,. «. '..Mil ::..,.! •■("Ml * M iHim.ir.j.Mn!.! MiV/v ^^^^■piB' a PRINCETON. N. J. Part of the ^ I ADDISON ALEXANDER LIBRARY /i^ which was presented by V Messus. R. L. and a. Stuart. ^ I) ^''''' . T455 2' Shelf. Section:.!.T]-W-v>'. />V;f>A' o No, I 06<^^C^ ■^ i?. 7 llfl^. .i /£ri. THE HISTORY THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. THE HISTORY OF C|e Clristinit Ctjurclj. BY HENRY W. J. THIERSCH, DOCTOR OP PHILOSOPHY AND THEOLOGY. . Cranslatctr from i^t (German. VOL. I. LONDON : THOMAS BOSWOBTH, EEGENT STREET 185-2. LONDON : G. J. PALMER, SAVOY STREET, STRAND. VOLUME I. €^t Cljurrji in tijt %n3tniit Ige. BY HENRY W. J. THIERSCH, DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY AND THEOLOGY. STrau^TatcJf from tT;e (Scrmaii, BY THOMAS CARLYLE, Esq., OP THE SCOTTISH BA.R. LONDON : THOMAS BOSWOKTH, REGENT STREET. 1852. TO FREDERICK THIERSCH. TRANSLATOR'S PREFACE. The ecclesiastical history, of which this first volume, on the Apostolic Age, has just appeared in Germany, and is now presented to the English reader, makes no parade of erudition. But it is the work of an erudite, orthodox, and pious man, as a Professor of Theology. It embodies the well digested results of laborious enquiry; and it is exempt from the faults of many similar compositions. Its small compass makes it accessible. It is no inaccurate, superficial, and trite compilation at second hand. It does not profane the Church by treating its rise and progress as those of a merely human institution. It is neither a dry chro- nicle, nor a series of religious biographies. And it is no party work. Independent of its vindicating the divine origin of Christianity, and the inspiration of its records, and of its luminous disquisition as to the true source and proper place of Episcopacy, the merit of this volume lies in its exposition of the relation between the human theatre and instruments, on the one hand, and the divine purposes and agency on the other. Many men virtually regard the God of the Church and the God of nature as two different beings. They look upon notliing PREFACE. as being truly spiritual which is at all analogous to the providential course of this world. And they concede no due place to the exercise of man's faculties, the operation of human motives, and the influence of ex- tenial circumstances, in the acts, writings, and judg- ments of Christ's servants ; as if, lest, by doing so, they should bring into question the agency of God. Such views the present work is eminently suited to correct, by transporting us into the midst of those persons, principles, and historical data, in which Christianity, planted by the same God who had prepared the soil, took root and grew — not an arbitrary heterogeneous exotic, but a developement as natural as its origin was divine. We here learn to understand God's present working with fallible instruments and in uncompleted forais, by seeing how He suited His eternal ways to man's condition at the beginning of the dispensation. We see, not only how the Church gradually made way and was manifested, as a perfect work awaiting only its place and recognition, but how she herself actually grew in knowledge as in stature, and was gradually led by the Spirit of Christ and the providence of God, through successive stages, into the knowledge of her place, her constitution, her duties, and her destiny. We must remind those who may think some of the arguments in the work superfluous, that Germany, the hot-bed of speculative unbelief, is the place of pub- lication. Some extracts from the author's preface will illustrate his position and objects. " One great error which pervades all recent investi- gations into the ancient histoiy of the Church, is seen, indeed, in its most naked form, among those critics PREFACE. XI who regard the primitive Christians as a generation ' reduced to a mere existence in literature.' But such a view, natural enough in professorial pedants, who would gladly make the past a mirror in which to see themselves, is only an extreme form of the unecclesias- tical ideas as to antiquity, which have long since crept in among us, and which it is high time to renounce. Both inquiry and experience now point to something better. The Church of old was no literary hot-house, no club of sophistic disputants, no theatre for individual license ; least of all in its beginnings. The solemn worship of God— the dignified severity of discipline — the autho- rity of holy tradition, were essentials with her from the first. The principle of order was not infused into her by Roman domination or incipient priestcraft. She is herself essentially a divine institution, a building fashioned of God, an organism in which divine ideas find expression. With the understanding of this we acquire, for the first time, a true insight into Christian antiquity. He who succeeds in constructing, not a mere chronicle of literature, dogmas, heresies, and rival schools, but a Church history in the proper sense of the word, has, in doing so, obtained the most salutary lessons for the present time. Yet the Church, although of heavenly birth, and wondrously guided by our risen Redeemer, is a strictly historical structure. She did not appear suddenly in a perfect form, as unhistorical orthodoxy may dream ; but was gradually developed. My chief labors have been long directed to establish the credibility of the New Testament. The enemies and friends of the sacred writings w^ll agree, that such col- lections of bones and splinters as pass under such names Xll PREFACE. as, ' Introduction into the New Testament/ ' Biblical Theology, &c.,' have no value. One may controvert for ever about the worth and origin of individual frag- ments. But when all is combined harmoniously into a living structure, when piece, joined to piece, completes the armour, that is done which will satisfy the friends, and silence the enemies of truth. " I have sought to learn from all quarters, even from the open adversaries of Holy Scripture. The criticism of negation does the same service as all heresy, which, condemnable though it be, has ever brought forward to our notice, points of truth which had been overlooked. If this is the case with dogmas, why not also with history ? Many things have been rightly observed by the sceptic which have escaped the orthodox. We must acknowledge every true discovery (not hypothesis) let it come whence it may, and give to it its proper interpretation and place. Love for the truth constrains me to make this use of the writings of opponents. And I shall be glad to find that they re- cognize in my work many of their discoveries. For their contributions to the investigation of antiquity, I give them (if they will allow me) my thanks. For their slander of that which is holy, my abhorrence. " The chief critical problem in primitive Church history is the genesis of Christian truth and life from the womb of Mosaism — the liberation of the Church from the Synagogue — the mutual relations of the Hebrew and Gentile parts of Christendom. To this point I have directed great attention. If we are now to have true light upon it, our theologians must learn, better than they have hitherto done, to transplant them- PREFACE. Xm selves into, and give due reverence to, the Mosaic economy, in a truly historical spirit; that they may know the position of the nascent Church in the nur- sery out of which it proceeded. Without faith in the Old Testament, as divine, one cannot understand it. And, as long as it is not understood, as long as its economy is an object of indifference or dislike, pri- iMitive Christianity cannot be rightly apprehended. I hope that the present work will be found more matured than what I wrote some years ago on a similar subject ;* although this later work by no means cancels the earlier, which contains much preparatory matter, unsuited to the present. Perhaps I have here erred on the side of brevity. But I prefer this error to its opposite. I have avoided all that useless traffic in quotations and parade of abstruse phrases, which makes most of our theological works so distasteful and unprofitable to the laity. But one thing I assume in every reader, a knowledge, — at least an accompanying consultation — of Holy Scripture. He, who does not take the trouble to read the texts to which I refer, will derive little profit from this work. "I have cited none but ancient authorities — no modern writers — friend or foe. Had I begun this, where could I have stopped } My chief opponent in Tiibingen cannot expect that I should notice him ; as he has left unnoticed my answer to him.f The de- * Versuch zur Herstellung des historischen Standpunktes fiir die Kritik der Neutestamentlichen Schriften — An Attempt to establish a Historical Basis for the Criticism of the New Testament Scriptures, 1845. f Einige Worte iiber die ^chtheit der Neutestamentlichen Schriften und ihre Erweisbarkeit aus der altesten Kirchengeschichte, 1846. Some Words XIV PREFACE. fenders of Holy Scripture will allow our common object to be my excuse for having drawn fi'om them. " My treatises on the Epistle to the Hebrews,* and on the discourse of Stephen, f are herein embodied. Some historical errors, into w^hich I have elsewhere fallen, are here corrected. The historical results to which I have come as to the Gospel of Mark and the Apocalypse, are comparatively recent. J I have sobered my colouring in describing the most ancient heresies. And I trust I have afforded no fresh excuse here for the groundless accusation, of having likened the state of things which succeeded the Apostolic Age to a second fall of man. § " I cannot conclude without a word to you, our young theologians, amongst whom I have so long lived and labored. I know your miserable distraction by the conflicts of your teachers. The cruelty with which every variety of scepticism, of diluted and corrupted faith has been thrust upon you, has brought on you in- tellectual stupefaction, slavish subjection to the autho- rity of infidelity, and eradication of capacity for divine truth. Shake off your indifference, and take courage. on the Grenuineness of the New Testament Scriptures and their confirmation by primitive Church History. (A pamphlet worthy of attention.— Tr.) * De Epistola ad Hebraeos commentatio historica. Marburg, 1848. t De Stephani protomartyris oratione commentatio exegetica. Marburg, 1849. J See pp. 100, &c., and 231 of this work, in correction of pp. 178, &c,, and 277, 278, of the " Attempt," &c. § In the most valuable irenical work which has for a long time ap])eared, entitled, " Vorlesungen iiber Cathclicismus und Protestantismus." Erlangen, 1848. Lectures on Catholicism and Protestantism— academical lectures, in which the respective excellencies of Protestantism and Komanism, and the compensation of the one by the other, are exhibited. — Te. PREFACE. XV Break the bands of blind obedience to those who, out of their own withered souls, can impart to you nothing but the science of doubt and suspicion. Be no longer mere note-takers, but real inquirers; no longer mere dreaming book-worms, but men who wrestle for truth in prayer. Return to the Holy Scriptures, that fountain of truth, the waters of which your enemies have taught you to suspect and put from your lips. Drink once more with confidence. And, when you are refreshed, know, of what blessings men would have robbed you." We may congratulate ourselves in this country that atheism and heresy are not yet provided for and taught in our schools of instruction, as varied forms of truth. But our exemption from this will be dangerous indeed, if it blinds us to our own proper defects and perils. In avoiding latitudinarianism, we may have ceased to be catholic. In our abhorrence of scepticism, we may have neglected to make ourselves intelligent. In de- fending the alphabet of the faith, we may have left its depths unexplored. Though we have inherited the form of truth, we may have lost its life. And though we may not be the more active agents, we may not the less be the carnal and ignorant dupes, of Antichrist. They only, who are perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works, have that, which will enable them to endure unto the end. If the perusal of these pages shall lead any forward to seek our common perfection, one great object of this translation will be served. COJ^TENTS. INTRODUCTION. PAGE Chapter First. — Heathenism . . . . . 1 — ly Chapter Second. — Judaism ..... 19 — 42 Chapter Third.— Christ and the Church .... 42— 5S BOOK FIEST. THE CHUECH IN THE APOSTOLIC AGE. CHAPTER I. THE LABORS OP PETER. Pentecost — Gift of tongues — Discourses of Peter— First Persecutions — Oldest ecclesiastical constitution — Community of goods — Discipline — Deacons — Elders — James — Position of the Apostles . . . 59 — 77 Stephen — Discourses of Stephen — Martyrdom of Stephen — Planting of the Church in Samaria — Simon the sorcerer — Baptism of first heathen — Perse- cution under Herod Agrippa I. — Martyrdom of James the son of Zebedee —Flight of Peter ...... 78-89 Peter in Rome — Jewish Colony in Rome — Banishment of Jews under Claudius — Gospel of Mark — Planting of the Church in Alexandria — Labors of the other Apostles to Israel — Epistle of James— James bishop of Jeru- salem ....... 90—104 CHAPTER II. THE LABORS OF PAUL. Youth of Paul — Paul as persecutor— Paul's conversion — Paul's outward career — Paul's inward progress — Revelations to Paul — Commencement of Paul's apostleship — Paul as Apostle to the Gentiles — Paul's behaviour to the Jews ....... 105 — 117 Jirst journey of Paul — The Churches in Galatia — Judaists in Antioch — Council at Jerusalem — Decisions of the Council — Other transactions there — h XVlll . CONTENTS. Kecognition of Paul — Behaviour of Paul as to the decision — Error of Peter at Antioch — Resistance by Paul — Separation of Paul and Barnabas 117-129 Second journey of Paul — His fellow-laborers — His dealing with Timotliy — Planting of Macedonian Churches — Paul in Athens — Paul in Corinth — The Corinthian Church — Parties in Corinth . . . 129 — 136 Third journey of Paul— Paul in Ephesus — Ephesus capital of Gentile Chris- tianity — Source of Gentile heresies — Essene errors in Colosse . 136 — 140 Form of Churches under Paul — The Pastoral Epistles — Fixed order in the Cliurch — Liberty to prophesy— Fixed offices in the Church — Sunday — Asce- ticism — Public praj'er — Reading of Old Testament — Communication of Christ's discourses — Gospel of Luke — Discipline — Deacons and Elders — No bishop yet — Apostolic delegates — Unity of the Church — Perfection of the Church 140—153 Relation of Paul to the Churches under Peter — Restoration of the Church at Rome — Respect of Paul for it — Epistles to Romans and Galatians — Epistle to Romans — Paul's apology — Church and State in Rome — Paul's last visit to Jerusalem — Accommodation to Judaism — Paul before the Sanhedrim — Paul in the power of Felix — Paul in prison — Writings of Paul and Luke — Arrival of Paul in Rome — Reception by the Jews . . 153 — 167 State of Judaea— Gospel of Matthew — Persecution of Christians under High Priest Ananus — Martyrdom of James — Excommunication of faithful in Judaea — Epistle to the Hebrews — Exclusion of faithful from Jewish worship — Remaining attachment to Moses — Authorship of Epistle to the Hebrews —Paul and Barnabas ..... 167—190 Peter's second visit to Rome — First Epistle of Peter — Spread of the Church in Western Asia — Peter comforts the Churches of Paul — Heathen slanders — Threatening of persecution by Nero — Rome new Babylon — Second Epistle nf Peter — Heathenism in the Church — Late reception of Second of Peter — Labors of Peter and Paul in Rome —Persecution by Nero — Martyrdom of Peter and Paul— Consequences of the same , . . 190 — 202 CHAPTER TIL LABORS OP JOHN, AND THE CHURCH AT THE END OF THE APOSTOLIC AGE. Causes of the Jewish war — First rising against the Romans — Expectations of Messiah — False prophets — The conflict — Civil war — Sufferings of Chris- tians — Defeat of Cestius Gallus — Flight of Christians from Judciea — Cam- paigns of Vespasian — Distress of Jerusalem by Vespasian — Siege by Titus — Destruction of Jerusalem — Its effect on the Church . 203 — 216 CONTENTS. XIX Apocal3'psc — Date — Authorship — The seven Churches — Their agreement with Paul — Heretics in them — Judaizing false Apostles^ — Heathen Gnostics —Nicolaitans— Epistle of Jude .... 21G— 237 Duties of John— His later writings — First Epistle — Antichrists expelled — False gnosis— Doceta2 — Two kinds — Cerinthus . . 237 — 247 Grospel by John — Its object — Its relation to the three others — To the Apo- calj'pse — Stamp of John on Church — Authenticity of his Gospel 247 — 254 John as orderer of the Church — Ecclesiastical institutions — Angels of the seven Churches — Episcopate therein — Episcopate in chief cities — Metropo- litans — Second Epistle by John — Advantage of Episcopacy — Relation of bishop to presbyters — Not domination — Abuses — Third Epistle by John — jMeaning of Episcopacy — Old and New Testament hierarchy — Call and ordi- nation — Discipline — Restoration of fallen — Weekly feasts — Annual fasts and Easter — Diversities in celebration of Easter — Worship — Hymns to Christ — Rituals — Fixed Liturg}'- — Baptism — Infant Baptism — Apostles' Creed — First half of principal act of Avorship— The Scriptures — Second half of worship — Eucharistic offering .... 254 — 288 Restoration of spiagogue in Judeea — Restoration of Church in Jenisalem — Appointment of Simeon as bishop — Hebrew bishops — Communion of He- brews and Greeks — Hebrews pure till Trajan — Schisms and heresies in second century — Breaking up of unity on death of Apostles — Invasion by Pharizaic and Essene heresies after the same — Church in Antioch — Ignatius —His Epistles— His martyrdom— The Church in Syria . 288—306 First bishops of Alexandria — Privileges of the elders there — Peculiar consti- tution of Egyptian Church — Dangers at Alexandria — Entrance of Thera- peutae — Pretended Epistle of Barnabas — Faithfulness of Alexandrian bishops — Gloom of Egyptian Christians . . . 306 — 314 Influence of Roman Church on the West— Law and rule — First Roman bishops — Traditions about Clement of Rome and his writings — Persecu- tion under Domitian — Jewish Christians in Roman Church — Epistle of Clement to Corinthians — Its import and authenticity — Pastor of Hermas — Conjectures in regard to — Jewish ideas therein— No Jewish heresy — Lijiht therein on the state of the Church . . . 314 — 335 Conclusion — Disappearance of Apostles and delegates — Difference between Episcopacy and Apostleship — Episcopacy not the highest office — Devolution on bishops — Need of higher authority — Elders in Asia — Metropolitans — Buddings of Romish primacy — Feeling of Church on disappearance of Apostles — Death of John— Tradition as to his arrival and return — Check to developement of Church — Uncertainty of Church as to the future 335 — 351 INDEX, Of the Books of the New Testament, and of the Primitive Writings connected with them. Gospel by Matthew, Mark. . Luke. John. Acts of Apostles, by Luke. Epistle of James, bishop of Jerusalem. ■ Peter, First. Second. John, First. Second. Third. ' Jude. > Paul to Romans. Corinthians. Ualatians. Ephesians. Philippians. Colossians. Thessalonians. Timothy, First. • Second. Titus. Philemon. Hebrews. The Revelation of St. John. The Gospel of the Hebrews or Nazarenes. Egyptians. The Revelation of Peter. Epistle of Barnabas. First Epistle of Clement of Rome to Corinthians. Apocryphal writings under name of Clement of Rome. The Pastor of Hermas. Epistles of Ignatius. INTRODUCTION. CHAPTER I. HEATHENISM. The ancient history of those nations which since the commencement of the historical period inhabited Western Asia and the coasts of the Mediterranean, is involved in deep obscurity. It was their lot to stand in succession for thousands of years at the head of the human family. Their territory, from the frontiers of India to the pillars of Hercules, was, before the Chris- tian ajra, the theatre of the most decisive events in the history of the world, and, after that aera, the soil on which the Christian Church was planted and developed. Yet the same obscurity rests upon the origin of their reli- gions as upon their colonization and their earliest bio- graphy. Nevertheless, where the historical muniments of the nations either fail or assume a mythical character, the Holy Scriptures still afford us sufficient means of un- derstanding the origin and essence of heathenism — its VOL. I. B 2 HEATHENISM. darkness, which Christianity should disperse — and its streaks of light by ^Yhich Christianity was ushered in. The original unity of mankind was one not of speech only, but of thought, object, and action ; one fitted to form a basis for the kingdom of God on earth. But it was abused by man in his titanic attempt, and therefore by God destroyed. Mankind were about to establish and extend their kingdom in this world without God in a way which precluded all hope of amendment. The divine judgment in the confusion of tongues and dis- persion of nations, anticipated this danger, and, while it punished the daring deed, afforded the means of deliverance. Not by a gradual process, for which thousands of years would not have sufficed, but by an extraordinary and sudden event was the human family divided, through those tongues, sections, and characters, which, without effacing in any nation all traces of ori- ginal unity, have ever since so separated, nay alienated, men from each other. And of the dismembered body each part was destined to follow the bias of its pecu- liar character, until all, after long experience and mani- fold chastisement, should be ripe for a higher reconsti- tution as the people of God. There was, as far as we are aware, no polytheism or idolatry, while the human race continued undivided. Yet it appears as if the nations, at their dispersion, carried few traditions with them, and began their migra- tions with a draught of Lethe. The confusion of tongues seems to have, in a great measure, expunged the remembrance of the beginnings of man, so as to allow each race honestly to regard itself as an Autoch- thon in its new possessions. Yet each did take with HEATHENISM. 3 it sacred recollections, holy customs, and traditional rights; those elements of religion and morals which are so inseparable from the undestroyed though fallen being of man, that nothing but personal guilt can ex- stirjiate them. And the men of ancient times were open to the influences of higher powers to a degree of which moderns have little conception. Hence, it is no marvel, that the fear of the Creator, the reference of law to Him, the worship of God Avith offerings and penances, the doctrine of the existence, punishment, and reward of souls after death, formed elements in all religions, and were so intimately connected with the real relation of man to God, that they were ever ready to re-appear after any apparent extinction. Men felt at once the nearness of the Almighty, their own estrangement, and the desire to appease his wrath. They knew that sin was sin — that it stood exposed to a divine judgment ; that it could be taken away only by suffering, and that deliverance from a fallen condition could only come through humiliation, devotion, and self-renunciation. And herein lay the origin and basis of atonement in its manifold forms ; a thing which could not but arise out of the loss of man's communion with God in paradise. The fountain of true religion is not the working of the understanding, but the voice of God in the con- science ; not the anxious excitement of the fancy, but the feeling of homage and thankfulness towards the Giver of all good. The faith of God's existence is not submitted to the option of man. It is there, anterior to man's volition ; and can only be suppressed by a criminal resolve. Fallen man was still able not only to know God, but to worship Him. The willing neglect B 2 4 HEATHENISM. of this was the source of heathen error, with all its vain imaginations and wicked works. " They knew God — He did not leave himself without witness — they could seek, feel after, and find Him." This, and no less, says Paul of the heathen ;■ — of the nations in ancient times ; — of every individual to the present hour. A mighty sin of omission was the step which brought the nations into that course which ended in the deepest darkness : " They knew God, and gave Him not thanks, nor glorified Him as God. Therefore were they given up, first to the vanity of their minds, and then to the darkness of their hearts." Every fi'esh step of their fall was afresh judgment. But at each step restoration was possible, in yielding to the feelings of thankfulness and duty through a right use of the measure of light afforded to them. The first consequence of this unthankfulness, and therefore the second step in the way of apostasy, was the vanity of men's imaginations as to things divine; the turning of their wisdom into folly. They no longer distinguished between Creator and creature ; and, pass- ing by the former, directed to the latter that homage which they could not withhold from some object or other. By this crime they were brought to the third step in their downward course — the moral obtuseness — the self-profanation — the flagitious crimes of heathen antiquity. Because they would not retain God in their knowledge, He gave them up to a reprobate mind and shameful lusts. Where the true relation between creature and Creator is destroyed, that of one creature to another must be corrupted by every abomination. The dark secret of heathenism lies not in polytheism, HEATHENISM. 5 but in the deification of the creature. Whether crea- tion as a whole or an individual creature be worshipped; whether the spirit of nature, pervading all things and awakened to consciousness in man, be uplifted to the throne of divinity; or a material object, a shapeless block — a white elephant — an Egyptian bull — a warrior's spear, be selected for adoration as a symbol of nature's power ; we see exhibited various stages of culture and forms of thought, but one and the self-same sin. Every rite and tradition of polytheism contains traces of faith in the unity of a primeval cause. But the question was and is, whether the vivifying fountain, the hidden root of all creatures is the divinity itself. Man himself, made in the image of God, could never have fallen into the delusion of pantheism save by re- fusing thanksgiving and obedience to the God whom he knew. What then were the forms assumed by the vain imaginations of man as to God } A full answer to this question would lead us into the labyrinth of mythology. It will here suffice to point out a few fixed results. Traces may be found of a correspondence in the progress of idolatry among difTerent nations. The worship of the heavenly bodies was the first, and, so to speak, the most excusable form of idolatry. The ad- miration and adoration of the great powers of nature in heaven and earth, long preceded the worship which connectad itself with local objects, such as mountains, forests, rivers, and stones fallen from heaven. And the estimation of images made by man, as being not only symbols but actual abodes of divine power, appeared 6 HEATHENISM. Still later, in some nations ; in others, not at all. But while man thus bowed before the majesty of nature and her now productive, now destructive powers, he forgot that he carried in himself the revelation of much higher things. He lost sight of the holiness of the Almighty, and the dignity of humanity ; and in relinquishing the worship of a holy God, he lost the source of his own holiness. In doing homage to the life of nature, which wrought in the lower world, he not only renounced his own higher destiny, but admitted inferior powers to operate on himself ; and, seeing no longer any evil in that which formed his deepest degradation, he defaced the remains of the divine image in himself, although un- able to exstirpate utterly the sense of right and wrong, the fear of retribution, and the belief in a future state. But while we can trace in heathen idolatry that which is common to all nations, that whicli is peculiar to each is yet more striking. In the images, history, and worship of each national deity, we find reflected that peculiarity of national character which is as mysterious in its origin as the peculiarities of individuals, and which operates as much upon the spiritual as upon the corporeal deve- lopement of a people. And while great prophets, priests, and religious lawgivers arose to stamp each national faith, the gradually increasing intercourse of nations originally isolated, produced, by mutual combinations, yet fuller fonns of worship. Yet all this is not ade- quate to explain the power of national religion over the heathen ; the unquestioning devotedness to the gods of their fathers, and the subjugation of a whole people to one faith and form of worship without a doubt as to the existence of its deities, without relaxa- HEATHENISM. 7 tion through lapse of ages, and without exception througli the exercise of private judgment. The in- calcuhible sacrifices which each nation has made for the sake of its gods, are a standing testimony against the ancient sceptic (or euhemeristic) and the modern rationalistic (or Vossian) theory, which would generate the whole world of heathen deities out of the apotheosis of great men by fiction or adulation, out of the fancy of individual poets, or out of the craft of civil or spiri- tual rulers. Had religious traditions no deeper origin than this, their extent and dominion were indeed in- explicable. Powers objective or external to man ruled the spirit of the nations who turned away from the adoration of the true God. Nothing less than the influence of a world of spirits, seeking entrance into man, can explain the spell of heathenism in its most irrational forms and most burdensome requirements. They who lived in the midst of heathenism and knew its fascinations, had no other idea than that of the working of demons in pagan rites. In this opinion the Jews and the fathers of the Church agree. And if we throw aside the strange traditions and interpretations with which this opinion was associated, the opinion itself is fully borne out both by the Old Testament and by the New. No doubt, the idol, as the apostle says, is nothing. The operations of heathenism are, compared with the power of God, as it were, nonentities. No divine power re- sides in the idol. The fantastic form of Apollo or Bac- chus, of Here or Isis, corresponds to no external or objective essence. Nevertheless the heathen sacrifices are sacrifices to demons ; and the feasts upon these 8 HEATHENISM. sacrifices do bring those who offer them into real com- munion with demons. To this the same apostle points when he speaks of the rulers of this world, — of the spirits of wickedness in heavenly places (the nearest to the earth), — and of the power of the prince of the air; powers which had ruled over the heathen, and from which, Christians are freed, in order to vanquish them. And who that has any knowledge of history, or understanding of antiquity, is rationalist enough to re- gard all oracles and visions of old as empty dreams, and the greatest, and sometimes most salutary acts of ancient seers and sacrificers, as mere priestcraft? Certainly that ancient Jewish tradition is much nearer the truth, according to which, when the Eternal divided the nations and reserved his own inheritance, He gave up the former to the subordinate superhuman powers, the princes and potentates, who had already departed from Him, and from w^hom the heathen were destined to learn their magic arts and idolatrous rites. The spirit of the individual strives after a self-suffi- ciency to which it may not attain. Least of all was it sufficient to itself in the times of which we speak. The inward being of man, appointed to be entirely actuated by the sanctifying Spirit of God, came under the power of a spiritual world, which was then not so exactly dis- tinguished from the nature of man as it now is. All new or great ideas and impulses, were ascribed to in- spiration, good or bad. Those sacrificers, pray-ers, and prophets, who, long before the time of the Greek heroic poets, guided the people and taught them the worship of the gods, deduced their authority from intercourse with invisible powers. The priests, distinct from the HEATHENISM. 