Chapter III: The Doctrinal Development and Apologetical (2)

b. =Hippolytus=, a presbyter and afterwards schismatical bishop
at Rome, though scarcely to be designated of Asia Minor, but
rather a Lyonese, if not a Roman pupil of Irenæus, belonged
to the same theological school. He was celebrated for his
comprehensive learning and literary attainments, and yet
his career until quite recently was involved in the greatest
obscurity. Eusebius, who is the first to refer to him,
places him in the age of Alex. Severus (A.D. 222-235),
calls him a bishop, without, however, naming his supposed
oriental diocese, which even Jerome was unable to determine.
The Liberian list of Popes of A.D. 354, describes him
as _Yppolytus presbyter_ who was burnt in Sardinia about
A.D. 235 along with the Roman bishop, Pontianus (§ 41, 1).
In the fifth century, the Roman church gave him honour as a
martyr. The poet Prudentius († A.D. 413) who himself saw the
crypt in which his bones were laid and which in the book of
his martyrdom was pictorially represented, celebrated his
career in song. According to him Hippolytus was an adherent
of the Novatian schism (§ 41, 3), but returned to the
Catholic church and suffered martyrdom at Portus near Rome.
According to his own statement quoted by Photius he was
a hearer of the doctrinal discourses of Irenæus. A statue
representing him in a sitting posture which was exhumed at
Rome in A.D. 1551, has on the back of the seat a list of
his writings along with an Easter cycle of sixteen years
drawn up by him (§ 56, 3). Finally, there was found among
the works of Origen a treatise on the various philosophical
systems entitled _Philosophoumena_, which professes to be
the first book of a writing in ten books found in Greece in
A.D. 1842, Κατὰ πασῶν αἱρέσεων ἔλεγχος. Starting from the
position, and seeking to establish it, that the heretics
have got their doctrines not from holy scripture, but from
astrology, pagan mysteries and the Greek philosophers, this
treatise is generally of great importance not only for the
history of the heresies of the Gnostics and Monarchians,
but also for the history of philosophy. The English editor,
E. Miller (Oxon., 1851), attributed the authorship of the
whole to Origen, which, however, from the complete difference
of style, point of view and position was soon proved to be
untenable. Since the writer admits that he was himself the
author of a book Περὶ τῆς τοῦ πάντος οὐσίας, and Photius
ascribes a book with the same title to the Roman Caius
(§ 31, 7), Baur attributes to the latter the composition of
the Elenchus. Photius, however, founds his opinion simply
upon an apocryphal note on the margin of his copy of the
book. Incomparably more important are the evidences for
the Hippolytus authorship, which is now almost universally
admitted. The Elenchus is not, indeed, enumerated in
the list of works on the statue. The book Περὶ τῆς τοῦ
πάντος οὐσίας, however, appears there, and it contains
the statement that its author also wrote the Elenchus. The
author of the Elenchus also states that he had previously
written a similar work in a shorter form, and Photius
describes such a shorter writing of Hippolytus, dating
from the time of his intercourse with Irenæus, under the
title Σύνταγμα κατὰ πασῶν αἱρέσεων. Lipsius has made it
appear extremely probable that in the _Libellus adv. omnes
hæreticos_ appended to Tertullian’s _De præscriptione
hæreticorum_, and so usually styled a treatise of the
Pseudo-Tertullian, we have an abbreviated Latin reproduction
of that work; for this one as well as the other begins
with Dositheus and ends with Noëtus, and both deal with
thirty-two heresies. Epiphanius and Philastrius [Philaster]
have used it largely in their heresiological works. The
discussion in the Elenchus agrees therewith in many passages
but also in many is essentially different, which, however,
when we consider the much later date of the first named
treatise affords no convincing evidence against the theory
that both are by one author. The Elenchus thereby wins a
high importance as giving information about the condition of
the Roman church during the first decades of the 3rd century,
about the position of the author who describes himself in
his treatise as a pupil of Irenæus, about his own and his
opponents’ way of viewing things, and about his conflict
with them leading to schism, though all is told from
the standpoint of an interested party (§§ 33, 5; 41, 1).
A considerable fragment directed against the errors of
Noëtus (§ 33, 5) was perhaps originally a part of his
Syntagma,--though not perhaps of the anonymous, so-called
Little Labyrinth against the Artemonites (§ 33, 3) or
probably against the Monarchians generally, from which
Eusebius makes extensive quotations, especially about the
Theodotians. This work is ascribed by Photius to the Roman
Caius, but without doubt wrongly. Great probability has been
given to the recently advanced idea that this book too may
have been written by Hippolytus.[72]

§ 31.4. =The Alexandrian Church Teachers.=

a. The first of the teachers of the catechetical school at
Alexandria known by name was =Pantænus=, who had formerly
been a Stoic philosopher. About A.D. 190 he undertook
a missionary journey into Southern Arabia or India, and
died in A.D. 202 after a most successful and useful life.
Jerome says of him: _Hujus multi quidem in s. Scri. exstant
Commentarii, sed Magis viva voce ecclesiis profuit_. Of his
writings none are preserved.

b. =Titus Flavius Clemens [Clement]= was the pupil of Pantænus
and his successor at the catechetical school in Alexandria.
On his travels undertaken in the search for knowledge he
came to Alexandria as a learned pagan philosopher, where
probably Pantænus gained an influence over him and was
the means of his conversion. During the persecution under
Septimius Severus in A.D. 202 he sought in flight to escape
the rage of the heathens, in accordance with Matt. x. 23.
But he continued unweariedly by writing and discourse
to promote the interests of the church till his death in
A.D. 220. The most important and most comprehensive of his
writings is the work in three parts of which the first part
entitled Λόγος προτρεπτικὸς πρὸς Ἕλληνας (_Cohortatio ad
Græcos_) with great expenditure of learning seeks to prepare
the minds of the heathen for Christianity by proving the
vanity of heathenism; the second part, Ὁ παιδαγωγός in
three books, with a _Hymnus in Salvatorem_ attached, gives
an introduction to the Christian life; and the third part,
Στρωματείς (_Stromata_), that is, patchwork, so-called from
the aphoristic style and the variety of its contents, in
eight books, setting forth the deep things of Christian
gnosis, but in the form rather of a collection of materials
than a carefully elaborated treatise. The little tractate
Τίς ὁ σωζόμενος πλούσιος (_Quis dives salvetur_) shows how
even wealth may be made contributory to salvation. Among
his lost treatises the most important was the Ὑποτυπώσεις
in eight books, an expository review of the contents of holy
scripture.[73]

