to this purpose from a Latin Homily. We find the same observation in a Greek fragment of his books of Principles, where he says, There are many difficulties in the scriptures, not only in the prophetical writings, which all allow to have many obscure aad enigmatical ex'pressions, but likewise in the gospels, and in the Revelation of John, and the epistles of the 'apostles.' This passage also serves to shew in part what were the scriptures which Origen, and other Christians, esteemed divine, and of authority. d с b 3. In his books against Celsus, Origen more than once speaks of the simple and popular, or even low style, of the writers of the New Testament; which, however, he affirms to be most for the general benefit of mankind: particularly he says, That the Jewish prophets, and the disciples of Jesus, renounced all artful composition of words, and what the scripture "calls"man's wisdom," and "fleshly wisdom." 1 Cor. ii. 4. 2 Cor. i. 12. In the Philocalia is a fragment of Origen's fourth tome upon St. John's gospel, which is introduced, and begins, as follows: Then after what he had said of the solecism of the gospel [or the evangelist], he goes on: But the apostles being sensible of their imperfection in this respect, and that they had not been educated in human learning, own themselves" rude in speech, though not in 'knowledge." For these words are not to be understood of Paul only, but likewise of the rest of the apostles: "But though we be rude in speech," &c.; and, "But we have this treasure ' in earthen vessels, that the excellence of the power may be of God, and not of us."' 2 Cor, xi. 6, iv. 7. By this means, he says, the truth of the gospel has been rendered more conspicuous: men have not been allured into it by the elegance of speech, but overcome by the mere force of truth alone. XXX. It appears to me worth the while to consider, whether Origen thought St. Matthew's gospel was originally written in Hebrew. We have seen three places where Origen speaks of this matter. In the passage cited from Eusebius, he says that Matthew delivered his gospel to the Jewish believers in the Hebrew language.' In the second passage he observes, there was a tradition that Matthew wrote first, and delivered his gospel to the He'brews, that is, the believers of the circumcision.' In the third he says, that Matthew wrote for the Hebrews, who expected him that was to descend from Abraham and David.' Having thus reminded the reader of these places, I would observe some other Origen. passages of In his Treatise of Prayer, explaining the fourth petition of the Lord's prayer, he observes, ' that the Greek word 718105, which by us is rendered daily,' is not used by any of the learned Greeks; nor is it,' says he, in use with the vulgar: but it seems to have been coined by the evangelists; for both Matthew and Luke agree in using it without any difference.' He goes on to say, that they also who translated the Old Testament into Greek, had some words peculiar to themselves.' It is somewhat strange that Origen should here take no notice of St. Matthew's Greek gospel being a translation, if he thought so. In his commentaries upon the second Psalm, he makes mention of two Hebrew copies which he had seen, and observes a difference between them in disposing the first two Psalms, and then how they were disposed in the Septuagint version. Again (to mention no more instances of this sort) upon Ps. iii. 7, he consults the Hebrew copies,* and finds a difference from • Και τι δει λεγειν περί των προφητικων, ὡς πανες ισμεν αινιγμαίων και σκοτεινων πεπληρωσθαι λόγων; καν επί τα ευαγ γελια δε φθάσωμεν, κακείνων η ακριβής κας, άτε νας Χρισε, δειται χαρίλος της δοθείσης. τω ειρηκότι ήμεις δε νεν Χρισε εχου μεν. . . [i Cor. ii. 12, 13.] και τα αποκεκαλυμμένα δε τῷ Ιωάννη τις εκ αν αναγνες καταπλαγειη την επικρυψιν των απορ ῥήλων μυσηρίων . . . ; αί δε των αποςόλων επισολαί τινι των βασανίζειν επιςαμενων λογες δόξαιεν αν είναι σαφεις και ευχερως Dr. Philoc. cap. i. p. 8. Cant. De Prin. I. iv. p. 167. Bened. Conf. Orig. p. 38. B. C. p. 39. B. C. Tom. i. Huet. b Con. Cels. 1. iv. P. 210. Cant. p. 556, 557. Bened. et lib. vi. init. - Οι δε εν Ιεδαίοις προφηται, και οἱ τε Ιησε μαθηται δι μακραν χαίρειν ειπονίες τη ποικιλῇ των λέξεων συνθεσει, κ. τ. λ. Cont. Cels. 1. vii. p. 372. Cant. p. 737. Bened. 4 Είία, είπων τον τε Ευαγγελία σολοικισμόν, επαγει· Απε δε εκ ασυναίσθητοι αποδο και τυγχανοντες των εν οἷς προσκοπίεσι, και περι & εκ ησχοAyulai, pasiv, x. λ. Philoc. cap. iv. p. 25. Cant. Tom. ii. p. 86. Huet. e Numb. iv. f Numb. vii. 4. 