9 bards, subsisted and exercised their rites, independent of the gradually amplified traditions as to gods and heroes. Paul called Epimenides, who had stayed the pestilence in Athens by his offerings and prayers, a prophet of the Greeks, while he would hardly have thus desig- nated either Homer or Hesiod. Homer knew the Or- phic mysteries, but he ventured neither to sing nor to ex- pound them. Side by side with the poetic theogony, the ancient worship pursued its course. Although afterwards mingled, they were originally distinct. Hence Plato could banish Homer from his republic without thereby offending against the worship of his country's gods. The power of the ancient deities reaches far down into the times of history, even among the Greeks, who were the most inclined to emancipate private opinion from the bondage of a common faith. Herodotus, although certainly an exception from his age in his reverence for the past, exhibits a thorough subjugation of spirit under the ancient mythology. So long as the individual remained undividedly a member of his nation and an organ of the national spirit, there was no room for the founding of the Church and the pouring out of the Holy Ghost. But a different state of things long preceded the appearance of Christianity. When did this emancipation of the spirits of men from the trammels of heathen tradition take place ? How did it make itself known ? and did it occur simul- taneously in all nations, or successively ? Such an emancipation shows itself not so much in reckless scepticism as in the attempt to find a substitute for that which is manifestly on the wane. Whether by a new system of philosophy, or by a new religion, by 10 HEATHENISM. esoteric doctrines, or by a reformed worship, in every case it is proved that the old thing is shaken to its foundations, displaced and unprofitable; and that the spirits of men are capable and desirous of the new. And it is not a little remarkable that this important sign of the times appeared in various ancient nations at one and the same a)ra. In the sixth century before Christ, the Greek philo- sophy began its course. Thales, at the head of the lonians, and Pythagoras, were the first to construct, on a speculative basis, a system of the world and of social life. Grecian wisdom developed itself in phy- sics and ethics ; and it did so, because the decay of the power of the gods demanded a cosmogony, and the decay of their authority a philosophical moral code. In the same century commenced that internal change among the Jewish people which has made their charac- ter and inclinations in all subsequent ages the opposite of what they once w^ere. Previously incurable in their attachment to strange gods, and relapsing after each deliverance and cleansing by the messengers of God, into forms of idolatry, the witchery of which was equalled only by their impurity, slavery, and horrors, the Jews are seen, after the captivity in Babylon, so entirely free from such inclinations and inaccessible to such temptations, that the martyrs under the Maccabees, were prepared to suffer anything rather than consent to acts into which their forefathers had rushed with greedi- ness. How was such a revolution wTought in seventy years ? It was not the mere consequence of the divine chastisements. It is plain that, taken in con- nection with the religious history of the heathen, this HEATHENISM. 11 internal change, however it may have helped to loose the bands of idolatry, was accompanied by a great ex- ternal change not confined to the Jewish nation. For in the same century the way was ])aved for the abolition of the ancient Persian religion by the system of Zoroaster. The latter was not confined, like the Grecian systems, to the schools of philosophy, but be- came, although a secondary phenomenon, the religion of the people. The worship of Ormuzd was in part indebted to Hebrew truths for its establishment. The ascetic severity of the East apprehended the moral contradiction in man's nature — the disruption of his original being, in a way of which the Greeks knew nothing. This contradiction, extended to the objective, pictured in the gigantic, and degraded to the earthly, is the essence of the Paric dualism, in ^vhich, with all its exaggeration of the conflict between light and dark- ness, the true idea of holiness was destroyed, its at- tainment was made impossible, and the reign of heathen- ism was prolonged, by the debasing of moral relations to natural, and the transforming of them into mere phy- sical antagonisms. In the same century also, the ancient worship of Brahma gave w^ay in India. What else is the import of Gautama's efforts, and of the wonderful effect of his doctrine } Unsatisfied by the popular fables, Indian sages sought by inward concentration of thought to find out the Godhead; and founded that system of pan- theistic contemplation which has radiated from India, and next to Christianity and Mahomedanism has, with its spell of witchery, exercised the mightiest infiuence over the spirits of men. Complete retirement from the ^'^ HEATHENISM. external world, and silent repose disturbed by no sen- sual enjoyment, were the means by which it proposed to invest the soul with power to apprehend the divine essence after an unutterable manner in the depth of man's own interior being, and thus attain to blessed union with the Godliead itself Something it certainly found m this way of world-denial and self-contempla- tion. But that something was no more than the spirit of nature and of creature being; and while it repre- sented this as the Godhead, it opened the door to all that unclean mockery of divine operations, illumina- tions and consecrations, with which Buddhism is filled It is important to observe that this subtle pantheism- the forerunner of the modern-was not an original, but a secondary, religion. Finally, the same century presents us with the symp- toms of dissolution in the most distant empire of the iiast. At that time scientific philosophy began to sup- plant in China the sacred traditions and the political constitution of which they formed the basis. This phi- losophy took two different directions; one, through Confucius, directed to practical morality; another, through Laotseu, entirely speculative, and not without likeness to Persian and Egyptian doctrines. It is easy to find these two forms of philosophy among the Crreeks; and it is surprising to find the same pheno- menon contemporary in two such distant quarters In Egypt, indeed, the land of tradition, we observe no such change.* And the ancient religions of Italy and ^orth Germany seem also to have been unaffected. Yet the facts already adduced suffice to prove that in • Query. Did notsuch a change succeed the conquest by Cambyses.-TE. HEATHENISM. 13 the sixth century a change passed upon heathenism, similar to that shaking and desolation with which, be- tween the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries after Christ, Christians, Jews, Mahomedans, and even Hin- doos, have been visited in common. A vast building, once shattered and deserted, sinks gradually but unavoidably into ruin. So was it with heathenism from the date of its first great shock, although its dissolution was not perfected for five cen- turies after Christ. The wants of the Greek and Roman world were all preparations, direct or indirect, for the introduction of Christianity. The great blank which nothing but the true worship of God and the pouring out of his Spirit could fill up, became continually wider. And both the philosophers and the devotees of the centuries preceding Christ, exhausted their efforts in endeavouring to fill this blank. Among all the religious substitutes to which men turned in their perplexity, the mysteries of Bacchus (Dionysos) were the most important. The unity of God, the immortality of the soul, and its purification for entrance into the Elysian fields, were leading ideas of higher worth than all that public religion taught. Dark as the origin and import, and defiled as the course of these mysteries may have been, they were a practical prophecy of a better redeeming religion yet to come. Among the preeks all philosophy had for its object the attainment of a philosophic life. No school was so degraded as to seek the mere increase of knowledge with- out a moral regulation of the life. The Greeks already had a remarkable moral inheritance in their laws; 14 HEATHENISM. partly in the unwritten laws of hospitality, marital fide- lity, fear of the gods, justice and truth towards men, and partly in the express provisions of their great law- givers at the commencement of their historical period. These pure laws stand remarkably contrasted with im- pure mj'ths ; these moral maxims with immoral rites. And without doubt the moral element was older than the immoral. A yet higher developement of morals ap- pears in Socrates, Plato, and the Stoics — morals, the dignity of which is now the wonder of Christians as it once was of Jews. It was possible for the heathen to recover a measure of the knowledge of God and his will. Were it not so, the Scriptures would not have declared them to be without excuse. An anxious hearkening to the law planted in the conscience, a catching of those scattered rays from the light of the Word (Logos) by which no man has been wholly un- enlightened, seems in the case of these men remarkably observable. The oj^inion of the Jewish and Christian teachers at Alexandria, that Plato drew instruction from the Scriptures, or at least from the revealed truths de- posited with the Jews, if it has never been confirmed, has never been proved unfounded. And why should none of these truths have found their way to the schools of Greece ? Why should they have escaped the notice of Pythagoras and Plato during their travels through the East in search of wisdom } These men are silent indeed on the subject. But Herodotus, who certainly knew of the Jews as a nation, is silent regarding the Jews. Be this as it may, a new and higher degree of moral apprehension, if not of moral life, is undeniable in Socrates, Plato, and Zeno. Yet the agreement of HEATHENISM. 15 their doctrine with the Jewish and the Christian, is in many points merely external, and associated with an internal difference in principle and sentiment. And it is more important to see this difi'erence aright, than to observe that similarity by which the ancient fathers of the Chm'ch allowed themselves to be so often deceived. Nowhere does Socrates or any of his successors fomid his four cardinal virtues on the fear, the adoration, or the love of God. Plato, with his lofty ideas of political virtue in the perfect " State," knows nothing of the holi- ness of monogamy. The moral ideal of woman, which we find in the writings of Solomon, is unknown to the moral ])hilosophers of heathen antiquity. In vain do we seek in the writings of Aristotle upon morals, for either chastity or mercy, (the tAvo pillars of true holi- ness,) among the manifold virtues of which they treat. To the Stoic, mercy is one of those disturbances of the soul above which the wise man should rise. And to the lives of the greatest philosophers cleaves that in- delible disgrace of heathenism — unnatural lust — as a fearful testimony that the heathen world could not be redeemed, but only judged, by its own improved know- ledge in morals. The Platonic and the Stoic schools adopted a con- siderable portion of the gravity of Eastern tradition. On the other hand, the school of Epicurus was the fullest developement of the frivolity and impiety which supplanted in Greece the dictates of conscience to man; gods dwelling remote from men and unconcerned as to their fate ; the soul mortal ; the world the result, and its course the effect, of chance ; pleasure, or rather the comfortable absence of pain, and a studious re- 16 HEATHENISM. velry in enjoyment the chief end and highest virtue of man. Such were the principles in which the spirit of man, not only emancipated from the bondage of mytho- logy, but unfaithful to, and hardened in, rebellion against the testimony of higher truth in nature and conscience, found its expression. This was unquestionably the most popular of all philosophies. The ancient virtues of the Greeks, had become almost exclusively political ; and they sank with the ancient civil polity, when inter- nal strife and foreign subjugation destroyed it. The Stoic and Platonic doctrines gave birth to great indi- viduals, — instance Plutarch's life of Dion. But such men were few in number, and generally characterized by the most dangerous pride and a more than pharizaic hardness of heart. Such w^as already the condition of Greece, while Rome yet exhibited exalted virtue and strength of mind, and being yet uninfected by the dissolution of the ancient faith, preserved the power to succeed the other nations in the dominion of the world. For one hundred and seventy years the* Romans worshipped their gods without images. Posidonius speaks with admiration of their still abiding fear of God. A cen- tury before Christ, when no man trusted a hundred oaths of a Greek, Polybius still found among the Romans the strictest fidelity to an oath. And the Roman statesmen were not blind to the danger of religious and philosophical innovations. The twelve tables forbade the w^orship of any strange gods not recognized by the state. The Bacchanalia, secretly in- troduced, were suppressed with wholesome severity. But after the conquest of Greece, Greek literature and HEATHENISM. 17 infidelity pervaded Rome as rapidly as those of France did Germany a century back. The fatal revolution was already complete under the first Caesars. Marcus Terentius Varro indeed still proposed to confine within the schools the philosophical form of religion, i. e. the unrestrained ratiocination upon the national gods. Yet the general tone of society w^as so thoroughly in- fidel, that Cicero, in his speech for Cluentius, alluded ironically, in open court, to the punishments of the nether world, as to a thing which no man any longer believed. And all who laid claim to education spoke in like manner. If the seductive myths of Greece, which furnished a welcome excuse for every earthly crime in a corresponding vice among the denizens of Olympus, had wrought evil enough already, whence could come courage to die for country and the righteous cause.? whence justice in judgment? whence mercy in rule t whence truth to promises ? if faith in immor- tality was no more ? Paul is not singular in his cata- logue of heathen crime. The historians, philosophers, and satirists of imperifd Rome, — Tacitus, Seneca, Juve- nal, — publish the same. But this sad condition was not to be the conclusion of man's history. The philosophers indeed of the fallen academy regarded nothing as true, save that nothing certain could be known of anything. And this also they held to be uncertain. Yet no sceptical acumen can banish the appetite of man for that truth which is certain, and which can purify and exalt him, or silence the longing of the soul for reconciliation with God and for holy worship. A cry of distress from per- plexed and dishonoured humanity ascended, intelligent VOL. I. c 18 HEATHENISM. or unintelligent, out of the breasts of thousands. The wisest of the Greeks had said, that nothing but the descent of a God could bring certainty to man. And, indeed, He who was to bring certainty, and with it, re- demption, could not be of this world. The dread of the invisible, the torment of a sense of guilt, the thirst for revelation, drove the restless to the acceptance of foreign deities, to initiation into the mysteries of the East, and to every strange rite which made promise of redemption. Plutarch, in his work on the morbid fear of the gods and on the denial of God, pictures to us a spiritual condition, in which no way to peace seems too hard. The mysteries of the Egyp- tian Isis and the Persian Mithras were transported to the distant West. These rites, partly a demoniacal cari- cature of the true Christian mysteries, appeared as delusive precursors. All the false messiahs of the Jews, all the Magi impostors {e. g. Simon the Samarite or Apol- lonius of Tyana) of the heathen, preceded our Lord and his apostles, or haunted their steps. These very forms of delusion, and the greecj^ness with which they were received, betokened the approaching rise of the Sun of truth. Happy were they who, in no small number, met, in their desperate search, with the doc- trines of Moses and the worship of the synagogue, which had then spread into all the cities of the empire and gathered around them strangers who feared God. On such persons lighted the dawn which ushered in the day. But the features of heathenism became darker and darker the nearer it approached to itf*extinction, and the more it came into collision with Christianity. Its bright points were blotted out. A powerless JUDAISM. 1^ antiquated, effete philosophy, associated with criminal practices and with magical and necromantic arts, was its last remnant. CHAPTER II. JUDAISM. At that important aera, when the true worship, exer- cised and taught by the first fathers of mankind, was nigh to extinction, yet subsisting, the call of God came to Abraham, and was solemnly recognized by Melchi- zedec, the representative of the pure original faith. It was the first link in that long chain of divine revela- tions which thenceforth conducted down to the appear- ance of the Redeemer himself. With it began the wonderful, condescension of God, "the possessor of heaven and earth," to a single race among whom He would dwell. He is the God of all flesh, yet He does not scruple to call Himself the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. The unbelief of man stumbles at this, as at every act of divine condescension, and imputes lit- tleness to the revelation of the Old Testament. But a glance at the object of God in the choice of the family of Abraham, is enough to remove the difficulty. While the separated nations went their own ways, and pursued them without divine intervention, one race was to be selected and prepared as the instrument for a future illumination and sanctifi cation of all. This one people was on this account favoured above all, not to retain selfishly for itself the truth and communion of c 2 20 JUDAISM. God, but to be educated as the mediator of salvation to others. The divine promise, that in the seed of Abraham all nations of the earth should be blessed, warranted the hope that mankind should not only recover their lost blessings, but attain yet higher, already dimly per- ceived, as the final end of their creation. And, un- doubtedly, this promise pointed to a kingdom of God upon earth, not in an invisible world of spirits. Para- dise itself had been upon earth ; much more should the earth be the theatre of the kingdom to come. Living men — nations of men — should be the blessed inhabitants of the earth. . In order to the attainment of this end in the ful- ness of time, it was needful that at least one fraction of humanity should be liberated and preserved from mere occupation with nature, and from the dominion of the demons who ruled the world. An abode purified for, and devoted to, the true tradition and worship, a place for the incarnation of the Saviour, a holy people fitted to be His instrument, were all indispensable. Such was the object of the law of Moses. It was given at a period when the evils of heathenism first show^ed their most dangerous features. It was given at a time when the land selected by God for the centre of His kingdom — the true Omphalos of the earth, as the Greeks erroneously designated their Pythian oracle — behoved to be purged of its nations. Else abominable worship, like a pestilence, might thus have spread thence over the whole w^orld, even as subsequently the law of God should in its own time go forth, and has gone forth from the same centre. JUDAISM. 21 Tlie Mosaic law, with its strict regulation and puri- fication of all the provinces of man's being, external and internal, was drawn as a fence around the people called to holiness — a dyke which the waves of ungodliness and immorality should not overflow — a partition, indis- pensable till the time when the heathen should be en- lightened, although then to be taken away. It contained so legibly the highest moral requirement and the expres- sion of God's will to man, that even its concessions to the hardness of men's hearts could not obscure it. It w^as a complete school of obedience, and it introduced the conscientious Israelite to the deepest knowledge of himself. But this was not the only way in which it was the schoolmaster unto Christ. The multitude of its directions as to worship w^ere such as corresponded to the actual relation of man to God at that time. Strange as it may appear to us in this age, in which spiritual life is so disconnected from external things, the Israelite really required to avoid unclean meats and to offer bloody sacrifices, in order to keep himself free from the overbearing influence of nature. Yet this circumstance is in itself inadeipiate to explain the great mystery of the Mosaic ceremonial. The New Testament enables us to contemplate the subject from another point of view. The phenomenon of man is the expression of his spiritual being ; nay, the whole visible world is created as a symbol of the invisible. And the same relation is observable be- tween the Mosaic rites, by which man was encomjiassed in his approach to God, and that higher form of com- munion with Him, which was reserved for the redeemed in Christ. Seen in this light, the law of Moses con- 22 JUDAISM. tains the whole fulness of divine truth; requires not addition, but merely developement and exposition ; and is, in fact, God's treasure-house of mysteries laid up for all eternity. The ever-recurring relapse of the Israelites into heathenism, and the very imperfect observance of the law, even at the best, afforded astonishing proof how much Israel needed a Saviour, ere they could become the salt of the earth, and the light of the world. The many successive messengers by whom God delivered and enlightened them, being both types of the coming Saviour, and awakeners of hope in His appearing, directed that hope forward by the very imperfection of their own achievements. The priesthood was continued by uninterrupted in- heritance. Next to it stood the offices of ruler and prophet, once united in the lawgiver, and then, to a cer- tain extent, in the judges, but afterwards separated. The people, in desiring a king like the heathen around, confessed thereby their own inability to bear and to be sanctified by the presence of Jehovah himself, their invisible King. Hence the unwillingness of God to grant their request, and yet the expressed object of the grant that the purpose of salvation should be ac- complished through the human king, the son of David. From that time forth God held out as His people's hope, not only the promised prophet like unto Moses, but also the Anointed One, who should, in one person and an infinitely higher degree, unite the characteristics of David and Solomon. The re-appearance of idolatry under the kings was aggi'avated by deeds of wickedness previously un- JUDAISM* 23 known. Prophets were raised up in those times of cor- ruption as witnesses against the apostasy. They were persecuted by tlieir people. Their blood called down judgment at the destruction of Jerusalem. Their suf- ferings were pre-indications that the greatest of all prophets should have to suffer at the hands of His own. The mystery of His sufferings and atoning death, already pointed at in the history of David, was revealed to the eye of Isaiah. The time was come when, under the yoke of the then ruler of the world, the better part of the Jewish people, the true Israel, was destined, with and for the rest, to undergo sufferings such as no former age had seen. With Nebuchadnezzar, the head of the x4.ssyro-Chal- daic monarchy, began the series of those tyrants who undertook to weld together into a unity the severed nations, and make them the basis for a throne of uni- versal despotism. At that season did God reveal to Daniel the then future succession of the kingdoms of the world— the order of the mystical beasts — the fearful form of the last godless conqueror of the world — and ultimately the kingdom of the Son of man and of the holy people ; thus filling up and combining into one the various prophecies as to Messiah. In this century, that in which judgment w^ent forth against the gods of the heathen, began quite a new period in the national history of the Jews. Finally delivered from the spell of idolatry, a cleansed rem- nant returned out of the Babylonian exile. In this small theocracy, which had struggled into restored existence, everything, and especially its inward life^ was changed. Once there stood opposed to the pro- 24 JUDAISM. phets and priests of demon-worship, the seers and wonder-^Yorkers of God, as Elias. Now both were gone. As the power of heathen darkness decayed (to such an extent, that at a later period only a very small number of Jews were perverted to heathenism by the cunning and power of the Syrian Antiochus Epiphanes), so did the mighty working of the spirit of prophecy disappear. The canon of the holy Scriptures was closed ; and the prophetic work was succeeded by the rise of a new order, the Scribes, w^ho, from the time of Ezra and Nehemiah, undertook the preservation and exposition of the sacred documents and traditions, and the office of teacher in the new worship of the synagogue. In their persons arose, side by side with the hereditary priesthood, an entirely new and rival power, resting upon learning and legal sanctity. By a natural pro- cess a theology gained ground, which, w^hile it em- braced the whole compass of divine tradition, was yet a human product and filled with human additions. The teachers of the too little known centuries succeed- ing the captivity, were exercised in deep and various meditation, not unaided by Greek philosophy. And the fruits of their labours are seen in the schools of the Pharizees and Sadducees, and in the sect of Essenes — phenomena respectively so similar to the Stoics, the Epicureans, and the Platonists, that Josephus evidently had the latter three in his eye when characterizing his " Three Sects." If we rightly apprehend the essence of these Jewish schools and their relation to Christianity, we need not trouble oiuselves with the question as to the origin of their names, and the time of their appearance. The names were probably assigned to them in the JUDAISM. 25 third century before Christ. The sects themselves were the offspring of an earlier period. The school of the Sadducees is that of least import- ance, as regards Christianity. Those spirits who at an earlier period would have been most easily seduced to idolatry, yielded themselves, at a later, to the influence of the sceptical and annihilate ve schools of philosophy, and became freethinkers — free at once from idolatrous mythology and from the fear of the true God — similar to the modern Deists — a class of persons of whom the most ancient times knew nothing. Few of the popular teachers, however, appear to have been of this class. The Sadducees valued little the esteem and consent of the peojde. They formed a party among the rich and powerful ; and their chief influence arose from their connexion with the Herodian dynasty, which accom- modated itself to heathenism in order to retain the support of Rome. To Christianity they were and continued to be strangers. They disappear from Jewish history with the destruction of Jerusalem. The Tal- mud sometimes speaks of them as heretics and Epi- cureans. We see clearly from the New Testament, that at the time of Christ almost all the chairs of instruction, at least in Judea, were filled by Pharizees. A hundred and fifty years afterwards the whole traditions of the expounders of the law were collected into a written form in the Mishnah. They are the complete expres- sion of the Pharizaic forms of thought and instruction. And yet in general, the name Pharizee was not extended to all whose principles were orthodox. It was applied properly to those who signalized themselves by scrupu- 26 JUDAISM. losity and rigid adherence to rules of faith and prac- tice. The Tahnud does not always speak in com- mendation of the Pharizees. Yet it is pervaded by the same spirit in which they acted at the time of Christ. They were at the close of the Jewish polity the spiri- tual dictators of the people, although the reins of exter- nal government were occasionally in the hands of the Sadducees. And they cherished in the people that feeling ^vhich found its vent in repeated risiugs against the government of Rome, and ultimately brought about the destruction of Jerusalem. In connexion with this, the measure of recognition which Christ and Paul accorded to the Pharizees, is very remarkable. Christ acknowledged that their disci- ples wrought miracles. " The Scribes and Pharizees," said He to His followers, " sit in Moses' seat ; all, therefore, whatsoever they command you, that observe." And on the occasion of the division between the Sad- ducees, who occupied the highest places, and the Pha- rizees, whom they oppressed, Paul unhesitatingly takes the part of the latter, who held fast the resurrection of the dead as the great hope of God's people. Nay, he goes so far, in recognising the truth as being with them in contradistinction to the Sadducees, that he even overlooks, for a moment, the question of faith or unbelief in Messiah already come. And, did this not suffice, the prolonged attachment of the first Christian churches to the Mosaic rites w^ere proof sufficient how completely Christianity grew, not out of the Essenes, but on the soil of orthodox Judaism. That which was blame-worthy in the Pharizees did not consist in false doctrines j for tliey possessed the JUDAISM. 27 truth. The dogmas of the fall of inaii, of evil inclina- tions in the fallen, of human liberty, of capacity and incapacity for good, of the worth of faith and good works, of the state of souls after death, of the resur- rection and kingdom of glory — all points of Christian theology, were objects of inquiry and disputation among the Scribes, whose remarks on these subjects, although often under strange forms, contain much that is deep and important. But herein lay their error, that they thought that they had eternal life in the pos- session of the Scriptures, and in the right form of knowledge. The more destitute of the Holy Spirit, the more firmly did they cling to the letter of the com- mandment ; and the more they sought therein the sub- stitute for the absent divine life, the more did they fall into the error of ranking the weightiest commandments of God with the most trivial rules of men, and ulti- mately of setting the latter above the former, as the unenlightened always do. All truths, especially that as to Messiah, were apprehended and taught rightly in the letter, yet entirely after the flesh, so that the holiest and more saving doctrines were those perverted to evil. The type in David with which the name Messiah connects itself, was the foundation of those Pharizaic ideas of the Anointed One, which spread through the people, and kept them ever in expectation. They re- garded Messiah merely as a warrior, conqueror, and ruler to come, similar to the son of Jesse, only with more splendid success, and more enduring ])ower. As the resurrection was held to be merely a repetition of mortal life, so was Messiah only a repetition of his 28 JUDAISM. shadow. The understanding of His divine dignity and of the meaning of His sufferings (if He were to suffer at all) was hidden from them. Nay, the promise of the prophet like Moses, was generally applied to the expected precursor Elias ; so that the antitype of the lawgiver was placed beside the Anointed, instead of being seen to be identical with him. The exposition of the law should have awakened the desire of redemption, and that of the prophets should have furnished the true picture of the Saviour. The Pharizaic teaching did the very opposite. It abused the law to feed the pride of holiness, and the prophets to foster fanaticism — the one the inward corrupter, and the other the outward destroyer, of Judaism, Yet under the rule of the Pharizees we find, in no small number, the true Israelites, the poor in spirit, who waited for the consolation of Israel, and received the Gospel. Of these persons, human narratives, which leave the precious things in Church History covered up and un- noticed, make no mention. But the New Testament shows us that the generation which should receive Christ, the holy remnant, was even then ripened in preparation by the secret operation of God. A re- markable love of order and law, accompanied with a deep reverence for the Holy One, and an ardent zeal in His worship, distinguished the better part of the Jews. In the bosom of orthodox Judaism there lay a domestic life so pure, noble, and tender, that it could yield such a person as the Holy Virgin, and could furnish an atmosphere in which the Son of God could grow up sinless from childhood to manhood. Among those who bowed before holy tradition and the autho- JUDAISM. 