Chapter IV: Theology and Its Battles (2)

§ 91.5. =The Predestinarian Controversy A.D. 847-868.=--The
earlier predestinarian controversy (§ 53, 5), was, so far
from being brought to a conclusion, that all the gradations
of doctrinal views, from that of Semi-Pelagianism to a doctrine
of predestination to condemnation that went far beyond Augustine,
could find representatives among the teachers of the church. In
the 9th century the controversy broke out in a passionate form.
=Gottschalk=, the son of Berno, a Saxon count, had been placed
by his parents when a child in the monastery of Fulda. A Synod
at Mainz in A.D. 829 allowed him to go forth, but the abbot of
Fulda at that time, Rabanus Maurus, got Louis the Pious to annul
this dispensation. Transferred to the monastery of Orbais, in
the diocese of Soissons, Gottschalk sought comfort in the study
of the writings of Augustine, and was an enthusiastic defender
of the doctrine of absolute predestination. In one point he
even went beyond Augustine himself, for he taught a two-fold
predestination (_Gemina prædestinatio_), a predestination to
salvation and a predestination to condemnation, while Augustine
had spoken of the latter mostly as a giving over to deserved
condemnation. He took advantage of two journeys into Italy in
A.D. 840 and A.D. 847 for spreading his doctrine. Impelled with
a vehement desire to make converts, he made an attempt upon
bishop Noting of Verona. Through him Rabanus, from A.D. 847
archbishop of Mainz, obtained information thereof, and issued
to Noting, as well as to Count Eberhard of Friaul, with whom
Gottschalk was living, threatening letters which distorted
Gottschalk’s doctrine in many particulars, and drew from it
unfair consequences, making the _Prædestinatio ad damnationem_
a _Prædestinatio ad peccatum_. Rabanus’s own doctrine
distinguished prescience and predestination, and placed the
condemnation of the wicked under the former point of view. At
the same time, in A.D. 848, he convened a Synod at Mainz, before
which Gottschalk stated his doctrine without reserve, in the
joyous conviction that it was in accordance with the doctrine
of the church. But the Council excommunicated him, and assigned
him for punishment to his metropolitan Hincmar of Rheims. Hincmar
had him anew condemned at the Synod of Quiersy in A.D. 849,
then, because he steadily refused to recant, had him savagely
scourged and consigned to imprisonment for life in the monastery
of Hautvilliers. Gottschalk offered to prove the justice of
his cause by submitting to an ordeal; but Hincmar, though in
other instances a defender of the ordeal, denounced this as the
proposal of a second Simon Magus. The inhuman treatment of the
poor monk, and the rejection of the doctrine of Augustine by two
church leaders, occasioned a mighty commotion in the Frankish
church, which was mainly directed against Hincmar. At first,
bishop Prudentius of Troyes took the condemned monk’s part. Then
Charles the Bald asked the opinions of Ratramnus of Corbie and
the abbot Servatus Lupus of Ferrières. Both of these took the
side of Gottschalk. Hincmar’s position threatened to become very
serious. He looked out for supporters, and succeeded in finding
champions in the deacon Florus of Lyons, the priest Amalarius of
Metz, and the learned Joannes Scotus Erigena. But the latter’s
advocacy was almost more dangerous to the metropolitan than the
charges of his accusers. For the speculative Irishman founded
his objections to the doctrine of predestination on the position,
unheard of before in the West, that evil is only a μὴ ὄν, and
condemnation therefore not a positive punishment of God, but
consisting only in the consciousness of a defect. Hincmar’s
position was now worse than ever, for his opponents made him
responsible for the heresies of Scotus. And not only an old
objector, Prudentius of Troyes in his _De prædest. c. Joh.
Scotu_, but even archbishop Wessilo of Sens and the deacon
Florus of Lyons, who had hitherto supported him, now put on
their armour against him. But Charles the Bald took the part
of the sorely-beset metropolitan, and summoned the national
Synod of Quiersy of A.D. 853, where in four articles (_Capitula
Carisiaca_), a modified Augustinianism, rejecting the _gemina
prædestinatio_, was set forth as the orthodox faith. The
Neustrian objectors were now compelled to keep silence, but
archbishop Remigius of Lyons set a Lothringian national Synod
of Valence of A.D. 855 over against the Neustrian Synod. This
Synod expressly condemned the decisions of the Synod of Quiersy,
together with the Scottish mixture (_pultus Scotorum_), and
laid down six conflicting articles as the standard of orthodoxy.
Finally the rulers of the West Franks combined their forces and
called an Imperial Synod at Savonnières, a suburb of Toul, in
A.D. 859. But harmony was not yet secured, and they were likely
to part with bitter feelings, when Remigius made the proposal to
reserve decision for a subsequent assembly to be convened in a
less agitated time, and meanwhile to maintain the peace. This
was agreed upon, and so the controversy put out of view, for
the proposed assembly was never brought about. Gottschalk, left
in the lurch by his former friends, now turned for help to the
powerful pope Nicholas I. The pope ordered Hincmar to answer
before the papal plenipotentiaries for his proceedings against
the monk at the Synod of Metz in A.D. 863 (§ 82, 7). Hincmar
preferred not to comply to this demand, and to his delight the
pope himself annulled the decisions of the Synod because his
legates had been bribed. Moreover the metropolitan succeeded by
intercession and well-planned letters in winning over the pope.
Thus then Gottschalk was cheated out of his last hope. For twenty
years he languished in prison, but with his latest breath he
rejected every proposal of recantation. He died in A.D. 868,
and by Hincmar’s orders was buried in unconsecrated earth.

§ 91.6. =The Trinitarian Controversy, A.D. 857.=--From his
prison Gottschalk had accused his metropolitan of a second
heresy. Hincmar had removed from a church hymn, _Te trina Deitas
unaque poscimus_, the expression, =trina Deltas=, as favouring
Arianism, and substituted the words, _sancta Deitas_. His
opponents therefore charged him with Sabellianism, and Ratramnus
made this accusation in a controversial tract no longer extant.
Ratramnus, on the other hand, to whom Hincmar applied, supported
the change, but would not commit himself to a written approval
of it, whereupon Hincmar himself undertook a defence of the
expression substituted in his treatise, _De una et non trini
Deitate_.[262]

§ 92. ENDEAVOURS AFTER REFORMATION.

The independence which Charlemagne gave to the German church first awakened in it the consciousness of its vocation as a reformer. This consciousness was maintained throughout the Middle Ages, though hampered indeed by much narrowness, one-sidedness, and error. Charlemagne himself stood first in the series of reformers with his energetic protest against image worship. Louis the Pious too persevered in this same direction, and encouraged Agobard of Lyons and Claudius of Turin when they contested similar forms of ecclesiastical superstition.

§ 92.1. =The Carolingian Opposition to Image Worship,
A.D. 790-825.=--On the occasion of an embassy of the emperor
Constantinus Copronymus (§ 66, 2) Pepin the Short convened a
Synod at Gentiliacum in A.D. 767 (§ 91, 2) where the question
of image worship was dealt with. We have no further information,
as the acts of this Synod have been lost. Then in A.D. 790
Hadrian I. sent to Charlemagne the acts of the 7th occasional
Synod of Nicæa (§ 66, 3). Charles, as emperor-elect, regarded
himself as grievously wronged by the assumption of the Greeks,
who, without consulting the German court, sought to enact
laws that were wholly antagonistic to the Frankish practice.
He published under his own name a state paper in 4 bks., the
so-called _Libri Carolini_, in which the Byzantine proceedings
were censured in strong terms, the synodal acts refuted one by
one, every form of image worship denounced as idolatry, while at
the same time the position of the iconoclasts was repudiated and,
with reference to Gregory the Great (§ 57, 4), the usefulness
of images in quickening devotion, instructing the people and
providing suitable decoration for sacred places was admitted.
Veneration of saints, relics, and the cross is, on the other
hand, permitted. Charlemagne sent this writing to the pope,
who in the most courteous language wrote a refutation, which,
however, made no impression upon Charlemagne. On the contrary he
now hastened preparations for calling a great œcumenical Synod of
all German churches that would outdo the Synod of the Byzantine
court. Alcuin utilized his visit to England for securing a
representation at this Synod of the Anglo-Saxon church. The
Synod met at Frankfort in A.D. 794 and confirmed the positions
of the Caroline books. The pope found it prudent to yield to
the times and the people. Under Louis the Pious the matter was
brought forward anew on the occasion of an embassy from the
iconoclast emperor Michael Balbus. A national Synod at Paris
in A.D. 825 condemned image worship sharply, in opposition to
Hadrian I., and affirmed the positions of the Caroline books.
Pope Eugenius II. kept silent on this subject. In the Frankish
empire down to the 10th century no recognition was given to the
2nd Nicene Council, and official opposition was continued against
image worship.

