world, those impotent genii, of their power over the virtuous and heaven-born souls of men; and to teach men how to withdraw their divine minds from these impure bodies, and fit them for a union with God. 7. Their systems of morals, we are informed, were widely different. For most of them recommended abstinence and austerity, and prescribed the most severe bodily mortifications, in order that the soul, whose ill fate it was to be associated with a body, might enjoy greater liberty, and be able the better to contemplate heavenly things. For, the more this depraved and grovelling habitation of the soul is weakened and attenuated, the less will it be able to withdraw the mind from the contemplation of divine objects. But some of them maintained, on the contrary, that we may safely indulge all our libidinous desires; and that there is no moral difference in human actions.' This contrariety of opinions needs not surprise us, because the one principle naturally produced both systems. For persons who believed that their bodies were the very essence of evil and calculated only to hold their souls in bondage, might, according as they were of a voluptuous or of a morose and austere disposition, either fall into the conclusion, that the acts of the body have no connexion with the soul when it has attained to communion with God, or, on the contrary, suppose that the body must be strenuously resisted and opposed as being the enemy of the soul. after assuming the name of Christians, became divided into numerous sects. In the first place, it appears from what has been already stated, that they held very different opinions before they professed Christianity. Hence, as each one endeavoured to accommodate his own philosophical opinions to the Christian religion, it was the necessary consequence that various systems of reli gion were produced. Moreover, some of them were born Jews as Cerinthus and others, and did not wish to appear contemners of Moses; while others were wholly estranged from the Jewish religion, and could indulge themselves in liberties which the former could not. And lastly, this whole system of philosophy and religion was destitute of any fixed and solid basis, and was, in a great measure, the creature of their own fancy; and who does not know, that systems and institutions which are the productions of the imagination, never have uniformity? 10. The heads and leaders of the philosophical sects which troubled the church in the first century, next come to be considered. The first place among them is by many given to Dositheus, a Samaritan. And it is sufficiently proved that there was a man of this name among the Samaritans, about the time of our Saviour; and that he left a sect behind him. But all the accounts we have of him clearly show that he is to be ranked, not among those called heretics, but among the enemies of the Christian name; or, if it be thought more correct, among the delirious and insane; for he wished to be accounted the Messiah or that Prophet whom God had promised to the Jews; he could not, therefore, have held Jesus Christ to be a divine ambassador, nor have merely corrupted his doctrines. 11. What I have said of Dositheus I would likewise say of Simon Magus. This impious man is not to be ranked among those who corrupted Christianity by an in 8. As these extraordinary opinions required proof, which it was not easy to find in the writings of the apostles, recourse was had to falsehoods and impositions. Therefore when asked, where they had learned what they had so confidently taught, some produced fictitious books under the names of Abraham, Zoroaster, and Christ, or his apostles; some pretended to have derived their principles from a concealed and secret doctrine taught by Christ; some affirmed that they had arrived at this high degree of wisdom by an innate energy which existed in their own minds; and some pretended that one Theudas, a disciple of St. Paul, or Matthias, one of Christ's disciples, had been their teacher. Those of them who did not wholly reject the books of the New Testa-sents him as an apostate Jew. According to Origen ment, either interpreted them most absurdly neglecting the true import of words, or wantonly corrupted them by retrenching what they disliked, and adding what they pleased. It is easy to see how these persons, 1 See Clemens Alex. Stromat. lib. iii. cap. v. p. 529, ed. Potter. Basnage, Histoire des Juifs, livr. ii. chap. xiii. p. 307. Simon, Critique de la Bibliothèque des Auteurs Ecclés. par M. du Pin, tome iii. chap. xiii. p. 304. [Mosheim, Inst. hist. Chris. majores, p. 376. Walch, Hist. der Ketzer. vol. i. p. 182. All the accounts