§ 31.5.

c. Great as was the reputation of Clement, he was far
outstripped by his pupil and successor =Origen=,
acknowledged by pagan and Christian contemporaries to be
a miracle of scholarship. On account of his indomitable
diligence, he was named Ἀδαμάντιος. Celebrated as a
philosopher, philologist, critic, exegete, dogmatist,
apologist, polemist, etc., posterity has with equal right
honoured him as the actual founder of an ecclesiastical and
scientific theology, and reproached him as the originator
of many heretical opinions (§§ 51; 52, 6). He was born of
Christian parents at Alexandria about A.D. 185, was educated
under his father Leonidas, Pantænus and Clement, while still
a boy encouraged his father when he suffered as a martyr
under Septimius Severus in A.D. 202, became the support
of his helpless mother and his six orphaned sisters, and
was called in A.D. 203 by bishop Demetrius to be teacher
of the catechetical school. In order to qualify himself
for the duties of his new calling, he engaged eagerly in
the study of philosophy under the Neo-Platonist Ammonius
Saccas. His mode of life was extremely simple and from
his youth he was a strict ascetic. In his eager striving
after Christian perfection he had himself emasculated,
from a misunderstanding of Matt. xix. 12, but afterwards
he admitted that that was a wrong step. His fame advanced
from day to day. About A.D. 211 he visited Rome. Accepting
an honourable invitation in A.D. 215 he wrought for a long
time as a missionary in Arabia, he was then appointed by the
celebrated Julia Mammæa (§ 22, 4) to Antioch in A.D. 218;
and in A.D. 230 undertook in the interest of the church
a journey to Greece through Palestine, where the bishops
of Cæsarea and Jerusalem admitted him to the rank of a
presbyter. His own bishop, Demetrius, jealous of the daily
increasing fame of Origen and feeling that his episcopal
rights had been infringed upon, recalled him, and had him
at two Alexandrian Synods, in A.D. 231 and 232, arraigned
and excommunicated for heresy, self-mutilation and contempt
of the ecclesiastical laws of his office. Origen now
went to Cæsarea, and there, honoured and protected by the
Emperor, Philip the Arabian, opened a theological school.
His literary activity here reached its climax. But under
Decius he was cast into prison at Tyre, in A.D. 254,
and died in consequence of terrible tortures which he
endured heroically.--Of his numerous writings[74] only a
comparatively small number, but those of great value, are
preserved; some in the original, others only in a Latin
translation.

1. To the department of =Biblical Criticism= belongs the
fruit of twenty-seven years’ labour, the so-called
Hexapla, that is, a placing side by side the Hebrew text
of the O.T. (first in Hebr. and then in the Gr. letters)
and the existing Greek translations of the LXX., Aquila,
Symmachus and Theodotion; by the addition in some
books of other anonymous translations, it came to be
an Octopla or Enneapla. By critical marks on the margin
all variations were carefully indicated. The enormous
bulk of fifty volumes hindered its circulation by means
of transcripts; but the original lay in the library
at Cæsarea open to the inspection of all, until lost,
probably in the sack of the city by the Arabians in
A.D. 653.[75]

2. His =Exegetical works= consist of Σημειώσεις or
short scholia on separate difficult passages, Τόμοι
or complete commentaries on whole books of the bible,
and Ὁμιλίαι or practical expository lectures. Origen,
after the example of the Rabbinists and Hellenists,
gave a decided preference to the allegorical method
of interpretation. In every scripture passage he
distinguished a threefold sense, as σῶμα, ψυχή, πνεῦμα,
first a literal, and then a twofold higher sense, the
tropical or moral, and the pneumatical or mystical.
He was not just a despiser of the literal sense, but
the unfolding of the mystical sense seemed to him
of infinitely greater importance. All history in the
bible is a picture of things in the higher world. Most
incidents occurred as they are told; but some, the
literal conception of which would be unworthy or
irrational, are merely typical, without any outward
historical reality. The Old Testament language is
typical in a twofold sense: for the New Testament
history and for the heavenly realities. The New
Testament language is typical only of the latter.
He regarded the whole bible as inspired, with the
exception of the books added by the LXX., but the New
Testament in a higher degree than the Old. But even the
New Testament had defects which will only be overcome
by the revelation of eternity.

3. To the department of =Dogmatics= belongs his four books
Περὶ ἀρχῶν (_De Principiis_), which have come down to
us in a Latin translation of Rufinus with arbitrary
interpolations. His Στρωματεῖς in ten books which
sought to harmonize the Christian doctrine with Greek
philosophy is lost, and also his numerous writings
against the heretics. His comprehensive apologetical
work in eight books, _Contra Celsum_ (§ 23, 3), has
come down to us complete.[76] Gregory of Nazianzus
[Nazianzen] and Basil the Great made a book entirely
from his writings under the title Φιλοκαλία, which
contains many passages from lost treatises, and a
valuable original fragment from his Περὶ ἀρχῶν. His
principal doctrinal characteristics are the following:
There is a twofold revelation, the primitive revelation
in conscience to which the heathen owe their σπέρματα
ἀληθείας, and the historical revelation in holy
scripture; there are three degrees of religious
knowledge, that of the ψιλὴ πίστις, an unreasoned
acceptance of the truth, wrought by God immediately in
the heart of men, that of γνῶσις or ἐπιστήμη to which
the reasoning mind of man can reach by the speculative
development of scripture revelation in his life, and
finally, that of σοφία or θεωρία, the vision of God,
the full enjoyment of which is attained unto only
hereafter. For his doctrine of the Trinity, see § 33, 6.
His cosmological, angelological and anthropological
views represent a mixture of Platonic, Gnostic
and spiritualistic ideas, and run out into various
heterodoxies; thus, he believes in timeless or eternal
creation, an ante-temporal fall of human souls,
their imprisonment in earthly bodies, he denies the
resurrection of the body, he believed in the animation
and the need and capacity of redemption of the stars
and star-spirits, in the restoration of all spirits to
their original, ante-temporal blessedness and holiness,
ἀποκατάστασις τῶν πάντων.