§ 92.2. Soon after the Parisian council of A.D. 825, =Agobard
of Lyons= made his appearance with a powerful polemic: _Contra
superstitionem eorum, qui picturis et imaginibus sanctorum
adorationis obsequiem deferendum putant_. He goes much further
than the Caroline books, for not only does he regard it as
advisable, on account of the inevitable misuse on the part of
the people, to banish images entirely, but with image worship
he also rejects all adoration of saints, relics, and angels. Man
should put his trust in the omnipotent God alone, and worship
and reverence only the one Mediator, Christ. He comes forward
also as a reformer of the liturgy. He finds fault with all
sensuous additions to Divine service, would banish from it all
non-Biblical hymns, urges to earnest study of Scripture, contends
against the folly of the ordeal (_De Divinis Sententiis_), the
popular superstitions about witchcraft and weather omens (_Contra
insulsam vulgi opinionem de grandine et tonitruis_), and the
idea that by presents to churches a stop can be put to epidemics
and pestilences. Also on inspiration he entertained very liberal
opinions (§ 90, 9). No one thought on account of these views to
charge him with heresy. =Claudius of Turin= went still further
than Agobard. By the help of Augustine he was able to grasp more
profoundly than any of his contemporaries the essential core of
saving truth, that man without any merit of works is justified
and saved by the grace of God in Christ alone. Louis the
Pious appointed him to the bishopric of Turin with the express
injunction that he should contend against image worship in his
Italian diocese. He found there image worship along with an
extravagant devotion to relics, crosses and pilgrimages carried
on to such a degree that he felt himself constrained reluctantly
because of the condition of affairs to cast images and crosses
out of the churches altogether. The popular excitement over this
proceeding rose to the utmost pitch, and his life was saved and
his office retained only through dread of the Frankish arms. When
pope Paschalis intimated to him his displeasure, he said the pope
is only to be honoured as apostolic, when he does the works of
an apostle, otherwise Matt. xxiii. 2-4 applies to him. Against
the views of his early scholar and friend the abbot Theodemir,
regarding monastic psalmody, he vindicated himself in A.D. 825
in his controversial tract _Apologeticus_, which is now known
only from the replies of his opponents. A Scotchman, Dungal,
teacher at Pavia, entered the lists against him and accused him
before the emperor, who, however, contented himself with calling
upon bishop Jonas of Orleans to refute the apologetical treatise.
This refutation appeared only after the death of Claudius. It
assumed the position of the Frankish church on the question of
image worship, as also Dungal had done.

Butler & Tanner, The Selwood Printing Works, Frome, and London.

FOOTNOTES.

[1] Dowling, “Introduction to Study of Eccl. Hist.; its
Progress and Sources.” Lond., 1838.
Smedt, “Introd. generalis ad Hist. Eccl. critice
tractandam.” Gandavi, 1876.

[2] See Sermon on The Pharisees in Mozley’s “Univ. Sermons.”
Lond., 1876; also
Schürer, Div. II., vol. ii., pp. 1-43, “Pharisees and
Sadducees.”

[3] See Lightfoot, _Ep. to the Col._, 5th ed., Lond., 1880,
Diss. on “Essenes, their Name, Origin, and Relation to
Christianity.” pp. 349-419; also
Schürer, Div. II., vol. ii., pp. 188-218, “The Essenes.”

[4] Nutt, _Sketch of Samaritan History, Dogma, and
Literature_. Lond., 1874.

[5] On Philo, see Schürer, Div. II., vol. iii., pp. 321-381.

[6] J. Bannerman, “The Church of Christ.” 2 vols.,
Edin., 1868.
Jacob, “Ecclesiastical Polity of the New Testament.”
Lond., 1871.
Hatch, “The Organization of the Early Chr. Churches.”
Lond., 1881; 2nd ed., 1883.
D. D. Bannerman, “The Doctrine of the Church.”
Edin., 1887.
Hodge, “The Church and its Polity.” Edin., 1879.
Binnie, “The Church.” Edin., 1882.
Pressensé, “Life and Pract. of Early Church.” Lond., 1879.
Lightfoot, “Comm. on Philip.” “Essay on Christian
Ministry.” 6th ed., Lond., 1881, pp. 181-269.

[7] Mommsen, “De collegiis et sodaliciis Rom.” Kiel, 1843.
Foucart, “Les associat. relig. chez les Grecs.”
Paris, 1873.
Hatch, “Organization of Early Chr. Churches.” pp. 26-39.

[8] Lightfoot, “Epistle to Phil.” 6th ed., Lond., 1881,
p. 95. Detached notes on the synonyms “bishop” and
“presbyter.” “Diss. on Christian Ministry.”
pp. 187-200.

[9] Blondel, “Apologia pro sententia Hieron. de episcop. et
presbyt.” Amst., 1646.

[10] The φίλημα ἅγιον of Rom. xvi. 16; 1 Cor. xvi. 20.

[11] Of these we probably find fragments in Eph. ii. 14;
1 Tim. iii. 16; 2 Tim. ii. 11-13; and perhaps also in
1 Tim. iii. 1, 16; Jas. i. 17; Rev. i. 4; iv. 11; v. 9;
xi. 15; xv. 3; xxi. 1; xxii. 10.

[12] Acts ii. 4, 6; xx. 7.

[13] John xx. 26; Acts xx. 7; 1 Cor. xvi. 2; Rev. i. 10.

[14] Acts ii. 39; xvi. 33; 1 Cor. vii. 14.

[15] Acts viii. 17; vi. 6; xiii. 3; 1 Tim. iv. 14.

[16] On the subject of this section consult:
Pressensé, “Early Years of Christianity.” Vol. 2,
“Apostolic Age.” Lond., 1879, pp. 361-381.
Lechler, “Apostolic and Post Apostolic Times.” 2 vols.,
Edin., 1886; Vol. i., pp. 37-67, 130-144.

[17] Burton, “Heresies of the Apostolic Age.” Oxford, 1829.

[18] As authorities for this period consult:
Moshemii, “Commentarii de reb. Christianor. ante
Constant.” Helmst., 1753.
Baur, “First Three Centuries of the Christian Church.”
Lond., 1877.
Milman, “Hist. of Chr. to Abol. of Pag. in Rom. Emp.”
3 vols., Lond., 1840.
Pressensé, “Early Years of Christianity.” 4 vols.,
Lond., 1879.

[19] Consult:
Killen, “The Ancient Church.” Edin., 1859; “The Old
Catholic Church.” Edin., 1871.
Lechler, “Apost. and Post-Apost. Times.” 2 vols.,
Edin., 1886; Vol. ii., pp. 260-379.
Robertson, “Hist. of Chr. Church.” Vol. i., (A.D. 64-590),
Lond., 1858.

[20] Although the Post-Apostolic and Old Catholic Ages are
sharply enough distinguished from one another in point
of time and of contents along many lines of historical
development, and are rightly partitioned off from each
other, so that they might seem to require treatment as
independent periods; yet, on the one hand, passing over
from the one to the other is so frequent and is for the
most part of so liquid and incontrollable a nature, while
on the other hand, the opposition of and the distinction
between these two periods and the œcumenical Catholic
Imperial Church that succeeds are so thorough-going,
that we prefer to embrace the two under one period and
to point out the boundary lines between the two wherever
these are clearly discernible.

[21] Inge, “Society in Rome under the Cæsars.” Lond., 1887.

[22] Uhlhorn, “Conflict of Christianity with Heathenism.”
Steere, “Account of the Persecutions of the Church under
the Roman Emperors.”

[23] Renan, “Antichrist.” Lond., 1874.
Merivale, “Hist. of Rom. Emp.” Vols. v. vi.,
Lond., 1856, 1858.
Farrar’s “Early Days of Christianity.” Lond., 1884;
Bk. I., pp. 1-44.
Mommsen, “Hist. of Rome.” 6 vols., Lond., 1875 ff.

[24] Renan, “Marcus Aurelius.” Lond., 1883.
Lightfoot, “Ignatius and Polycarp.” 3 vols., Lond., 1885.

[25] Lightfoot, “Ignatius.” Vol. i., pp. 469-476.

[26] “Kirchengesch. v. Dtschl.” I. 94.

[27] Mason, “The Persecution of Diocletian.” Cambridge, 1876.

[28] Cotterill, “Peregrinus Proteus.” Edin., 1879; Engl.
Transl. of Lucian’s works, by Dr. Francklin, 4 vols.,
Lond., 1781.

[29] Baur, “Christian Church in First Three Centuries.”
Lond., 1877.
“Celsus and Origen.” in vol. iv. of Froude’s “Short
Studies.”

[30] Philostratus, “Life of Apollonius of Tyana.” First 2 bks.,
Transl. by Blount, Lond., 1680.
Newman, “Hist. Sketches.” Vol. i., chap. ii., “Apollonius
of Tyana.”

[31] The works of Plotinus consist of 54 treatises arranged
in 6 Enneads, “Opera Omnia.” ed. Creuzer, 3 vols.,
Oxon., 1835. Several of the treatises transl. into
English by H. Taylor, Lond., 1794 and 1817.

