Cornell University 
 Library 
 
 The original of this book is in 
 the Cornell University Library. 
 
 There are no known copyright restrictions in 
 the United States on the use of the text. 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924075616874 
 
THE EPISTLES OF ST PAUL. 
 
 III. 
 
 THE FIRST ROMAN CAPTIVITY. 
 I- 
 
 EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 
 
CORNELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY 
 
 i 3 1924 075 616 874 
 
 SAINT PAUL'S 
 
 EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS 
 
 A REVISED TEXT 
 INTKODUOTION, NOTES, AND DISSERTATIONS 
 
 J. B. LIGHTFOOT, D.D, D.C.L., LL.D., 
 
 LATB BISHOP OF DUBBAU, 
 
 hokobaut fellow of tbinitt aoUiSaE, cambbidqx. 
 
 MACMILLAN AND CO., LIMITED 
 
 ST. MARTIN'S STREET, LONDON 
 
 1927 
 
First EiitUm printed 1868, 
 
 Second 1869, Third 1873, Pmrlh Feb. 1878 ; reprinted Dee. 1878; 
 
 ailh additions, 1881, 1883, with stighl alterations 1883, 
 
 1888, 1890, 1891, 1894, 1896, 1898, 1900, 1903, 1908, 
 
 1913. 1927. 
 
 PHINTED IN GREAT BRITAIN 
 
THE REV. B. F. WESTCOTT, D.D., 
 
 KEOICS PBOFESSOK OF DIYINITT AT OAUBniOQB, 
 
 IN AFFECTIONATE BBMEMBBANCE 
 
 OF 
 
 MANY VALUABLE LESSONS LEARNT 
 
 FBOM 
 
 AN INTIMATE PBIVATE FRIENDSHIP 
 
 AND FBOM 
 
 ASSOCIATION IN A COMMON WORK 
 
MIMHTAI MOT ri'MtcOC KAe<i>C xlr^ XP'^'^^f- 
 
 IlaDXoi ytvoiuvot fiiyurrot vmypaiiiMt, 
 
 GliEUKNT. 
 
 Ovx tit HavXos tutraairoiuu iiiiv' iKtivot airooToXoc, 
 iya KaTtuepiTos' cVctrac tKfvOipot, iyi di lUXP- "'"' ^uv^oi- 
 
 IaSAIIC8. 
 
 OvTC f'ym ovrc aXXoc Siuuot i/uA ftivarat xuraKoXov^trai 
 r^ croipif Tov luucapiov Kal cVdofov HavXov. 
 
 POLYOARP. 
 
PEEFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. 
 
 The present volume ia a second instalment of the commentary 
 on St Paul's Epistles, of which I sketched a plan in the preface 
 to my edition of the Galatians. At the same time it is in- 
 tended, like its predecessor, to be complete in itself; so that 
 the plan, as a whole, may be interrupted at any time without 
 detriment to the parts. 
 
 Here again I have the pleasure of repeating my obligations 
 to the standard works of reference, and to those commentators, 
 both English and German, whose labours extend over both epi- 
 stles and to whom I before acknowledged my debt of gratitude. 
 The special commentaries on this epistle are neither so nume- 
 rous nor so important, as on the former. The best, with which 
 I am acquainted, are those of Van Hengel, of Rilliet, and of 
 Eadie ; but to these I am not conscious of any direct obligation 
 which is not acknowledged in its proper place. I have also 
 consulted from time to time several other more or less important 
 works on this epistle, which it will be unnecessary to specify, 
 as they either lay no claim to originality or for other reasons 
 have furnished no material of which I could avail myself. 
 
 It is still a greater gratification to me to renew my thanks 
 to personal friends, who have assisted me with their suggestions 
 and corrections ; and to one more especially whose aid has been 
 freely given in correcting the proof-sheets of this volume 
 throughout. 
 
 The Epistle to the Philippians presents an easier task to an 
 editor than almost any of St Paul's Epistles. The readings are 
 for the most part obvious ; and only in a few passages does he 
 
viii Preface. 
 
 meet with very serious difficulties of interpretation. I have 
 taken advantage of this circumstance to introduce some inves- 
 tigations bearing on St Paul's Epistles and on Apostolic Chris- 
 tianity generally, by which this volume is perhaps swollen to an 
 undue bulk, but which will proportionally relieve its successors. 
 Thus the dissertation on the Christian ministry might well 
 have been left for another occasion : but the mention of ' bishops 
 and deacons ' in the opening of this letter furnished a good text 
 for the discussion ; and the Pastoral Epistles, which deal more 
 directly with questions relating to the ministerial office, will de- 
 mand so much space for the solution of other difficulties, that it 
 seemed advisable to anticipate and dispose of this important 
 subject. 
 
 In the dissertation on 'St Paul and the Three,' attached to 
 the Epistle to the Galatians, I endeavoured to sketch the atti- 
 tude of the Apostle towards Judaism and Judaic Christianity. 
 In the present volume the discussion on St Paul and Seneca is 
 offered as an attempt to trace the relations of the Gospel to a 
 second, form of religious thought — the most imposing system 
 of heathen philosophy with which the Apostle was brought 
 directly in contact. And on a later occasion, if this commentary 
 should ever be extended to the Epistle to the Colossians, I hope 
 to add yet a third chapter to this history in an essay on ' Chris- 
 tianity and Gnosis.' These may be considered the three most 
 important types of dogmatic and systematized religion (whether 
 within or without the pale of Christendom) with which St Paul 
 was confronted. 
 
 As we lay down the Epistle to the Galatians and take up 
 the Epistle to the Philippians, we cannot fail to be struck by 
 the contrast. We have passed at once from the most dogmatic 
 to the least dogmatic of the Apostle's letters, and the transition 
 is instructive. If in the one the Gospel is presented in its op- 
 
Preface. ix 
 
 position to an individual form of error, in the other it appears 
 as it is in itself. The dogmatic element in the Galatians is due 
 to special circumstances and bears a special character; while 
 on the other hand the Philippian Epistle may be taken to ex- 
 hibit the normal type of the Apostle's teaching, when not deter- 
 mined and limited by individual circumstances, and thus to 
 present the essential substance of the Gospel. Dogmatic forms 
 are the buttresses or the scaffold-poles of the building, not the 
 building itself. 
 
 But, if the Epistle to the Philippians serves to correct one 
 fabe conception of Christianity, it is equally impressive as a 
 protest against another. In the natural reaction against excess 
 of dogma, there is a tendency to lay the whole stress of the 
 Gospel on its ethical precepts. For instance men will often 
 tacitly assume, and even openly avow, that its kernel is contained 
 in the Sermon on the Mount, This conception may perhaps 
 seem more healthy in its impulse and more directly practical in 
 its aim ; but in fact it is not less dangerous even to morality than 
 the other : for, when the sources of life are cut off, the stream will 
 cease to flow. Certainly this is not St Paul's idea of the Gospel 
 as it appears in the Epistle to the Philippians. If we would 
 learn what he held to be its essence, we must ask ourselves 
 what is the significance of such phrases as ' I desire you in the 
 heart of Jesus Christ,' ' To me to live is Christ,' ' That I may 
 know the power of Christ's resurrection,' 'I have all strength in 
 Christ that giveth me power,' Though the Gospel is capable 
 of doctrinal exposition, though it is eminently fertile in moral 
 results, yet its substance is neither a dogmatic system nor an 
 ethical code, but a Person and a Life. 
 
 Tbiniit Colleqe, 
 Jvly lit, 1868. 
 
X Preface. 
 
 PREFACE TO THE SIXTH EDITION. 
 
 The present edition is an exact reprint of the preceding one. 
 This statement applies as well to the Essay on the Threefold 
 Ministry, as to the rest of the work. I should not have thought 
 it necessary to be thus explicit, had I not been informed of a 
 rumour that I had found reason to abandon the main opinions 
 expressed in that Essay. There is no foundation for any such 
 report. The only point of importance on which I have modified 
 my views, since the Essay was first written, is the authentic 
 form of the letters of St Ignatius. Whereas in the earlier 
 editions of this work I had accepted the three Curetonian letters, 
 I have since been convinced (as stated in later editions) that the 
 seven letters of the Short Greek are genuine. This divergence 
 however does not materially affect the main point at issue, since 
 even the Curetonian letters afford abundant evidence of the 
 spread of episcopacy in the earliest years of the second century. 
 But on the other hand, while disclaiming any change in my 
 opinions, I desire equally to disclaim the representations of 
 those opinions which have been put forward in some quarters. 
 The object of the Essay was an investigation into the origin of 
 the Christian Ministry. The result has been a confirmation of 
 the statement in the English Ordinal, 'It is evident unto all 
 men diligently reading the Holy Scripture and ancient authors 
 that from the Apostles' time there have been these orders 
 of Ministers in Christ's Church, Bishops, Priests, and Deacons.' 
 But I was scrupulously anxious not to overstate the evidence 
 in any case; and it would seem that partial and qualifying 
 statements, prompted by this anxiety, have assumed undue 
 proportions in tho minds of some readers, who have emphasized 
 them to the neglect of the general drift of the Essay. 
 
 J. B. D. 
 
 Sejptember g, 1881. 
 
Preface. xi 
 
 PREFACE TO THE TWELFTH EDITION. 
 
 The follotoing extracts from Bishop Light/oofs works illustrate his 
 view of the Christian Ministry over and above tJie particular scope of 
 the Essay in his Commentary on the Philippians. He felt that wnfair 
 use had been made of that special Une of thought which he there 
 pursued, and soon after the close of the Lambeth Conference of 1888 
 he had this collection of passages printed. 
 
 It is felt by those who have the best means of knowing that he 
 would himself have wished the collection to stand together simply as 
 his reply to the constant imputation to him of opinions for which 
 writers wished to claim his support vntltovt any justification. 
 
 1. Commentary on the Epistle to the Philippians (Essay on 
 the Christian Ministry, 1868). 
 
 (i) (See below, p. 201.) 
 
 'Unless we have recourse to a sweeping condemnation of received 
 documents, it seems vain to deny that early in the second century the 
 episcopal office was firmly and widely established. Thus dining the last 
 three decades of the first century, and consequently during the lifetime of 
 the latest surviving Apostle, this change must have been brought about.' 
 
 (ii) (See below, p. 214.) 
 
 ' The evidence for the early and wide extension of episcopacy through- 
 out proconsular Asia, the scene of St John's latest labours, may be 
 considered irrefragable.' 
 
 (iii) (See below, p. 227.) 
 
 'But these notices, besides establishing the general prevalence of 
 episcopacy, also throw considerable light on its origin.. ..Above all, they 
 establish this result clearly, that its maturer forms are seen first in those 
 regions where the latest siuriving Apostles (more especially St John) fixed 
 their abode, and at a time when its prevalence cannot be dissociated from 
 their influence or their sanction.' 
 
 (iv) (See below, p. 234.) 
 
 'It has been seen that the institution of an episcopate must be 
 placed as far back as the closing years of the first century, and that 
 it cannot, without violence to historical testimony, be dissevered from the 
 name of St John. 
 
xii Preface. 
 
 (v) (See below, p. 267.) 
 
 'If the preceding investigation be substantially correct, the threefold 
 ministry can be traced to Apostolic direction ; and short of an express 
 statement we can possess no better assurance of a Divine appointment 
 or at least a Divine sanction. If the facts do not allow us to imchurch 
 other Christian communities differently organized, they may at least 
 justify our jealous adhesion to a polity derived from this source.' 
 
 2. Commentary on the Epistle to the Philippians (Preface to 
 the Sixth Edition), 1881. (See above, p. x.) 
 
 3. Sermon preached before the Representative Council of the 
 Scottish Episcopal Church in St Mary's Church at Glasgow, 
 October 10, 1882. ('Sermons preached on Special Occasions,' 
 p. 182 sq.) 
 
 ' When I spoke of unity as St Paul's charge to the Church of Corinth, 
 the thoughts of all present must, I imagine, have fastened on one applica- 
 tion of the Apostolic rule which closely concerns yourselves. Episcopal 
 commmuties in Scotland outside the organization of the Scottish Episcopal 
 Church — this is a spectacle which no one, I imagine, would view with 
 satisfaction in itself, and which only a very urgent necessity could justify. 
 Can such a necessity be pleaded ? " One body " as well as " one Spirit," 
 this is the Apostolic rule. No natural interpretation can be put on these 
 words which does not recognize the obligation of external, corporate union. 
 Circumstances may prevent the realisation of the Apostle's conception, 
 but the ideal must be ever present to our aspirations and our prayers. I 
 have reason to believe that this matter lies very near to the hearts of aU 
 Scottish Episcopalians. May God grant you a speedy accomplishment of 
 your desire. You have the same doctrinal formularies : you acknowledge 
 the same episcopal polity : you respect the same liturgical forms. " Sirs, 
 ye are brethren." Do not strain the conditions of reunion too tightly. I 
 cannot say, for I do not know, what faults or what misunderstandings 
 there may have been on either side in the past. If there have been any 
 faults, forget them. If there exist any misunderstandings, clear them up. 
 " Let the dead past biu-y its dead." 
 
 ♦ ***#♦##♦ 
 
 While you seek unity among yourselves, you will pray hkewise that 
 unity may be restored to your Presbyterian brothers. Not insensible to 
 the special blessings which you yourselves enjoy, clinging tenaciously to 
 the threefold ministry as the completeness of the Apostolic ordinance and 
 the historical backbone of the Church, valuing highly all those sanctities 
 of liturgical office and ecclesiastical season, which, modified from age to 
 age, you have inherited from an almost immemorial past, thanking Gk)D, 
 
Preface. xiii 
 
 but not thanking Him in any Pharisaic spirit, that these so many and 
 great privileges are continued to you which others have lost, you will 
 nevertheless shrink, as from the venom of a serpent's fang, from any mean 
 desire that their divisions may be perpetuated in the hope of profiting by 
 their troubles. Divide et impera may be a shrewd worldly motto ; but 
 coming in contact with spiritual things, it defiles them like pitch. 
 Paeijlca et impera is the true watchword of the Christian and the 
 Churchman.' 
 
 4. The Apostolic Fathers, Part ii., St Ignatius : St Polycarp, 
 Vol. I. pp. 376, 377, 1885 (pp. 390, 391, 1889). 
 
 ' The whole subject has been investigated by me in an Essay on " The 
 Christian Ministry" ; and to this I venture to refer my readers for fuller 
 information. It is there shown, if I mistake not, that though the New 
 Testament itself contains as yet no direct and indisputable notices of a 
 localized episcopate in the Gentile Churches, as distinguished from the 
 moveable episcopate exercised by Timothy in Ephesus and by Titus in 
 Crete, yet there is satisfactory evidence of its development in the later 
 years of the Apostolic age ; that this development was not simultaneous 
 and equal in aU parts of Christendom ; that it is more especially connected 
 with the name of St John ; and that in the early years of the second 
 century the episcopate was widely spread and had taken firm root, more 
 especially in Asia Minor and in Syria. K the evidence on which its 
 extension in the regions east of the .^gean at this epoch be resisted, I am 
 at a loss to understand what single fact relating to the history of the 
 Christian Church during the first half of the second century can be regarded 
 as established ; for the testimony in favour of this spread of the episcopate 
 is more abundant and more varied than for any other institution or event 
 during this period, so far as I recollect.' 
 
 5. Sermon preached before the Church Congress at Wolver- 
 hampton, October 3, 1887. ('Sermons preached on Special 
 Occasions,' p. 259 sq.) 
 
 ' But if this charge fails, what shall we say of her isolation ? Is not 
 this isolation, so far as it is true, much more her misfortune than her 
 fault 1 Is she to be blamed because she retained a form of Church govern- 
 ment which had been handed down in imbroken continuity from the 
 Apostolic times, and thus a line was drawn between her and the reformed 
 Churches of other countries 1 Is it a reproach to her that she asserted her 
 liberty to cast off the accretions which had gathered about the Apostolic 
 doctrine and practice through long ages, and for this act was repudiated 
 by the Boman Church ? But this very positiQfi — call j^ ^solatiop if you 
 
xiv Preface. 
 
 will which was her reproach in the past, is her hope for the future. She 
 
 was isolated because she could not consort with either extreme. She was 
 isolated because she stood midway between the two. This central position 
 is her vantage ground, which fits her to be a mediator, wheresoever an 
 occasion of mediation may arise. 
 
 But this charge of isolation, if it had any appearance of truth seventy 
 years ago, has lost its force now.' 
 
 6. Durham Diocesan Conference. Inaugural Address, October, 
 
 1887. 
 
 ' When I speak of her religious position I refer alike to polity and to 
 doctrine. In both respects the negative, as well as the positive, bearing of 
 her position has to be considered. She has retained the form of Church 
 government inherited from the Apostolic times, while she has shaken o£f a 
 yoke, which even in medieval times our fathers found too heavy to bear, 
 and which subsequent developments have rendered tenfold more oppressive. 
 She has remained stedfast in the faith of Nicaea, but she has never 
 compromised herself by any declaration which may entangle her in the 
 meshes of science. The doctrinal inheritance of the past is hers, and the 
 scientific hopes of the future are hers. She is intermediate and she may 
 become mediatorial, when the opportunity occurs. It was this twofold 
 inheritance of doctrine and polity which I had in view, when I spoke of the 
 essentials which could under no circumstances be abandoned. Beyond this, 
 it seems to me that large concessions might be made. Unity is not 
 
 uniformity On the other hand it would be very short-sighted policy — 
 
 even if it were not traitorous to the truth — to tamper with essentials and 
 thus to imperil our mediatorial vantage ground, for the sake of snatching 
 an immediate increase of numbers.' 
 
 7. Address on the Reopening of the Chapel, Auckland Castle, 
 August 1st, 1888. ('Leaders in the Northern Church,' p. 145.) 
 
 'But, while we "lengthen our cords," we must "strengthen our stakes" 
 likewise. Indeed this strengthening of our stakes will alone enable us to 
 lengthen our cords with safety, when the storms are howling around us. 
 We cannot afford to sacrifice any portion of the faith onoe delivered to the 
 saints ; we cannot surrender for any immediate advantages the threefold 
 ministry which we have inherited from Apostolic times, and which is the 
 historic backbone of the Church. But neither cau we on the other hand 
 return to the fables of medievalism or submit to a yoke which our fathers 
 found too grievous to be borne— a yoke now rendered a hundredfold more 
 oppressive to the mind and conscience, weighted as it is by recent and 
 unwarranted impositions of doctrine,' 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 I. St Paul in Rome i — 29 
 
 II. Order qf the Epistles qf the Captivity 30 — 46 
 
 III. The Church qf PhUippi. 47 — 65 
 
 IV. Character and Contents qf the .^mtle 66 — 73 
 
 The Genuineness qf the Epistle. 74 — 77 
 
 TEXT AND NOTES. 
 
 L I— i 26 81—94 
 
 The synonymes 'bishop ' and 'presbyter'.... 95 — 99 
 
 The meaning qf'prcetorium' in i 13 99 — 104 
 
 i. 27— iii. I , 105—126 
 
 The synonymes iiop^ri and a-x>jiut 127 — 133 
 
 Different interpretations qf ovx apnayiiov ifyijcraro 133 — 137 
 Lost Epistles to the Philippiansf 138 — 143 
 
 iii. 2— iv. 23 143—167 
 
 ' Clement my fdlous4dbowrer' 168 — 171 
 
 Catar't household.,,,,, 171 — 178 
 
xvi Contents. 
 
 DISSERTATIONS. 
 
 FAOB 
 
 I. The Christian Minittry 181—269 
 
 II. St Paul and Smeea 270—328 
 
 TfM Lettert qf Paul and Seneca 329—333 
 
 INDEX 335—348 
 
I. 
 
 ST PAUL IN ROME. 
 
 THE arrival of St Paul in the metropolis marks a new and St Paul's 
 . ... visit to 
 
 important epoch in the history of the Christian Church. Bome al- 
 
 Hitherto he had come in contact with Roman institutions iatfona*be^ 
 modified by local circumstances and administered by subordi- Jf*®"/^* 
 nate oflScers in the outlying provinces of the Empire. Now he and the 
 was in the very centre and focus of Roman influence ; and from 
 this time forward neither the policy of the government nor the 
 character of the reigning prince was altogether a matter of 
 indifference to the welfare of Christianity. The change of 
 scene had brought with it a change in the mutual relations 
 between the Gospel and the Empire. They were now occupy- 
 ing the same ground, and a collision was inevitable. Up to 
 this time the Apostle had found rather an ally than an enemy 
 in a power which he had more than once successfully invoked 
 against the malignity of his fellow-countrymen. This pre- 
 carious alliance was henceforward exchanged for direct, though 
 intermittent, antagonism. The Empire, which in one of his 
 earlier epistles he would seem to have taken as the type of 
 that restraining power which kept Antichrist in check', was 
 itself now assuming the character of Antichrist. When St 
 Paul appealed from the tribunal of the Jewish procurator to 
 the court of Caesar, he attracted the notice and challenged the 
 hostility of the greatest power which the world had ever seen. 
 The very emperor, to whom the appeal was made, bears the 
 
 1 » TheBs. ii. 6, 7. 
 PHIL, I 
 
ST PAUL IN BOMB. 
 
 The Nero- 
 nian per- 
 Beoution a 
 oonee- 
 qnence. 
 
 St Paul's 
 sense of 
 the im- 
 portanoe 
 of this 
 yisit. 
 
 Its piomi- 
 nenoe in 
 St Luke's 
 nairative. 
 
 Aspect of 
 aSatrs 
 when 
 St Paul 
 arrived. 
 
 ignominy of the first systematic persecution of the Christians ; 
 and thus commenced the long struggle, which raged for 
 several centuries, and ended in establishing the Gospel on the 
 ruins of the Roman Empire. It was doubtless the impulse 
 given to the progress of Christianity by the presence of its 
 greatest preacher in the metropolis, which raised the Church in 
 Rome to a position of prominence, and made it a mark for the 
 wanton attacks of the tyrant. Its very obscurity would have 
 shielded it otherwise. The preaching of Paul was the necessary 
 antecedent to the persecution of Nero. 
 
 It is probable that the Apostle foresaw the importance of 
 his decision, when he transferred his cause to the tribunal of 
 Caesar. There is a significant force in his declaration at an 
 earlier date, that he ' must see Rome'.' It had long been his 
 'earnest desire" to visit the imperial city, and he had been 
 strengthened in this purpose by a heavenly vision'. To pre- 
 pare the way for his visit he had addressed to the Roman 
 Church a letter containing a more complete and systematic 
 exposition of doctrine than he ever committed to writing before 
 or after. And now, when the moment has arrived, the firm 
 and undaunted resolution, with which in defiance of policy he 
 makes his appeal, bears testimony to the strength of his con- 
 viction*. The sacred historian takes pains to emphasize this 
 visit to Rome. He doubtless echoes the feeling of St Paul 
 himself, when he closes his record with a notice of the Apostle's 
 success in the metropolis, deeming this the fittest termination 
 to his narrative, as the virtual and prospective realisation of 
 our Lord's promise placed in its forefront, that the Apostles 
 should be His witnesses to 'the uttermost part of the earth'.' 
 
 It was probably in the early spring of the year 6i, that 
 St Paul arrived in Rome*. The glorious five years, which 
 ushered in the reign of Nero amidst the acclamations of a 
 
 1 Acts xix. II. 
 
 ' Eom. i. 10 — 16, XV. 21 — 14, 28, 29, 
 32, iitiTToBCi, iirtroBlav tx<^v. 
 
 * Acts xxiii. 1 1 ' So must thou bear 
 witness also at Borne.' 
 
 * Acts XXV. II. 
 
 ° Acts i. 8. See Lekebnsoh ApotteU 
 geschichte p. 227 sq. 
 
 • See Wieseler Chronol. p. 66 Bq. 
 
ST PAUL IN BOMB. 3 
 
 grateful people, and which later ages recalled with wistful 
 regret, as an ideal of imperial rule *, had now drawn to a close. 
 The unnatural murder of Agrippina had at length revealed the 
 true character of Nero. Burrus and Seneca, it is true, still 
 lingered at the head of affairs: but their power was waning. 
 Neither the blunt honesty of the soldier nor the calm modera- 
 tion of the philosopher could hold their ground any longer 
 against the influence of more subtle and less scrupulous coun- 
 sellors. 
 
 At Rome the Apostle remained for ' two whole years,' Length ol 
 preaching the Gospel without interruption, though preaching it jj^°" 
 in bonds. By specifying this period' St Luke seems to imply 
 that at its close there was some change in the outward condition 
 of the prisoner. This change can hardly have been any other 
 than the approach of his long-deferred trial, which ended, as 
 there is good ground for believing', in his acquittal and release. 
 At all events he must have been liberated before July 64, if 
 liberated at aU. The great fire which then devastated Rome 
 became the signal for an onslaught on the unoffending Chris- 
 tians; and one regarded as the ringleader of the hated sect 
 could hardly have escaped the general massacre. 
 
 It will appear strange that so long an interval was allowed Probable 
 to elapse before the trial came on. But while the defendant jjjg ^^i^y 
 had no power to hasten the tardy course of justice, the accusers ?*.^' 
 were interested in delaying it. They must have foreseen 
 plainly enough the acquittal of a prisoner whom the provincial 
 
 1 Aurel. Vict, Cas. 5 'Uti merito Tra- end alike, as they had begun alike, (i) 
 
 janns aespins testaretui procul difierre The success of St Paul's pieaching in 
 
 cunctos prinoipes Nerouis quinijuennio.' Borne is a fitter termination to the his- 
 
 " Acts xxviii. 30, 31. The inference tory than any other incident which 
 
 in the text will not hold, if, as some could have been chosen. It is the most 
 
 suppose, St Luke's narrative was ac- striking realisation of that promise of 
 
 cidentaUy broken oS and terminates the universal spread of the Qospel, 
 
 abruptly. From this view however I which is the starting-point of the nar- 
 
 dissent for two reasons, (i) A compa- rative. 
 
 rison with the closing sentences of the ' The discussion of this question is 
 
 Gospel shows a striking parallelism in reserved for the introduction to the 
 
 the plan of the two narratives; they Pastoral Epistles. 
 
 I — 2 
 
8T PAUL IN ROME. 
 
 governor himself had declared to be innocent'. If they wished 
 to defer the issue, the collection of evidence was a sufficient 
 plea to urge in order to obtain an extension of time'. St Paul 
 was charged with stirring up sedition among 'all the Jews 
 throughout the world'.' From the whole area therefore, over 
 which his labours had extended, witnesses must be summoned. 
 In this way two years might easily run out before the prisoner 
 appeared for judgment. But more potent probably, than any 
 Indolence formal plea, was the indolence or the caprice of the emperor 
 himself*, who frequently postponed the hearing of causes inde- 
 finitely without any assignable reason, and certainly would not 
 put himself out to do justice to a despised provincial, labouring 
 under a perplexing charge connected with some ' foreign super- 
 stition.' If St Paul had lingered in close confinement for two 
 years under Felix, he might wdl be content to remain under 
 
 of Nero. 
 
 ' ActBxxv. 12, 25;comp. xxvi. 31,31. 
 
 ' Two cases in point are quoted, as 
 occurring about this time. Tac. Ann. 
 xiii. 52 ' Silvanum magna vis accusa- 
 torumcu'cumBteterat,poBoebatc|uetem- 
 pus evocandonun testium: reus illico 
 defendi postulabat.' Silvanus had been 
 proconsul of Africa. Also we are told 
 of SuUlius, wbo was accused of pecula- 
 tion in the government of Asia, Ann. 
 ziii. 43 ' Quia inquisitionem annuam 
 impetraverunt, brevius visum [sub-] ur- 
 bana crimina incipi quorum obvii testes 
 erant.' In both these cases the accusers 
 petition for an extension of the period, 
 whUe it is the interest of the defendant 
 to be tried at once. In the second case 
 a year is demanded and allowed for col- 
 lecting evidence, though the crimes in 
 question are confined to his tenure of 
 office and to the single province of 
 • Asia.' On the whole subject see Wie- 
 seler, Chronol. 407 sq. , who has fully 
 discussed the possible causes of delay. 
 Compare also Conybeare and Howson 
 II. p. 462 sq. (2nd ed,). 
 
 > Acts xxiv, 5 TT&ai Tois 'lovSalou 
 
 Tots Kara ttjv oIkoviUvtiv, 
 
 * Josephus (Ant. xviiL 6. 5) says of 
 Tiberius, whom he describes as /leXXijT^s 
 cl Kal Tis iripwv ^tuTCKitav ij Tvpiivuv 
 yevonevos, that he deferred the trial of 
 prisoners indefinitely in order to pro- 
 long their tortures. Nero seems to have 
 been almost as dilatory, though more 
 from recklessness and indolence than 
 from dehberate purpose. The case of 
 the priests accused by Felix (see below, 
 p. 5, note 4) illustrates this. Felix 
 ceased to be procurator in the year 60: 
 yet they were still prisoners in 63 or 64, 
 and were only then hberated at the in- 
 tercession of Josephus. For the date 
 see Clinton Fasti Bom. i. pp. 13, 45, 77. 
 
 Geib Geschichte des romischen Crimi- 
 nalprocesies etc, p. 691, speaking of 
 causes tried before the emperor, de- 
 scribes the practice of the early Cassara 
 as so * unsteady and caprioioos in all re- 
 spects,' that no definite rule can be laid 
 down: 'Erst in der spateren Kaiser- 
 zeit,' he adds, 'ist dieses anders gewor- 
 den und zwar namentUch hinsiohtlioh 
 des AppeUationsverfahrens ' Similarly 
 
ST PAUL IN ROME. 5 
 
 less irksome restraints for an equal length of time, awaiting 
 the pleasure of Caesar. 
 
 Meanwhile events occurred at Rome which shook society to stirring 
 its foundations. The political horizon was growing every day ^0*^6, 
 darker'. Death deprived Nero of his most upright adviser in 
 the person of Burrus the prefect of the praetorians. The ofiQce 
 thus vacated was handed over to Tigellinus, with whom was 
 associated as colleague the feeble and insignificant Rufus. By 
 the death of Burrus the influence of Seneca was effectually 
 broken'; and, though the emperor refused to consent to his 
 retirement, his part in the direction of affairs was henceforth 
 merely nominal. At the same time the guilty career of Nero 
 culminated in the divorce and death of Octavia; and the cruel 
 and shameless Poppaea became the emperor's consort in her 
 stead. With a strange inconsistency of character, which would 
 atone for profligate living by a fervour of religious devotion, 
 and of which that age especially was fertile in examples, she 
 had become a proselyte to Judaism', and more than once advo- 
 cated the cause of her adopted race before the emperor with 
 zeal and success*. 
 
 Labonlaye Loit CriminelUt dea Ro- 348 (2nd ed.). 
 
 maimp. 444, 'Sous les premiers Cfisars * It is not irrelevant to relate two 
 
 tout se fit sausrSgle et sansmesure.et incidents which occurred at this time, 
 
 il ne faut pas ohercher & oette fipoque aa they illustrate the nature of the com- 
 
 de systfime rfigulier,' etc. There is no munioation kept up between the Jews 
 
 trace of a statutable limitation of time and the imperial court, and the sort of 
 
 (prsBscriptio) applying to the imperial influence which Poppssa exerted on the 
 
 tribunal at this epoch. affairs of this people. 
 
 ' Tao. Ann. xiv. 51 ' GraTescentibus (i) Felix, while procurator of Ju- 
 
 indies publicis mails.' dasa, had brought a trivial charge 
 
 » Tac. Ann. xiv. s* ' Mora Burn in- against certain Jewish priests, and sent 
 
 fregit SeneoBB potentiam.' them to Bome to plead their cause be- 
 
 8 Joseph, ilntig. XX. 8. 11 Seoae^^s fore Osesar. Here they were kept in a 
 
 70/) fjv, i.e. a worshipper of the true lingering captivity, living on the hard- 
 
 Ood, a proselytess. In connexion with est fare, but remaining faithful in their 
 
 this fact the notice of her burial is re- allegiance to the God of their fathers, 
 
 markable; Tac. Ann. zvi. 6 'Corpus The historian Josephus, to whom these 
 
 Don igni aboUtum, ut Bomanus mos; priests were known, then a young man, 
 
 Bed regum extemorum consnetndine undertook a journey to Bome for the 
 
 diSertnm odoribns oonditur etc.* See purpose of procuring their liberation. 
 
 Friedlander 5itten^««e/it(;ftte JRonui. p. lake St Paul he was shipwrecked in 
 
6 ST PAUL IN ROME. 
 
 not im- How far the personal condition of St Paul, or his prospects 
 
 St Ptral." at the approaching trial, may have been affected by these two 
 changes, I shall have to consider hereafter. At all events he 
 cannot have been ignorant of such stirring incidents. His 
 enforced companionship with the soldiers of the praetorian 
 guard must have kept him informed of all changes in the 
 administration of the camp. His intimacy with the members 
 of Caesar's household must have brought to his hearing the 
 intrigues and crimes of the imperial court. It is strange 
 therefore, that in the epistles written from Rome during this 
 period there is not any, even the faintest, reference to events 
 His silence SO notorious in history. Strange at least at first sight. But 
 exp aine . ^j^^ Apostle would not venture to risk his personal safety, or 
 the cause which he advocated, by perilous allusions in letters 
 which from their very nature must be made public. Nor 
 indeed is it probable that he was under any temptation to 
 allude to them. He did not breathe the atmosphere of political 
 life ; he was absorbed in higher interests and anxieties. With 
 the care of all the churches daily pressing upon him, with a 
 deep sense of the paramount importance of his personal mission, 
 
 the Adriatic, and like liim lie also closure and to witness the performance 
 
 landed at PuteoH. Arrived at Borne, of the holy rites. This -was an outrage 
 
 he was introduced to Poppaea by a cer- on Jewish feeling, as well as a breach of 
 
 tain Jew, Aliturus by name, an actor immemorial custom, and was resented 
 
 of mimes, who was in great favour with accordingly. The Jews erected a couu- 
 
 Nero. The empress not only advocated terwaU, which excluded aU view from 
 
 the cause which he had at heart and the royal residence. Festus the procu- 
 
 procured the liberation of his friends, rator took the side of the king and or- 
 
 but sent bim back to his native country dered the demolition of this wall; but 
 
 laden with presents (Joseph. Vit. § 3). afterwards yielded so far as to allow 
 
 This took place in the year 63 or 64, the Jews to refer the case to Nero. An 
 
 and was therefore nearly, if not quite, embassy was accordingly sent to Eome, 
 
 coincident with St Paul's residence in composed of twelve persons including 
 
 Bome. Ismael the high-priest and Helcias the 
 
 {2) The second incident almost oer- treasurer. Poppoa interested herself 
 
 tainly occurred whilethe Apostle was in in the success of their mission, and in 
 
 the metropolis. The king's palace at deference to her entreaties the emperor 
 
 Jerusalemstoodintheimmediateneigh- allowed the wall to stand (Joseph. Ant. 
 
 bourhood of the temple. Agrippa had xx. 8. 11). 
 
 recently built a lofty tower, which en- It is suggested (Oonybeare and How- 
 
 abled him to overlook the sacred en- son n. p. 461), that this embassy may 
 
ST PAUL IN ROME. J 
 
 with a near and fervid anticipation of his own dissolution and 
 union with Christ, if not of the great and final crisis when 
 heaven and earth themselves shall pass away, it is not sur- 
 prising that all minor events, all transitory interests, should be 
 merged in those more engrossing thoughts. His life — so he 
 himself writing from Rome describes the temper of the true 
 believer — ^his life was hidden with Christ in God*. 
 
 The degree of restraint put upon a person labouring under oharaotei 
 a criminal charge was determined by various circumstances; by oaptiTity 
 the nature of the charge itself, by the rank and reputation of 
 the accused, by the degree of guilt presumed to attach to him. 
 Those most leniently dealt vnth were handed over to their 
 friends, who thus became sureties for their appearance; the 
 worst offenders were thrown into prison and loaded with 
 chains'. The captivity of St Paul at Rome was neither the 
 severest nor the lightest possible. 
 
 By his appeal to Caesar' he had placed himself at the 
 emperor's disposal. Accordingly on his arrival in Rome he is 
 delivered over to the commander of the imperial guards, the 
 prefect of the praetorians*, under whose charge he appears to 
 
 have been entrusted with the proseou- The custody of St Paul belongs to the 
 tion of St Paul. It seems at least last of the three, 
 certain, that the ambassadors arrived ' In republican times a difference 
 in Kome while the Apostle was BtUl a was made between ' provocatio ' and 
 prisoner there ; since Pestus had ceased • appeUatio.' The former was a refer- 
 to be procurator before the autumn of enoe to the populus, the latter to the 
 62 : but beyond the coincidence of date tribunes. On the other hand, the ap- 
 all is conjecture. In any case the peal to the emperor was called indiffer- 
 friendly meeting of Festus and Agrippa, ently 'provocatio' or 'appellatio'; for 
 related in the Acts, may have had refer- he combined all ftmctions in himself, 
 enoe to this dispute about Agrippa's The latter term however seems to have 
 building : and if so, the incident links been the more common. On this sub- 
 together the accusation of St Paul and ject consult Geib p. 675 sq., Eein Bos 
 the complaint against Agrippa. Privatrecht etc. p. 960. Krebs, Opusc. 
 1 Col. iii. 3. P- 13s ^Im ^^ "^ essay De provocatione 
 » On the different kinds of custodia, D. Fault ad Ccesarem; which however 
 roughly distinguished as Uiera,publica, does not contain any important matter, 
 and militarit, but admitting various * Acts xxviii. 16 TrapiSuKer rois 
 modifications, see Geib p. 561 sq., Seiridovs rf arparoreSipxTl' i-e- to the 
 Wieseler Ohronol. p. 380 sq., 394 sq. 'prtBfectusproetorio'or'prffifectusprtB- 
 
8 
 
 ST PAUL IN ROMB. 
 
 He is in have remained throughout his captivity. He represents him- 
 ' self as strictly a prisoner : he speaks again and again of his 
 bonds'. At times he uses more precise language, mention- 
 ing the 'coupling-chain". According to Koman custom he was 
 bound by the hand to the soldier who guarded him, and was 
 never left alone day or night. As the soldiers would relieve 
 guard in constant succession, the praetorians one by one were 
 brought into communication with the 'prisoner of Jesus Christ,' 
 
 tori,' for both cases ore found in in- 
 soriptions. From the use of the singu- 
 lar here it has been argued with much 
 probability that the officer in question 
 was Burrus. He held the prefecture 
 alone, whereas both before and aSUii 
 his time the office was shared by two 
 persons: see Tac. Ann. zii, 42, xiv. 
 51. For the changes which this office 
 underwent at different times consult 
 Becker and Marquardt Bdm. Alterth. 
 II. 3, p, ii6. With the singular here 
 contrast the plural in Trajan's letter, 
 Flin. Ep. z. 65 ' Yinctus mitti ad pr^- 
 fectoB preetori mei debet,' and in Fhi- 
 lostr. Vit. Soph. ii. 31 dveripupSij eh 
 T^v 'Vii/iTji' iis iiro'Kir/i)at>ii,aioi rois t&v 
 CTpaTonriium ^e/ionv. see Wieseler 
 Chronol. p. 8S. The whole clause how- 
 ever is rejected by most recent editors, 
 as the balance of existing authorities is 
 very decidedly against it. On the other 
 band the statement does not look like 
 an arbitrary fiction, and probably con- 
 tains a genuine tradition, even if it was 
 no part of the original text. 
 
 1 He calls himself S4ir/uos, Acts 
 xxTiii. 17, Philem. 1, 9, Ephes. iii. i, 
 iv. I ; his Seir/toi are mentioned Phil. i. 
 7. I3> 14. i7i PhUem. 10, 13, Coloss. 
 iv. 18; oomp. Coloss. iv. 3 St' 8 (or tv) 
 Kcd SiSe/iat. 
 
 " SKvnt, Ephes. vi. lo iwifi oiT jr/)e<r- 
 Peiia iv i\iita, Acts xxviii. 30 Ti)ii 
 SKviroi Tairrip irtplKet/icu. The word 
 seems originally to difier from deff/iot, 
 only as bringing out the idea of attach- 
 
 ment rather than confinement. After- 
 wards however it signifies especially 
 ' hand-fettera ' (manicie), as opposed to 
 riSai (pedicffl); Mark v. 4 vdiais Koi 
 &\i<reny SeSiaBai, Kcd SiurToaBai in' ai!- 
 ToD rhs aKiaeu Kol t4s iriSat vwrerfil- 
 tpSai. Meyer indeed denies this dis- 
 tinction: but the words SieairaffBiu, 
 avmerpl^ai, if taken to denote the ac- 
 tion of the hands and feet respectively, 
 are much more expressive ; and the dis- 
 tinction of &\i<ras and ir^Scu seems cer- 
 tainly to be observed elsewhere, e.g. 
 Polyb. iii. 82. 8, Dion. HaL Ant. Rom. 
 vi. i6, tj: comp. Pint. Mor. p. 829 A 
 ToTs x^pei" aXiffas. In Aristoph JVojm. 
 (Meineke 11. p. 1079), where both oXu- 
 <r«: and iriSai are mentioned as ladies' 
 ornaments, the former are perhaps 
 ' bracelets ' or ' cufEs ' : see also Nioostr. 
 Fragm. (ib. ni. p. 189). Hence the 
 word is used eepeoiaUy of the 'coupling- 
 chain,' ' hand-onff,' by which the pri- 
 soner was attached to his guard, as in 
 the case of Agrippa, Joseph. Ant. xviii. 
 6. 7, 10. Compare the metaphor in 
 Lncian, Quom. hut. corner. § 55 fx^/te- 
 KOK oi5toO xal iXinois Tpirif (rpiiroi'?) 
 awiipiioaiUvov, with Seneo. Epitt. i. 5 
 ' Quemadmodnm eadem catena et cns- 
 todiam et militem oopulat.' See a simi- 
 lar use in Plutarch, Vit. Itar. 17 ^crw 
 AirV ToO ^ij SM<tTrSji$ai riiv T(i£i» oi 
 wpbuaxoi naKpaXi i.\iatai avpex/ilimn. 
 
 When the confinement was very rigo- 
 rous, the prisoner was bound to two 
 soldiers. This was the ease with 8t 
 
ST PAUL IN ROME. 9 
 
 and thus he was able to affirm that his bonds had borne 
 witness to the Gospel ' throughout the imperial regiments*.' 
 
 On the other hand, the severity of his confinement was not enjoys 
 so great as this circumstance standing alone might seem to tiye li- 
 imply. It is certain that aU had free access to him, and that he ^^'" 
 was allowed to converse and write without restraint. He was 
 not thrown into prison, but lived in rooms of his own. When 
 he first arrived, he was taken to temporary lodgings ; either to 
 a house of public entertainment, or to the abode of some friend'. 
 But afterwards he rented a dwelling of his own', and there he 
 remained apparently till his release. 
 
 A natural desire has been felt to determine a locality so 
 fraught with interest as St Paul's abode in Rome. Some have St Paul's 
 imagined him a prisoner within the barracks attached to the Bome. 
 imperial residence on the Palatine. Others have fixed his 
 dwelling-place in the great camp, the head-quarters of the prae- 
 torians, without the walls to the north-east of the city. The 
 former conjecture seems hardly consistent with the mention of 
 his own hired house. The latter is less unlikely, for the camp 
 
 Peter, Acts zii. 6 Koiiui/uvot ^era{i 12 iroliia^t /un ^attav rather suggests 
 
 dio mpanuTiiv SeSefUvot i\iire<ny Surlv. a lodging in a friend's bouse: oomp. 
 
 Such had also been St Paul's condition Acts xxi. 16. 
 
 during the early days of his captivity ' Acts xxyiii. 30 ivl/iavtv Sierlav JXqc 
 
 at Jemsalem: Acts xxi. 33. A relaxa- iv tSl(f nurBd/MTttWheie lSl(f seems cei- 
 
 tion of the rigour of his earlier impri- tainly to distinguish the /dadu/ia here 
 
 somnent is mentioned Acts xxiv. 23. from the {eWa above. The word /d- 
 
 On this whole subject see Wieseler trSufia elsewhere signifies ' hire,' being 
 
 Chronol. p. 380 sq. When Ignatius, used especially in a bad sense of shame- 
 
 Rom. J, speaks of himseU as ivdeSe/iivot fnl wages, e.g. Deut. zziii. 18. Hence 
 
 Sixa \eoirdpSou i iarai CTpaTturrnhv Philo in Flacc. p. 536 M /teri riv iwd- 
 
 Tdyna, we must understand that he paroy iua66v, ^ xvpuirepov eirdv, to pl- 
 
 was in charge of a company of ten, cSupa: comp. M^ea V, H. iv. 11. 
 
 who successively relieved guard, so The sense, which it has here, is not re- 
 
 that he was attached to one at a time. cognised by the Greek lexicographers, 
 
 1 PhiL i. i^tr JX^i tv rpaiTuplif. nor can I find any other instance. 
 
 • Acts zzviii. 13 els t^i" ^evtav. Sui- Wetstein indeed quotes ev /utrSiipum 
 
 das explains Replay by Karayiiyiov, xa- olxely as from Philo, but gives no refer- 
 
 TiiKvpia, and similarly Hesychius ; comp, ence, and I suspect there is a mistake. 
 
 Clem. Horn, i. 15 impdvrot /*oi; tJJs yils This exceptional meaning of plaSupa 
 
 KOJL (eytay Siipup,iym, viii. a, zii. 14, may perhaps be explained as a trans- 
 
 siT. 1,8. On the other hand Philem. lation of the Latin ' oonductum.' 
 
10 ST PAUL IN ROME. 
 
 was large and might have contained within its precincts lodgings 
 rented by prisoners under military custody. Yet the reference 
 to the 'praetorium' does not require this, and the circumstances 
 seem naturally to point to a separate dwelling. Within the 
 camp then his abode may have been, near to the camp it pro- 
 bably was, for in the choice of a locality the convenience of the 
 soldiers in relieving guard would naturally be consulted*. 
 
 Thus mitigated, his captivity did not materially impede the 
 progress of his missionary work. On the contrary he himself 
 regarded his bonds as a powerful agency in the spread of the 
 Gospel. Beyond the dreary monotony of his situation, which 
 might well have crushed a spirit unsustained by his lofty hopes 
 and consolations, he was not very hardly treated. It was at 
 least an alleviation, that no restriction was placed on the visits 
 of his friends. 
 
 Friends Of these friends not a few names might be supplied by con- 
 
 resident in . . . 
 
 Eome. jecture from the long list of salutations in the Epistle to the 
 
 Romans. Did he faU in once again with Aquila and Priscilla, 
 
 his fellow-artisans and fellow-sufferers, who 'for his life had 
 
 laid down their own necks" ? Did he still find in Rome his 
 
 countrymen, perhaps his kinsmen, Andronicus and Junias and 
 
 Herodion' ? Did he experience once more the tender care of 
 
 the mother of Rufus, who in times past had treated him as her 
 
 own son* ? Did he renew his intimacy with those former friends 
 
 of whom he speaks with affectionate warmth, Epaenetus his 
 
 well-beloved, Urbanus his helper in Christ, Mary who laboured 
 
 much for him, Amplias, Stachys, Persis' ? 
 
 Of Roman residents however, beyond a general reference to 
 
 the members of Caesar's household', he makes no mention in 
 
 his letters written from the metropolis. They would probably 
 
 His perso- be unknown to his distant correspondents. But of occasional 
 
 and" visitors in Rome, his converts or his colleagues in the Gospel, the 
 
 nalcompa' 
 nions 
 
 1 See the detaclied notes on the * Bom. xvi. 13. 
 
 meaning of ' prtetorium ' in i 13. ' Eom. xvi. 5, 6, 8, 9, 12. 
 
 ' Eom. xvi. 3. ' Phil. iv. 12. 
 
 ' Bom. xvi. 7, II. 
 
ST PAUL IN ROME. II 
 
 companions of his travels and the delegates of foreign churches, "tlier »8- 
 _ ^ , ... . sodates. 
 
 not a few are named. His youthful disciple and associate 
 
 Timotheus, the best beloved of his spiritual sons, seems to have 
 been with him during the whole or nearly the whole of his 
 captivity'. Another friend also, who had shared with him the 
 perils of the voyage, Luke 'the beloved physician,' now his 
 fellow-labourer and perhaps his medical attendant, hereafter his 
 biographer, is constantly by his side". His two favourite Mace- 
 donian churches are well represented among his companions : 
 Philippi despatches Epaphroditus with pecuniary aid, welcome 
 to him as a relief of his wants but doubly welcome as a token 
 of their devoted love': Aristarchus is present from Thessalonica*, 
 a tried associate, who some years before had imperilled his life 
 with St Paul at Ephesus' and now shared his captivity at Kome'. 
 Delegates from the Asiatic churches too were with him: Ty- 
 chicus', a native of the Roman province of Asia and probably of 
 Ephesus its capital', the Apostle's companion both in earlier 
 and later days": and Epaphras the evangelist of his native 
 Colossae, who came to consult St Paul on the dangerous heresies 
 then threatening this and the neighbouring churches over 
 which he watched with intense anxiety". Besides these were 
 
 ' -His name appears in tlie opening Or does it signify a spiritual subjection 
 salutations of the Epistles to the Phi- {alxM^\'a<ria, Eom. vii. tj, 2 Oor. x. 5, 
 lippians, Colossians, and FMIemon : Ephes. iv. 8), so that it may be corn- 
 compare also Phil. ii. ig — 23. It may pared with aivSouKos (Col. i. 7, iv. 7), 
 perhaps be inferred from St Luke's and awnTpaniiriii (Phil. ii. 25, PhUem. 
 silence, Acts xxvit i, that Timotheus 3)? St Paul uses the term awai-xjiA- 
 did not accompany St Paul on his jour- Xwros also of Epaphras (Philem. 23), 
 ney to Bome, but joined him soon after and of hia ' kinsmen ' Andronicus and 
 his arrival. Junias or Junia (Eom. xvi. 7). See 
 
 ' Col. iv. 14, Philem. 24. the note on Col. iv. 10. 
 
 » Phil. ii. 25 — 30, iv. 14 — 18. See ' Ephes. vi 21, Col. iv. 7. 
 
 below, p. 60. ' Acts XX. 4, 2 Tim. iv. 12. He is 
 
 * Col. iv. 10, Philem. 34. On the mentioned together with Trophimus, 
 
 notice of Aristarchus in Acts xxvii. t, Acts 1.0., and Trophimus was an Ephe- 
 
 see below, p. 34, note 2. sian, ib. xxi. 29. 
 
 ' Acts xix. 29. » Acts XX. 4, 2 Tim. iv. n: comp. 
 
 < In Col. iv. 10, St Paul styles ViTtn Tit. iii. 12. Perhaps also he is one of 
 
 irvi'aix/t<iX<<>Ti{s yuou. Perhaps however the anonymous brethren in 2 Oor. viii. 
 
 this may refer to the incident at Ephe- 18, 22. 
 
 sus already alluded to (Acts xix. 29). " CoL i. 7, iv. 12, 
 
I a ST PAUL IN ROME. 
 
 other friends old and new : one pair especially, whose names are 
 linked together by contrast ; John Mark who, having deserted 
 in former years, has now returned to his post and is once more 
 a loyal soldier of Christ ' ; and Demas, as yet faithful to his 
 allegiance, who hereafter will turn renegade and desert the 
 Apostle in his sorest need'. To these must be added a disciple 
 of the Circumcision, whose surname 'the just" proclaims his 
 devotion to his former faith — one Jesus, to us a name only, but 
 to St Paul much more than a name, for amidst the general 
 defection of the Jewish converts he stood by the Apostle almost 
 alone*. Lastly, there was Philemon's runaway slave Onesimus, 
 ' not now a slave, but above a slave, a brother beloved,' whose 
 career is the most touching episode in the apostolic history and 
 the noblest monument of the moral power of the Gospel'. 
 St Paul's These friendships supported him under the ' care of all the 
 d*"^ mth churches,' which continued to press upon him in his captivity 
 rh^^^h ^^^ ^^^ heavily than before. The epistles of this period bear 
 testimony alike to the breadth and the intensity of his sym- 
 pathy with others. The Church of Philippi which he had 
 himself planted and watered, and the Church of Colossse with 
 which he had no personal acquaintance, alike claim and receive 
 his fatherly advice. The temporal interest of the individual 
 slave, and the spiritual well-being of the collective Churches of 
 Asia', are equally the objects of his care. Yet these four epi- 
 stles, which alone survive, must represent very inadequately the 
 extent of the demands made upon his time and energies at this 
 period. There is no notice here of Thessalonica, none of Corinth, 
 none of the churches of Syria, of his own native Cilicia, of 
 Lycaonia and Pisidia and Galatia. It is idle to speculate on 
 the possibility of lost epistles : but, whether by his letters or 
 by his delegates, we cannot doubt that these brotherhoods, 
 
 1 Ool. iy. 10, Philem. 34: oomp, j * Col. iv. n. 
 
 Tim- iv. II. » Col. iv. 9, and Philem. 10 sq. 
 
 • Col. iv. 14, Philem. 24: oomp. 1 • The Epiatie to the Bphesians 
 
 Tim. iv. 10. seems to have been a cironlar letter to 
 
 » See the note on Col. iv. 11. the Asiatio Chnrohes. 
 
BT PAUL IN ROME. 13 
 
 which had a special claim upon him as their spiritual father, 
 received their due share of attention from this 'prisoner of 
 Jesus Christ,' 
 
 But it was on Borne especially that he would concentrate Eristing 
 his energies : Borne, which for years past he had longed to see thtEoman 
 with an intense longing : the common sink of all the worst Church, 
 vices of humanityS and therefore the noblest sphere for evan- 
 gelical zeaL Here he would find a wider field and a richer soil, 
 than any which had hitherto attracted him. But the ground 
 had not lain altogether fallow. There was already a large and 
 flourishing Church, a mixed community of Jew and Gentile 
 converts, founded, it would seem, partly by his own companions 
 and disciples, partly by teachers commissioned directly from 
 Palestine and imbued with the strongest prejudices of their 
 race; a heterogeneous mass, with diverse feelings and sympa- 
 thies, with no well-defined organization, with no other bond of 
 union than the belief in a common Messiah; gathering, we may 
 suppose, for purposes of worship in small knots here and there, 
 as close neighbourhood or common nationality or sympathy or 
 accident drew them together; but, as a body, lost in the vast 
 masses of the heathen population, and only faintly discerned or 
 contemptuously ignored even by the large community of Jewish 
 residents. 
 
 With the nucleus of a Christian Church thus ready to hand, Success of 
 but needing to be instructed and consolidated, with an enor- labours io 
 mous outlying population of unconverted Jews and Gentiles to ^o™*- 
 be gathered into the fold, the Apostle entered upon his work. 
 Writing to the Romans three years before, he had expressed his 
 assurance that, when he visited them, he would 'come in the 
 fiilness of the blessing of Christ'.' There is every reason to 
 believe that this confidence was justified by the event. The 
 notice, with which the narrative of St Luke closes, implies no 
 small measure of success. The same may be inferred from 
 
 > Tac. Arm. zv. 44 'Quo cuncta ing of the spread of Ghristiani^ is 
 undique atrocia aut pudenda conflu- Bome. 
 unt oelebranturque.' Tacitus is speak- * Bom. zt. 29. 
 
14 ST PAUL IN ROME. 
 
 allusions in St Paul's own epistles and is confirmed by the 
 subsequent history of the Roman Church. 
 
 In considering the results of the Apostle's labours more in 
 detail, it will be necessary to view the Jewish and Gentile con- 
 verts separately. In no Church are their antipathies and feuds 
 more strongly marked than in the Roman. Long after their 
 junction the two streams are distinctly traced, each with its own 
 colour, its own motion; and a generation at least elapses, before 
 they are inseparably united. In the history of St Paul they 
 flow almost wholly apart. 
 St Paul I. Several thousands of Jews had been uprooted from their 
 
 himself native land and transplanted to Rome by Pompeius. In this 
 Jew'° *^* '^^^ ^°^^ *^®y ^^^ spread rapidly, and now formed a very im- 
 portant element in the population of the metropolis. Living 
 unmolested in a quarter of their own beyond the Tiber, pro- 
 tected and fostered by the earlier Csesars, receiving constant 
 accessions from home, they abounded everywhere, in the forum, 
 in the camp, even in the palace itself*. Their growing influ- 
 ence alarmed the moralists and politicians of Rome. 'The 
 vanquished,' said Seneca bitterly, 'have given laws to their 
 victors'.' Immediately on his arrival the Apostle summoned to 
 his lodgings the more influential members of his race — probably 
 the rulers of the synagogues'. In seeking this interview he 
 seems to have had a double purpose. On the one hand he 
 was anxious to secure their good-will and thus to forestall the 
 calumnies of his enemies ; on the other he paid respect to their 
 spiritual prerogative, by holding out to them the first ofi'er of 
 the Gospel*. On their arrival he explained to them the cir- 
 
 1 On the numbers and Influence of Compare also Pers. Sat. v. i8o, Jnv. 
 
 the Jews in Borne, see Merivale His- vi. 54s. The mock excuse of Horace, 
 
 tory of the Romans vi. p. 157 sq.. Fried- Sat. i. 9. 70, shows how wide was the 
 
 lander Sittengesch. iii. p. jog sq. influence ol this race in Borne, even a 
 
 " Seneca quoted by St Augustine Z)e generation earlier. Soe also Ovid 4.^1. 
 
 Civ. Dei vi. 11, 'Cum interim usque eo i. 76, and references in Merivale p. 159. 
 
 soeleratissimss gentis oonsuetndo con- ' Acts zzviii. 17 sq. 
 
 valuit, ut per omnes jam terras reoep- * He had declared this prerogative 
 
 ta sit : vioti viotoribus legea dedernnt.' of the Jews in writing to the Bomau 
 
ST PAUL IN ROME. 15 
 
 cumstances which had brought him there. To his personal ex- bnt is 
 planations they replied, in real or atfected ignorance, that they oeiwd."*" 
 had received no instructions from Palestine; they had heard no 
 harm of him and would gladly listen to his defence ; only this 
 they knew, that the sect of which he professed himself an ad- 
 herent, had a bad name everywhere*. For the exposition of his 
 teaching a later day was fixed. When the time arrived, he ' ex- 
 pounded and testified the kingdom of God,' arguing from then- 
 own scriptures ' from morning tUl evening.' His success was not 
 greater than with his fellow-countrymen elsewhere. He dismissed 
 them, denouncing their stubborn unbelief and declaring his inten- 
 tion of communicating to the Gentiles that offer which they had 
 spumed. It is not probable that he made any further advances 
 in this direction. He had broken ground and nothing more. 
 
 Yet it was not from any indisposition to hear of Messiah's Their an. 
 advent that they gave this cold reception to the new teacher. omeB!."" 
 The announcement in itself would have been heartily welcomed, "*'*• 
 for it harmonised with their most cherished hopes. For years 
 past Jewish society in Rome had been kept in a fever of excite- 
 
 Church, i. 16, ii. 9, 10, and would feel would do wisely to shield themselves 
 
 bound to regard it, when he arrived in under a prudent reserve. Their best 
 
 the metropolis. policy was to ignore Christianity; to 
 
 1 It is maintained by Baur {Paulm enquire as little as possible about it, 
 
 p. 368), Schwegler (Nachapott. Zeit. 11. and, when questioned, to vmderstate 
 
 p. 93), and ZeUer {Tfieolog. Jahrb. 1849, their knowledge. In a large and popu- 
 
 p. 571), that this portion of the narra- lous city like Rome they might without 
 
 tive betrays the unhistorioal character much difficulty shut their eyes to its 
 
 of the Acts; that the language here existence. When its claims were di- 
 
 ascribed to the Jews ignores the exist- rectly pressed upon them by St Paul, 
 
 ence of the Boman Church, and that their character for fairness, perhaps 
 
 therefore the incident is irreconcUeable also some conscientious scruples, re- 
 
 with the facts as gathered from the quired them to give him at least a for- 
 
 Epistle to the Romans. On the con- nial hearing. At all events the writer 
 
 trary, this language seems to me to be of the Acts is quite aware that there 
 
 quite natural under the circumstances, was already a Christian Church in 
 
 as it was certainly most politic. It is Rome ; for he represents the Apostle 
 
 not very likely that the leading Jews as met on his way by two deputations 
 
 would frankly recognise the facts of the from it. Indeed the two last chapters 
 
 case. They had been taught caution of the narrative so clearly indicate the 
 
 by the troubles which the Messianic presence of an eyewitness, that we can 
 
 fends had brought on their more im- hardly question the incidents, even if 
 
 petuous f ellow-counttymen ; and they we are at a loss bow to interpret them. 
 
i6 
 
 ST PAUL IN ROME. 
 
 Judaic 
 
 Christian- 
 ity in 
 Borne. 
 
 ment by successive ramours of false Christs, On one occasion 
 a tumult had broken out, and the emperor had issued a general 
 edict of banishment against the race*. If this check had made 
 them more careful and less demonstrative, it had certainly not 
 smothered their yearnings after the advent of a Prince who 
 was to set his foot on the neck of their Roman oppressors. But 
 the Christ of their anticipations was not the Christ of St Paul's 
 preaching. Grace, liberty, the abrogation of law, the supre- 
 macy of faith, the levelling of all religious and social castes — 
 these were strange sounds in their ears ; these were conditions 
 which they might not and would not accept. 
 
 But where he had failed, other teachers, who sympa- 
 thized more fully with their prejudices and made larger con- 
 cessions to their bigotry, might win a way. The proportion of 
 Jewish converts saluted in the Epistle to the Romans", not less 
 
 1 Sueton. Claud, ij 'JudiBos im- 
 pulsore Chresto assidae tumultuantes 
 Boma expulit.' Suetonius here makes 
 a double mistake: (i) He confuses the 
 names Chrestus and Ghristus. This 
 confusion was not unnatural, for the 
 difference in pronunciation was hardly 
 perceptible, and Chrestus, 'the good- 
 natured,' was a frequent proper name, 
 while ChristuB, 'the anointed,' would 
 convey no idea at aU to a heathen 
 ignorant of the Old Testament and 
 unacquainted with Hebrew customs. 
 The mistake continued to be made 
 long after Suetonius: comp. Justin 
 Apol. i. p. 54 D Sffov 7« IK ToO KaTiiyo- 
 poufiimv iinwv ivoiiaros, xpitrr^raroi 
 ineipxaiuv, Tertull. Apol. 3 ' Cum per- 
 peram Chrestianus pronuntiatur a vo- 
 bis,' ad Nat. i. 3, Theoph. ad Autol. i. 
 12 irepl ii roO fcaraycXai* fiov KoKoSyrd 
 /le \piaTiav6v, ovK olSas fl \iyns' r/>w- 
 TOK /Uv Sti to ■xfurrov ifii KoX c&xfiV'^o' 
 Kal aKa.Tayi\ain6v iarai; and even as 
 late as Lactantius, Intt. Div. It. 7 
 * Exponenda hujuB nominis ratio est 
 propter ignorantinm errorem, qui enm 
 immntata littera Chrestum tolent di- 
 
 cere.' See also Boeckh C. I. 3857 p, 
 App. The word ' Chrestianus ' appears 
 in an early inscription (Miintei Sinn- 
 bilder der alten Chriiten i. p. 14, Orell. 
 Inscr. 4416), where however it may be 
 a proper name. At all events the de- 
 signation ' Christian ' would hardly be 
 expected on a monument of this date ; 
 for other names in the inscription 
 (Drusus, Antonia) point to the age of 
 the earher Cssars. M. Benan (Let 
 Ap6tret, p. 134) is wrong in saying that 
 the termination -anus betrays a Latin 
 origin. Compare XapSiavoit TpoXXiowt. 
 (3) It seems probable that the dis- 
 turbances which Suetonius here attri- 
 butes to the instigation of some one 
 Chrestus (or Christus), understanding 
 this as a proper name, were really 
 caused by various conflicting rumours 
 of claimants to the Messiahship. Yet 
 even in this case we may fairly sup- 
 pose that the true Christ held a pro- 
 minent place in these reports ; for He 
 must have been not less known at this 
 time than any of the false ChristB. 
 
 * The only strictly Jewish name is 
 Mary; but Aquila and FrisciUa are 
 
ST PAUL IN ROME. I? 
 
 than the obvious motive and bearing of the letter itself, points 
 to the existence of a large, perhaps a preponderating, Jewish 
 element in the Church of the metropolis before St Paul's arrival. 
 These Christians of the Circumcision for the most part owed 
 no spiritual allegiance to the Apostle of the GentUes : some of 
 them had confessed Christ before him^ ; many no doubt were 
 rigid in their adherence to the law. It would seem as though 
 St Paul had long ago been apprehensive of the attitude these 
 Jewish converts might assume towards him. The conciliatory Their op- 
 tone of the Epistle to the Eomans — conciliatory and yet un- gt panL ° 
 compromising — seems intended to disarm possible opposition. 
 Was it not this gloomy foreboding also which overclouded his 
 spirit when he first set foot on the Italian shore? He had 
 good reason to 'thank God and take courage,' when he was 
 met by one deputation of Roman Christians at the Forum 
 of Appius, by another at the Three Taverns'. It was a relief 
 to find that some members at least of the Roman Church were 
 favourably disposed towards him. At all events his fears were 
 not unfounded, as appeared from the sequel. His bold advo- 
 cacy of the liberty of the Gospel provoked the determined 
 antagonism of the Judaizers. We can hardly doubt to what 
 class of teachers he alludes in the Epistle to the Philippians as 
 preaching Christ of envy and strife, in a factious spirit, only 
 for the purpose of thwarting him, only to increase his anguish 
 and to render his chains more galling'. An incidental notice 
 in another, probably a later epistle, written also from Rome, 
 reveals the virulence of this opposition still more clearly. 
 Of all the Jewish Christians in Rome the Apostle can name 
 
 known to have been Jews. St Paul's also would in all likelihood he Jews, 
 ■kinsmen' also, Andronicns, Junia (Ju- ' At the first day of Pentecost o! iiri- 
 
 nias?), and Eeiodion, must have he- Sij^ovcret 'Pu/iaioi, 'louSaiof re ko! ir/ioir- 
 
 longed to this lace, whatever sense we i^Xvroi, are mentioned among those pre- 
 
 attaoh to the word ' kinsmen.' Apelles sent, Acts ii. lo. In the Epistle to the 
 
 too, though not a strictly Jewish name, Romans St Paul salutes certain Jewish 
 
 was frequently home by Jews. If Christians, who were 'before him in 
 
 moreover the Aristobulus mentioned in Christ,' xvi 7. 
 ver. 10 belonged to the family of Herod, • Acts xiviii. 15. 
 
 as seems most probable (seep. 172 sq.), » PM. i. 15—18. 
 
 then the members of ' his household ' 
 
 PHIL. 2 
 
l8 ST PAOL IN ROME. 
 
 three only as remaining stedfast in the general desertion; Arist- 
 archus his own companion in travel and in captivity, Marcus 
 the cousin of his former missionary colleague Barnabas, and 
 Jesus sumamed the Just. 'In them,' he adds feelingly, 'I 
 found comfort'.' 
 Their zea- But if these sectarians resolutely opposed St Paul, they were 
 lytism^"^* hardly less zealous in preaching Christ. The incentive of rivalry 
 goaded them on to fresh exertions. Their gospel was dwarfed 
 and mutilated ; it ignored the principle of liberty which was 
 a main feature of the true Gospel: but though their motives 
 were thus unworthy and their doctrine distorted, still 'Christ 
 was preached': and for this cause, smothering aU personal 
 feeling, the Apostle constrained himself to rejoice '. 
 The Gen- 2. Meanwhile among the Gentiles his preaching bore more 
 tiMiswei- abundant and healthier fruit. As he encountered in the exist- 
 come St ing Church of Kome the stubborn resistance of a compact body 
 of Judaic antagonists, so also there were doubtless very many 
 whose more liberal Christian training prepared them to welcome 
 him as their leader and guide. If constant communication was 
 kept up with Jerusalem, the facilities of intercourse with the 
 cities which he himself had evangelized, with Corinth and 
 Ephesus for instance, were even greater. The Syrian Orontes 
 which washed the walls of Antioch the mother of Gentile 
 Christendom, when it mingled its waters with the Tiber, 
 assuredly bore thither some nobler freight than the scum and 
 refuse of Oriental profligacy, the degraded religions and 
 licentious morals of Asia'. Gentile Christianity was not less 
 fairly represented in Rome than Judaic Christianity. If there 
 were some who preached Christ of ' envy and strife,' there were 
 others who preached Him of ' good-wilj.' 
 
 Thus aided and encouraged, the Apostle prosecuted his 
 work among the Gentiles with signal and rapid success. In 
 
 ' Col. iv. 10, II otnm iyei^^trdv ' PhU.i iS 6.\\iL Kctl xapitco/iu. 
 
 lioiraprn/opta. Compare the expreBBion » Juv. Sat. iii. 6» 'Jam pridem Sy- 
 
 quoted above from Acts xxviii. 15 eu- rus in Tiberim deauxit Orontes etc' 
 
ST PAUL IN ROME. 19 
 
 two quarters especially the results of his labours may be traced. His buo- 
 The praetorian soldiers, drafted off successively to guard him pratMiuiu 
 and constrained while on duty to bear him close company, had 
 opportunities of learning his doctrine and observing his manner 
 of life, which were certainly not without fruit. He had not 
 been in Rome very long, before he could boast that his bonds 
 were not merely known but known in Christ throughout the 
 praetorian guard'. In the palace of the Caesars too his influence 
 was felt. It seems not improbable that when he arrived in 
 Rome he found among the members of the imperial household, and the 
 whether slaves or freedmen, some who had already embraced^" 
 the new faith and eagerly welcomed his coming. His energy 
 would be attracted to this important field of labour, where an 
 opening was already made and he had secured valuable allies. 
 At all events, writing from Rome to a distant church, he singles 
 out from the general salutation the members of Caesar's house- 
 hold*, as a body both prominent enough to deserve a special 
 salutation and so well known to his correspondents that no 
 explanation was needed. 
 
 Occupying these two strongholds in the enemy's territory, 
 he would not be slack to push his conquests farther. Of the 
 social rank, of the race and religion from which his converts 
 were chiefly drawn, we have no direct knowledge and can only 
 hazard a conjecture. Yet we can hardly be wrong in assuming 
 that the Church was not generally recruited from the higher 
 classes of society and that the recruits were for the most 
 part Greeks rather than Romans. 
 
 Of the fact that the primitive Church of the metropolis Greekjia- 
 before and after St Paul's visit was chiefly Greek, there is the5Elomaii 
 satisfactory evidence'. The salutations in the Roman letter con- Ciinrch. 
 tain very few but Greek names, and even the exceptions hardly 
 imply the Roman birth of their possessors. The Greek nation- 
 
 1 Phil. i. 13. See the detached note. best writers. See for instance West- 
 
 ' Phil. iv. 71. oott History of the Canon p. 244 sq., 
 
 ' The Greek origin of the Boman and Milman Latin Christianity i. p. 
 
 OhoToh is now generally allowed by the 2 J sqq. (1863). 
 
 2 — 2 
 
20 ST PAUL IN ROME. 
 
 ality of this church in the succeeding ages ia still more clearly 
 seen. Her early bishops for several generations with very few 
 exceptions bear Greek names. All her literature for nearly 
 two centuries is Greek. The first Latin version of the Scrip- 
 tures was made not for Kome, but for the provinces, especially 
 for Africa. Even later, the ill-spelt, ill-written inscriptions of 
 the catacombs, with their strange intermingling of Greek and 
 Latin characters, show that the church was not yet fully 
 nationalised. Doubtless among St Paul's converts were many 
 who spoke Latin as their mother tongue : the soldiers of the 
 praetorian guard for instance would perhaps be more Italian 
 than Greek. But these were neither the more numerous nor 
 the more influential members of the Church. The Greeks were 
 the most energetic, as they were also the most intelligent and 
 enquiring, of the middle classes in Rome at this time. The 
 successful tradesmen, the skilled artisans, the confidential ser- 
 vants and retainers of noble houses — almost all the activity and 
 enterprise of the common people whether for good or for evil — 
 were Greek '. Against the superior versatility of these foreign 
 intruders the native population was powerless, and a genera- 
 tion later the satirist complains indignantly that Eome is no 
 Social longer Roman'. From this rank in life, from the middle and 
 Uie early lower classes of society, it seems probable that the Church 
 oouverts. drew her largest reinforcements. The members of the Roman 
 Church saluted in St Paul's Epistle could assuredly boast no 
 aristocratic descent, whether from the proud patrician or the 
 equally proud plebeian families. They bear upstart names, 
 mostly Greek, sometimes borrowed from natural objects, some- 
 times adopted from a pagan hero or divinity, sometimes de- 
 scriptive of personal qualities or advantages, here and there 
 the surnames of some noble family to which they were perhaps 
 attached as slaves or freedmen, but hardly in any case bearing 
 the stamp of high Roman antiquity'. Of Rome, not less than 
 
 * See especially Juv. Sot. iii. 73— • Juv. Sat. iii. 60 'Non possom ferre, 
 80. Oomp. Friedlander Sittengeichichte Quiiites, Gr»oam urbem." 
 Rmru I. p. 60 sq. (ed. 7). a Examples of these different classes 
 
ST PAUL IN ROME. 21 
 
 of Corinth, it must have been true, that ' not many wise after 
 the flesh, not many powerful, not many high-bom' were 
 called*. 
 
 Not many, and yet perhaps a few. On what grounds and ConvertH 
 with what truth the great Stoic philosopher and statesman has higher 
 been claimed as a signal triumph of the Gospel I shall have to "'asses. 
 consider hereafter. Report has swollen the list of Roman con- 
 verts with other names scarcely less famous for their virtues or 
 their vices. The poet Lucan, the philosopher Epictetus, the 
 powerful freedmen Narcissus and Epaphroditus, the emperor's 
 mistresses Acte and Poppcea', a strange medley of good and 
 bad, have been swept by tradition or conjecture into that capa- 
 cious drag-net which ' gathers of every kind.' For such conver- 
 sions, highly improbable in themselves, there is not a shadow 
 of evidence. Yet one illustrious convert at least seems to 
 have been added to the Church about this time. Pomponia Pomponia 
 Grajcina, the wife of Plautius the conqueror of Britain, was 
 arraigned of 'foreign superstition.' Delivered over to a do- 
 mestic tribunal according to ancient usage, she was tried by 
 her husband in presence of her relations, and was pronounced 
 by him innocent. Her grave and sad demeanour (for she never 
 appeared but in a mourning garb) was observed by all. The 
 untimely and cruel death of her friend Julia had dra\vn a cloud 
 over her life, which was never dissipated'. Coupled with the 
 charge already mentioned, this notice suggests that shunning 
 society she had sought consolation under her deep sorrow 
 in the duties and hopes of the Gospel*. At all events a 
 generation later Christianity had worked its way even into the 
 imperial family. Flavins Clemens and his wife Flavia Domi- 
 
 of names among the Soman Christians place in the year 57 or 58, i.e. about 
 
 are: Staohys; Hermes, Kerens; Epae- the time when the Epistle to the Eo- 
 
 netus, Ampliatus, Urbanus ; Julia, mans was written, and some three years 
 
 Claudia (i Tim. iv. 1 r). before St Paul's arrival in Borne. 
 
 ' I Cor. i. 26. ■• The' superstitio externa 'of Tacitus 
 
 ' See Fleury Saint Paul et Siiiiqut in this passage has been explained by 
 
 n. p. log, and the references there Lipsius and others after him as referring 
 
 given. to Christianity. See especially Meri- 
 
 » Xao. Ann. xiiL 31. The trial took vt(le'B m>tqry of Ijhf Uornam vi. p. 173. 
 
32 
 
 ST PAUL IN ROME. 
 
 Clemens 
 and Domi 
 tUla. 
 
 tilla, both cousins of Domitian, were accused of 'atheism' and 
 condemned by the emperor. Clemens had only just resigned 
 oflSce as consul; and his sons had been nominated successors to 
 the empire. The husband was put to death; the wife banished 
 to one of the islands. Allowing that the emperor sacrificed his 
 kinsman on a ' most trivial charge,' the Roman biographer yet 
 withholds his sympathy from the unoffending victim as a man 
 of ' contemptible indolence'.' One whose prejudice or ignorance 
 
 • Sueton. Domit. 15 ' Flavinm Cle- 
 mentem patrnelem suum contemptissi- 
 jxiffiiiiertiffl...iepeiiteex temiissima sus- 
 picione tantmn non in ipso ejus consu- 
 lata iuteremit': Dion Cass. Ixvii. 14 
 K&tf TV aury irei dWovs re voWoiis 
 Koi rhv <i\aovlov KX'^/ievTO VTraTeioma, 
 Kolirep ive^iov iJcto koX ywaiKa Kal 
 avrrjv ffvyyeyi] ^ai/rou ^\aovLai> Ao/uriX- 
 \av txoyTO., (CttT^ff^afev d Ao/iiTiaiiis' 
 ^TTjv^X^V ^^ dfKpoiv iyKkfjua. AdeoTiyroSt 
 iip' iyt Kal aXXoi ^s t4 'lovSaiuv tBi) 
 i^oKtWovTct jroXXoi KaTeSiKdff6ri<Tai>, Kal 
 ol fjiiv diriSavov ol Si Toiv yoOv ovffiuv 
 iuTeprfdrjaav' i} bi AofuriWa {nrepwpU 
 ffOtj fiovov is HavSarepiav^ Atheism was 
 the oommon charge brought againet the 
 early Christians. The relationship of 
 this Domitilla to Domitian is not 
 given by Dion Cassius. It appears 
 however from other authorities that 
 she was his sister's daughter ; Quintil. 
 Imt. iv. Prooem., Orelli-Henzen Inacr. 
 5442, 5423. Again Eusebius, H. E. 
 iii. 18, refers to heathen historians 
 as relating (with au exact notice of 
 the date, the fifteenth year of Domi- 
 tian) the persecution of the Christians, 
 and more especially the banishment of 
 Flitvia DomitiUa, the niece of Flavius 
 Clemens (i^ aScX^^t 767oi'v(ai> ^Xaovlov 
 KK'fip.tvTos) one of the actual consuls, 
 to'.the island of Pontia, rrjt eh Xpi- 
 (rTdi> fiaprvptas iveKev, The heathen 
 writer especially intended here is one 
 Bruttiua, as appears from another pas- 
 sage in En8ebins,Ohron.p. 161 (SohSue) 
 anb anno 95,' Soribit Bruttius plnrimos 
 
 Christianorum sub Domitiano fecisse 
 martyrium : inter quoa et Flaviam Do- 
 mitillam, Flavii dementis consuUs ex 
 sororoneptem, in insulam Pontiam rcle- 
 gatam quia se Christianam esse testata 
 est.' This Bruttius is not improbably 
 the Prffisens with whom the younger 
 Pliny corresponds (Epist. vii. 3), Prffi- 
 sens being a cognomen of the Bruttii. 
 For the various persons bearing this 
 name see Lardner's Testimonies of An- 
 cient Heathens xii. On the confirma- 
 tion of this account derived from de 
 Bossi'g archeeological researches, and 
 on the possible connexion of Clement 
 the writer of the Epistle with this 
 Flavius Clemens, see S. Clement oj 
 Borne Appendix p. 257 sq. 
 
 It wUl be seen that the account of 
 Bruttius (or Eusebius) diSers from that 
 of other authorities both in the place 
 of exUe and in the relationship of 
 Domitilla to Clemens. Hence many 
 writers have supposed that two Domi- 
 tUlas, aunt and niece, were banished 
 by Domitian : so e. g. among receut 
 writers, Imhof Domitianus p. 116, de 
 Eossi Bull, di Archeol. Crist. 1865, p. 
 i7Bq., i875,p. figsq. The calendar also 
 commemorates a DomitiUa as a virgin 
 and martyr, thus distinguishing her 
 from the wife of Clemens : see Tille- 
 mont Hist. Eccl. 11. p. 124 sq. Tet it 
 can hardly be doubtful that one and 
 the same person is intended in these 
 notices. Nor is it difficult to explain 
 the two discrepancies, (i) The locality. 
 Pontia (or Pontile, for it is a group of 
 
8T PAUL IN ROME. 
 
 23 
 
 allowed him to see in Christianity only a ' mischievous super- 
 stition" would not be very favourably impressed by a convert 
 to the new faith, debarred by his principles from sharing the 
 vicious amusements of his age, and perhaps also in the absorb- 
 ing contemplation of his higher destinies too forgetful of the 
 necessary forms of social and political life. There seems no 
 reason to doubt that Clemens and Domitilla were converts to 
 the Gospel'. 
 
 It is impossible to close this notice of St Paul's captivity The Nero- 
 without casting a glance at the great catastrophe which over-^^t?on" 
 
 whelmed the Koman Church soon after his release. The Nero- e^Pl»"»^ 
 
 away. 
 
 nian persecution, related on the authority of Tacitus and 
 
 islands) and Fandateria are close to 
 each other; Strabo v. p. ^33 UarSa- 
 repta re xal Hovrta 01! ro\i dv dXXijXuv 
 8i^ou(rat. Hence they are constantly 
 named together; e.g. Strabo ii. p. 123, 
 Varro S. B. ii. 5, Suet. Calig. 15, 
 Mela il 7. And both alike were con- 
 stantly chosen as places of exile for 
 members of the imperial family ; Tao. 
 Arm. xiv. 63, Suet. Tib. 53, 54, Calig. 
 15, Dion Cass. Iv. 10, lix. 22. The cells, 
 in which DomitiUa was reported to 
 have lived during her exile, were 
 shown in Fontia in Jerome's time; 
 EQeron. Ep. oviii § 7 (L p. 695). 
 (j) The relatitymhip. The divergence 
 here may be explained very easily by 
 the carelessness of Eusebius or some 
 early transcriber. In the original text 
 of BmttiuB the words corresponding to 
 'Flavii Olementis' probably signified 
 ■the wife of Flavins Clemens,' while 
 those translated ■ ex sorore ueptem ' 
 described her relationship not to Cle- 
 mens but to Domitian. Q. Syncellus 
 (p. 650, ed. Bonn.), copying the Ghroni- 
 con of Eusebius, says iXavla AoiierlWa 
 l^aSfXipii KXr/firpiTos (sic) ^Xavlov ira- 
 Tutov us ^picTiavij els v^aov Uovriav ipv 
 yaSeiertu. This expression suggests a 
 very probable account of the error. If 
 Brntti^S {or some other authority) 
 
 wrote i\aaula AofierlWa i(aSi\<j)ri 1; 
 iXaovlov EXii/tcvTos, the accidental 
 omission of ^ would at once transfer 
 the relationship from Domitian to 
 Flavins Clemens. When Fhilostratus, 
 Vit. Apoll. viii. 25, speaks of the wife 
 of Clemens as the sister of the emperor, 
 he confuses her with another Domitilla 
 no longer living ; unless indeed (as 
 seems probable) the conjectural read- 
 ing i^aS{\<f)7ii> should be substituted 
 for dSeXipiiii in his text. The stemma 
 of the Flavii, constructed by Momm- 
 sen {Corp. Inscr. Lat. vi. p. 173), seems 
 to me to have nothing to recommend 
 it except the name of this truly great 
 scholar. It contradicts Apollonius, 
 Dion, Eusebius, and Quintilian alike ; 
 besides being open to other objections. 
 See the criticism of de Bossi Bull, di 
 Arch. Critt. 1875, p. 70 sq. 
 
 ' Sueton. Nero 16 ' superstitio nova 
 ac malefica.' 
 
 ' So even Gibbon, who says (0. xvi), 
 ' The guilt imputed to their charge was 
 that of Atheism and Jewish manners; 
 a singular association of ideas, which 
 cannot with any propriety be applied 
 except to the Christians etc' So too 
 Baur Paulus p. 472. Early in the 
 second century the Boman dhristians 
 are 80 influential that Ignatius fean; 
 
24 ST PAUL IN ROME. 
 
 Suetonius and embodied as a cardinal article in the historic 
 creed of the Church from the earliest times, has latterly shared 
 the fate of all assumed facts and received dogmas. The histo- 
 rian of the 'DecHne and Fall' was the first to question the 
 truth of this persecution. ' The obscurity as well as the inno- 
 cency of the Christians,' wrote Gibbon, 'should have shielded 
 them from Nero's indignation and even from his notice.' 
 Accordingly he supposed that the real sufferers were not 
 Christians but Jews, not the disciples of the true Christ but 
 the dupes of some false Christ, the followers not of Jesus the 
 Nazarene but of Judas the Gaulonite. It might easily happen, 
 so he argued, that Tacitus, writing a generation later when the 
 Christians, now a numerous body, had been singled out as the 
 objects of judicial investigation, should transfer to them ' the 
 guilt and the sufferings which he might with far greater truth 
 and justice have attributed to a sect whose odious memory was 
 almost extinguished'.' An able living writer also, the author of 
 the ' History of the Romans under the Empire',' paying more 
 deference to ancient authorities, yet feeling this difficulty, 
 though in a less degree, suggests another solution. He sup- 
 poses that the persecution was directed in the first instance 
 against Jewish fanatics'; that the persons thus assailed strove 
 to divert the popular fury by informing against the Christians; 
 that the Christians confessed their allegiance to a King of their 
 own in 'a sense which their judges did not care to discriminate'; 
 that in consequence they were condemned and suffered ; and 
 finally, that later writers, having only an indistinct knowledge 
 of the facts, confined the persecution directed against Jews and 
 Christians alike to the latter, who nevertheless were not the 
 principal victims. If I felt the difficulty which this suggestion 
 Testimony is intended to remove, I should be disposed to accept the solu- 
 
 of Roman . nrj e t • -f t • 
 
 tiistoriana. tion. But L do not feel justified m setting aside the authority 
 of both Tacitus and Suetonius in a case like this, where the 
 
 lest their intercession may rob him of 'A later notice however (Pseado- 
 
 the crown of martyrdom. Seneo. ad Paul. Ep. n) mentions the 
 
 > Decline and Fall «. xYi, Jews also as sufferers. 
 
 » VI. p. »89. 
 
ST PAUL IN ROME. 2$ 
 
 incident recorded must have happened in their own life-time; 
 an incident moreover not transacted within the recesses of the 
 palace or by a few accomplices sworn to secrecy, but open and 
 notorious, affecting the lives of many and gratifying the fanati- 
 cal fury of a whole populace. 
 
 But besides the distinct testimony of the Roman historians, Allusionin 
 there is, I venture to think, strong though indirect evidence lypse. 
 which has generally been overlooked. How otherwise is the 
 imagery of the Apocalypse to be explained? Babylon, the great 
 harlot, the woman seated on seven hills, ' drunken with the 
 blood of the saints and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus" — 
 what is the historical reference in these words, if the Neronian 
 persecution be a figment of later date? It is plain that some 
 great change has passed over the relations between the Gospel 
 and the Empire, since the days when St Paul sought protection 
 and obtained justice from the soldiers and the magistrates of 
 Rome. The genial indolence of Gallio, the active interposition 
 of Claudius Lysias, the cold impartiality of Festus, afford no ex- 
 planation of such language. Roman justice or Roman indiffer- 
 ence has been exchanged meanwhile for Roman oppression. 
 
 And after all the sole ground for scepticism is the assumed The 
 insignificance of the Roman Church at this epoch, its obscure Bome noi 
 station and scanty numbers. But what are the facts of the ™g^^at 
 case ? Full six years before the Neronian outbreak the brethren tliis 'i™«- 
 of Rome are so numerous and so influential as to elicit from 
 St Paul the largest and most important letter which he ever 
 wrote. In this letter he salutes a far greater number of persons 
 than in any other. Its tone shows that the Roman Church 
 was beset by aU the temptations intellectual and moral, to 
 which only a large and various community is exposed. In 
 the three years which elapsed before he arrived in the metro- 
 polis their numbers must in the natural course of events 
 have increased largely. When he lands on the shores of 
 
 1 Eev. ivii. 6. The argument in the for the passage might then be sup- 
 text loses some of its force, if the later posed to refer to the persecution of 
 date J?9 assigned to the Apocalypse; Pomitiao. 
 
26 ST PAUL IN ROME. 
 
 Italy, he finds a Christian community established even at 
 Puteoli\ For two whole years from this time the Gospel is 
 preached with assiduous devotion by St Paul and his compa- 
 nions ; while the zeal of the Judaizers, whetted by rivaby, is 
 roused to unwonted activity in the same cause. If besides this 
 we allow for the natural growth of the church in the year in- 
 tervening after the Apostle's release, it will be no surprise that 
 the Christian community -had by this time attained sufficient 
 prominence to provoke the indiscriminate revenge of a people 
 unnerved by a recent catastrophe and suddenly awakened to 
 the existence of a mysterious and rapidly increasing sect. 
 
 For it is in the very nature of a panic that it should take 
 
 alarm at some vague peril of which it cannot estimate the 
 
 TheEo- character or dimensions. The first discovery of this strange 
 
 Um sMMd community would be the most terrible shock to Roman feeling. 
 
 by a panic, g^^ ^i(je might not be its ramifications, how numerous its 
 
 adherents? Once before in times past Roman society had 
 
 been appalled by a similar revelation. At this crisis men 
 
 would call to mind how their forefathers had stood aghast at 
 
 the horrors of the JBacchanalian conspiracy; how the canker 
 
 still unsuspected was gnawing at the heart of public morality, 
 
 and the foundations of society were well-nigh sapped, when the 
 
 discovery was accidentally made, so that only the promptest and 
 
 most vigorous measures had saved the state'. And was not this 
 
 a conspiracy of the same kind ? These Christians were certainly 
 
 atheists, for they rejected all the gods alike ; they were traitors 
 
 1 Acta xxviii. 14. The traffic with • For the history of the Bacchanalian 
 Alexandria and the East would draw conspiracy detected in the years. 0. 186 
 to PuteoU a large number of Oriental see Livy xxxix. 8 sq. In reading this 
 sailors and merchants. The Inscrip- account it is impossible not to notice 
 tions bear testimony to the presence of theresemblanceof the crimes apparent- 
 Jews in these parts : see an article by ly proved against these Bacchanalians 
 Minervini in the Bullett. Archeol. Na- with the foul charges recklessly hurled 
 ^oZ. Feb. 1855. For the reference to at the Christians : see e. g. Justin ipol. 
 this article I am indebted to Fried- i. 26, Tertull. Apol. 7, Minuo. Felix, 9, 
 lander Sittengeschichte Boms 11. p. 65. »8. [The passage in the text was writ- 
 See also de Bossi Bull, di Archeol.Criat. ten without any recollection that Gib- 
 1864, p. 69 sq., on the Fompeisn in- bon had mentioned the Bacchanalian 
 Boription. conspiracy in the same connexion.] 
 
ST PAUL IN ROME. a; 
 
 also, for they swore allegiance to another king besides Cffisar. 
 But there were mysterious whispers of darker horrors than 
 these ; hideous orgies which rivalled the loathsome banquet of 
 Thyestes, shameless and nameless profligacies which recalled 
 the tragedy of the house of Laius'. To us, who know what the 
 Gospel has been and is, who are permitted to look back on the 
 past history of the Church and forward to her eternal destinies, 
 such infatuation may seem almost incredible ; and yet this mode 
 of representation probably does no injustice to Roman feeling 
 at the time. The public mind paralysed by a great calamity has 
 not strength to reflect or to argue. An idea once seizing it 
 possesses it wholly. The grave and reserved demeanour of the 
 Christians would only increase the popular suspicion. The ap- 
 parent innocence of the sect would seem but a cloak thrown over 
 their foul designs, which betrayed themselves occasionally by de- 
 nunciations of Roman life or by threats of a coming vengeance'. 
 
 The general silence of the Roman satirists is indeed a signi- Silence of 
 
 - . tbeKoxnan 
 
 ficant fact, but it cannot fairly be urged to show the obscurity satirists 
 
 of the Church at the date of the Neronian persecution. If no ""^^ ^^ 
 mention is made of Christianity in the short poems of Persius, 
 it will be remembered that he died nearly two years before this 
 event. K Juvenal and Martial, who in the next generation 
 ' have dashed in with such glaring colours Jews, Greeks, and 
 Egyptians',' banish the Christians to the far background of 
 their picture*, the fact must not be explained by the compara- 
 tive insignificance of the latter'. We may safely infer from 
 
 ' See the letter of the Churches of ' MeriTale vi. p. 277. 
 
 LyonsandVienneinEuseb. H.B. v. i. • Mart. x. •25, Juv. i. 155, viii. 135. 
 
 § 14 Kare^iicavTo ijiiuv QvitTTeia SeiTrva Even in these passages the allusion is 
 
 «al OlSiiroSelovs /d^ets KoX oca /t^re Xa- doubtful. 
 
 \ar iiirre votiv BiiM iuuv, Athenag. " The following instance will show 
 
 Legat. 3 rpia iiri<priiji^v(ri.v ijiuy fy/cX<- how little dependence can be placed on 
 
 IMTa, ieeirrrra, 6v4(TTa.a ia-irva, Oldi- this line of argument. Dean Milmau 
 
 ToSetovt /itfeis, i6. 31, Theoph. ad Aut. {History of Christianity, iii. p. 351) 
 
 iii. 4, 15, Tertull. ad Nat. L 7. writes: 'M. Beugnot has pointed out 
 
 ' See the suggestion of Dean Milman, one remarkable characteristic of Clau- 
 
 History of Christianity II. -p. 4S6US63). dian's poetry and of the times — ^hisex- 
 
 So also Pressens^ Troit Premiers traordinary religious iudifEerenoe. Here 
 
 SHclet n. p. 97. is 4 p9§t^ WRtiflf ft* tlis actual crisis o( 
 
28 ST PAUL IN ROMR 
 
 the narratives of Pliny and Tacitas that at this time they 
 were at least as important and influential as the Jews. But 
 in fact they oflfered very poor material for caricature. So far 
 as they presented any salient features which the satirist might 
 turn to ridicule, these were found in the Jews to a still greater 
 degree. Where they differed, their distinctive characteristics 
 would seem entirely negative to the superficial glance of the 
 heathen. Even Lucian, who satirizes all things in heaven and 
 earth, living at a time when Christians abounded everywhere, 
 can say nothing worse of them than that they are good-natured 
 charitable people, not overwise and easily duped by charlatans'. 
 Eetioenoe But how did this vast religious movement escape the 
 loaopherg" i^otice of philosophical writers, who, if they were blind to its 
 spiritual import, must at least have recognised in it a striking 
 moral phenomenon ? If the Christians were so important, it is 
 urged, how are they not mentioned by Seneca, ' though Seneca 
 is full of the tenets of the philosophers"? To this particular 
 question it is perhaps sufficient to reply, that most of Seneca's 
 works were written before the Christians on any showing had 
 attracted public notice. But the enquiry may be pushed further, 
 and a general answer will be suggested. How, we may well 
 ask, are they not mentioned by Plutarch, though Plutarch dis- 
 cusses almost every possible question of philosophical or social 
 interest, and flourished moreover at the very time, when by 
 their large and increasing numbers, by their unflinching courage 
 and steady principle, they had become so formidable, that 
 the proprietor of Bithynia in utter perplexity applies to his 
 imperial master for instructions how to deal with a sect thus 
 passive and yet thus revolutionary? How is it again, that 
 Marcus Aurelius, the philosophical emperor, dismisses them in 
 his writings with one brief scornful allusion", though he had 
 
 the oomplete trituuph of the new reli- works of Clandian.' 
 
 gion and the yisible extinotion of the ' Laoian De Mart. Peregr. % it sq. 
 
 old: if we may 8o speak, a striotly his- " Merivale, l.o. 
 
 torioal poet. ..Yet. ..no one wonld know ' M. Anton, ri. 3 pj) kot4 ^tXiJn 
 
 the existence of Ohristianity at that irapdra^iv (from mere ohstinaoy), it ol 
 
 period of the world by re»4i»g the Xptrnarol, iXKi, M^oyurnirm xoi n. 
 
8T PAUL IN ROME. 29 
 
 been flooded with apologies and memorials on their behalf, and 
 
 though they served in large numbers in the very army which 
 
 he commanded in person'? The silence of these later philoso- assumed 
 
 phers at least cannot be ascribed to ignorance ; and some other dential 
 
 explanation must be sought. May we not fairly conclude "''8°"'' 
 
 that, like others under similar circumstances, they considered 
 
 a contemptuous reticence the safest, if not the keenest, weapon 
 
 to employ against a religious movement, which was working 
 
 its way upwards from the lower grades of society, and which 
 
 they viewed with alarm and misgiving not unmingled with 
 
 secret respect" ? 
 
 /(PUS Kal, u<rre xal a\\or ireiirai, drpa- memorare aasns est, ne Tel laudaret 
 
 yi^us, contra suie patrisa yeterem oonsuetudi- 
 
 1 Thus mnob at least may be in- nem vel repreheuderet contra propriam 
 
 ferred from the story of the thunder- forsitan voluntatem.' Seneca indeed 
 
 ing legion : see espeoiaUy Mosheim De could hardly be expected to mention 
 
 Rebut Chrittian. sma. 1. § zvii, and the Christians, for most of his works 
 
 Lardner Tettinumiei, etc. xv. § 3. were perhaps written before the new 
 
 ' St Augustine de Civ. Dei vi. 1 1 sect had attracted the attention of his 
 
 says of Seneca, after mentioning this fellow-countrymen. But some such 
 
 philosopher's account of the Jews, motive as Augustine here suggests 
 
 ■ Ghristianos tamen, jam tunc Judteis must have sealed the lips of the later 
 
 inimicissimos, in neutram partem com- philosophers. 
 
11. 
 
 ORDER OF THE EPISTLES OF THE CAPTIVITY. 
 
 Four epi- 
 stles writ- 
 ten from 
 Kome. 
 
 ST PAUL remained in captivity between four and five years 
 (a.d. 58 — 63) ; the first half of this period being spent at 
 Caesarea, the second at Rome. While thus a prisoner he ■wrote 
 four epistles, to the Philippians, to the Colossians, to the Ephe- 
 sians, to Philemon. Though a few critics have assigned one or 
 more of these epistles to his confinement at Caesarea', there are 
 serious objections to this view'; and the vast majority of writers 
 
 > The tliree epistles are assigned to 
 the Cffisarean captivity by Bottger 
 [Beitr. 11. p. 47 sqq.), THersoli (Kirche 
 im apost. Zeit. p. 176), Beuss (Gesch. 
 der heil. Schriften §114), Meyer {Ephes. 
 Einl. § 2) and others : the Epistle to 
 tne Philippians by Paulus (Progr. Jen. 
 1799, and Heidelb. Jahrb. 1825. H. 5, 
 referred to by Bleek), Bottger (1. 0.), and 
 Thiersch {ib. p. 212), while Eilliet {in- 
 trod. § II and note on i. 13) speaks 
 doubtfully. The oldest tradition or con- 
 jecture dated all four epistles from 
 Borne : and this is the opinion of most 
 modem writers. Oeder alone {Progr. 
 Onold. 1731 : see Wolf Cur. Phil. iii. 
 p. 168) dates the Philippians from Co- 
 rinth during St Paul's fii'st visit. 
 
 ' Reasons for dating the three epi- 
 stles from Offisarea are given fully in 
 Meyer (Ephes. Eifil. § a). I cannot at- 
 tach any weight to them. For the Epi- 
 stle to the Philippians there is at least 
 Ibis prima facie case, that the mention 
 
 of the prsstorimn in Phil. i. 13 would 
 then be explained by the statement in 
 Acts xxiii. 35, that St Paul was con- 
 fined in ' the prsetorium of Herod.' But 
 the expression 'throughout the prasto- 
 rium' (^v oX^ TV TrpaiT(ijpi(t)), while it 
 implies a wider space than the palace 
 or official residence of Herod, is easily 
 explained by the circumstances of St 
 Paul's connexion with the imperial 
 guards at Bome : see above, p. 9. On 
 the other hand there aie many serious 
 objections to Caesarea as the place oi 
 writing, (i) The notice of Caesar's 
 household (Phil.iv. 22) cannot without 
 much straining of language and facts 
 be made to apply to Caesarea. (j) St 
 Paul's account of his progress (i. 11 
 sq. ) loses all its force on this supposi- 
 tion. He is obviously speaking of some 
 place of great consequence, where the 
 Gospel had received a new and remark- 
 able development. Caasarea does not 
 satisfy these conditions. It was after 
 
ORDER OF THE EPISTLES OF THE CAPTIVITY. 
 
 31 
 
 agree in placing all four at a later date, after the Apostle had 
 been removed thence to Rome. 
 
 Assuming then that they were all written from Rome, we The Phi- 
 have next to investigate their relative dates. And here again te^'stMids' 
 the question simplifies itself. It seems very clear, and is gene- pf^ii^ee 
 rally allowed, that the three epistles last mentioned were written are hnked 
 and despatched at or about the same time, whUe the letter 
 to the Philippians stands alone. Of the three thus connected 
 the Epistle to the Colossians is the link between the other two. 
 On the one hand its connexion with the Epistle to the Ephe- 
 sians is established by a remarkable resemblance of style and 
 matter, and by the fact of its being entrusted to the same 
 messenger Tychicus\ On the other, it is shown to synchronize 
 with the letter to Philemon by more than one coincidence: 
 Onesimus accompanies both epistles'; in both salutations are 
 sent to Archippus' ; in both the same persons are mentioned as 
 St Paul's companions at the time of writing*. 
 
 all not a yery important place. It had 
 been evangelized by the Apostles of the 
 Circumcision. The first heathen con- 
 vert CorneliuB lived there. As a chief 
 seaport town of Palestine, the great 
 preachers of the Gospel were constantly 
 passing to and fro through it. Alto- 
 gether we may suppose it to have re- 
 ceived more attention in proportion to 
 its size than any other place ; and the 
 language of St Paul seems wholly iu- 
 appUcable to a town with this antece- 
 dent history. (3) When this epistle is 
 written, he is looking forward to his 
 speedy release and purposes a visit to 
 Macedonia (i. 16, iL 14 : compare Phi- 
 lem. 12). Now there is no reason to 
 suppose that he expected this at Ges- 
 sarea. For what were the circumstances 
 of the case? He had gone up to Jerusa- 
 lem, intending immediately afterwards 
 to visit Borne. While at Jerusalem he 
 is apprehended on a frivolous charge 
 and imprisoned. When at length he 
 is brought to trial, he boldly appeals to 
 
 GsBsar. May we not infer that this 
 had been his settled determination from 
 the first? that he considered it more 
 prudent to act thus than to stake his 
 safety on the capricious justice of the 
 provincial governor? that at all events 
 he hoped thereby to secure the fulfil- 
 ment of his long-cherished design of 
 preaching the Gospel in the metropolis? 
 
 These considerations seem sufficient 
 to turn the scale in favour of Bome, as 
 against Csesarea, in the case of the Epi- 
 stle to the Philippians. As regards the 
 other three, I shall endeavour to give 
 reasons for placing them later than the 
 Philippian letter : and if so, they also 
 must date from Bome. At all events 
 there is no sufficient ground for aban- 
 doning the common view. 
 
 1 Col. iv. 7, Bphes. vi 11. 
 
 ' CoL iv. 9, Philem. 10 — 11. 
 
 " CoL iv. 17, Philem. 1. Hence it 
 may be inferred that they went to the 
 same place. 
 
 * Philem. i, 23, 14, OoL i i, iv. 
 
32 
 
 Waeit 
 written 
 before or 
 after the 
 others ? 
 
 Argu- 
 ments for 
 its later 
 date stated 
 and ex- 
 amined. 
 
 I. Progress 
 of the 
 Boman 
 Ohorch. 
 
 ORDER OP THE EPISTLES OF THE CAPTIVITY. 
 
 The question then, which I propose to discuss in the follow- 
 ing pages, is this: whether the Epistle to the Philippians should 
 be placed early in the Roman captivity and the three epistles 
 later; or whether conversely the three epistles were written first, 
 and the Philippian letter afterwards. The latter is the prevail- 
 ing view among the vast majority of recent writers, German 
 and English, with one or two important exceptions'. I shall 
 attempt to show that the arguments generally alleged in its 
 favour will not support the conclusions : while on the other 
 hand there are reasons for placing the Philippians early and 
 the three epistles late, which in the absence of any decisive 
 evidence on the other side must be regarded as weighty. 
 
 The arguments in favour of the later date of the Philippian 
 letter, as compared with the other three, are drawn from four 
 considerations : (i) From the progress of Christianity in Borne, 
 as exhibited in this epistle; (2) From a comparison of the 
 names of St Paul's associates mentioned in the different epistles; 
 (3) From the length of time required for the communications 
 between Philippi and Rome; (4) From the circumstances of 
 St Paul's imprisonment. These arguments will be considered 
 in order. 
 
 I. It is evident that the Christians in Rome form a large 
 and important body when the Epistle to the Philippians is 
 written. The Gospel has effected a lodgment even in the im- 
 perial palace. The bonds of the Apostle have become known 
 not only ' throughout the prajtorium' but ' to all the rest.' 
 There is a marvellous activity among the disciples of the new 
 
 7 — 14. The names common to both 
 are Timotheus, Epaphras, Marcus, 
 Aristarchus, Demas, Luke. Tychicus 
 and Jesus the Just are mentioned in 
 the Epistle to the Colossians alone. 
 
 ' In Germany, Do Wette, Schrader, 
 Hemsen, Anger, Credner, Neander, 
 Wieselor, Meyer, Wiesinger ; in Eng- 
 land, Davidson, Alford, Conybeare and 
 Hon son, Wordsworth, Ellioott, Eadie. 
 The ozceptions are Bleek (Einl. in dai 
 
 Neue Test. pp. 430, 460) who considers 
 the data insufficient to decide but 
 treats the Philippians first in order; 
 andEwald(Se7td«cAret6«7ie£c.pp.43i sq., 
 547), who however rejects the Epistle 
 to the Ephesians, and supposes the re- 
 maining three to have been written 
 about the same time. The older Eng- 
 lish critics for the moat part (e. g. Ussher 
 and Pearson) placed the Philippians 
 first, without assigning reasons. 
 
ORDER OP THE EPISTLES OF THE CAPTIVITY. 33 
 
 faith : * In every way Christ is preached.' All this it is argued 
 requires a very considerable lapse of time. 
 
 This argument has to a great extent been met already'. It its condl- 
 is highly probable, as I have endeavoured to show, that St Paul g" p^^?/* 
 found a flourishing though unorganized Church, when he"°°"°8- 
 arrived in Rome. The state of things exhibited in the Epistle 
 to the Romans, the probable growth of Christianity in the in- 
 terval, the fact of his finding a body of worshippers even at 
 Puteoli, combine to support this inference. It has been sug- 
 gested also (and reasons will be given hereafter for this sug- 
 gestion) that the 'members of Caesar's household' were, at least 
 in some cases, not St Paul's converts after his arrival but older 
 disciples already confessing Christ. And again, if when he 
 wrote he could already count many followers among the prae- 
 torian soldiers, it is here especially that we might expect to see 
 the earliest and most striking results of his preaching, for with 
 these soldiers he was forced to hold close and uninterrupted in- 
 tercourse day and night from the very first. 
 
 Nor must the expression that his ' bonds had become His Ian- 
 known to all the rest' of the Roman people be rigorously ^^* "° 
 pressed. It is contrary to all sound rules of interpretation to prewed. 
 look for statistical precision in words uttered in the fulness 
 of gratitude and hope. The force of the expression must be 
 measured by the Apostle's language elsewhere. In writing to 
 the Thessalonians for instance, only a few months after they 
 have heard the first tidings of the Gospel, he expresses his joy 
 that ' from them has sounded forth the word of the Lord, not 
 only in Macedonia and Achaia, but in every place their faith to 
 God ward is spread abroad I' 
 
 Indeed this very passage in the Philippian letter, which The notice 
 has been taken to favour a later date because it announces ^n oppo- 
 the progress of the Gospel in Rome, appears much more ^°"* "''*''■ 
 natural, if written soon after his arrival. The condition of 
 things which it describes is novel and exceptional It is evi- 
 dently the first awakening of dormant influences for good or 
 
 1 See above, p. 25 sq. " i Tliess. i. 8. 
 
 PHIL. 3 
 
 ence. 
 
34 ORDER OP THE EPISTLES OF THE CAPTIVITY. 
 
 evil, the stirring up of latent emotions of love, emulation, strife, 
 godless jealousy and godly zeal, by the presence of the great 
 Apostle among the Christians of Rome. This is hardly the 
 language he would have used after he had spent two whole 
 years in the metropolis, when the antagonism of enemies and 
 the devotion of friends had settled down into a routine of 
 hatred or of affection. Nor is the form of the announcement 
 such as might be expected in a letter addressed so long after 
 his arrival to correspondents with whom he had been in con- 
 stant communication meanwhile. 
 i.StPaul'fl 2. The argument drawn from the names of St Paul's asso- 
 associates. ^jg^^gg jg ^^ follows. We learn from the Acts that the Apostle 
 was accompanied on his voyage to Rome by Luke and Arist- 
 archus'. Now their names occur in the salutations of the 
 Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon", but not in the 
 Epistle to the Philippians. It seems probable therefore that 
 the letter last mentioned was written later, his two companions 
 having meanwhile separated from the Apostle. 
 General -^ argument from silence is always of questionable force. 
 
 tCMgu" ^^ °^^^^ *° ^® ^^^^^' ^* °^S^^ *° ^PPly t° ^^^ t^ese epistles alike. 
 
 ment. Yet in the Epistle to the Ephesians no mention is made of 
 Aristarchus and Luke, and what is more remarkable, none of 
 Timothy, though it was written at the same time with the 
 letters to Colossse and to Philemon. The omission in any par- 
 ticular case may be due to special reasons '. 
 
 Nor is it difficult to account for this silence. In the Epistle 
 to the Philippians St Paul throws his salutation into a general 
 form; 'The brethren that are with me greet you.' In this ex- 
 pression it is plain that he refers to his own personal com- 
 panions : for he adds immediately afterwards, 'All the brethren,' 
 
 ' Aotsxxvii. i. in the letter to PhUemon. Of this 
 
 ' OoL iv. lo, 14, Philem. 24. omission no aooount can be given. 
 
 » The doubtful force of such argu- There is the highest a priori probabi- 
 
 mentB from sUenoe is illustrated by an- lity that he would be mentioned either 
 
 other case occurring in these epistles, in both letters or in neither, for they 
 
 Jesus Justus is mentioned in the Epi- both were sent to the same place and 
 
 sUe to the Colossians (iv. 1 1), but not by the same messenger. 
 
ORDER OF THE EPISTLES OP THE CAPTIVITY. 
 
 35 
 
 including the resident members of the Eoman Church, 'but 
 especially they of the household of Caesar greet you'.' If 
 Aristarchus and Luke were with him, they might well be com- 
 prehended in this general salutation. Of Aristarchus the most Ariatar- 
 probable account, I think, is, that he parted from St Paul at ''^^' 
 Myra, and therefore did not arrive in Rome with the Apostle 
 but rejoined him there subsequently*. If this be the case, the 
 absence of his name in the Philippian Epistle, so far as it de- 
 serves to be considered at all, makes rather for than against the 
 earlier date. On the other hand St Luke certainly accom- st Liika 
 panied the Apostle to Rome : and his probable connexion with 
 
 • Phil. iy. 21, 22. 
 
 > St Luke's account ia this : 'Em- 
 baildng on an Adramyttian vessel, 
 intending to sail to (or along) the 
 coasts of Asia {/UWonrts x\eip roit 
 Kwrd rriv 'Aaiav tottous) we put out to 
 sea, AiistarchuB a Macedonian of Thes- 
 salonica being with us (Acts xxvii. 2).' 
 When they arrived at Myra, the centu- 
 rion ' found an Alexandrian vessel sail- 
 ing to Italy and put them (ij^as) on 
 board.' Now it is generally (I believe, 
 universally) assumed that Aristarchus 
 accompanied St Paul and St Luke to 
 Borne. Bat what are the probabilities 
 of the case 7 The vessel in which they 
 start belongs to Adramyttium a sea- 
 port of Mysia. If they had remained 
 in this ship, as seems to have been their 
 original intention, they would have 
 hugged the coast of Asia, and at length 
 (perhaps taking another vessel at Adra- 
 myttium) have reached Macedonia : and 
 if they landed, aa they probably would, 
 at Neapolis, they would have taken 
 the great Egnatian road through Phl- 
 lippi. Along thia road they would have 
 travelled to Dyrrhachium and thence 
 have crossed the straits to Italy, Thus 
 a long voyage in the open seaa would 
 have been avoided: a voyage peculiarly 
 dangerous at this late season of the 
 year, as the result proved. Such also, 
 at least from Smyrna onwards, was 
 
 the route of Ignatius, who likewise 
 was taken a prisoner to Bome and 
 appears also to have made this 
 journey late in the year. It was the 
 accident of falling in at Myra with au 
 Alexandrian ship sailing straight for 
 Italy which induced the centurion to 
 abandon his original design, for the 
 sake, as would appear, of greater ex- 
 pedition. But the historian adds when 
 mentioning this design, ■ one Aristar- 
 chus a Macedonian of Thessalonica 
 being with us.' Does he not, by in- 
 serting this notice in this particular 
 place, intend his readers to understand 
 (or at leaat understand himself) that 
 Aristarchus accompanied them on the 
 former part of their route, because he 
 was on Mb way home } If ao, when 
 their plans were changed at Myra, he 
 would part from them, continuing in 
 the Adramyttian vessel, and so reach 
 his destination. 
 
 I have hitherto given the received 
 text, fifKKoiTfs T\etv,' as we were to sail. ' 
 The greater number of the best authori- 
 ties however read nfWovri irXetv ' as it 
 (the vessel) was to sail.' If the latter be 
 adopted, the passage is silent about the 
 purpose of the centurion and his pri- 
 soners, but the probable destination of 
 Aristarchus remains unaffected by the 
 change. The copies which read /<^X- 
 "Kom for the most part also insert 
 
 3—2 
 
36 ORDER OP THE EPISTLES OP THE CAPTIVITY. 
 
 Philippi' suggests at least a presumption that he would be 
 mentioned by name, if he were still with St Paul. Again, when 
 in another passage ' the Apostle declaring his intention of sending 
 Timotheus to Philippi adds that he has ' no one like-minded 
 who will naturally care for them, for all pursue their own' 
 pleasures and interests, we cannot suppose that 'Luke the 
 beloved physician ' is included in this condemnation. It may 
 reasonably be conjectured however that St Luke had left Italy 
 to return thither at a later period, or that he was absent from 
 Rome on some temporary mission, or at least that he was too 
 busily occupied to undertake this journey to PhUippi. Even if 
 we assume Home to have been the head-quarters of the evan- 
 gelist during the whole of St Paul's stay, there must have been 
 many churches in the neighbourhood and in more distant 
 parts of Italy which needed constant supervision; and after 
 Timotheus there was probably no one among the Apostle's 
 companions to whom he could entrust any important mission 
 with equal confidence. 
 3. Jour- 3. Again it is urged that the numerous communications 
 
 ^^g|^ pjji. between Philippi and Rome implied by the notices in this 
 Uppi and epistle in themselves demand a very considerable lapse of time 
 
 after the Apostle's arrival. 
 Four at The narrative however requires at most two journeys from 
 
 required* ^^^ to Philippi and two from Philippi to Rome; as fol- 
 lows. 
 
 (i) From Rome to Philippi. A messenger bears tidings to 
 the Philippians of St Paul's arrival in Rome. 
 
 (2) From Philippi to Rome. The Philippians send contri- 
 
 butions to St Paul by the hand of Epaphroditus'. 
 
 (3) From Rome to Philippi. A messenger arrives at the 
 
 latter place with tidings of Epaphroditus' illness. 
 
 ek before rois xard riiv 'A.alav k.t.X. would be a temptation to alter iiiK- 
 
 It seems probable therefore that there Xovres in order to adapt it to subse- 
 
 has been a confusion between /lA- qnent facts. 
 
 "KaiTfs and iiiKKovri ek. The best ' See below, pp. 53, 59. 
 
 authorities are certainly in favour of ' Phil. ii. 19 — ^i. 
 
 the latter. On the other hand there ' Phil, ii, 15, iy. 18. 
 
ORDER OP THE EPISTLES OP THE CAPTIVITY. 37 
 
 (4) From Philippi to Eome. Epaphroditus is informed 
 that the news of his illness has reached the Philip- 
 pians\ 
 
 The return of Epaphroditus to Philippi cannot be reckoned 
 as a separate journey, for it seems clear that he was the bearer 
 of St Paul's letter'. 
 
 I say four journeys at most ; for the number may well be and tliia 
 halved without doing any violence to probability. As it has may be 
 been already stated', St Luke's narrative seems to imply that '^^<l"<=''^' 
 Aristarchus pai-ted from the Apostle at Myra, coasted along 
 Asia Minor, and so returned to his native town Thessalonica 
 by the Egnatian road. On his way he would pass through 
 Philippi, and from him the Philippians would learn that the 
 Apostle had been removed from Caesarea to Eome. Thus taking 
 into account the delay of several months occasioned by the ship- 
 wreck and the sojourn in Malta, Epaphroditus might well arrive 
 in Rome with the contributions from Philippi about the same 
 time with the Apostle himself; and this without any inconve- 
 nient hurry. On this supposition two of the four journeys 
 assumed to have taken place after St Paul's arrival may be dis- 
 pensed with. Nor again does the expression ' he was grieved 
 because ye heard that he was sick' necessarily imply that Epa- 
 phroditus had received definite information that the tidings of 
 his illness had reached Philippi. He says nothing about the 
 manner in which the Philippians had received the news. The 
 Apostle's language seems to require nothing more than that 
 a messenger had been despatched to Philippi with the tidings in 
 question. This however is a matter of very little moment. On 
 any showing some months must have elapsed after St Paul's 
 arrival, before the letter to the Philippians was written. And 
 this interval allows ample time for all the incidents, consider- 
 
 ' Phil. ii. 26 iirnndwv ijv iravras Philem. 11, 12, where aV^re^^a is said 
 
 ifiSs [ISeiv] Koi dSri/ioi/uii Si6ti TiKoitraTt of Onesimus the bearer of the letter, 
 
 irt riaBiniaiv. See the note on Gal. vi. 11. 
 
 " Phil. ii. ?.$, 28, 29. The frcfi^fia of • See above, p. 35, note 2. 
 ver. 28 is an epistolary aorist: comp. 
 
38 
 
 ORDER OF THE EPISTLES OF THE CAPTIVITY. 
 
 Contrast 
 with the 
 Acts, 
 
 ing that the communication between Rome and Philippi was 
 constant and rapid'. 
 4.StPanl'B 4. Lastly, it is urged that the general tone of the Epistle 
 oonSon *o *^® Philippians accords better with a later stage of the Apo- 
 stle's captivity. The degree of restraint now imposed upon the 
 prisoner appears to be inconsistent with the liberty implied in 
 the narrative of the Acts: the spirit of anxiety and sadness 
 which pervades the letter is thought to accord ill with a period 
 of successful labour. For these reasons the epistle is supposed 
 to have been written after those two years of unimpeded pro- 
 gress with which St Luke's record closes, the Apostle having 
 been removed meanwhile from his own hired house to the 
 precincts of the prsetorium, and placed in more rigorous con- 
 4nement. 
 and with And the view thus suggested by the contrast which this 
 
 1 A month would probably be a fair 
 allowance of time for the journey be- 
 tween Borne and Fhilippi. The distance 
 from Borne to Brundisium was 360 
 miles according to Strabo (vi. p. 283) or 
 358 according to the Autonine Itine 
 rary (pp. 49, 51, 54, Parth. et Pind.) 
 The distance from Dyrrhachium to Phi 
 lippi was the same within a few miles 
 the journey from Dyrrhachium to Thes 
 salonica being about 270 miles (167, 
 Polybius in Strabo vii. p. 323 ; 269, Itin. 
 Anton, p. 151 ; ani2';g,Tab. Peuting.), 
 and from Thessalonica to Philippi 100 
 miles {Itin. Anton, pp. 152, 157). The 
 present text of Pliny understates it at 
 325 miles, H. N. iv. 18. Ovid expects 
 his books to reach Bome from Brundi- 
 sium before the tenth day without hur- 
 rying (Ep. Pont . iv. 5. 8 ' ut festinatum 
 non faciatis iter') ; while Horace mov- 
 ing very leisurely completes the dis- 
 tance in 16 days {Sat. i. 5). The voyage 
 between Dyrrhachium and Brundisium 
 ordinarily took a day : Cio. ad Att. iv. 
 I ; oomp. Appian l p. 269 (ed. Bekker). 
 The laud transit on the Greek oontiuent 
 would probably not occupy much more 
 
 time than on the Italian, the distances 
 being the same. This calculation agrees 
 with the notices in Cicero's letters. 
 Cicero (if the dates can be trusted) 
 leaves Brundisium on April 30th and 
 arrives at Thessalonica on May 23rd 
 {ad Att. iii 8) ; but he travels leisurely 
 and appears to have been delayed on 
 the way. Again Atticus purposes start- 
 ing from Borne on June ist, and Cicero 
 writing from Thessalonica on the 13th 
 expects to see him 'propediem' (iii. 9). 
 Again Cicero writing from Thessalonica 
 on June i8th says that Atticus' letter 
 has informed him of all that has hap- 
 pened at Bome up to May 25th (iiL 
 10). Lastly Cicero at Dyrrhachium re- 
 ceives on Nov. 17th a letter from Bome 
 dated Nov. nth (iii. 23). The sea route 
 was more uncertain : but under favour- 
 able circumstances would be quicker 
 than the journey by land, whether the 
 course was by the gulf of Corinth or 
 round the promontory of Malea. On 
 the rate of sailing among the ancients 
 see Friedliinder Sittengetchichte Ronu 
 II. p. 12, to whom I owe some of the 
 above referenoes. 
 
ORDER OF THE EPISTLES OF THE CAPTIVITY. 39 
 
 epistle offers to St Luke's narrative is further supported by a the other 
 comparison with the other letters written during his captivity. *^'^ *°' 
 As distinguished from the remaining three, the Epistle to the 
 Fhilippians is thought to wear a gloomier aspect and to indicate 
 severer restraints and less hopeful prospects'. 
 
 At this point the aid of contemporary history is invoked, aooonnted 
 Have we not a sufficient account, it is asked, of the increased toLpora«r 
 rigour of the Apostle's confinement in the appointment of the history. 
 monster Tigellinus to succeed Burrus as commander of the 
 imperial gfuards 1 Must not the well-known Jewish sympathies 
 of Poppaea, now all-powerful as the emperor's consort, have 
 darkened his prospects at the approaching trial ? 
 
 The argument drawn from St Luke's narrative has been ContraBt 
 partially and incidently met already '. It seems highly proba- ^^^ *^* 
 ble that the pratorium does not denote any locality, whether plaiiied- 
 the barracks on the Palatine or the camp without the city. 
 Even if a local meaning be adopted, still it is neither stated nor 
 implied that St Paul dwelt within the praetorium. If he did 
 dwell there, he might nevertheless have occupied ' hired lodg- 
 ings.' In the history, as in the letter, he is a prisoner in 
 bonds. His external condition, as represented in the two 
 writings, in no way differs. In tone, it is true, there is a strong 
 contrast between St Luke's account and the language of St 
 Paul himself: but this could hardly be otherwise. St Luke, 
 as the historian of the Church, views events in the retrospect 
 and deals chiefly with results, presenting the bright side of the 
 picture, the triumph of the Church. St Paul, as the individual 
 sufferer, writing at the moment and reflecting the agony of 
 the struggle, paints the scene in darker colours, dwelling on his 
 own sorrows. The Apostle's sufferings were in a great degree 
 mental — the vexation of soul stirred up by unscrupulous op- 
 position — the agony of suspense under his impending trial — 
 his solicitude for the churches under his care — his sense of 
 
 ' So Alford {Prol. § iii. 5). Bnt alacriorque et blandior caeteria.' 
 Bengel, 'summa epistoIcB, gaudeo, 'Above, p. 9, and on 'prffitorium' 
 
 gaudere'; and Qrotius, 'Epistolalsetior in i. 13. 
 
40 ORDER OP THE EPISTLES OP THE CAPTIVITY. 
 
 responsibility — his yearning desire to depart and be with Christ. 
 It was impossible that the historian should reproduce this state 
 of feeling : he has not done so in other cases'. 
 Contrast And again : comparing the language of the PhUippian letter 
 
 other*eni- ^^^^^ *^® other epistles, it is difficult to see anything more than 
 Btles con- those Oscillations of feeling which must be experienced daily 
 under trying circumstances of responsibility or danger. All 
 these epistles alike reveal alternations of joy and sadness, 
 moments of depression and moments of exaltation, successive 
 waves of hope and fear. If the tone of one epistle is less cheer- 
 ful than another, this is a very insecure foundation on which 
 to build the hypothesis of an entire change in the prisoner's 
 condition. 
 Theargu- Moreover arguments are sometimes alleged for the later 
 traUsed^bv *^^*'® ^^ *^® Philippian letter, which, though advanced for the 
 other pas- same purpose, in reality neutralise those already considered. 
 It is no longer to the prevailing gloom, but to the hopefulness 
 of the Philippian letter, that the appeal is made. The Apostle 
 is looking forward to his approaching trial and deliverance. He 
 knows confidently that he shall abide and continue with the 
 Philippians for their furtherance and joy of the faith: 'their 
 rejoicing will abound by his coming to see them again' ' ; he 
 'trusts in the Lord that he shall visit them shortly'.' Such 
 passages are, I think, a complete answer to those who represent 
 the sadness of this epistle as in strong contrast to the brighter 
 tone of the other three. Yet considered in themselves they 
 might seem to imply the near approach of his trial, and so 
 to favour the comparatively late date of the epistle. But here 
 again we must pause. These expressions, even if as strong, are 
 not stronger than the language addressed to Philemon, when the 
 Apostle bids his friend 'prepare him a lodging,' hoping that 
 ' through their prayers he shall be given to them*.' At many 
 times doubtless during his long imprisonment, he expected his 
 
 ' Compare for instance the agony of passioned account of the same period 
 
 feeling CKpressed in the opening chap- in St Luke, 
 
 ters of the Second Epistle to the " Phil. i. 15, ^6. 
 
 Corinthians with the calm and onim- ' PhU. ii. 34. « Philem. 22. 
 
ORDER OF THE EPISTLES OF THE CAPTIVITY, 4 1 
 
 trial to come on. His life at this time was a succession of broken 
 hopes and weary delays. 
 
 If this be so, we need not stop long to enquire how the Political 
 political changes already noticed might possibly have affected aia not 
 St Paul's condition. A prisoner so mean in the eyes of the p "f^ ^* 
 "Roman world, a despised provincial, a religious fanatic — like 
 Festus, they would see nothing more in him than this — was 
 beneath the notice of a Tigellinus, intent on more ambitious and 
 grander crimes. More plausible is tlie idea that PoppiEa, insti- 
 gated by the Jews, might have prejudiced the emperor against 
 an offender whom they hated with a bitter hatred. Doubtless 
 she might have done so. But, if she had interfered at all, why 
 should she have been satisfied with delaying his trial or increas- 
 ing his restraints, when she might have procured his condemna- 
 tion and death ? The hand reeking with the noblest blood of 
 Rome would hardly refuse at her bidding to strike down a poor 
 foreigner, who was almost unknown and would certainly be un- 
 avenged. From whatever cause, whether from ignorance or 
 caprice or indifference or disdain, her influence, we may safely 
 conclude, was not exerted to the injury of the Apostle. 
 
 Such are the grounds on which the Epistle to the Philip- tjjb later 
 plans has been assigned to a later date than the others written "^"f^uV''^ 
 from Rome. So far from establishing this conclusion they seem ed. 
 to afford at most a very slight presumption in its favour. On 
 the other hand certain considerations have been overlooked, 
 which in the absence of direct evidence on the opposite side are 
 entitled to a hearing. They are founded on a comparison of the Argument 
 style and matter of these epistles with the epistles of the pre- g°']igj 
 ceding and the following groups — with the letters of the third '^***' 
 Apostolic journey on the one side, and the Pastoral Epistles 
 on the other. The inference from such a comparison, if I mis- 
 take not, is twofold; we are led to place the Epistle to tJie 
 Philippians as early as possible, and the Epistles to the Colos- 
 sians and Ephesians as late as possible, consistently with other 
 known facts and probabilities. 
 
 I. The characteristic features of its group are less strongly ,. Eeasons 
 
42 ORDER OP THE EPISTLES OP THE CAPTIVITY. 
 
 for plaoing marked in the Epistle to the Philippians than in the others. 
 topSi' Altogether in style and tone, as well as in its prominent ideas, 
 earty. it bears a much greater resemblance to the earlier letters, than 
 Resem- do the Epistles to the Colossians and Ephesians*. Thus it 
 blanoe to forms the link which connects these two epistles with those of 
 group, the third apostolic journey. It represents an epoch of transition 
 in the religious controversies of the age, or to speak more cor- 
 rectly, a momentary lull, a short breathing space, when one an- 
 tagonistic error has been fought and overcome, and another is 
 dimly foreseen in the future. The Apostle's great battle hitherto 
 has been with Pharisaic Judaism; his great weapon the doctrine 
 of grace. In the Epistle to the Philippians we have the spent 
 wave of this controversy. In the third chapter the Apostle 
 dwells with something like his former fulness on the contrast 
 of faith and law, on the true and the false circumcision, on his 
 own personal experiences as illustrating his theme. Henceforth 
 when he touches on these topics, he will do so briefly and in- 
 cidentally. Even now in his apostolic teaching, as in his inner 
 life, he is ' forgetting those things which are behind and reach- 
 ing forth unto those things which are before.' A new tjrpe of 
 error is springing up — more speculative and less practical in its 
 origin — which in one form or other mainly occupies his attention 
 throughout the Epistles to the Colossians and Ephesians and 
 the Pastoral Epistles ; and which under the distinctive name of 
 Gnosticism in its manifold and monstrous developments will 
 disturb the peace of the Church for two centuries to come, 
 eapecially ^^^ °f ^^ *^® earlier letters it most nearly resembles the 
 to the Epistle to the Romans, to which according to the view here 
 maintained it stands next in chronological order. At least I do 
 
 ' This fact ia reflected in the opi- is instructive. The special oharaoter- 
 
 niona entertained respecting the genu- istios of the main group (i, a Corinth- 
 
 ineness of these epistles. While the ians, Galatians, Bomans) have been 
 
 authorship of the Epistle to the Phi- taken as the standard of the Apostle's 
 
 lippians has been questioned only by style, when they rather indicate a par- 
 
 the most extravagant criticism, more tioular phase in it. The Kpistle to 
 
 temperate writers have hesitated to the Philippians has been spared be- 
 
 acoept the Colossians and Ephesians. cause it reproduces these features more 
 
 This hesitation, though unwarranted, nearly than the other two. 
 
ORDER OF THE EPISTLES OP THE CAPTIVITY. 
 
 43 
 
 not think that so many and so close parallels can be produced 
 with any other epistle, as the following : 
 
 Philippians. 
 
 (i) L 3, 4, 7, 8. I thank my 
 God in every mention of you at 
 all times in every request of mine 
 ...as ye all are partakers vdth me 
 in grace (t^s x^P'tos) : for God is 
 my witness, how / long for you 
 aU in the bowels of Christ Jesus. 
 
 (2) L 10. That ye may ap- 
 prove the things that are excel- 
 lent. 
 
 (3) iL 8, 9, 10, II. He became 
 obedient unto death... wherefore 
 God also highly exalted Him... 
 that in the name of Jesus every 
 knee may bow of things in hea- 
 ven and things on earth smd 
 things under the earth, and every 
 tongue may confess that Jesus 
 Christ is Lord, <ko. 
 
 (4) iL 2 — 4. That ye may 
 have the same mind, having the 
 same love, united in soul, having 
 one mind : (Do) nothing in fac- 
 tiousness or vainglory, 
 
 but in humility holding one 
 another superior to yourselves. 
 
 (5) iii. 3. For we are the 
 circumcision, 
 
 who serve (XarpevovTcs) by the 
 Spirit of God (6fov v. 1. 6eif), 
 and boast in Christ Jesus... 
 
 4, 5. If any other thinketh xi. i 
 
 ROUAXS. 
 
 i. 8 — 1 1. First I thank my Parallel 
 God through Jesus Christ for you passages, 
 all., for God is my ivitness... how 
 incessantly I make mention of 
 you... at all times in my prayers 
 making request... for / long to see 
 you, that I may impart some spi- 
 ritual grace (\dpuriMi) to you. 
 
 ii. 18. Thou approvest the 
 things that are excellent. 
 
 xiv. 9, II. For hereunto Christ 
 died and lived (i.e. rose again), 
 that he may be Lord both of the 
 dead and of the living... For it 
 is written, I live, saith the Lord : 
 for in me every knee shall bow 
 and every tongue shall confess 
 unto God (Is. xlv. 23, 24). 
 
 xii. 16 — 19. Having the same 
 mind towards one another : not 
 minding high things... Be not 
 wise in your own conceits {<i>p6- 
 viixoi Trap' cavTois).. .having peace 
 with all men : not avenging your- 
 selves. 
 
 10. In honour holding one 
 another in preference. 
 
 iL 28. For the (circumcision) 
 manifest in the Qeah is not cir- 
 cumcision... but circumcision of 
 the heai-t. 
 
 i. 9. God whom I serve (Xa- 
 Tpeiia)) in my spirit'. 
 
 V. II. Boasting in God through 
 our Lord Jesus Chi-ist. 
 
 For I also am an Is- 
 
 ^ The idea of the spiritnal Xarpela 
 appears again Bom. xii. i, r^v XayixV 
 Xar/icJav i/iuF, where this moral service 
 of the Gospel is tacitly contrasted with 
 the ritnal service 0/ the law as the 
 
 living sacrifice to the dead victim. 
 Compare also James i. 17 BptiSKda xa- 
 0aph, xal iixlavTot k.t.\. See the notes 
 on Phil. iii. 3. 
 
44 
 
 ORDER OF THE EPISTLES OF THE CAPTIVITY. 
 
 Philippians. 
 
 Farallel to trust in the flesh, I more :... 
 
 paesages. of the race of Israel, the tribe of 
 Benjamin. 
 
 (6) iii. 9. Not having my 
 own righteousness which is of 
 law, but that which is through 
 faith of Christ, the righteousness 
 of God in faith... 
 
 10, II. Being made conform- 
 able (o-ti/x/xo/x^ifo'/nei'os) unto His 
 death, if by any means I may at>- 
 tain unto the resurrection from 
 the dead : 
 
 21. That it may become con- 
 formable (oT;/i/iop<^oi') to the body 
 of His glory. 
 
 (7) iii 19. Whose end is 
 destniction, 
 
 whose God is their belly. 
 
 (8) iv. 18. Having received 
 from Epaphroditus the (gifts) 
 from you, an odour of a sweet 
 savour, a sacrifice acceptable, 
 well-pleasing to God. 
 
 Romans. 
 
 raelite, of the seed of Abraham, 
 the tribe of Benjanun. 
 
 X. 3. Ignorant of the righte- 
 ousness of God, and seeking to 
 establish their own (righteous- 
 ness). 
 
 ix. 31, 32. Pursuing a law of 
 righteousness... not of faith, but 
 as of works. 
 
 vi. 5. For if we have been 
 planted (trv/ii^irroi yeyoi'O/ttv) in 
 the likeness of His death, then 
 shall we be also of His resurrec- 
 tion, viii. 29. He foreordained 
 them conformable (o7;/x/i,op0ovs) 
 to the image of His Son. 
 
 vL 21. For the end of those 
 things is death. 
 
 xvi. 18. They serve not our 
 Lord Christ but their own belly. 
 
 xii. I. To present your bodies 
 a living sacrifice, holy, well-pleas- 
 ing to God. 
 
 Some verbal coincidences besides might be pointed out, on 
 which however no stress can be laid'. 
 
 2. But if these resemblances suggest as early a date for 
 
 ' I have observed the following words 
 and expiessious common to these two 
 epistles and not occurring elsewhere 
 in the New Testament ; iwoKapaSoKia, 
 Bom. yiii. 1 9, FhiL i. 20 ; dxp' ''o*' """t 
 Horn. viii. 22, Phil. i. 5; ^J iptOelat, 
 Bom. ii. 8, Phil. i. 16; ainiiopipos, Bom. 
 Tui. 29, Phil. iii. 2 1 ; irpoaS^xeffSai iv 
 Evplfi, Bom. xvi. .1, Phil. ii. 29; besides 
 one or two which occur in the parallels 
 quoted in the text. Compare also Bom. 
 xiv. 14 oMa Kal vivnajioi, with Phil. 
 j. 2$ toOto itertotBiii otto. The follow- 
 ing are found in St Paul in these two 
 
 epistles only, though ooouxring else- 
 where in the New Testament ; iKipatos, 
 Bom. xvi. 19, Phil. ii. 15 (comp. Matt. 
 X. 16); iinirfretv. Bom. xi. 7, Phil. iv. 
 17 (common elsewhere); X«Tovp76s, 
 Bom. xiii. 6, xv. 16, Phil. ii. 25 (comp. 
 Heb. i. 7, viii. 2) ; oianipbi. Bom. xii. 
 II, Phil. iii. I (comp. Matt. xxy. 26); 
 iirepix^U', Bom. xiii. i, Phil. ii. 3, iii. 
 8, iv. 7 (comp. I Pet. ii. 13); i/iolaiia, 
 Bom. i. 23, V. 14, vi. 5, viii. 3, Phil, 
 ii. 7 (oomp. Bev. ix. 7); and perhaps 
 lieuoSvye, Bom. ix. 20, X. 18, Phil. iii. 
 8 (comp. Luke xL 28). 
 
ORDER OP THE EPISTLES OP THE CAPTIVITY. 45 
 
 the Epistle to the Philippians as circumstances will allow, there a. Eeasona 
 are yet more cogent reasons for placing the others as late as j^e other* 
 possible. The letters to the Colossians and Ephesians— the «?"''«• 
 latter more especially — exhibit an advanced stage in the de- 
 velopment of the Church. The heresies, which the Apostle 
 here combats, are no longer the crude, materialistic errors of 
 the early childhood of Christianity, but the more subtle specu- 
 lations of its maturer age. The doctrine which he prea<;hes is 
 not now the 'mUk for babes,' but the 'strong meat' for grown 
 men. He speaks to his converts no more 'as unto carnal' but 
 "as unto spiritual.' In the letter to the Ephesians especially 
 his teaching soars to the loftiest height, as he dwells on the 
 mystery of the Word and of the Church. Here too we find 
 the earliest reference to a Christian hymn*, showing that the 
 devotion of the Church was at length finding expression in set 
 forms of words. In both ways these epistles bridge over the 
 gulf which separates the Pastoral letters from the Apostle's 
 earlier writings. The heresies of the Pastoral letters are the 
 heresies of the Colossians and Ephesians grown rank and cor- 
 rupt. The solitary quotation already mentioned is the precursor 
 of the not infrequent references to Christian formularies in these 
 latest of the Apostle's writings. And in another respect also 
 the sequence is continuous, if this view of the relative dates be 
 accepted. The directions relating to ecclesiastical government, 
 which are scattered through the Pastoral Epistles, are the out- 
 ward correlative, the practical sequel to the sublime doctrine of 
 the Church first set forth in its fulness in the Epistle to the 
 Ephesians. A few writers have questioned the genuineness of 
 the letters to the Colossians and Ephesians, many more of the 
 Pastoral Epistles. They have done so chiefly on the ground 
 that these writings present a later stage of Christian thought 
 and organization, than the universally acknowledged letters of 
 St Paul. External authority, supported by internal evidence 
 of various kinds, bids us stop short of this conclusion. But, if 
 
 ' Ephes. T. 14, Sio \iyei Ea2 ivdiTTa ix rcSv mspSv 
 
 'Eyupe i KaffeiSiav Kal iiri4>ai<ra aoi 6 Xpurrdt. 
 
46 ORDER OF THE BPISTLB8 OP THE CAPTIVITY. 
 
 we refuse to accept the inference, we can hardly fail to re- 
 cognise the facts which suggested it. These facts are best met 
 by placing the Epistles to the Colossians and Ephesians late in 
 St Paul's first Eoman captivity, so as to separate them as 
 widely as possible from the earlier epistles, and by referring 
 the Pastoral letters to a still later date towards the close of 
 the Apostle's life. 
 
III. 
 
 THE CHURCH OF PHILIPPI. 
 
 PHILIPPI' was founded by the great Macedonian king, Natural 
 whose name it bears, on or near the site of the ancient "^J^^j 
 Crenides, 'Wells' or 'Fountains'.' Its natural advantages were Pl»ilippi- 
 considerable. In the neighbourhood were gold and silver mines 
 which had been worked in very early times by the Phcenicians 
 and afterwards by the Thasians'. The plain moreover on which 
 it was situated, washed by the Gangites a tributary of the 
 Strymon, was and is remarkable for its fertility*. 
 