29 rity of the teacher, that spirit of prophecy revived, which, ill Mary and Elizabeth, in Simeon and Hannah, made known the appearing of the Saviour. In Palestine the ancient inclination to assimilate with the heathen, had been supplanted by hatred and contempt for all who were not Jews, as the natural man in escaping from one error always falls into its oppo- site. The Samaritans, who retained their reverence for the patriarchs and the lawgiver, and their hope in the '' Converter," and who, free from the pride of the Pharizees, showed themselves so susceptible for Chris- tianity, were avoided as infidels. The hopes of the Jews pointed not to an enlightening and sanctify- ing of the nations, but to a tyranny over them. Efforts were indeed made to win heathen over to the worship of the true God. But the few converted were infected with Pharizaic errors. And the inhabitants of Palestine appear to have had no peculiar pleasure in the nume- rous "fearers of God" who, in other lands, gathered around the synagogues, without adopting the Mosaic ceremonial. Quite a different spirit prevailed when the Jews could no longer persist in their segregation, and came in contact with the better elements of Greek and Oriental heathenism. The history of the world points out the circumstances which combined to effect this, especially in Alexandria, the second metropolis of Judaism. The schools of instruction in the city of the Ptolemies, (to which the best of the Greek literature and philosophy was transmitted, and where the doctrines of ancient Egypt and those of the East, opened since the time of Alexander, also found their admirers and expounders,) 30 JUDAISM. could not fail to obtain influence over the Jewish in- habitants, by the attraction of their learning, and their thoughtful severity. The translation of the holy Scriptures into Greek under Ptolemy Philadelphus, and the adoption of that translation by the synagogue, were the first great steps towards the approximation and amalgamation of the Jewish and Greek elements. The relinquishment of the holy tongue and the consecration of the Greek, broke through the previous seclusion in which Jewish education in Palestine had been studiously kept. And the translation of the Pentateuch itself betrays a marked reverence for Greek wisdom, in the constant endeavour to exclude all that might conflict with the Platonic conceptions of Deity. At the same time the awakened spirits among the Jews obtained free entrance to the whole cycle of instruction among the Greeks. And there could not fail to be many among them who availed themselves of the school of the grammatists and philosophers, in order to perfect them- selves as propagators of a Greco-Judaic theosophy. In short the persuasion gained ground that the deep moral elements of the Greek systems were completely identical with the truths of divine tradition. The Platonic mysticism, the Stoic morality, the Pythagorean manner of life, presented themselves to the deceived eye, as noble reflexions of the same divine truth of which the records of revelation are the depositories. And what could be more welcome to the Jew, who claimed citizenship among the educated, than the de- claration that the much extolled wisdom of the Greeks was identical with the despised doctrines of barbarian JUDAISM. 31 Jews, and the representation of the latter as being the more tlian ancient of the two — the original from which the former was derived ? While the orthodox in Palestine, in their proud cx- clasiveness, regarded Greek and Jewish wisdom as irre- concilable, the Alexandrians, with inconsiderate and in- discriminating admiration for that which was foreign, re- garded them as identical. We cannot fmlher trace the progress of the latter opinion. From the allegorical commentary on the Pentateuch by Aristobulus, in the time of Ptolemy Philometor, one hundred and seventy years before the time of Philo and that of Christ, we may conclude that it was then pretty fully developed. One might imagine that we have lost many means of judging in the matter. Yet we have not really done so ; because the undeniable w^ant of originality in Philo justifies the supposition that he would repeat all that his predecessors had excogitated. The peculiarity of this school was not its mystical or allegorical exposition, (for all faithful Jews acknow- ledged a hidden meaning in the Scriptures,) but the rejection of the historical and literal meaning, as if inconsistent with the mystical, and the abuse of alle- gory to persuade all parties alike, that the recondite import of the sacred records was identical with Pla- tonic wisdom. The most attractive thing is the com- bination of these two elements in Philo's doctrine of virtue. It much surpasses that of the Greek philo- sophers in moral weight, and is, indeed, the best which mankind, before Christ, had produced upon ethics. Philo naturally adopts the four cardinal virtues of the Socratic and Stoic schools. But he combines with 32 JUDAISM. them that which the heathen omitted— purity, faith, hope, and love. Even here, however, w^e find hetero- geneous things put together, as at a later period in the morals of the Scholastics. And the same is yet more observable in his dogmatic speculations. According to them the Platonic deity, the " essential existence" (to oi/tojs ov) is one with the Eternal who revealed His mysterious name to Moses. The Alexandrian transla- tion of the Scriptures already furnishes him with the "existing one" (o wv). Matter, out of which, accord- ing to Plato, the Fashioner of the world framed the visible creation, is the earth yet without form and void, of which the Scriptures speak. The higher world of the Platonic ideas, which contains those eternal schemes of things, that are shadowed forth in the formation of earthly things, is identical with the angel world of the Bible. Only through such mediating spiritual beings or powers could the Infinite spiritual and unnameable, consistently with His dignity, operate upon the lower finite substance of the world. The starry hosts are choirs of the highest and purest angels. The music of the spheres is that which Moses heard, and which w^as his meat and drink for forty days upon the Mount. The human soul, which Moses represents as the breath of God, proceeded, according to Plato, out of the above world of ideas, from which it brought with it its noblest reminiscences and its un- satisfied aspirations. The souls which allowed them- selves to be entangled with the love of things below, were constrained to come down out of the blessed realm of the angels into the prison darkness of the earthly body as into a grave, until they should on the JUDAISM. 33 completion of their cleansing, reascend into the aether, it maybe to descend again to new incorporation. This strange mixture of two opinions in themselves at variance, is most striking in the Platonic teaching as to the Logos, that central object of Jewish and Christian theology. The deity of Plato, to be found in irremove- able rest beyond the limits of created being, creates and operates not immediately, but through his world- formative understanding {vov<; KoaiJLOTroLo^)^ at once the sum of the divine ideas and the vivifying principle of the world. Herein is naturally found the Wisdom of the Proverbs, the agent in creation, whom the Eternal had by Him ere the world was. And the same analogy is extended to the Mediator as the revealer of God in the Old Testament, the angel of the Lord. But on the one hand, this mystery is adverted to throughout the Old Testament in terms which must strike the most unobservant. He who appeared to the Patriarchs, and who, as God — Jehovah — held converse with them, is yet distinct from Jehovah. He is called the messenger of Jehovah, and and yet himself bears all the names of the Eternal. In a word, the inquiring Israelite could not avoid knowing a second divine Person dis- tinct from, yet one with, the first. Nay, the holy tradi- tions and learned commentaries of the Jews even men- tion the " Word of Jehovah," by which term the Chaldee translations, composed for the synagogues of Judea, designate the manifested God, the Mediator of all revelation. He was as undoubtedly personal as the other angels who appeared. The popular faith could only regard him as a person, whether His true divi- nity was clearly or darkly discerned. And none but VOL. I. D 34 JUDAISM. a person could, like Wisdom in the Proverbs, have his delights with the sons of men and follow the erring in love. On the other hand, the Platonic Nus (vovs) is impersonal. Although of divine substance, it is not distinguished, as being another, from the eternal unity (jiovos). This indelible contradiction between the two views pervades the whole expressions of Philo in describing the Logos. His expressions divide them- selves into two classes — the one suited to the sum of the divine ideas, the other to the prince of divine mes- sengers. The name Logos, with its twofold meaning, viz., Understanding and Word — immanent thought, and thought coming into manifestation — is one well adapted to combine the incongruous into an apparent unity. But the unusual philosophic, and the popular biblical conceptions are so very diverse, that there can seldom be a doubt which of them the wavering eclectic really will express. Only so much of Philo's doctrine on the Logos as is actually based on the Old Testament is recognizable in the New. And this was nothing peculiar to the Alexandrian philosophy, but the com- mon property of the Jewish faith. Philo expected a new manifestation of the Logos at the Messianic sera, as of old at the Exodus. But he did not expect Mes- siah himself, whom he regarded as a mere human hero answering to the prophecy of Balaam. Of belief in the incarnation of the Son there is, in his writings, and in the whole Jewish theology, not a trace. The Jews knew that God had a Son, but that He should appear in person as the son of David was a truth hid- den from their eyes.* Side by side with these Alex- * Is this correct ?— Tr. JUDAISM. 35 andrine-Jiulaic theories, however, we find the atteni])t to carry out a manner of life conformable to them, in tlie ascetic societies of the Egyptian Therapeuta) and in the sects of the Essenes in Palestine, which not only cherished such ideas, but were named from them. The name Therapeutic designates those who laboured after both the healing of the soul and the constant worship of the Godhead. We hold it to be establislied that such persons were actuated by the views expressed in Philo's writings ; and it is extremely probable that their esoteric tenets were in the main those which after long abeyance re-appear in the writings of the Cabalists, as the Jewish mysteries of the middle ages. Philo's work on a contemplative life informs us of the ascetic fra- ternity at the lake of Mseris, the pre- christian monastery of Judaism. The description of these Therapeutse must have astonished the Platonic teachers among the heathen, by exhibiting realized the final end of their boldest efforts as contemplative philosophers. It also resembles the description of the Indian penitents, in their con- tinual aspiration after union with, and absorption into. Godhead. And, strangely enough, the Christian histo- rian Eusebius, carried away by the sublimity of such a life, appropriates the Therapeuta? as his own. He regards them, enoneously, as the first Christian Church in Egypt, and Philo himself as a disci])le of Christ. Similar, but less pardonable, is the error of the moderns, who, equally persuaded of the identity of these pheno- mena, merely apprehend differently their external re- lations ; derive the first Christians from the pre-chris- tian mystics of Palestine, i.e. from the Essenes ; and imagine that the Apostolic writers borrowed from Phi- D 2 36 JUDAISM. Ionic sources. This view has, sometimes with learned gravity, sometimes with the acerbit}' of malicious un- belief, been so often maintained, that it demands here the more serious examination. No one can deny that the Christian Church, while it has confessedly adopted and preserved much doctrine from the Pharizees, puts one much in mind of the Essenes in its life. And why should not, after a schism in the Jewish people, a part of the truth com- mitted to it, be discernible among the Essenes } Although heterodox, they surpassed the possessors of orthodoxy in their exhibition of a purified life ; as it has been, alas ! often the case in Christendom, that the sounder doctrine has been found w^ith the dominant priesthood and teachers, and the purer life with a sect. And the very office of the Christian Church was to inherit, appro23riate, and deliver from its mummy-like inclosure, to expand and to carry out in practice, the whole truth already professed by any of the Jews. If we do not err, the whole Therapeutic-Essene effort arose from the desire to recal and maintain the ancient prophetic inspiration and sincere devotion long sought in vain in the synagogue, in the daily worship of the temple, and in the great feasts of the people. In by-gone times there had been already settlements of the sons of the prophets, (falsely styled " schools of the prophets" by the rationalistic Jews and Chris- tians of later centuries,) in which were found the ex- ercise of th3 prophetic gift, and a peculiar solemnity of religious services. These ancient institutions seem to have been the model for the mystics subsequent to the captivity, and the pattern which the Essenes strove JUDAISM. 37 to copy. And who can say that their clTorts were alto- gether in vain, and that tliere was nothing divine in the prophetic phenomena wliich Joseplius reports to have been among them ? If, as is possible, though not cer- tain, the " Wisdom of Solomon," w^as really a fruit of the mystic school, it would prove that not only divine illumination but almost inspiration was granted to some of its number. Inquiries into the mystical sense of Scripture formed a favourite occupation of the con- templative. Indeed, the thirst after such knowledge was in them a prophetic impulse. Nor is it wonderfdl, that, as the time of fulfilment drew near, and the a])pearing of Christ was about to make plain long hidden mys- teries, glimpses of divine light led the way to fuller con- victions among those who searched the Scriptures. Much in the mystic teaching as to Messiah had this character. Its basis lay not in the Davidic, but in the Mosaic type. A glorious repetition of the lawgiver's his- tory was, and that not without reason, looked for. And this expectation came much nearer the truth, than the Davidic ideas of the Pharizees ; because the type itself and the condition of those who embraced it, gave less room for fleshly pictures of the future. Nay, the very fables with which the mystic fancy dressed out the life of Moses, are often gleams of light indicative of that which came to pass in Christ, the great prophet — myths which bore the same relation to the reality that parhelia do to the true sun, without whose presence in the heavens their appearance, although they are but optical delusions, were impossible. The esoteric doctrine of the mystics contains ap- proaches to an acknowledgment of the adorable Trinity. 38 ' JUDAISM. The Logos they held to be the Son of the Eternal Father, to be His eternal Wisdom, equal with Him, and the prototype for the creation of man. It were still more striking, if they had also known beforehand, that the Logos himself should appear as Saviour. But the paucity of our information renders it impossible to determine w^hether they received this light before or after the actual appearing of Christ. Yet such approximations to truth are completely out- weighed by the errors associated with them, which pre- clude all identification of the mystics with the nascent Church of Christ. And he does not know Christianity who can regard it as no more than the disclosure of Essene mysteries, and the Church as no more than an enlargement of the Essene order. We have already shown how" completely the Church at the beginning was rooted in orthodox Judaism. From the latter, how- ever, the Alexandrian school was separated by a wide chasm — namely, by the schismatic and truly condem- nable position taken by the Egyptian Jews in the erection of the illegal temple at Leontopolis. And the Essenes departed yet further in rejecting bloody offer- ings. They sent presents to the sanctuary ; but they were themselves forbidden entrance. They had a per- ception how inadequate were the Mosaic offerings — a longing for and persuasion of something higher. But they prematurely forsook the communion of Israel's worship before that higher thing appeared, and in doing so, followed a course the very opposite of that adopted by the first Christians. They thus renounced their par- ticipation in the blessings of the Jewish polity, and were justly regarded by the strict Israelites as departed JUDAISM. 39 wanderers. Their holy feasts of bread and salt, and the yet more solcnni nightly symposia of the Thera- peuta3, accompanied with lights and hymns, Nvitli mys- tic discourse and dance, were intended to supply the place of the Mosaic ritual, and especially of the Passover ; and were an abortive attempt to effect what nothing but Christian worship could. In a very differ- ent spirit does Christ always point His disciples to the lawful sanctuary in Jerusalem, which lie himself had not shunned, but recognized as His Father's house, and w^hich, instead of subverting, lie had cleansed from defilement. Moreover, in the radical tenets of the Jewish mystics was heretical matter which infected the whole system, and clearly distinguished it from Christian truth. The Philonic conception of the creation is false. However disguised, it is in substance this, that spiritual beings have come into existence by emanation, while matter has not been created by God out of nothing, but is self- existent, and the fountain of all evil. For although they were spirits who sinned, yet their sin consisted only in inclination towards matter. In themselves they continue healthy, being of divine substance. And in re- treating from matter they recover their entrance into their superterrene abode. Every doctrine of emanation caiTies with it the stain of Pantheism, that fundamental error of the heathen. Every doctrine of pre-existence sets aside the fact, of pregnant importance, that all men are one in origin and in fall. The fall is with Philo necessarily a mere symbol. The resurrection of the body was openly denied by the mystic school of Alex- andria and by the Essenes. And the same false ideas as 40 JUDAISM. to matter which necessarily led to this, also rendered the Essenes unable to believe in the Incarnation. While the Pharizees were blind to Christ's divinity, the P^ssenes were so to His humanity. Thus mystic Judaism pre- sented, on the most essential questions, the very oppo- site of Apostolic Christianity. The Essenes wearied themselves with the endeavour to solve the most im- portant of all problems for a pious soul, in the combi- nation of a contemplative wdth an active life. But the solution, reserved for the Church of Christ, was denied to them ; and their principles were such as could not but operate most injuriously upon both theoretical and practical ethics. It w^as not enough that they w^ere con- scious of infirmity and degradation. They sought for sin, like the heathen, in the wrong place — only in the corporeal regions. Their efforts to heal the evil left the chief seat — the spirit of man — untouched; and therefore failed. The unclean conscience remaining in them im- pelled them to more and more extravagant ascetic exercises, which only fostered pride in veiling corrup- tion. And, regarding matter as essentially unclean — as a thing to be abolished instead of being consecrated and used aright — they produced, instead of a life well pleasing to God, a splendid forgery of holiness. The same phenomena, indeed, appeared in primitive Christianity. But they did so, not in Christ and his disciples, but in the teachers of error at Colosse. And Paul's condemnation of these men was a virtual con- demnation pronounced by the Christian Church against the Essenes, and the practical vindication of the former from the charge of identity with the latter. The true kin- dred of the Essenes are to be found, not in the apostolic JUDAISM. 41 churches, but in the Elkesaites or Gnostic Ebionites of the second century, who appeared exactly in those two countries which had been the abodes of Jewish mysti- cism. The Essenes and the Thcrapeutaj disappeared. But, although many individuals of those sects became orthodox, the two streams of error did not flow into the orthodox Church as a receptacle. Not till the fourth century, when Gnosticism was a thing gone by, did the ascetic form of religion prevail in the Church itself. Then, indeed, it generated in Egypt and Syria, the scenes of former asceticism, the monasticism of the East, as a kindred phenomenon. But primitive Christianity breathed a very different spirit ; and Christ was as little the offspring of Essene extravagance as of Pharizaic pride or Sadducean scepticism. They must be superficial observers indeed, who find nothing important or true in the Jewish theology. Carefully examined, it yields treasures of truth most diligently handled. The Christian faith has nothing to fear from such a discovery, as if a doubt were thereby cast on the divine origin of the Gospel. If the Old Testament contains the whole truth in a latent form, it were strange if the Jewish theology did not contain the greater part of it, and if the spiritual conflicts and reli- gious zeal of centuries had been fruitless for good. To reproach Christianity with the fact that the majority of its teachers had been Jews, were to believe that Christ had come chiefly to publish new doctrines to the world, and not to fulfil the law, to put away sin, and to bestow the Holy Spirit. No doubt the schisms of Israel gave rise to schisms and perversions of the truth. The vari- ous Messiah theories of the various parties are a striking 4*2 CHRIST AND THE CHURCH. monument to the ruin of truth when no longer maintained as a harmonious unity. Holy traditions subsisted. But, for those who held them, they were little better than dead propositions, apprehended by flesh, destitute of power to sanctify. The studies and efforts of the true Israelite were rather thirst than anything to quench it. Though more enlightened than the heathen, he could put no other question than that which the redemption in Christ had to answer for both alike. All speculations as to the divine promises failed to reach the mystery of Godliness — God manifest in flesh. The whole Mes- siah theories of Jewish theology were silent as to the true incarnation of the Word. The condescension of the Son to assume the nature of man is that act of divine love, w^hich no human investigation could com- pass beforehand ; which can be believed, known, and declared, only after its accomplishment ; and prior to which nothing could have satisfied the disappointed longings of the faithful in Israel. CHAPTER HI. CHRIST AND THE CHURCH. At length, when the world and men's hearts were fully prepared, when necessity and expectation had reached their climax, Jesus Christ came, whom the Gospels describe, who is now Head of the Church. His appearing, extraordinary in every respect, is especially so, from the difficulties which it presents to the historical inquirer. No narrative is so perfectly CHRIST AND THE CHURCH. 43 satisfactory and conclusive for one class of persons, and so perplexing and suggestive of sceptical doubt for another, as the biography of our Lord. There must be a reason for this, and it is not difficult to discover. Christ will not suffer those men who will not obey Him, to comprehend Him with the understanding. He could not do so, without denying Himself. He will not surrender His doctrine or the offices of His house, as a prize to classical attainment and critical acumen. The understanding of the prudent shall not have the glory of doing that which the Holy Spirit has been sent to effect. Therefore has so little been written of the sacred history and doctrine ; and even that in such a form, that the understanding of those who do not walk in the light, finds obscurities and stumbling-blocks, ex- hausts itself on apparent contradictions, and, with appa- rent sincerity, remains where it was. Thus does the Lord take the wise in their own craftiness. Yet is the sacred record the most certain of all records. No other, be it confirmed with a thousand oaths, has the same continual divine confirmation. All other heroes and teachers of antiquity have died, and continue dead. Christ alone lives : and His church is as immortal as He. He works in her as her ever present Head. She knows Him as the same whom the fourfold Gospel pre- sents to us. His life is continued in her, He acts and speaks in her midst by His Spirit, as He once did in person on earth. All that Scripture says of him becomes intelligible in the Church. For her it is living truth, and therefore perfect certainty. The history of Christ is written for the Church. No book of the New Testa- ment, especially no Gospel was written for unbelieving or 44 CHRIST AND THE CHURCH. ignorant persons. The wliole books were committed to those churches which the labours of living witnesses had brought into being. Thej are the repetition, combina- tion, confirmation, completion of that which had been orally declared for the edifying of the Church of God. But this declaration, and its committal to writing, were both guided by jn'ofound wisdom and depth of purpose. The Gospels are a work, not only of inspiration, but also of the greatest human care. They are written by faithful hands, and aiford every security against misre- presentation. Yet the inquiries and representations of their authors were not intended to supply what the adversaries demand, and indeed then demanded. The evangelists did not, in the choice or management of their matter, inquire what the criticism of apostates might approve, but what would most enlighten the children of God and carry them on to perfection. The history of the apostolic age, shows, (if we may anticipate so far,) that the nascent Church went through three phases — the Jewish — the Gentile — and the two combined. To these correspond three forms of the preaching of Christ, — viz., the Gospel to the faithful in Israel; that to the newly formed heathen congregations; and that to the Church composed of both, settled into an indej^endent unity, and going on to perfection. Such three forms were to be expected, and we find them in the writings of Matthew, Luke, and John. Mark's Gospel is the oldest and shortest, the common basis for those of Matthew and Luke. The silence of an earlier evan- gelist as to things of importance which appear in the writings of a later — e. g., as to the discourses in John, — would justly excite remark in a document of profane his- CHRIST AND THE CHURCH. 45 tory. But in tliis case it is otlienvise ; because it can be proved that this silence arose not from ignorance or doubt, but from wise intention. It is undeniable that Christ, during the forty days after his resurrection, im- parted to his disciples, then endowed with increased capacity, most important things, which took deep root in their hearts. Yet the Gospels dismiss the subject with a few lines. Another and fifth Gospel could well have been written, containing the mysteries of the kingdom which Christ then comnumicated to the dis- ciples. Here, therefore, the silence has been evidently intentional. The same was the case with the acts and discourses related for the first time by John, and, for a short period, with the history of our Lord's childhood. And the Gospel of Mark, in which the latter does not occur — the oldest Gospel of all — contained originally not a word as to the appearances and words of Christ after His resurrection. So great w^as the just reserve and caution of these writers. The recklessness of anti-christian criticism is the complete opposite of the delicate reverence and prudence with which the holy writers handled holy things. Christ was, in his birth, no natural fruit of that tree which had its root in Adam. If He had been so, He could have been no redeemer. He is not a human person, raised to divine dignity, but a divine person, the eternal Son of God, who has assumed the human nature into the unity of his person. As God, being one with the Father, as man. He became one with us, partaker of our flesh and blood, veritable man, born of 46 CHRIST AND THE CHURCH. the substance of a mortal and fallible mother. The mys- tery of Godliness lay not therein, that the infinite be- came finite. This the Pantheist may admit. Bat it lay therein, that God was manifested in flesh — the Holy One in the nature, not of man as he was in Paradise, but of man as he now is. He was exempt from original sin ; for He was conceived of the Holy Ghost. In Him was no perversion of the human will, no disobedience againsfc God's law, no captivity under Satan's rule. From the beginning to the end of His life, His human will was conformed to that of His Father. Yet it is equally true that the Son of God took that nature which He had to redeem, and which, therefore, needed redemption, and that, when He went to the Father, He brought back that which had been lost. This is the miracle of His incarnation, that He adopted the fallen and accursed nature of man into the unity of His Person, and in that nature realized perfect holiness. The Son of God in His incarnation continued to be what He was ; He renounced none of His divine attri- butes, and yet He renounced the visible exercise of them all. On earth He never acted as the Ahnighty and Omniscient. Herein lay His emptying of Himself. His whole life on earth was a walk of faith. He who was God was man. His life, the life of God, was the life of a man. Its holiness, infinitely surpassing that of the unfallen angels, was not by force of divine attri- butes, but the fruit of constant faithfulness and obe- dience. In every aspect the Gospels confirm the reality of His manhood. In His childhood, He grew in wisdom as in years. He adopted into Himself every true and pure element to be found in His family and CHRIST AND THE CHURCH. 47 friends, in the traditions and the life of Israel. The holy Scriptures and the services of His Father's house were His spiritual nourishment. By His faithfulness and simplicity He was enabled to separate between good and evil, and preserved from the influence of the latter. The guiltless in the midst of the guilty, He pleased God by counting their guilt His own. He re- pented with and for His people. He went before them in hearty confession of the common sin. When John came preaching the baptism of repentance, Jesus, the great penitent, came to him, and although Himself without sin, submitted to his baptism. At length was that man found on whom the good pleasure of God could rest, on whom the Holy Ghost could descend to abide. The righteous Man, the faith- ful Jew, became the temple of the Holy Ghost. Though all His previous life had been a trial, now began His greatest temptations. These He met, not with the shield of omniscience or the sword of omnipo- tence, but with the same weapons which are given to His disciples, with the shield of faith and the Word of God. He conquered in a more dangerous position than that of the first man. His conflict was no mere semblance. The greater the resistance to temptation, the severer the struggle. He was tempted in all points like unto us, yet without sin. He was not indeed tempted as the servant of sin is, who is vanquished ere the fight begins. But He was tempted as the regene- rate is, whose will is pure and whose heart is occupied by God. Hitherto He had done no miracles. They began at His baptism with the Holy Spirit. He said expressly that 48 CHRIST AND THE CHURCH. He did the deeds by the Spirit of God. They were not immediate effluences of the omnipotence of His divine nature, but works of faith ; and His power to remove sickness and death, the fruits of sin, lay in His constant obedience to the counsels and guidance of His Father and in His anointing as man. As with His temptations, so with His sufferings. He bore them not by omnipotence ; for thus He could not have obtained for His Church the power, and im- posed upon her the duty, to bear them after His ex- ample. As His life drew near its close, they attained their climax, both bodily and mental. Plaving taken the nature. He experienced the sorrows, of the whole race ; and, by virtue of sympathy in its most real sense, did He, the only healthy member of the wdiole, feel those pangs to which the rest were insensible. He bore the displeasure of God against the world. In Him were the sins of the world judged. In submitting to this judgment, He became the perfect sacrifice. And by the execution of the curse upon Him, was not only the guilt expiated, but the sin abolished. Christ entered, through His resurrection, upon a manner of existence to which man had never before been elevated. He was the subject of a divine act till then unknown. He received a glory such as unfallen Adam never had. He became head of a new race, which stood no longer under Adam or the operation of the fall. Raised above all heavens, the Son of man came into the immediate presence of the Father, and became High Priest in heaven, mediating, for His Church, all those blessings which He had Himself received from the Father. Only for His disciples' CHRIST AND THE CHURCH. 