[32] Zeller, “History of Eclecticism in Greek Philosophy.”
Lond., 1831.
Ueberweg, “Hist. of Phil.” Lond., 1872; Vol. i.,
pp. 240-252.

[33] “Narratio orig. rituum et error. Christianor. S. Joannis.”
Rom., 1652.

[34] Ewald, “Hist. of Israel.” Lond., 1886; Vol. viii., p. 120.

[35] In de Sacy’s “Chrestom. Arabe.” 2 ed., I. 333.

[36] 1 Cor. xvi. 3; 2 Cor. viii. 19; Gal. ii. 9.

[37] Burton, “Heresies of the Apostolic Age.” Oxford, 1829.
Zeller, “Acts of the Apostles.” 2 vols., London,
1875, 1876.
Pressensé, “Apostolic Age.” London, 1879, pp. 66-73;
318-330.

[38] Neander’s “First Planting of Christianity and
Antignostikus.” (Bohn), 2 vols., Lond., 1851.
Mansel, “Gnostic Heresies of First and Second Centuries.”
Ed. by Bishop Lightfoot, Lond., 1875.
King, “Remains of the Gnostics.” Lond., 1864;
new ed., 1887.
Ueberweg, “Hist. of Phil.” 2 vols., Lond., 1872, Vol. i.,
pp. 280-290.

[39] These are published among the works of Origen. Recently
Caspari discovered an admirable Latin translation of them
made by Rufinus, and published it in his “Kirchenhist.
Anecdota.” I., (Christ., 1883).

[40] Lipsius, “Valentinus and his School.” in Smith’s “Dict.
of Biography.” Vol. iv., Lond., 1887.

[41] In Cureton’s “Spicil. Syr.” Lond., 1855.

[42] In its extant Coptic form, ed. by Petermann, Brl., 1851.
In a Latin transl. by Schwartze, Brl., 1853.
In English transl. in King’s “Remains of the Gnostics.”
Lond., 1887.

[43] Yet the school of Baur regard this Gospel of Marcion as
the original of Luke. Hilgenfeld thinks that both our
Luke and Marcion drew from one earlier source. Hahn
has sought to restore the Marcionite Gospel in Thilo’s
“Cod. Apoc. N.T.” I. 401.
Sanday, “Gospels in the Second Century.” London, 1876.

[44] Salmon, “Introd. to the N.T.” London, 1885, pp. 242-248.
Reuss, “Hist. of N.T.” Edin., 1884, §§ 291, 246, 362, 508.

[45] Lightfoot, “Comm. on Galatians.” Camb., 1865; Diss.
“St. Paul and the Three.”

[46] Lechler, “Apost. and Post-Apostol. Times.” Vol. ii.,
p. 263 ff.
Ewald, “Hist. of Israel.” Lond., 1886, Vol. viii.,
p. 152.

[47] Ewald, “Hist. of Israel.” Vol. viii., p. 122.

[48] We possess this work in the original Greek. The first
complete edition was that of Cotelerius in his “Pp.
Apost.” The latest and most careful separate ed., is by
Lagarde, Lps., 1865; Eng. transl. in Ante Nicene Lib.,
Edin., 1871.

[49] Existing only in the Latin transl. of Rufinus. Published
in Cotelerius, “Pp. Apost.”
Separate ed. by Gersdorf, Lps., 1838; Eng. transl.
Ante-Nicene Lib., Edin., 1867.

[50] See de Sacy, “Mem. sur diverses antiqu. de la Perse.”
Par., 1794.
The most important of these Arabic works are the Literary
History of An-Naddim, Kitab al Fihrist, ed. Flügel and
Roediger, Lps., 1871; then
Al-Shurstani’s “Hist. of relig. and phil. sects.” ed.
Cureton, Lond., 1842; and
Al-Biruni’s “Chron. d. Orient Völker.” ed. Sachau,
Lps., 1878.

[51] Among the Mandeans _mana rabba_ means one of the highest
æons, and is thus perhaps identical with the name
Paraclete borrowed from the Christian terminology,
which Manes assumed.

[52] Ueberweg, “Hist. of Phil.” 2 vols., Lond., 1872, Vol. i.,
pp. 290-325. Patristic. Phil. down to Council of Nicæa.

[53] Donaldson, “Apostolic Fathers.” Lond., 1874.
Lightfoot, “Clement of Rome.” 2 vols., Lond., 1869, 1877;
Ignatius and Polycarp, 3 vols., Lond., 1885.
Sanday, “The Gospels in the Second Century.” Lond., 1876.

[54] Luke i. 1; § 32, 4; 36, 7; 59, 1.

[55] “Patrum Apost. Opera.” Ed. Gebhardt, Harnack and Zahn,
3 vols., Lps., 1876 ff.
“Apostolic Fathers.” Engl. transl. in Ante-Nicene Library,
Edin., 1867.
Donaldson, “Apostolic Fathers.” Edin., 1874.

[56] At Constantinople, 1875.

[57] Comp. Lightfoot, “St. Clement of Rome, An Appendix.” etc.,
Lond., 1877.

[58] Donaldson, “History of Christian Literature.” Vol. i.,
Lond., 1864.
Cunningham, “Dissertation on Epistle of St. Barnabas.”
Lond., 1877.

[59] “Hermæ Pastor.” ed. Hilgenfeld, 2 ed., Lps., 1881. Down
to the middle of the 19th century it was known only in
a Latin translation, but since then the Greek original
has been accessible in two recensions, as well as
in an ancient Ethiopic translation (ed. d’Abbadie,
Lps., 1860). One of the Greek recensions almost complete
was found in the monastery of Athos; and an older, but
less perfect one, was found in the _Codex Sinaiticus_.
Schodde, “Hermâ Nabî; The Ethiopic version of Pastor
Hermæ examined.” Lps., 1876.

[60] Comp.
Harnack in _Expositor_ for March, 1886, pp. 185-192.
Lightfoot, “Ignatius and Polycarp.” Lond., 1885, vol. ii.,
pp. 433-470.

[61] Cureton, “Corpus Ignatianum.” (Rom., Eph., and Ep. to
Polyc.), Lond., 1819.

[62] Against their genuineness:
Dallæus, “De scrr. quæ sub Dionysii et Ignatii nom.
circumfer.” Gen., 1666.
Killen, “Ignatian Epistles entirely Spurious.”
Edin., 1886.

In favour:
Pearson, “Vindiciæ St. Ignat.” Cantab., 1672.
Lightfoot, “Ignatius and Polycarp.” 3 vols., Lond., 1885.

[63] Salmon, “Introd. to the New Testament.” Lond., 1885,
pp. 104-126.
Sanday, “Gospels in Second Century.” Lond., 1876.

[64] Schaff, “The Oldest Church Manual.” Edin., 1886.
Hitchcock and Brown, “Teaching of the Twelve Apostles.”
New York, 1884.
Taylor, “The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles with Illus.
from the Talmud.” Cambr., 1886.
_Expositor_, April and June, 1886, pp. 319 f. and
401 ff.; Nov., 1887, pp. 359-371.

[65] Donaldson, “Hist. of Chr. Lit. from death of App. to Nic.
Council.” 3 vols., Lond., 1864, Vols. ii. and iii.,
“The Apologists.”

[66] The Syriac translation of a treatise of Melito’s given
in Cureton’s “Spicileg. Syr.” Lond., 1853, which gives
itself out as an address delivered before Antoninus
Cæsar, is not identical with his Apology to Antoninus
Pius, of which Eusebius has preserved three fragments,
as these passages are not found in it.

[67] The fragments of Melito’s works are collected by Routh,
“Reliquiæ Sacr.” L., Oxon., 1814.

[68] “Opera.” ed. Otto, 3 vols., Jena, 1876; Engl. transl. in
Ante-Nicene Library, Edin., 1867.
Semisch, “Just. Mart.” 2 vols., Edin., 1843.
Kaye, “Writings and Opin. of Just. Mart.” Lond., 1853.

[69] Salmon, “Introd. to New Test.” On Tatian, pp. 96-104.
Wace on “Zahn’s Tatian’s Diatessaron.” in _Expositor_
for Sept. and Oct., 1882.

[70] Bigg, “The Christian Platonists of Alexandria.” Bampton
Lect. for 1886, Oxf., 1886.
Kingsley, “Alexandria and her Schools.” Camb., 1854.

[71] “Opera.” ed. Harvey, Cantab., 1857; Introd. II.
“Life and Wr. of Irenæus.” Engl. transl. in Ante-Nicene
Lib., 2 vols., Edin., 1868, 1869.
Lightfoot, “Churches of Gaul.” in _Contemp. Review_,
Aug. 1876.
Lipsius, “Irenæus.” in Smith’s “Dict. of Chr. Biog.”
III., pp. 253-279.