 But the circumstance, to which even more than to its rich 
 soil and mineral treasures Philippi owed its importance, was its 
 
 ^ Ou the geography and antiquities 
 of Philippi, see Cousinfiry Voyage dans 
 la Macidoitie II p. i sq. (1831); Leake 
 Northern Qreece in p. 214 sq. (1835) ; 
 and more recently two short papers by 
 Perrotinthei2evue^rcA^o2o^i}tte(i86o) 
 II. p. 44 sq., p. 67 sq., entitled Daton, 
 NiopolU, les minet de Philippes. A 
 work of great importance was com- 
 menced under the auspices of the late 
 French Kmperor, Mission Archiologi- 
 que de Macidoine, by MM. Heuzey 
 and Uaumet; of which the part re- 
 lating to Philippi and the neighbour- 
 hood has appeared (1869). Besides 
 several unpublished inscriptions it 
 contains what appears to be a veiy 
 careful map of the site of the town 
 and district. 
 
 ' Diod. Sio. XTt. 3, 8; Strabo vii. 
 p. 331 ; Appian Bell. Civ. iy. p. 105 
 
 ol S^ $iXi7nr(u ToXis iarly ^ Adroi 
 limniiero irSKaiL aal Kpr/iilSet fri irpi 
 Adrov, KpTJvai yap etai ircpi T<f \i(p(fi 
 vaii&Tiiii' roWaL k.t.\. Appian how- 
 ever is wrong in identifying Crenides 
 and Philippi with Dates or Daton, 
 though his statement is copied by more 
 than one recent writer. The site of 
 this last-mentioned place was near to 
 Neapolis: see Leake p. 213 sq., Per- 
 rot p. 46, Miss. Archiol. p. 60 sq. 
 
 s On the mines of Philippi see 
 Boeckh's Public Economy of Athens 
 p. 8 (Engl, trans.). Miss. Archiol. p. 4, 
 
 p. 5S SI- 
 
 * Cousinfiry 11. p. 5, 'Les produits 
 serai ent immenses si I'activit^ et I'in- 
 dustrie des habitans r£pondaient a la 
 lib^ralitSde la nature'; see also Perrot 
 p. 49 ; comp. Athen. xv. p. 682 b, Ap- 
 pian iy. p. 105. 
 
48 THE OIIUROH OP PHILIPPL 
 
 Its geogra- geographical position, commanding the great high road between 
 portanoe." Europe and Asia. The ahnost continuous mountain barrier 
 between the East and West is here depressed so as to form 
 a gateway for this thoroughfare of the two continents'. It was 
 this advantage of position which led Philip to fortify the site of 
 the ancient Crenides. It was this which marked out the place 
 as the battle-field where the destinies of the Empire were 
 decided. It was this, lastly, which led the conqueror to plant 
 a Roman colony on the scene of his triumph. 
 
 Neither to its productive soil nor to its precious metals can 
 we trace any features which give a distinctive character to the 
 early history of the Gospel at Philippi. Its fertility it shared 
 Its mines with many other scenes of the Apostle's labours. Its mineral 
 ■ wealth appears at this time to have been almost, if not wholly, 
 drained. The mines had passed successively into the hands of 
 the three prerogative powers of civilised Europe, the Athenians, 
 the Macedonians, and the Romans. Even before Philip founded 
 his city, the works had been discontinued on account of the 
 scanty yield. By his order they were reopened, and a large 
 revenue was extracted from them''. But he seems to have 
 taxed their productive power to the utmost; for during the 
 Roman occupation we hear but little of them'. 
 
 ' Bmtns and Cassius pitched their xlvii. 35 2v/i/3oXoi' ri x'^P^o' i'Ofidtovn 
 
 camps somewhere in the neighbonrhood Ka$' ri 6pos (Ketpo (i.e. 1X0770101') 
 
 of the pass on two eminences which iripif tu>1 is /ieaoyeiav ivaTeli/oim cv/jl- 
 
 stand on either side of the road. Ap- pdWti, ral (<m iiera^i N^as iroXcus Kal 
 
 pian, iv. p. 106, describing their posi- iMrruv ij /liv yi.p jrpos BcAdavTi koI 
 
 tion says, ri 3^ lUtrov tuv X^^wf, t4 ivrnripas Qdaov 171', ij Si ivros rCiv iptSv 
 
 iKTw UTiiSia, 5(o5<is fin is riji) 'Aaltui re lirl rip irtSlif ireroXiffTot ; see Leake 
 
 Kal Eipiiiriii', KaSdrep wiXai: see Miss. p. 217. The distance from Neapolis to 
 
 ArcMol. p. 105 sq. The pass itself is Philippi is giyen by Appian (iy. 106) as 
 
 formed by a depression in the ridge of 70 stadia, by the Jena. Itin. (p. 311, 
 
 Symbolum, so called because it bridges Wess.) as 10 miles (not 9, as stated by 
 
 together the higher mountains on MM. Heuzey and Danmet), and by the 
 
 either side, Fangaaum to the west and ^Rtontn.7ttn.(p.6o3,'Wess.)as n miles, 
 
 the continuation of Hsemus to the east. A recent measurement makes it from 
 
 The ridge of Symbolum thus separates n to 13 kilometres (Mission Archeolo- 
 
 the plain of the Gangites from the sea- gique p. 19), te. about 9 Eoman miles, 
 
 board, and must be crossed in visiting • Diod. Sic. xyi. 8. 
 
 PhiUppi from Neapolis : Dion Oass. • On the working of the Macedonian 
 
THE CHURCH OP PHILIPPI. 49 
 
 On the other hand the position of Philippi as a thorough- Its mixed 
 fare for the traflSc of nations invests St Paul's preaching here tion. 
 with a peculiar interest. To this circumstance may be ascribed 
 tbe groat variety of types among the first Philippian converts, 
 which is one of the most striking and most instructive features 
 in this portion of the narrative. We are standing at the con- 
 fluence of the streams of European and Asiatic life: we see 
 reflected in the evangelization of Philippi, as in a mirror, the 
 history of the passage of Christianity from the East to the 
 West. 
 
 It was in the course of his second missionary journey, st Paul's 
 about the year 52, that St Paul first visited Philippi. His ^"* ^"'• 
 associates were Silas who had accompanied him from Jeru- 
 salem*, Timotheus whom they had taken up at Lystra', and 
 Luke who had recently joined tbe party at Troas'. At this 
 last-mentioned place tbe Apostle's eyes were at length opened 
 to tbe import of those mysterious checks and impulses which 
 bad brought him to a seaport lying opposite to the European 
 coast. ' A man of Macedonia' appeared in a night vision, and 
 revealed to him the work which tbe 'Spirit of Jesus*' had 
 designed for him. Forthwith he sets sail for Europe. His 
 zeal is seconded by wind and wave, and tbe voyage is made 
 with unwonted speed'. Landing at Neapolis he makes no 
 halt there, but presses forward to fulfil bis mission. A 
 mountain range still lies between him and his work. Fol- 
 lowing tbe great Egnatian road be surmounts this barrier, 
 and tbe plain of Philippi, tbe first city in Macedonia, lies 
 
 mines generajly under the Eomans, Bee ' Compare Acts xyi. 8 /tar^/Sijffac 
 
 Becker and Marquardt Eiin. Alterth. eZs TpifdSa, with xvi. lo lidias ^ft^rij- 
 
 ni. 2, p. 144. I have not found any ffa/iev i^eXBav ds T^rMaKeSoirla.v. 
 
 mention of those of Philippi after the * Acts xvi. 7 to ryev/w, 'IijiroS, the 
 
 Christian era. The passages in ancient correct reading. 
 
 writers referring to mining operations ° Acts xvi. 1 1 eiBvSponrjffanev els 
 
 are collected in J. and L. Sabatier Za/ioBpfK^", t j Si inomj) ek NeaTroW. 
 
 Production de I'Or etc. (St Petersburg, On a later occasion the voyage from 
 
 1850) p. 5 sq. Neapolis to Troas takeajive days, Acts 
 
 1 Acts XV. 40. XX. j. 
 
 • Acts xvi. I, 3. 
 
 FHIL. 4 
 
Two fea- 
 tures in 
 St Luke's 
 aoconnt. 
 
 50 THE CHUEOH OF PHILirPl. 
 
 at his feet'. Here he establishes himself and delivers his 
 message. 
 
 Before considering the circumstances and results of this 
 mission, it will be necessary to direct attention to two features 
 in the actual condition of Philippi which appear on the face 
 of St Luke's narrative and are not without their influence on 
 the progress of the Gospel — its political status and its resident 
 Jewish population. 
 I. Philippi I. Appreciating its strategical importance of which he had 
 eoloiy^^ had recent experience, Augustus founded at Philippi a Roman 
 military colony with the high-sounding name ' Colonia Augusta 
 
 * Thia is the prohable explanation 
 of the expression in Acts xvi. ii, i;tis 
 iffrlr wpiirTi t^s /tepfSos, MaKcSorfa: ir6- 
 Xis, Ko\iavla, ' for this is the first place 
 in the country (or district), a city of 
 Macedonia, a colony.' The clause ex- 
 plains why the Apostle did not halt at 
 Heapolis. Though the political fron- 
 tier might not be constant, the natural 
 boundary between Thrace and Mace- 
 donia was the mountain range already 
 described: see p. 48, note i. Thus, 
 while FhUippi is almost universally as- 
 signed to Macedonia, Neapolis is gene- 
 rally spoken of as a Thracian town, 
 e.g. in Soylax {Geog. Min. i. p. 54, ed. 
 Miiller): see Bettig Quatt. Philipp. 
 p. 10 sq. The reading of Acts xvi. 
 12, which I have given, seems the best 
 supported, as well as the most expres- 
 sive : the first rijs (before lieplSos) ought 
 probably to be retained, being omitted 
 only by B, besides some copies which 
 leave out /leptSos also; the second (be- 
 fore MaxcSoWas) to be rejected, as it 
 is wanting in a majority of the best 
 copies : but these variations do not af- 
 fect the general sense of the passage. 
 For the expression compare Polyb. ii. 
 16. i liixP^ iriXeu! lUajjs, 1} wpiirri 
 KtiTai T^t lupprirtas us rpit ris Sw/idt, 
 and V. 80. 3 ^ xeirot utri 'PicoiciXov/n, 
 irpiirri tuv kotA koCKiip ZuoIok viKeuv, 
 
 K.T.\., quoted by Eettig pp. 7, 8. For 
 nepU compare /ifpiSdpxVh Joseph. Ant. 
 
 xii. 5- S- 
 
 Thus irpwri) describes the geographi- 
 cal position of Philippi. All attempts to 
 explain the epithet of its political rank 
 have failed. In no sense was it a 'chief 
 town. ' So far as we know, Thessalonica 
 was all along the general capital of 
 Macedonia; and if this particular dis- 
 trict had still a separate political ex- 
 istence, the centre of government was 
 not Philippi but Amphipolis. Nor again 
 can it be shown that irpi6n; was ever 
 assumed as a mere honorary title by 
 anycityin Greece or Macedonia, though 
 common in Asia Minor. On this latter 
 point Marquardt, in Beaker SSm. AU 
 terth.iii. I. p. 118. seems to be in error 
 when he states that Thessalonica was 
 styled vpi^it ^aKeS&vwv: he has mis- 
 interpreted the inscription mentioned 
 in Boeokh no. 1967 ; see Leake ui. pp. 
 114, 483, 486. The correction rpilmit 
 lupiSot for wpilnii r^i p,cplSos might 
 deserve some consideration, though un- 
 supported by any external evidence, 
 if it were at all probable that the ori- 
 ginal division of Macedonia by the Bo- 
 mans into four provinces was still re- 
 cognised; but it seems to have been 
 abandoned long before this date; see 
 Leake in. p. 487. 
 
THE CHURCH OP PHILIPPl. 
 
 51 
 
 Julia Philippensis'.' At the same time he conferred upon it 
 the special privilege of the 'jus Italicum'.' A colony is de- 
 scribed by an ancient writer as a miniature likeness of the 
 great Roman people"; and this character is fully borne out 
 by the account of Philippi in the apostolic narrative. The 
 political atmosphere of the place is wholly Roman. The chief 
 magistrates, more strictly designated duumvirs, arrogate to 
 themselves the loftier title of prietors*. Their servants, like 
 the attendant officers of the highest functionaries in Rome, 
 bear the name of lictors'. The pride and privilege of Roman 
 citizenship confront us at every turn. This is the sentiment 
 
 » Plin. N. H. iT. 18 'Intus Philippi 
 colonia.' See the coins in Eckhel 11. 
 p. 76, Mionnet i. p. 486; Orell. Inscr. 
 S I J . In one instance at least ' Victrix ' 
 seems to be added to this title, Mission 
 Archiologigue p. 17. According to 
 Dion Cass. li. 4, Augustus ridded 
 himself of troublesome neighbours by 
 transplanting to Philippi and other co- 
 lonies the inhabitants of those Italian 
 towns which had espoused the cause of 
 Antonius. 
 
 ' Dig. I.. 15. On the 'jus Italicum' 
 see Becker and Marquardt Rom. Al- 
 terth. III. I. p. 261 sq. 
 
 ' Goll. xvi. 13 'Populi Bomaui, cujus 
 istaa coloniffi quasi effigies parvs simn- 
 lacraque esse qusedam videntur.' 
 
 * Acts xvi. 19, 22, 35, 36, 38. The 
 same persons who are first designated 
 generally ' the magistrates ' (Hpxavrei, 
 ver. 19) are afterwards called by their 
 distinctive title ' the prtetors ' {arparri- 
 yol). It is a mistake to suppose that 
 the prisoners were handed oyer by the 
 civil authorities [dflxooret) to the mili- 
 tary {arparriyol) to be tried. The chief 
 magistrates of a colony were styled 
 ' duumviri juri dicundo,' or ' duumviri ' 
 simply. On their functions see Savigny 
 Geseh. d. R. B. i. p. 30 sq., with other 
 references in Becker and Marquardt 
 £%». Alterth. in, i. p. 351. A duumvir 
 
 of Philippi appears on an inscription, 
 OreU. no. 3746 0. JIBTVS 0. P. VOL. 
 FLOEVS . DEC . IIVIK . ET . MVNE- 
 EABIVS . PTTTTiTPPIS . FIL. CAB. C. ; 
 another on a monument at Neapolis, 
 Mission ArcMologique p. 15 [DECV] 
 EIONATVS . ET . nVIEALICIS . 
 PONTIFEX . FLAMEN . DIYI 
 CLAVDI . PHILIPPIS. See also a 
 mutilated inscription, ij. p. 117 II[VTR. 
 J[T]B . Die . PHILIPPIS. The second 
 must have been contemporary with St 
 Paul. On the practice of assuming the 
 title of 'prstor' see Cicero de Leg. 
 Agr. ii. 34 'Vidi, quum venissem 
 Capuam, coloniam deductam L. Con- 
 sidioetSezt. Saltio (quemadmodum ip- 
 si loquebantur) prtetoribus: nt intelli- 
 gatis quantam locus ipse afferat super- 
 biam...Nam primum, id quod dizi, 
 quum ceteris in coloniis duumviri ap- 
 pellentur, hi se prtetoresappellari volu- 
 erunt.' This assumption however was 
 by no means exceptional even in Italy 
 (see Orell. Inscr. 3785, Hor. Sat. 1.5. 34, 
 and notes) ; and where some Greek title 
 was necessary, as at Philippi, arpariiyol 
 would naturally be adopted. See Cure- 
 ton's Ane. Syr. Doc. p. i88. Another 
 inscription (Orell. no. 4064) mentions a 
 MAG. QVINQYENN. (quinquennaUs), 
 i.e. a censor, at Philippi. 
 » ^pSoSxoi, Acts xvi. 35, 38. 
 4—3 
 
52 THE CHURCH OP PHILIPPI. 
 
 •which stimulates the blind loyalty of the people*: this is 
 the power which obtains redress for the prisoners and forces 
 an apology from the unwilling magistrates'. Nor is this feature 
 entirely lost sight of, when we turn from St Luke's narrative 
 to St Paul's epistle. Addressing a Koman colony from the 
 Roman metropolis, writing as a citizen to citizens, he recurs to 
 the political franchise as an apt symbol of the higher privileges 
 of their heavenly calling, to the political life as a suggestive 
 metaphor for the duties of their Christian profession'. 
 1. The 2. On this, as on all other occasions, the Gospel is first 
 
 Philippi. offered to the Jews. Their numbers at Philippi appear to have 
 been very scanty. St Paul found no synagogue here, as at 
 Thessalonica and Beroea. The members of the chosen race met 
 together for worship every week at a 'place of prayer' outside 
 the city gate on the banks of the Gangites*. The Apostle 
 appears to have had no precise information of the spot', but 
 the common practice of his countrymen would suggest the 
 suburbs of the city, and the river-side especially, as a likely 
 place for these religious gatherings*. Thither accordingly he 
 repaired with his companions on the first sabbath day after 
 their arrival. To the women assembled he delivered his mes- 
 
 1 Acts zvi. 21 'And teach customs times represented by F. It is a great 
 
 which it is not lawful for us to receive error to identify the stream mentioned 
 
 neither to observe, being Bomaus.' by St Luke with the Strymon, which 
 
 ' Acts xvi. 37 — 39. must be about 30 mUes distant, and 
 
 " Phil. i. 27 /to'i'OK d|t(Di ToD eiayye- certainly would not be designated a 
 
 Mov ToO XpiiTToi ToXiTeicc^e, iii. 20 river without the definite article. 
 ilHat' yi.p r6 iroXfrcvjua iv oipapmt ' The correct reading seems to be, 
 
 irdpxfi- not o5 iyof.tj^eTo irpoaevx^ etvat, but oJ 
 
 * Acts xvi. 1 3 vapi TOTafwv. This Ivo/dj^ofuv Trpoir^ux V ^r'ati ' where we 
 
 river was the Gangas or Gangitea (Ap- supposed there was a place of prayer'; 
 
 plan iv. p. loG iv Tdyyav nvis, ol Si and may be explained in the way sug- 
 
 ro77(Tj;i', X^ouffi) whose sources are gested in the text, 
 near to Philippi and probably gave its " Joseph. Ant. xiv. 10. 23 rat vpixr- 
 
 name to Crenides. As this river is tux^t iroieiaSai irpis rg $a.\ia<rii icard 
 
 called by Herodotus, vii. 113, 'Ayyhri!, t6 wirpiov (Sos. So Tertullian speaks 
 
 and now bears the name Anghista, it of the'orationeslittorales'of the Jews, 
 
 would appear that the initial consonant adv. Nat. i. 13; comp. de Jyun. 16' 
 
 was not a decided G, but a guttural see also Philo in Flacc. § 14, p. 535 m, 
 
 round like the Shemitio Ayin which is and other references in Biscoe History 
 
 sometimes omitted in Greek and some- of the Acts etc. p. 182 sq. (1840). 
 
THE CHURCH OF PHILIPPI. S3 
 
 sage. Of strictly Hebrew converts the sacred record is silent ; 
 but the baptism of a proselytess and her household is related 
 as the first triumph of the Gospel at Philippi. 
 
 To the scanty numbers and feeble influence of the Jews we no Judaic 
 may perhaps in some degree ascribe the unswerving allegiance J^g ^'the 
 of this church to the person of the Apostle and to the true Pjiilippiau 
 principles of the Gospel. In one passage indeed his grateful 
 acknowledgment of the love and faith of his Philippian converts 
 is suddenly interrupted by a stern denunciation of Judaism'. 
 But we may well believe that in this warning he was thinking 
 of Rome more than of Philippi ; and that his indignation was 
 aroused rather by the vexatious antagonism which there 
 thwarted him in his daily work, than by any actual errors 
 already undermining the faith of his distant converts'. Yet 
 even the Philippians were not safe from the intrusion of these 
 dangerous teachers. At no great distance lay important Jewish 
 settlements, the strongholds of this fanatical opposition. Even 
 now there might be threatenings of an interference which 
 would tamper with the allegiance and disturb the peace of his 
 beloved church. 
 
 The Apostle's first visit to Philippi is recorded with a mi- charac- 
 nuteness which has not many parallels in St Luke's history. Luke's^' 
 The narrator had joined St Paul shortly before he crossed over narrative. 
 into Europe: he was with the Apostle during his sojourn at 
 Philippi : he seems to have remained there for some time after 
 his departure'. This exact personal knowledge of the writer, 
 combining with the grandeur and variety of the incidents 
 themselves, places the visit to Philippi among the most striking 
 and instructive passages in the apostolic narrative. 
 
 I have already referred to the varieties of type among the Three dif- 
 first disciples at Philippi, as a prominent feature in this portion fBi^ent 
 of the history. The three converts, who are especially men- the Phil- 
 tioned, stand in marked contrast each to the other in national conyerts. 
 1 Phil. iii. 2 sq. sumed at the same place (Acts xx. 5 
 
 ' See below, p. 69 sq. liievoi' ij/iS.s) after a lapse of six or seven 
 
 " The first person plural is dropped years. This coincidence suggests the 
 at Philinpi (Acts xvii. i, ij\8o») and re- inference in the te.'(t. 
 
54 THE CHURCH OF PHILIPPI. 
 
 descent, in social rank, in religious education. They are repre- 
 sentatives of three different races : the one an Asiatic, the other 
 a Greek, the third a Roman. In the relations of everyday life 
 they have nothing in common : the first is engaged in an 
 important and lucrative branch of traffic: the second, treated 
 by the law as a mere chattel without any social or political 
 rights, is employed by her masters to trade upon the credulous 
 superstition of the ignorant : the third, equally removed from 
 both the one and the other, holds a subordinate office under 
 government. In their religious training also they stand no less 
 apart. In the one the speculative mystic temper of Oriental 
 devotion has at length found deeper satisfaction in the revealed 
 truths of the Old Testament. The second, bearing the name of 
 the Pythian god the -reputed source of Greek inspiration, repre- 
 sents an artistic and imaginative religion, though manifested 
 here in a very low and degrading form'. While the third, if 
 he preserved the characteristic features of his race, must have 
 exhibited a type of worship essentially political in tone. The 
 purple-dealer and proselytess of Thyatira — ^the native slave-girl 
 with the divining spirit — the Roman gaoler — all alike acknow- 
 ledge the supremacy of the new faith. In the history of the 
 Gospel at Philippi, as in the history of the Church at large, is 
 reflected the great maxim of Christianity, the central truth of 
 the Apostle's preaching, that here 'is neither Jew nor Greek, 
 neither bond nor free, neither male nor female, but all are one 
 in Christ Jesus''.' 
 Order ot Again the order of these conversions is significant : first, 
 
 versions the proselyte, next the Greek, lastly the Roman. Thus the 
 typical, incidents at Philippi in their sequence, not less than in their 
 variety, symbolize the progress of Christianity throughout the 
 world. Through the Israelite dispersion, through the proselytes 
 whether of the covenant or of the gate, the message of the 
 
 1 See Plut. Mor. p. 4ns,Glem.Hom. mountain tribe in the HiGmus chain: 
 
 a. i6. It has been conjectured that this Herod, vii. in. At all eyents the inoi- 
 
 girl with the ' Pytho-spirit ' was a lep6- dentisiliustratedbythereligiouatemper 
 
 SmiKot attached to the famous oracle of of these half-barbarous mountaineers. 
 Dionysus among the Satre, a wild > Oal. iu. iS. 
 
THE CHURCH OF PHILIPPI. SS 
 
 Gospel first reached the Greek. By the instrumentality of the 
 Greek language and the di£Fusion of the Greek race it finally 
 established itself in Rome, the citadel of power and civilisation, 
 whence directly or indirectly it was destined to spread over the 
 whole world. 
 
 These events however are only symbolical as all history — 
 more especially scriptural history — is symbolical. The order of 
 the conversions at Philippi was in itself the natural order. 
 The sacred historian wrote down with truthful simplicity what 
 he 'saw and heard.' The representative character of these 
 several incidents can hardly have occurred to him. But from 
 its geographical position Philippi, as a meeting-point of nations, 
 would represent not unfairly the civilised world in miniature ; 
 and the phenomena of the progress of the Gospel in its wider 
 sphere were thus anticipated on a smaller scale. 
 
 But while the conversions at Philippi had thus a typical Social in- 
 character, as representing not only the universality of the Gos- the Gos- 
 pel but also the order of its diffusion, they seem to illustrate pj.^y?: 
 ■r ... boUzed in 
 
 stiU more distinctly the two great social revolutions which it the case oi 
 
 has effected. In most modem treatises on civilisation, from 
 
 whatever point of view they are written, a prominent place is 
 
 given to the amelioration of woman and the abolition of slavery, 
 
 as the noblest social triumphs of Christianity. Now the woman 
 
 and the slave are the principal figures in the scene of the 
 
 Apostle's preaching at Philippi. 
 
 As regards the woman indeed it seems probable that the (i) The 
 
 Apostle's work was made easier by the national feelings and ^°'"*°" 
 
 usages of Macedonia. It may, I think, be gathered from St 
 
 Luke's narrative, that her social position was higher in this 
 
 country than in most parts of the civilised world. At Philippi, 
 
 at Thessalonica, at Bercea, the women — in some cases certainly, 
 
 in all probably, ladies of birth and rank — ^take an active part 
 
 with the Apostle*. It forms moreover a strikiDg coincidence, 
 
 ' At Philippi, xtI 13 'We spoke to women not a few'; at Bercea, xvii. ri 
 
 tbewomen that were gatheredtogethei'; ' Man; of them believed, and of the 
 
 at Thessalomca, zvii. 4 ' There were Greek women of rank (eiaTcvi'il'uv) and 
 
 added to Panl and Silas... of the chief men not a fow.' 
 
56 
 
 THE CHURCH OF PHILIPPI. 
 
 doiiia. 
 
 and surely an undesigned coincidence, between the history and 
 the epistle, that while in the former the Gospel is related 
 to have been first preached to women and the earliest converts 
 specially mentioned are women, in the latter we find the peace 
 of the Philippian Church endangered by the feuds of two 
 ladies of influence, whose zealous aid in the spread of the 
 Influence Gospel the Apostle gratefully acknowledges'. Moreover the 
 in Mace- inference thus suggested by the narrative of St Luke and 
 strengthened by the notice in St Paul's epistle is farther 
 borne out, if I mistake not, by reference to other sources of 
 information. The extant Macedonian inscriptions seem to 
 assign to the sex a higher social influence than is common 
 among the civilised nations of antiquity. In not a few in- 
 stances a metronymic takes the place of the usual patronymic', 
 and in other cases a prominence is given to women which can 
 hardly be accidental'. But whether I am right or not in the 
 conjecture that the work of the Gospel was in this respect 
 
 ' Euodia and Syntyohe, Phil. iv. i, 
 aXriya Iv T$ eiayyeKlif irwii0\r)aiv fiot. 
 
 " On the well-known inscription 
 giving the names of the Thessalonian 
 poUtarchs, Boeckh no. 1967, we read 
 ZbJirtirdTpov tov KXeoTrdrpas and Tat^poi; 
 Tou'A/i/ilas; on a second at Beroea, 
 1957 f (add.) nSpos 'A/ipUas; on a third 
 not far from Beroea, 1957 g (add.) Mo- 
 k45ii)i> Evyclas; on a fourth near Thes- 
 salonica, 1967 b (add.) [0 Beim] 'Avti- 
 ^iXijs; ona fifth atEdeasa, 1997 o(add.) 
 'AX^tOKSpos KoX EioiiXios oi Jiapxlas, 
 "Eawepo[s] Se/jAijs, [EqoiJ\[io]s KoX- 
 X/(7Ti;s. See Leake iii. pp. 236, ■277, 
 tg2. 
 
 ' For instance one inscription (no. 
 1958) records how a wife erects a tomb 
 ' for herself and her dear husband out 
 of their common earnings (iK tCiv koivuv 
 Katiiruv)': another (no. 1977) how a 
 hnsbaiid erects a tomb ' for his devoted 
 and darling wife (rg <t>CKiviptp koI yKv- 
 Hvriirjt <rwpi(f) and himself,' in this ease 
 
 also from their common savings (iK tuv 
 Koivuv Koiruiv). Again there are cases 
 of monuments erected in hononr of 
 women by public bodies: e.g. no. 
 1997 d (add.) 1) irAXis [ic]a! ol (Tunrpa[y]- 
 li.aTe[u\oixivo[i] '?utuuo[i\ Uerpwlav A. 
 Herpwdov Bdir(ro[ii] Buyaripa St/)otiJ\- 
 Xai* Ti/iOvT[e]s [Otjois, no. 1999 Ma- 
 Keiovav ol ffiveSpoi Uapdav 'AKv\iav 
 ia^piKiavoO 'Avepot evyaT4p[a] iiSpis 
 iyadoO, no. 1999 b (add.) to koipop tuk 
 ilaKeSovuv MavXIav Uovrdav AoVKoiWat 
 ACXov HovtLov Jirjpou tou \ap.wpoTa.iov 
 ivSuTraTov yvvtuKa dper^s fvcxev. Again 
 the deferential language used by the 
 husband speaking of the wife is worthy 
 of notice, e. g. no. 1965 Evrixv Srpa- 
 TovUji Ty avixpiif koX Kvpli/. ^»eiat x^P^"- 
 These are the most striking but not 
 the only instances in wliioh an unusual 
 prominence is given to women. The 
 whole series of Macedonian insoriptiong 
 read continuously cannot fail, I think, 
 to suggest the inference in the text. 
 
THE CHURCH OP PHILIPPI. 57 
 
 aided by the social condition of Macedonia, the active zeal of 
 the women in this country is a remarkable fact, without a 
 parallel in the Apostle's history elsewhere and only to be com- 
 pared with their prominence at an earlier date in the personal 
 ministry of our Lord. 
 
 And as Christianity exerts its influence on the woman at (i) The 
 Philippi, so does it also on the slave. The same person, whose ^ "'*■ 
 conversion exemplifies the one maxim of the Gospel that in 
 Christ is ' neither male nor female,' is made a living witness of 
 the other social principle also that in Him is ' neither bond nor 
 free.' It can hardly have happened that the Apostle's mission 
 had never before crossed the path of the slave ; yet it is a signi- 
 ficant fact, illustrating the varied character and typical import 
 of this chapter of sacred histoiy, that the divining girl at Phil- 
 ippi is the earliest recorded instance, where his attention is 
 directed to one of these 'live chattels'.' 
 
 But more than this : as the Gospel recognises the claims of Fmnily re- 
 the woman and the slave severally, so also it fulfils its noblest emplified. 
 mission in hallowing the general relations of family life, which 
 combines these and other elements. Here too the conversion of 
 the Philippian Church retains its typical character. It has 
 been observed', that this is the first recorded instance in St 
 Paul's history where whole families are gathered into the fold. 
 Lydia and her household — the gaoler and all belonging to 
 him — are baptized into Christ. Henceforth the worship of 
 households plays an important part in the divine economy of 
 the Church. As in primeval days the patriarch was the re- 
 cognised priest of his clan, so in the Christian Church the father 
 of the house is the divinely appointed centre of religious life to 
 his own family. The family religion is the true starting-point, 
 the surest foundation, of the religion of cities and dioceses, of 
 nations and empires. The church in the house of Philemon 
 grows into the Church of Colosste' ; the church in the house of 
 
 » Aristot. Pol. i 4 a SoCXoi KT^/id ti » Bee Conybeare and Howsou i. 
 
 luivxor. See Colomam etc. pp. 313, p. 348 (ind edition). 
 31Q sq. ' Philem. 2. 
 
S8 THE CHURCH OF PHILIPPl. 
 
 Nymphas becomes the Church of Laodicea'; the church in the 
 house of Aquila and Priscilla loses itself in the Churches of 
 Ephesus and Rome*. 
 Grandeur Altogether the history of St Paul's connexion with Philippi 
 cideats. assumes a prominence quite out of proportion to the importance 
 of the place itself. In the incidents and the results alike of his 
 preaching the grandeur of the epoch is brought out. The perse- 
 cutions which the Apostle here endured were more than usually 
 severe, and impressed themselves deeply on his memory, for he 
 alludes to them once and again'. The marvellous deliverance 
 wrought for him is without a parallel in his history before or 
 after. The signal success which crowned his labours surpasses 
 all his earlier or later achievements. 
 Loyalty of On this last-mentioned feature it is especially refreshing to 
 pian^!"^^' dwell. The unwavering loyalty of his Philippian converts is the 
 constant solace of the Apostle in his manifold trials, the one 
 bright ray of happiness piercing the dark clouds which gather 
 ever thicker about the evening of his life. They are his 'joy 
 and croTvn, his brethren beloved and eagerly desired*.' From 
 them alone he consents to receive alms for the relief of his per- 
 sonal wants'. To them alone he writes in language unclouded 
 by any shadow of displeasure or disappointment. 
 Their suf- St Paul's first visit to Philippi closed abruptly amid the 
 feringa. gtorm of persecution. It was not to be expected that, where 
 the life of the master had been so seriously endangered, the 
 scholars would escape all penalties. The Apostle left behind 
 him a legacy of suffering to this newly bom church. This is not 
 a mere conjecture: the afflictions of the Macedonian Christians, 
 and of the Philippians especially, are more than once mentioned 
 in St Paul's epistles'. If it was their privilege to believe in Christ, 
 
 > Col. iv. 15. ing the same conflict which ye saw in 
 
 ' I Oor. XYi. 19, Kom. xvi. 5. me.' 
 
 ' I Thess. ii. 1 ' Though we had al- * Phil. iv. i. 
 
 ready suffered and been ignominionsly " PhiL iv. le. 
 
 treated (irpoiroW^TesraU/J^iffWi/Tts), as « 1 Cor. viii. j. See the notes on 
 
 ye know, at PhUippi,' PhU. i. 30 ' Hav- Phil. i. 7, 38—30. 
 
THE CHURCH OF PHILIPPI. 59 
 
 it was equally their privilege to sufifer for Him'. To this 
 refiner's fire may doubtless be ascribed in part the lustre and 
 purity of their faith compared with other churches. 
 
 About five years elapsed between St Paul's first and second Later 
 visit to Philippi : but meanwhile his communications with this 0^^'" 
 church appear to have been frequent and intimate. It has '^*'f ^^' 
 been already mentioned that on the Apostle's departure St Luke 
 seems to have remained at Philippi, where he was taken up 
 after the lapse of several years and where perhaps he had spent 
 some portion of the intervening period'. Again when in the 
 year S7 St Paul, then residing at Ephesus, despatched Timo- 
 theus and Erastus to Macedonia', we may feel sure that the most 
 loyal of aU his converts were not overlooked in this general 
 mission. When moreover about the same time, either through 
 these or other messengers, he appealed to the Macedonian 
 Christians to relieve the wants of their poorer brethren in 
 Judaea, it may safely be assumed that his faithful Philippian 
 Church was foremost in the promptness and cordiality of its 
 response, where all alike in spite of abject poverty and sore 
 persecution were lavish with their alms 'to their power, yea 
 and beyond their power*.' Nor is it probable that these notices 
 exhaust all his communications with Philippi at this time. 
 Lying on the high-road between Asia and Achaia, this city 
 would be the natural halting-place for the Apostle's messen- 
 gers", as they passed to and fro between the great centres of 
 Gentile Christendom. 
 
 At length in the autumn of the year 57 the Apostle himself, 
 released from his engagements in Asia, revisits his European 
 churches. His first intention had been to sail direct to Achaia, 
 in which case he would have called in Macedonia and returned 
 
 ' Pbil. i. 29 i/up ixapladri rb iirip infei that Timotheus did not proceed 
 
 XptaroS, 06 iiJtvov t6 els aiirov mffreieiv with Erastua to Corinth, but remained 
 
 dXXi Kcd t6 irrip airou ■iri<rx,a». behind in Macedonia. 
 
 ' See above, p. 53, note 3. * 2 Cor. viii i — 5. 
 
 " Acts xix. 21. Of Timotheus see ' Titus and his companion for in- 
 
 also I Cor. iv, 17, zvi. 10, 1 Cor. i. i. stance (2 Cor. ii. 13, vii. 6, xii. 18; 
 
 Fatting together these notices we may comp. i Cor. zvi. 11. 12). 
 
6o THE CHURCH OP PHILIPPI. 
 
 Second to Corinth. But afterwards he altered his plan and travelled by 
 JTsits'^"'^ land, so as to take Macedonia on the way\ Leaving Mace- 
 donia and visiting Corinth, he had purposed to take ship from 
 this latter place direct to Palestine : but receiving information 
 of a plot against his life, he changes his route and returns 
 by land". Thus owing to a combination of circumstances 
 Macedonia receives a double visit. On both occasions his af- 
 fectionate relations with Philippi seem to attract and rivet 
 him there. On the former, seeking relief from the agony of 
 suspense which oppresses him at Troas, he hurries across the 
 sea to Macedonia, halting apparently at Philippi and there 
 awaiting the arrival of Titus'. On the latter, unable to tear 
 himself away, he despatches his companions to Asia in advance 
 and lingers behind at Philippi himself, that he may keep the 
 paschal feast with his beloved converts*. It is the last festival 
 for some years to come, which ho is free to celebrate as and 
 where he wills. 
 
 Of the former visit St Luke records only the fact. But the 
 Second Epistle to the Corinthians certainly', the Epistle to the 
 Galatians not improbably", were written from Macedonia on this 
 occasion : and, though scarcely a single incident is directly re- 
 lated, they present a complete and vivid picture of the Apostle's 
 inward life at this time. Of his external relations thus much 
 may be learnt : we find him busy with the collection of alms 
 for Judaea, stimulating the Macedonian churches and gratefully 
 acknowledging their liberal response'; we gather also from the 
 mention of 'fightings without',' that the enemies whether 
 Jewish or heathen, who had persecuted him in earlier years, 
 
 ' i Cor. i. 15 — r7, oomp. i Cor. xvi. ippi as the place of writing, and thia 
 
 5, 6. is probable, though the authority i» 
 
 ' Acta xix. II, XX. 1 — 3. almost worthless. 
 
 » I Cor. ii. 12 sq., vii. 5, 6. « See Galatians, p. 35 sq. 
 
 * Acts XX. 5, 6 'These going before ' i Cor. viii. i — 6, ix. 2. 
 
 waited for us at Troas ; but we set sail ' 2 Cor. vii. 5 ; comp. viii. 2. To thia 
 
 from Philippi after the days of uulea- occasion also the Apostle may possibly 
 
 vened bread.' refer in Phil. i. 30, toV airoi' d7<3>'0 
 
 ' 3 Cor. ii. 13, vii. 5, viii. i sq., ix. ^x<"^''s oTov ttdere in i/iol. 
 ■t, 4. The subscription mentions Phil- 
 
THE CHURCH OF PHILIPPI. 6l 
 
 made his reappearance in Macedonia a signal for the renewal of 
 their attacks. Of the latter visit we know absolutely nothing, 
 except the names of his companions and the fact already men- 
 tioned that he remained behind for the passover. 
 
 From this time forward we read no more of the Philippians The Phil- 
 till the period of St Paul's Roman captivity. When they heard gend alms 
 of his destination, their slumbering affection for him revived. *° ^* ^'"^• 
 It was not the first time that they had been eager to offer and 
 he willing to receive alms for the supply of his personal wants. 
 After the close of his first visit, while he was still in Macedonia, 
 they had more than once sent him timely assistance to Thessa- 
 lonica'. When from Macedonia he passed on to Achaia, fresh 
 supplies from Philippi reached him at Corinth". Then there 
 was a lull in their attentions. It was not that their affection 
 had cooled, the Apostle believed, but that the opportunity was 
 wanting. Now at length after a lapse of ten years their loyalty 
 again took the same direction; and Epaphroditus was despatched 
 to Eome with their gift'. 
 
 Their zealous attention was worthily seconded by the mes- Dlness of 
 senger whom they had chosen. Not content with placing this ^^^s. 
 token of their love in St Paul's hands, Epaphroditus* devoted 
 himself heart and soul to the ministry under the Apostle's guid- 
 ance. But the strain of excessive exertion was too great for his 
 physical powers. In his intense devotion to the work he lost 
 his health and almost his life. At length the danger passed 
 away : ' God had mercy,' says the Apostle, ' not on him only, 
 
 ^ Phil. iv. 16. Epaphras (Col. i. 7, iv. 12, Philem. 43); 
 
 • Phil. iv. IS 'When I left Mace- for, though the names are the same, 
 donia, no chnrch communicated with the identity of the persons seems im- 
 me ia regard of giving and receiving probable for two reasons. (1) The one 
 but ye only'; 2 Cor. xi. 8, 9 'When I appears to have been a native of Phil- 
 was present with you and wanted,Iwas ippi (Phil. ii. 25 sq.), the other of Co- 
 not burdensome to any: for my want losses (Col. iv. 11). (2) The longer form 
 the brethren having come from Mace- of the name is always used of the Phil- 
 donia supplied.' ippian delegate, the shorter of the Co- 
 
 • PhU. ii. 25, 30, iv. 10 — 18. loaaian teacher. The name in fact is bo 
 
 • Epaphroditus is known to us only extremely common in both forms, that 
 from the notices in this epistle. He the coincidence affords no presumption 
 is doubtless to be distinguished from of the identity of persons. 
 
62 
 
 THE CHURCH OF PHILIPPI. 
 
 The Epi- 
 Btle to the 
 PbiUp- 
 pians, A.D. 
 6i or 62 ? 
 
 Mission of 
 Timothy. 
 
 Later 
 visits of 
 St Paul. 
 
 Ignatius at 
 Philippi. 
 
 but on myself also, that I might not have sorrow upon sorrow." 
 But his convalescence was succeeded by home-sickness. He 
 was oppressed with the thought that the Philippians would 
 have heard of his critical state. He was anxious to return 
 that he might quiet their alarm'. 
 
 This purpose was warmly approved by St Paul. To contri- 
 bute to their happiness in any way was to alleviate his own 
 sorrows'. He would not therefore withhold Epaphroditus from 
 them. So Epaphroditus returns to Philippi, bearing a letter 
 from the Apostle, in which he pours out his heart in an overflow 
 of gratitude and love. 
 
 In this letter he expresses his intention of sending Timo- 
 theus to them immediately'. Whether this purpose was ever 
 fulfilled we have no means of knowing. But in sending Timo- 
 theus he did not mean to withhold himself. He hoped before 
 long to be released, and he would then visit them in person*. 
 The delay indeed seems to have been greater than he then 
 anticipated; but at length he was able to fulfil his promise. 
 One visit at least, probably more than one, he paid to Philippi 
 and his other Macedonian churches in the interval between his 
 first and second captivities'. 
 
 The canonical writings record nothing more of Philippi. A 
 whole generation passes away before its name is again men- 
 tioned. Early in the second century Ignatius, now on his way 
 to Rome where he is condemned to suffer martyrdom, as he 
 passes through Philippi is kindly entertained and escorted on 
 
 The name Epaphroditus orEpaphras 
 is not specially characteristic of Ma- 
 cedonia, but occurs abundantly eyery- 
 Tvhere. On a Thessalonian inscription 
 (Boeckh no. 1987) we meet with one 
 Fiitbt KXdStos 'Eira^piSetros. This con- 
 currence of names is suggestive. The 
 combination, which occurs once, might 
 well occur again: and it is possible 
 (though in the absence of evidence 
 hardly probable) that Gains the Mace- 
 donian of St Luke (Acts zix. 39) is the 
 some person as Epaphroditus tiie Phil- 
 
 ippian of St Paul. 
 1 Phil. ii. 15 — 30. 
 
 * Phil. ii. 38 'That having seen him 
 ye may rejoice again, and I may be less 
 sorrowful.' 
 
 ' Phil. u. 19. 
 
 * Phil. u. 14. 
 
 ' I Tim. 1. 3. The notices in a Tim. 
 iv. 13, 10 perhaps refer to a later date. 
 K so, they point to a second visit of the 
 Apostle after his release; for in going 
 from Troas to Corinth he would natu- 
 rally pass through Macedonia. 
 
THE CHURCH OP PHILIPPI. 63 
 
 his way by the members of the church*. This circumstance 
 seems to have given rise to communications with Polycarp, the Polyoarp's 
 youthful bishop of Smyrna and trusty friend of Ignatius, in 
 which the Philippians invite him to address to them some words 
 of advice and exhortation. Polycarp responds to this appeal. 
 He congratulates them on their devotion to the martyrs ' bound Com- 
 in saintly fetters, the diadems of the truly elect.' He rejoices and wam- 
 that 'the sturdy root of their faith, famous from the earliest ""S- 
 days*, still survives and bears fruit unto our Lord Jesus Christ.' 
 He should not have ventured to address them, unless they had 
 themselves solicited him. He, and such as he, cannot 'attain 
 unto the wisdom of the blessed and glorious Paul,' who taught 
 among them in person, and wrote to them when absent instruc- 
 tions which they would do well to study for their edification in 
 the faith'. He offers many words of exhortation, more espe- 
 cially relating to the qualifications of widows, deacons, and pres- 
 byters*. He warns them against those who deny that Jesus 
 Christ has come in the flesh, against those who reject the 
 testimony of the cross, against those who say there is no 
 resurrection or judgment'. He sets before them for imitation 
 the example ' not only of the blessed Ignatius and Zosimus and 
 Bufus, but also of others of their own church, and Paul himself 
 and the other Apostles,' who have gone before to their rest*. 
 There is however one cause for sorrow. Valens a presbyter 
 
 ' Martyr. Ignat. § 5; Polyc. Phil, i the original waa probably rue <ri)i' oiSr^i) 
 
 St^a/iinou rd luiirmaTa rrji dXriOoOs dyi- qnoi certina agnoveritis, significate.' 
 Ti)s KoJ wpoTciityfiaatv ds iri^akev i/jilv, ' § I if dfixalojp KaTayyeWotUvii 
 
 Tois ipeCKintiUvovt \hia\riiiho\n1'\ ro7s xpovuf, 
 
 dyiorpeirin Ser/ujct drtrd lari JioSi)jitoTa ' § 3- On this passage see the de- 
 
 ic.r.X, The martyrs here alluded to are tached note on iii. i. 
 doabtlesalgnatius and others mentioned ' §§ 4 — 6. 
 
 by name § 9. The letter of Polycarp ' § 7- It would not be a safe infer- 
 
 was written after the death of Ignatius ence, that when Polycarp wrote the 
 
 (§ 9); but the event was so recent that Philippian Church was in any special 
 
 he asks the Philippians to send bim in- danger of these errors. The language 
 
 formation about Ignatius and his com- is general and comprehensive, warning 
 
 pardons, g 13 'Et de ipso Ignatio et de them against all the prevailing forma 
 
 his qui cum eo sunt (the present is of heresy, 
 doubtless due to the translator, where ' § 9. 
 
64 
 
 THE CHURCH OF PHILIPPI. 
 
 The crime in the Philippian Church, and his wife whose name is not given, 
 of ValenB, ^^^ brought scandal on the Gospel by their avarice'. From all 
 participation in their crime Polycarp exonerates the great 
 body of the church. He has neither known nor heard of any 
 such vice in those Philippians among whom St Paul laboured, 
 boasting of them in all the churches, at a time when his own 
 Smyrna was not yet converted to Christ'. He trusts the ofifend- 
 
 ' § II. Polycarp after speaking of 
 the crime of Valens adds, ' Moneo ita- 
 que voB at abstineatis ab avaritia et 
 sitis oasti et veraces...Si quis non abs- 
 tinuerit se ab avaiitia, ab idololatria 
 coinquinabitur.' The* crime of Valens 
 and his wife was doubtless avarice, not 
 concupiscence, as the passage is fre- 
 quently interpreted. In §§ 4, 6, ' ava- 
 ritia ' is the translation of ^i\apyvpia, ; 
 and this was probably the word used 
 in the original here. But even if the 
 Greek had rXiove^la, it is a mistake to 
 suppose that this word ever signifies 
 'unohastity' (see the note on Col. iii. 
 5); and the fact that both husband 
 and wife were guilty of the crime in 
 question points rather to avarice (as in 
 the case of Ananias and Sapphlra) than 
 to impurity. The word ' casti ' seems 
 to have misled the commentators ; but 
 even if the original were dynol and not 
 Kaffapol, it might still apply to sordid 
 and dishonest gain. This use of d7i'os 
 would not be unnatural even in a hea- 
 then writer (e.g. Find. 01. iii. 21 ct7i'd 
 Kpliris) ; and the Apostle's denunciation 
 of covetousness as idolatry (to which 
 Polycarp refers in the context) makes it 
 doubly appropriate here. 'Conuption' 
 is a common synonyme for fraud. On 
 the other hand 'veraces' is quite out of 
 place, if concupiscence was intended. 
 
 The correct interpretation may be 
 inferred also from other expressions in 
 the letter. Folycai'p seems to have had 
 the crime of Yalens in his thoughts 
 when in an earlier passage, § 4, he de- 
 clares that ' avai'ice is the beginning of 
 
 all troubles {dpxil irivrav X"^^'"'^ 0'^- 
 apyvpla),' and when again in enumer- 
 ating the qualifications of presbyters 
 (§ 6) he states that they must stand 
 aloof from every form of avaiice (^la- 
 Kpav BfTts nda'/ji ipiXupyvpias). The Ma- 
 cedonian churches in St Paul's time 
 were as hberal as they were poor (2 Cor. 
 viii. I — 3). Greed of wealth was about 
 the last crime that they could be charged 
 with. There is no reason to suppose 
 that their character had wholly changed 
 within a single generation. But a no- 
 table exception had occurred at PhU- 
 ippi; and, though Polycarp distinctly 
 treats it as an exception and acquits 
 the Fhihppiau church as a body (§ 1 1), 
 yet it naturally leads him to dwell on 
 the heiuousness of this sin. 
 
 The name ' Valens ' for some reason 
 seems to have been frequent in Mace- 
 donia; perhaps because it had been 
 borne by some local celebrity : see for 
 instance Boeckh no. 1969 (at Thessa- 
 lonica), where it occurs together with 
 another common Macedonian name 
 (Acts XX. 4), Oi)aXi)s xoi ZcKowios. It 
 is found also in another inscription at 
 Drama (Drabescus?) in Perrot (Revue 
 Archiol. i860, II. p. 73); and in a third 
 and a fomth at PhiUppi itself ,pubhshed 
 in Cousinfiiy ii. p. si, Miss. ArcMol. 
 p. 121. 
 
 ' § II 'In qnibus laboravit beatua 
 Faulus, qui estis in prinoipio epistola 
 ejus : de vobis eteuim gloriatur in om- 
 nibus ecclesiis qusa Deum sola touo 
 cognoTerant,nos autem nondom nove- 
 ramus.' 
 
THE CHURCH OF PHILIPPI. 6$ 
 
 era will be truly penitent : and he counsels the Philippians to 
 treat them, not as enemies, but as erring members. They are 
 well versed in the scriptures', and will not need to be reminded 
 how the duty of gentleness and forbearance is enforced therein. 
 
 At the conclusion, he refers to certain parting injunctions of Oonoln- 
 Ignatius : he complies with their desire and sends copies of 
 those letters of the martyr which are in his possession : he com- 
 mends to their care Crescens, the bearer of the epistle, who will 
 be accompanied by his sister. 
 
 With this notice the Philippian Church may be said to pass Later hia- 
 out of sight. From the time of Polycarp its name is very rarely p^ippi. 
 mentioned ; and scarcely a single fact is recorded which throws 
 any light on its internal condition'. Here and there the name 
 of a bishop appears in coimexion with the records of an ecclesi- 
 astical councU. On one occasion its prelate subscribes a decree 
 as vicegerent of the metropolitan of Thessalonica*. But, though 
 the see is said to exist even to the present day*, the city itself 
 has been long a wilderness. Of its destruction or decay no 
 record is left; and among its ruins travellers have hitherto failed 
 to find any Christian remains'. Of the church which stood 
 foremost among all the apostolic communities in faith and love, 
 it may literally be said that not one stone stands upon another. 
 Its whole career is a signal monument of the inscrutable coun- 
 sels of God. Bom into the world with the brightest promise, 
 the Church of Philippi has lived without a history and perished 
 without a memorial. 
 
 ' § II 'Oonfido enim tob bene ex- heldatFliiUppi,'inipeTaiitibasConstaii- 
 
 eroitatoB esse in sacris Uteris et nihU tini filiis,' he confuses Philippi with 
 
 vos latet etc. ' FhUippopolis. See Socr. U. E. n. lo, it. 
 
 • The rhetoric of TertnUiam {de Pra- ' Flavianua, who takes an active part 
 
 icr. 36, adv. Marc. iv. 5), who appeals at the 0. of Ephesns, a.d. 431; Labb. 
 
 among others to the Philippian Church Cone. iii. 456 etc. 
 as still maintaining the Apostle's doc- " Le Qnien, Or. Chr. 11. p. 70, gives 
 
 trine and reading his epistle publicly, the name of its bishop when he wrote 
 
 can hardly be considered evidence, (1740). 'Seale, Holy Eattern Church i. 
 
 though the fact itself need not be p. 92, mentions it among existing sees, 
 questioned. ° I ought to except one or two inscrip- 
 
 When Hoog, de Cat, Christ, Philipp. tions published since my first edition 
 
 etc. p. 176 (1835), speaks of a council appeared, Misi. Archiol. pp. 96, 97. 
 
 PHIL, S 
 
IV. 
 
 CHARACTER AND CONTENTS OF THE EPISTLE. 
 
 Motive rpHE external circumstances, whicli suggested this epistle, 
 epistle. -^ have been already explained. It must be ascribed to the 
 close personal relations existing between the Apostle and his 
 converts. It was not written, like the Epistle to the Galatians, 
 to counteract doctrinal errors, or, like the First to the Co- 
 rinthians, to correct irregularities of practice. It enforces no 
 direct lessons of Church government, though it makes casual 
 allusion to Church officers. It lays down no dogmatic system, 
 though incidentally it refers to the majesty and the humiliation 
 of Christ, and to the contrast of law and grace. It is the spon- 
 taneous utterance of Christian love and gratitude, called forth 
 by a recent token which the PhUippians had given of their 
 loyal affection. As the pure expression of personal feeling, 
 not directly evoked by doctrinal or practical errors, it closely 
 resembles the Apostle's letter to another leading church of 
 Macedonia, which likewise held a large place in his affections, 
 the First Epistle to the Thessalonians. 
 Affeotiou- But the Philippian Church was bound to the Apostle by 
 tionswith closer ties than even the Thessalonian. His language m ad- 
 irian^!^^' dressing the two has, it is true, very much in common ; the 
 absence of appeal to his apostolic authority, the pervading 
 tone of satisfaction, even the individual expressions of love and 
 praise. But in the Epistle to the PhUippians the Apostle's 
 commendation is more lavish, as his affection is deeper. He 
 utters no misgivings of their loyalty, no suspicions of false 
 
CHARAOTBR AND CONTENTS OP THE BPISTLH. 67 
 
 play, no reproaches of disorderly living, no warnings against 
 grosser sins. To the Philippians he had given the surest 
 pledge of confidence which could be given by a high-minded 
 and sensitive man, to whom it was of the highest importance 
 for the sake of the great cause which he advocated to avoid the 
 slightest breath of suspicion, and whose motives nevertheless 
 were narrowly scanned and unscrupulously misrepresented. 
 He had placed himself under pecuniary obligations to them. 
 The alms sent from Philippi had relieved his wants even at 
 Thessalonica. 
 
 Yet even at Philippi there was one drawback to his ge- Disputes 
 neral satisfaction. A spirit of strife had sprung up in the ries at 
 church ; if there were not open feuds and parties, there were ^^^PPi- 
 at least disputes and rivalries. The differences related not to 
 doctrinal but to social questions; and, while each eagerly as- 
 serted his own position, each severally claimed the Apostle's 
 sympathies for himself. 
 
 St Paul steps forward to check the growing tendency, st Paul 
 This he does with characteristic delicacy, striking not lessj^ggjo^. 
 surely because he strikes for the most part indirectly. He ™8 spirit, 
 begins by hintiag to them that he is no partisan : he offers 
 prayers and thanksgivings for all; he hopes well of all; he 
 looks upon all as companions in grace; his heart yearns after 
 all in Christ Jesus'. He entreats them later on, to be ' stead- 
 fast in one spirit,' to 'strive together with one mind for the 
 faith of the GospelV He implores them by all their deepest 
 Christian experiences, by all their truest natural impulses, to 
 ' be of one mind,' to ' do nothing from party-spirit or from vain- 
 glory.' Having piled up phrase upon phrase' in the ' tautology 
 of earnestness,' he holds out for their example the 'mind of 
 Christ,' who, being higher than all, nevertheless did not assert 
 His divine majesty, but became lowliest of the lowly. To- 
 wards the dose of the epistle* he returns again to the sub- 
 
 > See the studied repetition of irdlcTcf ^ ii. 2, 3, 4. 
 
 in the paragraph i. 3 — 8. * iv. 2 sq. 
 
 » Li7. 
 
 S— 2 
 
68 
 
 Indirect 
 reference 
 to doc- 
 trinal er- 
 ror. 
 
 Absence 
 of plan 
 in the 
 epistle. 
 
 Struotoie 
 of the 
 epistle. 
 i. I — II. 
 
 OHARAOTBR AND CONTENTS OP THE EPISTLE. 
 
 ject; and here his language becomes more definite. He 
 mentions by name two ladies, Euodia and Syntyche, who 
 had taken a prominent part in these dissensions ; he asks them 
 to be reconciled; and he invites the aid of others, of his true 
 yoke-fellow, of Clement, of the rest of his fellow-labourers, in 
 cementing this reconciliation. He urges the Philippians gene- 
 rally to exhibit to the world a spectacle of forbearance^. He 
 reminds them of the peace of God, which surpasses aU the 
 thoughts of man. He entreats them lastly, by aU that is noble 
 and beautiful and good, to hear and to obey. If they do this, 
 the God of peace will be with them. 
 
 Of errors in doctrine there is not the faintest trace in the 
 Philippian Church. In one passage indeed, where the Apostle 
 touches upon doctrinal subjects, he takes occasion to warn his 
 converts against two antagonistic types of error — Judaic for- 
 malism on the one hand, and Antinomian license on the other. 
 But while doing so he gives no hint that these dangerous 
 tendencies were actually rife among them. The warning seems 
 to have been suggested by circumstances external to the Phil- 
 ippian Church'. 
 
 Of plan and arrangement there is even less than in St 
 Paul's letters generally. The origin and motive of the epistle 
 are hardly consistent with any systematic treatment. As in the 
 Second Epistle to the Corinthians, the torrent of personal feel- 
 ing is too strong to submit to any such restraint. Even the 
 threefold division into the explanatory, doctrinal, and horta- 
 tory portions, which may generally be discerned in his epistles, 
 is obliterated here. 
 
 At the same time the growth and structure of the epi- 
 stle may be traced with tolerable clearness. After the opening 
 salutation and thanksgiving, which in the intensity of his affec- 
 tion he prolongs to an unusual extent, the Apostle explains 
 
 * iv, 5 TO iTTiUKh hfi&v yvtjjffdrJTU 
 K.r.X. See the note there. 
 
 '■' SehinZidieOhrUtlicheGemeindezu 
 PhiUppi (Ziirioh 1833), deoideg after a 
 ouref al examination of the purport of 
 
 this epistle, that the Philippian Church 
 was not yet tainted by Jadaism, and 
 that the disputes -were sooialrathet than 
 doctrinal. This result has bean gene- 
 rally accepted by more recent writeis. 
 
CHARACTER AND CONTENTS OF THE EPISTLE. 69 
 
 his personal circumstances ; the progress of the Gospel in i. it—t6. 
 Rome; the rivalry of his antagonists and the zeal of his ad- 
 herents ; his own hopes and fears. He then urges his con- i. tj — ii. 
 verts to unity in the strong reiterative language which has ' ' 
 been already noticed. This leads him to dwell on the humi- 
 lity of Christ, as the great exemplar; and the reference is 
 followed up by a few general words of exhortation. Return- 
 ing from this to personal matters, he relates his anticipation ii. 1 7—30. 
 of a speedy release; his purpose of sending Timothy; the 
 recent illness and immediate return of Epaphroditus. 
 
 Here the letter, as originally conceived, seems drawing to 
 a close. He commences what appears like a parting injunction : Ui. i. 
 'Finally, my brethren, farewell (rejoice) in the Lord.' 'To say 
 the same things,* he adds, ' for me is not irksome, while for you 
 it is safe.' He was intending, it would seem, after offering this 
 apology by way of preface, to refer once more to their dissen- 
 sions, to say a few words in acknowledgment of their gift, and 
 then to close. Here however he seems to have been inter- 
 rupted*. Circumstances occur, which recall him from these joy- 
 ful associations to the conflict which awaits him without and 
 which is the great trial and sorrow of his life. He is informed, interruji- 
 we may suppose, of some fresh attempt of the Judaizers in the ^'"^tf^nai 
 metropolis to thwart and annoy him. What, if they should portion. 
 interfere at Philippi as they were doing at Rome, and tamper 
 
 ' ^wali,die Sendschreibenetc.'p.^iS Polycarp (§ 3, 5s Kal drdu i/itv (ypaipev 
 eg., has explained with characteristic ^mrroXas); and Heinrichs {prol. p. 31 
 insight the sudden interruption and sq.), caiiying out the same idea, sup- 
 subsequent lengthening of the letter, posed i. i — iii. i iv xvplcf to be written 
 I should be disposed however to make to the Church generally, and iii. 2 rd 
 the break not after ii. 30 with Ewald, ouVd — iv. 20 to the rulers, the con- 
 but after iii. i with GrotiuB. Moreover eluding verses iv. J i — 1 3 being the close 
 I cannot agree with the former in re- of the former letter. He was answered 
 ferring iii. 17, 18, 19, still to Judaic for- by J.F.Krause Dissert. Acad. (Eegiom. 
 malism rather than to Antinomian ex- 1811). Faulus, Hetdeii. <7aAr2>. P. 7, p. 
 cess. See the notes on the third chapter. 702 (181 2), adopted the theory of 
 
 Le Moyne, Yar. Sacr. 11. pp. 332, Heinrichs, modifying it however by 
 
 343, suggested that two letters were making the close of the second letter 
 
 combined in our Epistle to the Philip- after iii. 9 instead of iii. to. See Hoog 
 
 plans, commenting on the plural in de Gat. Christ. Phil. etc. p. 54 sq. 
 
70 OHARAOTBR AND CONTENTS OP THE EPISTLE. 
 
 with the faith and loyalty of his converts ? With this thought 
 
 iu. 3—10. weighing on his spirit he resumes his letter. He bids the PhU- 
 ippians beware of these dogs, these base artisans, these muti- 
 lators of the flesh. This leads him to contrast his teaching with 
 theirs, the true circumcision with the false, the power of faith 
 with the inefficacy of works. But a caution is needed here. 
 Warned off the abyss of formalism, might they not be swept 
 into the vortex of license ? There were those, who professed the 
 Apostle's doctrine but did not follow his example ; who availed 
 themselves of his opposition of Judaism to justify the licentious- 
 ness of Heathenism; who held that, because 'all things were 
 lawful,' therefore ' all things were expedient' ; who would even 
 
 iii. II— J I. 'continue in sin that grace might abound.' The doctrine of 
 faith, he urges, does not support this inference; his own ex- 
 ample does not countenance it. Moral progress is the obligation 
 of the one and the rule of the other. To a church planted in 
 the midst of a heathen population this perU was at least as 
 great as the former. He had often raised his voice against it 
 
 It. I. before ; and he must add a word of warning now. He exhorts 
 the Philippians to be steadfast in Christ. 
 
 Subject re Thus the doctrinal portion, which has occupied the Apostle 
 
 Bumed. since he resumed, is a parenthesis suggested by the circum- 
 stances of the moment. At length he takes up the thread of 
 his subject, where he had dropped it when the letter was inter- 
 
 iT. 1, 3. rupted. He refers agaiu to their dissensions. This was the 
 topic on which repetition needed no apology. He mentions 
 by name those chiefly at fault, and he appeals directly to those 
 most able to heal the feuds. And now once more he seems 
 
 iv. 4— 7. drawing to a close: 'Farewell (rejoice) in the Lord alway: 
 again I say, farewell (rejoice).' Yet stiU he lingers : this fare- 
 well is prolonged into an exhortation and a blessing. At length 
 
 iv. 8, 9. he gives his parting injunction : ' Finally, my brethren, what- 
 soever things are true, etc' But something still remains unsaid. 
 He has not yet thanked them for their gift by Epaphroditus, 
 though he has alluded to it in passing. With a graceful inter- 
 mingling of manly independence and courteous delicacy he 
 
 iv. 10 — 20. 
 
CHARACTER AND CONTENTS OP THE EPISTLE. 71 
 
 acknowledges this token of their love, explaining his own cir- 
 cumstances and feelings at some length. At last the epistle 
 closes with the salutations and the usual benediction. iv. ii— ij. 
 
 The following then is an analysis of the epistle : ^th^^ 
 
 I, i. I, 2. Opening salutation. 
 
 L 3 — II. Thanksgiving and prayer for his converts. 
 i 12 — 26. Account of his personal circumstances and 
 feelings ; and of the progress of the Gospel in Rome. 
 
 II. i. 27 — ii. 4. Exhortation to unity and self-negation. 
 ii. 5 — II. Christ the great pattern of humility, 
 ii. 12 — 16. Practical following of His example. 
 
 HI. iL 17 — 30. Explanation of his intended movements; the 
 piu-posed visit of Timothy; the illness, recovery, and 
 mission of Epaphroditus. 
 
 IV. iiL I. The Apostle begins his final injunctions; but is 
 
 interrupted and breaks off suddenly. 
 
 [iii. 2 — iv. I. He resumes; and warns them against two 
 
 antagonistic errors : 
 Judaism (iii. 3 — 14). 
 He contrasts the doctrine of works with the doctrine of 
 
 grace ; his former life with his present. The doctrine 
 
 of grace leads to a progressive morality. Thus he is 
 
 brought to speak secondly of 
 Antinomicmism (uL 15 — iv. i). 
 He points to his own example; and warns his converts 
 
 against diverging from the right path. He appeals to 
 
 them as citizens of heaven, j 
 
 Here the digression ends ; the main thread of the letter 
 
 is recovered ; and 
 iv. 2, 3. The Apostle once more urges them to heal their 
 
 dissensions, appealing to them by name, 
 iv. 4—9. He exhorts them to joyfulness, to freedom 
 
 from care, to the pursuit of all good aims. 
 
 V. iv. 10 20. He gratefully acknowledges their alms re- 
 
 ceived through Epaphroditus, and invokes a blessing 
 on their thoughtful love. 
 
 VI. iv. 2 1 — 23. Salutations from all and to all. 
 
 The farewell benediction. 
 
72 OHARAOTBR AND CONTENTS OF THE EPISTLE. 
 
 Thoughts The Epistle to the Philippians is not only the noblest re- 
 l^'th'e*** flexion of St Paul's personal character and spiritual illumination, 
 epistle. jjjg 2g^j.gg sympathies, his womanly tenderness, his delicate cour- 
 tesy, his frank independence, his entire devotion to the Master's 
 service ; but as a monument of the power of the Gospel it yields 
 in importance to none of the apostolic writings. Scarcely thirty 
 years have passed since one Jesus was crucified as a malefactor 
 in a remote province of the empire ; scarcely ten since one Paul 
 a Jew of Tarsus first told at Philippi the stoiy of His cruel 
 death; and what is the result? Imagine one, to whom the 
 name of Christ had been hitherto a name only, led by circum- 
 stances to study this touching picture of the relations between 
 St Paul, his feUow-labourers, his converts ; and pausing to ask 
 himself what unseen power had produced these marvellous re- 
 sults. Stronger than any associations of time or place, of race 
 or profession, stronger than the instinctive sympathies of com- 
 mon interest or the natural ties of blood-relationship, a myste- 
 rious bond unites St Paul, Epaphroditus, the Philippian con- 
 verts ; them to the Apostle, and him to them, and each to the 
 other. In this threefold cord of love the strands are so inter- 
 twined and knotted together, that the writer cannot conceive 
 of them as disentangled. The joy of one must be the joy of 
 all ; the sorrow of one must be the sorrow of all. 
 
 The Apostle's language furnishes the reply to such a ques- 
 tioner. This unseen power is the ' power of Christ's resurrection*.' 
 This mutual love is difiused from 'the heart of Christ Jesus*,' 
 beating with His pulses and living by His life. When the con- 
 temporary heathen remarked how ' these Christians loved one 
 another,' he felt that he was confronted by an unsolved enigma. 
 The power which wrought the miracle was hidden from him. 
 It was no new commandment indeed, for it appealed to the 
 oldest and truest impulses of the human heart. And yet it was 
 a new commandment ; for in Christ's life and death and resur- 
 rection it had found not only an example and a sanction, but 
 a power, a vitality, wholly unfelt and unknown before. 
 ■ Phil. iii. lo. « Phil. i. 8. 
 
CHARACTER AND CONTENTS OF THE EPISTLE. 73 
 
 To all ages of the Church — to our own especially — this its great 
 epistle reads a great lesson. While we are expending our ®*'°°' 
 strength on theological definitions or ecclesiastical rules, it 
 recalls us from these distractions to the very heart and centre 
 of the Gospel — ^the life of Christ and the life in Christ. Here 
 is the meeting-point of all our differences, the healing of all 
 our feuds, the true life alike of individuals and sects and 
 churches : here doctrine and practice are wedded together ; for 
 here is the ' Creed of creeds' involved in and arising out of the 
 Work of works. 
 
The Oenuineness of the Epistte. 
 
 Internal TNTBRNAL evidence wUl appear to most readers to place the genuiner- 
 evidence. -L ness of the Epistle to the Philippians beyond the reach of doubt. This 
 evidence is of two kinds, positive and negative. On the one hand the 
 epistle completely reflects St Paul's mind and character, even in their 
 finest shades. On the other, it offers no motive which could have led 
 to a forgery. Only as the natural outpouring of personal feeling, called 
 forth by immediate circumstances, is it in any way conceivable. A forger 
 would not have produced a work so aimless (for aimless in his case it must 
 have been), and could not have produced one so inartificial 
 Genuine- Nevertheless its genuineness has been canvassed. Bvanson {Disio- 
 nesa ques- iiance, etc. p. 263) led the van of this adverse criticism. At a later date 
 tioned. Schrader {Der Apostel PauluB v. p. 201 sq.) threw out suspicions with 
 regard to different portions of the epistle. More recently it haa been 
 condemned as spurious by Baur (see especially his Paulus p. 458 sq.), 
 who is followed as usual by Schwegler {Naehap. Zeit. n. p. 133 sq.), 
 and one or two others. His objections, says Bleek {Einl. ins N. T. p. 433), 
 rest sometimes on perverse interpretations of separate passages, sometimes 
 on arbitrary historical assumptions, while in other cases it is bard to con- 
 ceive that they were meant in earnest. 
 Objeotions I cannot think that the mere fact of their having been brought 
 need not forward by men of ability and learning is sufficient to entitle objections 
 be oonsi- ^f j-jjjg stamp to a serious refutation. They have not the suggestive 
 character which sometimes marks even the more extravagant theories 
 of this school, and serve only as a warning of the condemnation which 
 unrestrained negative criticism pronounces upon itself. In this epistle 
 surely, if anywhere, the two complementary aspects of St Paul's person 
 and teaching — his strong individuality of character and his equally strong 
 sense of absorption in Christ — the 'I' and the 'yet not I'of his great 
 antithesis — ^both appear with a force and a definiteness which carry thorough 
 conviction. Hilgenfeld, the present leader of the Tiibingen school, refused 
 from the first to subscribe to his master's view respecting this epistle: 
 and probably few in the present day would be found to maintain this opi- 
 nion. The criticisms of Baur have been several times refuted ; e. g. in 
 the monographs of LUnemann Pauli ad Phil. EpUt. d^end., Gottingen 
 1847, and B. B. Bruckner jF^tsi. ad Phil. Paulo auctori vindic, Lips. 1848, 
 
THE GENUINENESS OP THE EPISTLE, 75 
 
 and in the introductions to the commentaries of Wiesinger, tadie, and 
 others. See also more recently Hilgenfeld Zeitschr. f. Wissensch. TheoL 
 1871 p. 192 sq., 309 sq., 1873 p. 178 sq. 
 
 The quotations from this epistle in early Christian writers are not Early qno- 
 80 numerous, as they would probably have been, if it had contained more *8.tions. 
 matter which was directly doctrinal or ecclesiastical Among the Apo- 
 stoUc fathers Clement op Rome (§ 47) uses the phrase ' in the beginning ApostoUo 
 of the Gospel ' (Phil. iv. 1 5). Again he says, ' If we walk not worthily fathers, 
 of Him' {nfj d|i(os avrou noKiTtvofuvoi, § 21 ; comp. PhiL i. 27). A third 
 passage (§ 2), ' Ye were sincere and harmless and not mindful of injury 
 one towards another,' resembles Phil. i. 10, ii. 15. And a fourth, in which 
 he dwells upon the example of Christ's humiMty (§ 16), seems to reflect the 
 famiUar passage in Phil. ii. 5 sq. Though each resemblance in itself is 
 indecisire, all combined suggest at least a probability that St Clement 
 had seen this epistle. When Ignatius {Rom. 2) expresses his desire of 
 being ' poured out as a libation ((r7ro»'8i<r5^i'ai) to God, while yet the altar 
 is ready,' this must be considered a reminiscence of PhiL ii. 17. In the 
 Epistle to the Philadelphians also (§ 8) the words 'do nothing from 
 party-spirit' (jujSiv kut ipiBtiav itpao-a-av) are taken from PhiL iL 3 ; 
 for in an eai-lier passage of the same letter (§ i) the writer reproduces the 
 second member of St Paul's sentence, ' nor from vainglory ' (ouSe Kara Kevo- 
 8o$iav). In the Epistle to the Smyrnseans again the words § 4 ' I endure all 
 tilings, while He strengtheneth me' arc derived from PhiL iv. 13, and the 
 words § II 'Being perfect be ye also perfectly minded ' from PhiL iiL 15. 
 PoLTOAKP, addressing the Philippians, more than once directly nientions 
 St Paul's writing to them (§ 3, 11): he commences the body of the 
 letter with an expression taken from this epistle, ' I rejoiced with you 
 greatly in the Lord' {(rwcx^l" "/*'" M^y"^'"* *'" Kupi'w, comp. PhiL iv. lo 
 e'xapijv Si iv Kvplif /teyoXois) : and in other passages his words are a re- 
 flexion of its language; e.g. § 2 ' Unto whom all things were made subject 
 that are in heaven and that are on the earth etc.,' of Phil. ii. 10; § 9 
 'I did not run in vain,' of PhiL ii. 16 (comp. Gal. ii. 2); § 10 'diligentes 
 invicem, in veritate sociati, mansuetudinem Domini alterutri prsestolantes,' 
 of PhiL ii. 2 — S; § 12 'inimicis crucis,' of PliiL iii. 18. The words iav 
 iroKirevadluBa d^las avrov (§ s) are perhaps taken from Clement of Rome 
 (see above), though they resemble Phil. i. 27. 
 
 When Hebmas, Vis. i. 3, writes ' they shall be vmtten into the books Hennas- 
 of life,' he probably refers rather to Rev. xx. 15, than to PhiL iv. 3. 
 Other coincidences, as Vis. iii. 13 ' If anything be wanting it shall be 
 revealed to thee' (PhiL iii. 15), Mand. v. 2 ' Concerning giving or receiving' 
 (PhiL iv. 15), are not sufficient to establish a connexion. 
 
 In the Testaments of the Twelve Pateiarchs, a Jewish Christian Test, xii 
 work probably dating early in the second century, a few expressions are Patri- 
 borrowed from this epistle : Leei 4 ' in the heart {iv (nrXayxvois) of His ^^^ ^ 
 Son,' from Phil. i. 8; Benj. 10 'Worshipping the king of the heavens 
 who appeared on ea.rth in the form of man ' {iv iiof)<t>5 et'6piairov, to which 
 
A polo. 
 
 glBtS, 
 
 >j(, THE GENUINENESS OF THE EPISTLE. 
 
 one text adds Tatitivaatai, comp. PhiL iiL 21), and ZcO). 9 'Ye shall see in 
 the fashion of man etc.' (oi^eo-de iv o-xiJ/iaTj avBpatrov, it is doubtful 
 whether or not Oeov should follow, but the reference is plainly to Christ), 
 from Phil. ii. 6 — 8 ; Levi 14 'Ye are the luminaries (oi (fxaa-Trjpes) of the 
 heayen,' from Phil. ii. 15. 
 
 The Apologists supply scvoral references. In the Epistle to Diognb- 
 Tus occur the words ' their dwelling ia on earth but their citizenship is in 
 heayen ' («Vl y^t Siarpt^ova-iv dXX' fv ovpav^ TrdXirevovrat § 5) : conip. Phil. lii. 
 20. Justin Martyr [!] de liesurr. (c. 7, p. 592 d) also speaks of ' our hea- 
 venly citizenship,' and in another place (c. 9, p. 594 e) writes, ' The Lord 
 has said that our dwelling is in heaven (cv ovpava vrripxeiv).' In the 
 second passage the reference is probably to such sayings as Joh. xiv. 2, 3 ; 
 but the actual expression seems certainly to be borrowed from St Paul's 
 language here. Melito {Fragm. 6, p. 416, Otto) designates our Lord 
 Qeos oKriBfis irpoaiaviot inapxav, perhaps having in his mind Phil. iL 6 ; and 
 again he wites {Fragm. 14, p. 420, a passage preserved in Syriac) 'servus 
 roputatus est ' and ' servi speciem indutus,' obvioTisly from the context of 
 the same passage in our epistle. Thbophilus {ad Autol.) more than once 
 adopts expressions from this epistle; i. 2 'approving the things that are 
 excellent,' either from Phil. i. 10 or from Rom. ii. 18; ii. 17 'minding 
 earthly things' (ra cViycia (fypovovvTav), from PhiL iii. 19; lii. 36 'these 
 things are true and useful and just and lovely {irpoa<f>i\TJ),' apparently from 
 Phil. iv. 8 ; and again, as quoted by Jerome EpUt. 121 (ad Algasiam), ho 
 writes ' Quse antea pro lucre fuerant, reputari in stercora ' from PhiL iii. 8 
 (if the work quoted by Jerome may be accepted as genuine). 
 
 In the Epistle of the Churches op Viennb and Ltonb (a.». 177) 
 Euseb. H. E. v. 2, the text PhiL ii 6 ' who being in the form of God etc.' is 
 quoted. 
 
 In AifoiEifT Steiao Documents (edited by Cureton) it is said of Christ 
 (p. 14), ' He being God had appeared to them like men ' (Phil. ii. 6, 7), and 
 in another writing of the same collection (p. 56) these words occur ; ' One of 
 the doctors of the Church has said : The scars indeed of my body — that I 
 may come to the resurrection from the dead ' ; a combination of Gal. vi 17 
 and Phil. iii. 1 1. 
 
 The Sbthlani, a very early heretical sect, are stated by Hippolytus 
 {Haerei. v. p. 143, x. p. 318) to have interpreted the text PhiL ii 6, 7, to 
 explain their own doctrines. Cassianub a Valentlnian (about 170) quotes 
 PliiL iii. 20 (Clem. Alex. Strom. iiL 14, p. 554 Potter). And Thbodotub 
 (on the authority of the Excerpts published in the works of Clem. Alex., 
 p. 966 Potter) has two distinct references to a passage in this epistle 
 (Phil. ii. 7 in § 19 and § 35). 
 Apoory- ^" ^^'^ Apocryphal Acts of Thomas § 27 we read ' The holy name of 
 
 pUal Aots, Christ which is above every name ' {to wrip irav ivopa), from PhiL ii. 9. 
 Canons of '^^ Epistle to the Philippians appears in all the Canons of Scripture 
 Scripture, during the second century : in the lists of the heretic Marcion and of the 
 Muratorian fragment, as well as in the Old Latin and Peshito Syriac 
 versiong. 
 
 Churches 
 of Gaul. 
 
 Syriao 
 Docu- 
 ments. 
 
 Heretics. 
 
THE GENUINENESS OP THE EPISTLE. 
 
 77 
 
 With the other Pauline Epistles of our Canon it is directly quoted and Oloae of 
 assigned to the Apostle by Iben^us, Tebtuluas, and Cleueni of Alex- '"*'"'* 
 ANPRiA. Tertullian more especially, in passages already quoted (p. 65, 
 note 2), speaks of its having been read in the Philippian Church uninter- 
 ruptedly to his own time. Though he may not say this from direct per- 
 sonal knowledge or precise information, yet the statement would not have 
 been hazarded, unless the epistle had been universally received in the 
 Church as far back as the traditions of his generation reached. 
 
npos ^lAinnHsioYS. 
 
WE ALL ARE OHANOED INTO THE SAME IMAOE F&OM 
 GLOET TO OLOEY, AS OP THE LOED THE SFIEIT. 
 
 BUT THE FEUIT OF THE SPIEIT IS LOVE, JOT, PEACE. 
 
 And so the Word had breath, and tDrought 
 With human hands the creed qf creeds 
 In loneliness of perfect deeds, 
 
 More strong than all poetic thought. 
 
iipos *iAirinHsioYs. 
 
 n 
 
 AYAOS Kai Tifipdeos, SovXoi Xpia-rov 'Itjtrou, 
 TTcccriv TOts dyioK iu X.pi(rrw 'lt](rou TOts ovariv 
 
 I. naOXos] The official title of 
 Apostle is omitted here, as in the 
 Epistles to the Tbessalonians. In 
 writing to the Macedonian Churches, 
 with which his relations were so close 
 and afEectionatc, St Paul would feel an 
 appeal to bis authority to be unneces- 
 sary. The same omission is found iu 
 the letter to rhilemon, and must be 
 similarly explained. lie does not en- 
 force a command as a superior, but 
 asks a favour as a Mend (Fhilem. 8, 
 9, 14). In direct contrast to this 
 tone is the strong assertion of his 
 Apostleship in writing to the Galatian 
 Churches, where his authority and his 
 doctrine alike were endangered. 
 
 Tt/iddcor] The intercourse between 
 Timotheus and the Fhilippian Church 
 had been constant and intimate. He 
 had assisted the Apostle in its first 
 foundation (Acts xTi. i, 13, and xvii. 
 14). He had visited Philippi twice 
 at least during the third missionary 
 journey (Acts xix. 22, comp. 2 Cor. 
 i. I ; and Acts xx. 3, 4, comp. Kom. 
 xvi. 21). He was there not impro- 
 bably more than once during the 
 captivity at Csesarea, when the Apo- 
 stle himself was prevented from see- 
 ing them. And now again he was 
 on the eve of another visit, having 
 been chosen for this purpose, as one 
 whose solicitude for the Phihppians 
 had become a second nature (yinjo-ias 
 liepinvijati ii. 20). In like manner his 
 name is associated with St Paul in 
 the letters to the other great church 
 
 PHIL. 
 
 of Macedonia (i Thess. i. i, 2 Thess. 
 i. I). 
 
 But beyond the association of his 
 name in the salutation, Timotheus 
 takes no part in the letter. St Paul 
 starts with the singular (ver. 3) which 
 he maintains throughout ; and having 
 occasion to mention Timotheus speaks 
 of him in the third person, ii. 19. 
 
 iraa-iv] see the note on ver. 4. 
 
 Toir oyj'oisj ' t/te saints' i.e. the 
 covenant people : a term transferred 
 from the old dispensation to the new. 
 The chosen race was a holy people 
 (Xaot ayws), the Israelites were saints 
 (ayioi), by virtue of their consecra- 
 tion to Jehovah : see e.g. Exod. xix. 
 6, Deut. vii. 6, xiv. 2, 21, Dan. vii. 
 18, 22, 25, viii. 24. So I Mace. x. 39 
 
 Tols ayiois Tots iv 'ifpovcraXiJ/i. The 
 
 Christian Church, having taken the 
 place of the Jewish race, has in- 
 herited all its titles and privileges ; 
 it is 'a chosen generation, a royal 
 priesthood, an holy nation {f6vos aytov), 
 a peculiar people (i Pet. 11-9).' All who 
 have entered into the Christian cove- 
 nant by baptism are ' saints ' in the 
 language of the Apostles. Even the 
 irregularities and profligacies of the 
 Corinthian Church do not forfeit it 
 this title. Thus the main idea of the 
 term is consecration. But, though it 
 does not assert moral qualifications 
 as a fact in the persons so designated, 
 it implies them as a duty. And it 
 was probably because ayior suggestd 
 the moral idea, which is entirely want- 
 
82 
 
 EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIAN8. 
 
 [I. 2, 3 
 
 eV <I>tAt7r7rots <rvv eTria-KOiroi^ kui Siukovok. *xa/Ots v/J-Tu 
 Kui eipijvri diro Qeov Trarjoos tj/ndSv Kal Kvpiov 'Iriarov 
 
 XpiCTTOV. 
 
 *Eiy;^apicrTftJ t<S Gew fxov iirl -rrdcrr] Ttj juLveia vficov 
 
 ing to itpot, that the former was adopt- 
 ed by the Lxx translators as the com- 
 mon rendering of B'lp, while the latter 
 is very rarely used by them in any 
 sense : see esp. Lev. xi. 44 ayuurd^- 
 aetrBt kA ayioi catirBe on ayios «/i» 
 iya. 
 
 fv Xpia-Ta 'It/o-ov] to be connected 
 with ayiois. For the omission of the 
 article see the notes on i Thess. i. i. 
 
 tVio-KOTToti KOI Sia/covoir] ' the pres- 
 byters and deacons! The contribu- 
 tions were probably sent to St Paul in 
 the name of the oflBcers, as well as of 
 the church generally : comp. Acts xv. 
 23. Hence St Paul mentions them in 
 reply. It seems hardly probable that 
 this mention was intended, as some 
 have thought, to strengthen the hands 
 of the presbyters and deacons, their 
 authority being endangered. The dis- 
 sensions in the Fhilippian Church do 
 not appear to have touched the offi- 
 cers. On (rriimtmos and irpKr^vrtpoc, 
 as interchangeable terms, see the 
 detached note, p. 95. 
 
 2. x"P«* "M'" "•'".X.] On the form 
 of salutation see the note oh i Thess. 
 L I. 
 
 3. The thanksgiving in this epistle 
 is more than usually earnest. The 
 Apostle dwells long and fondly on the 
 subject. He repeats words and accu- 
 mulates clauses in the intensity of his 
 feeling. As before in the omission of 
 his official title, so here in the fulness 
 of his thanksgiving, the letters to the 
 Thessaloniaus present the nearest pa- 
 rallel to the language of this epistle : 
 see introduction p. 66. 
 
 3 — 5. ' I thank my God for you 
 all at all times, as I think of you, 
 whensoever I pray for you (and these 
 prayers I offer with joy), for that you 
 have co-operated with me to the fur- 
 
 therance of the Gospel from the day 
 when you first heard of it to the pre- 
 sent moment.' 
 
 The arrangement of the clauses in 
 these verses is doubtful They may 
 be connected in various ways, and the 
 punctuation will differ accordingly. 
 On the whole however the words 
 navTorc iv irairji bfrjtrei funi xmip irai/rtDV 
 vpMv seem naturally to run together ; 
 and if so, we have the alternative of 
 attaching them to the foregoing or to 
 the following words. I have preferred 
 the former for two reasons, (i) The 
 structure of the passage is dislocated 
 and its force weakened, by disconnect- 
 ing clauses pointed out so obviously 
 as correlative by the repetition of the 
 same word irooj;, nmrroTe, natrj/, jrav- 
 rav; see Lobeck Parol, p. 56. (2) 
 
 The words pfra j^apas T^K Ser;(Tu/ Troiaii- 
 pevos seem to stand apart, a.1 an ex- 
 planatory clause defining the charac- 
 ter of the foregoing jrdtrj dnjo-ti ; for 
 there would be great awkwardness in 
 making one sentence of the two, iv 
 irairg Seijarti r^x Stjjaiv woiovptvos. For 
 the connexion euxapiirrciv irairroTt (in 
 most cajses with ircpi or vitip vpav) see 
 I Cor. i. 4, I Thess. i. 2, 2 Thess. i. 3, 
 ii. 13, Ephes. v. 20, and perhaps also 
 CoL i. 3, PhUem. 4 : comp. also Ephes. 
 
 1. 16 ov iravopai fv^apitrrav, 
 
 T^ et 9 pov] ' my God.' The singu- 
 lar expresses strongly the sense of a 
 close personal relationship : comp. Acts 
 xxvii. 23 ' whose I am and whom I 
 serve' : see also the note on GaL ii 20, 
 and comp. iii. 8. 
 
 (irl TToi/j; Tj pv(l^ ' in all my re- 
 membrance' not ' on every remem- 
 brance (eVi nacrji p.vt'uf)' which would 
 point rather to isolated, intermittent 
 acts. On ftvfla and cO^^opiarv see the 
 notes I Thess. i. 2. 
 
I- 4,S] 
 
 EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIAN8. 
 
 83 
 
 '*7rdvTOT6 eu Trdcrri 8e>j(ret julov virep Trdvrwv vfxwVf fierd 
 X<^pd^ "T^f ^^tjo'iv TTOiovixevo^, ^trn Tt] KOivmvia v/uuSv eU 
 TO evayyeXiov diro [t^s] irpwTt]^ i^fxepa^ ^XP'' '''^^ ^^^' 
 
 4. u'lrep iravrav t5;u<5i<] should be 
 connected rather with (vxapia-ra than 
 with iv ircurji Sfi/o-ei, for the following 
 reasons, (i) The words are more na- 
 turally taken as independent and co- 
 ordinate with all the preceding clauses, 
 
 eiri ivcurji tJ livcla, nivTOTf, iv ttooj; 
 SeTjo-ei, than as dependent on any one 
 singly. (2) The stress of the Apo- 
 stle's statement is rather on the 
 thanksgiving for all than the prayer 
 for all, as he is dwelling on their good 
 deeds. (3) In the parallel passages 
 already quoted the common connexion 
 is cv-)(apicrT(iv vrrep (or Trepl) vp^v. 
 
 There is a studied repetition of the 
 word 'all' in this epistle, when the 
 Philippian Church is mentioned : see 
 i. 2, 7 {vTTfp Trdvrav ijiav, itavras vpas), 
 8, 25, ii. 17, iv. 21. It is impossible 
 not to connect this recurrence of the 
 word with the strong and repeated 
 exhortations to unity which the epi- 
 stle contains (i. 27, ii. i — 4, iv. 2, 3, 5, 
 7, 9). The Apostle seems to say, ' I 
 make no difference between man and 
 man, or between party and party : my 
 heart is open to all ; my prayers, my 
 thanksgivings, my hopes, my obliga^ 
 tions, extend to alL' See the intro- 
 duction, p. 67. 
 
 /lero xapSs k.t.X.] ' Summa episto- 
 Ise,' says Bengel, ' gaudeo gaudete' : 
 comp. 1. 18, 25, ii. 2, 17, 18, 28, 29, 
 iiL I, iv. I, 4, 10. The article before 
 fitijo-tv refers it back to the previous 
 
 5. iiti Tjj Koivavia act.X.J The pre- 
 vious clause pfTa xapas TfjH Serjiriv 
 iroiovpevos being a parenthesis, these 
 words are connected with evxapiario. 
 For ft;;(api(n-fti' eVi see I Cor. L 4* 
 The words signify not ' your participa- 
 tion in the Gospel' {tov eiayyfXiov, 
 comp. iL I, iii lo), but ' your coopera- 
 tion towards, in aid of the Gospel' («s 
 rd (iayyikiov). For the construction 
 
 see 2 Cor. ix. 13 anXorriTi Trjs KOLVcovlat 
 els avTOvs, Bom, XV. 26 Kowwviav Tiva 
 jTotTJaairdai els roils TTTup^our. In the 
 passages just quoted Kotvavla has a 
 restricted meaning, ' contributions, 
 almsgiving ' (as also in 2 Cor, viii. 4, 
 Hebr. xiii. 16 ; so Koivtuvetv, Bora. xii. 
 13; KoivaviKos, I Tim. vi. 18; see 
 Fritzsche Som. in. p. 81); but hero, 
 as the context shows, it denotes co- 
 operation iu the widest sense, their 
 participation with the Apostle whether 
 in sympathy or in suffering or in ac- 
 tive labour or in any other way. At 
 the same time their almsgiving was a 
 signal instance of this cooperation, 
 and seems to have been foremost in 
 the Apostle's mind. In this particu- 
 lar way they had cooperated from the 
 very first (ano Tijs irptirris ^pepas) 
 when on his departure from Philippi 
 they sent contributions to Thessalo- 
 nica and to Corinth (iv. 15, 16 eV apx^ 
 TOV fvayye\[ov), and up to the present 
 time (Sxpi TOV vvv) when again they had 
 despatched supplies to Rome by the 
 hands of Epaphroditus (iv. 10 1781; iroTi). 
 
 TrpmTtjs] ' the first' The article is 
 frequently omitted, because the nu- 
 meral is sufficiently deflnite in itself: 
 comp. Mark xii. 28 — 30, xvi. 9, Acts 
 xii. 10, xvi. 12, XX. 18, Bphes. vi 2. 
 Here some of the oldest mss read rijr 
 n-pmrijs, but the article might perhaps 
 be suspected, as a likely addition of 
 some transcriber for the sake of 
 greater precision. 
 
 6, 7. 'I have much ground for 
 thanksgiving ; thanksgiving for past 
 experience, andthanksgivingfor future 
 hope. I am sure, that as God has in- 
 augurated a good work in you, so He 
 will complete the same, that it may be 
 prepared to stand the test in the day 
 of Christ's advent. I have every rea 
 son to think thus favourably of you 
 all; for the remembrance is ever in 
 
 6—2 
 
84 
 
 EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 ri-6,7 
 
 ^ireTTOidu)^ avTO rovro, on 6 ivap^d/xeuos h vfiTv epyov 
 djadov eTnreXea-ei d.xpi-[^ ij/JLepa^ 'Ijjo-oy Xpia-Tov, ^Kad- 
 ws ia-Tiv ^iKaiov e/moi rovro (ppoveiv virep Trdvrwv vfiwv, 
 lid TO ex'^iv fie ev t^ Kaplia vfxd^ eu re toT^ Sea-fxoh 
 
 6. ii/iipas Xpiarou 'IriroO, 
 
 my lieart, how you — yes, all of you — 
 have tendered me your aid and love, 
 whether in bearing the sorrows of my 
 captivity or in actively defending and 
 promoting the Gospel : a manifest to- 
 ken that ye all are partakers with me 
 of the grace of God.' 
 
 6. TTCTTot^wr avTo TovToi] ' HncC I 
 have this very confidence.' This as- 
 surance, built on the experience of 
 the past, enables the Apostle to anti- 
 cipate matter for thankfulness. For 
 avTo TouTo comp. Gal. ii. lo, 2 Cor. ii. 
 3, 2 Pet. 1. S (vrith a v. 1.). The order 
 alone seems sufficient to exclude an- 
 other proposed rendering of airo toC- 
 To, 'on this very account,' i.e. 'by rea- 
 son of your past cooperation.' 
 
 6 ivap^afuvos] The words eVdpx"'^'") 
 imreKtXv, possibly contain a sacriticial 
 metaphor : see the notes on Gal. iii. 3, 
 and compare ii. 17 rt xal (nrlvhofuu iitX 
 tjl 6v<rl<}. For the omission of ecor 
 before o evap^aiuvos compare Gal i. 6, 
 1 5 (notes). 
 
 tipyov aya66v\ By this ' good work ' 
 is meant their cooperation with and 
 affection for the Apostle. By the 
 workers of this work St Paul doubt- 
 less means the Philippians themselves. 
 Nevertheless it is God's doing from 
 beginning to end : He inaugurates 
 and Ho completes. This paradox of 
 all true religion is still more broadly 
 statedinii. 12, 13,'Work out your oiore 
 salvation, for it is Ood that worketh 
 in you both to will and to work etc' 
 
 &Xpit ^jiipas 'lijaoti} refers to the 
 foregoing notes of time, otto wptortjs 
 rjiiipas and a)^pi rov vvv ; but the ex- 
 pression implies something more thim 
 a temporal limit. The idea of a test- 
 ing is prominent : ' God will advance 
 you in grace, so that you may be pre- 
 
 pared to meet the day of trial' On 
 the meaning of rjp-fpa and on the ab- 
 sence of the definite ai-ticle see the 
 notes on i Thess. v. 2. 
 
 As 'the day of Christ ' is thus a 
 more appropriate limit than ' the day 
 of your death,' it must not be hastily 
 inferred from this expression that St 
 Paul confidently expected the Lord's 
 advent during the lifetime of his Phil- 
 ippian converts. On the other hand, 
 some anticipation of its near approach 
 seems to underlie axpn here, as it is 
 implied in 8t Paul's language else- 
 where, e.g. in 17 /if ir 01 fm>T« i Thess. 
 iv. 17, and in navres ov KoifiT)6Ti<Toiif6a 
 (probably the correct reading) i Cor. 
 XV. 51. 
 
 7. This confidence is justified by 
 their past cooperation, which is indeli- 
 bly stamped on the Apostle's memory. 
 The stress of the reason (Sm), which 
 is the foundation of this assurance, 
 rests not on ex"" *'" rs xapdi^i but on 
 crvvKOM'tavotif r^s -xapvros, not on the 
 act of remembering but on the thing 
 remembered. 
 
 Kadas\ See the note Gal. iii. 6. 
 
 TOUTO t^povciv K.T.X.] ' to entertain 
 this opinion concerning you all.' On 
 the difference between vtrip and irtpi 
 see the note on Gal. i. 4, and comp. 
 Winer § xlvii. p. 466. 
 
 81a TO fx^iv fie K.T.X.'l'because Ihave 
 you'; not, as it is sometimes taken, 
 ' because you have me.' The order of 
 the words points to this as the correct 
 rendering ; and the appeal which fol- 
 lows, 'for God is my witness,' re- 
 quires it. 
 
 €v Tf Toit ie(Tp.ols K.T.X.] Aro thcse 
 words to bo taken with the foregoing 
 or with the following clause ? Ac- 
 cording as they are attached to the 
 
1.8] 
 
 BPISTLB TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 85 
 
 juoi» Kai ev Trj dTroXoyia Kai (3el3aiw(rei tov evayyeXiov 
 avvKOivtovovs fxov tjjs 'xpipiTO^ Traj/ras i5/xas ovrav ^fiap- 
 Tus yap p-ov 6 0eos, oJs eirnroQio Traj/ras \jfxa.<s ev (nrXay- 
 
 avTov TrKTTeiSeiv aAXa Kai to virip av- 
 roS irdiTxtiv. A more special len- 
 dering of the passage is sometimes 
 adopted, 'joint-contributors to the 
 gift which I have received' : see e.g. 
 Paley's Hor. Paul, vii. i. But though 
 ;(a'pif sometimes refers specially to 
 almsgiving (e.g. i Cor. xvi. 3, 2 Cor. 
 viii. 4), such a restriction here seems 
 to sever this clause from the context 
 and to destroy the whole force of the 
 passage. 
 
 v/iac] repeated: comp. CoL iL 13 
 (the correct reading), and see Winer 
 § xxil p. 184. 
 
 8. ' 1 call God to witness that I did 
 not exaggerate, when I spoke of having 
 you all in my heart.' The same form 
 of attestation occurs in Rom. i. 9 : see 
 also 2 Cor. i. 23, i Thess. IL 5, 10. 
 
 imTcoda] ' / yearn after! The pre- 
 position in itself signifies merely di- 
 rection; but the idea of straining after 
 the object being thereby suggested, 
 it gets to imply eagerness: comp, 
 Biod. Sic.xvii. 101 irapovri iikv ov XPI- 
 irdiuvos airovTa Be €iri7ro0^<ras. It is a 
 significant fact, pointing to the greater 
 intensity of the language, that, while 
 the simple words iroBos, iroBelv, etc. 
 are never found in the New Testa- 
 ment, the compounds inmoBeiv, tVin-o- 
 6ia, iirtirodtjo-ts, eVnrofli)ror, occur with 
 tolerable frequency. 
 
 iv inrKayxvois k.t.X.] ' Did I speak of 
 having you in my own heart ? I should 
 rather have said that in the heart of 
 Christ Jesus I long for you.' A power- 
 ful metaphor describing perfect union. 
 The believer has no yearnings apart 
 from his Lord; his puke beats with 
 the pulse of Christ ; his heart throbs 
 with the heart of Christ ' In Paulo 
 non Paulus vivit,' says Bengel, 'sed 
 Jesus Christus' ; see the note on Gal. 
 ii. 20. Comp. Test. aii. Patr. Levi 4 
 iv a'7rXa/;(vo{s viov avrov. Theophilna 
 
 one or the other, their meaning will 
 be different, (i) If we connect them 
 with what precedes, iv will be tempo- 
 ral, and the sense will then be, ' I bear 
 this in mind, both when I am in bonds 
 and when I am pleading my cause in 
 court.' But even if there were ground 
 for supposing that the trial had al- 
 ready begun, the clause is thus ren- 
 dered almost meaningless. (2) On 
 the other hand, if they are attached 
 to the following words, the sense is 
 easy: 'participators with me both in 
 my bonds and in my defence and main- 
 tenance of the Gospel,' Le. 'If I have 
 suffered, so have you ; if I have la- 
 boured actively for the Gospel, so have 
 you': comp. vv. 29, 30. 
 
 rg airoKoyla ic.t.X.] The two words, 
 being connected by the same article, 
 combine to form one idea. As imo- 
 \oyia implies the negative or defen- 
 sive side of the Apostle's preaching, 
 the preparatory process of removing 
 obstacles and prejudices, so ^e^aiavis 
 denotes the positive or aggressive side, 
 the direct advancement and establish- 
 ment of the Gospel The two toge- 
 ther will thus comprise all modes of 
 preaching and extending the truth. 
 For dn-oXoym see ver. 16 ; for /Se/Saio)- 
 (ris I Cor. L 6. 
 
 (rvvKoiviovovs iiov k.t.\.2 'partakers 
 with me in grace.' The genitives are 
 best treated as separate and inde- 
 pendent, so e.g. iL 30: comp. Winer 
 § XXX. p. 239. In this case ij X'V^' 
 with the definite article stands abso- 
 lutely for ' the Divine grace,' as fre- 
 quently : e.g. Acts xviii. 27, 2 Cor. iv. 
 15, Qai. V. 4, Ephes. ii. 8. 'Grace' 
 applies equally to the ' bonds,' and to 
 the ' defence and confirmation of the 
 Gospel' If it is a privilege to preach 
 Christ, it is not less a privilege to suf- 
 fer for Him : comp. ver. 29 iiiiv ixa- 
 pladij TO VTrep Xpiarov, ov ii6vovTO fit 
 
86 
 
 EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 [1. 9, lo 
 
 Xvoii Xpiarou 'Irjarov' '/ca/ tovto "Trpocrevxoinah 'i-va^n d-y- 
 ccTTT] vfxcov en fiaXKov Kai fxaWou Trepura-evrj iv eTriyvoia-ei 
 Kai Trda-r] a'ia-6ii(r€i, "ets to loKiixd^eiv vfxd^ ra ^la- 
 (pipovTU, 'lua nre elXiKpiveis Kai aTrpoa-KOTroi ets vfxepap 
 
 g. fiSWov veptffaeiffji. 
 
 Apostle alone nor towards one another 
 alone, but love absolutely, the inward 
 state of the souL 
 
 (ad Autol. ii. lo, 22) uses o-jr\ayx>'a 
 and Kapbia as convertible terms, speak- 
 ing of the Word in one passage aa 
 (vhiaBerov ev rois ifii'oit airXayxvois (tov 
 8foC), in another as evStaderov iv xap- 
 Sia Bcov. 
 
 The oTrXdyx"" *re properly the no- 
 bler viscera, the heart, lungs, liver etc., 
 as distinguished from the evrepa, the 
 lower viscera, the intestines : e. g. ^sch. 
 Ago/m. 1 22 1 avv (vripoisTc oTrXdyp^va. 
 The irirKayxva alone seem to be re- 
 garded by the Greeks as the seatof the 
 affections, whether anger, love, pity, 
 or jealousy. On the other hand no 
 such distinction is observed in He- 
 brew. The words DiDm, WVD, and 
 even mp, which occur commonly in 
 this metaphorical sense, seem to cor- 
 respond rather to €VTfpa than to 
 (TirXayxva : whence even icotXia and 
 tyxara are so used in the lxx. The 
 verb <nrKayxv'i.^e<r6ai seems not to be 
 classical, and was perhaps a coinage 
 of the Jewish dispersion, the metaphor 
 being much more common in Hebrew 
 than in Greek 
 
 9. ' I spoke of praying for you (ver. 
 4). This then is the purport of my 
 prayer {tovto npoacvxoiuu), that your 
 love may ever grow and grow, in the 
 attainment of perfect knowledge and 
 universal discernment.' 
 
 lua] introduces the clause which de- 
 scribes the purport of tovto. For 
 this connexion of tovto Iva compare 
 I Joh. iv. 17: see also 3 Job. 4 /xei^o- 
 Tepav TOVT(OP ovk ?^q) x*^?^^ ^^^ aKovto 
 K.T.\., Joh. XV. 13 ixel^ova ravTr/s dya- 
 TTTjv ov^iels e^^' **'** '"'^ '^')^ ^i^X^^ avTov 
 
 6^ K.T.X. For such later usages of Iva, 
 which in older classical Greek always 
 denotes motite or design, see the 
 notes on i Thess. ii. 16, v. 4, Gal. v. 17. 
 ij dyon-i)] ' love,' neither towards the 
 
 cTt p.aWov (t.r.X.] An accumulation 
 of words to denote superabundance, 
 as below ver. 23. The present {rrfpur- 
 a-fvji), perhaps better supported than 
 the aorist (n-fpto-o-fuo-j), is certainly 
 more in place, as expressing the con- 
 tinuous growth. 
 
 emyvcia-ei] ' advanced,perfect know- 
 ledge.' The intensive preposition {iw't) 
 before yvda-n answers to the adjective 
 before alaSria-ei. Comp. I Cor. xiiL 12 
 
 lipTi yivdo-Kio CK fiepovs totc St eitt- 
 yvda-oiiat: see also the distinction of 
 yvaaris and irriyviatris in Justin Dial, 
 p 220 B. The substantive, which ap- 
 pears in St Paul in the Epistle to the 
 Romans (i. 28, x. 2) for the first time, 
 is found several times in the letters 
 of the captivity and afterwards. Its 
 more frequent occurrence thus corre- 
 sponds to the more contemplative as- 
 pect of the Gospel presented in these 
 later epistles. See CoL i. 9 (note). 
 
 !rd<ri) aiirflijo-fi] ' all perception.' Love 
 imparts a sensitiveness of touch, gives 
 a keen edge to the discriminating fa- 
 culty, in things moral and spiritual 
 While iirlyvams deals with general 
 principles, alir6r)<ns is concerned with 
 practical applications. The latter word 
 does not occur elsewhere in the New 
 Testament, but aWBriTripia is used si- 
 milarly to denote the organs of moral 
 sense, Hebr. v. 14 rav 8ia 1^1/ t^iv to. 
 ala-driT^pia yeyvjivaajxiva e;(diiTi»i< npot 
 SiaKpia-iv KoXov re xai KaKov : COmp. Jer. 
 iv. 19 TO. al(r6t]Tijpia ttjs KopSlas. 
 
 10. TO SiatfiepovTo] not 'things which 
 are opposed,' as good and bad (so for 
 instance Fritzsche Rom. 1. p. 129) — 
 for it requires no keen moral sense 
 to discriminate between these — but 
 
I. II, 12] 
 
 EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIAN8. 
 
 87 
 
 XpitTTOVf " ireirXriptonevoi Kapirov SiKaio<rui/ris tov Zia 
 \ri<rov XpuTTOv ets Bo^av kuI eTraivov Qeou. 
 
 "Tiucia-Keiv Se Vjuas fiovXofiai, dSe\(j)oi, oti ra kut' 
 e'jue fiaWou ek irpoKOirriv tov evayyeXlov iXtiXudeu, 
 
 'things that transcend,' ' ex bonis me- 
 liora' in Bengel'a words. The phrase 
 SoKifiaieiv ra diacpipovra occurs also 
 Rom. ii 18. 
 
 ttKiKpiveXt] signifies properly 'dis- 
 tinct, unmixed,' and hence ' pure, un- 
 sullied.' The probable derivation and 
 first meaning of the word (a strategi- 
 cal term, elXij, eiKriiov, ' gregatim,' 
 comp. <f)vKoKpivc'iv) are suggested by 
 Xen. Oyrop. viii. 5. 14 Koi 8ia to tiXi- 
 KpiVTJ cKairra (Tvai [to (jbvXa], ttoXu fioK- 
 \ov fjv B^\a, (cai oirori tis ivTOKToii] Koi 
 ei Ttt fiTf irpdrrot to irpoffTaTTofitvov, A 
 different account of the word however 
 (deriving it from tiXij, 'sunlight') is 
 generally received. 
 
 djrpoo-Koffot] might be either in- 
 transitive, 'without stumbling,' as Acts 
 
 xxiv. 16 dirpoiTKOirov trvi/EtSijo-iv cx^'" 
 jrpol TOV Qeov, or transitive, 'not caus- 
 ing offence,' as 1 Cor. x. 32 dnpocrKorroi 
 Kol 'lovSaiois yivfa6e Kal 'EXXi/aw. If 
 the former sense be taken, eiXucpufcic 
 and arpia-Konoi will be related to each 
 other as the positive and the negative : 
 if the latter, they will denote respec- 
 tively the relation to God (tlKiKpivfts) 
 and the relation to men (oirpoo-Kon-oi). 
 The former is to be preferred; for it 
 is a question solely of the fitness of the 
 Philippians to appear before the tri- 
 bunal of Christ, and any reference to 
 their influence on others would be out 
 of place. Comp. Jude 24, 25, ra Se Sv- 
 vafiivfo (jivXi^ai vfias dnraiaTovs Kai 
 (TT^crai icaTCTiiOTJOw Trjs So^iyt avrov dp,(o- 
 fiovs K.T.X. 
 
 f Is TJiicpav XpicToC] not ' until' but 
 'for the day qf Christ'; comp. ii. 16, 
 and see also i 6. 
 
 1 1. KopTTov SiKoioiTvi^r] Tho oxpros- 
 sion is taken from the Old Testament, 
 e.g. ProT. xi. 30, Amos vi 12, and oc- 
 curs also James iii. 18. For the ac- 
 
 cusative after n-Xi^poCo'dai comp. Col. 
 i. 9: similarly Luke xL 46 (popri^erf 
 Tois dvdpdirovc (jioprla 8v(rj3aoTaKra. 
 See Winer § xxxii. p. 287. ( 
 
 rai> dia 'lijo-ov] added to guard against 
 misunderstanding. The Apostle means 
 'righteousness in Christ,' as contrasted 
 with 'righteousness by law': comp. iii. 
 9. Only so far as the life of the believer 
 is absorbed in the life of Christ, does 
 the righteousness of Christ become 
 his own. Thus righteousness by faith 
 is intimately bound up with the life in 
 Christ: it must in its very nature be 
 fruitful ; it is indeed the condition of 
 bearing fruit. Comp. John xv. 4 'As 
 the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, 
 except it abide in the vine, no more 
 can ye, except ye abide in me.' 
 
 fit da|ai> K.T.X.] The only true aim 
 of all human endeavours: comp. iL 11. 
 ' The glory,' the manifestation of His 
 power and grace; 'the praise,' the re- 
 cognition of these divine attributes by 
 men : comp. Ephes. i. 6 els tiraivov do- 
 fi;r T^r xdpiros avrov, ib. i. 12, 14. 
 
 12. 'Lest you should be misinform- 
 ed, I would have you know that my 
 sufferings and restraints, so far from 
 being prejudicial to the Uospel, have 
 served to advance it. My bonds have 
 borne witness to Christ, not only among 
 the soldiers of the imperial guard, but 
 in a far wider circle. The same bonds 
 too have through my example inspired 
 most of the brethren with boldness, 
 so that trusting in the Lord they are 
 more zealous than ever, and preach 
 the word of God courageously and un- 
 flinchingly.' 
 
 TO Kar" ifu] 'my circumstances' as 
 Col. iv. 7, Ephes. vi. 21 : comp. Tobit 
 X. 8, I Esdr. i. 22. 
 
 ftaXXov] 'rather' than the reverse, 
 as might have been anticipated. 
 
88 
 
 EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 [I- I3f 14 
 
 '^ft)0"Te Toys SetTyuoi/s fiov (pavepoiii iv XpicrTw yevetrdai 
 iv o\w Tw TrpaiTmp'iM Kal TOts Xoi-TToh Trdariv, ^*Kai toi)s 
 7r\e/oi/as toov dSeXcJiSv ev Kvplu) TreTrot^oVas To7i Setr/xots 
 juof TrepKra-oreptos ToXjdav d<pol3w5 tou \6you tov Qeov 
 
 irpoKonTJi/] The verb irpoKcmTdv is 
 strictly classical; not so the substan- 
 tive, which is condemned in Phryni- 
 chus (Lobeck, p. 85). It is however 
 common in writers of this age. 
 
 13. (fiavcpois (C.T.X.] 'have become 
 manifest in Chrigt,' i.e. 'have been 
 seen in their relation to Christ, have 
 borne testimony to the Gospel.' 
 
 fv oXo) ra Trpanaipitfl 'througliout 
 tlie prwtorian guards i.e. the soldiers 
 composing the imperial regiments. 
 This seems to be the best supported 
 meaning of irpairiepiov. If a local sense 
 is assigned to it, it will probably sig- 
 nify the 'praetorian camp,' but clear 
 examples of thia sense are wanting : 
 see the detached note, p. 99. On St 
 Paul's intercourse with the prsetorian 
 soldiers see the introduction, pp. 7 
 
 19- _ 
 
 roil XoiTTotr 7raiTiv\ ' to all the rest ': 
 comp. 2 Cor. xiii. 2 ; a comprehensive 
 expression, which must not be rigor- 
 ously interpreted: see the introduc- 
 tion, p. 32 sq. The translation of the 
 Authorised Version, 'in all other 
 places,' will not stand. 
 
 14. Tovr liKeiovas] 'the greater num- 
 ber.' St Paul excepts a minority, who 
 through cowardice or indiflference held 
 back. 
 
 iv Kvpioi] to be taken with neiroiBo- 
 rar rolt Sctrpiois /lou. Similarly GaL v. 
 10 veitoiBa (Is vpas (v Kvpt'oi, 2 Thess. 
 iii. 4 tT€iroi6ap€V 8e iv Kupi^ c(^' Vfias. 
 
 Comp. also below ii. 24, Ilom. xiv. 14. 
 The words iv Kvpitf are thus emphatic 
 by their position. They cannot well be 
 attached to t£v dfi<X<^<ui', as rmv adt\- 
 <l)av alone designates the Christian 
 brotherhood, and the addition would 
 be unmeaning. The instances quoted 
 in favour of this connexion (CoL L 2, 
 iv. 7, Bphes, vi, 2i) are no correct pa- 
 
 rallels; for in none of these passages 
 does the preposition depend directly 
 on adcX(^or. For iriiroiBa, with a 
 dative of the thing in which the confi- 
 dence reposes (rotr hcapois), see Phi- 
 lem. 21. 
 
 ireptaraoTcpas] This word SCCDIS 
 never to lose its comparative force: 
 see the note on Gal. i. 14. Here it 
 denotes the increased zeal of the bre- 
 thren, when stimulated by St Paul's 
 endurance. The Apostle accumulates 
 words expressive of courage, vf7roi66- 
 ras, irepurfTOTtptast To\p3.v at^o^oir, as 
 above in ver. 9 (see the note). 
 
 TOV etoD] These words, which are 
 wanting in the received reading, have 
 a decided preponderance of authority 
 in their favour, and should probably 
 stand in the text: comp. Acts iv. 31 
 
 i\a\ovv TOV \oyov toO ©eoO pcTa itappxj- 
 aias. 
 
 IS — 17. 'But though all alike are 
 active, all are not influenced by the 
 same motives. Some preach Christ 
 to gratify an envious and quarrelsome 
 spirit: others to manifest their good- 
 will. The latter work from love, ac- 
 knowledging that I am appointed to 
 plead for the Gospel : the former 
 proclaim Christ from headstrong par- 
 tisanship and with impure motives, 
 having no other aim than to render 
 my bonds more galling.' 
 
 These antagonists can be none other 
 than the Judaizing party, who call 
 down the Apostle's rebuke in a later 
 passage of this letter (iii. 2sq.) and 
 whose opposition is indirectly implied 
 in another epistle written also from 
 Borne (Col. iv. 11): see above, pp. 17, 
 18. They preach Christ indeed, but 
 their motives are not single. Their 
 real object is to gain adherents to the 
 law. The main-spring of their activity 
 
1. 15—17] 
 
 EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANa 
 
 89 
 
 XaXeiv '^ 
 
 vuov Kai eptv, rices oe Kai oi 
 
 Tti/es juei/ Koi ha 
 evSoKiav Tov XpitrTov Kt]pv(r<rov(nv' ^'^01 fxev i^ dydinii, 
 etSores oti ets diroXoyiav tov evayyeXiov KeTfxai, '^ol 
 
 is a factious opposition to the Apostle, 
 a jealousy of his influence. They 
 value success, not as a triumph over 
 heathendom, but as a triumph over 
 St Paul It enhances their satisfac- 
 tion to think that his sufferings will be 
 made more poignant by their progress. 
 
 But how, it has been asked, can St 
 Paul rejoice in the success of such 
 teachers? Is not this satisfaction 
 inconsistent with his principles] Does 
 he not in the Epistle to the Galatians 
 for instance wholly repudiate their 
 doctrine, and even maintain that for 
 those who hold it Christ has died in 
 vain t This apparent incongruity has 
 led some writers to deny any reference 
 to the Judaizers here; while to others 
 it has furnished an argument against 
 the genuineness of the whole epistle. 
 But the two cases are entirely different. 
 In the one, where the alternative is 
 between the liberty of the Gospel and 
 the bondage of ritualism, he un- 
 sparingly denounces his Galatian con- 
 verts for abandoning the former and 
 adopting the latter. Here on the 
 other hand the choice is between an 
 imperfect Christianity and an uncon- 
 verted state; the former, however in- 
 adequate, must be a gain upon the 
 latter, and therefore must give joy to 
 a high-minded servant of Christ. In 
 Rome there was room enough for him 
 and for them. He was content there- 
 fore that each should work on inde- 
 pendently. It was a step in advance 
 to know Christ, even though He were 
 known only 'after the flesh.' 
 
 Koi iia <t>d6vov] 'even from envy^ 
 monstrous as this will seem. For dm 
 <^6voy see Matt, xxvii. 18, Mark xv. 
 10. Philemon the comic poet (Meineke, 
 IT. p. 55)> voKka fu SiiaiTKfK dfjidopas 
 Sta <f)0(tt>ov, has been quoted in illus- 
 tration of this passage. 
 
 KOI di' fvioKlav] 'alio out of gooA- 
 will'; this second xai must be differ- 
 ently translated from the former. The 
 substantive evDoKia may mean either 
 (i) 'purpose, design, desire,' Ecclus. xL 
 17 'J fvdoKia avTov tls tov alava fvo- 
 S<oB^<T(Tai, Bom. X. I 1; tvSoKta TTJt 
 e/i!}! KapSlas Ka\ i) bftitrn wpos tov 
 Qfov; or (2) 'satisfaction, contentment, 
 happiness,' Ecclus. xxxv. 14 oi opBpl^ov- 
 Tes (vprjorovaiv evSoKiav, 2 Thess, i. 1 1 
 iraxrav evdoKiav ayaOtotrvvijs ; or (3) 
 'benevolence, goodwill,' Ps. 1. 20 dya- 
 6wov, KvpK, ev Tji cvdoKia o-ov tt\v 
 Siiiv, cv. 4, and perhaps Luke ii. 14. 
 These different signi'flcations arise out 
 of the object to which tvSoKia is di- 
 rected. In the first case it refers to 
 things future, in the second to things 
 present, in the third to persons. 
 Fritzsche(i?om.n.p.37 1) hasseparated 
 the different meanings of this word, 
 but is not happy in his examples. In 
 the present passage the opposition to 
 dia (t>86vov Ka\ eptv seems to require 
 the third meaning. 
 
 16, 17. The order of the clauses is 
 reversed by the figure called chiasm, 
 so that the subject last introduced is 
 discussed first; as e.g. Gal. iv. 4, 5. 
 In the received text the verses are 
 transposed, with a view to remedying 
 this supposed irregularity. 
 
 t| ayaiTTisl 'the one preach Christ 
 out of love'; and t^ ipiBetas must be 
 similarly taken. Others connect o! c£ 
 
 tpiStias, oi f'l dyairr)!, 'the factious,' 
 'the loving,' comparing Kom. ii. Sroir 
 8c f^ epiBeias (see also iii. 26, Gal. iii. 
 7, 9); but the order in the second 
 clause is very awkward with this ar- 
 rangement, which makes ror Xpurrov 
 KarayyeWova-iv unduly emphatic. 
 
 Kci/tut] '/ am appointed,' as Luke 
 ii. 34 ovrof Kcirat tls Trruo'ti' Kai dva- 
 arainv iroKK&v, I Thess. iii, 3 avroi ydo 
 
90 
 
 BPISTLB TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 [I. i8, 19 
 
 Se e^ ipideia? [tov] Xpurrov KarayyeWovariv ovx ay- 
 i/aJs, olo/jLevoi dXi-^iv iyeipeiv tois Secyuots fiov. ' t' 
 yap ; ttX??!/ oTt ttuvtI rpovw, e'lTe 7rpo(f)d<rei e'ire d\ri 
 deia, XjOMTTOS KarayyeTiKeTai, koI iv tovtw X"'!" 
 dWd Kai ;;^a/)>j<ro/xar ^^oUa yap on tovto fioi aTro- 
 
 Tl 
 
 w 
 
 19. 
 
 oZ5a Zk oTL, 
 
 oidarc on eic tovto Kei/ifda: comp. 
 Josh. iv. 6. The idea of prostration, 
 if implied at all, can only be sub- 
 ordinate. 
 
 17. «| eptdfias] The interests of 
 party were predominant with the Ju- 
 daizers : their missionary zeal took the 
 form of a political canvass. For the pro- 
 per meaning of ipiOda, 'partisanship,' 
 see the note on Gal. v. 20. The words 
 TOV Xptarop KaTayyeWovtriv seem to be 
 added to bring out the contrast be- 
 tween the character of their motives 
 and the subject of their preaching; 
 for there is a moral contradiction be- 
 tween tpiBeia and XpLoros. 
 
 ovx oyiar] ' *"*% mixed, impure mo- 
 tives,' explained afterwards by npo- 
 <j>a<Tei. The insincere, selfish, and even 
 sordid motives of the Judaizers are 
 denounced in other passages also : 
 2 Cor. xi. 13, 20, Gal. vi. 12. 
 
 S\^riv tyeipeiv] 'to make m/y chains 
 gallmel where the metaphor in B^iyjns 
 is clearly seen. This word, though ex- 
 tremely common in the Lxx, occurs 
 very rarely in classical writers even of 
 a late date, and in these few passages 
 has its literal meaning. The same 
 want in the religious vocabulary, which 
 gave currency to SXlsjns, also created 
 'tribulatio' as its Latin equivalent. 
 On the accent of SXiyjfis see Lipsius 
 Cframm. Uhters. p. 35. The reading 
 iyeipeiv, besides being better support- 
 ed, carries out the metaphor better 
 than eirujtepftv of the received text. 
 The gathering opposition to the Apo- 
 stle's doctrine of liberty, the forming 
 of a compact party in the Church 
 bound to the observance of the law, 
 were the means by which they sought 
 
 to annoy and wound him. 
 
 18. Tl yap;] ' What then,' as Xen. 
 Mem. ii. 6. 2, 3, iii. 3. 6, and commonly 
 in classical writers: comp. also lxx, 
 Job xvi. 3, xxi. 4. 
 
 7rXi7K oTi] 'only that,' as Acts xx. 
 23; comp. Plut. Mor. p. 780 a, Plato 
 PhoBd. p. 57 B, Theaat.-p. 183 a. This 
 seems on the whole the most probable 
 reading. Some texts have ttX^v alone, 
 others on alone ; both which readings 
 appear like attempts to smooth the 
 construction. The latter however, 
 which is supported by one excellent 
 authority, may possibly be correct. 
 
 Trpo^so-ct] 'as a cloke for other de- 
 signs,' i.e. using the name of Christ to 
 promote the interests of their party 
 and to gain proselytes to the law. 
 On irpo<f)aais, 'an ostensible purpose,' 
 generally but not necessarily implying 
 insincerity, see the note on i Thess. ii. 
 5. The opposition of wpoifKuns and 
 aKridri.a is illustrated by numerous ex- 
 amples in Wetstein and RapheL 
 
 iv ToiiTo)] 'herein^ i.e. iv t^ Koray- 
 
 ycXXco-dat XptOTOv. 
 
 aKKa Koi \apr)iTopjii\'yea and I shall 
 r^oiee.' The abruptness reflects the 
 conflict in the Apostle's mind : he 
 crushes the feeling of personal annoy- 
 ance, which rises up at the thought of 
 this unscrupulous antagonism. The 
 A V. however, 'I will rejoice,' brings 
 out the idea of determination more 
 strongly than the original justifies. 
 
 19, 20. 'Is not my joy reasonable ? 
 For I know that all my present trials 
 and sufferings will lead only to my 
 salvation, and that in answer to your 
 prayers the Spirit of Christ will bo 
 shed abundantly upon me. Thus will bo 
 
I. 20] 
 
 BPISTLH TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 91 
 
 pria-erai ets a-corripiav Sia rij^ vfjLwv 8ej;'creft)s Kai iirixop- 
 >J7tas Tov irvevfiaro^ 'hjcrov Xpia-Tov, ^°KaTa Trjv diro- 
 KapahoKiav Kai e\7riSa /jlov, oti iv ovBeui ala-)(yv6ria'oixaiy 
 ctAA' eV 7rao-»j Trappria-ia ojs wavTOTe Kai vvv /meyaXwdn- 
 trerai Xpia-ro^ iv tw a-wpLari fxov, eiVe Bid ^w^s e'ire ha 
 
 fulfilled my earnest longing and hope, 
 that 1 may never hang back through 
 shame, but at this crisis, as always, 
 may speak and act courageously; so 
 that, whether I die a martyr for His 
 name or live to laboilr in His service. 
 He may be glorified in my body.' 
 
 19. rovTo] ' this state of things,' these 
 perplexities and annoyances. It is un- 
 connected with the preceding h rovrtf, 
 ver. 18. 
 
 awTrjpiaii] ' salvation,' in the highest 
 sense. These trials will develope the 
 spiritual life in the Apostle, will be a 
 pathway to the glories of heaven. His 
 personal safety cannot be intended 
 here, as some have thought ; for the 
 varrjpia, of which he speaks, will be 
 gained equally whether he lives or 
 dies (ver. 20). 
 
 TTji vfimu SfiqtTeas K.r.X.] The two 
 clauses are fitly connected by the same 
 article ; for the supply of the Spirit is 
 the answer to their prayer. 
 
 «Vtxopi)yiat] ' hountiful supply'; see 
 the note on Gal iii. 5. But must the 
 following genitive toS itveifuiTos be 
 considered subjective or objective ? Is 
 the Spirit the giver or the gift ? Ought 
 we not to say in answer to this qnes- 
 tion, that the language of the original 
 suggests no limitation, that it will bear 
 both meanings equally well, and that 
 therefore any such restriction is arbi- 
 trary 1 ' The Spirit of Jesus ' is both 
 the giver and the gift For the ex- 
 pression TO wivjia 'iTjo-ov Xpurroi com- 
 pare Bom. vlii. 9, Gal. iv. 6, and Acts 
 xvi 7 (the correct reading). 
 
 20. airoKapadoKtav] ' earnest desire.' 
 The substantive occurs once again in 
 the New Testament, Rom. viii. 19. 
 The verb is not uncommon in Polybius 
 
 and later writers. The idea of eager- 
 ness conveyed by the simple word 
 KapaboKiiv is further intensified by the 
 preposition, which implies abstraction, 
 absorption, as in airofiXeveiv, dircKSi- 
 Xeo-dai, etc. : comp. Joseph. B. J. iiL 
 7. 26 Tois ptiv ovv Kaff erepa irpotr((>e- 
 povtri ras /cXi/xa/tas ov i7po(rei)(tv, dir»- 
 KapaSoKei Se t^v 6pp.fiv rav ^fXav, i.e. 
 his attention was drawn ofif and con- 
 centrated on the missiles ; a passage 
 quoted by C. F. A. Fritzsche, whose ac- 
 count of the word however {Fritzscli. 
 Opusc. L p. 150) is not altogether 
 satisfactory. 
 
 aiaxwB^aopMi ic.r.X.] altrxvfl and 
 irapprja-ia are opposed, Prov. xiii. 5 
 direfi^s S« alcrxvvfrai Ka\ ovx «|« jrop- 
 prja-laVf I Joh. ii. 28 ax^f^^^ napprja-iav 
 Kol pLT) al(rxvi>B£p,ev drr' avTov. This 
 right of free speech {wai.prio-la) is the 
 badge, the privilege, of the servant of 
 Christ: see esp. 2 Cor. iil 12. 
 
 Kai mv] ' SO now.' For ical vvv (itot 
 ipri) corresponding to oSc {kuBios) comp. 
 I Joh. ii. 18, Gal. i. 9. 
 
 peydKvvBriaeTai] After €V jracrjj irap- 
 prio-iq. the first person might naturally 
 be expected: but with sensitive reve- 
 rence the Apostle shrinks from any 
 mention of his own agency, lest he 
 should seem to glorify himself. It is 
 not fteyaXwdria-opM, not even peya- 
 \vvo TOV XpKTTOv, but pcyokwdj^iTeTai 
 XpuTTot iv T^ irtipMrl pov. For the 
 thought compare 2 Cor. iv. 10 iriv 
 TOTt T^v vfKpaiTiv TOV 'lijcou eV Ta aa- 
 paTi nfpKJtfpovres, Iva Kai >J fm^ tov 
 'Ii/aofl iv T^ a-dpoTi ij/iui/ <}>av€p<a6^, 
 1 Cor. vi. 20 dofdo-arc dij tok e<oi» iv 
 r^ adp^Tt vpav. 
 
 21 — 26. ' Others may make choice 
 between life and death. I gladly 
 
92 
 
 davaTOv. 
 
 61 
 
 I de 
 
 EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. [I. 21, 32 
 
 e'/xoi yap to ^iju XpKTTos Kal to exTrodaveiv 
 J ^iju ev (rapKi touto fioi KapTro^ epyov — 
 
 TO 
 
 accept either alteraaiive. If I lire, 
 my life is one with Christ : if I die, 
 my death is gain to mo. Yet when 
 I incline to prefer death, I hesitate : 
 for ma; not my life — this present ex- 
 istence which men call life — may not 
 my life be fruitful through my labours 1 
 Nay, I know not how to choose. I am 
 hemmed in, as it were, a wall or this 
 side and a wall on that If I con- 
 sulted my own longing, I should desire 
 to dissolve this earthly tabernacle, and 
 to go home to Christ ; for this is very 
 far better. If I consulted your in- 
 terests, I should wish to live and 
 labour still: for this your needs re- 
 quire. And a voice within assures 
 me, that so it will be. I shall continue 
 here and abide with you all; that I 
 may promote your advance in the 
 faith and your joy in believing : and 
 that you on your part may have in me 
 fresh cause for boasting in Christ, 
 when you see me present among you 
 once more.' 
 
 31. e'/xoi] ' to me,' whatever it may 
 be to others : so i^/uSv, iii. 20. 
 
 TO Cqv Xpiaros] 'life it Christ.' 
 ' I live only to serve Him, only to com- 
 ratmo with Him; I have no concep- 
 tion of life apart from Him.' ' Quio- 
 quid vivo,' is Bengel's paraphrase, 
 ' Christum vivo': comp. Gal. ii. 20 fa 
 8e ovKfTi iyti, ^fi he iv c/ioi Xpiaros, and 
 Col. iii. 3, 4. 
 
 TO aTToBavfiv KfpSos] ' death is gain, 
 for then my union with Christ will be 
 more completely realised.' The tense 
 denotes not the act of dying but the 
 consequence of dying, the state after 
 death: comp. 2 Cor. viL 3 «'t ro 
 avvairoSavfiv Koi (ruvf^x, 'to be with 
 you in death and in life.' The proper 
 opposition to f^" is not dirodvjjo-Kfiv, 
 but aiToBavt'iv or redvavai, e.g. Plato 
 Leg. p. 958 B, Gorg. p. 483 b, Phced. 
 62 A. ^e difference is marked in 
 Plato Phced. 64 a ovfi^f jXXo cVtn^Sev- 
 
 ovirtv ij airoBv^a-Keiv Tt koX reOvavat. 
 
 22. The grammar of the passage re- 
 flects the conflict of feeling in the 
 Apostle's mind. He is tossed to and 
 fro between the desire to labour for 
 Christ in life, and the desire to be 
 united with Christ by death. The 
 abrupt and disjointed sentences ex- 
 press this hesitation. 
 
 t J 8e TO f^K K.T.X.] Of several inter- 
 pretations that have been suggested, 
 two only seem to deserve consideration : 
 (i) 'But if my living in the flesh will 
 be fruitful through a laborious career, 
 then what to choose I know not,' In 
 this case ml will introduce the apo- 
 dosis. The only passage at all ana- 
 logous in the New Testament is 2 Cor. 
 li. 2 fl yap iyi) \vira vpas, xai tU I 
 fitjipalvav pe ; comp. Clem. Horn. ii. 44 
 «i St ro ttIov Spot iiriBvpti, Koi tIvos to 
 wavra ; fl ^txiberai, Koi ris aXijOfvd ; 
 K.T.X. But the parallel is not exact, 
 for in these instances xal introduces a 
 direct interrogative. Passages indeed 
 are given in Hartung (i. pp. 130, 131) 
 where Koi nshers in the apodosis after 
 tl, but these are all poetical And 
 even if this use of koI be admissi- 
 ble, the sentence still runs awkwardly. 
 (2) 'But if (it be my lot) to live 
 in the flesh, then my labour will be 
 productive of fruit. And so what to 
 choose I know not.' Thus the sen- 
 tence (I ie TO Cljv K.T.X. is treated as 
 elliptical, the predicate being sup- 
 pressed. But, though ellipses are very 
 frequent in 8t Paul (comp. o.g. Rom. 
 iv. 9, V. 18, ix. 16, I Cor. iv. 6, xi. 24, 
 2 Cor. i. 6, Gal. ii. 9, y. 13, etc.), yet 
 the present instance would be ex- 
 tremely harsh. Of the two explana- 
 tions already considered the first seems 
 preferable ; but may not a third be 
 hazarded 1 (3) ' But what if my living 
 in the flesh will bear fruit, etc.? In 
 fact what to choose I know not' In 
 this case tl implies an interrogation, 
 
I-*3] 
 
 EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 93 
 
 Kai ri aipritronai ov yvwpi^w *^<ruvixoiJ.ai Se ck tiSv 
 Si/o, Ttjv iiridvixiav i'xwv ets to dvaXvorai kui (Tvv Xjotc- 
 
 the apodosis being suppressed ; as in 
 Bom. ix. 22, Acta xxiii. 9 (where the 
 received text adds ;ii7 6to\i.a.\Si^tv). 
 On this and similar uses of tl see 
 Winer § Ivii. p. 639, § Ixiv. p. 750, A. 
 Buttmann pp. 2 14, 2 1 5. I do not know 
 whether this interpretation has ever 
 been suggested ; but it seems to be in 
 keeping with the abruptness of the 
 context, and to present less difficulty 
 than those generally adopted. 
 
 rd ^i> iv o-opxi] St Paul had before 
 spoken of the natural life as to (ijp 
 simply; but the mention of the gain of 
 death has meanwhile suggested the 
 thought of the higher life. Thus the 
 word f7K requires to be qualifled by 
 the addition of iv a-apuL After all 
 death is true life. Tlie sublime guess 
 of Euripides, rw olSev tl to {^v iiiv 
 (<m KarBavflv to KorBaveiv bi (f/v, 
 which was greeted with ignoble ridi- 
 cule by the comic poets, has become 
 an assured truth in Christ. 
 
 Kapiros tpyov] Comp. Rom. L 13 tva 
 Til/a Kapirov <rx« Koi iv vfiiv. For the 
 metaphor see i Cor. iiL 6 sq. 
 
 ou yva>pl{la] ' I do not perceive.' 
 Vvtapl^eiv has two distinct senses ; (i) 
 'Tounderstand,know';(2) 'To declare, 
 make known.' In classical Greek the 
 former seems to be the more common, 
 even at a late date, though the latter 
 occurs not infrequently. On the other 
 hand in biblical Greek the latter is 
 the usual meaning (e.g. below, iv. 6), 
 the exceptions being very few, as here 
 and Jobiv. i6(Symm.),xxxiv.25(Lxx): 
 comp. Test. adi. Pair. Dan 2 <^(Xoi/ ov 
 yvapl^d. 
 
 23. a-vvcxop-ai i< Tap Suo] '/ am 
 hemmed in on both tides, I am pre- 
 vented from inclining one way or the 
 other.' The preposition seems to de- 
 note direction, as in ix Stiiac, in 6a- 
 Xoo-cri;;, etc. The dvo are the two horns 
 of the dilemma, stated in verses 21,22. 
 
 TTiv itriOviuav (e.T.X.] 'my own desire 
 
 tends towards.' Comp. Gal vi 4. 
 
 TO dvaXvirai] ' to break up, depart, 
 comp. dvaXva-is 2 Tim. iv. 6. The me- 
 taphor is drawn from breaking up au 
 encampment, e.g. Polyb. v. 28. 8 av6is 
 f u irapaxfilJuia-iav dviXvat, 1 Macc. ix. I 
 dvoKiKvKai aKotTfiuii. The camp-life 
 of the Israelites in the wilderness, 
 as commemorated by the annual feast 
 of Tabernacles, was a ready and ap- 
 propriate symbol of man's transitory 
 life on earth : while the land of pro- 
 mise with its settled abodes, the land 
 flowing with milk and honey, typified 
 the eternal inheritance of the redeem- 
 ed : Hebr. iv. i sq. See especially 
 
 2 Cor. V. I ihv r\ iiriyetos rjp.<av oiKia 
 Tov o-Kiji/ovf KaraXvdjj, oikoSo/jltjv ex 
 0eov expfiev, olxiav d)^fipoiroiriTov ald- 
 
 viov iv roic ovpavo'is, and ver. 4. Com- 
 pare also the metaphor in Plut Mor. 
 76 D ou fiovas TToioCo'ii' 5 iiroxat airirfp 
 iv oS^ Ttjs wpoKoirris dW* dvaXinreiS' 
 
 a-iiv Xp«(7Tm etvai] The faithful im- 
 mediately after death are similarly re- 
 presented as in the presence and kee]>- 
 ing of the Lord also in 2 Cor. v. 6, 8 
 
 ivBrjiioivTes iv t^ aaiuiTi inhtipioiviiev 
 diTo TOV Kvpiov K.r.X., Acts vii. 59 ; 
 comp. Clem. Bom. § 5 iwopevBt) tU rov 
 6<l)eiX6iievov TOTTov t^s So^rjs of St Pe- 
 ter and fir toi' ayiov tottov iiroptvdjj of 
 St Paul, Polyc. Phil. § 9 fit tok oi^f i- 
 \6ii(Vov avTo'is TOTTOV floX irapa t^ Ku- 
 pla. On the other hand their state 
 after death is elsewhere described as 
 a sleep from which they will arise, 
 I Cor. XV. 51, 52, I Thess. iv. 14, 16. 
 The one mode of representation musi 
 be qualified by the other, 
 
 TToXX^ pSKkov KpfTo'cov] For the 
 triple comparative see Isocr. Archid. 
 §83 7roXu yap icpf iTTov...TeXfWT^(ra« 
 roK (3ioi» fiaXXov ^ (^v k.t.\. and other 
 references in Wetstein : comp. Winer 
 § XXXV. p. 254, The insertion of yap 
 is supported Ijy most of the best iiss ; 
 and yet a reading which comes to tin 
 
94 
 
 BPISTLH TO THE PHILIPPIAN8. 
 
 [I. 24—26 
 
 T^ eivar ttoAAw [yap] yuaAAoj/ Kpeia-aov "^to Se ctti- 
 jxtveiv [ei/] TJ; aapKi dvajKaioTepov hi v/aas. ^^Kat tovto 
 ir€7roi6ws oiBa, oti /xej/w Kai Trapa/uievw irda-iv vfiiv eis 
 Triv vpiwv 7rpoK07rt]U Kai ^apau Trji Tr/cTTews, ^'iva to 
 Kav^rj/na vfxwv 7repur<revri iv X.pi(rT(S ^IrjcroO eu i/uoi Sid 
 Trji i/nfji Trapoucria? ttoKiv irpoi vfxd^. 
 
 relief of a disjoiuted syntax must be 
 regarded with suspicion. 
 
 24. cTTt/ievcu' rfi copKi] not 'to 
 
 abide in,' but ' to abide by the flesh,' 
 to ding to this present life, to take it 
 with all its inconveniences. This is the 
 common construction of (miUveiv in 
 St Paul, Bom. vi i, xi. 22, 23, Col i. 
 23, I Tim. iv. 16. The insertion of iv 
 weakens the force of the expression ; 
 besides that this preposition is not 
 found with (Ttijiivciv elsewhere in St 
 Paul, except in i Cor. xvi. 8 cmficva iv 
 'E(j)iira which is no parallel. 
 
 dvayKaiorepov'] The comparative cor- 
 responds to the foregoing Kpt'ia-trov. 
 Either alternative is in a manner ne- 
 cessary, as either is advantageous. But 
 the balance of necessity (of obligation) 
 is on one side, the balance of advan- 
 tage on the other. 
 