make Dositheus to have lived among the Samaritans; one writer repre(Philocal. i.), he was a rigorous observer of the law of Moses; and particularly allowed no one to move from the spot where the Sabbath overtook him. According the Christian heresies), he was an apostate Jew whose ambition being disappointed, he retired among the Sa to Epiphanius ( Hæres. lib. i. par. i. hær. 13, previous to It is maritans, lived in a cave, and fasted so rigorously as termixture of errors or among the heretics, present day. They are at least uncertain but is to be classed among those who de- and improbable. clared open war against Christianity, although nearly all the ancient and modern writers account him the head, father, and ringleader of the whole heretical crew. For it is manifest from all the records we have of him, that after his defection from the Christians, he ascribed to Christ no honour at all; but set himself in opposition to Christ and claimed to be the supreme power of God. 13. Simon undoubtedly belonged to that class of philosophers who admitted, as co existent with the supreme and all-perfect God, not only eternal matter but an evil deity who presided over it. And if I mistake not, he was one of those in this class who believed matter to have been eternally animated, and at a certain period to have brought forth, by its inherent energies, that depraved being who now rules over it, sur12. What the ancients relate of the life rounded by numerous attendants. From and opinions of Simon are so different and this opinion of Simon, the other gross errors inconsistent, that some very learned men ascribed to him by the ancients concerning have concluded they could not all relate to fate, the indifference of human actions, the one person; and therefore they suppose two impurity of the human body, the power of Simons; the one, Simon Magus, who aban-magic, &c. would very naturally follow. doned the Christian religion; and the other, The most shocking of all his abominations a Gnostic philosopher. On this point men was, his pretence that the greatest and most will judge as they see right; but to me it powerful of the Divine Aons of the male appears neither safe nor necessary to reject sex resided in himself; and likewise that the testimony of the ancients that there was another Eon of the female sex, the mother only one Simon.1 He was by birth either of all human souls, resided in his mistress a Samaritan or a Jew; and after studying Helena; and his proclaiming that the suphilosophy at Alexandria, professed to be preme God had dispatched him down to a magician, as was common in that age: this world, to break up the empire of the and by his fictitious miracles persuaded the world's fabricators, and to deliver Helena Samaritans among others, that he had re-out of their hands. 5 ceived from God the power of controlling those evil spirits which afflict mankind. 3 See Beausobre, Histoire de Manicée, pages 203395; Van Dale, Diss. de Statua Simonis, annexed to Acts viii. 9, 10. On seeing the miracles his book De Oraculis, p 579; Deyling, Observat Sawhich Philip performed by Divine power, crar. lib. i. Observ. xxxvi. p. 140, Tillemont, MeSimon joined himself to him, professed to and numerous others. [What Arnobius, Adv. Gentes, pour servir à l'histoire de l'Eglise, tom. i. p. 340, be a Christian, and hoped to learn from the lib. ii. p. 64, ed. Herald, and after him, many others Christians the art of working miracles. relate, with some variety, concerning Simon's death; viz. that while practising magic at Rome, in order to When cut off from this hope by the pointed ingratiate himself with Nero, he attempted to fly being reproof of St. Peter (Acts viii. 9, 10), he assisted by evil spirits; but that by the prayers of St. Peter, the evil spirits were compelled to let him fall, not only returned to his old course of sor-which either killed him outright or broke his bones, cery, but wherever he went he laboured to and so mortified him that he killed himself,-is too imobstruct the progress of Christianity. The probable and has too much the aspect of fiction to gain credit in this enlightened age. And the mistake of accounts of his tragical death and of a Justin Martyr, Apol i. cap. xxxiv. who says he saw statue decreed him at Rome, are rejected at Rome, has been satisfactorily accounted for, a public statue inscribed to Simon on an island in the with great unanimity by the learned at the Magus (Clemens, Recogn. lib. ii. 8, &c.) Eulogius, Bishop of Alexandria, in the seventh century wrote against the Dositheans (according to Photius, Biblioth. cxxx.), and besides his pretended Messiahship, he attributes to Dositheus various errors, all of which coincided with either Sadducean or Samaritan opinions. See Schmidt, Handb. d. christl. Kirchengeschichte, vol. i. sec. 50, p. 214, &c.