4. Of his =Ascetical Works=, the treatise Περὶ εὐχῆς with
an admirable exposition of the Lord’s prayer, and a
Λόγος προτρεπικὸς εἰς μαρτύριον have been preserved.
Of his numerous epistles, the _Epistola ad Julium
Africanum_ defends against his correspondent the
genuineness of the history of Susannah.

§ 31.6.

d. Among the successors of Origen in the school of Alexandria
the most celebrated, from about A.D. 232, was =Dionysius
Alexandrinus= [of Alexandria]. He was raised to the rank
of bishop in A.D. 247, and died in A.D. 265. In speculative
power he was inferior to his teacher Origen. His special
gift was that of κυβέρνησις. He was honoured by his own
contemporaries with the title of The Great. During the
Decian persecution he manifested wisdom and good sense
as well as courage and steadfastness. The ecclesiastical
conflicts of his age afforded abundant opportunities for
testing his noble and gentle character, as well as his
faithful attachment to the church and zeal for the purity of
its doctrine, and on all hands his self-denying amiability
wrought in the interests of peace. Of his much-praised
writings, exegetical, ascetical, polemical (Περὶ ἐπαγγελιῶν
§ 33, 9), apologetical (Περὶ φύσεως against the Atomism
of Democritus and Epicurus), and dogmatical (§ 33, 7),
only fragments are preserved, mostly from his Epistles
in quotations by Eusebius. We have, however, one short
tract complete addressed to Novatian at Rome (§ 31, 12),
containing an earnest entreaty that he should abandon his
schismatic rigorism.

e. =Gregory Thaumaturgus= was one of Origen’s pupils at Cæsarea.
Origen was the means of converting the truth-seeking heathen
youth to Christianity, and Gregory clung to his teacher with
the warmest affection. He subsequently became bishop of his
native city of Neo-Cæsarea, and was able on his death-bed
in A.D. 270 to comfort himself with the reflection that he
left to his successor no more unbelievers in the city than
his predecessor had left him of believers (their number was
seventeen). He was called the second Moses and the power of
working miracles was ascribed to him. We have from his pen
a panegyric on Origen, an Epistle on Church Discipline, a
Μετάφρασις εἰς Ἐκκλησιάστην, a Confession of Faith important
for the history of the Ante-Nicene period (§ 50, 1): Ἔκθεσις
πίστεως. Two other tracts in a Syrian translation are
ascribed to him: To Philagrius on Consubstantiality, and
To Theopompus on the Passibility of God. Dräseke, however,
identifies the first-named with Oratio 45 of Gregory
Nazianzus [Nazianzen] and assigns to him the authorship.[77]

f. The learned presbyter =Pamphilus= of Cæsarea, the friend
of Eusebius (§ 47, 2) and founder of a theological seminary
and the celebrated library of Cæsarea, who died as a martyr
under Maximinus, belongs to this group. His Old Testament
Commentaries have been lost. In prison he finished his work
in five books which he undertook jointly with Eusebius, the
Apology for Origen, to which Eusebius independently added a
sixth book. Only the first book is preserved in Rufinus’
Latin translation.

§ 31.7. =Greek-speaking Church Teachers in other Quarters.=

a. =Hegesippus= wrote his five books Ὑπομνήματα, about A.D. 180,
during the age of the Roman bishop Eleutherus. From his
knowledge of the Hebrew language, literature and traditions
Eusebius concludes that he was a Jew by birth. He himself
says distinctly that in A.D. 155 during the time of bishop
Anicetus he was staying in Rome, and that on his way thither
he visited Corinth. The opinion formerly current that
his Hypomnemata consisted of a collection of historical
traditions from the time of the Apostles down to the age of
the writer, and so might be called a sort of Church History,
arose from the historical character of the contents of eight
quotations made from this treatise by Eusebius in his own
Church History. It is, however, not borne out by the fact
that what Hegesippus tells in his detailed narrative of the
end of James the Just (§ 16, 3) occurs, not in the first
or second but in the fifth and last book of his treatise.
Moreover, among writers against the heretics or Gnostics,
Eusebius enumerates in the first place one Hegesippus,
having it would seem his Hypomnemata in view. From this
circumstance, in conjunction with everything else quoted
from and told about him by Eusebius, we may with great
probability conclude that the purpose of his writing was
to confute the heresies of his age. In doing so he traces
them partly to Gentile sources, but partly and mainly to
pre-Christian Jewish heresies, seven of which are enumerated.
He treats in the first three books of the so-called Gnostics
and their relations to heathenism and false Judaism. Then in
the fourth book he discusses the heretical Apocrypha and, as
contrasted with them, the orthodox ecclesiastical writings,
mentioning among them expressly the Epistle of Clemens
[Clement] Romanus [of Rome] to the Corinthians. Finally,
in the fifth book, he proves from the Apostolic succession
of the leaders of the church, the unity and truth of
ecclesiastically transmitted doctrine. The historical value
of his writing, owing to the confusion and want of critical
power shown in the instances referred to, cannot be placed
very high. The school of Baur, more particularly Schwegler
(see § 20), attached greater importance to him as a supposed
representative of the anti-Pauline Judaism of his time.
The value of his testimony in this direction, however, is
reduced by his acknowledgment of the Epistle of Clement that
accords so high a place to the Apostle Paul. His relations
to Rome and Corinth, with his judgment on the general unity
of faith in the church of his age, prove that he would be by
no means disposed to repudiate the Apostle Paul in favour of
any Ebionitic tendency.

b. =Caius of Rome=, a contemporary of bishop Zephyrinus
about A.D. 210, was one of the most conspicuous opponents
of Montanism. Eusebius who characterizes him as ἀνὴρ
ἐκκλησιαστικός and λογιώτατος, quotes four times from
his now lost controversial tract in dialogue form against
Proclus the Roman Montanist leader.