[72] Many works ascribed to him have been lost; whatever fragments
of these exist have been collected by Fabricius and Lagarde.
These were:
_Exeget._, a Com. on Daniel;
_Apolog._, Πρὸς Ἰουδαίους;
_Polem._,
against Gnostics and Monarchians,
against the Asiatic Observance of Easter (§ 37, 2);
_Dogmat._,
Περὶ τῆς τοῦ πάντος οὐσίας,
Περὶ τοῦ Ἀντιχρίστου,
Περὶ τῆς ἀναστάσεως (§ 22, 4),
Περὶ χαρισμάτων;
Hist.-chron.,
Chronicle, and Easter-Canon.
On Philosophoumena:
Döllinger, “Hippolytus and Callistus.” Edin., 1876.

[73] “Opera.” ed. Dindorf, 4 vols., Oxon., 1868.
“Supplementum Clementinum, in Zahn’s Forsch.” Vol. iii.,
Engl. transl. in Ante-Nicene Lib., 2 vols., Edin., 1867.
Bigg, “Chr. Plat. of Alex.” Lectt. II. III., Oxf., 1886.
Kaye, “Clement of Alexandria.” London, 1855.
Reuss, “Hist of Canon.” Edin., 1884, pp. 112-116.

[74] Jerome reckons them at 2,000; Epiphanius at 6,000; these
must include the thousands of separate epistles and
homilies.
Bigg, “Chr. Platonists of Alex.” Lectt. IV.-VI.,
Oxf., 1886.

[75] _Hexaplorum quæ supersunt._ Ed. Field, Oxon., 1871.

[76] Ed. Selwyn, Cantab., 1876; Engl. transl. of C. Celsum
and De Principiis, in Ante-Nicene Library, 2 vols.,
Edin., 1869-1872.

[77] “Gregory Thaumaturgus, Dionysius of Alex. and Archelaus.”
transl. by Prof. Salmond, Edin., 1871.

[78] Neander, “Antignosticus, or the Spirit of Tertull.”
appended to “Hist. of Planting of Chr. Church.”
2 vols., Lond., 1851.
Kaye, “Eccles. Hist. of 2nd and 3rd Cents. illustr. from
Wr. of Tertull.” 2 ed., Camb., 1829.
Tertullian, “Works.” 3 vols., Ante-Nicene Lib.,
Edin., 1869.

[79] “Cyprian’s Treatises and Epistles.” Lib. of Fathers,
2 vols., Oxf., 1839, 1844.
“Writings of Cyprian.” Ante-Nicene Lib., 2 vols.,
Edin., 1868.
Poole, “Life and Times of C.” Oxf., 1840.
Pressensé, “Martyrs and Apologists.” Lond., 1879,
pp. 414-438.

[80] Dillmann, “Pseudepigraph. des A. Ts.” Herzog, xii. 341.
Reuss, “Hist. of the N. T.” Edin., 1884.
Salmon, “Introd. to N. T.” 2nd ed., Lond., 1886.

[81] “Fabricius, Codex pseudepigr. V.T.” Ed. 2., Hamb., 1722.

[82] Drummond, “Jewish Messiah.” Lond., 1877.
Lawrence, “Book of Enoch.” Oxf., 1821.
Schodde, “Bk. of Enoch.” Andover, 1882.
Schurer, “Hist. of Jew. Peo. in Times of J. Chr.”
Div. II., Vol. 3., pp. 59 ff., 73 ff., 93 ff., 134 ff.;
(Enoch, Assumptio, Ezra, Bk. of Jub.).
Bensly, “Missing Fragment of Lat. Transl. of 4th Bk. of
Ezra.” Cambr., 1875.

[83] Sinker, “Test. XII. Patriarchum.” Cambr., 1869;
Appendix, 1879.
Malan, “Book of Adam and Eve.” Lond., 1882.
Hort on Bks. of Adam, in Smith’s “Dict. of Chr. Biog.”
Lond., 1877.

[84] Salmon, “Introd. to N.T.” Lond., 1885; Lect. XII.,
“Apoc. and Her. Gospels.” pp. 226-248.

[85] Nicholson, “The Gosp. acc. to the Hebrews.” Lond., 1879.

[86] Giles, “Cod. Apoc. N. T.” 2 vols., Lond., 1852.
Tischendorf, “Evv. Apocr.” Ed. 2, Lps., 1876.

[87] Wright, “Apocryphal Acts of the Apostles.” Syriac and
English, 2 vols., Lond., 1871.
Malan, “The Conflicts of the Holy Apostles.” Lond., 1871.
Tischendorf, “Acta app. Apocr.” Lps., 1851.

[88] Phillips, “Addai the Apostle.” Syriac and English,
Lond., 1876.

[89] Lightfoot, “Comm. on Phil.” 6th ed., Lond., 1881; “Diss.
on Paul and Seneca.” pp. 270-328; “Letters of Paul
and Seneca.” pp. 329-333.
Lightfoot, “Comm. on Col.” 5 ed., Lond., 1880;
pp. 274-300, “The Epistle from Laodicea.”

[90] Dorner, “Hist. of Dev. of Doctr. of Person of Chr.”
5 vols., Edin., 1862.
Pressensé, “Heresy and Christian Doctrine.” Lond., 1879.

[91] Deut. xviii. 15; Isa. liii. 3; Matt. xii. 32; Luke i. 35;
John viii. 40; Acts ii. 22; 1 Tim. ii. 5.

[92] Tertullian says: _Ita duo negotia diaboli Praxeas Romæ
procuravit, prophetiam expulit et hæresim intulit,
paracletum fugavit et patrem crucifixit._--Ps.-Tertull.:
_Hæresim introduxit, quam Victorinus corroborare
curavit._

[93] Dorner, “Person of Christ.” Vol. ii.

[94] Pressensé, “Life and Practice in the Early Church.”
Lond., 1872.

[95] Hatch, “The Organization of the Early Christian
Churches.” Lond., 1881; “The Growth of Church
Institutions.” Lond., 1887.
Bannerman, “Doctr. of the Church.” 2 vols., Edin., 1858;
espec. vol. i., pp. 277-480.
Lightfoot, “Comm. on Phil.” 6th ed., Lond., 1881:
“Dissertat. on Chr. Ministry.”
Papers in _Expositor_, 1887, on “Origin of Chr. Ministry.”
by Sanday, Harnack and others.

[96] We are not carried further than this by Irenæus, iii. 3.
Similarly, too, Cyprian, _De Unitate Ecclesiæ_, iv.
Tertullian also does not accept the Roman tradition
as of supreme authority, but prefers that of Asia
Minor in regard to the Easter Controversy, and, in the
_De Pudicitia_, he opposes with bitter invective the
penitential discipline of the Roman bishop Zephyrinus or
Callistus. So, too, Cyprian repudiates the Roman practice
in regard to heretics’ baptism (§ 35, 5); and on the same
subject Firmilian of Cæsarea in Cappadocia hesitates not
to write: _Non pudet Stephanum, Cyprianum pseudo-christum
et pseudo-apostolum et dolosum operarium dicere:
qui omnia in se esse conscius prævenit, ut alteri
per mendacium objiceret, quæ ipse ex merito audire
deberet._--Consult:
Blondel, “Traité hist. de la primauté.” Gen., 1641.
Salacious, “De Primatu Papæ.” Lugd. Bat., 1645.
Kenrick, “The Primacy of the Apostolic See Vindicated.”
New York, 1848.
“The Pope and the Council.” by Janus, Lond., 1869.

[97] Wall, “Hist. of Infant Baptism.” with Gale’s Reflections,
and Wall’s Defence, 4 vols., Oxf., 1836.
Wilberforce, “Doctr. of Holy Baptism.” Lond., 1849.

[98] Funk’s assertion that the ἀκροᾶσθαι and the γονυκλίνειν
were not stages in the Catechumenate, but penal ranks
in which offending Catechumens were placed, and that
there was only one order of Catechumens is untenable
for these reasons:

1. Because the penitential institution presupposes a
falling away from the grace of baptism;

2. Because the Canon of Neo-Cæsarea with its
κατηχούμενος ἁμαρτάνων, ἐὰν μὲν γονυκλίνων, ἀκροάσθω,
necessarily implies that γονυκλίνειν is a stage in
the Catechumenate;

3. Because this Canon provides that after the first
penal procedure, not after passing through two
penitential orders, the sinner will be expelled;

4. Finally, because the γονυκλίνειν of the Catechumens,
just like that of the congregation in prayer, is
even in expression something quite different from
the ὑπόπτωσις of the penitents.--Consult:

Pressensé, “Life and Practice in the Early Church.”
Lond., 1879, pp. 5-36, 333.

[99] Pressensé, “Life and Practice in the Early Church.”
pp. 201-216, 263-286.
Lechler, “Apostolic and Post-Apost. Times.” 2 vols.,
Edin., 1886; Vol. ii. 298.
Jacob, “Ecclest. Polity of N. T.” Lond., 1871,
pp. 187-319.

