rov rrarkpa b vibe, in Si r)rrov rb irvevpa. (" De
Princip.," i. 3, 5.)
J Td£ei Tipairtpov rrdvnov toiv vrrb tov rrdrpog Sid Xpiarov yBvopkvwv.
(" In Joann.," ii. 6, iv. 61.) 21 *

308 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
the world, however, inasmuch as He shares also in the
Divine life. He is the personification and the hypos
tasis of holiness, as the Word is of the reason. While
the Son reigns over all reasonable beings, the Holy
Spirit reigns over the saints. He is the centre and
source of spiritual gifts, the moral focus of religion.*
We have thus three realms of the Divine. The uni
verse, which belongs to the Father ; reasonable beings,
which are dependent on the Son ; and holy souls, which
are in communication with the Spirit. The two king
doms of the Son and of the Spirit are evidently com
prehended in that of the Father, who alone has the
eternal dominion, for as all proceeds from Him, so all
returns to Him. Thus we find that while Origen dis
tinctly speaks of the Trinity, his doctrine is yet widely
removed from that of Athanasius, and he bears clearly
the impress of his age.t Origen's teaching, neverthe
less, is true to the incomparable grandeur of his theme.
" The Trinity passes every intelligence, temporal or
eternal, for all that is not the Trinity must be measured
by the limitations of time."!
§ II. The Creation and the Fall.
The Word being Himself eternally engendered, pro
duces unceasingly the multiform life which exists
ideally in Him before He evolves it from nothing.
This divine idea comprehends the good alone, for evil
is an accident and a nonentity which can neither be
* " De princip.," i. 3, 5.
\ " Ilia vero substantia Trinitatis qua? principium est et causa
omnium, ex qua omnia et per quam omnia." (Ibid., iv. 26.)
X " Csetera quae sunt extra Trinitatem in saeculis et temporibus
metienda sunt." (Ibid., iv. 28.)

BOOK II. — THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 309
conceived nor originated by God. The Word creates
pure spirits, which are destined to be made participants
by Him in the eternal reason, and to be united to Him
as He is united to the Father. They are all of the
same divine substance. " Every spirit which shares in
the spiritual light is evidently of the same nature as
every other spirit which has part in the same light.
God and all spirits are therefore of the same sub
stance."* The difference is that none of them possess
good as an essential part of their being ; they are to
secure it by their own moral determination, and as
a necessary consequence they may lose it. The funda
mental axiom of this doctrine is: "Every rational
creature is capable of good and evil. His destiny de
pends not on his original condition, but on his own
desert."! Everything hinges on free will. Let us
pause to consider this main point of Origen's system ;
it is the true pivot around which the whole revolves.
Origen has devoted a large part of the third book of
his " Treatise on Principles" to this question, refuting
with extreme care all objections, especially those taken
from Scripture. This demonstration was very neces
sary at a time when opposition to Christianity was
taking the form of pantheistic fatalism. Absolute pre
destination was the fundamental article of the gnostics,
and the aliment of that unreasonable pride by which
they exalted themselves above all other beings, deeming
these to be by nature fitted only for a lower life.
* " Ex quo concluditur Deum et hasc quodammodo unius esse
substantia?." (" De Princip.," iv. 36.)
f " Omnis creatura rationabilis laudis et culpa; capax." (" De
Princip.," i. 5, 2.) " Ex merito non per conditionis prasrogativam."
(Ibid., i. 5, 2.)

310 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
Among beings capable of action, some have the
motive power without, some within themselves. Stone
and wood belong to the first category. The animal
has in himself the spring of movement, a spring which
is not merely mechanical, since it is accompanied by
instinct. The reasonable being adds to these natural
motive powers the force of reason, by which he can
distinguish between motives, reject some and accept
others.* He has, moreover, the faculty of choosing
the good ; thus he is responsible for the evil which he
commits. It is not true that the free creature is the
victim of external influences. He may preserve his
chastity in the midst of the most fiery temptations, as
he may lose it in the sternest school of morality. The
will alone gives the final decision. To hold any other
view is to lower man to the level of the brute.
How, on such a theory, could we explain repentance,
reformation of life, and all that which results from an
inward change, while the outward circumstances of
the life remain unaltered ? Reason constrains us then
to admit that if the outward accidents of life are not
under our control, it is in our power to make good
or bad use of them, by virtue of that Word who is
as a judge within us, discriminating between the evil
and the good.! Origen quotes, in support of this
thesis, the words of Scripture which appeal to human
freedom, the great Divine declarations which set before
man good and evil, death and life, J and above all the
appeals made by Jesus to sinners. § The texts which
seem to favour the idea of predestination are carefully
* " De Princip.," iii. r, 2, 4. f Ibid., iii. 1, 6.
X Micah vi. 3 ; Deut. xxx. 15. § Matt. v. 37 ; Rom. ii. 4.

BOOK II. — THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 311
considered by him. If it is said that God hardened
Pharaoh,* this proves that he was not bv nature
devoted to hardness of heart, as the gnostics as
sert. The Epistle to the Hebrews gives us the true
solution of this declaration, in the passage in which
it speaks of the same rain from heaven fertilising the
good ground, and leaving the barren land in its sterility, f
Thus the same graces produce effects differing accord
ing to the various dispositions of men's hearts. '" It is
as though the sun were to speak with a voice and say :
My beams now melt, now harden, the substances on
which they fall. There is nothing in this contrary to
right and reason. Does not the same heat liquefy wax
and desiccate clay ? So in like manner the very same
Divine power, acting by Moses, hardened Pharaoh
because of his wickedness, and subdued some of the
Egyptians, who joined themselves to the Hebrews."!
While this hardening is the chastisement due to rebel
lion, it is a mingling of love and justice ; for so far from
devoting Pharaoh to irremediable ruin, God holds out
to him a hope of salvation in the other life, and only
smites to heal, for He knew how to bring him back.§
Such is likewise the case of the rebellious and heedless
hearers of the word of Christ, upon whom He pro
nounces such terrible judgments. When God declares
by the prophet that He will give a heart of flesh for the
heart of stone,;: this does not imply that our will is to
have no share in the change, any more than when He
promises by the mouth of the Apostle Paul ,-to work
* Exod. iv. 21. f Heb. vi. 7. "De Princip./' i. 10.
J Ibid., iii. 1-1 1.
§ 'O rur ;>X,.>r fVt,-, o ticNSe swf «r«i n'r tf.ifWil «hrfi. (Ibid., iii. 14.)
j. E;ek. xi. 14.

312 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
in us to will and to do."* Liberty is, after all, God's
first gift to man, and to Him we owe it that we are
free spiritual creatures. The ship is saved from the
tempest only by the protection of God ; nevertheless
it would have been lost if the sailors had not toiled
at the pumps and in the rigging.t In discussing that
formidable chapter, the ninth of the Epistle to the
Romans, Origen shows without difficulty that the
human clay was not passive in the hands of the potter,
since the same apostle declares that " if a man keep
himself from evil, he shall be a vessel unto honour in
the household of God."! He finds, moreover, a con
venient means of escape from all difficulties in his
doctrine of the pre-existence of souls.
Free will is then the condition of all moral creatures.
They are called to a share in the Divine life by the
Word. Their number is determined, but it is in their
own power to regulate their destiny. According to the
choice they make, they will be a very race of gods, or
they will fall under the power of evil. They are destined
to attain by a spiritual act to their goal, which is in God
Himself. They are not, moreover, left to their own
strength; they receive divine assistance; grace supports
the will of the creature, § and the Holy Spirit coincides
with man's free will, proportioning His gifts according
to the manner in which His appeals are received.
This theory of liberty is incomplete upon one im
portant point. Origen does not get beyond the idea of
free will. He recognises only that phase of freedom in
* Phil. ii. 13. "De Princip.," iii. 15, 16. f Ibid., iii. 18.
! Ibid., iii. 20.
§ " Domini semper auxilio indigemus." (" Select, in. Psalm.,"
chap. ii. 4, 2, vol. ii. 672.)

BOOK II. — THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 313
which the will is summoned to make its choice. He
ignores that second period of the spiritual life, in which,
the choice having been made, the good is attained and
freedom finds its consummation in the normal develop
ment of the being. In other words, he admits only
negative liberty, that of conflict and trial, not the
positive liberty which consists in the realisation of our
moral destiny. Both are of equal importance. Without
the power of free choice, good is no longer anything
more than a natural necessity ; the soul brings forth
that which is good, as the ground brings forth the grass
and the corn ; it loses entirely its moral character. It
is absolutely essential, then, that liberty should pass
through a period of trial, and be placed in a position to
assert its determination. But from another point of
view, it is no less necessary that this period should have
an end, and the ordeal lead to a definite issue. When
the will has decided for good, that choice is no more
a revocable act, but a definitely acquired condition
of soul. Origen was on the track of the true solution
when he established that God possesses the good by
His very essence, and cannot by possibility be parted
from it. As he could not admit the idea that God was
not sovereignly free, he was led to conceive of a higher
form of liberty, which was something beyond mere
freedom of choice. Had he followed out this thought,
he would have discovered that free choice is but the first
stage of liberty for the created being. Man, in fact,
holds from the first a relative, not an absolute, position ;
he must accept voluntarily the law of his being and thus
fulfil his moral destiny. Free choice is only the pre
paration for the essential liberty which consists precisely

314 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
in this acceptance of the divine law, and in the quiet
and continuous development of the true human nature
finding its consummation in God. In consequence of
this defective view, religious history becomes, in the
system of Origen, a drama without a conclusion, which
is perpetually recommencing, and, as it were, repeating
itself. The brain wearies in watching this restless,
ever-revolving whirlpool.
We have seen that all spiritual beings bear a common
resemblance as they emerge from the hands of God.
This is the inevitable consequence of the system, since
all differences among them are supposed to arise from
the diversity of their own moral determinations. There
exists then, at first, only one spiritual nature made in
the image of God, but not partaking of His absolute
essence. This nature is destined to fix its own place in
the scale of beings. God created, at the same time,
matter, not as that heavy and dense corporeality
familiar to us, but as a subtle, mobile, malleable sub
stance, capable of assuming any form. " Corporeal
nature is subject to the most diversified changes, and
can transform itself after any manner. Thus we see
wood becoming fire, fire changing into smoke, smoke
melting into air."* Matter was created by God in
order to give outward form to moral determinations,
serving as an envelope to the soul, more or less ethereal
or gross, according as its choice is made for good or
evil. There is an entire spiritual history antecedent to what
we call the creation of the world, and creation is only
* " Ex rebus ipsis apparet quod diversam variamque permuta-
tionem recipiat natura corporea, ita ut possit ex omnibus in omnia
transformari." (" De Princip.," ii. 1, 4.)

BOOK II. — THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 315
the result of that which took place before our pale sun
shone upon our earth, which is at once a glace of pun
ishment and of reparation. Everything in our present
existence depends upon acts freely performed in an
anterior condition of life, and the position of all beings
is determined by their own previous choice. Our
existence in this world is the judgment passed upon
our existence in an earlier state. All the various con
ditions, which we observe here, correspond to the same
diversity in rational beings, and are all determined by
the different measure in -which souls have fallen from
the primal unity.*
Matter becomes a heavy clog on beings who have
fallen most deeply, while it is, as it were, etherealised
and made luminous for those of a higher order.! It
follows that the sublime commencement of Holy
Scripture is a symbol rather than narrative, but a
symbol embodying the highest spiritual realities.!
The fall was universal, though unequal. The first
spirit who fell from the divine life was Satan ; he grew
impatient of the contemplation of the Father, and sought
independence ; he brought about his ruin by his own
free act.§ Pride is the essence of sin, which always
consists in the exaltation of self, in the refusal to submit
to the Creator, and in severance from the source of life
as the necessary consequence. || As God alone is good,
* Ootuj Sk TroiKiXiurdrov tov KoGpov n<yxdvovrog, Kai roGavra Sidipopa
XoytKa rrtpikxovTog, ri dXXo xpr) Xiytiv ainov yByovkvat rov vrroGrrjvai avrov
r) rb TroiiaXov rrjg dTro—roiGBiog twv ovx bpoiorg rrjg ivdiog drroppBovriitv.
("De Princip.," ii. 1, 1.) f Ibid., ii. 2, 2.
! " Homil. i. in Genes.," 12, vol. ii. 53.
§ " Contra Cels.," vi. 44.
|| " Inflatio, superbia, arrogantia peccatum diaboli est, et ob haec
delicta ad terras migravit de ccelo. Superbia peccatis omnibus
major est." (•' Homil. in Ezekiel/' ix. 2, vol. iii. 389.)

316 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
goodness is identical with absolute being, and sin is
a diminution, an enfeebling of the life, a progress
towards death, a ceasing to be.* To sin is to die, for
it is to be separated from God, and death is nothing
but separation from life.
The convulsion caused by the rebellion of Satan was
felt by all spirits, but in various degrees ; for each one
has a separate volition, and is only brought under the
influences to which it yields of its own accord. The
first consequence of the rebellion among the spirits was
corporeal existence. In truth, in separating themselves
from God, spirits leave their centre of unity ; they
become divided and isolated as they enter the domain
of matter, which multiplies its forms and displays
infinite suppleness in its expression of the various
determinations of the spiritual nature. Thus is formed
in space the vast graduated scale of beings, every step
of the ladder corresponding exactly to the degree of
obliquity in the moral creature.
Without dwelling on the fantastic cosmology which
Origen derives from the dreams of the Platonists, we
shall notice his leading thought of a hierarchy, the
gradations of which correspond precisely to the free
determinations formed by pure spirits before the exist
ence of this universe. This hierarchy is not unchanging;
souls ascend or descend by various grades according to
their merits or demerits, perpetually changing forms in
the incessant mutation of their moral dispositions, which
attain to higher degrees of purity by means of these
very changes, for love being always a co-operative
principle with the justice of God, all punishment is
* T6 rrovripbv Kai KaKov ovk ov. ("' In Joann.," book ii. 7, vol, iv. 65.)

BOOK II. — THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 317
at the same time correction, and tends to ameliorate
the guilty. " We hold that God, the Father of all
beings, has ordered all things (in the existing world)
for the salvation of all His creatures, by the ineffable
reason of His Word and of His wisdom."* Only the
brute creation is excluded from this moving hierarchy,
since the moral creature cannot unite itself with the
beast, which has no higher soul than that in the blood.
Origen positively repudiates the Indian or Pythagorean
doctrine of metempsychosis.
At the highest point of the hierarchy of beings are
those who have least betrayed their trust. These
are those whom the Scripture calls gods. Then come
thrones, principalities, and powers, among which Origen
places the stars, sun, and moon.t The angels are set
over various countries, or they perform certain functions,
as Gabriel, who is the angel of war. They thus watch
over the inferior creation, as well as over man.! If
they are fallen, as the fact of their corporeal form, how
ever transparent and glorious it may be, proves that
they are, the degradation is very slight : they are at any
rate already purified and raised again. They have a
law, and will be judged in their turn. The evil angels
or demons were the instigators of the universal fall,
being led on by Satan, their chief. § They have a dark
* " Opinamur parentem omnium Deum pro salute universarum
creaturarum suarum singula dispensasse." (" De Princip.," ii. 1, 2.)
f " In Joann.," book i. 34, vol. iv. p. 35. " Stella; rationabiles
animantes." (Ibid., i. 7, 3.)
! "Angelos officia promeruisse putandum est ex suis meritis.''
(Ibid., i. 8, 1.)
§ " Manifestissime ostenditur cecidisse de coelo is qui prius erat
Lucifer. 1Principatum egit in eos quie jus malitias obsecuti sunt."
(" De Princip.," i. 5, S-)

318 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
body, which is the evidence of their perversity.
Enshrouded in this ignominious darkness, they inhabit
the regions of the air, and exert a fatal power over
mankind.* They form the organised forces of evil, and
yet they are not incapable of a return, to good.t The
righteous hold them in check by their good actions, for
holiness breaks their power.J Every man has his
demon, as each has his good angel : § plagues and lying
oracles come from Satan and his angels.
Midway between the demons and the angels is placed
a being in whom weakness is joined to grandeur —
a true microcosm, bearing at once the impress of a
divine origin and the stigma of the Fall. This being
is man. In order to understand his original condition,
we must go back beyond the Adam of Genesis, who was
already fallen to the level of corporeal life. Man, as he
appears to us, is no more the direct handiwork of God
than angel or demon. He also was originally pure spirit,
and the place he now occupies was determined by the
part he took in the universal fall : he has sunk lower
than the angels, less low than demons. Hence his
intermediate position. We must even go further.
Although, as a matter of fact, all the members of
mankind are alike in their nature, and although
all have fallen in the same manner, the differences
which we perceive among men prove that there have
been degrees in this universal fall. The disposition
* " Cohortatio ad Martyr.," 45.
f " Secundum nos ne diabolus ipse incapax fuit boni. Nulla
natura est qua? non recipiat bonum vel malum." (" De Princip.,"
i. 8, 3.) J " Homil. in Joshua," xv. 6, vol. ii. 434.
§ " Unicuique duo assistunt angeli, alter justitia?, alter iniquita-
tis." (" Homil. in Luke," xii. vol. iii. 945.)

BOOK II. — THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 319
of the various nations over the face of the globe, as well
as the diversities of individual lot, are all alike deter
mined by acts of the will, which took place before
history begins.* Original sin is not a collective thing.
It has been committed by all who suffer from its conse
quences, and those consequences are in exact proportion
to the greater or less gravity of the fault.! Character
itself is not a fatality of nature ; it is a spiritual seed
brought from the higher region whence we have fallen.
This seed is the product of our antecedent life, and it
may be choked or developed, according to our course
of life on earth. Speaking of the seed of Abraham,
Origen gives it to be understood that those who can
claim to be of it are those who have brought with them
from a previous life some spiritual nobility. " All
men," he says, "do not come into this human life
with the germs of the Word hidden in their souls."!
We have seen that free will retains all its power
even in this world of the fallen. Origen admits, how
ever, that having once descended, through our own
fault, to this earth, we form part of a whole which acts
upon us for good or for evil. It is not possible for us to
escape prematurely from this influence. This is evi
dent from the doctrine of redemption and of final
restoration, which will not adapt itself to an absolute
* " In initio mundi ita dispersi sunt filii illius Adam sicut illorum
merita postulabant." (" In Numer. Homil.," 28, 4, vol. ii. 385.)
! This appears from the curious passage in which Origen speaks
of the distinction between animals clean and unclean as the symbol
of the diversity of the moral condition of man, which proceeds not
from a fatality of nature, but from the determinations of the will.
("In Lev. Homil.," vii. 7, vol. ii. 227.)
X ArjXov on ov rrdvrBg dvBponroi ptrd arreppariKiov Xoywv riov lyKaraa-
rrapkvriiiv airuiv roig i^ivxaig rip f3itp rwv dvBpioTrwv lmSBSnpr)Ka3i. (" In
Joann.," book xx. 2, vol. iv. 308.)

320 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
individualism. The idea of solidarity appears, though
but indistinctly, in the system of Origen. He admits
the influence of parents over children, and recognises
the transmission of evil, not only by natural descent,
but also by example.*
Let us look somewhat more closely at man as he
appears to us in his actual condition. Though fallen,
he yet retains a divine spark within. The Word is
asleep within him, like Jesus in the tempest-tossed boat.!
This fallen being may become like the angels — like God
Himself. ! He thus rises from mere resemblance to
a complete conformity to the divine type. The germ
of the Word in him is his conscience, which is like
a sixth sense, the sense of the divine, § inherent in his
higher soul. The corporeal organism, which in its
actual form is the punishment of his previous rebellion,
is animated by a second soul. This is expressly distin
guished from the higher part of our being, which is the
spirit. || This is a. physical soul, as it were. In our
present condition, the body is bound to its spiritual
part, and cannot sever itself. It is not then in itself
evil, though it is the result of the fall. Our appetites
are only sinful when they lead us into evil.1T The
* " Omnes qui in hoc mundo nascuntur non solum nutriuntur a
parentibus, sed et imbuunturet non solum sunt filii peccatorum, sed
et discipuli." (" In Rom.," book v. 2, vol. iv. 553.)
f " Adhuc in infidelibus sermo dormitat." (" In Cantic. Homil.,"
ii. 9, vol. iii. 21.)
! "In Levit. Homil.," ix. II, vol. ii. 244. X-rrkvSiiipBv yevioBat Btoi.
(" In Joann.," book xx. 23, vol. iv. 347.)
§ " Sensum divinum." ("In Cantic," i. vol. iii. 42, 43.)
|| " Anima dici potest sensibilis et mobilis." ("De Princip.," ii.
8, 1.) " Alia sunt qua? sub anima? nomine et alia qua? sub spifitus
nomine deputantur." (Ibid., ii. 8, 4.)
% tivoig Giiparog ov piapd. (" Contra Cels.," iii. 42.)

BOOK II. — THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 321
higher soul, or the spirit, ought to rule and govern
them, for it is capable of acting upon the inferior soul.
Everything depends on the decision of the will, which
can triumph over temptation. Origen has only repro
duced the triple psychological division of St. Paul :
first, the higher soul, which is called the spirit; second,
the physical soul ; third, the body.*
Man, by the gravity of his sin, has fallen under the
empire of Satan, and has introduced evil into the
region which he inhabits.! He might have triumphed
over it even since his fall, but the power of the demons
has become terrible over him. It has gone on growing
through his fault, till he has no longer power to resist
it ;; he is lost if he does not receive superhuman aid.§
This superhuman aid is redemption.
§ III. Redemption.
The Word is the chief actor in the work of redemp
tion, which is simply the restoration for fallen spirits
of the plan of creation. Its object is to bring them
back to the divine life, to that state of perfection in God
in which they shall be freed from the heavy material
frame under which they now groan. The Word is per
petually working for this result. His mercy is more
mighty than the power of evil which is against us;
He is able to give us back our lost liberty ; He bears
within Him the divine life, and can restore it to
* " Spiritus, anima, corpus." (" In Exod. HomiL," iii. 3, vol. ii.
137.) \ " Contra Cels.," vii. 28.
X Tlavrbg dpaprwXov Kararvoawovpkvov v—o tov dpxovrog rov aiuvog
rovrov. (" De Oratione," 25.)
§ "In Rom.," book v. 1, vol. iv. 530, 551.
22

322 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
those who by their own fault have forfeited it.* The
work of redemption has been going on upon earth
without cessation ever since the Fall. The law — the
purpose of which is to check the motions of sin, and
to reveal the divine justice — is the first manifestation
of the Word. He next appeared in the person of the
prophets, to shed His brightness upon our moral dark
ness. + Thus is demonstrated that unity of the two
Testaments, which Gnosticism so persistently denied.!
There cannot be by possibility any opposition between
the Old Covenant and the New, as justice opposed to
love. These two divine attributes are entirely one.
" If goodness is virtue and righteousness, righteous
ness is, beyond question, also goodness. "§ It follows
that the God of the law is identical with the God of
the Gospel.
The Word does not reveal Himself by oracles only ;
He acts directly upon the human soul, which sighs
after His supreme manifestation.!! In fact, neither the
law nor prophecy is able to overcome error and sin.
Man is incapable of rising to the pure light. Hence
the Word stoops down to him, to enlighten and
teach him obedience. " Who could save the soul of
man, and bring it back to the supreme God, but the
God-Word, who, being from the beginning with God,
became flesh in order to make Himself visible to those
* " De Princip.," i. 2, 4.
! "Per legem purificatio peccatorum coepit operiri. Mittuntur in
auxilium legis propheta?.'' (" In Epist. ad Rom.," book v. 1, vol.
iv. 550.)
X " Unus atque idem Deus legis et Evangeliorum.", (" De
Princip.," ii. 4, 2.)
§ " Ergo si bonum virtus et justitia virtus est, sine dubio justitia
bonitas est." (Ibid., ii. 5, 3.) || " In Cantic," book i. vol. iii. 37.

BOOK II. — THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 323
who, being bound to and limited by this corporeal
nature, could not have seen Him as the Word with
God ? Speaking with human voice, and preaching in
the flesh, He calls these carnal beings to Himself, in
order to conform them first to the Word Incarnate, and
then to raise them to the vision of that which He was
before His humiliation."* He humbled Himself, and
took upon Him the form of a servant, and became
obedient unto death, that He might teach obedience to
those who by obedience alone could be saved.! The
incarnation itself remains for ever an impenetrable and
sublime mystery, which no intellect can comprehend,
no words express.!
This grand doctrine presented indeed special diffi
culties from the standpoint of the system of Origen.
A sincere and earnest Christian, he accepted this cen
tral doctrine of the Gospel, and firmly believed that
the Son of God had humbled Himself and assumed
our inferior nature to restore and save it. He expresses
with pathetic eloquence his sense of this act of love.
" The Saviour," he says, " abased Himself even into
the dust for the love of mankind."^ This is the lan
guage of truly Christian feeling ; but speculation soon
comes in to obscure the view. Origen is too consum
mate a logician to sacrifice the fundamental principles
of his system. Now the first of these principles is the
immutability of the Divine life. It is not then ad-
* "Ootic Iv dpxy rrpbg rov Bbov 5>v Sid rovg KoXXriBki'rag Ty aapKi Kai
ysvopivovg orrtp aapK, lyhtro adaz,- ("_ Contra Cels.," vi. 68.)
f " Unigenitus Filius Dei exinanivit semetipsum, obediens usque
ad mortem ut obedientiam doceret eos qui non aliter nisi per
obedientiam salutem consequi poterant." (" De Princip.," iii. 7, 6.)
! Ibid., ii. 6, 2.
§ Aia ipiXaBpmwiav iavrbv inivmatv. (" Contra Cels.," iv. 15.)

324 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
missible that the Word should suffer any degradation ;
He could neither suffer nor die. Again, the human
body is the consequence of sin ; it is not simply matter
created by God, and which has in itself nothing that
is evil ; it is the matter which God created rendered
dense and gross, as it were, as the result of the evil
determinations of the spirit which it holds in deserved
captivity. The Word could not then assume directly
this gross corporeal nature. Even though He were
conceived of the Spirit, still the formation of the human
body is the result of antecedent sin. How then could
the doctrine of the incarnation be harmonised with this
irremediable dishonour of the corporeal life ? Origen
seeks to escape from this dilemma by means of his
singular doctrine of the human soul of Christ. As the
Word could not unite itself directly to a body, it unites
itself to a hunian soul, which human soul can without
difficulty take up its abode in mortal flesh. This soul
becomes therefore, as it were, the mediator between the
Godhead and flesh.* This human soul will be truly
linked to the clay of which our body is formed; it will
share all its weaknesses and pains. It will even ex
perience the bitterness and agony of death, and thus
the Word, while remaining Himself impassible and
glorious, will be able to communicate eternal life to
mankind. Origen applies to the human soul of Jesus
his great principle of the classification of beings, which
is uniformly the free determination of the will. The
human soul which received the honour of being chosen
* " Hac substantia anima? inter Deum carnemque mediante (non
enim possibile erat Dei naturam corpori sine mediatore misceri),
nascitur Deus homo ilia substantia media subsistente." (" De
Princip.," ii. 6, 3.)

BOOK II. — THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 325
by the Word was the only one which had merited
this honour in the anterior life ; it had kept the law
of God, and was itself pure from all sin. This spotless
purity made it the fit receptacle for the excellence of
the Divine life. The heavenly treasure was enclosed
in a precious vessel. " As the diversity of souls pro
ceeds from the free choice of each one, according to the
degree of love in each for its Creator, so it follows that
that soul of which Jesus says, ' No man can take it
from Me,' had been joined to Him from the beginning
by a strong, indissoluble bond, inasmuch as He is the
wisdom and the Word of God, truth, and absolute light.
Having thus received Him in His fulness into the very
essence of its being, and losing itself, as it were, in
His resplendent brightness, this soul became essentially
one and the same spirit with Him."*
The defects of this theory are grave and numerous.
In the first place it destroys the reality of the union
of the Word with our human nature. For this soul that
had never sinned cannot be a human soul according to
the general principles of Origen's system. Humanity,
as we have seen, is a peculiar form of existence which
corresponds to a certain moral condition, and this
moral condition is characterised by sin. Man was not
directly created by God, any more than angel or demon.
He was born a pure spirit, like all moral creatures,
and he became man as the result of the moral deter
mination which fixed his place in the scale of beings.
This perfectly holy soul, then, to which the Word is
united, is not a human soul ; it does not belong to the
* " Pro liberi arbitrii facultate." (" De Princip.," ii. 6, 3.) 'ES
dvSpayaBijfiarog rovrov tvxojv. (Ibid., ii. 6, 4.)

326 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
class of the children of Adam. Again, we fail to under
stand how such a soul could unite itself to the body,
which, while it is not in itself- polluted, is nevertheless
a form inseparable from sin. If such a union can be
conceived because the human soul is capable of change,
it is again inconceivable on the ground of its possession
of perfect holiness. It is evident that the incarnation
of Jesus, as understood by Origen, bears but a very
distant resemblance to that which the Gospel presents.
The unity of the person of the Redeemer is no less
gravely compromised than the reality of the union
with humanity : we fall at once into absolute dualism.
Origen, comparing the sacrifice of the Cross with the
sacrifice of Abraham, identifies the Word — that is to
say, the Divine nature of the Redeemer — with the
offerer, while Isaac, or the victim, represents the human
nature of Jesus.* Only that which was human died
on Calvary ; the Word retained all the fulness of the
Divine life.t The iron glowing red from the action
of the fire upon it, symbolises the action of the Divine
nature upon the human, which was completely trans
fused with the Divine fire. J The Word in Jesus is like
a statue reproduced in miniature, but preserving all its
symmetry and beauty of form. His humanity is nothing
else than the pedestal of the Divine statue, designed to
bring it within the range of our vision. §
In such a conception human nature is not destined
to be eternally glorified in the person of Christ; it
* " Ideo ipse et hostia et pontifex. Patitur in carne cujus aries
forma est." (" In Genesis," book viii. vol. ii. 83.)
t 'Arrk9avBV b dv9piorrog' oitK aTriBavBv 0 9ebg Xoyog. (" In Joann.," 28,
14, vol. iv. 397. Comp. Ibid., 6, 35, vol. iv. 152.)
X " De Princip.," ii. 6, 6. § Ibid., i. 2, 8.

BOOK II. — THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 327
is a transient form, meant to vanish away. The Saviour
was man ; He is man no longer.* How could it be
otherwise, since the climax of history will be a return
to its starting-point, which is the unity of spirits in
God ? Jesus Himself then will return to this unity;
He will cast away His humanity as a chrysalis form,
by means of which He prepared the full development
of the sons of Adam for the glorious day in which,
restored to their primal state of pure spirits, they will
spread their wings in the regions of light. On this side
Origen's system is marred by a subtle docetism. If
he admits the reality of the body of Christ, it is subject
to his own definition of matter as an essentially mobile
and changing substance. Thus he did not hesitate to
allow that the body of Jesus may have put on various
appearances. t The incarnation, as he represents it,
is more nearly allied to the religion of India than to
that of the apostles. It would better become Vishnu
than Jesus, if the speculative theories of the great
Alexandrine doctor were not constantly modified and
corrected by the Christian feeling which pervades the
whole of his vague metaphysics.
Christ was born of a woman who has preserved
her virginity,! but who was nevertheless nothing more
than a child of Adam. Mary shared in the Fall, which
is the very condition of human existence. § The de-
* Ei' Kai i/v dv9piorrog, dXXd vvv oiSapiHg wni' dv9pi»rrog. (" In Jerem.
Homil.," xv. 6, vol. iii. 226.) f " Contra Cels.," iv. 16.
X " In Luke Homil.," vii. vol. iii. 940.
§ Even Mary was scandalised at the moment of the passion.
" Si autem omnes peccaverunt et egent gloria Dei justificati gratia
ejus et redempti, atque et Maria illo tempore scandalizata est."
(" In Luke Homil.," xvii. vol. iii. 952.) He expressly admits that
Mary, as a member of fallen humanity, needed the sacrifice ap-

328 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
velopment of the Divine Child is miraculous in charac
ter ; He possesses all the wisdom of God from His
tenderest years.* His ministry lasts for three years,
and to its tragic close the world owes its salvation.t
He never succumbs in the conflict. If he at first
puts away from Him the cup of woe in Gethsemane,
it is only to accept suffering yet more bitter.! He lies
in the grave, like the victorious lion couching in his
lair, and the power of His own divinity suffices to
bring His body back to life.§
Let us consider somewhat more closely the character
of His redeeming work. There is one obscure point
in the doctrine of Origen, namely, the effect which
he supposes this work to have upon the whole universe.
"Jesus Christ," he says, "is the propitiator of the
whole world ; universal creation sighs after the grace
of the Redeemer, and all things, in their own order,
obtain salvation." || According to Origen, Christ
became also the Saviour of the angels in heaven,
assuming their form at the time of His ascension,
and thus He is made all things to all.H In another
aspect, the sacrifice of Calvary is supposed to have
produced an effect in these higher regions, as the free
pointed for purification: " Diceremus Mariam, qua? homo erat,
purgatione indiguisse post partum." ("In Luke Homil.," xiv. vol.
iii. 947.) * Ibid., xviii. and xix.
! Origen does not limit the ministry of Jesus to one year, for he
takes the words, " the year of the Lord," in Luke iv. 19, as having
a mystical meaning. (Ibid., xxxii.)
X Bapvrtpov airiiv paprvpiov. (" Exhort, ad Martyr./' 29.)
§ "In Numeros Homil.," xvii. 339.
|| " Jesum propitiatorem non solum credentium, verum et totius
mundi." (" In Rom. Comment," book iii. 8, vol. iv. 516.)
If Sa0wc yiyovBV dv9pibrroig av9punrog Kai dyyiXoig dyytXog. (" In
Joann.," book i. 34, vol. iv. 35.)