8 Numb. xvii. 543. * Πρωίον δε τον ισέον, ὅτι ἡ λεξις ή, επιεσιον, παρ' εδενι των Ελλήνων, είε των σοφών ωνο μαςαι, είε εν τη ιδιωίων συνήθεια τείριπίαι, αλλ' εοικε πεπλασε θαι ύπο των ευαγγελίσων. Συνηνέχθησαν γεν ὁ Μαῖθαιος και ὁ Λέκας περι αυτης μηδαμως διαφερεσης [al. διαφερεσην] αυτην εξενηνοχότες. Το όμοιον δε και επ' άλλων οἱ ἑρμηνεύονίες τα Εβραϊκα πεποιήκασι. De Orat. p. 245. D. 246. A. Tom. i. Bened. · Δυσιν εντυχονίες Εβραϊκοις αντιγράφοις, εν μεν τῷ ἑτέρῳ εύρομεν αρχην δεύτερο ψαλμο ταυτά εν δε τῳ έτερῳ συνηπλεῖο τῷ πρωίῳ. Και εν ταις Πράξεσι δε των αποδό λων το, υἱος με ει συ, εγώ σήμερον γεγεννηκά σε, ελεγείο είναι το πρωτα ψαλμο [Acts xiii. 33.] τα Ελληνικα μεν οι αντιγραφα δεύτερον είναι τελον μηνύει. In Ps. ii. p. 537. F. Tom. ii. Bened. κ Οτι συ επαλαξας παντας τες εχθραίνοντας μοι ματαίως, κ. λ.] Τῳ Εβραϊκῳ εντυχονίες, τῳ ματαίως, εδαμώς εύρομεν δυναμενον δηλεσθαι. Ibid. p. 554. Α. the Seventy. Well, why did not Origen enquire also for Hebrew copies of St. Matthew's gospel? a In his Commentaries upon St. John he observes, John Baptist in the three gospels, says, "I am not sufficient; " but in John, "I am not worthy."' It is wonderful that Origen, who was so nice and exact, and minded such little things, did not compare likewise the Hebrew of St. Matthew, if he thought this evangelist had written in that language. It is true that in two or three places of Origen's works, which were transcribed formerly, we find the gospel according to the Hebrews cited; and in one of those places it is brought into a kind of comparison with a history related in the first three evangelists: but then it is in such a manner as to afford no ground at all for supposing he thought that an authentic edition of St. Matthew's gospel. In the place where he says there were many differences in the copies of the gospels, he makes mention of what he had done for correcting the errors crept into the Greek edition of the Old Testament then in use; and takes notice of the helps and advantages he had for that purpose, by comparing the Hebrew original and the several Greek versions of it; intimating, at the same time, that he had not such helps for attaining the right readings in the gospels. But certainly, if St. Matthew's gospel had been written in Hebrew, the original edition might have been of great use for correcting the Greek copies of that gospel at least; and it was an advantage very fit to be taken notice of, and could not easily have been omitted. I cannot but think, therefore, Origen was not fully satisfied that St. Matthew wrote his gospel in Hebrew. Undoubtedly there was such a tradition, as he himself owns; but it is likely he did not altogether rely upon it. This was said by some; but perhaps the account was not so attested as to demand a ready assent. If Origen had believed St. Matthew's gospel to have been written in Hebrew, in all probability he would have been induced to enquire for it; and if his belief had been well grounded, it can hardly be doubted but he might have found it upon enquiry. Origen had an intimate friendship with the chief bishops of Palestine; he could not but be well known to all the Christians in general in that country, none of whom would have refused to lend him their copies of any book of the New Testament in their possession. At one word spoken by him, Ambrose, and the notaries employed by him, and many others, would have sought for Hebrew copies of St. Matthew's gospel; and if there had been any such in that country, or near it, there would have been brought to him as many as he desired. Nevertheless Origen does not appear to have ever seen such a copy; therefore there was no such thing in being as an authentic Hebrew gospel of St. Matthew: if there had, how could it have escaped the industry and inquisitiveness of Origen? XXXI. Origen then received as divine scripture the four gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John; the Acts of the Apostles, written by the evangelist Luke; thirteen epistles of the apostle Paul; and likewise the epistle to the Hebrews, which he continually quotes as Paul's, though in one place he delivers his opinion that the sentiments only of the epistle were the apostle's, the phrase and composition of some one else, whose he did not certainly know. He received likewise the first epistle of Peter, and the first of John. We learn from him also that the epistle of James, the second of Peter, the second and third