[100] Jacob, “Ecclest. Polit. of N.T.” Lond., 1871, Lect. vii.,
“The Lord’s Supper.”
Waterland, “Review of the Doctrine of the Eucharist.”
Lond., 1737.

[101] See, _De Doctr. Christiana._ II. ii. 15.--“Old Latin
Biblical Texts.” Edited by John Wordsworth, Bp. of
Salisbury, Oxford, 1885, etc.

[102] Lechler, “Apostolic and Post-Apostolic Times.”
Edin., 1886, Vol. ii., pp. 301-310.

[103] Bosio, “Roma Sotteranea.” Rom., 1632.
De Rossi, “Roma sott. crist.” 3 vols., Rome, 1864-1877.
Northcote and Brownlow, “Roma Sotteranea.” Lond., 1869.
Withrow, “The Catacombs of Rome.” Lond., 1876.

[104] Marriott, “Testimony of the Catacombs.” Lond., 1877.

[105] Zöckler, “The Cross of Christ.” Lond., 1877.
Allen, “Early Christian Symbolism.” Lond., 1887.
Didson, “Chr. Iconography.” 2 vols., Lond., 1886.

[106] Schmidt, “The Social Results of Early Christianity.”
Lond., 1886.
Brace, “Gesta Christi.” Lond., 1883.
Uhlhorn, “Chr. Charity in the Ancient Church.”
Edin., 1883.
Pressensé, “Life and Practice in Early Church.”
Lond., 1879, pp. 345-477.
Ryan, “Hist. of the Effects of Relig. upon Mankind.”
Dublin, 1820.

[107] Morinus, “De discipl. in administr. s. pœnitentiæ.”
Par., 1651.
Marshall, “Penitential Discipline of the Prim. Church for
the First Four Centuries.” Lond., 1844 (1st ed., 1718).
Tertullian, “De Pœnitentia.” See Transl. in Library of
Fathers, Tertullian, vol. i., “Apologetic and Practical
Treatises.” Oxf., 1843; XI. Of Repentance, with long
and valuable notes by Dr. Pusey, pp. 349-408.

[108] J. de Soyres, “Montanism and the Primitive Church.”
Cambr., 1878.
Cunningham, “The Churches of Asia.” Lond., 1880,
p. 159 ff.

[109] Bunsen, “Hippolytus and his Age.” Lond., 1854.
Wordsworth, “St. Hippolytus and the Church of Rome.”
Lond., 1852.
Döllinger, “Hippolytus and Callistus.” Edin., 1876
(orig. publ. 1853).

[110] “Library of Fathers.” Oxf., 1843, Cyprian’s Treatises:
v.“On Unity of the Church.” vi. “On the Lapsed.” with
prefaces.
Also, “Epp. of S. Cyprian.” (1844) xli.-xlv., lii.
and lix.

[111] “Library of Fathers.” Oxf., 1844; “Epp. of S. Cyprian.”
Ep. lii., also Ep. lv.

[112] Merivale, “Conversion of the Roman Empire.” Lond., 1864.
Milman, “Hist. of Christianity to Abol. of Pag. in Rom.
Emp.” 3 vols., Lond.
Lecky, “Hist. of Eur. Morals.” Vol. ii., “From Constantine
to Charlemagne.”

[113] Döllinger, “Fables respecting the Popes of the Middle
Ages.” Lond., 1871.

[114] Original source is Eusebius, “Life of Constantine.”
Trans. Lond., 1842.
See interesting lect. on Constantine in Stanley’s “Hist.
of Eastern Church.” Lond., 1861.
Madden, “Christian Emblems on Coins of Constantine I.”
Lond., 1878.

[115] Neander, “The Emperor Julian and his Generation.”
Lond., 1850.
G. H. Rendall, “The Emperor Julian.” Lond., 1879.
Newman, “Miracles in Eccl. Hist.” Oxf., 1842.
Bp. Wordsworth, “Julian.” in Smith’s Dict. of Biog.,
vol. iii., pp. 484-523.

[116] On this whole period consult: Histories of Theodoret,
Sozomen, Socrates, and Evagrius (containing much
fabulous matter, but useful as contemporary records
extending down to A.D. 594). Transl. in 4 vols.,
Lond., 1812-1846.
For Theodosius I. see Hefele, “Hist. of Councils.”
vol. ii., p. 341 ff., Edin., 1876.

[117] A careful reconstruction of the whole as far as
possible has been attempted by Neumann (Leipz., 1880),
accompanied by prolegomena and a German translation.

[118] Hefele, “Hist. of Church Councils.” Edin., 1872, Vol. i.,
pp. 1-48.
Pusey, “Councils of Ch. from A.D. 51 to A.D. 381: their
constit., obj., and history.” Oxf., 1857.

[119] Its original form is probably preserved in a Syriac
translation; see Bunsen’s “Analecta Antenicæna.”
ii. 45-338, Lond., 1854.

[120] First published in the Greek original by Bickell under
the title, inapplicable to the first part: Αἱ διαταγαὶ
αἱ διὰ Κλήμεντος καὶ κανόνες ἐκκλησιαστικοὶ τῶν ἁγίων
ἀποστόλων.

[121] Maitland, “The Dark Ages.” Lond., 1844.
Ozanam, “Hist. of Civilization in 5th Cent.” Transl.
by Glyn, 2 vols.
Montalembert, “Monks of the West, from Benedict to
Bernard.” 7 vols., Edin., 1861 ff.

[122] Stephens, “Chrysostom: his Life and Times.” 3rd ed.,
London, 1883, pp. 59 ff., 294 ff.

[123] Hatch, “Organization of the Early Christian Churches.”
London, 1881, pp. 124-139.
Hatch, “Ordination.” in Smith’s “Dict. of Bibl. Antiq.”
Vol. ii.

[124] Hatch, “Organization of Chr. Ch.” p. 161.
Bede, “Eccles. Hist.” iv. 1.

[125] Dale, “Synod of Elvira, and Christ. Life in the 4th cent.”
London, 1882.
Lea, “Hist. of Sacerdotal Celibacy.” Philad., 1867.
Lecky, “Hist. of Europ. Morals.” London, 1877, Vol. ii.,
pp. 328 ff.
Hefele, “Hist. of Christ. Councils.” Edin., 1872, Vol. i.,
pp. 150, 380, 435.

[126] Neale, “Hist. of the Holy Eastern Church.” 5 vols.,
London, 1847-1873.
Stanley, “Lect. on the Eastern Church.” London, 1861.

[127] Greenwood, “Cathedra Petri: Pol. Hist. of Great Latin
Patriarchate from 1st to 16th cent.” 6 vols., London,
1856 ff.

[128] Hefele, “Hist. of Councils.” Vol. ii., Edin., 1876,
pp. 231 ff., 483 ff.

[129] Comp. Döllinger, “Fables Respecting the Popes of the
Middle Ages.” Lond., 1871.

[130] Milman, “Latin Christianity.” Vol. i.

[131] Bright, “Hist. of Church from A.D. 313-451.” 2 ed.,
Cambr., 1869.
Milman, “Latin Christianity.” Vol. i.

[132] Kellett, “Pope Gregory the Great and his Relations with
Gaul.” (Cambridge Essays, No. ii.), Cambridge, 1889.

[133] Engl. Transl.:
“Eccles. Hist. with Life of Euseb. by Valesius.”
Lond., 1843.
“Theophania, or Div. Manifest. of the Lord.” from Syr.
by Dr. Sam. Lee, Lond., 1843.
“Life of Constantine.” Lond., 1844.
“Life of Eusebius.” by Bright, prefixed to Oxf. ed.
of Eccl. Hist. of 1872.

[134] “Festal Epp. of Athanasius.” (transl. from Syriac
discovered in 1842 by Tattam, and first edited by
Cureton in 1848), Oxf., 1854.

[135] “Treatises against Arians.” 2 vols., Oxf., 1842 (new ed.,
1 vol., 1877).
“Historical Tracts.” Oxf., 1843; “Select Tracts,” with
Newman’s Notes, 2 vols., Lond., 1881.

[136] Newman’s, “Hist. Sketches.” Vol. ii., chap. v; Sketches
of Basil, Gregory, etc. Originally publ. under title
“Church of the Fathers.” Lond., 1842.

[137] Ullmann, “Gregory Nazianzen.” Oxford, 1855; and Newman
“Church of the Fathers.”

[138] Cyril’s Comm. on Luke is transl. from the Syriac by
Dr. Payne Smith, Oxf., 1859.

[139] A very full and admirable account of Synesius and his
writings is given by Rev. T. R. Halcomb in Smith’s
“Dict. of Chr. Biog.” Vol. iii., pp. 756-780.

[140] Neander, “Life of Chrysostom.” Lond., 1845.
Stephens, “Life of Chrysostom.” 3rd ed., Lond., 1883.
Chase, “Chrysostom: a Study.” Cambr., 1887.
His Homilies and Addresses are transl. in 15 vols. in
the “Lib. of the Fathers.” Oxf., 1839-1851.
Various Eng. translations of the tract “On the
Priesthood.”