§ 31.8.

c. =Sextus Julius Africanus=, according to Suidas a native of
Libya, took part, as he says himself in his Κεστοῖς, in the
campaign of Septimius Severus against Osrhoëne in A.D. 195,
became intimate with the Christian king Maanu VIII. of
Edessa, whom in his Chronographies he calls ἱερὸς ἀνὴρ,
and was often companion in hunting to his son and successor
Maanu IX. About A.D. 220 we find him, according to Eusebius
and others, in Rome at the head of an embassy from Nicopolis
or Emmaus in Palestine petitioning for the restoration of
that city. In consequence of Origen addressing him about
A.D. 227 as ἀγαπητὸς ἀδελφός it has been rashly concluded
that he was then a presbyter or at least of clerical rank.
The five books, Χρονογραφίαι, were his first and most
important work. This work which was known partly in the
original, partly in the citations from it in the Eusebian
Chronicle (§ 47, 2), together with its Latin continuation
by Jerome proved a main source of information in general
history during the Byzantine period and the Latin Middle
Age. Beginning with the creation of the world and fixing
the whole course of the world’s development at 6,000 years,
he set the middle point of this period to the age of Peleg
(Gen. x. 25), and in accordance with the chronology of the
LXX. and reckoning by Olympiads, proceeded to synchronize
biblical and profane history. He assigned the birth of
Christ to the middle of the sixth of the thousand year
periods, at the close of which he probably expected the
beginning of the millennium. From the fragments preserved
by later Byzantine chroniclers, Gelzer has attempted to
reproduce as far as possible the original work, carefully
indicating its sources and authorities. Of the other works
of Africanus we have in a complete form only an Epistle
to Origen, “a real gem of brilliant criticism spiced with
a gentle touch of fine irony” (Gelzer), which combats the
authenticity and credibility of the Pseudo-Daniel’s history
of Susannah. We have also a fragment quoted in Eusebius
from an Epistle to a certain Aristides, which attempts
a reconciliation of the genealogies in Matt. and Luke by
distinguishing παῖδες νόμῳ and παῖδες φύσει with reference
to Deut. xxv. 5. According to Eusebius “the chronologist
Julius Africanus,” according to Suidas “Origen’s friend
Africanus with the prænomen Sextus,” is also the author of
the so called Κεστοί (_embroidery_), a great comprehensive
work of which only fragments have been preserved, in which
all manner of wonderful things from the life of nature and
men, about agriculture, cattle breeding, warfare, etc.,
were recorded, so that it had the secondary title Παράδοξα.
The excessive details of pagan superstition here reported,
much of which, such as that relating to the secret worship
of Venus, was distinctly immoral, and its dependence on
the secret writings of the Egyptians seem now as hard to
reconcile with the standpoint of a believing Christian, as
with the sharpness of intellect shown in his criticism of
the letter of Susannah. It has therefore been assumed that
alongside of the Christian chronologist Julius Africanus
there was a pagan Julius Africanus who wrote the Κεστοί,--or,
seeing the identity of the two is strongly evidenced both
on internal and external grounds, the composition of the
Κεστοί is assigned to a period when the author was still a
heathen. The facts, however, that the Chronicles close with
A.D. 221 and that the Κεστοί is dedicated to Alex. Severus
(A.D. 222-235), seem to guarantee the earlier composition
of the Chronicles. The author of the Κεστοί, too, by his
quotation of Ps. xxxiv. 9 with the formula θεία ῥήματα,
shows himself a Christian, and on the other hand, the author
of the Chronicles says that at great cost he had made himself
acquainted in Egypt with a celebrated secret book.

§ 31.9.

d. =Methodius= bishop of Olympus in Lycia, subsequently at
Tyre, a man highly esteemed in his day, died as a martyr
in A.D. 311. He was a decided opponent of the spiritualism
prevailing in the school of Origen. His Συμπόσιον τῶν δέκα
παρθένων is a dialogue between several virgins regarding
the excellence of virginity written in eloquent and glowing
language (transl. in Ante-Nicene Lib., Edin., 1870). Of his
other works only outlines and fragments are preserved by
Epiphanius and Photius. To these belong Περὶ αὐτεξουσίου καὶ
ποθὲν κακά, a polemic against the Platonic-Gnostic doctrine
of the eternity of matter as the ultimate ground and cause
of sin, which are to be sought rather in the misuse of
human freedom; the dialogues Περὶ ἀναστάσεως and Περὶ τῶν
γεννητῶν, the former of which combats Origen’s doctrine of
the resurrection, and the latter his doctrine of creation.
His controversial treatise against Porphyry (§ 23, 3) has
been completely lost.

e. The martyr =Lucian of Samosata=, born and brought up in
Edessa, was presbyter of Antioch and co-founder of the
theological school there that became so famous (§ 47, 1),
where he, deposed by a Syrian Synod of A.D. 269, and
persecuted by the Emperor Aurelian in A.D. 272, as supporter
of bishop Paul of Samosata (§ 33, 8), maintained his
position under the three following bishops (till A.D. 303)
apart from the official church, and died a painful martyr’s
death under the Emperor Maximinus in A.D. 312. That
secession, however, was occasioned less perhaps through
doctrinal and ecclesiastical, than through national and
political, anti-Roman and Syrian sympathies with his
heretical countrymen of Samosata. For though in the Arian
controversy (§ 50, 1) Lucian undoubtedly appears as the
father of that Trinitarian-Christological view first
recognised and combated as heretical in his pupil Arius in
A.D. 318, this was certainly essentially different from the
doctrine of the Samosatian. About Lucian’s literary activity
only the scantiest information has come down to us. His most
famous work was his critical revision of the Text of the Old
and New Testaments, which according to Jerome was officially
sanctioned in the dioceses of the Patriarchs of Antioch
and Constantinople, and thus probably lies at the basis of
Theodoret’s and Chrysostom’s exegetical writings. Rufinus’
Latin translation of Eusebius’ Church History gives an
extract from the “Apologetical Discourse” in which he seems
to have openly confessed and vindicated his Christian faith
before his heathen judge.