-Mur. moires since the discovery, in the year 1574, of a stone in the Tiber at Rome, bearing this inscription: "Semoni Sanco, Deo Fidio Sacrum." For this inscription, which Justin, being an Asiatic, might easily misunderstand, was undoubtedly intended for an ancient pagar god.- Mur. 4 The dissertation of Horbius, De Simone Mago, though a juvenile production and needing correction in style, I prefer to all others on this subject. It will be found republished by Voigtius, in the Biblioth. Haresiologica, tom. i. par. iii. p. 511. Horbius treads closely clearly saw the source of those numerous errors by which the Gnostics and especially Simon, were infected. The other writers who have treated of Simon, are enumerated by Voigtius, ubi supra, p. 567. [See Walch, Hist. der Ketzer. vol. i. p. 152, &c. The English reader will find a full, but not a very accurate, account of Simon in Calmet's Dictionary of the Bible. 1 See the Dissertation by Voelger, revised and pub-in the steps of his preceptor, Thomasius, who very lished by Mosheim, Diss. ad Histor. Eccles. pertinentes, vol. ii p. 55, &c. De uno Simone Mago. [The idea of two Simons, the one a Samaritan mentioned Acts viii. the other a Jewish philosopher in the reign of Domitian, and the father of all the Gnostic sects, was first thrown out as a conjecture by Vitringa, Observ. Sacrar. lib. v cap. xii. sec. 9, p. 159, and afterwards defended by Heumann, Acta erudit. Lips. for April, A.D. 1717,-Mur. [But he ought especially to refer to Burton's p. 179; and Beausobre, Diss sur les Adamites, part ii. subjoined to L'Enfant's Histoire de la guerre des Husrites, sec 1. p. 350, &c. But this hypothesis is now generally given up.-Mur. Clementina, Homil. ii. in Patr. Apostol. tom. ii. p. 533. Heresies of the Apost. Age, Lec. iv. with the illustrative 5 Some very learned men, I am aware, have supposed that the ancient accounts of Simon's Helena should be interpreted allegorically; and that Simon intended, by 14. From Simon Magus, it is said, Menander, who was also a Samaritan, learned his doctrine; which is no more true than what the ancients relate, that all the heretical sects derived their origin from this Simon. Menander is to be removed from the list of heretics strictly so called, and classed among the lunatics and madmen, who foolishly arrogated to themselves the character of the Saviour of mankind. For it appears from the testimony of Irenæus, Justin Martyr, and Tertullian,' that he wished to be thought one of the Eons, sent from the upper world or the Pleroma, to succour the souls which were here suffering miserably in material bodies; and to afford them aid against the machinations and the violence of the demons who governed our world. As he erected his religious system on the same fundamental principles as Simon did, the ancients supposed that he must have been his disciple. 15. If those now mentioned are excluded from the number of the heretics of the first century, the first place among the Christian sectaries, and also among those denominated Gnostics, seems to belong to the Nicolaitans, of whom Jesus Christ himself expressed his detestation. Rev. ii. 6, 14, 15. 16. With greater propriety we may reckon among the Gnostics, Cerinthus, a Jew by birth, but was taught literature and philosophy at Alexandria. Though some of the learned have chosen to assign him rather to the second century than to the first, yet it appears it was while St. John was still living, that he endeavoured to form a singular system of religion, compounded of the doctrines and principles of Jesus Christ, and those of the Gnostics and Jews. From the Gnostics he borrowed the notions of a Pleroma, Eons, a Demiurge, &c. but these he so modified, that they appeared not wholly inconsistent with the opinions of the Jews. Therefore to the Creator of this world, whom also he acknowledged to be the Sovereign and the Lawgiver of the Jewish nation, he ascribed a nature possessed of the highest virtues, and derived from the true God; but which, he affirmed, had gradually receded from its primitive excellence and become deteriorated. Hence God had determined to subvert his power by means of one of the blessed ons, whose name was Christ. This Christ had entered into a certain Jew named Jesus (a very righteous and holy It is true the Saviour does not tax the ancients, except John Cassianus ( Collatio, xviii. cap. them with errors in matters of faith, but xvi.), supposed that Nicolaus of Antioch, the Deacon (Acts