 25. roCro Ttenoidas oida] ' Cff thia 
 lam confidently persuadedfthut etc' ; 
 COmp. Bom. xiv. 14 olba xal nfireurfiat 
 ...on (C.T.X., and Ephes. v. 5 tovto yap 
 UTTt yLvd<TKOvT€s OTI nag nopvos ic.r.X. 
 The words are commonly taken, 'being 
 persuaded of this (that my life will be 
 advantageous to you), I know that etc' 
 
 oiSa] not a prophetic inspiration, but 
 a personal conviction : comp. ii. 24. 
 The same word o'Sa is used Acts xx. 
 25, where he expresses his belief that 
 he shall not see his Asiatic converts 
 again. Viewed as infallible presenti- 
 ments, the two are hardly reconcilable ; 
 for the one assumes, the other nega- 
 tives, his release. The assurance here 
 recorded was fulfilled (i Tim. i. 3); 
 while the presentiment there express- 
 ed was overruled by events (i Tim, i 
 3, 2 Tim. i. 15, 18, iv. 20). 
 
 Trapaiieva] is relative, while luva is 
 absolute. It denotes continuance in a 
 certain place or with certain persons 
 or in certain relations. Very frequent- 
 ly, as here, it takes a dative of the per- 
 son, e. g. Plat. Apol. p. 39 E, Pkmd. 
 lis D ovKCTi v/uv TrapapievH, etc. The 
 reading of the received text avunapa- 
 fuva may be dismissed, as insufficient- 
 ly supported. fici/<u xm napaiieva may 
 be translated ' bide and abide.' 
 
 r^s irioTcas] to be taken with both 
 substantives. For xapav r^t irlamas 
 comp. Bom. xv. 13 n-Xi^pmo-ai vp,as tto- 
 o-Tjr x.'^pas Koi elp^v7]s iv t^ TTurreveiv. 
 On joyfulness, as the key-note of this 
 epistle, see the notes, i. 4, iv. 4. 
 
 26. iva TO Kai^t]p,a k.tX.] ' that you 
 may have more matter for boasting in 
 me,' not ' that I may have more mat- 
 ter for boasting in you,' as it is some- 
 times taken. Either would accord with 
 the Apostle's language elsewhere, 2 
 
 Cor. i. 14 on Kavx^lJta vfiiv iafiey icad- 
 airep Ka\ vfie'is ij/iuv iv TJ 'ifiepa row 
 Kvplov 'Ii/o-oO (comp. V. 12) ; but the 
 former is the simpler interpretation of 
 the words here. The words Kavxao-dai, 
 KaixTia-is, Kavxnfui, link this epistle 
 with the preceding group, where they 
 occur very abundantly (see the intro- 
 duction, p. 42 sq.). In the later epistles 
 only one instance is found, Ephes. ii. 
 g. On the difference between Kavxt- 
 lia, Kavx^(ric, see the note GaL vi 4. 
 
 iv] repeated. The first denotes the 
 sphere in which their pride lives ; the 
 second the object on which it rests. 
 Compare Col. ii. 7 irfpiao-tiovres iv av- 
 rn iv cvxaptoTif. 
 
 wapovaias itoXik] For the position of 
 iroXiK see the note on GaL 1. 13. 
 
EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIAN8. 95 
 
 The synonymes 'hisliop' and 'presbyter.' 
 
 IT is a lact now generally recognised by theologians of all shades of The two 
 opinion, that in the language of the New Testament the same ofScer in wotiIb ay 
 the Church is called indifferently 'bishop' (eVio-Kcuror) and 'elder' or 'presby- nonymea. 
 tor' (irpea^vTfpos). The bearing of this fact on the origin and authority of 
 the 'episcopate,' as the term was understood later and as it is understood 
 in the present day, will be considered in a dissertation at the end of this 
 volume. At present it will be sufficient to establish the fact itself; but 
 before doing so, it may be useful to trace the previous history of the two 
 words. 
 
 Episcopus, 'bishop,' 'overseer,' was an official title among the Greeks. Moaning 
 In Athenian language it was used especially to designate commissioners of 'bishop' 
 appointed to regulate a new colony or acquisition, so that the Attic 'bishop' in heathen 
 corresponded to the Spartan 'harmostV Thus the impostor, who intrudes ''"'®" 
 upon the colonists in Aristophanes (Av. 1022), says fVio-Koiros rJKo) &tvpo r^ 
 Kvaiuf Xaxdv. These officers are mentioned also in an inscription, Boeckh 
 no. 73. The title however is not confined to Attic usage; it is the designa- 
 tion for instance of the inspectors whose business it was to report to the 
 Indian Idngs (Arrian Ind. xiL 5) ; of the commissioner appointed by Mithri- 
 dates to settle affairs in Ephesus (Appian Mithr. 48); of magistrates who 
 regulated the sale of provisions under the Ilomans (Charisius in the Dig. 
 1. 4. 18); and of certain officers in Rhodes whose functions are unknown 
 (Boss. Imcr. Crrcec. Ined. fasc. in. nos. 275, 276)*. 
 
 In the Lxx the word is common. In some places it signifies 'inspectors, ^^^ jjj q^ 
 superintendents, taskmasters,' as 2 Kings xi. 19, 2 Chron. zxxiv. 12, 17, Is. lzx. 
 Ix. 17; in others it is a higher title, 'captains' or 'presidents,' Neh. xi. 9, 
 
 1 Harpociation a. v. (ed. Dindorf. er ia an article in the Bevue Archeo- 
 
 p.iig) quotes from TheophiastuSjiroXXv logique,^. 246 (Avril 1866), supposes 
 
 yip KiiXXioK Kard ye Tj)» rov dvi/aciTos the iirliiKoiroi here to be officers of a 
 
 64irty, us ol AiKuves ipiuxtris ipiiTKovres club or confraternity (fpanos or 0ia(ros), 
 
 eh Tit ircSXeif ir^^ireii", ovk iin(rK6rovs in which he is followed by Benan Les 
 
 ovdi ipi\aKas, <it 'kdrivaXoi. See also ApStres p. 353. If their opinion be cor- 
 
 Sohol. on Arist. Av. 1. c. 0! rap' 'A.6ri- rect, this inscription presents a closer 
 
 vttlwii els rlu iiriiKoovs iroX«! iwirKii/ia- analogytotheChriatianuaeof theterm, 
 
 fftfeu t4 rap' eKiffTois weiivo/iefot ivl- than the instances given in the text, 
 
 irxoirot Kui 4>6\aKes iKoKoSiTo oSs ol Aa- The context of the inscription however 
 
 Kuves itpiioariLS i\er/ov. is not decisive, though this interpreta- 
 
 * In these instances the MirKoirot tion seema fairly probable : see below 
 
 seem to hold aome ofSoe in connexion p. ig^. There can be no reasonable 
 
 with a temple. In another inacription doubt I imagine about the reading e'Tri- 
 
 (Ross. Inscr. Gr«c. Ined. faao. 11. no. ff/tiiros ; though Boss himaelf suggested 
 
 198), found at Thera, the word again imaah^as, because he found the word 
 
 occurs; AeSox^af aliiroSe\iaiUvos t^* in another Thersean inacription (Boeckh 
 
 IrayyeHau t4 /•[ii' ipYfipior iySauetaai no. 1448). In this latter inscription 
 
 Tit iitMKli[m>s\ A'wa koI HeKiXrirov, iiriirffd^oj is probablya mason's blunder 
 
 where among other dialectic forms the for htruiKoirot. 
 aoousativeploralinot occurs. M.Wesch- 
 
96 
 
 BPI8TLB TO THE PHILIPPIAN8. 
 
 tniaKOWi/i. 
 
 The term 
 presbyter 
 or elder 
 
 transfer- 
 red from 
 the Syna- 
 gogue to 
 the 
 Chmoh. 
 
 Identity of 
 the two 
 in the 
 apostolic 
 writings 
 
 14, 22. Of Antiochug Epiphanes we are told that when he determined to 
 overthrow the worship of the one true God, he 'appointed commissioners 
 {(iruTKonovs, bishops) over all the people,' to see that his orders were 
 obeyed (i Mace. i. 51 : comp. Joseph. Ant. xii. 5. 4; in 2 Mace. v. 22 the 
 word is iirurToras). The feminine ('muKair^, which is not a classical word, 
 occurs very frequently in the lxx, denoting sometimes the work, sometimes 
 the ojice, of an tiria-Koiros. Hence it passed into the language of the New 
 Testament and of the Christian Church. 
 
 Thus beyond the fundamental idea of intpeetion, which lies at the root 
 of the word 'bishop,' its usage suggests two subsidiary notions also; (i) Re- 
 sponsibility to a superior power; (2) The introduction of a new order of 
 things. 
 
 The earlier history of the word presbyterui (elder, presbyter, or priest) 
 is much more closely connected with its Christian sense. If the analogies 
 of the 'bishop' are to be sought chiefly among heathen nations, the name 
 and o£Sce of the 'presbyter' are essentially Jewish. Illustrations indeed 
 might be found in almost all nations ancient or modem, in tlie yrpovaia of 
 Sparta for instance, in the 'senatus' of Rome, in the 'signoria' of Florence, 
 or in the 'aldermen' of our own country and time, where the deliberative 
 body originally took its name from the advanced age of its members. But 
 among the chosen people we meet at every turn with presbyters or elders 
 in Church and State from the earliest to the latest times. In the lifetime 
 of the lawgiver, in the days of the judges, throughout the monarchy, during 
 the captivity, after the return, and under the Roman domination, the 
 'elders' appear as an integral part of the governing body of the country. 
 But it is rather in a special religious development of the office, than in these 
 national and civil presbyteries, that we are to look for the prototype of 
 the Christian minister. Over every Jewish synagogue, whether at home 
 or abroad, a council of 'elders' presided'. It was not unnatural therefore 
 that, when the Christian synagogue took its place by the side of the Jewish, 
 a similar organization should be adopted with such modifications as cir- 
 cumstances required; and thus the name familiar under the old dispen- 
 sation was retained under the new. 
 
 Of the identity of the 'bishop' and 'presbyter' in the language of the 
 apostolic age, the following evidence seems conclusive. 
 
 (i) In the opening of this epistle St Paul salutes the 'bishops' and 
 'deacons'.' Now it is incredible that ho should recognise only the first 
 
 ' See especially Vitringa de Synag. 
 Vet. ni. I. c. I, p. 613 sq. 
 
 " It may be worth while correcting 
 a mistake which runs through the criti- 
 cal editions of the Greek Testament. 
 Chrysostom is quoted as reading awe- 
 TTiffKoirou in one word. His editors no 
 doubt make him read so, but of this 
 reading there is no trace in the context. 
 After explaining that the terms deacon, 
 presbyter, bishop, were originally con- 
 vertible (ot rptapirepoi ri TaXativ ixa- 
 Xovrro iirUrKOiroi Koi SidKorai Xpivrov Kal 
 
 oi iirlrKoiroi rpeapirepoi), he Ulastrates 
 this by the fact that even in his own 
 day bishops often addressed a presbyter 
 as a fellow-presbyter, a deacon as a 
 fellow-deacon (o8ey Kcd ny s-oXXoi <ri;/t- 
 TpeafivT^pif Maxoroi ypa<j>nuin kuX ovr- 
 Siaicd »({;): but his language nowhere 
 implies that he read awensKavm. The 
 comment of Theodore of Mopsuestia 
 again has been understood (see Tischen- 
 dorf) as referring to and combating the 
 reading tvviTrwKaTtaix. This also is an 
 error. After explaining the identity ol 
 
BPISTLH TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 97 
 
 and third order and pass over the second, though the second was 
 absolutely essential to the existence of a church and formed the staple of 
 its ministry. It seems therefore to follow of necessity that the 'bishops' 
 are identical with the 'presbyters.' Whether or not the Philippian Church 
 at this time possessed also a 'bishop' in the later sense of the term, is 
 a question which must be reserved for the present. 
 
 (2) In the Acts (xx. 17) St Paul is represented as summoning to Mile- 
 tus the 'elders' or 'presbyters' of the Church of Bphesus. Yet in address- 
 ing them immediately after he appeals to them as 'bishops' or 'overseers' 
 of the church (xx. 28). 
 
 (3) Similarly St Peter, appealing to the 'presbyters' of the churches 
 addressed by him, iu the same breath urges them to 'fulfil the office of 
 bishops' ((Trto-KoirovvTes) with disinterested zeal (l Pet. v. i, 2). 
 
 (4) Again in the First Epistle to Timothy St Paul, after describing the 
 qualifications for the office of a 'bishop' (iii. i — 7), goes on at once to say 
 what is required of 'deacons' (iiL 8 — 13). He makes no mention of presby- 
 tei's. The term 'presbyter' however is not unknown to him; for having 
 occasion in a later passage to speak of Christian ministers he calls these 
 officers no longer 'bishops,' but 'presbyters' (v. 17 — 19). 
 
 (5) The same identification appear^ still more plainly from the Apostle's 
 directions to Titus (L 5 — 7); 'That thou shouldest set in order the things 
 that are wanting and ordain elders in every city, as I appointed thee ; if 
 any one be blameless, the husband of one wife, having believing children 
 who are not charged with riotousness or unruly; for a bishop (jov otIo-ko- 
 ttok)* must be blameless etc.^' 
 
 (6) Nor is it only in the apostolic writings that this identity is found. andinOIe- 
 
 ment of 
 Borne, 
 
 bishops and presbyters Theodore adda, however (Eabau. Maur. vi. p. 479, ed. 
 
 rpoatKriov on to aiv eiritrKOToi.s'Ki- Migue) mistakes and confuses his mean- 
 
 yei, oix <3s Tivet eyaiuffan iSinrep Tj/ieU ing. The interpretation which Theodore 
 
 civ rfiea^vripoit ypi/pew elddafieir oi is combating appears in the Ambrosian 
 
 yip vpis TO iavToS irpoawrov cliriv to Hilary; 'Cum episcopU et diaeonibus: 
 
 cir, i/a f <rii» hrisKmois rip,wv oXXi hoc est, cum Paolo et Timotheo, qui 
 
 irpoi TO 7ro« ToH iv *iX(7nrois dylots, utique episoopi eraut : simul significa- 
 
 ffiv T<us avTodt eirtq-Koirois re Kol Siajc6- vit et diaconoa qui ministrabant ei. 
 
 vois : ' It must be observed that when he Ad plebem enim scribit : nam si epis- 
 
 says with the bithopt, it is not, as some oopis scriberet et diacombus, ad per- 
 
 have thought, a parallel to our practice sonas eorum scriberet ; et loci ipsius 
 
 of writing ' together with the elders ' episcopo soribendum erat, non duobus 
 
 (i.e. of associating the elders with them- vel thbus, sicut et ad Titum et Timo- 
 
 selves in the superscription, as for in- theum.' See below, p. 130. 
 
 stance Folycarp does in writing to the ' In rbv MaKoirov the definite arti- 
 
 PhiUppians) : ' for he does not use the cle denotes the type, as in a Cor. xii. 
 
 word witA in reference to himself, mean- li ri, ai)iiaaTov airoaToKoS, Job. x. 11 
 
 ing with our bishops, bnt in reference to o irot/H}K o Ka\6i : see the notes on Gal. 
 
 all the saints that are at Philippi, i.e. ill. 10. 
 
 with the bishops and deacons that are ' The identity of the two titles in 
 there.' Here I have substituted aiy the New Testament is recognised by 
 vpefffivripou for avinrptepvripou, as the the Peshito Syriac Version, which corn- 
 context seems to require, and corrected mouly translates rir/o-xoiros by kasMsho, 
 the corrupt ^ Urijv into J aiv with the i.e. presbyter or elder : see WichelhauB 
 Latin. The Latin version of Theodore de Vert. Syr, Ant. p. 209. 
 
 PHIL. 7 
 
98 
 
 EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 Ignatius 
 and Poly. 
 mzp. 
 
 St Clement of Borne wrote probably in the last decade of the first century 
 and in his language the terms are still convertible. Speaking of the 
 Apostles he says that 'preaching in every country and city (xara x'^P"' "'" 
 jtari noKtis) they appointed their first-fruits, having tested them by the 
 Spirit, to be bishops and deacons of them that should believe (/leXXoin-uv 
 irtoTcuciv)' § 42. A little later, referring to the disorganised state of the 
 Corinthian Church, he adds, 'Our Apostles knew through our Lord Jesus 
 Christ that there would be strife concerning the authority (tVi tov ovoiuitos) 
 of the bishopric'...' ^e shall incur no slight guilt if we eject from the bi- 
 shopric those who have presented the ofierings (iapa) tmblameably and 
 holily. Blessed are the presbyters who have gone before, whose departure 
 was crowned with fruit and mature (piTivts tyKapirov kox TtXelcai eaxov Trjv 
 dvoKvatv) ' § 44- 
 Different This is the last instance of identificatioa With the opening of a 
 
 second century a new phraseology begins. In the epistles of Igna- 
 tius the terms are used in their more modem sense. In his letter to 
 Polycarp (§ 6) he writes: 'Give heed to the bishop, that God also may give 
 heed to you. I am devoted [dvrlyjnixov iyd) to those who are obedient to 
 the bishop, to presbyters, to deacons (ra eVtcrKair^, irpea^vrepois, buiKovois).' 
 The bishop is always singled out by this writer, as the chief ofiicer of the 
 Church*. So about the same time Polycarp, writing to the Philippians, 
 gives directions to the deacons (§ 5) and the presbyters (§ 6). He also 
 begins his letter, 'Polycarp and the presbyters that are with him.' TVith 
 this form of address may be coupled the fact that the writer is distinctly 
 called 'bishop of Smyrna' by Ignatius {Polye. init.). 
 
 Towards the close of the second century the original application of 
 
 the term 'bishop' seems to have passed not only out of use, but ahnost 
 
 out of memory. So perhaps we may accoimt for the explanation which 
 
 Irenseus gives of the incident at Miletus (Acts xx. 17, 28). 'Having called 
 
 together the bishops and presbyters who were from Ephesus and the other 
 
 neighbouring cities^' But in the fourth century, when the fathers of 
 
 The iden- the Church began to examine the apostolic records with a more criti- 
 
 tity proved cal eye, they at once detected the fact. No one states it more clearly 
 
 by Jerome, tiigj, Jerome. 'Among the ancients,' he says, 'bishops and presbyters are 
 
 the same, for the one is a term of dignity, the other of ageV 'The 
 
 Apostle plainly shows,' he writes in another place, 'that presbyters are the 
 
 same as bishops.. .It is proved most clearly that bishops and presbyters are 
 
 the same^' Again in a third passage he says ' If any one thir^ the opinion 
 
 ' Besides the passages quoted in the 
 text see Polye. 5, Ephes. 7. Ail these 
 passages are found in the Syiiao. The 
 shorter Greek teems with references to 
 the bishop as chief officer of the Church. 
 
 ' Iren. iii. 14. 1. His explanation 
 of the incident has been charged with 
 dishonesty, but I know of nothing to 
 iustiiy such a charge. It would appear 
 a very natnrol solution of a difficulty, if 
 the writer had only an indistinct know- 
 
 ledge of the altered value of the term. 
 At all events the same account has been 
 given by writers who lived in a more 
 critical age ; e.g. Potter, Church Govern- 
 ment c. iii. p. 118. 
 
 ' Epis t. Ixix (i. p. 4 1 4 sq., ed.Vallarsi). 
 
 * EpUt. oxlvi (i. p. 1081) ' Quum 
 Apostolus perspicue doceat eosdem esse 
 presbyteros quos episoopos ' . . . ' manifei- 
 tissime eomprobatur eundem esse epis- 
 oopum ntque presbyterum.' 
 
BPISTLB TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 99 
 
 that the bishops and presbyters are the same, to be not the view of the 
 Scriptures but my own, let him study the words of the apostle to the 
 Philippians,' and in support of his view he alleges the scriptural proofs 
 at great length^ But, though more full than other writers, he is hardly and rooog- 
 more explicit. Of his predecessors the Ambrosian Hilary had discerned nised by 
 the same truth'. Of his contemporaries and successors, Chrysostom, Pela- [^gj^"^"" 
 ^us, Theodore of Mopsuestia, Theodoret, all acknowledge it'. Thus in ^ters. 
 every one of the extant commentaries on the epistles containing the crucial 
 passages, whether Greek or Latin, before the close of the fifth century, 
 this identity is affirmed. In the succeeding ages bishops and popes ac- 
 cept the yerdict of St Jerome without questioa Even late in the medi- 
 seval period, and at the era of the reformation, the justice of his criticism 
 or the sanction of his name carries the general suffrages of theologians*. 
 
 Tlie meaning of ' prcetorivm,' in i. 13. 
 
 The word 'prsetorium' signifies properly (i) ' The general's tent,' 'the Common 
 head-quarters in a camp.' From this it gets other derived meanings : meanings 
 (2) 'The residence of a governor or prince,' e.g. Acts xxiiL 33 iv ra "' ''^^ 
 itpairapla tov 'SptiSov (A.V. 'judgment hall'), Mark xv. 16 mr^ayov avrov 
 f<ra Tijs av\ijs o iariv jrpaiTapiov, Acta ThotnCB § 3 npairdpta /Sao-iXixa, JuT. 
 Sat. X. 161 'sedet ad prsetoria regis,' TertulL ad Scap. § 3 'solus in 
 praetorio suo etc.' (3) 'Any spacious villa or palace'; Juv. Sat. i. 75 
 'criminibus debent hortos prsetoria mensas,' Sueton. Tiber. 39 'juxta 
 Terracinam in praetorio cui speluncas nomen erat incoenante eo' (comp. 
 Octav. 72, Calig, 37), Epict. Diss. iii. 22. 47 ov itpaiTtopihiov iDCKa yrj /xoi/ov 
 
 K.T.X. 
 
 So much for the word generally. It remains to enquire, what sense Explana- 
 it would probably bear, when used by a person writing from Rome tionsofthe 
 and speaking of the cause which he advocated as becoming known ' in the 0°^ "i 
 whole of the prsetorium.' Several answers have been given to this ques- 
 tion. 
 
 (i) ' The imperial residence on the Palatine.' So our English Version, (i) The 
 following the Greek commentators. Thus Chrysostom, ' They still (t/cbi) pala."*- 
 called the palace by this name.' Similarly Theodore of Mopsuestia^ 
 
 » Ad Tit. i. 5 (VII. p. 695). Theodore of Mopsuestia on Phil. 1. i, 
 
 • On Ephes. iv. 11. But he is hardly Tit. i. 7, and eBpecially on i Tim. iii. 
 
 consistent with himself. On i Tim. iii. (where the matter is fully discussed) ; 
 
 8 he recognises the identity less dis- Theodoret onPhil. i. i, i Tim. iii. i sq., 
 
 tinctly; on Phil. i. i (see above, p. 97, Tit. i. 7, following closely in the steps 
 
 note) he ignores it ; while on Tit. i. 7 he of Theodore. See also Ammonios on 
 
 passes over the subject without a word. Acta xx. j8 in Cramer's Catena, p. 337. 
 
 > Chrysostom on Phil. i. i (on i Tim. * Later authorities are given in 
 
 iii. 8, Tit. i. 7, he is not so clear) ; Pela- Gieseler Kirchengesch. 1. pp. 105, 106. 
 
 giuB on PhU. i. i, i Tim. iii. 11, Tit.i. 7 ; "In Baban. Maur. Op. vi. p. 481 A. 
 
 7—2 
 
I<X» BPISTLB TO THE PfllLIPPIANS. 
 
 ' What we are in the habit of calling the palace, he calls the prsetorium,' 
 Theodoret giving the same meaning adds, ' It is probable that the palace 
 was so called at that timeV This interpretation, which has the adyan- 
 tago of illustrating the reference to ' Caesar's household ' at the close of 
 Uie epistle, is thus ably advocated by Dean Merivale'; " In the provinces 
 the emperor was known, not as Princops, but as Imperator. In Judeea, 
 governed more immediately by him through the imperial procurators, he 
 would be more exclusively regarded as a military chief. The soldier, to 
 whom the Apostle was attached with a chain, would speak of him as his 
 general When Paul asked the centurion in charge of him, ' Where shall 
 I be confined at Rome V, the answer would be, ' In the praetorium ' or 
 the quarters of the general When led, as perhaps he was, before the 
 emperor's tribunal, if he asked the attending guard, ' Where am I ) ', again 
 they would reply, ' In the prtetorium.' The emperor was protected in his 
 palace by a body-guard, lodged in its courts and standing sentry at its 
 gates ; and accordingly they received the name of prsetorians." 
 Obiection ^* '* hardly probable however that in the early ages of the empire 
 to this ^^^ feelings of Roman citizens would be thus outraged by the adoption 
 meaning, of a term which implied that they were under a military despotism. In 
 the days of the republic the consuls were required to lay down their 
 ' imperium ' without the walls and to appear in the city as civilians. And 
 under the early Ceesars the fiction of the republic was carefully guarded, 
 though the reality had ceased to exist. If it be urged that the name 
 was confined to the soldiers (as Dean Merivale seems to suggest), it is 
 difficult to conceive why St Paul after several months' residence at least in 
 Rome, during which he must have mixed with various classes of men, 
 should have singled out this exceptional term, especially when writing to 
 distant correspondents. 
 No in- ^^^ whatever may be said of the a priori probability, it is a fatal 
 
 stance of objection that not a single instance of this usage has been produced. The 
 this sense, language of the Greek fathers quoted above shows that though they 
 assumed the word must have had this meaning at an earlier date, it was 
 certainly not so when they wrote. While ' praetorium ' is a frequent desig- 
 nation of splendid villas, whether of the emperors or others, away from 
 Rome, the imperial residence on the Palatine is not once so called'. 
 Indeed the word seems to have suggested to a Roman the idea of a 
 country seat. Thus when Tacitus and Suetonius are relating the same 
 event, the one uses ' villa,' the other ' prcetorium,' to describe the scene of 
 the occurrence*. Hence Forcellini with right appreciation defines the 
 word, 'sedes elegantiores ornatioresque in agris exstructse et villa quseque 
 
 ' His words are ri, fiaalXeia yi,p ritory is meant. naXXaKnavot here is 
 
 TpcuTiipioo rpoariryipevvev eUbs di drt explained ' imperial ' ' Ceesarean ' by 
 
 Kill ovTus Kar' iKtivov lino/uiieTo rhv km- Ferizonius de PratOT, p. 151, as if oou- 
 
 pip' dpxh" y^P '^X'" 4 ^u/*""") Suva- neoted with raSAnov (oomp. Dion Oass. 
 
 irrda. liii. 16 quoted above in the text); bat,like 
 
 * HUtory of the Bomam vi. p. 168. iiorti Pallantiani,the name is doabtlesa 
 
 » In Phlegou de Longav. § 4 ^k 2a- derived from its former ownerPallas; see 
 
 fiiywy iiri vpuTupLov iraWaKTiai'iiC, a Friedliinder Sittengesch. Eomt i. p. 98. 
 
 palooo of the emperor iu the Sabine ter- * Tao. ^nn. iv. 59, Suet. Tiber. 39. 
 
BP18TLB TO THE PHILIPPIANS. lOI 
 
 minime rustica vel villte pars nobilior et cultior ubi domini, rMsticari cum 
 Hbet, morantur.' In Rome itself a 'praetorium' would not have been 
 tolerated^ 
 
 (2) The ' prsetorium ' is not the imperial palace itself, but the pree- («) Tho 
 torian barracks attached thereto. This interpretation is open to many of I'^rraoks 
 the objections urged against the former. Moreover it is equally destitute paiatine. 
 of authority. In a passage of Dion Cassius indeed (liii. 16) there seems to 
 
 be mention of a 'prsetorium' on the Palatine; KaKeirai Sc to /Sao-iXeia 
 iraXaT(OK...ori tv re r^ TraXariiu o Kai<rap ^xei Koi tKcl to arpaT^yiov f'xf. 
 Here <rrpaT^yioi/ is doubtless a rendering of the Latin ' prsetorium' ; but the 
 sense is hardly local. As this passage stands alone, the words would 
 appear to mean simply that the emperor was surrounded by his body- 
 guards and kept state as a military commander. This language, though it 
 would probably have been avoided by a contemporary, was not in itself 
 inappropriate when applied to Augustus, of whom Dion is speaking, be- 
 fore the praetorian camp was built, and when the barracks attached to the 
 palace were still the head-quarters of the preetorian guards'. At all 
 events, if ' prsetorium ' ever had tliis sense, it can hardly have been meant 
 by St Paul here; for the expression ' throughout the praetorium,' in con- 
 nexion with the context, would be wholly out of place in reference to 
 a space so limited. 
 
 (3) The great camp of the praetorian soldiers is so designated. Tibe- (3) The 
 rius concentrated the cohorts previously scattered up and down the city PrsBtorian 
 (Tac. Ann. iv. 2) and established them outside tho CoUine gate at the <"imp. 
 North East of the city in a permanent camp, whose ramparts can be traced 
 
 at the present day, being embedded in the later walls of Aurelian. If 
 ' prsetorium ' here has a local sense, no other place could be so fitly desigr 
 nated ; for as this camp was without the walls, the term so applied would 
 give no offence. But this meaning again lacks external support. It might 
 indeed be argued that as the Greek equivalent to ' proefectus prsetorio ' 
 is o-TpaTojreSapx'!?, ' the commander of the camp,' the camp itself would 
 be designated 'prsetoriimi'; but, as a question of fact, no decisive in- 
 stance of this sense is produced. The camp is sometimes called ' castra 
 prsetoria' (Plia iV. ff. iiL 9), sometimes ' castra prsetorianorum ' (Tac. Hist. 
 L 3), once at least 'castra prsetori' (i.e. prsetorii, Orell. Inscr. 21); but 
 never ' prsetorium.' 
 
 As all attempts to give a local sense to 'prsetorium' thus fail for 
 want of evidence, it remains to discover some other suitable meaning, 
 which is not open to this objection. 
 
 (4) Praetorium signifies not a place, but a body of men. It is used for y^ The 
 instance of a council of war, the ofiBcers who met in the general's tent: PrEetorian 
 e.g. Liv. xxvi. 15, xxx. 5. But more frequently it denotes the prsetorian guards, 
 
 ' On the other hand away from about two ceuturiea after the event. 
 
 Borne the residence of the emperor's For this sense of aT/mTrytov oomp. 
 
 representative is frequently so called; Tao. Ann. iii. 33 'duorum egressus 
 
 e.g. at Cologne (OreU. 3197), at Munda coli, duo esse prffltoria,' where a com- 
 
 (ib. 3303). plaint is made of the pomp main- 
 
 * See PerizoniuB p. 330. It must tained by the wives of provincial 
 
 be remembered that DionOassins wrote governors. 
 
102 EPISTLB TO THE PHILIPPIAN8. 
 
 regiments, the imperial guards. This in fact is the common use of the 
 term. It is found in ' castra prsetorii ' already quoted and probably aluo 
 in 'prssfectus prsetorio.' It occurs also in such phrases as 'veteranus ex 
 praetorio' (Tac. Hist. ii. ii, Suet. Nero 9, OrelL Imcr. 123), 'missus ex 
 prsetorio' (OrelL no. 1644, note), 'lectus in prsetorio' (Orell. no. 941 ; comp. 
 nos. 3589, 6806, 6817). A guardsman was said to serve 'in praetorio,' a 
 soldier of the line 'in legione' (Orell. nos. 3547, 5286, 5291). If St Paul 
 seeing a new face among his guards asked how he came to be there, the 
 answer would be ' I have been promoted to the praetorium' ; if he enquired 
 after an old face which he missed, he might be told ' He has been dis- 
 charged from the praetorium.' In this sense and this alone can it be 
 safely aflBrmed that he would hear the word ' praetorium ' used daily. The 
 following passages will further illustrate this meaning : Plin. N. H. xxv. 2 
 'Nuper cujusdam militantis in praetorio mater vidit in quiete...in Lace- 
 tania res gerebatur, Hispaniae proxima parte' : Tac. Hist. L 20 ' Exauc- 
 torati per eos dies tribuni, e praetorio Antonius Taurus et Antonius Naso, 
 ex urbanis cohortibus .^milius Pacensis, e vigiliis Julius Fronto'; ib. iv. 46 
 'jMilitiam et stipendia orant...igitur in praetorium accepti' : Joseph. .4w*. 
 xix. 3- 1 <>« fp' i"" (TTparriyiKOv KaXovficvov cmp tfrrl Ttjc (rrpaTias KoBapia- 
 TOTov, Le. ' the prsBtorium, which is the flower of the army': Dosith. Hadr. 
 Sent. § 2 aiTovvroi rivos Iva arpareirjTai, 'AvSpiavos tliT€v' Hov dtktis 
 urpoTfittrBai ; cKtivov Xeyoirot EJr to irpaiTapiov, 'ASpiavot f^raaiv 
 noioi' fi^Kos txfu '} \eyovTos IkcIvov Hfprc noSas KaX if/twr, 'Aiptavot tmep 
 'Eu ToaovTif fls TTjv jroXiTiK^v OTpaTtvov, Kal iav xaXoc irrpaTidrris eari 
 rpiTtf o^lravia Svvria-ri els to irpairtipiov fiera^rjvai^ ; Mission Archeol. de 
 McKedoine no. 130 (p. 325) Ti. KXaiidtoi' oitTpavhv <rrpa.Ttv(ra\i.€vov iv 
 TTpairoip/o), no. 131 (p. 3^6) '^^' KXavdtos Fov(j>os overpavos fK Trpairwpiov. 
 This sense This sense is in all respects appropriate. It forms a fit introduction to 
 to be the words koI toIs Xoittois iraa-iv which follow. It is explained by St Paul's 
 
 adopted, position as an imperial prisoner in charge of the prefect of the praetorians. 
 And lastly it avoids any conflict with St Luke's statement that the Apostle 
 dwelt in 'his own hired house^': for it is silent about the locality. 
 
 ' See also Plin. N. H. vii. 19, Orell. most all recent commentators on the 
 
 no. 3477. On the meaning of the word Philippiaus occupy themselveB in dis- 
 
 prtetorinm see especially 'Perizonii cum cnssingtheposBibleZocalsensesof 'prse- 
 
 Hubero Disquisitio de Pratorio, etc. torium,' barely, if at nil, alluding to the 
 
 (Franeq. 1690),' a nmo volume con- only meaning which is really well snp- 
 
 taining more than 900 pages. Euber ported and meets all the requirements 
 
 maintained that by 'prtetorium' in of the case. Of recent writers on St 
 
 Phil. i. 13 must be understood the pa- Paul two only, so far as I have noticed, 
 
 lace or the audience-chamber therein. Bleek {Einl. in dae N. T. p. 433) and 
 
 Perizonius, whose refutation of his ad- apparently Bwald {Sendschreiben etc. p. 
 
 versary is complete, explained it of the 441), take what seems to be the correct 
 
 prsBtorion cohorts orthepratorian camp. view, but even they do not explain their 
 
 If he had omitted this second altema- reasons. On this account I have entered 
 
 tive, his work would in my judgment into the question more fully than its ab- 
 
 have been entirely satisfactory : though solute importance deserves. 
 
 I must confess to having once taken * This difficulty indeed is very slight, 
 
 it to mean the camp ; Jownal of Glati. if it be interpreted of the camp ; for the 
 
 and Sacr. Phil. no. x. p. jS. Al- campwas large and might perhaps have 
 
EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 103 
 
 The following account, relating to a contemporary of St Paul, who Account of 
 also spent some time In Borne under military custody, is abridged from Agrippa. 
 Josephus (Ant. xyiii. 6. 5 sq.). As throwing light on tho condition of 
 a prisoner under such circumstances, it may fitly close this investigation. 
 
 Herod Agrippa, then a young man and resident in Rome, contracted an 
 intimate friendship with Caius. On one occasion, when the two were 
 driving together, Agrippa was overheard praying that Tiberius would re- 
 sign the empire to make way for his friend who was 'in all respects more 
 worthy.* Some time after, the charioteer, having been dismissed by 
 Agi-ippa and bearing a grudge against him, reported his words to Tiberius. 
 So Agrippa was consigned to Macro, the prefect of the praetorians, to be His con- 
 put in chains. Hereupon Antonia, the sister-in-law of Tiberius, who had finement. 
 a kindly feeling for the Jewish prince as a friend of her grandson Caius, 
 
 contained houses or rooms rented by 
 prisoners: see above, p. g sc[. But if 
 the palace or tbePalatine barracks were 
 meant, St Luke's statement would not 
 be so easily explained. Wieseler indeed 
 {Chronol. p. 403, note 3), who pro- 
 nounces in favour of the Palatine bar- 
 racks, adduces the instances of Drusus 
 and Agrippa in support of his view. 
 But both cases break down on examina- 
 tion, (i) Drusus, it is true, was impri- 
 soned in the palace; Tac. Ann. vi. 23, 
 Suet. Tiber. 54. But this is no parallel 
 to the case of St Paul. Drusus, as a 
 member of the imperial family, would 
 naturally be confined within the pre- 
 cincts of the imperial residence. More- 
 over, as Tiberius had designs on bis ne- 
 phew's life, secresy was absolutely ne- 
 cessary for his plans. Nor indeed could 
 one, who might at any moment become 
 the focus of a revolution, be safely 
 entrusted to the keeping of the camp 
 away from the emperor's personal cog- 
 nisance. (1) Wieseler misunderstands 
 the incidents relating to Agrippa, whose 
 imprisonment is wboUy unconnected 
 with the Palatine. When Tiberius or- 
 dered him to be put under arrest, he was 
 at the emperor's Tusculan viUa (§ 6). 
 From thence he was conveyed to the 
 camp, where we find him still confined 
 at the accession of Gains, which led to 
 his removal and release (§ io).'Wieseler's 
 mistake is twofold. First; he explains 
 Tou pairiKelov as referring to l^e palace 
 at Rome ; though Josephus lays the scene 
 of the arrest at Tusculannm (Tt/S^^ios 
 iK tISd 'S.airptuv els lovaKOtiXavdv jrapayt- 
 yertu). For the existence of such palaces 
 
 at Tusoulum see Strabo v. p. 239 Sexo- 
 /iems §tt,<rCKdav (carainceuis iKirpcTreard- 
 ras. Secondly; heboldlytranelatesirT/so- 
 TOTreSoK by 'prsetorium,' understanding 
 thereby the Palatine barracks ; though 
 these barracks were in no sense a camp 
 and were never so called. Building 
 upon these two false suppositions, he 
 makes the Palatine the scene of both 
 his arrest and his imprisonment. Ca- 
 ractacus also, like Agrippa, appears to 
 have been imprisoned in the prsetorian 
 camp, Tac. Ann. xii. 36. And, if these 
 royal captives were not retained on the 
 Palatine, it is very improbable that an 
 exception should be made in the case of 
 a humble prisoner like St Paul, whose 
 case would not appear to differ from 
 many hundreds likewise awaiting the 
 decision of Caesar. 
 
 It will appear from the account 
 relating to Agrippa, given in the text, 
 that this prince was confined in the 
 camp during the reign of Tiberius ; but 
 that on the accession of Caius he was 
 removed to a house of his own, though 
 still under military custody. The no- 
 tices in the Acts suggest that St Paul's 
 captivity resembled this latter condition 
 of Agrippa, and that he did not reside 
 actually within thecamp. ABomantra- 
 ditionis perhaps preserved in the notice 
 of the Boman HUary (Ambrosiaster) in 
 his prologue to the Ephesians ; ' In cus- 
 todia sub fidejussore inteUigiturdegisse 
 manens extra castra in conduclu suo.' 
 In Acts xxviii. 16 some mbs (Greek 
 and Latin) read (^la r^s rapefifioS^, 
 'extra castra.' 
 
I04 EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 grieving at his misfortune, and yet not daring to intercede with the 
 emperor, spoke to Macro on his behalf. Her entreaties prevailed. The 
 prefect took care that the soldiers appointed to guard him should not be 
 over severe, and that the centurion to whom he was bound should be a 
 man of humane disposition. He was permitted to take a bath every day ; 
 free access was granted to his freedmen and his firiends; and other in- 
 dulgences were allowed him. Accordingly his friend Silas and his freed- 
 men, Marsyas and Stoecheus, were constant in their attendance: they 
 brought him food that was palatable to him; they smuggled in clothes 
 under pretence of selling them ; they made his bed every night with the 
 aid of the soldiers, who had received orders to this effect from Macro. 
 Death of In this way six months rolled by and Tiberius died. On hearing of the 
 
 Tiberius, emperor's death, Marsyas ran in hot haste to Agrippa to tell him the good 
 news. He found the prince on the threshold, going out to the baths, 
 and making signs to him said in Hebrew, ' The lion's dead.' The centurion 
 in command noticed the hurry of the messenger and the satisfaction with 
 which his words were received. His curiosity was excited. At first an 
 evasive answer was returned to his question; but as the man had been 
 friendly disposed, Agrippa at length told him. The centurion shared his 
 prisoner's joy, unfastened his chain, and served up dinner to him. But 
 while they sat at table, and the wine was flowing freely, contrary tidings 
 arrived. Tiberius was alive and would return to Rome in a few days. The 
 centurion who had committed himself so grievously was furious at this 
 announcement. He rudely pushed Agrippa off the couch, and threatened 
 him with the loss of his head, as a penalty for his lying report Agrippa 
 was again put in chains, and the rigour of his confinement increased. 
 So he passed the night in great discomfort But the next day the report 
 of the emperor's death was confirmed. And soon after a letter arrived 
 from Caius to Piso the prefect of the city, directing the removal of Agrippa 
 from the camp to the house where he had lived before he was imprisoned. 
 Belease of This relieved and reassured him. Though he was still guarded and 
 Agrippa. watched, yet less restraint was put upon his movements ((^«Xa/c^ niv rai 
 njpijo-it ^K, liCTa fiivTot ayeVews T^s (Is rqv Siairav). When the new emperor 
 arrived in Home, his first impulse was to release Agrippa at once: but 
 Antonia represented to him that this indecent haste would be regarded as 
 an outrage on his predecessor's memory. So after waiting a few days to 
 save appearances, he sent for Agrippa, placed the royal diadem on his 
 head, gave him the tetrarchies of Philip and Lysanias, and removing his 
 iron fetter (akva-fi) invested liim with a golden chain of the same weight. 
 
1.27] EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 105 
 
 '''Movou a^iws Tov euayyeXiov tov Xpia-rou ttoXi- 
 revea-de, 'I'va e'lre iXdcoi/ kuI iSwV vixa^ e'lre dirav aKOvio 
 ra Trepi vfxwv on a-rtiKere iv evi TrvevjjiaTi, juua -^vxrj 
 
 27* dirwv aKoOffU t4 irepl djiuy. 
 
 27 — 3°- 'But under all circum- 
 stances do your duty as good citizens 
 of a heavenly kingdom; act worthily 
 of the Gospel of Christ. So that whe- 
 ther I come among you and see with 
 my own eyes, or stay away and obtain 
 tidings from others, I may learn that 
 you maintain your ground bravely and 
 resolutely, acting by one inspiration; 
 that with united aims and interests 
 you are fighting all in the ranks of the 
 Faith on the side of the Gospel ; and 
 that no assault of your antagonists 
 makes you waver: for this will be a 
 sure omen to them of utter defeat, to 
 you of Ufe and safety : an omen, I say, 
 sent by God Himself; for it is His 
 grace. His privilege bestowed upon 
 you, that for Christ — yea, that ye 
 should not only believe on Him, but 
 also should suffer for Him. For ye 
 have entered the same lists, ye are 
 engaged in the same struggle, in which 
 you saw me contending then at Philip- 
 pi, in which you hear of my contend- 
 ing now in Rome.' 
 
 27. Movov] 'Only,' i.e. 'whatever 
 may happen, whether I visit you again 
 or visit you not' : see Gal. ii. 10, v. 13, 
 vi. 12, 2 Thess. ii. 7. 
 
 iroXiTfveade} 'perform your duties 
 as citizens.' The metaphor of the 
 heavenly citizenship occurs again, iii. 
 20 ijfifflv TO iro\iTfvfia iv ovpavots virap- 
 Xfi, and Ephes. ii. 19 tnnnroXiTai rav 
 ayiav. See the note on iii. 20. It was 
 natural that, dwelling in the metropolis 
 of the empire, St Paul should use this 
 illustration. The metaphor moreover 
 would speak forcibly to his correspond- 
 ents ; for Philippi was a Roman colony, 
 and the Apostle had himself obtained 
 satisfaction, while in this place, by 
 declaring himself a Roman citizen : 
 Acts xvi 1 2, 37, 38. Though the word 
 
 wo\iT€V(cr6ai is used very loosely at a 
 later date, at this time it seems al- 
 ways to refer to public duties devolving 
 on a man as a member of a body: so 
 
 Acts xxiii. I Ttatqi avvfiS^a-ei ayaS^ 
 ireiroX'iTfviiai, to) Qca k.t.X., where St 
 
 Paul had been accused of violating the 
 laws and customs of the people and 
 so subverting the theocratic constitu- 
 tion; Joseph. Vit. § 2 jjp^anTjv TToXi- 
 Ttvaroat Tjj ^apia-aiutv alpeaet KaT- 
 aKoXovdav, for the Pharisees were a 
 political as well as a religious party. 
 The opposite to wdKiTeiea-Oai. is iSim- 
 Ttietv, e.g. JSschin. Timarch. p. 27. 
 
 The phrase a^ias iroKiTevetrdai is 
 adopted in Clem. Rom. § 21. Poly- 
 carp also, writing to these same Phi- 
 lippians (§ 5), combines it very happily 
 with another expression in St Paul 
 
 (2Tim. ii, 12}, eav iroKLTevaoipeda d^las 
 avTov, Koi avp^aaiXevaopfV avrm, ' If 
 we perform our duties under Him as 
 simple citizens. He will promote us to 
 a share of His sovereignty.' 
 
 tva fhe iKddv k.t.X.] The sentence 
 is somewhat irregular. It would have 
 run more smoothly tva, eirf iXBdv Koi 
 Idtav, eiT€ diTtov Koi aKOvav, }id6a ra 
 
 TTfpi vp,av. For «T6, eire, with parti- 
 ciples, comp. e.g. 2 Cor. v. 9 ehe (vSi/- 
 fiovvTfs fire inbriiiovvTes. On this plan 
 the sentence is begun : but in the se- 
 cond clause the symmetry is lost and 
 the participle (d/coutov) exchanged for 
 a finite verb (okovo)), so that in place 
 of a general word applying to both par- 
 ticipial clauses (e.g. pAda) is substi- 
 tuted a special one {anoia) referring 
 to the second clause only. 
 
 oTijKert] 'stand firmj 'hold your 
 ground.' For the metaphor see Ephes. 
 
 vi. 13 tva hvvrfiryrt avTicT^vai iv TJ 
 i|/tcp9 TJ jrovrjp^, Kai diravra Karepya- 
 (ra/ievot a-Ttjvai. a-TiJTe oSv, irtpiiaa-d- 
 
I06 BPISTLB TO THE PHILIPPIANS. [1. 28, 29 
 
 avuadXovvrei rrj TritTTei tov evayyeXiov, '^Kat fxri tttu- 
 pofxevoi iu jULTjSevi viro Ttov dvTiKeifxevwv r/rts eaTiv av- 
 ToTs evSeipK aTrwXetas, uiulwu Se a-torripias, kul tovto 
 diro Qeov' '^^oti vfxTv ex«picr6tj to vTrep Xpia-rov, ov 
 
 lievoi K.T.X. In the form ittijko the 
 idea of firmnest or uprightness is 
 prominent : see the note on Gal. t. i. 
 
 In a later passage the Apostle com- 
 pares the Christian life to the Greek 
 stadium (iii. 14). Here the metaphor 
 seems to be drawn rather from the 
 combats of the Roman amphitheatre. 
 Like criminals or captives, the be- 
 lievers are condemned to fight for their 
 lives : against them are arrayed the 
 ranks of worldliness and sin : only un- 
 flinching courage and steady combina- 
 tion can win the victory against such 
 odds : comp. i Cor. iv. 9 o Beat rjims 
 Tovs dirooToKovs c(r;^arovs aTredei^ev as 
 firi0avaTiovs,oTi Biarpov iyevT)6j)ii€V 
 rm Kovfia K.r.X, 
 
 ivi jrKfv/inTt] diflFers from fua ^/'uxS' 
 The spirit, the principle of the higher 
 life, is distinguished from the soul, the 
 seat of the afiections, passions, etc. 
 For this distinction of n-i/eufio and 
 yjrvxn see the notes on i Thess. v. 23. 
 For Iv Tnevjia comp. Ephes. iv. 4, 
 Clem. Rom. 46, Hermas iSim. ix. 13. 
 
 )Tvva6\ovvTcs T7J nlcTTfi] 'striving in 
 concert vrith t?ie faith! Covht^. Mart. 
 Jgn. § 3 irapeKokei trvva&Keiv rfi avTov 
 TTpodecTft, Ignat. Polyc. § 6 o-vyKomaTe 
 aXKij\ois, (Tvva6XflTc. Thus ?; TTiVrw is 
 here objective, 'the faith,' 'the teach- 
 ing of the Gospel'; see the notes on 
 Gal. iii. 23. For this idea of association 
 with the faith, thus personified and 
 regarded as a moral agent, compare 
 
 1 Cor. xiii. 6 avyxaipti hi Tjj aXrjdeta, 
 
 2 Tim. i. 8 a-vyKaKoirdBrja-ov ra nJayyE- 
 Xi^, 3 Joh. 8 avvcpyol yiviip,(6a TJj dXi;- 
 6tia. The other construction, which de- 
 taches Tjj nlarei from the preposition in 
 avvaSXovvTts and translates it 'Jor the 
 fuith,' seems harsh and improbable. 
 
 28. iir) itTvpo/icvoi] 'not blenching' 
 
 'not startled': comp. Clem. Horn. u. 
 39 Jrrvpavrcs ap,a6eis oxKovs, M. Anton, 
 viii. 45, Polycr. in Buseb. H. E. y. 24. 
 The metaphor is from a timid horse 
 (TTTotiv); comp. Plut. Mor. p. 800 
 fi^Tt oyjrei firiTe cjiav^ irTvpo/iCfof avirep 
 Brjpiov vnoitTov, Vit. Fab. 3 ivrpoiiovrov 
 iTTTTOu ycvofievov Koi nrvpevTos. Though 
 apparently not an Attic word, it seems 
 to have been used in other dialecta 
 from the earliest times, e.g. Hippocr. 
 de Morb. Mul. i. p. 600 5 SfSiVcnjrat 
 Koi nrvpijTat. 
 
 tJTis] 'seeing that it,' i.e. 'your fear- 
 lessness when menaced with persecu- 
 tion'; by attraction with IvSei^ir : comp. 
 Ephes. iii. 13 airoG/uat fifj iyKaKtiv iv 
 Tois 6\lyjr€(riv povvirep viiaviJTis foriv 
 8o|a vfiiiv, and see Winer § xxiy. p. 
 209. St Paul uses very similar lan- 
 guage in writing to the other great 
 church of Macedonia, 2 Thess. L 47. 
 
 In this sentence the received text 
 presents two variations: (i) For tWi;' 
 avToti it reads avrois fiev ((rriv : (2) 
 For v^iSi' it has v/iTv. These are ob- 
 viously corrections for the sake of 
 balancing the clauses and bringing out 
 the contrast. 
 
 TOVTO (iiro 0fou] referring to ewSf i|tr. 
 It is a direct indication from God. 
 The Christian gladiator does not anxi- 
 ously await the signal of life or death 
 from the fickle crowd (Juv. Sat. iii. 
 36 ' Munera nunc edunt et verso pollice 
 vulgiquemlibet occidunt populariter*). 
 The great dyavodenjs Himself has 
 given him a sure token of deliverance. 
 
 29. ixapUrOij] ' God has granted yon 
 the high privilege of suffering for 
 Christ; this is the surest sign, that 
 He looks upon you with favour.' See 
 the note on i. 7. 
 
 TO vrrip Xpicrrov] i.e. ira<rx*iv. The 
 
1. 30, II. I] BPISTLB TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 10/ 
 
 fxovov TO eU avTov Tria-reveiv, dWd koI to v-rrep avTOv 
 ■rracrxeiv ^°Tdu avTov dywva exovre^ ohv ei'Sere iu ifioi 
 Kai vOv uKOveTe iv i/noi. 
 
 II. ' Ei' Tts ovv irapaKXria-K iv Xpia-Tw, e'i ti irapa- 
 
 sontence is suspended by the insertion 
 of the after-thought oi iiivov to eh 
 avrov nujTfvdv, and resumed in to 
 virep avTov iraaj^fiv, 
 
 30. dy&va] 'a gladiatorial or ath- 
 letic contest,' as 1 Tim. vi. 12, 2 Tim. 
 iv. 7 ; compare a-vvadXovvrfc, ver. 27. 
 
 exovTfs] It is difficult to say whether 
 this word should be taken (i) with 
 tmjtccTe trvva6\ovvres Koi ^fj irrvpofievotj 
 the intermediate words being a paren- 
 thesis ; or (2) with vfuv e'xapiVfli; k.t.X. 
 as an irregular nominative, of which 
 many instances occur in St Paul, e.g. 
 Col. iiL 16, Ephes. iii. 18, iv. 2 : see 
 Winer § Lxiii. p. 716. As o-TiJ/efre is 
 so far distant, the latter construction 
 seems more probable. 
 
 «iSfre] 'ye saw'; for the Apostle 
 suffered persecution at Philippi itself; 
 see Acts xvi. 19 sq., i Thess. ii. 2, 
 in which latter passage he uses the 
 same word as here, cV noWa dyavi. 
 See the introduction, pp. 58, 60. 
 
 II. I. 'If then your experiences in 
 Christ appeal to you with any force, if 
 love exerts any persuasive power upon 
 you, if your fellowship in the Spirit is 
 a living reality, if you have any affec- 
 tionate yearnings of heart, any tender 
 feelings of compassion, listen and obey. 
 You have given me joy hitherto. Now 
 fill my cup of gladness to overflowing. 
 Live in unity among yourselves, ani- 
 mated by an equal and mutual love, 
 knit together in all your sympathies 
 and affections, united in all your 
 thoughts and aims. Do nothing to 
 promote the ends of party faction, no- 
 thing to gratify your own personal 
 vanity: but be humble-minded and 
 esteem your neighbours more highly 
 than yourselves. Let not every man re- 
 gard his own wants, his own inter- 
 ests; but let him consult also the 
 
 interests and the wants of others.' 
 
 The Apostle here appeals to the 
 Philippians, by all their deepest ex- 
 periences as Christians and all their 
 noblest impulses as men, to preserve 
 peace and concord. Of the four grounds 
 of appeal, the first and third ('rrapa- 
 KKrjtTts iv XptoT^, Kotvavia Tri/fu/iaro?) 
 
 are objective, the external principles of 
 love and harmony; while the second 
 and fourth {napaixiidiov dyamjs, (rirKay- 
 Xva KOL oiKTip/ioi) are subjective, the in- 
 ward feelings inspired thereby. The 
 form of the appeal has been illus- 
 trated from Virgil Mn. i. 603 'Si qua 
 pios respectant nuraina, si quid us- 
 qnam justitise est, et mens sibi conscia 
 recti, etc' 
 
 napaxXrjcris iv Xpiora] i.e. 'If your 
 life in Christ, your knowledge of Christ, 
 speaks to your hearts with a persua- 
 sive eloquence.' The subject of the 
 sentence, the exhortation to unity, re- 
 quires that irapaiiKrja-is should be taken 
 here to mean not 'consolation' but 
 'exhortation.' See the next note. 
 
 Trapapivdiov'] 'incentive, encourage- 
 ment,' not 'comfort,' as the word more 
 commonly means. Tor this sense of 
 irapa/ivBiov, ' a motive of persuasion or 
 dissuasion,' see Plat. Legg. vi. p. 773 b, 
 ix. p. 880 A idv fiiv T« ToiovTois irapa- 
 fivOlois eviTfi6f)s yiyvrjTai, fv^vios av fir], 
 Euihyd. p. 272 B. This, which is the 
 original meaning of the word, appears 
 still more frequently in i!apa\t.v6ia, na- 
 paft.v6(Xa6m. For the conjunction of 
 TrapaKXt/crir, Trapapvdtov, in the sense in 
 which they are here used, see i Thess. 
 ii. 1 1 napaKa\ovvT€s v/xas Kai irapafiv- 
 6ovp,fvoi Kol iiapTvpopfvoi (with the 
 note), and perhaps 1 Cor. xiv. 3. 
 
 eiris Koivavia k.t.X.] 'If-cominuniou 
 with the Spirit of love is not a mwe 
 idle name, but a real thing.' Com- 
 
io8 
 
 BPISTLB TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 [11. 2, 3 
 
 fivdiov dyaTrri^, e'l ti^ KOivwvia Trveufxaros, e'i ti<s (nrXd'y- 
 ■)(ya Kal o'lKTipfJ-ol, ' TrXtipuxrare fxov Trjv x^^p^"* ''*'" ''"o 
 avTO (j)povfJTe, Ttjv avTr/v dyaTrrji/ e^ovre^y crvv^vxoi, 
 TO ev (ppovovvTev ^firihev kut epideiav /iriBe Kara kbvo- 
 
 pare the benediction in 2 Cor. xiii. 13. 
 
 «i Tis airKayxva K.T.X.] The ancient 
 copies are unanimous in favour of this 
 reading (the only important exception 
 being Clem. Alex. Strom, vi. p. 604 
 Potter, where nra is perhaps a later 
 correction); and we cannot therefore 
 look upon Tu/o as anything more than 
 an arbitrary, though very obvious, 
 emendation in the later mss where it 
 occurs. Nevertheless it seems hardly 
 possible that St Paul could have in- 
 tended 80 to write. If rts is retained, 
 it can only be explained by the eager 
 impetuosity with which the Apostle 
 dictated the letter, the « ns of the 
 preceding clause being repeated, and 
 then by a sudden impulse inrXay;^™ 
 Km olKTipyuoi being substituted for some 
 possible masculine or feminine sub- 
 stantive. Some few mss of no great 
 authority read in like manner d ns 
 irapajiiBiov. But it seems more pro- 
 bable that f I TK is an error of some 
 early transcriber, perhaps of the origi- 
 nal amanuensis himself, for it nva 
 or El ri. If « Ti were intended, the 
 error would be nothing more than 
 an accidental repetition of the first 
 letter in a-irXayxva. Under any cir- 
 cumstances, the reading « ns is a 
 valuable testimony to the scrupulous 
 fidelity of the early transcribers, who 
 copied the text as they found it, even 
 when it contained readings so mani- 
 festly difficult See the note on ^6fv 
 in Ual. ii. 12. 
 
 (nrXayxva] See the note on i. 8, 
 By airXayxva is signified the abode of 
 tender feelings, by oiVip/iol the mani- 
 festation of these in compassionate 
 yearnings and actions : comp. CoL iii. 
 12 mrXayxya olienpnov. 
 
 2. irKripdiraTe] 'comphte, as you 
 have begun.' He has already express- 
 
 ed his joy at their faith and love, i 4, 
 9. Compare Joh. iii. 29 avrrj ovv ij 
 
 iva\ 'go as to,' see the note on i. 9. 
 
 rb avTo (t>pov^Te] a general expres- 
 sion of accordance, which is defined 
 and enforced by the three following 
 clauses. It is the concord not of a 
 common hatred, but of a common love 
 (j^v atJT^K dyairr/v e;(OVTer). It mani- 
 fests itself in a complete harmony of 
 the feelings and affections {(rvmlrvxoi). 
 It produces an entire unison of thought 
 and directs it to one end {to tv <j>po- 
 vovvTcs). The redundancy of expres- 
 sion is a measure of the Apostle's 
 earnestness: ^a^ai, says Chrysostom, 
 TTOiraKts To avTO Xey« otto 8ta6ta-e(os 
 jToXX^f. See the introduction, p. 67. 
 
 TO ev <j>poiiovvTes] a Stronger expres- 
 sion than the foregoing to ovto <f)po- 
 vrJTe. from which it does not otherwise 
 differ. The two are sometimes com- 
 bined, e.g. Aristid. de Cone. Rhod. 
 p. 569, f Kol TavTov <f>povoiivTes, comp. 
 Polyb. V. 104. I XiyovTfs tv kcu tuvto 
 iravTes kcH mpirkiKonTft Tas pfcipar, 
 quoted by Wetstein. So too the Latin 
 'unum atque idem sentire.' The de- 
 finite article before iv gives additional 
 strength to the expression. 
 
 3. p.ri8ev] 'do nothing.' The verb 
 is 8uppres9ed, as is very frequently the 
 case in imperative sentences after ijoj, 
 e.g. Gal. V. 13 (see the note there): 
 comp. Klotz on Devar. n. p. 669. This 
 construction is more natural and more 
 forcible than the understanding <t>po- 
 vovvTes with iit]8iv from the preceding 
 clause. 
 
 KOT f'piBiiav] So Ignat. Philad. 
 8 p,r)b(v KOT ipiBeiav npaaa-fiv. See the 
 
 introduction, p. 75. On the meanmg 
 of ipt6eta, 'factiousness, party-spirit,' 
 see the note on GaJ. t. 20. The two 
 
II. 4] 
 
 EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 109 
 
 oo^iav, dWd t^ Ta7reivo<ppo(ruv^ dWt]\ovs nyovfxevoi 
 VTrepe'XpvTa^ eavTwv, '*fx^ to. iavTwv eKucrToi (tkottovv- 
 res, dWa Kal rd eTepwv eKacTTOi. 
 
 4i 5- /*^/ Ti iavTuii (xaaTos ffKoiroSvTes dWd xoi t4 Mpuv. "E/cairroi tovto 
 (ipovetre k.t.X. 
 
 impediments to an universal, diffusive, 
 unconditional charity are the exalta- 
 tion of party and the exaltation of 
 self. Both these are condemned here; 
 the first in kot ipiOdav, the second in 
 Kara itevoho^lav. The fii}8c Kara Kevo- 
 So^iav of the older mss distinguishes 
 and emphasizes the two false motives 
 more strongly than the ij KevoSo^lav of 
 the received text 
 
 KcvoSo^iav] 'vaitirglory, personal 
 vanity.' See the note on Gal. v. 26. 
 
 T5 TaiTfivo^poavvg\ ' your lowli- 
 ness of mind.' Though a common 
 word in the New Testament, Taireiue- 
 <i>poiTvvri seems not to occur earlier. 
 Even the adjective Taitei.v6<ppa>v and 
 the verb Taniuio<j)poveiv, though occur- 
 ring once each in the lxx (Prov. xxix. 
 23, Fs. cxxx. 2), appear not to be found 
 in classical Greek before the Christian 
 era. In heathen vrriters indeed ran-ci- 
 vos has almost always a bad meaning, 
 'grovelling,' 'abject.' In Aristotle (3) 
 for instance {Eth. Eudem. iii. 3) raitei- 
 vos is associated with dpSpairoSadrjs ; 
 in Plato {Leffg. iv. p. 774 c) with dve- 
 \fv6ipos ; in Arrian {JSpict. i. 3) with 
 ayennfis. To this however some few 
 exceptions are found, especially in 
 Plato and the Platonists; see Neau- 
 der Church Hist. i. p. 26 (Eng. Tr.). 
 On the other hand, 8t Paul once uses 
 Taireivo<l>poirvvti in disparagement, CoL 
 ii. 1 8. It was one great result of the 
 life of Christ (on which 8t Paul dwells 
 here) to raise 'humility' to its proper 
 level; and, if not fresh coined for this 
 purpose, the word raireivo^poirivri now 
 first became current through the in- 
 fluence of Christian ethics. On its 
 moral and religious significance see 
 Neander Planting i. p. 483 (Eng. Tr.). 
 
 oXXijXovc K.T.X.] Le. 'each thinking 
 
 the other better.' See esp. Rom. xii. 
 10 r^ ri/i^ dXXi)Xovs rrpojiyovfifvoi. 
 
 4, 5. 'These verses exhibit several 
 various readings. The received text 
 has o'Kmrf'iTt for itkottovvtcs, and <j)po- 
 veia-da for (ppovfiTC, also inserting yap 
 after tovto. All these variations may 
 be at once dismissed, as they have not 
 sufficient support and are evident al- 
 terations to relieve the grammar of 
 the sentence. But others still remain, 
 where it is more difficult to decide. 
 In ver. 4, at the first occurrence of the 
 word, there is about equal authority 
 for fKaoTos and cKoorot ; at its second 
 occurrence, the weight of evidence is 
 very decidedly in favour of cKaarroi as 
 against tKaaros. On the grammar it 
 should be remarked; (i) That the plu- 
 ral of eKoa-Tos, though common else- 
 where, does not occur again either in 
 the New Testament (for in Rev. vi. 1 1 
 it is certainly a false reading) or, as 
 would appear, in the lxx. (2) That 
 we should expect either ra iavrmv 
 CKaaroi or ra eavTou tKatrrosj but this 
 consideration is not very weighty, for 
 irregularities sometimes occur; and as 
 ra iavrav precedes fnaaros, the latter 
 might be looked upon as an after- 
 thought inserted parenthetically. (3) 
 That St Paul can hardly have written 
 fKom-os in the first clause and eKaaroi 
 in the second, intending the clauses as 
 correlative; and therefore if we retain 
 fxaa-Tos in the first case, it will be 
 necessary to detach the following cKa- 
 crroi, and join it on with the next sen- 
 tence. This view seems to have been 
 taken by some older expositors and 
 translators; and I have given it as 
 an alternative reading. Whether the 
 probabilities (independently of the evi- 
 dence) are in favour of Ixao-ror or «B- 
 
no 
 
 BPISTLB TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 [II. S, 6 
 
 ''TovTO (ppoveire ev vfilv, b kuI ev XpKTTW ^Irjarov, 
 *os iv fJLopcbfj Qeov VTrdp^wv ov^ dpTrayfiov fiyr](raTO to 
 
 oToi in the first caso, it is difficult to 
 say. The plural cKatrroi would mean 
 'each and all.' 
 
 iTKOTrovvTcs] 'regarding as your aim 
 (criHwrot).' For this sense of a-Konelv 
 ro cauToC, 'to consult one's own in- 
 terests,' comp. Eur. £1. 1114, Thuc. vi. 
 12, and other passages quoted by Wet- 
 stein. For other instances of parti- 
 ciples used where imperatives might 
 have been expected, see Bom. xii. 9, 
 Heb. xiii. 5. 
 
 dKKa KaC] 'but also,' i.e. let them 
 look beyond their own interests to those 
 of others. 
 
 exacrroi] for the repetition of the 
 word compare i Cor. viL 17. 
 
 S — II. ' Reflect in your own minds 
 the mind of Christ Jesus. Bo humble, 
 as He also was humble. Though ex- 
 isting before the worlds in the Eternal 
 Godhead, yet He did not cling with 
 avidity to the prerogatives of His 
 divino majesty, did not ambitiously 
 display His equality with God ; but di- 
 vested Himself of the glories of heaven, 
 and took upon Him the nature of a 
 servant, assuming the likeness of men. 
 Nor was this all. Having thus ap- 
 peared among men in the fashion of a 
 man, He humbled Himself yet more, 
 and carried out His obedience even to 
 dying. Nor did He die by a common 
 death : He was crucified, as the lowest 
 malefactor is crucified. But as was 
 His humility, so also was His exalta- 
 tion. God raised Him to a preemi- 
 nent height, and gave Him a title and 
 a dignity far above all dignities and 
 titles else. For to the name and ma- 
 jesty of Jesus all created things in 
 heaven and earth and hell shall pay 
 homage on bended knee ; and every 
 tongue with praise and thanksgiving 
 shall declare that Jesus Christ is Lord, 
 and in and for Him shall glorify God 
 the Father.' 
 
 S. tv vitiv] 'in yourselves,' i.e. 'in 
 
 your hearts,' as Matt. iiL 9 ^^ dofijre 
 \eyfui fv iavToTs, ix. 3 (iirav cv iavrols 
 (explained by iv Tats naphlats vfiav 
 which follows), ix. 21 etc. For vjuv, 
 where the New Testament writers 
 generally have iavroU and classical 
 authors viiiv uvroir, compare Matt. vL 
 19 fif) 6ij(Tavpi(fTe vjiiv Brjiravpovs; and 
 see A. Buttmann, p. 97. These slight 
 difficulties, together with the irregula- 
 rity of construction mentioned in the 
 next note, have doubtless led to the 
 
 substitution of (ppoveio-Sa for (ppovtln 
 
 in the received text. 
 
 o Koi K.r.X.] sc. ((j)povtlTo. The re- 
 gular construction would have been 
 Koi KptffTos 'irja'oiis e<f>p6vei ev iavT^, 
 
 6. «V popcfi^ Ocov] 'in the form of 
 God' On the meaning of /i°P04 and 
 its distinction from irxqiia see the de- 
 tached note at the end of this chapter. 
 Though popff)^ is not the same as 0v- 
 o-ir or ova-ia, yet the possession of the 
 P'Optf}fi involves participation in the oj- 
 a-la also : for p^p<i"i implies not the ex- 
 ternal accidents but the essential attri- 
 butes. Similar to this, though not so 
 decisive, are the expressions used 
 elsewhere of the divinity of the Son, 
 tiKav TOV Qeov 2 Cor. iv. 4, Col. i. 15, 
 and xi'poKT^p ttjs vno<TTa<Tea>t tov 6coS 
 
 Heb. i. 3. Similar also is the term 
 which St John has adopted to express 
 this truth, 6 Aoyos tov 6fov. 
 
 vnapxtov] The word denotes 'prior 
 existence,' but not necessarily 'eternal 
 existence.' The latter idea however 
 follows in the present instance from 
 the conception of the divinity of Christ 
 which the context supposes. The 
 phrase iv fitop(l)^ Bcov irrapxav is 
 thus an exact counterpart to cV opx^ 
 1J1/ o Aoyoy Koi 6 Aoyot ijv npos tov Qtov 
 k.tX., John i. I. The idea correspond- 
 ing to virapxav is expressed in other 
 terms elsewhere; CoL i. 15, 17 nporo- 
 ToKos natnjs KTitretus, avTos foriv irpo 
 iravrwv, Heb. i. 8, lo, John viiL 58, 
 
II. 7] BPISTLB TO THE PHILIPPIANS. Ill 
 
 eivat icra Gew, '^ dXXd iavTOV iKevcocreu fxop^^v ^ovXov 
 
 xviL 24, and Apoc. i. 17, iii. 14. 
 
 ovx apirayjiov i)yi;o-aro] ' yet did not 
 regard it as a prize, a treasure to be 
 clutched and retained at all hazards.' 
 The more usual form of the word is 
 apnayfia, which properly signifies sim- 
 ply ' a piece of plunder,' but especially 
 with such verbs as ^ytiirBai, iroieiadai, 
 vofitCeiv, eta, is employed like ep/iawv, 
 fvptifia, to denote ' a highly-prized pos- 
 session, an unexpected gain' : as Plut. 
 
 Mor. p. 330 D ov8e moTTfp apTraypa Kai 
 \atf)vpov evTvxLas dveXTTLOTOv tnrapa^ai 
 Kai avwripaaOai 8iavoj)6eis, Heliod. vii. 
 20 ovx o.pivaypa ovhi cpp.aioi> i/yf iTot to 
 irpayfui, ib. viii. 7 apirayjia to prjBtv 
 firoi^aaTo ij 'hpiraia), Titus Bostr. c. 
 Munich, i. 2 apnaypa i/rcvda>f to dvay- 
 Koiov Trjc (jivaeac ifyetrai, Euseb. JT. E. 
 viiL I2TOV 6avaTov apiraypu Bepevoi, Vit, 
 Const, ii. 31 otbv apirayiia ti t^v eVa- 
 t/o8ov iroiTjtrdfievoi. 
 
 It appears then from these in- 
 stances that apiraypa ijyeXaBai fre- 
 quently signifies nothing more than 
 ' to clutch greedily,' ' prize highly,' ' to 
 set store by;' the idea of plunder or 
 robbery having passed out of sight. 
 The form apnayfibs however presents 
 greater difficulty ; for neither analogy 
 nor usage is decisive as to its mean- 
 ing : (i) The termination -/ios indeed 
 denotes primarily the process, so that 
 dpirayiios would be ' an act of plunder- 
 ing.' But as a matter of fact substan- 
 tives in -/tor are frequently used to 
 describe a concrete thing, e.g. 6e<rp6s, 
 Xpiirp'Os, ^payiios, etc. (see Buttmann, 
 Ausf. Sprachl. § 1 19. 23 (11. p. 399) ; 
 with which compare the EngUsh 
 ' seizure, capture,' and the like) : so 
 that the form is no impediment to 
 the sense adopted above. (2) And 
 again the particular word apiray/ius 
 occurs so rarely that usage cannot 
 be considered decisive. In Plut. Mor. 
 p. 12 A roe (K Kpi;n;f KoKoviievov 
 afnrayitov, the only instance of its oc- 
 currence in any classical writer (for 
 
 though it appears as a various read- 
 ing for apwayri in Pausan. i. 20. 2, the 
 authority is too slight to deserve 
 consideration), it seems certainly to 
 denote the act. On the other hand 
 in Euseb. Comm. in Luc. vi. (Mai, 
 Nov. Pair. BiU. rv. p. 165) d Vierpoi 
 Se apirayfiov top 8ta trravpov 6dvaTov 
 eVotfiTO Sia Tar a-aTrjpiovs (Kiri&ai (a 
 reference which I owe to a friend), in 
 Cyril. Alex, de Ador. i. p. 25 (ed. Au- 
 
 bert.) ovx dpitaypiv ttjv jrapaiTrftTiv (»« 
 i^ dbpavovs Kai, vSaptirTepas iiroieiTO 
 <j)pfv6s (speaking of Lot's importunity 
 when the angels declined his offer of 
 hospitality), and in a late anonymous 
 writer in the Catena Possini on Mark 
 X. 42 T^ dct^ai oTi ovK eoTiv dpnaypoi 
 i; ri/uj, Tav e6vaiv yap to toiovtov, it is 
 equivalent to apTraypm. Under these 
 circumstances we may, in choosing 
 between the two senses of dpTtaypos, 
 fairly assign to it here the one which 
 best suits the context. 
 
 The meaning adopted above satis- 
 fies this condition : ' Though He pre- 
 existed in the form of God, yet He 
 did not look upon equality with God 
 as a prize which must not slip from 
 His grasp, hut He emptied Him- 
 self, divested Himself, taking upon 
 Him the form of a slave.' The idea 
 is the same as in 2 Cor. viii. 9 8C 
 vpas enTaxfV(r€V77\ova'ios (ov. The 
 other rendering (adopted by the A.V.), 
 'thought it not robbery to be equal 
 with God,' disconnects this clause from 
 its context. The objections to this 
 latter interpretation will be considered 
 more at length in the detached note at 
 the end of the chapter. 
 
 TO eivat "ura Oe^] 'to he on an 
 equality with God.' For this use of 
 ((TO as a predicate, comp. Job xL 12 
 ^poros dc ytvvrjTos yvpaiKos itra ova 
 iprtp'tTji. So opoia in Thucyd. i. 25 8v- 
 vapei ovT€s...ofioia toIs 'EXXi^ywv ttXov- 
 (TuoTaTots: see Jelf, Gramm. § 382, 
 The examples of the mere adverbial 
 
112 
 
 EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 [II. 8 
 
 XafitoVy ev ofxaiwixaTi dvOpunrtav yevofievo^, * Kai &'XfJiuiaTi 
 evpedeh aJs avdpcoTros eTaTreivuxrev eavrov, yevofievoi 
 
 nse of lo-a accumulated by commenta- 
 torg do not throw much light on the 
 meaning here. Between the two ex- 
 pressions t<Tos 6tva( and 'era that DO 
 other distinction can be drawn, except 
 that the former refers rather to the 
 person, the latter to the attributes. 
 In the present instance lo-a et^ ex- 
 presses better the Catholic doctrine of 
 the Person of Christ, than la-os ©eaj ; for 
 the latter would seem to divide the 
 Godhead. It is not the statement 
 either of the Lord Himself or of the 
 evangelist, but the complaint of the 
 Jews, that He 'made Himself to-ov ra 
 eea (John V. 1 8).' 
 
 In the letter of the synod of Anoyra, 
 directed against the Sabellianism of 
 Marcellus, attention is called to the 
 absence of the article with Qebs here 
 and above [iv i^opcpj GfoB) ; Ka66 etor 
 av ovTC liop(t>jj [pvT ev M°P<^9 '] *'<"■» tov 
 0toC aWa 0foC, ovTc icra eorl ra Oca 
 dWa 6eu, ovTt ailBevTiKois as 6 TraTTjp 
 
 (Epiphan. Hcer. Ixxiii. 9,p.85S Petav.). 
 The object of this comment, whether 
 right or wrong, is apparently to dis- 
 tinguish between Geor God absolutely 
 and o Geor God the Father ; but the 
 editors generally after Petau substitute 
 dKKa Geof, dXKa Geof, for dXXd Geov, 
 oXXa Qea, thus disregarding the us 
 and confusing the sense. 
 
 7. aiKKa iavrov] ' So far from this : 
 He divested Himself,' not of His divine 
 nature, for this was impossible, but ' of 
 the glories, the prerogatives, of Deity. 
 This He did by taking upon Him the 
 form of a servant' The emphatic 
 position of eavrov points to the humi- 
 liation of our Lord as voluntary, self- 
 imposed. 
 
 (Kevaaev] ' emptied, stripped Him- 
 idj" of the insignia of majesty. 
 
 Iioptpflv SotJXou XajSai/] 'by taking 
 the form of a slave.' The action of 
 \<^^<!>v is coincident in time vrith 
 the action of cKevatrtv, as e.g. Ephes. 
 
 i. 9 : comp. Plat. Men. p. 92 tvepye- 
 Ttt<Tov (jjpaa-as, and see Hermann on 
 Viger no. 224, Bemtiardy Griech. 
 Synt. p. 383, By ' form ' is meant not 
 the external semblance only {a-xrii"iof 
 the following verse), but the character- 
 istic attributes, as in ver. 6. For av- 
 Bpmiroi the stronger word iovKos is 
 substituted : He, who is Master(Kvptor) 
 of all, became the slave of alL Comp. 
 Matt. XX. 27, 28, Mark x. 44, 45. 
 
 This text was made the starting- 
 point of certain mystic speculations by 
 the early sect of the Sethians; Hippol. 
 
 HOBT. \. 19, X. II. 
 
 iv ofiouipAiTi] Unlike fiopeft^, this 
 word does not imply the reality of our 
 Lord's humanity: see Trench N. T. 
 Syn. § XV. 'Forma {fu)p<f>^) dicit 
 quiddam absolutum ; similitude {ofioi- 
 u>na) dicit relationem ad alia ejus- 
 dem conditionis ; habitus (a-xfjita) re- 
 fertur ad aspectum et sensum,' is 
 Beugel's distinction. Thus oiioiaiia 
 stands midway between ftop^^ and 
 a-xrjfui. The plural avQpidirav is used ; 
 for Christ, as the second Adam, repre- 
 sents not the individual man, but the 
 human race; Rom. v. 15, i Cor. xv. 
 
 45—47- 
 
 yevoitevosl like XajSmv is opposed to 
 the foregoing iirapxav (ver. 6), and 
 marks the assumption of the new upon 
 the old. 
 
 8. ' Nor was this His lowest degra- 
 dation. He not only became a man, 
 but He was treated as the meanest of 
 men. He died the death of a criminal 
 slave.' 
 
 axripxiTi. (C.T.X.] The former verse 
 dwells on the contrast between what 
 He was from the beginning and what 
 He became afterwards : hence Xa|3o>i' 
 (not ex""')) Ofioiaiia (not /iop0i|), yevo- 
 
 pevos (not me), all words expressive of 
 change. In the present the opposition 
 is between what He win Himself, and 
 what He appeared in the eyes of men : 
 
11.9] 
 
 BPISTLB TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 113 
 
 wTT^jKOOs liiexP'- QoLvdrov, davdrov Se (rravpov' 'Sto Kai 6 
 0eos avTOv V7repv'\jy(j0(rev kui i^apicraTO avTtS to bvofia 
 
 hence o-p^ij^an (for o/ioita/uirt or nop^ff), 
 riptdeU (for yepo/ifvoc or viTapx<i>v), as 
 av6panos{tor av6pamos),a,\\ expresaions 
 implying external lemblance. ' He 
 hath no form nor comeliness; there 
 is no beauty that we should desire 
 him : he was despised and we esteemed 
 him not' (Is. liiL 2, 3). For crxw"" 
 (vpfBe\s K.r.X. compare Test, xii Pair. 
 Zab. 9 o\jfe<Tde SfOK eu crxii/iO" avBpa- 
 iroVj Benj. lO ctti yrjs <l>av€VTa iv fiop(ji^ 
 dvBpcirrov {jairfiviia-fasl, 
 
 iSttij/coos] sc. tm Qe^ : comp. Ter. 9, 
 816 xat Bcos K.T.X. On the uTraxo^ 
 of Christ comp. Rom. v. 19, Ilebr. v. 8. 
 
 Bavarov he oraupoC] 'I Said death, 
 but it was no common death. It was 
 a death which involved not intense 
 suffering only but intense shame also : 
 a death reserved for malefactors and 
 slaves : a death on which the Mosaic 
 law has uttered a curse (Deut. xxi. 23), 
 and which even Gentiles consider the 
 most foul and cruel of all punish- 
 ments (Cic. Verr. v. 64) ; which has 
 been ever after to the Jews a stum- 
 blingblock and to the Greeks foolish- 
 ness.' Compare Heb. xii, 2 vKep.(wev 
 
 (TTavpov altrxyvjjs Karaf^povrjiras, and 
 see Galatians p. 152 sq. The con- 
 trast of his own position must have 
 deepened St Paul's sense of his Mas- 
 ter's humiliation. As a Roman citizen 
 he could under no circumstances suffer 
 such degradation ; and accordingly, if 
 we may accept the tradition, while St 
 Peter died on the cross, he himself 
 was executed by the sword : see Ter- 
 tuU. Scorp. 15, and comp. Ep. Gall. 
 in Buseb. JI. E. v. I, § 12. 
 
 9. dio] In consequence of this 
 voluntary humiliation, in fulfilment of 
 the divine law which He Himself 
 enunciated, d Tanfivoiv eavrov v'^fod^- 
 
 a-€Tai (Luke liv. 11, xviii. 14). 
 
 816 Kai] is a frequent collocation of 
 particles in the New Testament with 
 various shades of meaning. Here the 
 PHIL. 
 
 Kai implies reciprocation. 
 
 vTTfpv'^axrev] The word is found 
 several times in the lxx, but ap- 
 parently does not occur in classical 
 writers. 
 
 ixapitraro airSi] ' gave to Him, the 
 Son of Man.' 'Yntpxr^atrtv and ixapl- 
 a-aro are used in reference to the sub- 
 ordinate position voluntarily assumed 
 by the Son of God. 
 
 TO avona] ' the name, i.e. the title 
 and dignity,' comp. Bphes. i. 21 vntp- 
 avto TTOtrqs apx^s Koi e^ovtrias Kot dvi'a- 
 fieas Kai KvpioTrjTos Kol navTos ovofiaros 
 OKOfta^o/icvov, Heb.i. 4o(r^ hia^opa- 
 Tcpov nap avTotie KfKKripov6ft,riKfv o v o /ii a. 
 If St Paul were referring to any one 
 term, Kvpws would best explain the 
 reference ; for it occurs in the context 
 oTt Kuptor 'Ii;(roCi Xpiordt, ver. II. But 
 here, as in the passages quoted, we 
 should probably look to a very common 
 Hebrew sense of 'name,' not meanii^ 
 a definite appellation but denoting 
 office, rank, dignity. In this case the 
 use of the ' Name of God' in the Old 
 Testament to denote the Divine Pre- 
 sence or the Divine Majesty, more 
 especiaUyastheobject of adoration and 
 praise, will suggest the true meaning: 
 since the context dwells on the honour 
 and worship henceforth offered to Him 
 on whom 'the name' has been con- 
 ferred. ' To praise the name, to bless 
 the name, to fear the name, of God ' 
 are frequent expressions in the Old 
 Testament. See especially Gesenius 
 Thesaur. p. I432,s. v. Dt?, where he de- 
 fines 'the name of God,' 'Deus qua- 
 tenus ab hominibus invocatur, celebra- 
 tur.' Philo in a remarkable passage 
 (aniong other titles assigned to our 
 Lord in the Apostolic writings) gives 
 ' the Name of God ' as a designation 
 of the ' Word' : KaX av firjbeTra /icvrot 
 Tvyx^vjl Tis d^wxpfs av vJot ©tou 
 TrpotrayopevtfrBai, (nrovha^era KOfTfitiiT' 
 6ai Kara rov irporoyonov avroC 
 
 8 
 
114 
 
 EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 [II. 10 
 
 TO vTrep Trdv ovo/na, ^°'tva ev tw ovofxari 'Irja-ov han 
 rdNY KAMyH eirovpavioiv kuI eTriyetwu /cat Kara^vo- 
 
 \oyov, TOP tiyyfXov irpfo'^VTarov, as 
 dpxayytXov no\vdvvp.ov vtTap\ovTa Koi 
 yap dpx'i' Ka\ Svoiia Bfov nal Xoyor 
 Ka\ 6 KOT tiKova avBpairos Ka\ opmv 
 'ItrpaifK vpotrayopevfTat {de Conf. Ling, 
 § 28, p. 427 m). St Paul's idea here 
 seems to be the same; for the parallel 
 remains unaffected by the fact that the 
 Word was not revealed to Philo as an 
 incarnate Person. Somewhat different 
 in expression, though similar in mean- 
 ing, is St John's language, Rev. xix. 
 13. The reading to 3vo/ia (for which 
 the received text has ovopa without the 
 article) is unquestionably correct, both 
 as having the support of the oldest mss, 
 and as giving a much fuller meaning. 
 For other instances where to ovoim is 
 used absolutely, comp. Acts v. 41 <tan;- 
 
 ^laBrjarav iirip Tov dvoparos dripairB^vai, 
 Ignat. Eph. 3 bibcpm, iv r^ ovopari, 
 Philad. 10 Sofacrai to ovopa. In all 
 tj^ese cases transcribers or translators 
 have stumbled at the expression and 
 interpolated words to explain it. The 
 same motive will account for the omis- 
 sion of the article here. 
 
 10. This passage is modelled on 
 Isaiah xlv. 23 on c^oi xa/i^ei irav yon 
 Kat f^opoXoyrjfreTai iraa-a y\a(raa t^ 
 Qf^ (so Alex., but Vat. has koL opetToi 
 jr. y\. TOV 0f 01/, and Sin. xai opvnai it. 
 yX. TOV Kvpiov), the text being modi- 
 fied to suit St Paul's application to the 
 Son. In Bom. xiv. 10, 1 1, on the other 
 hand, the same text is directly quoted : 
 travTesyapirapao'Tr)a6pedaT^ P^pari TOV 
 6coi} (v. 1. ToC Xpitrrov)' yiypaitTai yap, 
 Z(S cyffi, Xcyet Kvpioi, on (po\ Kdpyjrti 
 K.T.X.; the introductory words however, 
 Zu ('yoS, A.cyci Kvptos, being substituted 
 for KOT ipavTov Spvva of the prophet. 
 In the passage in the Bomans then, if 
 the reading roC XpioroB were adopted, 
 T&vpiot would refer naturally to our 
 Lord, and thus it would serve to illus- 
 trate the application of the text here; 
 but the balance of authority is de- 
 
 cidedly in favour of roC Beov, which 
 is doubtless correct ; the other reading 
 having been introduced from 2 Cor. v. 
 10, where the words to ^r\pa tov Xpt<r- 
 Tov occur. 
 
 Yet even without the countenance 
 which would thus have been obtained 
 from Bom. xiv. 11, it seems clear from 
 the context that ' the name of Jesus ' 
 is not only the medium but the object 
 of adoration. The motive of the pas- 
 sage (as shown by the last verse) is to 
 declare the honour paid to Jesus; and 
 that the individual expressions suggest 
 this interpretation will appear from the 
 following note. 
 
 (V TO) dvopari] 'in the name,' i.e. the 
 majesty, the manifestation to man, as 
 an object of worship and praise. It 
 is not ' the name Jesus,' but ' the name 
 q/" Jesus.' The name here must be the 
 same with the name in the preceding 
 verse. And the personal name Jesus 
 cannot there be meant; for the be- 
 stowal of the name is represented as 
 following upon the humiliation and 
 death of the Son of Man. If such had 
 been the meaning, the words should 
 have run, not ' He bestowed on Him 
 the name etc.,' but ' lie exalted the 
 name borne by Him'; for, though emi- 
 nently significant in His case and thus 
 prophetic of His glorious office (Matt 
 L 2 1 ), it was the personal name of many 
 others besides. That the bending of 
 the knee is an act of reverence to Jesus, 
 and not only to God through Him, will 
 appear from the following considera- 
 tions; (i) The parallel clause describes 
 an act of reverence paid directly to 
 the Son as its object, the ultimate aim 
 however being the glory of the Fa- 
 ther, iraaa yX^aaa f^o/ioXoyjyo-fTai on 
 KvpLos 'lijo-oCr K.T.X. (2) The con- 
 struction fv T^ ovo;ian 'lijtrov nav ydw 
 Kap'^U in this sense is supported by 
 m^ny analogous instances where direct 
 adoration is meant: e. g. Ps. 'kiiL 
 
II. II, 12] 
 
 EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 "5 
 
 VltOUf "kaI HACA r^WCCA elOMOAorHC6TAI OTl KwOiOS 
 
 'I>j<roi/s XjOitrros ets So^aj/ Geou Trarpo's. 
 
 "' no"T6, dyaTrriToi fiov, Kadcos TrdvroTe v7rr]Kov(TaTe, 
 
 5 eV T^ ovofiaTL trov apm ras Xf tp*if M°^j 
 Ps. zUt. IO (V Tw ovo/iari <tov f'fofio- 
 \oyrjtrofie0af Ps. CV, 3 enaivflaBf fv ra 
 ovo/iaTL T^ dyi^ avroB, I Kings yiii. 44 
 7rpo(rev^ovTai tv ovofurri Kvpi'ov, besides 
 the very frequent expression «VtitaXei- 
 irBai iv ovofiari Kvplov (or Qeov) I Kings 
 xvliL 24, 25, 26, 2 Kings v. 1 1, Ps. xx. 
 8, cxvi. 17, 2 Cliron. xxviii. 15. 
 
 raw iirovpaviav k.t.X.] 'all creation, 
 all things whatsoever and wheresoever 
 they be.' The whole universe, whether 
 animate or inanimate, bends the knee 
 in homage and raises its voice in 
 praise: see especially Kev. v. 13 /cai 
 irav KTitrfia o fv ra ovpav^ xat eVi Trjs 
 yV* Koi vrroKOTat rfji y^s Koi eVi T^t 6a- 
 \a(Tin]S [a] tirriv koi to tv avTois iravra, 
 KCLt iJKOvtra Xeyovras rco Ka$rjp.evia K.r.X.; 
 
 and comp. Ephes. i. 20 — 22. So in 
 like manner St Paul represents 'all 
 creation' as awaiting the redemption 
 of Christ, Kom. viii. 22. Compare 
 Ignat. Trail. 9 jSXcTrwrwi' rav cVou- 
 paviav KaX cmyeitav Kal vtroxBovimv^ 
 Polyc. Phil. 2 Cj> vntrayr] ra iravra cttov- 
 pavta Kot imytia. It would seem there- 
 fore that the adjectives here are neu- 
 ter; and any limitation to intelligent 
 beings, while it detracts from the uni- 
 versality of the homage, is not requir- 
 ed by the expressions. The personifi- 
 cation of universal nature offering its 
 praise and homage to its Creator in 
 the 148th Psalm will serve to illus- 
 trate St Paul's meaning here. If this 
 view bo correct, all endeavours to 
 explain the three words of different 
 classes of intelligent beings; as Chris- 
 tians, Jews, heathens ; angels, men, 
 devils ; the angels, the living, the dead ; 
 souls of the blessed, men on earth, souls 
 in purgatory, etc., are out of place. 
 
 II. i^oiJLo\oyriaeTai\' proclaim with 
 thankggiving! In itself c'lo/ioXoyri- 
 <r6ai is simply 'to declare or confess 
 openly or plainly,' But as its second- 
 
 ary sense 'to offer praise or thanks- 
 giving' has almost entirely supplanted 
 its primary meaning in the lxx, whore 
 it is of frequent occurrence, and as 
 moreover it has this secondary sense in 
 thevorypassageof Isaiah whichSt Paul 
 adapts, the idea of praise or thanks- 
 giving ought probably not to bo ex- 
 cluded here. Compare the construc- 
 tion e^Ofi6\oyovp,ai aoi jr&Tfp OTt, Matt. 
 
 xi. 25, Luke x. 21. The authorities 
 are divided between c'lojuoXayiJa'ijrai 
 and f^oiJU)\oy^<TiTai. In a doubtful 
 case I have given the preference to 
 the latter, as transcribers would bo 
 tempted to substitute the conjunctive 
 to conform to Kap.^. The future is 
 justified by such passages as Rev. xxii. 
 14 'va c<TTai...Kai flireXBaa-iv ; see 
 Winer § xli. p. 360 sq. 
 
 Kupiof 'lijaoCs] See Acts ii. 36 koI 
 Kvpiov avTov Km Xpiarov 6 &ebs fVoi'ij- 
 aeVf rovTOP tqv ^Irjaovv ou Vfifis fiTTav- 
 pmraTf, Kom. X. 9 iau oiioXoy^cnji iu 
 Ta OTO/xaTi trov Kiipioi/ *Ii;(roCi/, i.e. 'con- 
 fess Jesus to be Lord,' where the 
 other reading on Kvpior 'lijo-oCs is a 
 paraphrase; comp. i Cor. xii. 3. 
 
 12, 13. 'Therefore, my beloved, 
 having the example of Christ's humi- 
 lity to guide you, the example of 
 Christ's exaltation to encourage you, 
 as ye have always been obedient 
 hitherto, so continue. Do not look to 
 my presence to stimulate you. Labour 
 earnestly not only at times when I am 
 with you, but now when I am far away. 
 With a nervous and trembling anxiety 
 work out your salvation for yourselves 
 For yourselves, did I say? Nay, ye 
 are not alone. It is God working in 
 you from first to last: God that in- 
 spires the earliest impulse, and God 
 that directs the final achievement : for 
 such is His good pleasure.' 
 
 vwi]Koi(raTe 'were obedient^ Le. to 
 God, not to St Paul himself. 'Yira/coij 
 
 8—2 
 
Il6 
 
 EPISTLE TO THE PIIILIPPIANS. 
 
 [11. 13 
 
 /ii»} ftjs iv Tw TrapovcTia fxov fxovov, dWa vvv iroWw /ulSK- 
 \ov ev TY] aTTOvcria. jaou, juLeTci (pofiou Kat Tpofxav rriv 
 eavTwv awTvipiav Karepyd^eo'de' '^©eos yap ecriv o 
 evepySv iv vfuv Kal to 6i\eiv kuI to evepyeiv vTrep Trji 
 
 is most frequently so used in the New 
 Testament of submission to the Gospel, 
 e.g. Rom. i. 5, xv. 18, xvi. 19, 26, 
 2 Cor. viL IS, X. 5, 6. It hero refers 
 back to the example of Christ, who 
 Himself 'showed obedience' (lijnj/toor 
 ytvojifvos ver. 8). 
 
 HV iBE f'v Tj k-tXI 'do not, as though 
 my presence prompted you, work out in 
 my presence only etc' The sentence 
 is a fusion of two ideas, fifj <is iv t§ 
 
 TTapovtrttf. /xov Karepyd^eaOef and fifj ip 
 Tji napov<Tia /wv fiovov Karepyaj^nrBe, 
 'do not be energetic because I am pre- 
 sent,' and 'do not be energetic only 
 when I am present.' The pleonastic 
 as lays stress on the sentiment or mo- 
 tive of the agent : compare Kom. ix. 
 32, 2 Cor. ii. 17, Philem. 14. 
 
 </>o^ov KaX T-pofiou] i.e. a nervous and 
 trembling anxiety to do right. Such 
 at least seems to be the meaning of 
 the phrase in St Paul, 2 Cor. vii. 15, 
 Bphes. vi. 5 : corap. i Cor. ii 3. The 
 words occur together frequently in 
 the Lxx, where however they have a 
 sterner import: Gen. ix. 2, Exod. xv. 
 16, Deut. iL 25, xi. 25, Ps. liv. 5, Is. 
 xix. 16. 
 
 iavTav] The word is emphatic in re- 
 ference both to what goes before and 
 to what follows. ' Do not depend on me, 
 but on yourselves,' 'When you depend 
 on yourselves, you depend on God.' 
 
 Karepyaffo-^e] 'work out,' as e.g. 
 Xen. Mem. iv. 2.7 TrXciovav wepl raCra 
 TpayimTevojiivav iKarrovs ol Karepya- 
 (oiicvoi yiymvrai. It is a common 
 word in St Paul. 
 
 13. yap] This verse supplies at once 
 the stimulus to and the corrective of 
 the precept in the preceding : 'Work, 
 for God works with you': and 'The 
 good is not your own doing, but God's.' 
 
 evfpymv] 'works mightily, works ef- 
 fectively.' The preposition of the com- 
 pound is unconnected with the tv of 
 ev vjuv ('in your hearts'). See the 
 notes on Gal. ii. 8. 
 
 Kal TO BfKciv K.r.X.] 'not less the will, 
 the first impulse, than the work, the 
 actual performance.' 'Jfos ergo volu- 
 mus, sed Deus in nobis operatur et 
 velle; nos ergo operamur, sed Deus in 
 nobis operatur et operari,' Augustiu. 
 de Don, Persee. 33 (x. p. 838, ed. Ben.). 
 It was not sufficient to say Qeos ta-rtv 
 6 ivepyav, lest ho should seem to Umit 
 the part of God to the actual working : 
 this activity of God comprises to 61- 
 Xeiv as well as to ivepyeiv. The Bikea 
 and the evepyelv correspond respec- 
 tively to the 'gratia prseveniens' and 
 the 'gratia cooperans' of a later theo- 
 logy.^ 
 
 vnep TTjs K.T.X.] 'in fulfilment of His 
 benevolent purpose'; for God 'vrill 
 have all men to be saved' (i Tim. iL 4). 
 The words should therefore be con- 
 nected with eeoi itrriv 6 tvepyav, not 
 with ical TO SiKeiv k.t.X. ; for this latter 
 connexion would introduce an idea 
 alien to the context. On evboKta see 
 the note l 15. 
 
 14 — 16. ' Be ye not like Israel of 
 old. Never give way to discontent 
 and murmuring, to questioning and 
 unbeliet So live that you call forth 
 no censure from others, that you keep 
 your ovm consciences single and pure. 
 Show yourselves blameless children 
 of God amidst a crooked and per- 
 verse generation. For you are set 
 in this world as luminaries iu the fir- 
 mament. Hold out to others the word 
 of life. That so, when Christ shall 
 come to judge all our works, I may be 
 able to boast of your faith, and to show 
 
II. 14— 16, 
 61/Sofctas. 
 
 EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 "7 
 
 '4 
 
 iravra -Troieire xWjOis yoyyvo'iJ.wv Kal Zia 
 
 XoyioTfxwv, '■'ij/a ryevtia-de afxefXTrTOi Kal uKepaioi, t^kn** 
 Qeov A M CO M A fxeaov reNeAc ckoAiac kai AiecrpAM- 
 M 6 N H Cj ev oh (paiveade wc (ixocxfipec ev Kocrfxtp, ^^Xoyov 
 
 that my race has not been run in vain, 
 that my struggles have indeed been 
 crowned with success.' 
 
 14. yoyyucr/idii/] ' murmurinffs.' The 
 word is constantly used in tlie lxx 
 of Israel in the wilderness : compare 
 I Cor.X. lOfirjSe yoyyv^ere Kaddirep Ttves 
 
 avTav fyoyyva-av. The same reference 
 to the Israelites, which is directly ex- 
 pressed in the passage just quoted, 
 seems to have been present to the 
 Apostle's mind here ; for in the next 
 verse he quotes from the song of 
 Moses. For yoyyvirfios the Athenians 
 used TovBopva-fios : the former however 
 occurs in the oldest Ionic writers (see 
 Lobeck Phryn. p. 358). This is one 
 of many instances of the exceptional 
 character of the Attic dialect : see 
 above on jfrvpo/iei/ot L 28 and Gala- 
 tians vi. 6, and p. 92 sg. 
 
 diaXoyt(7/i(Si'] This word in the New 
 Testament means sometimes ' inward 
 questionings,' sometimes 'disputes, dis- 
 cussion' ; for there is no sufScient 
 ground for denying it this second 
 meaning: see i Tim. ii. 8. Hero it 
 seems to have the former souse. As 
 yoyyva-fios is the moral, so SiaXoyio'/ios 
 is the intellectual rebellion against God. 
 
 1 5. yivTjaBf] ' may approve your- 
 selves' : heiisr supported than the 
 other reading fJTt. 
 
 aKfpaioi] 'pure, sincere,' literally 
 'unmixed,' 'unadulterated' (from «- 
 paiivvfu) ; for the word is used of pure 
 wine (Athen. iL 45 b), of unalloyed 
 metal (Plut. Mor. 1154 b), and the 
 like. Comp. Philo Leg. ad Cat. § 42, 
 
 p. 594 M TfjV X^P"* S'SotT (8a>KCV OVK 
 
 GKCpaLov dXX* afa^i^as avT^ deos dpya- 
 Xfdrepov. The stress laid in the New 
 Testament on simplicity of character 
 appears in this as in many other words : 
 
 (XTrXoSf, ciXiKpivij's, di^vxos etc. Of the 
 two words here used, the former (o- 
 fifjiTTTot) relates to the judgment of 
 others, while the latter {aKepaioi) de- 
 scribes the intrinsic character. 
 
 T€Kva &eov K.T.X.] A direct contrast 
 to the Israelites in the desert, who in 
 the song of Moses are described as ovk 
 aira riKva (i.e. no children of God) 
 fiap-Tira, yevea a-KoXid Kal 8Le(rrpapfi6tnj 
 (Deut. xxxii. 5, lxx) : comp. Luke ix. 41 . 
 
 a/ia)^a] Both forms ap,ap/)s and dua- 
 jirjTos are equally common. Here the 
 weight of evidence is in favour of the 
 former, though there is some authority 
 for the latter : in 2 Pet iii. 14 on the 
 other hand, a/i6>)iijroi has much stronger 
 support than a/xu/xot. 
 
 piaov\ For this adverbial use see 
 Steph. Tlies. (ed. Hase and Dindorf), 
 s. V. p. 824. The received text substi- 
 tutes (V ficVo). 
 
 &uaTp<xfLp.evrisY distorted,' s.strongOT 
 word than o-KoXiSt: comp. Arrian.Bpic<. 
 iii. 6. 8 01 /ii) ^aifrdiraa-L dieorpa/x/xeVoi 
 Twc dvdpaTTcov (comp. i. 29. 3). It cor- 
 responds to a strong reduplicated 
 form in the Hebrew 7117113. 
 
 (jyaivfo-dc] 'ye appear,' not ' ye shine ' 
 {(paivtre) as the A. V. The same error 
 is made in Matt. xxiv. 27, Rev. xviii. 
 23. On the other hand in Matt. ii. 7 
 Tov <j)aivoii€vov doTfpos, it is correctly 
 rendered 'appeared.' i^aivia-Bt here 
 should be taken as an indicative, not 
 an imperative. 
 
 aJr (paa-TTipis] ' as luminaries,' 
 The word is used almost exclusively 
 of the heavenly bodies (except when 
 it is metaphorical (as e.g. Gen. i. 14, 
 16 (where it is a rendering of ^1XD), 
 Bcclus. xliii. 7, Orac. Sibyll. n. 186, 
 200, iii. 88, etc. Comp. Dan. xii. 3 
 (lxx) <pavov(Tiv lis <j>toa'TTJpfs TOV ovpa- 
 
ii8 
 
 EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 [II. 17 
 
 tia^s e7re;)(;oi'T€S, ets Kuv-xrifxa ifxoi eU rtfxepav Xpi<rTOv, 
 on ovK els kcvov ehpanov ovhe eis kcvov eKOTriaa-a. 
 ''aAAa el kui cnrevdoiutai em t>j 6ua-ia. Kai Xeirovpyta 
 
 voii, Wisd. xiii. 2 (fxotrT^pas ovpavov rrpv- 
 Tai/en Koa-nov, The word occurs only 
 once again in the N. T., Rev. xxi. 1 1, 
 where also it should be translated 
 ' luminary.' 
 
 €v Koa-iuf] To be taken not with 
 ^aar^pes alone (as the passage of Wis- 
 dom just quoted might suggest), but 
 with (j>aivea6€ lis (fxatTTijpes. For in 
 the former case icoo-^p must signify 
 the material world as distinguislied 
 from the moral world. But this is 
 hardly possible in the language of the 
 New Testament: for though Koa-pos 
 sometimes refers to external nature, 
 yet as it much more frequently has a 
 moral significance, it cannot well, un- 
 less so defined by the context, signify 
 the former to theexclusionofthe latter. 
 It is therefore used here in the same 
 sense as in John iii. 19 ro (pas Aij'Xv- 
 
 6fv f IS Tov Kovpov Ka\ TJyawqaav oj av- 
 BpaiToi paWov TO CKoros K.r.X. : comp, 
 i. 9, 10, ix. 5, xji. 46, etc. 
 
 16. ejrexovTfs] The foregoing clause 
 fv ois <j)aivea6e as (jxotTTfjpes ev nocrpa 
 should probably be taken as paren- 
 thetical, so that diTtxovTfs is attached 
 to iva yivrjaBe ic.r.X. For this sense of 
 tVex"" ' to hold out ' see Horn. //. ix. 
 489, xxii.494, Ar.iViiS. 1382, etc. (plvov, 
 KoTtiXi)!'), Pausan. i. 33. 7, Plut. Mor. 
 
 265 A, 268 P (^patrrov, Biikrfv, yoXa). If 
 
 therefore we are to look for any meta- 
 phor in iirexovTis, it would most natu- 
 rally be that of oflFering food or wine. 
 At all events it seems wholly uncon- 
 nected with the preceding image in 
 <fia>tTTf)pes. 
 
 tls ij/iepai> XpioToO] 'against the 
 day (if Christ,' as L 10 ; comp. L 6. 
 ' The day of Christ' is a phrase pecu- 
 liar to this epistle. More commonly 
 it is ' the day of the Lord.' For this 
 reference to the great judgment in 
 connexion with his ministerial labours 
 
 compare i Cor. iii. 12, 13, iv. 3—5, and 
 esp. 2 Cor. i. 14. 
 
 tls Ktvov tSpapov\ as Qal. ii. 2. This 
 passage is quoted Polyc. Phil. § 9 
 ouTot rravTfs ov< els Ktvov eSpapov : com- 
 pare 2 Tim. iv. 7. 
 
 cKoiriaa-a] Probably a continuation 
 of the same metaphor, referring to the 
 training for the athletic games : com- 
 pare I Cor. ix. 24 — 27. At least <co- 
 TTtav is elsewhere associated with rpt- 
 Xtiv in the same way : Anthol. lii. p. 
 166 nivt Ka'i tv(j>palvov' Ti yap avpiov, ri 
 Ti TO ftcXXoc, ovdeiff yivoiaKti' p^ Tptxf, 
 prj /co7ria,Ignat. Polyc, S avyKOTrtaTt 
 dXX»)Xoiff, (TvvaOXtiTt, (TVVTpex^^^- 
 
 17, 18. 'I spoke of my severe la- 
 boars for the GospeL I am ready even 
 to die in the same cause. If I am re- 
 quired to pour out my life-blood as a 
 libation over the sacrificial offering of 
 your faith, I rejoice myself and I con- 
 gratulate you all therein. Yea in like 
 manner I ask you also to rejoice and 
 to congratulate me.' 
 
 Thus the particles dXXa tl xaX will 
 refer to the preceding tSpapov, tKoni- 
 a(ra. Most recent commentators ex- 
 plain the connexion in a very harsh 
 and artificial way. Assummg that St 
 Paul had before mentioned his antici- 
 pation of living till the advent of Christ 
 us ijptpav XpLtTTov (ver. 16), they sup- 
 pose that he now suggests the alterna- 
 tive of his dying before. But in fact 
 no such anticipation was expressed: 
 for his work would be equally tested 
 at 'the day of Christ,' whether he 
 were alive or dead when that day came. 
 The faint expectation, which in i. 6, 
 10 (where the same phrase occurs) is 
 suggested by the context, finds no ex- 
 pression hero. On tl Km as distinguish- 
 ed from (cal (I see the note on Qal. i 8. 
 
 (nrivdopai] As his death actually 
 approaches, he says eyco ydp rjd^ aitiif 
 
IL18] 
 
 BPISTLB TO THE PHILIPPIAN8. 
 
 119 
 
 TJJS 
 
 18 
 
 7r«rTews 
 TO Se 
 
 v/MOV, X'^'^P^ '^"' (TV'YX'^^P'^ iraaiv v/miv 
 
 e avTO Kai vfieis ^^aipere Kai a-vyxpiipeTe [xoi. 
 
 hoiuu 2 Tim. iv. 6. Comp. Ignat. Horn. 
 2 irXfov fioi /ii) 7rapaiTX>l<r6e tov ititovIIut- 
 Brjvai 6c(3, as en BvtrtatrTrjpiov croi/xdi' 
 
 cVriv, uttered under similar circum- 
 stances. It is a striking coincidence, 
 that St Paul's great heathen contem- 
 porary Seneca, whose name tradition 
 has linked with his own, is reported to 
 have used a similar metaphor when on 
 the point of death ; Tac. Ann. xy. 64 
 ' respergens proximos servorum, addita 
 voce libare so liquorem ilium Jovi libe- 
 ratori': compare the account of Thra- 
 soa, Ann. xvi. 35. The present tense 
 tnre'fSo/iat places the hypothesis vividly 
 before the eyes : but it does not, as 
 generally explained, refer to present 
 dangers, as though the process were 
 actually begun: comp. e.g. Matt. xiL 
 26, xviii. 8, 9, etc. 
 
 cVi Tj dva-ia] The general import 
 of the metaphor is clear ; but it has 
 been questioned whetherthe reference 
 is to heathen libations or to Jewish 
 drink-ofiferings. The preposition (eVi) 
 seems hardly conclusive. Even if it be 
 true that the drink-oflferings of the 
 Jews were always poured around and 
 not upon the altar (Joseph. Ant. iii. 9. 
 4 tnrevdovtri ire pi tov ^cofiov tov olvov^ 
 see Ewald Alterth. p. 37 sq. 2te ausg.), 
 yet the lxx certainly uses the preposi- 
 tion 'upon' to describe them: Levit. 
 
 v. 1 1 ov< iirixfei iir avTO eKawv, Num. 
 XXviiL 24 enl TOV oKoKavTmp,aTos tov dia 
 TraKTot TTOiiia-cis t^v (tttoi/SiJi' avTOV. Nor 
 
 need eVi with the dative necessarily 
 be translated 'upon,' but may mean 
 'accompanying.' On the other hand, 
 as St Paul is writing to converted hea- 
 thens, a reference to heathen sacrifice 
 is more appropriate (comp. 2 Cor. iu 
 14); while owing to the greater pro- 
 minence of the libation in heathen rites 
 the metaphor would be more expres- 
 sive. For the appropriateness of the 
 preposition in this case see Horn. II. 
 ,xi. 775 (nrevSav aiBoira olvov ett aldoiic- 
 
 vots Upo'uTiv, Arrian Aleic. vi. 19 airel- 
 iras cVi ry Bvala ttjv <^iaXi)v K.r.X., and 
 the common word firunrivinv. The 
 ' sacrifice ' {Bva'ui) here is the victim, 
 not the act. 
 
 X«Toupyi«i] This word has passed 
 through the following meanings : (l) 
 A civil service, a state-burden, espe- 
 cially in the technical language of 
 Athenian law : (2) A function or office 
 of any kind, as of the bodily organs, 
 e.g. the mouth, Arist. Part. An. iL 3 : 
 (3) Sacerdotal ministration especially, 
 whether among the Jews (as Hob. viiL 
 6, ix. 21, and commonly in the lxx), 
 or among heathen nations (as Died. 
 Sic. I 21, where it is used of the Egyp- 
 tian priesthood) : (4) The eucharistic 
 services; and thence more generally 
 (S) Sot forms of divine worship. As 
 the word is applied most frequently in 
 the Bible to sacerdotal functions, it 
 should probably be taken here as sup- 
 plementing the idea of dva-ia. Thus 
 St Paul's language expresses the fun- 
 damental idea of the Chri.stian Church, 
 in which an universal priesthood has 
 supplanted the exclusive ministration.s 
 of a select tribe or class : see i Pet. ii. 
 5 iepartvp-a ayiov dveveyKat 7rvfvp.aTiKas 
 
 dvaias. The Philippiansare the priests; 
 their faith (or their good works spring- 
 ing from their faith) is the sacrifice : 
 St Paul's life-blood the accompanying 
 libation. Commentators have much 
 confused the image by representing 
 St Paul himself as the sacrificer. 
 
 a-uyxalpa] ' I congratulate^ not ' I 
 rejoice with.' As joy is enjoined on 
 the Philippians in the second clause, 
 it must not be assumed on their part 
 in the first. For this sense of trvyxai- 
 peiv ' to congratulate,' where recipro- 
 cation on the part of the person ap- 
 pealed to is not so much presupposed 
 as invited, see e.g. Plut. Mor. 231 b 
 trvyxaipia T3 TToXet TptaKotriovs Kpeirro' 
 vat iMviroXiras ixoviTii,T6lyh.xxix. 7. 4, 
 
120 
 
 EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 [II. 19— 21 
 
 '''E\7rt^w Se ev Kvpica 'Irja-ov Tiuodeov Taykta^ mn- 
 ■^ai vfuv, 'I'va Kayw ew-^iy^co 71/01)5 Tci irepl ufiwv. *°oi/5- 
 ei/a yap 6;)^w 'kto-^v^ov, oVtis 'yvrjcritos tu -jrepi vfxwv 
 /jLepi/JLViia-ei' "01 Trai/res yap tu eavrwv ^rjTOVcriv, ou Ta 
 
 Barnab. I itaXKov myxaipai t'/iaurtp, 
 etc, 
 
 18. TO 817 avTo] 'in the same way,' i.e. 
 rrfv airfiv xapav x"'V'*''6 ; as Matt. 
 xxvii. 44 TO 8* auTO (tai ol 'Kriirra\...avei- 
 
 St^ov avTov. The accusative defines 
 the character rather than the object 
 of the action, so that ravTa xaipav 
 (Demosth. de Cor. p. 323) is ' to have 
 the same joys.' For the poetical use 
 of xalpew and similar words with an 
 accusative of the object see Valcknaer 
 on Eur. Hipp. 1338. 
 
 leai vp.fls xai'peTc] We are reminded 
 of the messenger who brought the 
 tidings of the battle of Marathon, ex- 
 piring on the first threshold with these 
 words on his lips, \aiptTt xai xalpojitv, 
 Plut. Mor. p. 347 c. See the note on 
 iv. 4. 
 
 19 — 24. ' But though absent myself, 
 I hope in the Lord to send Timotheus 
 shortly to you. This I purpose not for 
 your sakes only but for my own also ; 
 that hearing how you fare, I may take 
 heart. I have chosen him, for I have 
 no other messenger at hand who can 
 compare with him, none other who 
 will show the same lively and instinc- 
 tive interest in your welfare. For all 
 pursue their own selfish aims, reckless 
 of the will of Christ. But the creden- 
 tials of Timotheus are before you: you 
 know how he has been tested by long 
 experience, how as a son with a father 
 he has laboured with me in the service 
 of the Gospel. Him therefore I hope 
 to send without delay, when 1 see what 
 turn my affairs will take. At the same 
 time I trust in the Lord, that I shall 
 visit you before long in person.' 
 
 19. 'EXTri'fo) 8e] This is connected in 
 thought with ver. 12. 'I urged the 
 duty of self-reliance during my ab- 
 sence. Yet 1 do not intend to leave 
 
 you without guidance. I purpose 
 sending Timotheus directly, and I hope 
 to visit you myself before long.' Re- 
 cent commentators seem to agree in 
 taking AiriCm Sc as oppositive to the 
 fear expressed in the foregoing ct koX 
 o-ircvSofuu; but the possibility of his 
 own death and the intention of send- 
 ing Timotheus do not stand in any sort 
 of opposition. 
 
 iv Kvpia 'h](Tov] So above L 14 
 and below ii. 24. The same idea is 
 expressed still more explicitly i. 8 iv 
 otrKayxvois XpioroC 'Iijo'oC. The Chris- 
 tian is a part of Christ, a member of 
 His body. His every thought and 
 word and deed proceeds from Christ, 
 as the centre of volition. Thus he 
 loves in the Lord, he hopes in the 
 Lord, he boasts in the Lord, he labours 
 in the Lord, etc. He has one guiding 
 principle in acting and in forbearing 
 to act, iiovov iv Kvpia (l Cor. vii. 39). 
 
 fcaym fvylfvxa] ' / also may take 
 courage.' Comp. ver. 27 ovk ovtov Se 
 liovov aXKa (cai ipi. The guidance of 
 the Philippians was one object of Ti- 
 mothy's mission ; St Paul's comfort 
 was another. While (v'^x°^> eu'i/^uxi'a, 
 are not uncommon, the verb fv-<\rvxfiv 
 seems not to occur iu classical writers, 
 though the imperative iv^ixa- ap- 
 pears frequently on epitaphs : see 
 Jacobs Anthol. xii. p. 304. In PoUux 
 iii. 28 tv-^vx(iv is given as a syn- 
 onyme for dapa-elv. Comp. Hermas 
 Vis. i. 2. 
 
 20. ovSeva yap] This condemna- 
 tion must be limited to the persons 
 available for such a mission. See the 
 introduction, p. 36. 
 
 la-oylrvxov} ' like-minded,' not with 
 St Paul himself, as it is generally taken, 
 but with Timotheus. Otherwise the 
 words would have been ovSiva yap 
 
II. 22, 23] 
 
 EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 121 
 
 'Iria-ov XpiOTTOv. ^'rriv Se SoKifi^v avrov yivwa-KeTe, oti 
 aJs TTUTpt TeKVOv avv ifxoi iSovXevcrei/ eU to evayyeXiov. 
 ^^TOVTOv [lev ovu eXTTi^a) Trifiyj/^ai, ws av dcplZw to. irepi 
 
 11. oi rd XptrroC 'I);<roS. 
 
 3XXov or ovhiva yap ttX^v tovtqv. The 
 word la^rvxos is extremely rare. It 
 occurs in J5sch. Agam. 1470 (1446) 
 where it has much the same sense as 
 here. In Ps. liv. 14 avdpaire la-oijnixt 
 it is a rendering of *3"iy3 'as my 
 price,' i.e. 'quem mihi sequiparabam, 
 quern diligebam ut me ipsum ' (Gesen.), 
 being thus equivalent to dvrt^x^- 
 
 otrrif] 'such that he.' See GaL iv. 
 24 (note), 26, V. 19. 
 
 yw/o-iffls] i. e. as a birth-right, as 
 an instinct derived from his spiritual 
 parentage : see esp. [Demostli.] c. 
 Neasr. p. 1353 rois ^i5o e» ■noKiras icai 
 yvTjo-ias iiiTexovTas r^r TroXcmr, Mpi- 
 taph. p. 1390 Tovs fiev..,7ro\LTas irpotr- 
 ayop€VOfJL€vovs ofioiovs eivai Tois eltnroL- 
 1JTOLS rStu iralSoiVj tovtovs Se yvrjtrlovs 
 yov^ TTJs rrarpl^os aroXtras eivaL Ti- 
 motheua was neither a supposititioiis 
 {v63os) nor an adopted (t iottoitjtos) son, 
 but, as St Paul calls him elsewhere, 
 yinjtriov TcKvov iv ivicrTfi (l Tim. i. 2, 
 comp. Tit. i. 4); comp. Hippol. Hwr.yl. 
 20 'ItridiopQS 6 Ba(Ti\eidov irais ywj- 
 o-ior 'his father's own son.' He recog- 
 nised this filial relationship (a>c rrarpl 
 TfKvov ver. 22); he inherited all the 
 interests and affections of his spiritual 
 father. This, I suppose, is Chryso- 
 stom's meaning, when he explains it 
 
 TOVTCOTl TTOrpiKCOS (cOmparO TTaTpiKrj 
 
 (fiiKia, ex^pa etc.). Comp. Heb. xii. 8 
 apa vodoi Koi o^x ^'■^^ eore. 
 
 21. oi jravTff] 'one and all' 'all 
 without exception.' Por the force of 
 thearticle with navTcs, iravra, see Bern- 
 hardy vi. p. 320, Jelf § 454. 
 
 22. fioKi/iijK] 'approved character,' 
 as in 2 Cor. ii. 9, ix. 13, and probably 
 Rom. V. 4. See Fritzsche Rom. i. p. 259. 
 
 yiuaiTKeTt] 'ye recognise,' 'ye re- 
 member and acknowledge.' Timotheus 
 was personally well known to the 
 
 Philippians ; see the note i. i. 
 
 (»« Trarpi tIkvov] This is often ex- 
 plained by understanding irvv with 
 n-arpl from the following clause triv 
 e'/ioi'; see Jelf § 650. Instances of such 
 omissions however occur chiefly though 
 not always in poetry, and are found 
 mostly in clauses connected by con- 
 junctions {t), Km, etc.). The preposition 
 is omitted here, because the exactform 
 of the sentence was not yet decided 
 in the writer's mind when the first 
 words were written ; see Winer § 1. p. 
 525, § Ixiii. p. 722. For this testimony 
 to Timotheus compare i Cor. iv. 17 ot 
 fariv luw TCKVOV dyairr}Tov Koi niarov iv 
 Kvpia, xvi. 10 TO yap epyov Kvpiov ip- 
 yd(fTai oSs Kayd. 
 
 23. TovTov pev ovv] 'him tlien' the 
 clause being answered by niivoida &i 
 OTI. Ka\ avTos iXevtropcu (ver. 24), 
 while i^avT^s is matched by Taxias. 
 
 lis av...i^avTTJs]'atoncewhen.' For 
 as av temporal comp. Bom. xv. 24, 
 
 1 Cor. xi. 34. 
 
 d<j>iBa>] So dfjiopmvTes Heb. xiL 2. 
 If any weight is to be attached to the 
 agreement of the older mss, the as- 
 pirated form (dt^i'So) for d7ri'8<u) must 
 be read here. In Acts ii. 7 {ovx or 
 ovx' ISoii) and in Acts iv. 29 (e^iSc) 
 they are divided. In the three prin- 
 cipal MSB of the Lxx, so far as I have 
 noticed, the following instances of 
 aspirates in compounds of t'Soi/ occur : 
 Gen. xvi. 13, cfjiidav a; Gen. xxxi. 49, 
 fffuBoi a; Ps. xxx. 8, f<j>eiSes a; Ps. 
 xci. 12, f(j)i8ev a; Ps. cxi. 8, c<^i8i) K ; 
 Jer. xxxi. 19, e<^i8e N : Jonah iv. 5, 
 acJMiSri « ; I Mac. iii. 59, e<j>iSciv H a ; 
 
 2 Mace. 1. 27, ffjxiSt (for firiSe imper.) a; 
 2 Mace. viii. 2, ci^iSciv (e<^t8r) A ; Deut. 
 xxvi 15, KoBiSc b; Judith vL 19, 
 Koflf ifif (for /eoTiSe) A. It must be re- 
 membered that in the Vatican ms 
 
122 
 
 EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 [11. 24, 2$ 
 
 ifie, i^avTt}^' ^*7re7roi6a Se ev Kvpiu) 'oti kui ai/ros tu- 
 X^f^^ eXevcroiJLai [ttjOOs u/xas]. ^^dvayKoiov Be i^yn^'cilM^v 
 'R7ra<pp6SiTOV Tov dSe\^6v Kal avvep'yov kui avvcTTpa- 
 TiwTriv fxou, vfxwv he aVoVToAoi/ kul XeiTOvpyov Trjs 
 
 almost all Uie book of Genesis is lost 
 and that the Sinaitic contains less 
 than half of the Old Testament. Th& 
 collations of other mss in Holmes' and 
 Parsons' lxx supply many additional 
 examples both in these and other pas- 
 sages. Similarly «Xjrir is sometimes 
 preceded by an aspirate (d0eXjriXon-es 
 Luke vi. 35, e'c^" iXtribi, Rom. viii. 20, 
 I Cor. ix. 10, d<j>e\micais Hermas Vis. 
 iii. 12); when naturalised in Coptic it 
 is always so written, and we frequently 
 find Udpis is a proper name in Latin. 
 In both cases the anomaly is support- 
 ed by inscriptions: E*EIAE Boeckh 
 no. 3333; HEAniAA no. 170; the lat- 
 ter being as old as the 5th century B.C. 
 The aspirates are doubtless to be ex- 
 plained as remnants of the digamma, 
 which both these words possessed : 
 see Curtius Griech. Etym. pp. 217, 238 
 (2nd ed.). It is less easy to account 
 for ovx Sylffirde Luke xvii. 22, ovx 
 okiyoc Acts xii. 18 (in which passages 
 however the aspirate is not well sup- 
 ported), though there are some in- 
 dications that SnTofuu had a digamma. 
 On ovx 'lovSaiKas, Gal. ii. 14, see tlie 
 note there. 
 
 24. With St Paul's language here 
 compare i Cor. iv. 17, 19, ?jrf/nT//^a 
 Vfiiv Tifi66fov OS (irriv fiov renvov k.t.X, 
 tKevaofuu. S« raxcas irpos i)/iar iav 6 
 Kvpios 6c\^crji. 
 
 Tax^'as] If the view taken in the 
 introduction (p. 31 sq.) of the date of 
 this epistle be correct, St Paul's 
 release was delayed longer thsin he at 
 this time expected. We have a choice 
 between supposing him disappointed 
 in the anticipation expressed here 
 or in the anticipation implied in the 
 ii^unction to Philemon (ver. 22). 
 
 25 — 30. ' Meanwhile, though I pur- 
 pose sendingTimotheus shortly, though 
 
 I trust myself to visit you before very 
 long, I have thought it necessary 
 to despatch Epaphroditus to you at 
 once; Epaphroditus, whom you com- 
 missioned as your delegate to minister 
 to my needs, in whom / have found a 
 brotlier and a fellow-labourer and a 
 comrade in arms. I have sent him, 
 because he longed earnestly to see 
 you and was very anxious and troubled 
 that you had beard of his illness. Nor 
 was the report unfounded. He was 
 indeed so ill that we despaired of his 
 life. But God spared him in His 
 mercy; mercy not to him only but to 
 myself also, that I might not be 
 weighed down by a fresh burden of 
 sorrow. For this reason I have been 
 the more eager to send him, that 
 your cheerfulness may be restored by 
 seeing him in health, and that my 
 sorrow may be lightened by sympathy 
 with your joy. Receive him therefore 
 in the Lord with all gladness, and 
 hold such men in honour; for in his 
 devotion to the work, he was brought 
 to death's door, hazarding his life, 
 that he might make up by his zeal 
 and diligence the lack of your personal 
 services to supplement your charitable 
 gift.' 
 
 25. dvayKoiov ic.t-.X.] The same ex- 
 pression occurs 2 Cor. ix. 5. ijyijo-d- 
 liTjv is here the epistolary aorist, like 
 iirenylra (ver. 28); for Epaphroditus 
 seems to have been the bearer of the 
 letter. See the introduction p. 37 and 
 the note on Gal. vi. 1 1. 
 
 'E7ra(^pdSiTox] On Epaphroditus see 
 the introduction p. 61 sq. He is not 
 mentioned except in this epistle. The 
 name (corresponding in meaning to the 
 Latin 'vonustus') was extremely com- 
 mon in the Roman period. It was as- 
 sumed by the dictator Sylla himself in 
 
11.26,27] EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 1 23 
 
 ;^jOetas juou, TrefJi'^ai wpo^ i/'/xas, '"eTreiS?) eirnrodwv rjv 
 
 VTjaeu. ^"^ Kal yap ri(rdevr](Tev irapairXrio'iov OavciTia' dWd 
 
 writing to theGrcoks(Afu/c tot Kopi/iJXios 
 SvXXac "Ewa^poSiTos, Plut. Syll. 34; 
 comp. Appian. Civ. i. 97). It was 
 borne by a freedman of Augustus 
 (Dion Cass. IL 11, 13); by a favourite 
 of Noro, likewise a freedman (Tac. 
 Ann. XT. 55 etc.); by a grammarian 
 of Chaeroneia residing at Rome during 
 tills last emperor's reign (Suidass.v.); 
 by a patron of literature (possibly the 
 same with one of those already men- 
 tioned) who encouraged Josephus 
 (Antiq. proosm. 2, Fit. 76). The name 
 occurs very frequently in inscriptions 
 both Greek and Latin, whether at full 
 length Epaphroditus, or in its con- 
 tracted form Bpaphras. 
 
 d8e\<t>ov K.T.\.] The three words 
 are arranged in an ascending scale ; 
 common sympathy, common work, 
 common danger and toil and suffering. 
 SworpariiBnjs occurs again Pliilcm. 2. 
 The metaphor is naturally very com- 
 mon : see esp. 2 Cor. x. 3, 4, i Tim. i. 
 18, 2 Tim. ii. 3, 4. 
 
 v/uui> Sf\ This prominent position is 
 given to vnmv, both to contrast it with 
 the immediately preceding iiov, and to 
 bind together the words following ; 
 for aTTOOToXov Kal \tiTOvpyov Tfjs xp^^as 
 liov form one idea, 'a messenger sent 
 to minister to my need.' Epaphrodi- 
 tus was the bearer of the contributions 
 from Philippi(iv. 18), which just below 
 are designated Xetroupym (ver. 30) : 
 comp. Bom. XV. 27 iv toIs irapiuKois 
 XeiTovpy^jaai avroTc. For this sense of 
 iiTroiTTciXoi, 'a delegate or messenger of 
 a church,' see 2 Cor. viii. 23 a'lrdoroXot 
 cKKXi)crtiSv. The interpretation which 
 makes Epaphroditus an apostle or 
 bishop of Philippi will be considered 
 in the Dissertation on the Christian 
 Ministry. 
 
 T^i Xptios i"n>] as iv. i6; comp. 
 Acts zx. 34, Bom. xii. 13. 
 
 26. en-HToflui'] 'eagerly longing af- 
 ter' : see the note on i. 8. Here the 
 expression is still further intensified 
 by the substitution of mtiroBwv rju for 
 irrevoBei. Wliilo the external evidence 
 for and against Ibeiv is very evenly 
 balanced, the language seems to gain 
 in force by the omission. It may have 
 been added because ewmodeiv l&fiv 
 was a well-remembered expression in 
 St Paul; Rom. i. 11, i Thoss. iii. 6, 
 2 Tim. i. 4. 
 
 dSripx>i/av] 'distressed.' The word is 
 used in connexion with dn-optii', IXiy- 
 yiaii (Plato Tlisait. p. 175 d), with f«»o- 
 ■KaSiiv (Plut. Mor. 601 c), and the like. 
 It describes the confused, restless, 
 half-distracted state, which is pro- 
 duced by physical derangement, or by 
 mental distress, as grief, shame, dis- 
 appointment, etc. For its sense hero 
 comp. Dion. Hal. A. R. i. 56 dSij^o- 
 vovvTi Tw dvbp\ Koi TTapeiKQTi TO (rapa 
 vTTo \v7rr1s. The derivation of dfii/- 
 pove'iv suggested by Buttmaun {Lexil. 
 p. 29), from aSripos 'away from home' 
 and so 'beside oneself (in which how- 
 ever he seems not to have been aware 
 that he was anticipated by Photius 
 Lex. p. 9 : see Steph. 77i,es. s. v.), is 
 almost universally accepted. But to 
 say nothing else, the form of the word 
 is a serious obstacle; and Lobeck, 
 Pathol, pp. 160, 238, is probably right 
 in returning to the older derivation 
 aSijpcoi', dSfjaat. In this case the pri- 
 mary idea of the word will be loath- 
 ing and discontent. The word oc- 
 curs in Symmachus, Ps. cxr. 2 (tv rj 
 tKararrti, Lxx), Ps. Ix. 2 {aKTjiiatTai 
 Lxx), Eccl. vii. 16 {iimXayjis txx) ; and 
 in Aquila, Job xviii. 20 {iarcva^av 
 
 liXX). 
 
 27. Koi yap'\ 'for indeed' The 
 KOI implies that the previous ijadini- 
 a(v understates the case. 
 
124 
 
 EPISTLB TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 [II. 28—30 
 
 6 0e6s i]\eri(r6u auTOP, ovk avrov Se fxovov, dWa km 
 ifxe, 'iva jut] Xinrriv eTTi Xvirriv <rxcS. ^^ (nrovZaiOTepwi ovv 
 eirefxyl/^a avroUy 'iva ISoi/res avrov ttoXiv ^api^re, Kayu) 
 dXvTTOTeoos w. '^TrpocrBexecrde ovv avrov iv Kvpiu) fxerd 
 7rd(rr]s xajOas, Kai rovi roiovrovs evri^ovi e%€T6, ^°'ori 
 
 (Vi XuTTiji/] So all the best copies, 
 while the received text reads <Vi Xuttji. 
 In such cases the dative is more com- 
 mon in classical authors, but the ac- 
 cusative is supported by several pas- 
 sages in the lxx, e. g. Bzech. vii. 26 
 
 dyyeXia fVi ayyfkiav, Ps. Ixviii. 28 
 dvofiiav eTTi ttiv dvofiiaVy Is. xxvill. 10 
 (where both constructions are com- 
 bined) 5Xii|r«» cVl ff\l^lfiv, c\m8a tV 
 t\iriSt. Comp. Matt. xxiv. 2, and see 
 A. Bnttmann p. 291. 
 
 28. airovSmoTepioc] 'loith increased 
 eagerness' on account of this circum- 
 stance : see for the comparative Winer 
 § xxxT. p. 304, and compare the note 
 on ncpiaaoTepas i. 14. 
 
 e7rffi\|'a] i. e. with the letter, as in 
 Ephes. vi. 22, Col. iv. 8, Philem. 11, 
 and perhaps also 2 Cor. ix. 3. On this 
 aorist see above, ver. 25. 
 
 TToKiv xap'7'"f] 'fnay recover your 
 cJieerfidness,' which had been marred 
 by the news of Bpaphroditus' illness : 
 for the order suggests the connexion 
 of TroXiK with xopv" rather than with 
 
 ISoVTCS. 
 
 aKimoTfpos <S] 'my sorrow may be 
 lessened.' The expression is purpose- 
 ly substituted for naXiv x'^P'^t ^or a 
 prior son-ow will still remain unremov- 
 ed; comp. ver. 27 Xvm;i' eVi Xi57ri;i'. 
 
 29. irpoatix^<rde ic.t-.X.] Comp. Bom. 
 xvi. 2. 
 
 30. TO epyov] Comp. Acts xv. 38 
 navXor hi if^iov rbv diro<rratiTa dv 
 avTav dno Ilafic^uXiar kol p.7] (rvveX- 
 Bovra awTois els to cpyov, fiff trvv- 
 iTapaKap.^dvttv tovtov, where we seem 
 to have St Paul's very words. So too 
 Ignat. Ephes. 14 ov yap inayytKias to 
 ipyov, Rom. 3 o" JTfUTfiovtjs to epyov 
 a}iXa peytdovs e'orlv o xpitmavuriiot. 
 
 Thus ro fpyov is used absolutely, like 
 
 1) 086s, TO deXrjfia, to Zvopa (see on 
 
 ver. 9), etc. Though one only of the 
 oldest M8S has to tpyov alone, this 
 must be the correct reading. The 
 others add Kvpiou, XpioroC, roii Kvpwv, 
 ToOXptorroi), or Tou 6cov, of which the 
 two first are highly supported; but the 
 authorities, being very evenly divided, 
 neutralise each other. All alike are 
 insertions to explain ro tpyov. 
 
 irapa^o\ev(rdp€vos\ ' having gambled 
 with his life.' From irapo/SaXXco'dai, 
 to throw down a stake, to make a 
 venture (e. g. Polyb. ii. 94. 4 ov&apws 
 
 Kpivcov CKKv^eveiv ovSe TrapajSdXXeaOat 
 Tois oXow) comes jrapo/SoXos, 'gambling, 
 rash, reckless,' whence irapa^oXevea-Bai 
 'to play the gambler,' formed on the 
 analogy of d<ra>Tevf(r0M, StaKficniifv- 
 ftrOai, ncpnepevecrBai, jrqtnjpfVftrBai, 'to 
 play the spendthrift, quibbler, brag- 
 gjirt, scoundrel, etc. ' : see Lobeck 
 Phryn. p. 67. With the use here 
 compare the ecclesiastical sense of 
 parabolani, brotherhoods who at the 
 risk of thoir lives nursed the sick and 
 buried the dead. For the expression 
 compare Diod. Sic. iii. 35 expirav 
 irapa^dKiaBai rait \/^uxair, Horn. //. 
 ix. 322 alci tpfiv ylnixriv napa^dSXo- 
 /ievor. While irapajSoXXco'dat takes 
 either an accusative or a dative of the 
 thing staked, Trapa/SoXcvco-dat from its 
 nature can have only the latter. The 
 original meaning of the English word 
 'hazard' is the same, 'a game of 
 chance ' : see for the derivation Diez 
 Etymol. Worterb. der Rom,. Spr. p. 
 33 8. V. azzardo, B. Muller Etym. 
 Worterb. der Eng. Spr. s. v. No one 
 who has felt the nervous vigour of St 
 Paul's stylo will hesitate between n-apa- 
 
III. l] 
 
 EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIAKS. 
 
 125 
 
 Stet TO epyov f^^XP'- GavccTOV t^yyio'eu irapa^oXevtrajJx- 
 i/os TT) '^vx^i '"'« dvairXripwcTri to v/muii/ vcTTeprfixa tJjs 
 TTjOo's jue XeiTOvpy'ia^. 
 
 Ill, 'To XoLTTOv, d^eXfpoi fxov, ;)^atjoeTe iv Kvpico' 
 
 8o\fvtra^evos and TrapaSovKevtraixevos* 
 The latter, which would mean ' having 
 consulted amiss,' stands in the re- 
 ceived text : but the evidence is 
 strongly in favour of the former. Both 
 words alike are very rare. 
 
 dvanXijpfitT-Tj K.r.X.] as in I Cor. xvi. 
 17 X"'?" *'"■' ''i irapovaia 2Te(j>ava 
 K.T.X. oT« TO VfiCTeoov itTTepTjiia avTol 
 dveirXi^paxrav : comp. Clem. Eom. § 38 
 81' ov dvairXijpadfj avToii to VfTTfpTjpa. 
 So also avTavairXiipovv in CoL i. 24 
 and 7rpo(7ai'an'Xi;poi)v in 2 Cor. xL 9. 
 
 TO vp,a>v v(rTeprifia IC.T.X.] i. e. ' what 
 your services towards me lacked to be 
 complete,' in other words ' your per- 
 sonal ministrations,' as in i Cor. xvi. 
 17 just quoted. It seems plain from 
 this expression that Epaphroditus 
 illness was the consequence not of 
 persecution but of over-exertion. 
 
 III. I. 'And now, my brethren, 
 I must wish you farewell. Rejoice in 
 the Lord. Forgive me, if I speak once 
 more on an old topic. It is not irk- 
 some to me to speak, and it is safe for 
 you to hear.' 
 
 TO XoHToi/] '/or the rest,' i.e. 'finally, 
 in conclusion.' With \onrov or to 
 \017rbv St Paul frequently ushers in 
 the concluding portion of hia letters 
 containing the practical exhortations; 
 I Theas. iv. i, 2 Thess. iii. i, 2 Cor. 
 liii. II, Ephes. vi. 10 (where however 
 Tov Xoirrov should probably be read). 
 Sometimes this concluding portion is 
 prolonged, as in the First Epistle to 
 the Thessalonians, where it extends 
 over two chapters. In the present 
 instance the letter is interrupted, a 
 fresh subject is introduced, the con- 
 clusion is for a time forgotten, and 
 St Paul resumes his farewell injunc- 
 tions later at iv. 8 ro Xotirov, dSeXtfml 
 K.T.X. See the introduction, p. 69 sq. 
 
 In other passages Xonroy and to Xomtov 
 occur in reference to the approaching 
 end of all things ; as i Cor. vii. 29 ■> 
 
 Kaipbs avvecrraKfievos ctTTLVf to XotTTov 
 
 iva K.T.X., Ign. Bphes. 11, Smyrn. 9. 
 
 xaipfTf] '■fareieelU At the same 
 time the word conveys an injunction to 
 rejoice ; see iL 18, iv. 4, and the note 
 on the latter passage. 
 