2. CHURCH FATHERS WRITING IN LATIN.

§ 31.10. =The Church Teachers of North Africa.=--=Quintus
Septimius Florens Tertullianus [Tertullian]= was the son of a
heathen centurion of Carthage, distinguished as an advocate and
rhetorician, converted somewhat late in life, about A.D. 190,
and, after a long residence in Rome, made presbyter at Carthage
in A.D. 220. He was of a fiery and energetic character, in his
writings as well as in his life pre-eminently a man of force,
with burning enthusiasm for the truth of the gospel, unsparingly
rigorous toward himself and others. His “Punic style” is terse,
pictorial and rhetorical, his thoughts are original, brilliant
and profound, his eloquence transporting, his dialectic clear
and convincing, his polemic crushing, enlivened with sharp wit
and biting sarcasm. He shows himself the thoroughly accomplished
jurist in his use of legal terminology and also in the acuteness
of his deductions and demonstrations. Fanatically opposed to
heathen philosophy, though himself trained in the knowledge of it,
a zealous opponent of Gnosticism, in favour of strict asceticism
and hostile to every form of worldliness, he finally attached
himself, about A.D. 220, to the party of the Montanists (§ 40, 3).
Here he found the form of religion in which his whole manner of
thought and feeling, the energy of his will, the warmth of his
emotions, his strong and forceful imagination, his inclination to
rigorous asceticism, his love of bald realism, could be developed
in all power and fulness, without let or hindrance. If amid
all his enthusiasm for Montanism he kept clear of many of its
absurdities, he had for this to thank his own strong common sense,
and also, much as he affected to despise it, his early scientific
training. He at first wrote his compositions in Greek, but
afterwards exclusively in Latin, into which he also translated
the most important of his earlier writings. He is perhaps not
the first who treated of the Christian truth in this language
(§ 31, 12a), but he has been rightly recognised as the actual
creator of ecclesiastical Latin. His writings may be divided into
three groups.

a. =Apologetical and Controversial Treatises against Jews and
Pagans=, which belong to his pre-Montanist period. The most
important and instructive of these is the _Apologeticus adv.
Gentes_, addressed to the Roman governor. A reproduction of
this work intended for the general public, less learned, but
more vigorous, scathing and uncompromising, is the treatise
in two books entitled _Ad Nationes_. In the work _Ad
Scapulam_, who as Proconsul of Africa under Septimius
Severus had persecuted the Christians with unsparing cruelty,
he calls him to account for this with all earnestness and
plainness of speech. In the book, _De testimonio animæ_
he carries out more fully the thought already expressed in
the _Apologeticus c. 17_ of the _Anima humana naturaliter
christiana_, and proves in an ingenious manner that
Christianity alone meets the religious needs of humanity.
The book _Adv. Judæos_ had its origin ostensibly in a public
disputation with the Jews, in which the interruptions of his
audience interferes with the flow of his discourse.

b. =Controversial Treatises against the Heretics.= In the tract
_De præscriptione hæreticorum_ he proves that the Catholic
church, because in prescriptive possession of the field
since the time of the Apostles, is entitled on the legal
ground of _præscriptio_ to be relieved of the task of
advancing proof of her claims, while the heretics on the
other hand are bound to establish their pretensions. A
heresiological appendix to this book has been erroneously
attributed to Tertullian (see § 31, 3). He combats the
Gnostics in the writings: _De baptismo_ (against the Gnostic
rejection of water baptism); _Adv. Hermogenem_; _Adv.
Valentinianos_; _De anima_ (an Anti-Gnostic treatise,
which maintains the creatureliness, yea, the materiality of
the soul, traces its origin to sexual intercourse, and its
mortality to Adam’s sin); _De carne Christi_ (Anti-Docetic):
_De resurrectione carnis Scorpiace_ (an antidote to the
scorpion-poison of the Gnostic heresy); finally, the five
books, _Adv. Marcionem_. The book _Adv. Praxeam_ is directed
against the Patripassians (§ 33, 4). In this work his
realism reaches its climax at c. 7 in the statement: “_Quis
enim negabit, Deum corpus esse, etsi Deus spiritus est?
Spiritus enim corpus sui generis in sua effigie_,”--where,
however, he is careful to state that with him _corpus_ and
_substantia_ are identical ideas, so that he can also say in
c. 10 _de carne Christi_: “_Omne quod est, corpus est sui
generis. Nihil est incorporate nisi quod non est._”

c. =Practical and Ascetical Treatises.= His pre-Montanist
writings are characterized by moderation as compared with
the fanatical rigorism and scornful bitterness against the
Psychical, _i.e._ the Catholics, displayed in those of the
Montanist period. To the former class belong: _De oratione_
(exposition of the Lord’s Prayer); _De baptismo_ (necessity
of water baptism, disapproval of infant baptism); _De
pœnitentia_; _De idolatria_; _Ad Martyres_; _De spectaculis_;
_De cultu feminarum_ (against feminine love of dress); _De
patientia_; _Ad uxorem_ (a sort of testament for his wife,
with the exhortation after his death not to marry again,
but at least in no case to marry an unbeliever). To the
Montanist period belong: _De virginibus velandis_; _De
corona militis_ (defending a Christian soldier who suffered
imprisonment for refusing to wear the soldier’s crown);
_De fuga in persecutione_ (which with fanatical decision
is declared to be a renunciation of Christianity); _De
exhortatione castitatis_ and _De monogamia_ (both against
second marriages which are treated as fornication and
adultery); _De pudicitia_ (recalling his milder opinion
given in his earlier treatise _De pœnitentia_, that
every mortal sin is left to the judgment of God, with the
possibility of reconciliation); _De jejuniis adv. Psychicos_
(vindication of the fasting discipline of the Montanists,
§ 40, 4); _De pallio_ (an essay full of wit and humour
in answer to the taunts of his fellow-citizens about his
throwing off the toga and donning the philosopher’s mantle,
_i.e._ the Pallium, which even the Ascetics might wear).[78]