[141] Newman’s “Historical Sketches.” Vol. ii., chap. i.,
“Theodoret.”

[142] Translated by Dean Church in “Lib. of the Fathers.”
Oxf., 1838; with interesting and instructive Preface
by Newman.

[143] Ueberweg, “Hist. of Philosophy.” Lond., 1872, Vol. i.,
pp. 349-352.
Colet, “On the Hierarchies of Dionysius.” ed. by
Lupton, Lond., 1869.
Wescott, “Dionysius the Areopagite.” in _Contemp.
Review_ for May, 1867.

[144] Etheridge, “The Syrian Churches: their Early Hist.,
Liturg. and Lit.” Lond., 1846.

[145] Morris, “Select Writings of Ephraim the Syrian.”
Oxford, 1817.
Burgess, “Repentance of Nineveh, Metrical Homily by
Ephraem.” Lond., 1853.
“Select Metrical Hymns and Homilies of Eph. Syr.”
Lond., 1853.

[146] Newman, “Church of the Fathers.” 2nd ed., London, 1842.
Reprinted in Hist. Sketches, vol. ii.
Gilly, “Vigilantius and his Times.” London, 1844.

[147] “Lib. of Fathers.” in vol. of Cyprian’s Epps., Oxf., 1844,
pp. 318-384. For phrase quoted, see p. 322.

[148] A good account of the writings of Jerome is given by the
late Prof. William Ramsay in Smith’s “Dict. of Grk. and
Rom. Biogr.” Vol. ii., p. 460.
Milman, “Hist. of Chr.” Vol. iii., ch. xi.
Cutts, “St. Jerome.” Lond., 1877.
Gilly, “Vigilantius and his Times.” Lond., 1844.

[149] Gilly, “Vigilantius and his Times.” London, 1844.

[150] Newman’s “Arians of the 4th Century.” London, 1838.
Gwatkin, “Studies of Arianism.” Camb., 1882.
Hefele, “Hist. of Councils.” Vols. i. ii., Edin.,
1872, 1876.
Newman’s “Tracts Theolog. and Eccles.” Chap. ii.; Doctrinal
Causes of Arianism.
“Select Treatises of Athanasius.” Ed. by Newman, 2 vols.,
London, 1881, Vol. 2 containing notes on Arius,
Athanasius, etc.

[151] Hefele, “Hist. of Councils.” I., pp. 231-447.
Kaye, “Hist. of Council of Nicæa.” London, 1853.
Tillemont, “Hist. of Arians and Council of Nice.”
London, 1721.

[152] Newman’s “Select Treat. of Athanasius.” Vol. ii., p. 196 f.
Hefele, “Hist. of Councils.” Vol. ii., Edin., 1876, p. 193.

[153] Newman’s “Select Treat. of Athanasius.” Vol. ii., p. 282 ff.
Hefele, “Hist. of Councils.” ii., p. 217.

[154] Hefele, “Hist. of Councils.” ii., pp. 340-373.
Hort, “Two Dissertations.” ii., On the Constantinople Creed
and other Eastern Creeds of the 4th cent., Camb., 1874.

[155] Swete, “The Hist. of the Doctr. of the Procession of the
Holy Spirit from Apost. Age to Death of Charlemagne.”
Cambr., 1876.
Pusey, “On the clause ‘And the Son.’” Oxf., 1876.

[156] Hefele, “Hist. of Councils.” ii., p. 348 ff., § 97, The
Tome and the Creed.

[157] Stephens, “Chrysostom.” pp. 287-305.
Hefele, “Hist. of Councils.” ii., p. 430 ff.

[158] The most useful and complete account of Chrysostom is
that of Stephens. Consult also Milman, “Hist. of Chr.”
Vol. iii., pp. 206 ff.

[159] Dorner, “Hist. of the Development of the Doctr. of the
Person of Christ.” 5 vols., Edin., 1861.

[160] Newman, “Tracts Theological and Ecclesiastical.”
Chap. iii., Apollinarianism.

[161] Hefele, “Hist. of Councils.” Vol. iii., pp. 1-156.

[162] Most informing about all these transactions is Hefele, “Hist.
of Councils.” iii., Edin., 1883; (Robber Synod, p. 241 ff.;
Chalcedon, p. 451 ff.).
Perry, “Second Council of Ephesus.” London, 1877.
Bright, “Hist. of Church from A.D. 313-451.” Cambr., 1869.

[163] Butler, “Ancient Coptic Churches.” 2 vols., London, 1884.

[164] Döllinger, “Fables respecting the Popes of the Middle
Ages.” Lond., 1871.
Willis, “Pope Honorius and the New Roman Dogma.” Lond., 1879.
Bottalla, “Pope Honorius before the Tribunal of Reason and
History.” London, 1868.

[165] Wiggers, “Augustinianism and Pelagianism.” Andover, 1840.
Müller, “Chr. Doctrine of Sin.” 2 vols., Edin., 1868.
Ritschl, “Hist. of Chr. Doctr. of Justific. and
Reconciliation.” Edin., 1872.

[166] Laidlaw, “The Bible Doctrine of Man.” Edin., 1879.
Heard, “Tripartite Nat. of Man.” 3rd ed., Edin., 1870,
pp. 189-200.
Delitzsch, “Biblical Psychology.” 2nd ed., Edin., 1869,
pp. 128-142.
Beck, “Outlines of Biblical Psychology.” Edin., 1877, p. 10.

[167] For an entirely different representation of the Augustinian
system see Cunningham, “S. Austin and his Place in Hist.
of Chr. Thought.” Lond., 1886; esp. chaps. ii. and iii.,
pp. 45-107.
A good outline and defence in Hodge’s “System. Theol.”
Edin., 1874, Vol. ii., pp. 333-353.
Mosheim, “Eccl. Hist.” ed. by Dr. J. S. Reid, Lond., 1880,
p. 210, notes 3 and 4; (pt. II., chap. v., § 25.)
Mozley, “Augustinian Doctrine of Predestination.”
Lond., 1855.

[168] Hodge, “Systematic Theology.” Vol. ii., pp. 166-168.

[169] Lardner, “Credibility of the Gospel Hist.” Vol. iv.,
London, 1743.

[170] Butcher, “The Ecclesiastical Calendar.” London.
Hampson, “Medii Ævi Kalend.”

[171] Gieseler, “Ecclesiastical History.” Edinburgh, 1848,
Vol. ii., pp. 141-145.

[172] Tyler, “Image Worship of Ch. of Rome contrary to Scripture
and the Prim. Ch.” London, 1847.

[173] Tyler, “Worship of Virgin Mary contrary to Script. and
Faith of Ch. of first 5 Cents.” London, 1851.
Clagett, “Prerogatives of Anna the Mother of God.”
London, 1688. Also by same: “Discourse on Worship of
Virgin and Saints.” London, 1686.

[174] Cosin, “Scholastic History of Popish Transubstantiation.”
Lond., 1676.

[175] Reuss, “History of the N.T. Scriptures.” Edin., 1884,
§ 377.
Keil, “Introduction to the O.T.” Edin., 1870, Vol. ii.,
pp. 201-203.

[176] Swainson, “The Nicene and Apostles’ Creeds.” Camb., 1875.
Westcott, “The Historic Faith.” Lond., 1883, note iii.,
the Creeds.
Harvey, “Hist. and Theology of the three Creeds.”
Camb., 1854.
Hort, Two Dissertations: II. “The Constantinopolitan Creed
and the Eastern Creeds of 4th cent.” Camb., 1876.
Schaff, “Creeds of Christendom.” Edin., 1877, vol. i.
Lumby, “History of the Creeds.” Camb., 1873.
Waterland, “Crit. Hist. of Athanasian Creed.” Camb., 1724.
Heurtley, “The Athanasian Creed.” Oxf., 1872.
Ommaney, “Ath. Creed: an Exam. of Recent Theories
respecting its Date and Origin.” Lond., 1875.

[177] Neale, “Hymns of the Eastern Church.” Lond., 1863.
“Mediæval Hymns and Sequences.” Lond., 1863.
Gieseler, “Ecclesiastical History.” Vol. iii., p. 353.

[178] Hawkins, “History of Music.” Lond., 1853.

[179] Hammond, “Ancient Liturgies.” Oxf., 1878.
Neale and Littledale, “Translations of Primitive Liturgies.”
Lond., 1869.
Neale, “Essays on Liturgiology.” Lond., 1867.

[180] Marriott, “Vestiarium Christianum: Origin and gradual
development of Dress of Holy Ministry of Church.”
Lond., 1868.

[181] Woltmann and Woermann, “History of Painting.” 2 vols.,
Lond., 1886; vol. i., “Anc., Early Chr. and Mediæval
Painting.” ed. by Prof. Sidney Colvin.
“Handbook of Painting: Italian Schools. Based on Kügler’s
Handbook.” by Eastlake; new ed. by Layard, 2 vols.,
Lond., 1886.