BOOK II. — THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 329
offering of love. The sanguinary drama of the cross
is supposed to have had its counterpart in a mystical
sacrifice, in which the Word made an offering, not
of His material blood, but of the holy effluences of
His Deity.* It is not possible to attach any clear
meaning to these thoughts, which, grand as they are,
are very vague. The one distinct impression to be
retained is that of an indefinite extension of the
redeeming sacrifice. Not only does it produce an
effect in heaven above, but in the dark lower regions
of Hades, t whither Jesus descended while the sepulchre
was closed over Him. There He saved the spirits
that did not reject Him. " When His soul was parted
from the body, He preached to souls in like manner set
free from the corporeal life, and converted to Himself
all those who were willing to receive Him."! Thus
the one sacrifice of Christ was offered for the whole
moral creation. §
In treating of the redemption of humanity, Origen
defines his thought with more precision. The work
of Jesus is first of all an illumination ; it enlightens
the darkened and defective understanding, by drawing
near to it and softening, as it were, the celestial
brightness of the Word, which our reason could
* " Non solum pro terrestribus sed etiam pro ccelestibus oblatus
est hostia Jesus ... in ccelestibus vitalem corporis sui virtutem
velut spiritale quoddam sacrificium immolavit." (" In Levitic.
Homil.," i. 3, vol ii. 186.)
f John the Baptist went before Jesus into Hades to declare His
coming. (" In Luke Homil.," 4, vol. iii. 937.)
X Tvpvy GiZparog injyjq roig yvpvaig Gorpdnuv uipCXei ipvxaig imaTpktyiav
KdKtiviov rag {SovXopkvag. (" Contra Cels.," ii. 43.)
§ Mkyag dpxitptig, oiix virip dv9piii-uiv pdvov, dXXd Kai rravrbg Xoyxov,
rrjv ii-ai, 9vGiav TrpoGivByBtiGav iavrbv avtviyKiiiv. (" In Joann.," i. 40,
vol. iv. 41.)

330 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
not endure in its original glory. The incarnation
was the culminating point of this illumination, which
commenced with the law and the prophets. " Where
should we find the fulness of knowledge,* if not in
Him of whom the apostle said : ' In whom are hid
all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge ' ? This
signifies, as I suppose, that in the soul of Jesus
incarnate, the Word of God, or the only Son, and
the Holy Spirit do perpetually dwell. The holy soul
of Jesus was the mediator between the Trinity and
frail humanity. "t But to enlighten fallen man was
not enough ; he needed to be freed from the yoke of
the demon which pressed heavily upon him. Hence
the supreme importance of the death of the Redeemer.
This is not an expiation in the legal sense ; the blood
of Christ was not shed to appease the divine anger.
Origen maintains absolutely the profound agreement
between, the justice and the love of God. Punishment
is never vengeance or mere satisfaction of the wrath of
the Most High : its purpose is the purification of the
guilty. It is the correcting rod used by the hand of
the merciful Father. " If the sufferings inflicted on
sinners did not tend to their conversion, the merciful
and gracious God would not have attached punishment
to crime. The wrath of God has in view the amend
ment of the guilty ; it is intended to heal the sick
and to correct even those who have despised His
word."J The terrible chastisements which come upon
* " Plenitudinem scientiarum." (" In Rom./' book iii. 8, vol. iv.
314.) ! Ibid., book iii. 8.
! " Si non esse utile conversioni peccantium adhibere tormenta
peccantibus, nunquam misericors et benignus Deus poenis scelera
puniret. Furorem Dei non inutilem ad sanitatem, sed adhuc
adhiberi, ut curet asgrotantes." (" In Ezek. Homil.," i. 2, vol. iii. 255.)

BOOK II. — THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 331
some men in the present life, are sent to spare them
yet more awful punishment in another. Such is the
vengeance of the compassionate God. The end of
all His dealings is the extirpation of evil.* The
crucifixion of Christ was, therefore, the satisfaction,
not so much of the justice, as of the love of God, by
realising His glorious designs for the salvation of the
world-t It is in this sense that He is said to have offered
Himself to God.! Nevertheless, a ransom was paid
to Satan,, who held us in bondage. We have made
ourselves the slaves of the demon ; our sins have given
us over to him. Christ came to- redeem us, when we
were serving the master to whom w.e had sold ourselves.
His blood was our ransom. The devil, on the other
hand, won us more cheaply. Murder, adultery, theft —
with these he bought us.§
" If we ask to whom Jesus Christ gave His soul a
ransom for many, we reply — It was not to God. It
must have been then to the evil one ! In truth, the
evil one had us in his power until Jesus gave His
soul to purchase ours. Satan, on this point, allowed
himself to be deceived, believing he could retain
the soul of Christ, and not perceiving that he would.
be unable himself to endure the torments he would
* To rkXog rorv rrpayparuv dvaiptaBrjvai lari rr)v KaKiav. (" Contra
Cels.," viii. 72.)
f 'Y7rd rov Bbov rrapaSBSoGBai Trpuirov rov viov iva dpr) rrrv dpapriav.
(" In Matt. Comment./' xi. 8, vol. iii. 581.)
! " Se ipsum obtulit Deo." (" In Levit. Homil.," i. 2, vol. ii. 186.)
§ " Effecti vero sumus servi diaboli secundum quod peccatis
nostris vendidati sumus. Homicidum, adulterum, furtum, pecunia
diaboli. Christus, pretium nostri sanguinem suum dedit." (" In
Exod. Homil.," vi. 9, vol. ii. 150.)

332 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
suffer in such a case."* Thus is the triumph of death
over Jesus an empty victory ; death cannot hold Him,
for He has conquered it in its own domain. He
even carries with Him in His triumphal train all those
earlier captives of the tomb who believed in Him.
The divine Lamb has become, by His sacrifice, the
salvation of the whole world, for reasons which cannot
be uttered. " It is for the love which the Father bears
to humanity that the Son submitted to death, re
deeming us by His blood from the yoke which our
own sins had laid upon us."t Jesus made only His
human soul an offering ; this alone endured the
sufferings of the cross, t The divine nature could
not feel the touch of sin and death. We have seen,
indeed, that the Word made the human soul to which
He was united a sacrifice on Calvary, as the high
priest offers up the victim. The dying cry of Jesus,
"My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me!"
marks the lowest depth of His humiliation, not the
anger of the Father, to whom He committed His
divine Spirit. § Since He had placed this in the hands
of His Father, it did not form a part of the ransom
paid to the devil. It was, then, the human soul which
He offered up, "for the Godhead could not be given
as a ransom ;" and even this soul, forsaken as it was,
* Tivi bSwk£ rijv Svyiji- aiirov Xvrpov dvri jroXAwv ; oi* ydp cr) rip 9tip, fu\
ri ovv np —ovrfpip; ovrog ydp iyKpdrti Tfpitiv, tiog co&y rb v—ip tjfuov avnp
Xvrpov t) tov 'IrjGov -^ vxr), d—arnBivn, big cm'apivip aurrjg Kvpitvoai.
{- In Matt./' xvi. 8, vol. iii. 726.)
f Kara rnv rov —arolg rpiXnyBpiitiriav n)v GCoayijv di'Bcitaro, uvov/lEvog
rw iavrov a'ipan drrb rov raic dpapriatc r)pag rrnrpaGKofUVovg dyopdaavrog.
(" In Joann./' vi. 36, vol. iv. 152.)
X X,aoic Bbov. (Ibid., xxvii. 14. voL iv. 393.)
§ " In Matt. Comment.," xvi. S. vol. iii. 726.
|; Ti/i- 8t6n}ra pu" dv ciCvvdxsQai Xirpov Sodrjvai. (Ibid., xvi. 8, voL
iii. 727.)

BOOK II.— THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 333
proved mightier than the adversary, for it triumphed
over him in the gloomy realm of death as upon earth,
carrying liberty even there to the sons of Adam.*
Thus the devil, who thought to gain the mastery over
the Redeemer, found himself defrauded, and had no
power to retain even the ransom paid him, as is proved
by the resurrection. He lost all right over humanity,
while his power was set at nought by the victorious
Christ. The legitimate king overcame the tyrant
even in his own realm, and trampled his power
under foot.
If we ask in what manner the sufferings of the human
soul of Jesus achieved this decisive victory, we receive
answer that it is by virtue of the holiness they reveal.
Without doubt, suffering and death are a sort of acknow
ledgment and acquittal of the claim which our sins have
given to the evil one, but this payment of our debt
would not issue in our deliverance if an Almighty moral
power was not manifested in these very sufferings of
Him who was made like unto us. So true is this, that
this holiness, even when imperfectly displayed, as in the
martyrdom of the saints, reveals the same virtue and
tends to break the power of Satan. t "The cross is the
culminating point of the power of martyrdom, as mar
tyrdom is a continuation of the crucifixion. Just as,
under the Mosaic law, those who sprinkled the altar
with the blood of bulls and of goats were commissioned
to declare in the name of God the forgiveness of sins,
so the soul of Christians who have suffered death for
the name of Jesus pleads before the altar, and becomes
the medium of pardon to those who seek it. We know,
* " In Rom.," v. 10, vol. iv. 567. f "Ad Martyr.," 31.

334 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
indeed, that as our high priest Jesus Christ made Him
self a sacrifice, so the priests who serve under Him
yield themselves also as a holy offering, and truly belong
to the sanctuary. Who is the blameless priest, who
offers a pure sacrifice, if it be not he who witnesses
steadfastly a good confession for his Master, even till he
has sealed it with a martyr's death."* Again we read :
" We must believe that the powers of evil are overcome
by the death of the martyrs. Their faithfulness, their
perseverance even unto blood, and the ardour of their
piety, have weakened the empire of evil, not over them
selves alone, but over all mankind. When a man
crushes a serpent, he not only delivers himself from a
great peril, but he ensures the safety of others also.
What must we think of the Lamb of God, who was
made a victim, not to take away the sin of some men,
but the sin of the world, for which He suffered ?"t
Plainly, it is the moral character of this sacrifice which
gives it its chief value. It exhibits in their full power
those very virtues which exert a victorious influence,
even when incompletely manifested in the holy death of
the confessors. Hence the suffering of Christ, while it
is a ransom offered to the devil, is at the same time a
holy sacrifice to God. It teaches us obedience, while
it redeems from sin.
It is of this sacrifice, thus regarded in its totality,
that is to say, not merely as a ransom paid to the
demon, but as further the fulfilment of the will of the
* KardXvGtv ovv vopinrkov yiviaBai SvvdpBixiv KaKorroiiov Sid rov 9avdrov
riov dyiiov papriiptxiv, rrjg vrropovrjg avriov Kai rrjg opoXoyiag pixpi Bavarov,
Kai ri/g tig rb tiiatGlg rrpoBvpiag dptXvvob&ng rb 6^b rrjg Ikbivuiv Kard roil
rraGxoi'rog ImtovXijg. (" In Joann.," vi. 36, vol. iv. 1 53, I 54.)
! Ibid., vi. 36, 37.

BOOK II. — THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 335
Father, that Origen speaks in such sublime terms. He
beholds in it the realisation of all the types of the Old
Testament, of all those sanguinary rites which were
supposed to possess expiatory and purifying virtue.*
Jesus is the true Lamb of God, whose blood saves and
purities. He has taken upon llim all our woes, our
sufferings, our sins ; He has clothed Himself, as it
were, in our defiled garments. He was made sin, by
assuming a bod)- like our own.t We have deserved all
the reproach, indignity, and evil treatment which He
endured for our sake. He drank the cup of our con
demnation. If He had not drunk it, our ransom
would not have been paid, and our ruin would have been
without remedy. Let us then acknowledge in Him the
high priest of the New Covenant, who died for us,
and let us accept His blood as the ransom for the
world. % The consummation of the work of salvation
was the outpouring of the Hoi)- Spirit upon all the
disciples of Christ. §
Such is, in its general tenor, Origen's doctrine of
redemption. Closely considered, it produces a very dif
ferent impression from that formed at the first glance.
It is not just to summarise the whole in that singular
idea of a fraudulent transaction with the demon. After
all, it maintains the objective character of the reparatory
sacrifice. Sin has brought in its train our subjection to
the devil, who is the personification of all evil and of all
* "In ipsum omnis hostia rec.1pitul.1tur, in tantum ut, postquam
ipse oblatus est, omnes hostuv ccssavcrint, qua: eum in typo et
umbra prrecesserant." 1" l'1 Lcvit. Homil.." iii. 5. vol. ii. 106.)
f " Peccatum quidem non fecit, peccatum t.mren pro nobis factus
est dum qui crat in forma Dei, in forma sen i esse dignatur, dum
qui immortalis est moritur.'' (Ibid., iii. 1, vol. ii. 103.)
| Ibid., xii. 1, vol. ii. 240. 5 " ^ Princip.." ii. 7, 2.

336 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
suffering, since he and his angels have all plagues and
sicknesses at their command : death is his minister.
He plays the part of the Satan of the Book of Job, who,
spirit of evil as he is, yet takes his place among the
hosts of the Lord, as subject to His control. He
represents the destroying power to which we have sold
ourselves by sin. Hence his claim over us is a just
claim. In fact, however, as nothing happens without the
will of God, he has this right only because it has been
conceded to him. It is God who willed that a ransom
should be paid him ; it is He who ordained that salva
tion should not be realised without a great and holy
sacrifice, the victory of crucified love over sin and con
demnation. Unquestionably this sacrifice is not in
Origen's view a satisfaction of the anger of God, since
with Him justice is inseparable from love. It is also as
far removed as possible from the system which sees in
the infinite suffering of a God, the sole means of
establishing a proportion between the fault and the
punishment. We have observed that it separates ab
solutely the Divine Word from the human soul in the
person of Jesus, and that the latter only is the subject
of pain and death. The error in Origen's system is this
positive dualism, which destroys the oneness of the
Redeemer's personality. If he had admitted fully that
man is of divine origin, he would not have thus parted
the divine element from the human in Jesus ; he would
have recognised the fulness of humanity in the incarnate
and crucified Word. A great truth nevertheless comes
out from his system ; it is in his view a real man who
must offer the atoning sacrifice. The second Adam is
alone capable of cancelling the rebellion of the first, and

BOOK II. — THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. ^37
of renewing the broken bond between earth and heaven;
and he can only do this by submitting to all the conse
quences of the Fall, namely, to suffering and death.
This is the ransom paid to the devil. The evil one is
defrauded, only because the victim who suffers and dies
on the cross triumphs over sin in that very extremity
of sorrow and shame which seemed as if it must destroy
His work; His apparent defeat is a victory, and His
cross a throne. Satan had not foreseen that by this very
annihilation of self, by those tears and that blood, holi
ness would be manifested in all its grandeur, and that
the crucified Redeemer would teach men obedience,
and by obedience would bring them back to God.
Assuredly, this theory is a great advance upon that of
Clement, who suppressed almost entirely the objective
aspect of the redemption. It owes its imperfections to
the fundamental errors of Origen's system. His Christ
is, after all, neither God nor man in His sacrifice ; the
God has withdrawn from Him, and the human soul
which suffers and dies on Calvary is a strange thing,
raised by its impeccability above humanity, and not
corresponding to that grade of the moral ladder on
which the race of Adam is by its transgression placed.
But if we forget for a moment the errors of the logician,
if we listen to Origen only as a Christian, and consider
simply the noble aspects of this doctrine of redemption,
we find in it precious elements which only need to be
disengaged from the Platonic idealism of the great
Alexandrine, to form a large and suggestive synthesis.
One very beautiful part of Origen's system is that
which treats of the work of the Redeemer since the
resurrection. Enfranchised thenceforward from the
^5

338 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
limitations which the conditions of terrestrial life im
posed upon His action, He returns into the heavens,
only to exercise on behalf of the Church the saving
power of a divine love. His death, like the celestial
fire which consumes the holocaust, causes all that was
corporeal, external, local merely, to vanish from His
work, which He now carries on in the fulness of His
divine power.* He gives Himself to all and to each,
and while He is sometimes tender, sometimes severe,
His influence is ever gracious and sanctifying. The
rod of repression in His hands is like the rod of Aaron,
which in the end breaks forth in blossom. t He
destroys evil by the breath of His mouth. A purifying
virtue proceeds from Him, which will consume sin in
the heart of the Christian, as the fire of the altar
consumed the flesh of the victim. J His holy life
during the time of His sojourn here below abides as
the model of perfection. § His miracles symbolise the
powerful operations of His eternal mercy. He belongs
no longer to a little group of disciples only ; since His
death He belongs to -the whole world, and to all worlds.
He is wisdom, truth, holiness, righteousness, strength,
the essential good and the true life. [|
§ IV. Conversion and the Christian Life.
It will be anticipated that Origen will insist strongly
upon the appropriation of salvation. His spiritual con-
* " Omnia ha?c qua? in corpore a salvatore gesta sunt, ccelestis
ignis absumsit et ad divinitatis ejus naturam cuncta restituit." (" In
Levit.," i. 4, vol. ii. 187.)
f "In Joann./' i, 41, J " In Levit. Homil.," v. 3, vol. ii. 207.
§ TlapdSuypa dpiorov fiiov. (" Contra Cels.," i. 68.)
|| "Ad Rom.," iv. 7, vol. iv. 533.

BOOK II.  THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 339
ception of the reconciliation forbids him to entertain
the idea of any merely external imputation. If Christ
has conquered sin and the devil, it is not to make us
sharers in His triumph without any personal effort or
any battle of our own. We are called to a share in
the salvation, by becoming sharers in the holiness of
the Redeemer. It is He who makes this holiness
possible to us, first by what He did and suffered to
break the yoke of Satan, and then by His Spirit. He
alone transforms our nature, and the basis of this
transformation consists in our being united to Him in
His death and in His life by love — the sole source of
light and holiness. We must begin by smiting on our
breast. The part assigned to repentance in the appro
priation of salvation is an important one. It is like
Elias, or John the Baptist, the forerunner of the
Saviour, preparing the way for Him.* The redeeming
work is null and of no avail wherever repentance is
wanting, for light has no connection with darkness.
He who but half repents, has but a half salvation;!
we are bidden to die with Christ. J Repentance must
be earnest, deep, and renewed with every fresh sin.§ It
has therefore a permanent part to play in the Christian
life, as a purifying power, and there is no sin for which
it will not secure pardon, even after conversion, at least
in the sight of God.|| It expresses itself in honest
* " In Luke Homil." iv. vol. iii. 937.
t "Pro mensura pcenitentia?, remissionis quantitas moderatur."
("Select, in Psalm.," ii. vol. ii. 697.)
! " Non enim unusquisque ipse sibi dat, sed a Christo sumit
mortis exemplum, qui solus peccato mortuus est, ut et ipse imitatione
ejus possit alienus et mortuus effici a peccato." (" Ad Rom.," ix.
39, vol. iv. 661.) § " In Cantic," 6, vol. iii. 15.
|| " Novum hoc bonitatis est genus ut etiam post adulterium
23 *

340 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
confession before our brethren, and in real amendment,
for if it does not bring forth fruit it is idle and useless.*
Repentance leads to faith, which begins with the know
ledge of Christ — a knowledge which becomes in
creasingly pure and elevated, till it rises from the
contemplation of the visible to that of the invisible and
glorified Christ. t The true knowledge is not merely
intellectual ; it possesses its object ; it is love, and
produces the divine life and holiness. We love the
God in Christ with all our heart and soul.! This love
is at the same time obedience : it kindles a flame
within us, and constrains us to forsake all for the
Master. Just as repentance unites us to the Christ
crucified, so does real faith, manifested by holy service,
unite us to the risen Christ. $ Thus justification is
consummated in sanctilication, and the two cannot be
disjoined. Justifying faith is the inward work of love,
as opposed to the purely external work of Pharisaism.
"There are two justifications— the one which the apostle
connects with works, the other with faith. The former
derives its glory from itself, not from God ; the second
derives it from God alone, who reads the heart of man,
and who alone knows who is he that believes and he
that believes not. The outward work is manifest and
obvious to all, But those who arc circumcised in the
inward man, who are Jews according to the spirit, not
rcvcrtcntcm lumen el ex tolo conic pu'iulcnlcin suscipial aniuiam."
" In Kxod. Homil.," viii. 5, vol. ii. 100.)
* "In Psalm. Homil.," x.xxvii. (>, vol. ii. 6SS,
| " In Cantic," book iii. vol. iii. 84.
| "Diligcs domimim tuuni in Chrislo." ("In l.uke Homil.,"
xxv. vol. iii. 963,)
§ " Novilas vila' qua in Chrislo per ficleni ri'sunvclionis ejus
vivimus, domino dcputaUir," ("Ad Kom.," ix, 39, vol. iv. 661.)

BOOK II. — THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 341
according to the letter, cannot receive their honour
from men, but from God only."* The great defect in
the whole of this theory of justification consists in the
small place it assigns to the pardon of God. The work
of Christ opens to us the way of regeneration, but this
is not for the Christian a treasury of grace already
won, which he appropriates by faith. It is this work of
Christ indeed which restores life to us, and yet we have
not received from His hands our letter of pardon. Thus
we are never entirely saved on this side the grave ; we
are destined to fresh purifications after death, which
will be adapted to our moral condition. t We must
bear in mind that, according to Origen, we shall
always be liable, as free creatures, to fall back into
evil. Heaven can never then be said to be securely
gained. With these limitations, the importance of which we
frankly avow, Christian morality is treated in Origen's
system in a true and dignified manner. It all springs
from Jesus Christ, who is called the substance of the
virtues.! "Every soul attracts to itself and receives
in itself the Word of God in the measure of its faith.
When souls have thus drawn to themselves this divine
Word, and have allowed it to penetrate their every
thought and feeling ; when they have breathed its
perfume, they are filled with joy and power, and run
* " Palam est et videri oculis potest quidquid opere manifestum
est. Hi qui secundum interiorem hominem circumciduntur, horum
laus et gloria non apud homines, sed apud Deum." ("Ad Rom.,"
iv. vol. iv. 521.)
f " De Princip.," ii. 1 1, 6. " In Jerem. Homil.," vii. 1, vol. iii. 167
! "Virtutum substantiam Christum soleamus accipere." ("In
Cantic," i. vol. iii. 45-)

342 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
after Him."* Every good or evil action is so in its final
relation to Jesus Christ. The false Christians, who_
forget Him in their care for the riches and concerns of
this world, place afresh upon His brow the crown of
thorns.t The inward life is that which is of the most import
ance, for our actions are the fruit and manifestation of
this inner principle. Purity of spirit and of conscience
makes all actions pure. Even participation in meat
forbidden by the law, is no longer a thing to be carefully
shunned, in spite of the scandal it creates among the
Jews.! It is at the heart that God looks, for there is
the source of evil and good, and in the heart both are
virtually wrought. Outward things change their cha
racter to us according to our disposition towards them,
and this alone is of importance. The essence of holi
ness is love, which has its counterpart in hatred of
evil.§ This alone ripens and confirms true piety. Love
brings liberty ; it frees us from the law of the letter,
and raises us far above the Pharisaism which strains at
a gnat and swallows a camel, making that which is
secondary ever subordinate to that which is essential in
the practice of right. Love is the parent of the true
virtues, — which are self-denial, devotedness, justice,
and mercy. || We are no longer the slaves of a law of
coercion, but belong to that higher spiritual jurisdic
tion, which is directly under the inspiration of the
eternal Word.
* " Trahit unaqua?que anima et assumit ad se verbum Dei, pro
capacitatis et fidei sua? mensura." (Ibid., i. vol. iii. 41.)
]¦ "In Joann.," i. 12, vol. iv. 13, 14.
X " In Matt.," book xi. 12, vol. iii. 495.
§ " In Rom.," ix. 5, 6, vol. iv. 651.
|| " Comment. Series in Matt.," 19, vol. iii. 843.

BOOK II. — THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 343
The new law does not exclude asceticism, but it does
not attach any intrinsic value to it, nor accredit it with
any virtue except as facilitating the triumph of the soul
over the body. The Christian does not fast because
fasting was a command under the Old Covenant, but of
his own free will. Again, he does not forget that the
truly acceptable fast is humility of spirit and absti
nence from sin, and that it is not confined to limited
and set times. " If thou wilt fast in the spirit of Christ,
that is to say, if thou wilt humble thy soul, know that
every moment of the year is favourable for such a fast,
and that thy whole life should be a day of humiliation.
Fast by abstaining from all sin ; put away from thee
the food of malice, and the draughts of self-indulgence,
and refrain thy lips from the intoxicating cup of luxury."*
Origen, like Clement and Irenasus, does not admit
any essential distinction among days. The Jewish
Sabbath has disappeared, and the entire life should be
a remembrance of Christ. " 0 ye," he exclaims, "who
come to church only on festival days, tell me if other
days are not also feast days, days of the Lord ? It is
for the Jews to observe special and set days. God hates
those who will honour only one day as the day of the
Lord."t There are no more any consecrated places
than any days set apart in an exclusive sense. Chris
tianity knows but one altar — the believing heart."! We
* " Totius vita? tua? dies habeto ad humiliandam animam tuam.
Jejune ab omni peccato." (" In Levit. Homil.," x. 2, vol. ii. 245,
246.) f " Odit ergo Deus qui unum diem putant festum diem esse
Domini." (" In Genes. Homil.," x. 3, vol. ii. 88. Comp. " Select.
in Exod.," vol. ii. 127 ; " In Numeros Homil.," 23, 2, vol. ii. 357.)
| " Non in aliquo loco qua?ramus Deum." (" In Genes. Homil. /'
iii. 3, vol. ii. 95.)

344 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
are surprised to find some inconsistencies in a morality
bearing the impress of so high a spirituality. The
prohibition of using strangled beasts as food is regarded
as permanent.* Second marriages, if they are not
forbidden, are severely reprobated. t Christians are
charged to keep aloof from public offices.! Military
service is forbidden to the disciples of the meek and
gentle Master, if they will be true to their name of
children of peace, for under no pretext is it permitted
to a Christian to cause the death of a man.§ Assuredly
a spirit as liberal as that of Origen would not have
maintained these restrictions in a time when the state
did not rest on pagan foundations. How much greater
wisdom did St. Paul display in recognising the lawful
ness of the civil order, regarded in itself? In Origen's
view, the frequenting of circuses and cf theatres is a
sin. The soul there catches fire from the altars of
Satan, by becoming the prey of those strong passions
which scenic representations awaken. || The Christian
may not take any oath.1T We wonder again to find
Origen admitting the lawfulness of lying in extreme
cases, as, for instance, in connection with the healing
of the sick.** Progress in holiness is secured by spiritual
exercise, as agility of body results from a constant use
of the limbs. Jesus Christ is ever present to wash the
feet of His disciples, and to purify them from the dust
of the way.tt Thus the new man grows in strength
* " In Roman.," book ii. 13, vol. iv. 492.
f " In Luke Homil.," 17, vol. iii. 953.
X " Contra Cels.," viii. 73. § Ibid., iii. 7.
|| " In Levit. Homil.," ix. 9, vol. ii. 243.
IT " In Matt. Comment. Series," 16. vol. iii. 841.
** " Contra Cels.," iv. 19. f-f " In Joann.," 32, 2, vol. iv. 405.

BOOK II. — THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 343
and stature ; faith unites itself more closely with its
object, and becomes science, or the deeper knowledge
of the truth. We are made a sacrifice with Christ, and
share in His priesthood. Almsgiving is a true sacrifice ;
martyrdom is another, which possesses in some measure
the purifying virtue of the crucifixion, and tends to
break the power of the demons. Mortification and
charity are special sacrifices, far higher than those
offered by Israel.* Jesus accepts these sacrifices,
which are consumed upon the inward altar by the fire
of love, and He makes them a part of His own sacri
fice. In truth, we give to God only that which He has
Himself given us. It is the spiritual sacrifice which is
alone of value ; every other is worthless. " Each one
of us has in himself his own sacrifice, and the fire on
that altar of sacrifice is ever burning. If I give up all
I possess, if I take up my cross to follow Jesus Christ,
I offer a sacrifice on the altar of my God. If I love
my brethren so as to give my life for them, if I fight
even to the death for righteousness and truth, I present
my sacrifice on the altar of my God. If I mortify
every lust of the flesh, if the world is crucified to- me
and I to the world, I have offered my sacrifice on the
altar of my God, and I have been the priest of my own
holocaust. t It is thus that the priesthood is exercised
in the outer porch where the victims are offered. Then,
as a priest clothed in holy garments, I pass from that
outer sanctuary, within the veil, into that holy place,
into which, as Paul says, Jesus has entered, and which
* " Hoc modo inveniris tu verius et perfectius secundum evan-
gelium offerre sacrificia." (" In Levit. Homil.," ii. 4, vol. ii. 191.)
f " Ipse mea? hostia? sacerdos efficior." ("In Luke Homil., ix. 9,
vol. ii. 243.)

34& THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
is not a holy place made with hands, but heaven itself.
Thinkest thou my Lord, who is the High Priest, will
not deign to receive from me a portion of my poor
offering, which He will present to the Father in His
own name ? Thinkest thou He will not find some
feeble spark in the fire of my sacrifice to consume it in
His censer, and to offer it to the Father as a sweet
smelling savour ?"*
§ V. The Church. Worship. The Sacrament. The End
of all Things.
Origen does not forget that the religious life is not
simply something to be realised by the individual, but
that its design is also to form a Christian society. The
part taken by him in the ecclesiastical struggles of his
age, and the persecutions he endured from the repre
sentatives of the hierarchy, sufficiently indicate the
breadth of his point of view. The distinction between
the Church visible and invisible is implied in his views
of penitence. The Christian who has committed some
fault of exceptional gravity may always find pardon
and restoration in Christ, though he can be but once
reinstated in the Church.t It follows that there exists
above and beyond the Church on earth, a spiritual and
invisible order which cannot be absolutely- confounded
* " In Luke Homil.," ix. 9, vol. ii. 243.
f " In gravioribus enim criminibus semel tantum pcenitentia?
conceditur locus." (" In Levit.," xv. 2, vol. ii. 262.) The proof
that God pardons that which the Church does not pardon, is that
adultery is placed by Origen among the sins, the repetition of which
incurs final exclusion from the Church (" De Oratione/' 28, vol. i.
256), while he says elsewhere that Jesus Christ pardons this like
other sins. (" In Exod.," viii. 5, vol. ii. 160.) This distinction,
moreover, comes out clearly from his doctrine of the final restora
tion of every moral creature.

BOOK II. — THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 347
with that which is visible. Restorations to or excom
munications from the visible Church extend only to
the outer domain, which is all that is open to the eye of
man, and there is no necessary ratification of these
decisions by the great Head of the whole Church, who
searches the hearts. The Christian soul may appeal
from the judgment of men to the tribunal of Christ.
Hence ecclesiastical power is limited to the outward
and earthly, and does not extend to the substance of
things. ' The true Church goes further than the visible
Church, and is not bound by its judgments. A large
door is thus opened to the liberty of souls, and the
theocratic notion is deprived of its most powerful ele
ment. It is in virtue of these same principles that Origen
rejects anything like a restoration of an exclusive
priestly caste. He establishes the universal priesthood
of Christians. " The disciples of Christ," he says,
" are true priests."* Every Christian is an apostle.
If the Saviour sends a man to labour for the salvation
of his brethren, that man is an apostle.t The office is
nothing without the moral qualities which it demands.
A bishop without a calling is not a bishop.! In every
Christian soul there is a sanctuary where the Holy
Spirit fulfils all His priestly functions.! Free access to
the Master is granted to all believers. The Samaritans
* " Discipuli sui, veri sacerdotes." (" In Levit.," vii. 1, vol. ii. 220.)
f "Ov lav drroGrkXXy b Ginrrjp SiaKOvr]o-dpevov- ry nvoiv Giorrjpia, 6 a7roo-reX-
XopBvog drroGToXog lanv 'IijffoS Xpiarov. ("In Joann.," 32, 10, vol. iv.
43L) I " Si quis dicit se esse sacerdotem Dei, nisi habeat pectus
(sacerdotis) non est sacerdos." (" In Levit.," v. 12, vol. ii. 214.)
§ " Potest unusquisque nostrum etiam in semet ipso constituere
tabernaculum." (Ibid., 9, 4, vol. ii. 164.)

348 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
who came to Christ carefully distinguished between
faith and the preliminary belief which they derived
from the saying of the woman of Sychem. They knew
what it was to believe after they had heard the Christ
themselves, and found that He was indeed the Saviour
of the world. " It is better to have a direct view of
the Word, and»to hear His teaching for ourselves, than
simply to receive it from the lips of His servants who
have seen Him, without beholding Him with our own
eyes and being enlightened by His power."* The Church
is not a hierarchy ; it has no visible head upon earth.
The rock#on which it rests is Jesus Christ. Every
Christian may be called by the name of the apostle —
Cephas — if he has faith. " Jesus Christ is the roGk.t
All the followers of Christ have aright to this name."!
There is then no exclusive privilege conveyed to the
apostle to whom these words were for the first time
addressed. The whole Church is built, not upon his
person, but upon his faith, which is the faith of all
believers. § Lastly, the Church may only use in its
own defence the peaceful sword of the Spirit. ||
The sacrament has no intrinsic value. The water of
baptism cannot communicate the Holy Spirit by a sort
of virtue inherent in itself. " He who receives the
baptism of water does not necessarily receive the Holy
* BfiXriov bgtiv avrbmrrrv ytviaBai rov Xoyov ffrrtp pr) bpuivra avrbv
Suikoviov tGjv iopaKonov avrov aKOVBiv tov rrtpi avrov Xoyov. ("In Joann./'
xii. 52, vol. iv. 265.)
f " Petra Christus est." (" In Numer. Homil.," 19, 3, vol. ii. 345.)
X 'H rrirpa ovv b XpiGrog ' 7rd»<r£e 0! Xpiarov piprfrai, mrpa yivovrai.
(" In Jerem.," xvi. 2, 3, vol. iii. 229.)
§ " In Matt.," xii. 10, 11, vol. iii. 523, 525.
|| " Gladium spiritus." (" In Matt. Comment. Series," 101, vol.
iii. 907.)