49 sake did He appear for forty days on earth after His re- surrection. After His ascension came the Comforter whom He had promised. Then the Christian Church appeared, as the dwelling-place of the Holy Ghost — the body of the glorified Head — composed of the elect out of all nations, and placed so high in origin, dignity, destina- tion, and sanctity, as to obliterate the distinction be- tween Jew and Gentile. Such acts of God far ex- ceeded all the expectation of Israel, nay all the indi- cations of the future at the commencement of our Lord's own ministry. He had completely submitted to the law of Moses, and never released His followers from their obligation to it. He had made His first attempts in Judea to gather under His wings ; and had not turned to Galilee, until those failed. In His sermon on the Mount, wherein He published the fundamental laws of His kingdom. He began with a most signal confirmation of the law and the prophets. He never separated himself fi'om the Mosaic sanctuary. He devoted himself ex- clusively to the Jews, being sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Merely by necessity did He occasionally come in contact with Samaritans and heathen. He sent His twelve and His seventy to the Jews alone. And if His biography were not evidence enough, the protracted attachment of His people to the customs and rites of Moses, and their scruples as to the admission of the heathen, w^ould show clearly what example He had given. It w^ould almost have seemed as if the end of His redemption w^ere confined to the cleansing of the Jews and the glorifying of the Mosaic economy. VOL. I. E 50 CHRIST AND THE CHURCH. But while all the Gospels, even that of John, agree in this, yet all, the synoptic as well as that of John, as- cribe to Him the prediction that something very different should take place — the rejection of the Jews and re- ception of the heathen. Nothing but ignorance of the divine counsels can be puzzled or offended by our Lord's patience with the Jews and accommodation to Mosaism — the root of which lay, not in the essential limitation of God's purpose, but in the intentional order of its developement. Christ knew the preparation of heart among the heathen — a field ripe for harvest. He knew that He was appointed to be the Saviour of the world. But He denied himself to the most inviting sphere of labour, that He might devote himself to His proper duty. He belonged in the first place to the Jews, to w^iom He had been promised. Old Testament pro- phecy nowhere points to an immediate disappearance of the peculiar place of Israel, on the appearance of Messiah. All the prophets see in Israel the central people of the kingdom of heaven — the seat of Mes- siah's rule — the instrument for enlightening the nations. To this tended the original call and the divine educa- tion of the chosen people. While all other men could look only to grace, Israel had a vested right in Messiah. Conformably to this did Christ, first in per- son and then by His disciples, do all in His power to bring Israel up to its true destination as the light of the world and the focus of His kingdom. He came, ready to fulfil not a part only, but the whole of those prophecies of which many yet belong to the future. The time shall certainly come when the Jewish nation shall yet have a high place on earth^j and be a pure CHRIST AND THE CHURCH. 51 foinitain of blessing for the nations that remain. The resistance of the Jews hindered the accomplishment of this. Not the less however did Christ come unto His own, and hope against hope, giving himself, with divine humility, to the work of blessing that people ^vho rejected Him and delivered Him to the heathen. In such circumstances He could not proceed to abolish their ritual and customs. Although that wdiich has since disappeared was only a shadow, yet it was quite possible for the shadow to subsist for a time as a con- temporaneous reflex, after the appearance of the sub- stance. No one could say how much of the peculiari- ties of the Mosaic economy might survive in the new covenant, if Israel should really embrace the latter. And our Lord at first said nothing as to the extent to which the forms of Moses should pass over into His Church, even in the event of the Jews excluding them- selves from it ; but reserved it to Himself to enlighten His disciples thereon, when the time should come. Christ, rejected by His own as Prince of peace, still died as king of the Jews. But when He rose from the dead He showed himself as Saviour of the world, not merely as restorer of that which the world had lost, but as having first purified and redeemed the nature of man, and then raised it, endowed w4th the Holy Ghost, to a majesty excelling that of angels; making His people one with Him, partakers of His divine glory, and set in heavenly places in Himself^ now^ by faith, after- w^ards in open revelation. The Church, w^hich came into being at Pentecost, is not only the communion of the regenerate, but the possessor of the Holy Ghost, and much more, from the first, than a mere continuation E 2 62 CHRIST AND THE CHURCH. of Israel or the substitute for a rejected people. She is heavenly in origin, essence, and destination — having Him for her head who is above all heavens — having that unity with Him which He had with the Father — destined to walk with Him in humility, and to be ex- alted in Him, as He now on the Father's throne, so she afterwards on His. The future half of His work as Redeemer will be but the disclosure of that condition which already is. The appearance of Christ in glory will reveal the true being of the Church, and display her as the help meet for Him, as ruling with Him the world to come. The occurrence of events made the Old Testament prophecies plain. Apparently limited to the futurity of Israel, those prophecies contained also the counsels of God as to the Church. For although she is no mere substitute for Israel, and has a higher being and des- tiny, yet Israel was in all things her counterpart and earthly shadow. All that Israel had — all names, pro- mises, ordinances, belong, in a deeper sense and more glorious form, to her. The whole Old Testament, fulfilled or to be fulfilled in Israel, testifies in mystic language of the Church, and is written for her, both in her glory, and in her trials and sufferings. For although the Church of Christ, by virtue of her unity with Him, is the Queen of heaven,* yet she must reach her goal by an earthly course. Although she is originally in possession of the Paraclete in all his fulness, yet she must go through stages of developement and grow up from childhood to manhood. The whole truth is en- trusted to her, but not as a dead treasure buried in * TLe Papal Virgin both usurps and anticipates the Church's place.— Tr. CHRIST AND THE CHURCH. -53 the chambers of memory. The living Spirit of truth lives in her, and leads her into all truth. lie does so from step to step, not by suddenly imparting to her a useless omniscience, but by awakening in her, on every occasion, not too late, yet not too early, the precise measure of knowledge which she needs, to do the will of God. She is" no kingdom of this w^orld, and does not stand under the letter of the Mosaic law. Yet she is appointed to be visible, and to shape herself in this world according to a divine law. In all her members she is filled with the Holy Ghost. Yet she is not merely Spirit, but the body of Christ — an organism, in which each member receives from God its place and charge — a body — tangibly and historically developed. But how shall this developement proceed } There is one pattern to which it must correspond — the pattern of Christ. He too was not perfect from the beginning. He was made perfect by suffering and obedience. He began not as the Omniscient; but grew in know- ledge. He had his developement, without being in sin w^hile undeveloped. He was tempted, without being in sin w^hile tempted. Where there is progress to be made, there must indeed be the feeling of igno- rance, of weakness, and of danger; but there needs be no sin. Faithfulness is secure against transgression in all circumstances. Trial and temptation are neces- sary. Consent to evil is not so. As Christ did, so should the Church afford the practical proof, that man can undergo developement without the presence of sin. This and no less is the duty of each one who through the mystical washing of baptism is buried and raised with Christ. And it is the duty of the whole Church, 54 CHRIST AND THE CHURCH. as the aggregate of the baptized. Christians walk in- deed in the flesh. But Christ too walked in the flesh, yet without sin. In Christians the old man is put to death, and the new man quickened with Christ, that he may walk in newness of life and keep in death that sin which has been already delivered to death. We have a heavenly inheritance, that we may die unto the world. The Church is in the world as Christ was. He was visible. She is. He is now hidden. She should exhibit Him, as He once revealed the Father. The Holy Spirit is present to glorify Christ in the Church. The world sees and knows not the Holy Spirit. But it sees the Church. And through the Church will God persuade the world that Christ has come from Hira and gone unto Him again. In whom should the world see the virtues of Christ, and how can it believe in the invisible, if it does not perceive His image in the Church ? The obligation which rested on Israel rests wdth double weight on the Church, to glorify God by her conversation, and not to deny by her acts and her ■whole condition that which she declares in word. She is an institution for the healing of men. She must bring them real and perfect cure. She may not sink into a mere place of keeping for the incurable. The character of the Church militant, when she becomes the triumphant, must be like that of her Lord— in her resurrection, glorification, ascension into heaven, and participation in the rule of the new^ creation. And as her end corresponds to His, so should her history to His, exhibiting His image in her lowliness, and His con- versation in hers. Thus should it have been. Thus could it have been. CHPilST AND THE CHURCH. fi5 If it has not been so, the fault lies not with the Founder of the Chureh — not ^vith the Dweller in the Church — not with God — but with man. Vain is the attempt to excuse man by saying, that error and sin are unavoid- able processes. In thus excusing man God is accused, slandered, blaspliemed. If the Church has not been sufiiciently furnished with the means of continuing in truth and holiness, the reproach of her error and sin returns upon Christ. To say that sin is unavoidable in the life of the Church, because that life is human, is to say, either that Christ's life was not human or that it was not sinless. In the mouth of the Pantheist such e:xpressions are intelligible, but not in that of the Christian who owns that God is never the author of evil, and that the creature is responsible for all his acts. Whence has the Christian his authority to style the apo- stasy of God's children a natural developement, and to compare the self-induced corruption of Christendom with a physical disease ? The liberty of man is im- measurable ; but no less so is the guilt of its abuse, through which the Christian Church has missed her mark and disgraced her calling. The course of the Church has followed, with fatal truth, the type of unfaithfulness given in that of the Jewish people. She has converted the warning lesson of Israel's sin and judgment into an accomplished prophecy against herself. The possibility of apostasy even among the highest in Christendom — that sad mys- tery which Christ so cautiously indicated — she has un- blushingly disclosed into a gigantic undeniable fact. And where the world should have seen a manner and measure of goodness previously unknown, it has seen 56 CHRIST AND THE CHURCH. a manner and measure of wickedness to which neither Jew nor Heathen could attain. The higher the place of the Christian, the deeper is his fall, and the more difficult his rescue. The greater his power for good, the greater his power for evil. Blindness was the fate of the fleshly Jew ; but double blindness is that of the Christian, who, having begun in the Spirit, ends in the flesh. This downward course of the Christian nations has also been an aggravated repetition of the departure of the heathen from God. When the Gospel was preached and the Church planted among the heathen,- the un- clean spirit of heathenism gave place and quitted his habitation. The Church was fructified in the midst of the wilderness by the indwelling of the Holy Ghost, and was created out of the chaos of destruction as a holy people in whom Christ might reveal himself to the world. The sacrament of baptism gradually brought the nations of Europe into this sacred stand- ing. What has become of them since ? Step by step have the crimes of the heathen returned, and banished the vexed Spirit of Christ. And that faith which can- not consist W'ith sin, has decayed with the departure of the Spirit. An unholy life has alw^ays been the prelude of infidelity. The degradation, and then the neglect of worship — that great sin of omission in the ancient world — has been committed in Christendom also, and has been punished with judicial blindness in the latter, as in the former. Once more has the Word been fulfilled, "Esteeming themselves wise, they be- came fools." The wise ones of apostate Christendom, as of apostate modern Judaism, have transacted the CHRIST AND THE CHURCH. 57 great lie of deifying the creature, and even now cele- brate with every appliance of mental culture, yea, extol as the climax of Christian piety, the apotheosis of the Spirit of nature and of man. Thus does the demon once expelled return in sevenfold strength, to set up his throne on the place which the Holy Ghost forsakes. Thus does a generation arise worse than all its prede- cessors. The worship of nature, and the adoration of fallen humanity in the stead of God's Son, whether associated with open infidelity, or, as is rather to be feared, with delusive superstition, completes the last and deepest of all moral corruptions. From what quarter can healing come for the apostasy of those who have had among them the highest form and power of salva- tion, — and forsaken it ? To the heathen world, when, like the prodigal, it had spent its all, the Saviour came. But to Christendom, when the space for repentance is past, can He come only as judge. Yet the history of the Church testifies as clearly as that of the Jews and that of the human race have done, that, while all men are liars, God is true and faithful. Man has so sinned, that the disappearance of the truth and of the work of the Spirit of truth from the earth would be at once the natural consequence and the just punishment of his ways. But what Christendom has merited, it has not yet received. Still has the Holy Ghost remained with us. His union with the Church, to whom He condescended in coming down from heaven, is indissoluble. She still enjoys, not the mere gifts and operations, but the presence of the Paraclete, as cer- tainly and constantly as Christ, whom He here repre- sents, is in heaven. The Spirit cannot forsake her. He 58 CHRIST AND THE CHURCH. cannot leave the eaitli until she leave it too, in the day of her translation. In like manner has the truth re- mained. That measure of it which is indispensable to the saving of souls, and the continuance of Christian ordinances, however inadequate to the attainment of perfection, has never been denied by the ministries of the Church. The way of salvation has continued open, although a thousand stumbling-blocks and ignorances have impeded its discovery and use. The sacraments, those fountains of divine life, have preserved their essence even in the w^orst times. By a wonderful pro- vidence, the orthodox and catholic doctrine, although in many points overlain, perverted, and diluted, has been substantially maintained in the Church at large. And as God has preserved for every Christian the means of salvation, so has He conserved until now the truth and grace needful for the perfecting of the Catholic Church, that they may, at this, end of the dispensation, be brought forth out of hiding and oppression into full disclosure and restored operation.* Although the Romanists support their doctrine by a text, which, except in a figurative sense (taking natural life as the symbol of spiritual), has no application to the matter, when they quote the promise that the gates of hades shall not prevail against the Church, yet their doctrine is true, that the Church shall never perish. An apostasy of the Church is impossible. But an apostasy in the Church is possible, and not only possible but certainly predicted. And no man can say how many members of the Church — yea how many separate Churches or ecclesiastical constitutions in the Church that apostasy may carry away. The continuation of fiiiitful branches in the vine to the end is as certain as the continuance of the vine. But, how many twigs and whole branches may be cut out, and their places supplied by others, who can telU Xone but members of Christ are capable of apostasy. Nowhere but in Christendom can Antichrist be revealed. The remnant who do not apostatize, be it men or Churches^ will form that Church which shall be divinely redin- tegrated and saved, and to which the promise applies.— Tr. 59 25oofe Mv^t THE CHURCH IS THE APOSTOLIC AGE. CHAPTER I. THE LABORS OF PETER. The drama of the Apostolic age divides itself into three parts : the founding of the Church among Jews by Peter — the founding of the Church among Heathen by Paul— and the guidance of the Church by John, after the death of both, when Jerusalem had been destroyed and Ephesus had become the centre of the Christian religion as standing for itself. For the first period, the Acts of the x\postles by Luke are almost our only autho- rity. For the second, we have in addition the New Testament Epistles, especially those of Paul. For the third, we have chiefly the writings of John. As concerning the life of Christ, so concerning the most important part of the life of the Church, we find little written. Yet that little is so rich that it has not 60 THE LABORS OF PETER. been exhausted by the experience of centuries and the inquiries of all the learned. The working of Christ in the Church was seen most strikingly at the beginning. But, on this very account, the right understanding of the initial history of the Church decreased with the faith and illumination of Christians. The consequent neglect of this subject has been followed by its gross mistreatment through that inimical criticism which has, with arbitrary pro- faneness, wrought such confusion in the biography of Christ himself. Yet for all those, in whose eyes the matter is still sacred, a just estimate of the true import and intimate connection of primitive Church history, is a deeply felt desideratum. When our Lord went up to heaven He received power to bestow the Holy Spirit on those who had been reconciled through Him, and had been made one w^ith and in Him. As his atoning death and his resurrection answered to the Passover, so did the descent of the Spirit to the Feast of Weeks. At this latter feast Israel brought, in typical worship, the first fruits of harvest into the sanctuary. And by their consecration was the whole harvest sanctified. In like manner had the first fruits of the human race been ripened for God. The 120 disciples who waited for the fulfilment of the promise (Acts i. 15), and the 3,000 afterwards enlightened at Pentecost, were, by receiving the earnest of the kingdom to come, brought into the sanctuary. And their acceptance by God was the pledge that the whole of redeemed mankind was capable of sanc- tification. THE LABORS OF TETER. 61 Those strangers, out of every nation under heaven, who witnessed the events of Pentecost, and the majo- rity of whom must have then received baptism, were the representatives of all those nations among whom the Church arose in the Apostolic age. This con- sideration must have moved the historian to the re- cording of their names. (Acts ii. 9 — 11.) Wind and fire are symbols of the Spirit. It was a heavenly light, probably visible to the enlightened alone, which appeared to the disciples, and, descending from one source, divided itself into tongues of fire, and rested upon each, like that brightness out of the opened heavens which Christ beheld at his baptism and Stephen at his death. On the other hand, it was the physical force of the wind which filled the house, and by its mighty sound attracted the multitude who were at the time on their way to the sanctuary at the hour of morning prayer. We must ascribe it to the operation of the angels, when the inanimate creation accords to the mighty acts of God, and declares them to men by simultaneous phenomena — as was the case at the death and resurrection of Christ, and on many occasions in Old Testament history. It was probably no private building, but one of the porches which had been raised in the courts of the temple, perhaps that afterwards styled Solomon's porch, in which the miracle occurred, and before which the listening crowd assembled. With a loud voice and other tongues did those filled with the Spirit publish the mighty deeds of God, both the past and the future. Each of those who ap- proached heard them speak in his own tongue. The 62 THE LABORS OF PETER. supposition that tliey who spoke all used one tongue, the original tongue of man, and that it sounded in- telligibly to each as his mother tongue, has an appear- ance of depth and plausibility. But it contradicts the representation of the historian, which describes not a miracle in the hearers, wdiich would have been a self- deception, but an actual speaking in many tongues. We are far more warranted to suppose that the thou- sands were divided into national bands, as they had arrived to celebrate this feast, and that individual disci- ples addressed individual groups, or several each group. As the seer of old w^as enabled to discern the hearts of men, so was on this occasion such a word given to each of the disciples as addressed the heart of each hearer in his mother tongue. Every attentive reader of Paul's words, as to the speaking with tongues in the Corinthian Church, must be aware that the difference between it and the pheno- menon at Pentecost could hardly be greater than it was. (1 Cor. xiv. 2.) There a speech which no mortal imderstood without interpretation, which no philologist, none but the Holy Ghost, could interpret. Here a speech which required no interpreter. There a gift •which edified none but the speaker. Here one which edified the hearers. There no instruction for the ig- norant. Here their express instruction. Yet it were most unwarranted to regard the gift at Pentecost as a myth, on the ground of its disagreement with the description of Paul. Paul nowhere professes to de- scribe an event similar to that at Pentecost. On the contrary, in describing the charismata, and asserting the pre-eminence of love, he evidently distinguishes THE LABORS OF PETER. 63 between two kinds of tongues with Avliich man can , speak — those of men, and those of angels; (1 Cor. xiii. 1 ;) names peculiarly characteristic of two diverse phenomena. Tongues of men were spoken at Jerusa- lem ; tongues of angels at Corinth. And Paul is thus a collateral witness for such a gift of tongues as Luke describes.* It is clear that the Apostles had not then an abiding capacity to preach in the tongues of the strangers who met them, but were moved by a momentary inspiration. It is uncertain whether this was ever repeated. At any rate the miracle of Pentecost stands alone, like the day on which it occurred. The human race, who had been divided at Babel into nations and tongues, of which each took its own course, was now^, on the basis of the redemption wTought for all, called together again by the preaching of the One Spirit in many tongues, that God might have one family, hi which division might disappear and a much higher unity than that destroyed at Babel be established. The Jewish tradition, that, at Mount Sinai, the voice which spake the ten commandments sounded through- out the w^hole earth, accompanied with fiery tokens, and was heard in the seventy tongues of the heathen, stands strikingly related to the narrative of Pentecost; both because, among the later (though not the pre- sent) Jews, the giving of the law was commemorated at Pentecost; and also because the mission of the Comforter w^as really the new publication of the divine law, wTitten by Him in the hearts of men. Yet either * Tongues of angels need not mean tongues by which we converse with angels. We know that angels can speak. — Tr, 64 THE LABORS OF PETER. this tradition is of late origin and intended to set up the sacred history of the Jews as a rival to that of the Christians ; or, if it is older than the Acts of the Apostles, it has had its origin in the deep-seated anti- cipation of and longing for a yet more wondeiful cecumenic legislation, immeasurably transcending the Mosaic, — an anticipation which the Jew sought to satisfy by the belief that the Mosaic law was already in itself such a promulgation of the divine will for all nations. The vague expectation of an event proposed by God may easily take form in a tradition regarding the past. But no laws of thought justify the con- clusion that such an event is therefore a mere fable. The addresses of Peter at this early period to the people and the Sanhedrim are most remarkable for the simplicity of their contents. (Acts ii. 14; iii. 12.) He was waiTanted to assume of his hearers, that they ac- knowledged Christ as the man, accredited by God with signs and wonders, in whom men could hardly fail to see the antitype of Moses, save that His end upon the cross formed a sad contrast to that of Moses. And the great subject of faith and testimony was, that, in spite of such an apparent contradiction, He was never- theless the Prophet like unto Moses — and not only that, but the Anointed One, ^. e. the King Messiah, the Ruler of the kingdom of heaven. The unity of the Mosaic and Davidic types, so little known to the Jews, w^as presented to the eyes of the disciples in the risen Lord, who, having sent the Spirit from the right hand THE LABORS OF PETER. 65 of the Father, should at His return bring with Him the accomplishment of all prophecies. Peter's preaching confined itself to this. Of the pre-existcnce of the Son in heaven, His eternal divine majesty, His birth of the Virgin, His atoning death, Peter said nothing. Yet as the object of Christian faith is not a congeries of dead, tiiongh true and important propositions, but the living Christ, what Peter declared to the Jews w-as exactly those works of God which it was at the time profitable and possible for them to apprehend, as introductory to the rest of the truth. One thing is wonderful indeed — viz. the hope held out by Peter to his people, that, if they would yet obey the call of John, and repent both of their sins in general, and specially of their great national sin against Christ, God would not only give them remission of their sins, but send those times of refreshing from His presence when Christ should return and all that the prophets had spoken should be fulfilled. (Acts iii. 19 — 26.) In other words, the kingdom of God on earth, with Israel as the dominant nation, should appear with the return of Christ, as coupled with the conversion of God's ancient people. Tlius that conversion was re- presented as possible, and made the condition of Christ's re-appearance as King to bless the Jews, and, through them, the nations. Such leading ideas as these throw^ much light, not only upon the conceptions of the disciples at the time, but upon the real state of things. So great was the divine forbearance with the Jews, that they were not yet rejected of Him for hav- ing rejected Christ. That deed, needful to the fulfil- ment of His purposes, had been done in ignorance. VOL. I. F 66 THE LABORS OF PETER. And its guilt could yet be expunged on repentance. It was still for the moment open to them to become, in a higher sense than before, the people of God. If they embraced this the last occasion, the new order of things foretold by the prophets should at once appear. Jerusalem should remain the visible centre of Messiah's kingdom. And there should apparently be left no place for the independent developement of the Church as transcending both the Jews and the distinction be- tween Jew and Gentile. But this difficulty is merely apparent; for, in such a case, Israel itself should have been lifted up to be the New Testament Israel, and the earthly Jerusalem to be the heavenly polity of God. Further we will not speculate. Thus far the letter of Scripture warrants us to go. Yet this came not to pass. The guilt of the Jews had indeed then not been filled up. But it was com- pleted by their rejection of the double witness given by the Apostles and the Holy Ghost, for Christ raised from the dead. (Acts v. 32.) Not by insulting and slaying Christ in His humiliation, but by resisting the words and slaying the messengers of Christ in His glory, who thus testified to them by His Church and by His Spirit, did they invoke their tragical end. This view gives peculiar emphasis to the first perse- cution against the Church and to the death of Stephen (Acts iv. 5 — 6), as the continuation and aggravation of the things done against Christ in person. The same parties were mainly concerned in both. Only, while the Pharizees were the chief enemies of Christ, the Sadducees were of His Church. The Sadducees, who, although constituting a minority in the people and the THE LABORS OF PETER. 67 Sanhedrim, yet possessed (like Caiaphas) the highest offices, shewed a hostility greater than before, while counsels of moderation proceeded from the Pharizees, or rather from their chief Gamaliel. After the death of Christ himself, political apprehensions or pretexts, such as then united all parties against Him, w^ere out of the question. The Christians were brought to exe- cution not as political criminals, but as heretics. The violent acts of the Sadducees, whom even Josephus characterizes as cruel in their judgments, were dictated by pure hatred to the truth, and resistance to the tes- timony concerning the risen One. In the counsel of Gamaliel (Acts v. 35) (whom Luke describes in ac- cordance W'ith the Talmud,) we find traces indeed of the fear of God, yet beyond these nothing but that human wisdom, which, instead of acknowledging the hand of God, contending for the truth, and employing the gift of discernment in the light of God, dictates, under the pretext that discernment is impossible, an indolent postponement, and allows the hour of sal- vation to pass iiTevocably unimproved. In the midst of these troubles Peter appears in that plenitude of apostolic functions, which we see after- wards in Paul only, and even in him for but a short period. In these Peter was sustained by a Church, the purity of which has had no parallel. This Church was remarkable for its strictly Israelitish character and its hearty attachment to the Mosaic law and sanctuary, without disowning its new attributes. No subsequent f2 68 THE LABORS OF PETER. Cliurcli either could or should occupy such a twofold position as that of the congregation at Jerusalem, — on the one hand still bound up with Israel, on the other possessing the Spirit and ordinances of Christ. Tra- dition informs us that the porch of Solomon survived the destruction of the old temple, and thus constituted that part of the buildings which covered the hill of the temple, in which the unity of the first and second houses stood expressed. The use of this porch, first by Christ and then by his Church (Acts iii. 11), sym- bolically expressed the unity of the old and new covenants. The 3,000 and then the 5,000 believers appeared daily, as members of the Jewish nation, in this porch, which stood at their service, as other parts of the buildings of the temple may have been granted to other bodies of persons. They waited, at the hours of prayer, the third and the ninth, on the daily morning and evening w^orship of the Jews, being the first who estimated its true mystical import. In their own special meetings and the teaching of the iVpostles, they had an ample substitute for the Sabbatical ser- vices of the synagogue and the instruction of the Scribes. Yet it is clear that while they weekly cele- brated the day of the resurrection, they strictly ob- served the Sabbath also. They held their love-feasts, or agapse, in private houses, apparently in conjunction with the celebration of the Lord's Supper. Yet it can- not be determined how far the rite of the S.acrament of the altar and the understanding of its ftdl meaning were then developed. While the Old Testament ritual retained, as it then did, its power, the Christian sacrifice and priesthood, destined to take its place, were still in an embrvo form. THE LABORS OF PETER. 