vi. 5), was either the founder or accidental cause only with licentious conduct and a disre- of this sect. Irenæus makes him to have been the But Clemens Alex. states that an ingard of the injunction of the apostles to founder of it. abstain from meats offered to idols, and sect. For he being one day accused of too much attencautious speech or act of his gave occasion only to this from fornication. Acts xv. 29. But the tion to his wife, when he came to defend himself he writers of the second and the following cen-para Th σapki del, it is proper to abuse the flesh; publicly divorced her, using the expression, or mapaturies, Irenæus, Tertullian, Clemens Alexan-e. to subdue its corrupt propensities. This speech was drinus, and others, declare that they taught the same doctrines with the Gnostics concerning two principles of all things, and concerning the Eons and the origin of the present world. Whether this testimony is to be admitted, or whether we are to suppose that the ancients confounded two different sects which bore the same name; the one, the Apocalyptical Nicolaitans, and the other, a Gnostic sect of the second century founded by a man named Nicolaus; is question which admits of doubt.3 a the name of Helena, to indicate matter or the soul or something I know not what. But for such an allegorical interpretation, it would be easy to show there is little foundation. 1 Irenæus, lib. i. cap. xxiii.; Justin Martyr. Apol. ii. p. 69; Tertullian, De Anima, cap. 50; and De Resurrect. cap. v.-Mur. Irenæus, lib. ili cap. xi. and lib. ii. cap. xxvii.; Tertull. De Præscript. cap. xlvi.; Clem. Alex. Strom. lib. iii. cap. iv.-Mur. a See Demonstratio Secta Nicolaitarum, adv. doctiss. ejus oppugnatores, cum Supplemento; in Mosheim's Disert. ad Histor. Eccles. pertin. vol. 1. pag. 389-495; also, Mosheim's Institut. Hist. Christ. major. p. 46, and Comment. de Reb. Christ. ante C. M. p. 195, and especially Walch, tiist. der Ketzer. vol. i. p. 167 All afterwards perversely applied, by a Gnostic association, to justify their abominations. With this account agree Eusebius, Hist. Eccl. lib. iii. cap. xxix.; Theodoret. Fab. Heret. lib. iii. cap. i. Opp. tom. iv. p. 226, and Augustine, De Hares. cap. v. Now the question arises. whether there actually was, in the time of St. John, an heretical party holding different fundamental principles Nicolaitans. Some say there was, others say there was from the orthodox, and distinguished by the name of not. Mosheim takes the affirmative on account of the historical credibility of the Fathers, and the literal import of the words used in the Revelation. The next some follow Irenæus; others follow Clemens Alex.; there were two persons of the name of Nicolaus. If and some, among whom is Mosheim, think it probable question is, who was the founder of this sect? Here, this supposition be admitted, it will be easy to account for the fact that the Nicolaitans of the Fathers are accused of Gnosticism, while there is no mention of it in the Revelation. Baumgarten's Auzug der Kirchengesch.-Sch!. 4 For Epiphanius states, Hares. xxviii. sec. 3, that he was circumcised; and Johannes Damascenus, De Hæres. cap. viii. that his followers were Jews. His doctrines also show higher respect for the Jewish forms of worship than is common for the Gnostic heretics. Walch's Hist. der Ketzer, vol. i. p. 250.- Schl. 5 Theodoret, Fabul. Hæret. lib. ii. cap. iii. Opp. tom. iii. p. 219. 6 See Basnage, Annal. Polit. Eccles. tom. ii. p. 6; Faydit, Eclaircissements sur l'histoire ecclés, de deur premiers siècles, chap. v. p. 64, and others. To this is op posed Buddeus, De Eccl. Apostol. cap. v. p. 412; [and Tillemont, Mém. pour servir à l'histoire de Eglise, tome ii. p. 486; and Mosheim, Instit. Hist. Eccles. ma man, the son of Joseph and Mary by ordi- 17. Those who maintained the necessity nary generation), by descending upon him of the Mosaic law and ceremonies in order in the form of a dove, at the time when he to eternal salvation, had not proceeded so was baptized by John in the river Jordan. far in this century as to have no communion After his union with Christ, this Jesus vi- with such as thought differently. They gorously assailed the God of the Jews, the were of course accounted brethren, though world's Creator; and by his instigation weaker ones. But after the second destrucJesus was seized by the rulers of the Jew- tion of Jerusalem in the reign of Adrian, ish nation and nailed to the cross. But when they withdrew from the other Chriswhen Jesus was apprehended Christ flew tians and set up separate congregations; away to heaven; so that only the man Jesus they were regarded as sectarians