of John, and the epistle of Jude, were then well known, but not universally received as genuine; nor is it evident that Origen himself received them as sacred scripture. He owns the book of the Revelation for the writing of John the apostle and evangelist; he quotes it as his without hesitation; nor does it appear that he had any doubt about its genuineness or authority. Origen does mightily recommend the reading of the scriptures of the Old and New Testament, received in the churches as sacred and divine. From the large collection here made of his quotations of ecclesiastical and apocryphal writings, and from the observations that have been made upon them, presume it appears that none of these were esteemed by him as books of authority, from whence doctrines might be proved; or scripture, in the highest sense of that word. Indeed it is not evident that Origen received, as sacred books of the New Testament, all that we now receive; but that he admitted no other beside those in our present canon, may be reckoned certain, or however in the highest degree probable. If this has been made out to satisfaction, • Ο τοινυν Ιωαννης φησι παρα μεν τοις τρισιν, εκ είναι ίκανος, παρά δε τῳ Ιωαννη, εκ είναι αξιος. Comm. in Job. p. 127. Α. Huet. b See Matth. iii. 11; Mark i. 7; Luke iii. 16; and John i. 27. See Numb. xxiv. 2. p. 553, 554. • Την μεν εν εν τοις αντιγράφεις της παλαιας διαθήκης διαφω I γιαν, Θες δίδοντος, εύρομεν ἴασασθαι, κριτηρίω χρησάμενοι ταις it is a material point, and worth all the labour of this long chapter; though I hope it may likewise answer some other good purposes. Particularly, we may perceive hence, as well as from other parts of this work, that this was not with Christians an age of gross darkness; at least the ministers of Christ did not encourage sloth and ignorance in the people, but earnestly excited all men to a diligent pursuit of religious knowledge, according to their several abilities and opportunities, especially by studying the holy scriptures. The various readings, explications of texts, and other matters, are left with the reader, who is able to make a proper use of them. CHAP. XXXIX. ST. FIRMILIAN. с FIRMILI IRMILIAN, as we are assured by Eusebius in his Ecclesiastical History, and by others, was bishop of Cæsarea in Cappadocia. If we may rely upon Gregory of Nyssa, he was descended from an honourable family in that country; but that account has been disputed. Cave' sup poses that Firmilian was ordained bishop of the forementioned city in the year 233; Basnage and Tillemont think he obtained that honour sooner. They argue this from some words of Eusebius, where he speaks of Firmilian's flourishing at the tenth year of the Emperor Alexander, when Origen left Alexandria, in the year 231. Firmilian was present at a council in Iconium, which Tillemont thinks could not be held later than 231, though. Valesius and Cave' place it in 255. There seems to have been a council at Antioch in the year 252, on account of Novatus, at which Firmilian was present. He was likewise at the council of Antioch, in the cause of Paul of Samosata, in the year 264 or 265. He is said to have been twice at Antioch upon that account; but when the council was met at Antioch, in which Paul was condemned and deposed, as he was coming thither, he died at Tarsus, in the latter part of the year 269, of a great age, as may be well concluded from the commencement of his episcopate. Firmilian sided with St. Cyprian in the dispute about baptizing heretics that returned to the catholic church, and upon that subject wrote a long letter to St. Cyprian, which is still extant; but whereas undoubtedly it was written in Greek, we have now only a Latin translation: however it may be reckoned a good one, since learned men are generally agreed in allowing it to have been made by St. Cyprian himself, whose style it resembles. This letter was written in the year 256, and near the end of it. St. Basil makes a general mention of writings which Firmilian had left behind him, without saying expressly what they were. It may be argued that they were not very numerous, or not much known, since Jerom had not allotted any distinct article in his catalogue of ecclesiastical writers for this eminent bishop. As the letter to St. Cyprian, the only remaining piece of our author, was not written before the year 256, perhaps I should have chosen to place him about that time: but since Cave, and other learned moderns, speak of Firmilian as flourishing about the year 233 (and