6i) The Apostles, however, by their instructions, led the special assemblies of the faithful into the depths of the truth. They fulfilled the command of Christ on behalf of the baptized, "teach them to do all things that 1 have commanded you," by a faithful representation of the words and deeds of their Master. And if we have proof how faithfully they cared for the worldly goods of the flock (Acts vi. 3), we cannot doubt that they were yet more careful for the heavenly goods entrusted to them in their reminiscences of Christ. The Scrip- tures of the Old Testament were constantly read in the assemblies of the faithful, who rejoiced in the new light cast thereon. And it is probable that even at that early period a fixed type of instruction had been formed by the combination of the biogTaphy of Christ with the prophecies and types. The Hebrews and the Hellenists of whom the Church consisted (Acts vi. 1) were distinguished merely by language. The latter, whether in or out of Palestine, having Greek instead of Hebrew for their mother tongue, were nevertheless as much of Israelitish de- scent as the Hebrews, and as faithful to the law of their fathers. Yet the Hebrews, in consequence of the im- portance attached to the sacred language, were regarded as the more strict in the preservation of their common traditions. Although the Hellenists were the minority, yet their existence rendered it necessary that the Gospel should be from the beginning published, and the Old Testament read, in two languages. The Apostles all belonged to the Hebrew part of the con- gregation. And when the Hellenists conceived that their widows were neglected, the Church, of which the 70 THE LABORS OF PETER. majority were Hebrews, proceeded, in order to over- come distrust by confidence, to select for the care of the poor, seven men, whose names indicate that they belonged to the Plellenist party. Community of goods was not established by law. Nor was the resignation of private property into the hands of the collective body, a condition of admission — as among the Essenes. The liberty of each to retain his possessions is clearly shewn by the words of Peter to Ananias. (Acts v. 4). But love did more than the strictest law. No one who possessed houses or lands, failed in offerings for the poor, then numerous in the Church. Ananias and Sapphira wished by deceit to appear as liberal as the rest. They died, because they thought to deceive with their hypocrisy the Holy Ghost who abides in the Church. (xA.cts v. 9.) The presence of the Holy One, which they had thought so lightly of, was put beyond question by so terrible an act of divine discipline. The first buddings of falsehood were nipped, and the Church preserved from the en- trance of hypocrites, who, at a time of such peace and favor, would soon have crept in to enjoy the worldly benefits of fraternal love. It was an experience full of instruction for all after ages, that the community of goods, of which, as a universal law, modern, especially infidel, philanthropists dream, could not be carried out in the purest society which ever was on earth, without causing discontent and tempting to untruth. The Apostles were at first the only ministers in the Church, and fulfilled every duty therein. All offices were, so to speak, wrapped up and contained in theirs. The developement of other offices resulted from the THE LABORS OF TETER. 71 devolution, first of inferior, then of higher functions by the Apostles upon others associated with them. The diaconate was tlie first to appear, and eldership the next, as growths out of the apostolic root. The simi- larity of the deacons and elders with the officers in the synagogue, — one so overdrawn by the students of Judaism, — in no way sanctions the idea of the former being a mere continuance or imitation of the latter. The fact that the ordinances of the Christian Church are essentially suited to the real wants of man, renders it in no way wonderful that by a natural process the requirements of the Jewish polity should have given anticipative birth to similar institutions, from which the Apostles could learn, without thereby degrading the divine ordinances, committed to, administered, and developed by them, to the rank of mere human in- ventions. The Church has ever justly regarded the seven who were entrusted with the care of the poor and the goods of the flock, as having been the first deacons. To them were especially entrusted the widows, whose claim for regular support was acknowledged. Paul gives more special regulations regarding these. (I Tim. V. 3.) Yet w^e find them already, not only in Jerusa- lem, but in Joppa. And it seems as if Judaism had already possessed a similar order. The pattern of life for widows was Hannah, whom Luke mentions in his gospel. They are to be distinguished from deacon- nesses, of whom Dorcas, lamented by the widows of Joppa, appears to have been one. (Acts ix. 36.) If the deacons had duties at the love-feasts, they necessarily came to assist at public worship also, one 72 THE LABORS OF TETER. of the earliest and most important emploj-ments as- signed to them by the catholic Church. The require- ments of Paul as to deacons (1 Tim. iii. 8.) point alike to trustworthiness in earthly things, and to a life consistent with converse among heavenly things. It was most natural that they should be allowed a share in initial spiritual duties, for the blessing of those with- out, especially in preaching and baptism. For many of them their office was, as Paul expressly describes it (1 Tim. iii. 13), a stepping-stone to a higher. They were, as we have seen, chosen by the people, (a thing never said of the Presbyters,) and this for a most natural among higher reasons, that the goods of the Church might be in the hands of those in whom the flock had expressed full confidence. By their election the deacons became the proper representatives of the congregation or laity. They w^ere that which Pro-- testants, through defective understanding of apostolic ordinances, would have the elders of the Church to be./ The primitive Church had hardly subsisted ten years, when Barnabas and Paul, on arriving at Jerusalem, found elders already there, to whom they delivered the gifts from Antioch. (Acts. xi. 30.) These elders were evidently totally distinct persons from the seven deacons, although the Acts are silent as to the date or manner of their creation. Without doubt they had been taken from among the earliest converts. And many of them probably belonged to the 120 who, from Pente- cost onwards, formed the nucleus of the Church. Yet it would be wrong to suppose that the oldest members were necessarily and solely, as such, elders. The elder lequired ordination by the Apostles, as we see from THE LABORS OF TETER. 73 the report of the first Apostolic journey of Barnabas and Paul. (Acts xiv. '23. ) And, as Luke throughout draws the parallel between the labors of Peter and Paul, he thus gives us to understand that the elders in Jerusalem had, in like manner, been brought into their office by apostolic ordination. This also is clear, that the cure of souls, which is the work of the pastor and cannot be separated from the conducting of w^orship, was one of the duties of these elders. The only obscurity is that which rests on the date at which an office on which the Apostles devolved such important duties arose. Yet even of this we may find a trace. After the seven were appointed, and while Stephen was in the full exercise of his ministry, many of the priests were obedient to the faith. (xA.cts vi. 7.) This suggests the inference that such was a fit occasion for the first appearance of an office corresponding to theirs in the Christian Church, emanating indeed, from the apostolic, but approved, and in many cases occupied, by those converts out of the Aaronic priesthood, who became most appropriately and deservedly elders of the Church, under the new order of things into wdiich they themselves had been translated. The origin of the higher order, the Episcopate, is clearer than that of the Presbyterate. For, let the name have been what it may, the place already occu- pied by James in Jerusalem was no other than the Episcopate. James was not one of the twelve, but the oldest among the brethren of the Lord, — men clearly distinguished in both the Acts and Gospels from the Apostles. Jerome is the chief author of the erro- neous view in the Latin church, that James was one of 74 THE LABORS OF PETER. the Apostles, viz. the son of Alpheus. And he makes another mistake in understanding the " brethren of the Lord" to mean, not sons of Joseph, but sons of Cleopas and the sister of the Blessed Virgin. The Greek Church has stuck to the primitive tradition, that the brethren and sisters of the Lord were children of Joseph by a former marriage. This James stood over the elders in Jerusalem, and was the one head of the collective faithful. For to him apply the last words of Peter, when at length forced to flee from Jerusalem. (x4cts xii. 17.) To him was the Church entrusted by the Apostles when they fled. The high honor put upon him precludes the idea of his being a mere j^r/ry^^/^ inter iiares in the college of elders. He was not one of the twelve ; and yet he belonged to the pillars of the Church, and stood almost on an equal footing with the Apostles ; nay, in the opinion of the Jewish Christians, on a footing so com- pletely equal, that they judged of Paul by his agree- ment with James. (Gal. ii. 12.) To him Paul addressed himself when he again visited the metropolis. (Acts XX i. 18.) With him, as much as with Peter and John, did Paul labor to come to an understanding. (Gal. ii., Acts XV.) And in the council James spoke the deci- sive word. All this appears clearly from the New Testament. It corresponds so exactly wdth the statements of Hege- sippus as to " James the Just," (apud Euseb. Hist. Eccl. II. 23,) and to the traditions which form the basis of the Apocrypha of Clement in the Recognitions, Homilies, and Apostolical Constitutions, that the latter thereby acquire in substance a measure of credit. James had THE LABORS OF PETER. 75 been, if the gospel of the Hebrews speaks true, brought to the faith by a vision of the risen Lord, like that of Paul. (1 Cor. XV. 7.) He was, in his conversation, really that blameless one after the law whom Hegesip- pus describes him to have been,^Bi man regarded with esteem by all Israelites — an unwearied intercessor for his miserable people, whose destruction he saw ap- proaching. As the Apostles, when forced to quit Pales- tine, had entrusted to him the superintendence of all the churches gathered therein, so the flocks in Judea, Galilee, Samaria, and the coasts, all appertained to his diocese. Indeed, it appears as if the Judaic-Christian congregations of the diaspora were also placed under his care. For one cannot avoid seeing in him the author of the canonical Epistle of James. We do not go too far in asserting that James was invested by the Apostles with a dignity at least epis- copal. Perhaps he had, in addition, other functions personal to himself, and exceeding those of ordinary bishops. Be this as it may, the episcopal constitution \ in other parts of the Church, had already found its first pattern in Jerusalem. And the fixed character which it so early assumed there, in the mother of all Churches, under the eyes of the Apostles themselves, undoubtedly contributed not a little to its speedy in- troduction throughout all Christendom. Deacons chosen by the people, elders appointed by the Apostles, and over them a chief Shepherd respon- sible for the whole — the essential elements in the or- ganization of each individual church, — came into being in Jerusalem in the simplest manner. But in other places also do we perceive the devolution of 76 THE LABOHS OF PETER. those functions of the Head which were originally shut up in the Apostles. At first they were themselves the sole preachers of the Gospel, as the sole doers of every work. But w^oon find Evangelists, like Philip (Acts viii. 5, — xxi. aPfculfilling this part of their duty, and hastening from place to place where Christianity had not yet penetrated. In Samaria Philip preceded the Apostles (who followed him, to complete his work), just as the seventy disciples went before Christ. And after this we find, in Agabus, Judas, and Silas, prophets, through wdiose word the Spirit of Christ brought light to the Church, without any usurpation on the part of men thus wonderfully used, of that catholic rule which belonged to the Apostles alone. After the Apostles, however, had thus obtained such various help, they retained enough peculiar to them- selves and incommunicable to others. While others fled, they remained in Jerusalem (Acts viii. 1), evi- dently as the guides of the whole body. They pre- sided in council. Peter and John passed into Samaria, to impart the Holy Spirit, by the laying on of their hands, to those w^hom Philip had baptized— a holy office out of which, at a later period, episcopal con- firmation sprang. Peter went the round of the whole new founded churches in Judea, Galilee, and Samaria, and on the coast of the Mediterranean, in Lydda, and in Joppa (Acts ix. 31, 32), to order them according to the pattern of the Church in Jerusalem, and to give them the Apostolic confirmation and completion of that which other servants of Christ had wrought. And if the laying on of hands upon baptized persons was not devolved on Philip, it is plain that the yet higher THE LABORS OF PETER. 77 office of consecration to ministry, continued peculiar to the Apostles. These positions rest directly on the authentic and explicit statements of the Acts. And therefore, we have no fear of having fallen into the error of transferring by a fiction later xiews and practices into the primitive period, in order to invest them witli the autliority of antiquity. Those, who are disposed to look upon the condition of the primitive Churches as one of innocent anarchy, ought to reflect, that the universally acknow- ledged Israelite character of the congregations in Pales- tine, one so much insisted on by a certain party, con- strains us to assume in them a peculiar regard for order and law, practical tact, strict obligation, and in every member the most scrupulous observation of his own t)order and those of others. The measures and institutions of the primitive Church, although only shortly noticed in the Acts, must be regarded, not as mere temporary expedients for the occasion, but as ele- ments of a steady organic developement. The oppo- site theory, which finds no proof of fixed ecclesiastical order in the Acts, arises, partly froma want of experi- ence and practical knowledge, partly from profound ignorance of this cardinal truth, that the Church al- though composed of members who are all called to be filled with the Holy Ghost, has yet been from the beginning not mere Spirit, but the very body of Christ, in which every part has that place and duty which have been assigned to it by God, and no other. The Church is the most perfect of all organizations, and Christianity the completion of all ordinances. For they form to- gether the chief work of God, by whom all things in tlie world consist, and are ordered. 78 THE LABORS OF PETER. Although the labors of the Apostles had been hitherto confined to Jews, a rapid succession of events pointed to and prepared the way for the passing over of sal- vation to the Gentiles. Of these the first -was the ministry of Stephen. He was the great precursor of the Apostle to the heathen ; and his speech before the Sanhedrim already embraced a circle of truths which Peter had never touched upon, but which formed the very substance and basis of Paul's doctrine and ministry. Stephen, himself a Hellenist, held inter- course w^ith those synagogues which the Hellenized Jews from foreign parts — Italy, Cyrene, Lower Egypt, Cilicia, and Asia — had founded in Jerusalem (Acts vi. 9), forasmuch as it did not escape him that the Hellen- ists were fitted to mediate the knowledge of the truth to the heathen. The accusations brought against him must, although brought by false witnesses, have had some foundation in the words of the martyr. " We have heard him say that Jesus of Nazareth shall destroy this place, and change the customs w^hich Moses delivered to us." (Acts vi. 13.) We can the more easily determine what he really did say, that the same accusation had been previously directed against Christ on a ground which we know. Christ had never said, " I will destroy the temple." But He had said, " Destroy this temple, and I will build it again in three days." So spake He to those who defended that dese- cration of the sanctuary which they should have pre- vented, when He put an end to it. " Proceed thus, and ye will bring the destruction of the temple to pass." He thus described His enemies as the destroyers, and Him- self as the eternal restorer of the sanctuary. So also THE LARORS OF PETER. 79 must Stephen liave spoken. With reference to the growing opposition of the Jews to the cause of Christ, he declared as a prophet that of which we find not a word in the preaching of Peter. " This sanctuary shall fall, in a judgment predicted by Christ, invoked by you ; and the Church of Christ shall, on the aboli- tion of the Mosaic worship, observe, as an independent holy people, a new law." This must have been his supposed blasphemy against the holy place and the law — against Moses and God. For this was his state- ment on his trial, not indeed in so many w^ords (which would not have been borne for a moment), but in his appeal to the history of the past as a mirror of the future. What he said of Moses (Acts vii. 35) might have served as a key to the hearers for the understand- ing of the rest; for Moses was undoubtedly compared in his whole fate with Christ, and the behaviour of the people towards their lawgiver with that of the Jews towards Christ. The wrath of the Jewish rulers leaves no doubt that they understood Stephen's word better than Christian theologians have, according to whose I usual interpretation the speech contains A^ery little \ pertinent to Stephen's defence, and nothing fitted to I silence his accusers. But this view puts the new and very pertinent doctrines and predictions contained in the speech in a clear light. Let us go through them. " Abraham," says Stephen, " received from the God of glory, who appeared to him, the command to emi- grate from his land and kindred. (Acts vii. 2.) So have we, to whom God has appeared in Christ, re- ceived the command to forsake our generation ; an application the more apposite, that Paul calls Abraham 80 THE LABORS OF PETER. the father of the faithful, his faith our faith, and his relation to God that of Christians to God. iVbraham's seed had to suffer bondage in a strange land. But God promised to rid His people of the oppressor, and bring them out to serve Him. So should the race of oppressors before whom Stephen stood come to an end like Pharaoh and his host, and the liberated Church should then hold its independent worship." " Joseph w^as through envy betrayed by his brethren to the heathen ; but he was delivered by God from all evil, and set up as a benefactor and ruler of the heathen. (Acts vii. 9.) So had it been with Christ, so should it be with His Church." But the type did not end with this. It contained the sorest thing which a Jewish ear could hear, although in the mildest form. " Great distress drove the brethren of Joseph into Egypt, to seek for food. Then was Joseph made known to them, and used to bring his father's house to Goshen. So shall great tribulation and famine come upon you ; but ye shall at length acknowledge Him whom ye rejected, who has in the meanwhile fed the despised heathen. He shall kindly receive you, the people of Israel, and appoint to you, a place in His kingdom." Herein lay a revelation as to the ulti- mate fate of the Jews, precisely similar to the mystery declared by Paul in the eleventh chapter of the epistle to the Romans. The application of the third section of the address (Acts vii. 20), (concerning the birth of Moses at the time of hardest oppression, his first attempt and his rude rejection as deliverer, and his flight into forty years' concealment), made to the mystery of Christ, is so THE LABOKS OF PETER. 81 plain as to require no comment. Christ was born at a time when the Roman emperor, by his census, put tlie stamp of perfected bondage on the people of God, and when the Idumasan commenced the murder of the Innocents to annihilate the hope of Israel. Christ, ar- rived at manhood, liad offered Himself as His people's Saviour. Rejected, He had w^ithdrawn from their eyes. And then comes an opening of the final history of the Jews, the more remarkable, that, although well founded in the Old Testament, it appeared nowhere else in the New — the restoration of the Jews in consequence of Christ's second appearance, as the anti-type of that of Moses. Such was undoubtedly Stephen's use of the Mosaic type. " Now, indeed," so concludes the address, " ye act towards Christ as your fathers towards their lawgiver while he w^as hidden upon the holy mount." The high priest, the president of the court, must have seen himself in Aaron, w4io led Israel to the sin which follow^ed. Of old the Babylonish captivity had been the punish- ment of apostasy. The tabernacle, yea the temple, had not shielded against God's judgment. For " the Most High dwelleth not in temples made with hands." In this Stephen expressed no disapprobation of the build- ing of the temple, as some moderns have strangely imagined. Such a thought would have been entirely foreign to the matter in hand, a true instance of con- tradiction between Stephen and both Peter and Paul, and a just ground for the accusation of blasphemy. He rather said, " Although the Most High has willed the building of this sanctuary, in the everlasting con- tinuance of which ye so trust that ye regard my warn- \0L. I. G 82 THE LABORS OF PETER. ing as blasphemy, yet He is not bound to it. He can, He will forsake it, because ye have become traitors, murderers, and breakers of His law." The deceived Jews thought themselves entitled to apply that law of vengeance on which the celebrated act of Phinehas was based, by tumultuously putting to death the supposed blasphemer. There must at that time have been no Governor in Palestine. And Herod Agrippa I. could not then have entered on his kingly government. Such a persecution as this, which ex- tended as far as Damascus, could not have been set on foot by the authority of the Jews alone, except during an inteiTegnum. The death of the first martyr served, like the suffer- ings of all martyrs, to spread the truth, and helped to fulfil his own prophecy as to the transfer of salvation to the heathen. One might imagine that this crime of the supreme authority among the Jews would have justi- fied the Apostles in forsaking Jerusalem, shaking the dust off their feet, rejecting the Jews as a nation, and devoting themselves exclusively to the heathen. But N this they did not do. On the contrary, while all others fled, they, although the most endangered, remained in Jerusalem. For this course they must have had an express command of Christ, assuring them that the time for acting otherwise had not yet come. Yet a series of events, recorded in the iVcts from the eighth to the twelfth chapter, proves how the Spirit of God pressed the Church to the conversion of the heathen, and how the providence of God tended in the same direction ; the successful preaching to the Samaritans ; the baptism of the Ethiopian ; the conversion of the THE LABORS OF^^PETER. 83 man who should be Apostle to the heathen ; the pouring out of the Sph'it on Cornelius and his house ; and lastly, the great opening among the heathen at Antioch. Philip, who seems from this time forward to have laboured as an Evangelist, in a higher sphere than that of a deacon, preceded the Apostles. He found among the Samaritans as much preparedness for Chris- tianity as for heathen magic, to which Josephus testi- fies that they were addicted, and which was indeed so general among them that, in the mouth of a Jew, Sama- ritan, and sorcerer, or demonist, were synonymous. When Peter and John arrived to complete the work of Philip, they received the divine sanction for what had been done, in the undeniable outpouring of the Holy Spirit. (Acts viii. 14.) Such a confirmation was neces- sary to dissipate the conscientious doubts raised by the planting of the Church among Samaritans, whom the Jews regarded as heathen. PIt* 'i^ » j f^X(5^* It was, prospectively regarded, a most pregnant cir- cumstance, that the Gospel had scarcely taken root among the heathen, when a new evil appeared, to warn the Apostles of the peculiar danger to which Christi- anity should be exposed among nations not previously subdued and chastened by any divine legislation. (Gal. iii. 24.) The statementthat Simon the sorcererwas looked upon as " the great power of God" (Acts viii. 10) by those whom he deceived with his magic arts, has, strange though it may seem, the highest degree of probability, in the eyes of any one who knows the opinions and ten- dencies of that period. He had undoubtedly a power higher than that of others also regarded as demoni- acal, a force of hell before which all other sorcery G 2 84 THE L^ORS OF PETER. gave way. Hence the idea most naturally prevailed that, not one of the lower agencies but, the first and highest emanation of Deity was embodied in him, until his arts were put to shame by the simple power of the Gospel. In his proposal to Peter he betrayed (Acts viii. 19) the tendency to that daring prostitution of Christianity which forms the essence of the ancient heathenish heresies in the Church, the object of which was to use Christianity as a ma^ic agency, overlooking its moral power ; to appropriate its supernatural reve- lations and gifts, regardless of its humbling and sanc- tifying discipline ; and to desecrate all in the service of pride, whether that of the charlatan or that of the phi- losopher. The tradition, therefore, which represents the magician of Gittin as the originator of all heathen- gnostic heresy, and as the chief adversary of Peter, is certainly not entirely groundless. The Acts themselves, although silent as to the subsequent encounter at Home, clearly point to the injury which Simon did to the Church. Peter foresaw that he should be " for a gall of bitterness and for a bond of inquity" (Acts viii. 23), in other words, that he should pollute and poison many of the faithful, and present a centre and stay for the elements of lawlessness among them, p r) > ' Hitherto no one had received baptism who was not circumcised. The Ethiopian and the centurion were the first who, as proselytes of the gate, had been joined to the Church. Neither Philip nor Peter would have ventured to act as they did, without especial super- natural illumination and incitement. Thus they were enabled, without a repetition of miraculous guidance, to repeat an act, then already demonstrated to have been THE LABORS OF .PETER. 85 well-pleasing to God. In Cornelius, with his holy reverence for God, his beneficence, and his prayers (Acts X. 1), we find expressed that preparation and longing on the part of the heathen, which tallied with the desires of Peter and the motions of the Spirit in him. The partition which separated the Apostle from Cornelius (Acts x. 28, xi. 3), rested upon provi- sions which, in order to prevent the possibility of cere- monial uncleanness, exceeded the provisions of Moses to a much greater extent than now. For among modern Jews, the prohibition extends not to crosshig the threshold, but only to partaking in the food, of the un-i circumcised, which of course cannot be prepared ac- cording to the Talmud. The vision of Peter presented to him the manifold forms of the heathen whom the Church should embrace, the preparation of the unclean by the Apostle as a sacrifice well pleasing to God, and the consequent appeasing of the Apostle's hunger for their conversion. By the command " Sacrifice and eat" (Acts x. 13), God purified the unclean. Peter followed the messenger into the house of the centurion. The place where an angel had trodden was also clean.] for him. They who had received the baptism of the Spirit from God, could not be denied the baptism with water by him. They whom God had miraculously declared to have been cleansed by Himself, could not be declared by Peter unworthy of the sacrament of cleansing. God has indeed appointed in the Church that baptism shall precede the endowment with the Holy Ghost. But He has not fettered Himself. He can anticipate His ordinances in the impartation of His grace. '"'- — 86 THE LABORS OF PETER. The event in Caesarea is by Peter himself compared and ahnost co-ordinated with the first outpouring of the Spirit. (Acts xi. 15.) The two events resembled each other, both in the immediate descent of the Spirit, and in the proof of His presence by the praise of God in other tongues. They were both the accept- ance of the first fruits ; one from the Jews, the other from Gentiles. The elevation of heathen, without in- troduction through Moses, to the dignity of the anointed, was, in fact, a judgment upon Mosaism. A divine act had declared, that, in the Church, as the temple of the Holy Ghost, the precedence of the Jews was at an end, and the observance of the Jewish law^ was no con- dition of communion. All this seems so clear, that it originates the histo- rical question, how, after such experiences, Peter could, as Paul reports (Gal. ii. 11), have been induced, at Antioch, to renounce the communion of Gentile Chris- tians, and afterwards to confine his labors to the Jews. This question is to be answered by considering, what the event in the house of Cornelius really did establish, and what it left yet unsettled. We shall see that it left many questions of conscience unanswered. Peter and the Church at Jerusalem were satisfied as to that one case. But, while an exception had been made in favor of those who feared God in Samaria, and who were already on the threshold of Judaism, where was yet the proof that a mere heathen might be baptized without having beforehand visibly received the Spirit ? Where was the warrant to go out and preach to those yet enslaved by idolatry ? AVhere was the authority for Peter to turn his back on the Jews, THE LABORS OF PETER. 87 as a nation, especially when another had been raised up as Apostle to the heathen ? Lastly, had a word been spoken as to the dnty of the Jews to relinquish their ceremonial law ? In point of fact, the time for this last did not arrive for at least twenty years after. Peter knew and felt that, at the moment T\hen the Churches should relinquish the Mosaic ritual, and he should act as Paul had clone, all hope of operating upon the Jews as a body, was at an end. On all these grounds, the mere baptism of Cornelius made it no self-evident matter, that the twelve, wdth Peter at their head, were no longer called upon to pay any regard to the Jews and to the doubts of Jewish Christians. Apollonius at the end of the second century (Euseb. I Hist. Eccl. V. 18) relates the tradition, that the Re- deemer himself gave the Apostles commandment, not to ' depart from Jerusalem for twelve years. It is doubtful if our Lord predetermined such a time. But the number of years corresponds pretty accurately with the narrative of the Acts, as to the duration of Peter's labors in Jerusalem and its neighbourhood. Chronological in- quiry has not yet determined whether the year 30 or the year 31 of our usual computation, was the date of the founding of the Christian Church.* But this is clear, that the Feast^^f Easter, at which Peter w^as forced to flee from Jerusalem, falls in the year 44 — because in this year, the fourth of Claudius, Herod Agrippa I. died. The events of this year were of great importance for the internal history of Judaism and Christianity. The * In consequence of the recent chronological corrections, by wliich our Lord's birth is placed a few years earlier than it previously had been. — Tr. 88 THE LABORS OF PETER. Jews had not followed up the slaughter of Stephen by any fresh act of violence. All Roman governors were not so ready as Pilate to execute the capital sentence of the Sanhedrim. But in the first year of Claudius, the royal dignity was granted by the emperor to Herod Agrippa I. ; and his government extended also over Judea, so as to have the same circuit as that of his ancestor the first Herod. In him the Jews once more found a ruler from whom they might expect the exe- cution of their plans, because he did not share that jealousy against them as a nation which had actuated the Roman nobles who preceded him. He must also have had a personal hatred to Christianity, which poli- tical motives encouraged him to gratify, by coming foi*ward as zealous for Judaism, and securing the favor of all the fanatically inclined. On some of the Church he laid his hands to torture them, and slew the elder James, the son of Zebedee, with the sword. (Acts xii. 1.) When this James stood before the judg- ment-seat, (evidently a Jewish court of orthodoxy,) his accuser was convinced and converted, confessed Christ, and was carried out to execution with James. On the way he entreated pardon of James. The latter thought a little in silence, and then said, " Peace be with thee," and kissed him. (Clem. Alex. ap. Euseb. Hist. Eccl. ii. 9.) Such was the first martyrdom among the Apostles of Israel. The king also imprisoned Peter, to prepare a like fate for him, when Easter should be past. King and people brought upon them a common guilt. Its judgment appeared, when the messengers of sal- vation were taken away from Jerusalem, and when Agrippa was carried off by a death which, typically THE LABORS OF TETER. 