who had was put to death. Cerinthus required his deviated from the true doctrines of Christ. followers to worship the supreme God, the Hence arose the names, Nazarenes, and father of Christ, together with Christ him- Ebionites; 3 by which those Christians, self; but to abandon the Jewish Lawgiver, whose errors originated from an undue whom he accounted the Creator of this attachment to the Mosaic law, were discriworld; and while they retained some parts minated from the other Christians, who held of the Mosaic law, to regulate their lives that the Mosaic ceremonial law was abrochiefly by the precepts of Christ. He pro-gated by Christ. These Nazarenes or mised them a resurrection of their bodies, Ebionites, though commonly set down which would be succeeded by exquisite de- among the sects of the apostolic age, in lights in the millenary reign of Christ; and reality belong to the second century in then would follow a happy and never-end-which they had their origin. ing life in the celestial world. thus supposed that Christ would hereafter return, anal would unite himself again with the man Jesus in whom he had before dwelt; and would reign with his followers during a thousand years in Palestine.' For Cerin out, was first annexed in modern times by the Dominican, Bernhard of Luxemburg, in his Catalogus lære ticorum; and it deserves no credit. See Walch, ubi supra, p. 255.- Schl. This name the Jews first gave by way of reproach to the disciples of Christ, because he was a citizen of Nazareth. Acts xxiv. 5. Afterwards the name was jor. sec. i. p. 439, &c. They who place Cerinthus in applied especially to a Christian sect which endeathe second century rely chiefly on two arguments.voured to unite the Mosaic law with the religion of The first is, that the ancient writers who treat of the Christ. Of these Nazarenes, Mosheim treats largely. heretics set down Cerinthus after Marcion, (rather Institut. hist. Christ. major p. 465, and Comment, de after Carpocrates.) The other rests on a spurious let-Rebus Christ. ante C. M. p. 328; as also Walch, Hist. ter of Pius, Bishop of Rome (in the middle of the se- der Ketzer. vol. i. p. 101, &c.- Schl. cond century), to Justus, Bishop of Vienne; in which Pius laments that Cerinthus was at that time making many proselytes. The epistle may be found in Constant. Epistol. Pontific. Append. tom. i. p. 19; [and in Binius, Concil. Gen. tom. I. p. 124.] But the first argument proves nothing, because the historians of the heresies pay no regard to chronological order; and the second falls, because the epistle is not genuine.- Schl. [But, see on this subject Lampe, Commentar, in Johan, Proleg. lib. ii. cap. iii. sec. 13, &c. p. 181, &c.-Mur. 3 The origin of this name is still a subject of controwho was called Ebion. Others think the name Ebionites versy. Some derive it from some founder of this sect to be equivalent to the Hebrew word 'poor people. But they are not agreed why this name was given to the sect. Others again regard the whole subject as an historical problem, which can never be solved with absolute certainty. It is treated of largely by Walch, Hist. der Ketzer, vol. i. p. 100; and by Mosheim, Institut. hist. Christ, major. p. 477; and in his The doctrines of Cerinthus are stated in full by Diss. qua ostenditur, certo hodie et explorate constitui Walch, Hist. der Ketzer vol. i. page 260, &c.; and by non posse, utrum Ebion quidam nove Sectæ auctor exMosheim, Instit. hist. Christ. major. p. 445; and Com-titerit olim inter Christianos, necne? in his Dissert, ad ment, de Reb. Christ, ante C. M. p. 196. See Doederlein, It may be re-hist. eccles. pertin. vol. i. p. 547, &c. marked that Irenæus, Adv. Hæres. lib. iii. cap. iii. says Commentar. de Ebionais e numero hostium Christi erihe had heard from various persons, that Polycarp told mendis. Büzow. 1770, 8vo.- Schl. [See also Burton's them, that the Apostle John once met Cerinthus in a Heresies of the Apost. Age, Lect. vi. with notes 73 to public bath at Ephesus, and instantly fled out saying 84, inclusive; and particularly Gieseler, Lehrbuch d. he was afraid the bath would fall on that enemy of the Kircheng. sec. 32, with the important references to truth and kill him. This story may be true, notwith-recent works in notes 8 and 9. Davidson's translation, standing Irenæus had it from third-hand testimony; vol. i. p. 98, &c. Also, Matter, Hist. du Gnost. vol. iii, but the addition to it, that Cerinthus was actually killed P. 11, &c. who likewise treats of the Elsaites or Eices by the fall of the building as soon as John had gone aites.