[182] Ozanam, “Hist. of Civilization during the 5th Century.”
2 vols.
Lecky, “Hist. of European Morals.” Vol. ii.

[183] Smith’s “Dictionary of Christian Biography.” vol. iii.,
p. 367.

[184] Gilly, “Vigilantius and his Times.” Lond., 1840.

[185] Gieseler, “Eccl. Hist.” ii. 148.

[186] Ludolphus, “History of Ethiopia.” London, 1684.

[187] Malan, “Gregory the Illuminator: his Life and Times.”
London, 1868.
Article by Lipsius on Eznik in Smith’s “Dictionary of Chr.
Biography.” Vol. ii., p. 439.

[188] Muir, “Life of Mohammed and Hist. of Islam.” 4 vols., Lond.
Bosworth Smith, “Mohammed and Mohammedanism.” Lond., 1874.
Mühleisen-Arnold, “Islam, its Hist., Chr. and Rel. to
Christianity.” 3rd ed., Lond., 1874.
Deutsch, “Literary Remains: Islam.” Lond., 1874.
Stephens, “Christianity and Islam.” Lond., 1877.
Mills, “Hist. of Mohammedanism.” Lond., 1817.

[189] Muir, “Annals of the Earlier Khalifate.”

[190] Finlay, “Hist. of Greece from Rom. Conquest.” 7 vols.,
Lond., 1864, new ed., 1877; vols. ii. and iii.
Bower’s “Lives of Popes.” Vols. iii. and iv., Lond., 1754.
Comber, “Disc. on 2nd Council of Nicæa.” Reprinted in
Gibson’s “Preserv. from Popery.” Lond., 1848.
Didron, “Christian Iconography.” 2 vols., Lond., 1886.

[191] Mendham, “The Seventh General Council, the Second of
Nicæa.” in which the worship of images was established.

[192] Allatius, “De eccl. occid. et orient. perpetua
consensione.” Colon., 1669.
Swete, “Hist. of the Procession of the Holy Spirit.”
Camb., 1876.
Ffoulkes, “Christendom’s Divisions.” London.
Neale, “Holy Eastern Church.” 5 vols., London, 1847.

[193] Popoff, “Hist. of Council of Florence.” Transl. from
Russian by Neale, London, 1861.

[194] Lupton, “St. John of Damascus.” London, 1882.

[195] Badger, “The Nestorians and their Rituals.” 2 vols.,
London, 1852.

[196] Baring-Gould, “Curious Myths of the Middle Ages.”
Lond., 1881.

[197] Murawieff, “Hist. of the Church of Russia.” Trans. from
the Russ., Lond., 1842.
Romanoff, “Sketches of the Rites and Customs of the
Græco-Russian Church.” Lond., 1869.

[198] Potthast, “Biblioth. Hist. Modii Ævi.” Berol., 1862, with
suppl. in 1868.
D’Achery, “Vett. Script. Spicilegium.” (1655), 3 vols.,
Par., 1783.
Eccard, “Corpus Hist. Medii Ævi.” 2 vols., Lps., 1723.
Du Chesne, “Hist. Francorum Serr.” 5 vols., Par., 1636.
Parker, “Rer. Brit. Serr. Vetust.” Lugd. B., 1587.
Gale, “Hist. Brit., Saxon., Anglo-Dan. Scrr.” 2 vols.,
Oxf., 1691.
Wharton, “Anglia Sacra.” 2 vols., Lond., 1691.
Wilkins, “Conc. Brit. et Hib.” 4 vols., Lond., 1737.
Haddan and Stubbs, “Councils and Eccles. Documents.”
(Revision of Wilkins), Lond., 1879 ff.
Maitland, “The Dark Ages: Essays on the State of Relig. and
Lit. in 9th, 10th, 11th, and 12th Centuries.” Lond., 1844.

[199] Bryce, “The Holy Roman Empire.” Lond., 1866.
Ranke, “History of the Latin and Teutonic Nations.”
Lond., 1886.

[200] Ebrard, “Christian Apologetics.” 3 vols., Edin., 1886-1887,
Vol. ii., p. 407; “The Religion of the Germans and that
of the Slavs.”

[201] Mallet, “Northern Antiquities.” London, 1848.
Hallam, “Europe during the Middle Ages.”
Guizot, “Hist. of Civiliz. in Europe.”

[202] Hodgkin, “Italy and her Invaders: A.D. 376-476.” 2 vols.,
London, 1880.

[203] Scott, “Ulfilas, the Apostle of the Goths.” Cambr., 1885.
Douse, “Introduction to the Gothic of Ulfilas.” London, 1886.
Bosworth’s “Gothic and Anglo-Saxon Gospels.” Oxf., 1874.

[204] Gibbon, “Decline and Fall of Roman Empire.” Chaps. xxxiii.,
xxxvi., xxxvii.

[205] Freeman, “Historical Essays.” 3rd series, Lond.; “The Goths
at Ravenna.”

[206] Ussher, “Brit. Eccl. Antiqu.” Lond., 1639.
Perry, “Hist. of English Church.” i., Lond., 1882.
Lanigan, “Eccl. Hist. of Ireland.” 4 vols., 2nd ed.,
Dublin, 1829.
Stokes, “Ireland and the Celtic Ch.” Lond., 1886.
Lingard, “Hist. and Antiqu. of Anglo-Sax. Ch.” 2 vols.,
Lond., 1845.
Maclauchlan, “Early Scottish Church.” Edinb., 1865.
Reeves, “The Culdees of the British Islands.” Dublin, 1864.
Skene, “Celtic Scotland.” 3 vols., Edin., 1876; 2 ed., 1886.
Bright, “Chapters of Early Eng. Ch. Hist.” Oxf., 1878.
Pryce, “Ancient British Church.” Lond., 1886.

[207] Todd, “Life of St. Patrick.” Dublin, 1864.
Cusack, “Life of St. Patrick.” Lond., 1871.
O’Curry, “Lects. on Anc. Irish History.” Dublin, 1861.
Writings of St. Patrick. Transl. and ed. by Stokes and
Wright, Lond., 1887.

[208] Maclauchlan, “Early Scottish Church.” Pp. 145-205.
Adamnan, “Life of Columba.” Ed. by Dr. Reeves, Dublin, 1857.
Smith, “Life of Columba.” Edin., 1798.
Forbes, “Lives of Ninian, Columba, Kentigern.” in series of
Historians of Scotland.

[209] Ussher, “Discourse of the Religion anciently Professed by
the Irish and British.” Lond., 1631.
Maclauchlan, “Early Scottish Church.” Pp. 239-250.
Warren, “Ritual and Liturgy of the Celtic Church.”
Oxf., 1881.

[210] Soames, “The Anglo-Saxon Church.” 4th ed., Lond., 1856.
Stanley, “Historical Memorials of Canterbury.” Lond., 1855.
Hook, “Lives of Archbishops of Canterbury.” Vol. i.
Sharon Turner, “Hist. of Anglo-Saxons to the Roman
Conquest.” 6 ed., 3 vols., Lond., 1836.

[211] Lappenburg, “Anglo-Saxon Kings.” Lond., 1845.
Bede, “Eccles. History.” Book III.
Maclauchlan, “Early Scottish Church.” Pp. 217-238.

[212] Gildas († A.D. 570), “De excidio Britanniæ.” Engl. transl.
by Giles, London, 1841.
Bede († A.D. 735), “Eccles. Hist. of Engl.” Transl. by
Giles, London, 1840.

[213] Lanigan, “Eccl. Hist. of Ireland.” iii., ch. 13.
Innes, “Ancient Inhab. of Scotland.” in the Series of
Historians of Scotland.

[214] Maclauchlan, “Early Scottish Church.” p. 435.
Reeves, “The Culdees of the British Islands.” Dublin, 1864.
Robertson, “Scotland under her Early Kings.” Edin.,
2 vols., 1862.

[215] Merivale, “Conversion of the Northern Nations.”
London, 1866.
Maclear, “Apostles of Mediæval Europe.”

[216] That he first received the Latin name after his consecration
as bishop in A.D. 723 is rendered more than doubtful by
the fact that it is found in letters of earlier date. It
is probably only a Latinizing of the Anglo-Saxon Winfrid
or Wynfrith (from Vyn=fortune, luck, health; frid or
frith=peace; therefore: peaceful, wholesome fortune)
into the name, widely spread in Christian antiquity, of
_Bonifatius_ (from _bonumfatum_, Greek: Eutyches, good
luck). But the transposition into the form Bonifacius
which might seem the equivalent of the Anglo-Saxon word
“Benefactor” of the German people, is first met with,
although even then only occasionally, in the 8th century,
but afterwards always more and more frequently, and then
is given to the popes and other earlier bearers of the name.
By the 15th century the original and etymological style of
writing the name and that used in early documents had been
completely discarded and forgotten, till modern philology,
diplomatics and epigraphies have again clearly vindicated
the earlier form.

