« הקודםהמשך »
reason to pause, and to doubt of them. perhaps be considered in its proper place.
But this shall
The Recognitions and the Homilies of CLEMENS, written, as it is thought, in the second century, contain as much truth as Lucian's True History, Aristeas, Gulliver's Travels, the Lives of several Monks, of Lazarillo, of David Simple, and of Gil Blas. It would not be a reasonable request to desire any man to confute this work. It is sufficient to refer the reader to the judgment of Cotelerius, p. 607. · I shall only produce one passage, and none of the worst, for a specimen. Peter is introduced saying, Quod cum vidisset Gamaliel princeps populi, qui latenter frater noster erat in fide, sed consilio nostro inter eos erat'--i. 65.
Here this knave of a forger makes Peter, or Lord Peter, as he commonly calls him, and the rest of the apostles, mere politicians, who persuade Gamaliel to dissemble his religion, and to act the part of a spy and a hypocrite. .
In the Recognitions, ii. 13. Simon Magus is introduced speaking thus: Pueri incorrupti et violenter necati animam adjuramentis ineffabilibus evocatam adsistere mihi feci, et per ipsam fit omne quod jubeo.' Dr. Middleton thus translates it : “Simon Magus confessed to one of his companions, that he wrote all his amazing works by the help of the soul of a healthy young boy, who had been violently put to death for that purpose, and then called up from the dead by ineffable adjurations, and compelled to be his assistant.' Inquiry into the Miraculous Powers, &c. p. 67.
. Pueri incorrupti animam. In the Greek it was, I suppose, Ilaidos állaplópou Luxuv. Justin Martyr calls such children αδιαφθόρους, and Socrates the historian αφθόρους Taidas. Justin Apol. i. p. 27. NenuouAVTElan uiy yap, rai ai odia hópwy naidwr ÉTT OM TEÚceis.- Necyomantiæ enim, et incorruptorum puerorum inspectiones.'-Socrates iii. 13. Και τελετάς τινας συνίστασαν, ως και σπλαγχνοσκοπούν usvob qardas Hatalúérv á pépous—which Valesius translates, . Quin etiam nefanda quædam mysteria ab illis excogitata sunt; ita ut pueros impuberes immolarent, extaque eorum inspicerent
I once told Dr. Middleton, that I was inclined to think that in this place incorruptus' meant 'impubis' rather than
s sanus.' 'Al -0005, ñ B 900osincorruptus,' mcan pro. perly impollutus, expers veneris;' and they are used for
impubis,' because children are usually impolluti.' Tanda or zápny diabehely is (stuprare.' "A6960s, 'impubes, impollutus, incorruptus, imberbis,' say the Lexied. co.opos Turise puer imberbis,'Diosc. ii. c. 102. Kai ToX7.C Tues και πολλαι, εξηκοντουται και εδομηκοντουται, οι εε παίδων $11.05nTell 47,620 TÔ Xortê, úchopol Clochévours. Et multi sexus utriusque, et sexaginta et septuaginta nati annos, qui a pueris disciplinam Christi sunt assectati, incorrupti permanent.' justin Apol, i. 22. ed. Th. à 00.00, impolluti, expertes veneris, etiam legitimæ. Qui inviolati corporis virginitate perpetua fruuntur,' says Minucius, c. xxxi.
Concerning such magical rites, see Broukhusius on TibulJus i. 11. 45. and Fabricius Bibl. Antiqu. p. 417.419. and Hlavercamp's Tertullian, Apol. 23. 'Si pueros in eloquium oraculi elidunt.' Junius thinks that this relates to the sacri, ticing of children, which kind of divination was called Respon.xytria, pædomantia.
AMONGST the apostolical writers some have placed the author of the Epistle to Diognetus, which lias been usually ascribed to Justin Martyr: see Fabric. Bibl. Gr. v. 58. Tillemont (Hist. Eccl. ii. p. 493.) first declared that he was inclined for some reasons to think it more antient, and written before A. D. 70. He says also that a learned man, whom he names not, had been of that opinion. The last editor of Justin thinks that they are mistaken, as to the antiquity of this epistle, and is in doubt whether it should be ascribed to Justin, or not. Prof. p. lxxiv. Baratier gives it to Clemens Romanus, and Mr. Whiston to Timothy. In this epistle there are many allusions to the New Testament, which Mr. Whiston has marked in the margin of his translation, and there is nothing said concerning any miraculous powers and gifts amongst Christians. It is opus eximium et præsiantissimum,' says the Benedictin editor; and Baratier and Nir. Whiston are of the same opinion. Diogneius, who is called a cristos, was, we may suppose, if he really existed, a man of some rank. His Honour wanted to be informed of the nature of Christianity; and why this new religion was not made known sooner; and for what reasons the Christians exposed themselves to persecution and to death, neglecting the things of this world, and rejecting the religions of the Greeks and of the Jews. To these queries our author replies in a letter, in which the truth of Christianity is, in a inanner, taken for granted, and nothing is urged that was proper to convince and convert an unbeliver : so that Diognetus, if he had been morose and censorious, would have concluded, that this writer had found a new religion, but had lost some thing else. One would think that the apologist would have mentioned the prophecies of the Old Testament accomplished in Christ, the miracles of Christ and of his apostles, and other proofs of the truth and importance of Christianity. Not at all. He begins with setting forth the folly of wore shipping images, and thinking them to be real gods; and this he gives as the reason for which Christians rejected the religion of the Gentiles.