 TO. avTa\ 'the tame things! But 
 to what docs St Paul refer ? To his 
 own personal intercourse with the 
 Philippians ? To messages delivered 
 by his delegates ! To previous letters 
 not now extant ? To some topic con- 
 tained in this present epistle ? The 
 expression itself ra aOra ypdi^iiv seems 
 to limit the range of choice to written 
 communications. The theory of an 
 earlier letter or letters, which seems 
 to be supported by an expression of 
 
 Polycarp (§ 3 ditaiv vpTiv fypa\jfev fVt- 
 oToXay), will be considered in the 
 detached note. At present it is suf- 
 ficient to say that if the epistle itself 
 supphea the requisite allusion, it is 
 much more naturally sought here than 
 elsewhere. On what subject then does 
 this epistle dwell repeatedly ? 
 
 Two answers will suggest them- 
 selves, (i) The duty of r^oicing. 
 This topic is very prominent in the 
 epistle : see the note on i. 4. It has 
 occurred more than once already. It 
 has the advantage also of appearing 
 in the immediate context, xn'pfe iv 
 Kvpiip. Nevertheless it seems in- 
 adequate to explain St Paul's language 
 here. Such an injunction has no very 
 direct bearing on the tajety of the 
 Philippians; its repetition could hardly 
 be suspected of being irksome to the 
 Apostle. The words seem obviously 
 to refer to some actual or threatened 
 evil, against which a reiterated warn- 
 
126 
 
 EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 [III. I 
 
 TO. avra jpdcpeiv v/uuv i/nol fxev ovk OKvnpov, vfui/ Se 
 d(r(j)a\€£. 
 
 ing was necessary. (2) Such an ovil 
 existed in the dissensions among the 
 Philippians. This topic either directly 
 or indirectly has occupied a very con- 
 siderable portion of the letter hitherto ; 
 and it appears again more than once 
 before the close : see the introduction 
 p. 67 sq. It is the Apostle's practice 
 to conclude with a warning against 
 the prevailing danger of his cor- 
 respondents. The Corinthians are 
 again reminded that 'the Lordcometh' 
 (i Cor. xyL 22); the Oalatians are 
 told once more that 'circumcision 
 is nothing and uncircumcision is 
 
 nothing' (OaL vi. 1 5) ; the Thessalonians 
 receive a parting injunction against 
 the spirit of restlessness and disorder 
 spreading among them (i Thess. t. 14, 
 2 Thess. iii. 14). The Apostle there- 
 fore would naturally lay stress on this 
 point here, intending, as he appears 
 to have done, to bring his letter to 
 a speedy close. See the note on iii. 2. 
 oKvrjpov] 'irksome, tedious.' The 
 word generally signifies 'dilatory, 
 sluggish,' as in the lxx frequently ; 
 but here it is active, ' causing Skvos,' 
 as in Soph. (Ed. T. 834 ^yXv fiev, ava^, 
 
KPISTLB TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 1*7 
 
 The synonymes t^op^rj and axVf^"-'' 
 
 The word wxifia corresponds exactly in derivation, though but partially Olassieal 
 in meaning, to the old English ' haviour.' In its first sense it denotes the sense of 
 figure, shape, fashion, of a thing. Thence it gathers several derived mean- "^'"^ 
 ings. It gets to signify, like the corresponding Latin ' habitus,' sometimes 
 the dress or costume (as Aristoph. Eq. 1331 Temyotjiopas apxala axriiiaTi 
 Xa/iTTpos), sometimes the attitude or demeanour (as Eur. Ion 238 rpoirmp 
 reKfu/pioK TO (rxvn' ^x*" roSe). It is used also for a ' figure of speech,' as the 
 dress in which the sense clothes itself or the posture which the language 
 assumes. It signifies moreover pomp, display, outward circumstance (as 
 Soph. Ant. ii6g Tvpawova-xTJp-' ex"")) '^'^ frequently semblance, pretence, as 
 opposed to reality, truth (as Plat. JEpin. p. 989 oi5 a-xvi^ofi TexvaCovras ak\a 
 
 oKridfia Tipmvras dpenjv, Plut. Vit. Golb. J^ dpvjjaeas a-xfjlia Trjv dva^oK^v 
 €ivu <j)a<rKovTfs, Eur. Fragm. jEol. 18 ovSiv oXXo ttX^k oxXoi kqI trxop-a). 
 Altogether it suggests the idea of something changeable, fleeting, unsub- 
 stantial. 
 
 Moptfyij, like a-xwa, originally refers to the organs of sense I If o-x^/^a and oi 
 may be rendered by ' figure,' ' fashion,' pjopi^ri corresponds to ' form.' It l">p<t>'n- 
 comprises all those sensible qualities, which striking the eye lead to the 
 conviction that we see such and such a thing. The conviction indeed may 
 be false, for the form may be a phantom ; but to the senses at all events the 
 representation of the object conceived is complete. The word has not and 
 cannot have any of those secondary senses which attach to a-xvH'a, as ges- 
 ture or dress or parade or pretext. In many cases indeed the words are 
 used convertibly, because the sense is sufliciently lax to include either. 
 But the difference between the two is tested by the fact that the iiop<j>Tj 
 of a definite thing as such, for instance of a lion or a tree, is one 
 only, while its trxiip^ may change every minute. Thus we often find fiop4>fii 
 a-xvp-a, as in Latin 'figura fonnse^,' but rarely, if ever, crx^paros p^pcjiij 
 (Eur. Iph. Taur. 292 ov ravra ptopcfirjs o-xijftara, Ion 992 woiov tj ptoptjtrjs 
 a-xvpa-i)- The (rxripa is often an accident of the pop^rj. 
 
 1 The following note is founded on it with the Sanscrit ' vaipas,' ' form.' 
 some remarks which appeared several • As e. g. Luor. iv. 69 ' formal ser- 
 years ago (in the Journal of Class, and vare figuram.' Compare the account 
 Sacr. Philol. no. vii. p. 113 sq., 121), of 'forma' and ' figura' given by Do- 
 enlarged and modified. The distinction derlein, int. Syji. iii. p. 25 sq. (refer- 
 of pop<pii and rxvpa haa since been red to by Trench, 1. c p. 93). His dia- 
 drawn out by Archbiahop Trench [N. T. tinction corresponds to that which ia 
 5^71. § Ixx) in hia pointed and inatruc- here given of popipTj and axvp-a. ' The 
 tive manner. form (Gestalt),' he aaya, ' so far as it haa 
 
 » I have purposely avoided the ques- definite ontlinea is figura ; so for as 
 
 Uouof itsderivation,feeIingthatIhave it is the visible impression and the 
 
 no right to an opinion on the subject. stamp of the inner being and oorre- 
 
 Benfey, Wurzel-lex. 11. p. 309, connects sponds thereto, it is forma.' 
 
128 
 
 Its pbilo- 
 
 Bophioal 
 
 meaning. 
 
 Plato. 
 
 Aiietotle. 
 
 EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 Prom the primary popular sense of fiop^ij we pass to its seconoary 
 philosophical meaning. And here the older philosophers do not render much 
 assistance. In Parmenides indeed {iiop<j>as yap Karedevro 8vo, ver. iia Kar- 
 sten) the word signifies ' natures,' ' essences,' for he is speaking of two ele- 
 mental principles of the universe. But without the light thrown upon its 
 use here by the phraseology of later thinkers, no inference could safely be 
 drawn from this solitary instance. In Plato we first meet with a clear 
 example of its philosophical sense. In the Phsedo (p. 103 e, 104 a) So- 
 crates, eliciting the doctrine of ideas by question and answer after his 
 wont, concludes that 'not only is the same name always claimed for the 
 (iSof* itself, but also for something else which is not the eZSoy and yet has 
 its iwp(}>fi always whenever it exists.' And in illustration of his meaning he 
 adduces the example of the odd and the number three, the latter being 
 always called odd and being inseparable from oddness, though not the odd 
 itself. Thus in Plato's language the /xopc/)^ is the impress of the idea on the 
 individual, or in other words the specific character. It need not therefore 
 denote any material sensible quality, as in the instance quoted it does not. 
 In Plato however the philosophical sense of fiop<pfi is very rare. On the other 
 hand Aristotle uses it commonly. But its relation to e'Sor has undergone a 
 change, corresponding to the difference in his metaphysical views. As he 
 discards Plato's doctrine of ideas wholly, as he recognises no eternal self- 
 existent archetype distinct from the specific character exhibited in the indi- 
 viduals, it follows as a matter of course that with him el&os and fiopfjiTj are 
 identical. There are, according to his teaching, two elements or principles 
 or causes of things ; the matter, the substratum supporting the qualities, 
 and the form, the aggregate of the qualities 2. The form he calls indiffer- 
 ently f iSos or popcjiij^. He moreover designates it by various synonymes. 
 It is sometimes ' the abstract conception realised ' (to tL ^v €ivai *), sometimes 
 ' the essence corresponding to the definition ' (17 ova-ia ij Kara row 'Koyov), 
 
 ' Here the etSos is plainly the Idia. 
 Plato seems to have used both words 
 alike to denote the eternal archetype, as 
 for instance in the passages in Trende- 
 lenburg, Platon. de ideis doctr. p. 33 
 sqq. Where however especial accuracy 
 was aimed at, Idia would naturally be 
 preferred to elSos : see Thompson's 
 note on Archer Butler's Lectures 11. p. 
 128. 
 
 " A large number of passages is col- 
 lected by Waitz, Organon 11. p. 401 
 sq. See also Heyder Aristot. u. He- 
 gel. JXalektik p. 182 sq. , and especially 
 Bitter and PreUer Hist. Phil. p. 324 
 sq. (od. -i). In other places Aristotle 
 speaks of four causes, the efficient, the 
 material, the formal, and the final. The 
 final and the efficient causes however 
 may be conceived as involved in the 
 formal : see esp. G. Schneider, De Causa 
 
 Finali Aristotelea (Berol. 1865), p. 15 
 sq. 
 
 ' See Waitz Organon 11. p. 405. 
 There are exceptional cases where either 
 word is used in its popular rather than 
 its philosophical sense, referring direct- 
 ly to the organs of vision ; but Biese, die 
 Philosophie des Aristoteles i. p. 439, is 
 not justified in his general distinction 
 that /iop^rj is ' die ausserliche siohtbare 
 Form der Dinge,' and eUot 'das die 
 Dinge von innen heraus Gestaltende.' 
 This distinction may suit one passage, 
 but it is contradicted by twenty others. 
 The same remark appUes to the attempts 
 made by the old commentators on Ari- 
 stotle to distinguish liopijrrj and elSot. 
 
 * On this term see Trendelenburg, 
 Rhein. Mus. 11. p. 457 sq., esp. pp. 
 469, 481 (1828); comp. his note on de 
 Anima i. i, s, p. 193 sq. 
 
EPISTLE TO THE PHILIP PIAN8. 1 29 
 
 gometimes 'the deBnition of the essence' (o \6yos r^r oMaij, sometimes 
 ' the definition alone, sometimes ' the essence ' alone. He calls it also 'the 
 actuality' (cVcpycia) or 'the perfection' {ivriKcxfuiy, matter being desig- 
 nated 'the potentiality' (dwajtw). 'So rich in wealth and titles,' said a 
 later writer of a rival school half in irony, ' is the t'Sor with Aristotle^.' 
 The significance of his jixop(^i; or ttSos will appear also from the fact that he 
 ebewhere identifies it with the final cause {rcKos or ov IvtKay, because the 
 end or purpose is implicitly contained in the qualities. It is still more evi- 
 dent from the intimate connexion which he conceives to exist between the 
 form and the nature. ' The term nature,' he says, ' is used to signify three 
 things ; sometimes it is equivalent to the matter, sometimes to the form, 
 sometimes to both combined. Of the nature according to matter and the 
 nature according to form, the latter is the more influential {Kvpuaripa)^,' 
 Le. it has a more important function in making the thing what it is. 
 
 It will appear moreover from this account, that the term /iop(^if, 
 though originally derived from the organs of sense like cidot, and referring 
 to external conformation, has in the language of Aristotle a much wider 
 application, being not only applied to physical qualities generally, but also 
 extended to immaterial objects. Thus he says in one passage that skin, 
 vein, membrane, and all such things, belong to the same popi^ii ° ; in ano- 
 ther, that courage and justice and pi-udence have the same iiop<i>fi in a 
 state as in an individual'; in a third, that science and health may be called 
 die ixop^f) and ciSot of the scientific and the healthy respectively^; while in 
 a fourth, criticising the saying of Democritus that ' anybody could see what 
 was the form {fiopcj}^) of a man,' meaning that he might be known by his 
 shape and colour, he replies that ' a corpse has the form (/lo/K^if) of the 
 human shape (irxii/taToj) and yet nevertheless is not a man*.' The form of 
 a man therefore in Aristotle's conception was something more than his 
 sensible appearance. 
 
 This sense of iiop(f)% as the specific character, was naturally transmitted Later 
 from these great original thinkers to the philosophers of later ages. It is philoso- 
 found for instance in Plutarch'. It appears very definitely in the Ifeopla- P''^"' 
 
 ' On the foim regarded as the iyip- xal t^ x/"^/"*" inadT&v ian t&i re fi^av 
 
 yaa and the imtKix^ta see Trendelen- koX tUv liopiuv, dpSus Sv Ai/piKpiTot 
 
 burg de Anima ii. i, p. 295 sq. \iyoc ^aiverai yi,p ovtus ^aXa/Sciv. 
 
 ' A Flatouist in Stobeeus Eel. i. 0. ^ri<rl yovv wavrl S^Xok elvai oliv n rijv 
 
 13 ov'tu; oiItv irXoiaidv re Kal jroXuii- fiop^T^v ianv 6 AeBpuriros, us SvTot auToO 
 
 vvp6v iffTL t6 fZSos. Ttp Tc iTxVf^aTi Kal Ttp ypibpart yvupl- 
 
 ' See Schneider de Catia. Fin. Ari- p.ov. xab-oi xal 6 reffpeiis fx« tijo ainjv 
 
 itot. p. lo sq. and the passages quoted toO axnparot iiop<pijv, dX\' Spus ovk 
 
 p. II. i(TTu> ivSpuTTos (i.e. the corpse has the 
 
 * Phys. Ausc. ii. i, p. 192 A (Bek- popttni of the human <rxnp.a, but it has 
 
 ker), de Part. An. i. i, p. 640 b. See not the pop4>^ of a man). 
 
 below, note 8. ' Mor. p. 1013 airds re yip i 
 
 ' de Anim. Gen. ii. 3, p. 737 b. xovpos oStos kuI tSv pepuv tKttarov au- 
 
 ' Polit. vii. I, p. 1323 B. T06 irwiaT-qKiv Ik re ain/iaTtKTJs oialas 
 
 ' de Anima ii. 2, p. 414 a. koI koijt^s, Sy ij piv vXrjv Kal iroKelpevov, 
 
 ' de Part. An.i. i, p. 640 b, ij y&p ij Si popipiiv Kcd eXSos rif yaiopivip irap- 
 
 Karb, Tqv fiop^v (pvais Kvpuaripa. t^s ^o'XC k. r.X, Comp. p. 1022 E. For 
 
 iikiK^i ^i<reas. el p.iv ovv ti} trx^/uirt these references and the passage in the 
 
 PHIL. Q 
 
IjO EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 tonists'. And what is more to our purpose, it is recognised by Philo, the 
 chief representative of Alexandrian Judaism '- 
 Popular Nor can it have been wholly without influence on the language of every- 
 
 language. ^j^y j.fg_ Terms, like ideas, gradually permeate society till they reach its 
 lower strata. Words stamped in the mint of the philosopher pass into 
 general currency, losing their sharpness of outline meanwhile, but m the 
 main retaining their impress and value. The exclusive technicalities of the 
 scholastic logic are the common property of shopmen and artisans in our 
 own day. 
 
 New Do we then find in the New Testament any distinction between itop^fi 
 
 Testament and <rx5^ia corresponding to that which appears to have held roughly in the 
 °***® common language of the Greeks and to have been still further developed in 
 
 the technical systems of philosophers 1 
 of irxw" A review of the passages where a-xfjiia and its derivatives are used will 
 
 not, I think, leave any doubt on the mind that this word retains the notion 
 of 'instability, changeableness,' quite as strongly as in classical Greek. 
 Thus 'the fashion of this world,' which 'passeth away,' is to irx5/*a rov 
 Koa/iov TovTov (i Cor. vii. 31). 'To fall in with the fashion of this world' is 
 iTvvtrxriiJiaTi{ttr6at T9 aiwvi TovT<f (Rom. xii. 2). ' To follow the capricious 
 guidance of the passions' is avv(rxiiiaTiC€irdai rais cmOvfiiais (i Pet. i. 14). 
 The fictitious illusory transformation whereby evil assumes the mask of 
 good — the false apostles appearing as the true, the prince of darkness as an 
 angel of light, the ministers of Satan as ministers of righteousness — is 
 described by the thrice repeated word fifTao-xij/iarifeo-flat (2 Cor. xL 13, 14, 
 is). The significance of a-xqiia will be felt at once, if in any of these pas- 
 sages we attempt to substitute iu)p4>h in i''^ steads 
 and iiopiv. O"* ^^^ other hand the great and entire change of the inner life, other- 
 wise described as being born again, being created anew, is spoken of as a 
 conversion of /iop0^ always, of (rxjjiia never. Thus ' He fore-ordained them 
 conformable {<Tviiii6p(t>ovs) to the imago of His Son' (Rom. viii. 29); 'Being 
 made conformable (<rv;i/u)p(|)iCo/ievos) to His death ' (Phil. iii. 10) ; ' We are 
 transformed (jieraiiopctioviieda) into the same image' (2 Cor. iii. 18) ; ' To be 
 transformed by the renewal of the mind ' (Rom. xii. 2) ; ' Until Christ be 
 formed (ju)p<j)a6g) in you' (GaL iv. 19). In these passages again, if any one 
 doubts whether /lopc^ij has any special force, let him substitute a-xfjiw and try 
 the eftect. In some cases indeed, where the organs of sense are concerned 
 and where the appeal lies to popular usage, either word might be used. Yet 
 I think it will be felt at once that in the account of the transfiguration ptra- 
 
 next note I am indebted to Wytten- rots dirujudrois ivpditeffai, iv frv/uov 
 
 baoh's note on Plato, Phixd. p. 1 03 k. tvofia at ISiai, (carexpijo'OTo irpos to yivm 
 
 ' See e. g. Plotin. Erniead. i. 6, p. (Kaaroi' t^v ipnorrovirav Xa/Setx noptp-^v. 
 
 51 A, especially the expression oifK dra- For other references see Dahne JS- 
 
 irxo/i^Ki/t T^j SXijt ri irdn-ij (cotA t4 elSos duch-Alex. Religionsphilotophie I. p. 
 
 fiop^ovffdat, 185. 
 
 ' de Vict. Off. § 13, p. 261 M, t4 » In i Oor. iv. 6 raOra /icrcffxilM"'"'' 
 
 rtSKaanivov i.^ipifrai riir roiiTi/Ta Kal eU ipavrov k.t.X. the word refers to a 
 
 ri ct jot Kai tiiiv trtpiv iarw ^ Kvptus rhetorical irx^/ia, and here iiere/iipipusc 
 
 tlreiy Afiopipot SKri, and lower down, would of course be out of place. 
 
EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. XJl 
 
 axriiua-lita-Bai would have been out of place and that iieTaiiop(f>ov<r6ai alone 
 is adequate to express the completeness and significance of the change 
 (Matt. zvii. 2, Mark ix. 2). Even in the later addition to St Mark's Gospel 
 where our Lord is described as appearing to the two disciples ev erepf 
 /iop^g, though lioptjiTi here has no peculiar force, yet irxvi"' would perhaps 
 be avoided instinctively, as it might imply an illusion or an imposture. It 
 will be observed also that in two passages where St Paul speaks of an 
 appearance which is superficial and unreal, though not using trxfiim, he still 
 avoids iiop(j)fi as inappropriate and adopts p.op^aaK instead (Rom. iL 20 ti)i' 
 liopcjiatTiv T^s yvcitrfas Ka\ t^s a\t]6tias, 2 Tim. iii, 5 fiop(^a)(rui (V(Tf^iias), 
 Here the termination denotes the aiming after or affecting the /uop^i^. 
 
 And the distinction, which has thus appeared from the review of each Oononr- 
 word separately, will be seen still more clearly from those passages where they f'^noe of 
 occur together. In Rom. xii. 2 p.i) o-uv(rxi;M'"''ff o'^"' t^ alavi touto) y,nr^° 
 a\Xd fLeTafiop<l)ov<T6atTTJavaicatva(r€iTov voos the form of the sentence calls 
 attention to the contrast, and the appropriateness of each word in its own 
 connexion is obvious : ' Xot to follow the ieetiug Jashion of this world, but 
 to undergo a complete change, assume a new form, in the renewal of the 
 mind.' On the other hand in Phil. iiL 21 neraa-xi par to- ft to a-apa rijr Ta- 
 ireivaxTfas t|;i<Si' avppopcjyov.T^ (rapari t^s io^rft avTov, the difference is not 
 obvious at first sight. The meaning however seems to be, ' will change the 
 fashion of the body of our humiliation and^ it in the/orm of the body of 
 His glory.' Here I think it will be clear that a compound of irxvpa 
 could not be substituted for <rippap<i>ov without serious detriment to the 
 sense : while on the other hand p.eTapop(^a<Tti might possibly have stood for 
 pxTao'x^l'uiTiiTei \ 
 
 I now come to the passage in the Epistle to the Philippians out of PML ii. 6, 
 which this investigation has arisen. But before attempting to discover 7- 
 what is impUed by iiop<jjrj ecoS, it will be necessary to clear the way by dis- 
 posing of a preliminary question. Does the expression eu pop^irj GroS 
 virapx<ov refer to the pre-incamate or the incarnate Christ 1 Those who The pre- 
 adopt the latter view for the most part explain the words of the super- incarnate 
 natural or divine power and grace manifested by our Lord during His Christ ia 
 earthly ministry. Thus in ancient times the Ambrosian Hilary, ' Deus ■"**"'• 
 apparet, dum mortuos excitat, surdis reddit auditum, leprosos mundat, 
 et alia' : thus in a later age Erasmus, ' Ipsis factis se Deuni esse declara- 
 ret etc.'; and Luther, 'Dass gottliche Gestalt nichts anderes sei denn 
 sich erzeigen mit Worten und Werken gegen andere als ein Herr und 
 GottV Against this view De Wette, though himself referring the ex- 
 pression to Christ incarnate, urges with justice that the point of time 
 marked by v7rapx<ov is evidently prior to our Lord's actual ministry. 
 
 ' Of the two words juerairxiIA'aT/j'ai' 'transition but no absolute solution of 
 
 would refer to the transient condition continuity,' the spiritual body being 
 
 from which, p,erap.op<lioSy to the perma- developed from the natural, as the 
 
 nent state to which, the change takes butterfly from the caterpillar ; N. T. 
 
 place. Archbishop Trenohhowever sup- Syn. ind eer. p. pr. 
 
 poses that iiera<rxiU>^'''K^"' 1^ here pre- ' Postill.ad.Epist.Domin.Palm.{xii. 
 
 ferred to fterapopipoSy as eKprcssing p. 630 ed. HaU,), quoted by De Wette. 
 
 9—2 
 
132 BPISTLB TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 the period of this ministry itself being a period of humiliation. He 
 therefore explains it as describing the glory dwelling potentially in Christ, 
 at the moment when He commenced His ministry. The meaning of St Paul, 
 he thinks, is best illustrated by the account of the temptation (Matt. iv. 8), 
 where our Lord rejects Satan's oflfer of ' all the kingdoms of the world 
 and their glory.' At that moment and in that act of renunciation it might 
 be said of Him that iv fiop<j>j Beau irrapxav ovx apirayitbp ijyijaara to eivai 
 ta-a Of a dWa iavrov iKcvatrev. But this is quite as unsatisfactory as the 
 explanation which he rejects. The point of time is clearly prior not only 
 to our Lord's open ministry, but also to His becoming man. Even if the 
 words iu>p(j)f)v hovKov XajSuv did not directly refer to the incarnation, as 
 they appear to do, nothing else can be understood by iv ofioidiian dvdpd- 
 TToiv yfvop.fvos. We cannot suppose St Paul to hare meant, that our Lord 
 was not in the likeness of men before His baptism and ministry, and 
 became so then for the first time. On the contrary all accounts alike agree 
 in representing this (so far as regards His earthly life) as the turning- 
 point when He began to ' manifest forth His glory (John ii. ii).' It was 
 an exaggeration indeed when certain early heretics represented His bap- 
 tism as the moment of His first a;asumption of Deity: but only by a 
 direct reversal of the accounts in the Gospel could it be regarded in any 
 sense as the commencement of His humanity. The whole context in St 
 Paul clearly implies that the being born as man was the first step in His 
 humiliation, as the death on the Cross was the last. In other words, it 
 requires that iv iJ-op(]>jj Beov vnapxav be referred to a point of time prior to 
 the incarnation. 
 Thu8_ This being so, what meaning must we attach to ' the form of God' in 
 
 pjipiiri which our Lord pre-existed ? In the Clementine Homilies St Peter is 
 
 1"Atath to 
 
 the divine represented as insisting upon the anthropomorphic passages in the Scrip- 
 attributes, tures and maintaining therefrom that God has a sensible form (jiop(f>ij). "To 
 the objection of his opponent that if God has a form {iu>p(j>^), He most have 
 a figure, a shape {<rx<jiia) also, the Apostle is made to reply by accepting the 
 inference : ' God has a a-xijtui ; He has eyes and hands and feet like a man ; 
 nevertheless He has no need to use them^.' Not such was St Paul's con- 
 ception of God. Not in this sense could he speak of the p-op^^, not in 
 any sense could he speak of the axrjpa, of Him who is ' King of kings and 
 Lord of lords, who only hath immortality, who dwelleth in light unapproach- 
 able, whom no man hath seen or can see (i Tim. vi 15, 16).' It remains 
 then that poptjifj must apply to the attributes of the Godhead. In other 
 words, it is used in a sense substantially the same which it bears in Greek 
 philosophy 2. It suggests the same idea which is otherwise expressed in 
 
 1 Clem. Horn. xvii. 3, 7,8. demons ; the form of God is not of this 
 
 ' A passage in Justin Martyr (Apol. kind (oi> Toia&niy tx^'v t^" /top^iji') ; 
 
 i. 9) fairly illustrates the distinction of Hia glory and form are ineffable (ip^jp-on 
 
 Hop<l>^ and ffxvP-a iu St Paul. He says 84{o>' nal /iopipijv Ix"')- He thus ap- 
 
 that Ohristians do not believe .the idols pears to contrast the visible ffxiJ/ioTo of 
 
 formed by men's hands to have the demons with the insensible immaterial 
 
 form (fi,op<t>iji') of God ; they have only mo/>*i} of God. A corresponding dis- 
 
 the names and the shapes (o-x^/iora) of tinotiou also seems to hold in the Pistil 
 
EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 133 
 
 St John by o Aoyor tov Qeov, in Christian writers of succeeding ages by 
 vio; 6eoO &v Qfos, and in the Nicene Creed by 0(os ck Qeov. 
 
 In accepting this conclusion we need not assume that St Paul con- St Paul's 
 Bciously derived his use of the term from any philosophical nomenclature. "^'^Bs ^■ 
 There was sufficient definitoness even in its popular usage to suggest this {qj_ 
 meaning when it was transferrred from the objects of sense to the concep- 
 tions of the mind. Yet if St John adopted \6yot, if St Paul himself adopted 
 (Uav, npaTOTOKos, and the like, from the language of existing theological 
 schools, it seems veiy far from improbable that the closely analogous ex- 
 pression iiop(j)fi eeov should have been derived from a similar source. The 
 speculations of Alexandrian and Gnostic Judaism formed a ready channel, 
 by which the philosophical terms of ancient Greece were brought within 
 reach of the Apostles of Christ. 
 
 Thus in the passage under consideration the iiop<pfi is contrasted with General 
 the o-xW") 8fl that which is intrinsic and essential with that which is acci- result. 
 dental and outward. And the three clauses imply respectively the true 
 divine nature of our Lord (/lopc^^ efoO), the true human nature {fiop^fi hov- 
 Xov), and the externals of the human nature (irxv^ari as SpdpmrosY. 
 
 Different interpretations of ov)(^ dpTrar/fiov 'qyi^aaro. 
 
 It will appear from the notes, that two principal interpretations of ovx Two inter- 
 apirayp.ov ijyijVaro have been proposed, depending on the diflFerent senses pretationa 
 assigned to apirayp-os. In the one the prominent idea is the assertion, in 
 the other the surrender, of privileges. The one lays stress on the majesty, 
 the other on the humility, of our Lord. These two interpretations may 
 conveniently be considered side by side and discussed at greater length. 
 
 I. If apvaypxts 'plundering' is taken to mean 'robbery,' 'usurpation,' (i) dp- 
 then the expression asserts that the equality with God was the natural """^/'os 
 possession, the inherent right, of our Lord. This interpretation suits the '°''''*''y* 
 
 Sophia, where both words occur several ravToi/ tj ovclf TraiTus ItrHji), and the 
 times, pp. 38, 184, 226, 146, S53, 272, commentators Viotoriuus, Ambroaias- 
 '73> *74' *77; the former especially in ter, Ohrysostom.andTheodoret.on this 
 the phrase dX^fleta /wp^^s opposed to passage. St Chrysostom especially dis- 
 similitude or copy (a-op<iS«7;»o, see p. cusses the matter at some length. It is 
 253), the latter in connexion with tuttoi not surprising that they should have 
 and irapaSctynara (see esp. 272 sq.). taken this view, but they could hardly 
 - In the controversies of the fourth have insisted with such confidence on 
 and fifth centuries great stress was laid the identity of iu>p<fni and omla, unless 
 by CathoUo writers on the force of they had at least a reasonable case 
 liop4>v here. See for instance Hilary of on their side. I trust the investiga- 
 Poitiers de Trin. viii. 45 (11. p. 245), tion in the text will show that their 
 Ptalm cxxxvlii. (i. p. 569), Ambrose view was not groundless, though their 
 Epiit. 46 (11. p. 986), Greg. Nyss. language might be at tunes over- 
 c. Eunotn, iv. p. 566 (^ Si liop^ roO Qeov strained. 
 
134 
 
 EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 Tlie con- 
 text lost 
 Bight of. 
 
 Influence 
 of the 
 Latin 
 fathers. 
 
 (2) dp- 
 ■a prize.' 
 
 words themselves well enough, when isolated from their context, and so 
 far is free from objection. But it takes no account of the clauses which 
 immediately precede and follow, (i) It neglects the foregoing words. 
 For the Apostle is there enforcing the duty of humility, and when he adds 
 ' Have the mind which was in Jesus Christ,' wo expect this appeal to our 
 great Example to be followed immediately by a reference, not to the right 
 which He claimed, but to the dignity which He renounced. The dis- 
 location of thought caused by this interpretation is apparent ; ' Be ye hum- 
 ble and like-minded with Christ, who partaking of the divine nature 
 claimed equality with God.' The mention of our Lord's condescension 
 is thus postponed too late in the sentence. (2) And again this interpretation 
 wholly disregards the connexion with the words following. For in the 
 expression ovx apnayfiov ijyi/o-aro K.r.X. dXXa eavTov tKivacrfv, the particles 
 ovx and dWa obviously correspond, ' not the one but the other ' ; so that 
 €K(vaa-ei iavTov must contain the idea which directly contrasts with 
 apirayiwv ijyijo-aro. On the other hand the interpretation in question ren- 
 ders aWa as equivalent to dXX' o/xwc. Besides being unnatural in itself 
 after ovx, ^-Ws rendering fails entirely to explain the emphatic position 
 of apwayfiov. 
 
 This sense, which is adopted in our own English Version and has been 
 extensively received in modern times, may probably be traced to the in- 
 fluence of the Latin fathers, who interpreted the rendering of the Latin 
 Version ivithout reference to the original. The Latin phrase 'rapinain 
 arbitrari' did not convey the secondary meaning which was at once sug- 
 gested by apnay/iov {apirayiia) ^yeltrdai ; nor perhaps would the Latin par- 
 ticles 'non...sed' bring out the idea of contrast so strongly as ovx...dKKa. 
 At all events it should be noticed, that while this interpretation is most 
 common (though not universal) among Latin writers, it is unsupported 
 by a single Greek father, unless possibly at a very late date. 
 
 Such is the interpretation of Tertullian de Besurr. Cam. 6, adv. Prax. 
 7, adv. Marc. v. 20 ; of the Ambrosian Hilary here ; of St Ambrose de 
 Fid. ii. 8 (11. p. 483 ed. Bened.) ' Quod enim quis non habet, rapere conar 
 tur ; ergo non quasi rapinam habebat iequalitatera cum Patre etc' ; of 
 Primasics here; and above all of Sr Augustine who again and again 
 quotes and explains the passage in his Sermons, 92 (v. p. 500 ed. Bened.), 
 118 (p. 587), 183 (p. 87s), 186 (p. 88s), 213 (P- 937), 244 (P- 1019). 264 (p. 
 1075), 292 (p. 1170), 304 (p. 1235); comp. in Psalm, xc (iv. p. 972). The 
 distinctness with which this interpretation was enunciated by the greatest 
 teacher of the Western Church would necessarily seciire for it a wide 
 reception. 
 
 2. If on the other hand apirayfibv ijye lo-flai is considered equivalent to 
 the common phrase apTray/ia ^yeia-dai, 80 that dpjray^os will signify ' a prize,' 
 ' a treasure,' then the logical connexion with the context before and after 
 is strictly presei-ved : ' Be humble as Christ was humble : He, though 
 existing before the worlds in the form of God, did not treat His equality 
 with God as a prize, a treasure to be greedily clutched and ostentatiously 
 displayed : on the contrary He resigned the glories of heaven.' The only 
 objection to this rendering, the form dpirayiibs in place of apwayfux, has 
 been considered in the notes. 
 
EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 135 
 
 This is the common and indeed almost universal interpretation of the The sense 
 Greek fethers, who would have the most lively sense of the requirements ^"^^^^^ 
 of the language. So it is evidently taken in the earliest passage where it fathers, 
 is quoted, in the Epistle of the Churohks op Gaul (Buseb. H. E. v. 2), 
 where praising the humility of the martyrs they say tVi too-oCtok fijXaral f ^"IT* 
 xai luiirjTot XpHTToC tyevovTO, or fv fiopt^^ Qeov vnapxfiv ovx dpirayfibv 
 ifyijcraro ro rivat taa Beip, evidently thinking this clause to contain in itself a 
 statement of His condescension. So Obigen clearly takes it ; in Joann. Origen. 
 vi. § 37 (iV. p. 1 56 d) i^^xP^ davdrov xarajSaiKciv VTrep dtrefiav, ovx dpirayiibv 
 •jyovficKov TO elvai lo-a 6e^, Koi <(vovv iavTov k.t.X. ; in Matth, Gomtn, Ser, 
 (in. p. 916 0) ' Vere Jesus non rapinam arbitratus est esse se sequalem Deo, 
 et non semel sed frequenter pro omnibus seipsum humiliavit' ; in Rom. 
 V. § 3 (iv. p. 553 a) 'Nee rapinam ducit esse se sequalem Deo, hoc est, non 
 sibi magui aliquid deputat quod ipse quidem sequalis Deo et unum cum 
 patre sit'; ib. x. § 7 (iv. p. 672 0) 'Ohristus non sibi placens nee rapinam 
 arbitrans esse se eequalem Deo semetipsum exinanivit.' 80 too Methodius ; Methodius. 
 Fragm. p. 105 (Jahn) avrht 6 Kupiot, o uios to5 6eoS, TifiSv avrb [to 
 liaprvpiov] iiiaprvpTjiTCV, ovx dpirayjibv ^yijaafievos to eivai 'era Oe^, 'va Koi 
 TouTif Tov avBpatiTov TO x"?'"'/"'" "^ "" "ore/Sij trri'^. So again EUSEBIUS Eusebius. 
 unmistakeably ; Eccl. Proph. iii. 4 iyf^Sri irevqs, ovx dpjrayiiov ^oiiuvos 
 TO tlvai i<Ta 0e^ dW iavTov Toireaiav K.r.X. ; Eccles. Theol, i. 13 (p. 57) 
 vpovnapxcovj BeorrjTi TraTpiKTJs bo^rjs TeTtfiTjp,evos' ov p-^v apTToyixov rjyovp.evos 
 TO (Ivcu iaa &e^ cax/rbv 8" ovv KiVOKras k.t.X. ; comp. ib. i. 20 (p. 94)- So 
 also Theodobe of Mopsuestia (Baban. Maur. Op. vi. p. 488 b ed. Migne) Theodore. 
 ' Non magnam reputavit illam quae ad Deum est eequalitatem et elatus in 
 sua permansit dignitate, sed magis pro aliorum utilitate prseelegit humiliora 
 etc' ; and after him Theosobet, interpreting the passage, r^v npbs Tbv na- Theodo- 
 Ttpa lO-OTijTO ex"" "" /*'7" toOto virekafie. So moreover the PSEUDO- Athana- ™'' 
 
 siUB Horn, de Sem. (Athan. Op. n. p. 49 ed. Bened.) xpurOeu 8« 6 Aa««d «V ^t^a„a'. 
 jSao'iXea ovx ^P^ rjpTratre tt]v ^aaiKeiav dXX* ^veixcTO TToXXotr XP<"'^'^ Sov^ smB. 
 \tv<ov r^ SaovK' Ka\ 6 tranfip ^/lav yevtnjdtis ^aaCKtvs Ttpb rtSv al<ovav,..rivei- 
 X"o, OVX dpirayfibv jJy^iraTo to clvai lira 0e^ k.t.X. So in like manner 
 ISIDOBE OF FelUSIUM Epist. iv, 22 el ippmov ^qyr[tTaTO to ehai laov ovK av Isidore of 
 iavTov iTairelva»Tev...8ovXoc pev yap Kal (Kcv6(pa>6f\s koI vloBeiria Tiinjdeis otc Pelusinm. 
 apirayfia rj tvprjpa Tqv d^iav ijyjiirdpfvos ovd' av vTroarTah] oiKeriKov tpyov 
 dvvaai' o Si yvijirios vibs k.t.\. ; and Cteil OF Alexandria e. Jul. vi Cyril of 
 (vi. p. 19s cd. Aubert.) o /itV yap tiSk oXou' aarrip Kol Kvpios, Kairoi perbv Alex- 
 avTa Tb iv pop<p^ Kal to'OTi;rt t^ Kara irdv oTiovv opaaBai irpbs tov naTtpa *^"""' 
 KOI Toir T^s 6foTt]Tos ivafipvvto'Bai BaKois, ovx dprtaypbv lyy^croTO k.t.X. 
 (where the koi'toi is decisive). In addition to this positive testimony it 
 should be noticed, that throughout the important controversies of the fourth 
 and fifth centuries it does not seem once to have occurred to any Greek 
 father to put forward the other explanation of the passage, though so 
 eminently favourable to the orthodox belief. 
 
 1 It is not clear what interpreta- ■^piraae yip, ^ijalv, ovx IXafie Tb taov 
 
 tion was adopted by Didymns of Alez- etvu ry <p6aei tQ Qeif Koi warpl' koX 
 
 andria de Trin. i. »6 (p. 73), Ti ttjs Sij 6 nrj Inr' dX\ou KevaBelt lavriv Si 
 
 fcriTijTot ra&rris eiplffKerai dvurov; ovx Kevdaas aiSii>Ti)v Searbri^v o/mu Kai 
 
136 
 
 Also by 
 Hilary 
 
 and Je- 
 rome. 
 
 The two 
 
 senses 
 
 compared. 
 
 A middle 
 coTUCse 
 taken by 
 Ohryso- 
 •itom. 
 
 Objection 
 to bia ex- 
 planation. 
 
 EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 Nor is the interpretation thus generally adopted by Greek writers con- 
 fined to them alone. Some of the most acute and learned of the Latin 
 fathers explain it in the same way. 
 
 Thus perhaps Hilakt of Poitiebs de Trin. viii. 45 (n. p. 246 ed. 
 fiened.) ' Non sibi rapiens esse se sequalem Deo, ad susceptionem se formas 
 servilis per obedientiam exinaniTit...non tamen sequalem se Deo per rapi- 
 nam existimans quamvis in forma Dei et sequaUs Deo per Deum Deus sig- 
 natus exstaret*'; and more clearly Jebomb ad Hedib. Q. gii{Bput. 120, i. 
 p. 837) 'Pro quibus non rapinam arbitratus est se esse sequalem Deo sed 
 semetipsum exinanivit' ; see also his notes on Gal. iv. 12, r. 14^. 
 
 In comparing these two interpretations, it will be seen that while the 
 former makes ovx. apirayixov tj^i/craro a continuation and expansion of the 
 idea already contained in e» iiop<j>j 6foO vwapxav, ' He existed in the form 
 of God and to did not think it usurpation to be equal with God' ; the 
 latter treats the words as involving a contrast to this idea, ' He existed 
 in the form of God but nevertheless did not eagerly assert His equality 
 with God.' In short the two interpretations of the clause, as I have said 
 before, are directly opposed, inasmuch as the one expresses our Lord's asser- 
 tion, the other His cession, of the rights pertaining to His divine majesty. 
 
 And between these two explanations — the one which interprets apnray 
 iiov by abmiav, and the other which interprets it by tpjuuov — our choice 
 must be made. A middle interpretation however was maintained by 
 St Chrysostom, and has been adopted with more or less distinctness by 
 others, especially in recent times. It agrees very nearly with the first in 
 thcsense assigned to aprtayp-os, and yet approaches to the second in the 
 general drift of the clause. ' Being in the form of God, He did not con- 
 sider that He was plundering, when He claimed equality with God. He 
 did not therefore look upon His divine prerogatives as a booty of which 
 He feared to be deprived and which therefore it was necessary to guard 
 jealously. He reigned not as a tyrant but as a lawful sovereign. He could 
 therefore divest himself of the outward splendours of His rank without 
 fear'.' 
 
 As an indirect doctrinal inference from the passage, this account is 
 admissible ; but as a direct explanation of its bearing, it is faulty because 
 it understands too much, requiring links to be supplied which the con- 
 nexion does not suggest and which interrupt the sequence of thought. 
 
 itSiov iavrhv iwiSei^ev : comp. ib. iii. 1 7 
 (p. 377). The expression oux ^piraae 
 however seems to point to an interme- 
 diate interpretation like the one adopted 
 by Chrysostom, as given in the text. 
 Nothing can be inferred from the lan- 
 guage of St Basil adv. Eunom. iv. 
 (i, p. 294 E, ^96 a), or from Liturg. 
 S. Baa. p. 158 p^eale). 
 
 ^ Yet in another passage c. Const. 
 Imper. % 19 (11. p. S77) be says, 'Non ra- 
 pit quod erat Ohristus,' which points to 
 the other sense of ipraypis. Perhaps 
 he, like Chrysostom, adopted a middle 
 
 interpretation combining features of 
 both. 
 
 ' This is probably the view also of 
 Victorinus in his commentary on the 
 passage, 'Ergo nunc Panlus, Non, in- 
 quit, Christus rapinam oredidit, id est, 
 hoc sibi vindicavit, tantum habere 
 voluit ut forma Dei esset, sed etiam se 
 ipsTim exinanivit etc.'; but his lan- 
 guage is not distinct. See again his 
 treatise c. Arium i. 9, Galland Bibl. 
 Vet. Patr. viii. p. 155. 
 
 ' Op. XI. p. •245. I have abridged 
 his explanation. 
 
EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 137 
 
 All similar attempts to mediate between the two opposing explanations fail 
 in the same way and tend only to confuse the interpretation of the passage. 
 
 Of the two explanations then, between which our choice lies, the con- 
 text, as I have shown, seems imperatively to require the second ; and if 
 authority count for anything, the list of names, by which it is maintained, 
 suflBciently refutes the charge of being ' liable to grave suspicion on theolo- 
 gical grounds.' We should do wisely however to consider its doctrinal 
 bearing, without reference to authority. 
 
 Now while the other explanation directly asserts our Lord's divinity, Theologi- 
 this confessedly does not. Yet on the other hand the theological difference oalbearing 
 is only apparent. For, though we miss the direct assertion in this par- °* the m- 
 ticular clause, the doctrine still remains. It is involved in the preceding tf^ adopt- 
 words, for the ' pre-existence in the form of God,' as will appear I think ed. 
 from the last note, means substantially this. It is indirectly implied more- 
 over in this very clause taken in connexion with the context. For how 
 could it be a sign of humility in our Lord not to assert His equality with 
 God, if He were not divine? How could such a claim be considered 
 otherwise than arrogant and blasphemous, if He were only a man ? H St 
 Chrysostom's interpretation must be rejected as faulty and confused, his 
 argument at least is valid; 'No one wishing to exhort to humility says. 
 Be humble and think less of yourself than of your compeers {(Xottov ^povei 
 rav ofioTifLcov), for such and such a person being a slave did not set himself 
 up against his master ; therefore imitate him. Nay, one might reply, here 
 is a question not of humility, but of infatuation (airoKom;)'; 'It is no 
 humility for the inferior not to set himself up against his superior'; 'If 
 being a man. He washed the feet of men. He did not empty, did not 
 humble Himself; if being a man. He did not grasp at equality with God, 
 He deserves no praise '.' 
 
 One who refuses to claim some enviable privilege may be influenced by jj ^^gg ^g^ 
 either of two motives, by a feeling of humility or by a sense of justice, favour hu- 
 according as he has or has not a right to this privilege. Those who hold manita- 
 humanitarian views of the Person of Christ necessarily take the latter "*° views, 
 view of the motive in this instance. The equality with God, they argue, 
 was not asserted, because it would have been an act of usurpation to do so. 
 To this view it may fairly be objected, that it overlooks the true signi- 
 ficance of apirayfiov {aprrayfia) ijyfio-flai, which as a recognised phrase is 
 equivalent to epiiawv ^yela-Bai and therefore refers to the desiroibleness of the 
 possession or acquisition. But its fatal condemnation is this, that it treats 
 the clause as isolated and takes no account of the context. The act ex- 
 pressed by oix aprrayp,ov ^yijcraro is brought forward as an example of 
 humility, and can only be regarded as such, if the expression to dpai to-a 
 Bta refers to rights which it was an act of condescension to waive ^. 
 
 '■ Op. XI. pp. 236, 237, 247. look upon His being on an equality 
 
 ' One other interpretation put for- with God, as a means of seU-enrich- 
 
 ward by recent commentators deserves ment.' In answer to the mechanical ob- 
 
 attention. Meyer (followed by Dean jeotion urged against this sense, that a 
 
 Alford), desirous of giving ipwayiiov state {ri etrai) cannot be regarded as an 
 
 the active sense which its termination action {ipTraynov), he justly appeals to 
 
 suggests, translates thewords, 'Did not i Tim. vi. 5 voiu^vtuv iropuriiov ehcu 
 
»38 
 
 EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 Supposed 
 reference 
 to snoh in 
 the Epi- 
 stle itself 
 
 and in 
 Polyoarp. 
 
 Probabi- 
 lities con- 
 sidered. 
 
 Lost Epistles to the PhiKppiansf 
 
 It has been maintained by some, that a passage in the Epistle to the 
 Philippians implies a more or less sustained correspondence between 
 St Paul and his converts, so that the extant letter is only a single link in 
 a long chain. ' To vn-ite the same things,' says St Paul, 'to me is not irk- 
 some, while for you it is safe.' The reference, it is urged, cannot be ex- 
 plained from the epistle itself, since it does not supply any topic which 
 satisfies the two conditions, of occurring in the immediate context, and of 
 being repeated elsewhere in the course of the letter. 
 
 Moreover the inference thus suggested is thought to be confirmed by an 
 allusion in the Epistle of Polycarp. Writing to these same Philippians, he 
 says (§ 3) ; ' Neither I nor another like me can attain to the wisdom of the 
 blessed and glorious Paul; who coming among you taught the word of 
 truth accurately and surely before the men of that day; who also when 
 absent wrote letters (cVioroXas) to you, into which if ye search ye can be 
 builded up unto the faith given to you.' 
 
 Against this view no objection can be taken from the probabilities of 
 the case. On the contrary it is only reasonable to suppose, that during the 
 ten or eleven years which elapsed between the epoch of their conversion 
 and the date of this epistle, the Apostle, ever overflowing with love and 
 ever prompt to seize the passing opportunity, would have written not 
 once or twice only to converts with whom his relations were so close and 
 afiectionate. And — to consider the broader question — if we extend our 
 range of view beyond the Philippians to the many churches of his founding, 
 if we take into account not these ten years only but the whole period of his 
 missionary life, we can hardly resist the conclusion that in the epistles of our 
 Canon we have only a part — perhaps not a very large part — of the whole 
 correspondence of the Apostle either with churches or with individuals. 
 
 But, if there be any reluctance to allow that the letter of an inspired 
 Apostle could have been permitted to perish, a moment's thought will dis- 
 sipate the scruple. Any theory of inspiration, which would be consistent 
 with historical fact, must find a place for this supposition. It is true of 
 Him who ' spake as never man spake,' that if all His words had been pre- 
 served, ' the world itself could not contain the books that should be written.' 
 Yet His recorded sayings may be read through in a very few hours. And 
 
 TiiK evai^aav, -which presents an exact 
 parallel in this respect. This interpre- 
 tation suits the context very fairly, but 
 it seems to me tobe somewhat strained ; 
 and the fact that apwayiia iiytiaBai 
 (ToieiaOaC^ is a common phrase mean- 
 ing ' to prizehighly, to welcome eagerly,' 
 and that h^vayiiov iiyeiaBnn (voieXaBaC^, 
 wherever else it occurs, has also this 
 sonse, would appeal to be decisive. 
 Meyer indeed attempts to force his own 
 
 meaning on ipTray/iov in the passage of 
 Cyril, de Ador. i. p. it,, quoted above 
 (in the notes, p. iii); but when this 
 writer, speaking of Lot's renewal of the 
 offer of hospitality when declined by 
 the angels, describes this importunity 
 by oOx dpiroYyttdv rrjv rapatnjatv ivoieiTO, 
 it is difficult to conceive that the phrase 
 can mean anything else but 'did not 
 eagerly close with, did not gladly wel- 
 come their refusal.' 
 
BPISTLB TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 139 
 
 on the ground of inspiration we cannot assuredly claim for the letters of 
 the Apostle an immunity from the ravages of time, which was denied to 
 the words of the Saviour Himself. The 'litera scripta' indeed has a firmer 
 hold on life. But the difficulty of multiplying copies, the strife of parties 
 within the Church, and the perils assailing the brotherhood from without, 
 are sufficient to explain the loss of any documents in the earlier ages. And 
 from the nature of the case the letters of the Apostles could not have been 
 so highly prized by their contemporaries, as by later generations. History 
 confirms the suggestion which reason makes, that the writings of the first 
 teachers of the Gospel grew in importance, as the echo of their voice died 
 away. A letter from a dear friend is a poor substitute for the free inter- 
 change of conversation. But when he is taken from us, we know not how 
 to value his correspondence highly enough ^ 
 
 At all events indications are not wanting of other letters besides those Indica- 
 which have been preserved for the instruction of the Church. The two tions of 
 short Epistles to the Thessalonians stand alone in a period which extends J"*^®' ^°** 
 over at least twenty years before and after". Yet in one of these the Tjiegaji^. 
 Apostle calls attention to hia mode of signature, as a guarantee of genuine- nioa. 
 ness, which occurred ' in every epistle ' written by him '. Such an expres- 
 sion would be conclusive, even if unsupported by other allusions, which 
 suggest at least the suspicion that several letters may have passed oetween 
 St Paul and his Thessalonian converts'. Again, his written communica- 
 tions with the Corinthians seem to have extended beyond the two extant Corinth, 
 epistles. In a passage in the First Epistle, according to the most pro- 
 bable interpretation, he directly alludes to a previous letter addressed to 
 them": and the acknowledgment of the Corinthians, which he elsewhere 
 mentions, that his 'letters are weighty and powerful,' together with his 
 own reply ' Such as we are by letters when absent etc.V cannot be ex- 
 
 * Prof. Jowett, Epistles of St Paul ' i Cor. v. g (ipa.\j/a ifuv iv ry 
 L p. 19s (ind ed.), has an inBtructive iiri<rTo\^ 117) <rwaya/t,lym(rdai vopvois. 
 essay on the probability of many epi- The real difficulty in referring this allu- 
 stles having been lost. With some of his siou to the First Epistle itself lies not 
 special criticisms however I venture to in lypa\l/a, which might be explained aa 
 disagree. He snpposes for instance that an epistolary aorist, but in ie r^ im- 
 I Cor. V. 9 refers to the First Epistle to 0-7-0X3 'in my letter,' which is thus ren- 
 the Corinthians itself, and that Col. iv. dered meaningless : see Journal of 
 16 does not refer to the Epistle to the Class, and Sacr. Phil. 11. p. 196 (note). 
 Ephesiaus. Twoiudependentreasonshave probably 
 
 ' Fourteen years at least, probably conspired to promote the unnatural ex- 
 
 seventeen (see notes Oal. ii. i), elapsed planation by which it is referred to the 
 
 between St Paul's conversion and the FirstEpistle. (i) On tAeo2o^icai grounds 
 
 third visit to Jerusalem (a.d. 51). The commentators have been unwilling to 
 
 Epistles to the Corinthians, which pro- admit that an epistle of St Paul could 
 
 bably follow next in order after the have perished: while (i) they have been 
 
 Epistles to the Thessalonians, were not misled critically by the context, rer. 1 1 
 
 written till A.D. 57, 58. Thus the whole vw ik typaijia k.t.\., taking mv in its 
 
 period will be 20 or 23 years, according primary temporal sense, whereas it ap- 
 
 to the reckoning adopted. pears to mean, ' under these ciroum- 
 
 * 1 Thess. iii. 17. stances,' 'the world being what it is.' 
 
 * 2 Thess. ii. i, 15. ' i Cor. x. 10, 11. 
 
I40 EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 plained quite satisfactorily (though the explanation might pass) by the 
 
 single extant epistle written before this date. On the other hand the 
 
 [Laodi- 'letter from Laodicea,' which the Apostle directs the Colossians to procure 
 
 "^"••l and read', must not bo classed among these lost letters, as there is very 
 
 good reason for supposing that he there refers to the circular letter to the 
 
 Asiatic Churches, sent to Laodicea as one of the great centres and thence 
 
 communicated to the neighbouring town of Colossae, but circulated in the 
 
 Church at large through the metropolis of Asia and therefore generally 
 
 known as the Epistle to the Ephesians. Whether to these lost letters to 
 
 Thessalonica and to Corinth we are required to add one or more addressed 
 
 to the Fhilippians, I propose now to consider. The general question has 
 
 only been introduced to prepare the way for this investigation. 
 
 Kxplana- i. The passage in the Epistle to the Fhilippians itself has been 
 
 tions of variously explained. Some have interpreted it ' to repeat in writing the 
 
 examined **'"® injunctions which I gave you myself by word of month,' or ' which 
 
 I charged you by my messengers.' But such amplifications receive no 
 
 encouragement from the words themselves, which mean simply 'to write 
 
 the same things again and a^in.' To written communications therefore 
 
 our attention must be confined. 
 
 Even with this limitation, three solutions are offered. Either (i) The 
 
 extant epistle itself consists of two separate letters welded together; or 
 
 (2) A lost letter must be assumed in which the same subject was introduced ; 
 
 or (3) The often repeated topic must be discovered in the extant letter. 
 
 The first of these solutions has been already considered and set aside'; 
 
 nor indeed does it contribute anything towards the interpretation of this 
 
 passage (though it would explain the plural in Polycarp), for no new topic 
 
 is introduced by the disintegration of the existing letter. The second 
 
 might very fairly be accepted in default of a better : but there is nothing 
 
 in the words which suggests a reference to any incident external to the 
 
 letter itself, and it is therefore simpler not to look elsewhere for the 
 
 allusion. The third view then seems preferable, if any topic can be found 
 
 which satisfies the conditions. And in the notes on the passage I have 
 
 attempted to show that such a topic is not wanting. 
 
 Allusionin 2. But the reference in the Epistle of Polycarp still remains tc be ex- 
 
 Polycarp plained. What account must be given of the ' letters,' which St Paul wrote 
 
 g^ to the Philippians 1 Does Polycarp, as some have thought, include the 
 
 Thessalonian Epistles, which as being addressed to a neighbouring Church 
 
 would be known and read at Philippi also 1 This is possible ; but a simpler 
 
 {ri<rro\ai solution offers itself. Notwithstanding the plural eVio-ToXat, the reference 
 
 used of a ^^y j,^ satisfied by the one extant Epistle to the Philippians. Of this 
 
 letted usage of the plural tViorroXat, applying to a single letter', there can be no 
 
 doubt. This will appear plainly from Thucyd. viii. 51 oirov ot! napovvav 
 
 airo ToC 'AXki/SmSou jrtpl tovt<oi> eirtoroXiji', compared with at 8e vapa toO 
 
 'AXxijSiaSov cTTtcrroXal ov ttoXv vorcpov ^kov ; from Joseph. Ant. xii. 4. 10 
 
 1 Col. iv. 16. I hope to oonaider ' See the introduotion, page 69 
 
 the o^nestion of the ■ epistle from Lao- note. 
 
 dicea' in the introdnction to the Epis- ' Thorn. Mag. p. 354 ical ^loroX^ 
 
 tie to the Ephesians: see alao Colos- ko) iwurrdKai TrXriSwrucuf ^rpopixir. 
 lians p. 174 sq. 
 
EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. M' 
 
 6 AaKfbatfioviau ^aaiKds'Aptios irpta^tiav re fmiiirt xal tn'io'roXas c!» ri 
 avTiypa(j>6v icrri tomvtov, compared with ^ fiiv ovv e7rt(rTo\i) i; w(iKJ>6eT<ra 
 irapa tou Aaxedaifioi'iaiK jSacriXeiac tovtov irepietx* '"oi' TpoTrov' : and from 
 Alcipliron Epilt. ii. 4 <>>s BitneiiyJAa fiov rou /Sao-tXcox TOf cVioToXar, €v6vs 
 avfyvav, compared with (ro/SoCtra ralr ;(cp(rii> f/iavr^s t^w eVto'ToX^i' irii' 
 auT^ r^ /Sao-tXtKg o-c^payiSt; the singvilar in each case standing in the 
 immediate neighbourhood of the plural and referring to the game writing. 
 I have placed these instances side by side, because the context in all three 
 cases determines the sense, and because being taken from writers of differ- 
 ent epochs they show that the usage was not confined to any one period. 
 The following references also, which might be multipUed many times, serve 
 to illustrate its occurrence in classical writers at different stages of the 
 language: Eur. Iph. Taur. 589, 767, Iph. Aul. in, 314, Thucyd. i. 132, 
 iv. 50, Polyb. V. 43. S, Lucian. Amor. 47 (n. p. 450), Julian. Epist. 73 
 (comp. Epist. 44)'. Nor is this usage confined to classical Greek. In 
 Esth. iii. 14 c'lrioToXai is a translation of a singular substantive (SDS) ; 
 while in i Mace. v. 14, x. 3, 7, xi. 29, xii. 5 etc., it plainly refers to a single 
 document. And in ecclesiastical writers of a later date examples are found. 
 Eusebius {S. E. vi. i ) for instance, like the authors first quoted, uses t ttjotoX^ 
 and cVioToXai in the same context when speaking of one and the same 
 letter 3. 
 
 If therefore we find that in another place Polycarp, referring again to Singular 
 the Epistle to the Philippians, uses the singular (eVioroX^)*, this circum- ^^ plural 
 stance will present no difficulty; for we have seen similar variations of j^' , 
 usage in the passages of Thucydides and Alciphron, of Josephus and Euse- 
 bius, where the anomaly is rendered more striking by the fact that in these 
 authors the singular and plural occur in close proximity. 
 
 But a later passage of this same father has been quoted to show that he Folycarp'a 
 carefully distinguishes between the singular and the plural of this word. 'The usage else- 
 letters (e'TTioToXos) of Ignatius,' he writes, ' which were sent to us by him, ? jff fij °°' 
 and such others as we had by us, we have sent to you, as ye commanded ; 
 all which (ofrtwr) are appended to this letter (eVtoroXg); from which ye may 
 derive great advantage' (§ 13). The plural here has been explained as 
 referring to the two letters, the one to the Smymseans, the other to Poly- 
 carp, contained in the short Greek recension. This explanation, it will be 
 seen, supposes either the genuineness of the short Greek recension of the 
 Ignatian letters or the spuriousness of this portion of Polycarp's epistle. 
 Into these questions it would be beside the purpose to enter here. I 
 would only say that here again the imaroKm. may very well be used of a 
 single letter, and that on this supposition there is a certain propriety in the 
 
 1 Comp. also Antiq. xiii. 4. 8. * Polye. Phil. 1 1 ' qui estis in prin- 
 
 ' I owe a few of these references to oipio epistolffl ejus,' where some word 
 
 Eettig Quast. Phil. p. 38. like ' laudati ' should perhaps be sup- 
 
 ' Comp. also H. E. vi. 43, quoted plied. Others however suppose the ori- 
 
 by Cotelier on Polyo. Phil. 3. The ginal Greek to have been ol tvret ir 
 
 plural 'epistolsa' in Latin is used in ipxv ivuxroKal avrov, comparing for 
 
 the same way; Justin xi. 8, 12, Flin. iv dpxv-Phil. iv. 15, and fox iiruiToXaX 
 
 fif TT. TTTJii 12, quoted by Fabric. .Sii2. avroS t Cor. iii. 7, 3. 
 Grcec. iv. p. 804 (ed. Harles). 
 
142 EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIAN8. 
 
 change from the plural to the singular, when the writer has occasion to 
 speak of himself. For the plural eirurroXai, which signifies properly ' direc- 
 tions, injunctions,' whenever it occurs in prose of a single epistle, seems to 
 denote a missive of importance, such as a king's mandate or a bishop's 
 pastoral; and its employment by Polycarp to designate his own letter 
 would have jarred strangely with his pervading tone of humility, though it 
 would fitly describe the communications of the blessed Apostle Paul (§ 3) 
 or the holy martyr Ignatius (§ 13)'. 
 He does On the whole then it would appear probable that Polycarp refers solely 
 
 not refer jg ^.j^g g^tant Epistle to the Philippians ; for though the existence of other 
 letter. letters was seen to be in itself antecedently probable, yet it seems very 
 unlikely that an epistle of St Paul, which had survived the opening of 
 the second century and was then known to the Churches of Smyrna and 
 Philippi, should so soon afterwards have passed wholly out of memory. 
 Irenseus, the pupil of Polycarp, is evidently acquainted with only one 
 Epistle of St Paul to the Philippians". 
 
 ' By a curious ooinoidence Maximus Meri utoJ KK^/nairoi k. r.X. : but it seems 
 
 uses the plural of Polycarp's own epi- wholly incredible that Syncellaa him- 
 
 stle : Dion. Areop. Op. 11. p. 93 (ed. self, and very unlikely that any autho- 
 
 Corder.), ?x" ** ""i iirtaroKai outo'j rity quoted by him, should have been 
 
 fl«o5 noXu(ta/)7ros irpit ^iXiirTijalovs. acquainted with more than one Epistle 
 
 ' Georgius Synoellus indeed (Ghron. to the Philippians : and I can only ac- 
 
 I. p. 651 ed. Dind., a passage which I count for the reading by supposing that 
 
 owe to Bettig Quast. Phil. p. 38) speak- a superfluous a crept into the text 
 
 ing of St Clement of Borne writes, and was afterwards written out in full 
 
 TOVTOV Kid &TOffTo\oS iV Ty TTpOi ^tXtTT- TTptitTQ. 
 
 vjialovi /nififriTai irpiir-Q ewt<TTo\-§ (Iwiiy, 
 
III. 2] 
 
 EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 143 
 
 'B\e7r6T6 TOi)s Kuj/as, /SAeVeTe tov^ kukovs ip- 
 
 III. 2 — 6. 'Be on your guard. Shun 
 these shameless dogs, these workers 
 of mischief, these mutilators of the 
 flesh. I call it mutilation, for we are 
 the true circumcision, we offer the 
 genuine service ; we — you and I — 
 Gentile and Jew alike — who serve by 
 the Spirit of God, who place our boast 
 in Christ Jesus and put no trust in the 
 flesh. And yet, whatever be the value 
 of this confidence in the flesh, I assert 
 it as well. If any other man claims 
 to put trust in the flesh, my claim is 
 greater. I was circumcised on the 
 eighth day, a child of believing pa- 
 rents. I am descended of an old 
 Israelite stock. I belong to the loyal 
 and renowned tribe of Benjamin. I 
 am of a lineage which has never con- 
 formed to foreign usages, but has 
 preserved throughout the language 
 and the customs of the fathers. Thus 
 much for my inherited privileges ; and 
 now for my personal career. Do they 
 speak of law ? I belong to the Pha- 
 risees, the strictest of all sects. Of 
 zeal } I persecuted the Church. This 
 surely is enough ! Of righteousness t 
 In such righteousness as consists in 
 obedience to law, I have never been 
 found a defaulter.' 
 
 2. A probable account of the ab- 
 rupt introduction of this new topic is 
 given in the introduction p. 69. As 
 the Apostle is on the point of refer- 
 ring once more to the divisions in the 
 Philippian Church before concluding, 
 he is interrupted. Whether the in- 
 terruption was momentary, or whether 
 some hours or even days elapsed be- 
 fore the letter was resumed, it is vain 
 to conjecture. But it has diverted, 
 or at least modified, the current of 
 his thoughts. He speaks no longer of 
 the social dissensions actually pre- 
 valent among the Philippians ; but he 
 warns them against a much more 
 serious though hitherto distant peril 
 — ^the infection of Judaism. It seems 
 probable therefore that he had mean- 
 
 while been apprised of some fresh 
 outbreak or reminded of some old 
 antagonism on the part of his Judaiz- 
 ing opponents in Rome ; see p. 17. 
 
 The thrice repeated ' mark ye,' to- 
 gether with the recurrence of the defi- 
 nite article in the three clauses — the 
 dogs, the evil workers, the concision — 
 shows that St Paul is alluding to a 
 well-known and well-marked party in 
 or out of the Church. 
 
 BXejTfTe] ' look to, be on your guard 
 against, mark and watch.' Comp. Mark 
 iv, 24 ^KenfTc Ti aKovcTf, 2 Joh. 8 
 ^XtTTfTf iavTovf. SO frequently ^XfVeTf 
 diro (e.g. Mark viii. 15) and ^XeVert 
 /X17 (e.g. Luke xxi. 8). 
 
 Toiis Kvvas] St Paul retorts upon 
 the Judaizers the term of reproach, 
 by which they stigmatized the Gen- 
 tiles as impure. In the Mosaic law 
 the word is used to denounce the foul 
 moral profligacies of heathen worship 
 (Dent, xxiii. 19 ov Trpoaoiacis /itaBaiiu 
 iropvtjs ouSe aXKay/ia kvvos). Among 
 the Jews of the Christian era it was 
 a common designation of the Gentiles, 
 involving chiefly the idea of ceremo- 
 nial impurity ; see esp. Glem. Horn ii. 
 19 itiT€V OvK e^eo-Tiv lda-6ai ri Wvj] 
 fOiKoTa Kvtrlv dm to Siai^opois xprjirBm 
 rpoijiais KoX irpa^einv, anohfhopivqs Tys 
 Kara rrjv ^aaiKeiav rpajrt'f')* To'is vioit 
 'la-paj]X' ij Si TOVTO dxouo'ao'a, Kal rns 
 avT^s rpajrtfijt as Kva>v ^i^lav diro- 
 TimTOVTwv <Tvpp,tTaKap,^aveiv [beop^vnX 
 lieTaBepievr) owep ^p, TcS 6p.oims SiatTatr- 
 6ai vols rfjs ^aaiXeias viols t!js eis rriv 
 Bvyaripa, cos jj^iaa-ev, ervxev laaeas. 
 The writer thus interprets from a 
 Judaiziug point of view the incident 
 in Matt. xv. 22 sq., where our Lord 
 uses the Jewish phraseology of the 
 day to test the faith of the Cauaanite 
 woman. See the rabbinical quotations 
 in Schottgen l p. 1145. St John 
 applies the term to those whose moral 
 impurity excludes them from the new 
 Jerusalem, the spiritual Israel, Apoc. 
 xxii. 15. As a term of reproach the 
 
144 
 
 BPISTLB TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 [in. 3 
 
 ydTWS, /3A€7reT6 rnv Kararo/JL^v. ^n^ieT^ yap ea^iev ij 
 TrepiTOinri, o'l irvevixari Qeou XarpevovTe^ kuI Kouxuif^^voi 
 
 word on the lips of a Jew signified 
 chiefly ' impurity' ; of a Greek, 'impu- 
 dence.' The herds of dogs which prowl 
 about eastern cities, without a home 
 and without an owner, feeding on the 
 refuse aud filth of the streets, quarrel- 
 ling among themselves, and attacking 
 the passer-by, explain both applications 
 of the imago. To the Jew more especi- 
 ally the comparison of the heathen to a 
 dog would commend itself , as describing 
 his indiscriminate use of meats whether 
 clean or not. Thus St Paul's language 
 here is strikingly significant: 'They 
 speak of themselves as God's children; 
 they boast of eating at God's table ; 
 they reproach us as dogs, as foul and 
 unclean, as outcasts from the cove- 
 nant, because forsooth we eat meat 
 bought at the shambles, because we 
 do not observe the washing of cups 
 and platters. I reverse the image. 
 We are the children, for we banquet 
 on the spiritual feast which God has 
 spread before us : they are the dogs, 
 for they greedily devour the garbage 
 of carnal ordinances, the very refuse 
 of God's table.' See the note on cr/tu- 
 /3aXa ver. 8. 
 
 KUKovs ipydras] So again he says 
 of the Judaizing teachers 2 Cor. xi. 
 
 13 Oi TOiOUTOt ^ivBairoirrokoi, fpyarai 
 dokioi. The proselytizing zeal of the 
 party has been already noticed by St 
 Paul, L 15, 16. There he contemplates 
 it as exerted upon heathendom, and 
 with very mixed feelings he constrains 
 himself to rejoice: here on the other 
 hand he apprehends its assaults on a 
 more liberal Christianity, and an un- 
 qualified condemnation is pronounced 
 upon it. The Pharisaic party (Acts 
 XV. 5) which 'compassed sea and land 
 to make one proselyte' (Matt, xxiii. 15) 
 had carried its old leaven into the 
 Christian Church. There was the 
 same zealous activity in the pursuit 
 of its aims (('pyarar), and there were 
 
 the same pernicious consequences in 
 the attainment {kukovs). 
 
 Tfjv (caraTo/tiifx] ' the concision, the 
 mutilation.' "The corresponding verb 
 KaTarijivtiv is used in the lxx only 
 of mutilations and incisions forbidden 
 by the Mosaic law; Levit. xxi. 5 cVI 
 ras aapKat avrav ml KaTarffiovinv iv- 
 TO/ildas, I Kings xviii. 28 KaTarifivovTo 
 Kara tov iBLtrfiov avrav. Is. XV. 2, Hos. 
 xvii. 14. Hence the appropriateness 
 here: ' This circumcision, which they 
 vaunt, is in Christ only as the gashings 
 and mutilations of the idolatrous hea- 
 then' : comp. Gal. v. 12 o<j>i\ov mI 
 airoKo^ovrai, with the note. Thus it 
 carries out the idea of Kvvas. For the 
 paronomasia of KaraTo^TJf irepiroprf, 
 compare 2 Thess. iii. 11 fir^hh fpya^o- 
 fiivovs dWa ireptepya^op-evovs, Rom. xii. 
 3 /x^ VTrepfjtpovi'iv nap' b 6ei <j)povtai 
 oKKa (ppoveiv fls to (ra<l)povflv '. see 
 Winer § Ixviii. p. 793 sq. See the 
 monograph by J. F. Bottcher de 
 Paron. etc. Paulo freq. (Lips. 1823) ; 
 and for instances in the Old Testament 
 Glass. Phil. Sacr. v. ii. 2, p. 926. But, 
 though especially frequentin theBible, 
 they are naturally common everywhere. 
 The saying of Diogenes, that the school 
 of Buclides was not o-xoX^ but ^o^i) 
 and the discourse of Plato not dta- 
 TpijSij but Kararpifiij (Diog. Laert. vi. 
 24), may be matched in English by the 
 ambassador's complaint that he had 
 been sent not to Spain but to Pain, 
 or Leicester's report of the English 
 troops in the Netherlands that the 
 Queen's 'poor subjects were no better 
 than abjects,' or Coleridge's descrip- 
 tion of French philosophy as 'psilo- 
 sophy,' or again in Latin by the taunt 
 of pope against antipope tiiat he was 
 not ' consecratus ' but ' execratus,' or 
 the common proverb ' compendia dis- 
 pendia.' See also Parrar's Chapters 
 on Language p. 265 sq. 
 
 3. ij/itis K.r.X.] ' We are the true 
 
III. 4] 
 
 EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIAN8. 
 
 145 
 
 eV XpuTTw 'lti<rou kui ovk iv <rapKi TreTroidore^. ^Kaiwep 
 iyw 'e^(ou TreTroidt](riv kui iv (rapKr e'l Tts SoKeT aWos 
 
 circumcision; we, who have put off 
 the impurity of the heart and have 
 put on Ohrist, whether belonging to 
 the outward circumcision, as I, or to 
 the outward uncircumcision, as you.' 
 
 i| n-cptro/i^] The contrast of the 
 material and the spiritual circum- 
 cision occurs more than once else- 
 where in St Paul: Rom. ii. 25 — 29, 
 CoL ii. 1 1, comp. Ephes. iL 1 1 o» X«yo- 
 fitvoi oKpo^viTTia vno Tijs Xfyo/iExijs 
 wtpiTOfif/s fv aapKt ;i^€ipo9roiT}rov. In 
 this respect, as in so many others, St 
 Stephen's speech contains an anticipa- 
 tion of St Paul: Acts viL 51 ajrepiV/i?;- 
 T0( Kap8iaif Koi rots miriv. The use 
 
 made of the image of circumcision, as 
 a metaphor for purity, in the Old Tes- 
 tament had prepared the way for the 
 Apostle's application: e.g. the cir- 
 cumcision of the heart, Levit. xivi. 41, 
 Deut. X. i6, XXX. 6, Ezek. xliv. 7 ; of 
 the ear, Jer. vi. 10 ; of the lips, Exod. 
 vi. 12, 30; comp. Jer. ix. 25,26. Thus 
 too Philo discusses at some length the 
 sig^nificance of this rite, as a symbol of 
 moral purgation, de Circum.n. p. 211 
 M, comp. de Vict. Off. n. p. 258 m. 
 So too Justin. Dial. 12, p. 229 8ev- 
 Tfpas rjBij XP^'" ^fpiToiifjs, Kal Vfiets 
 «Vi Tij (rapid P'lya (ppovtirt (comp. § 19, 
 p. 236 0), § 43, p. 261 Ol5 TaVTTjV T^v 
 Kara trapita nepCKa^opxv irepiTopijV 
 dXXa irveviuiTiK-qv, Barnab. § 9. 
 
 irccu/xan Qeou] 'by the Spirit of 
 God' and not with the ordinances 
 and traditions of men. Thus 6cav, 
 besides being the better supported 
 reading, is also more emphatic than 
 Sf^. The latter however presents a 
 closer parallel to Rom. i. 9 o Qfos a 
 Xarpeia ev ra wvevpari fiov. See the 
 next note. 
 
 Xarpevovrcr] The terms Xarpcia, 
 Xarpfifiv, had got to be used in a very 
 special sense to denote the service 
 rendered to Jehovah by the Israelite 
 race, as His peculiar people : see espe- 
 cially Bom. ix. 4 (01/ 17 vioBeiria x.r.X. 
 
 PHIL. 
 
 Nai q Xarpeia Ka\ al enayyeXicu, 
 Acts xxvi. 7 fls f/V TO HaSfKatfmXov 
 i}/uSi> iv €KT(vela vvktu xaX ijfiepav Xa- 
 rpevov K.T.X. ; comp. Heb. ix. i, 6. 
 Hence the significance of St Paul's 
 words here; 'We possess the true 
 irepiTop.ri, the circumcision not of the 
 flesh but of the heart, and we also offer 
 the true XnTpfia,the service not of ex- 
 ternal rites but of a spiritual worship' : 
 comp. Joh. iv. 23, 24. The same op- 
 position between the external and the 
 spiritual Xarpcia is implied again in 
 Rom. xii. I irapaa-Tfjirai to a-iifiara 
 vfiav Bvaiav ^©(ray aylav evapeo'Tov rep 
 Gfw, TTjv XoytK^i/ Xarpetav v/iav, 
 besides Rom. i. 9 quoted in the pre- 
 vious note. Compare Athenag. Leg. 
 
 13 wpoacfifpfiv 8eoi> dvalp^KTOv Bvalav 
 /cal TTji' XoyiK^v Trpoo-ayfiv Xarpfiav, 
 and see the note on iv. 18. This defi- 
 nite souse of Xarpfveiv explains how it 
 is used absolutely without any case of 
 the object following, as in Luke ii. 37, 
 Acts xxvi. 7. The substitution of 
 Qea for BeoO here was probably an 
 attempt to relieve the apparent awk- 
 wardness of this absolute use. 
 
 xavx<a/<c>'o( x.r.X.] in accordance 
 with the precept in Jer. ix. 23, 24, 
 twice quoted in a condensed form by 
 St Paul, I Cor. i 31, 2 Cor. x. 17, o 
 Kav^^u/ievoc iv Kvpi'o) Kavxaada. 
 
 ovK iv trapKt] Comp. 2 Cor. xi. 18, 
 Gal. vL 13, 14. The expression iv 
 a-apxl extends beyond ;rfptTo/ii) to all 
 external privileges. 
 
 4. Kain-fp iya> k.t.X.] 'though hav- 
 ing my»elf confidence.' The Apostlb 
 for the moment places himself on the 
 same standing ground with the Ju- 
 daizers and, adopting their language, 
 speaks of himself as having that which 
 in fact he had renounced : comp. 2 Cor. 
 xi. 18 eVel TToXXot Kavx^VTai Kara Lti)*] 
 (rapKa, itdym <avxll<ropai. The proper 
 force of ex.""' TfTroWijo-iK must not be 
 explained away. The Kaiirep ey& 
 singles out the Apostle (comp. 1 Thess. 
 
 10 
 
146 
 
 EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 [III. s 
 
 ireiTOidevaL ev (rapKi, iyw /jluT^ov ^TrepiTOfitj OKTm]- 
 fxepos, CK 761/0175 'lo-jOaijA, t^yAJjs Bevia/jLeiv, 'E^paTo^ i^ 
 
 ii. 18), for the Philippians did not 
 likewise possess these claims. 
 
 Koi iv <TapKC\ 'in the Jlesh as well 
 as in Christ; as if forsooth this one 
 topic did not cover the whole field of 
 boasting.' 
 
 boKci neTTotBevai] 'thinks to have 
 confidence'; 'seems to himself rather 
 than 'seems to others'; for the former, 
 besides being the more common mean- 
 ing in St Paul (i Cor. iii. 18, vii. 40, x. 
 12, xi. 16 etc.), is also more forcible. 
 With eya /laXXoi' we must understand 
 SoKa ireiroiBcvai in the same sense; 
 'If they arrogate to themselves these 
 carnal privileges, I also arrogate them 
 to myself.' St Paul is using an argtt- 
 mentum ad hominem; in his own 
 language, he is for the moment 'speak- 
 ing foolishly,' is 'speaking not after 
 the Lord,' 2 Cor. xL 17. See the pre- 
 ceding note. 
 
 S. This passage has a close parallel 
 in 2 Cor. xi. 21 ; and the comparison 
 is instructive. With the same depth 
 of feeling and the same general pur- 
 port, the form of expression in the 
 two passages differs vridely. The tu- 
 multuous eagerness of the Apostle's 
 earlier style, which appears in the 
 letter to the Corinthians, is replaced 
 here by a more subdued, though not 
 less earnest, tone of remonstrance. 
 Compare also Rom. ix. 3 — 5, xi. i. 
 
 The four clauses at the beginning 
 of the fifth verse, which describe the 
 privileges inherited by the Apostle 
 apart from his own act or will, are 
 arranged in an ascending scale, (i) 
 The due performance of the rite of 
 circumcision shows that his parents 
 were neither heathens nor sons of 
 Ishmael. (2) But as this is consist- 
 ent with their being proselytes, he 
 specifies his direct Israelite descent. 
 (3) Again, his ancestors might have 
 been descendants of Israel and yet 
 have belonged to a renegade tribe. 
 Against this possibility he guards by 
 
 naming the faithful tribe of Benjamin. 
 (4) Lastly, many of those, whose de- 
 scent was unimpeachable and who in- 
 herited the faith of the Mosaic law, 
 yet aa living among heathens adopted 
 the language and conformed to the 
 customs of the people around them. 
 Not such were the forefathers of Saul 
 of Tarsus. There had been no Helle- 
 nist among them; they were all strict 
 Hebrews from first to last. 
 
 wepiTOfi^ oKTai^fifpos] Converts to 
 Judaism would be circumcised in 
 mature age; Ishmaelites in their thir- 
 teenth year. Concerning the latter 
 see Joseph. Ant. i. 12. 2. For the 
 dative irepiroiijj 'in respect of circum- 
 cision' comp. ii. 7 trxniio-Ti eipeBtis, 
 and see Winer § xxxi. p. 270. The 
 nominative n-fpiro/ii), read in some 
 texts, is hardly translatable. For 6k- 
 Tafiiifpos 'eight days old' compare 
 Tpififiepos (M. Anton, iv. 50), Terpa^/it- 
 pos (Arist. Pol. iii. 15), jrcwflij/ifpoi 
 (Xen. Hell. vii. l. 14), hexniupos 
 (Thucyd. v. 26, 32), etc. The passages 
 quoted show that the words denote 
 properly not interval but duration, 
 so that 'on the eighth day' is not a 
 veryaccurate translation. The broken 
 days at the beginning and end are of 
 course counted in to make up the eight. 
 
 CK yevms 'IcrpaiJX] i. e. his parents 
 were not grafted into the covenant 
 people, but descended from the ori^- 
 nal stock. On the significance of 
 'Israel, Israelite,' as Implying the 
 privileges of the theocratic covenant, 
 see the note on Gal. vi. 16. 
 
 <t)v\rjs Beviafielv] As Benjamin gave 
 to the Israelites their first king, as 
 Benjamin alone was faithful to Judah 
 at the disruption, so also this tribe 
 had from the earliest times held the 
 post of honour in the armies of the 
 nation. 'After thee, Beivjamin' was 
 a battle-cry of Israel; Judges v. 14, 
 Hos. V. 8. The glory of the Benjamito 
 however did not end here. He re- 
 
III. 6] 
 
 EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 147 
 
 'E^paitav, KaTo. vofiov ^apuraio's, ^Kara ^\os Biwkwv 
 rriv eKKXntriav, kutol SiKaiocrvvriv ty]v eV vofxta yevofxevo^ 
 
 membered with pride that his fore- 
 father alone of the twelye patriarchs 
 was born in the land of promise (see 
 the words put into the mouth of Mor- 
 decai in Megill. Esth. iii. 4, quoted by 
 Wetstein). He would also recal the 
 great national deliverance wrought by 
 means of a Benjamite, which was com- 
 memorated in the yearly festival of 
 Purim. St Paul mentions his descent 
 from Benjamin again Bom. xi. i. He 
 doubtless derived his name 'Saul' di- 
 rectly or indirectly from the Benja- 
 mite king, to whom he himself refers 
 with marked emphasis (Acts xiii. 21). 
 At a very early date the prediction 
 in Jacob's blessing of Benjamin (Gen. 
 xlix. 27), 'In the morning he shall 
 devour the prey and at night he shall 
 divide the spoil,' was appUed to the 
 persecuting zeal and later conversion 
 of St Paul J Test, xii Patr. Benj. 11, 
 Tertull. adv. Marc. v. i , Hippol. Fragm. 
 50 (p. 140 Lagarde), Bphr. Syr. iv. pp. 
 1 14, 193, (comp. p. 288) ; see Galatians 
 p. 321. On the character of Saul of 
 Tarsus in connexion with the cha- 
 racter of the tribe see Stanley Jewish 
 Church II. p. 40. 
 
 "EjSpaior £^ 'E/3pa/(»»] As 'lovSmoc 
 is opposed to 'eXXijk in the New Tes- 
 tament (e.g. Rom. i. 16), so is 'E/Spmor 
 to 'EXXiji/ioTi;! (Acts vi. i). In other 
 words, while the former pair of terms 
 expresses a contrast of race and re- 
 ligion, the latter imphes difference of 
 language and manners. Within the 
 pale of the Jewish Church a man was 
 'lavbdios, who traced his descent from 
 Jacob and conformed to the religion 
 of his fathers, but he was not'E/SpaTos 
 also, unless he spoke the Hebrew 
 tongue and retained Hebrew customs : 
 see Trench N. T. Syn. § xxxix. p. 129. 
 Hence here, as in 2 Cor. xi. 22, 'He- 
 brew' implies something which is not 
 expressed in 'Israelite.' Though St 
 Paul was bom in Tarsus, he was yet 
 
 brought up under a great Hebrew 
 teacher in the Hebrew metropolis 
 (Acts xxii. 3); he spoke the 'Hebrew' 
 language fluently (xxL 40, xxii 2); he 
 quotes frequently from the Hebrew 
 Scriptures which he translates for him- 
 self, thus contrasting with his contem- 
 poraries the Jewish Philo and the 
 Christian writer of the Epistle to the 
 Hebrews, who commonly use the Hel- 
 lenistic version of the Seventy. The 
 tradition mentioned by Jerome on 
 Philem. 23 (vii. p. 762, ed. Vallarsi), 
 that St Paul's parents lived in the 
 Galilean town of Gischala and were 
 driven thence by the Roman invasion, 
 contains its own refutation in a mani- 
 fest anachronism ; but it seems to 
 illustrate St Paul's statement here, for 
 it may rest on a reminiscence of the 
 long residence of his family in those 
 parts. For the form of expression 
 'E/Spmos e| ''E^palav, 'a Hebrew and of 
 Hebrew ancestry', comp. Herod, ii. 143 
 TTipaiuv i< irtpu/iiof, Demosth. Andr. 
 p. 614 SovXovf cK bovKav KoKmv cavroS 
 jSfXrioui KOI ix ^(\tiov<ou, Polyb. ii. 59. 1 
 ov iiovov yeyovevm Tvpavvov oKKa Koi ix 
 rvp(iw&>v7re(/>uKe>'a(, with other passages 
 collected in Wetstein and Kypke. 
 
 Having thus enumerated his in- 
 herited privileges, the Apostle goes 
 onto speak of matters which depended 
 on his own personal choice. Here are 
 three topics of boasting, (i) As re- 
 gards law, he attached himself to the 
 sect which was strictest in its ritual 
 observance. (2) As regards zeal, he 
 had been as energetic as any of his 
 countrymen in persecuting the Church. 
 (3) As regards righteousness, he had 
 left nothing undone which the law 
 required. 
 
 vofiov] 'law,^ not 'the late'; for 
 though the Mosaic law is meant, yet 
 it is here regarded in the abstract, as 
 a principle of action, being coordinated 
 with iijXos and diKoiomaniv. For the 
 
 10 — 2 
 
148 
 
 EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 [111.7,8 
 
 a/uLefiTTTO^. ^[a'Wa] ariva nv jxoi KepBtj, Tavra i^yrifiai 
 lia Tov XpKTTOV ^ri/uLiav. ^dWa fxev ovv [««*] nyod/xai 
 TrdvTa triixiav eJvai Sid to vTrepe-xpv Trj^ yvwcreca^ Xpiar- 
 
 7. Snvd A401 ijv xipSri. 8. <IXX4 ii-tvovvfe [koJ] iJycrv/iMt. 
 
 distinction of v&jios and 6 voiios see 
 the notes on Gal. ii. 19, iv. 4, 5 21, 
 V. 18, vi. 13. 
 
 ^aptiraios] Acts Xxiii. 6 tyii iapi- 
 o-moc flfu vlos idpiaalav (wliere vios 
 iapiaaiav perhaps refers rather to his 
 teachers than to his ancestors, behig 
 a Hebraism like ' the sons of the pro- 
 phets'; comp. Amos vii. 14), xxvi. 5 
 Kara r^v aKpi^earaxi^v alpftriv rrjs ij/if- 
 Tf pas dprjiTKelas efijo-a ^apiaaios, xxii. 
 3 TTfTratSeu/icVoff Kara aKplfifiav tov 
 irarpaov ro/iou. Similarly St Paul calls 
 himself fijXmriji toSi' jrarpiKav irapa- 
 Soa-eav in Gal. i. 14 : see the note there. 
 
 6. Kara f^Xor k.t.X.] An expression 
 of intense irony, condemning while be 
 seems to exalt his former self: 'I was 
 zealous above them all ; I asserted my 
 principles with fire and sword ; I perse- 
 cuted, imprisoned, slew these infatuat- 
 ed Christians ; this was my great claim 
 to God's favour.' This condensed irony 
 is more common in the earlier epi- 
 stles: e.g. I Cor. iv. 8, 2 Cor. xi. i, 7, 
 19. The correct reading is f^Xor (not 
 f^Xov), for which form see Winer 
 § ix. p. 76, A. Buttmann p. 20. In 
 Clem. Kom. §§ 3, 4, 5, 6, where the 
 word occurs frequently, the masculine 
 and neuter seem to bo interchanged 
 without any law. 
 
 SuaKav] The references to his per- 
 secution of the Church are frequent in 
 St Paul : see the note on Gal. i. 13 Kaff 
 irrtppoK^v fSiaKov Tfjv (KKKri<riav tov 
 
 &10V, 
 
 TTjv iv vifim] added to qualify and 
 explain Stxaioo-vi/i))'; 'Such righteous- 
 ness as consists iu law, in obedience to 
 formal precepts', but not the true 
 righteousness : see vor. 9. Here iv 
 voiuf is used without the article for 
 the same reason as in ver, 5. 
 
 yfviiifvoi a^f/iirroc] 'showing my- 
 
 ie(f hlamtless', ie. 'I omitted no ob- 
 servance however trivial', for iuii<t>t(r- 
 6ai applies to sins of omission, 
 
 ariva K.r.X.] 'All sucb things which 
 I used to count up as distinct items 
 with a miserly greed and reckon to my 
 credit — these I have massed together 
 under one general head as loss'. This 
 paraphrase is intended to bring out, 
 though with a necessary exaggeration, 
 the idea faintly expressed by the 
 change from the plural (ittpSi;) to the 
 singular {(tjiilav). Otherwise there 
 would be a natural tendency to make 
 both plural or both singular : comp. 
 Menand. Mon. 301 (Meineke iv. p. 348) 
 Kepdos vovripov (r]p,iav a(\ <f>epei with 
 ib. 496 (p. 354) TO luKpa Kipirj fijfiiac 
 fityoKai (}>ep€i. For ariva, denoting 
 'the class of things', see the notes on 
 Gal. iv. 24, V. 19. 
 
 Bia TOV XptoToj'] '/or Christ', i.e. as 
 it is explained below (ver. 8), Iva Xpi- 
 o-Tov KcpSiJau. To this end it was ne- 
 cessary first to renounce all other 
 claims to righteousness : see especially 
 Gal. V. 4. 
 
 8. oKXa liiv ovv k.t.X.] ' nay more- 
 over I do count all things etc' ; see 
 Winer § liii. p. 552. This combi- 
 nation of particles introduces the 
 present statement as an amendment 
 and extension of the former. The 
 advance consists iu two points ; ( i } The 
 substitution of the present for the 
 perfect (>iyou/iai for ijyriiuu); (2) The 
 expansion of raCra into iravTo. 
 
 81a TO imcpixov k.t.X.] Tho prepo- 
 sition may mean either 'for the sake 
 of (as in 8ia tov Xpiarbv above and 
 fli' ov below); or, as the sense of 
 iiTtpixov suggests, 'by reason of, sig- 
 nifying that the surpassing worth of 
 this knowledge eclipses and annihi- 
 lates all other gains in comparison; 
 
III. 9] 
 
 EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIAN8. 
 
 149 
 
 Tou 'lf](rou TOv Kvpiov fxov, di ov rd Travra i^tjfxicodriv 
 Kal nyovfxai (TKv^aXa, 'iva XpKTTOv KepZ^aw ^ kui evpeddo 
 ev avTw fit] e^Mu ifxrjv ZiKuioavvriv Trjv e'/c vofiov, dWa 
 
 as 2 Cor. iii. 10 ou SeSo^aarai to 8eSo- 
 ^atTiifvou iv rovro) r^ M^pet ttvtKtp 
 TTJt VTTf p/SaXXovci); do^rjs. 
 TOV Kvpfov /lov] See the note on 
 
 i.3- 
 
 TO iravra (^i;/xiiudi;v] ' I suffered the 
 confiscation, was mulcted, of all things 
 together.' For ri irivTa, which is 
 somewhat stronger than navra, comp. 
 Bom. Tiii. 32, xi. 36, i Cor. viii. 6, etc. 
 
 o-Kv/SaXa] The word seems to sig- 
 nify generally ' refuse', being applied 
 most frequently in one sense or other 
 to food, as m Plut. Mor. p. 352 d irepir- 
 Ta/m 8e Tpo(j>jjs icai trKv^aKov ouSev ayvov 
 oi58e Kadapov e'ori" €< Se Tav ireptrrto- 
 Itarav tpia (cai Xa^vai koX Tpixfs <tai 
 onxfs ava<f)vovTiu. The two significa- 
 tions most common are : (i) ' Excre- 
 ment,' the portion of food rejected by 
 the body, as not possessing nutritive 
 qualities: e.g. Joseph. B. J. v. 13. 7. 
 This sense is frequent in medical wri- 
 ters. (2) 'The refuse or leavings of 
 a feast,' the food thrown away from 
 the table : e. g. Leon. Alex. 30 {Anthol. 
 II. p. 196) oSc anobemvMov ycvaop.fvos 
 o-itti/SaXov, Aristo 2 (i6.II. p. 258)a€t7n'oi' 
 (Tvxvbv aiTO o'KV^aKcav, Adesp. 1 3 (*"&• iii- 
 p.253)cppi<^d(B ^rjpoXs <f>vp6iievov (TKvfia- 
 Xotr, Q. Msec. 8 {ib. 11. p. 238), Adesp. 
 386 (^. III. p. 233) ; and metaphori- 
 cally Heges. 4 (16. I. p. 254) f'l d\os 
 
 ^fiiPptOTOv dvrjveyKavTO o'ayrjve'ls avbpa 
 irokvKkavrov i/avriXiTjr iTKv^a\ov. So 
 again a-nv^aXuriia, Pseudo-Phocyl. 144 
 fofS aXXov irapa dairot (bjii <TKv\Pa- 
 Xurpa rpajrt'fijr. 
 
 As regards derivation, it is now 
 generally connected with a-xap, incardc 
 (Benfey JVurzel. i. p. 628, n. p. 172, 
 Lobeck Pathol, p. 92), This deriva- 
 tion countenances the former of the 
 two senses given above; but Suidas 
 explains the word, to tow kvo-i jSoXXo- 
 U€vov Kvo'i'/SoXoi' Ti av (comp. Etym. 
 
 Mag. p. 719, S3); and so Pott, Etym. 
 Forsch. II. p. 295, taking <tkv- to repre- 
 sent is Kvvas and comparing cxopa- 
 Ki^eip. This account of the word seems 
 at least as probable as the other ; but 
 whether correct or not, it would ap- 
 pear to have been the popular deriva- 
 tion, and from this circumstance the 
 second of the two meanings would 
 become more prominent than the 
 first. 
 
 At all events this meaning, which is 
 well supported by the passages quoted, 
 is especially appropriate here. The 
 Judaizers spoke of themselves as 
 banqueters seated at the Father's 
 table, of Gentile Christians as dogs 
 greedily snatching up the refuse meat 
 which fell therefrom. St Paul has 
 reversed the image. The Judaizers 
 are themselves the dogs (ver. 2) ; the 
 meats served to the sons of God are 
 spiritual meats ; the ordinances, which 
 the formalists value so highly, are the 
 mere refuse of the feast. 
 
 The earnest reiteration of St Paul's 
 language here expresses the intensity 
 of his desire to produce conviction: 
 Kepbrf, Ktpbriaui — fjyripm, ijyoufiat, ifyoC- 
 fim — (iiiiiav, (rip,iav, i^ijpuidrpi—^ia, 81a, 
 Sm' — iravTO, to navra — Xpiarov, Xpt(r- 
 ToC, XpiaTov ; see above i. 9, 14, 27, 
 ii. 2. 
 
 9. €«pe6i5] ' mat/ be found' ; per- 
 haps at the great day of revelation 
 (2 Cor. V. 3), perhaps more generally 
 (I Cor. iv. 2). For the frequent use 
 of this word in Aramaised Greek see 
 the note on Gal. ii. 17. 
 
 iv avTo] 'in Christ', as part of 
 Christ, as a member of His body. It 
 is only by becoming one with Christ, 
 that Christ'srighteousness can become 
 our righteousness. 
 
 ilifiv diKoioavviiv] 'Any righteous- 
 ness that I may have or not have.' 
 
ISO 
 
 BPISTLB TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 [III. lo 
 
 Triv ha ma-Tetoi XpicrTOv, rrjv bk Qeov ZiKaioavvnv eVi 
 Tt] TTia-Tei, "tov yvwvai avrov Kai t>)i/ ^vvafiiv Ttji dva- 
 <rTa<reftJS avTOV Kai KOivtoviav [t<3v] -rradriixaTtav avTOv, 
 
 It is iiirjv, not TTiv ifi^v ; for the latter 
 would seem to assume the existence 
 of such personal righteousness. Comp. 
 Rom. z. 3 dyvoovvT€t yap tiji' tov Qeov 
 SiKaiotrvvrjv KaX Tfjv liiav [SiKOioirvvriv] 
 {^rjrovvTts trrrjaai TJj diKoioavvj] tov 
 Qfov ovx VTrfTayrjaav. St Paul is ap- 
 plying and extending the language of 
 the Old Testament: comp. Ps. Ixxi. i6, 
 Is. Ixir. 6. 
 
 T171' «K vo/iov] See above ver. 6; 
 comp. Gal. ii. 16 — 21, iiL 10—12, 21, 
 Rom. iii. 21—31, iv. 13, 14, ix. 30—32, 
 X. 4, s. 
 
 dWa K.r.X.] Hero 8ih TriVrnor Xpicr- 
 TOV is opposed to c'k vofiov, and ex 
 Otov to c'/u)i>, of the preceding clausa 
 
 8ta ma-Tfas XpioroC] ' through faith 
 in Christ' The ix of the former 
 clause is changed into dia here, be- 
 cause faith is only the means, not 
 the source, of justification : see the 
 note on Oal. ii. 16. 
 
 cVi T5 jrioTti] ' on the condition qf 
 faith' ; as Acts iii. 16. The article (rg 
 jn'oT«) is used here, because nitn-eas 
 has gone before; ' the faith thus sup- 
 posed'. 
 
 10. ' That I may know Him. And 
 when I speak of knowing Him, I mean, 
 that I may feel the power of His resur- 
 rection; but to feel this, it is first 
 necessary that I should share His suf- 
 ferings.' The essence of knowing Christ 
 consists in knowing the power of His 
 resurrection ; hence the words xai r^v 
 dvvaiuv T^c dvaardaeas ojItov are added 
 byway of explanation. But these words 
 again suggest another thought; no 
 one can participate in His resurrection, 
 who has not first participated in His 
 death. Hence a further addition xal 
 Koivavlav t&v TradtniaTav aurov, which 
 logically precedes ttjv din/aiuv k.tX., 
 as appears from the explanation fol- 
 lowing, <Tvjtiu>p4>iC6iuvot r^ davara 
 aiiroC, ei ttuc k.tX. 
 
 TOV yvavai\ not simply 'know', but 
 'recognise, feel, appropriate'. Onyiiwir- 
 Ktiv see the notes to Oal. iii. 7, iv. 9, 
 This intense sense of yivda-Kdv, and 
 even of tlbivai. (e.g. i Thess. v. 12), is 
 the more common in Biblical Greek, 
 because both words are used in the 
 Lxx as renderings of VV which fre- 
 quently has this sense. 
 
 Trfv Sitia/uv k.t.X.] ' the power <f 
 His resurrection' ; as the assurance 
 of immortality (Rom. viiL 11, i Cor. 
 XV. 14 sq.), as the triumph over sin 
 and the pledge of justification (Rom. 
 iv. 24, 25), as asserting the dignity and 
 enforcing the claims of the human body 
 (i Cor. vi. 13 — 15, Phil. iii. 21) ; thus 
 quickening and stimulating the whole 
 moral and spiritual being (Rom. vi 4 
 sq., GaL ii. 20, Ephes. ii. 5, Col. ii 12}. 
 On this see Westcott's Gospel of the 
 Resurrection iL § 31 sq. 
 
 Koi Koivaviav k.t.X.] The participa- 
 tion in Christ's sufiierings partly fol- 
 lows upon and partly precedes the 
 power of His resurrection. It follows, 
 as the practical result on our life; 
 it precedes, as leadingupto the fulland 
 final appreciation of this power. In 
 this latter aspect it is taken up in 
 the explanatory clause which comes 
 immediately after, erv/:i/iop(/)i^o/xeyaf 
 K.r.X. For the expression rrjv Koipa- 
 viav K.T.X. comp. 2 Cor. i. 5 iteppurfv€i 
 Ta naBrjpaTa tov Xpiarov fit ij/iSi le.r.X., 
 I Pet. iv. 1 2 KoiyavelTt TOis tov Xpurrov 
 
 TraB^naa-tv, Col. i. 24, Polyc. PhiL 9 
 irapa Ta Kvpi^ ^ Kai crvvinoBov, See 
 also for the idea the passages quoted in 
 the next note. The ttjv before Kouiaviav 
 in the received text, besides being 
 deficient in authority, severs the close 
 connexion between ' the power of His 
 resurrection' and 'the participation 
 in His sufferings.' 
 
 irv/i/iop<]l>i^Ofin/or k.t.X.] See Rom. 
 vi. 5 ^' Y^P oviKJivToi yfyovafJitv r^ 
 
III. II, 12] 
 
 EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 ISI 
 
 (rvfxixop(pi^o}ievo^ Tip 6avaTw avrov, "e'l Trio? kutuvt^- 
 aru) ets Ttiv e^avda-raa-iv Ttjv e'/c veKpwv. "ov'x^ on ijSt] 
 
 OfioKUfiart roC Oavarov avroC, aXXii /col 
 rijs avacratreas iaoficBa, 2 Cor. iv. lo 
 iravTOTt T^v peKpoiaiv rov ^Irjcrov Iv tw 
 irdiuiTi TrepKpfpovTfS, iva koX i] ^o)^ roG 
 'Iijtrou (jiavepaBj iv rfi fli/ijTg trapxi i;/x<Si/ 
 k.tA.; comp. Rom. viii. 17, 2 Tim. ii. 1 1, 
 12. The conformity with the sufferings 
 of Christ implies not only the endurance 
 of persecution for His name, but all 
 pangs and all afiSictions undergone in 
 the struggle against sin either within 
 or without. The agony of Gethsemane, 
 not less than the agony of Calvary, 
 will be reproduced however faintly in 
 the faithful servant of Christ. For 
 sviiiiop(t>iCofjLevos see the detached note 
 on iiop<j)fi and (rxvf^ above p. 1 30. 
 
 « TTias (coTapTijo-col ' if SO be I may 
 attain.' The Apostle states not a 
 positive assurance but a modest hope, 
 for ei mos see Acts xxvii. 12 (optat.), 
 Rom. i. 10 (fut.), xi. 14 (fut. or conj.). 
 Here Karavrija-a) is probably the con- 
 junctive, as el KoX KaroKa^a follows 
 immediately. The conjunctive with «', 
 barely tolerated in Attic prose (tliough 
 less rare in poetry), is hardly more 
 common in the Greel: Testament. 
 The only decisive instance seems to 
 be c( Koi KardKa^a) below, ver. 12. 
 In other passages (as Luke iz. 13, 
 I Cor. ix. II, xiv. 5, i Thess. v. 10, 
 Rev. xi. 5) the possibility of error or 
 the existence of various readings ren- 
 ders it more or less doubtful. 
 
 Trjv t^ava(rTaiTiv K.T.X.] The ' resur- 
 rection from the dead ' is the final 
 resurrection of the righteous to a 
 new and glorified life. This meaning, 
 which the context requires, is implied 
 by the form of expression. The general 
 resurrection of the dead, whether 
 
 good or bad, is 1} dvaarains Tav vexpav 
 (e.g. I Cor. XV. 42) ; on the other hand 
 the resurrection of Christ and of those 
 who rise with Christ is generally 
 [ij] dvairravis [i|] eK vexpav (Luke XX. 
 35, Acts iv. 2, 1 Pet. i 3). The former 
 
 includes both the dvaarairis Carjs and 
 the dvdiTTaais Kpi<Teo)s (Joh, V. 29); the 
 latter is confined to the dvda-raiTic 
 Carjc, The received reading rtiii' vcKpuv 
 for Tiji» (K vfKpov, besides being feebly 
 supported, disregards this distinction. 
 Here the expression is further in- 
 tensified by the substitution of e^- 
 
 avaaraa-is for dvdirTaa-is, the WOrd not 
 
 occurring elsewhere in the New Tes- 
 tament. 
 
 12. In the following verses, though 
 St Paul speaks of himself, his language 
 seems really to be directed against the 
 antinomian spirit, which in its rebound 
 from Jewish formalism perverted 
 liberty into license. It is necessary to 
 supply a corrective to such false infer- 
 ences drawn from the doctrine of grace 
 broadly stated. This he does by point- 
 ing to his own spiritual insecurity, his 
 own earnest strivings, his own onward 
 progress. ' To continue in sin that grace 
 may abound' gains no countenance 
 either from his doctrine or from his 
 example. Having thus prepared the 
 way, he in the i8th verse directly 
 condemns those professed followers 
 who thus dragged his teaching in the 
 dust. See the introduction p. 70. 
 
 12 — 16. ' Do not mistake me, I 
 hold the language of hope, not of 
 assurance. I have not yet reached 
 the goal ; I am not yet made perfect 
 But I press forward in the race, eager 
 to grasp the prize, forasmuch as Christ 
 also has grasped ma My brothers, 
 let other men vaunt their security. 
 Such is not my language. I do not 
 consider that I have the prize already 
 in my grasp. This, and this only, is 
 my rule. Forgetting the landmarks 
 already passed and straining every 
 nerve and muscle in the onward race, 
 I press forward ever towards the 
 goal, that I may win the prize of my 
 heavenly rest whereunto God has call- 
 ed me in Christ Jesus. Let ew therefore, 
 
152 
 
 EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 [III. 13, 14 
 
 eXafiov rj tjBtj TeTeXeiufjiai, Sicokid Be ei kui KaraXafiw, 
 id)' at Kal KareXijfKpdriv vtto Xpia-Tov. ^^dSe\<poi, iyca 
 ifiavTOV ov Xoyi^Ofxai KareiXritpevaf ^^ev he, to. juLev ott'i- 
 <ru) einXavdavofxevo^ TOts Se efxirpoa'dev eireKTeivofxevo^ 
 
 who have put away childish things, 
 who boast that we are men in Christ, 
 so resolve. Then, if in any matter 
 we lose our way, God will at length 
 reveal this also to us. Only lot us 
 remember one thing. Our footsteps 
 must not swerve from the line in 
 which we have hitherto trodden.' 
 
 12. ovx oTi K.r.X.] The change of 
 tense is not accidental. The aorist 
 tKafiov points to a past epoch, to 
 which i(iifu<idr]v, KaTeXijii(f)6j]v, also 
 refer ; ' not as though by my conversion 
 
 1 did at once attain'. The perfect T-tre- 
 Xcim/tat describes his present state; 
 'not as though I were now already 
 perfected.' For ovx °" compare 2 
 Cor. iii. 5, vii. 9, 2 Thess. iii. 9, and 
 below iv. II, 17. 
 
 diuKo) K.r.X.] For the connexion of 
 diciKfiv and KardKaii^aveiv see Herod, 
 ix. 5^ diiuKrcoi nVi els o KaraXa/t- 
 <f)B(VT€s K.T.X., Lucian Hermot. 77 
 
 ffixvrcpoi TrapoTToXv hiaKOvres ov Kari- 
 Xa0oi<: compare LXX Bxod. xv. 9, 
 Bccles. xi. 10. For the meaning of 
 these two words see the note on eVex- 
 rtivoiiivos ver. 14 ; for the conjunctive 
 KaraXa/3(a, the note on Karavr^a ver. I o. 
 f<i) y] may mean either (i) 'Where- 
 fore, whereunto,' thus fulfilling Ood'g 
 purpose; or (2) ' Because,' thus fulfil- 
 ling his ovm duty. In this second sense 
 €0' ^ is apparently used Rom. v. 12, 
 
 2 Cor. V. 4. The former meaning seems 
 more appropriate here, though the 
 latter is better supported by St Paul's 
 usage elsewhere. On the different 
 senses of (<^ ^ see Fritzsche on Rom. 
 L p. 299. Others, as the English Ver- 
 sion, understand an antecedent, xaro- 
 Xi^ia cKcTvo t<t>' ^ (comp. Luke v. 25) ; 
 but KaraXa/3u, like KareiXi;<^cVai below, 
 seems to be used absolutely, as ifhciffov 
 
 wd Mito) ftlaQ are used. 
 
 13. abe\(l)oi} 'my brothers,' with 
 a view of arresting attention ; see the 
 notes on Gal. iii. 15, tl i, 18. 
 
 eyta cfiavTov] 'Facile hoc alii de 
 Paulo existimare possent,' says Bengel. 
 This however seems hardly to be the 
 point of the expressioa St Paul is 
 not contrasting bis own estimate of 
 himself with other people's estimate 
 of him, but bis estimate of himself 
 with others' estimate of themselves. 
 He is in fact protesting against the 
 false security, theantinomian reckless- 
 ness, which others deduced from the 
 doctrine of faith : see the notes on 
 TEX«ot ver. 15, and on w. 12, 19, and 
 the introduction p. 70. 
 
 14. Ii> 8e] This usage may be illus- 
 trated by the classical expression 
 Svoiv Barepov. It is difficult to say 
 whether h is a nominative or an 
 accusative. If (with Winer § Ixvi. p. 
 774) we may compare 2 Cor. vi. 13, It is 
 the latter. 
 
 TO. onloa] i.e. the portion of the 
 course already traversed. Compare 
 Lucian Column. 12 ol6v rt kqI nri 
 Tois yv/j.vtKo'is ayatriv viro rav Spofuav 
 yiyvcTat' xaKri yap o iiiv ayaBos Spoiiivs 
 Ttjs tfo-TrXijyoj fvBiis KaroTmrovinjr, /loiwi" 
 rov irpoartii i^iep.evos Ktxi rrfv diavoiai' 
 aTTOTeivas irpos to rtppa K.r.X. 
 
 iiTficTfivopxvos]'superextenxui: ocn- 
 lus manum, manus pedem prsevertit 
 et trahit,' is Bengel's paraphrase. The 
 metaphor may possibly be derived from 
 the chariot races in the Circus, as the 
 epistle was written from Rome. On 
 this supposition the meaning of cV«trci- 
 vop.fvos has been aptly illustrated by 
 Virgil's 'Instant verbere torto Et 
 proni dant lora ' {Georg. iiL 106). To 
 this view duuxo) lends some support, 
 for it is frequently said of charioteers 
 (e.g. Soph. El. 738); but all the terms 
 
III. IS] 
 
 EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 153 
 
 Kara (tkottov diwKa) eU to 
 ToD Qeou iv Xpia-rw 'Irjcrou 
 (ppovtofxev Kal e'l ti eVejOws 
 
 15. TOVTO 
 
 used are equally appropriate to the 
 foot-race, and there seems no reason 
 for departing from St Paul's usual 
 metaphor. Moreover the not looking 
 back, which showed a right temper 
 in a runner (Lucian 1. c), would be 
 fatal to the charioteer ; see Themist. 
 
 Oral. XV. p. 196 B avSpi 8e i^vioxoiv- 
 Ti. . .avayiaf . . .to /lev rrpoaa /irj nam opau 
 oiriaa Se act T€Tpa<f)dai rfj yvdjiji irpbs 
 Toiis StoKovras (c.r.X. The word occurs 
 Iren. i. 11. 3 (comp. i. 2. 2). 
 
 els TO /SpajSeioK] ' unto the prize' ; 
 comp. I Cor. ix. 24. This preposition 
 is used, because the prize marks the 
 position of the goal The irrl of the 
 common text is an obvious substitution 
 for a more difficult reading. 
 
 rijs ava KXijo-fmi] ' our heavenward 
 calling' ; so Philo Plant. § 6 p. 333 m 
 jrpos yap ro 6eiov ava KaXiladai Bifus 
 Toil in avTov KarairvewdivTas, comp. 
 Heb. iii i. Tho words iv Xpia-ra 'Iijo-oS 
 must be taken with xXro-eiix; see 
 I Cor. vii. 22, I Pet. v. 10. 
 
 I5> OCOl OVV Tf'XflOl] The TtXftOt 
 
 are 'grown men' as opposed to children ; 
 e.g. I Cor. xiv. 20, Ephes. iv. 13, Heb. 
 V. 14. They are therefore those who 
 have passed out of the rudimentary 
 discipline of ordinances (Gal. iv. 3,4), 
 who have put away childish things 
 (i Cor. xiii. 10 — 12), who have assimied 
 the Apostle's ground respecting the 
 law. The rcXfioi in fact are the same 
 with the nvfvpaTiKoi : comp. i Cor. 
 ii, 6 with iiL i. But these men, who 
 were proud of their manhood, who 
 boasted their spiritual discernment, 
 were often regardless of the scruples 
 of others and even lax in their own 
 lives. Hence the stress which St 
 Paul here lays on the duty of moral 
 and spiritual progress, as enforced by 
 his own example. Thus in Sa-oi WXctoi, 
 ' all yre who attained mr manhood, our 
 
 '^ocroi OVV reXeioi, touto 
 (ppoveiTe, Kal touto 6 Qeos 
 
 (fipovoSnev. 
 
 independence, in Christ', there is the 
 same reproachful irony as in i Cor. 
 viii. I olbafiai oTt navTts yvaaiv fj^o/iei', 
 in Bom. xv. i ijiiels oi Swarol, and 
 possibly also in Gal. vi. i vpeU oi 
 nvcvp.ariKoi. The epithet rcX«o( seems 
 to have been especially affected by 
 the party both at this time and later ; 
 comp. Barnab. 4 yevtipida nvfvpariKoi, 
 ycviipeSa vaos reKcws r^ 6'^, Iren. 
 i. 6. 4 iavTovs 8e intpv^ovai, reXeiovs 
 aTTOKoXovvTes Kal OTreppara tKKoyrjs 
 (comp. § 3, where oj reXt loraroi is said 
 in irony, and see also L 13. 5, i. 18. i, iii. 
 1 3. 5), Clem. Alex. Peed. i. 6 (p. 1 28 Pot- 
 ter) ipol 8e Koi Oavpa^eiv eneuriv Siras 
 trcfjas reXeiovs Tives ToXpatTL KoKelv Ka\ 
 yvaoTiKovs, virep Tov anoaroKov ^po' 
 povvres, ^fmoriovpevoi re Kal <j>pvaTT6pevoi 
 K.T.X., Hippol. Hcer. v. 8 ovSels Tovrav 
 T6av pvoTijpioiV aKpoaTT/s yiyovev tl p^ 
 ^ovot ol yfuo-TiKoi rcX«0(, not without 
 a reference to the secondary sense of 
 the word, ' instructed in the mysteries.' 
 See Clem. Horn. iii. 29 reXeias c'x^ai- 
 i/eiK TOV pviTTiKov XdyoK . . . Tot t 787 
 Te\flois t(\>ri. 
 
 TOVTO (ftpovapev] ' let US iMve this 
 mind', i.e. let us make it our rule to 
 forget the past and press ever for- 
 ward. 
 
 Kcu. fi n eTepas k.t.X.] ' Then, if only 
 you hold this fundamental principle, 
 if progress is indeed your rule ; though 
 you are at fault on any subjeet, God 
 will reveal this also to you' ; comp. 
 
 Joh. vii. 17 idv Tis BfXji TO BfXrjpa 
 avTov iroielv, yvmareTai jrepi tt/s 8t8a)(qs 
 TTorepov £K TOV &eov ioTiv k.t.X. Here 
 cTcpas seems to have the meaning 
 ' amiss ' ; see the note on Gal. i. 6. It 
 may however be 'otherwise,' in refer- 
 ence to TOUTO (j)pov£pev ; in which case 
 etn will mean ' in any minor point' : ' If 
 you are sound at the core, God will 
 remove the superficial blemishes.' 
 
IS4 
 
 EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 [III. i6, 17 
 
 ^'''Luv/jufxriTai fxov jivea-de, dBe\(poi, kui (TKOTreiTe 
 
 Comp. Herm. Vis. iii. 13 eav n Se 
 Sen, diroKoKvcjidi^acTal aoi. 
 
 16. jrKfjv els o k.t.X.] ' only we must 
 walk by the same rule whereunto we 
 attained.' What is meant by this same 
 rule 1 Is it (i) The rule of moral 
 progress 1 or (2) The rule of faith as 
 opposed to works 1 In the former case, 
 the words would simply enforce the 
 preceding roO to (jipopw/iev ; in the latter, 
 they are added as a parting caution 
 against 'the dogs, the base workers, 
 the concision.' The latter seems pre- 
 ferable, as on the whole the reference 
 to the Judaizers is the more probable, 
 both because St Paul's earnestness 
 would naturally prompt him to recur 
 to this subject, and because the 
 phrase is elsewhere used in the 
 same connexion; Gal. vi. 16 o<rot t^ 
 Kavovi TOVTta <TToi)(^irov(nv, comp. T. 25. 
 The words after otoix"" in the re- 
 ceived text {<av6tii, TO avro <j)povciv) 
 are interpolated from Gal. vi. 16, 
 Phil. ii. 2. Of these kovovi is a correct 
 gloss, while to awTo cjtpovflv expresses 
 an idea alien to the context. Though 
 nXfjv is now generally connected with 
 TrXeoi;, irXeiv, as if it signiffod 'more 
 than, beyond' (e. g. Klotz Devar. n. 
 p. 724, Curtius Griech. Etym. p. 253), 
 the etymology which connects it with 
 ireXar seems to offer a better explana- 
 tion of its usage. It will then signify 
 ' besides,' and hence, in passages like 
 the present, ' apart from this,' ' setting 
 this aside ' ; so that it is conveniently 
 translated ' only ' : comp. i. 18, iv. 14. 
 In this case it has an accusatival form, 
 like hUrfv, iirliCKrfv, or the Latin ' clam,' 
 ' palam,' etc. For the dative of the 
 rule or direction (t^ avT&) see the 
 notes on Gal. v. 16, 25, vi. 16. The 
 Infinitive aToixetK is equivalent to an 
 emphatic imperative; see Fritzsche 
 Rom. la. p. 85, and "Winer § xliii. 
 p. 398. For <i>6avtiv fls, ' to reach 
 
 to ' see Dan. iv. 19, Rom. ix. 31. 
 
 17 — 21. ' My brethren, vie with each 
 other in imitating me, and observe 
 those whose walk of life is fashioned 
 after our example. This is the only 
 safe test. For there are many, of 
 whom I told you often and now tell 
 you again even in tears, who profess- 
 ing our doctrine walk not in our 
 footsteps. They are foes to the cross 
 of Christ; they are doomed to per- 
 dition ; they make their appetites their 
 god; they glory in their shame; they 
 are absorbed in earthly things. Not 
 such is our life. In heaven we have even 
 now our country, our home; and from 
 heaven hereafter we look in patient 
 hope for a deliverer, even the Lord 
 Jesus Christ, who shall change the 
 fleeting fashion of these bodies— the 
 bodies of our earthly humiliation — so 
 that they shall take the abiding form 
 of His own body — the body of His 
 risen glory : for such is the working 
 of the mighty power whereby He is 
 able to subdue all things alike unto 
 Himself.' 
 
 17. Suv/ii/iijTm jiov] i.e. 'Vie with 
 each other in imitating me,' ' one and 
 all of you imitate me' : so (rv/i/u/^ctirdai 
 Plat. Polit. p. 274 D. Compare i Cor. 
 iv. 16, xi. I, I Thess. i. 6, 2 Thess. iii. 
 
 7, 9) «>"• eavTOVS rvJTOv Safuv v/iiK fit rh 
 
 luiielirBai ^fias. In I Cor. xL I the 
 injunction lufuiToi /lov ylveaBe is ad- 
 dressed, as here, to the party of re- 
 action against Judaism. 
 
 o-KOTTf iTt] ' mark and follow,' not as 
 generally ' mark and avoid', e.g. Rom. 
 xvi. 17. Under ^pJas are included 
 Timotheus, Epaphroditus, and other 
 faithful companions known to the 
 Philippians. Shrinking from the ego- 
 tism of dwelling on his own personal ex- 
 ample, St Paul passes at once from the 
 singular (jim) to the plural (^/iSr). 
 
 18. iroXXoi yap] If the view which 
 
III. i81 
 
 EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIAN8. 
 
 IS5 
 
 TOus ovTU) irepnrarovvra'i Kudtos e^^re tvttov »;/ias. 
 
 iroXKoi yap 7repnraT0V(riv, oi/s ttoXXukk eXejov v/uuv, 
 
 vvv oe Kai K\aiiov Xeyia, tovs e-xOpov^ toO (TTavpou tou 
 
 I have taken be correct, the persons 
 here denounced are not the Judaizing^ 
 teachers, but the antinomian re- 
 actionists. This Tiew is borne out by 
 the parallel expression, Bom. xvi. 
 l8 r^ Kvpiff i^fiuv XpiOT^ ov dovXcu- 
 ovcti) ciKKa TJ iavrav KoiKlif, where 
 the same persons seem to be in- 
 tended; for they are described as 
 creating divisions and offences (ver. 
 17), as holding plausible language 
 (ver. 18), as professing to be wise 
 beyond others (ver. 19) and yet not 
 innocent in their wisdom; this last 
 reproach being implied in the words 
 
 BiKw hi viias(TO<t>ovs itvai els to dyadov 
 oKcpaiovc fie tit TO KOKov, They appear 
 therefore to belong to the same party 
 to which the passages vL i — 23, xiv. 
 I — x\. 6, of that epistle are chiefly 
 addressed. For the profession of 
 ' wisdom ' in these faithless disciples 
 of St Paul see i Cor. i 17 sq., iv. 18 
 sq., viii. i sq., x. 15. Compare the 
 note on reKewi above. 
 
 irepiiraTovaiv] An adverbial clause, 
 such as ovK opdws, might have been 
 expected : but in the earnestness of 
 expression the sentence is uninter- 
 rupted, the qualifying idea being for 
 the moment dropped. It reappears 
 in a different form in the words roiis 
 cx^paviK.r.X. attached to thedependent 
 sentence ois jroWaxis eXeyov x.r.X. 
 
 vir fie] ' but now ', for the evil has 
 grown meanwhile. 
 
 Kai xXaiui/] The stress of St Paul's 
 grief would lie in the fact, that they 
 degraded the true doctrine of Uberty, 
 so as to minister to their profligate 
 and worldly living. They made use 
 of his name, but did not follow his 
 example. 
 
 Toils txSpovs Tov iTTavpov] See Polyc. 
 Phil. § 12. These words do not in 
 themselves decide what persons are 
 
 hero denounced; for the enemies of 
 the cross may be twofold; {1) Doc- 
 trinal. The Judaizers, who deny the 
 eflScacy of the cross and substitute 
 obedience to a formal code in its 
 place; oomp. Gal. v. 11, vi. 12, 14. 
 (2) Practical. The Antinomians, who 
 refuse to conform to the cross (iii. 10, 
 2 Cor. 1. s, 6) and live a life of self- 
 indulgence; comp. I Cor. i. 17. If 
 the view, which I have adopted and 
 which the context seems to require, 
 is correct, the latter are here meant ; 
 see the last note. In the passages, 
 Polyc. Phil. 7 OS ov ^17 «>/ioXoyg to 
 liapripiov tov aravpov, Ignat. Trail. 
 1 1 €CJ>aivovTO av KKaboi tov trravpov, 
 the reference is apparently to doce- 
 tism, as denying the reality of the 
 passion. But belonging to a later 
 generation, these passages throw no 
 light on St Paul's meaning here. 
 
 19. TO rAof aira\tia\ Comp. Bom. 
 TL 21 ToTeKos (Ktivav 6dvaTos: see also 
 2 Cor. xi 15, Hebr. vi. 8. 
 
 o Seos ^ KoiXi'a] See Bom. xvi. 18 
 already quoted: comp. Seneca de 
 Ben^. vii. 26 ' Alius abdomini servit', 
 Eur. Cycl. 33s 6vw...t^ ^eyiorp yatrrpl 
 TJfii Saiiiovav' as Tov/iiritiv yt Koi 
 ipayeiv Tov(j> ^p.epav Zeiis ovtos dvBpa- 
 TTouri To'uTi <r<i><^po(nv. 80 in attacks 
 on Epicurean ethics ' venter' commonly 
 appears as the type of sensual appe- 
 tites generally, e. g. Cic. Nat. Deor. 1. 
 40, Senec. Vit. Beat. ix. 4, xiv. 3. The 
 Apostle elsewhere reminds these lax 
 brethren, that ' the kingdom of God 
 is not eating and drinking,* Bom. xiv. 
 17; comp. I Cor. viii. 8. The self- 
 indulgence, which wounds the tender 
 conscienpe of others and turns Uberty 
 into license, is here condemned. 
 
 ij 8o|a icr.X.] The unfettered liberty, 
 of which they boast, thus perverted 
 becomes their deepest degradation. 
 
156 
 
 BPISTLB TO THE PHILIPPIAN8. 
 
 [III. 19, 20 
 
 Xpia-Tov, ''wi/ TO re'Aos aTrwXeia, tSv 6 6e6i >; KOiXia, 
 Kai >j Sopa iv Trj a\a-)({)vr} avrSv, 01 ra eTriyeia <j)po- 
 povpre^. '"nfiwv yap ro TroXirevfia iv ovpavoTi virdp- 
 ■yeiy eP ov Kai a-torfjpa aTreKdexofxeda Kvpiov 'lt](roup Xpio"- 
 
 10. rinCiv Si to' iroWreu/to. 
 
 Comp. Hosea vii. 8 t^v Ba^av airav 
 tit aTifilav 6^(ra. 
 
 oi TO emyeia K.T.X.] ' Men Trhose 
 miuds are set on earthly things ' ! For 
 the abrupt nominative occurring with- 
 out any grammatical connexion and 
 expressing amazement, comp. Mark 
 xii. 38—40; see Winer § xxix. p. 228. 
 
 20. ijjiicav yap K.r.X.] 'Their souls 
 are mundane and grovelling. They 
 have no fellowship with us; for we 
 are citizens of a heavenly common- 
 wealth'. The emphatic position of 
 i)jii<3i> contrasts the false adherents of 
 St Paul with the true. About the con- 
 necting particle there is some difBculty. 
 While the earliest mss all read yap, the 
 earliest citations (with several versions) 
 have persistently 8e. I have there- 
 fore given fie as a possible alternative ; 
 although it is probably a substitution 
 for yap, of whioli the connexion was 
 not very obvious. 
 
 TO TToXiVeu^] This may mean 
 either (i)' The state, the constitution, 
 to which as citizens we belong ', e. g. 
 Philo de Joa. iL p. JI M iyypa^fjs T^r 
 fv T^ \uyi(rrta Ktxl apiara TroXtrfufiari 
 To08< Tov Koirpmi, de Confus. L p. 
 421 M eyypaf^ovTai t^ T^ff TrpoTepas 
 iroXiTevjxan, 2 Maca xii. 7 to <rvp,irav 
 rav 'loTTinTmi' TroXiVeufia ; or (2) ' The 
 functions which as citizens we per- 
 form ', e. g. Demosth. de Cor. p. 262 
 Travra to TotaCTo itpojipoip,r]V iroXiTfv- 
 fiara ic.T.X., Luciau Prom. 15 «Vl t^ 
 TroXiTfv/ioTi Tot'T^, Tatiau ad Grwe, 
 19. The singular points t« the former 
 meaning, which is also more frequent. 
 In either case t'f oS ' whence ' will refer 
 not to TToKlmiia, but to ovpavoit. On 
 the metaphor see above i. 27. Compare 
 also Philo de Confui. i. p. 416 m irarpl- 
 
 fia jicv TOV ovpaviav )^apov iv <f ttoXitcu- 
 
 OKTOi ^fvov be TOV irepiydov tv if irapa- 
 Kri(rav voiii^ovaat, Epist, ad Diogn, 
 § 5 *"■' T^f 8iaTpi^ov<Tiv dW ev ovpavif 
 iroKiTevovTai, Clem. Horn. i. 16 nin^ ae 
 rj aKTjOfia ^evov Svra Trjs Ibias noXfas 
 KaraaT^trei iroXin;v. See also M. Anton, 
 iii. 1 1 n'oXiTi;!' ovra iroXcuc t^c di«aTan;c 
 fis ai XoiTral TroKtis aairtp oixiat flaiv. 
 It was a favourite metaphor with the 
 Stoics, Clem. Alex. Strom, iv. 26 (p. 
 642 Potter) XkyoviTi yap kA 01 Srul/coi 
 TOV iiiv ovpavbv Kvpias iroXiv ra Si M 
 yrjs ivTavBa ovK tri noXeis,\iyea'6ai pit 
 yap, OVK rivat fie k.t.X. ; see below, p. 
 303 sq. Somewhat similarly Plato says 
 of his ideal state {Reap. iz. p. 592 b) 
 iv ovpavm icruc jrapaSeiypa [rrjs noXtiat] 
 dvaKCiTai r^ ^ovXopevta opav Kai opavn 
 
 iavTov xarotKtffii'. But the reply of 
 Anaxagoras (Uiog. Laert. ii. 7) to one 
 who reproached him with indifference 
 to his countrymen, cv^t/im, t'^iol yap 
 
 xal (Ti^ofipa fiiXfi TJJs narpiSot (fifi|a( 
 TOV ovpavdv), ought not to be quoted 
 in illustration, as it refers to his astro- 
 nomical studies. 
 
 virapxfi] ' ii even now ', for the 
 kingdom of heaven is a present king- 
 dom; so Ephes. ii. 19 oOxfTi i<ni 
 ^ivoi Koi TrdpoiKoc dWa iari mivno- 
 XiToi tS)v ayiav k.t.X. (comp. ver. 6). 
 
 a-<oTijpa diriKbexopeda] ' we eagerly 
 await as a saviour'. On dircxfit- 
 xea-dai see GaL v. 5, together with 
 the note on dnoKapaboKia above, i. 20. 
 
 21. ptTaa-xripaTi<r(i] ' will change 
 the fashion'. For fMTa<rxi;/iario-« and 
 <ripp.op^ov see the detached note on 
 pop<j>fi and (Tx^jpa, p, 130. 
 
 rrjt Taireivdafat ij/imi'] ' of our hu- 
 miliation ', i. e. the body which we 
 bear in our present low estate, which 
 is exposed to all tlie passions, suffer- 
 ings, E^nd indignities of this life. The 
 
IIL 21, IV. i] EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 157 
 
 Tov, OS fxeTaa-xill^oiTLcrei to crcofxa t)js Tarreivuiareus^ 
 ijfxwv avuixoptpov tw (TcofiaTi rfjs So^ri? aurou, kuto. Trjv 
 evepyeiav tou Suvacrdai avrou Kai virord^ai avTW Toi 
 iravTa. IV. ^uxTTey dZeXcpoi fxov dyaTrrjTOi Kai eVt- 
 
 English translation, 'our vile body', 
 seems to countenance the Stoic con- 
 tempt of the body, of which there is no 
 tinge in the original. 
 
 criiiiwp<l>ov\ 'so as to be conform- 
 able', see Winer § IxvL p. 779. The 
 words fit ro yeveirBai, avro, occurring 
 before avfinop'^ov in the received 
 text, must be struck out as a gloss, 
 though a correct one. This trans- 
 formation is described at greater 
 length and in other language, i Cor. 
 
 XV. 35—53- 
 
 Tqs 86^r]s avToS] i.e. with which 
 He is clothed in His glorified estate. 
 
 Tiji' fvipyfiav tov SivaaBai] ' The 
 exercise of the power which He pos- 
 sesses.' This expression involves the 
 common antithesis of Svvafus and evep- 
 yfia ; comp. Ephes. i. 19. ' Potentia 
 arbor, efficacia fructus,' says Calvin, 
 Comp. Herm. Mand. vL I rim Svpaptv 
 ?XC' "ai ivfpyeiav. 
 
 Koi iitoTa^ai] 'also to stibject' i for 
 this power of subjugating the human 
 body is only one manifestation of the 
 universal sovereignty of Christ. On the 
 subjection of all things to the Son see 
 1 Cor. XV. 25 — 27. For to navra with 
 the article see the note above ver. 8. 
 
 avr^] i.e. rif Xpurr^, referring to 
 the subject of the principal verb, as 
 e.g. in Acts xxv. 21, Ephes. L 4. In 
 such connexions the rofiexive pronoun 
 tavTov would be required in Classical 
 Greek. In the later language however 
 we find auroS etc. in place of cavrov 
 etc. in almost every case, except where 
 it stands as the direct object, the 
 immediate accusative of the verb. See 
 the excellent account of the usage of 
 avros and tavrov in A. Buttmann 
 p. 97. In this passage there is not 
 suflicient authority for the reading 
 c'uvTy. The forms airov, wSr^, airoy, 
 
 have no place in the Greek Testament, 
 as is clearly shown by A. Buttmann 1.& 
 Winer, § xxiL p. 188 sq., speaks hesi- 
 tatingly. 
 
 IV. 1. aare] ' ther^ore.' 'Bearing 
 these things in mind, living as citizens 
 of a heavenly polity, having this hope 
 of a coming Saviour.' 
 
 cwmoSriToi] This adjective does not 
 occur elsewhere in theNew Testament: 
 comp. Clem. Rom. S9> Appian. Hisp. 
 43. The Apostle's love finds expres- 
 sion in the accumulation and repeti- 
 tion of words. In the final ayantjTol 
 he seems to linger over this theme, as 
 if unable to break away from it. 
 
 X<ipa Kai <rTe<j>avos pov] He uses 
 the same language in addressing the 
 other great Macedonian church, i 
 Thess. ii. 19. The word <rrf(t)avoi ' a 
 chaplet' must be carefully distin- 
 guished from SiaSripji 'a regal or 
 priestly diadem'. To the references 
 given in Trench iV. T. Syn. § xxiii, 
 p. 74, add Is. Ixii. 3 o-rei^avo; koXXovc 
 . . . Kol StaSrjpa /3a<riXetaf , Test, xii Patr. 
 Levi 8 o eKTOs (TTetjmvov /loi Tj K€<j)dKg 
 TTcpUdijKeVj o e^dopos 8ia8i]pa t^ kc- 
 <^aX,7 poi ieparelas irtpUBijKt, Diod. Sic. 
 XX. 54 SiaSrjpa pev ovk cKpiVfV ex""' 
 f<t)6pei yap del irrecpavov. Thus the idea 
 conveyed by trTf<j)avos is not dominion, 
 but either (i) victory, or (2) merri- 
 ment, as the wreath was worn equally 
 by the conqueror and by the holiday- 
 maker. Without excluding the latter 
 notion, the former seems to bo promi- 
 nent in this and in the parallel pas- 
 sage ; for there, as here, the Apostle 
 refers in the context to the Lord's 
 coming. His converts will then be 
 his wreath of victory, for it will ap- 
 pear that he ovk tis Ktvov eSpaptv (iL 
 16), and ho will receive the successful 
 athlete's reward ; comp. i Cor. ix. 2J. 
 
158 
 
 BPISTLB TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 [IV. 
 
 Kvpiw, dyaTrrjTOi. 
 
 " Ei/oS/aj/ TrapaKoXtt) Kac ^vvTV^flv TrapaKaXtS to 
 avTO (ppovelv iv Kvpiip. ^vai ipcortS kui ere, yvrjcrie <tvv- 
 
 ovras onJKeTt] ' Standfast so, as you 
 are guided by ray precept and my ex- 
 ample, as becomes citizens of a hea- 
 venly kingdom.' On oriJ/cfTf see the 
 notes, 1. 27, GaL v. i. 
 
 2. The Apostle at length returns 
 from his long digression (see the notes 
 on iii. I, 2) to the subject of the dis- 
 sensions at Philippi. His injunctions 
 here take the form of a direct perso- 
 nal appeal to those chiefly at fault; 
 and two ladies especially are mention- 
 ed by name. 
 
 2, 3. 'I appeal to Euodia, and I ap- 
 peal to Syntyche, to give up their dif- 
 ferences and live at peace in the Lord. 
 Yes I ask you, my faithful and true 
 yokefellow, who are now by my side, 
 who will deliver this letter to the Phil- 
 ippians, to reconcile them again: for 
 I cannot forget how zealously they 
 seconded my efforts on behalf of the 
 Gospel I invite Clement also, with 
 the rest of my fellow-labourers, whose 
 names are enrolled in the book of life, 
 the register of God's faithful people, 
 to aid in this work of reconciliation.' 
 
 Evofiiav K.T.X.] Both these names 
 occur in the inscriptions : Euhodia or 
 Euodia for instance in Gruter p. 695. 
 
 4, p. 789. 5, Muratori p. 107. 9, p. 932. 
 
 5, p. 1 161. 4, p. 1185. 7, p. 1340. 8, 
 p. 1362. 2, p. 1671. 3, 5 (comp. TertulL 
 ad Seap. 4) ; Syntyche, Suntyche, or 
 Syntiche, in Gruter p. 890. 7, p. 987, 8, 
 Muratori, p. 857. 7, p. 972. 5, p. 1315. 
 17, p. 1569. 4, p. 1664. 4. The English 
 Version treats the first as a man's 
 name ; and others have in like manner 
 interpreted the second. No instance 
 however of cither ' Buodias ' or ' Syn- 
 tycheg' lias l>eeu found in the inscrip- 
 tions. The former indeed might be 
 considered a contraction of Buodianus 
 which occm-s occasionally : but the 
 
 masculine form of the latter is Synty- 
 chus, a very rare name (Gruter p. 
 372. s). But, though it were possible 
 to treat the words in themselves as 
 masculine, two female names are 
 clearly required here, as there is 
 nothing else in the sentence to which 
 avTois can be referred. Euodia and 
 Syntyche appear to have been ladies 
 of rank, or possibly (like Phoebe, Rom. 
 xvi. i) deaconesses in the Philippian 
 church. On the position of women in 
 Macedonia and on their prominence 
 in the history of the Gospel there, see 
 the introduction, p. 55 sq. 
 
 7rapa<aXo>] St Paul repeats the word 
 as if, says Bengel, ' coram adhortans 
 seorsum utramvis.' 
 
 3. vai\ ' yea,' introducing an affec- 
 tionate appeal, as Philem. 20 vai, dSeX- 
 <j>e, iyti aov ovaiiajv. The koI of the 
 received text must be considered a 
 misprint, or a miswriting of a few late 
 uss. 
 
 fpara] 'I ask' ; a late use of the 
 word which in the classical language 
 signifies not 'rogo' generally, but 'in- 
 terrogo' specially. In this late sense 
 of 'requesting,' epmru differs from 01- 
 ra, as ' rogo ' from ' peto ' ; the two 
 former being used towards an equal, 
 the two latter towards a superior ; see 
 Tj-ench N. T. Syn. § xl. p. 135. 
 
 ■yi^fo-if (Tui/fuyf] 'true yoke-fdhw,' 
 comp. .^sch. Ag. 842; so 2 Cor. vL 14 
 (Tfpo^vyovvTes. It is doubtful whom 
 the Apostle thus addresses. On the 
 whole however it seems most probable 
 that Epaphroditus, the bearer of the 
 letter, is intended; for in his case 
 alone there would be no risk of making 
 the reference unintelligible by the sup- 
 pression of the name. Different com- 
 mentators have explained it of Barna- 
 bas, of Luke, of Silas, of Timotheus, of 
 
IV. 4] 
 
 EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIAN8. 
 
 IS9 
 
 ^vye, (rvvXafx/Savov uvtuk, aiTive^ iv tco evayyeXiti) 
 avvt]6\r\(rav /ixoi, fxeTci Kai KA>j/xei/Tos Kai tmv Xoittwv 
 (Tvvepywv fxov, wv to. ovofiaTa iv fiifiXw ^wJjs. 
 