BOOK II.— THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 349
Spirit."* If any one comes to baptism still in his sins,
he does not therein receive the forgiveness of his faults, t
Baptism is but a symbol;! the invocation of the Trinity
is that which imparts to it all its virtue.§ Children
may receive holy baptism as a sign of the regeneration
of which every human being stands in need.||
The Lord's Supper is not a material sacrifice, for
there is no place for any such offering in the New
Covenant, which recognises no other sacrifice than that
of the cross.T The elements used in the sacrament
undergo no change. The soul is fed in the Lord's
Supper by the blood and body of the Word " which are
His sayings."** Let us not seek anywhere else the bread
which comes down from heaven, the mystic vine from
which flows the holy beverage of the Christian soul.
"It was not then the bread which He held in His
hands which Jesus called His body, nor was the cup
" Qui accipit aquam non accipit Spiritum sanctum ; qui lavatur
in salutem, et aquam accipit et Spiritum sanctum." (" In Ezek.
Homil./' 6, 5, vol. iii. 378.)
t " Si quis peccans ad lavacrum venit, ei non fit remissio pecca-
torum." ("In Luke Homil.," 21, vol. iii. 957.)
+ Tou i-Sarog Xovrpbv, aiiptoXov rvyxavbv KaBapaiov ipvX'lc- (" In
Joann./' book vi. 17, vol. iv. 133.)
§ Tijg Svvdptiog rijg rrpoGKvvrfTijg rpidiog e-ikXj'jo-emj/. (Ibid., vi. 17
vol. iv. 133.)
i| "Ecclesia ab apostolis traditionem suscepit etiam parvnlis
baptismum dare. Sciebant enim quod essent in omnibus genuina;
sordes peccati, qua? per aquam et Spiritum ablui deberent." (" In
Rom.," v. 9, vol. iv. 565.)
IT " Possunt sacrificia spiritaliter offeri, qua? modo carnaliter non
possunt." (" In Exod.," xi. 6, vol. ii. 171 ; " In Levit. v. 7, vol. ii.
210.) " In his omnibus unus est agnus qui totius mundi potuit
auferre peccatum et ideo cessaverunt ca?tera? hostia?. Ideo spiritalia
sacrificia jugulemus." (" In Numeros," 24, 1, vol. ii. 363.)
** " Bibere dicimur sanguinem Christi, non solum sacramentorum
ritu, sed et cum sermones ejus recipimus, in quibus vita consistit."
(Ibid., 16, 9, vol. ii. 334.)

350 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
which He passed to His disciples really His blood.
No, He always intended by it the Word which nourishes
the heart."* Thus He could rejoice in the thought of
breaking this purely spiritual bread again in the king
dom of His Father.t The elements of the sacrament
are but symbols, from which only a living faith can
derive benefit. " The bread of the Lord only does good
to him who partakes of it with a pure heart and upright
conscience." It is not the fact of abstaining from this
bread which is our ruin, but the reason of such
abstinence, which is our persistence in evil. " That
which is of benefit to us in the Supper is not the
material bread, but the prayer which has been uttered
over it ; the ordinance does good only to him who
observes it not unworthily. This is all we have to
say as to the typical and symbolical body of Christ." !
" In truth, we eat the body and drink the blood of the
Word when we hear and receive His words. That
man has truly eaten His flesh who has apprehended
His deepest teachings. "§
We have seen that Origen sought only in his
system to grasp the doctrine of Scripture as it was
understood in the Church of his time. Thus he
fully admits, in principle, the authority of the sacred
book, and acknowledges no other ; he does not
* " Non enim panem ilium visibilem, quern tenebat in manibus,
corpus suum dicebat Deus Verbum, sed Verbum in cujus mysterio
fuerat panis ille frangendus ; nee potum ilium visibilem sanguinem
suum dicebat, sed Verbum, in cujus mysterio potus ille fuerat
effundendus." (" In Matt. Comment. Series," 85, vol. iii. 898.)
+ Ibid., 86, vol. iii. 897.
X Oi>x r) vXrj tov dprov, aXX' b lir avrip Biprjpkvog Xoyog iariv b wipBXwv
ruv pr) dvaZiwg rov Kvpiov iGBiovra avrbv, Kai ravra piv tteoi tov tvttikov
Kai (7u/igoXiKoD aioparog. (" In Matt.," xi. 14, vol. iii. 500.)
§ " In Exod.," vii. 7, vol. ii. 155.

BOOK II. — THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 351
bow to any tradition, nor will he submit to any but
God alone. " What is it to me," he exclaims, " that
a thousand men affirm a theory to be true, if it is
condemned by the word of God ? What avails it me
that many Churches have come to an agreement upon
a certain doctrine, if they have all been led astray by
heresy ? That which I desire above all things is that
God should confirm my words, and this confirmation He
gives them by the testimony of Holy Scripture."* These
constitute for Origen the supreme authority. Like a
harp of many strings, these merge all diversities in
one grand harmony ; t they unite the gentle and the
severe, as justice and mercy are blended in God.!
Origen seems to believe in verbal inspiration in the
most absolute sense. Just as every portion of the
plant has a significance to the botanist, so each iota of
the sacred canon has a special value in his eyes.§ He
seeks to reconcile all divergences of detail; || he does not
hesitate to multiply the miracles of Jesus Christ, in
order to remove trifling contradictions. IT He even goes
so far as to suppose that the gospels have intentionally
neglected historical accuracy in order to enrich the
spiritual meaning.** In other passages he modifies the
extravagance of his notion of inspiration ; he does not
* " Hoc est quod qua?ritur, ut Dominus sermonum meorum testis
assistat, ut ipse comprobet qua? dicuntur sanctarum testimonio
scriptarum." (" In Ezek.," ii. 5, vol. iii, 364.)
f " In Matt.," i. 2, vol. iii. 441.
! " In Jerem. Homil.," i. 16, vol. iii. 135.
§ Olpai on Kai rrdv 9avpdoiov ypdppa rb yBypappkvov iv roig Xoyioig tov
Btov Ipydi^BaBai, Kai ovk iotiv loira 'iv, r) pia KBpaia yeypappivrj iv ry ypafyy,
r)ng ovk ipydltrai rb iavrrjg ipyov. ( Ibid., 39, vol. iii. 286.)
|| "In Joann.," 6, 18, vol. iv. 134.
IT "In Matt," 16, 12 ; "In Matt. Comment. Series," 77, vol. iii.
732, 892. ** " In Joann.," x. 3, vol. iv 163.

352 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
make it extend to the correctness of the language
employed, for he points out the solecisms in the sacred
writers.* He does not hesitate to affirm that Moses
inserted ordinances of his own invention in the law of
God — a theory which implies a distinction between the
word of God and Scripture. t If, like Justin Martyr,
he compares the sacred writers to a harp, which
vibrates under the hand of the player, he affirms that
the Holy Ghost never yet animated a perverse spirit,
although it may be that wicked men, like Balaam and
Caiphas, may have had a certain knowledge of the
future, proceeding from an inspiration of a lower order,
possibly even diabolical. Origen thus assigns a place
to the moral element, although logically his theory
of inspiration required the complete passivity of its
subject.! He establishes degrees in inspiration, placing
the gospels above the epistles. § The inspiration of the
apostles is distinguished from that of later Christians
rather in degree than in kind. " We have not," says Ori
gen, "the Holy Spirit in such full measure. "|| We are
then justified in concluding that if Origen's dictum upon
inspiration is narrow, he often gives it expansion, and
that in fact his views exhibit much vagueness and
uncertainty. His theory of literal inspiration laid very
light fetters upon him, for his conception of the three
fold meaning of Holy Scripture allowed him to discover
* " In Joann.," iv. I, 2, vol. iv. 93.
f " Per Moysen quidem multa locutus est Deus, aliquanta tamen
et Moyses propria auctoritate mandavit." ("In Numeros Homil.,"
16, 4, vol. ii. 330.)
! "In Joann.," 28, 13, vol. iv. 388.
§ " In Joann.," i. 5, vol. iv. 4.
|| " Nobis non est tanta Spiritus abundantia." (" In Cantic.
Proleg.," iii. 36.)

BOOK II. — THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 353
in it almost what he would. He shows no more ex
actness in his conception of the canon. On the one hand,
he allows Christian science to have a voice in its determi
nation. Men are to be good and faithful stewards of
the divine treasure,* carefully guarding against any false
coinage. On the other hand, in his curious letter to
Julius Africanus, on the apocryphal " Book of Susan
nah," he inclines to the idea of a providential and
indisputable canon, asserting that we have no right to
diminish the treasure of the Church. t
Origen displays all his originality and boldness of
conception in his doctrine of the consummation of all
things. He first treats of our condition after death.
The soul of the good is carried into an earthly
paradise, which, however, still belongs tq our world,
and forms a solitary island, This is \he first place
of purification, but is far superior to any we have
known during our bodily existence.! The soql thep
enters an intermediate paradise, where it undergoes
a second purification. Then, as it becomes freed from
all that defiled it, it rises in the pure ether to God.§
The souls of the wicked are subjected in Hades to cruel
torments, but these have also a purifying virtue. ||
The fire which devqurs them is no flame of earth 5
sin is its own chastisement, and its memory alone is
sufficient punishment of the guilty, Apart from this
purely individual history of souls, the kingdom of God
has its development upon earth. Antichrist will, in the
* AoKipoi rpairtlirai. (" In Luke Homil.," i, vol. iii. 932.)
t "Letter to Africanus," 4, vol. i. 16.
! Origen calls this first place of trial " Schola animarum." (" De
Princip.," ii. 11,6.) § Ibid., ii. 11, 6.
|| " In Exod.," vi. 4, vol. ii. 148.
24

354 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
end of the ages, reunite all the forces of evil for one
final conflict.* After this will come the judgment,
and the end of the world inaugurated by the return
of Christ. All the prophetic symbols of this event,
however, are to be spiritualised. If Israel is to share
like other nations in the glories of the future, no
idea must be entertained of its local and material
restoration. To compare the heavenly Jerusalem to
a city built of stone is nothing short of blasphemy.!
Let us put aside all these old-wives' fables invented
by the Jews,! and picture to ourselves the return of the
Word in its true aspect. He will return, not materially,
but spiritually. Our world will not be preserved, but
renovated, to receive a glorious humanity, clothed in
ethereal bodies. § It may be said that Christ has
truly come again in His glory, when the manifesta
tion of His divinity shall be so overwhelming
that not only none of the righteous, but no sinner
shall be able to doubt what He really is.|| Nor will
this be the full consummation. That will only come
when God shall be all in all, that is, when spirits
fully discharged from their oppressive prison shall
return to their primitive unity, — evil being abolished
not by annihilation, but by the conversion of the
wicked. Then creation will have realised its eternal
idea, as that is found in the Word. " The love of God
by Christ will bring all creatures to the same end,
His enemies themselves being vanquished and sub-
* " Contra Cels./' vi. 46.
T " In Levit. Homil.," xii. 3, vol. ii. 249.
X VpawSwg Kai iovSdtKwg. (" In Joann.," v. 26, vol. iv. 206.)
§ " In Matt.," 12, 35, vol. iii. 556.
|| " In Matt. Comment. Series," 70, vol. iii. 889.

BOOK II. — THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 355
dued, for the end is to .be as the beginning."* As we
have observed, however, this final restoration has no
guarantee of permanency. The liberty of the creature
will always make it possible for him to stake and lose
his destiny of bliss, while still evil shall never ulti
mately triumph over good, the final utterance being
ever that of victorious love.t It is, in fact, a circle
which is never completed, or rather a sphere per
petually revolving through the countless ages of
eternity. Such is this sublime system, — the mightiest effort
of Christian thought in that age of fervour and free
dom. Our exposition has brought out both its beauties
and its imperfections. The great Christian philosopher
of Alexandria represents to us another Magian king
bringing to the cradle at Bethlehem all the treasures
of ancient culture. These treasures are not all of
equal value ; but they are all a holy offering, and the
purest incense rises from his adoring heart to the
Word. With all its errors, this comprehensive
synthesis is in its essence an act of worship. Adora
tion is at least the feeling which inspires it from first
to last.
* " In unum finem putamus quod bonitas Dei per Christum
suum universam revocet creaturam subactis et subditis etiam in-
imicis." (" De Princip.," i. 6, 1.) "Semper enim similis est finis
initiis." (" De Princip.," i. 6, 2.) See on the doctrine of final causes :
" De Princip.," iii. 6. t Ibid-j m- 6-

21 *

CHAPTER V.
CONTINUATION OF THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL.
THE DISCIPLES OF ORIGEN.
Origen's influence continued considerable in the
Eastern Church during the whole course of the third
centuiy. Even at Alexandria, where he had encountered
such sharp and unjust opposition, no spiritual authority
could be compared with his ; and his most illustrious
disciple, Dionysius the Great, occupied the first see
of the Egyptian Church. This is conclusive proof that
his teaching was not incompatible with the general
faith of the Church before Nicaja. Those who have
accused him of heresy have applied to him, by a sort of
theological retroaction, rules which were not of his age.
The weak and dangerous, points of his doctrine were
brought into prominence by his disciples in accordance
with that law of the liistory of thought which carries
every idea to its logical ponsequences, and constrains
it, in a manner, to reveal all its latent defectiveness
and error. Qrigen had insisted upon the subordination
of the Son to the Father more strongly than any of
his predecessors, while still maintaining the eternal
pre-existence of the Word ; but that pre-existence lost
much of its value when it was admitted that creation
also could boast of eternal duration. The Word was,

BOOK II. — THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 357
in fine, less necessary to God than to the world,
of which it was at once the idea and the principle,
the prototype and the active cause. The school of
Origen was not always able to maintain itself at the
precise point which the master made his ultimatum.
More than once it went beyond it, and yet it cannot
justly be accused of Arianism. It happily remained
faithful to its bold and generous spirituality, especially
in relation to the interpretation of the prophecies, and
it steadily resisted the materialism of the mille-
narians. It also preserved the tradition of extensive
Biblical studies, and it gave further development to
the principles of criticism, which Origen applied with
a timidity occasioned by his profound respect for
Holy Scripture.
§ I. Pierius, Gregory Thanmaturgus, Theognosius.
Pterins, who had the honour to be a successor of the
two great masters of the catechetical school of Alex
andria, and who, for his learning and eloquence,
deserves to be called a second Origen, is known to
us only by the very partial estimate of Photius. *
The praise awarded to him by this rigid exponent
of orthodoxy, " as having spoken piously of the
Father and the Son," suggests that he must have
passed over in silence the subordination of the
Word. The Son, according to him, shares in all the
glory of the Father, since the image cannot differ
* See Dorner and Baur (works quoted) on the various histories
of dogma, and especially their authorities. (Photius, "Bibliotheca,"
cod. 119 ; Routh, " Reliquix," iii. p. 42$, »nd following.)

35S THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
from the prototype.* On the other hand, Pierius
strangely lowered the position of the third person
of the Trinity. t An adherent of the doctrine of the
pre-existence of souls, he made large use of the alle
gorical method in the interpretation of Scripture.
Gregory Thaumaturgus carried his affection for the
great Alexandrine to the pitch of enthusiasm, as we
may judge by the panegyric he passes upon him.! He
does not always use exact and correct language in
reference to the relation of the Son with the Father.
He maintains that they are one in substance, and
distinct only in thought. § The Trinity thus under
stood resolves itself into a mere logical thesis, and
the difference of persons ceases to have any reality.
He seems also to speak of the Word as created or
produced. || Elsewhere he says that the three persons
of the Godhead are three names ; but he has himself
explained this rather vague expression by declaring
that he regards these names as representing corre
sponding realitiesiH" In his " Panegyric," which con
tains the most complete expression of his thought,
we find him using terms which vindicate him from
* nspi jiiv rrarpbg Kai t/iou tVGt€uig Trpta€tvBi. (Routh, iii. 430.) 'H
rrjg tiKovog npr) Kai dnpia, rov rrpiororirrov iari ripr) r) irdXiv dripid.
(Ibid.) t 'Yrrotli€riKBV'ai aiiro (rrvevpa) Tijg rov rrarpbg Kai mow dirotfiaoKBi SbfyfQ,
(Ibid:) } The " Panegyric " is in vol. iv. of Huefs " Origen." That which
remains of his writings has been collected in the " Bibliotheca
Patrum " of Galland, vol. iii. p. 379. See also in Mai', " Spicilegium
Rom.," vol. iii. p. 696, a fragment of a sermon by Gregory Thau
maturgus, " De Trinitate."
§ Xlartpa Kai vibv imvoiq. piv th'ai Svo, vtroardoBi Si 'iv. (Basile,
"Ep.," 2IO, 5.) || Tloiiipa, Kriopa. (Ibid., 2IO.)
IT " Nomina sunt persona? ; persona? significant id quod est et
subsistit." (Mai, " Spicileg. Rom.," iii. 696.)

BOOK II.  THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 359
any approach to Sabellianism. The Word is in his
view the Lord of our souls, the firstborn of the Father,
who has created and who governs the universe.
He is the truth, wisdom, and power of the universal
Father, one with Him, or rather He is in Him ; so
that all homage to the Son is really paid to the Father,
for He is the channel of the Father's favours and the
highway of piety. * We find the same doctrine in
the confession ascribed to him, which has probably
been somewhat remodelled in the disputes of Arian
ism. t The Son is the impress and image of the
Deity, the active power of universal creation. The
doctrine of the Holy Spirit bears the trace of an in
terpolation of much later date, for it is brought into
conformity with the strict orthodoxy of Nicaea. It is
certain that Gregory Thaumaturgus admitted the
distinction of the Divine persons, and that he only
appeared to deny it by his too emphatic assertion of
their substantial oneness. He had more piety than
originality, and was altogether free from the thraldom
of rigid formula?, which belongs to a later date.
Theognostus, who was one of the catechists of
Alexandria, gives us a striking instance of this loose
ness of expression.! He also speaks of the Word as
a creature,§ and yet he affirms that He neither came
forth from nothing nor from any created source, but
from the very bosom of God.|| He is the stream
flowing from the fountain, the ray issuing from the
* " Oratio Panegyrica," c 4- (Huet, iv. 59.)
f Basile, " Ep.," 210. X Routh, " Reliq.," 407.
§ Yibv Si Xkyiav Krkrpa. (" Phot Cod.," 106.)
|| 'Ex rrjg rov rrarpbg ovaiag ifv. (Athanasius, "Ep. de Decret.
Xica?n. Syn./' sec. 25 ; Routh, iii. 41-)

360 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
sun. His divinity is derived, but is nevertheless com
plete. Theognostus has one utterance of genius which
goes far beyond the views of his own school. " The
Father," he says, " must ever have a Son."* This
is an acknowledgment that the Word is, in a
manner, the complement of the Deity in a spiritual
sense, and that the God who is love must needs have
an eternal object to love. With one stroke of its
wings, Christian thought is carried far above the ab
stract notion of the absolute, which never gives a
solid basis to the divinity of the Word. In other
passages Theognostus reverts to the erroneous tenets
of his school, regarding the Word only in His relation
to creation. "When God formed the design of con
structing the universe," he says, " it was His will
that His Son should precede it as the rule and pattern
of the world. "t We are thus brought back to the
Platonist theory of the ideal.
§ II. Dionysius of Alexandria.
The most illustrious representative of Origen is
Dionysius, the great bishop of Alexandria (248).!
Possessing a mind singularly broad and liberal, he
never shrank from the boldest flight of thought or
form of expression. He did not indeed court opposi-
* AbTv tyr)ai rbv rraripa bxbiv viov. (" Phot. Cod./' 106.)
f Oiov nva Kavova rijg Sifpiovpyiag. (Greg. Nyssen., " Contra
Eunom.," iii. 132 ; Routh, iv. 412.)
{ The fragments of the works of Dionysius of Alexandria,
scattered throughout the writings of Athanasius and Basil, have
been collected in Galland's " Bibliotheca Patrum " (iii. 495). See
also Routh (" Reliq.," iii. 220) ; and for Dionysius's letters, see
" H. E.," Eusebius, book vii.

BOOK II. — THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 361
tion for its own sake, for never was man more averse
to idle disputations ; but his courageous loyalty to
truth made him anxious to give to the idea the most
forcible expression possible. Unhappily we have only
a few letters and fragments remaining from all his vast
exegetical and dogmatic labours. The saying of his
to which the strongest objection has been taken,
occurs in the letter addressed by him to Ammon and
Euphranor. In substance it is a challenge to Sabel
lianism. " The Son of God," he says, " is a creature
born of God ; He resembles Him in nature, but in
His essence He differs from the Father. In truth,
the husbandman cannot be confounded with the vine,
nor the builder of boats with his vessel. The Son,
inasmuch as He is a creature, did not exist before His
creation."* Dionysius' intention was to define as clearly
as possible the distinction of the Divine persons in
opposition to the school which regarded the Son as
a mere manifestation, only a ray of the eternal light.
But his words do; in fact, make a grave attack upon
the divinity of the Wordi In another passage of the
same writing he defined the Divine life as being es
sentially uncreated. " God is the Being who was
never produced ; His is the uncreated essence ; nature
then must have been created. "t The significance of
this declaration cannot be explained away ; it formed
too close a parallel to that which ascribed a beginning
to the Son. In order to judge fairly of the theology
* Tlohfpa Kai ytvt-bv tlvai rov viov rov 8tai\ fu'lTB Si fvati iSiov, dXXd
Ktvov Kar ovaiav tivai rov rrarpbg, wc-io ianv b ytwpyog ~obg n)v dpmXov
|iii 6 vavmfybg ~pbg rb oxd^og. Kai ydp ojg —ohfpa wr oi>K i/v —piv -^fvijrai.
(Athanasius, " De Sententia Dionysii," c. 4.)
t 'AyivijTov ianv b BBog Kai ovaia avrov 1) dyiwijaia. (Eusebius,
Pnepar. evang.," 7, 19.)

362 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
of Dionysius, we must not forget that in the same
writing he expressed the relations of the Father and
the Son by using the old figures of the stream flowing
from the source, the ray issuing from the central
light, the plant springing from the root. He was
not a Unitarian after the manner of Arius, any more
than he was a Trinitarian of the school of Atha
nasius. He regarded the distinctions which issued in
the triplicity of the persons, as produced in God
Himself; but these distinctions were far more strongly
marked in his view than they appeared to the orthodoxy
of Nicaea. In any case, his language was lacking in
logical exactness, and contained actual contradictions.
The assertions of the bishdp of Alexandria pro
voked a veritable scandal among the bishops of Libya.
They addressed a letter of complaint to Dionysius,
bishop of Rome, as the representative of one of the
most important Churches in the world; The Roman
bishop entered his protest against the ideas, and still
more against the expressions, of his colleague of Alex
andria, dwelling especially on the unfortunate words
which seemed to represent Christ as a creature, and
to establish a difference between Him and the Father.
Dionysius of Alexandria was a great friend of peace.
He endeavoured, in an apologetic letter addressed to
the bishop of Rome, to explain, not without modifying,
the declarations to which the strongest objection was
taken.* It would appear at first sight as if he accepted
entirely the ideas of his opponent. He does, in fact,
insist emphatically on the impossibility of separating
the reflection from the ray, and the Son from the
* See Routh, " Reliq.," iii, 390 and following.

BOOK II. — THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 363
Father, since the fatherhood of God must be contin
gent on His possession of the Son. The eternal light
must then have always had its reflection, and the
eternal fatherhood implies the equal eternity of the
Son.* To speak of the Son as produced by the Father
is simply to use the current language of the Greeks,
who are wont to say that the word is produced by him
who utters it. Is not this the true etymology of the
word poet ? The poet is he who produces, and that
which is produced is the manifestation of his thought. f
On closer examination, however, it is clear that
Dionysius of Alexandria still maintained in its strict
sense the subordination of the Son to the Father. He
compares their relation to that of word to thought.
Thought is, as it were, the inward, implicit word; as it
passes the lips it becomes outward, articulate language ;
it is the same in essence, but it has changed its mode.
This is again the old distinction between the inward
and the outward Word. Only with Dionysius the
inward Word is not simply the second person of the
Trinity in His virtual existence, as with Justin and
Athenagoras ; He is already God.! It is nevertheless
certain that before his controversy with the bishop of
Rome, Dionysius did not admit thus distinctly the
eternity of the outward Word, and that he spoke of
Him as having a beginning. He subsequently recon
sidered this, his first opinion, and he ought to have said
so more clearly. In endeavouring to justify all his
assertions, he involves his real views in obscurity. In
* "Ovrog dd rov ipiorbg, SijXov iiS ianv dti rb drravyaapa. (Routh, iii.
390. — Reproduction of the quotations of Athanasius.)
\ Ibid., 395. + Ibid., iii. 396, 399.

364 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
affirming that the Son is eternally begotten of the
Father, he means that He is eternally produced by
Him. Dionysius summed up his doctrine in this
formula: "We expand the indivisible Monas into the
Trias, and we bring back the Trias undiminished to the
Monas."* This singular formula sets aside absolutely
the idea that the Son is of a different nature from the
Father. Dionysius did not hesitate to declare the
identity of their essence; He tnade use here again of
figurative language. The fountain, in becoming a
stream, changes its name^ but not its nature; so is it
likewise with the root which becomes a pliant. The
spring is the Father, the stream is the Son. Life
issues from life, as the stream from its source ; the
shining light is the radiation of that which is inex
tinguishable. t All these images savour rather of
emanation than Of generation by an act of the will.
Evidently the thought of Dionysius is involved ; he
cannot give up the subordination, Which is, in his
view, the sole guarantee of the distinction of the Divine
Persons. But on the other hand* the rigid orthodoxy
which has been developed by opposition to Sabel
lianism lays its demands upon him. He acknowledges
the claim, but fails to reconcile it with his previous
bias. Hence ensues a painful conflict which he cannot
decide, and which involves him in flagrant contradic
tions. These contradictions themselves, however, in
so generous a mindj are Worthy of note as a sign of
the times. There is no position more painful for the
* Elg rr)v rpidSa rr)v povdSa rrXarvvopBV dSiaipBrov; Kai n)v rpidSa rrdXiv
dptiurov ei's ti)v uovdSa avyKBpaXaiovptBa. (Routh, iii. 395-)
t Zun} Ik Zu>ijg iytwiiBri Kai Hawtp trorapbg arrb Trtjyrjg. (Ibid., 398.)

BOOK II. — THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 365
religious thinker than to find himself on the boundary
between two distinct doctrinal periods, between old
convictions and new necessities.
The fragments of other doctrinal writings of Diony
sius, which have come down to us, present little interest
in a theological point of view. His "Treatise upon
Nature" is a clear and sound refutation of the atheism
of the Epicureans; he regards egoism as the source of
our spiritual errors.* His " Commentary on Job" has
come down to us in a very incomplete form. He speaks
in exalted terms of the power, the wisdom, and especially
of the eternity of God, which appears all the more to be
admired, as placed in contrast with our changing and
transitory life, in which the present slips away from us,
and the future, which as yet is not, is hurrying on to the
cessation of being.t But words like these add nothing
to the doctrinal teaching of Dionysius. It is clear,
from his canonical letter to Basilides, which treats of
the celebration of the paschal fast, that he remains
entirely faithful to the spirituality of Origen, and that
in worship, as in morals, he attaches importance, not
to the petty form, but to the true essence, and is there
fore very lenient to diversities of practice.! In the
writing directed by him against Nepos, he energetically
and in the very spirit of Origen reprobates the gross
and Jewish conceptions of the future of the Church
cherished by the millenarians.§ This led him to give
his whole thought to the book of the Revelation, from
* TvipXarrti rig irri rroXb rrtpi rd aiirip rrpoGrJKovra Sid ipiXavTidv.
(Routh, iv. 4I9-) + Ibid" 453'
J The letter to Basilides is given in Routh's " Reliq.," 111. 223.
§ The whole of this discussion is found in Eusebius. (" H. E.,"
vii. 23.)

366 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
which was the great argument of the millenarians.
Even when we fail to agree in his conclusions, we
cannot but admire the principles of sacred criticism
which he enunciates. This is unquestionably the
most novel and original portion of his theology.
He successfully created *the delicate instrument of
criticism, avoiding all exaggeration, and carefully
balancing the various elements of a just apprecia
tion. If he makes large use of internal evidence,
he carefully guards against any arbitrary assumption
that his interpretation of revelation must be absolutely
the right. This appears from the following words,
in which he addresses those who rejected the book
of the Revelation as a whole, because it clashed
with their preconceived notions. "I should not ven
ture," he says, " to reject altogether this book, which I
see to be held in such high esteem by many of my
brethren. I admit that it may have a meaning which
passes my conception, and which is the hidden and
profound sense of the things therein contained. Though
I may fail to understand, it is possible that the words
may conceal an idea more sublime than any which I
can discern. I do not make my understanding the
arbiter and measure of such a book,* but trusting the
more to faith, I am ready to believe that it contains
more glorious thoughts than those which I am capable
of perceiving. I do not condemn that which I fail to
grasp ; I rather admire that which is beyond me."t
With this important reservation, Dionysius assigns to
criticism its true office. He cannot reject the Revela-
* Ovk ISup ravra ptrpuiv Kai Kfiviov Xoyiapip. (Eusebius, "HE.,"
vii. 25.) \ Ibid.

BOOK II. — THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 367
tion because of the sublime character which he
discerns in it ; and he rightly finds a confirmation of
this direct intuition of the divine in the general feeling
of the Church. But he is careful not to apply this
purely mystical proof to the scientific aspect of the
question, which rightly claims an attentive examina
tion. This examination he carries on with profound
research, and his conclusion is that the Revelation is
not by the Apostle John. He arrives at this result by
a comparison of the undoubted writings of the apostle
with the book of Revelation. This is a mark of
genius, for he thus gains a solid basis for his critical
estimate, and marks out the surest line of criticism.
His comparison is first directed to the style. He
observes that the Greek of the gospel and epistles is
far more correct than that of the Revelation, which is
overlaid with Hebraisms. He then compares the de
velopment of the thoughts, and shows that there is a
striking analogy between the gospel and the epistles,
the tendency of both being to establish the incarnation
of the Word in opposition to docetism. The method
of exposition is the same in these writings, while in the
book of Revelation it is altogether different. In the
third place, Dionysius carries the comparison into the
domain of psychology. Neither in his gospel nor in
his epistles does John name himself, while the writer of
the Revelation lays great stress upon his personality.
Lastly, it is strange that John makes no allusion in his
letters to the revelations with which he had been
honoured, if he was indeed the writer of the Apocalypse,
while Paul frequently alludes to those which he had
received. Dionysius does not ignore the external

368 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
evidence, properly speaking, or treat with contempt the
tradition which ascribes the authorship of the last book
of Scripture to John. He endeavours to harmonise
this tradition with the results of his examination, by
ascribing the Apocalypse to John the Presbyter. The
Church has perfect liberty assuredly to question and to
reject this result of his researches, as indeed we our
selves do.* Nevertheless, his method cannot be too
much admired; he was the initiator of sacred criticism,
uniting respect for holy things with freedom of inquiry.
Clement shows himself in this respect superior to
Origen, who, as we have seen, leant towards the theory
of a divinely given canon, the infallible result of which
is to make Providence responsible for the errors and
fallacies of the human mind. The example of the
great Alexandrine is conclusive in this respect, for he
introduced into the sacred canon the " Book of
Susannah " and other apocryphal writings.
§ III. Julius Africanus, Methodius, Pamphylus the Martyr.
Dionysius of Alexandria had been preceded in the
path of exegesis by Julius Africanus, who elicited
Origen's letter about the " Book of Susannah." It
is through the refutation given him by his powerful
opponent that we are made acquainted with the fine
ness of his critical sense. The reasons for which
he rejects the apocryphal writing, which Origen was
so anxious to retain, are very remarkable. They
exhibit an admirable balancing of internal and ex
ternal evidence. Julius Africanus appeals first to the
* See " Martyrs and Apologists," by the author.

BOOK II.  THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 369
historical evidence, to the Jewish canon from which
the " Book of Susannah " was excluded. He demands
more from history than a mere testimony; he goes back
to the period and the circumstances to which tradition
assigned the facts narrated ; he shows that the state of
the Jews during the period of the captivity rendered
impossible the wealth which is ascribed in the story
to the family of Susannah. He then passes on to the
study of the text itself, and points out that it contains
plays upon words which indicate a Greek original.
He calls in question the representation given of Daniel,
and shows that he was not capable of passing the judg
ment which is attributed to him, and which is worthy
rather of a stage player than of a great prophet.
Lastly, rising to still higher considerations, he com
pares the mode of revelation in the apocryphal writing
with that of authentic prophecy, and he concludes from
all these considerations that the Church cannot accept
as a divine oracle that which is simply an absurd
fable.* Criticism — that inseparable companion of theo
logy, whose province is to divide the wheat from the
chaff in the granary of God — thus began its work in the
third century. Its earliest efforts were characterised
by that steadfast piety and holy liberty, which enable
the devout student to discern the divine element
and to free it from alien admixtures. The period of
spiritual fervour and independence which preceded the
Council of Nicaea, was admirably adapted to the develop
ment of a science so necessary to the Church, but it was
unhappily abruptly cut short after the fourth century.
* See Origen's letter to Julius Africanus, in which he goes over
the whole argument of his opponent. ("Origenis opera," i. 7.)
25

370 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
Everything denotes the commencement of a new
era. The further we advance in the third century,
the more keen and vigilant do we find the susceptibility
On points of doctrine. But even those who are most
conscious of this tendency are not free from the inde
cision of their age.
Methodius, bishop of Patara, in Syria, who died in 311,
vainly endeavoured to approve himself to the ortho
doxy of the succeeding age by assailing the writings of
Origen. He nevertheless maintained the subordination
pf the Word.* " God," he says, " willed that He who
existed before all ages in the heavens should be thus
produced for the world ; that is to say, that what was
before unknown should be revealed. t God alone is
without beginning." The Word is above time,! and all
things were made by Him ; He is, as it were, the hand
pf God, which, after having created matter, imparted
to it form, order, harmony.§ He has, then, a full
participation in the divinity; but He is, nevertheless,
in the second rank. He united Himself to human
flesh, as the bridegroom of the Canticles to the virgin,
who was affianced to Him.|| Methodius emphatically
repudiated the eternity of the Word as taught by
Prigen, the pre-existence of souls, and the idea of a
temporary humanity, which could have no positive
* Numerous fragments of the writings of Methodius are found
in Photius (" Codex," 234-236 ; Epiphanius, " Hasres," 64). They
have been collected by Galland (" Bibliotheca Patrum, iii. 663).
f Tbv rrpoovra -ijSi] rrpb tuiv aiioviov iv roig oiipavoig b€ovXt)Bbv Kai Tip
Koaptp ytwrJGai, '6 Sr) eon rrpboBtv dyvoovpzvov yviopiaai. (" Phot. Cod.,"
236, 311, Bekker edition.)
X 'Aop'iGrug, dxpoviiig. (Ibid.) The abode of the Father, avap%og.
(Ibid., 235, 304.)
§ 'O vibg r) iravroSvi'apog Kai Kparaid xs'P tov rrarpog. (Ibid., 236, 3°4-)
|| Ibid., 236, 311.