The Jews, says he, though they worship one God, yet offer him sacrifices, as if he stood in need of such gifts, and were to be fed with the steam of victims; they are also superstitious observers of the difference between food clean and unclean, of the sabbath, of circumcision, fasts, feasts, new moons, &c. Therefore we Christians reject the Jewish religion.
What he says on this head is not only too severe upon the Jews, but incautious and injudicious; and, if it proved any thing, would prove more than he intended and was aware of, and bear hard upon the Mosaic law. The same defect may be observed in some arguments of Arnobius upon the same subject.
Then he proceeds to observe that Christians were examples of all that was good, and patient under aillictions and ill usage ; that God sent his Son to suffer for men, to redeem and to instruct them, who, before he came, knew not God, and who were grown very wicked ; all which, if intended as a sufficient proof of Christianity, was litile better than begging the question.
He speaks of the Jews as if at that time they offered up sacrifices, whence some learned men have concluded that he wrote before the destruction of Jerusalem ; but the argument is scarcely conclusive, especially when we consider what sort of a writer we have to do with. “Sacrificia quidem,' says the Benedictin, Judæi offerre desierunt post urbis et templi excidia. Sed tamen cum author epistolæ quid intersit Judæos inter et Christianos exponat, non immerito in Jue dæis aspernatur cruenta illa animalium sacrificia, quæ et Judaici cultus pars erant insignis, et sibi per vim erepta Judæi, si minus usu, saltem animo et voluntate retinebant. Pluribus aliis contigit Judæos eodem modo exagitare. S. Phileas Martyr de Judæis sic loquitur, Act. Mart. p. 444. Solis Judæis præceptum fuerat sacrificare Deo soli in Jerosolyma. Nunc autem peccant Judæi in locis aliis solemnia sua celebrantes,' &c. Præf. p. 75.
I cannot believe that this epistle was written by Justin Martyr; for Justin would have managed the argument better, and have omitted neither the prophecies nor the miracles. The author seems to have been some Gentile converted to Christianity, who had perused Justin's Cohortatio ad Græcos.
Justin begins it thus : ’Apxóusvos tñs tapos újās Trapzcan νέσεως, ώ άνδρες Έλληνες, εύχομαι τω Θεώ εμοί μεν υπάρξαι, τα δέοντα προς υμας είπείν υμάς δε, της προτέρας αφεμένους φιλονεικίας, και της των προγόνων πλάνης em xay cay, ko ai ra AoiT4A00 vnđ Vuví. Cohorfationem apud vos, Græci, instituens, Deum precor, ut mihi quidem apud vos, ut par est, dicere contingat ; vos autem pristinam pertinaciam relinquentes, et a majorum discedentes errore, quæ utilia sunt in præsentia eligatis.' This is an imitation of the exordium in the oration of Demosthenes for Ctesiphon : and as Justin imitates Demosthenes, so the writer of the epistle imitates Justin-Tapa Toll Θεου, του και το λέγειν και το ακούειν ημίν χωρηγούντος, αιτούμαι δοθήναι, εμοί μεν, είπειν ούτως, ως μάλιστα αν d'Hollca [anovo ovzá] rs Beatiw yavbo fan coi te [OS] OUTWS CHOūras, cis per auto nonval TÓv el móvta. "Peto a Deo, qui et loquendi et audiendi nobis facultatem suppeditat, ut ab eo detur, mihi quidem, ita verba facere ut in primis contingat, te, postquam audieris, meliorem evadere ; et tibi, ita audire, ut tristitia non afficiatur is qui verba fe.
This is said well enough:
amphora cæpit Institui ; currente rota, cur urceus exit?
The epistle has a few chasms, but there seems to be only a little of it that is lost. It was perhaps an exercise, or declamation, addressed to a great man, with whom the author had no acquaintance; as some modern epistles to the Pope, and to Lewis the fourteenth, which were never presented.
As I have had occasion to mention Tillemont, and shall probably often cite him hereafter, I take this opportu. nity to own my obligations to him for his useful and labo, rious collections. After this due respect and acknowledgment, I hope it will be permitted to make a few observations, which may do others some good, and can now do him no harm, nor destroy the peace which, I believe, he enjoys in a better world.
His History of the Emperors is very valuable; but he has filled his other books with an account of trifling, absurd, ridiculous miracles.
He never affirms facts without vouchers; but he often makes use of bad ones in his Ecclesiastical History, and builds upon a sandy foundation, upon the testimony of forgers, fanatics, and of interested persons, who write in their own behalf, and want to discredit their adversaries.
He commonly proceeds upon a supposition, that they who have obtained the honour of ecclesiastical knighthood, and are called saints, are all excellent men, and entirely to be trusted ; and that all they who were, or were accounted, heterodox, are to be little regarded, and held in bad esteem.
He seems to have been a pious, humble, meek and modest, as well as a very learned and accurate man; and yet he cannot forbear insulting Protestant writers as heretics, even those to whom he and the Christian world had great obligations, as Usher, Pearson, &c. He takes all opportunities, and sometimes goes out of his way to seek opportunities of inculcating the horrible doctrine, that the very best of Pagans, heretics, and schismatics, are condemned to suffer eternal tortures. Speaking of young Tiberius, who was murdered by order of the emperor Caius, and compelled by the scldiers, as Philo relates it, to thrust a sword into his own body, he concludes the melancholy tale with this reflection :- Thus by his own hand he ended his