§ 31.11. =Thascius Cæcilius Cyprianus= [Cyprian], descended from
a celebrated pagan family in Carthage, was at first a teacher
of rhetoric, then, after his conversion in A.D. 245, a presbyter
and from A.D. 248 bishop in his native city. During the Decian
persecution the hatred of the heathen mob expressed itself in
the cry _Cyprianum ad leonem_; but he withdrew himself for a
time in flight into the desert in A.D. 250, from whence he guided
the affairs of the church by his Epistles, and returned in the
following year when respite had been given. The disturbances that
had meanwhile arisen afforded him abundant opportunity for the
exercise of that wisdom and gentleness which characterized him,
and the earnestness, energy and moderation of his nature, as well
as his Christian tact and prudence all stood him in good stead in
dealing, on the one hand, with the fallen who sought restoration,
and on the other, the rigorous schismatics who opposed them
(§ 41, 2). When persecution again broke out under Valerian in
A.D. 257 he was banished to the desert Curubis, and when he
returned to his oppressed people in A.D. 258, he was beheaded.
His epoch-making significance lies not so much in his theological
productions as in his energetic and successful struggle for the
unity of the church as represented by the monarchical position
of the episcopate, and in his making salvation absolutely
dependent upon submission to episcopal authority, as well
as in the powerful impetus given by him to the tendency to
view ecclesiastical piety as an _opus operatum_ (§ 39). As a
theologian and writer he mainly attaches himself to the giant
Tertullian, whose thoughts he reproduces in his works, with
the excision, however, of their Montanist extravagances. Jerome
relates that no day passed in which he did not call to his
amanuensis: _Da magistrum_! In originality, profundity, force
and fulness of thought, as well as in speculative and dialectic
gifts, he stands indeed far below Tertullian, but in lucidity and
easy flow of language and pleasant exposition he far surpasses
him. His eighty-one Epistles are of supreme importance for the
Ch. Hist. of his times, and next to them in value is the treatise
“De unitate ecclesiæ” (§ 34, 7). His _Liber ad Donatum s. de
gratia Dei_, the first writing produced after his conversion,
contains treatises on the leadings of God’s grace and the
blessedness of the Christian life as contrasted with the
blackness of the life of the pagan world. The Apologetical
writings _De idolorum vanitate_ and _Testimonia adv. Judæos_,
II. iii., have no claims to independence and originality. This
applies also more or less to his ascetical tracts: _De habitu
virginum_, _De mortalitate_, _De exhortatione martyrii_,
_De lapsis_, _De oratione dominica_, _De bono patientiæ_,
_De zelo et livore_, etc. His work _De opere et eleemosynis_
specially contributed to the spread of the doctrine of the merit
of works.[79]

§ 31.12. =Various Ecclesiastical Writers using the Latin Tongue.=

a. The Roman attorney =Minucius Felix=, probably of Cirta in
Africa, wrote under the title of _Octavius_ a brilliant
Apology, expressed in a fine Latin diction, in the form of a
conversation between his two friends the Christian Octavius
and the heathen Cæcilius, which resulted in the conversion
of the latter. It is matter of dispute whether it was
composed before or after Tertullian’s Apologeticus, and
to which of the two the origin of thoughts and expressions
common to both is to be assigned. Recently Ebert has
maintained the opinion that Minucius is the older, and
this view has obtained many adherents; whereas the contrary
theory of Schultze has reached its climax in assigning the
composition of the _Octavius_ to A.D. 300-303, so that he is
obliged to ascribe the Octavius as well as the Apologeticus
to a compiler of the fourth or fifth century, plagiarizing
from Cyprian’s treatise _De idolorum vanitate_!

b. =Commodianus= [Commodus], born at Gaza, was won to
Christianity by reading holy scripture, and wrote about
A.D. 250 his _Instructiones adv. Gentium Deos_, consisting
of eighty acrostic poems in rhyming hexameters and scarcely
intelligible, barbarous Latin. His _Carmen apologeticum adv.
Jud. et Gent._ was first published in 1852.

c. The writings of his contemporary the schismatical =Novatian=
of Rome (§ 41, 3) show him to have been a man of no ordinary
dogmatical and exegetical ability. His _Liber de Trinitate
s. de Regula fidei_ is directed in a subordinationist
sense against the Monarchians (§ 33). The _Epistola de
cibis Judaici_ repudiates any obligation on the part of
Christians to observe the Old Testament laws about food;
and the _Epistola Cleri Romani_ advocates milder measures
in the penitential discipline.

d. =Arnobius= was born at Sicca in Africa, where he was engaged
as a teacher of eloquence about A.D. 300. For a long time he
was hostilely inclined toward Christianity, but underwent a
change of mind by means of a vision in a dream. The bishop
distrusted him and had misgivings about admitting him
to baptism, but he convinced him of the honesty of his
intentions by composing the seven books of _Disputationes
adv. Gentes_. This treatise betrays everywhere defective
understanding of the Christian truth; but he is more
successful in combating the old religion than in defending
the new.

e. The bishop =Victorinus of Pettau= (Petavium in Styria), who
died a martyr during the Diocletian persecution in A.D. 303,
wrote commentaries on the Old and New Testament books that
are no longer extant. Only a fragment _De fabrica mundi_ on
Gen. i. and Scholia on the Apocalypse have been preserved.