BOOK II.  THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 37I
value, and would be only one stage in the process of
development, the body being represented simply as a
soiled garment, to be cast off as quickly as possible.
He insisted strongly also upon the resurrection of the
body.* The covering of skins, in which Adam was
clothed after the Fall, does not set forth his physical
nature, but that same nature in a state of deterioration,
and requiring to be purified by death. " Man is not
a soul without a body, nor a body without a soul, "t
It is strange that Methodius, possessing so much true
wisdom, should regard asceticism as the highest ideal
of holiness. He draws a clear distinction between
the morality of the perfect and that of ordinary
life. These thoughts are very fully expressed in his
"Dialogue of the Virgins," a diffuse composition
possessing no philosophical value. The fragments
preserved in his " Treatise on Free Will," show that
he was a true apostle of Christian spirituality. He
carefully distinguishes between the trial of liberty
and sin. The primordial law gave occasion for the
manifestation of the free will, Methodius fell into
error, not in discussing the very questionable views
advanced bv Origen, but in bringing against them the
charge of heresy : this was to substitute condemnation
for free controversy.
The great apologist found a zealous, and even
passionate defender in Pamphylus3 who deserved the
appellation of the Martyr. He devoted himself with
pious zeal to making a collection in the library of
* - Phot. CoA," 234. 23;.
t *A*fy»=w: tmn Cx-xi X*pk oi/iaroc. «te <n*/w x-P«£ VTOC- (Ibid.,
=94-) ^5*

372 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
Caesarea of the works of the master, and in particular of
the " Hexaples," and was aided in his task by his com
panion, the bishop Eusebius. Cast into prison during
the persecution under Maximus, he spent his last days
in writing an apology of Origen's teaching, of which
only a few pages have come down to us.* He endea
vours to justify the views of Origen as to the relation
of the Son to the Father. He shows, by numerous
quotations, that he in no way impugns the divinity
of the Redeemer, and that he gives no place either
to the theory of emanation or to docetism. He then
touches on Origen's doctrine of the pre-existence of
souls, and since he cannot deny that this is a diver
gence from current opinion, he invokes, on its behalf,
the legitimate rights of Christian thought, which has
never felt itself constrained to unanimity on such
obscure points. "It is notorious," he says, "that
there are great diversities among the adherents of the
Church on this doctrine of souls, and that some hold
one opinion and some another. Why, then, should
Origen be incriminated more than others for his
peculiar views ?"t Simple diversities of opinion are
not to be branded as heresies when they do not over
step the limits of the faith of the Church. Evidently
Pamphylus belongs to the old school ; he is one of
the last survivors of the great era of spiritual catho
licity. He is none the less a saint and a confessor.
His love for liberty is united with absolute devotion to
* This apology is found in vol. v. of Huet's " Origen," and in
Routh. (" Reliq.," iv. 339.)
f " Num vero cum diversitas sit apud omnes ecclesiasticos, et
alii alia de anima sentiant, et omnes diversa ; quomodo hie magis
quam ca?teri incusandus est ?" (" Apol.," c. 9 ; Routh iv. 380.)

BOOK II. — THE ALEXANDRINE SCHOOL. 373
Jesus Christ. He is worthy to represent that glorious
period of Christian liberality and heroism, as it is just
vanishing from the horizon of the Church. He bore
his testimony in the dungeon at Cassarea, which
witnessed the cruel sufferings of Origen. He was put
to death only a few years before the inauguration of
Christianity as the official and imperial religion. We
deem him happier dying thus, a free martyr in a free
age, than had he lived to see the day of infamous
state patronage and fatal spiritual thraldom.

CHAPTER VI.
THE GRECO-ROMAN SCHOOL.
The Roman West, like the East, had its theologians ;
it was not content to subject itself to the influence of
the great speculative movement inaugurated at Alexan
dria. It was not however from the metropolis of the
West that the impulse came, and the -initiative was
taken in the domain of religious science. The Church
of Rome devoted its energies to its own growth and
organisation, and to the exercise of that strong yet
supple genius of governing, which was soon to secure
to it the primacy. Western theology, apart from pro
consular Africa, has only two great names to mention.
Irenasus and Hippolytus are both sons of the Greco-
Oriental Church, the language of which they speak.
They reproduce its principal features, though in forms
modified by the influence of different surrounding
circumstances, and also by the peculiar genius of each.
They both took part in questions of government and
ecclesiastical polity, but their attitude was widely
different. While Irenasus urged on the development
of external authority and the acceptance of tradition,
Hippolytus, who laboured half a century later, was one
of the boldest champions of the freedom of the Church,
and adhered with such fidelity to the spirit of the
Alexandrine school, that one of his writings has been
ascribed to Origen himself.

BOOK II. — THE GRECO-ROMAN SCHOOL. 375
§ I. The Theology of Ireneeus.
Irenseus was a theologian both by necessity and duty.
Constrained to take up the defence of Christian beliefs
against Gnosticism, he was under the necessity of pre
senting them in the form of a creed, in order to vindicate
their true meaning in opposition to what he judged to
be the misconstructions of his skilful adversaries. This
apologetic and polemical design gives to his exposition
a very striking character of simplicity and clearness,
and prevents its lingering in pure speculation. He
seizes the thought with a firm grasp, and defines it with
clearness and force. He is a Latin as to method, but the
substance of his thought is truly Greek. It is the ripened
fruit of that long and free development which is mani
fested throughout the whole course of the second century*
in Greece, in Asia Minor, and at Alexandria, and which
finds its chief focus at Ephesus in the time of St; Johnj
He remained faithful to that fruitful doctrine of the
Word which combines in such deep and living har
mony the human element and the divine; Only upon
Gallo-Roman soil, the theologian has less faith in
freedom, and believes in the necessity of giving pro
tection to the truth. He does not yet seek that
protection in the formularies imposed by great councils ;
he is satisfied with the episcopal power as the guardian
of tradition. But even this is a deviation from the true
idea, and the dominant inspiration of the teaching
becomes less free. The stream, enclosed between higher
and closer banks, loses somewhat of its first brightness
and force. On the other hand, the theology of Irenasus,
which is directed entirely against the metaphysics of

376 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
Gnosticism, establishes itself strongly upon the terra firma
of spiritual truth ; it is not satisfied with mere words ;
it rejects all that approaches to idle and subtle sym
bolism, and deals only with great realities. Hence all
that relates to the person and work of Jesus Christ is
treated in this theology with incontestable superiority.
We have already seen from the plan of Irenasus' book
against the heretics, with what logical power he refutes
Gnosticism, pursuing it under all its disguises, tearing
away the artificial veil of its Scripture symbols, con
futing it by text after text restored to its true meaning,
and enforcing in opposition to it those great principles
of conscience, so insolently trampled upon by fatalistic
speculation, which treats of evil as a divine necessity.
Let us now consider his theological system, properly so
called. His theodicy is far more free from Platonist abstrac
tions than that of the Christian schools of the East.
Irenasus does not insist, like Justin and Athenagoras,
upon the incomprehensibility of God. No one has
raised a higher barrier between the finite and the
infinite, between the creature and the Creator.
"God," he says, "creates; man is produced."* He
deprecates all profane comparisons between the two.
He boldly avows that human language can never
convey the idea of the divine perfections, since it must
divide and analyse where, in reality, there is only a
living unity. The several attributes of God are dis
tinguished only by a necessity of our minds ; in truth,
they all blend in one bright ray of purity, holiness,
* " Deus quidem facit, homo autem fit." (" Hasres., iv. 24.)
(" Feuardentius " edition. Paris, 1639.)

BOOK II.— THE GRECO-ROMAN SCHOOL. 377
glory, intellect, and love. " If the Gnostics," he says,
" knew the Scriptures, and had allowed themselves to
be instructed in the truth, they would have acknow
ledged that God is not as men, and that His thoughts
are different from theirs. The universal Father is
indeed far above all human affections and passions.
He is a simple, not a compound being, ever equal and
unchangeable. He is all feeling, all spirit, all thought,
all reason, all hearing, all ear, all light, and the sole
source of all good. He is far above all attributes, and
hence He is ineffable." * In spite of this infinite distance
between us and God, He is not to us that silent abyss
of the Gnostics, which precedes all life, eludes all
perception, and is but another name for the great void.t
God is essentially spirit, wisdom, justice, love.! If He
is invisible to the eye of the creature, He is perceived
by love, which is an emanation from His being, and
constitutes the spiritual life of beings made in His
likeness. §
We thus escape that transcendentalism which
reduces the Divinity to a mere creation of the mind.
Irenasus shook off the yoke of abstract metaphysics,
which weighed down the Platonist Fathers, and which
exercised so fatal an influence upon the doctrine of the
Word. His God is a living God, and not a mere idea
or philosophical conception ; holiness and love form
part of His essence. Love is even the very substance
of His being, as appears from the passage in which
the pardon of Adam is based upon the unconquerable
* "Hasres.," ii. 16.
\ "Vacuum esse eum confitebantur." (Ibid., ii. 17.)
X Ibid., iii. 43.
§ " Per charitatem proximum fieri Deo." (Ibid., ii. 45.)

378 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
magnanimity of God.* Thus, for God not to pardon,
not to love, would be for Him to be overcome and
suffer loss. This is equivalent to the definition of St.
John, " God is love."
Irenasus is very moderate in his divine ontology ; he
will not even attempt to lift the veil which conceals
the essence of God from our feeble mind. Hence his
extreme reserve in touching on those higher meta
physics in which Gnosticism so delighted. He believes
in the Trinity, distinguishing clearly between the Father,
from whom all proceeds, the Word, who has received all
from the Father, and the Holy Spirit, who was before the
world. t Irenasus does not attempt to offer a meta
physical construction of this great mystery. Some
difficulty is found in distinguishing clearly the Word
from the Holy Spirit, at least in relation to His offices
and attributes. "God," says Irenasus, "is all Spirit
and all Word. That which He thinks, He says, and
that which He says, He thinks."! Thus the Wisdom and
the Word are eterflal as Himself, and form part of His
essence. We are thus led far away from the theology
of the early Greek Fathers, who only allowed the
outward and hypostatic production of the Word to be
coincident with creation. According to Irenseus, to
assert that the word comes after the thought, is to
fall intd anthropomorphism, to descend from the
* " Sed qiidriiam Deus invictus et magnanimus est, magnanimum
quidem se exhibuit ad correctionem hominis." (Hasres.," iii. 33.)
f "Adest ei (Patri) semper Verbum et Sapientia, Filius, et
Spiritus." (Ibid., iv. 37.)
! " Deus autem totus existens mens et totus existens Logos, quod
cogitat, hoc et loquitur ; et quod loquitur, hoc et cogitat. Cogitatio
enim ejus Logos, et Logos mens, et omnia concludens mens, ipse
est Pater." (Ibid., ii. 48.)

BOOK II. — THE GRECO-ROMAN SCHOOL. 379
region of the eternal to that of temporary succession.
" As God is all spirit, all reason, all operating mind,
all light, ever identical and equal with Himself,
we may not think of Him as in any sense divided.
The language of men being carnal, has no corres
pondence with the rapidity of His thought, which is
spiritual. Thus our word is, as it were, choked within
us; it cannot give expression all at once to our complete
thought, but finds separate and successive utterance,
according to the possibilities of our language."* The
divine Word is the full revelation of the Father. He
is His spoken, manifested, eternal reason. The Word
is inseparable from the attributes to which the Gnostics
had given distinct form as the divine .ZEons ; He is at
once the truth and the life.t The distinction of persons
seems hard to reconcile with this absolute denial of any
subordination. Irenseus was on the verge of Sabel
lianism ; he was only saved by his firm determination
not to depart from tradition, and to avoid all dangerous
speculation. He refuses to offer any explanation of the
mode of the generation of the Son ; this is a transcen
dental problem with which our intellect cannot deal.
" If it is asked in what manner did the Son proceed
from the Father, we reply that this procreation, this
generation, this production, this manifestation, or call
it what you will, this unutterable generation is known
to none, not to Valentinus, Marcion, Saturninus, or
Basilides ; not to angels, archangels, principalities, or
powers. It is known to the Father alone, who brought
forth the Son, and to the Son who is born of Him.
His generation cannot be told."J
* " Ha?res.," ii. 47- t Ibid-, "• 14.
! " Inenarrabilis generatio ejus." (Ibid., ii. 48.)

380 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
The generation of the Son, however, though so
deep a mystery, is nevertheless a reality, as clearly
beyond all dispute as beyond all thought. It has
no beginning. God, in His mysterious and holy
union with the Word, is perfectly self-sufficing.
Creation is an act of love ; it has no other cause
than the free mercy of the Father. God did not
make Adam in the beginning because He had need
of man, but that He might have a being upon whom
to bestow His benefits.* Before the creation of Adam
— before, indeed, any creature was called into being
— the Son, who dwelt in the bosom of the Father,
glorified Him, and was glorified by the Father. The
world was created by the Word out of nothing, and
was not simply formed by the organisation of chaotic
matter.t The moral creature was made in the image of God;
the Divine breath, animating the physical organism,
produced the reasonable being who is called man.
The greatness of his nature is fully manifested in the
second Adam. The union of the Word and the Holy
Spirit with humanity brings to the latter all the per
fections which it was divinely destined to possess.!
Man only attains to the true consummation of his
being when he receives the fulness of the Godhead.
* "Non quasi indigens Deus hominis plasmavit Adam." ("Hasres.,"
iv. 28.)
f " Omnia qua? facta sunt infatigabili Verbo fecit." (Ibid., ii.
2 ; Ibid., ii. 11.)
X " Quemadmodum ab initio plasmationis nostra? in Adam, ea
qua? fuit a Deo inspiratio vita?, unita plasmati animavit hominem,
et animal rationabile ostendit : sic in fine Verbum patris et Spiritus
Dei, adunitus antiqua? substantia? plasmationis Ada?, viventem et
pcrfectum effecit hominem.'' (Ibid., v. I.)

BOOK II.  THE GRECO-ROMAN SCHOOL. 381
We shall meet with this grand thought again, as
the very centre of the doctrine of redemption. Hu
manity, even if it had not sinned, would only have
reached its full realisation in becoming united with
the Deity in as real a manner as by the incarnation.
Adam was created free, that is to say, he was in
tended to fulfil his destiny by means of the determi
nation of his own will. Trial, not the Fall, was needed
to raise him to this high position. We were made
men that we might become gods.* God will not use
coercion ; His designs are only love. He puts good
in all ; but on man as on the angels He confers the
power of choice. t Good, which is the gift of the
Creator, is to be freely preserved ; it is only under this
condition that it acquires a moral character. The fall
and the punishment of the evil angels can be laid to
their own charge alone. They did not choose to hold
fast the good which was their appanage, and their re
bellion was their ruin. The kingdom of evil and of
perdition was not founded, as the Gnostics assert, by a
Divine decree, or by a predestination of woe. The fall
of man is the consequence of the unbelief and diso
bedience of Eve, who listened to the suggestions of
the serpent. J The first consequence of sin was the
loss of immortality ; the fallen being is devoted to
death, and transmits the germ of death to his descend
ants. § Suffering and toilsome labour are both fruits
* " Nos enim imputamus et quoniam non ab initio Dii facti sumus,
sed primo quidem homines, tunc demum Dii." (" Ha?res.," iv. 73.)
f " Bonum dat omnibus. Posuit autem in homine potestatem
electionis, quemadmodum in angelis." (Ibid., iv. 71.)
| Ibid., iii. 33.
§ " Quemadmodum per priorem generationem mortem ha?redita-
vimus." Jbid., v. i.)

382 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
of the first transgression. The punishment comes by
the direct will of God, who is as faithful to His
threatenings as to His promises. It is He who pro
nounced the sentence of condemnation ; nevertheless,
the curse rests rather upon the earth, which was the
scene of human rebellion, than upon Adam.*
Again, no one is condemned except for his own faults.
The race of Adam follows its father in the path of
death because it has followed him in that of rebellion.
Evil and good alike become effectual only as they re
ceive the seal and confirmation of the will.t
The Fall has destroyed in man the glorious work of
creation, by despoiling him of the divine and immortal
life, which was his glory and his true nature. God
will not be overcome ; He will not allow His original
plan to fail. Hence He resolves to save fallen man.
By this salvation He simply restores man to his normal
condition, or rather He fulfils that which would have
been man's glorious destiny had he not fallen. Such
a restoration fallen man could never have achieved for
himself, for he is the slave of evil and the victim of
death. It was not possible to create anew this man
who had been vanquished and spoiled, and thus to
render him victorious, nor could he who was still under
the dominion of sin be made to receive salvation.!
On the other hand, this salvation could not be wrought
outside the pale of humankind. " Death came by a man;
* " Non ipsum maledixit Adam, sed terram in operibus ejus."
(" Ha?res.," iii. 35.)
+ He says of the heretics that they retain the old leaven of their
birth : " In veteri generationis perseverantes fermento." (Ibid., v. 1.)
Present disobedience then is a confirmation of the first disobedience,
of which we have the germ within us by birth. | Ibid., iii. 20.

BOOK II. — THE GRECO-ROMAN SCHOOL. 383
the resurrection must come in like manner."* The in
carnation alone solves this otherwise insoluble problem.
Here appears the superiority of the theology of Iren
asus, who indeed on this point has never been surpassed.
All who went before him had made the incarnation
nothing more than a superior mode of revelation, or
Divine illumination, because they regarded religion
too much in the light of an intellectual problem. Iren
asus does not ignore this view, which has a measure
of importance. He also admits that the Word assumed
human flesh in order to give us the manifestation of
God, and to enlighten the darkness of our ignorance.
God alone could reveal God to us. The knowledge of
the Father is based upon the Word.t A knowledge
of God in His glory would utterly overwhelm us ; we
can know Him only by His love, which shines with
brightest, mildest ray, in His Son. J The Lamb alone
opens the seals of the book which contains the secret
of the Father. "Just as, in order to see the light,
we must be in the light ; so, in order to see God, we
must be in God."§ He who was incomprehensible
has made Himself visible, and come down to the com
prehension of men. || It is in this sense that Irenasus
says that the Father is the Son invisible, and the Son
is the Father visible. If
* E7TEiSi) yap Si dvBpw7rov b Bai'drog, Si dvBpiinrov dvaaraaig Ik VBKpuiv.
(" Hasres.," iii. 20.) f Ibid., iv. 15.
! " Igitur secundum magnitudinem non est cognoscere Deum :
impossibile est enim mensurari Patrem : secundum autem dilec-
tionem ej'us. Ha?c est enim qua? nos per Verbum ejus ducit ad
Patrem." (Ibid., iii. 37.)
§ "QffrrBp 01 flXiirovrBg to ipiog, ivrbg Btai rod tpiorbg, o'iirwg oi j3\k7rovrtg
tov Bbov ii'rbg yivovrai rov Bbov. (Ibid., iv. 30, 31.) || Ibid.
11 " Invisibile Pater, visibile autem Patris Filius." (Ibid., iv. 14.)

384 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
This object of the incarnation is not, however, the
most important. To know God is not all. He needs
to be appropriated and possessed ; and this implies,
for a fallen race, a work of reparation and redemption.
Wherein does this work consist ? Irenseus makes the
current use of Bible language. He speaks of a ransom,
a propitiation. The meaning, however, which he at
taches to these words, has no analogy with that sub
sequently given to them, when theology came to seek
an equivalent for the infinitude of sin, in the infinite
suffering endured by the God-man. Such a conception
is altogether alien to his thought. If the victim of
Calvary saves us, it is by virtue of His true and real
humanity, — a fact which would not, in the view of
Irenseus, compromise in an}- way His divinity, inas
much as for him, the second Adam is in fact the true
Adam, that is, the perfect man ; for union with the
Divine was the original destiny of the being created
in the image of God. Born miraculously of the Virgin
Mary, in order to escape the heritage of original sin,
Jesus is indeed the Word Incarnate. He has veritably
assumed our human flesh, with all its infirmities, but
without its defilements. He was familiar with want
and weariness ; He wept over the grave of Lazarus ;
drops of bloody sweat stood on his brow; His side
was pierced with the soldier's spear ; and His soul was
exceeding sorrowful, even unto death.* He was, in
The reader may consult with advantage the learned thesis of M.
Hackenschmidt on this subject, entitled " Sancti Irenasi De opere
et beneficiis D. N. Jesu Christi Sententia." Strasbourg, 1869. Y\'e
agree with this writer in his main idea. Like him, we fail to find
in Irenasus either the idea of a fraud practised on the devil, or the
theory of Anselm. * " Hxres.," iii. 32.

BOOK II. — THE GRECO-ROMAN SCHOOL. 385
very truth, all that He seemed to be.* The choice of
Mary as the mother of the Saviour was determined
not by a fictitious original purity, which places her
apart from fallen humanity. No, it was her obedience
to the call of God which won for her this high dig
nity, which Irenseus describes in somewhat exagge
rated terms when he says, that by her faith she broke
the fatal bond which Eve had formed by her dis-
obedience.t There is no suggestion of the immaculate conception
of the mother of the Saviour. Her submission to the
words of the angel Gabriel is her sole title to the
honour devolved upon her. The distinction of the two
natures in Jesus Christ finds no place in the doctrine
of Irenasus. Undoubtedly the human element is not
absolutely confounded with the divine, but there is
nothing to mark an essential difference between the
Word Incarnate and the first Adam. The first man
was, in truth, destined to receive and to possess the
Deity. The Word, in the man Jesus, occupies pre
cisely the place which the Divine Spirit would have
filled in primeval man had he remained true to his
original destiny. It follows that Christ realises in the
end of the ages the ideal which sin had destroyed
in the beginning. He was the perfect man; that is
to say, man perfectly united to God.! He recapitulates
as it were in Himself the whole human race. He is
* " Hasres./' v. 1. t Ibid., iii. 33.
| " Necesse fuit Dominum suum plasma requirentem, ilium ipsum
hominem salvare qui factus fuerat secundum imaginem ejus. . . .
Per secundum hominem vivificans eum hominem qui fuerat morti-
ficatus." (" Hasres./' iii. 33.) " In fine Verbum Patris et spiritus
Dei adunitus antiqua? substantia? plasmationis Ada? viventem et
perfectum fecit hominem." (Ibid., v. 1.)
26

386 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
the true head of mankind,* representing not only all
generations, but all ages, for He redeemed childhood,
youth, and mature age, by being Himself successively
child, youth, and full-grown man.t This detracts
nothing from His divinity, which was gloriously mani
fested in His miracles and still more in His pardons. J
As a man He was full of compassion for our miseries,
as God, He relieved them. Those who deny His
divinity spoil His very humanity by robbing it of its
brightest crown. § In truth, the Word became man
in order that man might put on the Word and be made
by adoption the son of God. " The Word was made
man," says Irenasus again, in words of singular bold
ness, "in order that He might accustom man to receive
God, and God to dwell in man."|| By Christ we finally
become gods.H
* " Filius Dei incarnatus longam hominum expositionem in seipso
recapitulavit, nobis salutem prasstans ut quod perdideramus in
Adam, id est secundum imaginem et similitudinem esse Dei, hoc
in Christo Jesu reciperemus." ("Hasres.," iii. 20.)
f " In omnem venit astatem." (Ibid., ii. 39.) J Ibid., v. 17.
§ ' Arroartpovvrag rbv dvBpio-rrov rrjg Big Btbv dvoSov. (Ibid., iii. 21.)
|| " Filius homo factus est, ut assuesceret hominem percipere
Deum et assuesceret Deum habitare in homine." (Ibid., iii. 22.)
IT " Primo quidem homines, tunc demum Dii." (Ibid., iv. 75.)
I find only a single passage which seems to imply the duality of the
two natures ; it is this : "Qairtp ydp i\v dv9piorrog, "iva rrBipaG9r), ovrwg
Kai Xoyog iva SoiZaa9y ' 7) ovxa^ovro g piv rov Xoy ov iv rip rrBipd^ea-
Bai Kai Gravpova9ai, Kai arroBvifGKBiv ' Gvyyivopkvov Si rip avBpiomp iv rip
viKav, Kai viropkvav, Kai xpr]GrtvtGBai, Kai dvioraaBai Kai dvaXap^dvEaBai,
(V. Int.) " Sicut enim homo erat ut tentaretur, sic et Verbum ut
glorificaretur : requiescente quidem Verbo, ut posset tentari et
inhonorari et crucifigi et mori ; absorpto autem homine in eo quod
vincit et sustinet et resurgit et assumitur." (iii. 21.) This passivity
of the Word, in suffering and death, implies a kind of dualism.
But as we have seen, this dualism is inherent in primeval man,
inasmuch as he was destined to participate in the divine life. In
fact, he is only truly man by virtue of this duality, which resolves

BOOK II. — THE GRECO-ROMAN SCHOOL. 387
If we consider further not only the person but the work
of the Redeemer, we shall understand still more clearly
how important it was in the view of Irenasus to main
tain in all its reality the human nature of Jesus Christ.
The race of Adam is the slave of sin and Satan ; it
has brought itself under the yoke by its rebellion. Only
by an act of obedience can it break its chains and
triumph over its conqueror; and this redeeming act
must be accomplished by man himself, or it can be
of no moral value. " If," says Irenasus, " the enemy
had not been overcome by a man, the victory would
not have been a righteous one.* Hence the neces
sity of a real substitution, which should make the
Word the representative of humanity." He was truly
a man fighting for his own kinsmen. He fought and
conquered; His obedience cancelled the rebellion of the
creature, and brought salvation by destroying sin."t
Thus redemption is the victory of the holy obedience of
the head of the new humanity over the power of evil
which held us enthralled.
In the days of His temptation Jesus encountered the
adversary, and when He then drove him from Him, He
cancelled the disobedience of Adam.! But the decisive
triumph was on the cross, because there He vanquished
death — " the last enemy." When Jesus made Himself
a sacrifice, He concentrated on Himself all the effects
of the hatred of the serpent to humanity; He then
itself into the unity of the moral person. This text cannot counter
vail all those we have quoted, which imply that human destiny finds
its consummation in the Deity.
* E pr) dvBpojrrog dv'iKr\GBV rbv dvrirraXov rov dvBpunrov, ovk dv SiKaiwg
lviKr)9rf b IxBpbg. (" Hasres.," iii. 20.)
f " Erat homo pro patribus certans, et per obedentiam inobeden-
tiam persolvens." (Ibid., iii. 20.) ! Ibid., v. 21.
26*

388 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
received that wound in the heel which had been pre
dicted, but He nevertheless crushed the head of His
adversary, because His death was the free sacrifice of
obedient love.* The crucifixion is not then a sort
of damnation endured by Christ in the room of the
sinner. God does not need sacrifices to satisfy and
appease His anger. It was not for His own sake, but
for man's, that He instituted sacrifices at all.t His
anger was not kindled against Adam, but against the
serpent, the author of man's fall.! That which He
requires is the rescinding of the rebellion ; it is obedience
under the conditions which sin has entailed, that is to
say, in suffering and death ; it is the victory of a holy
humanity over the power of evil. It is on this ground
we are reconciled to God by the death of His Son.§
Now all these conditions were fulfilled by the incarna
tion of the Word, by that merciful substitution of the
Son of God for mankind, or rather by that assimilation
freely established between His love and our misery,
which was possible by virtue of the original relationship
by which men rightfully belong to Him.|| "In His
infinite love He became what we are, in order to raise
us to what He Himself is.U It is in this sense Christ
has redeemed us by His own blood, and that He has
given his soul for our soul, His flesh for our flesh.
* " Hasres.," iv. 78.
t " Ostendens quod ipse nullius rei indiget." (Ibid., iv. 32.)
| " Deus retorsit inimicitiam in ipsum inimicitiarum authorem
auferens quidem suam, quas erat adversus hominem inimicitiam,
retorquens autem illam et mittens illam in serpentem." (Ibid., iv.
78.) § " Per passionem reconciliavit nos Deo." (Ibid., iv. 78.)
|| " Sui proprii." (Ibid., v. 18.)
IT " Factus est quod sumus, uti nos perficeret esse quod est ipse.''
(Ibid., v. " Prasfatio.")

BOOK II. — THE GRECO-ROMAN SCHOOL. 389
Since His glorious ascension He works powerfully upon
the Church ; He communicates to it His spirit ; He
guides and sustains it by His life. For us He suf
fered, for us He rose again."*
This work of free love ought to be accepted and
ratified by the free act of the fallen creature under the
influence of the Holy Spirit. "The Satanic rebellion
established a claim upon us without right ; we were by
nature the sons of God Almighty, and it was in opposi
tion to our true nature that we were estranged from
Him. It was thus a righteous retribution when the
Word of God, mighty in all things and standing steadfast
and immovable in His righteousness, fought against
apostasy in person, redeeming from its yoke those who
had become bound under it. Unlike the evil power
which has ruled over us from the beginning, laying hold
with insatiable violence on that which does not belong
to him, Christ uses no compulsion. No ; He employs
persuasion, as becomes a God, who would rather convince
than coerce those whom He seeks to win, that He may
maintain His righteousness, while yet He suffers not
His work to perish. t The best commentary on this
passage is given in the beautiful words of Vinet :
* Tip iSiip ovv a'ipari Xvrpioffapkvov r)pdg rov KVpiov, Kai Sovrog ryv
ipvxyv vrrip roiv rjpBrkpiov ^pv, Kai rr)v GapKa iavrov dvri rorv yptrBpittv
aapKuv. ("Hasres.," v. 1 ; iii. 18.)
t " Non cum vi, sed secundum suadelem." (Ibid., v. 1.) Baur
(" Verscehnungslehre/' p. 31) applies this expression not toman
but to the devil, as if Irenasus had meant to say that God sought to
persuade the devil himself of the righteousness of redemption. But
this is to forget that he does not acknowledge any right of the
devil over man (" injuste dominabatur nobis "), that there is there
fore no need to convince him that all his pretensions are justly
confounded as it were by the sufferings of Christ. It is in perfect
harmony with the system of Irenasus to show respect for human
freedom in the work of salvation.

390 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
" Grace is a divine eloquence which persuades the free
will." " The love of Christ constrains us," as says St.
Paul. The Divine Spirit reveals to us its grandeur and
sweetness. Thus arises faith, which is in truth a divine
persuasion, and by which the redeeming work wrought
by the Divine freedom is perfected by the concurrence
of the will of man. " Christ became the Head of the
Church that He might draw all things to Himself."*
Irenasus was led to treat at considerable length the
question of the relation of the two Testaments, which
are so constantly represented by Gnosticism as radically
opposed to each other. The bishop of Lyons threw
much light on this point. He recognised at once the
unity and the progression of the divine revelations. The
Old Testament is connected with the New as the period
of preparation with that of fulfilment. Irenasus did not
fall into the error of some of his predecessors, who
identified the two economies in almost every particular.
As religion was for them pre-eminently a doctrine, they
sought to discover identically the same teaching beneath
the veils of Jewish symbolism and in the more trans
parent exposition of the Gospel. The position is altered,
when, as with the bishop of Lyons, religion is regarded
as essentially the fulfilment of a positive work of re
demption. The idea or the symbol is always widely
removed from the actual fact : in this light Christianity
preserves its specific character. Thus Irenseus, after
having affirmed the Divine origin of the old economy,
and declared that both Testaments proceed from the
same God and Father, that the seed of the Word is to
be discovered throughout the whole of Holy Scripture,
* "Hasres.," iii. iS.

BOOK II. — THE GRECO-ROMAN SCHOOL. 391
boldly asserts the superiority of the Gospel.* Revela
tion has many steps, which rise in succession from
earth to heaven, and by which man is led up to God.t
The first Covenant was designed to train man under
the rod of the schoolmaster for the exercise of liberty.
His will was brought into subjection in the earthly
Jerusalem, and he was thus rendered fit for freedom.!
The Mosaic institutions, in their peculiar and restrictive
character, may be compared to the husk which encloses
the still delicate grain till it is ready to cast off its
sheath. § No declaration could be more explicit of the
abrogation of Judaism, while yet it was recognised in
its necessary and transitionary character. The Gospel
abolished the Old Testament by fulfilling it, that is to
say, by fully realising the religious idea contained in it,
in a more or less restricted form, and eliminating all
that gave it a sort of local and therefore limited
application. The question was not simply of that tradition of the
elders on which Jesus Christ set His ban, and which,
like a tasteless beverage, diluted the generous wine
of the Divine law.|| That law itself was developed,
enlarged, spiritualised, by the Master. It was not
repealed, abrogated, but extended. The Lord did not
destroy ; He fulfilled all that was fundamental in the
law, distinguishing thus between the moral and the
ceremonial.1I In the first place, Jesus Christ did away
* " Hasres.," iv. 21.
} " Non pauci gradus qui ducunt hominem ad Deum." (Ibid.,
iv. 22.)
I " Domitus habilis factus est ad libertatem." (Ibid., iv. 7.)
§ Ibid., iv. 7. || " Aquatam traditionem." (Ibid., iv. 25.)
IT Ibid., iv. 27.

392 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
with the few precepts which,- like the law of divorce,
were only concessions made to the hardness of the
human heart.* He further abolished the rites, such
as circumcision, which were mere figures. Irenseus
does not hesitate to place the Sabbath in this cate
gory. " The Sabbath," he says, " taught that all
our days ought to be consecrated to God. We have
esteemed, says St. Paul, all days alike, as sheep for
the slaughter ; that is to say, as victims devoted to the
altar of sacrifice, and we make our whole lives one
continual offering without intermission. "t The rite of
circumcision and the Sabbath have so little absolute
religious value, that the patriarchs were justified with
out any knowledge of them.! Thus the scope of the
Decalogue itself, which contains the ordinance of the
Sabbath, is ceremonial and transitory. That which
abides is the moral essence based upon the nature of
man, the universal element of the law, which does not
belong to any peculiar institution. The new law
presents this Divine and eternal essence of the old law
exalted by Jesus Christ. § This is the old and' new
commandment, of which love is the fulfilment. || Jesus
Christ made the most important change in the motive
to human obedience. Under Mosaism obedience was
yielded under the pressure of fear, and with the terrors
of the slave. The Gospel gives us the liberty of a
pardoned child.H Has not the love of God made im-
* " Hasres.," iv. 29.
t " Consecrati et ministrantes omni tempore." (Ibid., iv. 30.)
X Ibid.
§ " Omnia hasc non dissolutionem prasteritorum continent, sed
plenitudinem et extensionem." (Ibid., iv. 27.) || Ibid., iv. 23.
IT "Jesus Christus nobis in novitate restituit libertatem." (Ibid.,
iv. 21.)