89 exhibiting the end of so many subsequent persecutors, may serve as a waraing to all tyrants. Josephus agrees with Luke in relating (Jos. Archaeol. xix. 7) that the king appeared at Caesarea before his assembled dignitaries and all the people, in a vestment artificially woven of pure silver, and, when it glittered in the rays of the rising sun, was greeted as a god by his flatterers, and accepted the greeting. It was a scene intended to be an imitation of the blasphemous apotheosis of Caligula. Looking up, the king observed a herald of evil in an owl, which had settled on a rope above him, and, immediately seized with horrid tor- ments in his intestines, recognized the punishment of his blasphemy. He died after five days of torture. In those perilous days, when one of the iVpostles had been taken, and the sword hung over Peter, the Church of Christ at Jerusalem had no weapon but instant prayer. (Acts xii. 5.) She obtained a double victory in the liberation of Peter and the punishment of the tyrant, w^ithout human aid. Peter, before his flight, entrusted the Church to James, and escaped, shaking off the dust of Jerusalem, " to another place." (Acts xii. 17.) Here he d'sappears from the narrative. We learn nothing from iy of his subsequent labors ; so completely is it afterwa/'^ds occupied with the Apostle to the heathen. The reason for this appears to be, that Luke saw here the complete fulfilment of Peter's prin- cipal mission. Yet it is possible, from other sources, to discover the leading events with which to fill up this great blank in the Acts of the x-Vpostles. 90 THE LABORS OF PETER. Whither did Peter go ? He could remain nowhere in the whole kingdom of Agrippa. And yet the time was not come for him to go to the heathen ; because we know from the Epistle to the Galatians that, some time after, he still regarded it as his duty to devote himself to the Jews. Thus were his steps directed to the Jews in the dispersion. And the New Testament itself leads to the conclusion that he sought them at their chief places of abode. These were Alexandria and Rome. Here, therefore, the statements of the Fathers come with the greatest credibility to our aid, in seeking to fill up the biography of Peter, viz. that Peter went to Rome under Claudius and planted the Church there, and that Mark, at a later period, (as the delegate of Peter,) founded the Church in Alexandria. It cannot be denied that at an early period fables and even intentional inventions already attached them- selves to the abode of Peter at Rome. His second encounter with Simon the Socerer, in which there may be some historical truth, is adorned with fabulous matter. His labors at two different times in that ca- pital, first under Claudius and then under Nero, have been described as an episcopate for five-and-twenty years. But, turning from these later perversions, we hold to the oldest notices as vYorthy of all credit. Fables, gradually appended, justify no one in regarding that around which they are congregated as an invention. The concurrent testimonies of antiquity, the very oldest and most direct, are what we dare not reject unless they contradict the Scriptures. And our investi- gation tends to show that, on the contrary, they, in this case, completely harmonize with the divine record. THE LABORS OF PETER. 91 The Jewish colonization on tlie other side of the Tiber had its origin in the year 63 B.C., Avhen Pompey, the conqueror of Judea, brought Aristobulus and thou- sands of captives from Judea to Rome, and there emancipated them. From them went out afterwards the synagogue of the Libertines, which was founded in Judea. (Acts vi. 9.) After the death of the first Herod, •when ambassadors came from Jerusalem to plead with Augustus against the institution of Archelaus as suc- cessor to his father, 8,000 of their fellow-countrymen, resident in Rome, joined with them in making their representations to Octavianus in the temple of Apollo. Equally numerous in proportion must have been those heathen in Rome, who were inclined to Judaism. The mockeries of the Roman satirists, such as Horace and Juvenal, have reference to Roman proselytes of the gate. In this way rich materials were at hand for the formation of a Christian congregation. And a remark- able rehearsal of the subsequent fate of the Church at Rome took place in the 19th year of our reckoning, the fourth of Tiberius. Tacitus relates (Ann. ii. 85), that counsel was taken as to the expulsion of the Egyptian and the Jewish worship, and the determination come to by the assembled fathers, that 4,000 of the freed men who were infected with this superstition, should as soon as they were old enough, be carried to Sardinia, to put down the robbers there, since they were looked upon as persons whose death would be no great loss, should they sink under the effects of the climate. The rest were ordered to leave Italy, unless, within a fixed period, they had renounced their profane rites. Those called infected, were, in fact, " Proselytes." But the 92 THE LABORS OF PETER. Jews by birth seem also to have been pointed at by the measure. If, as is likely, Peter tm*ned first to Rome, he pro- bably did so, contemplating the future importance of the city for the spreading of the Gospel among the heathen. Yet, in the first instance, his preaching was directed to the synagogue only. And what commotion it must have excited there we may learn from the short but striking testimony of Suetonius. (Life of Claud, c. XXV.) "The Jews who, at the instigation of a certain Chrestus, excited ceaseless disturbances, he (Claudius) banished from the city." That Christians were among those banished is proved by the Acts. It is well known that "Chrestus" was the form given by heathen writers to the usual name " Christ," to change it, with as little alteration as might be, into a well known Greek name for a slave. A casual observer might well imagine that the conflicts caused by the preaching of Messiah w^ere caused by a living disturber called " Chrestus." The scenes which moved the emperor to expel the Jews, must have been like those which oc- curred in Philippi, Thessalonica, Corinth, and else- where. From the majority the testimony of Peter met with great opposition. The more zealous brought the matter before the Roman tribunals. They w^ere dis- missed, because it appeared that the courts of Rome had no call to mix themselves up wdth a mere question of Jewish doctrine. When thus foiled in their appeal, if not before, they were guilty of excesses against those converted to Christianity. These excesses were re- peated so as to call for the interference of the autho- rities. And thus the emperor found the welcome THE LABORS OF TETER. 93 occasion to follow the example of Tiberius, and expel the whole Jewish colony. Of course no distinction was made between Christians and Jews; for not till the time of Nero did men begin to see in Christianity something different from one form of the Jewish manner of life ; and even much later it retained its old desig- nation in the language of Roman jurists. This banish- ment took place, according to Orosius, in the ninth year of Claudius, the forty-ninth of our reckoning. Ere it came so far, Peter, who was the most in danger, must have left Rome, as we already find him again in the council of the Apostles at Jerusalem (Acts xv. 7), some time before Paul met at Corinth with Aquila, who had been then recently driven from Italy by the imperial edict. (Acts xviii. 2.) We must yet notice one fact connected with the be- ginning of the Church at Rome, — viz. the composition of the Gospel by Mark. As to this also the testimony of ancient waiters agrees, in our opinion, with the con- tents of the sacred records. John Mark, a youth belonging to the Church of Jeru- salem, and therefore originally connected with Peter, had already accompanied Paul the Apostle to the heathen, although only for a short distance. He left him, in order to return to his native church (Acts xiii. 13), pro- bably from want of resolution to follow him in a course so bold and so diverse from that of Peter. The likeli- hood is that he sought out Peter again in order to serve him with those talents for which he is commended in Scripture. (2 Tim. iv. 11.) He found Peter in Rome. 94 THE LABORS OF PETER. The separation of Mark from Paul fell exactly in the years between the flight of Peter from Palestine and his re-appearance in the council of the Apostles. Clement of Alexandria (Euseb. Hist. Eccl. vi. 14) communicates out of the mouth of those elders among whom he inquired for ancient traditions, the following statement. " After Peter had openly preached and had declared the Gospel in the Holy Ghost, those present, four in number, requested Mark, as having ac- companied him from afar and well remembered his words, to put Peter's communications in writing. On this Mark composed the Gospel and imparted it to those who made the request. Peter, when made aware of it, neither objected to, nor encouraged his act." The account bears this mark of credibility, that it is still free from any attempt to fortify the canonical writing of Mark with the approbation of Peter, or to represent it as the work of Peter himself. Moreover, we find clearly exhibited in it the original feeling of the disci- ples of Christ, as to putting sacred truths in writing, that holy avoidance of indiscriminate disclosure, which has been so unintelligible and offensive to men of later times. But the very contents of Mark's composition correspond with this account of its origin. His Gospel is in fact the oldest of the four, and not only the oldest, but the document which Matthew^ and Luke both em- ployed, each as the foundation of his own Gospel. This position, long overlooked, is now more and more recognized as well founded by all sound inquirers, of the most diverse creeds and most opposite parties. No one will now venture to call Mark a mere epito- mizer of Matthew and Luke. Were his Gospel an THE LABORS OF PETER. 95 epitome of theirs, it would bear tlie marks of the attempt to combine in one the excellencies of both ; else the labor of epitome would have been without an object. But the very opposite is the case. We miss the peculiarities of Matthew and Luke. We find that which is common to both. And, therefore, were Mark's Gospel a mere epitome of the others, we should have a third repetition of what had been already twice re- lated, with so little additional or more exact matter, that the intention and conduct of the writer would re- main a riddle. This difficulty disappears, and a great step is made in threading the labyrinth of the Gospel hannony, where we see that Mark formed the basis of Matthew and Luke. Where they follow him, they agree. Where they do not, — e.g. in the history of our Lord's childhood, in his discourses, and in his appear- ances after his resurrection, — they differ widely, and each takes his own way. It is quite in harmony with the genesis of the truth that we have here the sacred tradition in its most simple form ; in a form also most akin to the succinct narratives given by Peter and recorded in the Acts. (Acts x. 36 — 42.) Granting that the wonderful birth of the Redeemer had been already related to the Apostles by the Holy Virgin before they left Jerusalem ; granting that they had already possessed that information out of the bosom of the holy family, which Luke has adopted in his first and second chapters ; the time to publish these mys- teries, — that Christ was conceived of the Holy Ghost and born of the Virgin, — had not arrived. Even though these things might be talked over within the circle of the faithful, they were such as could not be committed 96 THE LABORS OF PETER. to writing, and exposed to the risk of coming into strange hands. It was no less suited to the first stage of instruction that this Gospel should contain nothing as to the appearances and discourses of Christ after his resurrection ; for its present conclusion (Mark xvi. 9 — 21) is a subsequent addition. Nay the greater part of the transactions of the forty days was intended to re- main a mystery. Further, Mark exhibits in his style the Hebrew type still in its purest form. He was, as John the Presbyter says (Euseb. Hist. Eccl. iii. 39), "the interpreter of Peter," from whose mouth he received communications in Hebrew. And yet side by side with his Hebraisms we find Latinisms, and explanations of things in Palestine, which show that he T\TOte for foreigners and in the West. In the inimitable truth, freshness, and power of his narrative, we see the reality of an eye witness and the peculiarity of Cephas. Everything is in favour of the ancient opinion that this work of Mark was essentially the Gospel of Peter. Thus did the first of the evangelists associate himself with the first of the Apostles. Thus was Peter, even as to those historical notices of Christ which the Church should inherit, that one of our Lord's disciples who laid the foundation. Here, then, we possess a compendium of that which was taught by the Apostles of Israel at Jerusalem and Rome concerning Christ during the first twenty years. And the " primitive Gospel," which so many in- quirers have sought for, stands in our canon, adapted, by its origin and character, to form a firm bulwark of defence against all assaults from myth-hypotheses. Yet Mark's Gospel was not then used in the churches THE LABORS OF PETER. 97 or apostolically sanctioned. It remained a private writing till the death of Peter, when it was for the first time received among the sacred books of the Church, and probably then received its conclusion. And this may explain why Clement of Alexandria obtained the erroneous impression, that the Gospels containing the genealogies were earlier written (Euseb. Hist. Eccl. vi. 14), because they were composed before the death of Peter. The assertion of the Presbyter John, according to Papias, that " Mark wrote not in the right order, and not at any length, because he wished to give nothing of his own, but only what he had heard from Peter, who suited his teachings to the occasion," is, in so far as regards the chronology, nothing but the opinion of that witness as to the cause of those Gospel discrepancies which all admit to exist. And that opinion is erro- neous ; for Mark observed the proper chronology, while Matthew departed from it. But, even were it otherwise, the thing would be explained by the origin of the Gospel. And what John the Presbyter does say about that, /. e. the relation of the Evangelist Mark to Peter, is not opinion, but historical assertion, and valuable. The Church in Alexandria was undoubtedly founded, or at least builded up, by Mark (Euseb. Hist. Eccl. iii. 39), although the date of its foundation cannot be ascertained. The first tidings of Christ must have come very early to the Egyptian Jews. But Mark's labors among them must be postponed to a time, when he was no longer a youth, and when he was invested with VOL. 1. j£ 98 THE LABORS OF PETER. yet higher authority,* suhsequcnt to the council of the Apostles, and to the dissension between Barnabas and Paul on his account ; therefore after the year 50. Yet it must have been before the year 58 ; because in the be- ginning of 58 we have a generally overlooked testimony from Paul, for the existence of the Christian Church in Egypt. He writes to the Romans (Rom. xv. 19) that from Jerusalem to Illyricum, i. e. to the coasts of the Adriatic, he had fulfilled the preaching of salvation, with the endeavour not to build on another's foundation, but to preach Christ there where He had not yet been named ; that he had been much hindered in coming to Rome, but that now he had no more place in those parts, and therefore intended to come to Rome, not to remain there (for there the Church was already founded), but to pass by Rome into Spain. He could not have thus spoken if there had been at that time no Church in Alexandria. Egypt belonged to those parts of which he said that there was nothing more for him to do in them. The Church must have been already there, founded by the Aj^ostles to Israel, pro- bably in conjunction with Barnabas. Thus had the Alexandrian Church a predominant Jewish origin and character. The three metropolitan cities of Judaism, Jerusalem, Rome, and Alexandria, had already been changed, by the labors of Peter, into three metropolitan cities of Christendom. Those also of the twelve, conceniing whose life, labors, and death, the Acts are silent, must, on leaving Palestine, have visited first the seats of the diaspora, and have gathered into the Churches there more Jewish * Probably by Apostolic delegation. — Tr. THE LABORS OF PETER. 99 elements than Paul did. Their way led them south, east, and north. Yet their traces have almost disap- peared, because in those parts there was na such rich and unbroken developement of ecclesiastical literature as on the territory of Greece and Rome. It is not un- likely that some of them went forth to seek out those numerous and powerful Jewish settlements beyond the Euphrates of which Josephus speaks. Thaddeus went to Edessa, Thomas to Parthia, Bartholomew to India, Andrew to Scythia. The invitation of the king of Edessa to Christ, pressing him to flee to him, may be a fact (Euseb. Hist. Eccl. i. 1.3), although the corre- spondence be a forgery. Indeed, it fits in well with the Gospel of John. (John xii. 20.) Certain it is that Edessa was the first state, the ruler of which received the Gospel, and was followed by his people. Its king Abgarus, seems to have been already a so-called pro- selyte of the gate. Among the Indians, too, Panta)nus found the Hebrew Gospel of Matthew, brought thither by Bartholomew. (Euseb. Hist. Eccl. v. ] 0.) This indi- cates the Judaic character of the first Christian con- gregations in the East. But all such indications are rendered superfluous by the remarkable mixture of Jewish customs with Christian truth, not only of old but at the present day, among the Christians of Syria, and Kurdistan, of India, Egypt, and Ethiopia. This was an evident consequence of the fact that the oriental churches were gathered not by Paul, but by the first twelve or their followers, and an evident proof that those who agreed with Paul in believing the divinity of Christ, and acknowledging the calling of the heathen, might yet retain a great part of the Mosaic institutions. h2 100 THE LABORS OF PETER. The Gospel of Mark, although the oldest New Tes- tament writing, is probably not the only one belonging to the first, period of the apostolic age. The Epistle of James has good claim to be regarded as almost equally old, being the encyclical address by the bishop of Jerusalem, and confined entirely to the Judseo- Christian sphere. Those addressed were Israelites who believed on Christ, not believing and unbelieving Jews without distinction, (for they are addressed as regenerate and first fruits of the new creation,) yet not Israelites and Greeks together. They called their as- sembly not yet Church, but Synagogue, as is after- wards seen in the Nazarenes. We read not a word as yet of their relation to a Church gathered out of the nations. There is as yet no mention of that contest about circumcision and other ceremonies of the law, which commenced at Antioch previous to the year 50. Indeed, it seems as if the Epistle had been written before the Greek Church founded by Paul had come into existence. And, if that Church existed, its amalga- mation with the Churches of James was obviously neither then effected nor presently contemplated. The subject of exhortation was quite different. James speaks of the poverty which oppressed these Jewish Churches, and their oppression at the hands of rich and influen- tial unbelieving Jews. The Churches of Judea were poor from the beginning. In addition, they had un- dergone that spoliation of which the Epistle to the Hebrews speaks (Heb. x. 34), a confiscation decreed by the Sanhedrim, or executed by the people in a time of disorder. The name " poor," " Ebionim," given to them, was still honorable. Not till a later period, when THE LABORS OF TETER. 101 it attached to a mere remnant of them, did it become the title of the Ebionite sect. They were insuhed and brought before heathen tribmials by their bretlu'en for the name of Christ. James announces to the rich, who thus slew the righteous, a day of judgment ; and comforts the oppressed with the speedy return of the Lord. We may easily recognize here the Sadducean High Priests, who had exercised their tyranny in Judea. (James ii. 0,7; V. 1.) The prophetic threatenings also pointed to the destruction of Jerusalem, foretold by Christ. The language which was appropriate in the years im- mediately preceding the Jewish war, after the execu- tion of the writer of this Epistle, James the Just, was not without its application to an earlier period, after the death of Stephen, and of James the son of Zebedee. Moreover, the form of Christian tiuth in this Epistle points to an early date. James labors to purify the Churches from all the moral evils of Pharizaism and Judaism. The atonement through Christ's death and the heavenly priesthood of the risen One, are not men- tioned. The time for the abolition of the earthly sacrifice and priesthood, and for the liberation of the churches therefrom, was not come. The faithful had for their first duty, to become Israelites indeed, ful- fillers of the law, in the spirit of liberty, free from all impure zeal, from the self-deception of those who hear the law and do it not, from the ambition to be teachers, from the abuse of the tongue, from vain swear- ing, from the preference of the rich, and from godless plans for gain ; all dark points in the usual character of the Jew. Above all, they had to lay aside their pride of orthodoxy, and the hope of being justified by 102 THE LABORS OF PETER. a faith without fruits. James does not here contend, either against Paul's doctrine, or against its abuse (James ii. 14), but against the besetting sins and dead orthodoxy of the Jews. They trusted to the possession and knowledge of the law. As Abraham, sprung from idolaters, and as Rahab, had been justified by faith in the one God, these concluded that they were sure of salvation, because they were monotheists. This error could the more easily be carried over by them into the Christian Churches, that it was an easy matter for many Jews to acknowledge Jesus as Messiah, without any radical change of heart; whereas the heathen who entered the Church must have undergone a most decided illumination and cleansing. Against all this James contends, not indeed as Paul w^ould have done, but as Christ actually had done. His Epistle is the counter- part of the Sermon on the Mount, both in general and in detail. As there Christ, so here James, contends against Pharizaism, and insists on the perfect law of liberty. And the Epistle takes the same place among the canonical Epistles, which the Sermon on the Mount does among the discourses of the Lord. It did not form part of the collection of Scriptures which Graeco- Koman Christendom recognized as canonical in the second century. For the heathen Churches, James the bishop was no such authority as the Apostle who had founded them. Yet the Syrian Church possessed the Epistle. The Peschito contains it. And, as appears from Clement of Rome and Hermes, it was known at Rome also, at the end of the apostolic age. This evidently harmonizes with the original intention of the Epistle. Not till the time of Clement of Alexandria, when seven THE LABORS OF PETER. 103 catholic Epistles were put together, did it come pro- minently before the Gracco-Roman Churches. And not sooner than the entrance upon the fifth century, did it obtain that acknowledgment from the whole Church, which is due to its undoubted inspiration. Indeed, its ultimate reception was partly due to the mistake propagated by Jerome, that James the bishop, the brother of the Lord, was identical with James the Apostle, the son of Alphaeus. The twelve tribes scattered abroad, to whom James wrote, were the spiritual Israel which then came forth out of the husk of Israel after the flesh — not yet the Church in her heavenly exaltation above all diversities of descent, but the kernel of the twelve tribes of Israel, separated, purified, and glorified, by the Gospel — a body, which although chiefly resident in the Holy Land, felt themselves nevertheless in a strange land, in the diaspora, because their land and the supreme power on earth were both in the hands of the adversaries of Christ They were, in the first instance, the Churches of Judea, Peraea, Galilee, and Samaria ; but more remotely also the Christian communities in the Jewish colonies, in Syria, in Rome, and perhaps in Egypt. As soon as such Churches were founded by the Apostles, and the Apostles went on further, these needed to be placed under an overseer, and to be referred to a centre on which they might rest. The Epistle of James appears to confirm the view that he really had such a place towards, and care over churches, at a distance from Jerusalem, as tradition assigns to him. The pictures drawn of James, as bishop of bishops, and as christian high priest, in the writings of both 104 THE LABORS OF PETER. the orthodox and the heretical Jewish Christians at a later period, are by no means utterly unwarranted. His rehition to all Israelite congregations really con- tained tlie buddings of an episcopate over all Chris- tian congregations. And the later claim of the bishop of Rome to such a place, was not the fruit of an en- tirely new idea. Nor is the statement of Eusebins un- important (Hist. Eccl. vii. 19), that the episcopal chair of James was preserved as a relic in Jerusalem, a symbol of the central episcopal authority thence arising. If we suppose the case, that, while the apostleship ceased, Jerusalem had been preserved, and the Judaic part of the Church kept distinct from that created by Paul's labors, we should have probably had a fully developed primacy in the bishops of Jerusalem permanently established over all Judaic Churches throughout the world. Jeru- salem, however, fell. The Judaic Churches decayed. The heathen Capital became the focus of Christianity. And, there, in the absence of the right apostolic go- vernment, a new supreme episcopal authority sought at a later period to uplift itself over the Catholic Church.* * It is here instructive to observe, how, in the absence of Apostles, the earliest and clearest authority for Episcopacy is also the authority for Papacy. The episcopal office was not intended to exist independent of apostolic rule. Apostolic rule over bishops is a thing demanded by the very nature of the Church. And nothing but the presence of Apostles can prevent the demand from being supplied, either by the exaggeration of a bishop into an illegitimate primate, or by submission to some authority extraneous to the Church, as a means of uniting, upholding, and controlling bishops. In this respect Judaism continued, even when already Christianized, to furnish, as of old, a type of Christendom. — Tr. 105 CHAPTER II. THE LABORS OF PAUL. Long before the twelve had finished tlieir work among the Jews, Paul was called and sent before them to the heathen. Christ accelerated the illumination of the heathen by an act of which his disciples had not dreamed. Peter and his associates -kTboted-yet- to con- "'^'^^ vert the Jews, when they saw with astonishment the la4^ rise of a work among the heathen, which left no doubt in their minds that Paul had as certainly received apostleship to the heathen as Peter to the Jews. By a remarkable divine providence the whole pre- vious life of the young man of Tarsus had served to prepare him for the calling of which he himself was still ignorant. He had received, in a manner superior to that of his contemporaries, early education at once in Greek and in Hebrew learning. As in Athens, so in Tarsus, flourished schools of Greek science, with only this difference, that, while strangers streamed to Athens, the natives sent their sons to Tarsus, to the schools of the philosophers, rhetorists, and grammatists, that they might be afterwards sent out to foreign parts as teachers of science. (Strabo. Geogr. xiv. p. 991. Amst. 1707.) Thus, it is moi-e than probable^ that Paul had, 106 THE LABORS OF PAUL. as a boy, taken part in the Greek studies of his native city. And this supposition is confirmed not only by his quotations from Aratus and Cleanthes, Menander and Epiraenides, but by his complete possession of the Greek language, and his truly classic, not rabbinic, dialect. The similarity of his Epistles to the Romans and Galatians with the ethics of Aristotle, in diction and method, is so remarkable, that it cannot be acci- dental. If Paul did not, like Justin, clothe his preach- ing in the garment of philosophy, and if he did not use Grecian eloquence and wisdom in introducing the truth among the Hellenes, it was not because he could not, but because such a course w^as contrary to his convictions. Perhaps it was the fear lest Paul might drink in too much the spirit of foreign philosophy, which determined his father, a strict Israelite, in whose house the ancient sacred language was retained, to send the youth to Jerusalem, that he might be under Gamaliel, the head of that rigorous school of biblical learning, which Gama- liel's father, Hillel, founded. The statement in the Talmud, that Gamaliel was the only master of Hebrew theology who was permitted to study Grecian litera- ture, indicates, not that he shared in the Alexandrian tendencies, but that his strict Pharizaism caused that to be regarded as innocent in him, which in another would have been accounted dangerous. This step suc- ceeded in filling Saul with admiration for the law and for the hope of his fathers, and with that submission to the traditions of Moses and the elders, which the Pha- rizees regarded as the great condition of blessing. His teachers imparted to him their hatred against the cause THE LABORS OF PAUL. 107 of Christ; and, as usual, he went beyond them. Great as was his guilt in persecuting the disciples of Christ, the ignorance in which he was kept through reverence for his teachers, was an excuse which made his con- version possible. That which he assailed was that which he afterwards preached. He found already in the Christian Church that which formed the basis of his own teaching — the application of the Gospel to all, — and the concomitant truth of Christ's exaltation and divine dignity as Redeemer of the human race, one alike nigh unto all. In the nascent negation of Mo- saism, he saw the decay of all the hopes of Israel. And he really contended for Israel's future Messiah, while preaching Him who had comeiand gone. Not only his enthusiasm and talents, but probably also his descent from a family distinguished by the right of Roman citizenship, made him, while unconverted, a valuable instrument for the Sanhedrim. Jesus appeared to him. The majesty and holiness of the glorified One annihilated his unchastened natural strength. The mildness of his Lord's words turned his heart. And all the impressions of truth and innocence made upon him by the persecuted, especially by Stephen, now found full and unresisted operation. As if in satisfaction to the disciples at Damascus, whom he had been about to injure, he was directed to one of them for the washing of regeneration and the comfort of the Holy Ghost. And, thus cleansed, thus united to Christ, he found that peace and power which he had sought in vain under the law. 108 THE LABORS OF PAUL. Paul himself bears witness that the risen Clirist had appeared to him as really and bodily as He had to the other disciples during the forty days. (1 Cor. xv. 8.) The companions of Paul had an experience similar to that of the guardians of the grave at the moment of our Lord's resurrection. (Acts ix. 7; xxii. 9; xxvi. 14.) They who venture to apply the critique of their semi- naturalism to this appearance of Christ, ought to weigh the consliquences of doing so : for, if Paul w^as mistal^en here, his whole faith and labors as the founder of the Church among the heathen, were mere fanaticism. And they who, as avowed naturalists, see nothing in this event but a sudden transition of a choleric nature from one extreme to another, ought to see, that although many an ascete has gone over to lawlessness, and many a devotee to infidelity, or vice vet'sa, such a theory is here inadmissible, unless it can be shown that Saul became a destroyer of the law and an enemy of Israel, after his conversion. So far from this, Paul displays a moderation and wisdom, a moral purity, and a right estimate of those who remained where he had been, which could be nothing but the fruit of the grace of God. Our Lord immediately on His appearing to Saul said, " I send thee to the Gentiles." (Acts xxvi. 17.) It is not easy to say whether these words conveyed a revela- tion of his future office as Apostle. This is certain, that he did not attain to the exercise of the apostolic office in its full sense till after long preparation and training. And we shall proceed to trace the steps of THE LABORS OF PAUL. 109 his outward and ill^Yard devclopement until he arrived at the full height of his calling. No sooner was he converted, than he, as a Rabbi, tes- tified in the synagogue at Damascus for the Messiah. (Acts ix. 20.) He fled to Arabia (Gal. i. 17), in order, as it appears, to find a refuge from the persecutions of the Jews, with king Aretas. Introduced by Barnabas, he made the personal acquaintance of Peter and James at Jerusalem. (Acts ix. 27 ; Gal. i. 18, 19.) But his only work of teaching there was in the synagogue. The Churches did not yet venture to believe that their prayers for the persecutor had been answered. In a few days he was forced to flee to Tarsus, where he remained con- cealed, as a lay member of the Church, until Barna- bas, who was the first rightly to recognize him, took him to Antioch, where we find him labouring as a Christian, prophet and teacher (Actsxi. 