 ^Xaipere ev Kvpiu) iravTOTe' irdXiv ipw, ■x^ccipere. 
 
 the chief presbyter or bishop of Pliil- 
 ippL Others again have taken Siiv- 
 (vyoi itself as a proper name, explain- 
 ing yvj^trit 'truly called.' The case 
 for Uiis interpretation is well stated 
 by Laurent Neutest. Stud. p. 134. It 
 would be plausible, if Suvfuyos occur- 
 red commonly, or occurred at all, in 
 the inscriptions. The passage would 
 then present a parallel to the play on 
 the name Onesimus in Philem. 11. 
 Less can be said in favour of another 
 expedient which makes Tv^a-ios the 
 proper name. A very ancient inter- 
 pretation again (Clem. Alex. Strom. 
 iii. p. 535 Potter, Orig. Som. L p. 461 
 Delarue) takes ' yokefellow ' to mean 
 St Paul's wife ; but the Apostle would 
 doubtless have written yvrjoria in this 
 case, and it seems clear moreover from 
 I Cor. vii. 8 that he was either unmar- 
 ried or a widower. The grammatical 
 objection applies equally to Renan's 
 suggestion [Si Paul p. 148) that Lydia 
 is meant. For ymjaie comp. Ecclus. vii. 
 18, and see the note on yvricriais ii. 20. 
 o'vvXa/i|3ai'ov, K.r.X.] 'assist them, 
 Euodia and Syntyche, since they la- 
 hmtred vnth me etc! They may have 
 belonged to the company of women to 
 whom the Gospel was first preached 
 at Philippi, Acts xvi. 13 T-mi amiKdoi- 
 aats ywai^iv. For a"nv», ' inasmuch 
 as tliey,' comp. e.g. Acts x. 41, 47, 
 Rom. ii. IS, vi. 3, etc. While or simply 
 marks the individual, outk places him 
 in a class, and thus calls attention to 
 certain characteristic features ; hence 
 the meaning ' quippe qui.' On the 
 distinction of or and otrrts see the 
 notes on Gal. Iv. 24, 26, v. 19. The 
 rendering adopted by the English ver- 
 sion, ' Help those women who laboured 
 etc.' is obviously incorrect, and would 
 require cKciWr a! avvriSKr^irav. 
 
 fiera Kai KXij/ievros (t.r.X.] 'with 
 Clement also.' These words ought 
 perhaps to be connected rather with 
 trvvXaii^avov avrais than with <Tvvij6\ji- 
 o-av /lot. The Apostle is anxious to 
 engage all in the work of conciliation. 
 On the Clement here meant see the 
 detached note p. 168. The leai before 
 KXiiftci/ros seems to be retrospective 
 (referring to yvqint (riv^vye) rather 
 than prospective (referring to koI tSiv 
 "Komiav avvepymv /tov) ; as in John ii. 2. 
 For its position comp. Clem. Rom. § 59 
 
 aw Kai ^opTovvaTO). 
 
 wv ra ovofiara K.T.X.] ' whose names, 
 though not mentioned by the Apostle, 
 are nevertheless in the book of life.' 
 The ' book of life ' in the figurative 
 language of the Old Testament is the 
 register of the covenant people : comp. 
 Is. iv, 3 01 ypa^evTcs els (afiv iv 'If pov- 
 (Toh^fi, Bzek. xiii. 9 eV iraiSeia toC XaoC 
 fjLov ovK etrovrai ovde iv ypa(^§ oikov 
 'itrpafiK ov ypafjxi^iTovTai. Hence ' to 
 be blotted out of the book of the liv- 
 ing' means 'to forfeit the privileges 
 of the theocracy,' 'to be shut out from 
 God's favour,' Ps. Ixix. 28 ; comp. Exod. 
 xxxii. 32. But the expression, though 
 perhaps confined originally to tempo- 
 ral blessings, was in itself a witness 
 to higher hopes ; and in the book of 
 Daniel first (xiL i sq.) it distinctly re- 
 fers to a blessed immortaUty. In the 
 Revelation to ^i^\iov rjjs Carjs is a 
 phrase of constant recurrence, iiL 5, 
 xiii. 8, xvii 8, xx. 12, 15, xxi. 27, xxiL 
 19 ; comp. Hermas Vis. i. 3. See also 
 Luke X. 20, Heb. xiL 23. It is clear 
 from the expression ' blotting out of 
 the book ' (Rev. iii. j), that the image 
 suggested no idea of absolute predes- 
 tination. For the use of the phrase 
 in rabbinical writers see "Wetstein here. 
 
 4. x^'P""'] This word combines a 
 
i6o 
 
 EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 [IV. 5-7 
 
 ^t6 imeiKe^ vjuuSv yvwa'driTa) ttuo'lv dvdpwTroi^. 6 Kv- 
 pio'i €771/9. ^fitjSev jULepijuvaTe , dW ev ttuvti Trj 7rpo<r- 
 ev^ij Kul Trj ^er^crei juer' ev^apt(rrias tu aiTrifxaTa vfxwv 
 yvtdpiVecrdw irpo^ tov Qeov. ''Kal ij elprjvr] tov Qeov j; 
 
 parting benediction witli an exhorta- 
 tion to cheerfulness. It is neither 
 ' farewell ' alone, nor ' rejoice ' alone. 
 Compare for this same combination of 
 senses the dying words of the Greek 
 messenger ;^ai'ptTf xaj x'"'p<'/*"' quoted 
 above on 11. 18 ; see the notes on ii. 18, 
 iii. I. 
 
 TiaKiv epai] ' again I will say' ; for 
 ipa seems to be always a future in the 
 New Testament as in Attic Greek. 
 Compare .^sch. Eum. 1014 xa'Pfe, 
 XaiptTf 6" av6is, iwavSiirXoiCa. See the 
 notes on i. 4. 
 
 S — 7. ' Let your gentle and for- 
 bearing spirit be recognised by all 
 men. The judgment is drawing near. 
 Entertain no anxious cares, but throw 
 them all upon God. By your prayer 
 and your supplication with thanks- 
 giving make your every want known 
 to Him. If you do this, then the 
 peace of God, far more effective than 
 any forethought or contrivance of 
 man, will keep watch over your hearts 
 and your thoughts in Christ Jesus.' 
 
 5. TO eVcciKcf v/nmv] ' your for- 
 hearance^ the opposite to a spirit of 
 contention and self-seeking. The eVi- 
 fiKi); stands in contrast to the a<pi^o- 
 SUaios, as being satisfied with less 
 than his due, Arist. Mh. Nic. v. 10. 
 The word is connected with apaxos, 
 
 naaav ivSeiKVviievos wpavrriTa (Tit. ill. 2, 
 
 comp. I Tim. iii. 3), with eip/jwxds, «?- 
 jrnflijf, \ieirros iKiovs k.t.X. (James iii. 
 17), with ;(pijOTos, jroXueXfOf (Ps.lxxxv. 
 
 S), with dya^os ('kind', i Pet. ii 18), 
 with {^tXai/^prnwoj (2 Macc.ix. 27). This 
 quality of irruUeta was signally mani- 
 fested in our blessed Lord Himself 
 (2 Cor. X. i). 
 
 6 Kvpias iyyvs] The nearness of 
 the Lord's advent is assigned as a rea- 
 son for patient forbearance. So simi- 
 
 larly in St James v. 8, paKpodviiija-an 
 Koi vfuis. . ,OTi i; irapovaia tov Kvpiov rjy- 
 yiKtv K.T.X. The expression 6 Kvpiot 
 iyyvs is the Apostle's watchword. In 
 I Cor. xvi. 22 an Aramaic equivalent is 
 given, Mapav aSa, whence we may infer 
 that it was a familiar form of mutual 
 recognition and warning in the early 
 Church. Compare Bamab. § 21 eyyis 
 ly ^fiepa iv jj {rvvajroXftTat irai/ra t^ ito' 
 vifpa, tyyiis 6 Kvpiof Kai o fuados ovVoC, 
 See also Luke xxi. 31, i Pet. iv. 7. 
 Thus we may paraphrase St Paul's lan- 
 guage here : ' To what purpose is this 
 rivalry, this self-assertion ? The end 
 is nigh, when you will have to re- 
 sign all. Bear with others now, that 
 God may bear with you then.' On the 
 other hand a different interpretation 
 is suggested by such passages as Ps. 
 cxix. 151 eyyvs tt Kuptf, cxlv. 18 iyyiis 
 Kvpws Trairt rots cViKoXov^tVois airov 
 (comp. xxxiv. 18), Clem. Bom. § 21 
 iSiopev ncis iyyvs iartv k.tX. (comp. 
 Hermas Vit. ii. 3 ; Clem. Alex. Quis 
 div. 41, p. 958); but this is neither 
 so natural nor so appropriate here. 
 
 6. p,r)hiv fiepi/xvare] ' have Tto anxi- 
 eties'; for pipipva is anxious harassing 
 care. See Trench, On the Authorized 
 Version p. 13 sq. (on Matt vi. 25): 
 and comp. i Pet. v. 7, where piipipm 
 is used of human anxieties, /icXn of 
 God's providential care. 
 
 Tj npoirevxv k.t.X.] While jrpocrfwx4 
 is the general offering up of the wishes 
 and desires to God, SetjirK implies spe- 
 cial petition for the supply of wants. 
 Thus Trpoa-evx^i points to the frame of 
 mind in the petitioner, 8«i;<rw to the 
 act of solicitation. The two occur to- 
 gether also in Ephes. vi. 18, i Tim.ii. i, 
 v. S- In aiTiJfiara again the several 
 olgeets of Sojo-is are implied. More on 
 the distinction of these words may be 
 
IV. 8] 
 
 EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 l6l 
 
 v'7repej(ov(ra iravTa vovv (ppovp^trei ras Kaphia^ vfxwv Kai 
 Ta votijjLaTa vjjliov ev XjOitTTol 'Irja-ou, 
 
 *To XoLTTOv, dSe\(f)OL, ocra ecTTiv dArjdii, ocra aefivd, 
 baa h'lKaia, o(ra dyvd, ocra Trpoa^iXfiy 6(ra eviprj/uia, e'l 
 
 seen in Trench, N. T. Syn. § li. p. 
 177 sq. 
 
 jrpor Tov 6eov] 'htfore God,' 'to 
 Godward,' not simply ra et ^. 
 
 /ifT fuxapioTias] Siuce tliankfulness 
 for past blessings is a necessary condi- 
 tion of acceptance in preferring new- 
 petitions. Great stress is laid on the 
 duty of evxapurria by St Paul; e.g. 
 Rom. i. 21, xiv. 6, 2 Cor. i. 11, iv. 15, 
 ix. II, 12, Ephes. v. 20, Col. ii. 7,iii. 17, 
 1 Thess. V. 18, I Tim.iL i. All bis own 
 letters addressed to churches, with the 
 sole exception of the Epistle to the 
 Galatians, commence with an em- 
 phatic thanksgiving. In this epistle 
 the injunction is in harmony with the 
 repeated exhortations to cheerfulness 
 {x<^pa) which it contains; see the note 
 on i. 4. 
 
 7. Koi i; flpijur) it.r.X.] ' tlwn the 
 peace 0/ God '; again an indirect allu- 
 sion to their dissensions. So too in 
 ver. 9 6 Beos ttjs «i/>i)i^r. Compare 2 
 Thess. iii. 16 avTos 8e 6 Wvpws Trjs flpi]- 
 V7IS bdri ijiiv T^v flprjvjjv k.t.X. 
 
 virepixovaa k. t. X.] 'surpassing 
 every device or counsel' of man, i. e. 
 which is far better, which produces 
 a higher satisfaction, than all puncti- 
 lious self-assertion, all anxious fore- 
 thought. This sense seems better 
 adapted to the context, than the mean- 
 ing frequently assigned to the words, 
 ' surpassing all Intelligence, transcend- 
 ing all power of conception.' In favour 
 of the latter however may be quoted 
 Ephes. iii. 20 r^ hwafiivm iirip iravra 
 voirjaai, vTrcpeKTTfpiiraov av alrovfuSa rj 
 voovfiev. 
 
 4>povpri<Tei K.T.X.] A verbal para- 
 dox, for (jipoupf'iv is a warrior's duty ; 
 ' God's peace shall stand sentry, shall 
 keep guard over your hearts.' Compare 
 I Thess. iv. 1 1 ^iXort/ieio-^ai ^o-uxof"" 
 
 ruiL. 
 
 for a similar instance. The voif/iara 
 reside in and issue from the Kapblai 
 (comp. 2 Cor. iii. 14, 15); for in the 
 Apostle's language naphia is the seat 
 of thought as well as of feeling. 
 
 8. To Xoittok] 'Finally.' Again the 
 Apostle attempts to conclude ; see the 
 note on to Xoittow iii. i, and the intro- 
 duction, p. 69 sq. 
 
 oo-a iarlv dXijd^ ic.r.X.] Speaking 
 roughly, the words may be said to be 
 arranged in a descending scale. The 
 first four describe the character of the 
 actions themselves, the two former 
 dXri61j, vep.va, being absolute, the two 
 latter biKaia, iyva, relative ; the fifth 
 and sixth iTpoa-<j}t\^, cv</)i;fia, point to 
 the moral approbation which they con- 
 ciliate; while the seventh and eighth 
 dperij, «rau>of, in which the form of 
 expression is changed (tlrts for oo-a), 
 are thrown in as an afterthought, that 
 no motive may be omitted. 
 
 oKtiBfj'] not ' veracious,' but ' true ' 
 in the widest sensa So St Chryso- 
 &tom,TavTa SvTas d\ri6^ i; apc7-ij, i^cSdos 
 di 1) KaKia. In like manner the most 
 comprehensive meaning must be given 
 to diKata ('righteous,' not simply 
 'just'), and to ayva ('pure, stainless' 
 not simply ' chaste ') : comp. Cio. JFin. 
 iii. 4 ' Una virtus, unum istud, quod 
 honestam appellas, rectum, laudabile, 
 decorum, erit enim notius quale sit, 
 pluribus notatum vocabulis idem de- 
 clarantibus.' 
 
 7rpo(r(/>(X^] 'amiable, lovely'; see 
 Ecclus. iv. 7, XX. 13. It does not oc- 
 cur elsewhere in the New Testament. 
 Comp. Cic. Lcel. 28 ' Nihil est amabi- 
 lius virtute, nihil quod magis alliciat 
 ad diligendum.' 
 
 fv(j>t]ij.a] not ' well-spoken of, well- 
 reputed,' for the word seems never to 
 have this passive meaning ; but with 
 
 II 
 
1 62 
 
 EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 [IV. 9, 10 
 
 TK dperri Kai e'l Tts eTrati/os, ravra Xoy'i^ea-de- 'a kui 
 ifidQere kuI TrapeXdfieTe /cat i]KOV(raTe Kat e'/Sere iu 
 iixoi, Tavra Trpda-aere, Kai 6 eeos T^s elpt'ivt]^ ea-rai 
 HeQ' iijjiwv. 
 
 ^°'^-)(ap7]v le ev Kvp'iw fxeydXw^, on r}Bt] irore dve- 
 
 its usual active sense, 'fair-speaking^ 
 and so 'winning, attractive." Com- 
 pare Plut. Vit. Thes. 20 d 8e tvifiijfio- 
 Tara rmv iiv66\oyovfiivav, Mor. 84 D 
 ri/njr (v<l>riiiov, Lucian Prom. 3 npos ro 
 oJ^ij^toTaTov €^riyoviievos to tlpTjfievnv, 
 
 i. e. putting the most favourable con- 
 struction on the account. 
 
 tl TIC aptTiJ] St Paul seems studi- 
 ously to avoid this common heathen 
 term for moral excelleuce, for it occurs 
 in this passage only. Neither is it 
 found elsewhere in the New Testa- 
 ment, except in i Pet. ii. 9, 2 Pet. i. 
 3, s, in all which passages it seemf to 
 have some special sense. In the Old 
 Testament it always signifies 'glory, 
 praise ' (as in i Pet. ii. 9) ; though in the 
 Apocrypha (e.g. Wisd. iv. i) it has its 
 ordinary classical sense. Its force here 
 is doubtful Some treat e' tls a'peTiJ, 
 (1 Tis ewaivos, as comprehensive ex- 
 pressions, recapitulating the previous 
 subjects under two general heads, the 
 intrinsic character and the subjective 
 estimation. The strangeness of the 
 word however, combined with the 
 change of expression « ns, will sug- 
 gest another explanation ; ' Whatever 
 value may reside in your old heathen 
 conception of virtue, whatever consi- 
 deration is due to the praise of men ' ; 
 as if the Apostle were anxious not to 
 omit any possible ground of appeal. 
 Thus Beza's remark on apcri; seems to 
 be just ; ' Verbum nimis humile, si 
 cumdonis SpiritusSancti comparetur.' 
 With this single occurrence of dper^, 
 compare the solitary use of to 6eiov in 
 the address on the Areopagus, Acts 
 xvii. 29. 
 
 9. In the former verse the proper 
 subjects of meditation(XoyiCco'dc) have 
 been enumerated; in the present the 
 
 proper line of action (jrpacro-eTf) is in- 
 dicated. The Philippians must obey 
 the Apostle's precepts (d (p.ideTe k<u 
 napeXafifTf) and follow his example (a 
 iJKOv<TaTe KOi cidfrc eV efioi). 
 
 Kol ijiaOere k.tX^ The verbs should 
 probably be connected together in 
 pairs, so that the xal before ep^aBcTt is 
 answered by the Koi before ^Kova-aTc. 
 With ciiaBfTt Koi. napeXa^ere we may 
 understand Trap' c'/iov from the ev c^oi 
 of the next clause. The word n-apeXa- 
 /3(Tc adds little to c'pddcrc, except the 
 reference to the person communicat- 
 ing tlie instruction : comp. Plat. Thecet. 
 p. 198 B TrapaKafi^avovra de fUtvOavetv. 
 
 iv ffioi] to be attached to ^Kovaare, 
 as well as to e'tdere ; 'heard when I was 
 away, and saw when I was vnth you' : 
 comp. i. 30 olov eiSerf ev f/iol Koi vvv 
 aKovere ev ip-oL 
 
 10—19. ' It W'S a matter of great 
 and holy joy to me that after so long 
 an interval your care on my behalf 
 revived and flourished again. I do 
 not mean that you ever relaxed your 
 care, but the opportunity was want- 
 ing. Do not suppose, that in saying 
 this I am complaining of want; for I 
 have learnt to be content with my 
 lot, whatever it may be. I know how 
 to bear humiliation, and I know also 
 how to bear abvmdance. Under all cir- 
 cumstances and iu every case, in plenty 
 and in hunger, in abundance and iu 
 want, I have been initiated in the 
 never-failing mystery, I possess the 
 true secret of life. I can do and 
 bear all things in Christ who inspires 
 me with strength. But, though I am 
 thus indifferent to my own wants, I 
 commend you for your sympathy and 
 aid in my affliction. I need not re- 
 mind you, my Philippian friends ; you 
 
IV. II, 12] 
 
 EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 163 
 
 daXcTe TO virep efxou (ppoveiv i(pi' w kui icjipoveire, tjKai- 
 peio'de Se. "°^X ^'''* 'f"^' vo'Teptjcriv Xeyco' eyw yap 
 e/JLadou iu ots c'lfii avTapKri^ elvai. "oJBa Kat Tuwei- 
 vovtrQai, olBa Kat TrepLcrcreveiv. ev iravTi Kat ev Tracriv 
 
 yourselves will remember ; that in the 
 first days of the Gospel, when I left 
 Macedonia, though I would not re- 
 ceive contributions of money from 
 any other Church, I made an excep- 
 tion in your case. Nay, even before 
 I left, when I was still at Thessalo- 
 nica, you sent more than once to sup- 
 ply my wants. Again I say, I do not 
 desire the gift, but I do desire that 
 the fruits of your benevolence should 
 redound to your account For my- 
 self, I have now enough and more 
 than enough of all things. The pre- 
 sents which you sent by Epaphro- 
 ditus have fully supplied my needs. 
 I welcome them, as the sweet savour 
 of a burnt-offering, as a sacrifice ac- 
 cepted by and well-pleasing to God. 
 And I am confident that God on my 
 behalf will recompense you and sup- 
 ply all your wants vrith the prodigal 
 wealth which He only can command, 
 in the kingdom of His glory, in Christ 
 Jesus.' 
 
 10. fx"!"!" 3^ k.tX.] So Polycarp 
 writing to these same Philippians be- 
 gUlS (§1) (Tuvexdprjv vfilv fieyaXots fv 
 VivpltA ^fiav 'lijaov Xpitrra K.r.X. The 84 
 arrests a subject which is in danger of 
 escaping : see Gal. iv. 20. It is as if 
 the Apostle said : ' I must not forget 
 to thank you for your gift.' 
 
 ijBrj irore aviBaXiTe K. T. X.] ' at 
 length ye revived your interest in 
 me.' For ^817 irore ' at length ' (not 
 necessarily referring to present time) 
 see Rom. i. 10, with the passages 
 quoted in illustration by Kypke. For 
 this construction of avaBoKKeiv, ' to 
 put forth new shoots,' with an accu- 
 sative of the thing germinated, com- 
 pare Ezek. xvii. 24 (^\oi> ^p6v), 
 Ecclus. 1. 18 (tlpjjviiVf vyUiav), xi. 22 
 (tvkoyiav), 1. lo (xapirovt). As the 
 
 two expressions ^Sij wore and AvtBa- 
 Xrrc combined might seem to convey 
 a rebuke, the Apostle hastens to re- 
 move the impression by the words 
 which follow, c<^' a Km e'0poi/»re and 
 ovx OTi Kaff vareprjtriv \ey<o. 
 
 i<f>' a K.T.X.] ' in which ye did in- 
 deed interest yourselves.' The ante- 
 cedent to w is ' my wants, my inter- 
 ests,' being involved in, though not 
 identical with, to virep ip.ov ippovtiv, 
 Such grammatical irregularities are 
 characteristic of St Paul's style : com- 
 pare for instance ii. 5. To obviate 
 the fancied difficulty, it has been pro- 
 posed to explain the previous clause 
 [tooTc] <f>pov€Xu TO vTrep ijiov, in which 
 case TO vnip ijiov would form a strict 
 antecedent to m. But the separation 
 of TO virip ifiov from (ppoveiv is harsh 
 and unnatural. 
 
 TJKaipfla-Be'] 'ye had no opportu- 
 nity'; a late and rare word. The 
 active uKcupeiv is found in Died. Sic. 
 Exc. p. 30 (Mai). 
 
 II. ovx oTi] ' It is not that I speak, 
 etc.' For ovx on comp. iiL 12, iv. 17 : 
 see A. Buttmann p. 319. For xad' 
 varipjia-iv, 'in language dictated by 
 want,' comp. Rom. x. 2 icot' iirlyvaaiv, 
 Acts iii. 17 Kara ayvoiav, eta: see 
 Winer § xlix. p. 501 sq. 
 
 ev ols elpX (C.T.X.] 'in the position 
 in which I am placed.' The idea of 
 avrapKeia is 'independence of external 
 circumstances.' Compare 2 Cor. ix. 
 8 iv Travri itavrore naaav avTapK-eiav 
 exovTes, I Tim. vi. 6. Socrates, when 
 asked ' Who was the wealthiest,' re- 
 plied, 'He that is content with least, 
 for avrapKeia is nature's wealth ' (Stob. 
 Flor. V. 43). The Stoics especially laid 
 great stress on this virtue : see Senec. 
 £!p. Mar. 9 (passim). So M. Anton, i. 
 16 TO avrapKes iv ivami, where also an- 
 
 II— 2 
 
l64 EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. [IV. 13, 14 
 
 fxejj.vt]fxaL, Koi ■)(0pTa.^ea-6ai kui ireivav, kuI 7repi<r(rev€iv 
 Kal vcTTepeicrdai. ^^iravra ia")(yw ev tw ev^vvafxovvTi fxe. 
 ^^TrXrjv KaAws eiroi^a-aTe (rvvKOivoovri(ravTe<s fxov rfj 6Xi- 
 
 otlier phrase found In St Paul (2 Tim. 
 iv. 5) occurs in the context, v^^ov ev 
 imai. See the notes on TroXiVcv^a iii. 
 20, and on direj^etv iv. 18, and the dis- 
 sertation on ' St Paul and Seneca.' 
 
 12. KOI TajreivovaBai] This clause 
 seems to be shaped in anticipation of 
 the KOI trepuTO-fveiv which follows, so 
 that the one koX would answer the 
 other, ' both to be abased and to 
 abound ' ; but the connexion is after- 
 wards interrupted by the repetition 
 of oida for the sake of emphasis. So 
 too perhaps i Cor. xv. 29, 30 W koi 
 ^aTrri^ovTai.. .Ti Km i)/tcis /c.r.X. J comp. 
 Bom. i. 13. 
 
 (V iravri leai ev vamv^ A general 
 expression corresponding to the Eng- 
 lish ' all and every ' ; iv iravri ' in 
 every case ' singly, iv iraa-tv ' in all 
 cases' collectively: comp. 2 Cor. xi. 6 
 iv TravTi <l)aveptaaaVTes ivTraaiv els vfias. . 
 
 fieiivriiiai] 'I luive been initiated, 
 I possess tlve secret' as Plut. Mor. p. 
 
 795 ^ ^^ M*'' npara ^avOdvtov ert 7ro- 
 \iTeve<r6ai Koi fivoviievos, Ta 8e eaxara 
 8tbd(rK0>v Koi fivaraycayav, Alciphr. 
 Epist. ii. 4 TtpapaTfveiv fivrjBija-oiiai, 
 The same metaphor is employed by 
 St Paul in liva-Ttjpia applied to reveal- 
 ed truths, and perhaps also in trtppa- 
 ■yi'ffo-^ai (Eph. i. 13). And St Igna- 
 tius also addresses the Ephesians (§12) 
 
 as IlavXov fTvpfxvaTai rod ^yiao'p.evov, 
 
 thus taking up the Apostle's own 
 metaphor. 
 
 XopTa^eadai] The word ;(opTaffti», 
 properly ' to give fodder to animals,' 
 is in the first instance only applied to 
 men as a depreciatory term, e. g. 
 Plat. Resp. ix. p. 586 a ^oa-KtuidTav 
 &iioiv...xopra(6iievoi. Henoe the ear- 
 lier examples of this application are 
 found chiefly in the Comic poets, as 
 in the passages quoted by Athenseus, 
 iii. p. 99 sq., whore the word is dis- 
 
 cussed. In the later language how- 
 ever xopraffo-^ai has lost the sense of 
 caricature, and become a serious equi- 
 valent to Kopivwa-dai, being applied 
 commonly to men and directly opposed 
 to weivdv, e. g. Matt. V. 6. On x°p- 
 TaCeiv see Sturz de Died. Mac. p. 200. 
 A parallel instance of a word casting 
 off all mean associations in the later 
 language is ylraiii{eiv, I Cor. xiii. 3. 
 
 jreimi'] On this form see A. Butt- 
 mann p. 38, Lobeck Phryn. p. 61. 
 
 13. TCf ivSwajiovvTi /xf] ' in Him 
 tfiat infuses strength into me^ i.e. 
 Christ : comp. i Tim. i. 12. The word 
 occurs several times in St Paul. 
 
 14. ttXi/v] ' »w»«ri/t«^«««, though I 
 could have dispensed with your con- 
 tributions.' 
 
 a\ivKo\.vmvr\aavTei k.t.X.] i. e. ' by 
 making common cause with my afflic- 
 tion, by your readiness to share 
 the burden of my troubles.' It was 
 not the actual pecuniary relief, so 
 much as the symxiathy and compa- 
 nionsliip in his sorrow, that the Apo- 
 stle valued. On the construction of 
 Kaivasve\v see the note on Gal. vi. 6. 
 
 15. The object of this allusion 
 seems to be not so much to stimulate 
 them by recalling their former zeal 
 in contributing to his needs, as to 
 show his willingness to receive such 
 contributions at their hands. 'Do 
 not mistake my meaning,' he seems to 
 say, 'do not imagine that I receive 
 your gifts coldly, that I consider them 
 intrusive. You yourselves will recol- 
 lect that, though it was my rule not 
 to receive such contributions, I made 
 an exception in your case.' 
 
 ical v/ictf ] ' ye too, ye yourselves, 
 without my reminding you ' : comp. i 
 Thess. ii. I avroi yap ot&aTt, dbe\<t>oi. 
 
 *tXi7r7ri)'<no»] StephauusByzantsays, 
 O jroXiTi/i ifiKiimevs, ^iXimnji'oc Si 
 
IV. iSl 
 
 EPISTLl TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 I6S 
 
 yj/^ei. '^oiSare Se Kai vfxeTi, fPiXnnr^a-ioi, on iv dpx^ "^ov 
 evayyeXioVy 'ore e^fjXdov diro MaKeSovias, ou^ejuia ixoi 
 EKKXtjo'ia eKoivoovticrev ets Xo'you SoVews kuc Xrifx^ews, 
 
 irapa Uokv^im. The passage of Poly- 
 bius to which he refers is not extant. 
 Though Stephanus does not mention 
 the form ^tXiTnr^crior, it occui'S in the 
 heading of Polycarp's letter (Iren. iii. 
 3. 4) as well as of this epistle, ^iXitt- 
 ireiis is found three times in a Boeotian 
 inscription in Keilp. 172 (see Dindorf s 
 Steph. Thes. s. v.). 
 
 iv dpxjj Tov evayyeKimi] 'in the ear- 
 liest days of the Gospel,' especially in 
 reference to Macedonia. Similarly, 
 writing to the Thessalonians soon 
 after his first visit, St Paul says (2 
 
 Theas. ii. 13) tiXaro inas 6 8cos dirap- 
 T(Tiv (v. 1. djr dpx^s) CIS (rarqpiav^ The 
 
 expression occurs in Clem. Kom. § 47 
 
 Ti TtpoTov vpliv iv dp\fi TOV €vayy{\iov 
 fypa^ev, and possibly this is the mean- 
 ing of Poly carp § 11 'qui estis in 
 principio epistolae ejus': see above, 
 p. 141, note 4. 
 
 ore f^T)\6ov UTTo MoKcSoi/iac] 'when 
 I departed from, Macedonia' may 
 mean either (i) 'at the moment of 
 my departure,' or (2) 'after my de- 
 parture.' This latter meaning is jus- 
 tified by the pluperfect sense which 
 the aorist frequently has (see Winer 
 § xl. p. 343); though in fact this is 
 no peculiarity of Greek, but a loose- 
 ness of expression common to all lan- 
 guages. If this meaning be adopted, 
 the allusion is explained by the con- 
 tributions sent from Macedonia to 
 Corinth (2 Cor. xL 8, 9). If on the 
 other hand the former sense were 
 rigorously pressed (though this is un- 
 reasonable), contributions might well 
 have been conveyed to him through 
 ' the brethren' who escorted him from 
 Macedonia to Athens, Acts xvii. 14, 
 1 5. The ' undesigned coincidence' be- 
 tween the history and the epistles in 
 the matter of these contributions is 
 well put by Paley {flor. Paul, vii. no. i ). 
 
 (IS \6yov le.T.X.] 'as regards'; liter- 
 ally ' to the account or score of ' ; 
 comp. Thuc. iiL 46 is xprjiiariov \6yov 
 lirxvoiaaK, Bemosth. F. L. p. 385 «r 
 apiTTJs \oyov Kai ^o^rjs i]V ovtoi xprjfia- 
 Tuiv arriSovTo, Polyb. xi. 28. 8 (Is dpyv- 
 piov \oyov dSiKcia-dai. In the passages 
 quoted, as here, the original applica- 
 tion to a money transaction is kept 
 more or less distinctly in view; but 
 this is not always the case, e. g. Polyb. 
 
 v. 89. 6 ^v\a Ciff <T(l)rjKL(TKtOV \6yov. 
 
 With the expression here compare 
 Cic. Lwl. 16 'ratio acceptorum et da- 
 torum.' 
 
 86(r(as Kaii Xij/iijffias] 'giving and 
 taking,' 'credit and debit,' a general 
 expression for pecuniary transactions, 
 derived from the two sides of the 
 ledger: see Ecclus. xlii. 7 naX 8o<ris xai 
 \rjii-\JAis Travrl iv ypa(j)^, xli. 1 9 iiTro (tko- 
 paKiajiov Xtjiiyjfeas koI Soaeas, Arrian. 
 Epict. ii. 9 TOV (jjiKdpyvpov [inai^ov- 
 o-ik] at (iKardXXijXot Xijijrfis Kai Sotreif, 
 Hermas Mand. v. 2 wepX Soa-eas rj \^- 
 ^eais ^ irepl toiovtcdv fiapav irpar/pATwv. 
 
 The phrase refers solely to the pass- 
 ing of money between the two. Tlie 
 explanation given by St Chrysostom 
 and followed by many later writers, 
 tls \oyov Soireas tSiv aapKiKav Kai 
 XiJ^ecos rav 7rvevp,aTiKav (the Philip- 
 pians paying worldly goods and re- 
 ceiving spiritual),is plainly inappropri- 
 ate; for the intermingling of diflferent 
 things destroys the whole force of the 
 clause els \6yov Soaeias xai XiJ/i^ctui, 
 which is added to define the kind of 
 contributions intended. 
 
 (1 iifj vne'is iiovoi] So, speaking of 
 this same period, he asks the Corinth- 
 ians whether he did them a wrong 
 in taking no contributions from them 
 and preaching the Gospel to them 
 gratuitously (2 Cor. xi. 7). The limit- 
 ation iv dpxj TOV tuayyfX/pv perhaps 
 
1 66 
 
 EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 [IV. 16—19 
 
 ei [xrj vfxei^ fiovoi, ^^oti kuc ev QecraraXoviKr) Kat uTra^ 
 KUi Bh [eU] TYiv X|oeirtt/ {jloi eirefxylrUTe. ^"^ ov^ on e-Tri- 
 inrci) TO Zofxa, dWa im^iiTw tov Kapirov tou TrAeo- 
 vdtovTa els Xoyov v/nuiv. '^a7re;y;a) Be Travra kuI Trepur- 
 a-evu), 7re7rXiipwiJ.ai Be^dfxevos irapd 'ETra(ppoBiTOv tol 
 Trap' vjxwv, 6(rfxr)v evtoBia?, duaiav BeKTijv euapea-TOV rw 
 Qew. "'o Be ©eos /mov irXnpuxrei irdaav Xjoe/aj/ vfiwu 
 KUTU TO ttXovto^ avTOV ev Bo^n ev Xpia-Tw 'Irjarou. 
 
 implies that ho relaxed his rule later, 
 when he became better known and 
 understood. 
 
 16. oTi KOL K.r.X.] 'for not only 
 did you contribute to my wants after 
 my departure from Macedonia, but 
 also in Thessalonica, before I left etc' 
 So St Paul himself reminds the Thes- 
 salouians (i Thess. ii. 5, 2 Thess. iiL 8) 
 that he did not burden them at all. 
 At the same time it appears from 
 those passages, that his bodily wants 
 were suppUed mainly by the labours 
 of his own hands. Thus it would seem 
 that the gifts of the Philippians were 
 ouly occasional, and the same may be 
 gathered from the words kqi airal koX 
 Sis here. On the abbreviated expres- 
 sion iv QetraaKovlKjj 'when I was iu 
 Thessalonica' see Winer § 1. p. 515; 
 comp. below, yer. 19. 
 
 Koi cma^ koI Sit] 'more than once' : 
 comp. I Thess. ii. 18. The double nai 
 is common in such cases, e.g. naX Sis 
 Koi Tpts, Plat. Phmd. p. 63 n. 
 
 tU Tr)v xpfiav] 'to relieve my wanti 
 the proposition indicating the object ; 
 see Winer § xlix. p. 495 . The omission 
 of els in some old copies is probably 
 due to the similar ending of the pro- 
 ceding word. Otherwise the reading 
 might claim to be adopted, though in 
 this sense the plural ras xp^ias would 
 be more natural. 
 
 17. Again the Apostle's nervous 
 anxiety to clear himself interposes. 
 By thus enlarging on the past liber- 
 ality of the Philippians, he might be 
 
 thought to covet their gifts. This 
 possible misapprehension he at once 
 corrects. 
 
 Qvx oTi eTn^rjTaJ For ov^ on see 
 the notes on ver. 11 and on ilL 12 ; 
 for the indirectly intensive force of the 
 preposition in cn-ifi;™, the note on 
 fTTinodai i. 8. The repetition of eVi- 
 fi)7-<5 is emphatic ; ' I do tiot want 
 the gift, I do want the fruit etc' 
 Compare the repetition of napaKeika 
 ver. 2, and of 018a ver. 12. 
 
 TOV Kapnov k.t.X.] 'i.e. the recom- 
 pense which is placed to your account 
 and increases with each fresh demon- 
 stration of your love.' 
 
 18. airex" k.t.X.] ' / have all 
 things to the full,' as Matt. vi. 2, 5, 
 16, Luke vi. 24. For the phrase aV- 
 t'^f IK navra compare Arrian. Epiet. iii. 
 2. 13 diTf xets airavra, iii. 24. 17 ro yap 
 evdaipovovv anex^^^ S^i Travra a BeXfi 
 7re7r\Tjpcafieva tw\ ioiKevai ; conip. Diog. 
 LaerL vii. ICX} xdXov Sc Xeyoviri ro 
 TeXiiov dyaOuj/ irapa to ndvTas nTrej^fiv 
 Toil e7Ti(riTovfievovs dpifljiois vtto Trjs 
 (j>icreas k.t.\. See also Gataker on 
 M. Anton, iv. 49. Like avTup<fia, it 
 seems to have been a favom-ite Stoic 
 word: see the note on ver. 11. As in 
 djroXafij3di/6ii'(see Gal. iv. 5), the idea of 
 mo iu this compound is correspond- 
 ence i.e. of the contents to the capacity, 
 of the possession to the desire, etc., so 
 that it denotes the full complement. 
 The following word irfpura-eva ex- 
 presses an advance on dTrcxu; 'not 
 only full, but overflowing.' 
 
IV. 20— 23] EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 167 
 
 '°Tft; oe Qew kuI TraTpl rifxwv ») Zo^a eis toi)s a'lwva^ twv 
 a'lwvwv, d/uLrjv. 
 
 "'A(nra<ra(r6e iravTa ayiov iv XpicrTiS 'Itia-ov. d- 
 a-Trd^ovTai vfxd^ ol avv ifioi dSeXcfyoi. " da-ird^ovTai 
 vfid^ TraVres 01 dyiot, iJ.dXi<rTa Se 01 e/c t^s Yiaiarapo^ 
 
 *3'H xctjOts TOO Kvp'iov 'lt]<rou Xpia-Tou fxeTa tou 
 TTvev/uLaTO^ vfjLwv. [a'/xJ7J/.] 
 
 TTapa 'ErratppoSirov ic.r.X.] 'at the 
 hands of Epaphroditus the gifts trans- 
 mitted from you.' On the preposi- 
 tion irapa See the note Gal. i. 12. 
 
 6iriJ.fii> tuaSias] A very frequent ex- 
 pression in the lxx for the smell of 
 sacrifices and offerings, being a ren- 
 dering of nn'3 nn (e.g. Gen. viii. 21, 
 Bxod. xxix. 1 8, etc.). St Paul employs 
 it as a metaphor likewise in Ephes. v. 
 2; comp. 2 Cor. ii. 15, 16. So too 
 Test, xii Pair. Levi 3 wpoa^epovcri 
 Kvpia o(Tixf)v evaSlas XoyiK^v /cm Bviriav 
 dvaifiaKTov, 
 
 6vtriav SfKT^v K.T.X.] So Bom. xii. i 
 napaoT^frai ra (rtofiara vfiSv dvtrlav 
 ^airav ayiav fvapfcrrov tc5 &ew k.t.X. 
 comp. I Pet ii. 5, Heb. xiii. 16. The 
 expression evaptaros rm &(m Occurs 
 Wisd. iv. 10 (comp. Clem. Rom. 49, 
 Ign. Sinyrn. 8), and eiaptaTciv np &ew 
 is common in the lxx. 
 
 19. o e.-or fiou] 'my God': comp. 
 L 3. The pronoun is especially ex- 
 pressive here : ' You have supplied all 
 my wants (w. 16, 18), God on my 
 5eAa{^ shall supply all yours.' 
 
 iv 8u^] These words show that 
 the needs here contemplated are 
 not merely temporary. nXijpucrct iv 
 8o|i7 seems to be a pregnant phrase, 
 signifying 'shall supply by placing you 
 in glory'; comp. ver. 16 iv Qfo-a-aXovUri. 
 This is still further explained by iv 
 XpuTTa 'Iria-ov, 'through your union 
 with, incorporation in, Christ Jesus.' 
 
 20. 1; dofa. See the notes Gal. i. 5. 
 
 ^nav] It is no longer jxou, for the 
 reference is not now to himself as dis- 
 tinguished from the Philippians, but 
 as united with them. 
 
 21. iv Xpia-ra 'irjo-ov] probably to 
 bo taken with dinracraa-de ; comp. Kom. 
 xvi. 22, I Cor. xvl. 19. 
 
 Ol aiiv i/iol d8eK<(>oi] Apparently 
 the Apostle's personal companions 
 and fellow-travellers are meant, as 
 distinguished from the Christians re- 
 sident in Rome who are described in 
 the following verse : see the note on 
 Gal. i. 2. On St Paul's companions 
 during or about this time see the in- 
 troduction p. 1 1. 
 
 22. rravres ol aytot] All the Chris- 
 tians in Rome, not his personal at- 
 tendants only. 
 
 oi CK TTJs Kalo-apos oi/c/as] ' The 
 members of Ccesar's household^ pro- 
 bably slaves and freedmen attached 
 to the palace : see the detached note 
 p. 171, and the introduction pp. 14, 19. 
 The expression oincia Kaia-apos corre- 
 sponds to 'familia' or 'domus Csesaris' 
 (Tac. Hist. ii. 92) and might include 
 equally the highest functionaries and 
 the lowest menials. Compare Philo 
 Flacc. p. 522 M el 81) iifi ^airCKevs ^v 
 dWa Tis Tuv cK T^s Kaiaapos olKiaSf 
 ov< atjitiKe irpovoftiav nva xai rtju^i/ 
 cxetv, Hippol. Seer. ix. 12 oiKcn/r 
 irvyxave Kap7ro<j)6pov rivos dvSpot 
 TrtoToO SvTos iK rrjs KaL(rapos olKias. 
 See St Clement qf Rome, Appendix, 
 p. 256 sq. 
 
l68 
 
 EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIAN8. 
 
 ' Clement my fellow-lahourer' 
 
 Identical 
 with Cle- 
 ment of 
 Borne? 
 
 Anthori- 
 ties for the 
 identifica- 
 tion. 
 
 Di6Scultiea 
 of place 
 
 and date. 
 
 WE have seen the Christians of Philippi honourably associated with 
 two Apostolic Fathers, Ignatius and Polycarp^ But were they even 
 more intimately connected with the third name of the triad! Is there 
 sufficient ground for identifying Clement St Paul's fellow-labourer, saluted 
 in this epistle, with Clement the writer of the letter to the Corinthians, 
 the early bishop of Rome, the central figure in the Church of the succeed- 
 ing generation? 
 
 Of the Roman bishop Irenseus says, that he 'had seen the blessed 
 Apostles and conversed with them and had the preaching of the Apo- 
 stles still ringing in his ears and their tradition before his eyes^,' From 
 his silence about St Paul it may perhaps be inferred that he did not 
 see any direct mention of the Roman Clemsnt in the epistles of this 
 Apostle. Origen however very distinctly identifies the author of the Co- 
 rinthian letter with the person saluted in the Epistle to the Philippians'. 
 And, starting from Origen, this view was transmitted through Eusebius 
 to later writers*. Nor does the supposition do any violence to character. 
 The epistle of the Roman Clement was written to heal a feud in a distant 
 but friendly Church : and in like manner St Paul's fellow-labourer is here 
 invoked to aid in a work of reconciliation. 
 
 Nevertheless the notices of place and time are opposed to the identi- 
 fication of the two. For (i) the author of the letter to Corinth was a 
 leading member of the Roman Church, while St Paul's fellow-labourer 
 seems clearly to be represented as resident at Philippic And again (2) 
 the date interposes a serious though not insuperable difficulty. Historical 
 evidence' and internal probability' alike point to the later years of Do- 
 mitian (about a.d. 96), as the time when the Epistle of Clement was 
 written. If Eusebius is correct, the author died soon after, in the 
 third year of Trajan, a.d. ioo". But in the list of the early bishops of 
 Rome, where even the order is uncertain, the dates may fairly be con- 
 sidered conjectural or capricious; and there is some ground for supposing 
 that he may have lived even longer than this. If the received chronology 
 be only approximately true, the Shepherd of Hermas can hardly have 
 been written much earlier than A.D. 140". Yet the author there represents 
 
 ' See the introduction, p. 62 eq. 
 
 • Iren. iii. 3. 3. 
 
 ' In Joann. i. 29 (iv. p. 153, Dela- 
 rue). 
 
 * Euseb. H. E. iii. 4, 15, Eplphan. 
 Bar. xxvii. 6 (where however by a slip 
 of memory the Epistle to the Bomans is 
 mentioned), Hieron. Vir. III. 15, adv. 
 Jovin, i. 1 1 ; comp. Apoit. Const, vi. 8. 
 
 ' The name valebivs . olemeks oc- 
 curs in a Philippian inscription, Corp. 
 
 Inscr. Lat. iii. p. 121. 
 
 ' HegosippusinEuseb.fl'.E.iii. 16; 
 comp. iv. 22. 
 
 ' See St Clement of Rome p. 4, with 
 the references. 
 
 8 Euseb. Jf.E. iii. 34. The date in the 
 Chronicon of the same writer is a.d. 95. 
 
 " The Btatemeuts in the text are 
 founded on two data; (1) The assertion 
 in the Muratorian Fragment (West- 
 oott Canon p. 480, 2nd ed.), 'Pastorem 
 
EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 169 
 
 himself as divinely commissioned to deliver the book to Clements It Notice in 
 is true we may place the imaginary date of the vision many years be- ^^^ Shep. 
 fore the actual writing and publication of the Shepherd : yet even then ^^^ °' 
 the difficulty does not altogether vanish; for the author describes him- 
 self as a married man with a family of children grown or growing up' 
 at the time when Clement is living. On these grounds it would appear 
 that we cannot well place the death of Clement earlier than a.d. iio 
 i.e. nearly 50 years after the date of the Epistle to the Fhilippians. And 
 it is not likely, though far from impossible, that St Paul's fellow-labourer 
 should still be living and active after the lapse of half a century. 
 
 Another objection also has been urged against the identity. Early Connexion 
 tradition almost uniformly represents St Clement of Rome as a disciple with St 
 not of St Paul but of St Peter'. On this however I cannot lay any ^*'*'^- 
 stress. The tradition may be traced to the influence of the Clementine 
 Homilies and Recognitions: and it belongs to the general plan of these 
 Judaic writings to transfer to St Peter, as the true Apostle of the Gen- 
 tiles, the companionships and achievements of St Paul*. On the other 
 hand St Clement's letter itself, though it shows a knowledge of the First 
 Epistle of St Peter, bears yet stronger traces of St Paul's influence. It 
 is at least possible that St Clement knew both Apostles, as he quotes the 
 writings of both and mentions both by name". 
 
 All these difficulties however might be set aside, if Clement were a Clement b 
 rare name. But this is far from being the case. Lipsius enumerates common 
 five Clements mentioned by Tacitus alone": and extant inscriptions would "^m^- 
 supply still more convincing proofs of its frequency'. Though common 
 enough before, its popularity was doubtless much increased under the 
 Flavian dynasty, when it was borne by members of the reigning house. 
 
 A strange destiny has pursued the name of Clement of Rome. The Recent 
 romance of story, which gathered about it in the earliest ages of the criticism. 
 Church, has been even surpassed by the romance of criticism of which 
 
 vero nuperrime temporibua nostris in may have become bishop at an earlier 
 
 urbeEomaHermaBconsoripsit, sedente date than Busebius supposes. If either 
 
 cathedra nrbia Bomse ecclesise Pio epi- or both these suppositions be true, the 
 
 scope fratre ejus ' ; (2) The received date interval between the death of dlement 
 
 of the episcopate of Pius (a,d. 142 — 157, and the writing of the Shepherd may be 
 
 Euseb. H.E. iii. 15, 34; a,d. 138 — 152, considerably diminished, and the chro- 
 
 Euseb. Cftron.). But on the other hand uological difBculty which I have sug- 
 
 it must be said (i) That as the Murato- gested in the text vanishes. See St 
 
 rian Fragment ia obviously a transla- Clement of Rome, p. 315 sq. 
 
 tion from the Greek, we cannot feel ' Hermaa Vis. ii. 4. 
 
 any certainty that the original stated s y^g^ j. j^ u. j. 
 
 the book to have been written during ' See especially TertuU. Prcescr. 
 
 the episcopate ofPius, though the Latin liar. 32, Origen P/iiZoe. 22: and oon- 
 
 (cdenteBeemstoimplythis; and(2)That suit Lipsius de Clem. Eom^ p. 172 sq. 
 
 no confidence can be placed in the dates * See Galatians, p. 329. 
 
 of the early Eoman bishops ; for while ^ Clem. Eom. § 5. See Galatians, 
 
 Eusebius himself has two different lists, pp. 538,358. 
 
 the catalogues of other writers differ ' Lipsius, p. 168. 
 
 from both. Hennas may have written ' See St Clement of Borne, p. 264 sq. 
 
 before his brother's episcopate, or Pius 
 
170 EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 it has been the subject in these latest days. Its occurrence in the Epistle 
 to the Philippians has been made the signal for an attack on the genuine- 
 
 Baur's ness of this letter. The theory of Baur^ is as follows. The conversion 
 
 theory. of Flavius Clemens, the kinsman of Domitian, is the sole foundation in 
 fact, upon which the story of Clement the Roman bishop has been built'. 
 The writer of the Clementine Homilies, an adherent of the Petrine or 
 Jewish party in the Church, bent on doing honour to his favourite Apo- 
 stle, represents Clement as the disciple or successor of St Peter. In order 
 to do this, he is obliged to throw the date of Clement farther back and 
 thus to represent him as the kinsman not of Domitian, but of Tiberius. The 
 forger of the Philippian Epistle writes at a later date when this fiction 
 has been generally received as an accredited fact. Though himself a 
 Pauline Christian, he is anxious to conciliate the Petrine faction and for 
 this purpose represents this imaginary but now all-famous disciple of St 
 Peter, as a fellow-labourer of St Paul. The whole epistle in fact is written 
 up to this mention of Clement. The praetorium, the household of Caesar, 
 are both introduced to give an air of probability to the notice. In this 
 criticism, unsubstantial as it is, one element of truth may be recognised. 
 The Roman Clement, as he appears in his extant letter and as he may be 
 discerned through the dim traditions of antiquity, is a man of large sym- 
 pathies and comprehensive views, if not a successful reconciler, at all events 
 a fit mediator between the extreme parties in the Church. The theory 
 itself it will not be necessary to discuss seriously. The enormous diffi- 
 culties which it involves will be apparent at once. But it may be worth 
 while to call attention to the hollow basis on which it rests. Baur omits 
 to notice that the Clement here mentioned appears as resident at 
 Philippi and not at Rome: though on this point the supposed forger 
 would have been scrupulously exact, as supplying the key to his whole mean- 
 
 Schwegler. ing. To these speculations Schwegler', following up a hint thrown out 
 by Baur, adds his own contribution. Buodia and Syntyche, he maintains, 
 are not two women but two parties in the Church, the 'true yoke- 
 fellow' being none other than St Peter himself. Were they the names of 
 historical persons, he writes, it would give the passage 'an extremely 
 strange character.' It may be inferred from this that he considers his 
 own interpretation entirely simple and natural. Schwegler however stops 
 short of explaining why the one party is called Buodia and the other 
 Syntyche. It is left to a later and bolder critic to supply the deficiency. 
 
 Volkmar. Volkmar* finds the solution in the Apostolic Constitutions, where it is 
 stated that Buodius was made bishop of Antioch by St Peter and Ignatius 
 by St Paul'. As Buodius is the Petrine bishop, so Buodia will represent 
 the Petrine party. The names, he supposes, are adopted with a view to 
 their significance. Buodia, 'taking the right path,' is a synonyme for ortho- 
 doxy, and therefore aptly describes the Jewish community: while Syntyche, 
 
 1 Paulus, p. 469 sq. Clemens as a proselyte to Judaism. Hia 
 
 ^ See above, p. 12. own speoulations are equally extrava- 
 
 ' Nachapost. Zeit. II. -p. i}$. gant: Gesch. der Juden iv. p. 435 
 
 * Theolog. Jahrb. xv. p. 311 sq. {ei.!), Monatsschr.f. OescKu.Wiss. d. 
 
 (1856), XVI. p. 147 sq. (1857). Crraetz Judenth. April 1869, p. 169. 
 
 answers Volkmar by claiming Flavins ' Apost. Const, vii. 46. 
 
BPISTLB TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 171 
 
 'the partner (censors),' is an equally fit designation of the later associated 
 Gentile Church^. This last story completes the building thus piled by 
 three successive hands. Meanwhile it will be obvious to all, that a writer 
 coald not more effectually have concealed his meaning and thereby 
 frustrated his own designs, thau by wearing the impenetrable veil of enigma 
 thus ascribed to him. Bm indeed it is needless to waste time on this 
 learned trifling, which might be overlooked if the interests indirectly 
 involved were less serious. In dealing with such theories the bare 
 statement is often the best refutation^. 
 
 CcBsar's Household. 
 
 THE mention of certain members of Caesar's household at the close of Baseless 
 the Philippian Epistle has given rise to much speculation and formed t"®*"^*^- 
 the groundwork of more than one capricious theory. It has been assumed 
 that this phrase must designate persons of high rank and position, powerful 
 minions of the court, great officers of state, or even blood relations of the 
 emperor himself. On this assumption, maintained in a more or less 
 exaggerated form, it has been inferred that some time must have elapsed 
 between St Paul's arrival at Rome and the date of this epistle, to account 
 for this unwonted triumph of the Gospel. And extreme critics have even 
 taken the expression as the starting-point for an attack on the genuineness 
 of the letter, charging the writer with an anachronism and supposing him 
 to refer to Clemens and Domitilla,, the kinsman and kinswoman of Domi- 
 tian, who suffered for the faith at the close of the century'. 
 
 All such inferences are built on a misconception of the meaning of the Extent of 
 term. The 'domus' or 'familia Csesaris' (represented by the Greek oixm tlie house- 
 Kaitrapos) includes the whole of the imperial household, the meanest slaves 
 as well as the most powerful courtiers. On the character and constitution 
 of this household we happen to possess more information than perhaps on 
 any other department of social life in Rome. The inscriptions relating 
 thereto are so numerous, that a separate section is assigned to them in all 
 good collections. And almost every year is adding to these stores of inform- 
 ation by fresh discoveries. In Rome itself, if we may judge by these 
 inscriptions, the 'domus Augusta' must have formed no inconsiderable 
 fraction of the whole population ; but it comprised likewise all persons in 
 the emperor's service, whether slaves or freemen, in Italy and even in the 
 provinces. 
 
 The monuments to which I have referred are chiefly sepulchral. Co- Sources of 
 lumbaria have been discovered from time to time, whose occupants be- jpfor^a- 
 
 1 When I wrote the above, I should ' Other recent speculations relating 
 
 not have thought it possible to outbid to the history of the Soman Clement, 
 
 in extravagance the speculations men- more innocent but equally unsubstan- 
 
 tioned in the text ; but Hitzig, Zur tial, will be found in Lagarde's intro- 
 
 Kritik Paulinischer Briefe, p. 7 sq. duction to his Clementina, p. (n) sq. 
 
 (1870), far exceeds them all. The re- (1865). 
 
 futation of Hilgenfeld, Zeitschr. 1871, " See above, pp. 21, 170. 
 p. 331 sq., was quite unnecessary. 
 
172 EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 longed principally, if not solely, to this class. In 1726 one of these places 
 of sepulture was exhumed on the Appian way. Its contents will appear 
 from the title of a work published the following year, and giving an account 
 of the discoyery : Monumentum sive OolurribariuTn Libertorum et Ser- 
 vorum Livice Augustce et Cwsarum, etc., db A. F. Oorio. More recent 
 excavations have added to our knowledge on this subject. Since the year 
 1840 several other sepulchral dove-cotes, situated also near the Appian 
 way, have been brought to light. Accounts of these, more or less complete, 
 with copies of inscriptions will be found in Canina's Prima Parte delta 
 Via Appia i. p. 217 sq., in the Dissertazioni della Poniificia Accademia 
 Romana di Archeologia xi. p. 317 sq. (1852), and in the Monumenti ed 
 Annali pvbblicati doll' Instituto di Gorrispondenza Archeologica net 
 1856 (a paper by Henzen). The occupants of these recently excavated 
 columbaria again are almost all freedmen or slaves of the emperors. The 
 frequency of the name Ti. Claudius suggests a date not earlier and not 
 much later than the second and fourth Cissars : and this date is confirmed 
 by the mention of other members of the imperial family at this time, as 
 Messalina, Octavia, Agrippina, Drusus, etc. Though here and there a 
 name points to a later emperor, the great majority miist be assigned to the 
 reign of Nero or his immediate predecessors and successors, and thus the 
 persons to wliom they refer were mostly contemporaries of St Paul. Be- 
 sides these special sources of infoi-mation, a vast number of isolated inscrip- 
 tions relating to the servants and dependents of the emperors have been 
 discovered from time to time, and will be found in the general collections 
 of Muratori, Gruter, Orelli, atid others. By these means we obtain some 
 insight into the names and offices of the 'household of Csesar' at the date 
 when the expression was used in the Epistle to the Philippians. 
 List of The following list will give some idea of the number and variety of 
 
 offices in places which the 'domus Augusta' included: 'psedagogus puerorum, dis- 
 JJ' w "°^' P°"^**or rationis privatae, exactor tributorum, propositus velarionini, pro- 
 curator pi-aegustatorum, praepositus auri escarii, procurator balnei, villicus 
 hortorum, etc. ; a lapidicinis, a pendice cedri, a fnimentis, a commentariis 
 equorum, a veste regia, a cura catellee, ab argento potorio, a supellectile 
 castrensi, a veste forensi, a libellis, a studiis, ab epistulis, a rationibus, a 
 bibliotheca Latina ApoUinis, a bibliotheca Graeca Palatina, etc. ; architectus, 
 tabellarius, castellarius, chirurgus, ocularius, disetarchus, nomenclator, 
 tesserarius, designator, vicarius, symphoniacus, musicarius, pedissequus, 
 lecticarlus, cocus, argentarius, sutor, cubicularius, triclinarius, ostiarius, 
 omator, unctor, etc. ; tonstrix, sarcinatrix, obstetrix, etc' This very im- 
 perfect list suggests a minute subdivision of offices. When we find several 
 distinct functions in the single department of the wardrobe or the plate- 
 chest, when even the 'tasters' form a separate class of servants under their 
 Bearing own chief, the multitude and multiplicity thus exhibited forbid us to spe- 
 on the re- culate on the exact office or rank which may have been held by these friends 
 St VaaL^ "^ ^^ ^^^^- I^^ast of all are we encouraged to assume that they were persons 
 of great influence or distinguished rank. At the same time the connexion 
 with Caesar's household doubtless secured even to the lowest grades of 
 slaves and freedmen substantial though uudehned privileges and immuni- 
 ties, and conferred on them a certain social Importance among their equals, 
 
EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 1/3 
 
 which made them value their position \ Hence we may account for the 
 scrupulous care with which an office in the household, however mean, is 
 always recorded on monumental inscriptions. At the time when St Paul 
 wrote, the influence of the emperor's slaves and dependents had about 
 reached its climax. The reigns of Claudius and Nero have been described 
 aa the saturnalia of the imperial freedmen'. 
 
 Now, if I am right in svipposing that the Epistle to the I hilippians was Members 
 written soon after St Paul's arrival in the metropolis, it would seem to of the 
 follow that the members of Caesar's household who sent their salutations to honsehold 
 Philippi were earlier converts, who did not therefore owe their knowledge of bably etttlj 
 the Gospel to St Paul's preaching in Rome'. Under any circumstances converts, 
 this supposition best explains the incidental character of the allusion. For 
 St Paul obviously assumes that his distant correspondents know all about 
 the persons thus referred to. If so, we are led to look for them in the long 
 list of names saluted by St Paul some thi-ee years before in the Epistle to 
 the Romans. 
 
 Nor is there any prior improbability in this supposition. The earliest Foreigner 
 converts in Rome would naturally be drawn from the classes of foreigners named in 
 sojourning or permanently resident there*, Greeks, Syrians, and especially ^^ valuta 
 Jews. Accordingly one of the persons thus saluted is described as a 'first- to Borne 
 fruit of Asia'^ Aquila and Priscilla also, who are mentioned in this list, 
 appear residing at one time at Corinth, at another at Bphesus'- Of several 
 others again St Paul speaks as personal acquaintances, though he had not 
 as yet visited Rome. Of these Mary bears a Jewish name', and others 
 besides plainly belonged to the same race', though their names do not 
 directly proclaim their origin. Now, though Greeks and Orientals formed 
 a numerous and active portion of the general population of Rome, it was 
 especially about the palace and the court that their numbers and in- 
 fluence were felt°. History reveals not Greeks only, of whom the Romans and four. 
 
 were a little less intolerant, but Syi-ians, Samaritans, Philistines"', and Jews, about the 
 
 court, 
 
 ' Plin. N.H. xiii. 5 'Maroelli Msei- ' Rom. xvi. 5 (the correct reading), 
 
 iiini libertus sed qui se potenti© causa * Acts xviii. 2, 18, 26, i Cor. xvi. 
 
 Offisaris libertis adoptasset,' Hist. Aug. 19. 
 
 Pertinax 8 'Eeddidit prseterea domi- ' Kom. xvi. 6. Probably Jewish, 
 
 nis eos qui se ex privatis domibus in though not certainly, for the form is 
 
 aulam coutulerant.' indecisive. The best mss read Ma- 
 
 ' See Friedlander Sittengeschichte plav (not Hapiiii), and ' Maria ' is a 
 
 Roma I. pp. 65, 68 (ed. 2). In the 2ud good Latin name also, 
 
 chapter of this work much important « xvi. 7, 10, those whom St Paul 
 
 information respecting the court of the calls his 'kinsmen' (oomp. ix. 3). 
 
 early Cffisars is collected and arranged. See above, p. 14, and comp. espe- 
 
 The references in the last note are taken cially Friedlander i. p. 60 sq. 
 
 thence (p. 62). " Thallus a Samaritan under Tibe- 
 
 ' See above, pp. 19, 32. rius (Joseph. Ant. xviii. 6. 4), and A- 
 
 * Seneca (adv. Helv. Cons. 6) says of pelles an Ascalonite under Caius (sea 
 
 the population of Borne at this time, below, p. 1 74], will serve as examples 
 
 ' Jube istou omnes ad nomen citari et of these two minor races. Syrians and 
 
 unde domo quisque sit qusre : videbis Jews very commonly rose to power at 
 
 mo/orem^artem esse quEerelictissedibus court. The case of the Jewish actoi 
 
 suisveneritinmaximamquidemetpul- Alitums mentioned above (p. 6) illaa 
 
 cherrimam urbem, nou tamen suam.' trates the influenceof this latterpeople. 
 
174 
 
 BPISTLB TO THE PHILIPPIAN8. 
 
 holding places of influence about the emperors at this time. And, for every 
 one Tcho succeeded in attaining to distinction, there must hare been tens 
 and hundreds of Orientals about the court who never emerged from obscurity. 
 For, independently of other causes, the success of the few would draw 
 
 Inference, around them crowds of their fellow-countrymen. Thus the household of the 
 Caesars would supply in the greatest abundance the material from which 
 the conversions mentioned in the Epistle to the Romans would probably be 
 «n:ought. 
 
 Following this clue, it may be useful to consult the inscriptions with 
 a view to ascertaining whether the information thence derived throws any 
 additional light on the subject. And for this purpose I shall take in order 
 those names in the salutations of the Epistle to the Romans which give 
 promise of yielding a result. 
 
 Amplias. !• Amplias is a contraction of Ampliatus, which is read in some of the 
 
 best copies. A common name in itself, it occurs several times in connexion 
 with the imperial household. Thus ampliatfs . hilari . augfstoe . libbkti . 
 SER.viLicus (Grut. p. 62. 10). We meet with it also attached to the names 
 'Ti. Claudius' (Murat. p. 1249, i4,comp. p. 1150.7). Again two persons bear- 
 ing the name are mentioned in the inscriptions of columbaria specially ap- 
 propriated to the household {Ace. di Arch. xi. pp. 359, 374). At a Liter 
 date we read of one Ampliatus, a freedman of Hadrian (Grut. p. 591. 10). 
 
 Urbanus. 2. The name Ukbanus is equally common with Ampliatus, and in the 
 
 following inscriptions designates members of the household: ti.olaudi, 
 
 URBANI . SER . MENSORIS . AEDIKICIORUM (Murat. p. 924. 8) : CLAUBIAB . PUI- 
 LBTI . AUG . L . LIBERTAE . HEURESI . URBANUS . ET . SURUS . FBATRES . SORORI . 
 
 PIIS8IMAE (Murat. p. 996. 5): urbanus . lydbs . aug . l . dispeks . inmunis . 
 
 DAT . HERMAE . FRATRI . OtC. (Murat. 92O. l) : T . FLAVIUS . AUG . LIB . URBA- 
 NUS (Grut. p. 589. 10). Accordmgly the name C. Julius Urbanus is found 
 more than once (Grut. p. 574. i, p. 981. 3). On an inscription a.d. 115, 
 Urbanus and Ampliatus occur next to each other in a list of imperial 
 freedmen connected with the mint (Grut. p. 1070. i). 
 
 Stachys. 3. The next name Staohys is comparatively rare. Yet at least one 
 
 person so called held an important oflBce in the household near the time 
 when St Paul wrote : stachts . marcbllae . medicub, whose name occurs 
 on the same monument with one n. julics . fides (Henzen in the Imtit. di 
 Corriep. Arc/ieol. 1856, p. 15, no. 44). Again in another inscription, 
 where one Stachys is mentioned, and where the names of his relations, 
 Julius, Julia, Claudia, are also given, we may safely infer some connexion 
 with the court (Grut. p. 689. i). Compare also Grut. p. 587. 2, 
 
 ApeUes. 4. Apelles again is a name belonging to the imperial household. It 
 
 was borne for instance by a famous tragic actor, a native of Ascalon, who at 
 one time stood high in the favour of the emperor Caius, and is described 
 as inheriting a national antipathy to the Jews (Philo Leg. ad Cat. p. 576 m ; 
 see Friedlander Sittmgesch. Boms 1. p. 98). One ol. apelleb again is 
 mentioned as a member of the household (Orell. 2892) and the name ti. 
 CLAUDIUS APELLA occurs in an inscription of the age of Vespasian (Grut 
 p. 240). 
 
 Household 5- Aristobulus surnamed the younger, a grandson of Herod the Great, 
 was educated in the metropolis, together with his brothers Agrippa and 
 
EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 1 75 
 
 Herod. While his two brothers became kings, the one of Judeea, the other of Aristo- 
 of Ohalcis, Aristobulus himself ended his days in a private station, and iia it tulus. 
 appears, in Rome (Joseph. Bell. Jvd. ii. 1 1. 6). The date of his death is 
 uncertain, but he was still liviug in the year 45 {Antiq. xx. i. 2). The 
 emperor Claudius, writing at this time, speaks of Aristobulus as entertain- 
 ing moat dutiful and friendly sentiments towards himself. When the slaves 
 of a household passed into the hands of a new master, by cession or inhe- 
 ritance or confiscation, they continued to be designated by the name of 
 their former proprietor. Thus a slave whom the emperor had inherited by 
 the will of the Galatian king Amyntas is described as caesaris . ber . 
 AMTNTIANUS (Grut. p. 577. S). In the same way in the imperial household 
 we meet with Msecenatiani, Agrippiani, Germaniciani, etc., where in like 
 manner the names preserve the memoi-y of their earlier masters ^ Now it 
 seems not improbable, considering the intimate relations between Claudius 
 and Aristobulus, that at the death of the latter his servants, wholly or in 
 part, should be transferred to the palace. In this case they would be de- 
 signated Arutohuliani, for which I suppose St Paul's ol in rap 'hpiaro^ov- 
 Xov to be an equivalent. It is at least not an obvioias phrase and demands 
 explanation. And, as the household of Aristobulus would naturally be 
 composed in a large measure of Jews, the Gospel would the more easily 
 be introduced to their notice. Moreover it is worth observing that after 
 saluting 'them of the household of Aristobulus,' St Paul immediately 
 singles out one whom he designates his kinsman, i.e. his fellow-countryman', 
 and whose name Herodiok we might expect to find among the slaves or 
 freedmen of a distinguished member of the Herodian family. This inter- 
 pretation of the expression roiis €< rav 'Apia-ToPovXov will, I think, be con- 
 firmed by the salutation which follows. 
 
 6. For immediately after St Paul uses the same form of expression in Household 
 speaking of the household of Narcissus. The name Narcissus indeed is °' Narcis- 
 common enough, and we meet with it several times where a connexion 
 
 with the household seems probable, e.g. Ti. Claudius Narcissus (Murat. 
 p. 1325. 5, comp. p. 1452. 8), Ti. Julius Narcissus (Murat. p. 1362. 2, 4). 
 But here, as in the case of Aristobulus, the expression seems to point to some 
 famous person of the name. And the powerful freedman Narcissus, whose 
 wealth was proverbial (Juv. Sat. xiv. 329), whose influence with Claudius 
 was unbounded, and who bore a chief part in the intrigues of this reign, 
 alone satisfies this condition. He was put to death by Agrippina shortly 
 after the accession of Nero (Tac. Ann. xiii. i, Dion Cass. Ix. 34), about 
 three or four years before the Epistle to the Romans was written. As was 
 usual in such cases, his household would most probably pass into the hands 
 of the emperor, still however retaining the name of Narcissus. A mem- 
 ber of this household apparently is commemorated in an extant inscription, 
 TI . CLATJDio . sp . p . NAROissiAifo (Murat. p. 1150. 4; comp. p. 902. 5). 
 These Narcissiani I suppose to bo designated by St Paul's ol ck twv 
 Na/iKiVtrov. 
 
 7. In TBYPH.«af A and Tetphosa we may recognise two sisters or at Tryphsna 
 least near relatives, for it was usual to designate members of the same 
 
 1 See Ephemeris Epigraphica 11. p. 29. " See above, p. 16, note 2. 
 
1/6 
 
 BPISTLB TO THE PHILIPPIAN8. 
 
 and Try- 
 phosa. 
 
 family by derivatives of the same root. The name Trypbsena, though not 
 common, was found in the imperial household at or about the time when 
 St Paul wrote. On an inscription in the columbaria chiefly appropriated 
 to the emperor's servants wo read, d . m . tetphabnab . valbria . teyphae- 
 
 NA . MATEI . B . M . P . ET . VALEKIUS . FUTIANUS (AcC. di Avcheol. XI. p. 375) J 
 
 where the direct connexion with the household is established by a neigh- 
 bouring inscription, d . m . olaudiae . auo . lib . neebidi . m . valeeius . fu- 
 TiANS (sic) . MATEI . OAEISBIMAE (ib. p. 376). The names Valeriim, Valeria, 
 very frequently occur in connexion with Claudius, Claudia, the former 
 having doubtless been introduced into the imperial household through the 
 empress Messalina, a daughter of M. Valerius Messala^ The combination 
 of these two gentile names fixes the date approximately. Another Valeria 
 Tryphsena, if it be not the same, is mentioned elsewhere; Q . taleeio . sa- 
 
 LUTAEI . AUG . PUTEOLIS . ET . CUMIS . ET VALEEIAE . TRIPBNAB . HEEEDES (Grut, 
 
 p. 481. 2). The name of one Claudia Tryphsena also is preserved : olaudu. 
 
 TRrPHAENA . FECIT . A6IATICAB . FILIAB . SUAE (Murat p. II50. 3). 
 
 The name Tryphosa also, which occurs more frequently, is found several 
 times in connexion with the household : agriae . trtphosae . vestifioae . 
 
 LrVIUS . THEOJfA . AB . BPISTULIS . GEAEO . SCEIBA . A . LIB . PONTIFIOALIBUS . 
 CONJUGI . SANCTISSIMAB . B.D.S.M. (Grut. p. 578. 6, COmp. ib. p. 446. 6) : DI8 • 
 MANIBU8 . JULIAB . TEYPHOSAE . T. FLAVIUS . POETUNATUS . CONJUGI etC (Grut 
 
 p. 796. 3, comp. ib. p. 1 133. i). In another inscription again it is found 
 connected with the name Valerius : valeei . peimi . et . jun . teyphosae . 
 VIVA . FBO . (Grut. p. 893, a). 
 
 8. RuFus is a very ordinary namo, and would not have claimed notice 
 here but for its occurrence in one of the Gospels. There seems no reason 
 to doubt the tradition that St Mark wrote especially for the Romans ; and, 
 if BO, it is worth remarking that he alone of the evangelists describes Simon 
 of Cjrene, as 'the father of Alexander and Rufus' (xv. 21). A person of 
 this name therefore seems to have held a prominent place among the Ro- 
 man Christians ; and thus there is at least fair ground for identifying the 
 Rufus of St Paul with the Rufus of St Mark. The inscriptions exhibit 
 several members of the household bearing the names Rufus and Alexander, 
 but this fact is of no value where both names are so common. 
 
 9. Of the gi'oup which follows, Heemes is among the commonest slave- 
 names. In the household alone probably not less than a score of persons 
 might be counted up from the inscriptions, who bore this name at or about 
 the time when St Paul wrote. Heemas again, being a contraction of several 
 different names, such as Hermagoras, Hermeros, Hermodorus, Hermo- 
 genes, etc., though not quite so common as the former, is still very frequent. 
 
 Patrobas. The remaining three are rare. Yet Pateobas, an abbreviated form of 
 Patrobius, was borne by a wealthy and powerful freedman of Nero, who 
 was put to death by Galba (Tac. Hist. i. 49, ii. 95). But though the in- 
 frequency of the name would suggest his identity with the person saluted 
 by St Paul, his character accords ill with the profession of a disciple of 
 
 Bufus. 
 
 Hermes. 
 
 Hermas. 
 
 1 This inscription will serve bb an il- 
 lustration ; VALEEIA . niLAHU . NUTKIX . 
 OCIAVIAE . CAESABIB . ACOUSTI . REQDI- 
 ESCIT . OUM . II . OLACDIO . FBDOTO , 
 
 Vino (Orelli, 4491). This Ooiavia is 
 the mihappy daughter of Claudius and 
 Messalina, who was afterwards married 
 to Nero. See also Clem. Bom. § 59 (note). 
 
JEPISTLB TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 1 7; 
 
 Christ, unless history has done him a cruel wrong. The Patrobas of St Paul 
 however might well have been a dependent of this powerful freedman. To 
 some member of the household, possibly to this notorious Patrobius, the 
 following inscription refers: ti . ol . auo . l . patrobius (Grut. p. 6io. 3), 
 where doubtless ' Patrobius ' is correctly read for ' Patronus' : comp. Murat. 
 
 p. 1329. 3, TI . CLAUDIO . PATROBIO. 
 
 10. Philologus and Julia appear to have been man and wife, or bro- PhUologna 
 ther and sister. The latter name points to a dependent of the court. The and Julia, 
 former also occurs more than once in connexion with the imperial house- 
 hold : . JULIO . . L . PHILOLOGO (Murat. p. 1586. 3) : dama . hviae . l . cas . 
 
 PHOEBUS . PHILOLOGI {Mon. Liv. p. l68) : TI . CLAUDIUS . AUGUSTI . LIB . PHILO- 
 LOGUS . AB . EPISTOLIS (Murat. p. 2043. 2)': TI . CLAUDIUS . AUGUSTI . LIB . 
 PHILOLOGUS . LIBEEALIS (Grut. p. 63O. l). 
 
 11. Immediately after Philologus and Julia are mentioned Nereus and Nereus 
 his sister. Por Nereus compare this inscription found at Ancyra ; eutt- ^^ ^** 
 OHUS . NEEEi . CAESARis . AUG . SBR . viL . PiLio (Murat. p. 899. 7). The sister's ^'° ^^' 
 name is not given, but one Nereis was a member of the household about 
 
 this time, as appears from an inscription already quoted (p. 176). 
 
 As the result of this investigation, we seem to have established a fair General 
 presumption, that among the salutations in the Epistle to the Romans some result. 
 members at least of the imperial household are included. The inscriptions 
 indeed cannot generally be taken to show more than the fact that the same 
 names occurred there. A very faint probability of the identity of persons 
 may in some instances be added, though even with the rarer names the 
 identification must be held highly precarious. But a combination, such as 
 Philologus and Julia, affords more solid ground for inference : and in other 
 cases, as in the household of Narcissus, the probable circumstances suggest 
 a connexion with the palace. If so, an explanation has been found of the 
 reference to members of Caesar's household in the Philippian letter. At all 
 events this investigation will not have been useless, if it has shown that 
 the names and allusions at the close of the Roman Epistle are in keeping 
 with the circumstances of the metropolis in St Paul's day ; for thus it 
 will have supplied an answer to two forms of objection ; the one denying 
 the genuineness of the last two chapters of this letter, and the other 
 allowing their genuineness but detaching the salutations from the rest and 
 assigning them to another epistle^. 
 
 1 It has been supposed that the of the 14th, in others at the end of the 
 name Philologus wag given by the mas- 16th chapter, and in others in both 
 ter to the freedman mentioned in this places, while others again omit it en- 
 inscription, as being appropriate to tirely. Moreover in Marcion's copy the 
 his office ; Friedlander, i. pp. 89, 160. last two chapters of the epistle were 
 Thefollowinginscriptionmaybealleged wanting. All these variations are easily 
 in support of this conjecture ; PUDENS. explained by the hypothesis that the 
 M . liEPim . I. . OKAMMATious . eto. Epistle to the Eomans was circulated 
 AiiEics . PHiLOLOQUS . DisoiPULUS at a vciy early date in two forms, the 
 (Grut. p. 653. 2). If so, some light is personal matter being omitted in the 
 thrown on the probable occupation of shorter. Baur however condemns the 
 the Philologus of St Paul. last two chapters as spurious (Paulus 
 
 » The doxology (Eom. xvl 25, 26, p.spSsq.j.thoughthemindof StPauIis 
 
 17) is found in some copies at the end apparent in almost every phrase. Other 
 
 PHIL. 12 
 
i;8 
 
 EPISTLE TO THE PHILTPPIANS. 
 
 less extravagant critics have found dif- 
 ficulties in one or two historical no- 
 tices which these chapters contain : and 
 Ewald, whose opinion always deserves 
 consideration, solves these difficulties 
 by severing xvi. 3 — lo from the rest, 
 and treating it as a fragment of a lost 
 Epistle to theEphesians(Z)ieSen(foc7w«i- 
 ben etc. p. 428). By this means he ex- 
 plains the reference to Epeenetus as the 
 first-fruit of Asia (ver. 5 where 'Atrlas, 
 not 'Axatas, is the right reading), and 
 accounts also for the presence of Aqmla 
 and Priscilla (ver. 3), who were found 
 not long before at Ephesns (i Cor. xvi. 
 19). This view is far preferable to the 
 former, inasmuch as it recognises St 
 Paul's authorship; but on the other 
 hand it loses all support from the phe- 
 nomena of the Mss, which require the 
 two chapters to be treated as a whole, 
 and lend no countenance to this ar- 
 bitrary dissection. The novel theory 
 started by Benan (Saint Paul p. Ixxiii), 
 who supposes that an editor has com- 
 bined four copies of the same encyclical 
 letter of St Paul, each addressed to a 
 different church and having a difierent 
 ending, has the same advantage over 
 Baur's view, but is condemned by its 
 own complexity. Nor in fact are the 
 difficulties serious enough to justify any 
 
 such treatment. At a time when the 
 court and city of Eome swarmed with 
 Asiatics (Friedlander i. p. 59 sq.), it is 
 no surprise to encounter one Christian 
 convert among the crowd. And again, 
 as Bome was the head-quarters of Aqnila 
 and Priscilla, and they had been driven 
 thence by an imperial edict (Acts xviil 
 2), it is natural enough that they should 
 have returned thither, as soon as it was 
 convenient and safe to do so. The year 
 which elapses between the two notices 
 of this couple (i Cor. xvi. 19; Bom, xvi. 
 3 — 5) allows ample time for them to 
 transfer themselves from Ephesus to 
 Bome, and for the Apostle to hear of 
 their return to their old abode. The 
 results of the investigation in the text 
 (whatever other value it may have) seem 
 sufficient to counterbalance any such 
 difficulties, for it has been shown that 
 the notices are in keeping with Bome, 
 and the same degree of coincidence pro- 
 bably could not be established in the 
 case of any other place. A fuller re- 
 futation of Eenan will be found in the 
 Journal of Fhilology, 11. p. 264 sq. 
 In this and a later article {ib. lu. 
 p. 193 sq.) I have suggested a theory 
 to account for the documentary facts, 
 more especially the varying position of 
 the doxology. 
 
DISSERTATIONS. 
 
 12 — 2 
 
1. 
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 
 
 II. 
 
 ST PAUL AND SENECA. 
 
T 
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 
 
 HE kingdom of Christ, not being a kingdom of this world, is Idealofthe 
 not limited by the restrictions which fetter other societies, poli- cii^nh'" 
 tical or religious. It is in the fullest sense free, comprehensive, 
 universal. It displays this character, not only in the acceptance of 
 all comers who seek admission, irrespective of race or caste or sex, 
 but also in the instruction and treatment of those who are already 
 its members. It has no sacred days or seasons, no special sanctu- 
 aries, because every time and every place alike are holy. Above all 
 it has no sacerdotal system. It interposes no sacrificial tribe or class 
 between God and man, by whose intervention alone God is recon- 
 ciled and man forgiven. Each individual member holds personal 
 communion with the Divine Head. To Him immediately he is 
 responsible, and from Him directly he obtains pardon and draws 
 strength. 
 
 It is most important that we should keep this ideal definitely Necessatj 
 in view, and I have therefore stated it as broadly as possible. Yet ^lalinca- 
 the broad statement, if allowed to stand alone, would suggest a false 
 impression, or at least would convey only a half truth. It must be 
 evident that no society of men could hold together without officers, 
 without rules, without institutions of any kind ; and the Church of 
 Christ is not exempt from this universal law. The conception in 
 short is strictly an ideal, which we must ever hold before our eyes, The ide» 
 which should inspire and interpret ecclesiastical polity, but which ""J^,v 
 nevertheless cannot supersede the necessary wants of human society, 
 and, if crudely and hastily applied, will lead only to signal failure. 
 As appointed days and set places are indispensable to lier efficiency, 
 
I82 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 
 
 so also the Church could not fulfil the purposes for which she exists, 
 without rulers and teachers, without a ministry of reconciliation, 
 in short, without an order of men who may in some sense be de- 
 I / signated a priesthood. In this respect the ethics of Christianity pre- 
 l sent an analogy to the politics. Here also the ideal conception and 
 the actual realization are incommensurate and in a manner con- 
 tradictory. The Gospel is contrasted with the Law, as the spirit 
 with the letter. Its ethical principle is not a code of positive ordi- 
 nances, but conformity to a perfect exemplar, incorporation into a 
 divine life. The distinction is most important and eminently fertile 
 in practical I'esults. Yet no man would dare to live without laying 
 down more or less definite rules for his own guidance, without 
 yielding obedience to law in some sense ; and those who discard or 
 attempt to discard all such aids are often farthest from the attain- 
 ment of Christian perfection. 
 
 This qualification is introduced here to deprecate any misunder- 
 standing to which the opening statement, if left without compensa- 
 tion, would fairly be exposed. It will be time to enquire hereafter 
 in what sense the Christian ministry may or may not be called a 
 Special priesthood. But in attempting to investigate the historical de- 
 istic of " velopment of this divine institution, no better starting-point sug- 
 Christian- gested itself than the characteristic distinction of Christianity, as 
 declared occasionally by the direct language but more frequently by 
 the eloquent silence of the apostolic writings. 
 
 For in this respect Christianity stands apart from all the 
 older religions of the world. So far at least, the Mosaic dispensa- 
 tion did not difier from the religions of Egypt or Asia or Greece. 
 TheJewish Yet the sacerdotal system of the Old Testament possessed one im- 
 pnes 00 •pQj.^^jjj characteristic, which separated it from heathen priesthoods 
 and which deserves especial notice. The priestly tribe held this 
 peculiar relation to God only as the representatives of the whole 
 nation. As delegates of the people, they ofiiered sacrifice and made 
 atonement. The whole community is regarded as 'a kingdom of 
 priests,' ' a holy nation.' "When the sons of Levi are set apart, 
 their consecration is distinctly stated to be due under the divine 
 guidance not to any inherent sanctity or to any caste privilege, 
 but to an act of delegation on the part of the entire people. The 
 Levites are, so to speak, ordained by the whole congi-egation. ' The 
 
THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 1 83 
 
 children of Israel,* it is said, ' shall put their hands upon the \, 
 Levites'.' The nation thus deputes to a single tribe the priestly //', 
 functions which belong properly to itself as a whole. 
 
 The Christian idea therefore was the restitution of this immediate Its relation 
 and direct relation with God, which was partly suspended but not ciiriBtian 
 abolished by the appointment of a sacerdotal tribe. The Levitical priesthood, 
 priesthood, like the Mosaic law, had served its temporary purpose. 
 The period of childhood had passed, and the Church of God was 
 now arrived at mature age. The covenant people resumed their 
 sacerdotal functions. But the privileges of the covenant were no 
 longer confined to the limits of a single nation. Every member of 
 the human family was potentially a member of the Church, and, as 
 such, a priest of God. 
 
 The influence of this idea on the moral and spiritual growth of influence 
 the individual believer is too plain to require any comment ; but ?iu • +• 
 its social eflfects may call for a passing remark. It will hardly ideal, 
 be denied, I think, by those who have studied the history of 
 modern civilization with attention, that this conception of the 
 Christian Church has been mainly instrumental in the emancipation 
 of the degraded and oppressed, in the removal of artificial barriers 
 between class and class, and in the diffusion of a general phil- 
 anthropy untrammelled by the fetters of party or race ; in short, 
 that to it mainly must be attributed the most important advan- 
 tages which constitute the superiority of modem societies over 
 ancient. Consciously or unconsciously, the idea of an luiiversal 
 priesthood, of the religious equality of all men, which, though not 
 untaught before, was first embodied in the Church of Christ, has 
 worked and is working untold blessings in political institutions and 
 in social life. But the careful student will also observe that this 
 idea has hitherto been very imperfectly apprehended ; that through- 
 out the history of the Church it has been struggling for recognition, 
 at most times discerned in some of its aspects but at all times wholly 
 ignored in others ; and that therefore the actual results are a very 
 inadequate measure of its efficacy, if only it could assume due pro- 
 minence and were allowed free scope in action. 
 
 This then is the Christian ideal; a holy season extending the 
 
 1 Num. viii. 10. 
 
l84 THE OHEISTIAN MINISTRY. 
 
 whole year round — a temple confined only by the limits of the habit- 
 able world — a priesthood coextensive with the human race. 
 Practical Strict loyalty to this conception was not held incompatible with 
 
 tiwi"""^' pJ'S'Ctical measures' of organization. As the Church grew in num- 
 bers, as new and heterogeneous elements were added, as the early 
 fervour of devotion cooled and strange forms of disorder sprang 
 up, it became necessary to provide for the emergency by fijced 
 rules and definite officers. The community of goods, by which the 
 infant Church had attempted to give effect to the idea of an universal 
 brotherhood, must very soon have been abandoned under the pres- 
 Fixeddays sure of circumstances. The celebration of the first day in the week 
 of worship- ^* once, the institution of annual festivals afterwards, were seen to be 
 necessary to stimulate and direct the devotion of the believers. The 
 appointment of definite places of meeting in the earliest days, the 
 erection of special buildings for worship at a later date, were found 
 indispensable to the working of the Church. But the Apostles never 
 but the lost sight of the idea in their teaching. They proclaimed loudly 
 in view. ^^^^ ' ^°^ dwelleth not in temples made by hands.' They indig- 
 nantly denounced those who ' observed days and months and seasons 
 and years.' This language is not satisfied by supposing that they 
 condemned only the temple-worship in the one case, that they repro- 
 bated only Jewish sabbaths and new moons in the other. It was against 
 the false principle that they waged war ; the principle which exalted 
 the means into an end, and gave an absolute intrinsic value to subor- 
 dinate aids and expedients. These aids and expedients, for his own 
 sake and for the good of the society to which he belonged, a Christian 
 could not afibrd to hold lightly or neglect. But they were no part of 
 the essence of God's message to man in the Gospel : they must not 
 be allowed to obscure the idea of Christian worship. 
 Appoint- So it was also with the Christian priesthood. For communi- 
 
 miuistry. eating instruction and for preserving public order, for conducting 
 religious worship and for dispensing, social charities, it became 
 necessary to appoint special officers. But the priestly functions and 
 privileges of the Christian people are never regarded as transferred 
 or even delegated to these officers. They are called stewards or 
 messengers of God, servants or ministers of the Church, and the 
 like : but the sacerdotal title is never once conferred upon them. 
 The only priests under the Crospel, designated as such in the New 
 
THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 1 85 
 
 Testament, are the saints, the members of the Christian brother- 
 hood". 
 
 As individuals, all Christians are priests alike. As members Two pas- | 
 
 of a corporation, they have their several and distinct offices. The PauLre- ; V 
 
 similitude of the human, body, where each Limb or organ performs lath's / 
 . >. • 111 tzi6rGto. I 
 
 its own functions, and the health and growth of the whole frame are 
 promoted by the harmonious but separate working of every part, was 
 chosen by St Paul to represent the progress and operation of the 
 Church. In two passages, written at two different stages in his 
 apostolic career, he briefly sums up the offices in the Church with 
 reference to this image. In the earlier^ he enumerates ' first apostles, 
 secondly jrophets, thirdly teachers, then powers, then gifts of heal- 
 ing, helps, governments, kinds of tongues.' In the second passage' 
 the list is briefer; 'some apostl^, and some jprophetSj, and some 
 evangelists, and some pastors and teachers.' The earlier eniimera-l 
 tion diflFers chiefly from the later in specifying distinctly certain! 
 miraculous powers, this being required by the Apostle's argument! 
 which is directed against an exaggerated estimate and abuse of suchj 
 gifts. Neither list can have been intended to be exhaustive. In both They refer 
 alike the work of converting unbelievers and founding congregations '^iZn^n '' 
 
 holds the foremost place, while the permanent government and in- raryminis- 
 
 try. 
 struotion of the several churches is kept in the background. This 
 
 prominence was necessary in the earliest age of the Gospel. The 
 apostles, prophets, evangelists, all range under the former head. But 
 the permanent ministry, though lightly touched upon, is not forgot- 
 ten; for under the designation of 'teachers, helps, governments' 
 in the one passage, of 'pastors and teachers' in the other, these 
 officers must be intended. Again in both passages alike it will be 
 seen that^reat_stress is laid onTEe~work of the SpTHiE! The faculty 
 of governing not less than the utterance of prophecy, the gift of heal- 
 ing not less than the gift of tongues, is an inspiration of the Holy 
 
 1 I Pet. ii. 5, 9, Apoc. i. 6, V. 10, XX. 6. Ephes. iv. ij). The whole passage, 
 
 The comiQentator Hilary has express- to which I shall have occasion to refer 
 
 ed this truth with much distinctness : again, contains a singnlarly apprecia- 
 
 'In lege nascebantnr saoerdotes ex ge- tive account of the relation of the mi- 
 
 nereAaronLevitsB: nunc autem omnes nistry to the congregation, 
 
 ex genere simt saoerdotaU, dicente " i Cor. xii. 28. 
 
 Petro Apostolo, Quia estis genus regale ' Ephes. iv. 1 1, 
 et sageydptftle etc' (AlB^irPsiast. on 
 
1 86 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 
 
 Ghost. But on the other hand in both alike there is an entire 
 
 silence about priestly functions : for the most exalted office in the 
 
 Church, the highest gift of the Spirit, conveyed no sacerdotal right 
 
 which was not enjoyed by the humblest member of the Christian 
 
 community. 
 
 Growing From the subordinate place, which it thus occupies in the notices 
 
 miport- ^£ g^ Paul, the permanent ministry gradually emerged, as the Church 
 
 permanent assumed a more settled form, and the higher but temporary offices, 
 
 TniniBiiy. ^^^-^ ^ ^j^^ apostolate, feU away. This progressive growth and 
 
 development of the ministry, until it arrived at its mature and 
 
 normal state, it will be the object of the following pages to trace. 
 
 Definition But before proceeding further, some definition of terms is neces- 
 
 of terms g^j.^ Qn no subiect has more serious error arisen from the con- 
 neceasary. ■' •' 
 
 fusion of language. The word ' priest' has two difierent senses. In 
 
 the one it is a synonyme for presbyter or elder, and designates the 
 minister who pi:esides over and instructs a Christian congregation : 
 in the other it is equivalent to the Latin sacerdos, the Greek Upev^, 
 or the Hebrew ]n3, the offerer of sacrifices, who also performs other 
 mediatorial offices between God and man. How the confusion 
 between these two meanings has affected the history and theology of 
 'Priest' the Church, it will be instructive to consider in the sequel. At 
 and ' pres- pj.gggjjt Jt; is sufficient to say that the word will be used throughout 
 this essay, as it has been used hitherto, in the latter sense only, so 
 that priestly will be equivalent to 'sacerdotal' or 'hieratic' Etymo- 
 logically indeed the other meaning is alone correct (for the words 
 priest and presbyter are the same); but convenience will justify its 
 restriction to this secondary and imported sense, since the English 
 language supplies no other rendering of sacerdos or Upevi. On the 
 other hand, when the Christian elder is meant, the longer form ' pres- 
 byter' will be employed throughout. 
 
 Different History seems to show decisively that before the middle of the 
 
 views pn ggcond centmy each church or organized Christian community had 
 
 ol the its three orders of ministers, its bishop, its presbyters, and its 
 
 ministry, deacons. On this point there cannot reasonably be two opinions. 
 
 But at what time and under what circumstances this organization 
 
 was matured, and to what extent our allegiance is due to it as an 
 
 authoritative ordinance, are more difficult questions. Some have 
 
THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 1 87 
 
 recognised in episcopacy an institution of divine origin, absolute and 
 
 indispensable ; others have represented it as destitute of all apostolic 
 
 sanction and authority. Some again have sought for the archetype of 
 
 the threefold ministry in the Aaronic priesthood j others in the 
 
 arrangements of synagogue worship. In this clamour of antagonistic 
 
 opinions history is obviously the sole upright, impartial referee ; and 
 
 the historical mode of treatment will therefore be strictly adhered to 
 
 in the following investigation. The doctrine in this instance at all 
 
 events is involved in the history'. 
 
 St Luke's narrative represents the Twelve Apostles in the earliest Ministry 
 
 days as the sole directors and administrators of the Church. For jg pgy'eve 
 
 the financial business of the infant community, not less than for its the Apo- 
 
 ... . sties, 
 
 spiritual guidance, they alone are responsible. This state of things 
 
 could not last long. By the rapid accession of numbers, and still 
 
 more by the admission of heterogeneous classes into the Church, the 
 
 work became too vast and too various for them to discharge unaided. 
 
 To relieve them from the increasing pressure, the inferior and less 
 
 important functions passed successively into other hands : and thus 
 
 each grade of the ministry, beginning from the lowest, was created 
 
 in order. 
 
 I. The establishment of the diaconate came first. Complaints i. Dea. 
 
 had reached the ears of the Apostles from an outlying portion of the Appoint- 
 
 community. The Hellenist widows had been overlooked in the "P^"' "* 
 
 ■' the Seven. 
 
 daily distribution of food and alms. To remedy this neglect a new 
 office was created. Seven men were appointed whose duty it was 
 to superintend the public messes", and, as we may suppose, to provide 
 in other ways for the bodily wants of the helpless poor. Thus 
 relieved, the Twelve were enabled to devote themselves without 
 interruption ' to prayer and to the ministry of the word.' The 
 Apostles suggested the creation of this new office, but the persons 
 were chosen by popular election and aftervrards ordained by the 
 Twelve with imposition of hands. Though the complaint came from 
 the Hellenists, it must not be supposed that the ministrations of the 
 
 1 The origin of the Christian minis- more recent works ou the subject with 
 
 try is ably investigated in Eothe's which I am acquainted, and to both of 
 
 Anfdnge der ChristUchen Kirehe etc. them I wish to acknowledge my obliga- 
 
 (1837), and Eitschl's EnUtehung der tions, though in many respects I have 
 
 AUkatholisciien Kirehe (2nd ed. 1857). arrived at results different from eith?I. 
 
 These are the most important of the ' Acts vj. ? iuiKOPetii Tpair^lau, 
 
I88 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 
 
 Seven were confined to this class". The object in creating this new 
 ofiSce is stated to be not the partial but the entire relief of the Apostles 
 from the serving of tables. This being the case, the appointment of 
 Hellenists (for such they would appear to have been from their 
 names') is a token of the liberal and loving spirit which prompted 
 the Hebrew members of the Church in the selection of persons to fill 
 the oflB.ce. 
 The Seven I have assumed that the oflSce thus established represents the 
 cons later diaconate ; for though this point has been much disputed, I do 
 
 not see how the identity of the two can reasonably be called in 
 question'. If the word deacon does not occur in the passage, yet 
 the corresponding verb and substantive, Sia/coi/etv and SiaKovia, are 
 repeated more than once. The functions moreover are substantially 
 those which devolved on the deacons of the earliest ages, and which 
 still in theory, though not altogether in practice, form the primary 
 duties of the office. Again, it seems clear from the emphasis with 
 which St Luke dwells on the new institution, that he looks on 
 the establishment of this office, not as an isolated incident, but as 
 the initiation of a new order of things in the Church. It is in 
 short one of those representative facts, of which the earlier part of 
 his narrative is almost wholly made up. Lastly, the tradition of 
 the identity of the two offices has been unanimous from the earliest 
 times. Irenseus, the first writer who alludes to the appointment of 
 the Seven, distinctly holds them to have been deacons*. The Eoman 
 Church some centuries later, though the presbytery had largely in- 
 creased meanwhile, still restricted the number of deacons to seven, 
 thus preserving the memory of the first institution of this office*. 
 
 - So for instance Vitringa de Synag. p. iSg.note i)asfavouringhiBview. With 
 
 III. 2. 5, p. 928 sq., and Mosheim de strange perversity Bdhmer {Diss. Jur. 
 
 Beb. Christ, p. 1 19, followed by many Eccl. p. 349 sq.) supposes them to be 
 
 later -writers. presbyters, and this account has been 
 
 ' This inference however is far from adopted even by Bitaohl, p. 355 sq. 
 
 certain, since many Hebrews bore According to another view the office of 
 
 Greek names, b. g. the Apostles An- theSevenbranohedoutintothetwolater 
 
 drew and Philip. orders of the diaconate and the presby- 
 
 ' It is maintEiined by Vitringa iii. 2. terate, Lange Apost. Zeit. 11. i. p. 75. 
 
 5, p. 920 sq., that the office of the * Iren. i. 26. 3, iii. n. lo, iv. 15. i. 
 
 Seven was different from the later diaoo- " In the middle of the third century, 
 
 nate. He quotes Chrysost. Horn. 14 in when Cornelius writes to Fabiua, Rome 
 
 Act. (ix. p. 115, ed. Montt.) and Can. has 46 presbyters bnt only 7 deacons, 
 
 10 of the Quinis^xt^ne Coijncil (oomp., Puseb. H. E. yi. 43; see Routh's Bel, 
 
THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY, 1 89 
 
 And in like manner a canon of the Council of Neocieaarea (a.d. 315) 
 enacted that there should be no more than seven deacons in any 
 city however great', alleging the apostolic model. This rule, it is 
 true, was only partially observed ; but the tradition was at all events 
 so far respected, that the creation of an order of subdeacons was 
 found necessary in order to remedy the inconvenience arising from 
 the limitation ° 
 
 The narrative in the Acts, if I mistake not, implies that the The office 
 office thus created was entirely new. Some writers however have institution 
 explained the incident as an extension to the Hellenists of an institu- 
 tion which already existed among the Hebrew Christians and is im- 
 plied in the 'younger men' mentioned in an earlier part of St Luke's 
 history". This view seems not only to be groundless in itself, but 
 also to contradict the general tenour of the narrative. It would 
 appear moreover, that the institution was not merely new within the 
 Christian Church, but novel absolutely. There is no reason for con- 
 necting it with any prototype existing in the Jewish community. 
 The narrative offers no hint that it was either a continuation of 
 the order of Levites or an adaptation of an office in the sjmagogue. 
 The philanthropic purpose for which it was established presents no 
 dii-ect point of contact with the known duties of either. The Levite, not bor- 
 whose function it was to keep the beasts for slaughter, to cleanse the Leviti- 
 away the blood and offal of the sacrifices, to serve as porter at the "*! order, 
 temple gates, and to swell the chorus of sacred psalmody, bears no 
 strong resemblance to the Christian deacon, whose ministrations lay 
 among the widows and orphans, and whose time was almost wholly 
 spent in works of charity. And again, the Chazan or attendant in nor from 
 the synagogue, whose duties were confined to the care of the building gogueT 
 and the preparation for service, has more in common with the 
 modem parish clerk than with the deacon in the infant Church of 
 
 Sacr. III. p. 23, with his note p. 61. Sacr.vr.p. 185): aee Bmgham'B Anttq. 
 
 Even in the fourth and fifth centuries 11. lo. 19. At the Quiuisextine or ^nd 
 
 the number of Eoman deacons still re- Trullan council (a. d. 693) this Neoose- 
 
 mained constant: see Amhrosiast. on sarean canon was refuted and rejected: 
 
 iTim. iii 13, Sozom. vii. ig didKovoi Si see Hefele Consiliengeseh. iii. p. 304, 
 
 irapd "Va/mtois eltriri iniv eMv iirrd... and Vitringa p. 922. 
 
 wapd 6i Tots dWott aitdipopos 6 tovtuv ' See Bingham in. i. 3. 
 
 iaiBiins. ' -^-o'^ '^- 6, 10. This is the view of 
 
 ' CouoiL Neocses. c. u (Bouth Bel. Mosheim de Eeb. Christ, p. lu. 
 
igo THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 
 
 Cfhrist'. It is therefore a baseless, though a very common, assump- 
 tion that the Christian diaconate was copied from the arrangements 
 of the synagogue. The Hebrew Chazan is not rendered by deacon in 
 the Greek Testament ; but a different word is used instead*. We 
 may fairly presume that St Luke dwells at such length on the esta- 
 blishment of the diaconate, because he regards it as a novel creation. 
 Teaching Thus the work primarily assigned to the deacons was the relief 
 
 d t ^to" ''^ ^^^ poor. Their office was essentially a ' serving of tables,' as 
 the office, distinguished from the higher function of preaching and instruction. 
 But partly from the circumstances of their position, partly from the 
 personal character of those first appointed, the deacons at once 
 assumed a prominence which is not indicated in the original creation 
 of the office. Moving about freely among the poorer brethren and 
 charged with the relief of their material wants, they would find 
 opportunities of influence which were denied to the higher officers of 
 the Church who necessarily kept themselves more aloof The devout 
 zeal of a Stephen or a Philip would turn these opportunities to the 
 best account ; and thus, without ceasing to be dispensers of alms, 
 they became also ministers of the Word. The Apostles themselves 
 had directed that the persons chosen should be not only 'men of 
 honest report,' but also ' full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom' : and 
 this careful foresight, to which the extended influence of the diacon- 
 ate may be ascribed, proved also the security against its abuse. But 
 still the work of teaching must be traced rather to the capacity of 
 the individual officer than to the direct functions of the office. 
 St Paul, writing thirty years later, and stating the requii-ements of the 
 diaconate, lays the stress mainly on those qualifications which would 
 be most important in persons moving about from house to house 
 and entrusted with the distribution of alms. While he requires that 
 they shall hold the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience, in other 
 words, that they shall be sincere believers, he is not anxious, as in the 
 case of the presbyters, to secure 'aptness to teach,' but demands 
 especially that they shall be free from certain vicious habits, such as 
 
 ' Vitringa (iii. i. 4, p. 914 sq.., m. view, the fact that as a rule there was 
 
 2. «, p. 1 1 30 sq.) derives the Christian only one Chazan to each synagogue 
 
 deacon from the Ohazan of the syna- must not be overlooked, 
 
 gogue. Amongother objections to this ' uirij/jfrijt, Luke iv. so. 
 
THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. IQI 
 
 a love of gossiping, and a greed of paltry gain, into which they might 
 
 easily fall from the nature of their duties'. 
 
 From the mother Church of Jerusalem the institution spread to Spread of 
 
 Gentile Christian brotherhoods. By the ' helps" in the First Epistle ^j^jg ^°' I ' 
 
 to the Corinthians (a.d. k"?), and by the ' ministration" in the Epistle Gentile k 
 \ J ' /> .; r ohurohes. f 
 
 to the Komans (a.d. 58^, the diaconate solely or chiefly seems to be 
 
 intended; but besides these incidental allusions, the latter epistle 
 bears more significant testimony to the general extension of the 
 office. The strict seclusion of the female sex in Greece and in some 
 Oriental countries necessarily debarred them from the ministrations 
 of men : and to meet the want thus felt, it was found necessary at 
 an early date to admit women to the diaconate. A woman-deacon 
 belonging to the Church of Cenchrese is mentioned in the Epistle to 
 the Romans*. As time advances, the diaconate becomes stUl more 
 prominent. In the Philippian Church a few years later (about a.d. 
 62) the deacons take their rank after the presbyters, the two orders 
 together constituting the recognised ministry of the Christian society 
 there'. Again, passing over another interval of some years, we 
 find St Paul in the First Epistle to Timothy (about a.d. 66) giving 
 express directions ai to the qualifications of men-deacons and women- 
 deacons alike". From the tenour of his language it seems clear that 
 in the Christian communities of proconsular Asia at all events the 
 institution was so common that ministerial organization would be 
 considered incomplete without it. On the other hand we may perhaps 
 infer from the instructions which he sends about the same time to 
 Titus in Crete, that he did not consider it indispensable; for while he 
 mentions having given direct orders to his delegate to appoint pres- 
 byters in every city, he is silent about a diaconate'. 
 
 2. While the diaconate was thus an entirely new creation, called 2. Pbes- 
 forth by a special emergency and developed by the progress of events, '°^'^^^^' 
 the early history of the presbyterate was different. If the sacred 
 historian dwells at length on the institution of the lower office but is 
 silent about the first beginnings of the higher, the explanation seems 
 to be, that the latter had not the claim of novelty like the former. 
 
 1 I Tim. iii. 8 sq. ' PhU. i. i. 
 
 ' 1 Cor. xii. 28. ' I Tim. iii. Ssq. 
 
 » Eom. xii. 7. ' Tit. i. 5 sq. 
 * Rom. xvi. I. 
 
192 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 
 
 not a new Tlie Christian Church in its earliest stage was regarded by the body 
 ' of the Jewish people as nothing more than a new sect springing up 
 by the side of the old. This was not unnatural : for the first disciples 
 conformed to the religion of their fathers in all essential points, 
 practising circumcision, observing the sabbaths, and attending the 
 temple-worship. The sects in the Jewish commonwealth were not, 
 properly speaking, nonconformists. They only superadded their own 
 special organization to the established religion of their country, which 
 but adopt- for the most part they were careful to observe. The institution of 
 Bvna- synagogues was flexible enough to allow free scope for wide diver- 
 
 gogue. gences of creed and practice. DiflFerent races as the Cyrenians and 
 Alexandrians, diflFerent classes of society as the freedmen', perhaps 
 also different sects as the Sadducees or the Essenes, each had or 
 could have their own special synagogue', where they might indulge 
 their peculiarities without hindrance. As soon as the expansion of 
 the Church rendered some organization necessary, it would form a 
 ' synagogue' of its own. The Christian congregations in Palestine 
 long continued to be designated by this name', though the term 
 ' ecclesia' took its place from the very first in heathen countries. 
 With the synagogue itself they would naturally, if not necessarily, 
 adopt the normal government of a synagogue, and a body of elders or 
 presbyters would be chosen to direct the religious worship and partly 
 also to watch over the temporal well-being of the society. 
 
 Hence the sUence of St Luke. When he first mentions the pres- 
 byters, he introduces them without preface, as though the institution 
 Occasion were a matter of course. But the moment of their introduction 
 tion°°^ °^' ^^ significant. I have pointed out elsewhere* that the two persecu- 
 tions, of which St Stephen and St James were respectively the chief 
 victims, mark two important stages in the diffusion of the Gospel. 
 Their connexion with the internal organization of the Church is not 
 less remarkable. The first results directly from the establishment of 
 
 ^ Acts Ti. 9. yrjv ovToi KoKovai t-iJi* iavrwv iKKKTjtriaPt 
 
 ' It is stated, that there were no less Kal ou'xi iKKK-qalav. See also Hieron. 
 
 than 480 synagogues in Jerusalem. Epist. cxii. 13 (i. p. 746, ed. Vail.) 
 
 The number is doubtless greatly ex- 'pertotas orientissynagogas.'speakirg 
 
 aggerated, but must have been very of the Nazarseaus ; though his meaning 
 
 considerable: see Vitriuga proL 4, is not altogether clear. Comp. Test. 
 
 p. 2&, and I. I. 14, p. 753. xii Patr. Benj. ii. 
 
 * James ii. i. Epiphanius (xxx. 18, < See Galatians pp. 198, 303. 
 p. 142) says of the Ebionites, awayu- 
 
THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 193 
 
 the lowest order in the ministry, the diaconate. To the second may 
 probably be ascribed the adoption of the next higher grade, the pres- 
 bytery. This later persecution was the signal for the dispersion of 
 the Twelve on a wider mission. Since Jerusalem would no longer be 
 their home as hitherto, it became necessary to provide for the perma- 
 nent direction of the Church there ; and for this purpose the usual 
 government of the synagogue would be adopted. Now at aU events 
 for the first time we read of 'presbyters' in connexion with the 
 Christian brotherhood at Jerusalem'. 
 
 From this time forward all official communications with the Presbytery 
 mother Church are carried on through their intervention. To the f™*™*"' 
 presbyters Barnabas and Saul bear the alms contributed by the 
 Gentile Churches'. The presbyters are persistently associated with 
 the Apostles, in convening the congress, in the superscription of the 
 decree, and in the general settlement of the dispute between the 
 Jewish and Gentile Christians °. By the presbyters St Paul is 
 received many years later on his last visit to Jerusalem, and to them 
 he gives an account of his missionary labours and triumphs'. 
 
 But the office was not confined to the mother Church alone. Extension 
 Jewish pi-esbyteries existed already in all the principal cities of the L Gentiie* 
 dispersion, and Christian presbyteries would early occupy a not less Churches, 
 wide area. On their very first missionary journey the Apostles 
 Paul and Barnabas are described as appointing presbyters in every 
 church'. The same rule was doubtless carried out in all the brother- 
 hoods founded later; but it is mentioned here and here only, 
 because the mode of procedure on this occasion would suffice as a 
 type of the Apostles' dealings elsewhere under similar circumstances. 
 
 The name of the presbyter then presents no difficulty. But whattPresbyters 
 must be said of the term ' bishop' 1 It has been shown that in the "^^ '^^° 
 apostolic writings the two are only diffijrent designations of one and 
 the same office'. How and where was this second name originated] 
 
 To the officers of Gentile Churches alone is the term applied, as a but only io 
 synonyme for presbyter. At Philippi', in Asia Minor', in Crete", o^^J^gg 
 
 ' Acts zi. 30. On the sequence of ' Acts xiv. 23. 
 
 events at this time see Oalatiam p. ' See above, p. g6 sq. 
 124. ' Phil. i. I. 
 
 ' Acts xi. 30. ' Acts XX. 28, t Tim. iii. 1, 3; comp. 
 
 * Acts XT. 2, 4, 6, 21, 23, xvi. 4, : Pet. ii. 25, v. 2. 
 
 * Acts xxi. 18. ' Tit. i. 7. 
 
 PHIL. 13 
 
194 
 
 PosaiWe 
 origin of 
 the term. 
 
 Twofold 
 duties of 
 the presby- 
 ter. 
 
 The f unc« 
 tion of 
 teaching. 
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 
 
 the presbyter is so called. In the next generation the title ia 
 employed in a letter written by the Greek Church of Rome to the 
 Greek Church of Corinth'. Thus the word would se em to be_es£e-_ 
 cially Hellenic. Beyond this we are left to conjecture. But if we 
 may assume that the directors of religious and social clubs among the 
 heathen were commonly so called', it would naturally occur, if not to 
 the Gentile Christians themselves, at all events to their heathen 
 associates, as a fit designation for the presiding members of the new 
 society. The infant Church of Christ, which appeared to the Jew as 
 a synagogue, would be regarded by the heathen as a confi^temity '. 
 But whatever may have been the origin of the term, it did not alto- 
 gether dispossess the earlier name 'presbyter,' which still held its 
 place as a synonyme even in Gentile congi-egations*. And, when at 
 length the term bishop was appropriated to a higher office in the 
 Church, the latter became again, as it had been at first, the sole 
 designation of the Christian elder". 
 
 The duties of the presbyters were twofold. They were both rulers 
 and instructors of the congregation. This double function appears 
 in St Paul's expression 'j)astors an d teachers", where, as the form of 
 the original seems to show, the two words describe the same office 
 under different aspects. Though government was probably the first 
 conception of the office, yet the work of teaching must have fallen 
 to the presbyters from the very first and have assumed greater 
 prominence as time went on. With the growth of the Church, the 
 visits of the apostles and evangelists to any individual community 
 must have become less and less frequent, so that the burden of in- 
 struction would be gradually transferred from these missionary 
 preachers to the local officers of the congregation. Hence St Paul 
 
 ° Other more general designations in 
 the New Testament are oi irpourrditevoi 
 (i Thess. V. ij, Eom. xii. 8: comp. 
 I Tim. v. 17), or ol ij^ou/iei'M (Hebr. 
 xiii. 7, 17, 24). For the former oomp. 
 Hennas Vis. ii. 4, Justin. Apol. i. 67 
 (0 irpoerrm) ; for the latter, Clem. Bom. 
 I, 21, Hermas Vis. ii. 3, iii. 9 (oIt/joij- 
 
 yOV/M€VOi). 
 
 • Ephes. It. i i toi)s Si iroi/t^rai raJ 
 8iSo<r<caXous. For irotiialvtiv applied 
 to the iirldKovm or irpetrpirtpos see 
 Acts XX. iS, t Pet. v. 1 ; comp. i Pet. 
 
 ii. 25. 
 
 ' Clem. Eom. 42, 45. 
 
 ' The evidence however ia slight : 
 see above p. 95, note 2. Some light is 
 thrown on this subject by the fact that 
 the Boman government seems first to 
 have recognised the Christian brother- 
 hoods in their corporate capacity, as 
 burial clubs: see de Bossi Bom. Sotterr. 
 I. p. 371. 
 
 ' Ontheseclubs orconfraternitiessee 
 Benan Les ApStrea p. 351 sq. ; comp. 
 Saint Paul p. 339. 
 
 * Acts XX. 17, I Tim. v. 17, Tit. i. 5, 
 I Pet. V. I, Clem. Bom. 21, 44. 
 
THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 195 
 
 in two passages, where he gives directions relating to bishops or 
 presbyters, insists specially on the faculty of teaching as a qualifica- 
 tion for the position'. Yet even here this work seems to be regarded 
 rather as incidental to than as inherent in the office. In the one 
 epistle he directs that double honour shall be paid to those pres- 
 byters who have ruled well, but especially to such as 'labour in 
 word and doctrine',' as though one holding this office might de- 
 cline the work of instruction. In the other, he closes the list of 
 qualifications with the requirement that the bishop (or presbyter) 
 hold fast the faithful word in accordance with the apostolic teaching, 
 ' that he may be able both to exhort in the healthy doctrine and to 
 confute gainsayers,' alleging as a reason the pernicious activity and 
 growing numbers of the false teachers. Nevertheless there is no 
 ground for supposing that the work of teaching and the work of 
 governing pertained to separate members of the presbyteral college "- 
 Aa each had his special gift^ so would he devote himself more or less 
 exclusively to the one or the other of these sacred functions. 
 
 3. It is clear then that at the close of the apostolic age, the two 3.B1BHOFS. 
 lower orders of the threefold ministry were firmly and widely esta- 
 blished ; but traces of the third and highest order, the episcopate pro- 
 perly so called, are few and indistinct. 
 
 For the opinion hazarded by Theodoret and adopted by many The ofiSce 
 later writers*, that the same officers in the Church who were first "^nation' 
 
 > I Tim. iii. -i, Tit. i. 9. * On i Tim. iil. i, roit Si vw itoXou- 
 
 s I Tim. V. 17 /lidXiffTa 0! KOTiavrei iitvom imaKbirovt diroo-TiXoi/s livbiui^v 
 
 if \6y(ti KoX StdaiTKaXig,, At a much tov Si 'xphvov irpoibvTtK rd ftiif rifl diro' 
 
 later date we read of ' presbyteri doc- o-toX^s ovo/m rois iXriOus airoffrcfXoi: 
 
 tores,' whence it may perhaps be in- KaTiXtrov, ri Si t^s iiruiKinrrjs rots irdXat 
 
 ferred that even then the work of KaXounhots airoarbKoa iiriBeaav. See 
 
 teaching was not absolutely indispens- also his note onPhil. i. i. Comp.Worda- 
 
 able to the presbyteral office; Act. worth Thegph. Angl. c. x, Blunt First 
 
 Perp. et Fel. 13, Cyprian. Epist. 29: Three Centuries p. 81. Theodoret, as 
 
 see BitschI p. 352. usual, has borrowed from Theodore of 
 
 • The distinction of lay or ruling Mopsuestia on i Tim. iii. 1, ' Qui vero 
 
 elders, and ministers proper or teaching nunc episoopi nominantur, iUi tuna 
 
 elders, was laid down by Calvin and apostoli dicebantur...Beatis vero apo- 
 
 has been adopted as the constitution of stolis decedentibus, illi qui post iUoa 
 
 several presbyterian Churches. This ordinati sunt ... grave existimaverunt 
 
 interpretation ol St Paul's language is apostolorum sibi vindicare nuncnpatio- 
 
 refuted by Eothe p. 224, EitscKl p. 352 nem ; diviserunt ergo ipsa nomina etc.' 
 
 gq., and SohafE Hist, of Apost. Ch. 11. (Baban. Maur. vi. p. 604 n, ed. Migne). 
 
 p. 312, besides older writers such as Theodore however makes a distinction 
 
 Yitringa and Mosheim. between the two offices: nor does he, 
 
 13—3 
 
196 THB CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 
 
 of the apo- called apostles came afterwards to be designated bishops, is baseless, 
 stolate. j£ ^j^g ^^jj offices had been identical, the substitution of the one name 
 for the other would have required some explanation. But in fact 
 the functions of the Apostle and the bishop differed widely. The 
 Apostle, like the prophet or the evangelist, held no local office. 
 He was essentially, as his name denotes, a missionary, moving about 
 from place to place, foundiag and confii-ming new brotherhoods. 
 The only ground on which Theodoret builds his theory is a false 
 interpretation of a passage in St PauL At the opening of the 
 Epistle to Philippi the presbyters (here called bishops) and deacons 
 are saluted, while in the body of the letter one Epaphroditus is 
 Enil. ii. 25 mentioned as an ' apostle ' of the Philippians. If ' apostle ' here had 
 TzD^^d ^^^ meaning which is thus assigned to it, all the three orders of the 
 ministry would be found at Philippi. But this inteqiretation will 
 not stand. The true Apostle, like St Peter or St John, bears this 
 title as the messenger, the delegate, of Christ Himself : while Epapliro- 
 ditus is only so styled as the messenger of the Philippian brother- 
 hood ; and in the very next clause the expression is explained by the 
 statement that he carried their alms to St Paul'. The use of the 
 word here has a parallel in another passage', where messengers (or 
 apostles) of the churches are mentioned. It is not therefore to the 
 apostle that we must look for the prototype of the bishop. How 
 far indeed and in what sense the bishop may be called a successor of 
 the Apostles, wiU be a proper subject for consideration : but the 
 succession at least does not consist in an identity of office. 
 The epis- The history of the name itself suggests a different account of the 
 
 veF Bed origin of the episcopate. If bishop was at first used as a synonyme 
 out of the for presbyter and afterwards came to designate the higher officei' under 
 tery. whom the presbyters served, the episcopate properly so called 
 
 would seem to have been developed from the subordinate office. 
 In other words, the episcopate was formed not out of the apostolic 
 order by localisation but out of the presbyteral by elevation ; and 
 the title, which originally was common to all, came at length to be 
 appropriated to tho chief among them'. 
 
 like Theodoret, misinterpret PhU.ii.is. ' 2 Cor. vili. 23, see Galatians p. 96, 
 
 ThecommentatorHilaryalBOiOnEphes. note 3. 
 
 iv. J I, says 'apostoli episoopi sunt.' ' A parallel instance from Athenian 
 
 ' See Phil. U, 25, with the note. institutions will illustrate this usage, 
 
THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 197 
 
 If this account be true, we might expect to find in the mother St James 
 Church of Jerusalem, which as the earliest founded would soonest earliest 
 lipen into maturity, the first traces of this developed form of the I'istop, 
 ministry. Nor is this expectation disappointed. James the Lord's 
 brother alone, within the period comi)asscd by the apostolic writings, 
 can claim to be regarded as a bishop in the later and more special 
 sense of the term. In the language of St Paul he takes precedence 
 even of the earliest and greatest preachers of the Gospel, St Peter and 
 St John', where the affairs of the Jewish Church specially are con- 
 cerned. In St Luke's narrative he appears as the local representa- 
 tive of the brotherhood in Jerusalem, presiding at the congress, whose 
 decision he suggests and whose decree he appears to have framed', 
 receiving the missionary preachers as they revisit the mother Church", 
 acting generally as the referee in communications with foreign 
 brotherhoods. The place assigned to him in the spurious Clementines, 
 where he is represented as supreme arbiter over the Church universal 
 in matters of doctrine, must be treated as a gross exaggeration. This 
 kind of authority is nowhere conferred upon him in the apostolic 
 writings ; but his social and ecclesiastical position, as it appears in 
 St Luke and St Paul, explains how the exaggeration was possible. 
 And this position is the more remarkable if, as seems to have been 
 the case, he was not one of the Twelve*. 
 
 On the other hand, though especially prominent, he appears in the but yet 
 Acts as a member of a body. When St Peter, after his escape from '^-l *^°',**- 
 prison, 13 about to leave Jerusalem, he desires that his deliverance presby- 
 shall be reported to 'James and the brethren'.' When again St '^' 
 Paul on his last visit to the Holy City goes to see James, we are 
 told that all the presbyters were present'. If in some passages St 
 James is named by himself, in others he is omitted and the presbyters 
 alone are mentioned'. From this it may be inferred that though 
 
 The iincT&Tits was chairman of a body last and apparently with some degree 
 of ten Tp6eSpoL, who themselves were of authority (iyi) Kptvu ver. ig). The 
 appointed in turn by lot to serve from decree is clearly framed on his recom- 
 a larger body of fifty irpwriveit. Yet we mendatious, and some indecisive coin- 
 find the iiruTTirris not only designated cidences of style with his epistle have 
 vpvTapi! par excellence (Demosth. Ti- been pointed out. 
 iriocr. § 157), but even addressed by » Acts xxi. 18; comp. xii. 17. See 
 this name in the presence of the other also Gal. i. 19, ii. 12. 
 wpbeipoi (Thuc. vi 14). < See Galatians p. 252 sq. 
 
 1 Gal. ii. 9; see the note. » Acts xii. 17. « Acts xxi. 18. 
 
 » Acts XV. 13 sq. St James speaks ' Acts xi. 30; oomp. xv. 4, 13, xvi .1! 
 
igS 
 
 Nobishops 
 
 as yet in 
 
 theGentile 
 
 Choiches. 
 
 Two stages 
 of develop- 
 ment : 
 
 (i) Occa- 
 sional su- 
 pervision 
 by the 
 Apostles 
 them- 
 selves. 
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 
 
 holding a position superior to the rest, he was still considered as a 
 member of the presbytery ; that he was in fact the head or president 
 of the college. What power this presidency conferred, how far it 
 was recognised as an independent official position, and to what de- 
 gree it was due to the ascendancy of his personal gifts, are questions 
 which in the absence of direct information can only be answered by 
 conjecture. But his close relationship with the Lord, his rare energy 
 of character, and his rigid sanctity of life which won the respect 
 even of the unconverted Jews', would react upon his office, and 
 may perhaps have elevated it to a level which was not definitely 
 contemplated in its origin. 
 
 But whUe the episcopal office thus existed in the mother Church 
 of Jerusalem from very early days, at least in a rudimentary form, the 
 Now Testament presents no distinct traces of such organization in 
 the Gentile congregations. The government of the Gentile churches, 
 as there represented, exhibits two successive stages of development 
 tending in this direction; but the third stage, in which episcopacy 
 definitely appears, still lies beyond the hoi-izon. 
 
 (r) We have first of all the Apostles themselves exercising the 
 superintendence of the churches under their care, sometimes in per- 
 son and on the spot, sometimes at a distance by letter or by message. 
 The imaginaiy picture drawn by St Paul, when he directs the ptm- 
 ishment of the Corinthian offender, vividly represents his position in 
 this respect. The members of the church are gathered together, the 
 elders, we may suppose, being seated apart on a dais or tribune ; he 
 himself, as president, directs their deliberations, collects their votes, 
 pronounces sentence on the guilty man*. How the absence of the 
 apostolic president was actually supplied in this instance, we do not 
 know. But a council was held ; he did direct their verdict ' in spirit 
 though not in person' ; and ' the majority ' condemned the offender'. 
 In the same way St Peter, giving directions to the elders, claims a 
 place among them. The title ' fellow-presbyter,' which he applies to 
 himself*, would doubtless recal to the memory of his readers the 
 occasions when he himself had presided with the elders and guided 
 their deliberations. 
 
 ' See Galatians p. 365 sq. 
 ' I Cor. v. 3 sq. 
 
 ' I Cor, ii. 6 4 iTin/tla awrtj ii inri 
 Tuv TrXet^cofp, * i Pet. v. ! 
 
THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 199 
 
 (2) As the first stage then, the Apostles themselves were the h) Eesi- 
 superintendents of each individual church. But the wider spread of apostoUo 
 the Gospel would diminish the frequency of their visits and impair the delegates. 
 eflSciency of such supervision. In the second stage therefore we find 
 them, at critical seasons and in important congregations, delegating 
 some trustworthy disciple who should fix his abode in a given place 
 for a time and direct the afiairs of the church there. The Pastoral 
 Epistles present this second stage to oiu" view. It is the conception 
 of a later age which represents Timothy as bishop of Ephesus and 
 Titus as bishop of Crete'. St Paul's own language implies that the 
 position which they held was temporary. In both cases their term 
 of office is drawing to a close, when the Apostle writes'. But the 
 conception is not altogether without foundation. With less perma- 
 nence but perhaps greater authority, the position occupied by these 
 apostolic delegates nevertheless fairly represents the functions of the 
 bishop early in the second century. They were in fact the link 
 between the Apostle whose superintendence was occasional and gene- 
 ral and the bishop who exercised a permanent supervision over an 
 individual congregation. 
 
 Beyond this second stage the notices in the apostolic writings do The angels 
 not carry us. The angels of the seven churches indeed are frequently ^^ ^^^°I 
 alleged as an exception'. But neither does the name 'angel' itself bishops, 
 suggest such an explanation*, nor is this view in keeping with the 
 highly figurative style of this wonderful book. Its sublime imagery 
 
 * Const. Apost. vii. 46, Euseb. H. E. was a bishop. This cannot be pro- 
 
 iii. 4, and later writers. nounoed impossible, but the language 
 
 ' See I Tim. i. 3, iii, 14, 2 Tim. iv. 9, is far too indefinite to encourage such 
 
 II, Tit. i. 5, iii. ii. an inference. 
 
 ' See for instance among recent wri- * It is conceivable indeed that a 
 
 ters Thiersch Geseh. der Apost. Kirche bishop or chief pastor should be called 
 
 p. 178, Trench Epistles to the Seven an angelormessengerofGodorof Christ 
 
 Churches p. 47 sq., with others. This (comp. Hag. i. 13, Mai. n. 7), but he 
 
 explanation is as old as the earhest would hardly be styled an angel of the 
 
 commentators. Eothesupposesthatthe church over which he presides. Seethe 
 
 word anticipates the establishment of parallel case of on-iSffToXos above, p. 196. 
 
 episcopacy, being a kind of prophetic Vitringa (11. 9, p. 550), and others after 
 
 symbol, p. 423 sq. Others again take him, explain 477eXos in the Apocalypse 
 
 the angel to designate the coUective by the nh^, the messenger or deputy 
 
 ministry, i.e. the whole body of priests of the synagogue. These however were 
 
 and deacons. For various explanations only inferior officers, and could not be 
 
 see Sohaff fltsf. of Apost. Ch. 11. p. 223. compared to stars or made responsible 
 
 Bothe (p. 426) supposes that Dio- for the well-being of the ohnzohes ; see 
 
 trephes d <j>CKoirpii>T€vm> airav (3 Joh. 9) Bothe p. 504. 
 
200 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 
 
 seems to be seriously impaired by this interpretation. On the other 
 hand St John's own language gives the true key to the symbolism. 
 'The seven stare,' so it is explained, 'are the seven angels of the seven 
 churches, and the seven candlesticks are the seven churches'.' This 
 contrast between the heavenly and the earthly fires — the star shiniog 
 steadily by its own inherent eternal light, and the lamp flickering and 
 uncertain, requiring to be fed with fuel and tended with care — 
 True ex- cannot be devoid of meaning. The star is the suprasensual counter- 
 planation. ^^^.^^ ^^e heavenly representative ; the lamp, the earthly realisatioa, 
 the outward embodiment. Whether the angel is here conceived as an 
 actual person, the celestial guardian, or only as a personification, the 
 idea or sjjirit of the church, it is unnecessary for my present purpose 
 to consider. But whatever may be the exact conception, he is identi- 
 fied with and made responsible for it to a degree wholly unsuited to 
 any human officer. Nothing is predicated of him, which may not be 
 predicated of it. To him are imputed all its hopes, its fears, its 
 graces, its shortcomings. He is punished with it, and he is rewarded 
 with it. In one passage especially the language applied to the angel 
 seems to exclude the common interpretation. In the message to 
 Thyatira the angel is blamed, because he suffers himself to be led 
 astray by ' his wife Jezebel'.' In this image of Ahab's idolatrous 
 queen some dangerous and immoral teaching must be personified; 
 for it does violence alike to the general tenour and to the individual 
 expressions in the passage to suppose that an actual woman is meant. 
 Thus the symbolism of the passage is entirely in keeping. Nor 
 again is this mode of representation new. The ' princes ' in the pro- 
 phecy of Daniel" present a very near if not an exact parallel to the 
 angels of the Revelation. Here, as elsewhere, St John seems to 
 adapt the imagery of this earliest apocalyptic book. 
 
 Indeed, if with most recent writers we adopt the early date of the 
 Apocalypse of St John, it is scarcely possible that the episcopal 
 organization should have been so mature when it was written. In 
 this case probably not more than two or three years have elapsed 
 from the date of the Pastoral Epistles*, and this interval seems quite 
 
 1 Eev. i. 30. a correct reading, it seems to be a cor- 
 
 " Bev. ii. 20 tV yvvaiKd ttov "lefdjSeX. reot gloss. 
 
 The word aov should probably be re- ' Dan. x. 13, 20, ji. 
 
 tained in the text: or at least, if not • The date of the Pastoral Bpistles 
 
THE OHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 201 
 
 insufficient to account for so great a change in the administration 
 
 of the Asiatic churches. 
 
 As late therefore as the year 70 no distinct signs of episcopal go- Episcopa- 
 
 vemment have hitherto appeared in Gentile Christendom. Yet unless bijahedin 
 
 we have recourse to a sweeping condemnation of received documents, Gentile 
 
 , , . , , . cnuroheg 
 
 it seems vain to deny that early m the second century the episcopal before the 
 
 office was firmly and widely established. Thus during the last three M^tov 
 decades of the first century, and consequently during the lifetime of 
 the latest surviving Apostle, this change must have been brought 
 about. But the circumstances under which it was effected are 
 shrouded in darkness ; and various attempts have been made to read 
 the obscure enigma. Of several solutions offered one at least deserves 
 special notice. If Rothe's view cannot be accepted as final, its ex- Bothe'a 
 amination will at least serve to bring out the conditions of the ^°™"°°- 
 problem : and for this reason I shall state and discuss it as briefly 
 as possible'. For the words in which the theory is stated I am 
 myself responsible. 
 
 'The epoch to which we last adverted marks an important crisis Import- 
 in the histoiy of Christianity. The Church was distracted and ^g?^''**''* 
 dismayed by the growing dissensions between the Jewish and 
 Gentile brethren and by the menacing apparition of Gnostic heresy. 
 So long as its three most prominent leaders were living, there had 
 been some security against the extravagance of parties, some guai-an- 
 tee of harmonious combination among diverse churches. But St 
 Peter, St Paul, and St James, were carried away by death almost at 
 the same time and in the face of this great emergency. Another 
 blow too had fallen : the long-delayed judgment of God on the once 
 Holy City was delayed no more. With the overthrow of Jerusalem 
 the visible centre of the Church was removed. The keystone of the 
 fabric was withdrawn, and the whole edifice threatened with ruin. 
 There was a crying need for some organization which should cement 
 together the diverse elements of Christian society and preserve it 
 from disintegration.' 
 
 may be and probably is as late as a.d. episcopacy is assailed (on grounds in 
 
 66 or 67; while the Apocalypse on many respects differing from those 
 
 this hypothesis was written not later which I have urged) by Baur Urepntvg 
 
 than A.D. 70. des Episcopats p. 39 sq., and Bitsohl 
 
 ' SeeBothe'BAnfdngeetc.VV-iH — p. 410 aq. 
 392. Bothe's account of the origin of 
 
202 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 
 
 Origin of ' Out of this need the Catholic Church arose. Christendom had 
 
 UoOhujch! hitherto existed as a number of distiaot isolated congregations, drawn 
 in the same direction by a common faith and common sympathies, 
 accidentally linked one with another by the personal influence and 
 apostolic authority of their common teachers, but not bound together 
 in a harmonious whole by any permanent external organization. 
 Now at length this great result was brought about. The magnitude 
 of the change effected during this period may be measured by the 
 difference in the constitution and conception of the Christian Church 
 aa presented in the Pastoral Epistles of St Paul and the letters of St 
 Ignatius respectively.' 
 Agency of ' By whom then was the new constitution organized ? To this 
 toe J^o^^" question only one answer can be given. This great work must be 
 Btles. ascribed to the surviving Apostles. St John especially, who built 
 
 up the speculative theology of the Church, was mainly instrumental 
 in completing its external constitution also ; for Asia Minor was the 
 centre from which the new movement spread. St John however 
 was not the only Apostle or early disciple who lived in this pro- 
 vince. St Philip is known to have settled in Hierapolis'. St 
 Andrew also seems to have dwelt in these parts'. The silence of 
 history clearly proclaims the fact which the voice of history but 
 faintly suggests. If we hear nothing more of the Apostles' mission- 
 ary labours, it is because they had organized an united Church, to 
 which they had transferred the work of evangelization.' 
 Evidence ' Of such a combined effort on the part of the Apostles, resulting 
 
 cond^Apo- ^^ ^ definite ecclesiastical polity, in an united Catholic Church, 
 
 stolic no direct account is preserved : but incidental notices are not want- 
 Council. 
 
 ing ; and in the general paucity of information respecting the whole 
 
 period more than this was not to be expected'.' 
 
 Hegesip- '(i) Eusebius relates that after the martyrdom of St James 
 
 ^ ' and the fall of Jerusalem, the remaining Apostles and personal dis- 
 
 ' Papias in Euseb. H. E. iii. 39 ; de Baptismo Hareticorum, which is 
 
 Polycrates and Caius in Enseb. H. E. included among Cyprian's worlds, app. 
 
 iii. 21. p. 30, ed. Fell; Bee Galatiam p. 353 
 
 > Muratorian Canon (circ. 170 a.d.), note), where the writer mentions a 
 
 Bouth Rel. Sacr. i. p. 394. meeting of St Peter and St Paul in 
 
 ' Besides the evidence which I have Borne. The main question however in 
 
 stated and discussed in the text, Bothe so slightly aflected thereby, that I have 
 
 also brings forward a fragment of the not thought it necessary to investigate 
 
 Pradicatio Fault (preserved in the tract the value and bearing of this fragment. 
 
THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 203 
 
 ciples of the Lord, witli his surviving relations, met together and 
 after consultation unanimously appointed Symeon the son of Clopas 
 to the vacant see". It can hardly be doubted, that Eusebius in 
 this passage quotes from the earlier historian Hegesippus, from 
 •whom he has derived the other incidents in the lives of James and 
 Symeon : and we may well believe that this council discussed 
 larger questions than the appointment of a single bishop, and that 
 the constitution and prospects of the Church generally came under 
 deliberation. It may have been on this occasion that the surviving 
 Apostles partitioned out the world among them, and 'Asia was 
 assigned to John'.' 
 
 ' (2) A fragment of Irenaeus points in the same direction. Irennua. 
 Writing of the holy eucharist he says, ' They who have paid atten- 
 tion to the second ordinances of the Apostles know that the Lord 
 appointed a new offeiing in the new covenant^' By these ' second 
 ordinances' must be understood some later decrees or injunctions 
 than those contained in the apostolic epistles : and these would 
 naturally be framed and promulgated by such a council as the notice 
 of Eusebius suggests.' 
 
 ' (3) To the same effect St Clement of Rome writes, that the Clement of 
 Apostles, having appointed elders in every church and foreseeing 
 the disputes which would arise, ' afterwards added a codicil (supple- 
 mentary direction) that if they should fall asleep, other approved 
 men should succeed to their ofiSce*.' Here the pronouns 'they,' 
 ' their,' must refer, not to the first appointed presbyters, but to 
 the Apostles themselves. Thus interpreted, the passage contains a 
 distinct notice of the institution of bishops as successors of the Apo- 
 stles ; while in the word ' afterwards ' is involved an allusion to the 
 later council to which the ' second ordinances ' of Irenseus also refer'.' 
 
 ^ Euseb. S.E. EL 11. the persons intended in Koiiii]B<l<rir and 
 
 ' According to the tradition reported avrwv (see the notes on the passage), 
 
 by Origen as quoted in Euseb. H.E. 'A much more explicit though 
 
 iii. I. somewhat later authority may be 
 
 ' One of the Pfaffian fragments, no. quoted in favour of his view. The 
 
 xxxviii, p. 854 in Stieren's edition of Ambrosian Hilary on Ephes. iv. 12, 
 
 Irenasns. speaking of the change from the pres- 
 
 * Clem. Eom. § 44 Kardrrriirav toIis byteral to the episcopal form of govem- 
 
 Tpoetpr/iiivovs (sc. vpta^vripom) koI fur- ment, says ' immutata est ratio, pro- 
 
 a(i\iinvoii.iiii\itSiiKatnv, Siras, ei,v Koi/ir]- tpiciente concilia, nt non ordo etc' If 
 
 diiair, SiaS^^uvTot trepoi SedoKiiiaafUmi the reading be correct, I suppose he 
 
 ii>Spes ri)!' Xarmpylav avTiM'. The in- was thinking of the Apostolic Ooustitn- 
 
 terpretation of the passage depends on tiong. See also the expression of St 
 
204 
 
 Besnlts of 
 the Covm- 
 cil. 
 
 Valne of 
 
 liothe's 
 
 theory. 
 
 The evi- 
 dence ex- 
 amined. 
 Hegesip- 
 pus. 
 
 Ireuicaa. 
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 
 
 'These notices seem to justify the conclusion that immediately 
 after the fall of Jerusalem a council of the apostles and first 
 teachers of the Gospel -was held to deliberate on the crisis, and to 
 frame measures for the well-being of the Church. The centre of 
 the system then organized was episcopacy, which at once secured the 
 compact and harmonious working of each individual congregation, 
 and as the link of communication between separate brotherhoods 
 formed the whole into one undivided Catholic Church. Recom- 
 mended by this high authority, the new constitution was immedi- 
 ately and generally adopted.' 
 
 This theory, which is maintained with much ability and vigour, 
 attracted considerable notice, as being a new defence of episcopacy 
 advanced by a member of a presbyterian Church. On the other 
 hand, its intrinsic value seems to have been unduly depreciated ; for 
 if it fails to give a satisfactory solution, it has at least the merit of 
 stating the conditions of the problem with great distinctness, and of 
 pointing out the direction to be followed. On this account it seemed 
 worthy of attention. 
 