BOOK II. — THE GRECO-ROMAN SCHOOL. 393
mortality again ours ? We have now free access to the
Father, and a holy boldness in claiming our part in the
heritage of His children. Jesus Christ has made us
indeed His freed men. Irenseus does not apply these
great principles to the law alone, but to prophecy also.
Prophecy partakes of the general character of Judaism ;
it thus prepared the way for that which superseded it.
Particular prophecy was designed to accustom men to
receive the Spirit of God.* God was seen by momentary
glimpses, in order to herald in the time when the veil
which hides Him should be removed from every eye.
The disciple of Christ occupies a higher position than
the prophets, for he sees directly Him whom men like
Isaiah and Elijah saw only indirectly and afar off.t
It is strange that after marking with so firm a line,
and so truly in the spirit of St. Paul, the difference
between the two Testaments, Irenasus should have
revived Jewish sacerdotalism, which, from his point
of view, should have been as distinctly merged in a
larger priesthood, as the Sabbath, circumcision, and pro
phecy were exchanged for their antitypes. In truth,
if there was an institution incompatible with Christian
liberty, and with the entire consecration of the life to
God, it was that of the priesthood. It was intimately
connected with the economy of coercion, of outward
authority, of tutelage. It could not continue after
that enfranchisement of the redeemed of Christ, so
admirably described by the bishop of Lyons. And
yet, none has done more than he to restore its power
and influence. This inconsistency can be ascribed
* " Prophetas prasstruebat in terra, assuescens hominem portare
ejus Spiritum." (" Hasres.," iv. 28.) f Ibid., iv. 37.

394 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
only to the unworthy alarm aroused in his mind by
Gnosticism, and the perils to which it exposed the
Church. Let us guard ourselves, however, against
any exaggeration. It was not the priesthood, properly
speaking, which Irenasus sought to restore, for he re
cognised no other sacrifice for sin than that of Christ.
The Lord's Supper was not in his eyes a renewal of
the sacrifice of Calvary offered by the hands of a priest.
No, all was fulfilled on the cross ; peace is made
between man and God. Jesus Christ has for ever
abolished sacrifice in the old sense of the word, as He
has abolished the Sabbath and ceremonial feasts.* The
eucharistic meal is only a sacrifice of thanksgiving,
an act of praise ; it has no expiatory virtue. Even
this idea of sacrifice as applied to the Lord's Supper
was not without danger. It might become so blended
with the idea of expiation, as to lead subsequently to
the restoration of a sacrifice properly so called, which
would be not simply the memorial, but also the daily
repetition of the sin offering of Calvary. Irenasus is
yet very far from this transformation of the holy com
munion, the first result of which was to introduce the
priesthood into the Church ; for there can be no true
priesthood without a sacrifice. "We are bound," says
Irenseus, " to bring our offerings to God, and to show
ourselves grateful in all things to the Creator-God,
offering Him the first-fruits of His creatures. The
Church alone thus offers to God a true sacrifice. "t
* " Cum abnuisset holocaustomata, et sacrificium, et oblationes,
et adhuc etiam et neomenias, et sabbata et ferias et reliquam uni-
versam consequentem his obscrvationcm, intulit, suadens eis quas
salutaria sunt." (" Hasres.," iv. 32.)
f " Oportet enim nos oblationem Deo facere et in omnibus

BOOK II. — THE GRECO-ROMAN SCHOOL. 395
" The bread and wine of the communion do not present
to us the real body and blood of the Lord Jesus.
They are only created things. Jesus, giving instruc
tion or an example to His disciples, desired that the
first fruits of creation should be offered to God ; not
that He had need of them, but practically to testify our
sincere gratitude. He took the bread, which forms
part of creation, and having given thanks, He said :
'This is my body.' In like manner, He declared the
wine (also a created thing) to be His blood; and He
thus teaches us what is the new oblation which the
Church, under the New Covenant, presents to God,
according to apostolic tradition, offering to Him who
bestows on us the aliment of daily life the first-
fruits of His gifts."* The meaning of this passage
is clear. That which is offered to God is the first-
fruits of created things, which, while they preserve
their true nature, serve to express our gratitude to
the God by whom our life is sustained. " Is it not
evident," we read elsewhere, " that the eucharistic
bread cannot be called the body of Christ, and that the
cup cannot be called His blood, except it be acknow
ledged that the Son of God truly created the world,
and that it is His Word which has made the tree to
bear fruit, the stream to flow, the corn to grow, and
gratos inveniri fabricatori Deo, primitias earum quas sunt in ejus
creatura offerentes : in hanc oblationem Ecclesia sola puram offert
fabricatori, offerens ei cum gratiarum actione ex creatura ejus."
(" Hasres.," iv. 35.) Upooipkpoptv Si abnp rd iSia, as we read in the
" Sacred Parallels" of John Damascena.
* " Eum qui est ex creatura panis accepit. Calicem similiter
qui est ex ea creatura suum sanguinem confessus est, et Novi Testa-
menti novam docuit oblationem, quam Ecclesia ab apostolis ac-
cipiens in universo mundo offert Deo ei qui alimenta nobis prasstat,
primitias suorum munerum." (Ibid., iv. 32.)

396 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
the harvest to ripen ? How can our adversaries assert
that the flesh, nourished by the body and blood of the
Lord, is only the prey of corruption ? We offer to God
that which belongs to Him, .maintaining the relation
and the oneness of the flesh and spirit. Just as, in fact,
the bread which comes from the earth, so soon as the
divine invocation is pronounced over it, is no longer
ordinary bread, but becomes the eucharist, at once
earthly and heavenly food, so our bodies which receive
the eucharist are no longer corruptible, but possess the
hope of the resurrection. We offer to God that which
He does not need, but it is with a view to acknowledge
His gifts, and thus to sanctify created things."* The
mystical tone of the language of Irenseus does not
conceal his true thought. Seeking to oppose the
doctrine of the Gnostics, who condemned the corporeal
creation, and regarded it as altogether evil, he exalts
creation as the very work of the Word. It is His by
peculiar right ; it is, as it were, His own body and
blood. The sacrifice of the New Covenant vindicates
this high dignity of created things, for it consecrates to
God by prayer the first-fruits of this same creation.
These first-fruits are not materially transformed, they
are simply raised to a new and celestial dignity by the
divine invocation. Thus the eucharist in itself ennobles
the material creation, and it may be concluded that our
body, which belongs to this creation, is not in itself an
element devoted to corruption. The eucharistic meal
* " Quomodo autem constabit eis, cum panem in quo gratias actas
sunt, corpus esse Domini sui et calicem sanguinis ejus, si non ipsum
fabricatoris mundi Filium dicant, id est Verbum ejus. . . . Offerimus
ei non quasi indigenti sed gratias agentes donationi ejus et sanctifi-
cantes creaturam." (" Hasres.," iv. 34.)

BOOK II. — THE GRECO-ROMAN SCHOOL. 397
thus gives us a guarantee of our resurrection. The
same thought is found further developed in another
passage, which must be interpreted by the light of the
texts already quoted. The gist of the argument is still
the refutation of docetism. " They are mistaken, who
despise the whole of creation, and who deny the
resurrection of the body. Jesus would not, were this
so, have redeemed us on the cross by His blood ; the
eucharistic cup would not then be the communication
of His blood, nor the broken bread the communication
of His body.* Being members of His body, we are
nourished by the natural elements. These elements He
supplies by making His sun to rise, and giving rain as
it pleases Him. He has declared that this wine of the
cup, which is a part of creation, is His blood, by which
ours is nourished; and that this bread (part also of
creation) is His body, by which ours is fed.t When
the cup — in which wine and water are mixed — and the
broken bread have received the divine blessing, we
have in them the eucharist of the blood and body of
Christ, which strengthens and sustains the substance
of our body. Now, after this, can any assert that the
flesh thus fed by the body and blood of Christ cannot
receive the gift of God, which is eternal life ? Just as
the stock of the vine, planted in the earth, bears fruit
in its season, and as the grain of wheat falls to the
ground, dies, and then under the multiplying action of
* " Sic neque calix Eucharistias communicatio sanguinis ejus est.''
(" Hasres.," v. 2.) These words are thus rendered in the translation
of the Fathers in the Genoude collection : "Ainsi ilne serait pas
vrai que le vin ffit change" en son sang dans l'Eucharistie " (vol.
iii. p. 479). It is to be used freely with the passages.
t " Eum calicem qui est creatura, suum sanguinem qui effusus
est, ex quo auget nostrum sanguinem." (Ibid., v. 2.)

398 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
the Spirit of God, which makes all things for the good
of man, brings forth abundantly; just as this bread
and this wine become, under the invocation of the
Word of God, the eucharist, that is to say, the body
and blood of Christ ; so our bodies, when they shall
have been broken, buried, and surrendered to dissolu
tion in the grave, shall be raised again by the Word, in
due time, to the glory of God the Father."*
In short, the material world is the creation of the
Word ; the bread and the wine which sustain our life
come from Him ; in offering to the Word the first-fruits
of this creation, we are offering Him of His own. Con
secrated by the divine Word, these elements are, as it
were, His body and blood, but they undergo no change
of substance. They nourish us just as common food
nourishes, and they are designed to express our grati
tude for the divine bounty, which enables us to find the
support and sustenance of our life in the natural crea
tion. We honour the work of the Word in natural
creation, which is indeed in a manner an incarnation of
the Word. If Irenasus is open to any reproach, it is
that of having divested the holy communion too much
of the idea of the sacrifice of Christ, and of having
represented it rather as the memorial of creation than
of redemption, in his great anxiety to confute Gnostic
docetism. We do not deny that some of his expres
sions are susceptible of various interpretations, and
that, pressed to the letter, they will lend some sup
port to the theory of sacramental realism; but the
general meaning of these various passages, when they
* " Hasres.," v. 2. The Eucharist is here presented not as the
active principle of the resurrection, but as its pledge, since it is the
Word who at the last day will restore our bodies to life.

BOOK II. — THE GRECO-ROMAN SCHOOL. 399
are collated, is certainly that which we have given. In
any case, whatever be the interpretation finally ac
cepted, it is evident that the eucharistic feast presents,
in the view of the bishop of Lyons, no analogy what
ever with the renewal of the redemptive sacrifice.*
It is not sacrifice, properly speaking, it is spiritual
authority which Irenseus is anxious to restore in order
to raise a barrier against the intrusion of heresy. The
Church is represented not as a society of believers, but
as a hierarchy by divine right, though not possessing
as yet any centre or fixed organisation. Irenseus says
nothing as to the mode of admitting fresh converts ; he
offers no theory of baptism. It has been asserted that
he accepted infant baptism, on the ground of the
passage already quoted, in which he declares that
Christ, by stooping Himself to the cradle, sanctified
childhood. But this is a purely gratuitous supposition.
* In opposition to our interpretation, these words are adduced :
" Verbum quod offertur Deo." (" Hasres.," iv. 33.) But this is a
false reading. It should be : " Per quod offertur." This is the
only reading that will agree with the doctrine of Irenasus. Neander,
in his "History of Doctrines ' (vol. i. pp. 230-253), yields, as we
think, too much to the partisans of the Real Presence in his inter
pretation of the texts which we have quoted. He has not taken
sufficient account of the general idea of creation given by Irenasus
as being the work and manifestation of the Word. The Eucharist
is designed to bring into full relief that divine aspect of the material
creation which was so gloriously manifested in the incarnation.
The operation of grace connects the material element with the
spiritual agent by which it was produced. Our interpretation is
confirmed by the fragment of Irenasus, discovered by Pfaff. We
there read in so many words : 'H rrpoaipopd rrjg EvXapurnag ovk Inn
aapicixr) dXXd rrvtvpariKf). (The offering of the Eucharist is not
carnal, but spiritual.) If the bread and the wine of the Lord's
Supper are compared to the body and blood of Christ, they are
none the less designated the first fruits of the creation, and are
called, 'Avrirvrra.

400 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
He is sufficiently explicit, however, on the government
of the Church. The apostles were not simply the
chosen witnesses of Christ, the accredited representa
tives of the primitive Christianity, which is to be the
perpetually abiding law of Christian thought and
practice ; they possessed also an organised and trans
missible power. They were the heads of a permanent
hierarchy, and are therefore invested with the personal
gift of infallibility. "The Lord gave to His apostles the
power of the Gospel ; through them the truth is made
known to us, even the doctrine of the Father and the
Son, for the Lord said to them : ' He that heareth you
heareth Me.'* Disciples of the truth, they are pre
served from all error.t The Spirit has made them
perfect.! Thus their doctrine is the rule of faith trans
mitted to the Church. § They have refused all con
cession, like the doctor who will yield nothing to the
evil he seeks to cure. "J
The doctrine of the apostles is contained first of all
in their writings. Irenasus highly exalts the authority
of the Gospels, which he compares in a famous text to
the four cherubim, the four living ones of the Revela
tion. U But oral tradition is of no less importance than
Holy Scripture. The heretics are no less culpable for
rejecting the secondary than the primary authority.**
The elders who gathered around St. John at Ephesus
* " Apostolis Dominus dedit potestatem Evangelii." (" Hasres./'
iii. " Prasfatio.")
f " Extra omne mendacium sunt." (Ibid., iii. 5.)
J Ibid., iii. 12.
§ " Deus . . . quem apostoli tradunt, quem Ecclesia credidit."
(Ibid., ii. 55.) || Ibid., iii. 5. 1T Ibid., iii. 11.
** " Traditionem, quas est ab apostolis, quas per successiones
presbyterorum in Ecclesia custoditur." (Ibid., iii. 2.)

BOOK II. — THE GRECO-ROMAN SCHOOL. 4OI
are placed on the same level as the sacred writers.
Polycarp and the men who heard the apostles are
appealed to as decisive authorities.* Oral tradition
may even take the place of holy Scripture, and entire
nations are satisfied with it.t Thus is constituted the
rule of faith, the echo of that apostolic tradition,
written or oral, which was communicated to the
Churches founded by the apostles. J These Churches
are naturally the great depositaries of this tradition. If
a discussion is raised on some minor question, reference
must be made to the most ancient Churches, those
which were honoured with the presence of the apostles,
and from them a positive and decisive answer will be
received on the point in dispute. Irenasus makes no
distinction among the Churches of apostolic origin. If
he refers chiefly to the Church of Rome, it is because
that is the nearest to him, and time would fail him
to produce the titles to confidence of other Churches
of the same order. " It would be too long a pro
cess," he says, " to trace the succession of all the
other Churches."§ He confines himself to that which
is most accessible, and the best known and most illus
trious because of its antiquity, and as having been
founded by the two apostles whose equality he pro
claims. "Peter," he says, "was the apostle of the
same God as Paul."|| We shall see in the discussions
* "Hasres.," iii. 3.
f " Multas gentes barbarorum quorum qui in Christum credunt
sine chartis et atramento scriptam habentes per Spiritum in cordi-
bus suis salutem." (Ibid., iii. 4.)
X " Ecclesia autem omnis per universum orbem, hanc accepit ab
apostolis traditionem." (Ibid., ii. 9 ; comp. iii. 4.)
§ " Sed quoniam valde longum est omnium Ecclesiarum enu-
merare successiones." (Ibid., iii. 3.) || Ibid., iii. 3.
27

402 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
as to the right date of the Easter festival that Irenasus
distinctly denies the primacy of the bishop of Rome.
It is unquestionable, however, that he contributed
largely by his labours to the triumph of the hierarchy.
The episcopate is recognised by him as the true apos
tolical succession in the Church. It has the same
rights and the same authority as the apostolate. Irenseus
is also the jealous and watchful guardian of tradition,
which he traces back as a direct institution to the
apostles themselves.* The episcopate is not regarded
by Irenseus as the representative and democratic insti
tution which it was in primitive times, when the office
of bishop was not to be distinguished from that of elder.
The same spirit which animated the apostolate breathes
in the episcopate, which is but a continuation of it. Nay,
more ; the bishops are made the depositaries of the
truth, in order to preserve intact the trust of tradition.
"We must obey," said Irenasus, "the elders who were
followers of the apostles, and whose is the episcopal
succession. They have received the supernatural gift
of truth, according to the good pleasure of the Father."t
We must look doubtfully on those who have deviated
from the main line of the succession, wherever they
may be gathered together. We must treat them as
heretics, holding evil doctrines ; they are schismatics,
self-exalted and self-satisfied, or they are hypocrites.
All are alike estranged from the truth. The heretics
* Tj7 ai'iry rd%ri Kai ry dvry SiSa\y i)rB drrb rdv drroGroXoiv Iv ry
'EKK\)]Giif rrapdSoGig, kui to rijg dXr/Biiag Ki)pvypa KardvrrfKBV tig ypag"
(" Hasres.," iii. 3.)
t " Quapropter eis qui in Ecclesia sunt presbyteris obaudire
oportet, his qui successionem habent ab apostolis, qui cum episco-
patus successione charisma vcritatis certum, secundum placitum
Patris acceperunt." (Ibid., iv. 43.)

BOOK II.— THE GRECO-ROMAN SCHOOL. 403
who bring strange fire, that is to say, strange doctrines
to the altar of God, shall be consumed like Nadab and
Abihu by fire from heaven.* To be outside the truth
is to be outside the Church.t Holy Scripture does not
suffice as the sole authority ; it is only safely interpreted
under the control of the episcopate.! The fear of heresy
had urged on Irenasus to these extreme consequences
of the doctrine of authority. The day of their triumph
was not yet come, but he had sown seed which would
germinate only too quickly, and which at this very time
found in Rome itself a congenial soil and atmosphere.
Upon the inspiration of Holy Scripture Irenasus had
no very original views. He appears to have accepted
in all its rigour the theory of the literal inspiration of
both the Old and New Testament. He believes in the
famous legend of the Seventy translating the Bible,
each man apart, and all arriving at the same version.
He even asserts that, by virtue of the prophetic inspira
tion, the seventy translators of Alexandria had discovered
the very text of the prophets. § His noble theory of the
expansion of particular inspiration since the coming of
Christ, implies a freer mode of inspiration under the
NewCovenant. Irenasus does not preserve in his doctrine
of the last days the same spirituality which we have
admired in his conception of Judaism. He there exhibits
prejudices worthy only of rabbinism, and interprets
prophecy in the most material sense. Antichrist is to
come in the end of the ages, which will coincide with
the fall of the Roman Empire, for the mysterious name
of the Beast is Latinits. In him will be concentrated
* " Hasres.," iv. 43.
f " Extra vcritatem, id est extra Ecclesiam.'' (Ibid., iv. 62.)
X Ibid., iv. 43. § Ibid., iii. 25.
27*

404 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
the evil of all past generations. After dwelling in
Jerusalem three years and five days, he will be van
quished.* The millennium will commence after the
resurrection of the just ; it will be a purely earthly
glory and felicity, after the sort depicted in such brilliant
colours in the Jewish apocalypses. Irenasus does not
hesitate to adopt the absurdities of Papias. " The vines
will produce ten thousand branches, every branch ten
thousand shoots, every shoot ten thousand clusters,
every cluster ten thousand grapes, and every cluster,
when pressed, will yield twenty-five measures of wine.
And when a saint shall gather a grape, another grape
shall say, ' I am yet more beautiful than that thou hast
gathered; take me and bless the 'Lord.'" It shall be
the same with the wheat, t The resurrection will be
followed by the final judgment, the result of which will
be the eternal punishment of the wicked, or their final
separation from God.!
Such is the theological system of Irenasus, a blending
of sublime spirituality and Jewish superstition, which,
while it contained the fullest and grandest statement of
the doctrine of the Word, as held by the great teachers
of the East, contributed more than any other system to
precipitate the West down the incline of external
authority and of the hierarchy. His determined oppo
sition to Gnosticism was the real source both of his
apocalyptic chimeras and of his hierarchical tendency.
* " Hasres.," v. 29, 30. f Ibid., v. 33. J Ibid., v. 27.

BOOK II. — THE GRECO-ROMAN SCHOOL. 405
§ II. St. Hippolytus.* Dionysius of Rome.
St. Hippolytus, the famous bishop of the Port of
Rome, who took a very important part in the ecclesias
tical and religious controversies of his age, and who has
bequeathed to us such invaluable documents on the
heresies of the second century, may be regarded as a
disciple of Irenasus. He united very extensive philo
sophical learning with the bias of an ardent polemic.
He is, however, far inferior as a theologian to the bishop
of Lyons. He does not treat the grave problems con
nected with the person of Christ with the same breadth
and elevation as his predecessor. He rather follows the
track of oriental speculation than that of the school of
Lyons, which had succeeded better than any other in
* We have already given a sketch of the life of Hippolytus, and
established the authenticity of the " Philosophoumena." (See
" Early Years of Christianity " and " Martyrs and Apologists.")
His other writings are contained for the most part in the collection
published by Fabricius. (" Sancti Hippolyti Opera," 2 vols, in fob,
Hamburg, 1716.) See also Galland, " Bibliotheca Patrum," vol. ii.
These writings consist mainly of fragments of commentaries on
the Holy Scriptures, the treatise " De Antechristo/' the book Xltpi
rov rravrbg obaiag, which is mentioned on the statue of the saint in
the museum " Pio Clementi," at Rome ; the " Homily on Noetus ;"
the treatise against " Bero ;" the " Homily on the Theophany or the
Baptism of Jesus." The fragments of the " Little Labyrinth " are
found in Eusebius, " H. E.," vi. 20-28. Routh accompanies them
with notes in his " Reliquias sacras," vol. ii. 126-163. He erroneously
ascribes them to Caius ; in fact, the author of the treatise Utpi rov
wavrbg oialag, says that he wrote the " Little Labyrinth." Now we
know from the statue of Hippolytus that he wrote a treatise on the
" Essence of the Universe." We find a precious fragment of the
commentary of Hippolytus on the "Proverbs" in vol. vii. of the
" Nova Bibliotheca Patrum" of Angelo Mai' (pp. 71-77)- See the
important dissertation in Bunsen on the writings of Hippolytus
(" Hippolytus," vol. i. 5th letter), and the passage referring to him
in Dorner's great work (pp. 605-630).

406 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
dissipating the clouds of abstract metaphysics, and
bringing into clearer light the harmony of the human and
the divine in Jesus. Hippolytus is primarily an orator.
His exposition always assumes the somewhat diffuse
form of the homily ; he delights in abrupt turns. He
uses these with admirable effect, but a little to the detri=
ment of the precision of his thought. On one point he
entirely eclipses Irenasus; his conception of the Church
bears the impress of the noble liberalism of the early
age of the Church ; his one aim is to arrest the fatal re
trogression to Jewish sacerdotalism and theocratic rule.
Hippolytus' idea of God is as abstract as that of
Justin and Athenagoras. He regards Him rather as
the eternal reason than as eternal love. " God," he
says, " is primarily one and alone. He produced all
beings, and He governs all ; no being can be traced
back so far as His.* All was in Him, and He was
all." t Hippolytus, starting from this almost Neo-Pla-
tonist conception of God, has no solid basis on which
to rest the pre-existence of the Word. The Son is not
necessary to the fulness of the Divine life, as in the
systems in which Divine love requires an object ex
ternal to the world — an eternal object. The Word is
not confounded with the world, since it exists ante
cedently to it, and proceeds not from nothing, but from
the Father Himself, of whom He is the perfect expres
sion, the living utterance ; but He does not possess a
distinct existence from all eternity. He exists first as
the creative thought, then He becomes the instrument
of creation, the sovereign agent of the Divine will, to
* 0e6c Big b Trpuirog Kai povog Kai diravTiiiv rroirfrng Kai icvpiog, avyxporvov
iaxtv ovSkv. (" Phil.,"x. 32.)
f Tldvra Kai ijv iv avnp Kai yv rb rrdv. (" Contra Noet.," IO.)

BOOK II. — THE GRECO-ROMAN SCHOOL. 407
call into life contingent beings. He is thus a person,
not simply an idea, as in all the forms of Platonism.
The God who dwelt alone, willed to create the world.
He thought.* By this thought He begat the Word,
not simply as an utterance or sound, but as the
inner thought of the universe. t The Word alone was
produced by the Being, for the Father was the Being;
the Word came forth from Him to produce all existence.
He possessed in Himself all divine ideas. Thus He
was able, when the Father commanded that the world
should be created, to produce all beings according to
the good pleasure of God.J The Word shares in the
impassibility, the absolute immobility of the Father,
who fills in the theology of Hippolytus the place of the
prime motor in that of Aristotle. The divine life
cannot be limited ; it is always identical with itself,
infinite and absolute.! The bishop of the Port of
Rome confounds together immutability of essence
and of action, and does not comprehend that the
moral nature maintains its unity unimpaired amidst
the most diversified modes of operation, according to
the diversity of the relations in which it is placed. We
shall find that this abstract conception of the divinity
largely influenced his idea of the incarnation.
The Word is distinguished from the world, inasmuch
as He came forth from the Father, while the world
* 'O coo-fioi' IwoifBtig. (" Contra Noet.," 10.)
t Aoyov rrpaiTOV IvvoiiGeic d-o-ftvvtp, ov Xoyov, lie fovyv, dXX' lvSid9trov
rov rrai'rbg Xo-jiGpov. (" Phil.," X. 33.)
J 'Ey« iv iavnp rdg iv rip -arpi -potvvoifitirmg ISiag, oBtv KiXtvovrog
jrarpof yivtaBai Koopov rb Kurd iv Aoyog a-EreXetro dpBGKiov 8f(j/. (Ibid.,
X- 33-)
§ To ydp d-eipov kot orSiva rporrov if Xoyov sTride*'"" khijo-iv.
(" Contra Bero," Fabricius's edition, vol. i. p. 22^-)

408 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
came from nothing. Thus He may with reason call
Himself God, being of the essence of God.* Not that
there are therefore two Gods ; no : the Word is like the
light which springs from light, as the stream from the
source, the ray from the sun. There is but one power,
which is that of the All in all. Now the Father is the
All in all, from whom proceeds the power of the Word.
All things were made by the Word, but He alone
proceeds from the Father. " There are not, then,
two Gods, but one God in two persons. The third
economy is the grace of the Holy Spirit. "t The Father
commands, the Son obeys, the Holy Spirit enlightens.
The Father is over all, the Son acts by all, the Holy
Spirit is in all. The Holy Spirit constitutes a third
divine person, of whose nature and mode of operation
Hippolytus gives no explanation.
The constituent and primordial elements of finite
existence are fire, air, water, earth.! The angels are
formed of the two first. Man, who is the king of the
terrestrial creation, is composed of the four elements.
Thus he shares in the condition of all that is multiple
and divisible ; he is by nature subject to death. The
Divine and immortal life does not belong to him by
natural right ; it can only become his as a new gift.
God might have made him God directly, communicat
ing to him that derived divinity which is not to be
confounded with his absolute, infinite, immutable
being ; but He did not so will it. The divinity is to be
* Tourou 6 Xoyoc fiovog e£ avrov' Sib Kai 9ebg, ovaia vwdpx^v Btov. '0
Si Koapog 1% ovStvog' Stb oil 9Bog. (" Phil.," x. 33.)
f Aio piv ovk ipip 9eovg, dXX' if h'a, rrpoGiorra Si Svo, oiKovopiav St
Tpirrjv, n)v x"Ptv rov dyiov irvebparog. (" Contra Noet.," 14.)
X " Phil.," x. 33.

BOOK II. — THE GRECO-ROMAN SCHOOL. 409
the crown of his being, a new gift.* Doubtless man
has enjoyed ever since his creation a certain illumina
tion from the Word ; he bears the image of the Word,t
but this resemblance is more or less external. The
divine element in man is not that light which, accord
ing to St. John, lightens every man that cometh into
the world, and which constitutes, in fact, his higher
life. It is not that sacred germ of which Justin speaks,
that divine seed which belongs to human nature. Man
is naturally destitute of the Word, and the Word
becomes his only by special gift of grace.
Adam, born to liberty and entrusted with the free
control of his destiny, falls by his own fault. Man, as
created by God, was a free being, endowed with liberty
of choice. This freedom became the cause of evil, which
is only a contingency ; for it would have had no ex
istence had man not sinned. It had no existence in
the beginning, it supervened, as it were, accidentally.!
Hippolytus is very moderate in his views of the nature
and consequences of original sin. He admits the fall of
humanity as a fact, but does not define its scope or
character. The work of salvation is referred directly to the Word.
It is He who accomplishes it from first to last ; the
two Covenants form but one continuous and progressive
revelation. He first gave the law for man's correc
tion and instruction ; then prophecy — which illuminates
the past no less than the future. § " The prophets have
* "AvBpiarrov 9'bXwv, dv9pwrrov at hroiyaiv ei St 9kXtig Kai 9tbg ytvkaBai,
viraKOVB np rrerroiifKOTi. (" Phil.," x. 33.) f Ibid.
J 'O Si yBvbpBvog avBpiarrog %tpov aiirt^oiiGiov yv . . . iv Tip BkXtiv Kai
vopi&iv ti KaKov to kokov ovopdZtrai, ovk ov arr apxyg dXX' Iniyivoptvov.
(Ibid., x. 33.) , 5 Ibid-

410 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
become, as it were, our eyes, to hold forth to the eye of
faith the mysteries of the Word ; it is from Him their
wisdom was derived."* In all this moral education
of the human race, the Word has never ceased to
respect the liberty of man, in His efforts to bring him
to obedience. t He came the first time by the lawgivers,
the second time by the prophets, the third time by the
Gospel, revealing Himself without a veil.! The Father
sent Him in person, that instead of speaking any longer
through symbols more or less obscure, He might
render Himself in a manner visible, and thus gain the
recognition of the world. § The Word, in becoming
incarnate, took upon Himself true human nature,
became of the seed of Adam, but without laying aside
the impassibility of the Divine nature. This was
neither surrendered nor destroyed ; it remained what it
was, not being susceptible of any modification. || The
human flesh did not become Divine, neither did the
Divine clothe itself in the passivity of flesh. U The
distinction of the two natures remained intact and
absolute in the unity of the person. This is a mystery
which cannot be explained : let us be content with
recognising that in the incarnate Word the Divinity is
the active, the flesh the passive, principle. The Word
* Upoiprjrai dipBaXpoi r)pdv iykvovro rrpoopoivrtg Sid rriGTBiog rd rov
Xoyou pvGT-rjpia. (" De Antechristo." Fabricius's edition, i. 5.)
t Ov fiia dXX' iV lXBv9tpiav. (" Phil.," x. 33.)
X 'Eavrov ipavBpCig ImStiKvig. (Saint Hippolytus, " Comment, in
Prov." Angelo Mai, "Nova Bibl. Patrum," vol. vii. 75.)
§ Airroi//Et favepuBijvai.. (" Phil.," x. 33.)
|| T6 ydp OeTok, we yv rrpb GapKiliatiog, tan Kai ptrd adpKioaiv Kara Qvatv
drreipov, aax'rov, drraBkg. (" Contra Bero," p. 227.)
IT " Neque caro per se sine Verbo subsistere poterat, quia in
Verbo habebat ri)v ovoraaiv, id est in Verbo subsistebat." (" Contra
Noet./' chap. 15.)

BOOK II. — THE GRECO-ROMAN SCHOOL. 4II
communicated to the flesh the force of the Divinity,
which was not abated by His humiliation.* Just as
thought makes use for its expression of the physical
organs of language, without having any analogy with
them, and by a process to us inexplicable, so the Word,
in the incarnation, employs the true human flesh which
He has assumed.! His body is in a manner His
vesture.! In His incarnation He passed through the
womb of the Virgin.§ "The Divinity of Jesus accom
plishes those Divine acts of which His flesh is by nature
incapable, and His humanity performs the human acts
which have in their essence nothing divine." || It would
not be possible to give expression to more positive
dualism than this, in the account of the incarnation
of the Word. Nevertheless Hippolytus insists strongly
upon the reality of His humanity. The Redeemer
chose to pass through all the stages of human life,
according to the beautiful thought of Irenasus, in order
to be the model of every age. He took upon Him in
the womb of the Virgin a human organism as well as
a reasonable soul ;1T and He thus made manifest in the
world the perfect man.** Though God, He was subject
to the conditions of human life. He thirsted, was an
hungered, and weary ; He was not only acquainted with
* Trjc iSiag BBoryrog iprroiyaag ry aapKi rr)v IvipyBiav, oil rrtpiypaipopivyv
airy Sid rr)v Ktvivaiv. (" Contra Bero," p. 226.)
t Ibid., pp. 227, 228.
X "EvSvpa ixoiv to dvBpCimvov ou>pa. (" Prasdicatio in Theophania,"
p. 262.)
§ 'O 9Bog Xoyog aapKiv9Big Siity KaXiog fiyrpav wap9ivov. (" Comm. in
Prov." Mai, " Nova Bibl. Patrum," vii. 73.)
II SBorqn piv rd 9bio., Sid rrjg avrov rravayiag aapKog Kai rd dv9pivrrtva
dv9pi»rr6ryri. (" Contra Bero," p. 230.)
IT " Contra Noet," 18 ; Mai, " Nova Bibl. Patrum," 74.
** "Oc rbv tbXeiov dv9pivKov dvavtiiioag iv Koapip. (Ibid.)

412 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
fear, but with tears and trembling ; He prayed that the
cup He had come into the world to drink, might pass
from Him, and in the anguish of His soul the sweat
became blood upon His brow. He who knew what was
in man was betrayed by Judas. He who had received
as God the homage of the high-priest Caiaphas, was
calumniated by him. Th5 judge of all the earth was
the butt of the scoffs of Herod. He who bore our griefs
was delivered over by Pilate to be scourged. He whom
myriads of angels obeyed, was struck on the face by the
rude soldiery. He who stretched out the heavens as a
curtain, was nailed by His own people to the cross.
The Spirit, who is one with the Father, lifts to the
Father a cry of anguish, and He who said, " I have
power to lay down my life, and I have power to take it
again," bows His head to death.*
Hippolytus attributes a unique efficacy to the death
of Christ in the work of salvation. " The God of the
universe became man, in order that by suffering in the
flesh, and being made subject to grief, He might redeem
our race which was sold unto death." t This doctrine
of redemption is utterly vague. Hippolytus does not
make a single allusion to a ransom paid to God Him
self. He sees in Jesus Christ first of all a living law,
which reveals to us the true good underlying all the
sufferings of the human race, and death in particular.
" He has humanly fulfilled all righteousness." J He
has restored a perfect humanity. " Like a skilful
* "Contra Noet.," 18.
j Aid rovro ykyovBV dv9pu)irog o riov oXiov 9tbg, 'iva rrapKi piv 7ra9yry
7rdoxit>v iirrav ypoiv Tip 9dvanp rrpa9lv Xvrpoiarfrai ykvog. (" Contra Bero.,"
p. 227 ; "Contra Noet./' 17.)
X 0 pbvog av9pioirivu>g rrdaav SiKaioovvyv rrXypoiaag. (Mai, " Nova
Bibl. Patrum," vii. 73.)