according to Eusebius himself he was a person of note at that time, or sooner,) and the matter is of no great importance, I have determined not to innovate. a Firmilian had an earnest zeal for what he thought to be the truth, as his letter to St. Cyprian shews; which is also confirmed by what the council at Antioch, in 269 or 270, say of his condemning the opinions of Paul of Samosata, bishop of that city. He was, besides, a man of prudence and moderation; for to him it is ascribed by the said council, that Paul was not deposed in a former council met at the same place. And who knows whether Firmilian, if he had lived to be present at this last assembly, might not have prevented the deposition of Paul, or at least once more deferred the sentence then pronounced? Though Firmilian seems not to have made any great figure as an author, he was well known in the world, and highly esteemed by his contemporaries, and by following ages. There is honourable mention made of him by Dionysius of Alexandria in one of his letters, and by the council of Antioch by which Paul of Samosata was deposed. Theodoret gives this Cappadocian bishop the character of an illustrious person, equally master of divine and human 'knowledge. It is a further argument of his great reputation, that both Eusebius and Jerom have so particularly insisted upon his respect to Origen, as a considerable testimony to the extraordinary merit of that great man. This may suffice for the history and character of Firmilian. I proceed to observe the quotatious of the books of the New Testament which are to be found in his forementioned letter to St. Cyprian. g I. Hence we may be able to understand what Christ said to Peter only: "Whatsoever "thou shalt bind on earth, shall be also bound in heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, shall be also loosed in heaven." Matth. xviii. 18. II. The Lord himself declaring, "Many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ, and shall deceive many." See Mark xiii. 6. But it must be owned that there are exactly the same words in Matth. xxiv. 5. III. For union, and peace, and concord, afford the greatest joy not only to "faithful men, and those that know the truth," but also to the "heavenly angels," who, the divine word says, "rejoice over one sinner that repenteth." Luke xv. 10. And in the preceding words is a plain reference to 1 Tim. iv. 3. IV. And again in the gospel, when Christ breathed on the apostles only, saying, "Re'ceive ye the Holy Ghost. John xx. 22. He has likewise quoted' John xvii. 21. V. Accordingly the blessed apostle Paul baptized again with a spiritual baptism those who had been baptized by John, before the Holy Spirit had been sent by the Lord; and then laid his hands upon them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost.' See Acts xix. I......7. VI. Though the Jews were in great ignorance, and guilty of much wickedness, the 'apostle owns they "had a zeal of God." Rom. x. ii. n VII. "This will be the wisdom which Paul writes to be in them that are perfect." 1 Cor. ii. 6. He likewise quotes P 1 Cor. xiv. 30, and 1 Cor. xi. 27. VIII. Nor are there many spouses of Christ, since the apostle says, "I have espoused you unto one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin unto Christ." 2 Cor. xi. 2. He also refers to ver. 13 of the same chapter. IX. For if the apostle does not lie when he says, "As many of you as have been bap'tized into Christ, have put on Christ." Gal. iii. 17. • Ο δε Φιρμιλιανος, και δις αφικομένος, κατέγνω μεν των ὑπ' εκεινα καινοτόμες μενων, κ. λ. Ap. Eus. I. vii. c. 30. p. 279. D. b Επαγγειλάμενο [Παυλο] δε μεταθήσεσθαι, πίςευσας και Ελπισας ανευ τινός περι τον λόγον λοιδορίας το πραγμα εις δεον καλαςήσεσθαι, ανεβαλείο, κ. λ. Ibid. p. 280. Α. Eus. H. E. 1. vii. c. 5. p. 251. D. d Ib. cap. 30. p. 279. D. * Και Φιρμιλιανος ὁ Καισαρέων της Καπ 8 παδοκίας επίσκοπος, περιφανης ανήρ, και γνωσιν ἑκατέραν ἔχων, xaι Tyv Dupatev, xai Thy Selay. Theodoret. Hæret. Tab. I. iv. cap. 8. p. 222. D. See the preceding chapter, p. 523. Hinc intelligi potest quod soli Petro Christus dixerit: 'Quæcunque ligaveris super terram, erunt ligata et in cœlis; с et quæcunque solveris super terram, erunt soluta et in cœlis.' Inter Ep. Cyprian. 