 It must indeed be confessed that the historical notices will not 
 bear the weight of the inference built upon them, (i) The account 
 of Hegesippus (for to Hegesippus the statement in Eusebius may 
 fairly be ascribed) confines the object of this gathering to the 
 appointment of a successor to St James. If its deliberations had 
 exerted that vast and permanent influence on the future of the 
 Church which Rothe's theory supposes, it is scarcely possible that 
 this early historian should have been ignorant of the fact or knowing 
 it should have passed it over in silence. (2) The genuineness of the 
 Pfaffian fragments of Irenseus must always remain doubtful '. Inde- 
 pendently of the mystery which hangs over their publication, the very 
 passage quoted throws great suspicion on theii" authorship; for the ex- 
 pression in question" seems naturally to refer to the so called Apostolic 
 Constitutions, which have been swelled to their present size by the 
 
 Jerome on Tit. i. 5 (quoted below p. 
 2o6) ' in toto orbe deeretum est.' 
 
 ^ The controversial treatises on either 
 tide are printed in Stieren's Irenseus 11. 
 p. 381 sqq. It is sufficient here to 
 state that shortly after the transcrip- 
 tion of these fragments by Pfafl, the 
 Turin mb from which they were taken 
 
 disappeared ; so that there was no 
 means of testing the accuracy of the 
 transcriber or ascertaining the charac- 
 ter of the MS. 
 
 ' The expression al SeSrepai tui< aVa- 
 ffT6\ii)v Starafns closely resembles the 
 language of these Constitutions; see 
 Hippol. p. 74, 83 (Lagarde). 
 
THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 205 
 
 accretions of successive generations, but can hardly have existed even 
 in a rudimentary form in the age of Irenseus, or if existing have 
 been regarded by him as genuine. If he had been acquainted with 
 such later ordinances issued by the authority of an apostolic coun- 
 cil, is it conceivable that in his great work on heresies he should 
 have omitted to quote a sanction so unquestionable, where his main 
 object is to show that the doctrine of the Catholic Church in his day 
 represented the true teaching of the Apostles, and his main argu- 
 ment the fact that the Catholic bishops of his time derived their 
 office by direct succession from the Apostles ? (3) The passage in Clement, 
 the epistle of St Clement cannot be correctly interpreted by Bothe : 
 for his explanation, though elaborately defended, disregards the pur- 
 pose of the letter. The Corinthian Church is disturbed by a spirit 
 of insubordination. Presbyters, who have faithfully discharged their 
 duties, have nevertheless been ruthlessly expelled from office. St 
 Clement writes in the name of the Roman Church to correct these 
 irregularities. He reminds the Corinthians that the presbyteral 
 office was established by the Apostles, who not only themselves 
 appointed elders, but also gave directions that the vacancies caused 
 from time to time by death should be filled up by other men of cha- 
 racter, thus providing for a succession in the ministry. Conse- 
 quently in these unworthy feuds they were setting themselves in 
 opposition to officers of repute either actually nominated by Apo- 
 stles, or appointed by those so nominated in accordance with the 
 apostolic injunctions. There is no mention of episcopacy, properly 
 so called, throughout the epistle; for in the language of St Clement, 
 'bishop' and 'presbyter' are still synonymous terms'. Thus the 
 pronouns 'they,' 'their,' refer naturally to the presbyters first ap- 
 pointed by the Apostles themselves. Whether (supposing the read- 
 ing to be correct') Rothe has rightly translated iirivofuqv 'a codicil,' 
 it is unnecessary to enquire, as the rendering does not materially 
 affect the question. 
 
 Nor again does it appear that the rise of episcopacy was so Episcopa- 
 
 sudden and so immediate, that an authoritative order issuing from "^ ?,"' * 
 
 ° sudden 
 
 an apostolic council alone can explain the phenomenon. In the creation, 
 mysterious period which comprises the last thirty years of the first 
 
 ' See above, pp. 97, 98. noy^v ; see the notes on the passage. 
 
 ' The light leadhig is probably ivi- 
 
206 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 
 
 century, and on which history is almost -vrhoUy silent, episcopacy 
 must, it is true, hare been mainly developed. But before this period 
 its beginnings may be traced, and after the close it is not yet fully 
 matured. It seems vain to deny with Eothe' that the position of 
 St James in the mother Church furnished the precedent and the 
 pattern of the later episcopate. It appears equally mistaken to main- 
 tain, as this theory requires, that at the close of the jSrst and the 
 beginning of the second century the organization of all churches 
 alike had arrived at the same stage of development and exhibited 
 the episcopate in an equally perfect form, 
 but ma- On the other hand, the emergency which consolidated the epi- 
 
 a"critioS S'^op'il form of government is correctly and forcibly stated. It was 
 emergency remarked long ago by Jerome, that ' before factions "were introduced 
 into religion by the prompting of the devil,' the churches were 
 governed by a council of elders, ' but as soon as each man began to 
 consider those whom he had baptized to belong to himself and not to 
 Christ, it was decided throughout the world that one elected from 
 among the elders should be placed over the rest, so that the care of 
 the church should devolve on him, and the seeds of schism be 
 removed'.' And again in another passage he writes to the same 
 effect; ' When afterwards one presbyter was elected that he might be 
 placed over the rest, this was done as a remedy against schism, that 
 each man might not drag to himself and thus break up the Church 
 of Christ^' To the dissensions of Jew and Gentile converts, and to 
 the disputes of Gnostic false teachers, the development of episcopacy 
 may be mainly ascribed, 
 and in Nor again is Rothe probably wrong as to the authority mainly 
 
 under the instrumental in effecting the change. Asia Minor was the adopted 
 
 influence home of more than one Apostle after the fall of Jerusalem. Asia 
 of St John. . .» , 
 
 Minor too was the nurse, if not the mother, of episcopacy in the 
 
 Gentile Churches. So important an institution, developed in a 
 
 Christian community of which St John was the living centre and 
 
 guide, could hardly have grown up without his sanction : and, as 
 
 will be seen presently, early tradition very distinctly connects his 
 
 name with the appointment of bishops in these parts. 
 
 But to the question how this change was brought about, a some- 
 
 1 p. ■264 sq. ' Epist. cxlvi ad Evang. (i. p. 
 
 » On Tit. i. 5 (vii. p. 694, ed. Vail.). loSs). 
 
THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 20/ 
 
 what different answer must be given. "We have seen that the Manner ot 
 needs of the Church and the ascendancy of his personal character lopment. 
 placed St James at the head of the Christian brotherhood in Jeru- 
 salem. Though remaining a member of the presbyteral council, he 
 was singled out from the rest and placed in a position of superior 
 responsibility. His exact power it would be impossible, and it is 
 unnecessary, to define. When therefore after the fall of the city 
 St John with other surviving Apostles removed to Asia Minor and 
 found there manifold irregularities and threatening symptoms of dis- 
 ruption, he would not unnaturally encourage an approach in these 
 Gentile Churches to the same organization, which had been signally 
 blessed, and proved effectual in holding together the mother Church 
 amid dangers not less serious. The existence of a council or col- 
 lege necessarily supposes a presidency of some kind, whether this 
 presidency be assumed by each member in turn, or lodged in the 
 hands of a single person'. It was only necessary therefore for him 
 to give permanence, definiteness, stability, to an office which already 
 existed in germ. There is no reason however for supposing that 
 any direct ordinance was issued to the churches. The evident 
 utility and even pressing need of such an office, sanctioned by the 
 most venerated name in Christendom, would be sufficient to secure 
 its wide though gradual reception. Such a reception, it is true, 
 supposes a substantial harmony and freedom of intercourse among 
 the churches, which remained undisturbed by the troubles of the 
 times ; but the silence of history is not at all unfavourable to this 
 supposition. In this way, during the historical blank which ex- 
 tends over half a century after the fall of Jerusalem, episcopacy 
 was matured and the Catholic Church consolidated'. 
 
 ' The Ambrosian Hilary on Epbes. pears to denote the president of the 
 
 It. 1 2 seems to say that the senior council of elders : see Titringa ii. i. p. 
 
 member was president ; but this may 586 sq., iii. 1. p. 610 sq. The opinions 
 
 be mere conjecture. The constitution of Yitringa mast be received with cau- 
 
 of the synagogue does not aid mate- tion, as his tendency to press the re- 
 
 rially in settling this question. In the semblance between the government of 
 
 New Testament at aU events o/ixKri/ra- the Jewish synagogue and the Chris- 
 
 yayos is only another name for an elder tian Church is strong. The real lilse- 
 
 of the synagogue (Mark v. 12, Acts ness consists in the council of presby- 
 
 ziii. 15, xviii. 8, 17; comp. Justin DiaZ. ters; but the threefold order of the 
 
 c. Tryph. § 137), and therefore corre- Christian ministry as a whole seems to 
 
 spends not to the bishop but to the have no counterpart in the synagogue, 
 
 presbyter of the Christian Ohuroh, * The expression ' Catholic Church ' 
 
 Sometimes however ipxtwi'dyuyos ap- is found first in the Ignatian letter to 
 
208 
 
 This view 
 supported 
 by the no- 
 tioes of in- 
 dividnal 
 churches. 
 
 Jebusa- 
 St James. 
 
 Symeon. 
 
 Later 
 bishops. 
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 
 
 At all events, when we come to trace the early history of the 
 office in the piinoipal churches of Christendom in succession, we 
 shall find all the facts consistent with the account adopted here, 
 while some of them are hardly reconcUeable with any other. In 
 this review it will be convenient to commence with the mother 
 Chm-ch, and to take the others in order, as they are connected either 
 by neighbourhood or by political or religious sympathy. 
 
 1. The Church of Jerusalem, as I have already pointed out, 
 presents the earliest instance of a bishop. A certain official pro- 
 minence is assigned to James the Lord's brother, both in the Epi- 
 stles of St Paul and in the Acts of the Apostles. And the inference 
 drawn from the notices in the canonical Scriptures is borne out by 
 the tradition of the next ages. As early as the middle of the second 
 century all parties concur in representing him as a bishop in the 
 strict sense of the term'. In this respect Catholic Christians and 
 Ebionite Christians hold the same language : the testimony of 
 llegesippus on the one hand is matched by the testimony of the 
 Clementine writings on the other. On his death, which is recorded 
 as taking place immediately before the war of Vespasian, Symeon 
 was appointed in his place'. Hegesippus, who is our authority fbr 
 this statement, distinctly regards Symeon as holding the same office 
 with James, and no less distinctly calls him a bishop. This same 
 historian also mentions the circumstance that one Thebuthis (ap- 
 parently on this occasion), being disappointed of the bishopric, raised 
 a schism and attempted to corrupt the virgin purity of the Church 
 with false doctrine. As Symeon died in the reign of Trajan at an 
 advanced age, it is not improbable that Hegesippus was born during 
 his lifetime. Of the successors of Symeon a complete list is preserved 
 by Eusebius'. The fact however that it comprises thii-teen names 
 v/ithin a period of less than thii-ty years must thi-ow suspicion od 
 
 the SmyrnBBans § 8. In the Martyr- 
 dom of Polyoarp it occurs several 
 times, inscr. and §§ 8, i6, 19. On its 
 meaning see Westcott Canon p. 28, 
 note (4th ed.). 
 
 » Hegesipp. in Euseb. H. E. ii. 23, 
 iv. »i ; Clem, Horn. xi. 35, Ep. Petr. 
 init., and Ep. Olem. init. ; Clem. 
 Recogn. i. 43, 68, 73 ; Clem. Alex, 
 in Euseb. ii. i ; Const. Apost. v. 8, vi. 
 14. '""• 35, 46- 
 
 s Hegesipp. in Euseb. H. E. iv. 22. 
 
 ' H. E. iv. 5. The episcopate of 
 Justus the successor of Symeon com- 
 mences about A.D. 108 : that of Marcus 
 thefirstGentilebishop, A.D.I 36. Thus 
 thirteen bishops occupy only about 
 twenty-eight years. Even after the 
 foundation of ^lia Capitolina the suc- 
 cession is very rapid. In the period 
 from Marcus (a.i>. 136) to Narcissus 
 (a.d. 190) we count fifteen bishops. 
 
THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 209 
 
 its accuracy. A succession so rapid is hardly consistent with the 
 known tenure of life offices in ordinary cases : and if the list be cor- 
 rect, the frequent changes must be attributed to the troubles and 
 uncertainties of the times'. If Eusebius here also had derived his 
 information from Hegesippus, it must at least have had some soUd 
 foundation in fact ; but even tlien the alternation between Jenisalem 
 and Pella, and the possible confusion of the bishops with other pro- 
 minent members of the presbytery, might introduce much error. 
 It appears however that in this instance he was indebted to less 
 trustworthy sources of information". The statement that after 
 the foundation of Aelia Capitolina (a.d. 136) Marcus presided 
 over the mother Church, as its first Gentile bishop, need not be 
 questioned ; and beyond this point it is unnecessary to carry the 
 investigation'. 
 
 Of other bishops in Pauestine and the neighbourhood, before the Other sees 
 latter half of the second century, no trustworthy notice is preserved, tjjjg ^^^ 
 
 so &,r as I know. During the Roman episcopate of Victor however peighbonr- 
 
 . mg coan- 
 
 (about A.D. 190), we find three bishops, Theophilus of Ceesarea, Cas- tries. 
 
 sius of Tyre, and Claxus of Ptolemais, in conjunction with Narcissus 
 
 of Jerusalem, writing an encyclical letter in favour of the western 
 
 view in the Paschal controversy*. If indeed any reliance could be 
 
 placed on the Clementine writings, the episcopate of Palestine was 
 
 matured at a very early date : for St Peter is there represented as 
 
 appointing bishops in every city which he visits, in Csesai-ea, Tyre, 
 
 Sidon, Berytus, Tripolis, and Laodicea'. And though the fictions 
 
 of this theological romance have no direct historical value, it is 
 
 The repetition of the same names preserved in the archives of Edessa 
 
 however suggests that some conflict (H.E. i. 13) shows how treacherous 
 
 was going on during this interval. such sources of information were. 
 
 1 Parallels nevertheless maybe found ^ I^arcissus, who became bishop of 
 
 in the aimals of the papacy. Thus from Jerusalem in 190 a.d., might well have 
 
 A,D. 882 to A.D. 904 there were thiiieen preserved the memory of much earlier 
 
 popes: and in other times of trouble times. His successor Alexander, in 
 
 the succession has been almost as whose favour he resigned a.d. 214, 
 
 rapid. speaks of him as still Uving at the ad- 
 
 ' This may be inferred from a com- vanced age of 1 16 (Euseb. H. E. ■n. 1 1). 
 
 parison of H. E. iv. 5 roaovTov i^ iyypd- * Eusebi S. E. v. 25. 
 
 0UI' irapeC\ri4>a with if. .E. v. 12 al t&v ' Clem. Horn. iii. 68 sq. (Caesarea), 
 
 avrbBi SiaSaxal Trepiixo^ot- His infor- vii. 5 (Tyre), vii. 8 (Sidon), vii. u 
 
 mation was probably taken from a list (Berytus), xi. 36 (Tripolis), xx. 23 
 
 kept at Jerusalem; but the case of the (Laodicea) : comp. Glem. Reeogn. iii. 6£, 
 
 spurious correspondence with Abgarus 66, 74, vi. 15, x. 68. 
 
 PHIL. 14 
 
2IO 
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 
 
 hardly probable that the writer would have indulged in such state- 
 ments, unless an early development of the episcopate in these parts 
 had invested his naiTative with an air of probability. The institu- 
 tion would naturally spread from the Church of Jerusalem to the 
 more important communities in the neighbourhood, even without the 
 direct intervention of the Apostles. 
 
 Antioch. 2. From the mother Church of the Hebrews we pass naturally 
 
 to the metropolis of Gentile Christendom. Antioch is traditionally 
 
 Evodius. reported to have received its first bishop Evodius from St Peter'. 
 The story may perhaps rest on some basis of truth, though no confidence 
 can be placed in this class of statements, unless they are known to 
 
 Ignatius, have been derived from some early authority. But of Ignatius, who 
 stands second in the traditional catalogue of Antiochene bishops, 
 we can speak with more confidence. He is designated a bishop by 
 very early authors, and he himself speaks as such. He writes to 
 one bishop, Polycarp; and he mentions several others. Again and 
 again he urges the duty of obedience to their bishops on his cor- 
 respondents. And, lest it should be supposed that he uses the 
 term in its earlier sense as a synonyme for presbyter, he names 
 in conjunction the three orders of the ministry, the bishop, the 
 presbyter, and the deacons'. Altogether it is plain that he looks 
 upon the episcopal system as the one recognised and authoritative 
 form of government in all those churches with which he is most 
 directly concerned. It may be suggested indeed that he would 
 hardly have enforced the claims of episcopacy, unless it were an 
 object of attack, and its comparatively recent origin might there- 
 fore be inferred : but still some years would be required before it 
 could have assumed that mature and definite form which it has in 
 his letters. It seems impossible to decide, and it is needless to 
 investigate, the exact date of the epistles of St Ignatius : but we 
 cannot do wrong in placing them during the earliest years of the 
 
 Later second century. The immedinte successor of Ignatius is reported 
 
 bishops, to have been Hero" : and from his time onward tlie list of 
 Antiochene bishops is complete*. If the authenticity of the list, 
 
 * Corut. Apost. vii. 46, Euseb. H.E. 
 iii. 22. 
 
 • e. g. Polyc. 6. I single ont this 
 passage from several which might be 
 
 alleged, because it is found in tlie 
 Syriao. See below, p. 134. 
 
 ' Euseb. H. E. iii. 36. 
 
 * Euseb. H. E. iv. 20. 
 
THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 2" 
 
 as a whole, is questionable, two bishops of Antioch at least dming 
 the second century, Theophilus and Serapion, are known as his- 
 torical persons. 
 
 If the Clementine writings emanated, as seems probable, from Clomen- 
 * ' , . . , tine writ- 
 
 Syria or Palestine', this will be the proper place to state their attitude iugg. 
 
 with regard to episcopacy. Whether the opinions there advanced 
 
 exhibit the recognised tenets of a sect or congregation, or the private 
 
 views of the individual writer or writers, will probably never be 
 
 ascertained ; but, whatever may be said on this point, these heretical 
 
 books outstrip the most rigid orthodoxy in their reverence for the 
 
 episcopal office. Monarchy is represented as necessary to the peace 
 
 of the Church'. The bishop occupies the seat of Christ and must be 
 
 honoured as the image of God'. And hence St Peter, as he moves 
 
 ftom place to place, ordains bishops everywhere, as though this were 
 
 the crowning act of his missionary labours*. The divergence of the 
 
 Clementine doctrine from the tenets of Catholic Christianity only 
 
 renders this phenomenon more remarkable, when we remember the 
 
 very early date of these writings ; for the Homilies cannot well be 
 
 placed later than the end, and should perhaps be placed before the 
 
 middle of the second century. 
 
 3. "We have hitherto been concerned only with the Greek Sybiaii 
 
 Church of Syria. Of the early history of the Syeiaji Church, °°'"'°' 
 
 strictly so called, no trustworthy account is preserved. The documents 
 
 which profess to give information respecting it are comparatively 
 
 late : and while their violent anachronisms discredit them as a whole, 
 
 it is impossible to separate the fabulous &om the historic*. It should 
 
 be remarked however, that they exhibit a high sacerdotal view of 
 
 the episcopate as prevailing in these churches from the earliest times 
 
 of which any record is preserved". 
 
 1 See Galatians pp. 340 sq. in gross anaolironisms and probably 
 
 > Glem. Horn. iii. 62. is not earlier than the middle of the 
 
 » Clem. Horn. iii. 62, 66, 70. See 3rd century: see Zahn Gr3«. Gcl.Anz. 
 
 below, p. 238. 1877, P- '61 sq. 
 
 * See the references given above p. • See for instance pp. 13, 16, 18, »i, 
 209, note s- 23, 24, 26, 29, 30, 33, 34, 35, 42, 71 
 
 • Ancient Syriac Documents (ed. (Coreton). The Bucoession to the 
 Cureton). The Doctrine of Addai has episcopate is conferred by the ' Hand 
 recently been published complete by of Priesthood' through the Apostles, 
 Dr Phillips, London 1876. This work who received it from our Lord, and is 
 at all events must be old, for it was derived ultimately from Moses and 
 found by Eusebius in the archives of Aaron (p. 24). 
 
 Edessa (H. E. i. 13) ; bat it abounds 
 
 14—2 
 
212 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 
 
 Asia Mi- 4. AsiA MiNOB follows next in order; and here we find the 
 
 ''°"' widest and most unequivocal traces of episcopacy at an early date. 
 
 Clement of Alexandria distinctly states that St John went about from 
 city to city, his purpose being ' in some places to establish bishops, in 
 Activity of others to consolidate whole churches, in others again to appoint to 
 prooonsu- the clerical office some one of those who had been signified by the 
 lar Asia. Spirit'.' ' The sequence of bishops,' writes Tertullian in like manner 
 of Asia Minor, ' traced back to its origin wUl be found to rest on 
 the authority of John^' Aud a writer earlier than either speaks of 
 St John's 'fellow-disciples and bishops" as gathered about him. The 
 conclusiveness even of such testimony might perhaps be doubted, if 
 it were not supported by other more direct evidence. At the begin- 
 ning of the second century the letters of Ignatius, even if we accept 
 as genuine only the part contained in the Syriac, mention by name 
 OneBimua. two bishops in these parts, Onesimus of Ephesus and Polycarp of 
 Smyrna*. Of the former nothing more is known : the latter evi- 
 dently writes as a bishop, for he distinguishes himself from his 
 presbyters", and is expressly so called by other writers besides 
 Ignatius. His pupil Irenseus says of him, that he had 'not 
 only been instructed by Apostles and conversed with many who had 
 seen Christ but had also been established by Apostles in Asia as 
 bishop in the Church at Smyrna".' Polycrates also, a younger con- 
 temporary of Polycarp and himself bishop of Ephesus, designates him 
 by this title'; and again in the letter written by his own church 
 and giving an account of his martyrdom he is styled ' bishop of 
 the Church in Smyrna'.' As Polycarp survived the middle of 
 the second century, dying at a very advanced age (a.D. 155 or 156), 
 the possibility of error on this point seems to be excluded : and 
 indeed all historical evidence must be thrown aside as worthless, if 
 testimony so strong can be disregarded. 
 Ignatian It is probable however, that we should receive as genuine not 
 
 only those portions of the Ignatian letters which are represented in 
 
 1 Quia Div. Salv. 42 (p. 959). < Polyc. iuscr., Ephes. i. 
 
 " Adv. Marc. iv. 5. " Polyo. Phil. init. 
 
 ' Muratorian Fragment, Eouth Bel. " Iren. iii. 3. 4. Comp. Tertull. de 
 Sacr. I. p. 394. Ireuffius too, whoso Piccscr. 31. 
 experience was drawn chiefly from ' In Euaeb. v. 14. 
 Asia Minor, more than once speaks of ' Mart. Polyc. 16. Polycarp is call- 
 bishops appointed by the Apostles, iii. ed ' bishop of Smyrna ' also in Mart, 
 3. I, V. •20. I. Ignat. Ant. 3. 
 
THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 2^3 
 
 the Syriao, but also the Greek text in its shorter form. Under 
 any circumstances, this text can hardly have been made later than 
 the middle of the second century', and its -witness would still be 
 highly valuable, even if it were a forgery. The staunch advocacy of 
 the episcopate which distinguishes these writings is well known and 
 will be considered hereafter. At present we are only concerned with 
 the historical testimony which they bear to the wide extension and 
 authoritative claims of the episcopal oflSce. Besides Polycarp and 
 Onesimus, mentioned in the Syriac, the writer names also Damas 
 bishop of Magnesia" and Polybius bishop of Tralles'; and he urges 
 on the Philadelphians also the duty of obedience to their bishop*, 
 though the name is not given. Under any circumstances it seems 
 probable that these were not fictitious personages, for, even if he 
 were a forger, he would be anxious to give an air of reality to his 
 writings : but whether or not we regard his testimony as indirectly 
 affecting the age of Ignatius, for his own time at least it must be 
 regarded as valid. 
 
 But the evidence is not confined to the persons and the churches 
 already mentioned. Papias, who was a friend of Polycarp and had Bishops o£ 
 conversed with personal disciples of the Lord, is commonly desig- ijg_ 
 nated bishop of Hierapolis'; and we learn from a younger contem- 
 porary Serapion', that Claudius ApoUinaris, known as a writer 
 against the Montanists, also held this see in the reign of M. Aureliua. 
 Again Sagaris the martyr, who seems to have perished in the early Sagaris. 
 years of M. Aurelius, about A. d. 165', is designated bishop of Lao- 
 dicea by an author writing towards the close of the same century, who 
 also alludes to Melito the contemporary of Sagaris as holding the Melito. 
 see of Sardis". The authority just quoted, Polycrates of Ephesus, Folyoratea 
 who flourished in the last decade of the century, says moreover that f^ions^ ™' 
 he had had seven relations bishops before him, himself being the 
 eighth, and that he followed their tradition'. When he wrote he 
 had been 'sixty-five years iu the Lord'; so that even if this period 
 
 ' See below, p. 234, note. see Golossiam p. 63. 
 
 ^ Magn. 2. * Polycrates in Enaeb. H. E. v. 24. 
 
 ' Trail. I. MeUto'a office may be inferred from the 
 
 * Philad. I. contrast implied in vepi/iivuiv riiv d-iri 
 
 " Euseb. H. E. iii. 36. riDc oipavuv iviaKoiriiv. 
 
 8 In Euseb. H. E. v. 19. » In Euseb. H. E. v. 24. See Gala- 
 1 On the authority of his oontempo- {j({n» p. 362 ggte. 
 
 raiy Melito in Euaeb, ff, E. iv, a6 : 
 
214 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 
 
 date from the time of his birth and not of his conversion or baptism, 
 
 ho must have been bom scarcely a quarter of a century after the 
 
 death of the last surviving Apostle, whose latest years were spent in 
 
 the veiy Church over which Polycrates himself presided. It appears 
 
 moreover from his language that none of these relations to whom he 
 
 refers were surviving when he wrote. 
 
 Thus the evidence for the early and wide extension of episcopacy 
 
 throughout proconsular Asia, the scene of St John's latest labours, 
 
 Bishops iu ™ay be considered irrefragable. And when we pass to other districts 
 
 otherparts ^f A sia. Minor, examples are not wanting, though these are neither 
 of Asia ' * • • • 1 J 
 
 Minor. 60 early nor so frequent. Marcion a native of Sinope is related to 
 
 have been the son of a Christian bishop': and Marcion himself had 
 elaborated his theological system before the middle of the second 
 century. Again, a bishop of Eumenia, Thraseas by name, is stated 
 by Polycrates to have been martyred and buried at Smyrna'; and, as 
 he is mentioned in connexion with Polycarp, it may fairly be sup- 
 posed that the two suffered in the same persecution. Dionysius of 
 Corinth moreover, writing to Amastris and the other churches of 
 Pontus (about a.d. 170), mentions Palmas the bishop of this city': 
 and when the Paschal controversy breaks out afresh under Victor of 
 Eome, we find this same Palmas putting his signature first to a cir- 
 cular letter, as the senior of the bishops of Pontus*. An anonymous 
 writer also, who took part in the Montanist controversy, speaks of 
 two bishops of repute, Zoticus of Comana and Julianus of Apamea, 
 Episcopal ^ having resisted the impostures of the false prophetesses'. But 
 synodB. indeed the frequent notices of encyclical letters written and synods 
 held towards the close of the second century are a much more powei> 
 ful testimony to the wide extension of episcopacy throughout the 
 provinces of Asia Minor than the incidental mention of individual 
 names. On one such occasion Polycrates speaks of the 'crowds' of 
 bishops whom he had summoned to confer with him on the Paschal 
 question". 
 Maoedo- S- -A^ we turn fi:om Asia Minor to Macedonia and Greece, 
 
 NiA and j^jjg evidence becomes fainter and scantier. This circumstance is no 
 
 1 [Tertnll.] ado. omn. lucres. 6. amea on the Mseander ia mentioned at 
 
 " In Buseb. H. E. v. 24. the end of tlie chapter, probably this 
 
 ' In Euseb. H. E. iv. 23. is the place meant. 
 
 * EuB^b. H. E. V. 73. e In Euseb. H. E. v. 14 ttoXXA irX^tf^. 
 
 I In Euseb. H. E. v. 16, As Ap- 
 
THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 215 
 
 doubt due partly to the fact that these churches were much leas 
 active and important during the second century than the Christian 
 communities of Asia Minor, but the phenomena cannot perhaps be 
 wholly explained by this consideration. "When Tertullian in one of Later da- 
 his rhetorical flights challenges the heretical teachers to consult the ^f episeo- 
 apostolic churches, where 'the very sees of the Apostles still pre- V^7- 
 side,' adding, 'If Achaia is nearest to you, then you have Corinth ; if 
 you are not far from Macedonia, you have PhUippi, you have the 
 Thessalonians ; if you can reach Asia, you have Ephesus" : liis main 
 argument was doubtless just, and even the language would commend 
 itself to its own age, for episcopacy was the only form of government 
 known or remembered in the church when he wrote : but a careful 
 investigation scarcely allows, and certainly does not encourage us, 
 to place Corinth and Philippi and Thessalonica in the same category 
 with Ephesus as regards episcopacy. The term 'apostolic see' was 
 appropriate to the latter ; but so far as we know, it cannot be 
 strictly applied to the former. During the early years of the second 
 century, when episcopacy was firmly established in the principal 
 churches of Asia Minor, Polycarp sends a letter to the Philippians. Philippi. 
 He writes in the name of himself and his presbyters; he gives 
 advice to the Philippians respecting the obligations and the autho- 
 rity of presbyters and deacons ; he is minute in his instructions 
 respecting one individual presbyter, "Valens by name, who had been 
 guilty of some crime ; but throughout the letter he never once refers 
 to their bishop ; and indeed its whole tone is hardly consistent with 
 the supposition that they had any chief officer holding the same pro- 
 minent position at Philippi which he himself held at Smyrna. We 
 are thus led to the inference that episcopacy did not exist at all 
 among the Philippians at this time, or existed only in an elementary 
 form, so that the bishop was a mere president of the presbyteral 
 council. At Thessalonica indeed, according to a tradition mentioned Thesaalo- 
 by Origen', the same Caius whom St Paul describes as his host ''^''*" 
 at Corinth was afterwards appointed bishop ; but with so common 
 a name the possibilities of error are great, even if the testimony 
 were earlier in date and expressed in more distinct terms. When 
 from Macedonia we pass to Achaia, the same phenomena present 
 
 ' TertuU. de Prtencr. 37. traditione majorum ' (rv. p. 86, ed. De- 
 
 ' On Bom. svi. 13; 'Feitur sane larue). 
 
8l6 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 
 
 themselves. At the close of the first century Clement Tsaites to 
 Oorinth. Corinth, as at the beginning of the second century Polycarp writes to 
 Philippi. As in the latter epistle, so in the former, there is no allu- 
 sion to the episcopal ofiSce : yet the main subject of Clement's letter 
 is the expulsion and ill treatment of certain presbyters, whose au- 
 thority he maintains as holding an office instituted by and handed 
 down from the Apostles themselves. If Corinth however was with- 
 out a bishop in the strict sense at the close of the first century, 
 she cannot long have remained so. When some fifty years later 
 Hegesippus stayed here on his way to Rome, Primus was bishop 
 of this Church ; and it is clear moreover from this writer's language 
 that Primus had been preceded by several occupants of the see'. 
 Indeed the order of his narrative, so far as we can piece it together 
 from the broken fragments preserved in Eusebius, might suggest 
 the inference, not at all improbable in itself, that episcopacy had 
 been established at Corinth as a corrective of the dissensions and 
 feuds which had called forth Clement's letter ^ Again Dionysius, 
 one of the immediate successors of Primus, was the writer of several 
 letters of which fragments are extant'; and at the close of the 
 century we meet with a later bishop of Corinth, BacchyUus, who 
 Athens, takes an active part in the Paschal controversy*. Wben from 
 Corinth we pass on to Athens, a very early instance of a bishop 
 confronts us, on authority which seems at first sight good. Eusebius 
 represents Dionysius of Corinth, who wrote apparently about the 
 year 170, as stating that his namesake the Areopagite, 'having been 
 brought to the faith by the Apostle Paul according to the account 
 in the Acts, was the first to be entrusted with the bishopric (or 
 supervision) of the diocese (in the language of those times, the parish) 
 of the Athenians".' Now, if we could be sure that Eusebius was 
 
 ' InEuseb. If. E.iv. 22,Kai ^ir^/iei/ei/ /ion-os Tphs KopivBlous ftrioroX^s avrlf 
 
 Tl iKK\ri<rla ij KopivBlwi' in rlf ipBif Xoytp elpij/Um, H. E. iv. 22) he continued in 
 
 /i^XP' Hpi/iov ina-KoreiovTos iv KopMtp the words which are quoted in the last 
 
 K.T.\ A little later he speaks of ^/cdffri; note [iviKiyovTos touto, KoJ irip-cver 
 
 SiaJox^, referring apparently to Corinth ^ iKK\ii(rla k.t.X.). On the probable 
 
 among other chniohes. tenor of Hegesippus' work see below, 
 
 ' Hegesippus mentioned the feuds in p. 230. 
 
 the Church of Corinth during the reign > The fragments of Dionysius are 
 
 of Domitian, which had occasioned the foimd in Euseb. S. B. iv. 23. See 
 
 writing of this letter (H. E. iii. 16); also Eouth Bel. Sacr. t. p. 177 sq. 
 
 and then after some account of Ole- • Enseb. S. E. v. 22, 23. 
 
 meat's epistle [und nva ire/)} t^s KXtJ. » in Euseb. II. B. iy. 23, 
 
THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 217 
 
 here reporting the exact words of Dionysius, the testimony though 
 not conclusive ■would be entitled to great deference. In this case the 
 easiest solution would be, that this ancient writer had not unnatu- 
 rally confounded the earlier and later usage of the word bishop. 
 But it seems not improbable that Eusebius (for he does not profess 
 to be giving a direct quotation) has unintentionally paraphrased and 
 interpreted the Btatement of Dionysius by the light of later ecclesias- 
 tical usages. However Athens, like Corinth, did not long remain 
 without a bishop. The same Dionysius, writing to the Athenians, 
 reminds them how, after the martyrdom of Publius their ruler (tov 
 irpoforioTa), Quadratus becoming bishop sustained the courage and 
 stimulated the faith of the Athenian brotherhood'. If, as seems 
 more probable than not, this was the famous Quadratus who pre- 
 sented his apology to Hadrian during that emperor's visit to Athens, 
 the existence of episcopacy in this city is thrown back early in the 
 century; even though Quadratus were not already bishop when 
 Hadrian paid his visit. 
 
 6. The same writer, from whom we learn these particulars about Obetk. 
 episcopacy at Athens, also furnishes information on the Church in 
 Crete, He writes letters to two different communities in this island, 
 
 the one to Gortyna commending Philip who held this see, the other to 
 the Cnossians offering words of advice to their bishop Pinytus'. The 
 first was author of a treatise against Marcion": the latter wrote a 
 reply to Dionysius, of which Eusebius has preserved a brief notice". 
 
 7. Of episcopacy in Thrace, and indeed of the Thracian Church Tbbaoe, 
 generally, we read nothing till the close of the second century, when 
 
 one jSilius Publius Julius bishop of Debeltum, a colony in this pro- 
 vince, signs an encyclical letter'. The existence of a see at a place so 
 unimportant implies the wide spread of episcopacy in these regions. 
 
 8. As we turn to Roue, we are confronted by a far more per- Eome. 
 plexing problem than any encountered hitherto. The attempt to 
 decipher the early history of episcopacy here seems almost hopeless, 
 where the evidence is at once scanty and conflicting. It has been 
 
 ' Euaeb. H. E. iv. 23. Eoman usage, suggests the suspicion 
 
 ' Buseb. H. E. iv. 2S- tliat the signatures of three distinct 
 
 s Bnseb. i7. E.v. 19. Theoombiua- persons have got confused. The error 
 
 tion of three gentile names in 'iElius however, if error it be, does not ftfieot 
 
 Publius Julius ' is possible at this late the inference in the test. 
 
 epoch; but, ^eipg a gross violation o{ 
 
21 8 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 
 
 The pre- often aasumed that in the metropolis of the world, the seat of imperial 
 vailing j^jg ^j^g gpirit which dominated in the State must bv natural pre- 
 spint not ' ^ • ij. • 1. /-ii. 1. 1 
 
 mouarchi- disposition and sympathy have infused itself into the Church also, so 
 
 that a monarchical form of government would be developed more 
 rapidly here than in other parts of Christendom. This supposition 
 seems to overlook the fact that the influences which prevailed in the 
 early church of the metropolis were more Greek than Roman', and 
 that therefore the tendency would be rather towards individual 
 liberty than towards compact and rigorous government. But indeed 
 such presumptions, however attractive and specious, are valueless 
 against the slightest evidence of facts. And the most trustworthy 
 sources of information which we possess do not countenance the idea. 
 
 Bearing of The earliest authentic document bearing on the subject is the Epistle 
 
 euiBtlT' froiQ tlie Romans to the Corinthians, probably written in the last 
 decade of the first century. I have already considered the bearing of 
 this letter on episcopacy in the Church of Corinth, and it is now 
 time to ask what light it throws on the same institution at Rome. 
 Now we cannot hesitate to accept the universal testimony of anti- 
 quity that it was written by Clement, the reputed bishop of Rome : 
 and it is therefore the more surprising that, if he held this high 
 office, the writer should not only not distinguish himself in any way 
 from the rest of the church (as Polycarp does for instance), but that 
 even his name should be suppressed". It is still more important to 
 observe that, though he has occasion to speak of the ministry as an 
 institution of the Apostles, he mentions only two orders and is silent 
 about the episcopal office. Moreover he still uses the word ' bishop ' 
 in the older sense in which it occurs in the apostolic writings, as a 
 synonyme for presbyter', and it may be argued that the recogni- 
 tion of the episcopate as a higher and distinct office would oblige 
 the adoption of a special name and therefore must have synchro- 
 nized roughly with the separation of meaning between ' bishop' and 
 'presbyter.' Agam not many years after the date of Clement's 
 
 Testimony letter, St Ignatius on his way to martyrdom writes to the Romans. 
 
 o igna lUB rjijjQ^gjj ^jjig gg^i^i- jg ^jjg rgcognisod champion of episcopacy, though 
 the remaining sis of the Ignatian letters all contain direct injunc- 
 tions of obedience to bishops, in this epistle alone there is no allu- 
 
 ' See above, p. lo sq. > See S. Clement of Borne p. 552 sq. Appendix^ 
 
 ' See abovn, p. 96 sq. 
 
THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 219 
 
 sion to the episcopal office as existing among his correspondents. 
 The lapse of a few years carries us from the letters of Ignatius to the and 
 Shepherd of Hennas. And here the indications are equivocal. 
 Hermas receives directions in a vision to impart the revelation to the 
 presbyters and also to make two copies, the one for Clement who shall 
 communicate with the foreign churches (such being his duty), the 
 other for Grapte who shall instruct the widows. Hermas himself is 
 charged to ' read it to this city with the elders who preside over the 
 church'.' Elsewhere mention is made of the ' rulers ' of the church'. 
 And again, in an enumeration of the faithful officers of the churches 
 past and present, he speaks of the ' apostles and bishops and teachers 
 and deacons'.' Here most probably the word ' bishop ' is used in its 
 later sense, and the presbyters are designated by the term ' teachers.' 
 Yet this interpretation cannot be regarded as certain, for the ' bishops 
 and teachers ' in Hermas, like the ' pastors and teachers ' in St Paul, 
 might possibly refer to the one presbyteral office in its twofold aspect. 
 Other passages in. which Hermas uses the same terms are indecisive. 
 Thus he speaks of * apostles and teachers who preached to the whole 
 world and taught with reverence and purity the word of the Lord*'; 
 of ' deacons who exercised their diaconate ill and plundered the life 
 {njv CdJifi') of widows and orphans"; of ' hospitable bishops who at all 
 times received the servants of God into their homes cheerfully and 
 without hypocrisy,' 'who protected the bereaved and the widows 
 in their ministrations without ceasing'.' From these passages it 
 seems impossible to arrive at a safe conclusion respecting the minis- 
 try at the time when Hermas wrote. In other places he condemns 
 the false prophet ' who, seeming to have the Spirit, exalts himself and 
 would fain have the first seat"; or he warns 'those who rule over 
 the church and those who hold the chief-seat,' bidding them give up 
 their dissensions and live at peace among themselves"; or he de- 
 
 ^ Vis, ii. 4 ypd^eis ovv 5uo jS(/3Xi5dpio ' Sim. ix. 25. 
 
 itai iri/iil/ea If KXruievrt xal If Tpairr^, ^ Sim. ix. 26. 
 
 T^fjt^ei ovfi K'XTjfiTjs eZs ras ?^w iroXets" * Sim, ix. 27. 
 
 ineivifi ydp iiriTiTpairTtu' Tpairrij Si ' Mand. xi, 
 
 vovSeTTjaei tos ot/"'s koI rods optjiavovr > Vis. m. 9 iiuii yUyu toU rporiyov- 
 
 <ri U dfayviifffis els Taijriv t^v ttoKiv /iirois Trjs iKKXr/ffias Kcd Tois irparoKaSe- 
 
 Hcrd Tuv vpcffpvripuv tiSv irpoCtTapAvw/ Spirals, k.t,\. For the form vpairoKa- 
 
 rijs iKKKijalas, BeSplriis see the note on (rvpStSaaxoKl- 
 
 ' Vis. ii. 2, iii. 9. rais, Ignat. Ephes. 3. 
 
 ' Vis, in. 5. 
 
220 
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 
 
 nounces those who have 'emulation one with another for the first 
 Unwar- place or for some honour'.' If we could accept the suggestion that 
 inference. ^ ^^^ ^^^ class of passages the writer condemns the ambition which 
 aimed at transforming the pi-esbyterian into the episcopal form of 
 government', we should have arrived at a solution of the difficulty ; 
 but the rebukes are couched in the most general terms and apply at 
 least as well to the ambitious pursuit of existing offices as to the 
 arrogant assertion of a hitherto unrecognized power'. This cine 
 failing us, the notices in the Shepherd are in themselves too vague 
 to lead to any result. Were it not known that the writer's own 
 brother was bishop of Rome, we should be at a loss what to say 
 about the constitution of the Roman Church in his day*. 
 
 But while the testimony of these early writers appears at first 
 sight and on the whole unfavourable to the existence of episcopacy in 
 Rome when they wrote, the impression needs to be corrected by im- 
 Testimony portant considerations on the other side. Hegesippus, who visited 
 sippns ' ^ome about the middle of the second century during the papacy of 
 Anicetus, has left it on record that he drew up a list of the Roman 
 bishops to his own time'. As the list is not preserved, we can only 
 conjecture its contents; but if we may judge &om the sentence imme- 
 diately following, in which he praises the orthodoxy of this and other 
 churches under each succession, his object was probably to show that 
 the teachings of the Apostles had been carefully preserved and handed 
 down, and he would therefore trace the episcopal succession back to 
 and of Ire- apostolic times'. Such at all events is the aim and method of Ire- 
 ^'^™' naeus who, writing somewhat later than Hegesippus and combating 
 Gnostic heresies, appeals especially to the bishops of Rome, as depo- 
 sitaries of the apostolic tradition'. The Hst of Irenseus commences 
 
 ^ Sim. viii. 7. 
 
 " So Eitschl pp. 403, 535. 
 
 ' Comp. Matt, xxiii. 6, eto. When 
 Irenseus wrote, episcopacy was cer- 
 tainly a venerable institution : yet 
 hia language closely resembles the 
 reproachful expressions of Hermas : 
 ' Contumeliis agunt reliquos et princi- 
 palis consessiouis (mbs oonoessionis) 
 tumore elati sunt' (iv. 26. 3). 
 
 * See above, p. 168, note 9, and 
 8. Clement of Borne p. 316, Appendix, 
 
 P In Euseb. H. E. iv. ij, 
 
 « The words of Hegesippus ^i- iKiar} 
 imSoxa Kol kv iKiaro Jr6X« k.t.X. have a 
 parallel in those of Irenteue (iii. 3. 3) tJ 
 airS Tdfei Kal rj avrg SiSaxlj (Lat. 
 ' bao ordinatioue et successione ') ^ re 
 dirA TiSv dTToo-ToXuv h> tj iKxXriirlf ra- 
 pdSoais Kal t6 rfjs dXijffeias K^puyim 
 KOTijiTijKei' eli iifiSs. May not Irentsus 
 have derived his information from the 
 StaSox)] of Roman bishops which Hege- 
 sippus drew up ? See below, p. i^o, 
 
 ' Iren. iii. 3. 3. 
 
THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 221 
 
 with Linus, whom he identifies with the person of this name men- Lists of 
 
 tioned by St Paul, and whom he states to have been ' entrusted with ^?^ 
 
 the office of the bishopric' by the Apostles. The second in succession 
 
 is Anencletus of whom he relates nothing, the third Clemens whom 
 
 he describes as a hearer of the Aposftles and as writer of the letter to 
 
 the Corinthians. The others in order are Evarestus, Alexander, 
 
 Xystus, Telesphorus, Hyginus, Pius, Anicetus, Soter, and Eleuthe- 
 
 rus during whose episcopacy Ireneeus writes. Eusebius in different 
 
 works gives two lists, both agreeing in the order with Irenseus, 
 
 though not according with each other in the dates. Catalogues are 
 
 also found in writers later than Irenseus, transposing the sequence of 
 
 the earliest bishops, and adding the name Cletus or substituting it 
 
 for Anencletus'. These discrepancies may be explained by assuming 
 
 two distinct churches in Rome — a Jewish and a Gentile community 
 
 — ^in the first age ; or they may have arisen from a confusion of the 
 
 earlier and later senses of Ejrio-Kojros ; or the names may have been 
 
 transposed in the later lists owing to the influence of the Clementine 
 
 Homilies, in which romance Clement is represented as the immediate 
 
 disciple and successor of St Peter". With the many possibilities of Untis, 
 
 error, no more can safely be assumed of Linus and Anencletus than . •*•"• °°" 
 ' ■' ... Anenole- 
 
 that they held some prominent position in the Roman Church. But tus, 
 
 the reason for supposing CiiEMENT to have been a bishop is as strong element ' 
 
 as the universal tradition of the next ages can make it. Yet, while •*•• "■ 9'- 
 
 calling him a bishop, we need not suppose him to have attained the 
 
 same distinct isolated position of authority which was occupied by 
 
 his successors Eleutherus and Victor for instance at the close of the 
 
 second century, or even by his contemporaries Ignatius of Antioch 
 
 and Polycarp of Smyrna. He was rather the chief of the presbyters 
 
 than the chief over the presbyters. Only when thus limited, can the 
 
 episcopacy of St Clement be reconciled with the language of his own 
 
 1 On this subject see Feaxson's Dis- Documents p. 71) is doubtless due to 
 
 sertationes diue de serie et successione the fact that the names Cletus, Cle- 
 
 primorum Romce episcoporum in his mens, begin with the same letters. In 
 
 Minor Theological Worki 11. p. 296 sq. the margin I have for convenience 
 
 (ed. Churton), and especially the recent given the dates of the Boman bishops 
 
 work of Lipsius Chronologie der rami- from the Ecclesiastical History of Eu- 
 
 8chenBi»cliofe,'Ki.e\ iS6g. The earliest sebius, without however attaching any 
 
 list which places Clement's name first weight to them in the case of the 
 
 belongs to the age of Hippolytus. The earlier names. See above, p. 169. 
 omission of his name in a recently ' See Galatians p. 329. 
 
 discovered Syiiao Ust {Ancient Syriac 
 
222 
 
 THB CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 
 
 ETarestus, 
 
 A. D. 100. 
 
 Alexander, 
 A. D. 109. 
 
 Xystus, 
 
 A. D. 119. 
 
 Telespho- 
 ms, 
 
 A. D. Il8. 
 
 Hyginus, 
 
 A.D. 139. 
 
 Pius, 
 
 A.D. 141. 
 
 Anicetus, 
 
 A.D. f57. 
 
 epistle or with the notice iu his younger contemporary Hermas. At 
 the same time the allusion in the Shepherd, though inconsistent with 
 any exalted conception of his office, does assign to him as his special 
 province the duty of communicating with foreign churches', which in 
 the early ages was essentially the bishop's function, as may be seen 
 by the instances of Polycarp, of Dionysius, of Irenseus, and of Poly- 
 crates. Of the two succeeding bishops, Evarestus and Alexander, 
 no authentic notices are preserved. Xystus, who follows, is the re- 
 puted author of a collection of proverbs, which a recent distinguished 
 critic has not hesitated to accept as genuine'. He is also the earliest 
 of those Roman prelates whom Ii-enaeus, writing to Victor in the 
 name of the Galilean Churches, mentions as having obsei-ved Easter 
 after the western reckoning and yet maintained peace with those 
 who kept it otherwise'. The next two, Telesphokus and Hyginus, 
 are described in the same terms. The former is likewise distin- 
 guished as the sole martyr among the early bishops of the metro- 
 polis*; the latter is mentioned as being in office when the peace of 
 the Roman Church was disturbed by the presence of the heretics 
 Valentinus and Cerdon°. "With Pius, the next in order, the office, 
 if not the man, emerges into daylight. An anonymous writer, treat- 
 ing on the canon of Scripture, says that the Shepherd was written 
 by Hermas ' quite lately while hia brother Pius held the see of the 
 Church of Rome'.' This passage, written by a contemporary, be- 
 sides the testimony which it bears to the date and authorship of the 
 Shepherd (with which we are not here concerned), is valuable in its 
 bearing on this investigation ; for the use of the ' chair ' or ' see' as 
 a recognised phrase points to a more or less prolonged existence 
 of episcopacy in Rome, when this writer lived. To Pius succeeds 
 Anicetus. And now Rome becomes for the moment the centre of 
 interest and activity in the Christian world'. During this episcopate 
 Hegesippus, visiting the metropolis for the purpose of ascertaining 
 
 ' See above, p. 219, note i. 
 
 " Ewald, Gesch. dea V. I. vii. p. 321 
 sq. On the other hand see Zeller 
 Philos. der Griechen in. 1. p. 601 note, 
 and Sanger in the Jildische Zeitsehrift 
 (1867) p. 29 sq. It has recently been 
 edited by Gildemeister, Sexti Senten- 
 tia, 1873. 
 
 ' Tren. in Euseb. H. E. v. 14. 
 
 * Iren. iii. 3. 3. At least Irensaus 
 mentions him alone as a martyr. Later 
 stories confer the glory of martyrdom 
 on others also. 
 
 ' Iren. iii. 4. 3. 
 
 • See above, p. 168, note 9, where the 
 passage is quoted. 
 
 ' See Westcott Canon p. 191, ed. 4. 
 
THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 223 
 
 and recording the doctrines of the Eoman Church, is welcomed by the 
 bishop'. About the same time also another more illustrious visitor, 
 Polycarp the venerable bishop of Smyrna, arrives in Rome to confer 
 with the head of the Eoman Church on the Paschal dispute' and 
 there falls in with and denounces the heretic Marcion'. These facts 
 are stated on contemporary authority. Of Soter also, the next in Soter, 
 succession, a contemporary record is preserved. Dionysius of Corinth, 
 writing to the Romans, praises the zeal of their bishop, who in his 
 fatherly care for the suffering poor and for the prisoners working 
 in the mines had maintained and extended the hereditary fame of 
 his church for zeal in all charitable and good works*. In Eleu- Eleutho- 
 THEKUS, who succeeds Soter, we have the earliest recorded instance ^_'j,_ ,.__ 
 of an archdeacon. When Hegesippus paid his visit to the metro- 
 polis, he found Eleutherus standing in this relation to the bishop 
 Anicetus, and seems to have made his acquaintance whUe acting in 
 this capacity'. Eleutherus however was a contemporary, not only of 
 Hegesippns, but also of the great writers Irenseus and TertuUian', 
 who speak of the episcopal succession in the churches generally, and 
 in Rome especially, as the best safeguard for the transmission of the 
 true faith from apostolic times'. With Victor, the successor of Victor, 
 Eleutherus, a new era begins. Apparently the first Latin prelate *■"' ' '' 
 who held the metropolitan see of Latin Christendom", he was more- 
 over the first Roman bishop who is known to have had intimate 
 
 '■ Hegesipp. in Euseb. H. E. iv. 23. in writing, but bears a Greek name also. 
 
 » Iren. in Euseb. H. E. v. 24. It is worth observing also that Tertul- 
 
 ' Iren. iii. 3. 4; oomp. iii. 4. 4. liau {de Prtescr. 30), speaking of the 
 
 ■* In Euseb. H. E. iv. 23. episcopate of Eleutherus, designates 
 
 " In Euseb. H. E. iv. 22 /Uxpt! 'Avt- the church of the metropolis not 'eo- 
 
 KriTov t^ Siixovoi ^v '^'Kei6epos. clesia Bomana,' but 'eoclesia Eoma- 
 
 « He is mentioned by Irenieus iii. 3. nensis,' i.e. not the Church of Eome, 
 
 3 vw SuSexiTtf ToVij) rbv rrji iinaKoirijs but the Church in Borne. The tran- 
 
 atriTUv atroiTToKmi kot^ci KKTJpov"EKei- sition from a Greek to a Latin Church 
 
 Bepot, and by Tertullian, Prascr. 30 was of course gradual; but, if a defi- 
 
 ' sub episcopatu Eleutheri benedicti.' nite epoch must be named, the episoo- 
 
 ' Iren. iii. 3. 2, TertuU. de Prceeer. pate of Victor serves better than any 
 
 32, 36, adv. Marc. iv. 5. other. The two immediate successors 
 
 8 AH the predecessors of Victor bear of Victor, Zepbyrinus (202 — 219) and 
 
 Greek names with two exceptions, Cle- CaUistuB(2i9 — 2 23), bear Greek names, 
 
 mens and Pius ; and even these appear and it may be inferred from the ao- 
 
 not to have been Latin. Clement coimt in Hippolytus that they were 
 
 writes in Greek, and his style is wholly Greeks ; but from this time forward 
 
 unlike what might be expected from a the Boman bishops, with scarcely an 
 
 Boman. Hermas, the brother of Pius, exception, seem to have been Latins. 
 
 not only employs the Greek language 
 
224 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 
 
 relations with the imperial court', and the first also who advanced 
 those claims to universal dominion which his successors in later ages 
 have always consistently and often successfully maintained'. 'I 
 hear,' writes TertuUian scornfully, ' that an edict has gone forth, aye 
 and that a peremptory edict j the chief pontiff, forsooth, I mean the 
 bishop of bishops, has issued his commands'.' At the end of the 
 fii-st century the Roman Church was swayed by the mild and peaceful 
 counsels of the presbyter-bishop Clement ; the close of the second 
 witnessed the autocratic pretensions of the haughty pope Victor, 
 the prototype of a Hildebrand or an Innocent. 
 
 Gaul. 9- The Churches of Gaul were closely connected with and pro- 
 
 bably descended from the Churches of Asia Minor. If so, the episco- 
 pal form of government would probably be coeval with the founda- 
 tion of Christian brotherhoods in this country. It is true we do not 
 meet with any earlier bishop than the immediate predecessor of 
 Irenseus at Lyons, the aged Pothinus, of whose martyrdom an account 
 is given in the letter of the G-allican Churches \ But this is also the 
 first distinct historical notice of any kind relating to Christianity 
 in Gaul. 
 
 Ajkioa. 10. Africa again was evangelized from Rome at a compara^ 
 
 tively late date. Of the African Church before the close of the 
 second century, when a flood of light is suddenly thrown upon it bj 
 the writings of Tertullian, we know absolutely nothing. But we need 
 not doubt that this father represents the traditions and sentiments of 
 his church, when he lays stress on episcopacy as an apostolic institu- 
 tion and on the episcopate as the depositary of pure Christian 
 doctrine. If we may judge by the large number of prelates assem- 
 bled in the African councils of a later generation, it would appear 
 that the extension of the episcopate was far more rapid here than in 
 most pai-ts of Christendom". 
 
 ' Hippol. Hccr. ix. 12, pp. 287, 288. enim quisquam nostrum episoopum se 
 
 ^ See the account of his attitude in epiaooporum oonstituit etc.,' donbtleas 
 
 the Paschal controversy, Euseb. S. M. in allusion to the arrogance of the 
 
 V. 24. Boman prelates. 
 
 » Tertull. tie Pudic. 1. The bishop < The Epistle of the GallioanCaiurclieS 
 
 here mentioned will be either Victor or in Euseb. H. E. v. i. 
 Zephyrinus; and the passage points to "> At the African council conToked 
 
 the assumption of extraordinary titles by Cyprian about 50 years later, the 
 
 by theEoman bishops about this time. opinions of as many as 87 bishops are 
 
 See also Cyprian in the opening of the recorded ; and allusion is made in one 
 
 Concil. Carth. p. 158 (ed. Fell) 'neque of his letters [Epist. 59) to a council 
 
THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 
 
 225 
 
 1 1. The Church of Alexandria, on the other hand, was pro- Albzak- 
 bably founded in apostolic times'. Nor is there any reason to doubt 
 the tradition which connects it with the name of St Mark, though the 
 authorities for the statement are comparatively recent. Neverthe- 
 less of its early history we have no authentic record. Eusebius 
 indeed gives a list of bishops beginning with St Mark, which here, as 
 in the case of the Koman see, is accompanied by dates'; but from 
 what source he derived his information, is unknown. The fii'st con- 
 temporary notice of church officers in Alexandria is found in a 
 
 heathen wiiter. The emperor Hadrian, writing to the consul Servi- Hadrian's 
 
 letter 
 anus, thus describes the state of religion in this city : ' I have become 
 
 perfectly familiar with Egypt, which you praised to me ; it is fickle, 
 
 uncertain, blown about by every gust of rumour. Those who worship 
 
 Serapis are Christians, and those are devoted to Serapis who call 
 
 themselves bishops of Christ. There is no ruler of a synagogue there, 
 
 no Samaritan, no Christian presbyter, who is not an astrologer, a 
 
 soothsayer, a quack. The patriarch himself whenever he comes to 
 
 Egypt is compelled by some to worship Serapis, by others to worship 
 
 Christ*.' In this letter, which seems to have been written in the 
 
 held before his time, when 90 bishops 
 assembled. For a list of the African 
 bishoprics at this time see Miinter 
 Primord. Eccl. Afric. p. 31 sq. The 
 enormous niunber of African bishops a 
 few centuries later would seem incredi- 
 ble, were it not reported on the best 
 authority. Dupin (Optat. Milev. p. lix) 
 counts up as many as 690 African sees: 
 compare also the Notitia in Bnlnort'e 
 Victor Vitensis p. 117 sq., with the 
 notes p. 115 sq. These last references 
 I owe to Gibbon, c. zxxvii and c. xU. 
 
 ^ Independently of the tradition re- 
 lating to St Mark, this maybe inferred 
 from extant canonical and uncanonical 
 writings which appear to have emanated 
 from Alexandria. The Epistle to the 
 Hebrews, even if we may not ascribe 
 it to the learned Alexandrian Apollos 
 (Acts zriii. 24), at least bears obvious 
 marks of Alexandrian culture. The so- 
 oaUed Epistle of Barnabas again, which 
 may have been written as early as the 
 reign of Vespasian and can hardly date 
 later than Nerva, must be referred to 
 the Alexandrian school of theology. 
 
 PHIL. 
 
 ' Euseb. H. E. ii. 14, iii. 14, etc. 
 See Clinton's Fasti Bomani 11. p. 544. 
 
 • Preserved in Vopiscns Fit. Saturn. 
 8. The Jewish patriarch (who resided 
 at Tiberias) is doubtless intended ; for 
 it would be no hardship to the Christian 
 bishop of Alexandria to be ' compelled 
 to worship Christ.' Otherwise the ana- 
 chronism involved in such a title would 
 alone have sufficed to condemn the let- 
 ter as spurious. Tet Salmasius, Casan- 
 bon, and the older commentators gene- 
 rally, agree in the supposition that the 
 bishop of Alexandria is styled patriarch 
 here. The manner in which the docu- 
 ment is stated by Vopiscns to have 
 been preserved (' Hadrian! epistolam ex 
 librisPhlegontis liberti ejus proditam ') 
 is favourable to its genuineness ; nor 
 does the mention of Vems as the em- 
 peror's 'son' in another part of the 
 letter present any real chronological 
 difficulty. Hadrian paid his visit to 
 Egypt in the autumn of 130, but the 
 letter is not stated to have been written 
 there. The date of the third consul- 
 ship of Servianus is a.d. 134, and the 
 
 IS 
 
426 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 
 
 jear 134, Hadrian shows more knowledge of Jewish ecclesiastical 
 polity than of Christian : but, apparently without knowing the exact 
 ralue of terms, he seems to distinguish the bishop and the presbyter 
 in the Christian conmiunity*. From the age of Hadrian to the age 
 of Clement no contemporary or nearly contemporary notices are 
 found, bearing on the government of the Alexandrian Church. The 
 Clement of language of Clement is significant; he speaks sometimes of two 
 dria. orders of the ministry, the presbytera and deacons'; sometimes of 
 
 three, the bishops, presbyters, and deacons'. Thus it would appear 
 that even as late as the close of the second century the bishop of 
 Alexandria was regarded as distinct and yet not distinct from the 
 presbytery*- And the language of Clement is further illustrated by 
 the fact, which will have to be considered at length presently, that 
 at Alexandria the bishop was nominated and apparently ordained by 
 the twelve presbyters out of their own number". The episcopal 
 office in this Church during the second century gives no presage of 
 the world-wide influence to which under the prouder name of patri- 
 archate it was destined in later ages to attain. The Alexandrian 
 succession, in which history is hitherto most interested, is not the 
 succession of the bishops but of the heads of the catechetical school 
 
 account of Spartianus (Ver. 3) easily mean different offices, when speaking 
 
 admits of the adoption of Terns before of the bishop and the presbyter, 
 
 or during this year, though Clinton * Strom, -m. i (p. 830, Potter) i/uitui 
 
 {Fait. Rom. 1. p. 114) places it as late Si koI Kara n^v iKKktiaUw, nji' iih /SsX- 
 
 as i.,D. 135. Gregorovius (Kauer Ha- rtartKiiv o2 ir/)«r/9vrepo( rci^unc ekoVa, 
 
 drianp.7i)suggeBt3that'filiummeum' tV iuntpeTiieiii' 5i oJ SidKovot. 
 
 may have been added by Phlegon or by » Strom, vi. 13 (p. 793) at hnaOea 
 
 some one else. The prominence of the /card r^iv ixxXiiclap irpoKmral, erutKoruv, 
 
 Christiansinthisletterisnotsurprising, Tpca^vripom, Smkovuiv, fufirifiara otpau 
 
 when we remember how Hadrian inter- dyyt\tK7Js Sojijs, Strom, iii. 1 1 (p. 551), 
 
 ested himself in their tenets on another Pad. iii. 11 (see the next note): see 
 
 occasion (at Athens). This document ^aje'B Clement of AUxandria p. ^6isq. 
 
 is considered genuine by such opposite * Tet in one passage he, like Irenaus 
 
 authorities as Tillemont (Hist. desEmp. (see above p. 98), betrays his ignorance 
 
 II. p. 165) and Gregorovius (I. 0. p. 41), that in the language of the new Testa- 
 
 and may beaccepted without hesitation. ment bishop and presbyter are syno- 
 
 ' At this time there appears to have nymes ; see Pad. iii. 11 (p. 309) nvplu 
 
 been only one bishop in Egypt (see Si oo-ot inroeiJKai ds wpoauira hXeicTi 
 
 below, p. 131). But Hadrian, who would Siarelvovaai iyyeypdipaTai Tois |8ijS\«s 
 
 have heard of numerous bishops else- tois dv^ois, at piir rpea^vripott ot 
 
 where, and perhaps had no very precise Si eirio-icoTrots ol Si Siaxmots, oWuu 
 
 knowledge of the Egyptian Church, xw<"s k.t.\. 
 
 might well indulge in this rhetorical » See below, p. 131. 
 flourish. At all events he seems to 
 
THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 22/ 
 
 The first bishop of Alexandria, of whom any distinct incident is 
 recorded on tnistworthy authority, -was a contemporary of Origen. 
 
 The notices thus collected' present a large body of evidence Inferenooa. 
 establishing the fact of the early and extensiye adoption of epi- The gene- 
 scopacy in the Christian Church. The investigation however would j^^^ ^j g. 
 not be complete, unless attention were called to such indirect testi- pisoopaoy, 
 mony as is furnished by the tacit assumptions of writers living 
 towards and at the close of the second century. Episcopacy is so 
 inseparably interwoven with all the traditions and beliefs of men 
 Uke Irenseus and TertuUian, that they betray no knowledge of a 
 time when it was not. Even Ireneeus, the earlier of these, who was 
 certainly bom and probably had grown up before the middle of the 
 century, seems to be wholly ignorant that the word bishop had 
 passed from a lower to a higher value since the apostolic times'. 
 Kor is it important only to observe the positive though indirect 
 testimony which they afford. Their silence suggests a strong negar 
 tive presumption, that while every other point of doctrine or practice 
 was eagerly canvassed, the form of Church government alone 
 scarcely came under discussion. 
 
 But these notices, besides establishing the general prevalence of Gradual 
 episcopacy, also throw considerable light on its origin. They indi- ™™'^™b 
 cate that the solution suggested by the history of the word ' bishop' lopment of 
 and its transference from the lower to the higher office is the true 
 solution, and that the episcopate was created out of the presbytery. 
 They show that this creation was not so much an isolated act as a 
 progressive development, not advancing everywhere at an uniform 
 rate but exhibiting at one and the same time different stages of 
 growth in different churches. They seem to hint also that, so far as 
 this development was affected at all by national temper and charac- 
 teristics, it was slower where the prevailing influences were more 
 purely Greek, as at Corinth and Philippi and £ome, and more rapid 
 where an oriental spirit predominated, as at Jerusalem and Antioch 
 
 1 In this sketch of the episcopate in several names to the list; but this evi- 
 
 the different ohnrohes I have notthought dence is not trustworthy, though in 
 
 it necessary to carry the lists later than many cases the statements doubtless 
 
 the second century. Nor (except in a rested on some traditional basis, 
 
 very few cases) has any testimony been ' See above, p. 98. The same is true 
 
 accepted, unless the writer himself flou- of Clement of Alexandria: see p. a 16, 
 
 rished before the close of this century, note 4. 
 The Apostolic Ckmstitntions would add 
 
 IS— 2 
 
nssuB " 
 
 328 THH CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 
 
 and Ephesus. Above all, they establish this resxilt clearly, that its 
 maturer forms are seen fii-st in those regions where the latest sm-viv- 
 ing Apostles (more especially St John) fixed their abode, and at a 
 time when its prevalence cannot be dissociated from their influence 
 or their sanction. 
 Original The original relation of the bishop to the presbyter, which this 
 
 the two ° investigation reveals, was not forgotten even after the lapse of 
 offioea not centuries. Though set over the presbyters, he was still regarded 
 as in some sense one of them. Irenseus indicates this position of the 
 episcopate very cleai-ly. In his language a presbyter is never desig- 
 nated a bishop, while on the other hand he very frequently speaks 
 A bishop of a bishop as a presbyter. In other words, though he views the 
 a nreBbv- ^pi^^opate as a distinct office from the presbytery, he does not 
 ter by fie- regard it as a distinct order in the same sense in which the diaco- 
 nate is a distinct order. Thus, arguing against the heretics he says, 
 ' But when again we appeal against them to that tradition which is 
 derived from the Apostles, which is preserved in the churches by 
 successions of presbyters, they place themselves in opposition to it, 
 saying that they, being wiser not only than the presbyters but even 
 than the Apostles, have discovered the genuine truth'.' Yet just 
 below, after again mentioning the apostolic tradition, he adds, ' We 
 are able to enumerate those who have been appointed by the 
 Apostles bisliops in the churches and their successors down to our 
 own time" J and still further, after saying that it would take up too 
 much space if he were to trace the succession in all the churches, 
 he declares that he will confound his opponents by singling out the 
 ancient and renowned Church of Home founded by the Apostles 
 Peter and Paul and will point out the tradition handed down to his 
 own time 'by the succession of bishops,' after which he gives a list 
 from Linus to Eleutherus*. So again in another passage he writes, 
 ' Therefore obedience ought to be rendered to the presbyters who are 
 in the churches, who have the succession from the Apostles as we 
 have shown, who with the succession of the episcopate have also 
 received the sure grace of truth according to the pleasure of the 
 Father' ; after which he mentions some 'who are believed by many 
 to be presbyters, but serve their own lusts and are elated with the 
 
 ' Ircn. iii. i. j. • ten. iiL 3. i. 
 
 • Iren. iii. 3. a, 3. 
 
THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 229 
 
 pomp of the tihMf seat' and bids his readers shun these and seek 
 such aa ' together with the rank of the presbytery show their speech 
 sound and their conversation void of offence,' adding of these 
 latter, 'Such presbyters the Church nurtures and rears, concerning 
 whom also the prophet saith, " I will give thy rulers in peace and 
 thy bishops in righteousness"". Thus also writing to Victor of 
 Rome in the name of the Galilean churches, he aajs, ' It was not so 
 observed by the presbyters before Soter, who ruled the Church which 
 thou now guidest, we mean Anicetus and Pius, Hyginus and Teles- 
 phorus and Xystus'.' And the same estimate of the office appeai-s and Cle- 
 in Clement of Alexandria : for, while he speaks elsewhere of the ^lexan- 
 three offices in the ministry, mentioning them by name, he in one ^*' 
 passage puts forward a twofold division, the presbyters whose duty 
 it b to improve, and the deacons whose duty it is to serve, the 
 Church*. The functions of the bishop and presbyter ai'e thus re- 
 garded as substantially the same in kind, though different in degree, 
 while the functions of the diaconate are separate from both. More 
 than a century and a half later, this view is put forward with the 
 greatest distinctness by the most learned and most illustrious of 
 the Latin fathers. ' There is one ordination,' writes the commen- XeBtimon; 
 tator Hilary, ' of the bishop and the presbyter ; for either is a priest, =505*6. 
 but the bishop is first. Every bishop is a presbyter, but every pres- 
 byter is not a bishop : for he is bishop who is first among the pres- 
 byters'.' The language of St Jerome to the same effect has been Jerom«, 
 quoted above*. To the passages there given may be added the fol- 
 lowing : < This has been said to show that with the ancients pres- 
 byters were the same as bishops : but gradually all the responsibility 
 
 ' Iren. iv. 26. t, 3, 4, 5. throughout be uniform in this matter. 
 
 ' In Euseb. H, E. v. 24. In other ' See the passage quoted above, p. 
 places IreniBUS apparently uses irpeapi- 126, note 2. So also in the aneodote of 
 repoi to denote antiquity and not office, St John (Quit div, talv. 42, p. 959) we 
 as in the letter to Florinns, Euseb. read ry Ka8e<rT<3Ti tr/>oirj3X^^as i Ti- 
 ll. E. V. 20 oJ ir/jo rHitiv ir/wcr/Surepot (ric<i7r^>, but immediately afterwards 
 oJ Kal Tois ajrocTToXois ffvpupoiTyaavres Bi irpea^artpot anaXa^uni k-t.^l., and 
 (oomp. ii. 22. 5); in which sense the then again aye Sri, l^ri, w iTlaKoire, 
 word occurs also in Papias (Euseb. E.E. of the same person. Thus he too, Uke 
 iii. 59 ; see Contemporary Beview, Aug. Ireneens, regards the bishop as a pres- 
 1875, p. 379 sq.) ; but the passages quo- byter, though the converse would noi 
 ted in the text are deoisive, nor is there be true. 
 
 any reason (as Bothe assumes, p. 414 * Ambrosiast. on i Tim. iii, 10. 
 
 sq.) why the usage of Irenseus should ' See p. 98. 
 
230 
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 
 
 and Aa- 
 gastine. 
 
 Bishops 
 styled 
 them- 
 selves fel- 
 low-pres- 
 byteiB. 
 
 The 
 
 bishop ^f 
 Alexan- 
 dria cho- 
 sen and 
 
 was deferred to a single person, that the thickets of heresies might 
 be rooted out. Therefore, as presbyters know that by the eustom of the 
 Chwrch they are subject to him who shall have been set over them, 
 so let bishops also be aware that they are superior to presb3rters 
 more owing to custom them to any actual ordinance of the Lord, etc. : 
 Let us see therefore what sort of person ought to be ordained pres- 
 byter or bishop'.' In the same spirit too the great Augustine 
 writing to Jerome says, 'AJ though according to titles of honour 
 which the practice of the Church has now made valid, the episcopate 
 is greater than the presbytery, yet in many things Augustine is less 
 than Jerome'.' To these fathers this view seemed to be an obvious 
 deduction from the identity of the terms 'bishop' and 'presbyter' 
 in the apostolic writings ; nor indeed, when they wrote, had usage 
 entirely effaced the original connexion between the two offices. Even 
 in the fourth and fifth centuries, when the independence and power 
 of the episcopate had reached its maximum, it was still customary 
 for a bishop in writing to a presbyter to address him as 'fellow- 
 presbyter',' thus bearing testimony to a substantial identity of order. 
 Nor does it appear that this view was ever questioned until the era 
 of the Keformation, In the western Church at all events it carried 
 the sanction of the highest ecclesiastical authorities and was main~ 
 tained even by popes and councils*. 
 
 Nor was it only in the language of the later Church that the 
 memory of this fact was preserved. Even in her practice indica- 
 tions might here and there be traced, which pointed to a time when 
 the bishop was still only the chief member of the presbytery. The 
 case of the Alexandrian Church, which has already been mentioned 
 casually, deserves special notice. St Jerome, after denouncing the 
 audacity of certain persons who ' would give to deacons the prece- 
 
 1 On Tit. i. s (vn- p. 696). 
 
 ' Epist. Ixxzii. 33 (11. p. 20J , ed. Ben.). 
 
 » So for instance Cyprian, Epist. 14, 
 writes 'compresbyteri nostri Donatns 
 etFortunatus'; and addressing Gorne- 
 Uas bishop of Borne (Epist, 45) he 
 says 'cnm ad me talia de te et com- 
 presbyteris tecum oonsidentibus scripta 
 venisaent.' Compare also Sjtist. 44, 45, 
 71,76. Augustine writes to Jerome in 
 the same terms, and in fact this seems 
 to have been the recognised form of ad- 
 
 dress. See the Qiuett. Vet.et Nov. Test. 
 ci (in Angustin. Op. ni. P. », p. 93) 
 ' Quid est enim episcopua nisi primus 
 presbyter, hoc est summus saoerdoaf 
 Deniqae non aliter qnam compresbyte- 
 ros hio vooat et oonsacerdotes suoa. 
 Numquid etministros condiaoonos snos 
 dioit episcopus?', where the writer is 
 arguing against the arrogance of the 
 Boman deacons. See above, p. 96. 
 
 * See the references collected bj 
 Gieseler i. p. 105 sq. 
 
THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 231 
 
 dence over presbyters, that is over bishops,' and alleging Bcriptural created by 
 proofs of the identity of the two, gives the following fact in ilhis- byjg™**' 
 tration: 'At Alexandria, from Mark the Evangelist down to the 
 tunes of the bishops Heraclas (a.d. 233 — 249) and Dionysius (A.D. 
 249 — 265), the presbyters always nominated as bishop one chosen 
 out of their own body and placed in a higher grade : just as if an 
 army were to appoint a general, or deacons were to choose from 
 their own body one whom they knew to be diligent and call him 
 ai-chdeacon' ,' Though the direct statement of this father refers only 
 to the appointTnent of the biiihop, still it may be inferred that the 
 function of the presbyters extended also to the consecration. And 
 this inference is borne out by other evidence. 'In Egjfpt,' writes 
 an older contemporary of St Jerome, the commentator Hilary, ' the 
 presbyters seal (Le, ordain or consecrate), if the bishop be not pre- 
 sent'.' This however might refer only to the ordination of pres- 
 byters, and not to the consecration of a bishop. But even the latter 
 is supported by direct evidence, which though comparatively late 
 deserves consideration, inasmuch as it comes from one who was him- 
 self a patriarch of Alexandria. Eutychius, who held the patriarchal Testimony 
 see from a.d. 933 to a.d. 940, writes aa follows : ' The Evangelist °i,i„a ^' 
 Mark appointed along with the patriarch Hananias twelve presbyters 
 who should remain with the patriarch, to the end that, when the 
 patriarchate was vacant, they might choose one of the twelve pres- 
 byters, on whose head the remaining eleven laying their hands should 
 bless him and create him patriarch.' The vacant place in the pres- 
 bytery was then to be filled up, that the number twelve might be 
 constant*. ' This custom,' adds this writer, ' did not cease till the 
 time of Alexander (a.d. 313 — 326), patriarch of Alexandria. He 
 however forbad that henceforth the presbyters should create the 
 patriarch, and decreed that on the death of the patriarch the bishops 
 
 1 EpUt. oxlvi ad Evang. (i. p. 1082). ferenoes in the text are resistedby Abra- 
 
 > Axabrosiagt. on Ephea. IT. II. So ham'EaahellensiB Butychiui vindicatws 
 
 too in the Qucett. Vet. et Nov. Test, ci p. 11 sq. (in answer to Selden the trans- 
 
 (falsely ascribed to St Augustine), Au- lator of Eutychius), and by Le Quien 
 
 gust. Op. III. P. 2, p. 93, 'Nam in Oriens Christianm 11. f. 341, who urge 
 
 Alexandria et per totam ^gyptum, all that can be said on the opposite side, 
 
 si desit episoopua, conseorat (t. 1. con- The authority of a writer so inaccurate 
 
 signat) presbyter.' asEutychius.ifithadbeennnsupported, 
 
 ' EatychiiFatr.Alezandr. Annaleti. would have had no weight; but, as we 
 
 p. 331 (Fooooke, Oxon. i6j6). The in- have seen, this is not the case. 
 
232 
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 
 
 Inoreaae 
 of the 
 Eg^tian 
 episco- 
 pate. 
 
 Decree of 
 the Oonn- 
 oiJ of An- 
 cyra. 
 
 nhould meet to ordain the (new) patriarch, etc." It is clear fi-om this 
 passage that Eutychius considered the functions of nomination and 
 ordination to rest with the same persons. 
 
 If this view however be correct, the practice of the Alexandrian 
 Church was exceptional ; for at this time the formal act of the 
 bishop was considered generally necessary to give validity to ordi- 
 nation. Nor is the exception difficult to account for. At the close 
 of the second century, when every considerable church in Europe 
 and Asia appears to have had its bishop, the only representative of 
 the episcopal order in Egypt was the bishop of Alexandria. It was 
 Demetrius fii-st (a.d. 190 — 233), as Eutychius informs us', who ap- 
 pointed three other bishops, to which number his successor Heraclas 
 (a.d. 233 — 249) added twenty more. This extension of episcopacy 
 to the provincial towns of Egypt paved the way for a change in the 
 mode of appointing and ordaining the patriarch of Alexandria. But 
 before this time it was a matter of convenience and almost of neces- 
 sity that the Alexandrian presbyters should themselves ordain their 
 chief. 
 
 Nor is it only in Alexandria that we meet with this peculiarity. 
 Where the same urgent reason existed, the same exceptional practice 
 seems to have been tolerated. A decree of the Council of Ancyra 
 (a.d. 314) ordains that 'it be not allowed to country-bishops (x«»p«- 
 TTto-KOTTow) to ordain presbyters or deacons, nor even to city-presby- 
 ters, except permission be given in each parish by the bishop in 
 writing'.' Thus while restraining the existing license, the framers 
 
 > Between Dionysins and Alexander 
 four bishops of Alexandria intervene, 
 Maximus (a.d. 265), Theonas (a.d. 183), 
 Peter I (a.d. 301), and Achillas (a.d. 
 312). It will therefore be seen that 
 there is a considerable discrepancy be- 
 tween the accounts of Jerome and Eu- 
 tychius as to the time when the change 
 was effected. But we may reasonably 
 conjecture (withBttschl,p. 43}) that the 
 transition from the old state of things 
 to the new would be the result of a pro- 
 longedoonflict between the Alexandrian 
 presbytery who had hitherto held these 
 fanotions, and the bishops of the re- 
 cently created Egyptian sees to whom 
 it was proposed to transfer them. 
 
 Somewhat later one Isohyras was 
 
 deprived of his orders by an Alexan- 
 drian synod, because he had been or- 
 dained by a presbyter only: Athan. 
 Apol. c. Arian. 75 (i. p. 151). From 
 this time at all events the Alexandrian 
 Church insisted as strictly as any other 
 on episcopal ordination. 
 
 > Butyoh. Ann. 1. c. p. 331. Hera- 
 olas, we are informed on the same 
 authority (p. 335), was the first Alex- 
 andrian prelate who bore the title of 
 patriarch ; this designation being equi- 
 valent to metropolitan or bishop of 
 bishops. 
 
 ' Concil. Ancyr. can. 13 (Bonthii<2. 
 Sacr. 17, p. m) x<<>/>ciriffK(>irou /iij i^ei- 
 fat irpecfluTipovt ij Staxjiiovt x«poroi>eri>, 
 aXXct [/iijc] iv^Si TparPvripou rSKiut 
 
THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 
 
 233 
 
 of the decree still allow very considerable latitude. And it is espe- 
 cially important to observe that they lay more stress on episcopal 
 sanction than on episcopal ordination. Provided that the former is 
 secured, they are content to dispense with the latter. 
 
 As a general rule however, even those writers who maintain a 
 substantial identity in the offices of the bishop and presbyter reserve 
 the power of ordaining to the former'. This distinction in fact may 
 be regarded as a settled maxim of Church polity in the fourth and 
 later centuries. And when Aerius maintained the equality of the 
 bishop and presbyter and denied the necessity of episcopal ordina- 
 
 Ordina- 
 tion con- 
 fined to 
 the 
 bishops. 
 
 Xwpis Toy iirtTpaviji'eu viro tov ^iriaKO- 
 rov (UcTo ypaiiiun-uv iv iKaar'Q irapoiKlf. 
 The variouB readinga and interpreta- 
 tions of this canon will be found in 
 Boutb's note, p. 144 sq. Bonth him- 
 Belf reads dWa fii^v nrjSi irpea^vrdpovs 
 iroXcus, making irpeirpvTipovs irAeoit 
 the object of x^'P"'''""^^"' ^^^ ^'^ ^^^ 
 there is a twofold objection: (i) he 
 necessarily understands the former 
 vpeff^vripout to mean Tpea^vripov! xi- 
 />as, though this is not expressed: (2) 
 he interprets aXXa /tijv infii 'much 
 less,' a sense which iii)Si seems to ex- 
 olnde and which is not borne out b; 
 his examples. 
 
 The name and office of the x'^P^'"^' 
 CKoro! appear to be reliqnes of the time 
 when MaKOTos and irpeapirepoi were 
 synonymes. While the large cities had 
 their college of presbyters, for the vil- 
 lages a single irpeffpvrepos (or MffKoros) 
 wonld suffice; bnt from his Isolated 
 position be would be tempted, even if 
 he were not obliged, to perform on his 
 own responsibility certain acts which 
 in the city would only be performed by 
 the bishop properly so called, or at least 
 woold not be performed without his 
 consent. Out of this position the office 
 of the later x[i)peir<(rKoira! would gra- 
 dually be developed; but the rate of 
 progression would not be uniform, and 
 the regulations affecting it would be 
 determined by the circumstances of the 
 particular locality. Hence, at a later 
 date, it seems in some places to hare 
 been presbyteral, in others episcopal. 
 In the Anoyran canon just quoted a 
 
 chorepiscopus is evidently placed below 
 the city presbytery ; but in other notices 
 he occupies a higher position. For the 
 conflicting accounts of the x<»/)eir(<rK«ro( 
 see Bingham 11. xiv. 
 
 Baur's account of the origin of the 
 episcopate supposes that each Christian 
 congregation was presided over, not 
 by a college of presbyters, but by a 
 single Trpeapirepos or ivlirKoiirot, i.e. 
 that the constitution of the Church 
 was from the first monarchical : see 
 Fastoralhriefe p. 81 sq., Ursprung det 
 EpiacopatB p. 84 sq. This view is 
 inconsistent alike with the analogy of 
 the synagogue and with the notices in 
 the apostolic and early ecclesiastical 
 writings. But the practice which he 
 considers to have been the general rule 
 would probably hold in small country 
 congregations, where a college of pres- 
 byters would be unnecessary as well as 
 impossible. 
 
 1 St Jerome himseU {Epist. cxlvi), 
 in the context of the passage in which 
 he maintains the identity of the two 
 orders and alleges the tradition of the 
 Alexandrian Church (see above, p. 231), 
 adds, 'Quid enim facit excepta ordina- 
 tione episoopus quod presbyter non 
 faoiatr' So also Const. Apost. viii. 38 
 4irl<rK07r OS x"""^"'*' X'V'''"'"'"'''/'™'/'''- 
 Tepos x«/"'*«''« o" X'V^""'! Chrysost. 
 Horn, xi on I Tim. iii. 8 r j x^V'"''"^ 
 lUvn vTrepPepiJKOirt Kol ToiT<p /i6t>op do- 
 Kovai irXeoyeKTtiy vpea^xnipovs. See 
 Bingham 11. iii. 5, 6, 7, for other re- 
 ferences. 
 
«34 
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY, 
 
 Causes of 
 ths deve- 
 lopment 
 of episco- 
 pacy. 
 
 Three 
 names 
 connected 
 with its 
 progress. 
 
 I. lauA- 
 
 TIDB. 
 
 TheSyriao 
 Version. 
 
 tion, his opinion was condemned as heretical, and is stigmatized as 
 'frantic' by Epiphanius'. 
 
 It has been seen that the institution of an episcopate must be 
 placed as far back as the closing years of ihe first century, and that 
 it cannot, without violence to historical testimony, be dissevered 
 from the name of St John. But it has been seen also that the earli- 
 est bishops did not hold the same independent position of supremacy 
 which was and is occupied by their later representatives. It will 
 therefore be instructive to trace the successive stages by which the 
 power of the office was developed during the second and third centu- 
 ries. Though something must be attributed to the frailty of human 
 pride and love of power, it will nevertheless appear that the pressing 
 needs of the Church were mainly instrumental in bringing about the 
 result, and that this development of the episcopal office was a provi- 
 dential safeguard amid the confusion of speculative opinion, the dis- 
 tracting effects of persecution, and the growing anarchy of social 
 life, which threatened not only the extension but the very existence 
 of the Church of Christ. Ambition of office in a society where pro- 
 minence of rank involved prominence of risk was at least no vulgar 
 and selfish passion. 
 
 This development wiU be conveniently connected with three 
 great names, each separated from the other by an interval of more 
 than half a century, and each marking a distinct stage in its progress. 
 Ignatius, IrensBus, and Cyprian, represent three successive advances 
 towards the supremacy which was ultimately attained. 
 
 I. Ignatius of Antioch is commonly recognized as the staunch- 
 est advocate of episcopacy in the early ages. Even, though we 
 should refuse to accept as genuine any portions which are not 
 contained in the Syriac Version ', this view would nevertheless be 
 amply justified. Confining our attention for the moment to the 
 Syriac letters we find that to this father the chief value of episcopacy 
 lies in the fact that it constitutes a visible centre of v/nity in the con- 
 
 ' Kates. Ixxv. 3; oomp. Augustine 
 Uaree. § 53. See Wordsworth Theoph. 
 Angl.e. z. 
 
 ' In the earlier editions of this work 
 I assumed that the Syriac Version 
 published by Oureton represented the 
 Epistles ol Ignatius in their original 
 
 form. I am now oonvinoed that this 
 is only an abridgment and that the 
 shorter Greek form is genuine; but 
 for the sake of argument I have k«pt 
 the two apart in the text. I hope be- 
 fore long to give reasons for this change 
 of opinion in my edition of this father. 
 
THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 235 
 
 gregation. He seems in the development of the office to keep in view Thebishop 
 the same purpose vhich we may suppose to have influenced the last ^g ^ centre 
 surviving Apostles in its institution. The withdrawal of the autho- of unity. 
 ritative preachers of the Gospel, the personal disciples of the Lord, had 
 severed one bond of union. The destruction of the original abode of 
 Christendom, the scene of the life and passion of the Saviour and of 
 the earliest triumphs of the Church, had removed another. Thus de- 
 prived at once of the personal and the local ties which had hitherto 
 bound individual to individual and church to church, the Christian 
 brotherhood was threatened with schism, disunion, dissolution. 
 'Vindicate thine office with all diligence,' writes Ignatius to the 
 bishop of Smyi-na, ' in things temporal as well as spiritual. Have a 
 care of unity, than which nothing is better'.' 'The crisis requires 
 thee, as the pilot requires the winds or the storm-tossed mariner a 
 haven, so as to attain unto God'.' ' Let not those who seem to be 
 plausible and teach falsehoods dismay thee ; but stand thou firm as 
 an anvil under the hammer : 'tis the part of a great athlete to be 
 bruised and to conquer'.' ' Let nothing be done without thy con- 
 sent, and do thou nothing without the consent of God*.' He adds 
 directions also, that those who decide on a life of virginity shall dis- 
 close their intention to the bishop only, and those who marry shall 
 obtain his consent to their union, that ' their marriage may be accord- 
 ing to the Lord and not according to lust'.' And turning from the 
 bishop to the people he adds, ' Give heed to your bishop, that God 
 also may give heed to you. I give my life for those who are obedient 
 to the bishop, to presbyters, to deacons. With them may I have my 
 portion in the presence of God°.' Writing to the Ephesians also he 
 says that in receiving their bishop Onesimus he is receiving their 
 whole body, and he charges them to love him, and one and all to be 
 in his Ukeuess', adding, ' Since love does not permit me to be silent, 
 therefore I have been forward in exhorting you to conform to the 
 wiU of God'.' 
 
 From these passages it will be seen that St Ignatius values the 
 episcopate chiefly as a security for good discipline and harmonious 
 
 ' Polye. I. ' Polye. 5. . 
 
 ' Polye. t. ' Polye, 6. 
 
 ' Polye. 3. ' Ephei. i, 
 
 * Polye. 4. • Ephei. j. 
 
236 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 
 
 The Greek working in the Church. And, when we pass from the Sjriac let 
 
 ters to the Short Greek, the standing ground is still unchanged. 
 
 At the same time, though the point of view is unaltered, the Greek 
 
 letters contain far stronger expressions than are found in the 
 
 Syriac. Throughout the whole range of Christian literature, no 
 
 more uncompromising advocacy of the episcopate can be found 
 
 than appears in these writings. This championship indeed is 
 
 extended to the two lower orders of the ministry ', more espe- 
 
 Their ex- cially to the presbyters'. But it is when asserting the claims of the 
 
 exaltation episcopal office to obedience and respect, that the language is strained 
 
 "'.*''* ^ to the utmost. 'The bishops established in the farthest parts of 
 episcopate. _ ^ _ '^ 
 
 the world are in the counsels of Jesus Christ'.' ' Every one whom 
 
 the Master of the house sendeth to govern His own household we 
 
 ought to receive, as Him that sent him ; clearly therefore we ought 
 
 to regard the bishop as the Lord Himself*.' Those ' live a life after 
 
 Christ,' who ' obey the bishop as Jesus Christ'.' ' It is good to know 
 
 God and the bishop; he that honoureth the bishop is honoured of 
 
 God j he that doeth anything without the knowledge of the bishop 
 
 serveth the devil'.' He that obeys his bishop, obeys 'not him, but 
 
 the Father of Jesus Christ, the Bishop of all.' On the other hand, 
 
 he that practises hypocrisy towards his bishop, 'not only deceiveth 
 
 the visible one, but cheateth the Unseen',' 'As many as ore of God 
 
 and of Jesus Christ, are with the bishop'.' Those are approved 
 
 who are 'inseparate [from God], from Jesus Christ, and from the 
 
 bishop, and from the ordinances of the Apostles'.' 'Do ye all,' says 
 
 this writer again, 'follow the bishop, as Jesus Christ followed the 
 
 Father ".' The Ephosians are commended accordingly, because they 
 
 are so united with their bishop 'as the Church with Jesus Christ 
 
 and as Jesus Christ with the Father,' ' If,' it is added, ' the prayer 
 
 of one or two hath so much power, how much more the prayer of the 
 
 bishop and of the whole Church".' 'Wherever the bishop may 
 
 appear, there let the multitude be, just as where Jesus Christ may 
 
 ' Magn. 13, Trail. 3, 7, Philad. 4, 7, • Smym. 9. 
 
 Smym. 8, i». ' Magn. 3. 
 
 • Ephet. 2, 50, Magn. », 6, Trail. 13. • Philad. 3. 
 » Ephei. 3. » Trail. 7. 
 
 « Ephea. 6. " Smym. 8, oomp. Magn. 7. 
 
 • Trail. 2. " Bphtt, 5. 
 
THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY, 237 
 
 be, there is the muTersal Church'.' Therefore 'let no man do 
 anything pertaining to the Church without the bishop'.' 'It ia 
 not allowable either to baptize or to hold a love-feast without the 
 bishop : but whatsoever he may approve, this also is well pleasing to 
 God, that everything which is done may be safe and valid'.' ' Unity 
 of God,' according to this writer, consists in harmonious co-operation 
 with the bishop *. 
 
 And yet with all this extravagant exaltation of the episcopal The pres- 
 office, the presbyters are not put out of sight. They form a council', y^^^^j. 
 a 'worthy spiritual coronal" round the bishop. It is the duty of »ot'or- 
 every individual, but especially of them, ' to refresh the bishop unto 
 the honour of the Father and of Jesus Christ and of the Apostles'.' 
 They stand in the same relation to him, ' as the chords to the lyre',' 
 If the bishop occupies the place of God or of Jesus Christ, the pres- 
 byters are as the Apostles, as the council of God°. K obedience 
 b due to the bishop as the grace of God, it is due to the presbytery 
 as the law of Jesus Christ". 
 
 It need hardly be remarked how subversive of the true spirit of Oonsidera- 
 Christiauity, in the negation of individual freedom and the conse- -^g^g^^' 
 quent suppression of direct responsibility to God in Christ, is the this Ian- 
 crushing despotism with which this language, if taken literally, 
 would invest the episcopal office. It is more important to bear in 
 mind the extenuating fact, that the needs and distractions of the 
 age seemed to call for a greater concentration of authority in the 
 episcopate ; and we might well be surprised, if at a great crisis the 
 defence of an all-important institution were expressed in words care- 
 fully weighed and guarded. 
 
 Strangely enough, not many years after Ignatius thus asserted The same 
 the claims of the episcopate as a safeguard of orthodoxy, an- ^^^j ^ 
 other writer used the same instrument to advance a very dif- the inter* 
 ferent form of Chistianity. The organization, which is thus em- bioniBm.' 
 ployed to consolidate and advance the Catholic Church, might 
 
 1 Smym. 8. the Ignatian Epistles. 
 
 ' ib.; oomp. Magn. 4, Philad. 7. • Magn. 13. 
 
 ' Smym. 8. ' Trail. 11. 
 
 * Polyc. 8 iv iv&rirri Beau Kal {tutkS- ' Ephes. 4; comp, the metaphor In 
 
 vov (v. 1. ivurKmri) : comp. Philad. 3, 8. Philad. i. 
 
 ■ The word TpeapVTipum, whioh oo- * Trail, i, 3, Mayn. 6, Smynu 8, 
 
 con I Tim. iv. 14, ia very frequent in " Magn. t. 
 
338 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 
 
 Borre equally well to eatabUsL. a compact Ebionite community. I 
 have already mentioned the author of the Clementine Homilies as 
 a staunch advocate of episcopacy'. His view of the sanctions and 
 privileges of the office does not differ materially from that of 
 Ignatius. ' The multitude of the faithful,' he says, ' must obey 
 a single person, that so it may be able to continue in har- 
 mony.' Monarchy is a necessary condition of peace ; this may be 
 seen from the aspect of the world around : at present there are many 
 kings, and the result is discord and war ; in the world to come God 
 has appointed one King only, that ' by reason of monarchy an inde- 
 structible peace may be established : therefore all ought to follow 
 some one person as guide, preferring him in honour as the image of 
 God; and this guide must show the way that.leadeth to the Holy 
 City'.' Accordingly he delights to speak of the bishop as occupying 
 the place or the seat of Christ'. Every insult, he says, and every 
 honour offered to a bishop is carried to Christ and from Christ is 
 taken up to the presence of the Father ; and thus it is requited 
 manifold*. Similarly another writer of the Clementine cycle, if he 
 be not the same, compares Christ to the captain, the bishop to the 
 mate, and the presbyters to the sailors, while the lower orders and 
 the laity have each their proper place in the ship of the Church'. 
 Monta- It is no surprise that such extravagant claims should not have 
 
 reaction ^^^^ allowed to pass unchallenged. In opposition to the lofty 
 
 against hierarchical pretensions thus advanced on the one hand in the 
 
 this extra- 
 
 vaganoe. Ignatian letters on behalf of Catholicism and on the other by 
 
 the Clementine writer in the interests of Ebionism, a strong spiritual- 
 ist reaction set in. If in its mental aspect the heresy of Montanus 
 must be regarded as a protest against the speculative subtleties 
 of Gnosticism, on its practical side it was equally a rebound from 
 the aggressive tyranny of hierarchical assumption. Montanus taught 
 that the true succession of the Spirit, the authorized channel of 
 Divine grace, must be sought not in the hierarchical but in the pro- 
 phetic order. For a rigid outward system he substituted the free 
 inward impulse. Wildly fanatical as were its manifestations, this 
 reaction nevertheless issued from a true instinct which rebelled 
 
 ' See above, p. 209. * ib. iii. 66, 70. 
 
 * Clem. Horn. iii. 61, 63. ' ib. Ep. Olem. 15. 
 
 ' ib. iii. 60, 66, 70. 
 
THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 239 
 
 against the oppressive yoke of external tradition and did battle for 
 the freedom of the individual spirit. Montanus was excommuni- 
 cated and Montanism died out ; but though dead, it yet spake ; for 
 a portion of its better spirit was infused into the Catholic Church, 
 which it leavened and refreshed and invigorated. 
 
 2. Irek^us followed Ignatius after an interval of about two 2. Ibb- 
 geuerations. "With the altered circumstances of the Church, the 
 aspect of the episcopal office has also undergone a change. The 
 religious atmosphere is now charged with heretical speculations of 
 all kinds. Amidst the competition of rival teachers, all eagerly bid- 
 ding for support, the perplexed believer asks for some decisive test 
 by which he may try the claims of the disputants. To this question 
 Irenaeus supplies an answer. ' K you wish,' he argues, ' to ascertain Thebishop 
 the doctrine of the Apostles, apply to the Church of the Apostles, gitary of 
 In the succession of bishops tracing their descent from the primitive priimtive 
 age and appointed by the Apostles themselves, you have a guarantee 
 for the transmission of the pure faith, which no isolated, upstart, 
 self-constituted teacher can furnish. There is the Church of Home 
 for instance, whose episcopal pedigree is perfect in all its links, and 
 whose earliest bishops, Linus and Clement, associated with the 
 Apostles themselves : there is the Church of Smyrna again, whose 
 bishop Polycarp, the disciple of St John, died only the other day '.' 
 Thus the episcopate is regarded now not so much as the centre 
 of ecclesiastical v/niiy but rather as the deposUary of apostolic 
 tradition. 
 
 This view is not peculiar to Irenseus. It seems to have been The same 
 
 advanced earlier by Hegesippus, for in a detached fragment he lays j,- Hege- 
 
 stress on the succession of the bishops at Home and at Corinth, wppus and 
 
 . Tertul- 
 
 adding that in each church and in each succession the pure faith was lian. 
 
 preserved'; so that he seems here to be controverting that 'gnosis 
 
 falsely so called' which elsewhere he denounces'. It is distinctly 
 
 maintained by Tertullian, the younger contemporary of Irenseus, 
 
 who refers, if not with the same frequency, at least with equal 
 
 emphasis, to the tradition of the apostolic churches as preserved 
 
 by the succession of the episcopate". 
 
 1 See especially iii. 00. 2, 3, 4, iv. 26. p. 220. 
 I sq., iv. 31. I, V. prfflf., v. 20. i, 2. ' Buseb. H. E. iii. 31. 
 
 » InEuseb. H. E. iv. 22. See above, « Tertnll, de Prater. }t. 
 
240 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 
 
 3. Ot- 3. Afl two generations intervened between Ignatius and Ire- 
 
 nseua, so the same period roughly speaking separates Irenseus from 
 CrPRiAN. If with Ignatius the bishop is the centre of Christian 
 unity, if with Irenteus he is the depositary of tlie apostolic tradition, 
 The with Cyprian he is the absolute vicegerent of GhriBt in things 
 
 vicegerent spiritual. In mere strength of language indeed it would be difficult 
 of ChrUt. to surpass Ignatius, who lived about a century and a half earlier. 
 With the single exception of the sacerdotal view of the ministry which 
 had grown up meanwhile, Cyprian puts forward no assumption which 
 this father had not advanced either literally or substantially long 
 before. This one exception however is all important, for it raised 
 the sanctions of the episcopate to a higher level and put new force 
 into old titles of respect. Theoretically therefore it may be said 
 that Cyprian took his stand on the combination of the ecclesiasti- 
 cal authority as asserted by Ignatius with the sacerdotal claim 
 Influence which had been developed in the half century just past. But 
 on the"S^ ^^^ ^®^^ influence which he exercised in the elevation of the episco- 
 scopate. pate consisted not in the novelty of his theoretical views, but in his 
 practical energy and success. The absolute supremacy of the bishop 
 had remained hitherto a lofty title or at least a vague ill-defined 
 assumption: it became through his exertions a substantial and patent 
 and world-wide fact. The first prelate whose force of character 
 vibrated throughout the whole of Christendom, he was driven not 
 less by the circumstances of his position than by his own tempe- 
 rament and conviction to throw all his energy into this scale. And 
 the permanent result was much vaster than he could have antici- 
 pated beforehand or realized after the fact. Forced into the epi- 
 scopate against his will, he raised it to a position of absolute inde- 
 pendence, from which it has never since been deposed. The two 
 great controversies in which Cyprian engaged, though immediately 
 arising out of questions of discipline, combined from opposite sides 
 to consolidate and enhance the power of the bishops'. 
 First oon- The first question of dispute concerned the treatment of such 
 as had lapsed during the recent persecution under Decius. Cyprian 
 
 1 The influence of Cyprian on the sq. (1857). See also Eettberg Thaiciut 
 
 episcopate is ably stated in two vigor- CScilim Gyprianui p. 367 sq., Huther 
 
 ous articles by Kayser_entitled Cyprien Cyprian'i Lehre von der Kirche p. 59 
 
 ou VAuUnumie de I'Episcopat in the sq. For Cyprian's work generally see 
 
 Btvue de ThiohgU xv. pp. 138 sq., 141 Smith's Diet, of Chnst. Biogr. 8. v. 
 
THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 24I 
 
 found himself on this occasion doing battle for the episcopate against Treatment 
 a twofold opposition, against the confessors who claimed the right of lapsed, 
 absolving and restoring these fallen brethren, and against his own 
 presbyters who in the absence of their bishop supported the claims of 
 the confessors. From his retirement he launched his shafts against 
 this combined an-ay, where an aristocracy of moral influence was 
 leagued with an aristocracy of official position. With signal deter- 
 mination and courage in pursiiing his aim, and with not less sagacity 
 and address in discerning the means for carrying it out, Cyprian had 
 on this occasion the further advantage, that he was defending the 
 cause of order and right. He succeeded moreover in enlisting in his 
 cause the rulers of the most powerful church in Christendom. The 
 Koman clergy declared for the bishop and against the presbyters 
 of Carthage. Of Cyprian's sincerity no reasonable question can be 
 entertained. In maintaining the authority of his office he believed 
 himself to be fighting his Master's battle, and he sought success as 
 the only safeguard of the integrity of the Church of Christ. In this 
 lofty and disinterested spirit, and with these advantages of position, 
 he entered upon the contest. 
 
 It is unnecessary for my purpose to follow out the conflict in 
 detail : to show how ultimately the positions of the two combatants 
 were shifted, so that from maintaining discipline against the cham- 
 pions of too great laxity Cyprian found himself protecting the fallen 
 against the advocates of too great severity; to trace the progress 
 of the schism and the attempt to establish a rival episcopate ; or to 
 unravel the entanglements of the Novatian controvei-sy and lay open 
 the intricate relations between Rome and Carthage'. It is sufficient Powei of 
 to say that Cyprian's victory was complete. He triumphed over the P* P'^nop 
 confessors, triumphed over his own presbyters, triumphed over the church de. 
 schismatic bishop and his party. It was the most signal success 
 hitherto achieved for the episcopate, because the battle had been 
 fought and the victory won on this definite issue. The absolute 
 supremacy of the episcopal office was thus established against the two 
 antagonists from which it had most to fear, against a recognised aris- 
 
 * The intricacy of the whole proceed- nists, varying and even interchanged 
 
 ing is a strong evidence of the genuine- with the change of circumstances, ore 
 
 ness of the letters and other documents very natural, but very unlike the in- 
 
 which contain the account of the con- vention of a forger who has a distinct 
 
 troversy. The situations of the antago- side to maintain. 
 
 PHIL. 16 
 
242 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 
 
 tocracy of eoclesiaatioal office and an irregular but not less powerful 
 
 aristocracy of moral weight. 
 
 The position of the bishop with respect to the individual church 
 
 over which he ruled was thus defined by the first contest in which 
 
 Second Cjrprian engaged. The second conflict resulted in determining his 
 
 versy? Be. relation to the Church universal. The schism which had grown up 
 
 baptism of during the first conflict created the difficulty which gave occasion to 
 
 heretics. . , . , 
 
 the second, A question arose whether baptism by heretics and 
 
 schismatics should be held valid or not. Stephen the Roman 
 bishop, pleading the immemorial custom of his church, recognised 
 its validity. Cyprian insisted on rebaptiam in such cases. Hitherto 
 the bishop of Carthage had acted in cordial harmony with Home : 
 but now there was a collision. Stephen, inheriting the haughty 
 temper and aggressive policy of his earlier predecessor Victor, excom- 
 municated those who differed from the Roman usage in this matter. 
 These arrogant assumptions were directly met by Cyprian. He 
 summoned first one and then another synod of African bishops, who 
 declared in his favour. He had on his side also the churches of 
 Asia Minor, which had been included in Stephen's edict of excom- 
 munication. Thus the bolt hurled by Stephen fell innocuous, and 
 the churches of Africa and Asia retained their practice. The prin- 
 Belations ciple asserted in the struggle was not unimportant. As in the 
 bishops to former conflict Cyprian had maintained the independent supremacy 
 
 the Uni- of the bishop over the officers and members of his own congregation, 
 
 versal 
 
 Chuich 80 now he contended successfully for hia immunity from any inter- 
 
 deuued. ference from without. At a later period indeed Rome carried the 
 victory, but the immediate result of this controversy was to establish 
 the independence and enhance the power of the episcopate. More- 
 over this struggle had the further and not less important conse- 
 quence of defining and exhibiting the relations of the episcopate 
 to the Church in another way. As the individual bishop had been 
 pronounced indispensable to the existence of the individual commu- 
 nity, so the episcopal order was now put forward as tlie absolute 
 indefeasible representative of the universal Church. Synods of 
 bishops indeed had been held frequently before ; but under Cyprian's 
 guidance they assumed a prominence which threw all existing prece- 
 dents into the shade. A ' one undivided episcopate' was his watch- 
 word. The unity of the Church, he maintained, consists in the 
 
THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 243 
 
 ananimity of the bishops'. In this controTersy, as in the foimer, he 
 acted throughout on the principle, distinctly asserted, that t}ie exist- 
 ence of the episcopal office was not a matter of practical advantage or 
 ecclesiastical rule or even of apostolic sanction, but an absolute in- 
 controvertible decree of God. The triumph of Cyprian therefore was 
 the triumph of this principle. 
 
 The greatness of Cyprian's influence on the episcopate is indeed Cyprian's 
 due to this fact, that with him the statement of the principle pre- ™*Jg°. 
 cedes and necessitates the practical measures. Of the sharpness and pate, 
 distinctness of his sacerdotal views it will be time to speak pre- 
 sently; but of his conception of the episcopal office generally thus 
 much may be said here, that he regards the bishop as exclusively the 
 representative of God to the congregation and hardly, if at all, as 
 the representative of the congregation before God. The bishop is 
 the indispensable channel of divine grace, the indispensable bond of 
 Christian brotherhood. The episcopate is not so much the roof 
 as the foundation-stone of the ecclesiastical edifice ; not so much the 
 legitimate development as the primary condition of a church'. 
 The bishop is appointed directly by God, is responsible directly to 
 God, is inspired directly from God'. This last point deserves espe- 
 cial notice. Though in words he frequently defers to the established 
 usage of consulting the presbyters and even the laity in the appoint- 
 ment of officers and in other matters affecting the weU-being of the 
 community, yet he only makes the concession to nullify it imme- 
 diately. He pleads a direct official inspiration* which enables him 
 
 ' De Unit. Eccl. 2 ' Qaam unitaiem gabernetur.' Hence the expression ' neo 
 
 finuiter tenere et vindicate debemus episcopum nee ecclesiam cogitans,' 
 
 maxime episcopi qui in ecciesia prsesi- Epist. 41 ; hence also 'honor episcopi' 
 
 demus, ut episcopatum quoque ipsum is associated not only with ' ecclesiie 
 
 nnum atque indivisnin probemus ' ; and ratio ' (Epist. 33) bnt even with ' timor 
 
 again 'Episcopatus unns est, cujus a dei' {Epist. 15). Compare also the 
 
 singulis in solidom pars teuetur: ec- language (Epist. 59) 'Nee ecciesia istio 
 
 olesia quoque una est etc' So again he cuiquam clauditur nee episcopas alicui 
 
 argues (Epist. 43) that, as there is one deuegatur', and again {Epist. 43) 
 
 Church, there must be only 'imum al- ' SoU cum episcopis non sint, qui oou- 
 
 tare et unum sacerdotium (i. e. one epi- tra episcopos rebellarunt. ' 
 
 scopate)'. Comp. al8o£^t«t. 46, 55,67. 8 gee esp. Epist. 3, 43, 55, 59, 73, 
 
 > Epist. 66 ' Scire debes episcopum and above all 66 {Ad Piipianum). 
 
 inecolesia esse et ecclesiam in episcopo, * Epist. 38 'Expectouda non sunt 
 
 et si quis cum episcopo non sit, in eccle- testimonia humana, cum prsecednnt 
 
 sia non esse'; Epist. 33 'Ut ecciesia diviua suffragia' ; Epist. 39 'Non hu- 
 
 Buper episcopos constituatur et omms mana sufEragatione sed divina digna- 
 
 uctus ecciesia per eosdem prespositoa tione conjunctum'J Epitt, 40 'Ad> 
 
 16 — 2 
 
244 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 
 
 to dispense with ecclesiastical custom and to act on his own respon- 
 sibility. Though the presbyters may still have retained the shadow 
 of a controlling power over the acts of the bishop, though the 
 courtesy of language by which they were recognised as fellow-pres- 
 byters' was not laid aside, yet for all practical ends the independent 
 supremacy of the episcopate was completely established by the prin- 
 ciples and the measures of Cyprian. 
 
 The power In the investigation just concluded I have endeavoured to trace 
 bishops a ^^^ changes in the relative position of the fii'st and second orders 
 qnestionof ^f the ministry, by which the power was gradually concentrated in 
 conveni- the hands of the former. Such a development involves no new prin- 
 enee, ciple and must be regarded chiefly in its practical bearings. It is 
 
 plainly competent for the Church at any given time to entrust a 
 particular office with larger powers, as the emergency may require. 
 And, though the grounds on which the independent authority of 
 the episcopate was at times defended may have been false or ex- 
 aggerated, no reasonable objection can be taken to later forms of 
 ecclesiastical polity because the measure of power accorded to the 
 bishop does not remain exactly the same as in the Church of the 
 subapostolic ages. Nay, to many thoughtful and dispassionate minds 
 even the gigantic power wielded by the popes during the middle 
 ages will appear justifiable in itself (though they will repudiate the 
 false pretensions on which it was founded, and the false opinions 
 which were associated with it), since only by such a providential 
 concentration of authority could the Church, humanly speaking, have 
 and un- braved the storms of those ages of anarchy and violence. Now how- 
 \rithsacer- ^^®^ ^* ^^ ^^^ purpose to investigate the origin and growth of a new 
 dotalism. principle, which is nowhere enunciated in the New Testament, but 
 which notwithstanding has worked its way into general recognition 
 and seriously modified the character of later Christianity. The pro- 
 gress of the sacerdotal view of the ministry is one of the most 
 striking and important phenomena in the history of the Church. 
 No saoer- It has been pointed out already that the sacerdotal functions and 
 
 in theNew privileges, which alone are mentioned in the apostolic writings, per- 
 Testa- tain to all believera alike and do not refer solely or specially to the 
 
 monitoa nos et instruotos soiatis digna- adacribatur preabyterorum etc. 
 tione divina ut Nnmidioaa preabyter ' See above p. 230, note 3. 
 
THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 245 
 
 ministerial office. If to this statement it be objected that the 
 inference is built upon the silence of the Apostles and Evangelists, 
 and that such reasoning is always precarious, the reply is that an 
 exclusive sacerdotalism (as the word is commonly understood) ' con- 
 tradicts the general tenour of the Gospel. But indeed the strength 
 or weakness of an argument drawn from silence depends wholly 
 on the circumstance under which the silence is maintained. And 
 in this case it cannot be considered devoid of weight. In the Pas- 
 toral Epistles for instance, which are largely occupied with questions 
 relating to the Christian ministry, it seems scarcely possible that this 
 aspect should have been overlooked, if it had any place in St Paul's 
 teaching. The Apostle discusses at length the requirements, the 
 responsibilities, the sanctions, of the ministerial office : he regards 
 the presbyter as an example, as a teacher, as a philanthropist, as 
 a ruler. How then, it may well be asked, are the sacerdotal func- 
 tions, the sacerdotal privileges, of the office wholly set aside t If 
 these claims were recognised by him at all, they must necessarily 
 have taken a foremost place. The same argument again applies with 
 not less force to those passages in the Epistles to the Corinthians, 
 where St Paul asserts his apostolic authority against his detractors. 
 Nevertheless, so entirely had the primitive conception of the Chris- its rapid 
 tian Church been supplanted by this sacerdotal view of the ministry, ^^^^^ "' 
 before the northern, races were converted to the Gospel, and the date, 
 dialects derived from the Latin took the place of the ancient tongue, 
 that the languages of modern Europe very generally supply only 
 one word to represent alike the priest of the Jewish or heathen 
 ceremonial and the presbyter of the Christian ministry'. 
 
 ' In speaking of sacerdotalism, I as- atonement for the sins of others. 
 
 Bume the term to have essentially the ' It is a significant fact that in those 
 
 same force as when applied to the Jew- languages which have only one word to 
 
 iah priesthood. In a certain sense (to express thetwoidea8,thiswordetymolo- 
 
 be considered hereafter) all officers ap- gioally represents 'presbyterus' and not 
 
 pointed to minister 'for men in things 'sacerdos,' e.g. the French prUre, the 
 
 pertaining to God' may be called priests; Germanpricster,andtheKnglish2)rie«t; 
 
 and sacerdotal phraseology, when first thus showing that the sacerdotal idea 
 
 applied to the Christian ministry, may was imported and not original. In the 
 
 have borne this innocent meaning. But Italian, where two words prete and 
 
 at a later date it was certainly so used scuierdote exist side by side, there is no 
 
 as to imply a substantial identity of marked difference in usage, except that 
 
 character with the Jewish priesthood, prete is the mare common. If the lat- 
 
 ie. to designate the Christian minister ter brings out the sacerdotal idea more 
 
 as one who offers sacrifices and makes jiromiaently, th? fpriner is also applied 
 
246 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 
 
 For, though no distinct traces of sacerdotalism are visible in the 
 
 ages Immediately after the Apostles, yet having once taken root 
 
 in the Church it shot up rapidly into maturity. Towards the 
 
 close of the second century we discern the first germs appearing above 
 
 the surface : yet, shortly after the middle of the third, the plant has 
 
 all but attained its full growth. The origin of this idea, the progress 
 
 of its development, and the conditions favourable to its spread, will 
 
 bo considered in the present section of this essay. 
 
 Distino- -^ separation of orders, it is true, appeared at a much earlier 
 
 tion of the j^jg ^nd was in some sense involved in the appointment of a 
 clergyfrom ' _ ^'^ 
 
 the laity special ministry. This, and not more than this, was originally con- 
 tained in the distinction of clergy and laity. If the sacerdotal view 
 of the ministry engi-afted itself on this distinction, it nevertheless 
 M as not necessarily implied or even indirectly suggested thereby, 
 notderived TLb term ' clerns,' as a designation of the ministerial office, did not 
 Levitical °'^^S *" ^'°'7 existing associations convey the idea of sacerdotal 
 prieet- functions. The word is not used of the Aaronic priesthood in any 
 special sense which would explain its transference to the Christian 
 ministry. It is indeed said of the Levites, that they have no 
 ' clerus' in the land, the Lord Himself being their ' clerus". But the 
 Jewish priesthood is never described conversely as the special ' clerus' 
 of Jehovah : while on the other hand the metaphor thus inverted is 
 more than once applied to the whole Israelite people'. Up to 
 this point therefore the analogy of Old Testament usage would 
 
 to Jewish and Heathen priests and rendered in Wiclif's version ' the gret 
 
 therefore distinctly involves this idea. tist men of birthe,' a misunderstanding 
 
 Wiclif's version of the New Testament of the Vulgate 'majores natu.' The 
 
 naturally conforms to the Vulgate, in English versions of the reformers and 
 
 which it seemstobetherule to translate the reformed Church from Tyndale 
 
 irpeapvTepot by 'presbyteri' (in Wiolif downward translate Tperpirepoi uni- 
 
 'preestes') where it obviously denotes formly by 'elders.' 
 
 the second order in the ministry (e.g. ' Deut. x. 9, xviii. 1,7; oomp. Nnm. 
 
 Acts xiv. 23, I Tim. v. 1 7, 19, Tit. i. 5, xxvi. 61, Deut. xii. 1 1, xiv. 27, 19, Josh. 
 
 James v. 14), and by 'seniores' (in xiv. 3. Jerome (Epist. lii. 5, i.p. 258) 
 
 Wiclif 'eldres' or 'elder men') in other says, 'Propterea vocantur clerioi, vel 
 
 passages: but if so, this rule is not quia do sorte sunt Domini, vel quia ipse 
 
 always successfully applied (e.g. Acts Dominus sors, id est pars, olericorum 
 
 xi. 30, xxi. 18, I Pet. V. i). A doubt est.' The former explanation would be 
 
 about the meaning may explain the reasonable, if it were supported by the 
 
 anomaly that the word is translated language of the Old Testament: the 
 
 ' presbyteri,' ' preestes,' Acts xv. 2, and latter is plainly inadequate, 
 
 'seniores,' 'elder men,' Acts xv. 4, 6, » Deut. iv. 20 eZVot avT$^aaV fyxXi;- 
 
 M, xvi 4 ; though the persons intended pop : oomp. ix. 19 offrg) \o6s aqy ^ «i 
 
 Are the same. In Acts xn. fj, it is K\^p6s rov. 
 
THE CHRISTIAN MIMISTRY. 247 
 
 have suggested ' clerus ' as a name rather for the entire body of 
 the faithful than fbr the ministry specially or exclusively. Nor do 
 other references to the clerus or lot in connexion with the Levitical 
 priesthood countenance its special application. The tithes, it is true, 
 were assigned to the sons of Levi as their ' clerus"; but in this 
 there is nothing distinctive, and in fact the word is employed 
 much more prominently in describing the lands allotted to the 
 whole people. Again the courses of priests and Levites selected 
 to conduct the temple-service were appointed by lot'; but the mode 
 adopted in distributing a particular set of duties is far too special 
 to have supplied a distinctive name for the whole order. If indeed 
 it were an established fact that the Aaronic priesthood at the time 
 of the Christian era commonly bore the name of ' clergy,' we might 
 be driven to explain the designation in this or in some similar 
 way ; but apparently no evidence of any such usage exists", and it 
 is therefore needless to cast about for an explanation of a fact which 
 itself is only conjectural. The origin of the term clergy, as ap- 
 plied to the Christian ministry, must be sought elsewhere. 
 
 And the record of the earliest appointment made by the Origin of 
 Christian Church after the Ascension of the Lord seems to supply ^ name f 01 
 the clue. Exhorting the assembled brethren to elect a successor tjie Chiis- 
 in place of Judas, St Peter tells them that the traitor ' had been ministry, 
 numbered among them and had received the lot (xX^pov) of the 
 ministry' : while in the account of the subsequent proceedings it 
 is recorded that the Apostles ' distributed hts' to the brethren, 
 and that 'the lot fell on Matthias and he was added to the eleven 
 Apostles*.' The following therefore seems to be the sequence of 
 meanings, by which the word xX-^pos arrived at this peculiar sense : 
 (1) the lot by which the office was assigned; (2) the office thus 
 assigned by lot; (3) the body of persons holding the office. The 
 first two senses are illustrated by the passages quoted from the 
 
 1 Num. xviii. ti, 24, 26. {\aXic6s, i Sam. xxi. 4, Ezek. xlviii. 15; 
 
 ' I Chron. xxiv. 5, 7, 31, xxv. 8, 9. XaV/c(Sw, Deut. xx. 6, xxviii. 30, Euth i. 
 
 » On the other hand Xads is used of i2,Ezek.vii. 22); oomp. Clem. Eom. 40. 
 
 the people, as contrasted either -with * Acts i. 17 IXaxc rdv KKrjpov, 26 
 
 the rulers or with the priests. From iSuKav /tX^pous airoU nal (ireaev i K\fj- 
 
 this latter contrast comes XoiVo's, 'laic' /)t>s iirl MoStfiap. In ver. 35 KXrjpov is 
 
 or 'profane,' and XolKiu 'to profane'; a false reading. The use of the word 
 
 which, though not found in the lxx, in i Pet. v. 3 KaraKvpievovTes tSv kXij- 
 
 ooour frequently in the versions of puv (i.e. of the flocks assigned to them) 
 
 Aquila, Symma«tos, and Tbeodotion does not illustrate this meaning, 
 
248 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 
 
 Acts J and from the second to the third the transition is easy and 
 natural. It must not be supposed however that the mode of 
 appointing officers by lot prevailed generally in the early Church, 
 Besides the case of Matthias no other instance is recorded in the 
 New Testament j nor is this procedure likely to have been commonly 
 adopted. But just as in the passage quoted the word is used 
 to describe the office of Judas, though Judas was certainly not 
 selected by lot, so generally from signifying one special mode of 
 appointment to office it got to signify office in the Church gene- 
 rally'. If this account of the application of 'olerus' to the Chris- 
 tian ministry be correct, we should expect to find it illustrated 
 by a corresponding progress in the actual usage of the word. And 
 this is in fact the case. The sense 'clerical appointment or office' 
 chronologically precedes the sense ' clergy'. The former meaning 
 occurs several times in Irenseus. He speaks of Hyginus as ' holding 
 the ninth clerus of the episcopal succession from the Apostles" ; and 
 of Eleutherus in like manner he says, ' He now occupies the clerus 
 of the episcopate in the tenth place from the Apostles'.' On the 
 other hand the earliest instance of 'clerus', meaning clergy, seems 
 to occur in TertuUian*, who belongs to the next generation. 
 No saoer- I* '^^ tli^s be seen that the use of 'clerus' to denote the 
 
 dotal idea ministry cannot be traced to the Jewish priesthood, and is there- 
 
 oonveyed "^ ■'■ 
 
 by the fore wholly unconnected with any sacerdotal views. The term 
 
 does indeed recognise the clergy as an order distinct from the laity; 
 
 but this is a mere question of ecclesiastical rule or polity, and 
 
 1 See Clem. Alex. Quis diu. salv.^2, pom, it is used absolutely of 'clerical 
 where Kkripovv is 'to appoint to the offices.' The Epistle of the Galilean 
 ministry'; and Iren.iii 3. 3 /cXijpoi/ireot Churches (Euseb. H. E. v. i) speaks 
 TTJv iruFKoTriji'. A similar extension of more than once of the nX-^pos twv flap- 
 meaning is seen in this same word kXtj- riipuv, i.e. the order or rank of mar- 
 pos appHed to land. Signifying origi- tyrs: comp. Test, xii Pa«r. Levi 8. See 
 naUy a piece of ground assigned by lot, Kitschl p. 390 sq., to whom I am in- 
 it gets to mean landed property gene- debted for several of the passages which 
 rally, whether obtained by assignment are quoted in this investigation, 
 or by inheritance or ia any other way. < e.g. de Monog. 11 'Unde enim 
 ' Iron. i. 27. I. episcopi et clerus?' and again 'Extolli- 
 » Iren. iii. 3. 3. In this passage how- mur et inflamur adversus olerum." Per- 
 ever, as in the preceding, the word is haps however eaiUer instances mayhave 
 explained by a qualifying genitive. In escaped notice. In Olem. Alex. Quii 
 Hippol. Hfflr. ix. 12 (p. 290), ■^p^avro div. salv. 42 the word seems not to be 
 MsKoToi <cai wper^vrepoi Kal StaVovoi used in this sense. 
 
 Slya/ioi Kalrptyaiioi Ka6itna<r0M (Is k\v- 
 
THE CHKISTIAN MINISTRY. 249 
 
 mTolres no doctrinal bearings. The origin of sacerdotal phraseology 
 
 and ideas must be sought elsewhere. 
 
 Attention has been already directed to the absence of any Silence oJ 
 
 appeal to sacerdotal claims in the Pastoral Epistles. The silence gtoUo^"' 
 
 of the apostolic fathers deserves also to be noticed. Though the fathers on 
 
 saoer- 
 genuine letters of all three may be truly said to binge on questions dotalism. 
 
 relating to the ministry, no distinct traces of this influence are 
 risible. St Clement, as the representative of the Roman Church, Clement, 
 writes to the Christian brotherhood at Corinth, offering friendly 
 counsel in their disputes and rebuking theii' factious and unworthy 
 conduct towards certain presbyters whom, though blameless, they 
 had ejected from o£B.ce. He appeals to motives of Christian love, 
 to principles of Christian order. He adduces a large number of 
 examples from biblical history condemnatory of jealousy and in- 
 subordination. He urges that men, who had been appointed directly 
 by the Apostles or by persons themselves so appointed, ought to have 
 received better treatment. Dwelling at great length on the subject, 
 he nevertheless advances no sacerdotal claims or immunities on 
 behalf of the ejected ministers. He does, it is true, adduce the Import of 
 Aaronio priesthood and the Temple service as showing that God rigcmvri^h 
 has appointed set persons and set places and will have all things the Aaron- 
 done in order. He had before illustrated this lesson by the sub- hood, 
 ordination of ranks in an army, and by the relation of the different 
 members of the human body: he had insisted on the duties of 
 the strong towards the weak, of the rich towards the poor, of the 
 wise towards the ignorant, and so forth: he had enforced the 
 appeal by reminding his readers of the utter feebleness and insig- 
 nificance of man in the sight of God, as represented in the Scriptures 
 of the Old Testament; and then follows the passage which contains 
 the allusion in question; 'He hath not commanded (the offerings 
 and ministrations) to be performed at random or in disorder, but 
 at fixed times and seasons; and where and through whom He 
 willeth them to be performed, He hath ordained by His supreme 
 will. They therefore who make their ofierings at the appointed 
 seasons are acceptable and blessed, since following the ordinances of 
 the Mastei- they do not go wrong. For to the high priest peculiar 
 services are entrusted, and the priests have their peculiar office 
 assigned to them, and on Levites peculiar ministrations are imposed : 
 
250 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY, 
 
 the layman is bound by lay ordinances. Let each of you, brethren, 
 in his own rank give thanks to God, retaining a good conscience, 
 not transgressing the appointed rule of his service (kuTovpyiaij etc. ' ' 
 Here it is clear that in St Clement's conception the sanction pos- 
 sessed in common by the Aaronic priesthood .and the Christian 
 ministry is not the sacerdotal consecration, but the divinely ap- 
 pointed order. He passes over in silence the numerous passages 
 in the Old Testament which enjoin obedience to the priests; while the 
 only sentence (§ 42) which he puts forward as anticipating and 
 enforcing the authority of the Christian ministry is a misquoted and 
 misinterpreted verse from Isaiah; 'I will establish their overseers 
 (bishops) in righteousness and their ministers (deacons) in faith". 
 Again a little later he mentions in illustration the murmuring of 
 the Israelites which was rebuked by the budding of Aaron's rod'. 
 But here too he makes it clear how far he considers the analogy 
 to extend. He calls the sedition in the one case 'jealousy con- 
 cerning the priesthood', in the other strife concerning the honour 
 of the episcopate". He keeps the names and the offices distinct. 
 The significance of this fact will be felt at once by comparing his 
 language with the expressions used by any later writer, such as 
 Cyprian, who was penetrated with the spirit of sacerdotalism'. 
 Ignatius. Of St Ignatiua, as the champion of episcopacy, much has been said 
 
 already. It is sufficient to add here, that he never regards the 
 ministry as a sacerdotal office. This is equally true, whether we 
 accept as genuine the whole of the seven letters in the short Greek, 
 or only those portions contained in the Syriac version. WhUe these 
 
 ' Clem. Eom. 40,41. Neander(Ctercfe inakethyofficers{lit.inagistrates)peace 
 History, i. p. 272 note.Bohn's transla- and thine exactors (i.e. task-masters) 
 tion) conjectures that this passage is righteousness'; i.e. there shall be no 
 an 'interpolation from a hierarchical tyranny or oppression. The lxx de- 
 interest,' and Dean Milman (Hist, of parts from the original, and Clement 
 Christianity, iii. p. 259) says that it is has altered the lxx. By this double 
 'rejected by all judicious and impartial divergence a reference to thetwoorders 
 scholars.' At the risk of forfeiting all of the ministry is obtained, 
 claim to judiciousness and impartiality ' Clem. Eom. 43. 
 one may venture to demur to this arbi- 'Contrast § 43 fiJXou tiiirialnnot 
 trary criticism. Indeed the recent irepi riit Upuaivrfi with § 44 fpis faroi 
 discovery of a second independent ms ifl toC oKo/xarot tijs iiriCKoirijs. The 
 and of a Syriac Version, both contain- common feature which connects the two 
 ing the suspected passage, may be re- offices together is stated in the words, 
 garded as decisive on this point. § 43 tra /ii^ aKaraiTTaala ytvifron, 
 
 ' Is. Ix. 17, where the A. V. cor- ' See below p. 259. 
 rectly renders the original, ' I will also 
 
THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 25 1 
 
 letters teem with passages enjoining the strictest obedience to bishops, 
 while their language is frequently so strong as to sound almost pro- 
 fane, this father never once appeals to sacerdotal claims', though 
 such an appeal would have made his case more than doubly strong. 
 If it be ever safe to take the sentiments of an individual writer as 
 e^cpressing the belief of his age, we may infer from the silence which 
 pervades these letters, that the sacerdotal view of the ministry had 
 not yet found its way into the Christian Church. 
 
 When we pass on to the third apostolic father, the same pheno- 
 menon is repeated. Polycarp, like Clement and Ignatius, occupies Polycarp. 
 much space in discussing the duties and the claims of Christian mi- 
 nisters. He takes occasion especially to give his correspondents ad- 
 vice as to a certain presbyter who had disgraced his office by a grave 
 offence'. Yet he again knows nothing, or at least says nothing, of 
 any sacerdotal privileges which claimed respect, or of any sacerdotal 
 sanctity which has been violated. 
 
 Justin M.SLTtyr writes about a generation later. He speaks at Jnstin 
 length and with emphasis on the eucharistic offerings. Here at least """"yi 
 we might expect to find sacerdotal views of the Christian ministry 
 propounded. Yet this is far from being the case. He does indeed 
 lay stress on sacerdotal functions, but these belong to the whole body 
 of the Church, and are not in any way the exclusive right of the 
 clergy. 'So we,' he writes, when arguing against Trypho the Jew, maintains 
 'who through the name of Jesus have believed as one man in God gal priJgY- 
 the maker of the universe, having divested ourselves of our filthy tood. 
 garments, that is our sins, through the name of His first-bom Son, 
 and having been refined {irupm6ivTe{) by the word of His calling, are 
 the true high-priestly race of God, as God Himself also beareth wit- 
 ness, saying that in every place among the Gentiles are men offering 
 sacrifices well-pleasing unto Him and pure (Mai. i. 11). Yet God 
 
 > Somepassages are quoted in Green- through whom the whole Church haa 
 
 wood Cathedra Petri i. p. 73 as tending access to God, over the old dispensa- 
 
 in this direction, e.g. Philad. 9 koXoI tionof the Levitioal priesthood (iepeij). 
 
 Koi ol lepeU, Kpetaaov U dpxifpev' If tliis interpretation be correct, the 
 
 K.T. X. But rightly interpreted they do passage echoes the teaching of the Epi- 
 
 not favour this view. In the passage stle to the Hebrews, and is opposed 
 
 quoted tor instance, the writer seems to exclusive sacerdotalism. On the 
 
 to be maintaining the superiority of the meaning of evaiaaT-qpiov in the Ignatian 
 
 new covenant, as represented by the Epistles see below p. 265, note 2, 
 great High-Priest (apxiepeii) ir and ' See above p. 63 sq. 
 
252 
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 
 
 doth not receive sacrifices from any one, except through His priests. 
 Therefore God anticipating all sacrifices through this name, which 
 Jesus Christ ordained to be offered, I mean those offered by the 
 Christians in every region of the earth with (eiri) the thanksgiving 
 (the eucharist) of the bread and of the cup, beareth witness that 
 they are well-pleasing to Him; but the sacrifices offered by you and 
 through those your priests he rejecteth, saying, "And your sacrifices 
 I will not accept from your hands etc. (Mai. i. lo)'".' The whole 
 Christian people therefore (such is Justin's conception) have not only 
 taken the place of the Aaronic priesthood, but have become a nation 
 of hig/irpriests, being made one with the great High-Priest of the new 
 covenant and presenting their eucharistic offerings in His name. 
 Irons us Another generation leads us from Justin Martyr to Irenaeus. 
 
 When Irenaeus writes, the second century is very far advanced. Yet 
 still the silence which has accompamed us hitherto remains un- 
 broken. And here again it is important to observe that Irenaeus, if 
 he held the sacerdotal view, had every motive for urging it, since the 
 importance and authority of the episcopate occupy a large space in 
 his teaching. Nevertheless he not only withholds this title as a spe- 
 cial designation of the Christian ministry, but advances an entirely 
 acknow- different view of the priestly office. He recognises only the priest- 
 ledges only JjqqJ (jf moral holiness, the priesthood of apostolic self-denial. Thus 
 a moral '^ * 
 
 priest- commenting on the reference made by our Lord to the incident in 
 
 David's life where the king and his followers eat the shew-bread, 
 'which it is not lawful to eat save for the priests alone,' Irenaeus 
 remarks'; 'He excuseth His disciples by the words of the law, and 
 signifieth that it is lawful for priests to act freely. For David had 
 been called to be a priest in the sight of God, although Saul carried 
 on a persecution against him; for all just men belong to the sacer- 
 dotal order'. Now all apostles of the Lord are priests, for they in- 
 herit neither lands nor houses here, but ever attend on the altar and 
 on God': 'Who are they', he goes on, 'that have left father and 
 
 ' Dial c. Tryph.o. ii6, 117, p. 344. 
 
 ' Hter. iv. 8. 3. 
 
 " This sentence is cited by John Da- 
 mascene and Antonius irds paai\eu! 
 Sixaios lepariKrji' fx" Tdlii/; but the 
 words were quoted doubtless from me- 
 mory by the one writer and borrowed 
 by the other from him. /Sao-iXeOs is not 
 
 represented in the Latin and does not 
 suit the context. The close conformity 
 of their quotations from the Ignatian 
 letters is a sufficient proof that these 
 two writers are not independent au- 
 thorities ; see the passages in Cureton's 
 Corp. Ignat. p. 180 sq. 
 
THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 253 
 
 mother and have renounced all their kindred for the sake of the 
 word of God and His covenant, but the disciples of the Lord 1 Of 
 these Moses saith again, "But they shall have no inheritance; for 
 the Lord Himself shall be their inheritance"; and again, "The 
 priests, the Levites, in the whole tribe of Levi shall have no part nor 
 inheritance with Israel : the first-fruits (fructificationes) of the Lord 
 are their inheritance; they shall eat them." For tlua reason also 
 Paul saith, "I require not the gift, but I require the fruit." The 
 disciples of the Lord, he would say, were allowed when hungry to 
 take food of the seeds (they had sown) : for "The labourer is worthy 
 of his food." ' Again, striking upon the same topic in a later passage' 
 and commenting on the words of Jeremiah (xxxi. 14), "I will intoxi- 
 cate the soul of the priests the sons of Levi, and my people shall be 
 fiUed with my good things," he adds, 'we have shown in a former 
 book, that all disciples of the Lord are priests and Levites : who also 
 profaned the Sabbath in the temple and are blameless.' Thus Ire- 
 nieus too recognises the whole body of the faithful under the new dis- 
 pensation as the counterparts of the sons of Levi under the old. The 
 position of the Apostles and Evangelists has not yet been abandoned. 
 
 A few years later, but still before the close of the century, Poly- Explano- 
 crates of Ephesus writes to Victor of Rome. Incidentally he speaks nag'gMeln 
 of St John as 'having been made a priest' and 'wearing the mitre"; Poly- 
 and this might seem to be a distinct expression of sacerdotal views, 
 for the 'mitre' to which he alludes is doubtless the tiara of the 
 Jewish high-priest. But it may very reasonably be questioned if this 
 is the correct meaning of the passage. Whether St John did actually 
 wear this decoration of the high-priestly office, or whether Polycrates 
 has mistaken a symbolical expression in some earlier writer for an 
 actual fact, or whether lastly his language itself should be treated as 
 a violent metaphor, I have had occasion to discuss elsewhere". But 
 in any case the notice is explained by the language of St John him- 
 self, who regards the whole body of believers as high-priests of the 
 new covenant*; and it is certain that the contemporaries of Poly- 
 
 ' Har. V. 34. 3. T^s rtcTeus k.t.X. See also, aa an illus- 
 
 ' In Enseb. H. E. v. 24 oj lyeiriiOr) trationofthemetaphor.TertuU.Jfono^. 
 
 Upeit ri vfroKov ireipopmilis. Oomp. 1 2 ' Cum ad pertequationem diaciplinie 
 
 Tertull. adv. Jud. 1 4 ' exornatns podere sacerdotalis provocamur, deponimm in 
 
 et mitra', Test, xii Patr. Levi 8 dra- fulas.' 
 
 ffxAf trSvaai Trp aroKiiv t^s kparelas.. ' See Galatians p. 362 note. 
 
 riv iroS^^pri T^s oXijflf/o! Kol to" HraKor * Eev. ii. 17; see the commentators. 
 
254 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 
 
 crates still continued to hold similar language*. As a figurative ex- 
 pression or as a literal fact, the notice points to St John as the vete- 
 ran teacher, the chief representative, of a pontifical race. On the 
 other hand, it is possible that this was not the sense which Poly- 
 crates himself attached to the figure or the fact : and if so, we have 
 here perhaps the earliest passage in any extant Christian writing 
 where the sacerdotal view of the ministry is distinctly put forward, 
 
 Clement Clement of Alexandria was a contemporary of Polycrates. 
 
 ofAiezau- Though his extant writings are considerable in extent and though 
 they are largely occupied with questions of Christian ethics and 
 social Ufe, the ministry does not hold a prominent place in them. 
 In the few passages where he mentions it, he does not betray any 
 tendency to sacerdotal or even to hierarchical views. The bias of his 
 mind indeed lay in an opposite direction. He would be much more 
 inclined to maintain an aristocracy of intellectual contemplation than 
 of sacerdotal office. And in Alexandria generally, as we have seen, 
 the development of the hierarchy was slower than in other churches. 
 How far he is from maintaining a sacerdotal view of the ministry 
 and how substantially he coincides with Irenseus in this respect, 
 
 His ' gnoa- ■will appear from the following passage, 'It is possible for men 
 
 hood"*^ even now, by exercising themselves in the commandments of the 
 Lord and by living a perfect gnostic life in obedience to the Gospel, 
 to be inscribed in the roll of the Apostles. Such men are genuine 
 presbyters of the Church and true deacons of the will of God, if they 
 practise and teach the things of the Lord, being not indeed ordained 
 by men nor considered righteous because they are presbyters, but 
 enrolled in the presbytery because they are righteous : and though 
 here on earth they may not be honoured with a chief seat, yet shall 
 they sit on the four and twenty thrones judging the people'.' It 
 is quite consistent with this truly spiritual view, that he should 
 elsewhere recognise the presbyter, the deacon, and the layman, as 
 distinct orders'. But on the other hand he never uses the words 
 ' priest,' ' priestly,' ' priesthood,' of the Christian ministry. In one 
 passage indeed ho contrasts laity and priesthood, but without 
 any such reference. Speaking of the veil of the temple and as- 
 
 ' So Justin in the words already quoted below p. 257. 
 
 quoted (p. 250), Dial. c. Tryph. § 116 • Strom. -vl 13, p. 793. 
 
 ipX^'piinKdii rd dXriBimv yims ia/iiv tou ' Strom, iii. go, p. 551. 
 OeoO. See also the passage of Origen 
 
THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 255 
 
 signiag to it a symbolical meaning, he describes it as * a barrier 
 
 against laic unbelief,' behind which 'the priestly ministration is 
 
 hidden'.' Here the laymen and the priests are respectively those 
 
 who reject and those who appropriate the spiritual mysteries of the 
 
 Gospel. Accordingly in the context St Clement, following up the 
 
 hint thrown out in the Epistle to the Hebrews, gives a spiritual 
 
 meaning to all the fumitui-e of the holy place. 
 