BOOK II. — THE GRECO-ROMAN SCHOOL. 413
physician, he endeavours to instruct the ignorant, and
to bring back into the right path those who are going
astray. He is to be found of all who seek Him, and
opens the door to every man who knocks with a pure
heart. He rejects none of His servants. He does not
esteem the rich more than the poor, as if poverty were
any ground for contempt. He does not disdain the
barbarian or the eunuch, as though he had forfeited
his manhood. Woman is not rejected, though she was
the mother of transgression, nor her husband, because
of his disobedience. He 'is willing to save all without
exception, so as to make one perfect man after the
heavenly pattern."* Thus perfect man becomes God,t
and it is to procure for us this eternal and truly divine
life He suffered on the cross. This His suffering saves
us, not as an expiatory sacrifice, but inasmuch as it is the
highest manifestation of His holiness, and the greatest
demonstration to our hearts of His love. Salvation
becomes ours by faith united to good works. ! After His
resurrection He returned into heaven ; thence He will
come again to judge the world, and to restore to life
these mortal bodies, the imperishable seed of which is
buried in the dust.§ Hippolytus depicts in detail the
great coming conflicts of the Church with Antichrist,
who, five hundred years after our era, is to come out of
the tribe of Dan and to rebuild the temple at Jerusalem. ||
Hippolytus delights in interpreting the most obscure
* Ei'c 'iva riXeiov dvBponrov KaXdv. (" De AntechristO," p. 6.)
7 Et ovv d9dvarog yEyoj'Ej' 0 dvBpwrrog iarai Kai Bsog. (" In Theo-
phania," p. 264.)
! Mai, "Nova Bibl. Patrum.," vii. 75.
§ 'Avrd rd au'ipara dvwrSiv. (IT £01 rov rr avrbg, p. 221.)
|| " De Antechristo," p. 9.

414 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
oracles of Daniel and of the Revelation. The righteous
and the wicked, while awaiting this final consummation,
are in an intermediate place. The former enjoy already
perfect happiness under the guardianship of the holy
angels, while the latter anticipate in their present
torments the eternal anguish which awaits them.*
The righteous will be made blessed for ever upon a
renovated earth.t
The part which Hippolytus took in the violent
controversies of the Church of Rome is indicative of
the breadth of his views with regard to the Church.
This does not present itself to him as a religious
monarchy despotically governed by the episcopate.
His strenuous opposition to the bishop of Rome sets
aside the idea of any primacy belonging to him. Nor
does Hippolytus admit that the bishops have the power
of the keys, so that they are invested with peculiar
authority to dispense the pardons of God. He thus
distinctly repudiates everything like sacerdotalism. He
does not allow that the office has any intrinsic virtue
apart from the spiritual qualifications befitting a Chris
tian and a bishop. Neither does he conceive of the
Church as an impersonal institution, giving shelter alike
to piety and impiety. He repels indignantly the dan
gerous metaphor of Callisthus, who likened it to Noah's
ark, into which entered both clean and unclean animals.
He regards it as a holy fellowship of believers.! The
Church, which finds its actual realisation in the various
particular Churches, is compared by him to a great
ship, with Jesus Christ for its pilot and the cross for
*IlEpi tov iravrog, pp. 220-222. (" Phil.," x. 34.)
t Utpi to H ir avrbg, p. 222, | " Phil.," ix. 12.

BOOK II. — THE GRECO-ROMAN SCHOOL. 415
its colours.* In another image, he compares it to the
woman of the Apocalypse, clothed with divine light
as with the sun. The twelve stars on her brow are
the apostles, and she travails incessantly in birth till
the Word be formed in every Christian heart.t The
rock on which she rests is Jesus Christ alone;! Hip
polytus recognises no other.
The supreme authority in matters of religion is Holy
Scripture, the sacred fountain of truth. Inspired
by God, this is above oral tradition.§ The Church's
chief mission has been to transmit these sacred oracles. ||
St. Hippolytus in the writings which have come down to
us does not speak of any sacrament but baptism. He
never separates the sign from the thing signified. If
he says that water with the Holy Spirit is an element
of regeneration, IT he does not intend any physical or
magical operation, for he insists strongly on the spiritual
conditions which are required. " Thou shalt be re
generate if thou art no murderer, nor idolater, nor
licentious. He who goes down with faith into the
waters of regeneration, forsakes evil and gives himself
to Jesus Christ."**
The theology of Hippolytus reflects the various in-
* "Exbi ydp ptB' iavrrjg rov IprrBipov laitspvyrrfv Xpiarbv. (" De Ante-
christo," 25.)
f Oi rrdvBrai y BKKXyaia ytvvHaa i« KapSiac rbv Xoyov. (Ibid., p. 30.)
X Ty rrvBvpariKy Trkrprf, Xpiortp. (Mai, " Nova Bibl. Patrum," 73.)
§ 'Qc e£ dyidg -rryyrjg. (" De Antechristo," p. 4.) Hippolytus con
fronts the heretics first with the authority of Scripture : ei pr) rrpurov
piv dvrknnrrov avroXg ai Bb'ioi ypaipai. (Ex " Parvo Labyrintho," apud
Eusebius, " H. E.," v. 28. Routh, " Reliq.," ii. 129.) He quotes only
as subordinate to this the testimony of the Fathers : Ov morBvovoiv
dyap irvtvpan XtXkxBai rag Btiag ypaijidg. (Ibid., p. 1 34.)
|| ITap' ivv Karyx^SyGav pi) roiavrag rrapkXatov rag ypaipdg. (Ibid.)
If Ai vSarog Kai ayiov rrvtiiparog. (" De Theophania," p. 264.)
** Karataivoiv ptrd -rriartoig. (Ibid.)

416 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
fluences at work on the Church of his day. It vacil
lates between that of Origen and that of Irenasus, and
indeed on more than one point coincides with that of
Tertullian, minus the fervent flame and piercing point.
It lacks coherence and originality. But it bears out
its date, for it evidently belongs to an age in which the
East and West were still in constant and close com
munication. The controversialist and the preacher in
Hippolytus decidedly outweigh the thinker.
We have only one more theologian to mention be
longing to the Western Church : this is Dionysius,
the bishop of Rome (257-269).* His two predecessors,
Cornelius and Stephen, distinguished themselves only
in ecclesiastical controversies. Dionysius took his stand
as the vigilant guardian of orthodoxy, not only against
heresy, but also against the school of Origen, whose bril
liant representative was Dionysius of Alexandria. He
also completely repudiated the opinions of Tertullian
and of Hippolytus as to the non-eternity of the Word.
After presiding over the council held at Rome, to in
quire into the charge brought by the Egyptian bishops
* Dorner ("Lehre von Pers. Christ.," i. p. 7^7) places Zeno,
bishop of Verona, before Dionysius of Rome, principally on the
ground of his doctrine, which he deems to be ante-Nicene. Accord
ing to Zeno, the Word is the full manifestation of the Father, his
objective ego j they might be spoken of as two seas mingling their
waters. This outward manifestation, however, would not have
taken place but for the creation. Thus Zeno approaches Tertullian
on this latter point, while he differs from him by his affirmation of
the equality of the Father and the Son. His conception of the in
carnation is the same as that of Hippolytus ; but other portions of
his writings recall Lactantius, Hilarius, and Basil, and confirm the
passage of St. Ambrose, referring to a certain Zeno, his contem
porary. (5th Letter to Syagrius.) The chronological question is
still too doubtful to allow us to place Zeno among the theologians
of the first three centuries.

BOOK II. — THE GRECO-ROMAN SCHOOL. 417
against the views of Dionysius of Alexandria, Dionysius
of Rome wrote a circular letter to the complainants.
Some fragments of this letter have been preserved by
Athanasius.* The doctrine of the Trinity is there for
the first time defined with exactness. Dionysius first
repudiates the extravagant spiritualism of the Sabel-
lians, who admit only a threefold manifestation of the
Deity, instead of recognising three divine persons.
Then he rejects the gross tritheism which makes of
these persons three distinct divinities. t Lastly, he
strongly condemns the opinion of both Tertullian and
Hippolytus, as to the production of the Word at the
moment of creation. He asserts His eternal divinity.!
"It is not lawful to divide into three deities the glorious
and divine Monad. It is necessary that the Word
should be united to the God of the universe, that the
Holy Spirit should dwell and abide in Him, and that
the sacred Triad should be resolved at length into a
sublime unity in the Almighty God, the Creator of all
beings. We must believe in one God, the Father
Almighty, in Jesus Christ His Son, and in the Holy
Spirit. The Word is one with the God of the uni
verse.! Thus do we hold fast at once the divine Triad
and the holy doctrine of the divine unity." || Dionysius
of Rome simplified the matter by merely affirming the
existence of the Trinity, without giving any doctrinal
* The fragments of Dionysius of Rome are found in Athanasius:
" De decretis synodis Nic," c. 4. (Routh, " Reliquias," iii. p. 373.)
| Routh, iii. p. 373.
X Ov pt'iov S' dv rig Karapepipoiro Kai roig rroiypa rbv viov tlvai So^aKovrag
Kai ytyovtvai rbv Kipiov. (Routh, " Reliquias," iii. p. 374-) 'Aei Sk '>¦
(Ibid., 375.) , . .
§ 'HSn Kai rr)v BBiav roi.wa tig 'iva, iiarr.ptig Kopvfnv nva. ovyKsfaXai-
ov (Ibid.) II Ibid-> 377-
28

418 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
construction of it. The image of the triangle satisfied
him ; he thus avoided all the difficulties which the
question of subordination might raise. While he writes
in Greek, his spirit is plainly that of a Western Father
and of a bishop of Rome. He contents himself with a
clear and emphatic formula, which meets the require
ments of those whom the teaching of Hippolytus,
Origen, and Tertullian had roused to opposition. His
doctrine forms nevertheless a very important link in
the chain of doctrinal development, which was to find
its completion in Athanasius and in the decretals of
Nicasa. He is the forerunner of the school of authori
tative metaphysics. With him the age of free doctrinal
creations seems to pass away. Dionysius of Rome is
the most complete exponent of the genius of Western
Rome. We find in him the teacher in whom that genius
is most fitly expressed, and who, upon the boundary
between two great periods in the history of Christianity,
stands like the first landmark of the new path on which
the Church is about to enter, a path of subserviency to
official creeds and to external authorities.

CHAPTER VII.
THE SCHOOL OF CARTHAGE.
§ I. The System of Tertullian.*
The history of thought presents no stronger contrast
than that between the school of Carthage and the
school of Alexandria. The doctrinal basis is, indeed,
the same : a clear statement of evangelical facts, with
the utmost possible vagueness and variety in the expla
nation of those facts. The same moral animus also
pervades the two theologies, which, both alike, protest
against Gnostic determinism. But the general spirit
and method of the two systems differ absolutely. The
mystic idealism, full of speculative boldness, of men
like Clement and Origen, is exchanged for a deter
mined realism, which fears to go beyond its depth, and
shows a strong tendency to materialism. The motto
of the school of Carthage, or to speak more correctly,
of its illustrious founder, is that witty saying applied to
the quintessence of perfect love : " Thicken religion."
The subtle and brilliant metaphysics of the great
Alexandrines is but a bodiless shade in the view of
* Apart from the works of Tertullian, which I quote from the
Leipzig edition (Leopold, 1839), and the general works on doctrinal
history already cited, I may mention Neander's " Antignosticus "
(Berlin, 1849). See als0 M- ReVille's articles in the " Revue de
Theologie," Strasburg (1857, 1858). 28*

420 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
Tertullian. Like Thomas, he would handle the truth
for himself, and see it with his bodily eyes. If I have
not thus sensibly realised the divine, he seems to say,
it has no existence for me. Hence the craving for an
external authority, a tangible something ; hence the
strange materialisation both of God and of the soul;
hence the cabalistic conception of baptismal regenera
tion, and the fanatic doctrine of the final issues of
history, which are the characteristic features of the
theology of Tertullian. These grave defects were the
secret of the strength of his influence in the succeeding
period, when there was so deep a decadence from
primitive Christian spirituality. They are to a large
extent redeemed, however, by the deep earnestness of
his tone, by the vigour of his religious thought, and the
incomparable eloquence in which he clothes his ideas.
On some points Tertullian contributed to the normal
development of Christian doctrine ; he also made his
mark on the theology of his age. In spite of his
adhesion to Montanism, he still exerted the strongest
influence on the theological thought of the Western
Church of the third century, because his peculiar views
bore only upon secondary points, while the general
tendency of his system was in perfect harmony with
the spirit of the age. He always thought and wrote
with the intensity of a partisan, as the determined and
deadly opponent of Gnosticism. The title of his most
famous controversial treatise might be applied to his
entire system, "Contra Marcionem." This is the Alpha
and Omega of Tertullian's writings. His invariable
method is to place himself at the antipodes of his
adversaries. Gnosticism delights in pure speculation,

BOOK II.  THE SCHOOL OF CARTHAGE. 42I
and mocks at texts and traditions. Tertullian exalts,
beyond measure, the authority of the past, and makes
antiquity, in matters of religion, the criterion of truth.
Gnosticism starts with dualism and ends in docetism.
Tertullian represents corporeal life as inseparable from
the spiritual life in all stages of being, even in the
highest, and on this ground exalts the flesh, though he
seeks to mortify it by asceticism. Gnosticism degrades
and despises Judaism. Tertullian lifts the Old Testa
ment so high, that the difference between the law and
the gospel is almost effaced. Neander has therefore
with justice named him the anti-gnostic. Herein lies
his power, his passion, but his weakness also. It is
alwavs dangerous when we come to regard the truth
no longer as it is in itself, but as it appears to the
partial eye of the polemic.
Throughout the whole of his theology, Tertullian is
seeking, not the idea, but the fact itself. He reverts to
this perpetually, like a determined advocate in the
great doctrinal suit which is pleaded before Christen
dom. He is anxious to vindicate the facts alone, caring
yen- little about the explanation. This tendency is
vers- marked in the discussion of the question — what are
the sources whence we may lawfully derive our know
ledge of the truth ? He replies : Avaunt, philosophy
and reasoning. Let us take as our guide, nature,
which is for us the first reality : but let us take it
as it came from the hand of God, before it has been
deformed and transformed by civilisation and its impure
refinements. Nothing is more beautiful or more divine
than the primitive order of nature. Thus the work
of Christ consists exclusively in re-establishing and

422 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
restoring that order.* The end of the ages will bring
us back to the beginning, like a perfected circle. The
Redeemer is the Alpha and Omega ; that is to say, the
first and last word of religious history is one and the
same. Let us, then, interrogate nature, whether in the
outer world, or in our soul, but rising, as we do so,
above culture and science, which have more or less
falsified nature. The Bible is a divine book, but it
has been interpolated by Satan. t Let us seek to read
the original text in the flower of the fields, or in the
fresh, artless feeling of the human heart, uncorrupted
by education. The divine nature will speak to us by
both voices, and will proclaim to us the true God, who
created both mind and matter, and who will restore us
by the Saviour to Himself. " The human race, as a
whole, knows the God of Moses, even though it knows
not Moses or his book. The soul is more ancient than
philosophy ; conscience is the first gift bestowed on
it by God. God has never been hidden, never has He
left mankind. He has been always apprehended, heard,
contemplated by every soul that has not turned away
from Him. God has His witnesses in all that we
are, and all that surrounds us.! True nature is a
divine reality. The more closely then we return to this
true nature, rising above all that has been superadded
to it, the more we come to realise again its primitive
condition, the more nearly shall we approach the
divine. It follows that antiquity is itself an evidence
* " In Christo omnia revocantur ad initium." (Tertullianus.
" De monogam.," chap. 5.)
f " Diabolo, interpolatore naturas." (" De cultu femin.," i. 8.)
! " Ante anima quam prophetia. Habet Deus testimonia, totum
hoc quod sumus et in quo sumus." (" Adv. Marc," i. 10.)

BOOK II. — THE SCHOOL OF CARTHAGE. 423
of truth. That which was is the rule of that which
is to be.* What is a new God, but a false God ?t In
all things truth precedes its image ; imitation comes
after the reality.J It would be absurd, then, to pretend
that heresy is anterior to sound doctrine. On closer
examination, the gospel is found to be no new thing.
It is new only in the ultimate form which it gives to
religion, but its essential doctrines are discovered in
the most ancient traditions of the human race. There
has been no unforeseen event, as Marcion asserts,
coming suddenly upon the world. " Nothing that
comes from God is sudden, since all forms part of a
well-ordered plan."§
The chain of revelation shows an unbroken succes
sion of links running through all the ages ; a principle
of continuity is plainly traceable through the whole
religious evolution from Adam to Jesus Christ. In
reality, it is one and the same religion, always
identical with itself, which has been continuously
developed ; thus its antiquity may be appealed to as
its first claim to our confidence. It is strange to see
Tertullian insisting so strongly upon the continuity of
the religious idea, when we remember his ordinary
style of thought and writing, in which he delights in
antithesis, and seems only to sew the new piece of the
gospel into the old garment of nature, in order to rend
the latter in pieces by the former.
* " Omnis res anterior posteriori regulam praministravit." ("Adv.
Marc," i. 9.)
f " Quid Deus novus nisi falsus ? " (Ibid., S.)
! "In omnibus Veritas imagincm anteccdit." ("De prasscript,"
29.) § " Nihil a Deo subitum, quia nihil a Deo non dispositum."
("Adv. Marc." iii. 2.)

424 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
Holy Scripture is the most ancient religious tradition
in the order of revelations. Hence the immutable con
fidence which we should place in it. " Moses lived
nine hundred years before Saturn; how much more
ancient then must he be than all his descendants ;
hence unquestionably the most divine teacher is this
Moses, who records the wanderings of mankind ever
since the world began, designating each birth, each
name, each period, and proving the divinity of his
work by the inspiration of his word."* Thus divine
inspiration combines with antiquity to give supreme
authority to Holy Scripture. Tertullian believes in
literal verbal inspiration. " Our sacred Scriptures,"
he says, " are the very words and letters of God."t
The same divine spirit was the leader of Moses and
of Paul-! The Holy Spirit has so ordered His Scrip
tures, that they instruct us in the development and
origin of things. § In his "Apology," Tertullian closely
connects the authority of Scripture with that of nature
and of conscience. After appealing to the testimony
of the naturally Christian conscience, he adds : " It
was the will of God that we should come to a more
full and deep understanding of His plan and purposes ;
thus He added to nature the instrument of a written
revelation.|| He sent from the beginning men, worthy
by their innocence and uprightness, to know and reveal
Him, and on these He poured forth in floods His
Divine Spirit. The words spoken, and the miracles
* "Multo antiquior Moyses etiam Saturno." (" De anima," 28.)
j- " Inspice Dei voces, litteras nostras." (" Apol.," 31.) " Dei
litteras." (Ibid., 2.) J '•' De oratione," 17.
§ " Adv. Hermog.," 22.
|| " Instrumentum adjecit litteraturas." ("Apol.," 18.)

BOOK II. — THE SCHOOL OF CARTHAGE. 425
wrought by these men to establish faith in the Godhead,
remain in sacred literature as in a treasury open to all.
The primary authority of the book is conferred upon it
by its high antiquity.* The last of the prophets ceased
to speak when the first of the Greek philosophers
appeared. These were acquainted with the sacred
Hebrew Scriptures, as may be perceived from their
writings, for error itself is made up of the materials
of truth. t Tertullian acknowledges, indeed, that the
miraculous character of the sacred books, which is so
evident in their prophetic portion, sets upon them a
seal still more divine than mere antiquity. Never
theless, it is really upon the latter evidence that he
lays the greatest stress. The whole of this theory of
inspiration is full of contradictions. On the one
hand, we have the theory of absolute theopneustia,
the very words being dictated by the Holy Spirit,
though no difference be shown between the spoken and
written words of the prophet. On the other hand,
this literal inspiration does not establish any radical
difference between the Bible of historic revelation and
the Bible of nature and of conscience, since the former
is but the complement of the latter. The divine in the
supernatural is not opposed to the divine in the natural
order, or rather, both are in essential harmony with the
true nature, whether we discover it in the world and in
the heart of man, or whether it be restored by revela
tion. Tertullian always seeks to go back to the divine
original, to the unfalsified reality. Hence the pre
dominant part he assigns to antiquity as the standard
* "Apol.," 18.
f " Omnia adversus veritatem de veritate constructa sunt."
(Ibid., 47.)

426 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
of truth. His ideas on canonicity are not more exact
than those of his contemporaries : they are vague and
variable.* The same considerations lead him to enunciate a
doctrine of tradition so narrow that its result was, in
spite of his ulterior protest, to inaugurate the triumph
of the hierarchy. His "Treatise on Prescriptions" is
the most signal service ever rendered to religious
despotism. The title of this writing is taken from the
language of the bar. The former advocate of Carthage
would transfer to the great religious controversy, the
convenient process by which judicial cases are cut
short when they threaten to be unduly prolonged.
Such a proceeding is perfectly legitimate in the sphere
of inferior interests, which are necessarily regulated by
a relative and limited justice. It is otherwise when
eternal truth is at stake; then no prescription is ad
missible, no mouth may be closed, no inquiry arrested
in the mind. We must not charge Tertullian with
inconsistency with himself, because, after giving fuller
recognition than any other teacher to the authority of
conscience, he seeks to make us bend under the yoke of
tradition, and fetters us in our research. Here, again,
he is faithful to his principle of the conformity of truth
to the primeval nature of things. That which he re
gards as primitive and natural, is the spontaneous
assent of the soul to the gospel truth contained in the
sacred writings. All that goes beyond this assent,
every essay of speculation, takes us out of the true
* Tertullian quotes as inspired the Book of Enoch (" De idolat.,"
4 ; " De cultu femin.," i. 3), the Sibylline books ("Ad nation.," ii.
42), the "Pastor" of Hennas ("De orat.," 12). He does not quote
the epistle of James, those of Peter, or the minor epistles of John.

BOOK II. — THE SCHOOL OF CARTHAGE. 427
order of nature. He uses, but in a peculiar sense, the
language of the Book of Proverbs, that God has made
man upright, but that he has sought out many inven
tions. The upright heart is the naturally Christian
conscience, which worships the God of the Bible. The
many inventions are arguments and philosophies treat
ing of divine realities to explain them away. His
treatise on Prescriptions is in full harmony with his
sublime treatise on the Testimony of the Soul. That
which Tertullian would prohibit at all costs, is the
thorough investigation of religious truth. If it is said
to us : Seek, and ye shall find, this commandment
applies only to the period preceding the formation of
the faith.* Jesus uttered these words at the com
mencement of His ministry, before He had fully
established His divinity. The same precept applies
equally to the pagans, who, in their profound ignor
ance, cannot know Christ directly. But the Master did
not intend to invite us to indefinite inquiry ; we are to
seek till we have found, and then to content ourselves
with the faith which will thenceforward suffice us.t We
have but to guard our treasure. " Whosoever believes
has found ; whosoever seeks has not yet found, or he
has lost again that which he had found."! So long as
we stand knocking at the door, we show that it has not
yet been opened to us. It is only lawful to seek within
the enclosure of truth; the woman of the parable did
not go beyond her house to look for her lost piece of
* " De prasscript.," 8.
f '¦ Ouasrendum est, donee invenias, et credendum, ubi inveneris.-'
(Ibid.,*) X " Nemo quasrit, nisi qui aut non habuit, aut perdidit." (Ibid.,
4-)

428 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
silver.* Let us, then, also abide at home, as it were ;
let us not trust to strangers ; let us not go beyond the
rule of faith, handed down to us by the Church. This
rule, laid down by Christ Himself, cannot raise any
questions, unless it be on the part of the heretics, and
to add to their number. t Let us be careful not to
dispute or seek to deepen that rule, even by a pro
found examination of Holy Scripture, for this would be
to pander to curiosity, which ought to be subordinate
to faith, as the love of glory to salvation. " To know
nothing beyond the law, is to know all things."!
The question of the supreme authority of the Scrip
tures, as appealed to by the heretics in opposition to
the faith of tradition, was still a grave one. Tertullian
enters on it with much frankness, not shrinking from a
rigid following out of its principles to their conse
quences. He is perfectly justified in objecting to his
adversaries, that they play with those sacred books
which they choose to use as a shield, for they reject in
the most arbitrary manner all that they cannot make
subservient to their purpose. Instead of invoking the
principles of a sound criticism at once religious and
scientific, Tertullian declares that the Scriptures may
be made to yield anything they seek, and will accom
modate them to every caprice of interpretation^ They
need, therefore, to be studied by the light of the sound
doctrine contained in the rule of faith. || It was a
strange depreciation of the Divine Book to assert that it
* " Intra tectum suum." ("De prasscript," 12.) j Ibid., 13.
! " Adversus regulam nihil scire, omnia scire est." (Ibid., 14.)
§ Ibid., 39-
|| " Ubi apparuerit esse veritatem disciplinas et fidei Christianas
illic, erit Veritas scripturarum." (Ibid., 19.)

BOOK II. — THE SCHOOL OF CARTHAGE. 429
could not be understood by its own light ; even when
accepted in good faith in its general scope, in the
spirit, and not in the dead letter. After all, was not
the rule of faith, itself susceptible, like all human
speech of various interpretations ? If an external
authority is required to fix the sense of the Scriptures,
such an authority must be equally necessary for the
tradition of the Church, and thus no solid basis is to be
found anywhere.
Tertullian endeavours, by his theory of the apos
tolate, to make Jesus Christ Himself the founder of
religious authority. He considers that Christ made
the apostles, by a direct mandate, the infallible ex
ponents of true doctrine. The apostles not only
wrote books, but founded Churches. These are the
sole depositaries of truth, and they constitute that
catholicity which is not bound by any outward organi
sation, hut simply by brotherly love and by the unity of
the faith, as derived from the rule of faith which is its
invariable and universal expression.* Apostolic infalli
bility guaranteed by miracle, t is not impaired by any
error of conduct like that which St. Paul charges
against St. Peter in the city of Antioch, for such
practical mistakes in no way affect the doctrine itself.!
The language of the apostle of the Gentiles, when he
commits the trust to Timothy, § is a sure pledge of the
transmission of the truth in the truly apostolic
Churches, which are in a manner the mothers of all
the rest. || The Holy Spirit, sent by Christ, preserved in
* " De prasscript.," 20. f Ibid., 30. J Ibid., 23. § Ibid., 25.
|| " Ecclesiis apostolicis matricibus et originalibus fidei." (Ibid.)
"Sine dubio tenentem quod Ecclesias ab apostolis, apostoli a
Christo, Christus a Deo accepit." (Ibid., 21.)

43O THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
its purity the teaching of the first witnesses of Christ.*
If, then, we would possess the unadulterated truth, we
must look to these Churches. Western Christianity
has readiest access to the great Church of Rome, which
has no other claim to preference but that of nearness,
since it can glory in nothing over the Churches of the
East, whose institution can in like manner be traced
back to the apostles. t This is the sure method of
arriving at infallible truth, and of discovering the true
meaning of the Scriptures, while avoiding all disputa
tion and dangerous questioning.
Let it not be presumed that this tradition may be
insufficient, on the ground that Jesus Christ may not
have revealed everything to His disciples, or that these
may have kept to themselves some secret doctrine.!
There is no such subterranean current of tradition ; all
is contained in the rule of faith. This is the truly
venerable tradition ; the good seed was sown before the
tares; heresy may have made its way into the field, and
scattered some germs of error, but it is not the first
occupant, and its incursions are plainly foretold and
strongly denounced by the apostles. § The field belongs
to the Churches founded by the first disciples of Christ,
and to all those who, by consanguinity of doctrine,
form one body with them.|| Will the false teachers
dare to oppose their prescriptions to ours ? We are in
all things their predecessors ; they only come after us.U
* " De prasscript," 28.
t " Si potcs in Asiam tcndcrc, h.ibes Ephesum. Si autem Italias
adjaces, habes Romam, undo nobis quoque auctoritus pr.vsto est."
(Ibid., 36.) I Ibid., 22. § Ibid., 33.
|| " Pro consanguinitate doctrinas," (Ibid., 3s.)
11 " Posterior nostra res non est, imo omnibus prior est." (Ibid.,
35-)

BOOK II. — THE SCHOOL OF CARTHAGE. 431
We hold our title direct from the apostles, who approve
our doctrine as strongly as they condemn all that is
opposed to it. Thus the judge that ends the strife is
not the Divine Book, since that may be variously
interpreted, and Christians ought not to allow heretics
to appeal to this book in order to lead them into
disputation. It is without the Scriptures that the
Church convinces them they have no part nor lot in the
matter ; it takes its stand upon the authority of Jesus
Christ, which is confounded with that of the apostles,
and which is embodied in the common faith of the
Churches founded by them. Thus it is justified in
asking these intruders by what right they cut down its
forests, destroy its canals, and move its landmarks.
" This is my domain," the Church may say, " my
ancient possession ; my title is received from those
to whom it first belonged. I am the inheritor of the
apostles. I am in possession by their will and testa
ment ; I fulfil the testamentary conditions. As for you,
they repudiated and branded you as strangers and
enemies."* No proscription could be more clear and
rigorous than this.
Let us endeavour to elicit from this remarkable
treatise, which has exercised so great an influence on
the formation of ecclesiastical authority, the points of
doctrine clearly derivable from it. The final authority
is not that of Holy Scripture, but the unanimous tradi
tion of the Apostolic Churches, which is the authentic
expression of the teaching of the apostles, epitomised
in the rule of faith. That tradition is complete ; there
is nothing to be added to or taken from it. The Church
* " Extranei et inimici." (" De prasscript.," 37.)

432 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
has, then, no commission to augment or to interpret
this tradition, for it comes directly from Christ and
His apostles. The Apostolic Churches have no superi
ority over the rest except as sources of information ;
they are in a manner the depositaries of the sacred
archives, which are to be preserved by them intact and
unalterable. It would be a grave error to compare the
theory of Tertullian with the ecclesiastical system,
which is not content with making the Church the
depositary of the true apostolic doctrine, but which
constitutes it an active authority, forming decisions on
points of doctrine, and enforcing them by virtue of its
official character. Tertullian holds that the primitive
apostolate speaks by the Church, as it spoke when its
representatives first preached the Gospel to the world.
I know, indeed, that after he became a Montanist, he
asserted the constant development of revelation and
the continuity of inspiration. Those who condemned
him profited nevertheless by his twofold error ; they
combined the two ideas which succeeded each other
in his mind, though with him the second error cast
out the first. The Church of later days accepted the
authority of the rule of faith, but it also believed in
its own inspired right to interpret, and soon began to
add to it. The gravity of such a synthesis in the
formation of a system of authority is at once evident.
With regard to the constitution of the Church,
Tertullian, even before his conversion to Montanism,
taught nothing which could lend support to the
hierarchical system. Catholicism, as he represents it,
is a purely spiritual society, without any official bond
of union. He never, like Irenasus, gave sanction to

BOOK II. — THE SCHOOL OF CARTHAGE. 433
the episcopal power, against which he subsequently
launched such stern invectives. He nowhere gave any
explanation of the manner in which the rule of faith
was formed; he does not go beyond the historical claim
established by the succession of the Apostolic Churches;
he does not nominate' any guardians of this tradition,
which remains the real doctrinal power in the Church.
Clearly this is an omission from the ' point of view he
occupies ; it needs the supplement already given by
Irenseus, who saw in the episcopate the true apostolic
succession. Tertullian is not influenced by any hierar
chical tendency, but purely and simply by his desire
to guard against the dangers of speculation, and to cut
short the investigation of truth. Therefore he makes
antiquity the final touchstone; this is confounded, in
his view, with the true nature of things, which is to
be found only in the origin of institutions. While
we thus perceive the consequences which will follow
from the principles he has laid down, it is not just to
impute these directly to Tertullian, and we are bound
to admit that in this problem of religious authority he
remained steadily faithful to the essentially realistic
tendency of his system. The manner, so strikingly
individual and original, in which we shall find him
interpreting the rule of faith, shows how impossible it
is to suppose the acceptance as a whole of any body of
orthodoxy whatever, for each ardent champion could
not but set upon it the seal of his own individuality.
Let us speak first of that which is properly called
the theology of Tertullian. We shall lay stress only on
those points which bring into prominence his peculiar
tenets. "The God whom we adore," he says, "is
29

434 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
one."* He has no equal, else there would be two
absolute Beings, which is a contradiction, for the
absolute is necessarily unique. If God is not the one
God, He is no God. To suppose a second God is, then,
to deny the Deity.t He is invisible, incomprehensible,
above all understanding, except He reveal Himself.J
He is eternal, having neither beginning nor end ; He is
also Almighty. § He is supremely wise and sovereignly
free. || Fearful above all things of losing the divine
substance in pure idealism, Tertullian does not hesitate
to admit that the invisible, ineffable God has a body.
Pure spirit is to him a great void ; the divine substance
is the supreme reality. Therefore God, purely spiritual
as He is, has a body which is, as it were, the form of
His Spirit ; hence man could be created in His like
ness. *H Goodness and justice are the moral attributes
of the Deity, and should never be placed in opposition
as an irreducible antithesis. God is essentially love or
goodness. He manifests this goodness in all time, but
always in harmony with reason, and on principles of
justice. " Goodness precedes justice ; the former is
the very nature of God ; severity is only occasionally
manifested when evil has been done."** Goodness
would cease to be goodness if it were wanting in
justice. These two great attributes are manifested in
* "Apol.," 17.
T " Duo summa, quomodo consistent ?" (" Adv. Marc," i. 3.)
! "Apol.," 17.
§ " In asternitate constitutum, innatum." (" Adv. Marc," i. 3.)
|| " Adv. Marc," iii. 5. " Nulla vis aderit illi." (" Adv. Hermog.,"
170 IT " Quis enim negabit Deum corpus esse ?" ("Adv. Prax./' 7.)
** " Prior bonitas Dei secundum naturam, severitas posterior
secundum causam." ("Adv. JMarc/'ii, 11 ; comp. Ibid., i. 23.)