25; xiii. 1) in the Church there recently gathered out of the heathen. During the persecution by Herod Agrippa I., which drove Peter out of Judea, Paul tarried wdth Barnabas at Jerusalem, whither he had brought those gifts by which the Church at Antioch expressed its thankfulness for the heavenly blessings which had flowed to it from the mother Church. (Acts xi. 30.) Thereafter came that call of the Holy Ghost to him and Barnabas at Antioch (Acts xiii. 2), which warranted him to pass as converter of the heathen into the regions of the West, which he had long had upon his heart. And here, for the first time, do we find those fruits of his labors in Cyprus, Pisidia, and Lycaonia, which attested his apostleship. (Acts xiii. xiv.) Such is the series of outward events in this part of his life. His cotemporary inward experience 110 THE LABORS OF PAUL. is SO wrapped in mystery, as to be almost beyond the reach of inquiry. When he joined the communion of the faithful, he drank from the rich common stream of Christian tradi- tion, which was confirmed in the main both by the holy rites of the Church, and probably also by private notices. A remarkable providence kept him from inter- course with those who were Apostles before him, so that he could afterwards assert that he received his Gospel without their intervention. (Gal. i. 11, 12.) We leani from the Acts, that at his first illumination he was informed by repeated heavenly visions as to the subject of his testimony. (Acts xxvi. 27.) But we know too little of these supernatural communications to determine from them only what is to be understood by that " Gospel" of which, in writing to the Galatians, he states, that he had received and learned it not from men, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ. We can hardly confine it to mere historical particulars, such as the words of institution at the sacrament of the altar, or the appearances of the Lord after His resurrection, which he refers to in the first Epistle to the Corin- thians in similar terms, i. e. " I have received from the Lord." " I have delivered to you that which I re- ceived." (1 Cor. xi. 23 ; xv. 3.) The Gospel super- naturally communicated to him could be nothing merely common to all Christian preachers, although the living revelation of Christ enabled him to sei3arate the im- portant from the unimportant, the true from the false, in tradition, and to apprehend the depth of the truth. It must have been something peculiar to him, by which he was distinguished not only from other teachers, but THE LABORS OF PAUL. Ill from the twelve Apostles. And this was — liis insight into the divine purposes as to Israel and the Heathen ; his profound appreliension of the great facts of Christ's history, especially of His death and resurrection ; his glance into the hidden glory and the future manifesta- tion of the Christian Church. This he calls the "mystery of Christ," which he had to declare ; (Eph. iii. 4 ;) that the heathen were fellow-heirs, and partakers in one body of the promise of God in Christ ; and that even to the heavenly powers the manifold wisdom of God should be known through the Church. In one word, the great truth of the Churcli, not as a continua- tion and improvement of the ancient covenant people, or as a temporary substitute for the same, but as some- thing much higher and more glorious ; one with its heavenly head ; raised up with Christ and seated with Him in heavenly places ; — this, with all it consequences for the faithful, was the new thing, which was not dis- closed to the other Apostles as it was to Paul. To this consideration it cannot be objected that such views appear for the first time in the Epistles to the Ephe- sians and Colossians. They stand also in the most intimate connexion with his teaching to the Romans and Galatians. By faith are we all justified, as Abraham. (Rom. iv. 1 1 ; Gal. iii. 28.) By baptism do we put on Christ, so as to be all one in Him. (Rom. vi. 3 ; Gal. iv. 27.) The works of the law fade before the bright- ness of the righteousness of Christ. We have what no legal effort could attain to. Christ the risen One lives in us. In Him all distinction between circumcision and uncircumcision vanishes before higher privileges. To make circumcision and the ceremonial law the con- 112 THE LABORS OF TAUL. dition of salvation were a denial of the holiness and dignity of the baptized. All such truths, although proximately concerning only the individual, exalted to be a child of God, are combined together in the great mystery of the Church revealed to Paul. That vision to which he alludes in his second Epistle to the Corin- thians (2 Cor. xii. 1), and which forms one of the most important passages in his life, stood, if w^e mistake not, in connexion therewith. He w^as thereby caught up into the third heavens, and saw, as already present, that glory of the Church, still hidden, but soon to be re- vealed, which John afterwards beheld in the wonderful visions of the Apocalypse. Now, if we consider the date of Paul's vision, we shall approach to the solution of the question, wheu he began to exercise his apostleship. Fourteen years be- fore the end of 57, the date of the second Epistle to the Corinthians, /. e. in the beginning of the year 44, Paul had this vision. At the time when he remained in Jeru- salem during that persecution which cost James the Elder his life, and forced Peter to flee ; at the time when Christ Himself turned away from the city in which the blood of His witnesses was shed ; Paul was full of longing to enlighten his former companions in guilt. But they were shut up. This appears to have been the occasion on which that happened to him which he relates to the Hebrew people in the twenty-second chapter of Acts. He prayed in the temple ; for whom, if not for his people ? Jesus appeared to him, in token that God had not till then forsaken the holy place of Israel; yet with the command then to depart, and with the mission to the distant heathen. (Acts xxii. 17,21.) THE LABORS OF PAUL. 113 This was the occasion of his receiving that insiglit into the heavenly calling of the Church, which led the way for his apostolic action. The time for its commence- ment was come. His work among the heathen was a testimony against the Jews. It aggravated their bitter- ness and delusion. But it could tarry no longer. They had deserved nothing else. The last point of the turn- ing had arrived. Closely following upon these events in Jerusalem, comes the call of the Holy Ghost to Barnabas and Paul. And although the concise narrative in the Acts does not of itself enable us to conclude whether the Church and Paul himself were then fully instructed as to his apostolic dignity or not, the historical circum- stances leave little doubt that he then entered upon apostolic functions. From that time forward his w^orks among the heathen formed the counterpart to those of Peter among the Jews, and fully certified his inde- pendent apostleship. Luke intentionally draws a paral-Q lei, from the fourteeuth chapter of the Acts onwards, be- ' tween the career of the two, in almost every particular. He describes them like a Christian Plutarch. But he was neither the first inventor of this comparison, nor its inventor at all. For, what persuaded James, Peter, and John, after the first apostolic journey of Paul and Bar- nabas, that the word of salvation for the heathen was committed to Paul, but their perception that He who had been mighty in Peter towards the Jews was equally mighty in Paul toward the heathen. (Gal. ii. 7 — 9.) Paul reports this in his Epistle to the Galatians. The simi- larity of action was based on reality. Paul must have adverted to it as an existing thing in the report which VOL. I. I 114 THE LABORS OF PAUL. he made at Jerusalem. (Acts xv. 12.) He himself had an important share in the selection of matter fur the writing of Luke. And thus the Acts as a whole, in so far as they draw a parallel between the two Apostles, and in particular the account given in the Acts of Paul's first journey, which no man in his sound reason can regard as fiction, derive from the Epistle to the Galatians a striking confirmation. Luke plainly writes to reconcile the Jewish Chris- tians wdth Paul. He lays no stress on Paul's claim to like dignity with Peter, which it would have been hard for them to acknowledge. He would persuade the reader not by the title of the man, but by his work. The Epistle to the Galatians, again, opens to us the whole amount of his claims. He is an Apostle, not of men, nor by man (Gal. i. 1), ecjual in birth to Peter, and entitled to withstand him on the territory of Gentile Christianity. (Gal. ii. 11.) He nowhere grounds his claim upon a vacancy in the apostolic college. The place of Judas had been legitimately and adequately filled up by Matthias. (Acts i. 26.) It is a mistake to say that the a])pointment of Matthias had not the sanc- tion of Christ. He sanctioned it by the sending of the Spirit, to which act the completion of the number twelve was a pre-requisite ; and the whole subsequent naiTative pre-supposes the validity of this co-optatiqn. Nowhere does Paul allude to any vacancy, by the death of James or otherwise, as making way for him to a place among the twelve. And as little can he be re- garded as a thirteenth, an addition or appendage to the original apostleship. He was the first of a new series — the nucleus of a new^ apostleship. On no other suppo- THE LABORS OF PAUL. 115 sition was lie warranted to claim an entire and strict eciuality with Peter, the pillar of the first apostleslii]). Whether this second apostleship, appointed to gather and perfect the Church from among the Gentiles, was seen in others besides Paul, is a question, the decision of which cannot affect what we have now said. Yet we may observe, that Barnabas, the Levite of Cyprus, a member of the original Jewish Church, a^ man of mild- ness, whose efforts were directed to reconcile it with the new Gentile Churches, was sent by the Apostles at Jerusalem, as legate to the congregation at Antioch, and assumed on such a mission an almost apostolic place like that of James. After he had stood foi' a time at the head of the Church in the then metropolis of Gentile Christendom, as James had in the Jewish metropolis, he was called, together with Paul, and acted with him. And although, after having stood even higher than Paul, he was ultimately transcended by him, yet both alike are represented as brothers in office, as Apostles to the heathen. This relation between them appears as clearly from the Epistles of Paul as from the Acts. In the latter, Paul is only twice called an Apostle, and that in connexion with Barnabas (Acts xiv. 4 — 14), so that thereaderis almost constrained either to regard Bar- nabas also as an Apostle, or to doubt whether Paul was properly one. The Greek and Roman Churches have preserved the truth in their commemoration, by styling Barnabas an Apostle in their martyrology. Clement of Alexandria, Ambrose, and Jerome, call him so. And jthe Syrian Christians celebrate him under the like title.* * The Anglican, and both the Scottish and American Episcopal Churches, celebrate the feast of St. Barnabas as an Apostle. — Tk. 116 THE LABORS OF PAUL. Paul, although Apostle to the Gentiles, appears to have throughout held himself bound in every place to carry the message of salvation first to the Jews there resident. His Epistles treat the Gospel as belonging first to the Jews, and also to the Greeks. (Rom. i. 16.) Those among whom Christ had been destined to appear, were those also among whom He w^as to be first preached. (Rom. XV. 8.) The Apostle longed after and felt for his people as Moses had done. He was willing to be him- self accursed from Christ, if he could thereby deliver his brethren after the flesh. (Rom. ix. 1.) Neither his mission to the heathen world, nor his compact with Peter, could loosen his obligation to them. And, inde- pendently of this, his regard to the success of the Gospel led him to use his privilege as a scribe, by pre- senting himself everywhere in the synagogue, which w^as by its very existence a preparation for a Christian Church, like an oasis of moral life round which, in the desert of heathenism, those Gentiles who feared God, the most accessible of all men for the truth, had gathered. It was fitting that to such persons the full light should proceed from that quarter where they had first observed the dawn. They were the link of com- munication with the heathen who yet sat in perfect darkness. They generally formed the centres of the Churches which Paul planted. And yet, from being accustomed to look reverently on Judaism as clothed with divine authority, they were peculiarly exposed to the danger of Judaizing. When Paul and Barnabas returned from their travels through Cyprus, Pamphylia, Pisidia, and Lycaonia, to Antioch, they could say that God had opened the door of/ THE LABORS OF PAUL. 117 faith to the heathen. (Acts xiv. 27.) The apostlcship to the Gentiles had opened the closed gate to the kingdom of heaven, for the entrance of nmltitudes. ^hurclies full of the Holy Ghost were founded. The Epistle to the Galatians refers to the miracles and sufferings of Paul among them. (Gal. iv. 13, 19.) It is more than pro- Jbable that these Churches of Galatia, which were so early led astray by Judaizing teachers, were not con- gregations in the Gallo-Grecian cities, such as iVncyra, Pessinus, Gordium, or Tavium (and w^e may conclude from the Acts that Paul never entered the country of the Celto-Germanic immigrants), but rather the Churches planted by Paul and Barnabas together, in Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe, and, perhaps, also that at Antioch in Pisidia ; since, after the death of the last Galatian king Amyntas, Iconium and thirteen neighbouring cities were incorporated with the Roman province of Galatia. (Dio Cassius, xlix. 32 ; liii. 26 ; Strabo, xii. 5()9.) _ Immediately upon the return of Paul to Antioch commenced that contest with the Judaists which occu- pied him so much. (x4ctsxv. 1.) Christianized Phari- zees, from the Church in Jerusalem, had come to Antioch, and wished to impose on the Gentile converts the Mosaic law as a condition of salvation. They were false brethren crept in, who could show no warrant for teaching in that Church. Their bold innovations con- tradicted the wholesome customs previously observed. The Church was shaken. And Paul, with Barnabas, went to the council at Jerusalem, to procure a definitive 118 THE LABORS OF PAUL. settlement of the matter. Paul appears to have come unwillingly to this determination. A revelation was needed to make him yield to the wishes of the flock. (Gal. ii. 'i.) In order to give practical proof of the right of the heathen to have their sanctification recog- nized without the ceremonial law, he took with him Titus, an uncircumcised man, perhaps already a fellow-teacher. And this act was crowned with success. For when the false teachers wished to force circumcision upon Titus, the Apostles at Jerusalem, who had to decide, declined, as Paul reports, to sanction such an imposition, and, evidently after deliberation on the matter, freed Titus from all obligation to be circumcised. (Gal. ii. 3.) In the public assembly of the Apostles, Peter, as president, had the first word. (Acts xv. 7.) He solemnly recognized the purifying of the heathen by faith, con- firmed by the outpouring of the Holy Ghost ; regarding it as a doubting of God's acts, and a tempting of God, to impose on them, by way of condition, the yoke of Moses. Barnabas and Paul, in their turn, related the corresponding doings of the Lord among the subjects of their ministry. James, from whom, according to his position and manner of life, the greatest opposition might have been expected, had the last word. (Acts XV. 13.) Yet even he acknowledged that the divine election of a people from among the Gentiles, distinct from Israel, was in accordance w^ith the prophecies. And, seeing that the synagogue, through which Moses had in every city those who preached him, sufficiently provided for the continuance of Mosaism, he concluded that the only conditions of communion to be required of the converted heathen, were abstinence from meats THE LABORS OF PAUL. 119 offered to idols, from blood, from tilings strangled, and from fornication. Without further explanation or proof this remarkable proposal was accepted, decreed, and published. (Acts xv. 20, 28 ; xxi. 25.) Puzzling as it may seem to us, it must have been intelligible and evident for the Christians of Jerusalem and Antioch at the time. And it was so, because it contained, as all inquirers agree, no new requirements, nothing more than what had long been imposed, under the name of the commandments of the Noachidae,uj)on the strangers of the gate ; although the Talmud nowhere contains exactly the same number of commandments. The Gentile Christians, of whom a great proportion had already undertaken these pledges, were all bound to take them, but were, in doing so, to enjoy as Christians a recognition which the Jew had denied to the strangers of the gate ; for none but the strict proselyte of right- eousness had the same approach as the Jew to holy things. This decision, unanimously adopted by the council, and confirmed by the spirit of prophecy, was sent to the Churches in Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia, by the hands of Barnabas and Paul, Judas and Silas, and afterwards delivered by Paul and Silas to the Galatian Churches. (Acts xv. 23 ; xvi. 4.) But now arise the weighty questions. How comes it, that, after all this, Paul makes no use whatever of this decision, evidently so applicable to the case, in his rebuke to the Galatians for their return to Judaistic errors ? How comes it, that, having to answer the question as to meats offered in sacrifice, in his fust l^pistle to the Corinthians, he does not mention this decision already given ? And how comes it, that his 120 THE LABORS OF PAUL. report of his journey to Jerusalem in the Epistle to the Galatians runs so differently from the narrative in the Acts ? We shall first take up the last of these questions, and endeavour to place in its true light the text of Paul's Epistle, which has in these days been converted by false exposition into a source and warrant for the most extravagant and pernicious critical errors. We assume that he speaks of the same journey as that narrated in the Acts. It could not have been a prior one ; because acts which proved the apostleship of Paul must already have been performed. The jour- ney related in Acts xiii. and xiv., must have been then over. Neither could it be a subsequent one ; because immediately after the Jerusalem Coimcil, Paul and Bar- nabas disagree; wdiereas, here, they are still united. Further, the two accounts correspond in all important points — the same controversy — the same immediate occasion in the efforts of the Judaists — Peter and James the same chief actors— and the same testimony by Paul and Barnabas to their success among the heathen. The journeys were clearly identical. But no human acumen could prove that the deliberations and deter- V. minations were. Now this, closely examined, is the very key to the solu- tion of the difficulty. The Acts treat of the rights and duties of Gentile Christians. They do not speak of Paul's apostleship. The decree does not call him an Apostle. On the other hand, the discussion described to the Galatians, relates solely to his apostlehsip. No allu- sion is there made to the demands made on the Gentile converts. The full recognition of Paul's independent THE LABORS OF PAUL. 121 apostleship, and the agreement as to the partition of labor, are there given as the results of the conference at Jerusalem. No two things can be conceived more different. But Paul himself (Gal. ii. 2) uses a phrase which renders clear the relation between the two trans- actions. The understanding come to regarding his apostolic office occurred {Kar tStW) in private, after the public settlement of the question as to the Syrian Christians. And why so.? The questions were akin to each other, and yet very different. It was much more difficult to recognize Paul's apostleship than the rights of the Gentiles. But the two questions could be kept apart. The former coidd be left over, in deciding the latter. Both Paul and Peter were probably anxious to spare the faithful at large the trial of a question for Avhich they were not prepared, and of which they were not the immediate judges. The matter was brought before those only, who, by virtue of their office, were called upon to decide, and to take a de- finite position towards Paul and Barnabas. It appears that no one in the Jerusalem Church had as yet had a jast view of the new claim to apostleship. James, Peter, and John, alone, were enabled by the exercise of an admirable self-denial, and by illumination from above, to recognize the wonderful fact, that, without their intervention, an Apostle in the fullest sense had appeared, invested with the same mission and authority from the risen Lord, for the heathen, as Peter had received from Him while on earth for the Jews (Gal. ii. 7, 8), and responsible, like Peter, to Christ alone. This acknowledgment paved the way to an agreement on all subsidiary questions^ VVhen the Apostles took 122 THE LABORS OF PAUL. leave of each other, it was no separation such as when Luther, in the Castle of Marburg, refused the hand of Zuingle, or when James Andreas refused that of Theodor Beza, at Montbeliard. Nothing but an un- paralleled misconstruction can represent the brotherly conclusion of the conference, related by Paul (Gal. ii. 9, 10), as a mere armistice resulting from perplexity and exhaustion ; as if the three had said to the two : Do what you like; intrude not into our province ; and we shall let the heathen alone. In such a case, the giving of the right-hand would have been anything but a sign of communion — a mere act of hypocrisy or in- difference. We shall now find some light thrown upon the two other questions. And first, upon that arising from the silence of the Acts. When Luke wrote with a view to reconcile the Jewish Christians, very few of them could have conceived of an independent apostleship in Paul.* And the same grounds which moved Paul to avoid drawing the Jerusalem Church into this question, induced the historian to avoid puzzling his readers by alluding to it, in their unprepared condition. But we now also see how^ Paul came to pass over this decree in his Epistles. He w^as as independent in his guidance of the Churches as Peter w^as in his. And his independence was acknowledged. He was tram- melled by no human authority and responsible to none.f * And yet no more a rival apostleship than his Gospel was a rival Gospel, t Paul's own conduct on other occasions as well as every true principle of Church government shews, that this must not be understood as implying that each Apostle, like an exaggerated or universal Bishop, can plead the exclusive authority of the Lord, as entitling him to follow a course of his own without regard to the mind of Christ in the Apostolic College, by which the Church THE LABORS OF PAUL. 123 This he asserted in Galatia and in Corintli. The time was come for him to vindicate his apostleship on every hand, lie had no need, in correcting errors, to quote the decrees of others. His word as an Apostle of Christ to the heathen was decree sufficient for them. At the very time when his authority was questioned by the Churches wliich he himself had planted, it would have been a fatal concession, had he cited to th(3m another power tlian his own, as their guide. On the other hand, he never thought of contradicting the moderate demands made by the Jerusalem Council on the Gentiles, or of allowing any Christian to act, as even a stranger of the gate ought not to have done. We do not know whether his explanations as to meats offered in sacrifice (1 Cor. viii. 1 ; X. 23) entirely accorded with those considerations which dictated the Jerusalem decree. But the result, adverse to the eating of such meats, was the same in both cases. He could hardly have taught otherwise as to the use of blood and things strangled ; seeing that the Greek Church still holds to their prohibition. As to fornication, whether it meant marriage within for- bidden degrees or marriage with heathen, the agree- ment is undoubted. This Council of the Apostles recognized the unity of the two great factors of the Church, and expressed a principle, which,' if followed out, would realize that unity, in the body, which was already seen in its heads. is guided in unity. But Paul was the deputy of no ot?ier Apostle, and his apostleship was not subordinate to that of the first twelve, or amenable to it. — Tr. 124 THE LABORS OF PAUL. Yet every one not blind to history must see that the Churches were yet far from fully apprehending or applying the great idea of unity in Christ, and that, in the Apostles themselves, that imity was not pre- served entire. We read of sad scenes shortly after at Antioch, — the contradiction of Peter by Paul, and the dispute of the latter with Barnabas. (Gal. ii. 11 ; Acts XV. 36.) The fault of Peter at Antioch and its exposure by Paul were no trifles, either in their essence or in their consequences. On these things the Ebionites have rested their hardest accusation against Paul, the Gnos- tics their prejudices against Peter and the other Apostles to Israel, the nationalists their arguments against in- spiration, and the most modern perverters of criticism their dream as to the constant unremoved variance betweeiTthe two great Apostles. And certainly the usual answers to such objections have been anything but successful. Clemens Alexandrinus interpolates a second Cephas, against whom Paul's reproaches were directed. Tertullian sees a fault in the conduct merely, not in the doctrine, of Peter; as if actions did not teach. And Jerome, following certain Greeks, imagines a concerted instructive sham-fight between the two ; an idea however, which Augustine scouts. But how stood the matter in truth.? Peter paid a first visit to the metropolis of Gentile Christianity, ap- parently with no intention to act as a rival to Paul in apostolic work. On his arrival, he ate with the Gentile believers, /. e. he united with them in Eucharist and Agapae; and thus recognized them as sanctified. Then came certain from the Church of James, no doubt THE LABORS OF PAUL. 125 anxious to see how the Apostle to Israel would deport hmiself in such new company, and ready to be oflended by his conduct, and to infect with their displeasure the strict Judaists at home. For, in spite of the decree of the Council, these might still with some reason shrink from full communion with heathens ; as even the proselyte of the gate, when he came to Jerusalem, had not equal privileges in worship with the Jew. And it was not so easy to yield to a consequence, as to see it. Indeed, we need only look to the subsequent divisions of the Church, (in w^hich the adherents of one confession, although they dare not deny salvation to those of another, or insist on their coming over, still refrain / conscientiously from communion with them,) in order to find a repetition of the same state of feeling and conduct. Peter separated himself. His example was followed by all members of Jewish descent, even by Barnabas himself. (Gal. ii. 13.) The rent went through the whole Church. A two-fold worship and agapae arose on the ruins of unity. Paul was the only Israelite who continued with the Gentiles. Great as w^as the evil, dangerous as the consequences might be, the error of Peter was natural. He shrank at the thought of the stir and perhaps the division which his bold step might occasion at Jerusalem. He feared for weakening his own authority over the Churches ana losing his hold of the Jews. He might doubt if he had done well in coming into a situation where he must take either one side or the other. We cannot wonder at his yielding, although he ought to have persisted in the course which he had once adopted, and although by acting contrary to his own expressed 126 THE LABORS OF PAUL. convictions he justly exposed himself to Paul's charge of dissimulation. He failed, not so grievously, but in the same "vvay, as when he denied Christ. He had, at Antioch, as in the court of the High Priest, thrown himself uncalled into danger. He was out of his place, and therefore weak. He sacrificed his conscience to his fears. But the apostolic office and the divine guidance of the Church are not afTected by such an event. It w^ere a grievous mistake to think that, because Apostles are God's ordinance for the infallible guidance of the Church, therefore no Apostle can err. No man has any other assurance than that he shall lack neither light nor power when he has to do his duty.* Peter erred, because he was out of the path of duty. Paul w^as in that path, and corrected him. He claimed the same authority at Antioch which he would have yielded j to Peter at Jerusalem. Herein lies the divine guidance of the Church, that, through the working of its whole organism, of each part in its measure, error and evil are checked, growth and establishment in the truth attained. We cannot doubt that through the resolute conduct of Paul, who rebuked Peter " before all," in a meeting of both sections of the congregation especially sum- moned for the purpose, Peter w^as restored and the * Christ's guidance is tlie only infallible one. His infallibility rests on his servants, only in so far as they abide in him, — in so far as they are in their right place— personally fitted for it— and sustained by the rightly ordered co-operation of all other members of the body. As no member can say to another,— I have no need of thee, — so Apostles, although Christ's ordinance for universal and infallible guidance, cannot fulfil their mission unless assisted by all other ordinances and the whole Church. — Tr. THE LABORS OF TAUL. 127 schism healed. But traces of the evil are to be found in the subsequent dissension, and long estrangement, between Paul and Barnabas. Luke has spared the reader the details of their schism at Antioch. But it does not follow that he has distorted any fact which he does communicate. He states without reserve the dis- cord in which the two Apostles to the heathen parted. (Acts XV. 39.) Mark had, during the first journey of Barnabas and Paul, after they had gone over Cyprus and landed in Asia Minor, separated himself from them and returned home, not from fear of danger, but more probably from doubts as to their mode of operation. Paul regarded him in consequence as not fitted to be their fellow-labourer. And when Barnabas insisted on keeping him, Paul, remembering that Barnabas himself had for a moment denied the truth at Antioch, pre- ferred to go his own way, selecting helpers on whom he could rely, Silas the prophet, Luke the Evangelist, who continued v/ith him in bondage, andT Timothy, the most faithful of his disciples, whom we at length find chief shepherd of the flock at Ephesus. These three were his companions on that his second great journey which brought him into Europe. (Acts xv. 40.)* * Here we cannot but reflect — 1st. On the efforts of the devil to rend the body of Christ by separating first the Jewish and Gentile Apostles, and then the two for the Gentiles. 