 His younger contemponiry Tertullian is the first to assert diriect TertiiUian 
 
 sacerdotal claims on behalf of the Christian ministry. Of the heretics gaoerdotal 
 
 he complains that they impose sacerdotal functions on laymen". 'The ^ewof the 
 
 ' ministry, 
 
 right of giving baptism,' he says elsewhere, 'belongs to the chief priest 
 
 (summus sacerdos), that is, the bishop'.' 'No woman,' he asserts, 
 ' ought to teach, baptize, celebrate the eucharist, or arrogate to her- 
 self the performance of any duty pertaining to males, much less 
 of the sacerdotal office'.' And generally he uses the words sacer- 
 dos, sacerdotium, sacerdotalis, of the Christian ministry. It seems 
 plain moreover from his mode of speaking, that such language was 
 not peculiar to himself but passed current in the churches among 
 which he moved. Yet he himself supplies the true counterpoise to 
 this special sacerdotalism in his strong assertion of the universal priest- 
 hood of all true believers. 'We should be foolish,' so he writes when yet quali- 
 arguing against second marriages, 'to suppose that a latitude is ^fg^asser- 
 aUowed to laymen which is denied to priests. Are not we laymen tion of on 
 also priests] It is written, "He hath also made us a kingdom and priest- 
 priests to God and His Father." It is the authority of the Church ^o"^- 
 which makes a difference between the order (the clergy) and the 
 people — this authority and the consecration of their rank by the 
 assignment of special benches to the clergy. Thus where there is no 
 bench of clergy, you present the eucharistic offerings and baptize and 
 are your own sole priest. For where three are gathered together, 
 there is a church, even though they be laymen. Therefore if you 
 exercise the rights of a priest in cases of necessity, it is your duty 
 also to observe the discipline enjoined on a priest, where of necessity 
 you exercise the rights of a priest'.' And in another treatise he 
 
 1 Strom. V. 33 sq., p. 665 sq. Bp. ' de Prcescr. Hter. 41 'Nam et laiois 
 
 Kaye {Clement of Alexandria p. 464) saoerdotalia munera injungunt.' 
 
 incorrectly adduces this passage as an ' de Baptismo 17. 
 
 express mention of 'the distinction be- * de Virg. vel. 9. 
 
 tween the clergy and laity.' " de Exh. Cast. 7. See Kaye's Tertul- 
 
256 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 
 
 ■writes in bitter irony, 'When we begin to exalt and inflame our- 
 selves against the clergy, then we are all one; then we are all 
 priests, because "He made us priests to God and His Father": but 
 when we are required to submit ourselves equally to the priestly 
 discipline, we throw off our fillets and are no longer equal' .' These 
 passages, it is true, occur in treatises probably written after Ter- 
 tuUian had become wholly or in part a Montanist: but this con- 
 sideration is of little consequence, for they bear witness to the fact 
 that the scriptural doctrine of an universal priesthood was common 
 ground to himself and his opponents, and had not yet been obscured 
 by the sacerdotal view of the Christian ministry'. 
 Sacerdotal "^ incidental expression in Hippolytus serves to show that a 
 langnage few years later than Tertullian sacerdotal terms were commonly 
 lytus. used to designate the different orders of the clergy. 'We,' says 
 the zealous bishop of Portus, 'being successors of the Apostles and 
 partaking of the same grace both of high-priesthood and of teaching 
 and accounted guardians of the Church, do not close our eyes 
 drowsily or tacitly suppress the true word, etc." 
 
 The march of sacerdotal ideas was probably slower at Alexandria 
 
 Origen in- than at Carthage or Rome. Though belonging to the next gene- 
 
 th^'miest- '''*''^'"*> Origen's views are hardly so advanced as those of Tertul- 
 
 hood spin- lian. In the temple of the Church, he says, there are two sanc- 
 
 tuaries : the heavenly, accessible only to Jesus Christ, our great 
 
 High-Priest; the earthly, open to all priests of the new covenant, 
 
 that is, to all faithful believers. For Christians are a sacerdotal 
 
 race and therefore have access to the outer sanctuary. There they 
 
 must present their offei-ings, their holocausts of love and self-denial. 
 
 From this outer sanctuary our High-Priest takes the fire, as He 
 
 enters the Holy of Holies to offer incense to the Father (see 
 
 lian p. 211, whoso interpretation of iv. 9, adv. Jud. 14. Again, he uses 
 
 •honor per ordinis consessum sanotifi- ' sacerdos' in a moral sense, de Spectac. 
 
 oatus' I have adopted. 16 'saoerdotea paois," de Cult. Fern. ii. 
 
 ' de Monog. 12. I have taken the u 'sacerdotes pudicitise,' ad Uxor. i. 
 
 reading 'impares' for 'pares,' as re- 6 (oomp. 7) ' virginitatis et viduitatis 
 
 quired by the context. sacerdotia.' On the other hand in de 
 
 * Tertullian regards Christ, oui great Pall. 4 he seems to compare the Chris. 
 
 High-Priest, as the counterpart under tian minister with the heathen priests, 
 
 the new dispensation of the priest under but too much stress must not be laid 
 
 the old, and so interprets the text on a rhetorical image. 
 
 'Show thyself to the priest' ; adv. Marc. ' Har. proosm. p. 3. 
 
THB CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 257 
 
 Lev. xvi. 12)'. Very many professed Christians, he writes else- 
 where (I am here abridging his words), occupied chiefly with the 
 concerns of this world and dedicating few of their actions to Qod, 
 are represented by the tribes, who merely present their tithes and 
 first-firuits. On the other hand ' those who are devoted to the divine 
 word, and are dedicated sincerely to the sole worship of God, may not 
 unreasonably be called priests and Levites according to the differ- 
 ence in this respect of their impulses tending thereto.' Lastly * those 
 who excel the men of their own generation perchance will be high- 
 priests.' They are only high-priests however after the order of 
 Aaron, our Lord Himself being High-Priest after the order of Mel- 
 chisedek*. Again in a third place he says, 'The Apostles and they 
 that are made like unto the Apostles, being priests after the order of 
 the great High-Priest, having received the knowledge of the worship 
 of God and being instructed by the Spirit, know for what sins they 
 ought to offer sacrifices, etc.',' In all these passages Origeu has 
 taken spiritual enlightenment and not sacerdotal office to be the 
 Christian counterpart to the Aaronic priesthood. Elsewhere how- but applies 
 
 ever he makes use of sacerdotal terms to describe the ministry of the Baoerdoia) 
 
 . terms to 
 Church*; and in one place distinguishes the priests and the Levites theminia' 
 
 as representing the presbyters and deacons respectively *. ^' 
 
 Hitherto the sacerdotal view of the Christian ministry has not 
 been held apart from a distinct recognition of the sacerdotal func- 
 tions of the whole Christian body. The minister is thus regarded Thepriest- 
 
 as a priest, because he is the mouthpiece, the representative, of a hood of the 
 
 ministry 
 priestly race. Such appears to be the conception of TertuIUan, who springs 
 
 speaks of the clergy as separate from the laity only because the IriMthcT d 
 
 ' Som. ix in Lev. 9, 10 (11. p. 243 bears this sense, for the 'pontifex' ap- 
 
 Delarae). plies to our Lord; and it is clear from 
 
 ' In Joann. i. § 3 (:v. p. 3). Horn, in Ps. xxxvii § 6 (ii. p. 688) that 
 
 ' d£ Oral. 38 (i. p. 155). See also in Origeu's opinion the confessor to 
 
 Bom. iv in Num. 3 (11. p. 283). the penitent need not be an ordained 
 
 * Ham. V in Lev. 4 (11. p. 208 sq.) minister. The passages in Bede- 
 ■Discant sacerdotes Domini qui eccle- ' penning's Origenet bearing on this 
 
 siis prEBSunt,' and also ib. Ham. ii. 4 subject are i. p. 357, n. pp. 250, 417, 
 
 (II. p. 191)' Cum non erubescit sacerdoti 436 sq. 
 
 Domini indicare peccatum suum et ' Ham. xii in Jerem. 3 (iii. p. 196) 
 
 quieiere medicinam' (he quotes James 'If any one therefore among these 
 
 V. 14 in illustration). But Horn, x in priests (I mean us the presbyters) or 
 
 Num. 1, 1 (11. p. 301), quoted by Bede- among these Levites who stand about 
 
 penning (Origenes 11. p. 417), hardly the people (I mean the deacons) etc.' 
 
 PHIL, 17 
 
35 8 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 
 
 of the con- Church in the exercise of hei' prerogative has for convenience 
 gregation. , i i j? • 
 
 entrusted to them the performance of certain sacerdotal functions 
 
 belonging properly to the whole congregation, and of Origen, 
 ■who, giving a moral and spiritual interpretation to the sacerdotal 
 office, considers the priesthood of the clergy to differ from the priest- 
 hood of the laity only in degree, in so far as the former devote their 
 time and their thoughts more entirely to God than the latter. So 
 long as this important aspect is kept in view, so long as the priest- 
 hood of the ministry is regarded as springing from the priesthood of 
 the whole body, the teaching of the Apostles has not been directly 
 violated. But still it was not a safe nomenclature which assigned 
 the terms sacerdos, Upevs, and the like, to the ministry, as a special 
 designation. The appearance of this phenomenon marks the period of 
 transition from the universal sacerdotalism of the New Testament 
 to the particular sacerdotalism of a later age. 
 Cyprian If TertuUian and Origen are still hovering on the border, 
 
 pionofnn- Cyprian has boldly transferred himself into the new domain. It 
 
 disguised ig not only that he uses the terms sacerdos, sacerdotium, sacer- 
 
 sacerdo- 
 
 talism. dotalis, of the ministry with a frequency hitherto without parallel. 
 
 But he treats all the passages in the Old Testament which refer 
 to the privileges, the sanctions, the duties, and the responsibilities 
 of the Aaronic priesthood, as applying to the officers of the Christian 
 Church. His opponents are profane and sacrilegious; they have 
 passed sentence of death on themselves by disobeying the com- 
 mand of the Lord in Deuteronomy to 'hear the priest"; they 
 have forgotten the injunction of Solomon to honour and reverence 
 God's priests'; they have despised the example of St Paul who 
 regretted that he ' did not know it was the high priest" ; they 
 have been guilty of the sin of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram*. 
 These passages are urged again and again. They are ui-ged more- 
 over, as applying not by parity of reasoning, not by analogy of 
 circumstance, but as absolute and immediate and unquestionable. 
 As Cyprian crowned the edifice of episcopal power, so also was 
 he the first to put forward without relief or dLsguise these sacer- 
 
 ' Dent. xvii. n; see Epist. 3, 4, 43, ' Acts xxiii. 4; see Epist. 3, 59, 
 
 59, 66. 66. 
 
 ' Though the words are ascribed to * De Unit. Eccl. p. 83 (Fell), Epitt. 
 
 Solomon, the quotation comes from 3, 67, 69, 73. 
 KvisluB. Tii. 19, 31 ; see Epist. 3. 
 
THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 259 
 
 dotal assumptions j and bo uncompromising was the tone in which 
 he asserted them, that nothing was left to his successors but to 
 enforce his principles and reiterate his language'. 
 
 After thus tracing the gradual departure from the Apostolic 
 teaching in the encroachment of the sacerdotal on the pastoral and 
 ministerial view of the clergy, it wiU be instructive to investigate 
 the causes to which this divergence from primitive truth may 
 be ascribed. To the question whether the change was due to Were 
 Jewish or GentUe influences, opposite answers have been given, ^g^j j„g 
 To some it has appeared as a reproduction of the Aaronio priest- 1° Jewish 
 hood, due to Pharisaic tendencies, such as we find among St Paul's tile in- 
 converts in Gralatia and at Corinth, still lingering in the Church : ""c^o^^' 
 to others, as imported into Christianity by the ever increasing 
 mass of heathen converts who were incapable of shaking off their 
 sacerdotal prejudices and appreciating the free spirit of the Gospel. 
 The latter view seems correct in the main, but requires some 
 modification. 
 
 At all events so far as the evidence of extant writings goes. The 
 
 there is no reason for supposLag that sacerdotalism was especially je^igh 
 
 rife among the Jewish converts. The Testaments of the Twelve Christian 
 
 . . . wntinga 
 
 Patriarchs may be taken to represent one phase of Judaic Chris- contain no 
 
 tianity ; the Clementine writings exhibit another. In both alike gaMrdotal- 
 there is an entire absence of sacerdotal views of the ministry, ism. 
 The former work indeed dwells at length on our Lord's office, 
 as the descendant and heir of Levi ', and alludes more than once 
 to his institution of a new priesthood ; but this priesthood is 
 spiritual and comprehensive. Christ Himself is the High priest', 
 and i^e sacerdotal office is described as being 'after the type of 
 the Gentiles, extending to all the Gentiles*.' On the Christian 
 ministry the writer is silent. In the Clementine Homilies the 
 case is somewhat different, but the inference is stUl more obvious. 
 Though the episcopate is regarded as the backbone of the Church, 
 though the claims of the ministry are urged with great distinct- 
 ness, no appeal is ever made to priestly sanctity as the ground 
 
 ^ The sacerdotal language in the well be placed earlier than Cyprian. 
 
 Apostolical Constitution* is hardly less ' See Oalatianc p. 319. 
 
 strong, while it ia more systematic; ' Buben 6, Symeon j, Levi 18. 
 
 but their date is uncertain and cannot * Levi 8. 
 
 17 — 2 
 
26o THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY 
 
 of this exalted estimate". Indeed the hold of the Levitical priest- 
 hood on the mind of the pious Jew must have been materially 
 weakened at the Christian era by the development of the synagogue 
 organization on the one hand, and by the ever growing influence 
 of the learned and literary classes, the scribes and rabbis, on the 
 other. The points on which the Judaizers of the apostolic age 
 insist are the rite of circumcision, the distinction of meats, the 
 observance of sabbaths, and the like. The necessity of a priest- 
 hood was not, or at least is not known to have been, part of their 
 programme. Among the Essene Jews especially, who went so far 
 as to repudiate the temple sacrifices, no great importance could 
 have been attached to the Aaronic priesthood': and after the 
 Apostolic ages at all events, the most active Judaizers of the Dis- 
 persion seem to have belonged to the Essene type. But indeed 
 the overwhelming argument against ascribing the growth of sacer- 
 dotal views to Jewish influence lies in the fact, that there is a 
 singular absence of distinct sacerdotalism during the flrst century 
 and a half, when alone on any showing Judaism was powerful 
 enough to impress itself on the belief of the Church at large. 
 Sacerdo- I* i^ therefore to Gentile feeling that this development must 
 
 taUsm was jjg ascribed. For the heathen, familiar with auguries, lustrations. 
 Gentile in- sacrifices, and depending on the intervention of some priest for 
 uenoes, ^^jj ^j^^ manifold religious rites of the state, the club, and the 
 famUy, the sacerdotal functions must have occupied a far larger 
 space in the afiairs of every day life, than for the Jew of the 
 Dispersion who of necessity dispensed and had no scruple at dis- 
 pensing with priestly ministrations from one year's end to the 
 other. With this presumption drawn from probability the evidence 
 of fact accords. In Latin Christendom, as represented by the 
 Church of Carthage, the germs of the sacerdotal idea appear first 
 and soonest ripen to maturity. If we could satisfy ourselves of 
 the early date of the Ancient Syriac Documents lately published, 
 we should have discovered another centre from which this idea 
 
 > See the next note. good, the false to the true, like Cain to 
 
 ' See Galatiana pp. 323, 316, Colot- Abel, Ishmael to Isaac, etc. In the 
 
 lians pp. 89, 371. In the syzygies of Beoognitions the estimate of the high- 
 
 tlie Olementine Homilies (ii. 16, 33) priest's position is still nnfavooiahle 
 
 Aui'on is opposed to Moses, the high- (i. 46, 48). Oompare the statement 
 
 priest to the lawgiver, as the bad to the in Justin, Dial. e. Tryph. 117. 
 
THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 261 
 
 was propagated. And so far their testimony may perhaps be 
 accepted. Syria was at least a soil where snch a plant would 
 thrive and luxuriate. In no country of the civilized world was 
 sacerdotal authority among the heathen greater. The most im- 
 portant centres of Syrian Christianity, Antioch and £mesa, were 
 also the cradles of strongly-marked sacerdotal religions which at 
 different times made their influence felt throughout the Eoman 
 empire*. This being so, it is a significant fact that the first instance 
 of the term 'priest', applied to a Christian minister, occurs in a 
 heathen writer. At least I have not found any example of this 
 application earlier than Lucian*. 
 
 But though the spirit, which imported the idea into the Church but sought 
 of Christ and sustained it there, was chiefly due to Gentile education, old Testa- 
 yet its form was almost as certainly derived from the Old Testament. J"®?' ^*" 
 •' _ ' logies. 
 
 And this is the modification which needs to be made in the state- 
 ment, in itself substantially true, that sacerdotalism must be traced 
 to the influence of Heathen rather than of Jewish converts. 
 
 In the Apostolic writings we find the terms ' offering ', ' sacrifice ', (i) Meta- 
 applied to certain conditions and actions of the Christian life. < saori- 
 These sacrifices or offerings are described as spiritual'; they fioos.' 
 consist of praise*, of faith', of almsgiving', of the devotion of the 
 body', of the convei-sion of unbelievers', and the like. Thus whatever 
 is dedicated to God's service may be included under this metaphor. 
 In one passage also the image is so far extended, that the Apostolic 
 writer speaks of an altar' pertaining to the spiritual service of the 
 Christian Church. If on this noble Scriptural language a false super- 
 structure has been reared, we have here only one instance out of 
 many, where the truth has been impaired by transferring state- 
 ments from the region of metaphor to the region of fact. 
 
 These 'sacrifices' were very frequently the acts not of the 
 
 ' The worship of the Syrian goddess " i Pet. ii. 5. 
 of Antiooh was among the most popn- * Heh. xiii. 15. 
 
 lar of oriental superstitions under the ' Phil. ii. 17. 
 
 earlier Cmsars; the rites of the Sun- * Acts xxiv. 17, Phil. iv. 18; comp. 
 
 pod of Emesa became fashionable un- Heb. xiii. 16. 
 der Elagabalus. ' Eom. xii. i. 
 
 2 de Mart. Peregr. 11 Tr/c BavnaaTTp ' Eom. xv. 16. 
 
 <ro(t>lay tS>v TipuiTiavSiv i^i/iaOe wepl t^v ' Heb. xiii. 10. See below p. 265, 
 
 HaXanrrfci;!' rott lepeOat Kal ypaii/iarfO- note 2, 
 sa> ainun) ivyyci'inei'os. 
 
262 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 
 
 individual Christian, but of the whole congregation. Such for 
 instance were the offerings of pubUc prayer and thanksgiving, or the 
 collection of alms on the first day of the week, or the contribution 
 Offerings of food for the agape, and the like. In such cases the congregation 
 bv^the was represented by its minister, who thus acted as its mouthpiece 
 ministers, and was said to ' present the offerings ' to God. So the expression 
 is used in the Epistle of St Clement of Home'. But in itself it 
 involves no sacerdotal view. This ancient father regards the sacri- 
 fice or offering as the act of the whole Church performed through 
 its presbyters. The minister is a priest in the same sense only 
 in which each individual member of the congregation is a priest. 
 When St Clement denounces those who usurp the functions of the 
 presbyters, he reprobates their conduct not as an act of sacrilege 
 but as a violation of order. He views the presbytery as an Apostolic 
 ordinance, not as a sacerdotal caste. 
 
 Thus when this father speaks of the presbytery as 'presenting 
 the offerings,' he uses an expression which, if not directly scriptural, 
 is at least accordant with the tenour of Scripture. But from such 
 language the transition to sacerdotal views was easy, where the 
 sacerdotal spirit was rife. From being the act of the whole con- 
 gregation, the sacrifice came to be regarded as the act of the minister 
 who officiated on its behalf. 
 Special And this transition was moreover facilitated by the growing 
 
 of th^°*'* tendency to apply the terms ' sacrifice ' and ' offering ' exclusively or 
 taphor to chiefly to the eucharistic service. It may be doubted whether, even as 
 rigt. " used by St Clement, the expression may not have a special reference 
 to this chief act of Christian dedication'. It is quite certain that 
 
 ' Clem. Bom. 44 rois aiUnirrui koX especially Heb. riii. 10, 15, 16, (xoikv 
 
 iffiots irpoaeveyKdm-ai tA 5(Spa. "What 6vffia(Tji}piov i^ oiT ipayetv oix ix^^'^*-^ 
 
 sort of offerings are meant, may be [iiowlav] 0! tj o-xijvp XaTpeiJovTcs...Ai' 
 
 gathered from other passages in Cle- airov ovv di'a(p(pufia> dvalcw alviaem 
 
 ment's Epistle ; e.g.%a Bvala alviaiwi Si4 xan-os ti? BeJ, TovriciTiv, Kafmov 
 
 boiaff£L fiCf § 5-2 Bvtrov t^ Gey Svuidv x^iX^wj/ ofioKoyoivTwv t(J/ oy^/iart a&rov' 
 
 abiiatas Kal d7r65os rlf i^lcTif ris eix"'' '^' 5i ci>7raaa; xaX Kowwulat ;«) ivCKaii- 
 
 ffov, § 36 evpo/uv ri ai^T-fipiov iifiHv $ai>ca6e, toioutois yiXp Oiivtun eiapea- 
 
 ^iTjtrovv XptffT6tf rdv ipxt^pio. rwv irpoff- Teirat 6 Geds. 
 
 tjiopdv -qiiCiv rhv vpoaraTiiv Kal PorjS&v The doctrine of the early Clmroh re- 
 
 T^s iaBevelas TJfujv, and § 41 haffros specting • sacrifice ' is investigated by 
 
 i/i&v, i5e\4)ol, iv tJ lUif T07/10T1 eixo^ Hoiling die Lehre der dlteiten Kirche 
 
 ptartlrw r!f Qeif iv &ya6^ aweiS'^jfi vom Opfer (Erlangen 1851). 
 
 ivdpxw, liii irapeK^alviitv rbv iipur/iivov ' On the whole however the language 
 
 njf \«ir<ity)7^os airov Kaydfa. Compare of the Epistle to the Hebrews quoted 
 
THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 263 
 
 writers belonging to the generations next foUo'wing, Justin Martyr 
 and Irenseus for instance", employ the terms very frequently with 
 this reference. We may here reserve the question in what sense the 
 celebration of the Lord's supper may or may not be truly called a 
 sacrifice. The point to be noticed at present is thisj that the of- 
 fering of the eucharist, being regarded as the one special act of 
 sacrifice and appearing externally to the eye as the act of the offi- 
 ciating minister, might well lead to the minister being called a priest 
 and then being thought a priest in some exclusive sense, where the 
 religious bias was in this direction and as soon as the true position 
 of the minister as the representative of the congregation was lost 
 sight of. 
 
 But besides the metaphor or the analogy of the sacrifice, there h) Ana- 
 was another point of resemblance also between the Jewish priesthood the three 
 
 and the Christian ministry, which favoured the sacerdotal view of 9J"^"^ *^.^ 
 '' ' the LeTiti- 
 
 the latter. As soon as the episcopate and presbytery ceased to be cal urieat- 
 regarded as sub-orders and were looked upon as distinct orders, the 
 correspondence of the threefold ministry with the three ranks of the 
 Levitical priesthood could not fail to suggest itself. The solitary 
 bishop represented the solitary high-priest; the principal acts of 
 Christian sacrifice were performed by the presbyters, as the principal 
 acts of Jewish sacrifice by the priests; and the attendant ministra- 
 tions were assigned in the one case to the dea«on, as in the other to 
 the Levite. Thus the analogy seemed complete. To this corre- 
 spondence however there was one grave impediment. The only 
 
 in the last note Beems to be the best Kapirois i/uiv xal ri, Ipya ruv xcipCiD 
 
 exponent of St Clement's meaning, as vix&v els eiXoytav v/iuv irpotnfiipovTts 
 
 he very frequently follows this Apos- airr^ (se. t^j iTurK6trif)...Th Supa v/iuii 
 
 tolio writer. If etxapuTTelra has any BiddiTes airtfi cis lepet 6eou, § 53 Supov Si 
 
 special reference to the holy encharist, iari &e(^ i} ixiffTov irpoaevx^ Kal eirxp.- 
 
 as it may have, tCipa will nevertheless purrla: comp. also § 35. These passages 
 
 be the ahns and prayers and thanks- are quoted in Hofling, p. 27 sq. 
 givings which acoompanied the oele- ' The chief passages in these fa- 
 
 bration of it. Compare Const. Apost. thers relating to Christian oblations 
 
 ii. 25 at Tore Bvirlai vSv eixal naX 5c^i)-«s are, Justin. Apol. i. 13 (p. 60), i. 65, 
 
 KoX cix"/""'''''"' "' ■'■"'■* Arapxti Kal 66, 6'j (p. 97 sq.), Dial. 2S, 29 (p. 246), 
 
 SexoTot Kal oipaipipiaTa Kal Supa vvv 41 (p. 259 sq.), 116, 117 (p. 344 sq.), 
 
 rpoff^iopal oi Sti, Tuv oaluv iirtffKo- Ireu. Har. iv. oe. 17, 18, 19, v. a. 3, 
 
 iruv vpo<ripep6i),evai Kvptif k.t.\.,%ij [Vragm. 38, Stieren]. The plaoe ocou- 
 
 irpoir^Ka ovv koX viias, dSeXipol, ris Svirtas pied by the eucharistio elements in their 
 
 viiuy 1^01 irpoa^opis Tif iirurKoirif Trpoa- view of saerifioe will only be appreciated 
 
 iptpeiv i)i Apx"P^ K.T.\; S 34 Tois by reading the passages continuously. 
 
264 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 
 
 High Priest under the Gospel recognised by the apostolic writings, 
 is our Lord Himself. Accordingly in the Christian remains of the 
 ages next succeeding this title is reserved as by right to Him ' ; and 
 though belonging to various schools, all writers alike abstain from 
 applying it to the bishop. Yet the scruple was at length set aside. 
 When it had become usual to speak of the presbyters as ' sacerdotes', 
 the designation of 'pontifex' or 'summus sacerdos' for the bishop 
 was far too convenient and too appropriate to be neglected. 
 
 Thus the analogy of the sacrifices and the correspondence of the 
 threefold order supplied the material on which the sacerdotal feeling 
 worked. And in this way, by the union of Gentile sentiment with 
 the ordinances of the Old Dispensation, the doctrine of an exclu- 
 sive priesthood found its way into the Church of Christ. 
 
 Question How far is the language of the later Church justifiable? Can 
 
 ^ ' the Christian ministry be called a priesthood in any sense 1 and 
 if so, in what sense? The historical investigation, which has 
 suggested this question as its proper corollary, has also supplied the 
 means of answering it. 
 Silence of Though different interpretations may be put upon the fact that 
 stolio wri- *^® sacred writers throughout refrain from applying sacerdotal terms 
 ters. to the Christian ministry, I think it must be taken to signify this 
 
 much at least, that this ministry, if a priesthood at all, is a priest- 
 hood of a type essentially different from the Jewish. Otherwise we 
 shall be perplexed to explain why the earliest Christian teachers 
 should have abstained from using those terms which alone would 
 adequately express to their hearers the one most important aspect 
 of the ministerial ofiSce. It is often said in reply, that we have here 
 a question not of words, but of things. This is undeniable : but 
 words express things ; and the silence of the Apostles still requires 
 an explanation. 
 Epistle to However the interpretation of this fact is not far to seek. The 
 brews-" Epistle to the Hebrews speaks at great length on priests and sacri- 
 fices in their Jewish and their Christian bearing. It is plain from 
 this epistle, as it may be gathered also from other notices Jewish 
 
 » See OleiH. Eom. 36, 58, Polyo. Pair. Bub. 6, Sym. 7, etc., Cltm. 
 Phil. 12, Ignat. Philad. 9, Test, xii Recogn. L 48. 
 
THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 
 
 265 
 
 and Heathen, that the one prominent idea of the priestly office at 
 this time was the function of offermg sacrifice and thereby making 
 atonement. Now this Apostolic writer teaches that all sacrifices 
 had been consummated in the one Sacrifice, all priesthoods absorbed 
 in the one Priest. The offering had been made once for all : and, 
 as there were no more victims, there could be no more priests'. All 
 former priesthoods had borne witness to the necessity of a human 
 mediator, and this sentiment had its satisfaction in the Person and 
 Office of the Son of Man. All past sacrifices had proclaimed the 
 need of an atoning death, and had their antitype, their realisation, 
 their annulment, in the Cross of Christ This explicit statement 
 supplements and interprets the silence elsewhere noticed in the 
 Apostolic writings. 
 
 Strictly accordant too with the general tenour of his argument 
 is the language used throughout by the writer of this epistle. He 
 speaks of Christian sacrifices, of a Christian altar ; but the sacrifices 
 are praise and thanksgiving and well-doing, the altar is appa- 
 rently the Cross of Christ'. If the Christian ministry were a 
 
 its doctri- 
 nal teach- 
 ing, 
 
 and spiri- 
 tual analo 
 
 gies. 
 
 1 The epistle deals mainly with the 
 office of Christ as the antitype of the 
 High Priest ofEering the annual sacri- 
 fice of atonement: and it has been 
 oiged that there is still room for a 
 saorifioial priesthood under the High 
 Priest. The whole argument however 
 is equally applicable to the inferior 
 priests : and in one passage at least it 
 is directly so applied (x. 11, 12), ' And 
 every priest standeth daily (kuS' iindpav) 
 ministering and offering the same sacri- 
 fices, etc.'; where the v.l. dpxitpcis ioi 
 Upeii seems to have arisen from the 
 desire to bring the verse into more exact 
 conformity with what has gone before. 
 This passage, it should be remembered, 
 is the summing up and generalisation 
 of the previous argument. 
 
 » It is surprising that some should 
 have interpreted Suciaar'^piov in Heb. 
 xiii. lo of the Lord's table. There 
 maybe a doubt as to the exact signifi- 
 cance of the term in this passage, but 
 an actual altar is plainly not intended. 
 This is shown by the context both be- 
 fore and after : e. g. ver. 9 the opposi- 
 tion of x'^P'^ "■^^ Ppiinara, ver. 13 the 
 
 contrast implied in the mention of 
 0vala alrtaeat and xapuros xeA^UK, and 
 ver. 16 the naming edvoita koI Kowiavia 
 aa the kind of sacrifice with which God 
 is well pleased. In my former editions 
 I interpreted the dvaiaaTTipiov of the 
 congregation assembled for worship, 
 having been led to this interpretation 
 by the Christian phraseology of suc- 
 ceeding ages. So Clem. Alex. Strom. 
 vii. 6, p. 848, iari yovv to trap ijfjup 
 BvffiaffTTipiov ivTav0a to iTriyeiov to a- 
 BpouTfia Tuv TOiS e^ah SLvaKei/iivuy. 
 The use of the word in Ignatius also, 
 though less obvious, appears to be sub- 
 stantially the same, Ephes. 5, Trail. 
 7, Philad. 4 (but in Magn. 7 it seems 
 to be a metaphor for our Lord EUm- 
 self) ; see Hofiing Opfer etc. p. 31 sq. 
 Siniilarly too Polycarp (§ 4) speaks 
 of the body of widows as Bvaiaar^ptov 
 OeoS. But I have since been con- 
 vinced that the context points to tlie 
 Cross of Christ spiritually regarded, 
 as the true interpretation. 
 
 [Since my first edition appeared, a 
 wholly difierent interpretation of the 
 passage has been advocated by more 
 
266 
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 
 
 sacerdotal office, if the holy eucharist ■were a sacerdotal act, in 
 the same sense in which the Jewish priesthood and the Jewish 
 sacrifice were sacerdotal, then his argument is faulty and his language 
 misleading. Though dwelling at great length on the Christian coun- 
 terparts to the Jewish priest, the Jewish altar, the Jewish sacri- 
 fice, he omits to mention the one office, the one place, the one act, 
 which on this showing would be their truest and liveliest coun- 
 terparts in the every-day worship of the Church of Christ. He has 
 rejected these, and he has chosen instead moral and spiritual analo- 
 gies for all these sacred types'. Thus in what he has said and 
 in what he has left unsaid alike, his language points to one and 
 the same result. 
 
 If therefore the sacerdotal office be understood to imply the 
 offering of sacrifices, then the Epistle to the Hebrews leaves no place 
 
 in another for a Christian priesthood. If on the other hand the word be taken 
 sense; 
 
 in a wider and looser acceptation, it cannot well be withheld from the 
 
 ministry of the Church of Christ. Only in this case the meaning 
 
 of the term should be clearly apprehended : and it might have been 
 
 Christian 
 ministers 
 are priests 
 
 than one writer. It is maintained 
 that JxoMf dv<rLa<rTijpiov should be 
 understood ' we Jews have an altar,' 
 and that the writer of the epistle is 
 here bringing an example from the 
 Old Dispensation itself (the sin-offering 
 on the day of atonement) in which the 
 sacrifices were not eaten. This inter- 
 pretation is attractive, but it seems to 
 me inadequate to explain the whole 
 context (though it suits parts well 
 enough), and is ill adapted to indi- 
 vidual expressions (e.g. Bvffia(rTripio^ 
 where Bvala would be expected, and 
 ol TH aKi/v^ Xarpei/ovTes which thus 
 becomes needlessly emphatic), not to 
 mention that the first person plural 
 and the present tense ^xo/tex seem 
 unnatural where the author and his 
 readers are spoken of, not as actual 
 Christians, but as former Jews. In 
 fact the analogy of the sacrifice on 
 the day of atonement appears not to 
 be introduced till the next verse, uv 
 yap flfffpipsrai j^uuiv k.t.X.] 
 
 Some interpreters again, from a com- 
 parison of I Cor. ix. 13 with i Cor. x. 
 18, have inferred that St Paul recog- 
 
 nises the designation of the Lord's 
 table as an altar. On the contrary it 
 is a speaking fact, that in both pas- 
 sages he avoids using this term of the 
 Lord's table, though the language of 
 the context might readily have sug- 
 gested it to him, if he had considered 
 it appropriate. Nor does the argu- 
 ment in either case require or en- 
 courage such an inference. In i Cor. 
 ix. 13, 14, the Apostle writes 'Know 
 ye not that they which wait at the 
 altar are partakers with the altar? 
 Even so hath the Lord ordained that 
 they which preach the gospel should 
 live of the gospel' The point of resem- 
 blance in the two cases is the holding 
 a sacred office ; but the ministering on 
 the altar is predicated oijy of the 
 former. So also in i Cor. x. i8 sq., 
 the altar is named as common to Jews 
 and Heathens, but the table only as 
 common to Christians and Heathens ; 
 i.e. the holy euoharist is a banquet 
 but it is not a sacrifice (in the Jewish 
 or Heathen sense of sacrifice). 
 
 ' For the passages see above, pp. 
 261, 162. 
 
THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 267 
 
 better if the later Christian vocabulary had conformed to the silence 
 of the Apostolic writers, so that the possibility of confusion would 
 have been avoided. 
 
 According to this broader meaning, the priest may be defined as 
 one who represents God to man and man to God. It is moreover 
 indispensable that he should be called by God, for no man ' taketh 
 this honour to himself The Christian ministry satisfies both these 
 conditions. 
 
 Of the fulfilment of the latter the only evidence within our cog- as having 
 aisance is the fact that the minister is called according to a divinely * '"'?°® 
 appointed order. If the preceding investigation be substantially ment, 
 correct, the three-fold ministry can be traced to Apostolic direction ; 
 and short of an express statement we can possess no better assurance 
 of a Divine appointment or at least a Divine sanction. If the facts 
 do not allow us to unchurch other Christian commimities difierently 
 organized, they may at least justify our jealous adhesion to a polity 
 derived from this source. 
 
 And while the mode of appointment satisfies the one condition, 
 the nature of the office itself satisfies the other ; for it exhibits the 
 doubly representative character which is there laid down. 
 
 The Christian minister is God's ambassador to men : he is charged as repre- 
 with the ministry of reconciliation ; he unfolds the will of heaven ; g^J'f ^ 
 he declares ia God's name the terms on which pardon is ofieredj man, 
 and he pronounces in God's name the absolution of the penitent. 
 This last mentioned function has been thought to invest the ministry 
 with a distinctly sacerdotal character. Yet it is very closely con- 
 nected with the magisterial and pastoral duties of the office, and is 
 only priestly in the same sense in which they are piiestly. As 
 empowered to declare the conditions of God's grace, he is empowered 
 also to proclaim the consequences of their acceptance. But through- 
 out his office is representative and not vicaiial'. He does not inter- 
 j^ose between Gtod and man in such a way that direct communion 
 with God is superseded on the one hand, or that his own mediation 
 becomes indispensable on the other. 
 
 Again the Christian minister is the representative of man to ^^^a ^^ ,„ 
 
 God — of the congregation primarily, of the individual indirectly as presenting 
 
 man to 
 
 1 The distinotion is made in Mavirioe's Kingdom of Christ 11. p. 716, 
 
268 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 
 
 a member of the congregation. The alms, the prayers, the thanks- 
 givings of the community are offered through him. Some represen- 
 tation is as necessary in the Church as it is in a popular govern- 
 ment: and the nature of the representation is not affected by the 
 fact that the form of the ministry has been handed down from 
 Apostolic times and may well be presumed to have a Divine sanction. 
 For here again it must be borne in mind that the minister's function 
 is representative without being vicarial. He is a priest, as the 
 mouthpiece, the delegate, of a priestly race. His acts are not his 
 own, but the acts of the congregation. Hence too it will follow that, 
 viewed on this side as on the other, his function cannot be absolute 
 and indispensable. It may be a general rule, it may be under 
 ordinary circumstances a practically universal law, that the highest 
 acts of congi-egational worship shall be performed through the 
 principal officers of the congregation. But an emergency may arise 
 when the spirit and not the letter must decide. The Christian ideal 
 will then interpose and interpret our duty. The higher ordinance 
 of the universal priesthood will overrule all special limitations. The 
 lajrman will assiune functions which are otherwise restricted to the 
 ordained minister*. 
 The preva- Yet it would be vain to deny that a very different conception 
 s^erdotal Prevailed for many centuries in the Church of Christ. The Apo- 
 iwn oon- stolic ideal was set forth, and within a few generations forgotten. 
 The vision was only for a time and then vanished. A strictly 
 sacerdotal view of the ministry superseded the broader and more 
 spiritual conception of their priestly functions. From being the 
 representatives, the ambassadors, of God, they came to be regarded 
 His vicars. Nor is this the only instance where a false conception 
 has seemed to maintain a long-lived domination over the Church. 
 For some centuries the idea of the Holy Roman Empire enthralled 
 the minds of men. For a still longer period the idea of the Holy 
 Roman See held undisturbed sway over Western Chiistendom. To 
 those who take a comprehensive view of the progress of Christianity, 
 even these more lasting obscurations of the truth will present no 
 serious difficulty. They wUl not suffer themselves to be blinded 
 
 ' For the opinion of the early Church passage of Tertullian quoted above, 
 on this Bnbjeot see especially tho p. 156. 
 
THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 269 
 
 thereby to the true nobility of Ecclesiastical History : they will not 
 fail to see that, even in the seasons of her deepest degradation, the 
 Church was stUl the regenerator of society, the upholder of right 
 principle against selfish interest, the visible witness of the Invisible 
 God; they will thankfully confess that, notwithstanding the pride 
 and selfishness and dishonour of individual rulers, notwithstanding 
 the imperfections and en-ors of special institutions and develop- 
 ments, yet in her continuous history the Divine promise has been 
 signally realised, 'Lo I am with you always, even imto the end of 
 the world.' 
 
ST PAUL AND SENECA. 
 
 Seneoatra- mHE earliest of the Latin fathers, Tertullian, -writing about a 
 
 ditionaJly I 
 
 aooounted -"- century and a half after the death of Seneca, speaks of this 
 
 tian '^' pliilosopher as 'often our own'.' Some two hundred years later 
 St Jerome, having occasion to quote him, omits the qualifying ad- 
 verb and calls him broadly ' our own Seneca'.' Living midway 
 between these two writers, Lactantius points out several coincidences 
 with the teaching of the Gospel in the writings of Seneca, whom 
 nevertheless he styles 'the most determiaed of the Koman Stoics'.' 
 From the age of St Jerome, Seneca was commonly regarded as 
 standing on the very threshold of the Christian Church, even if he 
 had not actually passed within its portals. In one Ecclesiastical 
 Council at least, held at Tours in the year 567, his authority is 
 quoted with a deference generally accorded only to fathers of the 
 Church*. And even to the present day in the marionette plays of his 
 native Spain St Seneca takes his place by the side of St Peter and 
 St Paul in the representations of our Lord's passion*. 
 
 Comparing the language of Tertullian and Jerome, we are able 
 to measure the growth of this idea in the interval of time which 
 separates the two. One important impulse however, which it re- 
 ceived meanwhile, must not be overlooked. When St Jerome wrote, 
 
 1 TertuU. de Anim. 10 'Seueoa Boepe fuit' : oomp. ii. 9, vi. 14, etc. 
 
 noster.' * Labbaji Concilia v. p. 856 (Paris, 
 
 * Adv. <A)vtn. i. 49 (11. p. 3i8)'Scrip- 167 1) 'Siout ait Seneca pessimnm in eo 
 
 Berunt Aristoteles et Plntarohus et nos- yitivuu esse qui in id quo insanit caste- 
 
 tor Seneca de matrimonio libros etc.* rog pntat furere.' See FleTiry Saint 
 
 ' Div. Inst. i. j ■ Annans Seneca Paul et SSnique i. ■p. n. 
 
 qui ex Eomanis vel acerrimuB Stoious ' So Fleury statea, i. p. 189. 
 
ST PAUL AND SBNBCA. 271 
 
 the Christianity of Seneca seemed to be established on a sounder TheforgBd 
 basis than mere critical inference. A correspondence, purporting to denoe of 
 
 have passed between the heathen philosopher and the Apostle of the ^^'^ '"^'^ 
 n ,.■, , . r r r Seneca. 
 
 Orentiles, was then in general circulation; and, without either affirm- 
 ing or denying its genuineness, this father was thereby induced to 
 give a place to Seneca in hia catalogue of Christian writers'. If the 
 letters of Paul and Seneca, which have come down to us, are the 
 same with those read by him (and there is no sufficient reason for 
 doubting the identity"), it is strange that he could for a moment 
 have entertained the question of their authenticity. The poverty of 
 thought and style, the errors in chronology and history, and the 
 whole conception of the relative positions of the Stoic philosopher 
 and the Christian Apostle, betray clearly the hand of a forger. Yet 
 this correspondence has without doubt been mainly instrumental 
 in fixing the belief on the mind of the later Church, as it was even 
 sufficient to induce some hesitation in St Jerome himself. How far 
 the known history and the extant writings of either favour this idea, 
 it will be the object of the present essay to examine. The enquiry 
 into the historical connexion between these two great contemporaries 
 will naturally expand into an investigation of the relations, whether 
 of coincidence or of contrast, between the systems of which they were 
 the respective exponents. And, as Stoicism was the only philosophy 
 which could even pretend to rival Christianity in the earlier ages of 
 the Church, such an investigation ought not to be uninstructive*. 
 
 Like all the later systems of Greek philosophy. Stoicism was the Later phi- 
 ofispring of despair. Of despair in religion : for the old mythologies lv°°^c'-\*'' 
 had ceased to command the belief or influence the conduct of men. dren of 
 Of despair in politics : for the Macedonian conquest had broken the 
 independence of the Hellenic states and stamped out the last sparks 
 of corporate life. Of despair even in philosophy itself : for the older 
 
 ' Fir. IHiMtr.u' Quern nonponerem earKer and contemporary Bystems of 
 
 in catalogo sanctorum, nisi me Ulse epi- philosopliy, I am greatly indebted to 
 
 stolsB provooarent quae leguutur a pluri- the account in Zeller's PhilosopMe der 
 
 mis, Pauli ad Senecam et Seneeas ad Griechen Th. iii. Abth. i Die nach- 
 
 Paulum.' aristotelische PhilosopMe (2nd ed.1865), 
 
 ^ 'See the note at the end of this dis- which it is impossible to piaise too 
 
 sertation. highly. See also the instructive essay of 
 
 » In the sketch, -which I have given, Sir A. Grant on 'The Ancient Stoics' 
 
 of the relation of Stoicism to the cir- in his edition of Aristotle's Ethics i. 
 
 cumstauces of the time and to other p. 243 sq. (2nd ed.). 
 
273 ST PAUL AND SBNBOA. 
 
 thinkers, though they devoted their lives to forging a golden chain 
 which should link earth to heaven, appeared now to have spent their 
 strength in weaving ropes of sand. The sublime intuitions of Plato 
 had been found too vague and unsubstantial, and the subtle analyses 
 of Aristotle too hard and cold, to satisfy the natural craving of man 
 for some guidance which should teach him how to live and to die. 
 Greece Thus the soil of Greece had been prepared by the uprootal of 
 
 hir new P'^^^ interests and associations for fresh developments of religious and 
 aystemB of philosophic thought. When political life became impossible, the 
 phy. moral faculties of man were turned inward upon himself and concen- 
 
 trated on the discipline of the individual souL When speculation 
 had been cast aside as barren and unprofitable, the search was di- 
 rected towards some practical rule or rules which might take its 
 place. When the gods of Hellas had been deposed and dishonoured, 
 some new powers must be created or discovered to occupy their 
 vacant throne. 
 Coinoi- Stimulated by the same need, Epicurus and Zeno strove in dif- 
 
 oontiaBts ferent ways to solve the problem which the perplexities of their age 
 of the Epi- presented. Both alike, avoiding philosophy in the proper sense of 
 Stoio phi- the term, concentrated their energies on ethics : but the one took 
 osop es. ijappiaess, the other virtue, as his supreme good, and made it the 
 starting point of his ethical teaching. Both alike contrasted with 
 the older masters in building their systems on the needs of the indi- 
 vidual and not of the state : but the one strove to satisfy the cravings 
 of man, as a being intended by nature for social life, by laying stress 
 on the claims and privileges of friendship, the other by expanding 
 his sphere of duty and representing him as a citizen of the world or 
 even of the universe. Both alike paid a certain respect to the waning 
 beliefs of their day : but the one without denying the existence 
 of the gods banished them from all concern in the affairs of men, 
 while the other, transforming and utilising the creations of Hellenic 
 mythology, identified them with the powers of the physical world. 
 Both alike took conformity to nature as their guiding maxim : but 
 nature with the one was interpreted to mean the equable balance of 
 all the impulses and faculties of man, with the other the absolute 
 supremacy of the reason, as the ruling principle of his being. And 
 lastly ; both alike sought refuge from the turmoil and confusion of 
 the age in the inwai-d calm and composure of the soul. If Serenity 
 
ST PAUL AND SENECA. 273 
 
 (arapaiia) was the supreme virtue of the one, her tvdn sister Passion- 
 lessness (diraOta) was the sovereign principle of the other. 
 
 These two later developments of Greek philosophy both took root Oriental 
 a,nd grew to maturity in Greek soil. But, while the seed of the one "'J?"^^ °' 
 was strictly Hellenic, the other was derived from an Oriental stock. 
 Epicurus was a Greek of the Greeks, a child of Athenian parents. 
 Zeno on the other hand, a native of Citium, a Phcenician colony in 
 Crete, was probably of Shemitio race, for he is commonly styled ' the 
 Phoenician'.' Babylon, Tjrre, Sidon, Carthage, reared some of his 
 most illustrious successors. Cilicia, Phrygia, Rhodes, were the homes 
 of others. Not a single Stoic of any name was a native of Greece 
 proper'. 
 
 To Eastern aflBnities Stoicism was without doubt largely in- ug moral 
 
 debted for the features which distinguished it from other schools of earnest- 
 
 ° _ _ nesB de- 
 
 Greek philosophy. To this fact may be ascribed the intense moral rived 
 
 earnestness which was its most honourable characteristic. If the ^"*'*' 
 later philosophers generally, as distinguished from the earlier, busied 
 themselves with ethics rather than metaphysics, with the Stoics this 
 was the one absorbing passion. The contrast between the light 
 reckless gaiety of the Hellenic spirit and the stern, unbending, almost 
 fanatical moralism of the followers of Zeno is as complete as could 
 well be imagined. The ever active conscience which is the glory, 
 and the proud self-consciousness which is the reproach, of the Stoic 
 school are alike alien to the temper of ancient Greece. Stoicism 
 breathes rather the religious atmosphere of the East, which fostered 
 on the one hand the inspired devotion of a David or an Isaiah, and 
 on the other the self-mortification and self-righteousness of an Egyp- 
 tian therapeute or an Indian fakir. A recent writer, to whom we 
 are indebted for a highly appreciative account of the Stoic school, 
 describes this new phase of Greek philosophy, which we have been 
 reviewing and of which Stoicism was the truest exponent, as ' the 
 transition to Tnodernism'.' It might with greater truth be described aa 
 the contact of Oriental influences with the world of classical thought. 
 
 ' See Diog. Laert. yii. 3, where So again ii. 1 14 Zt^kuto t6i> iolviKa, 
 Crates addresscB him ri 0ei!7eis, (3 *ot- ' See below, pp. igg, 303. 
 
 riKlStov; comp. § 15 iolvurffav; § 25 ' Grant, I. c. p. 243. Sir A. Grant 
 
 <Poi.nKtKus;§ioeldirrdTpaioli'i(raa, Hs however fully recognises the eastern 
 
 i ip66vos. We are told also § 7 ayre- element in Stoicism (p. 246). 
 iroiodvTO 5* avTov Kal ol iv 2iSwL Kirieis. 
 
 PHIL. 18 
 
2/4 ST PAUL AND SBNBCA. 
 
 Union of Stoicism was in fact the earliest offiipring of the union between the 
 ""tlT'l* religious consciousness of the East and the intellectual culture of 
 Bioal the West. The recognition of the claims of the individual soul, the 
 
 ""^ ' sense of personal responsibility, the habit of judicial introspection, 
 in short the subjective view of ethics, were in no sense new, for 
 they are known to have held sway over the mind of the chosen peo- 
 ple from the earliest dawn of their history as a nation. But now 
 for the first time they presented themselves at the doors of Western 
 civilization and demanded admission. The occasion was eminently 
 favourable. The conquests of Alexander, which rendered the fusion 
 of the East and West for the first time possible, also evoked the 
 moral need which they had thus supplied the means of satisfying. 
 By the overthrow of the state the importance of the individual 
 was enhanced. In the failure of political relations, men were thrown 
 back on their inward resources and led to examine their moral wants 
 and to educate their moral faculties. 
 Exclusive It was in this way that the Eastern origin of Stoicism com- 
 to ettiio° biii6<i ynt}i the cii-cumstances and requirements of the age to give it 
 an exclusively ethical character. The Stoics did, it is true, pay 
 some little attention to physical questions : and one or two leading 
 representatives of the school also contributed towards the systematic 
 treatment of logic. But consciously and expressly they held these 
 branches of study to be valueless except in their bearing on moral 
 questions. Representing philosophy under the image of a field, they 
 compared physics to the trees, ethics to the fruit for which the trees 
 exist, and logic to the wall or fence which protects the enclosure'. 
 Or again, adopting another comparison, they likened logic to the 
 
 Praotioal shell of an egg, physics to the white, and ethics to the yolk'. As 
 
 Q6gxeot of , , 
 
 physios tlio fundamental maxim of Stoical ethics was conformity to nature, 
 
 and as therefore it was of signal importance to ascertain man's rela- 
 
 > Diog. Laert. vli. 40, Philo dt Phil. § 396. But this is a matter of 
 
 Agrie. 3, p. 301 m. See also de Mut. little moment; lor, whichever form of 
 
 Nom. § 10, p. 589 M, where Philo after the metaphor be adopted, the ethical 
 
 giving this comparison says outus ovu bearing of physios is put prominently 
 
 tipaitav KoX Iv ^tiKoaoplf Stty tiJi' t« ipv forward. Indeed as anoient naturalists 
 
 crwV Kol \<rfiKiiv irpay/iaTelay iirl t-^k were not agreed about the respective 
 
 rjeiKvy h>a<t>(pt<ieu k. t.\. fnnotions of the yolk and the white, the 
 
 « Sext. Emp. vii. 17. On the other application of the metaphor must have 
 
 hand Diog. Laert. I.e. makes ethics the been influenced by this uncertainty. The 
 
 white and physios the yolk. See ZeUer inferiority of logio appears in all the 
 
 I.e. p. 57, and Bitter and Preller Hiat. comparisons. 
 
ST PAUL AND SBNBOA. 2/5 
 
 tion i» the world around, it might have been supposed that the study 
 of physics would have made great progress in the hands of Zeno's 
 disciples. But, pursuing it for the most part without any love for the 
 study itself and pursuing it moreover only to support certain foregone 
 ethical conclusions, they instituted few independent researches and 
 discovered no hidden truths. To logic they assigned a stUl meaner 
 part. The place which it occupies in the images already mentioned and depre- 
 clearly points to their conception of its functions. It was not so logio. 
 much a means of arriving at truth, as an expedient for protecting 
 truth already attained from external assaults. An extreme repre- 
 sentative of the school went so far as to say that ' Of subjects of 
 philosophical investigation some pertain to us, some have no relation 
 to us, and some are beyond us : ethical questions belong to the fii-st 
 class ; dialectics to the second, for they contribute nothing towards 
 the amendment of life ; and physics to the third, for they are beyond 
 the reach of knowledge and are profitless withal'.' This was the 
 genuine spirit of the school', though other adherents were more 
 guarded in their statements. Physical science is conversant in ea^eri- 
 ment; logical science in argvmentation. But the Stoic was impa- 
 tient alike of the one and the other ; for he was essentially a philo- 
 sopher ottTUuitions. 
 
 And here again the Oriental spirit manifested itself. The Greek Prophetio 
 moralist was a reasoner : the Oriental for the most part, whether jS^gg^ool 
 inspired or uninspired, a prophet. Though they might clothe their 
 systems of morality in a dialectical garb, the Stoic teachers belonged 
 essentially to this latter class. Even Chrysippus, the great logician 
 and controversialist of the sect, is reported to have told his master 
 Cleanthes, that 'he only wanted the doctrines, and would himself 
 find out the proofs".' This saying has been condemned as ' betrayiug 
 a want of earnestness as to the truth"; but I can hardly think that it 
 ought to be regarded in this light. Flippant though it would appear 
 at first sight, it may well express the intense faith in intuition, or 
 what I have called the prophetic' spirit, which distinguishes the 
 
 1 Ariston in Diog. Laert. Tii. i6o, ' Diog. Laert. vii. 179 rroWdas (\eyt 
 
 Stob. Flor. Ixxz. 7. See Zeller 2. c. /Uv^s ttjs tiSv Soy/iiruv SiSairKoKtas xpi' 
 
 p. 50. fei» t4s S" iwoSei^eis avris evp'/jireiy. 
 
 " 'Quicqnid legeiia ad mores statim * Grant I.e. p. 253. 
 
 referas,' says Seneca Ep. Mor. Izxxiz. ' Perhaps the nse of this term needs 
 
 See the whole of the preceding epistle some apology; but I could not find 
 
 18—2 
 
276 ST PAUL AND SBNBOA. 
 
 school. Like the other Stoics, Chrysippus had no belief in argumen- 
 tation, but welcomed the highest truths as intuitively apprehended. 
 Logic was to him, as to them, only the egg-shell which protected the 
 germ of future life, the fence which guarded the fruitful garden. As 
 a useful weapon of defence against assailants and nothing more, it 
 was regarded by the most perfect master of the science which the 
 school produced. The doctrines did not derive their validity from 
 logical reasoning : they were absolute and self-contained. Once stated, 
 they must commend themselves to the innate faculty, when not 
 clouded by ignoble prejudices of education or degrading habits of Ufe. 
 Parallel to But though the germ of Stoicism was derived from the East, its 
 ity in the systematic development and its practical successes were attaiaed by 
 
 westward transplantation into a western soil. In this respect its career, as it 
 
 progresBoi "^ 
 
 Stoicism, travelled westward, presents a rough but instructive parallel to the 
 
 progress of the Christian Church. The fundamental ideas, derived 
 
 from Oriental parentage, were reduced to a system and placed on an 
 
 Influence intellectual basis by the instrumentality of Greek thought. The 
 
 of O'TGfiCfi ■._ 
 
 schools of Athens and of Tarsus did for Stoicism the same work 
 which was accomplished for the doctrines of the Gospel by the con- 
 troversial writings of the Greek fathers and the authoritative decrees 
 of the Greek councils. Zeno and Chrysippus and Pansetius are the 
 counterparts of an Origen, an Athanasius, or a Easil. But, while the 
 systematic expositions of the Stoic tenets were directly or indirectly 
 the products of Hellenic thought and were matured on Greek soil, 
 and of the scene of its greatest practical manifestations was elsewhere. It 
 must be allowed that the Roman representatives of the school were 
 very inadequate exponents of the Stoic philosophy regarded as a spe- 
 culative system : but just as Latin Christianity adopted from her 
 Greek sister the creeds which she herself was incapable of framing, 
 and built thereupon an edifice of moral influence and social organi- 
 zation far more stately and enduring, so also when naturalised in its 
 Latin home Stoicism became a motive power in the world, and ex- 
 hibited those practical results to which its renown is chiefly due. 
 This comparison is instituted between movements hai-dly comparable 
 
 a better. I meant to express by it tinct belief in a personal God, was not 
 
 the charaoteristio of enunciating moral a prophet in the ordinary sense, but 
 
 truths as authoritative, independently only as being the exponent of his own 
 
 of processes of reasoning. The Stoic, iimer consciousness, which was his su- 
 
 boing a pantheist and having no dis- preme authority. 
 
ST PAUL AND SENEGA. 
 
 277 
 
 in their character or their effects; and it necessarily stops short of 
 the incorporation of the Teutonic nations. But the distinctive feature 
 of Christianity as a Divine revelation and of the Church as a Divine 
 institution does not exempt them from the ordinary laws of pro- 
 gress : and the contrasts between the doctrines of the Porch and the 
 Gospel, to which I shall have to call attention later, are rendered 
 only the more instructive by observing this parallelism in their out- 
 ward career. 
 
 It is this latest or Roman period of Stoic philosophy which has Attention 
 chiefly attracted attention, not only because its practical influence ^^^^ '" 
 then became most manifest, but also because this stage of its history period, 
 alone is adequately illustrated by extant writingc of the school. On 
 the Christian student moreover it has a special claim; for he will 
 learn an instructive lesson in the conflicts or coincidences of Sto- 
 icism with the doctrines of the Gospel and the progress of the 
 Church. And of this stage in its history Seneca is without doubt 
 the most striking representative. 
 
 Seneca was strictly a contemporary of St Paul. Born probably Seneca 
 within a few years of each other, the Christian Apostle and the 
 Stoic philosopher both died about the same time and both fell vic- 
 tims of the same tyrant's rage. Here, it would have seemed, the 
 parallelism must end. One might indeed indulge in an interesting 
 speculation whether Seneca, like so many other Stoics, had not 
 Shemitio blood in his veins. The whole district from which he came 
 was thickly populated with Phoenician settlers either from the mo- 
 ther country or from her great African colony. The name of his 
 native province Bsetica, the name of his native city Corduba, are 
 both said to be Phoenician. Even his own name, though commonly 
 derived from the Latin, may perhaps have a Shemitic origin ; for it 
 is borne by a Jew of Palestine early in the second century'. This 
 however is thrown out merely as a conjecture. Otherwise the Stoic contrasted 
 philosopher from the extreme West and the Christian Apostle from p^'^, ^* 
 the extreme East of the E^man dominions would seem very imlikely 
 to present any features in common. The one a wealthy courtier and 
 statesman settled in the metropolis, the other a poor and homeless 
 
 1 The name Sewexas or Seyera! word is usually ooimected with ' senex.' 
 occurs in the list of the early bishops Curtius Griech. Etym. § 428. 
 of Jerusalem, Bnseb. H. E. iv. 5. The 
 
278 
 
 ST PAUL AND SEN BOA. 
 
 Coinoi- 
 denoes of 
 thought 
 and lan- 
 guage. 
 
 preacher -wandering in distant provinces, they were separated not 
 less by the manifold influences of daUj life than by the circum- 
 stances of their birth and early education. Yet the coincidences of 
 thought and even of language between the two are at first sight so 
 striking, that many wi-iters have been at a loss to account for them, 
 except on the supposition of personal intercourse, if not of direct 
 plagiarism'. The inference indeed appears unnecessary: but the facts 
 are remarkable enough to challenge investigation, and I propose 
 now to consider their bearing. 
 
 Though general resemblances of sentiment and teaching will 
 carry less weight, as compared with the more special coincidences of 
 language and illustration, yet the data would be incomplete without 
 taking the former into account'. Thus we might imagine ourselves 
 
 par le Ghristianitme (Paris 1853). The 
 oppoaite view is taken by C. Martha 
 Les Moraliites sous I'Bmpire Bomain 
 (i™ed. Paris 1866). Le StoicUme a 
 Borne, by P. Mont^e (Paris, 1865), is a 
 readable little book, but does not throw 
 any fresh light on the subject. Seeleers 
 after God, a popular and instructive 
 work by the Bev. F. W. Farrar, ap- 
 peared about the same time as my first 
 edition. Still later are the discussions 
 of G. Boissier La Religion Romaine u. 
 p. 52 sq. (Paris, 1874) and K. Franke 
 Stoicismus u. Christenthum (Breslau, 
 1876). The older literature of the sub- 
 ject will be found in Fleury i. p. i sq. 
 In reading through Seneca I have been 
 able to add some striking coincidences 
 to those collected by Fleury and others, 
 while at the same time I have rejected 
 a vast number as insufficient orillnsoiy. 
 ' No account is here taken of cer- 
 tain direct reproductions of Christian 
 teaching which somevmtershave found 
 in Seneca, Thus the doctrine of the 
 Trinity is supposed to be enunciated by 
 these words 'Quisquis f ormator universi 
 fuit, sive ille Dew est potens omnium, 
 sive inoorporalis ratio ingentium ope- 
 nmi artifei, sive divinus spiritus per 
 omnia maxima ac minima eeqnali in- 
 tentions difEusns.Bive fatnm et inmuta- 
 bUis oausarum inter se cohsrentinm 
 series' {ad Helv. matr. 8). Fleury (i. 
 p. 97), who holds this view, significantly 
 ends Ms quotation with ' diffosng,' owit- 
 
 ' The connection of St Paul and Se- 
 neca has been a favourite subject with 
 French writers. The most elaborate of 
 recent works is A. Fleury's Saint Paul 
 et Senique (Paris 1853), in which the 
 author attempts to show that Seneca 
 was a disciple of St Paul. It is inter- 
 esting and full of materials, but extra- 
 vagant and unsatisfacto:j. For more 
 critical is 0, Aubertin's Etude Critique 
 lur les rapports suppotis enire Senique et 
 Saint Paul (Paris 1857), which appears 
 intended as an answer to Fleniy. Au- 
 bertin shows that many of the parallels 
 are fallacious, and that many others 
 prove nothing, since the same senti- 
 ments occur in earlier writers. At the 
 same time he fails to account for other 
 more striking coincidences. It must be 
 added also that he is sometimes very 
 careless in his statements. For instance 
 (p. 186) he fixes an epoch by coupling 
 togetherthe names of Oelsus and Julian, 
 though they are separated by nearly 
 two centuries. Fleury's opinion is com- 
 bated Eilso in Baur's articles Seneca und 
 Paulus, republished in Drei Abhand- 
 lungen etc. p. 377 sq. (ed. Zeller, 1876). 
 Among other recent French works in 
 which Seneca's obligations to Christian, 
 ity are maintained, may be named those 
 of Troplong, De Vinfiuence du Chris- 
 tiaiUsme tur le droit civil dei Somains 
 p. 76 (Paris 1843), and 0. Schmidt 
 EttaihiitoriqueiurlasocUti civile dans 
 kmonde Bomain etsurta transformation 
 
ST PAUL AMD SEN EC A. 279 
 
 listening to a Christian divine, ■when we read in the pages of 
 Seneca that ' God made the world because He is good,' and that Goodness 
 ' as the good never grudges anything good. He therefore made every- 
 thing the best possible'.' Yet if we are tempted to draw a hasty 
 inference from this parallel, we are checked by remembering that it is 
 a quotation from Plato. Again Seneca maintains that ' in worshipping Belation 
 the gods, the first thing is to believe in the gods,' and that ' he who Qq?"" 
 has copied them has -worshipped them adequately"; and on this duty 
 of imitating the gods he insists frequently and emphatically*. But 
 here too his sentiment is common to Plato and many other of the 
 older philosophers. 'No man,' he says elsewhere, 'is good without 
 €rod*.' ' Between good men and the gods there exists a friendship — 
 a friendship do I say? nay, rather a relationship and a resemblance"; 
 and using still stronger language he speaks of men as the children of 
 God'. But here again he is treading in the footsteps of the older 
 Stoic teachers, and his very language is anticipated iu the words quoted 
 by St Paul from Cleanthes or Aratus, ' "We too His ofispring are'.' 
 
 From the recognition of God's fatherly relation to man im- Fatherly 
 poi-tant consequences flow. In almost Apostolic language Seneca ''"*™^*- 
 describes the trials and sufferings of good men as the chastisements God. 
 of a wise and beneficent parent : ' God has a fatherly mind towards 
 good men and loves them stoutly ; and, saith He, Let them be 
 harassed with toils, with pains, with losses, that they may gather 
 true strength'.' 'Those therefore whom God approves, whom He 
 
 ting the olanse ' sive fatum, etc' Thus singulis enim et Geuium et Juuonem 
 
 again some writers have found an allu- dederunt.' See Zeller p. 297 sq. 
 
 sion to the Christian sacraments in 1 Ep. Mor. Ixv. lo. 
 
 Seneca's language, 'Ad hoo sacramen- ' Ep. Mar. xcv. 50. 
 
 turn adactisumnsferremortalia,'de Fit. ' de Vit. heat. 15 'Habebit illud 
 
 heat. 15 (oomp. Ep. Mor. Izv). Such in auimo vetus praBCeptum: deum se- 
 
 critioisms are mere plays on words and quere'; de Benef.iv. «5 'Propositum 
 
 do not even deserve credit for ingenuity. est nobis seoundum rerum naturam vi- 
 
 On the other hand Seneca does mention vere et deonun ezemplnm sequi ' ; ib. 
 
 the doctrine of guardian angels or de- i. 1 ' Hos sequamur duces quantum 
 
 mons; 'Sepone in prssentia qMse qui- humanaimbecillitaBpatitur';£j).ilf or. 
 
 bnsdam placent, unicuique nostrum ozxiy. 23 'Animns emendatus ao purus, 
 
 pffldagogum dari deum,' Ep. Mor. ex. ; ssmulator del." 
 
 but, as Anbertin shows (p. 284 sq.), this * Ep. Mor. xli ; oomp. Ixdii. 
 
 was a tenet common to many earlier ° deProv. \; eomp. Nat. Quuett. 'pro'L, 
 
 philosophers ; and in the very passage etc. 
 
 qnoted Seneca himself adds, 'Itatamen ' de Prov. i, de Benef. ii. 29. 
 
 hoosepona3volo,utmeminerismajorea ' Aots zvii. 28. 
 
 nostTos,^W«redidemnt, Stoicos foisse, *> de Prov. 2. 
 
28o ST PAUL AND SENECA. 
 
 loves, them He hardens, He chastises. He disciplines'.' Hence the 
 'sweet uses of adversity' find in him an eloquent exponent. 'No- 
 thing,' he says, quoting his friend Demetrius, 'seems to me more 
 unhappy than the man whom no adversity has ever befallen'.' 'The 
 life free from care and from any buffetings of fortune is a dead sea'.' 
 Hence too it follows that resignation under adversity becomes a 
 plain duty. 'It is best to endure what you cannot mend, and 
 without murmuring to attend upon God, by whose ordering all 
 things come to pass. Ho is a bad soldier who follows his captain 
 complaining*.' 
 The in- Still more strikingly Christian is his language, when he speaks 
 
 B^it of °^ *^°^' ^^° ' ^^ ^^^^ ^^> '" ""^^^ ^^> ^ within,' of ' a holy spirit 
 God. residing in us, the guardian and observer of our good and evil 
 
 deeds'.' 'By what other name,' he asks, 'can we call an upright 
 and good and great mind except (a) god lodging in a human body"?' 
 The spark of a heavenly flame has alighted on the hearts of men'. 
 They are associates with, are members of God. The mind came 
 from God and yearns towards God°. 
 
 From this doctrine of the abiding presence of a divine spirit 
 the practical inferences are not less weighty. ' So live with men, as 
 if God saw you; so speak with God, as if men heard you'.' ' What 
 profits it, if any matter is kept secret from men t nothing is hidden 
 from God'°.' 'The gods are witnesses of everything".' 
 Dniversal But even more remarkable perhaps, than this devoutness of tone 
 of sin. ^"^ which the duties of man to God arising out of his filial relation 
 are set forth, is the energy of Seneca's language, when he paints 
 the internal struggle of the human soul and prescribes the disci- 
 pline needed for its release. The soul is bound in a prison-house, is 
 weighed down by a heavy burden". Life is a continual warfare". 
 
 1 de Prov. 4 ; comp. ib. § i. the words ' Quia dens, incertum est ; 
 
 " de Prov. 3. habitat Dens' (Virg. ^n. viii. 351), and 
 
 » Bp. Mor. Ixvii. This again is a say- applies them to this inward monitor, 
 ing of Demetrius. 7 de Otio 5. 
 
 ■• E-p.Mor. ovii; comp. ib. Ixxvi. « Ep. Mor. xoii. 
 
 " Ep. Mor. xli; comp. ib. Ixxiii. » Ep. Mor. x. 
 
 « Ep. Mor. xxii. The want of the w Ep. Mor. Ixxxiii; oomp. Fragm. 14 
 
 definite article in Latin leaves the exact (in Lactant. vi. 74). 
 meaning uncertain; but this imoertaiu- " Ep. Mor. cii. 
 
 ty is suited to the vagueness of Stoio " Ad Helv. matr. 11, Ep. Mor. Ixv.ciL 
 
 theology. In E^j.ilfor. xli Seneca quotes " See below, p. 787, note 9. 
 
ST PAUL AND SENEGA. 281 
 
 From the terrors of this struggle none escape unscathed. The 
 Apostolic doctrine that all haye sinned has an apparent counterpart 
 in the teaching of Seneca ; ' We shall ever be obliged to pronounce 
 the same sentence upon ourselves, that we are evil, that we have 
 been evil, and (I wUl add it unwillingly) that we shall be evU'.' 
 ' Every vice exists in every man, though every vice is not promi- 
 nent in each'.' ' If we woidd bo upright judges of all things, let 
 us first persuade ourselves of this, that not one of us is without 
 fault'.' ' These are vices of mankind and not of the times. No age 
 has been free from fault*.' * Capital punishment is appointed for 
 all, and this by a most righteous ordinance'.' 'No one will be found 
 who can acquit himself; and any man calling himself innocent has 
 regard to the witness, not to his own conscience'.' 'Every day, 
 every hour,' he exclaims,' ' shows us our nothingness, and reminds us 
 by some new token, when we forget our frailty'.' Thus Seneca, in OfiSoe of 
 common with the Stoic school generally, lays great stress on the ggi^n°e ' 
 office of the conscience, as ' making cowards of us all.' ' It reproaches 
 them,' he says, 'and shows them to themselves °.' 'The first and 
 greatest punishment of sinners is the fact of having sinned".' ' The 
 beginning of safety is the knowledge of sin.' ' I think this,' he adds, 
 ' an admirable saying of Epicurus '".' 
 
 Hence also follows the duty of strict self-examination. ' As far Self-exa- 
 as thou canst, accuse thyself, try thyself : discharge the office, first of ^* ^n" 
 a prosecutor, then of a judge, lastly of an intercessor".' Accordingly fession. 
 he relates at some length how, on lying down to rest every night, he 
 follows the example of Sextius and reviews his shortcomings during 
 the day : ' When the light is removed out of sight, and my wife, who 
 is by this time aware of my practice, is now silent, I pass the whole 
 
 ^ de Senef,i. 10. as elsewhere by 'sin'; but it will be 
 
 " de Benef. iv. 27. evident at onoe that in a saying of Bpi- 
 
 ' de Ira ii. 28 ; oomp. ad Polyh. 11, ourus, wliose gods were indifferent to 
 
 Ep. Mor. xlii.. the doings of meUjtheassooiationsoon- 
 
 * Ep. Mor. xovii. neoted with the word must be very dif- 
 
 5 Qa. Nat. ii. 59. ferent. See the remarks below, p. 296. 
 
 « de Ira i. 14. Fleury (i. p. 1 1 1) is eloquent on this 
 
 7 Ep, Mor. oi. coincidence, but omits to mention that 
 
 8 Ep. Mor. xovii. 15. it occurs in a saying of Epicurus. His 
 t j-j. ,, argument crumbles into dust before 
 10 Ep. Mor. xxviii. 9 'Initium est our eyes, when the light of this fact is 
 
 ealutis notitia peccati' For couve- admitted. 
 QJeneg I have translated j)eccatum here " ib. 10. 
 
282 ST PAUL AND SBNBCA. 
 
 of my day under examinatiou, and I review my deeds and words. 
 I hide nothing from myself, I pass over nothings. Similarly he 
 describes the good man as one who ' has opened out his conscience to 
 the gods, and always lives as if in public, fearing himself more than 
 others'.' In the same spirit too he enlarges on the advantage of 
 having a faithful friend, ' a ready heart into which your every secret 
 can be safely deposited, whose privity you need fear less than your 
 own" ; and urges again and again the duty of meditation and self- 
 converse*, quoting on this head the saying of Epicurus, 'Then retire 
 within thyself most, when thou art forced to be in a crowd'.' 
 Duties Nor, when we pass from the duty of individual self-discipline to 
 
 others ^ ^^^ social relations of man, does the Stoic philosophy, as represented 
 by Seneca, hold a less lofty tone. He acknowledges in almost Scrip- 
 tural language the obligation of breaking bread with the hungry". 
 ' You must live for another,' he writes, ' if you would live for your- 
 self'.' 'For what purpose do I get myself a friend 1' he exclaims 
 with all the extravagance of Stoic self-renunciation, ' That I may 
 have one for whom I can die, one whom I can follow into exile, one 
 whom I can shield from death at the cost of my own life'.' ' I will 
 so live,' he says elsewhere, ' as if I knew that I was bom for others, 
 and will give thanks to nature on this score'.' 
 
 Moreover these duties of humanity extend to all classes and 
 ranks in the social scale. The slave has claims equally with the 
 freeman, the base-born equally with the noble. 'They are slaves, 
 you urge ; nay, they are men. They are slaves ; nay, they are com- 
 rades. They are slaves j nay, they are humble friends. They are 
 slaves ; nay, they are fellow-slaves, if you reflect that fortune has 
 the same power over both.' ' Let some of them,' he adds, ' dine 
 with you, because they are worthy; others, that they may become 
 worthy.' ' He is a slave, you say. Yet perchance he is free in 
 spirit. He is a slave. Will this harm him 1 Show me who is not. 
 
 ' de Ira iii. 36. » Ep. Mor. xxv. 
 
 ' de Benef. vil i. » Ep. Mor. xov ' Cum esuriente pa- 
 
 8 de Tranq. Anim. 7. Oomp. Ep. nem suum dividat': oomp. Is. Iviii. 7 
 
 Mor. xi. (Vulg.) 'Frange esurient! pauem tuum, 
 
 * Ep. Mor. vii 'Eeoede in teipsum Ezek. xviii. 7, 16. 
 
 quantum potes,' de Otio a8 (i) ' Prode- ' Ep. Mor. xlviii. 
 
 rit tamen per se ipsmn seoedere; me- 8 £y_ jj^g^^ jj_ 
 
 liores erimus singnli': oomp. odiiorc. » de Vit. beat. 10: oomp. de Otio 
 
 n- 30 (3), 
 
ST PAUL AND SENECA. 283 
 
 One is a slave to lust, another to avarice, a third to ambition, all 
 alike to fear'.' 
 
 But the moral teaching of Seneca will be brought out more Parallels 
 clearly, while at the same time the conditions of the problem before ^^^ ^^ 
 us will be better understood, by collecting the parallels, which are the Mount 
 scattered up and down his writings, to the sentiments and images 
 in the Sermon on the Mount. 
 
 ' The mind, unless it is pui-e and holy, comprehends not God°.' Matt. t. 8. 
 
 ' A. man is a robber even before he stains his hands ; for he is y, n sq. 
 already armed to slay, and has the desire to spoil and to kill'.' 
 • The deed will not be upright, unless the will be upright*.' 
 
 ' Cast out whatsoever things rend thy heart : nay, if they could v. 19. 
 not be extracted otherwise, thou shouldst have plucked out thy 
 heart itself with them'.' 
 
 ' What will the wise man do when he is buffeted (colaphis per- v. 39. 
 oussus) I He will do as Cato did when he was smitten on the 
 mouth. He did not burst into a passion, did not avenge himself, 
 did not even forgive it, but denied its having been done'.' 
 
 ' I will be agreeable to friends, gentle and yielding to enemies'.' v. 44. 
 ' Give aid even to enemies'.' 
 
 ' Let us follow the gods as leaders, so far as human weakness v. 45. 
 allows : let us give our good services and not lend them on usury... 
 How many are unworthy of the light: and yet the day arises... 
 This is characteristic of a great and good mind, to pursue not the 
 fruits of a kind deed but the deeds themselves'.' ' We propose 
 to ourselves... to follow the example of the gods. ..See what great 
 
 ' Ep. Mor. xlvii. 15, 17. (v.l. senili) manu' : eomp.also deBencf. 
 
 » Ep. Mor. Ixxxvii. ii. v. i (fin.), vii. 31, de Ira i. 14. Such 
 
 * de Benef. v. 14. So also de Const. howeTer ia not always Seneca's tone 
 
 Sap. 7 he teaohes that the sin consists with regard to enemies: comp.JSp. Mor. 
 
 in the intent, not the act, and instances Izzzi ' Hoc certe, inquis, justitisa oon- 
 
 adultery, theft, and murder. venit, sunrn cnique reddere, benefioio 
 
 < £p. ilfor. Ivii' Actio recta non erit, gratiam, injurisB talionem aut certe 
 
 nisi recta fnerit voluntas,' de Benef. v. malam gratiam. Terom erit istud, 
 
 19 'Mens spectanda est dantis.' cum alius injuriam fecerit, alius bene- 
 
 Ep.Mor.M. 13. fioiumdederitetc' This passage shows 
 
 ' de Comt, Sap. 14, that Seneca's doctrine was a very feeble 
 
 ' de Vit. beat. 20 'Ero amicis jn- and imperfect recognition of the Chris- 
 
 cundus, inimicis mitis et facilis.' tian maxim ' Love your enemies.' 
 
 ' de OHo 18 (i) 'Non desinemus com- ' de Benef. i. i. See the whole con- 
 
 muni bono operam dare, adjuvare sin- text. 
 
 gahh, opem ferre etiam inimicis miti 
 
284 ST PAUL AND SENECA. 
 
 things they bring to pass daily, what great gifts they bestow, with 
 what abundaat fruits they fill the earth... with what suddenly falling 
 showers they soften the ground... All these things they do without 
 reward, without any advantage accruing to themselves... Let us be 
 [Luke vi. ashamed to hold out any benefit for sale : we find the gods giving 
 gratuitously. If you imitate the gods, confer benefits even on the 
 unthankful : for the sun rises even on the wicked, and the seas are 
 open to pirates'.' 
 
 vi 3 sq. ' One ought so to give that another may receive. It is not 
 
 giving or receiving to transfer to the right hand from the left'.' 
 ' This is the law of a good deed between two : the one ought at 
 once to forget that it was conferred, the other never to forget that 
 it was received'.' 
 
 vi. 10. ' Let whatsoever has been pleasing to God, be pleasing to man*.' 
 
 vi. 16. ' Do not, like those whose desire is not to make progress but 
 
 to be seen, do anything to attract notice in your demeanour or 
 mode of life. Avoid a rough exterior and unshorn hair and a 
 carelessly kept beard and professed hatred of money and a bed laid 
 on the ground and whatever else afiects ambitious display by a 
 perverse path... Let everything within us be unlike, but let our 
 outward appearance (frons) resemble the common people*.' 
 
 vi. ,n. 'Apply thyself rather to the true riches. It is shameful to de- 
 
 pend for a happy life on silver and gold'.' ' Lot thy good deeds be 
 invested like a treasure deep-buried in the ground, which thou canst 
 not bring to light, except it be necessary'.' 
 
 vii. 3 sq. ' Do ye mark the pimples of others, being covered with countless 
 
 ulcers t This is as if a man should mock at the moles or warts on the 
 most beautiful persons, when he himself is devoured by a fierce scab'.' 
 
 * de BeneJ. iv. 25, 26. See the oon- tatemStoioiBseotaBpriBferebathabituet 
 text, OompEire also de Benef, vii. 31. ore ad exprimeudam imaginem honesti 
 
 ' de Benef, v. 8. exeroitus,' Egnatms,likesomanyother 
 
 ' de Benef. il 10. Stoics, was an Oriental, a native of 
 
 * Ep. Mor. Ixxiv. 20. Beyrout (Juv. iii. 1 16). If the plii- 
 " Ep. Mor. V. I, 2. Other writers losopher's basts may he trusted, the 
 
 are equally severe on the insincere pro- language of Tacitus would well describe 
 
 fessors of Stoic principles. 'Like their Seneca's own appearance : but proba- 
 
 Jowish counterpart, the Pharisees, they bly with him this austerity was not 
 
 were formal, austere, pretentious, and affected. 
 
 not unfrequently hyprocritical'; Grant ' Ep.Mor. ox. 18. 
 
 p. 281. Of the villain P. Egnatina ' de Vit. beat. 34. 
 
 Tacitus writes <4Bn. xvi 32), 'Anpto^v. ^ de Vit. beat. 27. 
 
ST PAUL AND SENECA. 285 
 
 'Expect firom others what you have done to another'.' 'Let us tU. ii. 
 so give as we woiild wish to receive'.' 
 
 'Therefore good things cannot spring of evil... good does not vii. 16, 17. 
 grow of evil, any more than a fig of an olive tree. The fruits cor- 
 respond to the seed'.' 
 
 ' Not otherwise than some rock standing alone in a shallow vii. 26. 
 sea, which the waves cease not from whichever side they are 
 driven to beat upon, and yet do not either stir it from its place, 
 etc.... Seek some soft and yielding material in which to fix your 
 darts*.' 
 
 Nor are these coincidences of thought and imagery confined to other co- 
 
 the Sei-mon on the Mount. If our Lord compares the hypocritical "».<"dences 
 
 ^ ""^ with our 
 
 Pharisees to whited walls, and contrasts the scrapulously clean Loid'alan- 
 
 outside of the cup and platter with the inward corruption, Seneca 
 also adopts the same images : ' Within is no good : if thou shouldest 
 see them, not where they are exposed to view but where they 
 are concealed, they are miserable, filthy, vile, adorned without like 
 their own walls... Then it appears how much real foulness beneath 
 the surface this borrowed glitter has concealed'.' If our Lord 
 declares that the branches must perish unless they abide in the 
 vine, the language of Seneca presents an eminently instructive 
 parallel : ' As the leaves cannot flourish by themselves, but want 
 a branch wherein they may grow and whence they may draw sap, 
 so those precepts wither if they are alone : they need to be 
 grafted in a sect".' Again the parables of the sower, of the mustard- 
 seed, of the debtor forgiven, of the talents placed out at usury, 
 of the rich fool, have all their echoes in the writings of the Roman 
 Stoic : ' "Words must be sown like seed which, though it be small, 
 yet when it has found a suitable place unfolds its strength and 
 from being the least spreads into the largest growth. ..They are few 
 things which are spoken : yet if the mind has received them well, 
 they gain strength and grow. The same, I say, is the case with 
 precepts as with seeds. They produce much and yet they are 
 scanty'.' 'Divine seeds are sown in human bodies. If a good 
 
 ' Ep. Mor. xciv. 43. This is a quo- " de Provid. 6. 
 
 tation. ' Ep. Mor. xov. 59. See the remarks 
 
 ' de Benef. ii. i. below, p. 316, on this parallel. 
 
 3 Ep. Mor. Ixxxvii. 24, 25. ' Ep. Mor. xrsviii. i. 
 < de Vit. beat. fj. 
 
286 ST PAUL AND SBNBOA. 
 
 husbandman receives them, they spring up like their origin...; if a 
 bad one, they are killed as by barren and marshy ground, and 
 then weeds are produced iu place of grain'.' 'We have received 
 our good things as a loan. The use and advantage are ours, and 
 the duration thereof the Divine disposer of his own bounty regu- 
 lates. We ought to have in readiness what He has given us for 
 an uncertain period, and to restore it, when summoned to do so, 
 without complaint. He is the worst debtor, who reproaches hia 
 creditor'.' 'As the money-lender does not summon some creditors 
 whom be knows to be bankrupt... So I will openly and persistently 
 pass over some ungrateful persons nor demand any benefit from 
 them in turn'.' ' how great is the madness of those who embark 
 on distant hopes : I will buy, I will build, I will lend out, I will 
 demand payment, I will bear honours : then at length I will 
 resign my old age wearied and sated to rest. Believe me, all 
 things are uncertain even to the prosperous. No man ought to 
 promise himself anything out of the future. Even what we hold 
 slips through our hands, and fortune assails the very hour on 
 which we are pressing*.' If our Master declares that 'it is more 
 blessed to give than to receive,* the Stoic philosopher tells his 
 readers that he ' would rather not receive benefits, than not confer 
 themY and that 'it is more wretched to the good man to do 
 an injury than to receive one'.' If our Lord reminds Hia hearers 
 of the Scriptural warning 'I will have mercy and not sacrifice,' 
 if He commends the poor widow's mite thrown into the treasury as 
 a richer gift than the most lavish offerings of tlie wealthy, if His 
 whole life is a comment on the prophet's declaration to the Jews 
 that God 'cannot away with their sabbaths and new moons,' so 
 also Seneca writes; 'Not even in victims, though they be fat and 
 their brows glitter with gold, is honour paid to the gods, but in the 
 pious and upright intent of the worshippers'.' The gods are 'wor- 
 shipped not by the wholesale slaughter of fat carcasses of bulls nor 
 by votive offerings of gold or silver, nor by money poured into 
 their treasuries, but by the pious and upright intent'.' 'Let us 
 
 » Ep. Mar. Ixxiii. 16. « Ep. Mor. xov. 51 : oomp. de Benef. 
 
 ' Ad Marc. 10. iv. n, vii. 31, 31. 
 
 » de Belief, v. 11. 7 de Benef. i. 6. 
 
 « Ep. Mor. oi. 4. 8 Ep. Mor. oxv. 5. 
 ' de Benef. i. i. 
 
ST PAUL AND SENECA. 287 
 
 forbid any one to light lamps on sabbath-days, since the gods 
 
 do not want light, and even men take no pleasure in smoke... he 
 
 worships God, who knows Him'.' And lastly, if the dying prayer 
 
 of the Redeemer is ' Father, forgive them, for they know not what 
 
 they do,' somo have discovered a striking counterpart (I can only see 
 
 a mean caricature) of this expression of triumphant self-sacrifice in 
 
 the language of Seneca : ' There is no reason why thou shouldest be 
 
 angry: pardon themj they are all mad'.' 
 
 Nor are the coincidences confined to the Gospel narratives. Coinoi- 
 
 The writings of Seneca present several points of resemblance also ^t^^tjjg 
 
 to the Apostolic Epistles. The declaration of St John that ' perfect ApoBtoHc 
 
 . . Epistles, 
 
 love casteth out fear" has its echo in the philosopher's words, 
 
 'Love cannot be mingled with fear*.' The metaphor of St Peter, 
 also, ' Girding up the loins of your mind be watchfnl and hope",' 
 reappears in the same connexion in Seneca, 'Let the mind stand 
 ready-girt, and let it never fear what is necessary but ever expect 
 what is uncertain".' And again, if St James rebukes the pre- 
 sumption of those who say, ' To-day or to-morrow we will go into 
 such a city, when they ought to say, If the Lord wUl, we shall live 
 and do this or that',' Seneca in a similar spirit says that the wise 
 man will ' never jn-omise himself anything on the security of fortune, 
 but will say, I will sail unless anything happen, and, I will be- 
 come prsetor unless anything happen, and. My business wiU turn 
 out well for me unless anything happen'.' 
 
 The coincidences with St Paul are even more numerous and andespeoi- 
 not less striking. It is not only that Seneca, like the Apostle of gt p^ 
 the Gentiles, compares life to a warfare', or describes the struggle 
 after good as a 'contest with the flesh'",' or speaks of this present 
 
 ' Ep. Mor. xcv. 47. quo numquam qules, numquam otium, 
 
 ' de Bene/, v. 17. See the remarka datur'; ib. Ixv 'Hoc quod vivit stipen- 
 
 below, p. 297. dium putat ' ; ib. oxx. 1 1 ' Civem ee esse 
 
 » I Joh. iv. 18. universietinilitemcredens.' Thecom- 
 
 ' Ep. Mor. xlvii. 18. parison is at least as old as the Book of 
 
 » I Pet. i. 13. Job, vii. i. 
 • ad Polyb. 11 'lu procinotu stet ^' ad Marc, n 'Omne illi cum hao 
 
 animns etc' came grave certamen est.' The flesh 
 
 7 James iv, 13. is not unfrequeutly used for the carnal 
 
 8 de Tranq. Anim. 13. desires and repulsionB, e.g. Ep. Mor. 
 ' Ep. Mor, zcvi 'Vivere, Lncili, Ixxiv 'Nonestsummafelicitatisnostrte 
 
 ujilitare est ' ; ib. li 'Nobis qnoque mi- in came ponenda.' This use of ripi 
 
 litandum est et quidem genere militia has been traced to Epicurus. 
 
288 ST PAUL AND SENECA. 
 
 existence as a pilgrimage in a strange land and of our mortal lodies 
 as tabernacles of the soul'. Though some of these metaphors are 
 more Oriental than Greek or Roman, they are too common to suggest 
 any immediate historical connexion. It is more to the purpose to 
 note special coincidences of thought and diction. The hateful flattery, 
 first of Claudius and then of Nero, to which the expressions are 
 prostituted by Seneca, does not conceal the resemblance of the 
 following passages to the language of St Paul where they occur in 
 a truer and nobler application. Of the former emperor he writes 
 to a friend at court, 'In him are all things and he is insstead of 
 all things to thee": to the latter he says, 'The gentleness of thy 
 spirit will spread by degrees through the whole body of the empire, 
 and all things will be formed after thy likeness : health passes 
 from the head to all the members'.' Nor are still closer parallels 
 I Cor. xii. wanting. Thus, while St Paul professes that he will ' gladly spend 
 '^' and be spent' for his Corinthian converts, Seneca repeats the same 
 
 striking expression, ' Oood men toil, they spend and are spent*.' 
 lit. i. 15. While the Apostle declares that 'unto the pure all things are 
 pure, but unto the defiled and unbelieving nothing is pure,' it is 
 the Roman philosopher's dictum that ' the evil man turns all 
 things to evil'.' While St Paul in a well-remembered passage 
 compares and contrasts the training for the mortal and the immortal 
 I Cor, ix. crown, a strikingly similar use is made of the same comparison 
 **■ in the following words of Seneca ; ' What blows do athletes receive 
 
 in their face, what blows all over their body. Yet they bear all 
 the torture from thirst of glory. Let us also overcome aU things, 
 for our reward is not a crown or a palm branch or the trumpeter 
 proclaiming silence for the announcement of our name, but virtue 
 and strength of mind and peace acqviired ever after".' 
 
 The coincidence will be further illustrated by the following 
 
 ' Ep. Mor. oxx 'Neo domum esse mua partum),' and designates death by 
 lioo corpus Bed hospitium et quidem the term since consecrated in the Ian- 
 breve hospitium,' and again 'Magnus guage of the Christian Church, as the 
 animus... nihil horum quae circa sunt birth-day of eternity: 'Dies iste, quem 
 Buum judicat, sed ut commodatis utitur tamquam supremum ref ormidas, stemi 
 peregrinus et properans.' So also Bp. natalia est ' (§ 26). 
 Mor. cii. 24 'Quicquid circa te jaoet " ad Polyb. 7. 
 rerum tamquam hospitalis looi sarcinas ' de Clem. ii. 2. 
 specta.' In this last letter (§ 23) he * de Provid. 5. 
 speaks pf advancing age as a ' ripening » Ep. Mor. xcviii. 3. 
 to another birth (in alium maturesoi- Ep. Mor. Ixxviii. 16, 
 
ST PAUL AND SBNBOA. 289 
 
 passages of Seneca, to which the corresponding references in St Paul 
 are given in the margin. 
 
 * They consecrate the holy and immortal and inviolable gods Bom. i. 23. 
 in motionless matter of the vilest kind : they clothe them with the 
 
 forms of men, and beasts, and fishes '.' 
 
 ' They are even enamoured of their own ill deeds, which is the Eom. i. a8, 
 last ill of all : and then is their wretchedness complete, when shame- 
 ful things not only delight them but are even approved by them'.' 
 
 'The tyrant is angry with the homicide, and the sacrilegious man Bom.ii.ii, 
 punishes thefts'.' '^" 
 
 ' Hope is the name for an uncertain good*.' Eom. viii. 
 
 ' Pertinacious goodness overcomes evil men'.' Eom. xii 
 
 'I have a better and a surer light whereby I can discern the ic'oriiii 
 true from the false. The mind discovers the good of the mind'.' 
 
 ' Let us use them, let us not boast of them : and let us use them i Cor. vii. 
 sparingly, as a loan deposited with us, which will soon depart'.' *'' 
 
 ' To obey God is liberty'.' 2 Cor. iii, 
 
 ' Not only corrected but transfigured*.' 2 Oor. iii. 
 
 ' A man is not yet wise, unless his mind is transfigured into those '^' 
 things which he has learnt".' 
 
 ' "What is man 1 A cracked vessel which will break at the least 2 Cot it. 7, 
 fall".' 
 
 ' This is salutary ; not to associate with those unlike ourselves 2 Cor. vi 
 and having different desires ".' '"*■■ 
 
 ' That gift is far more welcome which is given with a ready than 2 Cor. ix.;. 
 that which is given with a full hand".' P^roy.xxii. 
 
 * Gather up and preserve the time".' Eph. v. 16. 
 
 ' I confess that love of our own body is natural to us".' Eph. v. 28, 
 
 29. 
 
 1 de Swperat. (Fragm. 31) in August, that true liberty may fall to thy 
 
 Civ. Dei vi. 10. lot.' 
 
 " Ep. Mor. xEsix. 6. ' Ep. Mar. vi. i. 
 
 ' de Ira ii. 28. " Ep. Mor. xoiv. 48. 
 
 * Ep. Mor. X, § 2. " ad Marc. 11. So Ps. xrxi. 14 'I 
 
 ' de Benef. viL 31. am become like a broken vessel.' 
 
 « de Vit. beat. 2. •» Ep. Mor. zxxii. 2. 
 
 1 Ep. Mm. Ixxiv. 18. " de Benef. i 7. 
 
 « de Vit. beat. 15. Compare the Ian- " Ep. Mor. i. i. So also he speaks 
 
 guageof our Liturgy, ' Whose service is elsewhere (rfeBrco. Fit. i)of 'investing' 
 
 perfect freedom.' Elsewheie {Ep. Mor. time (oonlocaretur). 
 
 viii) he quotes a saying of Bpioums, " Ep. Mor. xiv. i. The V70rd used 
 
 ' Thou must be the slave of philosophy, for love is ' caritas.' 
 
 PHIL, 
 
 «9 
 
290 ST PAUL AND SENECA. 
 
 Col. ii. aa. ' Which conies or passes away very quickly, destined to perish in 
 
 the very using (in ipso usu sui periturum) '.' 
 I Tim. 11.9. ' Neither jewels nor pearls turned thee aside'.' 
 iTim.iv.8. ' I reflect how many exercise their bodies, how few their minds'.' 
 
 'It is a foolish occupation to exercise the muscles of the arms.... 
 
 Keturn quickly from the body to the mind : exercise this, night and 
 
 day*.' 
 I Tim. V. 6. 'Do these men fear death, into which while living they have 
 
 buried themselves' V ' He is sick : nay, he is dead'.' 
 a Tim. ui. 'They live ill, who are always learning to live'.' 'How long 
 ^' wilt thou learn ? begin to teach'.' 
 
 In the opening sentences of our Burial Service two passages 
 r Tim. vi. of Scripture are combined : ' "We brought nothing into this world 
 Job i 2 ^^^ ^* ^ certain we can carry nothing out. The Lord gave and 
 
 the Lord hath taken away : blessed be the name of the Lord.' 
 
 Both passages have parallels in Seneca : ' Non licet plus eflTerre quam 
 
 intuleris";' ' Abstulit (fortuna) sed dedit'".' 
 
 In the speech on the Areopagus again, which was addi-essed 
 
 partly to a Stoic audience, we should naturally expect to find 
 
 parallels. The following passages justify this expectation. 
 Acts xvii. ' "^^ whole world is the temple of the immortal gods".' ' Temples 
 
 *4 s4- are not to be built to God of stones piled on high : He must be 
 
 consecrated in the heart of each man '".' 
 x-vii. J5. ' Crod wants not ministers. How so 1 He Himself ministereth 
 
 to the human race. He is at hand everywhere and to all men".' 
 xvii. 17. ' Ctod is near thee : He is with thee ; He is within ".' 
 
 xvii. 19. ' Thou shalt not form Him of silver and gold : a true likeness 
 
 of God cannot be moulded of this material ".' 
 The first The first impression made by this series of parallels is striking, 
 
 from these They seem to show a general coincidence in the fundamental prin- 
 parallels cjpieg of theology and the leading maxims in ethics: they exhibit 
 
 moreover special resemblances in imagery and expression, which, it 
 
 1 de Vit. beat. 7. » Ep. Mor. oii 25. 
 
 s ad Helv. matr. 16. •» Ep. Mor. Ixiii. 7. 
 
 ' Ep. Mor. Ixxx. 2. " de Benef. vii. 7. 
 
 * Ep. Mor. XV. I, 5. " Fragm. 123, inLaotant. Div. Intt. 
 ' Ep. Mor. oxzii. 3. vi. 25. 
 
 • de Brev. Vit. 11. '3 Ep. Mor. xov. 47. 
 
 * Ep. Mor. xxiii. 9. 1* Ep. Mor. xli. i. 
 
 • Ep. Mor. xxxiii. 9. i» Ep. Mor. xxxi. 1 1. 
 
ST PAUL AND SBNBOA. 291 
 
 would seem, cannot be explained as the result of accident, but must needs to be 
 ... I,- . • , • modified, 
 
 point to some histoncal connexion. 
 
 Nevertheless a nearer examination very materially diminishes the 
 force of this impression. In many cases, where the parallels are 
 most close, the theory of a direct historical connexion is impossible ; 
 in many others it can be shown to be quite unnecessary; while in not 
 a few instances the resemblance, however striking, must be con- 
 demned as illusory and fallacious. After deductions made on all 
 these heads, we shall still have to consider whether the remaining coin- 
 cidences are such as to require or to suggest this mode of solution. 
 
 I. In investigating the reasonableness of explaining coinci- Diffioulty 
 
 dences between two different authors by direct obligation on the tUshkiK 
 
 one hand or the other, the dates of the several writings are ob- the rela- 
 
 . , , . . T 1 ^^^^ chro- 
 
 viously a most important element in the decision. In the present nology. 
 
 instance the relative chronology is involved in considerable difficulty. 
 
 It is roughly true that the literary activity of Seneca comprises 
 
 about the same period over which (with such exceptions as the 
 
 Gospel and Epistles of St John) the writings of the Apostles and 
 
 Evangelists extend. But in some cases of parallelism it is difficult, 
 
 and in others wholly impossible, to say which writing can claim 
 
 priority of time. If the Epistles of St Paul may for the most 
 
 part be dated within narrow limits, this is not the case with the 
 
 Gospels : and on the other hand the chronology of Seneca's writings 
 
 is with some few exceptions vague and uncertain. In many cases The prior 
 
 however it seems impossible that the Stoic philosopher can have times be- 
 
 derived his thoughts or his language from the New Testament. 1°°8^ *° 
 
 . . Seueoa. 
 
 Though the most numerous and most striking parallels are foimd in 
 
 his latest writings, yet some coincidences occur in works which must 
 be assigned to his earlier years, and these were composed certainly 
 before the first Gospels could have been circulated in Rome, and 
 perhaps before they were even written. Again several strong 
 resemblances occur in Seneca to those books of the New Testament 
 which were written after his death. Thus the passage which dwells 
 on the fatherly chastisement of God ' presents a coincidence, as re- 
 markable as any, to the language of the Epistle to the Hebrews. Thus 
 again in tracing the portrait of the perfect man (which has been 
 
 ^ See above, p. 279 sq. Compare 11, 12, which is quoted there. 
 Hebrews xii. 5 eq., and see Prov. iii- 
 
 19—2 
 
292 
 
 ST PAUL AND SENECA. 
 
 Seneca's 
 obliga- 
 tionu to 
 previous 
 writeis. 
 
 thought to reflect many features of the life of Christ, delineated in 
 the Gospels) he describes him as • shining like a light in the dark- 
 ness ' ' ; an expression which at once recalls the language applied to 
 the Divine Word in the prologue of St John's Gospel. And again in 
 the series of parallels given above many resemblances will have 
 been noticed to the Pastoral Epistles, which can hardly have been 
 written before Seneca's death. These facts, if they do not prove 
 much, are at least so far valid as to show that the simple theory 
 of direct borrowing from the Apostolic writings will not meet all 
 the facts of the case. 
 
 2. Again; it is not sufficient to examine Seneca's writings by 
 themselves, but we must enquire how far he was anticipated by the 
 older philosophers in those brilliant flashes of theological truth or 
 of ethical sentiment, which from time to time dazzle us in his 
 writings. If after all they should prove to be only lights reflected 
 from the noblest thoughts and sayLags of former days, or at best 
 old fires rekindled and fanned into a brighter flame, we have found 
 a solution more simple and natural, than if we were to ascribe them 
 to direct intercourse with Christian teachers or immediate acquaint- 
 ance with Christian writings. We shall not cease in this case to 
 regard them as true promptings of the Word of God which was from 
 the beginning, bright rays of the Divine Light which ' was in the 
 world ' though ' the world knew it not,' which ' shineth in the 
 darkness' though ' the darkness comprehended it not' : but we shall 
 no longer confound them with the direct efiulgence of the same Word 
 made flesh, the Shechinah at length tabernacled among men, ' whose 
 glory we beheld, the glory as of the only-begotten of the Father.' 
 
 And this is manifestly the solution of many coincidences which 
 have been adduced above. Though Seneca was essentially a Stoic, 
 yet he read widely and borrowed freely from all existing schools of 
 philosophy'. To the Pythagoreans and the Platonists he is largely 
 indebted ; and even of Epicurus, the founder of the rival school, he 
 speaks with the deepest respect'. It will have been noticed that 
 several of the most striking passages cited above are direct quo- 
 
 ^ Bp. Mor. oxx. 1 3 ' Non aliter quam 
 in tenebris lumen effulsit.' 
 
 » See what he says of himself, de Vit. 
 beat. 3, de Otio t (29). 
 
 ' de Vit. beat. 13 'In ea qnidem ipsa 
 
 sententia sum, iuvitis hoc nostris popu- 
 laribus dioam, sanctaEpicnrom et recta 
 prtBoipere et, si propiua aooesseria, tris- 
 tia' ; comp. Ep. Mor. n. 5, vi. 6, viii. 
 8, XX. 9. 
 
ST PAUL AND SENECA. 293 
 
 tations from earlier writers, and therefore can have no immediate 
 connexion with Christian ethics. The sentiment for instance, which 
 approaches most nearly to the Christian maxim 'Love your ene- 
 mies,' is avowedly based on the teaching of his Stoic predecessors'. 
 And where this is not the case, recent research has shown that (with Parallels 
 some exceptions) passages not only as profound in feeling and truth- fo^ud in 
 
 ful in sentiment, but often very similar in expression and not less earlier 
 
 authors. 
 striking in their resemblance to the Apostolic writings, can be pro- 
 duced from the older philosophers and poets of Greece and Eome^ 
 One instance will suffice. Seneca's picture of the perfect man has 
 been already mentioned as reflecting some features of the 'Son of 
 Man' delineated in the Gospels. Yet the earlier portrait drawn by 
 Plato in its minute touches reproduces the likeness with a fidelity 
 so striking, that the chronological impossibility alone has rescued him 
 from the charge of plagiarism : ' Though doing no wrong,' Socrates 
 is represented saying, 'he will have the greatest reputation for 
 wrong-doing,' 'he will go forward immovable even to death, ap- 
 pearing to be unjust throughout life but being just,' 'he will be 
 scourged,' 'last of all after suffering every kind of evil he will be 
 crucified (avacrxi-vSvXcvdija-eTaL)'.' Not unnaturally Clement of Alex- 
 andria, quoting this passage, describes Plato as 'all but foretelling 
 the dispensation of salvation^.' 
 
 3. Lastly : the proverbial suspicion which attaches to statistics Many co- 
 ought to be extended to coincidences of language, for they may be, ^^ taUa,- 
 and often are, equally fallacious. An expression or a maxim, which cious. 
 detached from its context offers a striking resemblance to the theo- 
 logy or the ethics of the Gospel, is found to have a wholly different 
 bearing when considered in its proper relations. 
 
 This consideration is especially important in the case before us. Stoicism 
 Stoicism and Christianity are founded on widely different theological t^nity^-j 
 conceptions ; and the ethical teaching of the two in many respects opposed, 
 presents a direct contrast. St Jerome was led astray either by his 
 ignorance of philosophy or by his partiality for a stern asceticism, 
 
 ' de Otio I (28). See above, p. 183, collection of passages in B. Schneider 
 
 note 8. See also Schneider Christliche Chriatliche KlAnge au» den Qrieehischen 
 
 Kldnge p. 327 sq. undRdmisclienKlassikem(Got'ba,,iZ6^), 
 
 " Such parallels are produced from ' Plato Itesp. ii. pp. 361, 362. See 
 
 older writers by Anbertin (S&neque et Aubertiu p. 254 eq. 
 
 Saint Paul), who has worked out this * Strom, v. 14 /iovovovxl vpoijnrrciuf 
 
 line of argument. See also the large ttjv auriipiw olnovonlav. 
 
294 ST PAUL AND SENECA. 
 
 when he said that 'the Stoic dogmas in very many points coincide 
 wdth our own'.' It is in the doctrines of the Platonist and the Py- 
 thagorean that the truer resemblances to the teaching of the Bible are 
 to be sought. It was not the Porch but the Academy that so many 
 famous teachers, like Justin Martyr and Augustine, found to be the 
 vestibule to the Church of Christ. Again and again the Platonic 
 philosophy comes in contact with the Gospel; but Stoicism moves 
 in another line, running parallel indeed and impressive by its paral- 
 lelism, but for this very reason precluded from any approximation. 
 Only when he deserts the Stoic platform, does Seneca really ap- 
 proach the level of Chiistianity. Struck by their beauty, he adopts 
 and embodies the maxims of other schools : but they betray their 
 foreign origin, and refuse to be incorporated into his system. 
 Seneca was ^°^ °^ ^^^ whole Lactantius was right, when he called Seneca 
 
 a true ^ most determined follower of the Stoics'. It can only excite our 
 Stoio. •' 
 
 mai-vel that any one, after reading a few pages of this writer, 
 
 should entertain a suspicion of his having been in any sense a Chris- 
 tian. If the superficial colouring is not seldom deceptive, we can- 
 not penetrate skindeep without encountering some rigid and in- 
 flexible dogma of the Stoic school. In his fundamental principles 
 he is a disciple of Zeno ; and, being a disciple of Zeno, he could not 
 possibly be a disciple of Christ. 
 Hia pan- Interpreted by this fact, those passages which at first sight strike 
 
 theistio ^g ^yj their resemblance to the language of the Apostles and Evan- 
 
 EQatenal- 
 
 ism. gelists assume a wholly different meaning. The basis of Stoic theo- 
 
 logy is gross materialism, though it is more or less relieved and 
 compensated in different writers of the school by a vague mysticism. 
 The supreme God of the Stoic had no existence distinct from ex- 
 ternal nature. Seneca himself identifies Him with fate, with neces- 
 sity, with nature, with the world as a living whole'. The different 
 elements of the universe, such as the planetary bodies, were inferior 
 
 1 Hieron, Comm. in Isai. iv. o. ii partibusque ejua inserta?...Huno eun- 
 
 ' Stoioi qui nostro dogmati in plerisque dem etfatum si dixeris, non mentieris... 
 
 concordant' {Op. iv. p. 159, Vallarai). Sio nunc naturam voca, fatum, fortu- 
 
 s See above, p. 170. nam, omnia ejusdem dei nomina aunt 
 
 ' See eapeciaUy de Bencf. iv. 7, 8 varie utentia aua potestate'; de Yit. 
 
 'Natura,inqmt,hoomihipr8sstat. Non Icat. 8 'Mundns cuncta oomplootens 
 
 intellegia te, oum hoc dioia, mutare reotorque universi deua.' Oooaaionally 
 
 nomen deo7 quid enim aliud est natura a more personal conception of deity ap- 
 
 quam dens et diyina ratio toti mundo pears: e. g. ad Helv. Matr, 8. 
 
ST PAUL AND SENEGA. 2^5 
 
 gods, members of the Universal Being'. With a bold consistency 
 the Stoic assigned a corporeal existence even to moral abstractions. 
 Here also Seneca manifests his adherence to the tenets of his school. 
 Courage, prudence, reverence, cheerfulness, wisdom, he says, are all 
 bodily substances, for otherwise they could not affect bodies, as they 
 manifestly do*. 
 
 Viewed by the light of this material pantheism, the injunction His lan- 
 to be 'followers of God' cannot mean the same to him as it does ^^t^gjj,. 
 even to the Platonic philosopher, still less to the Christian Apostle, terpreted 
 In Stoic phraseology ' imitation of God' signifies nothing deeper tenets, 
 than a due recognition of physical laws on the part of man, and a 
 conformity thereto in his own actions. It is merely a synonyme for 
 the favourite Stoic formula of ' accordance with nature.' This may 
 be a useful precept ; but so interpreted the expression is emptied of 
 its religious significance. In fact to follow the world and to follow 
 God are equivalent phrases with Seneca'- Again in like manner, 
 the lesson drawn from the rain and the sunshine freely bestowed 
 upon all*, though in form it coincides so nearly with the language of 
 the Gospel, loses its theological meaning and becomes merely an ap- 
 peal to a physical fact, when interpreted by Stoic doctrine. 
 
 Hence also language, which must strike the ear of a Christian as Consistent 
 shocking blasphemy, was consistent and natural on the lips of a Stoic. l'l?sp?ifl- 
 Seneca quotes with approbation the saying of his revered Sextius, speaking 
 that Jupiter is not better than a good man; he is richer, but riches ° 
 do not constitute superior goodness; he is longer-lived, but greater 
 longevity does not ensure greater happiness'. 'The good man,' he 
 says elsewhere, 'differs from God only in length of time'.' 'He is 
 like God, excepting his mortality'.' In the same spirit an earlier 
 Stoic, Chrysippus, had boldly argued that the wise man is as useful 
 to Zeus, as Zeus is to the wise man". Such language is the legi- 
 timate consequence of Stoic pantheism. 
 
 1 de Olem. i. 8. " Ep. Mor. Izziii. 12, 13. 
 
 ' Ep. Mor. ovi : oomp. Ep. Mor. cxvii. ' de Prov. i. 
 
 s de Irau. 16 'Quid est autem our ' de Carmt. Sap. 8: comp. Ep. Mor. 
 
 hominem ad tarn infelicia exempla re- xxxi 'Par deo surges.' Nay, in one 
 
 voces, cum habeas mundum deumque, respect good men excel Qod, * Ille extra 
 
 quern ez omnibus animalibus ut solus patientiam malorum est, tob supra 
 
 imitetur, solus intellegit.' patientiam,' de Prov. 6. 
 
 * See the passages quoted above, p. ' Flut. adv. Stoic. 33 {Op. Mor. p, 
 
 a83 sq. 1078). 
 
296 ST PAUL AND SBNBCA. 
 
 He has no Hence also the Stoic, bo long as he was true to the tenets of his 
 nesBofsm, school, could have no real consciousness of sin. Only where there is 
 a distinct belief in a personal God, can this consciousness find a rest- 
 ing-place. Seneca and Tertullian might use the same word peccatum, 
 but its value and significance to the two writers cannot be compared. 
 The Christian Apostle and the Stoic philosopher alike can say, and 
 do say, that 'All men have erred"; but the moral key in which the 
 saying is pitched is wholly different. With Seneca error or sin is 
 nothing more than the failure in attaitiing to the ideal of the perfect 
 man which he sets before him, the running counter to the law of the 
 universe in which he finds himself placed. He does not view it as 
 an offence done to the will of an all-holy all-righteous Being, an 
 unfilial act of defiance towards a loving and gracious Father. The 
 Stoic conception of error or sin is not referred at all to the idea of 
 God'. His pantheism had so obscured the personality of the Divine 
 Being, that such reference was, if not impossible, at least unnatural. 
 Meaning And the influence of this pantheism necessarily pervades the 
 
 spirit in Stoic vocabulary. The ' Sacer spiritus' of Seneca may be translated 
 Seneoa. Uterally by the Holy Spirit, the irvev/ia ayiov, of Scriptural language; 
 but it signifies something quite different. His declaration, that we 
 are ' members of God,' is in words almost identical with certain ex- 
 pressions of the Apostle ; but its meaning has nothing in common. 
 Both the one and the other are modes of stating the Stoic dogma, 
 that the Universe is one great animal pervaded by one soul or prin- 
 ciple of life, and that into men, as fractions of this whole, as limbs of 
 this body, is transfused a portion of the universal spirit'. It is almost 
 purely a physical conception, and has no strictly theological value. 
 His moral Again, though the sterner colours of Stoic morality are fre- 
 has all the qiently toned down in Seneca, still the foundation of his ethical 
 
 repulsive system betrays the repulsive features of his school. His fundar 
 
 features of "' •' '^ 
 
 Stoicism, mental maxim is not to guide and train nature, but to overcome 
 
 it*. The passions and afiTections are not to be directed, but to be 
 
 crushed. The wise man, he says, will be clement and gentle, but he 
 
 will not feel pity, for only old women and girls will be moved by 
 
 * See the passages quoted above, Virgil, ^n. vi. 726 ' Spiritus intus alit 
 
 p. 184. totamque infusa per artus mens agitat 
 
 ' See the remarks of Baur I, c. p. 190 molem et magno se cprpore miscet.* 
 sq., on this subject. * de Brev. Vit. 14 ' Hominis naturam 
 
 » Compare the -well-known passage in cum Stoicis viuoere.' 
 
ST PAUL AND SENEGA. 297 
 
 tears; he will not pardon, for pardon is the remission of a deserved 
 penalty; he wUl be strictly and inexorably just'. 
 
 It is obvious that this tone leaves no place for repentance, for for- 
 giveness, for restitution, on which the theological ethics of the Gospel 
 are built. The very passage', which has often been quoted as a 
 parallel to the Saviour's dying words, ' Father, forgive them, for they 
 know not what they do,' really stands in direct contrast to the spirit 
 of those words : for it is not dictated by tenderness and love, but 
 expresses a contemptuous pity, if not a withering scorn. 
 
 In the same spirit Seneca commits himself to the impassive calm 
 
 which forms the moral ideal of his school'. He has no sympathy 
 
 with a righteous indignation, which Aristotle called 'the spur of 
 
 virtue'; for it would disturb the serenity of the mind*. He could Its impaB- 
 
 only have regarded with a lofty disdain (unless for the moment the oraSasts 
 
 man triumphed over the phUosopher) the grand outburst of pajssion- ""^^^ the 
 . , p 1 ^ .1 , ethics of 
 
 ate sympathy which m the Apostle of the Gentiles has wrung a tri- theGospel, 
 
 bute of admiration even from unbelievers, ' Who is weak, and I am 
 not weak? Who is offended, and I bum not']' He would neither 
 have appreciated nor respected the spirit which dictated those touch- 
 ing words, 'I say the truth... I lie not... I have great heaviness and 
 continual sorrow of heart... for my brethren, my kinsmen according to 
 the flesh'.' He must have spurned the precept which bids the Chris- 
 tian 'rejoice with them that do rejoice, and weep with them that 
 weep',' as giving the direct lie to a sovereign maxim of Stoic philoso- 
 phy. To the consistent disciple of Zeno the agony of Gethsemane could 
 not have appeared, as to the Christian it ever will appear, the most 
 sublime spectacle of moral sympathy, the proper consummation of a 
 Divine life: for insensibility to the sorrows and sufferings of others 
 was the only passport to perfection, as conceived in the Stoic ideal. 
 
 These considerations will have shown that many even of the 
 most obvious parallels in Seneca's language are really no parallels at 
 
 1 de Clem. ii. S — 7> where he makes magis hano timet quam illam dolet... 
 
 a cnrioas attempt to vindicate the Inhonesta est omnia trepidatio et solli- 
 
 gtoics. citudo.' And see especially Ep. Mor. 
 
 ' It is quoted above, p. 287. cxvi. 
 
 • Ep. Mor. Ixxiv. 30 ' Non adfligitur * de Ira iii. 3. 
 
 sapiens liherorum amissione, non ami- ° 2 Cor. xi. 29. 
 
 coram : eodem enim animo fert illornm " Bom. ix. i, 2,3. 
 
 mortem quo suam exspectat. Non ' Bom. xii. 15. 
 
298 ST PAUL AND SENECA. 
 
 Inoongist- all. They will have served moreover to reveal the wide gulf which 
 Seneca"' separates him from Christianity. It must be added however, that 
 andof Sto- jj^ humanity frequently triumphs over his philosophy; that he often 
 writes with a kindUness and a sympathy which, if little creditable to 
 his consistency, is highly honourable to his heart. In this respect 
 however he does not stand alone. Stoicism is in fact the most incon- 
 gruous, the most self-contradictory, of all philosophic systems. With 
 a gross and material pantheism it unites the most vivid expressions of 
 the fatherly love and providence of God : with the sheerest fatalism 
 it combines the most exaggerated statements of the independence 
 and self-su£5ciency of the human soul : with the hardest and most 
 uncompromising isolation of the individual it proclaims the most ex- 
 pansive view of his relations to all around. The inconsistencies of 
 Stoicism were a favourite taunt with the teachers of rival schools'. 
 The human heart in fact refused to be silenced by the dictation of a 
 rigorous and artificial system, and was constantly bursting its philo- 
 sophical fetters. 
 Goinoi- But after all allowance made for the considerations just urged, 
 
 ^*j?.°®* some facts remain which still require explanation. It appears that 
 main to be the Christian parallels in Seneca's writings become more frequent 
 as he advances in life'. It is not less true that they are much more 
 striking and more numerous than in the other great Stoics of the 
 Roman period, Epictetus and M. Aurelius; for though in character 
 tliese later writers approached much nearer to the Christian ideal 
 than the minister of Nero, though their fundamental doctrines are 
 as little inconsistent with Christian theology and ethics as his, yet 
 the closer resemblances of sentiment and expression, which alone 
 would suggest any direct obligations to Christianity, are, I believe, 
 decidedly more frequent in Seneca'. Lastly : after all deductions 
 made, a class of coincidences still remains, of which the expression 
 
 ' See for instance the treatise of Flu- think, be found substantially true, 
 
 tarch de Repugnantiis Stoicorum {Op. ' I have read Epiotetus and M, Au- 
 
 Mor. p. 1033 sq.). relius through with a view to such coin- 
 
 3 Among his more Christian works cidenoes, and believe the statement in 
 
 are the de Providentia, de Otio, de Vita the text to be correct. Several of the 
 
 beata, de Beneficiis, and the Epistohe more remarkable parallels in the former 
 
 Morales; among his less Christian, the writer occur in the passages quoted be- 
 
 de Gomtantia Sapientis ani de Ira. In low, p. 314 sq., and seem to warrant 
 
 aome cases the date is uncertain ; but the belief that he was acquainted with 
 
 what I have said in the text will, I the language of the Gospel. 
 
ST PAUL AND SBNBOA. 299 
 
 'spend and be spent' may be taken as a type', and which can hardly 
 be considered accidental. If any historical connexion (direct or 
 indirect) can be traced with a fair degree of probabOity, we may 
 reasonably look to this for the solution of such coincidences. I shall Historical 
 content myself here with stating the different ways in which such 
 a connexion was possible or probable, without venturing to affirm 
 what was actually the case, for the data are not sufficient to justify 
 any definite theory. 
 
 I. The fact already mentioned is not unimportant, that the (i) The 
 principal Stoic teachei-s all came from the East, and that therefore origin of 
 their language and thought must in a greater or less degree have Stoioism. 
 borne the stamp of their Oriental origin. We advance a step further 
 towards the object of our search, if we remember that the most 
 famous of them were not only Oriental but Shemitio. Babylonia, 
 Phoenicia, Syria, Palestine, are thoir homes. One comes from 
 Soythopolis, a second from Apamea, a third from Ascalon, a fourth 
 from Ptolemais, two others from Hierapolis, besides several from 
 Tyre and Sidon or their colonies, such as Citium and Carthage'. 
 What religious systems they had the opportunity of studying, and 
 how far they were indebted to any of these, it is impossible to say. 
 But it would indeed be strange if, living on the confines and even Its possi- 
 within the borders of the home of Judaism, the Stoic teachers escaped ^jg^g ^J^ ' 
 all influence from the One religion which, it would seem, must have Judaism, 
 attx-acted the attention of the thoughtful and earnest mind, which 
 even then was making rapid progress through the Roman Empire, 
 and which afterwards through the Gospel has made itself far 
 
 ^ See above p. 288. Aubertin lias at- Boethus? (p. 40); Ptolemais, Diogenes 
 
 tacked this very instance (p. 360 sq.), (p. 43); Apamea in Syria, Posidonius 
 
 but without success. He only shows (p. 509); Citium, Zeno (p. syj.Persmus 
 
 (what did not need showing) that ' im- (p. 34) ; Carthage, Herillua (p. 33) ; 
 
 pendere' is used elsewhere la this same Cyrene, Eratosthenes (p. 39). The Cili- 
 
 sense. The important feature in the cian Stoics are enumerated belowp. 303. 
 
 coincidence is the combination of the Of the other famous teachers belong- 
 
 active and passive voices. ing to the School, Cleanthes came from 
 
 ' I have noted down the following Assos (p. 3i),AristonfromChios(p.32), 
 
 homes of more or less distinguished Dionysius from Heraclea (p. 35], SphsB- 
 
 Stoic teachers from the East; SeZcucia, rus from Bosporus (p. 35), Panastius 
 
 Diogenes (p. 41) ;£pipftamo, Euphrates from Bhodes (p. 500), Epictetus from 
 
 (p. 613); Scj^t^yoKs.Baailides (p.614); Hierapolis in Phrygia (p. 660). The 
 
 AseaUm, Antibius, Eubius (p. 615); references are to the pages of ZeUer's 
 
 HierflpolisinSyria{?),8eia,Tpio(jp.6i7), work, where the authorities for the 
 
 PubUus (p. 615) ; Tyre, Antipater, Apol- statements will be found. 
 lonins (p. 510); Sidon, Zeno (p. 36), 
 
300 ST PAUL AND SENEGA. 
 
 more widely felt than any other throughout the civilised •world. 
 I have already ventured to ascribe the intense moral earnestness of 
 the Stoics to their Eastern origin. It would be no extravagant 
 assumption that they also owed some ethical maxims and some 
 theological terms (though certainly not their main doctrines) directly 
 or indirectly to the flourishing Jewish schools of their age, founded 
 on the teaching of the Old Testament. The exaggerations of the 
 early Christian fathers, who set down all the loftier sentiments of 
 the Greek philosophers as plagiarisms from the lawgiver or the 
 prophets, have cast suspicion on any such affiliation : but we should 
 not allow ourselves to be blinded by reactionary prejudices to the 
 possibilities or rather the probabilities in the case before us. 
 (i) Sene- 2. The consideration which I have just advanced will explain 
 
 bl ^Imow- ^'^^y coincidences : but we may proceed a step fnrther. Is it 
 ledge ot impossible, or rather is it improbable, that Seneca was acquainted 
 jty. with the teaching of the Gospel in some rudimentary form 1 His 
 
 silence about Christianity proves nothing, because it proves too 
 much. If an appreciable part of the lower population of Rome 
 had become Christians some few years before Seneca's death', if the 
 Gospel claimed converts within the very palace walls", if a few 
 (probably not more than a few) even in the higher grades of society, 
 like Pomponia Grsecina', had adopted the new faith, his acquaintance 
 with its main facts is at least a very tenable supposition. If his 
 own account may be trusted, he made a practice of dining with his 
 slaves and engaging them in familiar conversation*; so that the 
 avenues of information open to him were manifold". His acquaint- 
 ance with any written documents of Christianity is less probable; 
 but of the oral Gospel, as repeated from the lips of slaves and others, 
 he might at least have had an accidental and fragmentary know- 
 ledge. This supposition would explain the coincidences with the 
 Sermon on the Mount and with the parables of our Lord, if they 
 are clear and numerous enough to demand an explanation. 
 
 (3) His 3- But the legend goes beyond this, and connects Seneca directly 
 
 supposed 
 
 1 See above, p. 17 sq., 15 eq. 6, quoted by Friedlauder, iii. p. S3S) 
 
 ' Phil. It. 12; Bee p. 171 Bq. mentions one M. Anneus Fanlus Fe- 
 
 ' See above, p. 21. trus, obfiously a Christian. Was he 
 
 * Ep. Mot. xlvii. descended from some freedman of Se- 
 
 » An early insoription at Ostia (de neoa's house ? 
 Bossi Bull, de Archeol. Crist. 1867, p. 
 
ST PAUL AND SENECA. 301 
 
 ■with St Paul. The Stoic philosopher is supposed to be included oonnexioii 
 
 with St 
 among the ' members of Csesar's household ' mentioned in one of the Paul. 
 
 Apostle's letters from Kome. The legend itself however has no value 
 as independent evidence. The coincidences noted above would suggest 
 it, and the forged correspondence woiild fix and substantiate it. We 
 are therefore thrown back on the probabUities of the case; and it 
 must be confessed that, when we examine the Apostle's history 
 with a view to tracing a historical connexion, the result is not 
 very encouraging. St Paul, it is true, when at Corinth, was brought 
 before Seneca's brother GaUio, to whom the philosopher dedicates Gallio. 
 more than one work and of whom he speaks in tenderly affectionate 
 language'; but Gallio, who 'cared for none of these things,' to 
 whom the questions at issue between St Paul and his accusers 
 were merely idle and frivolous disputes about obscure national 
 customs", would be little likely to bestow a serious thought upon 
 a case apparently so unimportant, stiU less likely to communi- 
 cate his experiences to his brother in Home. Again it may be 
 urged that as St Paul on hia arrival in Rome was delivered to 
 Burrus the prefect of the praetorian guards', the intimate friend Burrus. 
 of Seneca, it might be expected that some communication between 
 the Apostle and the philosopher would be established in this way. 
 Yet, if we reflect that the praetorian prefect must yearly have been 
 receiving hundreds of prisoners from the different provinces, that 
 St Paul himself was only one of several committed to his guardian- 
 ship at the same time, that the interview of this supreme magistrate 
 with any individual prisoner must have been purely formal, that 
 from his position and character Burrus was little likely to discrimi- 
 nate between St Paul's case and any other, and finally that he 
 appears to have died not very long after the Apostle's arrival in 
 Kome^, we shall see very little cause to lay stress on such a supposi- 
 tion. Lastly; it is said that, when St Paul was brought before Nero Nero, 
 for trial, Seneca must have been present as the emperor's adviser, 
 and being present must have interested himself in the religious 
 opinions of so remarkable a prisoner. But here again we have only 
 
 ' Nat. Qu. iv. prtef . § lo ' QaUionem comp. Ep. Mor. civ ' domini mei Gal. 
 
 fratrem meum quern nemo non paium lionis.' 
 aniat,etiam qui amare pins non potest,' " Acta zviii. 14,45. 
 and again §11' Nemo mortalium uni ' See above, p. 7 sq. 
 
 tarn dulcis est, quam hie ommbas': * See above, pp. 5, 8, 39. % 
 
302 ST PAUL AND 8BNB0A. 
 
 a series of assumptions more or less probable. It is not known under 
 what circumstances and in whose presence such a trial would take 
 place; it is very far from certain that St Paul's case came on before 
 Seneca had retired from the court ; and it is questionable whether 
 amid the formalities of the trial there would have been the oppor- 
 tunity, even if there were the will, to enter into questions of religious 
 or philosophical interest. On the whole therefore it must be con- 
 fessed that no great stress can be laid on the direct historical links 
 which might connect Seneca with the Apostle of the Gentiles. 
 
 Summary I have hitherto investigated the historical circumstances which 
 might explain any coincidences of language or thought as arising out 
 of obligations on the part of Seneca or of his Stoic predecessors. It 
 has been seen that the teachers of this school generally were in all 
 likelihood indebted to Oriental, if not to Jewish, sources for their re- 
 ligious vocabulary; that Seneca himself not improbably had a' vague 
 and partial acquaintance with Christianity, though he was certainly 
 anything but a Christian himself; and that his personal intercourse 
 with the Apostle of the Gentiles, though not substantiated, is at least 
 not an impossibility. How far the coincidences may be ascribed to 
 one or other of these causes, I shall not attempt to discriminate : but 
 there is also another aspect of the question which must not be put 
 out of sight. In some iustances at least, if any obligation exist at 
 all, it cannot be on the side of the philosopher, for the chronology 
 resists this inference : and for these cases some other solution must be 
 found. 
 Stoicism, As the speculations of Alexandrian Judaism had elaborated a new 
 
 andrian ^^"^ important theological vocabulary, so also to the language of Sto- 
 
 Judaiam, icism, which itself likewise had sprung from the union of the relisious 
 aprepara- . , , tr a o 
 
 tionforthe sentiment of the East with the philosophical thought of the West, 
 Gospel. ^^ ^^g ^^ equally remarkable development of moral terms and 
 images. To the Gospel, which was announced to the world in ' the 
 fulness of time,' both the one and the other paid their tribute. As 
 St John (nor St John alone) adopted the terms of Alexandrian theo- 
 sophy as the least inadequate to express the highest doctrines of 
 Christianity, so St Paul (nor St Paul aJone) found in the ethical lan- 
 guage of the Stoics expressions more fit than he could find elsewhere 
 
ST PAUL AND SENECA. 303 
 
 to describe in certain aspects tlie duties and privileges, the stiniggles 
 and the triumphs, of the Ohristian life. But though the words and 
 symbols remained substantially the same, yet in their application 
 they became instinct with new force and meaning. This change in 
 either case they owed to their being placed in relation to the central 
 fact of Christianity, the Incarnation of the Son. The Alexandrian 
 terms, expressing the attributes and operations of the Divine Word, 
 which in their origin had a purely metaphysical bearing, were trans- 
 lated into the sphere of practical theology, when God had descended 
 among men to lift up men to God. The Stoic expressions, describing 
 the independence of the individual spirit, the subjugation of the un- 
 ruly passions, the universal empire of a triumphant self-control, the 
 cosmopolitan relations of the wise man, were quickened into new life, 
 when an unfailing source of strength and a boundless hope of victory 
 had been revealed in the Gospel, when all men were proclaimed to be 
 brothers, and each and every man united with God in Christ. 
 
 It is difficult to estimate, and perhaps not very easy to overrate, Wide in- 
 the extent to which Stoic philosophy had leavened the moral vocabu- fi!^*"tv''S 
 lary of the civilised world at the time of the Christian era. To take language 
 a single instance ; the most important of moral terms, the crowning ioigm." 
 triumph of ethical nomenclature, trureiSijo-is, conscientia, the inter- 
 nal, absolute, supreme judge of individual action, if not struck in the 
 mint of the Stoics, at aU events became current coin through their 
 inftuence. To a great extent therefore the general diffusion of Stoic 
 language would lead to its adoption by the first teachers of Chris- 
 tianity; while at the same time in St Paul's own case personal cir- 
 cumstances might have led to a closer acquaintance with the diction 
 of this school. 
 
 Tarsus, the birth-place and constant home of St Paul, was at this Stoioiam 
 time a most important, if not the foremost, seat of Greek learning. ■'■sisus. 
 Of all the philosophical schools, the Stoic was the most numerously 
 and ably represented at this great centre. Its geographical position, 
 as a half-way house, had doubtless some influence in recommending it 
 to a philosophy which had its birth-place in the East and grew into 
 maturity in the West. At all events we may count up six or mora' 
 
 1 Strabo (ziv. 13, 14. p. 673 sq.) named Cordyllon, and Athenodoms son 
 mentions five by name, Antipater, Ar- of Sandon. To these may be added 
 ehedemus, Nestor, Atheuodorus sur- Zeuo (Zeller, p. 40: Diog. Laert. vU. 
 
304 
 
 ST PAUL AND 8BNB0A. 
 
 St Paul's 
 aoqnaint- 
 ance with 
 Stoic 
 teaching. 
 
 Two in- 
 stances 
 given. 
 
 I. The 
 portrait of 
 the wise 
 man. 
 
 well-known Stoic teachers whose home was at Tarsus, besides Chry- 
 sippus and Aratus who came from the neighbouring SoU ', and three 
 others who resided at Mallos, also a Oilician town". If St Paul's 
 early education was Jewish, he was at least instructed by the most 
 liberal teacher of the day, who, unlike his stricter countrymen and 
 contemporaries, had no dread of Greek learning; and during his 
 repeated and lengthened sojourns in Tarsus, he must hare come ia 
 contact with Stoic maxims and dogmas. But indeed it is not mere 
 conjecture, that St Paul had some acquaintance with the teachers or 
 the writings of this school. The speech on the Areopagus, addressed 
 partly to Stoics, shows a clear appreciation of the elements of truth 
 contained in their philosophy, and a studied coincidence with their 
 modes of expression". Its one Quotation moreover is taken from a 
 Stoic writing, the hymn of Cleanthes, the noblest expression of hea- 
 then devotion which Greek literature has preserved to us*. 
 
 And I think we may find occasionally also in St Paul's epistles 
 sufficiently distinct traces of the influence of Stoic diction. A few 
 instances are set down in the notes to this epistle. Many more 
 might be gathered from his other letters, especially the Pastoral Epi- 
 stles. But I -will content myself with giving two broad examples, 
 where the characteristic common-places of Stoic morality seem to be 
 adopted and transfigured in the language of the Christian Apostle. 
 
 I. The portrait of the wise man, the ideal of Stoic aspiration, 
 has very distinct and pecuUar features — so peculiar that they pre- 
 sented an easy butt for the ridicule of antagonists. It is his promi- 
 nent characteristic that he is sufficient in himself, that he wants 
 
 35 enumerates eight of the name), and 
 Heracleides (Zeller, p. 43). Of Atheno- 
 dorus son of Sandon, Strabo adds Sv 
 KoX 'Kava.vlrTjy ipaalv dirci Kta/jtijs rtvds^ 
 If Strabo's explanation of Kavavhris be 
 correct, the coincidence with a surname 
 of one of the Twelve Apostles is acci- 
 dental. But one is tempted to suspect 
 that the word had a Shemitic origin. 
 
 ^ The fathers of both these famous 
 men appear to have migrated fi'om 
 Tarsus. For Chrysippus see Straboxiv. 
 8, p. 671 ; of Aratus we are told that 
 Asclopiades Tapaia <pi]aly airAy 76701'^- 
 wu oAV oiSoKia (Arati Opera 11. p. 419 
 ed. Buhle). 
 
 " Crates (Zeller, p. 42), the two Pro- 
 cluses {ib. p. 615). 
 
 » See above, p. 290. 
 
 * Acts xvii. s8. The words in Clean- 
 thes are {k <roO yiip yivos iiriUo. The 
 quotation of St Paul agrees exactly 
 with a half-line in Aratus another Stoic 
 poet, connected with his native Tarsus, 
 Tov yi.p Kol yhoi iff/ifr. Since the 
 Apostle introduces the words as quoted 
 from some of their own poets, he would 
 seem to have both passages in view. 
 By at KoS' i/ias iroiTjTal he probably 
 means the poets belonging to the same 
 school as his Stoio audience. 
 
ST PAUL AND SENECA. 305 
 
 notlimg, that he possesses everything. This topic is expanded with a 
 ferrour and energy which often oversteps the proper bounds of Stoic 
 caJm. The wise man alone is free: he alone is happy: he alone is 
 beautiful. He and he only possesses absolute wealth. He is the 
 true king and the true priest". 
 
 Now may we not say that this image has suggested many expres- 
 sions to the Apostle of the GentUesI 'Even now are ye full,' he iCor.iv.S. 
 exclaims in impassioned irony to the Corinthians, ' even now are ye 
 rich, even now are ye made kings without us': 'we are fools for iCor.iv.io. 
 Christ, but ye are wise in Christ : we are weak, but ye are strong : 
 ye are glorious, but we are dishonoured.' ' All things are yours,' he i Cor. iii. 
 says elsewhere, ' all things are yours, and ye are Christ's, and Christ '^' *''■ 
 is God's.' So too he describes himself and the other Apostles, ' As 2 Cor. vi. 
 being grieved, yet always rejoicing; as beggars, yet making many rich; '°' 
 as having nothing, and yet possessing all things.' ' In every thing 1 Cor. ix. 
 at every time havingevery self-sufficiency (awapKctoj').. .in every thing '' 
 being enriched.' ' I have learnt,' he says again, ' in whatsoever circum- Pliil.iv ii, 
 stances I am, to be self-sufficing. I have all strength in Him that '3' 
 giveth me power. I have all things to the full and to overflowing.' 
 
 If the coincidence of imagery in these passages is remarkable, Coinci- 
 
 the contrast of sentiment is not less striking. This universal domi- oontrasr 
 
 nion, this boundless inheritance, is promised alike by the Stoic yj'^ 3'°- 
 
 icism in St 
 philosopher to the wise man and by the Christian Apostle to the Paul's oon- 
 
 beUever. But the one must attain it by self-isolation, the other by "^P^o"- 
 
 incorporation. The essential requisite in the former case is a proud 
 
 independence ; in the latter an entire reliance on, and intimate union 
 
 with, an unseen power. It is iv tm evSuva/^owrt that the faithful 
 
 becomes all-sufficient, all-powerful; it is ev Xpio-jw that he is crowned 
 
 a king and consecrated a priest. All things are his, but they are 
 
 only his, in so far as he is Christ's and because Christ is God's. 
 
 Here and here only the Apostle found the realisation of the proud 
 
 ideal which the chief philosophers of his native Tarsus had sketched 
 
 in such bold outline and painted in these brilliant colours. 
 
 2. The instance just given relates to the development of the j. The cos- 
 
 individual man. The example which I shall next take expresses ™°P°"*»" 
 
 1 See esp. Seneca de £enef. vii. 3, 4, 3. 124 sq.) will be remembered. See 
 6, 10, Ep. Mot. ix. Compare Zeller also the passages from Plutarch quoted 
 p. 331. The ridicule of Horace (Sat. i. in Orelli's Ezonrsus (11. p. 67). 
 
 PHIL. 20 
 
3o6 
 
 teaclusg 
 o{ the 
 Stoioa 
 
 illnstrated 
 by the 
 language 
 of Seneoa. 
 
 ST PAUL AND SBNBOA. 
 
 his widest relations to others. The cosmopolitan tenets of the 
 Stoics have been already mentioned. They grew out of the history 
 of one age and were interpreted by the history of another. Nega- 
 tively they were suggested by the hopeless state of politics under 
 the successors of Alexander. Positively they were realised, or 
 rather represented, by the condition of the world under the Roman 
 Empire'. In the age of the Seleucids and Ptolemies, when the 
 old national barriers had been overthrown, and petty states with 
 all their interests and ambitions had crumbled into the dust, the 
 longing eye of the Greek philosopher wandered over the ruinous 
 waste, until his range of view expanded to the ideal of a world-wide 
 state, which for the first time became a possibility to his intellectual 
 vision, when it became also a want to his social instincts. A few 
 generations passed, and the wide extension of the Roman Empire, 
 the far-reaching protectorate of the Roman franchise', seemed to 
 give a definite meaning, a concrete form, in some sense a local 
 habitation, to this idea which the Stoic philosopher of Greece had 
 meanwhile transmitted to the Stoic moralist of Rome. 
 