f. =Lucius Cœlius Firmianus Lactantius= († about A.D. 330),
probably of Italian descent, but a pupil of Arnobius
in Africa, was appointed by Diocletian teacher of Latin
eloquence at Nicomedia. At that place about A.D. 301 he
was converted to Christianity and resigned his office
on the outbreak of the persecution. Constantine the Great
subsequently committed to him the education of his son
Crispus, who, at his father’s command, was executed in
A.D. 326. From his writings he seems to have been amiable
and unassuming, a man of wide reading, liberal culture
and a warm heart. The purity of his Latin style and the
eloquence of his composition, in which he excels all the
Church Fathers, has won for him the honourable name of the
Christian Cicero. We often miss in his writings grip, depth
and acuteness of thinking; especially in their theological
sections we meet with many imperfections and mistakes.
He was not only carried away by a fanatical chiliasm,
but adopted also many opinions of a Manichæan sort. The
_Institutiones divinæ_ in seven bks., a complete exposition
and defence of the Christian faith, is his principal work.
The _Epitome div. inst._ is an abstract of the larger works
prepared by himself with the addition of many new thoughts.
His book _De mortibus persecutorum_ (Engl. trans. by
Dr. Burnett, “Relation of the Death of the Primitive
Persecutors.” Amsterdam, 1687), contains a rhetorically
coloured description of the earlier persecutions as well
as of those witnessed by himself during his residence in
Nicomedia. It is of great importance for the history of the
period but must be carefully sifted owing to its strongly
partisan character. Not only the joy of the martyrs but
also the proof of a divine Nemesis in the lives of the
persecutors are regarded as demonstrating the truth of
Christianity. The tract _De ira Dei_ seeks to prove the
failure of Greek philosophy to combine the ideas of justice
and goodness in its conception of God. The book _De opificio
Dei_ proves from the wonderful structure of the human body
the wisdom of divine providence. Jerome praises him as a
poet; but of the poems ascribed to him only one on the bird
phœnix, which, as it rises into life out of its own ashes
is regarded as a symbol of immortality and the resurrection,
can lay any claim to authenticity.

§ 32. THE APOCRYPHAL AND PSEUDEPIGRAPHICAL LITERATURE.[80]

The practice, so widely spread in pre-Christian times among pagans and Jews, of publishing treatises as original and primitive divine revelations which had no claim to such a title found favour among Christians of the first centuries, and was continued far down into the Greek and Latin Middle Ages. The majority of the apocryphal or anonymous and pseudepigraphic writings were issued in support of heresies Ebionite or Gnostic. Many, however, were free from heretical taint and were simply undertaken for the purpose of glorifying Christianity by what was then regarded as a harmless _pia fraus_ through a _vaticinia post eventum_, or of filling up blanks in the early history with myths and fables already existing or else devised for the occasion. They took the subjects of their romances partly from the field of the Old Testament, and partly from the field of the New Testament in the form of Gospels, Acts, Apostolic Epistles and Apocalypses. A number of them are professedly drawn from the prophecies of old heathen seers. Of greater importance, especially for the history of the constitution, worship and discipline of the church are the Eccles. Constitutions put forth under the names of Apostles. Numerous apocryphal Acts of Martyrs are for the most part utterly useless as historical sources.

§ 32.1. =Professedly Old Heathen Prophecies.=--Of these the
=Sibylline Writings= occupy the most conspicuous place. The
Græco-Roman legend of the Sibyls, σιοῦ βούλη (Æol. for θεοῦ
βούλη), _i.e._ prophetesses of pagan antiquity, was wrought up
at a very early period in the interests of Judaism and afterwards
of Christianity, especially of Ebionite heresy. The extant
collection of such oracles in fourteen books were compiled in the
5th or 6th century. It contains in Greek verses prophecies partly
purely Jewish, partly Jewish wrought up by a Christian hand,
partly originally Christian, about the history of the world, the
life and sufferings of Christ, the persecutions of His disciples
and the stages in the final development of His kingdom. The
Christian participation in the composition of the Sibylline
oracles began in the first century, soon after the irruption of
Vesuvius in A.D. 79, and continued down to the 5th century. The
Apologists, especially Lactantius, made such abundant use of
these prophecies that the heathens nicknamed them Sibyllists.--Of
the prophecies about the coming of Christ ascribed to an ancient
Persian seer, =Hystaspes=, none have been preserved.

§ 32.2. =Old Testament Pseudepigraphs.=[81]--These are mostly of
=Jewish Origin=, of which, however, many were held by the early
Christians in high esteem.

a. To this class belongs pre-eminently the =Book of Enoch=,
written originally in Hebrew in the last century before
Christ, quoted in the Epistle of Jude, and recovered only in
an Ethiopic translation in A.D. 1821. In its present form in
which a great number of older writings about Enoch and Noah
have been wrought up, the book embraces accounts of the fall
of a certain part of the angels (Gen. vi. 1-4; Jude 6; and
2 Pet. ii. 4), also statements of the holy angels about the
mysteries of heaven and hell, the earth and paradise, about
the coming of the Messiah, etc.

b. The =Assumptio Mosis= (ἀνάληψις), from which, according to
Origen, the reference to the dispute between Michael and
Satan about the body of Moses in the Epistle of Jude is
taken, was discovered by the librarian Ceriani at Milan.
He found the first part of this book in an old Latin
translation and published it in A.D. 1860. In the exercise
of his official gift Moses prophesies to Joshua about the
future fortunes of his nation down to the appearing of the
Messiah. The second part, which is wanting, dealt with the
translation of Moses. The exact date of its composition is
not determined, but it may be perhaps assigned to the first
Christian century.

c. The so-called =Fourth Book of Ezra= is first referred to by
Clement of Alexandria. It is an Apocalypse after the manner
of the Book of Daniel. It was probably written originally in
Greek but we possess only translations: a Latin one and four
oriental ones--Ethiopic, Arabic, Syriac and Armenian. From
these oriental translations the blanks in the Latin version
have been supplied, and its later Christian interpolations
have been detected. The angel Uriel in seven visions makes
known to the weeping Ezra the signs of the approaching
destruction of Jerusalem, the decay of the Roman empire,
the founding of the Messianic kingdom, etc. The fifth vision
of the eagle with twelve wings and three heads seems to fix
the date of its composition to the time of Domitian.

d. In the year 1843 the missionary Krapff sent to Tübingen
the title of an Ethiopic Codex, in which Ewald recognised
the writing referred to frequently by the Church Fathers as
the =Book of Jubilees= (Ἰωβελαῖα) or the =Little Genesis=
(Λεπτογένεσις). This book, written probably about A.D. 50
or 60, is a complete summary of the Jewish legendary matter
about the early biblical history from the creation down to
the entrance into Canaan, divided into fifty jubilee periods.
The name _Little Genesis_ was given it, notwithstanding
its large dimensions, as indicating a Genesis of the second
rank.[82]