BOOK II. — THE SCHOOL OF CARTHAGE. 435
creation, for if the world was produced by goodness,
it is governed and regulated by justice.* Tertullian
perceives justice in the natural laws according to
which light was separated from darkness, the earth
from the heaven, the waters beneath from the waters
above, and even in the distinction of the sexes. Jus
tice thus finds its primary application in the physical
world before it is realised in the sphere of morals. It
assumes the form of wrath and punishment in view of
sin.t This thought is very grand. God is love, but
love is holy and condemns its opposite. There is no
other way of reconciling justice and goodness, for so
long as they are regarded as attributes in opposition,
and, as it were, distinct entities, which must be treated
as powers with differing interests, dualism is inevitable.
The theologians of Alexandria had indeed affirmed the
radical and essential unity of the two attributes, by
saying that goodness is holy ; but they had not
sufficiently guaranteed the just claims of God. Ter
tullian was more exact on this point. Unhappily, he
carried to too great a length the comparison between
the justice of God and the anger of man, taking his
stand on the analogy which ought to subsist between
the image and its prototype. We resemble God not
only in the rational part of our being, but also in the
passions and affections. It is necessary that God
should experience all the feelings which our acts are
calculated to awaken — anger against the evil, bitterness
towards the ungrateful, aversion from the proud ; in a
word, He must needs resent all wickedness on the
* " Omnia ut bonitas concepit, ita justitia distinxit." (" Adv.
Marc,"ii. 12.) f "De anima," 16 ; "Adv. Marc,"i. 26.
29 *

436 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
same ground as He has pity on souls wandering in
error, and takes pleasure in the good.* Tertullian is
ever under the same fear of seeing feelings resolvecl
into mere ideas. He imagines that the justice and
severity of God have no reality, except as they
resemble the passionate movements of our hearts.
In spite of his strong repugnance to metaphysics, he
cannot evade them when he comes to treat of the most
obscure point in the divine ontology — that grave pro
blem of the Trinity, so much debated in his day, and
which, in the absence of any official and authoritative
theory, necessarily stimulated intellectual subtlety.t
He had to harmonise the rule of faith, which was very
positive as to the pre-existence and divinity of the
Word, with the tenets of a positive monotheism, which
was the imperious demand of the Christian conscience.
The success of the unitarian monarchism of Praxeas
was due to no other cause. In view of such a position,
of the danger of which Tertullian was fully conscious,
he did not have recourse to the convenient and
summary process of prescription ; he entered into
discussion, and endeavoured to overcome error by
acknowledging the element of truth that might be
contained in it. If he did not discover the final
solution, he at least helped to prepare the way for it,
by his novel and suggestive treatment of the doctrine of
the Trinity. He began by boldly asserting, as we have
seen, the unity of God ; the absolute is incompatible
* " Iram propter scelestos et bilem propter ingratos et asmula-
tionem propter superbos." (" Adv. Marc," ii. 16.)
t The whole Christology of Tertullian is found in his treatise
" Adv. Praxeam," and " De carne Christi."

BOOK II. — THE SCHOOL OF CARTHAGE. 437
with duality. "He is alone," said Tertullian: "there is
nothing beyond Him. Nevertheless, He was not abso
lutely alone ; He had with Him and in Himself reason,
for God is a God of reason ; that which is in Him in
the very first place is reason, which is the consciousness
He has of Himself. We recognise in this reason the
Logos of the Greeks."* It is not personal, however,
and is distinguished from the Word properly so called,
as in man thought precedes articulate speech. God is
thus reason before He is the Word. The former is the
substance of the latter, the hidden source whence it will
spring. There is, moreover, identity of essence between
the reason and the Word. " Even before God had
given forth His Word, He had it in Himself, in His
reason, for He thought and ordered in silence that
which He would shortly utter by His Word."t These
terms are clear. Tertullian does not recognise any
more than Justin or Athenagoras the eternal and
personal pre-existence of the Word. He regards it as
existing before the creation only in the divine thought.
Nay, more; this thought is not primarily the conscious
ness which God has of Himself ; it is rather the eternal
idea of creation, for as He has just told us, God thinks
that which He is about to utter by His Word. Now,
this divine utterance, replete with life, like all that
proceeds from God, is the world, and chiefly that which
* " Ante omnia Deus erat solus, ne tunc quidem solus, habebat
enim secum, quam habebat in semet ipso, rationem suam scilicet.
Hunc Grasci Xoyov dicunt." (" Adv. Prax.," 5.)
f " Cum rationem competat antiquiorem haberi, quia non sermo-
nalis a principio, sed rationalis Deus, etiam ante principium. Etsi
Deus nondum sermonem suum miserat, proinde eum cum ipsa et in
ipsa ratione intra semet ipsum habebat, tacite cogitando et dis-
ponendo secum qua; per sermonem mox erat dicturus." (Ibid.)

438 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
is the object and final end of creation — the moral
creature, who for us, and in our sphere, is no other
than man. The Word of God is not indeed to be
confounded with the world. He is its Author, the
organ of the creative power, a true divine person ; but
it is nevertheless true that He exists only in relation to
the world and as the prototype of the moral creature.
There is an evolution in the bosom of the Deity or of
the absolute, but it is not designed solely for the full
realisation of the Deity, if we may so express it. If
God had remained alone, there would have been no
necessity for it ; it is an evolution called for only by the
necessities of the creation. In other words, the Unity
becomes the Trinity, only for the sake of the world.
This is the great imperfection of the theology of Ter
tullian, as of most of his contemporaries. He has
brought it out in full relief, so to speak, by the vigour
of his language.
When God was about to produce the world, with all
its categories of beings, he sent forth His Word. We
recognise in this Word the wisdom of the Proverbs,
which cries : " The Lord created me in the beginning
of His way, before His works of old."* The inward
Word has become the outward ; it assumed its form
and mode of life when God said, "Let there be light. "t
Such is the perfect nativity of the Word which proceeds
from God. This Word, Tertullian calls the first-born
* " Ut primum Deus voluit ea quas cum Sophias ratione et
sermone disposuerat intra se, in substantius et species suas edere,
ipsum primum protulit sermonem, ut per ipsum fierent universa."
(" Adv. Prax.," 6.)
t " Tunc sermo speciem et ornatum suum, sumit, cum dicit Deus:
fiat lux." (Ibid., 7.)

BOOK II. — THE SCHOOL OF CARTHAGE. 439
Son of God. He thus emerges from philosophical
abstraction, and insists on the religious aspect of this
grave and difficult problem. The Word proceeding
from the Father was the first-born, only Son, He who
alone was begotten of the Father, coming forth from His
very heart. Nothing empty and unreal could emanate
from God, as if He Himself could be assimilated to that
which is unreal and empty. It follows that the Word
is substantial like the Father, and that He shares in
the divine reality, which is inseparable from corpore
ality.* This production of the Word may be fitly
called His emanation, provided only that word be
not used in the sense attached to it by the Valen
tinian heresy, which recognises the iEon as distinct
from the principle whence it emanates, and as re
taining only a feeble reflection of it.t
Tertullian, on the contrary, regards the Word as
abiding in absolute union with the Father. He
alone knows Him, reveals Him, and shows to us all
that he has seen and heard with the Father. He is
with the Father, for ever inseparable from Him. This
is the true emanation. The Son emanates from the
Father as the fruit from the root, the stream from the
source, the ray from the sun.! It is in this sense we
must recognise the divine duality. The root and the
fruit are indeed two things, but closely united ; we
distinguish between the source and the stream, though
they are indivisible. Thus the duality or triplicity of
the Deity may be reached by the same process. " The
eternal thought is in the Father ; the Word expresses
* " Adv. Prax.," 7. t Ibid., 8.
! " Protulit Deus sermonem sicut radix fruticem et fons fluvium
et sol radium." (Ibid.)

44O THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
it in creation, and the Spirit brings all to perfection.
The Spirit emanates from the Spirit. God emanates
from God, as light from light. That which comes
forth from God is God, or the Son of God, and the two
are one."* The Divine Being is not multiple in His
essence, but in His mode of action : He comprehends
not several conditions, but several degrees. t After the
sun we have the ray, and after the ray, the reflection ;
so after the Father we have the Son, and after the Son,
the Holy Spirit ; but the same attributes belong to the
three persons.
The doctrine of the Holy Spirit is not clearly stated
by Tertullian. It is certain that he recognises His
personality, as well as that of the Word ; but that
personality has also a beginning. The Spirit is not
distinguished from the Word until the ascension, as
the Word itself was not distinguished from the Father
until creation. The Son, in returning to heaven, gives
the Spirit to the Church as the third name in the God
head.t Thus the Trinity descends from the Father
by degrees, following each other in close and necessary
sequence, without at all infringing on the divine monar
chy^ Tertullian calls it the economic, that is to say, the
* " Ita de Spiritu Spiritus et de Deo Deus. Quod de Deo per-
fectum est, Deus est et Dei Filius et unus ambo." ("Apol.," 21.)
f " Alteram non numero, gradu." (Ibid.)
X "Paracletum a Patre se postulaturum cum ascendisset ad
Patrem, et missurum repromittit, et quidem alium. (" Adv. Prax./'
25.) Spiritum sanctum tertium nomen divinitatis effudit." (Ibid.,
30.) See Reville (articles before quoted). See also the observa
tions on the original identity of the Word and the Spirit in the
treatise " Adv. Hermog.," iv., where the Spirit, like the impersonal
Word, bears the name Wisdom. " Spiritus sermoni inerat." ("Adv.
Prax.," 7.)
§ " Ita trinitas per consertos et connexos gradus a patre decur-

BOOK II. — THE SCHOOL OF CARTHAGE. 44I
successive, Trinity ; like the Jewish and Christian
economies, which were, in a manner, the movement
or evolution upon earth of the divine thought. The
evolution is, in this case, transferred to the celestial
sphere. It is impossible to maintain the eternity of
the Trinity on such a conception of it. " There was
a time," says Tertullian, plainly, " when the Son
was not."*
From this principle two results follow : the identity
of nature, but the marked subordination of the Son and
Spirit in relation to the Father. " The Father is the
totality of substance ; the Son has a derived- and
limited existence, as He declared when he said : ' The
Father is greater than I.' The Father is not con
founded with the Son, for he is the greater. He
who begets and He who is begotten, are not one
and the same, nor is He who is sent identical with
Him who sends Him."t The same subordination is
manifest in the relation of the Holy Spirit to the Son
and to the Father. There is no possibility on this
system of merging all the Divine persons in one, as
though the Son was only another name for the
Father. No ; the Father is the Father only because
He has the Son. This distinction of the persons
detracts nothing from the divinity of the Son ; we
call Him God, as we call the ray sunlight. It is by
means of this subordination that the divine has been
able to descend from its transcendental height. The
rens et monarchias nihil obstrepit, et owovopiag statum protegit.''
("Adv. Prax.," 8.)
* " Fuit tempus cum ei Filius non fuit." (" Adv. Hermog.," 3.)
f " Pater tota substantia est, Filius vero derivatio totius et portio.
Pater Filio major." (" Adv. Prax.," 7-)

442 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
Father is invisible because of the glory of His Majesty ;
He could not manifest Himself directly, nor humble
Himself to our low estate. The Son is the Divine
made accessible, the God who may be heard and seen,
the God who can stoop, because He is not the absolute
but the derived divinity.* He is like the ray which
our eyes can look upon without pain, while gazing upon
the sun they would be blinded by excessive brightness.
We can endure the light in a softened and diminished
lustre ; we could not bear it in its full shining. Again,
the Father is impassible ; the Son alone was able to
take upon Himself the sufferings by which our redemp
tion was to be wrought. While the stream remains
calm at the source, it is troubled as it flows along ; it
is the same water still, but under different conditions. t
Thus subordination is the necessary condition of reve
lation. The Word had already manifested Himself in
angelic form under the Old Covenant ; these preliminary
incarnations foreshadowed and prepared the way for
the crowning condescension, when the Lord became the
babe of Bethlehem. J It is the Son who comes down to
our earth, who asks questions, who makes vows. Thus
the notion of the absolute, that which Tertullian calls
the philosophical idea of God, remains intact. All that
is incompatible with it is assigned to the Son, who had
power to take upon Him our humanity, and in human
form to suffer shame and the cross. §
The conception of the incarnation does not present
any difficulty to him as regards the divine ontology, for
* " Invisibilem Patrem intelligamus pro plenitudine majestatis ;
visibilem vero Filium agnoscamus pro modulo derivationis."1 ("Adv.
Prax.," 14.) f Ibid., 29. J Ibid., 16. § " Adv. Marc," ii. 27.

BOOK II. — THE SCHOOL OF CARTHAGE. 443
there is a natural relation between man and the Word.
The Word is not only the principle, but the type of
humanity. The terrestrial creation sighs after man as
its consummation. Itself the work of the Word, called
by Him out of nothing, its purpose is to show forth
the majesty of the divine glory.* Matter cannot be
eternal, else it would be possessed of an essential
attribute of the Godhead.t It cannot have come forth
from the bosom of God, or the indivisible would have
been divided.! To suppose that creation was a neces
sity, would be to limit the absolute, and to impugn His
independence^ In support of the contrary theory,
some urge the existence of evil which is ascribed to
matter, but evil is virtually vindicated if it is made
eternal as God Himself, and imputed to Him as a
condition of being, determined by His own will.|| The
object of creation is the glory of God, which can,
however, never be realised apart from goodness, the
essential attribute of the Deity. The moral creature
is the crown of the work.
The apex of being is not occupied by angels, for
angels have not received the Spirit of God as man
has ; they are like flames of fire.H By a singular
contradiction they are yet supposed to enjoy freedom
of choice, since the fall of the demons is laid entirely
to their own charge.** The part taken by Satan in the
fall of man is important ; he led man away after him,
* "Totam molem istam de nihilo expressit, in ornamentum
majestatis suas." ("Apol.," 17-)
\ " Adv. Hermog.," 4.
! Ibid., 2. § Ibid., 9. || Ibid., 10.
IT Afflatus Dei, generosior spiritu materiali quo angeli consti-
terunt." (" Adv. Marc," ii. 8.) ** " Apol," 22.

444 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
and frustrated the lofty purposes of his creation.* No
higher destiny could be conceived than that for which
man was formed. He was made both body and soul in
the very image of the Word, and as though in view of
the incarnation. The Creator, foreseeing that His Son
would become man, said, " Let us make man in our
own image. "t Man is at once soul and body ;! while,
at the same time, there is a clear distinction between
the two portions of his being, since his soul has a body
of its own, which shares in the conditions of matter, is
susceptible, that is, of suffering and joy;§ it is fed,
and grows to a greater or less stature. || The soul is
indivisible and immortal. IT The flesh is not in itself
evil ; it was moulded by the hand of God to be in after
times the temple of His Word.** The Divine Phidias
therein enshrined the soul as an inestimable jewel ;tt
the flesh serves as the instrument of its immortal
guest ; it is designed, therefore, to share its destinies.
Hence the necessity of the resurrection resting on a
twofold basis. First, divine justice cannot leave the
flesh unpunished after it has been the handmaid of
both good and evil during the earthly life.!! In the
* " Diabolus ipse sese fecerit, deferendo de Deo." (" Adv.
Marc," ii. 10.)
•f- " Ille enim Christum, sermonem suum, intuens hominem
futurum: faciamus, inquit, hominem ad imaginem et similitudinem
nostram." (Ibid., v. 8.)
X " Hie erit homo interior, alius exterior, dupliciter^unus." (" De
anima," 9.)
§ " Incorporalitas nihil patitur." (" De anima," 7 ; " De resurrect.
carnis/' 17.) || " De anima/' chaps. 36-39. IT Ibid., 14.
** " Ita limus ille jam turn imaginem induens Christi futuri in
carnc, non tantum Dei opus erat, sed et pignus." (" De resurrect.
carnis," 6.) tt " Phidias tantus* Deus vivus." (Ibid., 6.)
XI " Qualis vixerit, talcm judicari, quia de eo, quod vixerit, habeat
judicari." (Ibid., 14.)

BOOK II. — THE SCHOOL OF CARTHAGE. 445
second place, the infinite mercy seeks to accomplish
a complete salvation, and to restore the first Adam
in his entire nature, to the image of the second Adam
who is risen from the dead.*
The soul bears the image of God : this image, which
constitutes its intellectual and moral life, is designed to
reach a perfect resemblance. t Tertullian rejects the
famous trilogy of the Platonist psychology, which
divided the soul into three parts — reason, desire, and
anger, on the ground that reason reigned alone in the
primeval soul ; desire and anger were the offspring of
sin, which had, at first, no existence.! The soul is
active in the formation, both of ideas and of sensa
tions^ It has not descended to earth from a higher
world, having already passed through various modes of
existence.|| Metempsychosis is contradicted by facts.
Do we not observe a great diversity in the men com
posing successive generations ? Conscience cannot
acquiesce in a divine sentence executed upon a being
different from him who has sinned. Besides, the
hypothesis has no foundation, since our memory cannot
go back beyond the present life. Moral liberty is the
appanage of man as of all the higher creatures. 1T The
law given to him laid upon him no necessity to evil ;
it merely gave the occasion for his will to declare itself
on the one side or the other. It was only by free choice
* " Resurgit igitur caro per Jesum Christum, qui et homini Deum
et hominem Deo reddet, carni Spiritum et Spiritui carnem . . . ut
rursus prassentetur Adam auditurus a Domino : ecce Adam quasi
unus ex nobis factus est." (" De resurrect, carnis," 63.)
f " Neque enim facie et corporalibus lineis ad uniformem Deum
expressus est sed in ea substantia, quam ab ipso Deo traxit, id est
anima." ("Adv. Marc," ii. 5.) ! " De anima," 16.
§ Ibid., 17, 18. || Ibid., 2S-36. If "Adv. Marc," ii. 4.

446 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
that he could rise to the goodness which was not
natural to him as to God.* This freedom, which is a
gift of God, is always strengthened and sustained by
Him. Grace is an abiding power of the spiritual
order; it triumphs over nature. t The Fall must be
ascribed to an estranged and rebellious will. J Though
it leads to perdition, it has not, nevertheless, abso
lutely perverted our being, "for the divine element
within us is rather obscured than extinguished." §
Nature, corrupted as it is, still reflects the divine.
Original sin is transmitted by generation, for the soul
is generated with the body, and grows with it, the
father transmitting all the good and evil germs which
are in him.|| Death is the meed of rebellion, and
passes upon the whole race. 17
This anthropology, which has some grand aspects,
might have led Tertullian to a very broad conception of
the incarnation, and he would thus have avoided the
trenchant dualism of the two natures in Jesus Christ.
If man is really created in the image of the Word,
human nature will reach the full realisation of its idea,
or of its ideal, in the earthly manifestation of its pro
totype. It is strange to find Tertullian less advanced
and enlightened upon this essential point than Irenasus.
* " Bonus natura Deus solus. Ut ergo bonum jam suum haberit
homo, de institutione adscripta est illi libertas et potestas arbitrii, ut
ita demum bonus consisteret homo, si ex voluntate jam bonus
inveneretur." (" Adv. Marc," ii. 6.)
f " Hasc erit vis divinas gratias, potentior utique natura, habens
in nobis subjacentem sibi liberam arbitrii potestatem." (" De
anima," 21.) J " Adv. Marc," ii. 8.
§ " Quod enim a Deo est, non tarn cxstinguitur, quam obumbra-
tur. In pessimis aliquid boni." (" De anima," 4.)
|| Ibid., 27. 11 Ibid., 50.

BOOK II. — THE SCHOOL OF CARTHAGE. 447
His treatise " On the Body of Christ " is devoted
entirely to the incarnation. After establishing the
possibility of miracle, on the ground of the Almighty
power of God, which has no other limitation than His
will,* he shows eloquently that the dignity of the Most
High is not compromised by such a condescension.
Love finds therein its highest glory. Yes, the Christ
truly loved that insignificant being whose origin is so
humble. t For him He came down from heaven, for
him He abased Himself unto death, even the death of
the cross. His love may be measured by the price He
gave for our ransom. This is the divine folly which
confounds human wisdom — God, born of a virgin, in
human flesh, and taking upon Himself in a manner
the degradation of our nature. If the death of the
Redeemer was necessary to our salvation, He must
needs be born in order to die. Let us not quibble with
the heretics about the body of Christ. It is not com
posed of a subtle essence taken from the stars. What
is gained by the Gnostic view of creation, in which it is
all regarded as the work of a fallen ^Eon, and may be
fitly characterised in a word as the sin of a god?!
Neither is the body of Christ of angelic substance.
" It was man who had fallen, man who was to be
restored." § Equally erroneous is it to regard the flesh
of the Redeemer as the soul taking a visible form, for
in that case He would not be one like unto us, and
could not be our Saviour. Lastly, His soul, like every
* " Deo nihil impossibile, nisi quod non vult." (" De carne
Christi," 3.)
| " Certe Christus dilexit ilium in inlTmnditiis. Amavit utique
quem magno redemit." (Ibid., 4.) ! Ibid., 8.
§ " Homo perierat, hominem restitui oportuerat." (Ibid., 14.)

448 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
other being, had its own body, which may not be
confounded with the flesh. Let us hold fast to the
simplicity, and what might be called the good faith of
the language. It is our very flesh which the Son of
God assumed.* Every objection disappears so soon as
it is admitted that the human body is not by nature
defiled, but that it becomes so by an act of the will.
Sin is in the flesh, but the flesh is not sin ; the original
substance is pure ; it is polluted only by the commis
sion of sin. Now, it is this original substance which
Christ assumed and carried up into heaven.t He took
it complete and virginal as it was in Adam. It was
a real body, for it came forth from the womb of a
daughter of men, the second Eve, but it was kept
perfectly pure by virtue of the miraculous conception.
Thus was broken the chain of sinful generation, and
a new and divine commencement was made. " It was
meet that He who was to introduce here on earth
a new birth, should Himself be born by a new mode. J
It was not fit that the Son of God should be born of the
seed of man, for He would then have been entirely
a son of man. He would not have been the Son of God
at all, nor would He have been greater than Solomon
or Jonah. Ebion would then be justified. § The
divine germ was to be substituted for the human
seed ; man has become one with God by the union of
the human flesh with the Spirit of God."|| His birth
took place in conformity with natural laws. Mary did
not preserve eternal virginity."1T
* " De carne Christi," 13. f Ibid., 16.
X " Nove nasci debebat novas nativitatis dedicator." (Ibid., 17.)
§ Ibid., 18.
|| " Sic denique homo cum Deo, dum caro hominis cum Spiritu
Dei." (Ibid., 18.) IT Ibid., 20-23.

BOOK II. — THE SCHOOL OF CARTHAGE. 449
The incarnation, real as it is, does not in any way
impair the divinity of the Redeemer; for it is the
peculiar character of the Divine nature to abide un
changed in the midst of changing circumstances.*
And yet Tertullian had established that the nature of
the Word is distinct from that of the Father in this
very respect — that it can emerge from the immutable
absolute. The human and the divine in Jesus are
rather in juxtapcsition than united and blended. While
the God remains impassible, the man is liable to legal
defilements. t " The divine ray having entered the
womb of a virgin, takes the form of flesh : thus is born
the man who is one with God. This flesh, informed
by the Spirit, is fed, grows, speaks, eats, and acts ;
it is our Christ." ! These expressions imply an irre
ducible duality, which comes out still more clearly
from the treatise against Praxeas. The divine immu
tability is again expressed in all its severity. The
Word undergoes no change; He can be no other
than God, as the flesh cannot cease to be human.
"Thus we have two natures, not confounded, but
united in the single person of Jesus." § The peculiar
character of these two natures undergoes no change,
for the Spirit accomplishes the works which belong to
Him, namely, miracles ; while the flesh submits to all
* " Id est, ut Deus et in omnia converti possit et qualis est per-
severare." (" De came Christi," 3.)
t " Tetigit leprosum, a quo etsi homo inquinari potuisset, Deus
utique non inquinaretur, incontaminabilis scilicet." (" Adv. Marc,"
iv' 9-) ... ,
X " Iste igitur Dei radius, delapsus m virgmem quamdam, et in
utero ejus caro figuratus, nascitur homo Deo mixtus." (" Apol.," 21.)
§ " Videmus duplicem statum, non confusum, sed conjunctum in
una persona Deum et hominem Jesum." (" Adv. Prax.," 27.)
30

450 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
the sufferings which are its due. " Jesus is then man
by the flesh, God by the Spirit. In His humanity He
died, while He remains by the Spirit the Word and
the Son of God."* It follows from these explicit terms
that the humanity of Jesus consists essentially only in
His flesh, that it is entirely passive. We are thus led
into a new form of docetism, which gravely affects the
work of redemption. Tertullian speaks indeed else
where of the soul of Jesus, which bowed beneath the
weight of anguish, and uttered the cry of desolation on
the cross ; but the active part of His being is neverthe
less the Spirit of the Word, from which He must needs
part before He could die. " He united in Himself man
and God, showing Himself God in His power, a man
in weakness, giving to man all that is separable
from His Godhead." t Unquestionably. Tertullian re
mains a dualist. We lose altogether the notion of a
humanity created in the image of God, and formed to
bear His perfect resemblance. This is one of the
gravest imperfections of his system.
The work of redemption is affirmed rather than
defined by him. He attaches great importance to
the death and resurrection of Jesus ; he speaks the
language of St. Paul, like all the Fathers, but his
words convey no clear idea. The notion of expiation,
strictly speaking, nowhere appears. He insists very
strongly upon the necessity that Christ should come
to earth in shame and sorrow before He comes in glory
to reign. He compares Him to the accursed goat slain
* "Adv. Prax.," 27.
f " Miscente in semet ipso hominem et Deum, in virtutibus
Deum, in pusillitatibus hominem." (" Adv. Marc," ii. 27. See M.
Reville (article quoted), p. 126.)

BOOK II. — THE SCHOOL OF CARTHAGE. 45I
without the camp, and to the goat of expiation, whose
blood flowed upon the altar for the sins of the people.*
This blood which redeems us is the blood of the spot
less Lamb, the blood even of a God.t Nothing can be
more explicit than this language ; yet closely pressed,
it yields only vagueness and uncertainty. The cross
doubtless occupies the central place in religious history;
it is the foundation of the Gospel and of our salvation.!
It fulfils all the prophecies and types of the Old Testa
ment, from the sacrifice of Isaac to the extended hands
of Moses interceding for his people, which prefigure
the nailed hands of the victim of Calvary. The cross
was that power which lifts humanity to heaven like
the horns of the bull, to which Joseph, that other type
of Christ, has been compared. It was a victory over
the demon, and like the serpent of brass, it heals the
soul which beholds it by faith of the bites of the dia
bolical serpent. § Death as well as sin was vanquished
on Calvary. |! The government was laid upon the
shoulder of Jesus on the very day when He bowed
Himself to death upon the accursed tree. The resur
rection was the manifestation of His triumph.
If we ask wherein consisted this triumph over death
and the demon, we find it is reduced to the ide"a of a
holy act, a sacrifice of perfect obedience, which is set
before us as a model, and which we may copy by the
aid of Divine grace. Thus, and in no other way, are
we redeemed from sin. " Let us ask of God that He
* " Adv. Marc," iii. 7. t '" De pudicitia," 6.
X "Mors Christi summum fundamentum Evangelii." ("Adv.
Marc," iii. 8.) § Ibid., iii. 18.
|| " Superata morte a passione ligni, Christus regnavit." (Ibid.,
iii. 19.) 3(1 *

453 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
will grant us to know and do His will, that we may be
saved both in heaven and upon earth. That Divine
will was accomplished by the Saviour in His preaching,
in His works, and in His sufferings. Clearly, He did
in all things the will of the Father, and He has thus
left us an example that we also preach, work, and
suffer, even unto death." * Jesus is thus a revealer
and reformer rather than a Saviour.
There is nothing peculiar and positive in the work
of Calvary. We also may offer a redeeming sacrifice
for sin. Martyrdom is a continuation in a lower degree
of the same sacrifice : it has an expiatory value for him
who suffers it.t The merit of works is the logical con
sequence of such a theory. Faith, by the difficulties
which it presents to our mind, vindicates for itself a
place in the category of meritorious works.! The
prayer of a pure heart, crowned by love and accom
panied by the sacred incense of Christian virtues, is
the acceptable sacrifice to God presented upon the
spiritual altar. § By it we satisfy Divine justice. Re
pentance and fasting possess expiatory virtue. |j Expi
ation, in a word, is simply reparation. It is enough
that good works take the place of evil. On such a
conception of salvation, the difference between the Old
* " Est et ilia Dei voluntas, quam Dominus administravit prasdi-
cando, operando, sustinendo. Sine dubio, quas faciebat, ea erat
voluntas patris, ad quas nunc nos velut ad exemplaria provocamur."
(" De orat," 4.)
f " Lavacrum sanguinis securum." (" Contra gnostic, scorpiac,"
6-) .
! " Ut fides, non mediocri prasmio destinata, difficultate con-
staret." ("Apol.," 21.) § " De orat.," 23.
|| " Patientia satis Deo fecit ("De patientia," 13). Ouis dubitavit,
ut homo per eamdem materiam causas satis Deo faciat, per quam
offenderat. . . . Primordiale delictum expiaretur." (" De jejun.," 3.)

BOOK II. — THE SCHOOL OF CARTHAGE. 453
and New Testament is completely effaced ; we have
in the latter a simple development of the doctrine of
the former ; the Gospel is only the Law amplified and
spiritualised. The old institutions are abolished like
circumcision, or completed like the law, or accomplished
like prophecy, or consummated like faith.* The Sermon
on the Mount is the supplement of the ancient discipline.
The Gospel precepts are the abundant harvest yielded
by the seed deposited by Mosaism. t The Old Testa
ment, represented exclusively as a law, loses its highest
character as a preparation for redemption. Sacrifice
has no relation to the offering of Calvary; it is only
the palpable form under which holiness must needs be
presented to a carnally-minded people.!
These important restrictions of the redemptive work
explain the exaggerated estimate of authority enter
tained by Tertullian. The man who is but imperfectly
saved is but half set free. Hence also springs that inor
dinate asceticism, which at once assumes a meritorious
character, and gives a false tone to the morality of
Tertullian, especially after he became a Montanist.
Repentance is transformed into penance ; tears purify
the soul ; public confession, made in sackcloth and
ashes, extinguishes the fire of Gehenna in the heart. §
We give satisfaction to the justice of God by afflicting
our flesh and spirit. || From the same fundamental
error proceeds the sacramental materialism which
* " De orat./' 1.
t "Hasc Christus adjecerit ut supplementa consentanea disci-
plinas creatoris." ("Adv. Marc," iv. 16.) J Ibid., ii. 18.
§ " De posnitentia," 12.
|| " De pristinis satisfacimus conflictatione carnis et Spiritus."
(" De baptismo," 20.)

454 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
was connected also with Tertullian's ideas of the
corporeality of the soul. A magical virtue is attributed
to the baptismal water. The Holy Spirit moved over
the confused waters of chaos ; some particles of Divine
influence are still retained by the element which re
ceived so great an honour.* The power of the demons
has often made water an injurious instrument. t What
ground is there then to question that the Divine in
fluence may make itself felt through the same medium
in an opposite direction ? A truly sanctifying virtue
is conferred on the baptismal water after the invocation
of the officiator, and is communicated to the neophyte
who has received the imposition of hands. J Christian
baptism, which differs by its efficacy from the rite
practised by John the Baptist, was only instituted
after the completion of the work of Christ. It is
necessary to salvation, unless its omission be supplied
by martyrdom. § Tertullian admits that any Christian
has the right to administer baptism, || and he wishes it
to be deferred in the case of little children, who, not
as yet knowing Jesus Christ, cannot fulfil the spiritual
conditions required to give full efficacy to the sacra
mental grace. IT
With regard to the Lord's Supper, he is much
more moderate. His views are clear and positive that
it is only a symbol of the broken body of Christ ; and
he does not even hint at its possessing any magical
* " De baptismo," 4. f Ibid., 5.
| " Sanctissimus Spiritus super baptismi aquas tanquam pristi-
nam sedem recognoscens conquiescit." (Ibid., 8. Comp. 5.)
§ " Prasscribitur nemini sine baptismo competere salutem."
(Ibid., 12, 16.) || " Laicis just est." (Ibid.)
IT " Cunctatio baptismi utilior est, prascipue tamen circa parvulos."
(Ibid., 18.)

BOOK II. — THE SCHOOL OF CARTHAGE. 455
virtue.* We cannot hope to find in his doctrine of
the final issues of the world's history more spirituality
than in that of Irenasus. He insists strongly upon the
resurrection of the flesh in the special treatise he has
devoted to that subject, and this he accepts in the most
material sense, though he looks for a glorious trans
figuration, t All nature will have its palingenesis.
The soul awaits the final consummation in an inter
mediate state, which is neither earth nor heaven, but
the preparation for future glory.! The millennium is
the restoration of the reign of Christ upon earth. All
the apocalyptic images are taken in a literal sense.
Jesus will come again to judge the world. He will
send the wicked to eternal punishment, and consume
by fire the heavens and the earth that now are. From
the ashes will arise a new and purified nature, and the
Son will restore the kingdom to His Father.§
Such is this system, marked from beginning to end
by a character of narrowness and realism, but illu
minated by splendid flashes of genius and eloquence.
* The leading passage on this point is found in " Contra Marc,"
iv. 40 : "Acceptum panem et distributum discipulis corpus suum
ilium fecit, hoc est corpus meum dicendo, id est figura corporis mei.
Figura autem non fuisset nisi Veritas esset corpus." (After having
taken the bread and distributed it to His disciples, He made it His
body — that is, He said, " This is my body," signifying the figure of
my body. But there would be no figure if His body itself had not
been a reality.) It is evident, in spite of interpretations to the con
trary (see Mcehler, " Patrology," vii. pp. 584, 585), that Tertullian
simply affirms in this passage the reality of the body of Christ, of
which the eucharistic bread is merely a figure.
f " De resurrect, carnis," 57.
X "De anima," 55-58. " The soul passes through no other suffer
ing than that of awaiting the resurrection " (chap. 58). This pre
sents no analogy to expiation.
§ " De spectac," 30 ; " De resurrect, carnis," 63.

456 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
It was destined to exert a considerable influence on
Christian thought, alike by its imperfections and its
nobler features. § II. Cyprian.
Tertullian owes in large measure the permanence
and extent of his influence to the wise moderation of
his disciple Cyprian, who served him no less by his
modifications of the master's doctrine, than by the
lucid and softened form in which he presented it as a
whole. The boiling torrent subsides in his writings
into a river flowing through a channel broad and deep.
Cyprian adds nothing to the theology of Tertullian ; he
guides it into no new course ; but he carefully guards
and moderates the fresh current of thought just opened
by an impetuous and original mind. On one point
alone — his view of the Church — has he supplemented
or given a defined form to the teaching of the master.
It is needless then for us to dwell here upon the
dogmatic portion of his work, since it presents nothing
original, but only develops in strains of calm and
noble eloquence the thoughts of his illustrious pre
decessor. These Cyprian reproduces in his theology, avoiding
as far as possible the use of rigid formularies. He quotes
the principal texts of the Old Testament by which
Tertullian established that the Word was the Wisdom
of the Book of Proverbs, produced by God before any
of His works.* It is probable therefore that he also
held that the Word had a beginning, and that the
eternal thought of God only became a distinct person
* Cyprian, "Testim. contra Judasos," ii. I.