 The language of Seneca well illustrates the nature of this cosmo- 
 politan ideal. 'All this, which thou seest, in which are comprised 
 things human and divine, is one. We are members of a vast body. 
 Nature made us kin, when she produced us from the same things 
 and to the same ends'.' 'I will look upon all lands as belonging 
 to me, and my own lands as belonging to all. I will so live as if 
 I knew that I am bom for others, and on this account I will give 
 thanks to nature... She gave me alone to all men and all men to me 
 alone*.' 'I well know that the world is my country and the gods 
 its rulers; that they stand above me and about me, the censors of 
 my deeds and words'.' ' Seeing that we assigned to the wise man 
 
 ' Plutarch {Op. Mor. p. 329 B) says 
 that Alexander himself realised this 
 ideal of a world-wide polity, which Zeuo 
 only delineated as a dream or a phan- 
 tom {(Sairep 6vap tj cffioiXoi' ivarvTrwad' 
 ,/uKot). If Plutarch's statement be oor- 
 >reot that Alexander looked upon him- 
 self as entrusted with a divine mission 
 to ' reconcile the whole world,' he cer- 
 tainly had the conception in his mind ; 
 but his actual work was only the be- 
 ginning of the end, and the realisation 
 
 of the idea (so far as it was destined to 
 be realised) was reserved for the Bo- 
 mans. • Feoisti patriam diversis gen- 
 tibus unam,' ' Urbem fecisti quod prius 
 orbis erat,' says a later poet addressing 
 the emperor of his day; Bnta de Red. 
 i. 63, 66. 
 
 • See Oioero pro Salb. 13, Ferr. v. 
 
 57. 65- 
 ' Ep. Mor, xov. 5a. 
 
 * de Vit. beat. 20. 
 ' ibid. 
 
ST PAUL AND SENECA. 3^7 
 
 a commonwealtli worthy of Mm, I mean the world, he is not beyond 
 the borders of his commonwealth, even though he has gone into 
 retirement. Nay, perhaps he has left one corner of it and passed 
 into a larger and ampler region ; and raised above the heavens he 
 understands (at length) how lowly he was seated when he mounted 
 the chair of state or the bench of justice'.' 'Let us embrace in our 
 thoughts two commonwealths, the one vast and truly named 
 common, in which are comprised gods and men, in which we 
 look not to this corner or to that, but we measure the boundaries 
 of our state with the sun; the other, to which the circumstances 
 of our birth have assigned us*.' 'Vii'tue is barred to none: she 
 is open to all, she receives all, she invites all, gentlefolk, freed- 
 men, slaves, tings, exiles alike'.' ' Nature bids me assist men ; and 
 whether they be bond or free, whether gentlefolk or freedmen, 
 whether they enjoy liberty as a right or as a friendly gift, what 
 matter ? Wherever a man is, there is room for doing good*.' ' This 
 mind may belong as well to a Koman knight, as to a fi'eedman, as 
 to a slave : for what is a Roman knight or a freedman or a slave 1 
 Names which had their origin in ambition or injustice'.' 
 
 Did St Paul speak quite independently of this Stoic imagery, its Ohris- 
 when the vision of a nobler polity rose before him, the revelation terow^'in' 
 of a city not made with hands, eternal in the heavens ? Is there the hea- _ 
 not a strange coincidence in his language — a coincidence only the zenship ol 
 more striking because it clothes an idea in many respects very °' Pai"- 
 different? 'Our citizenship is in heaven.' 'God raised us with PhU.iii.jo. 
 Him, and seated us with Him in the heavenly places in Christ ' ' ' 
 
 Jesus.' ' Therefore ye are no more strangers and sojourners, but Ephea. ii. 
 fellow-citizens with the saints and members of God's household.' 
 ' Fulfil your duties as citizens worthily of the Gospel of Christ.' PML i. 27. 
 ' We being many are one body in Christ, and members one of Bom. xii. 
 another.' ' For as the body is one and hath many members, and all ^'q., ^jj 
 the members of the body being many are one body, so also is 12, 13, 17. 
 Christ : for we all are baptized in one Spirit into one body, whether [EpheB.iT. 
 Jews or Greeks, whether bond or free. Ye are the body of Christ ^^' '' ^°"-' 
 
 1 Ep. Mot. Ixviii * de Benef. iii 18. 
 
 a de Otio 4 (31). ' Glaubt man hier * de Vit. heat. 24. 
 
 nicht,' asks Zeller (p. 275), 'fast Au- " Ep. Mar. xxxi. 11. 
 gustin De Civitate Dei zu horen?' 
 
 20—3 
 
308 ST PAUL AN1» SENECA. 
 
 Gal.iu.28. and members in particular.' 'There is neither Jew nor Greek; 
 there is neither bond nor free ; there is no male and female : for ye 
 
 Col.iii. II. all are one in Christ Jesus.' 'Not Greek and Jew, circumcision and 
 uncircumcision, barbarian, Scythian, bond, free : but Christ is all 
 things and in all'.' 
 
 Here again, though the images are the same, the idea is trans- 
 figured and glorified. At length the bond of coherence, the missing 
 principle of universal brotherhood, has been found. As in the 
 former case, so here the magic words Iv Xpto-rm have produced the 
 change and realised the conception. A living soul has been breathed 
 into the marble statue by Christianity ; and thus from the ' much 
 admired polity of Zeno"" arises the Ci vitas Dei of St Augustine. 
 
 Summary. It has been the aim of the investigation just concluded to point 
 out how far the coincidences between Seneca and St Paul are real, 
 and how far fallacious ; to show that these coincidences may in some 
 cases be explained by the natural and independent development of 
 religious thought, while in others a historical connexion seems to be 
 required ; and to indicate generally the different ways in which this 
 historical connexion was probable or possible, without however at- 
 tempting to decide by which of several channels the resemblance in 
 each individual instance was derived. 
 Christiani- In conclusion it may be useful to pass from the special connexion 
 ^oioism fcct'^^een St Paul and Seneca to the more general relation between 
 compared. Christianity and Stoicism, and to compare them very briefly in their 
 principles, their operations, and their results. Stoicism has died 
 out, having produced during its short lifetime only very transient 
 
 ' Eece Homo p. 1 36 ' The city of God, gladiator born beside the Danube. In 
 of which the Stoics doubtfully and brotherhood they met, the natural birth 
 feebly spoke, was now set up before the and kindred of each forgotten, the bap- 
 eyes of men. It was no unsubstantial tism alone remembered in which they 
 city such as we fancy in the clouds, no have been bom again to God and to 
 invisible pattern such as Plato thought each other.' See the whole context, 
 might be laid up in heaven, but a visible ' Plut. Op. Mor. p. 329 t\ irakb flau- 
 corporation whose members met toge- \i.u.^oi>,ht\ TroAtrefa toO t^v 2Twi'/rf)K ofpe- 
 ther to eatbread and drink wine, and in- cai Kara^aXoiUvmi Ziji-utos. It is re- 
 to wluch they were initiated by bodily markable that this ideal is described m 
 immersion in water. Here the Gentile the context under a scriptural image, 
 met the JeW whom he had been accus- ets U /S(os J koX Koitfto!, tSixTep ayiXris aw- 
 tomed to regard as an enemy of the v6(u») yo/ufi koii'^ <rvvTpe<f>oiJi,ii>rit : oomp. 
 human race: the Bomon met the lying Joh. x. 16 xal 70Tio-6Toi /nio voiiinii, ets 
 Oreek sophist, the Syrian slave, the toi^iJv. 
 
ST PAUL AND SENKCA. 309 
 
 and partial effects; Christianity has become the dominant religion 
 of the civilised world, and leavened society through its whole mass. 
 The very coincidences, on which we have been dwelling so long, 
 throw into relief the contrast between the failure of the one and 
 the triumph of the other, and stimulate enquiry into the causes of 
 this difference. 
 
 To some it may seem sufficient to reply that the one is a mere The ques- 
 human philosophy, the other a Divine revelation. But this answer g^g gtated. 
 shelves without solving the problem ; for it is equivalent to saying 
 that the one is partial, defective, and fallacious, while the other is 
 absolutely true. The question therefore, to which an answer is 
 sought, may be stated thus : What are those theological and ethical 
 principles, ignored or denied by Stoicism, and enforced by the Gos- 
 pel, in which the Divine power of the latter lies, and to which it 
 owes its empire over the hearts and actions of men ? This is a very 
 wide subject of discussion ; and I shall only attempt to indicate a 
 few more striking points of contrast. Yet even when treated thus 
 imperfectly, such an investigation ought not to be useless. In an 
 age when the distinctive characteristics of Christianity are regarded 
 as a stumblingblock by a few, and more or less consciously ignored 
 as of little moment by others, it is a matter of vast importance to en- 
 quire whether the secret of its strength does or does not lie in these j 
 and the points at issue cannot be better suggested, than by comparing 
 it with an abstract system of philosophy so imposing as the Stoic. 
 
 Indeed our first wonder is, that from a system so rigorous and Meagre re- 
 unflinching in its principles and so heroic in its proportions the di- □'J . .° 
 rect results should have been marvellously little. It produced, or at 
 least it attracted, a few isolated great men : but on the life of the 
 masses, and on the policy of states, it was almost whoUy powerless. 
 
 Of the founder and his immediate successors not very much is The older 
 known ; but we are warranted in believing that they were men of ^*°^''*' 
 earnest aspirations, of rare self-denial, and for the most part (though 
 the grossness of their language seems hardly reconcilable with this 
 view') of moral and upright lives. Zeno himself indeed cannot be 
 
 1 It is impossible to speak with amy and even complacency the most hateful 
 
 confidence on this point. The language forms of heathen impurity (see Plu. 
 
 held by Zeno and Chiysippus was gross- taioh Op. Mor. p. 1044, Clem. Horn. v. 
 
 ly licentious, and might be taken to 18, Sezt. Emp. Pyrrh. iii. 100 sq.). 
 
 show that they viewed with indifierence Bat it is due to the Jotown obaiaoter 
 
3IO ST PAUL AND SENEGA 
 
 set dcwTi to the credit of the school. He made the philosophy and 
 was not made by it. But Cleanthes was directly moulded by the 
 influence of his master's teaching ; and for calm perseverance, for 
 rigorous self-discipline, and for unwavering devotion to a noble 
 ideal, few characters in the history of Greek philosophy are com- 
 parable to him. Yet Cleanthes, like Zeno, died a suicide. The ex- 
 ample, not less than the precept, of the first teachers of the sect 
 created a fatal passion for self-murder, which was the most indelible, 
 if not the darkest, blot on Stoic morality. 
 Stoicism It was not however among the Greeks, to whose national temper 
 
 in ome. ^^^ genius of Stoicism was alien, that this school achieved its proud- 
 est triumphs. The stern and practical spirit of the Romans offered 
 a more congenial sphere for its influence. And here again it is 
 worth observing, that their principal instructors were almost aU East- 
 ems. Posidonius for instance, the familiar friend of many famous 
 Its obliga- Romans and the most influential missionary of Stoic doctrine in 
 East ° '^ Rome, was a native of the Syrian Apamea. From this time forwajd 
 it became a common custom for the Roman noble to maintain in 
 his house some eminent philosopher, as the instructor of his children 
 and the religious director of himself and his family ' ; and in this 
 capacity we meet with several Oriental Stoics. Thus Cato the 
 younger had at diSerent times two professors of this sect domesti- 
 cated in his household, both of Eastern origin, Antipater of Tyre 
 Cato the and Athenodorus of Tarsus*. In Cato himself, whom his contem- 
 y uDger. pQj,gj.jgg regarded as the 'most perfect Stoic',' and in whom the sect 
 at large would probably have recognised its most illustrious repre- 
 sentative, we have a signal example alike of the virtues and of the 
 
 and teaching of these men, that we tumeamremprofuissesibioonfessaest,' 
 should put the most favourable con- where he is speaking of Livia after the 
 struotionon such expressions; and they death of her sou Drusus. This philo- 
 may perhaps be regarded as theoretical sopher is represented as using the fol- 
 extravaganoes of language, illustrating lowing words in his reply to her: ' Ego 
 the Stoio doctrine that externals are adsiduusvirituioomes.ouinon tantum 
 indiflerent (see Zeller, p. 361 sq.). Yet quia in publicum emittuntur nota, sed 
 this mode of speaking must have been onmes sunt seoretiores animorum ves- 
 highly dangerous to morals ; and the trorum motus.' For another allusion 
 danger would only be increased by the to these domestic chaplains of heathen- 
 fact that such language was held by dom Bee de Tranq. Anim. 14'Proseque- 
 men whose characters were justly ad- batur iUum phihsophus suus.' 
 mired in other respects. " Plutarch Vit. Cat. 4, 10, 16. 
 
 1 Seneca ad Marc. 4 'Cousol [atori so] ' Cicero Brut, xxxi, Pamd. procem. 1. 
 Areo philosopho viri sui prasbuit et mnl- 
 
ST PAUL AND SBNBCA. 3" 
 
 defects of the school. Honest, earnest, and courageous even to death, His excel- 
 but hard, stolid, impracticable, and almost inhuman, he paralysed jigjggtg^ 
 the higher qualities of his nature by his unamiable philosophy, so 
 that they were rendered almost useless to his generation and country. 
 A recent Koman historian has described him as 'one of the most 
 melancholy phenomena in an age so abounding in political carica- 
 tures.' 'There was more nobility,' he writes bitterly, 'and above 
 all more judgment in the death of Cato than there had been in his 
 life.' 'It only elevates the tragic significance of his death that he 
 was himself a fool'.' Exaggerated as this language may be, it is 
 yet not wholly without truth ; and, were the direct social and poli- 
 tical results of Cato's life alone to be regarded, his career must be 
 pronounced a failure. But in fact his importance lies, not in what 
 he did, but in what he was. It was a vast gain to humanity, that 
 in an age of woi'ldly self-seeking, of crooked and fraudulent policy, 
 of scepticism and infidelity to all right principle, one man held his 
 ground, stem, unbending, upright to the last. Such a man may 
 fail, as Cato failed, in all the practical aims of life : but he has left 
 a valuable legacy to after ages in the staunch assertion of principle ; 
 he has bequeathed to them a fructifying estate, not the less produc- 
 tive because its richest harvests must be reaped by generations yet 
 unborn. Cato was the true type of Stoicism in its striking excel- 
 lence, as in its hopeless weakness. The later Roman Stoics are Later Eo. 
 feeble copies, more or less conscious, of Cato. Like him, they were P^"' °*°' 
 hard, impracticable, perverse, studiously antagonistic to the prevail- 
 ing spirit or the dominant power of their age : but, like him also, 
 they were living protests, when protests were most needed, against 
 the dishonesty and corruption of the times; and their fearless demean- 
 our was felt as a standing reproach alike to the profligate despot- 
 ism of the ruler and to the mean and cringing flattery of the sub- 
 ject. Yet it is mournful to reflect how much greater might have 
 been the influence of men Uke Thraaea Psetus and Helvidius Prisons 
 on their generation, if their strict integrity had been allied to a more 
 sympathetic creed. 
 
 In these men however there was an earnest singleness of pur- 
 pose, which may condone many faults. UnhappUy the same cannot 
 be e»»d of Seneca. We may reject as calumnies the grosser charges Seneoa. 
 
 } Jlommsen'g History of Borne, iv. pp. 156, 448 sq. (Eng. trans.). 
 
312 8T PAUL AND SENECA. 
 
 with which the malignity of his enemies has laden his memory; but 
 enough remains in the admissions of his admirers, and more than 
 enough in the testimony of his own writings, to forfeit his character 
 His fatilts. as a high-minded and sincere man. No words are too strong to 
 condemn the baseness of one who could overwhelm the emperor 
 Claudius, while living, with the most fulsome and slavish flattery, 
 and then, when his ashes were scarcely cold, turn upon him and 
 poison his memory with the venom of malicious satire". From this 
 charge there is no escape ; for his extant writings convict him. 
 We may well refuse to believe, as his enemies asserted, that he coun- 
 selled the murder of Agrippina; but it seems that he was in some 
 way implicated with the matricide, and it is quite certain that he 
 connived at other iniquities of his imperial pupil. We may indig- 
 nantly repudiate, as we are probably justified in doing, the grave 
 charges of moral profligacy which were brought against him in his 
 Hfetime and after his death; but the man who, while condemning, 
 can describe at length the grossest forms of impurity (as Seneca does 
 occasionally) had surely no very sensitive shrinking from sins 'of 
 which it is a shame even to speak.' We may demur to accepting 
 the account of his enemies, that his wealth was amassed by fraud 
 and violence ; but there is no doubt that, while preaching a lofty 
 indiflerence to worldly advantages, he consented to be enriched by a 
 profligate and unscrupulous tyrant, and that the enormous property 
 thus accumulated exposed him to the reproaches of his contempo- 
 raries. A portrait which combines all these features will command 
 no great respect. Yet, notwithstanding a somewhat obtrusive rhe- 
 toric, there is in Seneca's vrritings an earnestness of purpose, a 
 yearning after moral perfection, and a constant reference to an ideal 
 standard, which cannot be mere affectation. He seems to have been 
 a rigorous ascetic in early life, and to the last to have maintained a 
 severe self-discipline. Such at least is his own statement; nor is 
 it unsupported by less partial testimony '. 
 
 For all this inconsistency however we must blame not the creed 
 but the man. He would probably have been much worse, if his 
 
 ' The treatise ad Polybium de Conso- of the extravagant panegyric pronouno- 
 
 latione would be disgraceful, if it stood ed by Nero over his predecessor (Tao. 
 
 alone; but contrasted with the Ludua Ann. xiii. 3), 
 
 Ae Morte Claudii it become odious. To " See Ep, Mor. Ixxxvii. 2, oviii. 14 ; 
 
 complete bis shame, he was the author oomp. Tao. Ann. xiv. 53, xv. 45, 63. 
 
ST PAUL AND SENEGA. 3^3 
 
 philosophy had not held up to him a stern ideal for imitation. His own 
 Is it genuine or affected humility — a palliative or an aggravation gj^^g ^j 
 of his offence — that he himself confesses how far he falls short of this weaknesa. 
 ideal 1 To those taunting enemies of philosophy, who pointing to his 
 luxury and wealth ask ' Why do you speak more bravely than you 
 live?', he replies: 'I will add to your reproaches just now, and 
 I win bring more charges against myself than you think. For the 
 present I give you this answer : I am not wise, and (to feed your 
 malevolence) I shall not be wise. Therefore require of me, not that 
 I should equal the best men, but that I should be better than the 
 bad. It is enough for me daily to diminish my vices in some de- 
 gree and to chide my errors.' ' These things,' he adds, ' I say not 
 in my own defence, for I am sunk deep in all vices, but in defence 
 of him who has made some progress'.' 'The wise man,' he writes 
 apologetically, 'does not think himself unworthy of any advantages 
 of fortune. He does not love riches but he prefers them. He 
 receives them not into his soul but into his house. Nor does he 
 spurn them when he has them in his possession, but retains them 
 and desires ampler material for his virtue to be furnished thereby'.' 
 'I am not now speaking to you of myself,' he writes to Lucilius, 
 'for I fall far short of a moderate, not to say a perfect man, but 
 of one over whom fortune has lost her power'.' Seneca, more than 
 any man, must have felt the truth of the saying, ' How hardly shall 
 they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God*.' 
 
 From Seneca it is refreshing to turn to Epictetus. The lame Epiotetop 
 slave of Epaphroditus is a far nobler type of Stoic discipline than the 
 wealthy courtier of Epaphroditus' master. Here at all events, we 
 feel instinctively that we have to do with genuine earnestness. His 
 motto 'bear and forbear" inspires his discourses throughout, as it 
 appears also to have been the guide of his life. But more striking still 
 is the spirit of piety which pervades hia thoughts. ' When ye have 
 Bhut the doors,' he says, ' and have made all dark within, remem- 
 
 1 de Vit. beat. 17; comp. ad Helv. tion in the letters to Lucilius seems 
 
 Matr. 5. exaggerated. I wish I could take as 
 
 ' de Vit. beat. 1 1. favourable a view of Seneca's character 
 
 ' Ep. Mot. Ivii. 3. as this writer does. 
 
 * The account of Seneca in Martha's ' ivixov koX ojt^ou, Aul. Gell. xvii 
 
 Moraliitet p. i sq. is wellworth reading, 19, where the words are explained, 
 thongb fte idea of the spiritual direo- 
 
314 ST PAUL AND SENECA. 
 
 Ezpres- ber never to say that ye are alone, for ye are not ; but God is witliin 
 
 piety inhia '""■^ ^° ^ y*""^ angel (Saowov); and what need of light have these to 
 
 writings, gee what ye do ? To this God ye also ought to swear allegiance, as 
 
 soldiers do to Ceesar'.' 'If we had sense, ought we to do anything 
 
 else both in public and in private but praise and honour the divine 
 
 being (to $^ov) and recount his favours? What then? Since ye, 
 
 the many, are blinded, should there not be some one to fill this 
 station and to sing for all men the hymn to God 1 For what else 
 can I, a lame old man, do but sing hymns to God ] Nay, if I were 
 a nightingale, I had done the work of a nightingale ; if a swan, the 
 work of a swan. So being what I am, a rational creature, I must sing 
 hymns to God. This is my task, and I perform it ; nor will I ever 
 desert this post, so far as it is vouchsafed me : and you I exhort to 
 join in this same song^' ' How then dost thou appear? As a witness 
 called by God: Come thou and bear witness to vie... What witness 
 dost thou bear to God ? / am in wretched plight, Lord, and I am 
 miserable; no one cares for me, no one gives me anything ; all men 
 blame me, all msn speak ill of me. Wilt thou bear this witness, and 
 disgrace the calling wherewith He hath called thee, for that He ho- 
 noured thee and held thee worthy to be brought forward as a witness 
 in this great cause °1' 'When thou goest to visit any great person, 
 remember that Another also above seeth what is done, and that thou 
 oughtest to please Him rather than this one\' 'Thou art an off- 
 shoot (djTocriracr/ita) of God; thou hast some part of Him in thyself. 
 Why therefore dost thou not perceive thy noble birth? Why dost 
 thou not know whence thou art come? Thou bearest Gtod about 
 with thee, wretched man, and thou dost not perceive it. Thinkest 
 thou that I mean some god of silver or gold, without thee ? Within 
 thyself thou bearest Him, and thou dost not feel that thou art 
 defiling Him with thy impvire thoughts and thy filthy deeds. If 
 
 ' Diss, i, 14. 13 eq. ; oomp. Matt. tetus, but does not oocnr (so far as I am 
 
 xxii. 21. aware) in any heathen writing before 
 
 ' Diss. i. 16. 15 sq. the ApostoHo times. Sometimes we 
 
 ' Diss. i. 29. 46 Bq. The words t^ find Kipu 6 Gra's, and once he writes 
 
 (cXifffiK ijK KiK\r]Kcv appear from the Kipte i\4ri<rov (ii. 7. u). It is worth 
 
 context to refer to citing witnesses, but noting that all the three cities where 
 
 they recall a familiar expression of St Epiotetua is known to have lived 
 
 Paul ; I Cor. vii. JO, Ephes. iv. i, comp. Hierapolis, Bome, NicopoUs occur in 
 
 1 Tim. i. 9. The address Kipie, used the history of St Paul. 
 in prayer to Qoi, is frequent in Epic- * Diss. i. 30. i. 
 
ST PAUL AND SENECA. 3^5 
 
 an image of God were present, thou wouldest not dare to do any of 
 these things which thou doest : but, God Himself being present 
 within thee, and overlooking and overhearing all, thou art not 
 ashamed to think and to do these things, man, insensible of thine 
 own nature, and visited with the wrath of God'.' 'Remember that 
 thou art a son. What profession is due to this character? To 
 consider all that belongs to Him as belonging to a father, to obey 
 Him in all things, never to complain of Him to any one, nor to say 
 or do anything hurtful to Him, to yield and give way to Him in all 
 things, working with Him to the utmost of thy power'.' ' Dare to 
 look up to God and say. Use me henceforth whereunto thou wilt, 
 I consent unto Thee, I am Thine. I shrink from nothing that seem- 
 eth good to Thee. Lead me where Thou wilt : clothe me with what 
 garments Thou wilt. "Wouldest Thou that I should be in office or 
 out of office, should live at home or in exile, should be rich or poor 1 
 I will defend Thee for all these things before men'.' ' These (vices) 
 thou canst not cast out othei-wise than by looking to God alone, by 
 setting thine affections (TrpoaireirovOoTo.) on Him alone, by being con- 
 secrated to His commands*.' ' When thou hast heard these words, 
 O young man, go thy way and say to thyself, It is not Epictetus who 
 has told me these things (for whence did Ite come by them !), but 
 some kind God speaking through him. For it would never have 
 entered into the heart of Epictetus to say these things, seeing it is 
 not his wont to speak (so) to any man. Come then, let us obey 
 God, lest God's wrath fall upon us (tva ii.rj ^£oxoA.(dtoi u>ix.€v''y ' Thus 
 much I can tell thee now, that he, who setteth his hand to so 
 great a matter without God, calls down God's wrath and does 
 but desire to behave himself unseemly in public. For neither in 
 a well-ordered household does any one come forward and say to 
 himself / rrmst be steward. Else the master, observing him and 
 seeing him giving his orders insolently, drags him ofl" to be scourged. 
 So it happens also in this great city (of the world) ; for here too 
 there is a householder, who ordereth everything'.' ' The cynic (L e. 
 
 1 Diss. ii. 8. II sq. We are reminded * Diss. ii. i6. 46. 
 
 of the surname Beoipopos, borne by a ' Diss. iii. i. 36 sq. 
 
 Christian contemporary of Epictetus; • Diss. iii. 22. i sq. The passage 
 
 see the uotesonlgnat. £f Aes. inBor.,9. bears a strong resemblance to our 
 
 ' Diss. ii. 10. 7. Lord's parable in Matt. xxiv. 45 sq., 
 
 * Diss. ii. 16. 42. Luke zii. 41 sq. The exp^ssions, i 
 
3l6 8T PAUL AND SBNBCA. 
 
 the true philosopher) ought to know that he is sent a messenger 
 from God to men, to show them concerning good and evil'.' ' He 
 must be wholly given without distraction to the service of God, 
 free to converse with mankind, not tied down by private duties, nor 
 entangled in relations, which if he transgresses, he will no longer 
 keep the character of a noble and good man, and if he observes, 
 he will fail in his part as the messenger and watchman and herald 
 of the gods'.' 
 Improved The genuine piety of these passages is a remarkable contrast to 
 st"^ °X ^^^ arrogance and blasphemy in which the older Stoics sometimes 
 logy. indulged and which even Seneca repeats with approval'. Stoic 
 
 theology, as represented by Epictetus, is fast wiping away its re- 
 proach ; but in so doing it has almost ceased to be Stoic. The pan- 
 theistic creed, which identifies God with the world, is kept in the 
 background ; and by this subordination greater room is left for the 
 expansion of true reverence. On the other hand (to pass over graver 
 defects in his system) he has not yet emancipated himself from the 
 austerity and isolation of Stoical ethics. There stUl remains a 
 hardness and want of sympathy about his moral teaching, which 
 betrays its parentage. But enough has been said to account for the 
 fact that the remains of Epictetus have found a place in the library 
 of the Church, and that the most pious and thoughtful Christian 
 divines have listened with admiration to his devout utterances*. 
 
 olKovofioii 6 KvpioSf 6 olKoSeatroTTj^f occur whole passage should be read. Epiote- 
 in both tbe philosopher and the Evan- tus appears throughout to be treading 
 gelists. Moreover the word tTefi,a> in in the footsteps of St Paul. His words, 
 Epictetus con'esponds to Sixorofii/iffH aTrepiffiraffTov clcai bei S\ov irpbs rf Sta- 
 in the Gospels, and in both words the Kovlf tov 9eoO, correspond to the Apo- 
 difficulty of interpretation is the same. stle's expression, eiirdpeSpov rif Kvpiif 
 I can hardly believe that so strange a iirepiffirdarm (i Cor. vii. 35), and the 
 coincidence is quite accidental. Com- reason given for remaining unmarried 
 bined with the numerous parallels in is the same. Another close coincidence 
 Seneca's writings collected above (p. with St Paul is 8 fiiv SAci 01) irotet (ii. 
 181 sq.), it favours the supposition that 26.1). Again such phrases as va/iZ/iius 
 our Lord's discourses in some form or iffKeTp (iii. 10. 8), ypafi/iara aurranKi 
 other were early known to heathen (ii. 3. i), toCto ueXira (iv. i. 170), ouk 
 writers. For other coincidences more elid i\ei0epos ; (iii. 21. 48), recall the 
 or less close see i. 9. 19, i. 25. 10, i. 19. Apostle's language. Other Scriptural 
 31, iii. 21. 16, iii. 22. 35, iv. 1. 79 (&p expressions also occur, such as QtoS 
 8" el77ope(o j k.t.X., comp. Matt, f/jXwrijs (ii. 14. 13), rpoipii arepeuTipa 
 V. 41), iv. 8. 36. (ii. 16, 39), etc. 
 
 1 JDiss. ui. 22, 23. ' See above p. 295. 
 
 * DUa. iii. 22. 69. I have only been '' 'Epictetus seems asif hehadoome 
 
 able to give short ^^^rt^cts, but th^ ^fter or before his time; too late {or 
 
ST PAUL AND SENECA. 317 
 
 As Epictetus gives a higher tone to the theology of the school, M. Aureli- 
 BO the writings of M. Aurelius manifest an improvement in its 
 ethical teaching. The manifold opportunities of his position would 
 cherish in an emperor naturally humane and sensitive wider symr 
 pathies, than were possible to a lame old man born and bred a slave, 
 whom cruel treatment had estranged from his kind and who was Improved! 
 still further isolated by his bodily infirmity. At all events it is in gtojo 
 this point, and perhaps in this alone, that the meditations of M. Jaoiality. 
 Aurelius impress us more favourably than the discourses of Epicte- 
 tus. As a conscious witness of God and a stern preacher of right- 
 eousness, the Phrygian slave holds a higher place : but as a kindly 
 philanthropist, conscientiously alive to the claims of all men far and 
 near, the Roman emperor commands deeper respect. In him, for the 
 first and last time in the history of the school, the cosmopolitan 
 sympathies, ■with which the Stoic invested his wise man, become 
 more than a mere empty form of rhetoric. His natural disposition 
 softened the harsher features of Stoical ethics. The brooding melan- 
 choly and the almost feminine tenderness, which appear in his me- 
 ditations, are a marked contrast to the hard outlines in the por- 
 traiture of the older Stoics. Cato was the most perfect type of the 
 school : but M. Aurelius was the better man, because he was the worse 
 Stoic. Altogether there is a true beauty and nobleness of character in 
 this emperor, which the accidents of his position throw into stronger 
 relie£ Beset by all the temptations which unlimited power could 
 create, and sorely tried in the most intimate and sacred relations of 
 life — with a profligate wife and an inhuman son — he neither sullied 
 nor hardened his heart, but remained pure and upright and amiable 
 to the end, the model of a conscientious if not a wise ruler, and the 
 best type which heathendom could give of a high-minded gentleman. 
 With all this it is a more than ' tragical fact,' that his justice and his Perseou- 
 humanity alike broke down in one essential point, and that by his ^^'^. °? *^® 
 
 philosophy, too early for reUgion. We direct and genuine language, ^bout 
 
 are tempted continually to apply to his hnman duties andhumanimproyemeut, 
 
 system the haclmeyed phrase : It is all Epictetus will have much to teach those 
 
 very magnificent, but it is not philoso- who know more than he did both of 
 
 phy — ^it is too one-sided and careless of philosophy and religion. It is no won- 
 
 knowledge for its own sake; and it is der that he kindled the enthusiasm of 
 
 not religion — ^it is inadequate and wants Pascal or fed the thought of Butler.' 
 
 a basis. Yet for all this, as long as Satwrday Review, Vol. jctii. p. 580. 
 men appreciate elevated thought, in 
 
3l8 8T PAUL AND SEN BOA. 
 
 bigotry or through his connivance the Christians suffered more widely 
 and cruelly during his reign than at any other epoch in the first 
 century and a half of their existence '. Moreover the inherent and 
 vital defects of the school, after all the modifications it had under- 
 gone and despite the amiable character of its latest representative, 
 are stUl patent. ' The Stoicism of M. Aurelius gives many of the 
 moral precepts of the Gospel, but without their foundation, which 
 can find no place in his system. It is impossible to read his re- 
 flections without emotion, but they have no creative energy. They 
 are the last strain of a dying creed'.' 
 Beferenoes It is interesting to note the language in which these two latest 
 anitv in '' ^^^ noblest representatives of Stoicism refer to the Christians. Once 
 
 Epietetus and once only is the now numerous and rapidly growing sect men- 
 
 ondM.Au- 
 
 relins. tioned by either philosopher, and in each case dismissed curtly with 
 
 an expression of contempt. ' Is it possible,' asks Epietetus, ' that a 
 man may be so disposed under these circumstances from madness, or 
 from habit like the Galileans, and can no one learn by reason and 
 demonstration that God has made all things which are in the world'!' 
 ' This readiness to die,' writes M. Aurelius, ' should follow from in- 
 dividual judgment, not from sheer obstinacy as with the Christians, 
 but after due consideration and with dignity and without scenic dis- 
 play (drpa-yt^Sfos), SO as to convince others also*.' The justice of such 
 contemptuous allusions may be tested by the simple and touching 
 narrative of the deaths of this very emperor's victims, of the Gallic 
 martyrs at Vienne and Lyons : and the appeal may confidently be 
 made to the impartial judgment of mankind to decide whether 
 there was more scenic display or more genuine obstinacy in their 
 last moments, than in the much vaunted suicide of Cato and Cato's 
 imitators. 
 
 * Martha,MoraZi3tc«p. 112, attempts maintamed (M. Aurelius Antoninus all 
 
 to defend M. Aurelius against this Freund u. Zeitgenosse des Rabbi Jehuda 
 
 charge; but the evidence of a wide lia-Nasi by A. Bodek, Leipzig 1868), 
 
 persecution is irresistible. For the mo- he would have an additional motive 
 
 tives which might lead M. Aurelius, for his treatment of the Christians ; 
 
 both as a ruler and as a philosopher, to but, to say the least, the identification 
 
 sanction these cruelties, see Zeller Mar- of the emperor is very uncertain. 
 CM8 Aurelius Antoninus in his VortrSge ' Westcott in Smith's Dictionary of 
 
 p. loi sq. If it were established that the £ible 11. p. 857, b. v. Philosophy. 
 thisemperorhadintimaterelationswith ^ Diss. iv. 7, 6. 
 
 a Jewish rabbi, as has been recently * M. Anton, xi. 3, 
 
ST PAUL AND SENECA. 319 
 
 I have spoken of Epictetus and M. Aurelius as Stoics, for so Eoleoti- 
 they regarded themselves ; nor indeed could they be assigned to any "^g^jater 
 other school of philosophy. But their teaching belongs to a type, StoioB. 
 which in many respects would hardly have been recognised by Zeno 
 or Chrysippus. Stoicism during the Eoman period had been first 
 attaching to itself, and then assimilating, diverse foreign elements, 
 Platonic, Pythagorean, even Jewish and Christian. In Seneca these 
 appear side by side, but distinct ; in Epictetus and M. Aurelius they 
 are more or less fused and blended. Roman Stoicism in fact 
 presents to us not a picture with clear and definite outlines, but 
 a dissolving view. It becomes more and more eclectic. The mate- 
 rialism of its earlier theology gradually recedes ; and the mystical 
 element appears in the foreground'. At length Stoicism fades away; Stoicism 
 and a new eclectic system, in which mysticism has still greater pre- bv'NeoDk- 
 dominance, emerges and takes its place. Stoicism has fought the bat- tonism. 
 tie of heathen philosophy against the Gospel, and been vanquished. 
 Under the banner of Neoplatonism, and with weapons forged in the 
 armouiy of Christianity itself, the contest is renewed. But the day 
 of heathendom is past. This new champion also retires from the con- 
 flict in confusion, and the Gospel remains in possession of the field. 
 
 In this attempt to sketch the progress and results of this school, The 
 I have not travelled beyond a few great names. Nor has any in- unaffected 
 
 justice been done to it by this coui-se , for Stoicism has no other by Stoic- 
 ism, 
 history, except the history of its leaders. It consisted of isolated 
 
 indi^'iduaIs, but it never attracted the masses or formed a com- 
 munity. It was a stafi" of professors without classes. This sterility Causes of 
 mnat have been due to some inherent vicious principles : and I ^° 
 propose now to consider its chief defects, drawing out the contrast 
 with Christianity at the same time. 
 
 I. The fundamental and invincible error of Stoic philosophy i- Its pan 
 
 theism, 
 was its theological creed. Though frequently disguised in devout 
 
 language which the most sincere believer in a personal God might 
 
 have welcomed as expressing his loftiest aspirations, its theology 
 
 was nevertheless, as dogmatically expounded by its ablest teachers, 
 
 nothing better than a pantheistic materialism. This inconsistency 
 
 between the philosophic doctrine and the religious phraseology of 
 
 1 On the approximation of the later lins,toNeoplatonism,seeZelleT's^ac/t- 
 Stoios, and more especially of M. Anre- aristotelische Philosophie 11. p. «oi sq. 
 
320 ST PAUL AND SENECA. 
 
 the Stoics is a remarkable feature, which perhaps may be best 
 
 explained by its mixed origin. The theological language would be 
 
 derived in great measure from Eastern (I venture to think from 
 
 Jewish) affinities, while the philosophical dogma was the product 
 
 of Hellenized thought. Heathen devotion seldom or never soars 
 
 dymn of higher than in the sublime hymn of Clesmthes. ' Thine offspring 
 
 ■ are we,' so he addresses the Supreme Being, ' therefore will I hymn 
 
 Thy praises and sing Thy might for ever. Thee all this universe 
 
 which rolls about the earth obeys, wheresoever Thou dost guide it, 
 
 and gladly owns Thy sway.' 'No work on earth is wrought apart 
 
 from Thee, nor through the vast heavenly sphere, nor in the sea, 
 
 save only the deeds which bad men in their folly do.' 'Unhappy 
 
 they, who ever craving the possession of good things, yet have no 
 
 eyes or ears for the universal law of God, by wise obedience where- 
 
 unto they might lead a noble life.' ' Do Thou, Father, banish fell 
 
 ignorance from our soul, and grant us wisdom, whereon relying Thou 
 
 rulest all things with justice, that being honoured, we v.dth honour 
 
 may requite Thee, as beseemeth mortal man : since neither men nor 
 
 gods have any nobler task than duly to praise the universal law for 
 
 Contradio- aye'.' If these words might be accepted in their first and obvious 
 
 tween Sto- "leaning, we could hardly wish for any more sublime and devout 
 
 io dogma expression of the relations of the creature to his Creator and Father. 
 
 and Stoio i i • . i 
 
 hymnolo- -"Ut a reference to the doctrinal teaching of the school dispels the 
 
 ^* splendid illusion. Stoic dogma empties Stoio hymnology of half its 
 
 sublimity and more than half its devoutness. This Father in hea- 
 ven, we learn, is no personal Being, all righteous and all holy, of 
 whose loving care the purest love of an earthly parent is but a 
 shadowy counterfeit He — or It — is only another name for nature, 
 for necessity, for fate, for the universe. Just in proportion as the 
 theological doctrine of the school is realised, does its liturgical lan- 
 guage appear forced and unnatural. Terms derived from human 
 relationships are confessedly very feeble and inadequate at best to 
 express the person and attributes of God; but only a mind prepared 
 by an artificial training could use such language as I have quoted 
 with the meaning which it is intended to bear. To simple people 
 it would be impossible to address fate or necessity or universal 
 
 ' Fragm. Philot. Grae. i. p. 151 (ed. MuUaoh). 
 
ST PAUL AND SENECA. 321 
 
 nature, as a Father, or to express towards it feelings of filial obe- 
 dience and love. 
 
 And with the belief in a Personal Being, as has been already No oon- 
 remarked, the sense of sin also will stand or fall'. Where this of'g^™*" 
 belief is absent, error or wrong-doing may be condemned from two 
 points of view, irrespective of its consequences and on grounds of 
 independent morality. It may be regarded as a defiance of the 
 law of our being, or it may be deprecated as a violation of the 
 principles of beauty and propriety implanted in the mind. In other 
 words it may be condemned either from physical or from cesthetie 
 considerations. The former aspect is especially common with the 
 Stoics, for indeed conformity with nature is the groundwork of 
 Stoical ethics. The latter appears occasionally, though this point 
 of view is characteristic rather of the Academy than of the Porch, 
 These are important subsidiary aids to ethical teaching, and should 
 not be neglected : but the consciousness of sin, as sin, is distinct 
 from both. It is only possible where there is a clear sense of a 
 personal relation to a Personal Being, whom we are bound to love 
 and obey, whose will must be the law of our lives and should be 
 the joy of our heai^. Here again the Stoic's language is treacher- 
 ous. He can talk of sin, just as he can talk of God his Father. 
 But so long as he is true to his dogma, he uses terms here, as before, 
 in a non-natural sense. Only so far as he deserts the theological 
 standing-ground of his school (and there is much of this happy 
 inconsistency in the great Stoic teachers), does he attain to such 
 an apprehension of the ' exceeding sinfulness of sin' as enables him 
 to probe the depths of the human conscience. 
 
 2. When we turn from the theology to the ethics of the Stoical 2. Defects 
 school, we find defects not less vital in its teaching. Here again ^tj^ig'" 
 Stoicism presents in itself a startling and irreconcilable contra- 
 diction. The fundamental Stoic maxim of conformity to nature, 
 though involving great difficulties in its practical application, might 
 at all events have afibrded a starting-point for a reasonable ethical 
 code. Yet it is hardly too much to say that no system of morals, 
 which the wit of man has ever devised, assumes an attitude so 
 fiercely defiant of nature as this. It is mere folly to maintain that Defiance 
 pain and privation are no evils. The paradox must defeat its own °^ nature. 
 ^ See above, p. 196. 
 PHIL. 21 
 
322 ST PAUL AND SENECA. 
 
 ends. True religion, like true philosophy, concedes the point, and 
 
 sets itself to counteract, to reduce, to minimise them. Our Lord 
 
 ' divides himself at once from the ascetic and the Stoic. They had 
 
 said. Make yourselves independent of bodily comforts : he says. Ye 
 
 have need of these things'.' Christianity itself also preaches an 
 
 avrdpKeia, a moral independence, but its preaching starts from a due 
 
 recognition of the facts of human life. 
 
 Want of And, while Stoicism is thus paradoxical towards the individual, 
 
 its view of the mutual relations between man and man is a stUl 
 
 greater outrage on humanity. 'In every age the Christian temper 
 
 has shivered at the touch of Stoic apathy'.' Pity, anger, love — all 
 
 the most powerful social impulses of our nature — are ignored by 
 
 the Stoic, or at least recognised only to be crushed. There is no 
 
 attempt to chasten or to guide these affections : they must simply be 
 
 rooted out. The Stoic ideal is stem, impassive, immovable. As a 
 
 natural consequence, the genuine Stoic is isolated and selfish : he 
 
 feels no sympathy with others, and therefore he excites no sympathy 
 
 in others. Any wide extension of Stoicism was thus rendered im- 
 
 })ossible by its inherent repulsiveness. It took a firm hold on a 
 
 few solitary spirits, but it was wholly powerless with the masses. 
 
 Stoicism Nor indeed can it be said in this respect to have failed in its 
 
 and not ^''^' '^^^ *"*® Stoic was too self-contained, too indifferent to the 
 
 proselytiz- condition of others, to concern himself whether the tenets of his 
 ing. 
 
 school made many proselytes or few. He wrapped himself up in his 
 
 self-conceit, declared the world to be mad, and gave himself no more 
 trouble about the matter. His avowal of cosmopolitan principles, 
 his tenet of religious equality, became inoperative, because the springs 
 of sympathy, which alone could make them effective, had been frozen 
 at their source. Where enthusiasm is a weakness and love a delusion, 
 such professions must necessarily be empty verbiage. The temper of 
 Stoicism was essentially aristocratic and exclusive in religion, as it 
 was in politics. While professing the largest comprehension, it was 
 practically the narrowest of aU philosophical castes. 
 U ^tifl^'t ^' '^^°^S^ °^'^®'^ philosophers had speculated on the immortality 
 in man's of the soul, and though the belief had been encouraged by some 
 t'Suy.' schools of moralists as supplying a most powerful motive for well- 
 doing, yet still it remained for the heathen a vague theory, unasoer- 
 
 ' Ecce Homo p. ii6. » Ecce Homo p. 119. 
 
ST PAUL AND SBNBOA. 323 
 
 tained and unasoertainable. To the Christian alone, when ho ac- 
 cepted the fact of Christ's resurrection, did it become an established 
 and incontrovertible truth. Stoicism does not escape the vagueness 
 which overclouds all mere philosophical speculation on this subject. 
 On one point alone were the professors of this school agreed. An 
 eternal existence of the human soul was out of the question. At the 
 great periodic conflagration, when the universe should be fused and 
 the manifold organizations dissolved into chaos, the souls of men 
 must necessarily be involved in the common destruction'. But 
 within this limit much diversity of opinion prevailed. Some main- Diversity 
 tained a longer, some a shorter, duration of the soul. Cleanthes said among the 
 that all men would continue to exist till the conflagration ; Chrysip- Stoics, 
 pus confined even this limited immortality to the wise'. The lan- 
 guage of Seneca on this point is both timid and capricious. ' If there Seneca's 
 be any sense or feeling after death' is his cautious hypothesis, fre- ^ ^^^ 
 quently repeated'. ' I was pleasantly engaged,' he writes to his vagueness, 
 friend Lucilius, 'in enquiring about the eternity of souls, or rather, I 
 should say, in trusting. For I was ready to trust myself to the opi- 
 nions of great men, who avow rather than prove so very acceptable 
 a thing. I was surrendering myself to this great hope, I was begin- 
 ning to be weary of myself, to despise theremaining fragments of a 
 broken life, as though I were destined to pass away into that illimit- 
 able time, and into the possession of eternity ; when I was suddenly 
 aroused by the receipt of your letter, and this beautiful dream 
 vanished*.' When again he would console the bereaved mourner, he 
 has no better words of comfort to offer than these : ' Why do I 
 waste away with fond regret for one who either is happy or does not 
 exist at aU ? It is envy to bewail him if he is happy, and madness if 
 he does not exist'.' ' Bear in mind that no evils affect the dead ; that 
 the circumstances which make the lower world terrible to us are an 
 idle story.' ' Death is the release and end of all pains.' ' Death is 
 neither a good nor an evil : for that only can be good or evil which 
 
 ' See e. g. Seneca ad Marc. 26, ad post mortem finiri, etiam ipsam.' 
 
 Polyb. I. (20). * Ep. Mor. cii. 2 ; comp. Ep. Mor. 
 
 ' Diog. iJaert, vii. 157. czvii. 6 'Gum animarmn atemitatem 
 
 ' De Srev. Vit. 18, ad Polyb. 5, 9, disserimus, non leve momentum apud 
 
 Ep. Mor. zxiv. 18, Ixv. 24, Ixxi. 16. nos habet consensus homintmi ant ti- 
 
 Tertulliau {de Besurr. Gam. i, deAnim. mentium inferos aut colentimn.' 
 
 42) quotes Seneca as saying ' Omnia ' Ad Polyb. 9. 
 
 21 — 2 
 
324 ST PAUL AND SENECA. 
 
 is something.' ' Fortune can retain no hold, where nature has given 
 a release : nor can one be ■wretched, who does not exist at all'.' 
 Afterwards indeed he speaks in a more cheerful strain : ' Eternal rest 
 awaits him leaving this murky and troubled (earth) and migrating to 
 the pure and liquid (sky)" : but such expressions must be qualified 
 by what has gone before. Again in this same treatise, as in other 
 places", he promises after death an enlarged sphere of knowledge 
 and a limitless field of calm and pure contemplation. But the pro- 
 mise which he gives in one sentence is often modified or retracted 
 in the next ; and even where the prospects held out are the brightest, 
 it is not always clear whether he contemplates a continuance of con- 
 scious individual existence, or merely the absorption into Universal 
 Being and the impersonal participation in its beauty and order*. 
 The views of Epictetus and M. Aurelius are even more cloudy and 
 cheerless than those of Seneca. Immortality, properly so called, has 
 no place in their philosophies. 
 Import- Gibbon, in his well-known chapter on the origin and growth 
 
 doctrSe to "'^ Christianity, singles out the promise of eternal life as among 
 
 Christian- the chief causes which promoted its diffusion. Overlooking much 
 Ity. 
 
 that is offensive in the tone of his remarks, we need not hesitate 
 
 to accept the statement as substantially true. It is indeed more 
 
 than questionable whether (as Gibbon implies) the growth of the 
 
 Church was directly due to the inducements of the offer ; for (looking 
 
 only to self-interest) it has a repulsive as well as an attractive side : 
 
 but without doubt it added enormously to the moral power of the 
 
 Gospel in commending it to the hearts and consciences of men. 
 
 Deterring, stimulating, reassuring, purifying and exalting the inward 
 
 and outward life, ' the power of Christ's resurrection' extends over 
 
 the whole domain of Christian ethics. 
 
 Its iudif- On the other hand it was a matter of indifference to the Stoic 
 
 Bt'^ofs^m" ■'^^st^sr he doubted or believed or denied the immortality of man ; 
 
 for the doctrine was wholly external to his creed, and nothing 
 
 1 Ad Mare. 19; comp. Ep. Mor. Seneca n. -p. 58 sq. (1859) endeavours 
 
 xzxvi. 10 'Mora nullum babet incom- to show that Seneoais throughout cou- 
 
 modum: esse enim debet aliquiB.oujua sistent with himself and follows the 
 
 sit inoommodum,' with the ooutext. Platonists rather than tbe Stoios in his 
 
 * Ad Marc. 24. doctrine of tbe immortality of the soul. 
 
 » Oomp. e.g. Ep. Mor. Ixxix. n, I do not see how it is possible, after 
 
 Ixxxvi. I, oil. 21, 18 sq. reading the treatise ad Marciam, to ao- 
 
 '' Holzberr Der Philosoph L. Aniufut quit him of inconsiateuey. 
 
ST PAUL AND SENEGA. 3^5 
 
 oould be lost or gained by the decision. Not life but death was 
 the constant subject of his meditations. His religious director was 
 summoned to his side, not to prepare him for eternity, but to teach 
 him how to die'. This defect alone would have rendered Stoicism 
 utterly powerless with the masses of men : for the enormous de- 
 mands which it made on the faith and self-denial of its adherents 
 could not be sustained without the sanction and support of such 
 a belief. The Epicurean motto, ' Let us eat and drink, for to-morrow Conse- 
 we die,' base though it was, had at least this recommendation, that redoxes*' 
 the conclusion did seem to follow from the premisses : but the moral and per- 
 teaching of the Stoic was practically summed up in the paralogism, stoioiBm. 
 ' Let us neither eat nor drink, for to-morrow we die,' where no wit 
 of man could bridge over the gulf between the premisses and the 
 conclusion. A belief in man's immortality might have saved the 
 Stoic from many intellectual paradoxes and much practical per- 
 plexity : but then it would have made him other than a Stoic. 
 He had a profound sense of the reign of moral order in the universe. 
 Herein he was right. But the postulate of man's immortality alone 
 reconciles this belief with many facts of actual experience; and, 
 refusing to extend his views beyond the present life, he was obliged 
 to misstate or deny these facts in order to save his thesis'. He 
 staunchly maintained the inherent quality of actions as good or bad 
 (irrespective of their consequences), and he has deserved the grati- 
 tude of mankind as the champion of a morality of principles. But he 
 falsely supposed himself bound in consequence to deny any force to 
 the utilitarian aspect of ethics, as though it were irreconcilable 
 with his own doctrine ; and so he was led into the wildest paradoxes, 
 calling good evU and evil good. The meeting-point of these two 
 distinct lines of view is beyond the grave, and he refused to carry 
 his range of vision so far. It was inconsistent with his tenets to 
 hold out the hope of a future life as an incentive to well-doing and a 
 dissuasive from sin ; for he wholly ignored the idea of retribution. 
 
 • Socrates (or Plato) said that true ' the divine government which we ex- 
 philosophers oiSip aWo airol imrriSev- perieuce ourselves under in the present 
 ovffw ^ airodviiaKeiv re Kol reOydvai statCj taken alone, is allowed not to be 
 (Phado 64 a). The Stoic, by accept- the perfection of moral goverimient. ' 
 ing the droOir/irKeiv and forgetting the The Stoic denied what the Chiistian 
 TeSnii'iu, robbed the saying of its vir- philosopher assumes, and contradicted 
 tne. experience by maintaining that it is 
 
 ' Butler argues from the fact that perfect, taken alone. 
 
326 »T PAUL AND SBNBCA. 
 
 So far, there was more substantial truth and greater moral power 
 in the crude and gross conceptions of an afterworld embodied in 
 the popular mythology which was held up to scorn by him, than iu 
 the imposing philosophy which he himself had devised to supplant 
 them. 
 4. Absence 4. Attention was directed above to an instructive parallel 
 torical which Seneca's language presents to our Lord's image of the vine 
 basis. j^j^^ tjjQ branches'. Precepts, writes the philosopher, wither un- 
 less they are gi-afted in a sect. By this confession Seneca vir- 
 tually abandons the position of self-isolation and self-sufficiency, 
 which the Stoic assumes. He felt vaguely the want of some his- 
 torical basis, some bond of social union, in short some principle 
 of cohesion, which should give force and vitality to his ethical 
 teaching. No mere abstract philosophy has influenced or can in- 
 
 A sacred fluence permanently large masses of men. A Bible and a Church — 
 record and i i j t • -j. ■ j-i.- 
 
 areUgious * sacred record and a religious community — are primary conditions 
 
 commu- Qf extensive and abiding success. An isolated spirit here and there 
 
 nityneces- . ° . 
 
 aary. may have dispensed with such aids ; but, as a social power, as a 
 
 continuous agency, mere doctrine, however imposing, will for the 
 most part be ineffective without such a support. 
 
 So far we have been speaking of conditions of success which were 
 wanting indeed to Stoicism, but which nevertheless ai-e not peculiar 
 to Christianity. All creeds, which have secured any wide and lasting 
 allegiance, have had their sacred books and their religious organi- 
 Christian- zation. But our Lord's language, of which Seneca's image is a 
 in a'pe™^ partial though unconscious echo, points to the one distinguishing 
 son. feature of Christianity. It is not a record nor a community, but a 
 
 Person, whence the sap spreads to the branches and ripens into the 
 rich clusters. I have already alluded to Gibbon's account of the 
 causes which combiaed to promote the spread of the Church. It 
 will seem strange to any one who has at all felt the spiiit of the 
 Gospel, that a writer, enumerating the forces to which the dissemi- 
 nation and predominance of Christianity were due, should omit all 
 ChriBlthe mention of the Christ. One might have thought it impossible to 
 themoral ^^^'^J ^^^^ common attention the records of the Apostles and 
 power of martyrs of the first ages or of the saints and heroes of the later 
 ity, Church, without seeing that the consciousness of personal union with 
 
 ' See above, p. 285. 
 
ST PAUL AND SENECA. 327 
 
 Him, the belief in His abiding presence, was the mainspring of their 
 actions and the fountain of all their strength. This is not a precon- 
 ceived theory of what should have happened, but a bare statement 
 of what stands recorded on the pages of history. In all ages and 
 under all circumstances, the Christian life has ever radiated from 
 this central fire. "Whether we take St Peter or St Paul, St Francis 
 of Assisi or John Wesley, whether Athanasius or Augustine, Anselm 
 or Luther, whether Boniface or Francis Xavier, here has been the 
 impulse of their activity and the secret of their moral power. Their 
 lives have illustrated the parable of the vine and the branches. 
 
 It is this which differentiates Christianity from all other reli- Distinctive 
 
 T A Ail 11 ffl rtl 
 
 gions, and still more from all abstract systems of philosophy. Those christian- 
 who assume the entire aim and substance of the Gospel to have **y* 
 been the inculcation of moral precepts, and who therefore rest its Not a mor- 
 
 8il cods 
 
 claims solely or chiefly on the purity of its ethical code, often find 
 themselves sorely perplexed, when they stumble upon some noble 
 and true utterance of Jewish or Heathen antiquity before the coming 
 of Christ. A maxim of a Stoic philosopher or a Rabbinical school- 
 man, a saying of Plato or Confucius, startles them by its resem- 
 blance to the teaching of the Gospel. Such perplexity is founded on 
 a twofold error. On the one hand they have not realised the truth 
 that the same Divine Power was teaching mankind before He was 
 made flesh : while on the other they have failed to see what is 
 involved in this incarnation and its sequel. To those who have 
 felt how much is implied in St John's description of the pre-incamate 
 Word as the life and light of men ; to those who allow the force of 
 Tertullian's appeal to the ' witness of a soul naturally Christian' ; 
 to those who have sounded the depths of Augustine's bold saying, 
 that what we now call the Christian religion existed from the dawn 
 of the human race, though it only began to be named Christian when 
 Christ came in the flesh' j to those who can respond to the senti- 
 ment of the old English poem, 
 
 'Many man for Cristes love 
 Was martired in Eomayne, 
 Er any Cristendom was knowe there 
 Or any cros honoured ' ; 
 
 it cannot be a surprise to find such flashes of divine truth in men 
 ' Retract, i. 13. 
 
328 8T PADL AND SENECA. 
 
 who lived before the coming of our Lord or •were placed beyond 
 the reach of the GoapeL The significance of Christ's moral precepts 
 does not lose but gain by the admission : for we learn to view Him 
 no longer as one wholly apart from our race, but recognising in His 
 teaching old truths which ' in manhood darkly join,' we shall only be 
 the more prompt to 
 
 'Yield all blessing to the name 
 Of Him that made them current coin.' 
 
 bntaprin- But the mere ethical teaching, however important, is the least 
 centred in important, because the least distinctive part of Christianity. If 
 a Person. t}iere bo any meaning in the saying that Christ appeared to ' bring 
 life and immortality to light,' if the stedfast convictions of St Peter 
 and St Paul and St John were not a delusion, and their lives not 
 built upon a lie, then obviously a deeper principle is involved. The 
 moral teaching and the moral example of our Lord will ever have 
 the highest value in their own province ; but the core of the (Jospel 
 does not lie here. Its distinctive character is, that in revealing a 
 Person it reveals also a principle of life — ^the union with God in 
 Christ, apprehended by faith in the present and assured to us here- 
 after by the Resurrection. This Stoicism could not give ; and there- 
 fore its dogmas and precepts were barren. Its noblest branches 
 bore ieither flowers nor fruit, because there was no parent stem 
 from which they could draw fresh sap. 
 
ST PAUL AND SENECA. 329 
 
 The Letters of Paul wnd Seneca. 
 
 THE spurious correspondence between the Apostle and the philosopher The coith- 
 to wliich reference is made in the preceding essay, consists of fourteen spondence 
 letters, the ist, 3rd, sth, 7th, 9th, nth, 12th, and 13th written in the name described, 
 of Seneca, and the 2nd, 4th, 6th, Sth, loth, and 14th of St Paul In the 
 address of the 6th the name of Lucilius is added to that of Seneca, and in 
 the same way in the address of the 7th Theophilus is named along with 
 St Paul. 
 
 I have not thought it worth while to reprint these letters, as they may Editions 
 be read conveniently in the recent edition of Seneca's works by F. Haase of the 
 (in. p. 476 sq.) included in Teubner's series, and are to be found likewise in l^"^". 
 several older editions of this author. They have been printed lately also 
 in Floury's St Paul et S^neque (11. p. 300 sq.) and in Aubertin's Seneque et 
 St Paul (p. 409 sq.), and still more recently in an article by Kraus, entitled 
 Der Bri^wechsel Pauli mil Seneca, in the Tlieologische Quarialschr\fl 
 XLix. p. 601 (1867). 
 
 The great popularity of this correspondence in the ages before the The msb 
 Keformation is shown by the large number of extant mss. Pleury, and collar 
 making use of the common catalogues, has enumerated about sixty ; and *^°°^' 
 probably a careful search would largely increase the number. The major- 
 ity, as is usual in such cases, belong to the thirteenth, fourteenth, and 
 fifteenth centuries, but two at least are as early as the ninth. Ilaase used 
 some fresh collations, from which however he complains that little was to 
 be got (p. xxii); and Fleury also collated three mss from Paris and one 
 from Toulouse. Haase directed attention to the two most ancient, Ambro- 
 sianus C. 90 and Argentoratensis C. vr. 5, both belonging to the ninth 
 century (which had not yet been examined), but had no opportunity of 
 collating them himself. Collations from these (together with another later 
 Strassburg MS, Argentoratensis C. vi. 7) were afterwards used by Kraus 
 for his text, which is thus constructed of better materials than any other. 
 But after all, it remains in an unsatisfactory state, which the worthlessness 
 of the letters themselves may well excuse. 
 
 This correspondence was probably forged in the fourth century, either Probable 
 to recommend Seneca to Christian readers or to recommend Christianity to ™otive of 
 students of Seneca^ In favour of this view may be urged the fact that „erv 
 in several mss these spurious letters precede the genuine works of 
 Seneca^ Nor does any other motive seem consistent with the letters them- 
 selves; for they have no doctrinal bearing at all, and no historical interest of 
 
 1 As for instance Argent. 0. vi. 5 Seneca, being themselves preceded by 
 
 described by Kraus. So in Burn. 151 the notice of Jerome and followed by 
 
 (British Museum), which I have ex- the first of the epistles to Lucilius. It 
 
 amined, they are included in a collec- is not imcommou to find them imme- 
 
 tion of genuine and spurious works of diately before the genuine epistles. 
 
330 ST PAUL AND SENECA. 
 
 sufficient importance to account for the forgery. They are made up chiefly 
 of an interchange of compliments between the Apostle and the philoso- 
 pher; and the only historical thread which can be said to run through 
 them is the endeavour of Seneca to gain the ear of Nero for the writings 
 of St Paul. 
 Beferenoe I* ^ commonly said that St Jerome, who first mentions these letters, 
 to the let- had no suspicion that they were spurious. This statement however is 
 tera by exaggerated, for he does not commit himself to any opinion at all about 
 Jerome, y^gj^ genuineness. He merely says, that he ' should not have given a place 
 to Seneca in a catalogue of saints, unless challenged to do so by those 
 letters of Paul to Seneca and from Seneca to Paul which are read by very 
 many persons' {de Vir. III. 12 'nisi me illis epistolae provocarent quje 
 leguntur a plurimis'). When it is remembered how slight an excuse 
 serves to bring other names into his list, such as Philo, Josephus, and 
 Justus Tiberiensis, we cannot lay any stress on the vague language which 
 he uses in this case. The more probable inference is that he did not deli- 
 berately accept them as genuine. Indeed, if he had so accepted them, 
 his profound silence about them elsewhere would be wholly inexplicable, 
 iugustine, St Augustine, as generally happens in questions of historical criticism, 
 repeats the language of Jerome and perhaps had not seen the letters 
 {Epist. cliii. 14 'Seneca cujus qucedam ad I'aulum apostolum leguntur 
 and later cpistolae")- Throughout the middle ages they are mentioned or quoted, 
 wi-iters. most frequently as genuine, but occasionally with- an expression of doubt, 
 until the revival of learning, when the light of criticism rapidly dispelled 
 the illusion'. 
 These lot- As they are now universally allowed to be spurious, it will be unneces- 
 ters a sary to state at length the grounds of their condemnation. It is sufficient 
 manifest ^q g^y that the letters are inane and unworthy throughout ; that the style 
 orgery. ^^ either correspondent is unlike his genuine writings ; that the relations 
 between the two, as there represented, are highly improbable ; and lastly, 
 that the chronological notices (which however are absent in some important 
 Mss) are wrong in almost every instance. Thus, independently of the 
 unbroken silence of three centuries and a half about this con-espondence, 
 internal evidence alone is sufficient to condemn them hopelessly. 
 Yet the Yet the writer is not an ignorant man. He has read part of Seneca 
 
 writer la and is aware of the philosopher's relations with Lucilius ; ho is acquainted 
 rant'?""' ^''^ ^^^ story of Castor and Pollux appearing to one Vatinius (or 
 wholly Vatienus) ; he can talk glibly of the gardens of Sallust j he is acquainted 
 oarelesB. with the character of Caligula whom ho properly calls Gains Caesar ; he is 
 even aware of the Jewish sympathies of the empress Poppeea and makes 
 her regard St Paul as a renegade'; and lastly, he seems to have had 
 before him some account of the Neronian fire and persecution* which is no 
 
 1 Another passage quoted above, p. ' Ep. 5 ' Indignatio dominnj, quod a 
 49, note i, in which Augustine remarka ritu et seotn veteri reoesseris et [te] 
 onSeneoa'sailenoeaboutthe Christians, aliorsum converteris' ; comp. Ep. 8, 
 ia inoonaistent with a conviction of the where however the reading ia doubt- 
 genuineness of these letters. fah 
 
 ' See Fleury i. p. 269 sq. for a * Yet there must be some mistake in 
 
 catena of references. the numbers, which appear too small. 
 
ST PAUL AND SENECA. 331 
 
 longer extant, for he speaks of ' Christians and Jews ' being punished as the 
 authors of the conflagration and mentions that ' a hundred and thirty-two 
 houses and six insuloe were burnt in sis days.' 
 
 Moreover 1 believe ho attempts, though he succeeds ill in the attempt, 
 to make a difference in the styles of Seneca and St Paul, the writing of 
 the latter being more ponderous. Unfortunately he betrays himself by 
 representing Seneca as referring more than once to St Paul's bad style ; 
 and in ono letter the philosopher mentions sending the Apostle a book 
 de Copia Ferborum, obviously for the purpose of improving his Latin. 
 
 I mention these facts, because they bear upon a theory maintained by Theory of 
 some modern critics^ that these letters are not the same with those to some mo- 
 which Jerome and Augustine refer ; that they had before them a genuine f^™ ""' 
 con-espondence between St Paul and Seneca, which has since perished; and 
 that the extant epistles were forged later (say about the ninth century), 
 being suggested by the notices in these fathers and invented in conse- 
 quence to supply their place. The only specious arguments advanced in 
 favour of this view, so far as I know, are these: (i) A man like Jerome The argu- 
 could not possibly have believed the extant correspondence to be genuine, ments for 
 for the forgery is transparent ; (2) The de Copia Verhorum is a third title '^^J ']j^'" 
 to a work otherwise known as de Formula Honestm Vital or de Quatuor ^ * * 
 Virtutihug, written by Martinus Bragensis or Dumiensis (t circ. a.d. 580), 
 but ascribed in many mss to Seneca. Sufficient time therefore must have 
 elapsed since this date to allow the false title and false ascription to take 
 the place of the true and to be generally circulated and recognised^. 
 
 To both these arguments a ready answer may be given : (i) There is no and an- 
 reason to suppose that Jerome did believe the correspondence to be swered. 
 genuine, as I have already shown. He would hardly have spoken so 
 vaguely, if he had accepted them as genuine or even inclined to this beUef. 
 (3) A much better account can be given of the false title and ascription 
 of Martin's treatise, if we suppose that they arose out of the allusion in 
 the letters, than on the converse hypothesis that they were prior to and 
 suggested this allusion. This Martin, whose works appear to have had Martinus 
 a very large circulation in the middle ages, wrote on kindred subjects Bragensia 
 and seems occasionally to have abridged and adapted Seneca's writings. 
 For this reason his works were commonly bound up with those of Seneca, 
 and in some instances came to be ascribed to the Stoic philosopher. This 
 is the case at all events with the de Morihus, as well as the de Quatuor 
 Virtutibui, and perhaps other spurious treatises bearing the name of 
 Seneca may be assigned to the same author. A copy of the de Quatuor Account 0/ 
 Virtutibus, either designedly abridged or accidentally mutilated, and on de Copia 
 this account wanting the title, was bound up so as to precede or follow V^i'iorum. 
 the correspondence of Paul and Seneca^; and, as Seneca in one of these 
 
 • An account of these views will be 11. p. 267 sq. The df. Formula Hones- 
 
 found in Fleury n. p. 215 sq. He f(j Fttis is printed in Haase's edition of 
 
 himself holds that the letters read by Seneca (iii. p. 468) together with other 
 
 these fathers were not the same with spurions works, 
 our correspondence, but questions whe- ' It is found- in some extant mss 
 
 ther those letters were genuine. (e.g. Elor. Fl. xlv. Cod.iv^'immediately 
 
 ' This argument is urged by Fleury before the letters, and ii may perhaps 
 
332 
 
 ST' PAUL AND SENECA, 
 
 letters mentions sending the de Copia Verhorum, a later transcriber as- 
 sumed that the neighbouring treatise must be the work in question, and 
 without reflecting gave it this title*. Whether the forger of the corre- 
 spondence invented an imaginary title, or whether a standard work bearing 
 this name, either by Seneca himself or by some one else, was in general 
 circulation when he wrote, we have no means of deciding ; but the motive 
 in the allusion is clearly the improvement of St Paul's Latin, of which 
 Seneca more than once complains. On the other hand the de Quatuor 
 Virtutibug Is, as its name implies, a treatise on the cardinal virtues. An 
 allusion to this treatise therefore would be meaningless; nor indeed has 
 any reasonable explanation been given, how it got the title de Copia Ver- 
 borum, on the supposition that this title was prior to the allusion in the 
 correspondence and was not itself suggested thereby, for it is wholly 
 alien to the subject of the treatise. 
 
 But other strong and (as it seems to me) convincing arguments may be 
 brought against this theory : (i) Extant ms8 of the correspondence date 
 th^°* ''''°™ *'^® ninth century, and in these the text is already in a corrupt state. 
 (2) The historical knowledge which the letters show could hardly have 
 
 Direct 
 reasons 
 
 occur in some others immediately after 
 them. [Since the first edition appeared, 
 in which this oonjeoture was hazarded, 
 I have found the treatise immediately 
 after the letters, Bodl. Laud. Misc. 383, 
 fol. 77 a, where it is anonymous.] 
 
 ' The work, when complete, consists 
 of (i) A dedication in Martin's name 
 to Miro king of GaUioia, in which he 
 mentions the title of the book Formula 
 Vita Honestte ; (i) A short paragraph 
 enumerating the four cardinal virtues ; 
 (3) A discussion of these several virtues 
 and the measure to be observed in each. 
 In the MSS, so far as I have learnt 
 from personal inspection and from no- 
 tices in other writers, it is found in 
 three different forms ; (i) Complete 
 (e.g. Cambridge Univ. Libr. Dd. xv. 
 II ; Bodl. Laud. Misc. 444, foL 146), 
 in which case there is no possibili- 
 ty of mistaking its authorship; (2) 
 Without the dedicatory preface, so that 
 it begins Quatuor virtutum species etc. 
 In this form it is generally entitled 
 de Quatuor Virtutibus and ascribed to 
 Seneca. So it is for instance in three 
 British Museum mss, Bum. 151 
 fol. 33 a (xiiith cent.; the treatise 
 being mutilated at the end and con- 
 cluding ' In has ergo maculae pruden. 
 tia inamensurata perduoet'). Bum. 360, 
 fol. 35 a (xivth cent.?), and Harl. 233 
 (xnith or xivth cent.?; where how- 
 
 ever the general title is wanting and 
 the treatise has the special heading 
 Seneca de prudentia). The transcriber 
 of Arund, 249 (xvth cent.) also gives 
 it in this form, but is aware of the true 
 author, for the heading is Incipit trac- 
 tatus libri honeste vite editus a Martino 
 episcopo Qui a multis intitulatur de 
 quatuor virtutibvxetattrihuilurSenece; 
 but he ends it Explicit tractatus de 
 quatuor virtutibus Annei Senece Gordu- 
 bensis, as he doubtless found it in the 
 copy which he transcribed. In Bodl. 
 Laud. Lat. 86, fol. 58 a, where it 
 occurs in this form, it is ascribed to its 
 rightauthor; whileagaininBodLXiaud. 
 Arise. 280, fol. 1 1 7 a, it is anonymous. 
 These Msslhaveexamined. (3) It occurs 
 without either the dedicatory preface or 
 the general paragraph on the four vir- 
 tues, and some extraneous matter is 
 added at the end. Only in this form, so 
 far as I can discover, does it bear the 
 strange title de Verhorum Copia. So in 
 one of the Gale mss at Trinity College 
 Cambridge (0, 3. 31) it begins 'Senece de 
 quatuorvirtutibusprimo(7) deprudentia. 
 Quisquis prudentiam...' aild ends'... 
 jactura que per negUgentiam fit. Ex- 
 plicit liber Senece de verborum copia' ; 
 and the ms described by Haase (iii. p. 
 xxii) belongs to the same type. These 
 facts accord with the account of the title 
 which I have suggested in the text. 
 
ST PAUL AND SENECA 333 
 
 been possessed, or turned to such account, by a writer later than the 
 fourth or fifth century. (3) Jerome quotes obliquely a passage from the 
 letters, and this passage is found in the extant correspondence. To this it 
 is replied, that the forger, taking the notice of Jerome as his starting- 
 point, would necessarily insert the quotation to give colour to his forgery. 
 But I think it may be assumed in this case that the pseudo-Seneca would 
 have preserved the words of Jerome accurately or nearly so ; whereas, 
 though the sense is the same, the difference in form is considerable^ It 
 may be added also that the sentiment is in entire keeping with the per- 
 vading tone of the letters, and has no appearance of being introduced for 
 a distinct purpose. (4) It is wholly inconceivable that a genuine corre- 
 spondence of the Apostle could have escaped notice for three centuries 
 and a half; and not less inconceivable that, having once been brought to 
 light at the end of the fourth and beginning of the fifth century, it should 
 again have fallen into oblivion and been suffered to disappear. This theory 
 therefore may bo confidently rejected, 
 
 ^ The reference in St Jerome la tianos.' The words stand in the letters 
 ' (Seneca) optare se dioit ejus esse loci (no. ii),'[Uii]namqmmenB,tauBapud 
 apad suos, cujns sit Paulus apud Chris- te loouB, q^ni tuos, velim ut meas.' 
 
INDEX. 
 
 AxnoNio priesthood; see priesthood 
 accumulated expiessions in St Paul, 
 
 i- 9. 14. '3. 27i "• «. iii- 9> i^- '• "< '7 
 
 Aote, p. II 
 
 Acts of the Apostles ; passages ex- 
 plained, p. 50 (xvi 11), 51 (xvi. 13), 
 304 (XTU. »8), 35 (xxvii. a), 7, 103 
 (xzTiii. 16), 9 (xxTiii. 30) ; ending not 
 abrupt, p. 3; last chapters authentic, 
 p. 15 ; account of St Paul compared 
 with his epistles, p. 1, 38 sq. ; account 
 of Philippi, p. 50 
 
 advent of Christ ; its nearness, i. 6, 10, 
 ii. 17, lii. 1, iv. s 
 
 AeliuB Publius Julias, p. 117 
 
 Aerius, p. 233 
 
 Africa, episcopacy in, p. 224; synods 
 of, p. 124, 242 ; sacerdotaliBmin,p. i6o 
 
 Agrippa (Herod, I); his imprisonment 
 and release, p. 103 si^. 
 
 Agrippa (Herod, II); his dispute with 
 the Jews and relations with Festus, 
 
 P- 7 
 
 Alexander (the Great) ; his view of his 
 mission, p. 306 ; effects of bis con- 
 quests, p. 274, 306 
 
 Alexander (of Alexandria), p. 231 
 
 Alexander (of Borne), p. 211 sex. 
 
 Alexandria, early foondation of the 
 Church of, p. 125 ; state of religion 
 in, ib, ; ordination at, p. 126 ; episco- 
 pacy in, p. 225 sq., 231 sq.; patriarch 
 of, 231 sq. ; sacerdotalism at, p. 254, 
 256 
 
 Alexandrian Judaism and the Gospel, 
 p. 302 sq. 
 
 Aliturus, p. 6, 173 
 
 altar, use of the word, p. 251, 261, 
 265 
 
 Ambrosiaster (Hilary) ; on the Diyinity 
 of Christ, p. 131 ; on the priesthood, 
 p. 185; on the identity of 'bishops' 
 and 'presbyters,' p. 99; on episco- 
 pacy, p. 203 sq., 207, 229; on the 
 Alexandrian episcopate, p. 231 ; pre- 
 serTes a tradition about St Paul, 
 p. 103 
 
 amphitheatre, metaphor from the, i. 
 27, 28 
 
 Amplias, p. 10, 174 
 
 Ancient Syriao Documents, p. 76, 211, 
 221, 260 
 
 Ancyra, Council of, p. 232 sq. 
 
 Andrew (St) in Asia Minor, p. 202 
 
 Andronicus and Junias, p. 10, 11, 17 
 
 Anencletus, p. 221 sq. 
 
 angels; of a synagogue, p. 199 ; in the 
 Apocalypse, p. 199 sq. 
 
 Anicetus, p. 220, 222 sq. 
 
 anthropomorphism, p. 132 
 
 Antichrist, p. i 
 
 antinomianism rebuked, p. 68, 70, iii. 
 12, 13, 15, 18 
 
 Antioch, bishops of, p. 210 sq. 
 
 Antonia, p. 103 sq. 
 
 AntoniuB Melissa, p. 252 
 
 aorist; epistolary, p. 37, 139, ii. 25. 
 28; participle of, ii. 7; pluperfect 
 sense of, iv. 15 ; with perfect, iii. 12 
 
 Apelles, p. 17, 173, 174 
 
 Apocalypse, angels in the, p. 199 sq. ; 
 date of, p. 200 ; reference to persecu- 
 tion in, p. 25; ii. 20 interpreted. 
 p. 200. 
 
336 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Apostles; not bishops, p. 196; super- 
 vision of ohuiohes by, p. 198 ; Second 
 Council of the, p. 202 sq. 
 
 Apostolic Constitutions, p. 259, 263 
 
 Apostolic delegates, p. 199 
 
 appeals to Csesar, p. 4, 31 
 
 appellatio, p. 7 
 
 Appian way, monuments of the, p. 
 171 sq. 
 
 AquilaandPriscilla; their movements, 
 p. 178J in Borne, p. lo, 16, 173 
 
 Aratus, p. 304 
 
 Archippus, p. 31 
 
 Areopagus ; see Paid {St) 
 
 Aristarchus, p. 11, 18, 35, 37 
 
 Aristobnlus, p. 17, 174 
 
 Aristotle's use of /iOfKp-^ and syuonymes, 
 p. 128 sq. 
 
 article (the definite) ; omission of, i. i, 
 5, 6, iii. 9 ; type denoted by, p. 97 ; 
 uses of, ii. 6, 21, 30, iii. 9 
 
 Asia Minor; Apostles settled in, p. 202 ; 
 episcopacy in, p. 212 sq.; sides with 
 Cyprian, p. 242 
 
 aspirates (anomalous), ii. 13 
 
 Atheism,auameof Christianity.p. 22,23 
 
 Athens; episcopacy at, p. 216 sq. 
 
 Attic dialect exceptional, ii. 14 
 
 Anbertin (C), Siri&que et St Paul, p. 
 278, 299 
 
 Augustine (St) ; on Seneca, p. 29 ; on 
 episcopacy, p. 230 ; on pre-Christian 
 Christianity, p. 327 
 
 Augustus; his policy as to PhiUppi, 
 p. SO, S' 
 
 Aurelius (M. Antoninus); his charac- 
 ter, p. 29S, 31 7 ; his modified Stoicism, 
 p. 317, 318 sq. ; defects of his teach- 
 ing, p. 318 ; persecution of the Chris- 
 tians, p. 317 sq.; supposed relations 
 with rabbi Jehuda, p. 318 ; notice of 
 Christianity, p. 28, 318 ; on immor- 
 tality, p. 324 
 
 ayioi, i. I 
 
 d7i'4t, p. 64, iv. 8 
 
 iytity, i. 30 
 
 iStXipol (emphatic), iii. 13 
 
 iSrinovetv, ii. 16 
 
 ataB^is, aladip-iipia, i. 9 
 
 alaxii^, vap/nirla, i. 20 
 
 iKOipetv (-peiffdai), iv. 10 
 
 ixipcuos, ii. 15 
 
 dXij^Tit, iv. 8 
 
 &\\&, /iiv oHv, iii. 8. 
 
 aXvais (Se<r/*6», widij), p. 8 
 
 ifte/iTTOs, iii. 6 
 
 dfiu/ws (-/tT/Toi), ii. IS 
 
 dpa6i\K(U' (transitive), iv. 10 
 
 ivaXieiv, i. 23 
 
 ivaTrXripow, ii. 30 
 
 ivdiTTaffis {i^ayivraais), iii. 1 1 
 
 ii/a, iii. 15 
 
 dira^ KoU dLs, iv. 16 
 
 &TreKd4x(v9ai, iii. 20 
 
 dir^tiK, iv. 18 
 
 iirodaveiv, i, 21 
 
 diroKapadoKiaf i. 20 
 
 iiro\oyla, i. 7 
 
 dir^iTToXos (delegate], iL 25, p. 196 
 
 dTpSffKOTTOs, i. 10 
 
 dperi), iv. 8 
 
 apTayiia (dpvayiibv) ^yeiaSai etc., ii. 6, 
 
 p. 133 eq. 
 dpxiffvvdyuyoSf p. 207 
 airapxaa, iv. 11 
 airh toCto, i. 6 ; tA aird, iL 1 8 
 airoS etc. {aurdv etc.), use of, iii. 21 
 o^eXTrifcu', ii. 23 
 a<t>op&v (-(Sell'), ii. 23 
 
 Bacchanalian conspiracy, p. 26 
 
 BacohyUus, p. 216 
 
 Barnabas, Epistle of p. 225 
 
 Baur (C.F.), p. 74, 170, 177, 233, 278, 
 
 296 
 Benjamin, tribe of, iii. 5 
 bishops ; see episcopate 
 book of life, iv. 3 
 Bruttius, p. 22 
 BurruB, the prsBtorian prefect, p. 3, 5, 
 
 8,301 
 Butler (Bp.), p. 325 
 /3e/3afu(ris, i. 7 
 p\4veTe, iii. 2 
 
 Cessarea ; evangelization of, p. 31 ; St 
 Paul's captivity at, p. 30, 31 
 
 Oessar's household, p. 19, 30, 33, 100, 
 171 sq., iv. 21 
 
INDEX. 
 
 337 
 
 Oaius or Qaius (the empeior) and Agiip- 
 pa, p. 103 sq. 
 
 CaiuB or Gaius (St Paul's host), p. 215 
 
 Cadus or Oaios (of Maoedonia), p. 62 
 
 Gallistaa, p. 223 
 
 Calvin's distinction of la; and teaching 
 elders, p. 195 
 
 Carthage ; see Africa 
 
 Cassiua of Tyre, p. 209 
 
 CathoUo- Church, p. 204, 207 
 
 Cato the younger ; his character, p. 3 1 o 
 sq. 
 
 chains of prisoners, p. 8 
 
 chazan, his duties, etc., p. 189 sq. 
 
 chiasm, i. 16 
 
 Chrestus, Chrestianns, p. 16 
 
 Christ; divinity and pre-existence of , ii, 
 6 sq., p. 131 sq., 137 ; uniTersal sove- 
 reignty of, iii. 2 1 ; high priesthood of, 
 p. 251 ; an object of worship, ii. lo; 
 the Word, p. 292, 303, 327 ; the true 
 vine, p. 326 sq., 328 ; obedience of, 
 ii. 8, 12; righteoasness in, iii. 9; 
 membership in, ii. 19, p. 307 sq.; com- 
 munion withHissufCeringsand death, 
 iii. 10 ; see Christianity, Church, Be- 
 aurrection, etc. 
 
 Christiauministry, priesthood, etc.; see 
 ministry, priesthood, etc. 
 
 Christianity, distinguishing feature of, 
 p. 326 sq.; its true character, p. 327 
 sq. 
 
 Christians, accusations against, p. 24, 
 26; silence of heathen writers about, 
 p. 27, 28, 29 
 
 chorepiscopi, p. 232 sq. 
 
 Chrysippus, p. 275 sq., 309, 323 
 
 Chrysostom (St) ; on bishops and prns- 
 byters, p. 99 j on prffitorium, ii. ; 
 confused interpretation of, 136 sq.; 
 misunderstood, p. 96 
 
 Church of Christ ; ideal of, p. 181 sq. ; 
 itBpracticallimitations,i&.; influence 
 of this ideal, p. 183; false ideas pre- 
 vailing in, p. 268 
 
 Cicero's letters, rate of travelling in, 
 
 p. 38 
 circumcision, metaphor of, iii. 3 
 citizenship ; St Paul's metaphor of the 
 
 PHIL. 
 
 heavenly, p. 52, 307 sq., i. 27, iii. 20 ; 
 rights of Roman, ii. 8, p. 306 
 
 Claras (of Ftolemais), p. 209 
 
 Claudian, his religious indifference, p. 
 27 
 
 Claudius ApoUinaris, p. 213 
 
 Cleauthes, character of, p. 310 ; hymn 
 of, p. 304, 320; on immortality, p. 
 3»3 
 
 Clemens (Alezandrinns) ; on the minis- 
 try, p. 212, 226, 229, 254 sq.; no 
 sacerdotalism in, p. 254 
 
 Clemens (Plavius) ; see Flavins 
 
 Clemens (Bomanus); character of, p. 
 168, 170; his date, p. 168; connexion 
 with St Peter and St Paul, p. 169 ; 
 recent criticisms on, p. 169 sq.; a 
 Greek, p. 223; his office, p. 218 sq., 
 221 ; occasion of his letter, p. 216; 
 its purport and contents, p. 205, 216, 
 249 sq. J passages discussed, p. 203, 
 205, 249 sq.; resemblances to Philip- 
 piaus in, p. 75 ; no sacerdotalism in, 
 p. 249 sq. ; use of term ' offerings ' 
 in, p. 262 ; bishops and presbyters 
 identified in, p. 97 sq., 205, 218 
 
 Clement, St Paul's feUow-labourer, 
 p. 168 sq. ; the name common, p. 
 169 
 
 Clementine Homilies, etc. ; anthropo- 
 morphism in, p. 132; not sacerdotal, 
 p. 260; on episcopacy, p. 209, 211, 
 238; position of St James in, p. 197, 
 208; on the Ganaanitish woman, 
 iii. 2 
 
 clergy, distinguished from laity, p. 246 
 sq., 248 ; origin of the term, p. 245 
 sq. ; see kKtjpos 
 
 Cletus, p. 221 
 
 clubs ; see confratemitiet 
 
 collection of alms ; see Macedonia, Phi- 
 
 lippians 
 colonies (Eoman), p. 51 
 Colossians, Epistle to the ; written from 
 Eome, p. 12; not from Cssarea, p. 
 30, 31; date of, 31 sq.; later than 
 Philippians, p. 45 ; genuineness of, 
 p. 18 ; Judaizers mentioned in, p. 17 
 sq. ; Gnosticism refuted in, p. 4a 
 
 22 
 
33S 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 comparative ; force of, ii. 18 ; accumu- 
 lated, i. 23 
 
 compresbyterus, p. 130 
 
 ooufratemities, p. 95, 194 
 
 oonscientia, p. 303 
 
 Corinth, the Church of; St Paul's 
 dealings with, p. 198 ; episcopacy in, 
 p. 116 sq.; lost letters to, p. 139; see 
 Cletnens Romania 
 
 Corinthians, Epistles to the ; no sacer- 
 dotalism in, p. 245; passages inter- 
 preted (i Cor. V. 3 sq., I Cor. ii. 6), 
 p. 198 
 
 Crenides, p. 47, 52 
 
 Crete, episcopacy in, p. 117 
 
 crucifixion, horrors of, ii. 8 
 
 custodia, kinds of, p. 7, 8, 103 sq. 
 
 Cyprian ; his mode of addressing pres- 
 byters, p. 230; view of the episco- 
 pate, p. 240 sq., 243 sq. ; contro- 
 versies of, p. 240 sq.; his character 
 and work, p. 340 sq. ; genuineness of 
 his letters, p. 141 ; sacerdotalism of, 
 p. 158 sq. 
 
 Cyril (of Alexandria), wrongly inter- 
 preted, p. 138 
 
 KaBiUlv, ii, 23 
 
 Kal, answering to in, i. 20 ; after el etc. 
 i. 2 2 ; displaced, i v, 1 2 ; doubled, iv. 1 6 
 
 Kai>avlr7;s, p. 304 
 
 Kapila, iv. 7. 
 
 Kaprht ilKiuotinp, i. 1 1 
 
 Kard, iv. 11 
 
 stToKattfiiytiv, iii. 12 
 
 KaTarifweiv {-rofnj}, iii. 2 
 
 KaTtpydltaSat, ii. 12 
 
 Kouxaffflcu, icauxWi s'"., i. 26 
 
 KtiaBai els, i. 16 
 
 Kemio^la, ii. 3 
 
 kX$/)os (xXiipavv, etc.), p. 246 sq. 
 
 KoMa, iii. 19 
 
 Koivavta, i. 5 
 
 KOTTlSl', ii. 16 
 
 Kiaiiot, ii. 15 
 
 iciVes, iii. 2 
 
 Kipiot, a title of Jesus, ii. 9, 11; ki!/>ic, 
 in heathen writers, p. 314 
 
 Xa(/>efi>, ii. 8, iii. I, iv. 4 
 
 Xapu ())), i. 7 
 
 Xo/wifeo', iv. 12 
 XiapeirlaKDVot, p. 232 
 
 Damascene (John), p. 251 
 
 dative (of relation), iii. 5 
 
 Datos or Daton, p. 47 
 
 deaconesses, p. 191 
 
 deacons ; see diaconate 
 
 Demas, p. 12 
 
 Demetrius of Alexandria, p. 232 
 
 De Wette ; false interpretations of, p. 
 
 131. i3» 
 diaconate; its establishment, p. 187; 
 
 its novelty, p. 189 sq.; limitation to 
 
 seven, p. 188 sq. ; its functions, p. 
 
 189 sq.;teaching incidental to, p. 190; 
 
 OKtension to Crentilo Churches, p. 
 
 191 sq. 
 Dionysius, of Alexandria, p. 231 
 Dionysius the Areopagite, p. 2 16 sq. 
 Dionysius of Corinth quoted, p. 214, 
 
 216 sq., 223 
 Divinity of Christ ; see Chritt 
 dogs, a term of reproach, iii, 2, 8 
 Domitian, persecution of, p. 22 
 Domitilla ; see Flavia 
 Drusus, imprisoiunent of, p. 103 
 duumviri, p. 51 
 S4, iv. 10 
 
 S4ri<ns (irpoirevx^), iv. 5 
 Sii, with accus., iii. 7, 8 ; iii 006vok, 
 
 i. 15 ; Sii, (Ik) vlaTeus, iii. 9 
 SiaSriiia (ffri^xuios), iv. I 
 SidXoyur/Ut, ii. 14 
 Sia(f>ipi)i>Ta (ra), i. 10 
 iteaT/iamiivm, ii. 15 
 Sii Kal, ii, 9 
 
 iidiKem (xaraXaju^afciv), iii, 12 
 SoKetv, iii. 4 
 SoKi/u;, ii. 22 
 ibnt Kol Xijii^it, iv. IS 
 Sipaiut {ivifyeta), iii. 21 
 
 Kcce Homo quoted, p. 308, 32 1, 322 
 Egnatian road, p. 35, 37, 38, 49 
 Eguatius the Stoic, p, 284 
 Egypt, episcopate of, 232 
 Eleuthems, p. 223 
 ellipsis, i. 22, ii. 3, ili. 13 
 
INDEX 
 
 339 
 
 Epeeuetus, p. lo, 178 
 
 Spapbras, p. 11; see Epaphroditus 
 
 Epapbroditus (Nero's freedman), p. 21, 
 
 Epaphroditus (St Fanl's friend) ; his 
 journeys between Bome and Fhilippi, 
 36 eq. ; bears alms to St Paul, p. 1 1 , 
 61, ii. 25 sq.; bis siokness, etc., p. 37, 
 61, 62, ii. 30; distinguisbedfromEpa- 
 pbras, p. 61 ; a oommon name in 
 Macedonia, and elsewbere, p. 61, ii. 
 35 ; probable allusion to, iv. 3 
 
 Epbesians, Epistle to tbe; a circular 
 letter, p. 12, 140; \mttenfrom Bome, 
 p. 12; not from Geesarea, p. 30, 31 ; 
 date of, p. 31 sq. ; later tban Fbilip- 
 pians, p. 45 sq.; Gnosticism refuted 
 in, p. 42 ; bymn quoted in, p. 45 j 
 genuineness of, p. 42, 45 ; supposed 
 fragment of anotber epistle, p. 178 
 
 Epictetus ; bis earnestness and piety, 
 p. 313 sq.; bis tbeology and etbics, 
 p. 316; modified Stoicism of, p. 319 ; 
 bis places of abode, p. 314; coinci- 
 dences witb tbe N.T., p. 298, 314 
 sq.; especially St Paul, p. 314, 316; 
 bis notice of Christianity, p. 318; 
 said to be a Christian, p. 21 ; views 
 of immortality, p. 324 
 
 Epicurus ; sayings of, p. 281, 287, 289 ; 
 admired by Seneca, p. 292 ; bis sys- 
 tem, p. 272 sq.; its Greek origin, p. 
 173; Epicurean ethics basely consist- 
 ent, p. 325 
 
 episcopate ; bishops not tbe same as 
 Apostles, p. 195 sq. ; episcopate de- 
 veloped from presbytery, p. 196 sq., 
 207, 227 sq. ; preparatory steps to- 
 wards, p. 198 sq.; causes of develop- 
 ment, p. 201, 206, 234 sq.; gradual 
 progress of, p. 205 sq., 227, 234 sq. ; 
 first matured in Asia Minor, p. 202, 
 206 sq., 211 sq., 227; episcopate of 
 Jerusalem, p. 197, 208 sq. ; of other 
 obnrcbes,p. 201, 209 sq. ; prevalence 
 of episcopacy, p. 227 ; ordination 
 confined to bishops, 232 sq. ; foreign 
 correspondence entrusted to them, p. 
 213; liieir mode of addressing pres- 
 
 byters, p. 96 sq., 230 ; they represent 
 tbe universal Church, p. 242 ; their 
 increased power involves no principle, 
 p. 244; see iirlaKoTos, tynodi, Cle- 
 mentine Homilies, etc. 
 
 Essenes, not sacerdotal, p. 360 
 
 Evarestus, p. 221, 222 
 
 Evodia, iv. i, p. 1 70 
 
 Erodius, p. 170, 210 
 
 Eusebius ; on 2nd Apostolic Council, 
 p. 202 sq. ; his list of bishops of Je- 
 rusalem, p. 208 sq. ; of Bome, p. 168, 
 221 ; of Alexandria, p. 225 
 
 Eutychius (patriarch of Alexandria); 
 bis testimony, p. 231 sq. 
 
 Bwald ; on Pbilippiaus, p. 69 ; on Bo- 
 mans, p. 178 
 
 'E/3^aiot ('lovSaios), iii. 5 
 
 tl interrogative, i. 22 ; witb conjunctive, 
 iii. 1 1 ; 6( irus, ih. 
 
 eWos (jiapijrii, l&ia), p. 128 sq. 
 
 etKiKpiviis, i to 
 
 eh, uses of, iii. 14, iv. 16 
 
 €fTe...efTe witb participles, i. 27 
 
 ix, uses of, i. 23, iii. 5 
 
 (Kauros, (KaoToi, ii. 4 
 
 iXrls (aspirated), ii. 23 
 
 if, repeated, i. 26 ; pregnant use of, iv. 
 
 '9 
 
 ly di, iii. 13 
 hapxenBat, 1 6 
 ivipytia (Si!va/us), iii. 2 1 
 irepyety, ii. 12 
 lyrepa [jT^iyxya), i. 8 
 i^aviurrans, iii. 11 
 iioiu)Koyeia$<u, ii. 11 
 iveKTelveaSai, iii, 14 
 iir^eic, ii. 16 
 iirl, uses of, ii. 17, 27 
 Myyains, i. 9 
 iTrieiKijt, iv. 5 
 Im^av, iv. 17 
 iTi/iiyeu' with dative, L 24 
 hrtToitXv, i. 8, ii. 26, p. 2 
 invoBijros, iv. i 
 
 iiritTKOTTTi, p. 96 
 
 iirlnKmros ; various uses of, p. 95, 194 ; 
 ='rpe<rpiTepos, p. 95 sq., 193 s<|., 
 333; eea e^copate 
 
 22- 
 
340 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 iniTToXri {inaroKai), p. 140 sq. 
 
 iiriTcXein, i. 6 
 
 irixopvy^O; i. 19 
 
 tpyof {t6), ii. 30 
 
 ipiBela, i. 17, ii 3 
 
 tpiS (future), iv. 4 
 
 ipuT&v, iv. 3 
 
 Mpas, iii. 15 
 
 evapearos ry Oe^i iv. 18 
 
 eiSoKla, i. 15, ii. 13 
 
 -tieaffai (termination), iu 30 
 
 Eioila, iv. 2 
 
 evplaxeaBax, iii. 9 
 
 ei^rifios, iv. 8 
 
 ci^j/vXciv, ii. 19 
 
 i<ptSeii>, ii. 23 
 
 ^1^' (f, iii. 12 
 
 ■IjSiii vdre, iv. lo 
 
 ij^pa XpLffTov, i. 6, ii. 16 
 
 ■■quepos (compounds ending in), iii. 5 
 
 Family, religion of tlie, p. 57 
 
 Felix accuses Jewish priests, p. 4 sq. 
 
 Festus and Agrippa, p. 7 
 
 figura; see/orma 
 
 Flavia DomitiUa; her history, p. 22, 
 
 23; confusion respecting, p. 22 
 Flavins Clemens ; his history, p. 22 ; 
 
 Baur on, p. 170, 171 
 Fleury's Saint Paul et SSnlque, p. 278, 
 
 281, 3'9. 331 sq. 
 forma, figura, p. 127 
 freedmen of CsBsar, p. 172 sq. 
 future after tva, ii. 1 1 
 
 Gains ; see Caiut 
 
 Gallio, St Paul before, p. 301 ; Seneca's 
 account of, ib. 
 
 Gangites, p. 47, 48, 52 
 
 Gaul, episcopacy in, p. 224 
 
 genitive, i. 7, 19 
 
 Georgius Syncellus on Philippians, p. 
 142 
 
 Gibbon ; on the Neronian persecution, 
 p. 23, 24 ; on the spread of Chris- 
 tianity, p. 324, 326 
 
 Gischala, iii, 5 
 
 gladiator ; see amphitheatre 
 
 Gnosticism ; refuted by St Paul, p. 42 ; 
 
 serves to develope episcopacy, p. 
 
 201 sq. 
 Oraetz on Flavins Clemens, p. 170 
 gratia prffiveniens, cooperans, ii. 13 
 ytvwffKeiv, iii. 10 
 7i'))fft05, iv. 3 ; yvrjfflas, ii. 20 
 yyinpt^eiv, i. 22 
 yoryywiios, ii. 14 
 
 Hadrian, letter of ; its authenticity, p. 
 225 sq. 
 
 Hananias, p. 231 
 
 Hebrew; see 'EyS/ieuos 
 
 Hebrews, Epistle to the; its Alexan- 
 drian origin, p. 225; absence of sa- 
 cerdotalism in and general argument 
 of, p. 264 sq. 
 
 Hegesippus ; on St James, p. 208 ; on 
 Symeon, p. 203 sq., 208 ; on the Co- 
 rinthian Church, p. 2 16 ; on the Bo- 
 man Church and bishops, p. 220, 222 ; 
 his acquaintance with Eleutherus, p. 
 223; aim of his work, p. 220, 239 
 
 Hellenists, p. 187 sq. 
 
 Heraclas of Alexandria, p. 231, 232 
 
 heretics, rebaptism of, p. 242 sq. 
 
 Hermas; the name in St Paul, p. 176 
 
 Hermas, the Shepherd of ; its date, p. 
 168 sq.; its author, p. 169, 222 ; his 
 language, p. 223 ; on Church officers, 
 etc., p. 219 sq.; on Clement, p. 169, 
 219, 222 ; possible acquaintance with 
 Philippians, p. 75 
 
 Hermes, p. 176 
 
 Hero of Antioch, p. 210 
 
 Herodion, p. 10, 17, 175 
 
 Hierapolis; its bishops, p. 213 
 
 high-priests ; mitre of, p. 253 ; Chris- 
 tians, so called, p. 251, 253, 256; see 
 Christ 
 
 Hilary; see Ambrotiaiter 
 
 HippolyiuB ; use of kX$/)oi in, p. 248 ; 
 sacerdotal terms in, p. 256 
 
 Holzherr, p. 324 
 
 Huber and Perizonius, p. 102 
 
 humility, a Christian virtue, ii. 4 
 
 Hyginns, p. 222 
 
 Jacob's blessing on Benjamin, iii. 5 
 
INDEX. 
 
 341 
 
 James (St); a bishop, p. 197, 308; but 
 one of the presbytery, p. 197 sq 
 
 -iaaus (the termination), p. 1 75 
 
 Jehuda-ha-Nisi, p. 318 
 
 Jerome (St) ; on the identity of bishops 
 and presbyters, p. 98, 99; on the 
 origin of episcopacy, p. 106, 129 sq.; 
 on Church polity in Alexandria, p. 
 130 sq.; on episcopal ordination, p. 
 133; on Seneca, p. 270 sq., 193, 330 
 sq. ; on St Paul's birth-place, iii. 5 ; 
 quotes Theophilus, p. 76 
 
 Jerusalem; bishops of, p. 197, 208 sq. ; 
 presbytery of, p. 197 
 
 Jesus Justus, p. 12, 18, 32, 34 
 
 Jewish Christians in Borne, p. 16 sq. 
 
 Jewish priesthood; see prieithood 
 
 Jews, in Borne, p. 14 sq., their Mes- 
 sianic hopes, p. 16; confused with 
 Christians, p. 24, 27; at FhiUppi, 
 
 P-S2 
 
 Ignatian letters (short Greek), p. 234 ; on 
 episcopacy, p. 212 sq., 236 sq. ; on 
 presbyters, p. 237; unchristian doc- 
 trine of, p. 237 sq. ; not sacerdotal, 
 p. 250; use of 'altar' in, p, 266; pas- 
 sagemisinterpreted [Philad. 9), p. 25 1 
 
 Ignatius (St) ; his bonds, p. 8 ; his jour- 
 ney to Borne, p. 35 ; sojourn at Phil- 
 ippi, p. 62,63; Polycarp's reference 
 to, p. 63, 6s, 141 ; on the Eoman 
 Christians, p. 218; on episcopacy, 
 p.2 10, 234 sq.; recognises three orders, 
 p. 98 ; not sacerdotal, p. 250 ; remi- 
 niscences of our epistle, p. 75 
 
 immortality of man, p. 322 sq. 
 
 infinitiTe for imperative, iii. 16 
 
 John Damascene, p. 252 
 
 John (St); in Asia Minor, p. 202; 
 matures episcopacy, p. 201, 207, 212 
 
 Josephus ; his mission to Borne, p. 4, 
 5 ; account of Agrippa's confinement, 
 p. 103. 
 
 Jowett (Prof.) on lost epistles of St 
 Paul, p. 139 
 
 Irenseus; Pfaffian fragments of, p. 204; 
 his honesty vindicated, p. 98 ; his use 
 of terms 'presbyter' and 'bishop, 'p. 
 98, 228 sq.; of 'oblations,' p. 263; 
 
 of kXi;/)os, p. 248 sq. ; list of Bomaji 
 bishops, p. 220 sq.; on Clemens Bo- 
 manus, p. 168; on episcopacy, p. 227, 
 239 sq. ; on priesthood, p. 252; on 
 2ud Apostolic Council, p. 203; his 
 relation to Hegesippus, p. 220 
 
 Isohyras, p. 232 
 
 Israelite, iii. 5 
 
 Judaizers ; not sacerdotal, p. 259 ; their 
 activity in Borne, p. 17, i8, 69, i. 1$ 
 sq., iii. -i 
 
 Julia, p. 177 
 
 Juliauus (of Apamea), p. 214 
 
 Junia or Junias ; see Andronicus 
 
 Justin Martyr; use of nopijrq, ffxw". 
 p. 132; of 'oblations,' p, 263; not 
 sacerdotal, p. 251 
 
 ISea, eUos, p. 128 
 
 tva, i. 9, ii. 2 ; (future with), ii. 1 1 
 
 taa {l<ros), ii. 6 
 
 laoypirxfii, ii. 20 
 
 Lactantius on Seneca, p. 268, 294 
 
 laity; see Xao's, etc. 
 
 Laodicea, St Paul's Epistle to, p. 140 
 
 Latin Version, influence of the, p. 134 
 
 lapsed, controversy about the, p. 240 
 sq. 
 
 law and the law; see vinoi 
 
 Levites; ordination of, p. 182; duties 
 of, p. 189 
 
 libations, Jewish and heathen, ii. 1 7 
 
 Linus, p. 221 sq. 
 
 lots, use of, p. 247 
 
 Lucan, p. 21 
 
 Lucian, on the Christians, p. 28 ; sacer- 
 dotal language of, p. 261 
 
 Luke (St); in Borne, p. ii, 36; at Phil- 
 ippi, p. 49, 52, 59 
 
 \a6if XalWff, XaiKovVf p. 247 
 
 Xarpe/a, XoT/jcifeti', iii. 3 
 
 XciTowpyfa, ii. 17 
 
 X070S (e/$ \6yov), iv. 15 
 
 XotTTov {to XowrfSp), iii. i, iv. 8 
 
 Macedonia; Bomau provinces of, p. 50; 
 collections of alms in, p. 59, 60; epi- 
 stles written from, p. 60; epistles 
 written to, i. i, 28, p. 66; episcopacy 
 
342 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 in, p. 714 sq.; position ol women in, 
 P-S6 
 
 Macro, p. 103 sq. 
 
 Maroiou; his parentage, p. 314; his 
 copy of Bomans, p. 1 77 
 
 Marcus Aorelius ; see AureliUB 
 
 Mark (St), p. ii, 18, 125, 231 
 
 Marsyas, p. 104 
 
 Martinus Bragensis: his relation to 
 Seneca, p. 331; words of, ib.; receu- 
 Hious, titles, and mss of the Formula 
 Honesta Vita of, p. 331 sq. 
 
 Mary, (a Soman Ohristian), p. 16, 173 
 
 Matthias (St), appointment of, p. 247 
 
 Melito, p. 76, 213 
 
 Merivale (Dr); on the persecution of 
 Nero, p. 24 ; on prsBtorium, p. 100 
 
 Messianic expectations in Borne, p. 16 
 
 metronymics, p. 56 
 
 Mihuan (Dean), p. 250 
 
 ministry (the Christian); three orders 
 of, p. ^6, 186, 265 sq.; not sacerdotal, 
 p. 184 ; St Paul on, p. 185 ; the tem- 
 porary and the permanent, p. 185 sq.; 
 views of the origin of, p. 186 sq.; 
 how far a priesthood, p. 264 sq. ; re- 
 presentatiye, not vicarial, p. 267 sq. ; 
 see tacerdotalism, priestliood, episco- 
 pate, etc. 
 
 Mommsen on Cato, p. 311 
 
 Montanism; a reaction, p. 238 
 
 mystery, the metaphor of, iv. 12 
 
 -/ta, -/ids, (terminations), ii. 6 
 
 liepilivSv, iv. 6 
 
 likaov (adYCrbial), ii. 15 
 
 /4eTO(7X';;i*aT(fe(r9o( {-noptpovaBai), p. 130 
 sq. 
 
 MV, mHv (ellipsis after), ii. 3 
 
 lilttBaiio, p. 9 
 
 Itovav, i. 27 
 
 HOp'l>if-(iiioluiia, irxiiii.ii), ii. 6 sq., p. 127 
 sq. ; (elSos), p. 128 sq. 
 
 livtittBat, iy. 12 
 
 Name of God, ii, 9 ; of Jesus, ii. 10 
 Narcissus (Nero's freedman), p. 21 ; his 
 
 household, p. 175 
 N»roi89ug (of Jerusalem), p. 208, 209 
 
 Neander, criticism on, p. 150 
 Neapolis, p. 48, 49, 50 
 Neoplatonists, their use of /lopipij, p. 
 129; conflict with Christianity, p. 
 
 319 
 
 Nereus and his sister, p. 177 
 
 Kero; administration of, p. 2, 3, 4; 
 guilty acts of, p. 5 ; his persecution, 
 p. i; attempts to explain it away, 
 p. 23 sq. ; causes of it, p. 26 ; silence 
 of heathen writers about it, p. 27, 
 28, 29; account of it in the letters of 
 Paul and Seneca, p. 330 sq. 
 
 nominative (irregular), i. 30, iii. 19 
 
 Novatian schism, p. 241 
 
 vai, iv. 3 
 
 po/ios and a vofios, iii. 5, 6, 9 
 
 Oblation, offering ; see sacrifice 
 Onesimus (Philemon's slave), p. 12, 31 
 Onesimus (of Ephesus), p. 212 
 ordination by presbyters, p. 231, 232 
 
 sq.; restricted to bishops, p. 232 sq. 
 Oriental characteristics, p. 273 
 Origen; on Clement of Eome, p. i68j 
 
 on Gains, p. 215 ; on the priesthood, 
 
 p. 256 sq. 
 olSa, i. 25 
 OKvqpis, iii. i 
 6KTaTiixepos, iii. 5 
 ovqim; to ovona, ii. 9; iv (t$) om/um, 
 
 ii. 10 
 owlaa, iii. 14 
 da/ii) eiaSlas, iv. 18 
 oiTTis, i. 28, ii. 20, iii. 7, iv. 3 
 oix on, iii. 12, iy. xi, 17 
 lis, pleonastio, ii. 12 
 lis dr, temporal, ii. 23 
 
 Palestine (bishops of), p. 209 sq. 
 
 Palmas, p. 214 
 
 pantheism admits no consoiousnesa of 
 
 sin, p. 196, 321 
 papacy, power of the, p. 244 sq. 
 Papias, p. 213, 229 
 parabolani, ii. 29 
 paiodox (verbal), iv. 7 
 paranomasia, iii. 2 
 Pastoral Epistles ; Gnosticism attacked 
 
INDEX. 
 
 343 
 
 in, p. 41 ; qaotationa in, p. 45 ; late 
 date of, ib. ; no sacerdotalism in, p. 
 
 patriarchs (Jewish), p. 22$ ; (AJexan- 
 drian), p. 126, 231, 232 
 
 Patrobas, p. 176 
 
 Paul (St); his birth-plaoe, iii. 5; his 
 tribe, ib. ; his name Saul, ib. ; a He- 
 brew and a Pharisee, ib. ; his kins- 
 men, p. 16 sq., 173; not married, 
 iv. 3 ; his persecution of the Church, 
 iii. 6; his means of support, iv. 16 ; 
 speech on Areopagus, p. 290, 304 ; 
 his visit to Borne, p. i sq., 31 ; voyage 
 thither, p. 35 ; length of stay, p. 3, 
 30; his first captivity, 7 sq. ; his 
 bonds, p. 8, 9 ; his abode in Borne, 
 p. 9, 10, 102 ; his comparative li- 
 berty, p. 9 ; his associates and friends, 
 p. 10 sq., 34 sq. ; correspondence 
 from Borne, p. 12, 40 sq.; preaching 
 and success there, p. 13 sq.; inter- 
 view with the Jews, p. 14 sq. ; his 
 feelings and sorrows at Bome, p. 
 39 sq. ; hopes of release, p. 40 sq., 
 ii. 24; trial, etc., p. 3, 4, 301; his 
 silence about political events, p. 6 sq.; 
 tradition of his death, U. 8; chrono- 
 logy of his epistles, p. 139 ; lost 
 letters of, p. 13S sq. ; his irony, iii. 6; 
 his acquaintance with Stoic diction, 
 etc., p. 303 sq. ; his use of hyperbole, 
 p. 33; irregular constructions, i 27, 
 29, 30, ii. I, 5, 12, 22, iii. 18, iv. 10, 
 12 J mode of closing his epistles, p. 
 126; see aecumulatedexpresHons, citi- 
 zenship, Corinthians, Philippi, Philip, 
 piant, Seneca, etc. 
 
 peccatum, p. 296, 321 
 
 Pelagius, on bishops and presbyters, p. 
 
 99 
 
 Perizonins on 'prsstorium,' p. 102 
 
 Persis, p. 10 
 
 Peshito Syriac, the; identifies the titles 
 
 'bishop' and 'presbyter,' p. 97 
 Peter (St), in prison, p. 8; appoints 
 
 bishops, p. 209, 2 10; styles himself 
 
 'feUow-presbyter,' p. 198 
 Philemon, Epistle to, p. 12 ; not written 
 
 from CiBBarea, p. 30, 31 ; date of, p. 
 31 sq. 
 
 Philip (St) at Hierapolis, p. 202 
 
 Philip of Gortyna, p. 217 
 
 Philippi, former names of, p. 47 ; its 
 site and natural advantages, p. 47, 
 48 ; its mines, p. 48, 49 ; site of the 
 battle of, p. 48 ; mixed population of, 
 p. 49; a Eoman colony, p. 50, 51, 
 i. 27 ; Jews at, p. 52 sq.; length of 
 journey from Bome to, p. 38; St 
 Paul's first visit to, p. 49 sq. ; his 
 conversions at, p. 53 sq. ; their typi- 
 cal character, p. 54 sq. ; women at, 
 p. 55 sq., iv. 2, 3 ; his sufferings at, 
 P- 58» 69. i- 30; grandeur of the in- 
 cidents, p. 58 ; his second and third 
 visits, p. 59, 60 ; later visits, p. 62 ; 
 crime of Valens, p. 64 ; subsequent 
 history of the Church of, p. 65 ; epi- 
 scopacy at, p. 215 
 
 Philippians, the; their communications 
 with St Paul, p. 36 sq., 59 ; absence 
 of Judaism among, p. 53, 68 ; their 
 fidelity to St Paul, p. 53, 58 ; they 
 send relief to him, p. 61, i. 5, 7, iv. 
 1 5 sq. ; his affection for them, p. 66, 
 67, i. I ; their sufferings, p. 58, 59 ; 
 their strife, p. 67, 68, i. 4, iii. i, iv. 
 2 sq., 7; communications with Igna- 
 tius, p. 62, 63 ; correspondence with 
 Polycarp, p. 63, 64 ; lost letters (?) of 
 St Paul to them, iii. i. p. 138 sq. 
 
 Philippians, Epistle to the; written 
 from Bome, p. 12, 30 sq. ; date of, 
 p. 31 sq., 62, 173; circumstances at 
 the time, p. 33, 34 ; its motive, p. 
 66 sq. ; structure and contents, p. 68 
 sq. ; interruption of, p. 69, iii. 2, iv. 
 2 ; integrity of, p. 69, iii. i ; genuine- 
 ness of, p. 74 sq. ; aUusion to Juda- 
 izers in, p. 17, 6g, i. 15 sq., iii. 1 sq.; 
 its characteristics, p. 42, 66 sq., 73 
 sq. ; its cheerful tone, p. 66, i. i, 4, 
 25, ii. 18, iii. I, iv. 4, 6; compared 
 with Acts, p. 38 sq. ; with OoL 
 Ephes. Philem., p. 38, 41 sq. ; with 
 Bomans, p. 42 sq. ; with Thessalo- 
 niauB, p. 66, 67, i. i, 28, iv. i, 15, 
 
344 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 i6; with Galatiana, i. i. 15 ; witli 
 1 Oorinthians, iit 5 ; public reading 
 of, p. 65; lessoDB to be derived from, 
 
 P- 73 
 Philippopolis confused with Philippi, 
 
 p. 65 
 Philistines in Borne, p. 173 
 Philo, on the Word, ii. 5 ; his use of 
 liop^, p. 130 
 
 PhQologUB, p. 177 
 
 philosophy, later Greek, p. 171 sq. 
 
 Phlegon, p. 100 
 
 Piers Ploughman, p. 327 
 
 Pinytus, p. 217 
 
 Pistis Sophia, iiopffrq and axwo- '>^> P- 
 132 sq. 
 
 Pius (I of Borne), p. 169, 222 
 
 Plato (Flatonists), ethics of, ii. 4 ; use 
 of liopifiii, etSo!, etc. in, p. 128 sq.; his 
 portrait of the just man, p. 293 
 
 Plutarch ; his silence about Christians, 
 p. 28 ; his use of iiop<p^, p. 129 
 
 Polycarp; a bishop, p. 210, 212 ; visits 
 Borne, p. 222 ; analysis of his epistle, 
 p. 63 sq. ; its date, p. 63 ; passages 
 in it explained, p. 63, 64, 140 sq., 
 iv. 15; recognises three orders, p. 
 q8; adopts St Paul's language, p. 
 75i i- 27, iv. 10; spealis of Epistle 
 (or Epistles) to Philippians, p. 138, 
 140 sq. ; mentions no bishop of 
 Philippi, p. 215 ; has not sacerdotal 
 views, p. 25 1 sq. 
 
 Polycrates (of Ephesns), and his rela- 
 tions, p. 213 ; passages quoted from 
 him, p. 212, 214; notice of St John 
 ™. P- 2S3 ; is he sacerdotal? p. 253 
 
 Pompeius, p. 14 
 
 Pomponia Graoina, probably a Chris- 
 tian, p. 21 
 
 PoppsBa ; her character, p. 5 ; relations 
 with the Jews, p. 5, 6, 330 ; supposed 
 antagonism to StPaul, p. 39, 41, 330; 
 reported a Christian, p. 21 
 
 Posidonius the Stoic, p. 310 
 
 Pothinus, p. 214 
 
 Priedioatio Pauli, p. 202 
 
 prsitoT, another name for duumvir, p. 5 1 
 
 PreDtorian camp, p. g, loi sq. 
 
 Prffltoiian guards, p. 7, 9, 19, 100 sq.; 
 
 prefect of the, p. 7, 8, 301 
 prsstorium ; see irpainhpiov 
 presbyter (elder), among the Jews, p. 
 96, 192; iirldKOTros a synonyme of, 
 p. 95 sq., 193 sq. ; Christian presby- 
 ters derived from the synagogue, p. 
 192 sq. ; in the mother Church, p. 
 193; in Gentile Churches, p. 193 sq. ; 
 their duties, p. 194 sq. ; their names, 
 p. 194; bishops so called, p. 228 sq. ; 
 how addressed by bishops, p. g6 sq., 
 230; 'presbyteri doctores,' p. 195; 
 see ministry, priest, etc. 
 present tense, force of, ii. 17 
 
 priest distinguished from presbyter, p. 
 186 ; the two confused in many lan- 
 guages, p. 186, 246 
 
 priesthood; idea common to Jewish 
 and heathen, p. 182, 265 ; the Chris- 
 tian, p. 183, 184 sq., 264 sq. ; uni- 
 versal, ii. 17, p. 268 ; the Jewish, p. 
 1 82 ; not called KKfjpos, p. 247 ; ana- 
 logy with Christian ministry, 263 sq. ; 
 see ministry, sacerdotalism, etc. 
 
 Primus of Corinth, p. 216 
 
 PriscUla; Bee Aquila 
 
 prosencha, p. 52 
 
 provocatio, p. 7 
 
 Publius of Athens, p. 217 
 
 Puteoli, p. 26, 33 
 
 pythoness at Philippi, p. 54 
 
 7rd\u> (its position), i. 26 
 
 7ra\Xai>Tiai>ic, p. 100 
 
 Trapa^o\tiiae<u (-BovKiieaSat), ii. 30 
 
 irapaxKiiint, ii. j 
 
 irapaiUvtai {jUveai), i. 25 
 
 irapaix.i$iov, ii, i 
 
 vapptiala, i, 20 
 
 irSs ; ol TToKT-cs, ii. 2 r ; tA vdvra, iii. 8 ; 
 iv vavri, iv iroffi, iv. 12 
 
 •wetvav, iv. -t 
 
 veirm$ivai with dative, i. 14 
 
 Trepioaoripui, i. 14 
 
 vlimt (17) personified, i. 27 
 
 xXeoveffa, p. 64 
 
 irKiipomBai with accus., i, 11 
 
 irMiv, iii. 16; itKiiv Sti, i. 18 
 
 TKev/ua (^«xi?), i. 27 
 
INDEX. 
 
 345 
 
 voKiT€ve<r9ai, i. 27 
 
 iroX(T6v/ia, iii, 10 
 
 rpcuTupiov, p. 9, 29, 39, 99 sq., i. n 
 
 rptapirepos ; see presbyter 
 
 TrpoKitvrj^ i. 13 
 
 jrpoireuxi} (5eij(r4s)i iv. 6 
 
 rpor0iXi;s, IT. 8 
 
 vp6(t>aitiiy i. 18 
 
 irpi^avit, p. 197 
 
 jr/)i4rroita9eJp(Tijs, p. 119 
 
 TpuTos (withoat article), i. 5 
 
 WT^peffdaif i. 38 
 
 tpaiveiVy ffiaiveffdai, ii. 15 
 
 tt>6dpeti> els, iil 16 
 
 4>iXHr7r:^fr«» (and other fonnB), vr. ij 
 
 0oj3ot /ca2 rp6nos, ii, 1 1 
 
 ^povelv t6 ^V) rd ai/ro, ii. 3 
 
 0<ii(r7-ijp, ii. 15 
 
 Qnadratns, p. 217 
 
 Qmnisextine Oonncil, p. 188, 189 
 
 qninqueiinalis, p. 51 
 
 Bebaptism of heretics, p. 241 
 resurrection, power of the, iii. 10, p. 
 
 in, 3'»4 
 
 Revelation ; see Apocalypse 
 
 righteousness hy faith and by law, i. 1 1, 
 iii. 9 
 
 Bitschl's theories, p. i83 
 
 Soman Empire; its relations to Chris- 
 tianity, p. 1, 24; cosmopolitan idea 
 realised in, p. 306 
 
 Bomans, Epistle to the ; salutations in, 
 p. 16, 17, 20, 173 sq. ; conciliatory 
 tone of, p. 17; integrity of, p. 177; 
 its resemblance to Fhilippians, p. 
 42 sq. 
 
 Borne, Jews in, p. 14, 173; Greeks and 
 Orientals in, p. 173 sq., 178 
 
 Borne, the Church of, p. 13 sq. ; its 
 composition and character, p. 13; 
 Jewish Christians in, p. 16 sq. ; Gen- 
 tile Christians in, p. 18; earliest con- 
 verts foreigners, p. 173; at first 
 Oreelc, not Latin, p. 19, 20, 223; 
 transition to a Latin Church, p. 223; 
 aooial rank of, p. 20 sq. ; r»pid growth 
 
 o'l P- 15> 31 Bq.; deacons limited to 
 seven, p. 188 sq. ; episcopacy and 
 Church government in, p. 217 sq. 5 
 succession and chronology of bishops, 
 p. 169, 220sq.; communications with 
 Cyprian, p. 241 sq.; see Clemens Bo- 
 manut, Nero, Paul {St), etc. 
 
 Eothe, on the angels of the Apocalypse, 
 p. 199; on the origin of episcopacy, 
 p. 201 sq. 
 
 Enfus, p. 10, 176 
 
 Sacerdotalism; the term defined, p. 245; 
 its absence in the K.T., p. 181, 183, 
 244Sq.,264Bq. ; rapid growth, p. 245; 
 progress of development, p. 253 sq. ; 
 how far innocent, p. 257; whether 
 due to Jewish or Gentile influences, 
 p. 259 sq.; see priesthood 
 
 Bftcrifice (offering); use of the term in 
 the K. T., p. 261 sq. 
 
 Sagaris, p. 213 
 
 'saints,' i. i 
 
 Samaritans in Bome, p. 173 
 
 Saul and Paul, iii. 5 
 
 Schwegler, criticisms on, p. 15, 170 
 
 Seneca; possibly of Shemitio race, p. 
 277 ; his personal appearance, p. 284; 
 relations with Nero, p. 3, 312; his 
 retirement, p. 5; chronology of his 
 writings, p. 291, 298 ; spurious work 
 ascribed to, p. 331 sq. ; Haase's edi- 
 tion of, p. 329, 331 ; his character, 
 p. 311 sq. ; his own confessions of 
 weakness, p. 312 sq. ; on the Jews, 
 p. 14; silence about the Christians, 
 p. 28, 29 ; on the population of Bome, 
 p. 173; accounted a Christian, p. 
 270 ; supposed connexion with St 
 Paul, p. 270, 300 sq.; literature on 
 the subject, p. 278; compared and 
 contrasted with St Paul, p. 277 sq.; 
 coincidence of thought and language 
 with the Bible, p. 278 sq. ; nature of 
 God, p. 278 sq. ; relation of man to 
 God, p. 279 sq. ; guardian angels, p. 
 279; an indwelling spirit, p. 280; 
 universality of sin, p. 280 sq. ; the 
 conscience, p. 181; self-examination, 
 
346 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 eto.,p. 781 sq. ; duties towards others, 
 p. 282 sq. ; parallels to the Sermon on 
 the Mount and to the Gospels, p. 
 183 sq.; to the Apostolic Epistles, 
 p. 287; to St Paul, p. 187 sq., ii 17; 
 fallacious inferences therefrom, p. 
 191; his ohligations to earlier writers, 
 p. 292 sq. ; portrait of the wise man, 
 p. 291 sq., 293; a true Stoic in Ms 
 theology and his ethics, p. 294 sq. ; 
 his possible knowledge of Christian- 
 ity, p. 300 sq. ; his coBmopolitauism, 
 p. 306 sq.; his Tague ideas of immor- 
 tality, p. 323 sq.; his sense of the 
 need of a historic basis, p. 326; see 
 Sloidsm 
 
 Seneca and Paul, the letters of; de- 
 scribed, p. 271, 329, 330 sq. ; MBS 
 and editions of, p. 329; motive of the 
 forgery, p. 329; opinion of St Jerome 
 about them, p. 271, 330, 331; men- 
 tioned by St Augustine and later 
 writers, p. 330 ; their spuriousness, 
 p. 271, 330; a theory respectingthem 
 discussed, p. 331 sq. ; de Copia Ver- 
 horum mentioned in them, p. 331 sq. 
 
 Serapion, p. 211, 213 
 
 Seven, appointment of the, p. 187 sq. ; 
 they were deacons, p. 188 
 
 Silas, p. 49 
 
 simplidty, stress laid on, ii. 15 
 
 sin; seapeccatum 
 
 slaves; their position raised by Chris- 
 tianity, p. 57; transfer of, p. 175 
 
 Socrates, on airripKeta, iv. 11; on pre- 
 paration for death, p. 325 
 
 Soter, p. 223 
 
 Stachys, p. 10, 174 
 
 stadium, metaphor of the, i. 27, ii. 16, 
 iii. 14, iv. I 
 
 state after death, i. 23 
 
 Stephen of Borne, p. 241 
 
 Stceoheus, p. 104 
 
 Stoicism; rise of, p. 271 sq. ; Oriental 
 origin and character of, p. 273 sq., 
 »75 sq., 299 sq., 310, 319, 322; ex- 
 clusive attention to ethics, p. 274Bq.; 
 neglect of physios and logic, p. 274 
 sq.; its prophetic character, p. 275 sq.; 
 
 its westward progress, p. 276; the 
 older Stoics, p. 309 sq.; Stoicism at 
 Tarsus, p. 303 sq.; in Bome, p. 276, 
 310; native places of its great teach- 
 ers, p. 299, 303 sq. ; its obligations 
 to Judaism, p. 299 sq. ; a prepara- 
 tion for the Gospel, p. 302 sq. ; wide 
 influence of its vocabulary, p. 303 ; 
 contrast to Christianity, p. 293 sq., 
 308 ; its materialistic pantheism, p. 
 294, 319 sq.; consistent blasphemies, 
 p. 295, 316; no consciousness of sin, 
 p. 296, 321 sq. ; 'sacer spiritus,' p. 
 2S0, 296; faulty ethics of, p. 296 sq., 
 321 sq. ; apathy of, p. 297, 322 ; de- 
 fiance of nature in, p. 321 ; inconsis- 
 tencies of, p. 298, 321; paradoxes and 
 paralogisms of, p. 325 ; its cosmopo- 
 litanism, iii. 20, p. 305 sq.; contempt 
 of the body, iii. 20; auripKaa, iv. 11; 
 the wise man, p. 304 sq.; diverse and 
 vague ideas about man' s immortality, 
 p. 322 sq. ; no idea of retribution, 
 p. 325 sq.; want of a historic basis, 
 p. 326 sq.; religious directors, p. 310; 
 improved theology in Epictetns, p. 
 316; improved ethics in M. Aurelins, 
 p. 31 7; modifications and decline of, 
 p. 319; hymnology of, p. 320; ex- 
 clusiveness of, p. 322; meagre results 
 of, p. 309 sq., 319; causes of failure, 
 p. 3 1 9 sq. ; see Epictctiu, M. A urelius, 
 Seneca, Zeno, etc. 
 
 Bubdeacons, p. 189 
 
 Suetonius, on the Jews in Bome, p. 16; 
 on Clemens and Domitilla, p. 22 
 
 Symbolum, pass of, p. 48 
 
 Symeon (Bp. of Jerusalem), p. 203, 20S 
 
 synagogues ; character and number of, 
 p. 192; adopted by the Christians, 
 p. 207; angels of, p. 199; rulers of, 
 p. 192; chazon of, p. 189 sq. 
 
 synods (episcopal), p. 214, 224, 342 
 
 Syntyohe, iv. 2, p. 170 
 
 Syrian Church, p. 211 ; sacerdotalism 
 in, p. 261 ; see Ancient Syriac Docu- 
 ments 
 
 Syrians in Bome, p. 173 
 
 ffdpj, p. 287 
 
INDEX. 
 
 347 
 
 ffnoireii', u. 4; (TKOTreire, m. 17 
 
 tKipoKa, eto. , iii. 8 
 
 cvtvSoniu, ii, 17 
 
 aTr^Afxya ((nrXoTxWitaffm),!. 8, ii. i 
 
 ari^aros {SidSjina), iv. I 
 
 (TTi^Keu>, i. 2 J, IT. I 
 
 OTpaTiiryiov, p. lOi 
 
 irrpaToirtSdpx'Pt P- 7t 101 
 
 mrfxalpeo), ii. 17 
 
 av/i/iip^iot {-^oCaSat, -^(Jieffflot), p. 130 
 
 sq. 
 irvvadXery, i. 27 
 cwaijc/idXaros, p. 11 
 0'i»>ct3i)a'is, p. 303 
 ffivjyyos, iv. 3 
 rwiuiiifral, iii. 17 
 irui'<rx';/«tTlJl;ff9ai, p. 130 sq. 
 SwTiJx'Ji iT. ■» 
 ffjc^/"" {/»>p<j>4, iiiolana), ii. 6 sq., p. 117 
 
 sq. 
 
 TaoituB on the Chiistiaus, p. 24 
 
 Tarsus, Stoicism at, p. 303 sq. 
 
 Telesphorus, p. 221 
 
 tent, metaphor from a, i. 23 
 
 TertuUian; on the Philippian letter, 
 p. 65. 77 J on episcopacy, p. »ii, 115, 
 227,739; on the Church and bishops 
 of Bome, p. 223 sq. ; on Seneca, 
 p. 270; on natural Christianity, p. 
 327 ; use of ' clems ' in, p. 248 ; sa- 
 cerdotal views of, p. 255 sq. 
 
 Testaments of the Twelve Fatriachs; 
 no sacerdotalism in, p. 259 sq.; re- 
 semblances to FhiUppians in, p. 75 
 
 thanksgiving, duty of, iv. 6 
 
 Thebuthis, p. 208 
 
 Theodore of Mopsuestia ; a passage cor- 
 rected and explained, p. 97; on 
 bishops and presbyters, p. 99; on 
 bishops and Apostles, p. 195 ; on pra- 
 torium, p. 99 
 
 Theodoret, on bishops and presbyters, 
 p. 99 ; on bishops and Apostles, p. 195 
 sq.; on praetorium, p. 100 
 
 Theophilus of Antioch, p. 211 
 
 Theophilus of Cssarea, p. 209 
 
 The3salonians,Epistle3tothe; seei'W- 
 lippiani, EpUtlet to the 
 
 Thessalonica, mistake respecting, p. 50; 
 lost letters to, p. 139; episcopacy at, 
 
 P- »i5 
 Thomas, Acts of; reference to Fhilip- 
 
 pians, p. 76 
 Thrace, episcopacy in, p. 217 
 Thraseas of Enmenia, p. 214 
 thundering legion, p. 29 
 Thyatira, Lydia of, p. 54 
 Tiberius; his treatment of Agrippa, 
 
 p. 103 sq.; of Drusus, p. 103; prss- 
 
 torian camp built by, p. loi 
 Tigellinus, p. 5, 41 
 Timotheus; his character, ii. 20 sq. ; 
 
 in Bome, p. 1 1 ; at PhiUppi, p. 49, 
 
 59, 62, i. I, ii. 19 sq. ; his position at 
 
 Ephesus, p. 199 
 Titus; his position in Crete, p. 199 
 transcribers, fidelity of, ii. i 
 travelling, rate of ancient, p. 38 
 Tryphena, p. 175 sq. 
 Tryphosa, ib. 
 
 Tubingen school, p. 74, 1 70 sq. 
 Tychious, p. 11, 31, 32 
 Tyndale and other versions, rendering 
 
 of irparp&Ttpos in, p. 246 
 ri, (car i/ii, i. 12 
 Tairtu'6(pp(oj', etc., ii. 4 
 riXaot, iii. 15 
 tL yip; i. 18 
 r6 airi, ii. 18 
 Tovro Xva, i. 9 
 6e(Ss, i 6e6s, ii. 6 
 Beove^ns, p. S 
 Oca^opos, p. 315 
 ffXlilits, i 17 
 Svrla, ii 17 
 SvttaaT^ipiov; see altar 
 
 Valens (the Philippian); his crime, p. 
 64, 215; the name common in Ma- 
 cedonia, p. 64 
 
 Victor of Bome, p. 223 sq. 
 
 vine, parable of the, p. 326 sq. 
 
 Yitiinga, criticisms on, p. 188, 199, 207 
 
 Volkmar, criticisms on, p. 170 
 
 Urbanus, p. 10, 174 
 
 Vulgate rendering of ir^e7/3i/repas,p. 246 
 
 VMas repeated, i. 7 
 
348 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 ifuv etc. (foi ^avrois etc.), ii. 5 
 ixaKmi, ii. 12 
 vripx^iv, ii. 6, iii. 10 
 inrepv\j/o\ni, ii. 9 
 
 Wiolil's version, p. J46 
 Wieseler on prsBtorium, p. 103 
 woman; raised by Christianity, p. 55, 
 56; her influence inMacedonia,p. 56 
 Word of God, the; see Christ 
 work, the, U. 30 
 
 Xystus, p. 221, 222; proverbs ascribed 
 
 to, p. 222 
 feyfo, p. 9 
 
 Zeno ; his system compared with that 
 of Epicurus, p. 272 sq.; aPhcenician, 
 p. 2 73 ; his character, p. 309 ; his ad- 
 mired polity, p. 306, 3 1 1 ; see StoicUm 
 
 Zephyrinus, p. 223 sq. 
 
 ZoticuB, p. 214 
 
 i^\m, iii. 6 
 
349 
 
 Additional Note on the Christian Ministry. 
 
 As a full treatment of the information contained in the recently 
 published Doctrine qf the Twelve Apostles would have required more 
 extensive additions to the Essay on the Christian Ministry than the time at 
 my disposal allowed, I have thought it best lo leave the Essay itself un- 
 altered, and to add a few remarks here relating to the new discovery. 
 This course was the less difficult, because this newly discovered work 
 seems to me in almost every respect to confirm the view which I have 
 taken, and any alterations which I might have to make would be chiefly in 
 the way of elucidation and supplement. 
 
 The date of the Didache has been variously fixed. The first editor 
 Bryennios placed it about a.d. 120 — 160. Among the advocates of a late 
 date are Haruack (Texte u. Untersuchungen n. ii. p. 63 sq.), who assigns it 
 to the period between a.d. 135 (or 140) and a.d. 165, and Hilgenfeld, who 
 places it after the rise of the Montanist controversy. On the other hand 
 Zahn (Forsch. zur Gesch. d. Kanons ni. p. 319) considers that it cannot have 
 been written later than a.d. 120; Spence {Teaching qfthe Ttcelne Apostles 
 p. 139) gives the probable limits as a.d. 70 and a.i>. 106 ; Schaff {Teaching 
 qfthe Twelve Apostles, p. 122) places it between a.d. 90 and a.d. 100, as a 
 rough ^approximation; and Funk {Theolog. Qttartalschr. 1884, p. 381 sq.) 
 assigns it to the last quarter of the first century; while Sabatier {La 
 Didache p. 165) would even date it as early as A.D. 50, before St Paul's 
 great missionary journeys were undertaken. 
 
 For myself, I see no reason to depart from the rough limits (a.d. 80 — 
 A.D. 1 10), which I assigned to it in a paper read at the Carlisle Church 
 Congress {Official Report, p. 230 sq.; see also Expositor, Jan. 1885, 
 p. I sq.), though it might possibly have been written a few years earlier or 
 later. In that paper I spoke of Alexandria as not improbably the place 
 of writing, on the ground that it is quoted by, or contains matter in common 
 with, more than one Alexandrian writer. But to this view, which has been 
 generally maintained, a very serious and (it appears to me now) almost 
 insuperable objection has been urged. The writer (§ 9) speaks of the corn 
 from which the eucharistic bread is made as having been 'scattered upon 
 the mountains {ditaKopnurncvov iir'aiia opiav) and gathered together' into 
 one. This is the last expression which would havo occurred to any one 
 writing in the Delta of the Nile, though natural enough in Palestine or 
 Syria. Tet it is obviously quite incidental and unpremeditated. 
 
 The main reasons for the early date are, besides the archaic simplicity 
 of the whole document, the two facts that the Eucharist is still part of a 
 meal and connected with the Agape (an arrangement which at all events 
 did not survive the persecution of Trajan in Bithynia, even if it lasted so 
 long) and that there is no trace of the episcopal oflSce as distinct from the 
 
350 ADDITIONAL NOTE. 
 
 presbyteral (a phenomenon which points to the first rather than the second 
 century). 
 
 Moreover the picture, which it presents of the temporary and the 
 permanent ministry working side by side — the latter encroaching upon the 
 former— is the same which I have set forth (p. 185 sq.) as characteristic of 
 the later decades of the Apostolic age ; and even Harnack allows (p. lor) 
 that the aspect of Church organization which it exhibits closely re- 
 sembles the representations in the First Epistle to the Corinthians — more 
 closely (he thinks) even than those in the Epistle to the Ephesians. The 
 permanent ministry is represented in the Dida4she by 'Apostles' and 
 'prophets'; the temporary by 'bishops' and 'deacons'. But we are told 
 (§ 15) that the latter (the 'bishops' and 'deacons') 'likewise minister the 
 ministration of the prophets and teachers' (X«roupyow(rt kcu avroi t^v \«- 
 Tovpyiav Tuy irpo0?)raSi> koi SiSao-KoXuv). This is an illustration of what I have 
 said (p. 194) as to the gradual transference of the function of teaching from 
 the missionary preachers to the local officers of the congregations. It is 
 possible indeed that the term 'Apostle' in the Didache has a wider range 
 than I have assigned to it elsewhere (fialatians p. 97 sq.), where following 
 the language of S. Paul it is laid down as a necessary qualification of an 
 'Apostle' that he should ' have seen the Lord,' and should be in some sense 
 a witness of the Resurrection. But in Syria and Palestine at all events, 
 about the years (say) A.D. 80 — 90, there must have been not a few who 
 possessed this qualification, as there certainly were several even in procon- 
 sular Asia. If for instance this work emanated from the neighbourhood of 
 Pella, whither the Christian community retired before the siege of Jerusa- 
 lem by Titus, this more restricted sense of the term 'Apostle' would create 
 no difficulty. 
 
 The discussion of the original form of the Ignatian Epistles, to which I 
 have referred in a note (p. 234) to this Essay on the Christian Ministry, will 
 be found in my new work on the Epistles of S. Ignatius and S. Polycarp, 
 (Apostolic Fathers Part 2, i. p. 267 sq.) which will appear, I hope, nearly 
 siqiultaneously with this editioa 
 
 Printed in Qkbat Britain by Richard Cult & Sons, Limited, 
 bunoay, suffolk. 
 
BY BISHOP LIGHTFOOT 
 
 St. Paul's Epistle to the Colosslans 
 and to Philemon. A Revised 
 Text, with Introductions, etc. 
 8vo. 12S. net. 
 
 St. Paul's Epistle to the Galatians. 
 
 A Revised Text, with Introduc- 
 tions, Notes, and Dissertations. 
 8vo. I2S. net. 
 
 The Apostolic Fathers. Abridged 
 edition. With Short Introduc- 
 tions, Greek Text, and English 
 Translation. 8vo. i6s. net. 
 
 The Apostolic Fathers. Part II. 
 St. Ignatius to St. Polycarp. 
 Revised Texts, with Introduc- 
 tions, Notes, Dissertations, and 
 Translations. Three vols. 8vo. 
 48s. 
 
 MACMILLAN & CO., LTD., LONDON