-R. CENTURY SECOND. PART I. THE EXTERNAL HISTORY OF THE CHURCH. CHAPTER I. THE PROSPEROUS EVENTS OF THE CHURCH. in another, protected them against the evil designs of the populace and the priests. Hence the Christian community increased and became vastly numerous in this century. Of this fact we have the clearest testimony of the ancients, which some have in vain attempted to call in question.3 1. Most of the Roman emperors of this century were of a mild character. Trajan (A.D. 98-117), though too eager for glory and not always sufficiently considerate and provident, was humane and equitable. Ad- 3. On what particular countries, both rian (A.D. 117-138) was more severe, within the Roman empire and beyond it, yet not absolutely bad and tyrannical; his the light of heavenly truth first shone in character was a compound of virtues and this century, the paucity of ancient records vices. The Antonines (Pius, A. D. 138 will not allow us to state with precision. -161, Marcus Aurelius the Philosopher, There are unexceptionable witnesses who A.D. 161-180, with Verus, A.D. 161-declare that in nearly all the East, and 169, and Commodus, A.D. 169–192) were models of excellence and benignity. Even Severus (A.D. 193-211), who afterwards assumed another character, was at first oppressive to no one, and to the Christians mild and equitable. 2. Through this lenity of the emperors, Christians living in the Roman empire suffered far less than they would have done if they had been under severer rulers. The laws enacted against them were indeed sufficiently hard; and the magistrates, excited by the priests and the populace, often made considerable havoc among them, and went frequently much beyond what the laws required. Yet for these evils some relief was commonly attainable. Trajan would not have the Christians to be sought after; and he forbade any complaints being received against them without the names of the accusers annexed.' And Antoninus Pius even decreed that their accusers should be punished. Some in one way and others 1 See Pliny's Epistles, lib. x. ep. 98. Eusebius, Hist. Eccles. lib. iv. cap. xiii. [where the law of Antoninus is given at length fron. the Apology of Melito. Some indeed have supposed that it was Marcus Antoninus, and not Antoninus Pius, who issued this decree (80 Valesius in loc.) But this is contrary to the express testimony of Eusebius, and to the contents of the edict itself. For we know from history that the earthquakes, mentioned in the edict, happened under Pius. See Capitolinus, Vita Antonini Pii, cap. Besides, if Marcus himself had published this edict, Melito could have had no occasion by this Apo among the Germans, the Spaniards, the Celts, the Britons, and other nations, Christ was now worshipped as God. But if any inquire, which of these nations received Christianity in this century and which in the preceding, it is not in my power to answer. Pantænus, master of the school in Alexandria, is said to have instructed the logy implore the grace of the emperor in favour of C. M. p. 240.-Schl the Christians. See Mosheim, De Reb. Christ. ante 3 See Moyle, On the Thundering Legion; a Latin translation of which, with notes, I have annexed to my Syntagma Diss. ad sanctiores disciplinas pertinent. pages 652-661. See also an additional passage in Justin Martyr, Dial. cum Tryphone, p. 341. 4 Irenæus, Adv. Hæres. lib. i. cap. x.; Tertullian, Adv. Judæos, cap. vii. [The testimony of the former is this: "Neither do those churches which are esta blished among the Germans, believe or teach otherwise; nor do those among the Heberii, or among the Celts; nor those in the East; nor those in Egypt; nor those in Libya; nor those established in the central parts of the world." The language of Tertullian is rhetorical, and the statement, undoubtedly, somewhat too strong. He says: "In whom. but the Christ now come, have all nations believed? For, in whom do all other nations (but yours, the Jews) confide? Parthians, Medes, Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, Armenia, Phrygia, Cappadocia, and inhabitants of Pontus, and Asia, and Pamphylia; the dwellers in Egypt, and inhabitants of the region beyond Cyrene; Romans and strangers; and in Jerusalem both Jews and proselytes, so that the various tribes of the Getuli and the nume rous hordes of the Moors; all the Spanish clans, and the different nations of Gauls, and the regions of the Britons inaccessible to the Romans but subject to Christ, and of the Sarmatians, and the Dacians, and Germans, and Scythians, and many unexplored nations and countries, and islands unknown to us and which we cannot enumerate: in all which places, the name of the Christ who has already come, now reigns."—— Mur. F |