[217] Wright, “Biog. Britannica Literaria.” Lond., 1842.
Cox, “Life of Boniface.” Lond., 1853.
Hope, “Boniface.” London, 1872.
Maclear, “Apostles of Mediæval Europe.”

[218] Trench, “Lectures on Mediæval Church History.” Lond., 1877.
Hardwick, “History of Christian Church during Middle Ages.”

[219] Mosheim, “Eccl. Hist.” Ed. by Reid, London, 1880, p. 285,
Cent. viii., pt. ii., ch. 5.
Wright, “Biographia Brit. Literaria.” London, 1842.

[220] Milman, “Hist. of Latin Christianity.” Vol. ii., Trench’s
“Lectures on Mediæval Church History.”

[221] “William of Malmesbury’s Chronicle of Kings of England.”
Bk. I., ch. 4.

[222] Freeman, “Historical Essays.” 2nd series: “The Southern
Slavs.”

[223] Adam of Bremen, “Gesta Hammaburgensia.” A.D. 788-1072.
Pontoppidan, “Annales Eccles. Danicæ.” Copenhag., 1741.
Merivale, “Conversion of the Northern Nations.”
London, 1865.

[224] Geijer, “History of the Swedes.” Transl. by Turner,
Lond., 1847.

[225] Muir, “Annals of Early Khalifate.”
Ockley, “Hist. of Saracens and their Conquests in Syria,
Persia and Egypt.”

[226] Condé, “History of Dominion of Arabs in Spain.” 3 vols.
Freeman, “Hist. and Conquests of the Saracens.” 2nd ed.,
Lond., 1876.
Abd-el-Hakem, “History of the Conquest of Spain.” Tr. from
Arabic by Jones, Gött., 1858.

[227] Kingsley, “Roman and Teuton.” Lectures in Univ. of Cambr.:
“The Popes and the Lombards.”

[228] Crakenthorp, “The Defence of Constantine, with a Treatise
on the Pope’s Temporal Monarchy.” Lond., 1621.

[229] Platina, “Lives of Popes.” Under John VII.
Bower, “Lives of Popes.” Vol. iv.
Blondel, “Joanna Papissa.” Amst., 1657.
Hase, “Church History.” New York, 1855, p. 186.

[230] Cunningham, “Discussions on Church Principles.”
Edin., 1863, pp. 101-163; “Temporal Supremacy of the Pope
and Gallican Liberties.”
Barrow, “Pope’s Supremacy.” London, 1683.

[231] Hatch, “Growth of Church Institutions.” ch. viii., National
Churches, pp. 139-154.

[232] Hefele, “History of Councils.” iii. 69, 131, 149.
Field, “Of the Church.” Reprint by Eccl. Hist. Society,
5 vols., London, 1847; vol. iii., pp. 7, 245 ff.
Hatch, “Growth of Church Institutions.” ch. vii., The
Metropolitan, pp. 128-135.

[233] Lea, “Studies in Church History.” Philad., 1869.
Lecky, “History of European Morals.” 3rd ed., 2 vols.,
London, 1877.

[234] Hatch, “Growth of Church Institutions.” London, 1887,
p. 43.

[235] Marriott, “Vestiarium Christianum.” P. 187 ff.,
London, 1868.

[236] Hatch, “Growth of Church Institutions.” Ch. v., The Parish,
pp. 89-97.

[237] Hatch, “Growth of Church Institutions.” Ch. ix., The
Canonical Rule, pp. 157-172; Ch. x., The Cathedral
Chapter, pp. 175-190.

[238] Hatch, “Growth of Ch. Instit.” Ch. xi., The Chapter of the
Diocese, pp. 193-208.
Stubbs, “Constit. Hist. of England.” Vol. iii.

[239] Walcott, “Cathedralia.”
_Ibid._, “Sacred Archæology.”
Hatch, “Growth of Church Institutions.” Ch. iii., Fixed
Tenure of Parish Priest; Ch. iv., The Benefice.

[240] Lecky, “Hist. of Europ. Morals.” ii., 183-248.
Montalembert, “Monks of West from Benedict to Bernard.”
7 vols., Edin., 1861 ff.

[241] Hatch, “Growth of Church Institutions.” Ch. vi., Tithes and
their Distribution, pp. 101-117.

[242] Roth, however, regards this _divisio_ as putting a complete
stop to the secularization of church property.

[243] Hatch, “Growth of Ch. Institutions.” Ch. iv., The Benefice,
pp. 61-77.
Art. “Benefice.” in Smith’s “Dict. of Chr. Antiquities.”

[244] Ayliffe, “Parergon Juris Canonici.” Lond., 1726.
Guizot, “Hist. of Civilization.” Transl. by Hazlitt,
Lond., 1846.
Walcott, “Sacred Archæology.”

[245] Blondel, “Pseudo-Isid. et Turrianus vapulantes.”
Genev., 1628.

[246] Hopkins, “The Organ, its hist. and construct.” Lond., 1855.

[247] Guest, “History of English Rhythms.” Vol. ii.,
London, 1838.
Wright, “Biogr. Brit. Lit. Anglo-Saxon Period.”
London, 1842.
Thorpe, “Cædmon’s Paraphrase in Anglo-Saxon with Engl.
Transl.” London, 1832.
Conybeare, “Illustr. of Anglo-Saxon Poetry.” London, 1827.

[248] Evans, “Treatise on Chr. Doct. of Marriage.” New
York, 1870.
Hammond, “On Divorces.” In his Works, vol. i.,
London, 1674.
Cosin, “Argument on the Dissolution of Marriage.” Works,
vol. iv., Oxf., 1854.
Tertullian, Treatise in “Lib. of Fath.” Oxf., 1854, with
two Essays by Pusey, “On Second Marriages of the Clergy.”
and “On Early Views as to Marriage after Divorce.”

[249] Babington, “Influence of Chr. in promoting the Abolition
of Slavery in Europe.” London, 1864.
Edwards, “Inquiry into the State of Slavery in the Early
and Middle Ages of the Christian Era.” Edin., 1836.

[250] Smith’s “Dict. of Chr. Antiq.” Vol. i., pp. 785-792; Arts.:
“Hospitality, Hospitals, Hospitium.”

[251] Haddan and Stubbs, “Councils and Eccl. Documents.”
Vol. iii., Oxf., 1871.

[252] Barington, “Lit. Hist. of the Middle Ages.” Lond., 1846.
Hallam, “Europe in Middle Ages.” 2 vols., Lond., 1818.
Trench, “Lect. on Med. Ch. Hist.” Lond., 1877.

[253] Lorentz, “Life of Alcuin.” Transl. by Slee, Lond., 1837.

[254] Kingsley, “Roman and Teuton: Paulus Diaconus.”

[255] Hampden, “The Scholastic Philosophy in its rel. to Chr.
Theology.” Oxf., 1833.
Ueberweg, “Hist. of Philosophy.” Vol. i., pp. 358-365.

[256] Mullinger, “Schools of Charles the Great and Restoration
of Education in the 9th cent.” Cambr., 1877.

[257] Cassiodorus’ work in 12 bks., _De rebus gestes Gotorum_,
has indeed been lost, but about A.D. 550 Jornandes, who
also used other documents, embodied this work in his
_De Getarum orig. et reb. gestis_.

[258] Gildas wrote about A.D. 560 his: _Liber querulis de
excidio Britanniæ_ (Eng. transl. in “Six Old English
Chronicles.” London, Bohn).

[259] Nennius wrote about A.D. 850 his: _Eulogium Britanniæ s.
Hist. Britonum_ (Engl. transl. in “Six Old Engl. Chron.”).

[260] Collected Ed. of Alfred’s works, by Bosworth, 2 vols.,
Lond., 1858.
Fox, “Whole Wks. of Alfred the Great, with Essays on Hist.,
Arts and Manners of 9th cent.” 3 vols., Oxf., 1852.
Spelman, “Life of Alfred the Great.” Oxf., 1709.
Pauli, “Life of Alfred the Gt.” transl. with Alfred’s
Orosius, Lond., 1853.
Hughes, “Alfred the Great.”
Giles, “Life and Times of King Alfred the Great.”
Lond., 1848.

[261] Robertson, “Hist. of Chr. Church.” Vol. ii., London, 1856;
pp. 154 ff.
Dorner, “Hist. Development of Person of Chr.” Div. II.,
vol. i.

[262] Ussher, “Gotteschalci et controv. ab eo motæ hist.”
Dubl., 1631.

TRANSCRIBER’S NOTES.

The following corrections have been made in the text:

§ 7, 1.
Sentence starting: There are mysterious phenomena....
- added omitted Word ‘to’
(which seemed to establish)

§ 14.
Sentence starting: The Levite Barnabas,...
- ‘ministery’ replaced with ‘ministry’
(and strengthened his own ministry)

§ 16, 1.
Sentence starting: That Babylon is mentioned....
- ‘23’ replaced with ‘13’
(1 Pet. v. 13)