BOOK II. — THE SCHOOL OF CARTHAGE. 457
at the creation. He does not enlarge upon the perfect
divinity of Christ, in whom he recognised and adored
the God-Man, without defining the relation of the
two natures.* He is not more explicit than Tertullian
as to the work of salvation ; he affirms rather than
expounds it. It is in his representation not so much
a redemption, as deliverance from death and succour
against sin ; though he also uses the apostolic language,
and speaks of our redemption by the blood of Christ. t
But it is a redemption which has in it nothing absolute
and incommunicable, since it is to be supplemented by
our works, especially by almsgiving and martyrdom,
the latter possessing a purifying virtue. The Jewish
religion would have been final if the obligations which
it imposed on its adherents had been observed by them.
The Jews lost their privilege by their pride and diso
bedience.! Jesus Christ came then only because the
work of Moses had failed. The difference between the
two Testaments is not really maintained on such a
conception of the Gospel. A return to the institutions
of the Old Testament is but one step further. The
hierarchical theocracy exists in germ in such a doctrine.
" The Word of God, who is also His wisdom, His
power, and glory, came to be the revealer and the
teacher of the human race, according to the oracles of
the prophets. He stoops to enter the womb of a virgin,
and the Holy Spirit assumes human flesh. "§ These
* Cyprian, " Testim. contra Judasos.," ii. 6-10.
t " Per sanguinem Domini redempti sumus." (" De habitu
virg.," 2.)
X "Judasis primum erat apud Deum gratia sed illi negligentes
disciplinas dum divina prascepta contemnunt, datam sibi gratiam
perdiderunt." (" De idol, vanit," 10.)
S " Gratias arbiter et magister sermo et Filius Dei mittitur qui

458 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
expressions indicate a very vague conception of the
Trinity, since the third person seems to be confounded
with the second. " God joins Himself to man : it
is our God, our Christ, who took on Him humanity to
bring it back to the Father."* " Christ was pleased
to be what man is, that man might be what Christ
is." After casting out the demons by His word,
healing the paralytics, cleansing the lepers, raising
the dead, commanding the elements, and compel
ling the winds and the sea to obey Him, He was cru
cified by the Jews. "The prophets had foretold this
fact as necessary, not simply in order that He might be
acquainted with death, but that He might conquer it ;
and that, reascending into heaven after His passion, He
might manifest His divine power. After having of His
own free will given up the spirit which was in Him,
thus anticipating the deed of His executioners, He rose
again the third day. He was then received up by a
cloud into heaven, that by His victory He might raise
to the right hand of His Father that humanity which
He had loved, taken upon Himself, and saved from
death. The disciples whom He left spread abroad His
precepts for the salvation of the world, and to dispel the
darkness of error by the light of truth. "t Victory over
death, the manifestation of His power, the enlighten
ment of the minds of men, — this is in brief the work
of redemption. Cyprian says elsewhere that the Lord
alone can pardon sins because He has borne them upon
Him, because He was delivered by God for those sins,
per prophetas omnes retro illuminator et doctor humani generis
prasdicabatur. Carnem Spiritus sanctus induitur, Deus cum homine
miscctur." (" De idol, vanit.," ii.)
* Ibid. f Ibid., 13-15.

BOOK II. — THE SCHOOL OF CARTHAGE. 459
and suffered for us. But this is only the repetition of a
text of which he has not apprehended the true mean
ing, as is shown by the words which follow this declara
tion : " The merits of the martyrs and the works of
the saints are of great weight with the Judge."* The
treatise on " Good Works and Almsgiving " develops
the principle of meritorious works; they are clearly
described as means of propitiation, expiating our sins.t
Jesus can then be said to have borne our burden only
in a very limited sense. He did not so much repair
the wrong, as to take upon Himself the consequences
of evil, and His death is a triumph, not an expiation.
Doubtless the result of this victory is permanent gain
to us ; it procures us the succour of His grace and
the perpetual presence of His love by which He
dwells in His Church. He is indeed the liberator,
but He is not in the complete sense the Redeemer.
Hence Christian morality loses its sublime simplicity.
It is a scale of merits, carefully graduated, instead
of being the appropriation of the work of Calvary
accomplished once for all to cover all our sins. The
highest steps of this ladder rise above the level of virtue
obligatory on all. Martyrdom, though it may be de
manded of all Christians should the occasion arise,
raises to peerless honour those who endure it; but
virginity, which cannot be made incumbent on all be
lievers, is a counsel of perfection, which all should follow
who desire to belong to the elect among the saints.!
* " Credimus quidem posse apud judicem plurimum martyrum
merita et opera justorum." (" De lapsis," 17.)
f " Magisteria divina docuerunt operationibus justis Deo satis-
fieri, misericordias meritis peccata purgari." (" De operis et eleemo-
syna," 5.) X " De habitu virg.," 21.

460 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
Cyprian believed of necessity in sacramental efficacy,
the virtue of which increases in the exact ratio of the
depreciation of the work of redemption. He is satisfied
however to see in the Holy Communion a type of the
mystical union of Christians with a crucified Saviour,*
though he seems sometimes to attribute magical virtue
to the elements, and regards the eucharist as the sa
crifice which the Church offers to God.t He accepts
Tertullian's idea of baptism, ascribing to it a regene
rative power.! It is in his idea of the Church we
trace the most unhappy consequences of his general
doctrine. He identifies absolutely the outward with
the inward and spiritual fact, confounding the visible
and invisible, and making unity the essential character
of the religious society, so that no holiness can exist
outside its limits. That which within its sacred sha
dow is holy, becomes elsewhere a sin.§ The episco
pate is the only continuation of the apostolate; it takes
* On the one hand, Cyprian says that by the Holy Communion
we are strengthened by the body and blood of Christ : " Non
inermes protectione sanguinis et corporis Christi muniamus quos
excitamus ad praslium." (" Epist," 57, 2.) On the other hand, in
his letter 73, he declares that it is the wine which is offered to God
in the eucharist (" Epist.," 73, 13), and that the water mixed with it
represents the people of God. This passage determines the repre
sentative and typical value of the eucharist : Videmns in aqua
populum iutti/igi. The sacrament represents the union of Christian
people with Christ in the Supper. Now, as it is not possible to sup
pose a transubstantiation of the water into the corporeal reality of
the Church, so must we set aside any such idea in connection
with the wine, which is only the emblem of the blood of Jesus
Christ. f Cyprian calls it the Holy Supper (Oblatio, sacrificiwri), and
speaks of the altar. (" Epist.," i. 1, 2 ; 12, 2.)
X " Per baptisma Spiritus Sanctus accipitur." (Ibid., 73, 8.)
§ "Adulterari non potest sponsa Christi. Quisque ab Ecclesia
segregatur adulteras jungitur." ("De unitate Eccles.," 6.)

BOOK II. — THE SCHOOL OF CARTHAGE. 46 1
the place of the priesthood of the Old Testament, as the
pillar of the spiritual building.* To divide the Church
is to rend the robe of Christ ; excommunication should
be the doom of all schismatics. t The hierarchical sys
tem is not yet complete, more than one link is wanting
to the chain. The primacy of Peter and that of the
bishop of Rome are alike denied.! With the latter
Cyprian enters unhesitatingly into controversy. § The
laity are not deprived of their ancient rights ; they have
a voice in the chapter in the government of religious
matters. || The Church is not a monarchy, it is an epis
copal senate. It is nevertheless true that the wall of
separation between the people of God and the priest
hood has been rebuilt. How could it be otherwise,
when the redemptive efficacy of the sacrifice of Calvary
is depreciated as it is by Cyprian ? We must recognise
that all has been accomplished on the cross, before the
veil can be rent from top to bottom, and the way of
access into the holiest laid open to the whole people of
God. The bondage of the Church, about to become
so grievous in the following age, was thus prepared
by the deviations of her teachers from the true doctrine
of redemption ; and through the might of Tertullian's
* "De unitate Eccles.," 4.
f "Apostolis, id est episcopos." (" Epist.," 3, 3.) " Episcopatus
unus est, Ecclesia quoque una est." (" De unit. Eccles.," 5.) The
episcopate is a new priesthood : Sacerdotalis auctoritas. (" Epist./'
69, 7-)
| " Quando tunica Christi non dividitur." (" De unit. Eccles.,"
17, 18.)
§ " Hoc erant utique et casteri apostoh quod fuit Petrus." (Ibid.,
4-) || "A primordio episcopatus mei statuerim nihil sine conciho
vestro et sine consensu plebis mea privatim sententia gerere."
(" Epist," 14, 4-)

462 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
eloquence, and the high and legitimate influence of
Cyprian, it was at Carthage that these deviations
acquired the gravest influence. The doctrine of final
issues differs in the writings of Cyprian from that of
his predecessors upon one important point. He rejects
the idea of an intermediate state between death and
judgment. According to him, the irrevocable sentence
is passed upon every soul as it quits the earthly life, a
fact which will not however interfere with the universal
judgment on the great resurrection day.*
* " Ad Demetrionum." 26.

CONCLUSION.
At the close of this exposition of the theology of the
second and third centuries, let us cast a rapid glance
over the ground traversed, not indeed with any view to
a chimerical synthesis, for it is not possible to compre
hend in one line of view schools which differ so widely,
and which, though they all rest on the same basis of
faith, are too rich in original ideas to be constrained
into uniformity. It is just this fertile variety which
enables contemporary theology to make such large use
of the ante-Nicene Fathers. On more than one impor
tant point they have been, not surpassed, but forgotten ;
everything contained in their teaching which was not
in accordance with the official credo of the age of
authority was at one time eliminated. Such of their
views as militated against the received orthodoxy of
the Church had become null and void in the fourth and
fifth centuries ; but they are brought out again to the
light by the fuller development of religious thought
which characterises our own day. My design, in these
concluding remarks, is not to present a broad picture
of the whole theological movement of primitive Chris
tianity, for a field of history so wide and various cannot
be thus comprehensively treated; but merely to disinter
the nuggets of pure gold which have been left buried,
not because they were so largely mingled with alloy as

464 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
to be scarcely discernible, but because of their very
purity. We have se'en theology properly so called originating
with the Greco-Asiatic school, of which Justin Martyr
was the head or the initiator ; then developing itself
with incomparable breadth at Alexandria, through the
subtle and brilliant genius of Clement and the dialectic
power of Origen, who formed the first complete system.
St. Hippolytus represents at Rome the Oriental school
with all its greatness and all its defects. Irenasus weds
it in a manner with the genius of the West, and frees
it from Platonist abstraction : this is the special merit
and glory of the Gallo-Asiatic school, which is weak on
the question of authority. The school of Carthage,
which unhappily espouses ardently the cause of epis
copal monarchy, fails to hold the advanced ground
reached by the bishop of Lyons with regard to the
living conception of the Deity, and blends a fierce
asceticism with the extreme assertion of the rule of
faith. Let us pass rapidly in review the essential
points of the Christian doctrine, in order to draw the
line between the errors and imperfections which may
be buried with the past, and the true and fruitful ideas
which may still be of benefit to ourselves.
We recognise at the outset that the ante-Nicene
theology was led, by its resistance to Gnostic and
naturalistic fatalism, to settle firmly the bases of
moral order. All its organs without exception affirm
with perfect clearness the free action of God and of
man. This is abundantly evident from the passages
we have quoted. The idea of arbitrary predestination
is purely a doctrine of heresy. Confronted with a

CONCLUSION. 465
pantheism equally hostile, under all its various dis
guises, Christian theology felt that it could only gain
the battle by remaining strictly faithful to the revela
tion of conscience. Doubtless, liberty was too often
reduced to mere freedom of choice, as in the system of
Origen ; but Irenasus rises to the conception of positive
liberty, which is not merely an act, but a state, and by
the trial of the will brings us to the realisation of our
true destiny. He admits that man finds his consumma
tion in the divine life by union with the Word. How
ever we may regard this divergence, the motto of all
primitive theology is this: "God never uses violence :
He only persuades."
The contest with Gnosticism had the further effect
of vindicating the unity of God as opposed to dualism.
The Alexandrine Fathers established admirably that
justice and goodness are not two attributes in opposi
tion, but are inseparable in their action. "Justice is
full of goodness, and goodness of justice," says Clement;
nor is he controverted by Tertullian, who declares
boldly that the essence of God is goodness, and that
He is only constrained to severity by our abuse of
liberty. Nothing was needed but to deduce the con
sequences from these principles, in order to arrive at
the complete and living conception of the God who
is essential love. The Platonist school had still too
strong a hold on cultivated minds to allow Christian
theodicy to escape its influence, and the moral idea
became subordinate to the metaphysical. The Fathers
brought up in this school of brilliant speculation, saw
in God rather the Ineffable One, the Transcendent Ab
solute, than the Father who is infinite love. Hence
3*

466 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
the defectiveness of their Trinitarian system. The
Trinity becomes a necessity in relation to the world ;
it is not the completion of the Divine life, of the very
being of God. , If God is love, He must have through
all eternity an object to love, and we are thus led to
the eternity of the Word as a person. The mystery
which overwhelms the reason satisfies the conscience,
since it is only the eternal realisation of its highest
ideal. Justin, Origen, Hippolytus, Tertullian, Cyprian
—all fail to reach this height : thus with most of them
the Word has a beginning. He simply precedes crea
tion in order to call it into existence, as the organ of
the first principle. The subordination of the Son to
the Father, thus understood, becomes so marked that
it is hard to maintain with any logical consistency
the full divinity of the Word. We are still far from
Arianism, however, which makes the Word come forth
from nothing; for all the Fathers of that age regard
Him as proceeding from God — to use their own ex
pression, as the stream from its source, the ray from
the sun. The Council of Nicasa certainly made a
great advance in theology by establishing that the
Trinity was, not merely contingent on creation, but
was an evolution of the Divine life in itself. It was
wrong, however, in confining itself too closely within
the metaphysical sphere, and in neglecting the great
moral idea of. love, which implies the eternity of the
Son, resting in the bosom of the Father, according to
the sublime image of St. John. In direct contradiction,
moreover, of the positive teaching of Scripture, it ab
solutely denied the subordination of the Word, a fact
which is perfectly reconcilable with His eternity, since

CONCLUSION. 467
He is eternally the Son and never the Father. With
regard to the personality of the Holy Spirit, we are
bound to admit that Christian antiquity was very vague
and undecided, and that it often seemed to confound
together the second and third persons of the Trinity.
This outline of primitive theodicy clearly necessi
tates a large expansion, if not of our theological
conception, at least of our appreciation of theological
systems. Even should we still hold the conviction
that the eternal divinity of the Word alone suffices to
give the true idea of God, it will be impossible for us
to exclude from the pale of Christianity all that deviates
metaphysically from this point of view ; for this would
be to involve in the same condemnation the most illus
trious representatives of the Church of the martyrs.
Anthropology was one of the glories of the theology
of this' period, but its depth and breadth caused it to
be entirely ignored in the ages which followed. All
the Fathers of the second and third centuries, except
Arnobius, maintained with a boldness which would be
considered scandalous in many sections of the Church
of our day, the original relationship between man and
God. They were never weary of dilating on the grand
saying of Paul to the Athenians, " Ye are the offspring
of God." From Justin, who discerns in our higher
life the germ of the Word, to Tertullian, who openly
avows our true nature to be Divine, none of them
hesitate to speak of the divinity of man. They use
the word without hesitation. Man's destiny finds its
full realisation in God. " First man, then God."
This saying of the theologian of Carthage truly repre
sents the thought of all the Fathers. The Word is
31 *

468 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
the prototype of Adam — the second Adam, that is, the
true Adam, not marred by sin, but realising the idea
or the ideal of humanity. Such a doctrine, carried to
its ultimate consequences, might have produced the
broadest and most comprehensive conception of the
nature of the Redeemer. Unhappily, many of the
Fathers wavered upon this point, and, untrue to their
own principle, yielded to the dualising tendency ; and
so completely separated the man from the God in
Christ, that the unity of the person can only be ad
mitted by a mental tour de force. Irenasus alone is
almost entirely free from this inconsistency ; he had
already deviated from his predecessors in his con
ception of God, which was far less of an abstraction
than that of Alexandrine Platonism, since the first
principle in his view is eternal love. We have quoted
at some length the admirable passages in which he
shows us in the incarnate Word the perfect man —
the very man whom God had in view in creation. He
truly humbled Himself to us, in order to raise us to
Himself. Homo factus est ut nos assuesceret fieri Dei.
The dogma of the two natures finds no place in his
theology, which cannot be too highly commended to
the study of our contemporaries.
We have seen that redemption is for the most part
stated in a very incomplete manner in the systems of this
period, although it is never reduced to a mere declaration
pure and simple of the divine love. All the ante-Nicene
Fathers allow that the restoration of humanity requires
a positive act of reparation, a sacrifice, but none of
them has an adequate apprehension of the awful depths
of evil. They affirm the fact of the Fall, without

CONCLUSION. 469
sufficiently recognising the extent of its ravages. They
are indeed right in their unanimous rejection of the
false and exaggerated idea of the total corruption of
human nature ; and yet, in spite of his doctrinal ex
travagances, St. Augustine will accomplish a very neces
sary task when, two centuries later, he grapples closely
with this large and melancholy theme. The idea of a
ransom paid to Satan, which was chiefly developed by
Origen, bears evident traces of Gnostic origin. Divine
justice is not recognised in all its claims. If the theo
logy of the second and third centuries rejects by all its
organs the inadmissible theory of a strictly judicial satis
faction, which makes the curse of God to alight directly
upon the innocent head of the Crucified, it at the same
time fails to recognise the full scope and the deep neces
sity of the reparative sacrifice, with the exception indeed
of Irenseus, who on this point, as on many others, is
the most faithful inheritor of apostolic teaching. He in
sists, with much force, upon the necessity of a retracta
tion of the primeval rebellion, by a perfect obedience
even unto death. But these grand thoughts were but
imperfectly developed, and come down to us in a more
or less fragmentary form. Evidently succeeding ages
had an important mission to fulfil in this respect.
Irenseus and Clement of Alexandria needed to be sup
plemented by Augustine and Anselm, while we ourselves
shall do well to retain the element of truth found in
each theory. It remained for the Reformation of the
sixteenth century to extirpate from primitive theology
all the false notions as to works of merit and expiation
which had crept into it ; not failing at the same time to
maintain, in opposition to the vehement reaction of Cal-

47° THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
vinism, that assertion of liberty which the ante-Nicene
Fathers uttered with one voice.
That which cannot be too highly commended is the
noble spirituality of this great epoch in the religious
life. The narrow Sabbatarianism which has played so
large a part in Protestant piety is completely foreign
to it. It does not allow that the Sunday has been
substituted for the Sabbath, though it lays much
stress on the celebration of the Christian feast. It does
not believe in the necessity of a sanctuary any more
than in that of a day of greater holiness than the rest.
If it wavers upon the notion of the priesthood, we may
make the same apology for it as for Irenasus, who is the
first to give expression to the idea of the apostolic suc
cession in the episcopate, and who is led to entertain
that view under the double pressure of persecution and
heresy. Neither Justin, Clement, nor Origen teaches
anything of the sort. We shall see in the sequel of this
history how prolonged and fierce was the conflict for
the liberty of the Church. The sacraments are vari
ously understood ; it is difficult indeed to derive any
distinct and definite idea from the mystical language
employed with regard to them. Nowhere however do
we find the exact idea of a magical transformation of
the eucharistic elements, and many declarations having
a contrary tendency may be cited.
As to the method to be pursued in the determination
of religious truth, the opinions are very various. Holy
Scripture preserves its pre-eminence; inspiration is
generally understood in its most rigorous sense, al
though statements are found in all the Fathers not easily
to be reconciled with such a theory. They are almost

CONCLUSION. 471
all agreed in recognising an enlarged measure of inspira
tion in the New Testament. Irenasus considers that the
exclusive gift of prophecy terminated with Christ : its
object was to accustom man to bear the Divine Spirit
within. The canon of the sacred writings is not de
fined with any fixity. The Apocryphal Gospels, the
" Letter to Barnabas," and the " Pastor Hermas," are
constantly quoted like the Gospels and Epistles.
Oral tradition is appealed to by Irenasus. He deems
that by its aid he can go back to the teaching of the
apostles ; and he argues that the faithful memory of
that teaching is to be sought only in the Churches
founded by them. Upon this point, however, there are
notable diversities of opinion. While Clement of
Alexandria enjoins the patient labour of religious
thought, and does not fear the inevitable differences of
opinion sure to arise from such a study, Tertullian in
his treatise, " De Prescriptiones," seeks to cut short
all inquiry, and bequeaths to his episcopal disciple,
Cyprian, the charge of completing his work, and of
teaching the reason to bow before the majestic unity of
the visible Church, which lacks as yet, however, the
crown of the pontificate. Everything proclaims the
advent of a new order of things. We must be careful,
however, not to antedate it, by confounding its prepara
tion with its consummation. The general characteristics
of the theology of the second and third centuries
are still liberty and diversity upon the common ground
of a living faith in Christ.
After thus indicating that which appears to us sugges
tive and helpful in this theology, and pointing out also
that which is in our view faulty and obsolete, it only

472 THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.
remains for us to leave this great history to convey
its own lessons to the Christian thought of our day, by
showing the dangers to be avoided and the precious
veins to be worked. The first practical lesson it will
teach is this — to repudiate alike the religious radical
ism which denies revelation, and the narrow orthodoxy
which insists on the acceptance of its own interpreta
tions. In truth, neither the one tendency nor the other
finds any sanction in the heroic Church, which was
wise enough to encounter fundamental errors with the
simple weapon of free discussion, and to vindicate the
legitimate independence of the human mind by the
very variety of its schools and its formularies.

INDEX OF SUBJECTS.

Achmoth, 31, 32.
./Elia Capitolina, 76.
jEons, 27, 28, 29.
Alogians, 127.
Andrew, acts of, 165; martyr
dom of, 165.
Anthropomorphism, its charac
ter and tendency, 19.
Antichrist, 403.
Apocryphal writings, 155; gos
pels of, 161 ; apocalypses of,
183.
Ariman, 60.
Asceticism, 453.
Athenagoras, 250 ; on the Word,
250; on angel of matter, 251 ;
on marriage, 251 ; on sin, 251 ;
on sacrifices of blood, 251.
Attitude of Christianity, 1, 2.
Barcocheba, 76.
Barnabas, epistle of, 6.
Basilides, Gnostic system of, 22,
23, 24.
Beast, najne of, 403.

Beryllus, bishop of Botsra, 136.
Bossuet, 210.
Buddhism, 12.
Callisthus, 144 ; favours Noetus'
views, 145 ; becomes rigidly
orthodox, 146.
Carthage, school of, 419.
Catechumens, faith of, 204.
Cerinthus, 75.
Childhood of Mary, Arabic
gospel of, 176.
Christ, second Moses, 244 ;
monogram of name, 197.
Church, the, 346 ; faith of, in
second and third centuries,
195-199 ; two great sections of,
219 ; conflicts of, 1, 2.
Christianity, its character and
sphere, 7, 8.
Clement of Alexandria, theodicy
of, 256 ; his idea of God at
first, 256; on duty of Christian
Gnostics, 257 ; on intuition of
the Divine Being, 258 ; on the

474

THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.

Word, 258 ; on righteousness
and goodness, 261 ; on punish
ment, 261 ; on doctrine of
Trinity, 264 ; on main end
and goal of Creation, 265 ; on
emanation from Divinity, 265 ;
on prescience of God, 265 ;
on demons, 266 ; on the Fall,
267 ; on sufferings of the
Redeemer, 269; on sacrifice,
269; on moral purification,
270; on justification, 271 ; on
sins committed before and
after repentance, 274; on
heaven, 276.; on Judaism,
277 ; on Christian morality,
279 ; on condition and calling
of life, 280; on martyrdom,
282 ; on special priesthood,
283; on mysteries of religious
knowledge, 285 ; on outward
sacrifices, 286 ; on distinction
of days, 287; on inspiration
of Scriptures, 288; on three
fold meaning of Scripture,
289; on Church authority in
matters of doctrine, 291 ; on
foundation of unity, 293 ; on
baptism and the Lord's Sup
per, 294.
"Clementine Homilies," doc
trines of, 85-88.
Cleomenes, supporter of Unita-
rianism, 143.

Conclusion, 461-472.
Conflicts of the Church, 1, 2.
Consummation of all things,
353-
Corinthians, apocalypse of, 171.
Creation, design of, 251.
Creation and Fall, 308.
Cyprian, 456 ; wise modera
tion of, 456 ; reproduces the
thoughts of his master Ter
tullian, 456-458 ; treatise of,
on " Good Works and Alms
giving," 459 ; on sacramental
efficacy, 460 ; on the episco
pate, 460 ; on intermediate
state, 462.
Diognetus, letter to, 221 ; echo
of school of Ephesus, 222 ;
designed to establish claims
of evangelical religion, 223 ;
doctrinal idea of, 224 ; idea of
God therein developed, 225 ;
asserts moral freedom, 226 ;
ridicules prescriptive observ
ance of Sabbath and fast,
227 ; an isolated monument
towering over all that sur
rounds it, 227.
Demiurgus, 33, 45.
Divine Being, intuition of, 258.
Divinity, no finite being emana
tion from, 265.
Dionysius of Alexandria, 360.

INDEX OF SUBJECTS.

475

Dionysius, bishop of Rome,
416 ; letter of, 417.
Docetism, 16.
Doctrine, Christian development
of, 193-
Dogmatic development of 2nd
and 3rd centuries, various
schools and tendencies in,
208.
"Dogmatic Theology," Father
Petau's, 209.
Ebionitism, 83 ; meaning of
term, 83 ; doctrine of, 84, 85.
Elkesaites, doctrines of, 81, 82.
Emanations, 27.
Essenism, 13.
Eugene Haag, "History of Doc
trine" of, 215.
Father, the, an unfathomable
abyss, 26 ; all love, 27.
Feasts, Jewish, replaced by
Christian festivals, 198.
Freppel, Abbe", 211.
Ginoulhac, Mgr., 212.
Gnosticism, dominant trait of,
6 ; its mythology of numbers,
19; Christian, 16; reasonable
division of systems of, 21 ;
sources of symbolism of, 20.
Gnostics, first school of, 22 ;
second school of, 39.

Gospels, apocryphal, 176.
Greco-Roman religion, 13.
Greco-Roman school, 374.
Greco-Asiatic school, 221.
Gregory Thaumaturgus, 358.
Gundaphora, king of, 167.
Hegelianism, 10.
Henri Klee, 210.
Hermas, Pastor, book of, 109.
Heresy, 3, 4, 5.
Hippolytus, 405 ; his idea of
God abstract, 406 ; on con
stituent and primordial ele
ments of finite existence, 408 ;
on Adam's fall, 409 ; on sal
vation, 409 ; on Holy Scrip
ture as supreme in matters of
religion, 415.
Hystaspis, book of, 188.
Ignatius, motto of, 197.
Irenasus, theology of, 375 ;
theodicy of, 376 ; on Divine
ontology, 378 ; on the Fall,
381 ; on consequence of sin,
381 ; on grounds of condem
nation, 382 ; on immaculate
conception, 385 ; on real sub
stitution, 387 ; on the cruci
fixion, 388 ; on relation of
the two Testaments, 390-393 ;
on the Lord's Supper, 394 ; no
theory of baptism, 399 ; on

476

THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.

oral tradition, 401 ; on literal
inspiration of the Old and New
Testaments, 403 ; on common
faith of all the Churches, 202.
John, St., acts of, 181 ; book
of, on "Death of Mary," 187.
Joseph the carpenter, Coptic
gospel of, 176.
Judaso - Christian community,
three sections of, 74, 75 ;
modified by events, 76 ; third
school of, 79 ; Justin Martyr's
opinion of, 77, 78.
Julius Africanus, 368.
Justin Martyr, theology of, 227 ;
his abstract theodicy, 229 ;
affirms Divinity of Christ,
230 ; makes Him second in
rank, 230 ; on theophanies of
Old Testament, 230 ; on Word
created by the Father, 231 ;
identifies Spirit with the
Word, 232 ; universe work of
the Word, 233 ; on idolatry,
234 ; on appearance of the
Word, 235 ; on the work of
redemption, 236 ; on Jewish
sacrifices, 238 ; on death of
Christ, 238 ; compares Him
to the goat Azazel, 239 ; on
curse borne by Christ, 240 ;
on last prayer of Christ, 241 ;
resurrection of Christ large

place in his writings, 241 ; on
Lord's day, 242 ; on Christ as
second Moses, 244 ; his posi
tion above all the varied
schools of Judaso-Christianity,
245 ; on baptism, 246 ; on
the Lord's Supper as a kind
of transubstantiation, 246 ; on
prophecy as the gift of all
Christians, 247 ; believes in
an earthly Jerusalem, 248 ;
seems to admit the eternity of
suffering, 249 ; his system
abounding in contradictions,
251.
Latinus, name of the Beast, 403.
Liturgy, Alexandrine, 200.
Mani, 54, 55 ; assumes name of
Paraclete, 56 ; cruelly put to
death, 59 ; his system, 60-73 ;
St. Augustine on, 64.
Manichasism, 51, 52, 54.
Marcion, 40-47.
Martyrdom, its effects, 2.
Methodius, 37.
Milner, Church history of, 213.
Mithra, mysteries of, 52.
Montanism, 10 1 ; three main
elements of, 102 ; strong re
action against established or
der, 105 ; early history of,
obscure, 107; its rise in Phry-

INDEX OF SUBJECTS.

477

gia ; 108 ; Montanus, founder
of, 1 08 ; development of, in
Rome, 109 ; openly con
demned, 109 ; largest number
of adherents in Africa, 1 10 ;
doctrine of, 110-114.; pytho
ness of, 1 14 ; revelations of,
no; fastings of, 117 ; forbids
marriage, 119; perversion of
doctrine of redemption, 122.
Mcehler, his "Patrology," 211.
Moses, apocalypse of, 183.
Myths of the East, 11.
Nativity, gospel of, 176.
Naturalism mystical, 12.
Nazarenes, 78.
Neo- Platonism, 13.
Newman, Dr., "The Develop
ment of Christian Doctrine "
of, 214.
Nicodemus, gospel of, 175.
Ophites, 39 ; influence of, 66.
Origen, system of, 296 ; theodicy
of, 299 ; Godhead complete in
the Father, 300 ; Son, same
in essence as the Father, 306 ;
on Holy Spirit, 307 ; on Crea
tion, 308 ; on free will, 309-3 1 2 ;
his "Treatise on Principles,
309 ; his theory incomplete,
113 ; on anterior condition of
life, 3 1 5 ; on rebellion of Satan,

316 ; on the Fall, 315 ; his
idea of a hierarchy, 316-320;
on condition of fallen man,
320 ; on redemption, 321 ;
on human soul of Christ, 324 ;
defects of his theory, 325-327 ;
on redemption of humanity,
329 ; on ransom, 331-334 ; his
positive dualism, 336 ; on work
of Redeemer since the resur
rection, 337 ; on conversion
and Christian life, 338 ; on
inward life, 342 ; on asceti
cism, 342-346 ; on the Church,
346 ; on priesthood of Chris
tians, 347 ; on sacraments,
348-350 ; on consummation of
all things, 353.
Ormuz, 60.
Pamphylus, 371.
Parseeism, 13.
Patristic divergence, 210-212.
Patriarchs, twelve, Testament
of, 174-
Petau, Father, dogmatic the
ology of, 209.
Paul and Thekla, acts of, 179.
Paul of Samosata, bishop of
Antioch, 131 ; surrounds him
self with great pomp, 132 ;
condemned by council of An
tioch, 133 ; his opinion of
Christ, 135.

478

THE EARLY YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY.

Pella, 76.
Peter, apocalypse of, 188.
Peter and Paul, acts of, 177.
Philo, great precursor of Gnos
ticism, 14.
Philosophy, Pythagorean, 19.
Pierius, 357.
Pistis Sophia, 36, 37, 38.
Pleroma, 30, 31.
Plutarch, 14.
Praxeas, 139.
Predestination, first appearance
of, 24.
Preps, 49.
Protovangelism of James, 176.
Pseudo-Matthew, 176.
Ransom, 331-334.
Rapture of Isaiah, 171.
Redeemer, work of, since resur
rection, 337.
Redemption, 301.
Sabellius of Lybia, 146 ; his
views, 148, 149.
Sacraments, the, 348, 350.
Stoics, the, 14.
Sybil, the, 188.
Syzygias, or couples, 19.
Tatian, " Exhortation against
the Greeks" by, 253; disciple

of Justin, 253 ; on the Word,
253 ; on matter as the source
of evil influence, 254.
Tertullian, system of, 419 ; he
seeks not idea, but fact, 421 ;
on revelation, 423 ; holds
literal verbal inspiration, 424 ;
his treatise on prescriptions,
226 ; his theory of the apos
tolate, 229 ; on tradition of
apostolic churches, 431 ; on
doctrine of the Trinity, 436-
442 ; on necessity of resurrec
tion, 444 ; his treatise " On
the Body of Christ," 446 ; on
redemption, 450 ; his idea of
sacrifice, 45 1 ; on martyrdom,
452 ; on asceticism, 453 ; his
views of the Lord's Supper,
454 ; he takes apocalyptic
images literally, 455.
Thaddeus, acts of, 182.
Theodotuses, two, 128.
Theognostus, catechist of Alex
andria, 439.
Theology of the Alexandrine
School primarily a defence of
Christianity, 255 ; its absolute
triumph over dualism, 256.
Theophilus of Antioch, 251 ; on
design of Creation, 257 ; his
idea of the Word, 252 ; on
theophanies, 252 ; on mar
riage, 253.

INDEX OF SUBJECTS.

479

Thomas, curious gospel ascribed
to, 161 ; origin of, 163.
Thought, three great schools of,
15,16.

25, 26 ; his chief disciples,
35-
Vedas, songs of, 12.
Vinet, beautiful words of, 390.

Unitarians, first school of, 127 ;
definite form of, 128 ; second
school of, 138.
Valentinus, Gnostic system of,
22, 23, 24 ; native of Egypt,
24; his idea of human history,

Word, world of the, 15 ; uni
verse work of, 233 ; became
incarnate in Jesus, 235 ; pro
duced by the Father by His
wisdom, or Spirit, 252 ; eter
nal reason of God, 250 ; God
Himself, 304.

UNWIN BROTHERS, THE GRESHAM PRESS, CHILWORTH AND LONDON.

YALE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY

3 9002 01463 0520

m

wiM