§ 32.3. The following Pseudepigraphs are of =Christian Origin=.

a. The short romantic =History of Assenath=, daughter of
Potiphar and wife of Joseph (Gen. xli. 45). Its main point
is the conversion of Assenath by an angel.

b. =The Testaments of the XII. Patriarchs=, after the style of
Gen. xlix., written in Greek in the 2nd cent., and quoted
by Origen. As in the chapter of Gen. referred to parting
counsels are put in the mouth of Jacob, they are here
ascribed to his twelve sons. These discourses embrace
prophecies of the coming of Christ and His atoning
sufferings and death, statements about baptism and the
Lord’s supper, about the great Apostle of the Gentiles,
the rejection of the O.T. covenant people and the election
of the Gentiles, the destruction of Jerusalem and the
final completion of the kingdom of God. The book is thus a
cleverly compiled and comprehensive handbook of Christian
faith, life and hope.

c. Of the =Ascensio Isaiæ= (Ἀναβατικόν) and the =Visio Isaiæ=
(Ὅρασις) traces are to be found as early as in Justin
Martyr and Tertullian. The Greek original is lost. Dillmann
published an old Ethiopic version (Lps., 1877), and Gieseler
an old Lat. text (Gött., 1832). Its Cabbalistic colouring
commended it to the Gnostics. In its first part, borrowed
from an old Jewish document, it tells about the martyrdom of
Isaiah who was sawn asunder by King Manasseh; in its second
part, entitled _Visio Isaiæ_ it is told how the prophet in
an ecstasy was led by an angel through the seven heavens and
had revealed to him the secrets of the divine counsels
regarding the incarnation of Christ.

d. A collection in Syriac belonging perhaps to the 5th or 6th
century in which other legends about early ages are kept
together, is called =Spelunca thesaurorum=. We are here
told about the sepulchre of the patriarch Lamech and the
treasures preserved there from which the wise men obtained
the gifts which they presented to the infant Saviour. The
Ethiopic _Vita Adami_ is an expansion of the book just
referred to. This book is manifestly a legendary account of
the changes wrought upon all relations of life in our first
parents by means of the fall (hence the title: “Conflict
of Adam and Eve”), and Golgotha is named as Adam’s burying
place. A second and shorter part treats of the Sethite
patriarchs down to Noah. The still shorter third part
relates the post-diluvian history down to the time of
Christ.[83]

§ 32.4. =New Testament Apocrypha and Pseudepigraphs.=--The
Gnostics especially produced these in great abundance. Epiphanius
speaks of them as numbering thousands. But the Catholics, too,
were unable to resist the temptation to build up the truth by
these doubtful means.

I. =Apocryphal Gospels.=

1. =Complete Gospels= existed in considerable numbers,
_i.e._ embracing the period of Christ’s earthly
labours, more or less corrupted in the interests of
Gnostic or Ebionitic heresy, or independently composed
Gospels; but only of a few of these do we possess any
knowledge.[84] The most important of these are the
following: _The Gosp. of the Egyptians_, esteemed by
the Encratites, according to Origen one of the writings
referred to in Luke i. 1; also _the Gosp. of the XII.
Apostles_, generally called by the Fathers Εὐαγγ. καθ’
Ἑβραίους originally written in Aramaic; and finally,
_the Gosp. of Marcion_ (§ 27, 11). The most important
of these is the Gospel of the Hebrews, on account of
its relation to our canonical Gospel of Matthew, which
is generally supposed to have been written originally
in Aramaic.[85] Jerome who translated the Hebrew Gospel
says of it: _Vocatur a plerisque Matthæi authenticum_;
but this is not his own opinion, nor was it that of
Origen and Eusebius. The extant fragments show many
divergences as well as many similarities, partly in
the form of apocryphal amplifications, partly of changes
made for dogmatic reasons.

2. Gospels dealing with particular Periods--referring to
the days preceding the birth of Jesus and the period of
the infancy or to the closing days of His life, where
the heretical elements are wanting or are subordinated
to the general interests of Christianity. Of these
there was a large number and much of their legendary or
fabulous material, especially about the family history
of the mother of Jesus (§ 57, 2), has passed over into
the tradition of the Catholic Church. Among them may be
mentioned;

a. _The Protevangel. Jacobi minoris_, perhaps the
oldest, certainly the most esteemed and most widely
spread, written in Greek, beginning with the story
of Mary’s birth and reaching down to the death of
the children of Bethlehem;

b. The _Ev. Pseudo Matthæi_, similar in its contents,
but continued down to the period of Jesus’ youth,
and now existing only in a Lat. translation;

c. The _Ev. de nativitate Mariæ_, only in Lat.,
containing the history of Mary down to the birth of
Jesus;

d. The _Hist. Josephi fabri lignarii_ down to his death,
dating probably from the 4th cent., only now in an
Arabic version;

e. The _Ev. Infantiæ Salvatoris_, only in Arabic, a
compilation with no particular dogmatic tendency;

f. Also the so-called _Ascension of Mary_ (§ 57, 2)
soon became the subject of apocryphal treatment,
for which John was claimed as the authority (John
xix. 26), and is preserved in several Greek, Syriac,
Arabic and Latin manuscripts;

g. The _Ev. Nicodemi_ (John xix. 39) in Greek and Lat.
contains two Jewish writings of the 2nd century.
The first part consists of the _Gesta_ or _Acta
Pilati_. There can be no doubt of its identity with
the _Acta Pilati_ quoted by Justin, Tert., Euseb.,
Epiph. It contains the stories of the canonical
Gospels variously amplified and an account of
the judicial proceedings evidently intended to
demonstrate Jesus’ innocence of the charges brought
against Him by His enemies. The second part,
bearing the title _Descensus Christi ad inferos_,
is of much later origin, telling of the descent
of Christ into Hades along with two of the saints
who rose with him (Matt. xxvii. 52), Leucius and
Carinus, sons of Simeon (Luke ii. 25).[86]

§ 32.5.