75. p. 225. Oxon. h... Dominus ipse manifestat, dicens, Multi venient in nomine meo, dicentes, Ego sum Christus, et multos fallent.' Ib. p. 222. i Adunatio enim, et pax, et concordia, non solum hominibus fidelibus et cognoscentibus veritatem, sed et angelis ipsis a b X. But what says the apostle Paul? "One Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God.” Eph. iv. 5, 6. A little before he quoted the first four verses of this same chapter. XI. But as to what they pretend in favour of heretics, that the apostle has said, "Whe'ther in pretence, or in truth, Christ is preached;" we must answer, that it is impertinently alleged. Which, he says, will appear to any one who reads the epistle of the apostle whence those words are taken. е d XII. He says of all heretics in general, It is manifest they are condemned of themselves, and before the day of judgment they have passed an incontestable sentence against 'themselves.' It is very probable he refers to Tit. iii. 10, 11: and we before saw a plain reference to St. Paul's first epistle to Timothy. g XIII. This writer says, that Noah's ark was a figure of the church of Christ. He adds, 'As also the apostle Peter teaches, saying, "In like manner also will baptism save you: us,' as in some copies. 1 Pet. iii. 21. or XIV. And moreover abusing the blessed apostles Peter and Paul, as if they also had ' delivered this doctrine; though they in their epistles have cursed heretics, and admonished us to avoid them.' This passage may be thought to shew that Firmilian owned two epistles of Peter, because he speaks of epistles in the plural number: and, besides, what is here said does well enough suit the second epistle ascribed to that apostle. Here one cannot help wishing that we had this letter in its original language. It would be a particular satisfaction to know, that Firmilian received two epistles of St. Peter. XV. He seems to refer to the first epistle of St. John, when he says of heretics in general, That since they have not the true Lord the Father, they cannot have the true Son, nor the true Spirit: and of the Cataphrygians or Montanists, in particular. That they have not the Father, nor the Son, nor the Holy Spirit; and that they have not in them the " truth, but the spirit of error." See I John ii. 22, 23; and iv. 6. spirit of XVI. I forbear transcribing any more, though I might insist on some other allusive expressions. Here are sufficiently clear references to the gospels of St. Matthew, St. Luke, and St. John; to the Acts of the Apostles; to the epistle to the Romans; the first and second to the Corinthians; the epistles to the Galatians, the Ephesians, the Philippians; the first to Timothy, and to Titus; the first, if not also the second, of St. Peter; and the first epistle of St. John: and sometimes the names of the apostles Peter and Paul are expressly mentioned when their words are quoted. And there appear marks of a peculiar respect for these books, since they are quoted as writings of authority. It cannot be well questioned but Firmilian's canon of the New Testament was much the same as ours. It is plain that our scriptures were well known at that time in Cappadocia: and in particular it may be observed, that the epistle of St. Paul to the churches of Galatia, and the first epistle of St. Peter, both addressed to Christians in that country, or near it, were received as genuine and divine scriptures by this learned and discreet bishop, who had his residence in those parts. a Sed quid ait apostolus Paulus? Unus Dominus, una fides, unum baptisma, unus Deus.' P. 229. b P. 228. • Ad illud autem quod pro hæreticis ponunt, et aiunt apostolum dixisse, Sive per occasionem, sive per veritatem, Christus annuntietur,' ut respondeamus, ineptum est. p. 226. d Quando manifestum sit apostolum, in epistolâ suâ, quâ hoc dicit, neque hæreticorum, neque baptismi eorum, mentionem fecisse, sed locutum esse de fratribus tantum. ... Nec porteat hoc longo tractatu excutere, sed ipsam satis sit epistolam legere, &c. Ibid. • Quos omnes manifestum est a semetipsis damnatos esse, et ante diem judicii inexcusabilem sententiam adversus semetipsos dixisse. p. 220. ? Quemadmodum et Sic et vos similiter salvos h Adhuc etiam infamans At Numb. iii. p. 576. apostolus Petrus posuit, dicens, 'faciet baptisma.' p. 224. Petrum et Paulum beatos apostolos, quasi hoc ipsi tradiderint; qui in epistolis suis hæreticos execrati sunt, et, ut eos evitemus, monuerunt. p. 220. Satis est illud in compendio dicere, eos, qui non teneant verum Dominum Patrem, tenere non posse nec Filii nec Spiritûs Sancti veritatem. p. 220. fin. Nec Patrem possunt habere, nec Filium, nec Spiritum Sanctum. p. 221. inît. In quibus cum animadverta mus non veritatis spiritum, sed erroris fuisse. Ibid. |