2nd. On the ability which Satan acquires by the .sin of man to inflict on the Church wounds against which she were otherwise proof. 3rd. On the weakening effect of the first error of Barnabas on his subsequent spiritual discernment and strength. 4th. On the mighty assurance of faith, which enabled Faul in such trying circumstances to resist his own Jewish prepossessions, and the authority both of the first of the Apostles and of the mother Church, when his only colleague in that very apostleship which he was vindicating gave way,— an assurance which nothing less than a separate call could have given him;— and, 5th. The instance of the four-fold ministry (Eph. iv. 1 1) in the different offices of Paul and his three companions. — Tr. 128 THE LABORS OF PAUL. Silas, or Sylvanus, was one of those who by the gift of prophecy was enabled to render to the Apostles the most important services, and who stood next to them in the building of the Church. (Eph. ii. 20 ; iii. 5 ; 1 Cor. xii. 28.) Through him Paul obtained, not only light on divine truth, but communication of the divine will, and indications from the Holy Ghost as to the way he should take. (Acts xvi. 6, 7.) When Timothy was directed to his future calling, and Paul was in- duced to ordain him by prophetic utterances (1 Tim. i. 18 ; iv. 14 ; 2 Tim. i. 6), these communications most ])robably came through the mouth of Silas, in the same way as Paul and Barnabas themselves had previously been called by prophecy. The same took place as to Luke. On the entrance of the mission into Europe Luke begins to narrate in the first person (iicts xvi. 10), not because he had only then joined Paul and become an eye-witness, but because he had then received a pro- phetic call to preach the Gospel, and from that time forward became a co-operator in the things narrated. Paul caused Timothy, the son of a Jewish mother and a Greek father, to be circumcised, before taking him with him. (Acts xvi. 3.) How does this accom- modation harmonize with the determined refusal of which Paul boasted, to let Titus be circumcised } This difficulty was felt by the earliest fathers. Some thought that Paul must subsequently have made alike concession as to Titus. And so runs the old various reading of the Epistle to the Galatians, which Tertullian cites against Marcion (Gal. ii. 5 without the negation), but which has evidently arisen from the vain attempt to make a summary riddance of the contradiction, and to take from the Gnostic enemies of the Old Testament, a sup- THE LABORS OF PAUL. IO9 posed sanction in that Epistle. The conti-adiction is manifest. But the difference of the case~s was sufficient to justify a difference of action. In the case of Titus the Greek, the object was to withstand the false teachers and protect the flock from their requisitions. In the case of Timothy, the object was to procure admission for him into the synagogues in which the Gospel was not yet preached, and with which Paul had to connect his labours. Paul testifies that he himself had become a Jew to the Jews, to win those who could not else be won. (ICor. ix. 33.) He asked no more from Timothy. And he was entitled to ask it; because, according to the Talmud, the child should follow the mother, so that the son of a mixed marriage, whose mother was a Jewess, should be circumcised; otherwise (and the Roman Ca- tholic Church now makes similar conditions), the Jewish law would not have recognized the marriage. This had been neglected in the case of Timothy, perhaps through the opposition of his father. The Jews of his native place knew this; and he would not have been admitted among them, had Paul not made good the omission. Paul, Sylvanus, Luke, and Timothy, brought the Gospel from Asia to Greece in the beginning of the second half of the century. The longing of the in- habitants of Europe for divine aid was revealed to Paul in a vision, and found a response in the mighty impulse of the Spirit in himself and his companions towards the West. His first labours in Macedonia and Greece were richly rewarded. And it is most in- VOL. I. 130 THE LABORS OF PAUL. teresting to follow him in this, his first invasion of the heathen world, in Greece. (Acts xvi. 11 ; xviii. 17.) In Philippi, in Thessalonica, and Bersea, arose, as by magic, in spite of the shortening of his stay by perse- cution, those Churches which gave him the greatest joy and the least grief. Small in number, and poor in this world, they had endured severer persecutions than any Churches, save those of Judea. (1 Thess. ii. 14.) Martyrs had died in Thessalonica, concerning whose fate Paul in his first Epistle comforted the faithful. (1 Thess. iv. 11.) From no Church but that of Philippi, did he take offerings, even when pressed upon him. (Phil. iv. 10.) In Corinth and Ephesus he supported himself and his fellow-ministers by the labour of his hands. (Acts xvi. 20; 2 Cor. xi. 8; Acts xx. 33—35.) The Macedonian Christians were proof against Pharizaic errors. The prominent features of their religion were brotherly love and the hope of Christ's return to set up His kingdom. (1 Thess. i. 10; iv. 9.) The latter had been preached among them by Paul. It had formed the ground of the political accusation against him. (Acts xvii. 7.) And, before Paul's second Epistle came as a corrective, it may have led some to neglect their worldly callings. To the Church in those parts, which he calls his joy and his crown, Paul, singularly enough, communicated very early by word and afterwards by writing, the dark prophetic mystery (2 Thess. ii. 3, 5) of the apostasy under the Man of Sin, before Christ's return. At the very time when Gentile Christianity wore its loveliest aspect, came the sad intimation, understood or not at the time, that it should be invaded by unparalleled corruptions, THE LABORS OF PAUL. 131^ and, from being the spiritual temple of Christ, should become the place of Anti-Christ's tln'one. Paul wandered solitary through the city of Minerva (Acts xvii. 16), in which much must have reminded him of his native city. With holy grief he regarded the various idols, and the wonders of art dedicated to an impure worship. In the inscription of that altar which was erected to an unknown God, (although not exactly intended to designate the Almighty,) he read a confession of ignorance as to things divine, yet a desire to leave no heavenly being unhonored. In the market-place, he daily entered, like a second Socrates, into conversation full of wisdom with those who chanced to meet him. Some, reminded of Socrates, brought Paul, as their ancestors had done Socrates, into court, although rather in idle irony than in bitter seriousness. They took him to Mars'-hill, not at a solemn assembly of the court, but only to hear the new doctrine, and superficially to judge it with less disturbance. There, beholding the Parthenon and the Temple of Theseus, Paul testified that the Godhead did not dwell in temples made with hands, nor could be likened to the forms of man's fancy. There he announced a day of judgment upon the earth, and a resurrection of the dead. EjDicurean and Stoic philosophers mocked him. The historian does not say whether Platonists met him, or how they received him. But, doubtless, there were such at Athens. And a significant tradition makes Dionysius, judge in the Areopagus, to have excelled in ^Platonic wisdom, that last flower of heathen morality, that connecting link with Christian truth. In Corinth (Acts xviii. 1), which had recently re- K 2 132 THE LABORS OF PAUL. covered its ancient glory, Paul had occasion to see the crimes of heathenism in that ripeness which he afterwards described in wTiting thence to the Romans ; and he was opposed by the whole power of false Greek culture, in its pride, in its denial of nobler truth, and in its toleration of superstition and immorality. Surrounded by this flood of corruption, he felt oppressed and in need of divine consolation. For a time, before his fellow-labourers followed him from Macedonia, he con- tinued comparatively quiet, in the workshop of his fellow-craftsman Aquila ; for, according to the good usage of the Pharizees, he conjoined with his Scrip- tural learning the knowledge of a handicraft, namely the preparation of cloth for tents and cloaks fi'om the hair of wild goats, which abounded in his native country, Cilicia. Soon, however, his labors in the demonstration of the Spirit and of power were so great, that in this city of corruption a large congregation was gathered, a Church, in which all the excellencies, but at the same time all the faults, of the Greek nation and Church came to light, as we may learn from the Epistle which he addressed to the Corinthians on his third journey. The Corinthian Church, excelling other Gentile Churches in the abundance of spiritual gifts as much as they in other respects did the Jews, deserved to be called by Paul the seal of his Apostleship. (1 Cor.- ix. 1, 2.) But these precious gifts were turned more to the exaltation of individuals than to the edification of the w^hole ; for the holiness of the flock did not keep pace with its light; nor did its obedience, discipline, and charity equal its spiritual activity. None but such THE LABORS OF PAUL. 13S as Paul could have maiutaincd order and unity, taught the right use of tlie gifts, and kept this Church from dissohition. Its Greek frivolity was seen in its leni- ency to heathen crimes, and in the foolhardy partici- pation of some in sacrificial feasts. Those doubts as to the resurrection, and questions as to the nature of the resurrection body, -which Paul had to meet, were dic- tated, not, as elsewhere, by dark ascetic abhorrence of the coi*poreal, but by Epicurean and Sadducean senti- ments, and philosophical scepticism. The morbid admiration of eloquence and profoundness character- ized not a mere party in the congregation, but, pro- bably, its whole Greek components. Paul, although he could have^ done so, would not minister to these lusts. He confined himself the more rigidly to the simple and dreadfully severe preaching of the crucified One, in whom the whole human nature, with all its wisdom, was judged, and who alone, as the recipient of the curse on man, is our true wisdom, by bringing unto us righteousness, sanctification, and redemption. Such a Church was suited to become the scene of the most dangerous machinations against Paul and his apostolic labors. It caused one grief after another to its spiritual father. His opponents, emissaries of the Pharizaic party in Judca, must have found entrance here also, as in Antioch, and Galatia.* In Galatia they succeeded in making both the doctrine and the office of Paul suspect. In Corinth, which had never acknowledged Moses, they could not yet do the former. * One sees throughout how those distinguished by following God to a cer- tain measure, become, if they stand still, as it were evil spirits, which haunt and hinder all further progress, contrary both to God and to man. — Tu. JuA 134 THE LABORS OF PAUL. But they too surely paved the way for it by bringing into question both his office and his character. Hence originated that partizanship which to this day presents some unsolved difficulties to the historical inquirer, and 4ead us to ask, what was the real distinction made in the assumption of the names of Paul, Apollos, Cephas, and Christ, by the contending factions at Corinth ? We can understand the difference between Paulites and Petrites. Such would the temporary parties at Antioch have become, had they persisted in their fleshly schism. And those also might have called themselves after Paul, although unjustly, who used an offensive freedom in regard to sacrificial meats, while the Jewish and the scrupulous might have ranged themselves under Peter. Some might have been actually hearers of Peter, and indebted to him. As to the Alexandrian Apollos, or Apollodorus, it is generally supposed that those addicted to clothing truth in a philosophical garb gathered chiefly round him. But this can be admitted only to a very limited extent. Apollos himself was certainly not to blame for this abuse of his name. Paul never alludes to any difference between Apollos and himself in opinion or conduct. He was not a rheto- rician, but a serious disciple of John, and especially a student of the Scriptures. (Acts xviii. 24.) And, if he was a philosopher, he shared the Platonic ascetic cha- racter of his countryman, Philo. From his subsequent obstinate, refusal to return to Corinth (1 Cor. xvi. 12) one sees how displeasing to him was the excessive preference of some for him, who were deeply indebted to him, and would have made him head of a party. Lastly, as to those who called themselves after Christ, THE LABORS OF PAUL. 135 there is no proof that they were heathenish or gnosti<;, as little proof that they had clone right, and still less that they made their boast in a mystic, instead of a historic, Christ. Their appellation is to be under- stood precisely like that of the others. They were per- sonal disciples of Christ, who had learned from His own lips. Why could not such have come to Corinth? Only twenty years after Christ's departure there were surely many such surviving. They may have been driven both out of Palestine and out of Rome by the scattering of the Churches there. And the}' were the most dangerous of all Paul's adversaries ; those with whom he maintained a severe contest in the last part of his second Epistle. Pharizaic in spirit — proud of their Hebrew origin, and no less so of having known Christ after the flesh — they set Paul's whole authority at defiance. They were " the very chiefest Apostles," as he ij ^pnij sally styles them. (2 Cor. xi. 15; xii. 11.) It was they who commended themselves, who tyrannically exercised their usurped authority in the Church. By disowning him and stealing the heart of the Chmch, they forced him to boast ; they found vacillation in his purposes ; severity in his epistles ; weakness in his presence ; fear of man, and corruption of God's Word in his doctrine. They ascribed his very disinterested- ness, in accepting no offerings from the Church, not to love and zeal, but to cunning. They had not then brought forward their concealed heresies. But they had sho^^Tl enough to justify Paul in calling them false Apostles and ministers of Satan. (2 Cor. xi. 13 — 15.)* * This view both receives confirmation from, and throws light upon the pas- sage in 1 Cor. ix. 1., where Paul says, " Have I not seen Christ Jesus our 136 THE LABORS OF PAUL. That such persons could find entrance, and, although only for a time, estrange that Church from Paul which owed all to him and had enjoyed the full blessing of his office, is one of the saddest facts in the Apostolic age. We may assume that he gained the victory at Corinth, and effected that by his presence which he could not by his letters ; for in the beginning of the year 58 he wrote an Epistle in which he expresses the conviction that he has completed his work there. (Rom. XV. 17, &c.) Yet it were not to be wondered at, if this ingratitude still lurked in the primitive Church, poison- 1 ing and weakening its inward life. ; -^ -^1 .--j. ' \ %\^ After Paul had visited Jerusalem and Antioch, and had wintered in the Cilician Nicopolis (Acts xviii. 22 ; Tit. iii. 12), he undertook his third journey (Acts xviii. 23), during which we see his apostolic labours for the first time in fall and glorious developement. What Jerusalem was to Pe^er, Ephesus became to Paul, the place where Christ did by him His mightiest acts — the manifest outpouring of the Holy Ghost — manifold and wonderful healings — and the destruction of heathenism and its magic arts. (Acts xix. 1, &c.) There, at one of the chief staples of intercourse between East and West, between Oriental and Grecian religion and edu- cation, was that Church destined to arise, which soon surpassed Antioch and Corinth. Pro-consular Asia, i. e. Ephesus, with the circle of Ionian and Phrygian Lord V His words are no proof that a man cannot be an Apostle who has not seen the ascended Lord. They were directed against the argument of such opponents, that they must be in the right because they had seen and heard the Lord. We forget that the apostolic Epistles were not abstract dogmatic treatises, but part of a practical work. See also 2 Cor. xi. 22. — Tb. 1 THE LABORS OF PAUL. 137 neighbouring cities, gained in importance for Christen- dom, as Jerusalem lost its central place; and main- tained an undisputed pre-eminence throughout the time of John, until the Romish Church appeared as a rival in the third century. This metropolis of Asia was not recognized for the first time in the Apocalypse. The Epistle to the Ephesians had done so before. In taking leave of the elders at Miletus (Acts xx. 17), Paul had received such intelligence as to the growth of the Ephesian Church in his absence, and the progress of the Gospel in Asia, as moved him to address his ency- clical Epistle, primarily to the Church in that capital, and secondarily, to the suburban churches derived fi'om it, all which together presented themselves to him as that crown of his work, and that noble edifice in the midst of Christendom, round which all other Churches in the wide world should range themselves. It was given him to entrust as a legacy to these Churches the greatest truths wliich he had to declare concerning the Church of Christ, its increase unto the perfect man in Him, and its future glory. Yet he must also have had a presentiment of a different kind, in parting from the elders of Ephesus, among whom he had laboured three years. He knew that from that place should proceed a heresy of a new and dangerous kind, a heathenish corruption of Christianity, the counterpart of its Pha- rizaic perversion at Jerusalem ; that from among those who had received the sacred pastoral office men should arise, speaking perverse things, misleading the hearts of the disciples, and going about as wolves among the flock of Christ. (Acts xx. 29.) In short, in that parting address of his, which for its solemnity resembled tlie 138 THE LABORS OF PAUL. last words of Moses and Samuel, he described, in pro- phetic words, the rise of that false heathenish gnosis by which his doctrine should be so fearfully deformed, and so many Christians should suffer in faith and morals. His words to the elders of Ephesus are few. But to Timothy, who was left behind there, he speaks more at large, both as to the present and as to the future. Hymenaeus and Philetus (perhaps the same as Alexander) were his fellow-teachers. They made ship- wreck of faith (1 Tim. i. 20 ; 2 Tim. ii. 17, 18) ; for they had not kept a pure conscience ; and the snare of secret or open sin invariably precedes heresy and infidelity. Their delusion, that the resurrection was past already, i. e. that a resurrection of the body was not to be ex- pected, they maintained against the Apostle, with an obstinacy, which approached to blasphemy and forced him to deliver them to Satan. As Korah and his com- pany rose against Moses and Aaron and usurped the priesthood (2 Tim. ii. 19; Numb. xvi. 5, 26), so did these attempt to set up their own heretical office of teacher, against lawful authority ; and Paul foresa\T in the Spirit that their word would eat like a cancer (2 Tim. ii. 7), till they should meet an end like that of their precursors. There were also already present persons addicted to black arts, comparable to Jannes and Jambres, men such as Simon the sorcerer, or the later Gnostic Marcos, seducers to shameful works, who haunted the servants of Christ, and crept into Churches and families. (2 Tim. iii. 6.) Such phenomena on Christian ground were early and sure evidences of that apostasy of which Paul informed the Thessalonians. .Its first step was the hypocritical asceticism of a seared THE LABORS OF PAUL. 139 conscience. (1 Tim. iv. 1.) Not till later did it de- velope itself in that lawless disruption of moral re- straints, the coming universality of which had been foretold. (2 Tim. iii. 1.) The Apostle furnished Timothy with the antidote to all these perversions, in the mystery of godliness, the pillar and ground of the truth, God manifest in flesh (1 Tim. iii. 16),* i.e. the incarnation, as the fountain of holiness ; the holy life, / the death, and the resurrection of God's Son, in our \j very flesh, as furnishing both our obligation and our ability to be holy, — that truth of truths, which a seared conscience chafes at, which unclean spirits cannot con- fess (1 John iv. 3), and the denial of which is the leading feature of all heretical gnosis. The wickedness was as yet but partially disclosed. Paul, had to meet, in one Church allied to Ephesus, and to point out for the warning of others, only one present error of no very dangerous character. In the Epistle to the Colossians, which both date and contents con- nect with the encyclical Epistle, he denounces a Juda- istic amalgamation of Christianity with Essaism. Such a thing was to be expected ; and had no doubt occurred in other places .beside the Phrygian city on the Lycos. This error may^Tiave been introduced by those dis- ciples of John, who w^ere akin to the Essenes, and whom the Apostle found as the first nucleus of the Ephesian Church. (Acts xix. 1.) The Epistle to the Ephesians is itself not without reference to it ; although Paul judges it much more mildly than the Pharizaism of the Galatians, because it had not then assumed that * Christ, not the Church, is the truth. But the Church, as filled witb His presence, is its pillar and ground, its right testimony and basis. — Tn. 140 THE LABORS OF PAUL. hostile attitude towards the Apostle and his doctrine which we find some centuries after, in those its for- geries which pass under the name of Clement of Rome. While this Essene theosophy supposed a heavenly hierarchy of emanated spirits between God and man, asserted the mediation and intercourse of angels, and would introduce the w^orship of them in the Church (Col. ii. 18, 19), Paul reminded the Colossians that angels have all been created through the Son, and that He is in His exaltation the sole head and foundation of the Church, in whom alone we have forgiveness and perfection. (Col. i. 16; ii. 10.) Mortification of the body; scrupulosity as to unclean meats; keeping of the Sabbath, the new moon, and other Jewish feasts ; nay, submission to circumcision, were recommended by these mystics. (Col. ii. 11, 16, 20, 23.) They were blind to the presence of the substance of these shadows in Christ and His mystical body. (Col. ii. 17.) It is with reason that the Epistle to the Colossians illustrates the divine dignity of the Head along with the heavenly essence and calling of the Church. (Col. i. 16.) This became especially necessary in proportion as the Church attained to a consciousness of her own dignity and privileges. We see less of it in the former Epistles of Paul — more of it in the Epistle to the Hebrews. But the Epistle to the Ephesians has never yet been realized in the Church's life. And while we can see that she has completely passed through the stages of Galatia and Rome, we cannot say that the condition described in Paul's Epistles to Ephesus and Colosse is already gone through and past, in her developement. THE LABORS OF PAUL. 141 We have followed the Apostle down to the year 58, the climax of his labors. He could then say to the Romans that he had executed his commission to preach the Gospel from Jerusalem to the coasts of Adria. With this agrees the fact, that in this year Titus, who had been setting in order the Churches in Crete, went, no doubt by Paul's direction, to Dalmatia. (-2 Tim. iv. 9.) Meanwhile, Churches must have been planted by other Apostles in the countries of the South, in Egypt and Cyrene, as well as in Italy. And Paul desired to hasten by Rome to the distant West, where he might find a sphere of labor yet occupied by none. (Rom. XV. 20 — 'i4.) Accompanied by many fellow-laborers, he paid a farewell visit to the Churches on the coast of the ^Egean Sea. (Acts xx. 3.) But the prophecies concerning the things which awaited him in Jerusalem (Acts XX. 23; xxi. 11) awakened in him quite different anticipations, and w^ere fulfilled when he was aiTcsted at Pentecost, and brought to his long imprisonment at Caesarea. (Acts xxi. 33 ; xxiii. 33.) Let us here then, before proceeding to the last acts and fate of Paul, look back at his Churches, to see in wdiat order he left them, when his labors w^ere so suddenly and sadly in- ^ term p ted. Along with the first Epistle to the Corinthians and that to the Ephesians, the pastoral Epistles must be our chief source of information. They were his legacy to the rulers of the Church ; the sum of all those wise regulations according to which the House of Christ should be guided in the absence of Apostles ; and at the same time his testimony against the unfaithfulness of the stewards, and the decay of the Church, in after 142 THE LABORS OF PAUL. ages. Paul charged his son Timothy, by the day of judgment, to keep these holy commandments unblame- able till the appearing of Jesus Christ. (1 Tim. v. 21 ; vi. 13; 2 Tim. iv. 1.) But what Christian community can say that it has done so ? And yet shall all rulers of the Church be judged by this document. And no one can escape this judgment by pleading that the pas- toral Epistles are not genuine. Titus had been sent as delegate of the Apostle to Crete, and Timothy had been left at Ephesus, when they received these written directions, in which Paul gave at once a recapitulation of his oral instruction, and a certificate of their mission to the Churches. The Apostle must have made an excursion from Corinth to Crete, on his second journey, at the end of which the Epistle to Titus was written. (Acts xviii. 22 ; comparing Titus iii. 13.) The first Epistle to Timothy falls within the third journey. Paul must have interrupted his three years' residence in Asia by a journey to Mace- donia, not reported by Luke, but pointed at in the second Epistle to the Corinthians. (2 Cor. xiii. 1.) Lastly, the second Epistle to Timothy was written from Ca3sarea, a few months after the farewell journey, to which its beginning and end have a clear retrospect. (2 Tim. i. 4 ; comp. Acts xx. 37 ; 2 Tim. iv. 13 ; corap. Acts XX. 13 ; 2 Tim. iv. 20; comp. Acts xx. 15.) It is a misunderstanding of certain passages which has led some to refer this Epistle to Paul's Roman captivity. (2 Tim. i. 17; iv. 16, &c.) It is a strange idea, that, although elsewhere we see the beginnings of a fixed ecclesiastical polity, there was none in the Churches under Paul — that every one THE LABORS OF PAUL. 143 had a right to teach — that spiritual equality was the fundamental law — that there was no office divinely originated and authorized, no sure tradition of facts and doctrines, no obligation to obedience, no law for discipline and rule, no uniformity in rites, but an in- determinate latitude and fluidity in all relations, which has been pictured as the beau ideal of the Church's state, but with which no community in the world could subsist for a week. Those only could fall into such mistakes who regard the teaching of Paul as to faith and Christian liberty as an emancipation from God's eternal laws and man's holy obligations. Neither in doctrine nor in practice does the Apostle show a trace of Antinomianism. And it is plain from his Epistles that there is not a vestige of truth in all the phantastic pictures of a golden age of ecclesiastical license. Paul repeated in his Epistles few of those arrange- ments which he was wont to make in planting Churches, because the Epistles were written to Churches already ordered. He referred to the traditions and decrees (the technical expressions for a liturgy), which they had received from him. He required their exact ob- servance. He promised to the Corinthians, when he should come again, yet fuller provisions as to worship and discipline, which in the interim had become need- ful. (1 Cor. xi. 34.) He compared the character of a Church, as it should be, to that of a marshalled army. (Col. ii. 5; Phil. i. 27.) And he urged upon the Corinthians, who had transgressed wholesome laws in the exercise of spiritual gifts, a principle to be observed in all Churches and cases, that God is not a God of disorder, but of peace. (1 Cor. xiv. 33.) In that very 144 THE LABORS OF PAUL. matter, which to a superficial reader of Paul's writings would most suggest the idea of primitive anarchy in the Church, viz. the use of spiritual gifts, Paul insisted on the strictest and wisest order. (1 Cor. xiv. 1, &c.) He allowed, yea, he encouraged all to prophesy. But he nowhere allowed all to teach. Prophesying and teaching, or preaching, are totally distinct, although a thousand times confounded by the ignorance of later times. In prophecy the Holy Ghost speaks through man. In teaching, man speaks by the aid of the Holy Ghost. Teaching is entirely prohibited to women — prophecy is allowed. The command that they shall be silent in the Church (I Cor. xiv. 34, 35 ; 1 Tim. ii. 12) went to meet their ambition to teach.* But their liberty to prophesy w^as recognized in the very con- dition imposed upon them that their head in prophe- sying should be covered (1 Cor. xi. 5), a provision evidently applicable, not to the domestic circle, but to the public assembly. Speaking in the tongues of angels,t with accompanying interpretation in the tongues of men, — prophecies full of comfort and ex- hortation, — songs inspired of the Holy Ghost, were heard during the worship and the feasts of love. (1 Cor. xiv. 26; Eph. V. 18, 20.) But the action of him who conducted the worship and officially instructed the Church was totally distinct from all these expressions of spiritual gifts. There were elders present, ordained and appointed by Apostles, who had officially to labor in word and doctrine. (1 Tim. v. 17.) And to whom did it belong so much to enforce the observance of * Often under pretext of asking instruction, — Tr. t The author means by this unknown tongues. — Te. I THE LABORS OF PAUL. 145 these rules as to worship ? When Paul said, " There are diversities of gifts, but one Spirit ; there are differ- ences of administrations, but one Lord" (1 Cor. xii. 4), he placed, side by side with the gifts in which the Holy Ghost manifests Himself, and yet quite distinct from them, tliose offices by which Christ, the Head of tlie body, guides the Church. In the former we see that life acting whicli pervades every member, in the latter that authority with which certain members are invested for the good of the rest. Without the latter the body would be inorganic — without the former dead organism. If ever there was a man who stood, for the organic order of the whole, against all atomic-democratic ideas of the Church, that man was Paul. (1 Cor. xii. 12 — 30 ; Eph. ii. 21 ; iv. 4 — 16 ; Eom. xii. 4.) It is an almost unparalleled mistake to use his name in support of such a theory, which is alike baseless regarding the origin of the Church, as regarding that of the State. Paul's Epistles recapitulate so little of his rules for worship that much in this department is hid from our view. The Lord's day was kept (Acts xx. 7 ; 1 Cor. xvi. 2), and no doubt had for its chief solemnity the Lord's Supper. This was not merely a divine ministry of blessing, but the highest act of worship. Else it could never have been compared with the Jewish and heathen sacrificial rite^ It was that reality of which the Jews had the shadow and the heathen the mockery. (1 Cor. X. 15 — 22.) The exact relation of the Eucha- rist to the Agape cannot, even with the help of the directions in 1 Cor. xi., be exactly determined. We can only conjecture by the aid of later authorities that the act of worship took place in the morning, and the VOL. I. L 146 THE LABORS OF PAUL. love-feast, distinct from it, in the evening. (Pliny, Ep. X. 97.) The Corinthians rendered themselves unfit to celebrate the former, by their offences against charity and temperance at the latter. There was no command to keep the Sabbath as well as the Lord's day. Nay, the Apostle contended to the utmost against making its observance a condition of salvation. Yet he was evidently willing to allow its observance to the Jewish Christians as a concession to their weakness. And he required that they should be boilie with by the Grecian portion of the Church, even in observing the law as to meats and in other forms of abstinence, provided they did not burden or perplex others. Many of those who brought the gloomy severity of strict Judaism with them into the Church were so scrupulously ascetic, that they abstained from meat and wine, altogether, or on fixed days. (Rom. xiv. 1 — 21.) They made a conscience of doing so, because they were accustomed to regard every such indulgence as weakening the power of the spirit over the flesh, and hoped thus to keep down the old man. It was a very intelligible mistake, which we do not need to ascribe to any gnosticism, uncleanness of conscience, or hypo- crisy, and which widely differed from that mortification which springs from " doctrines of devils." (1 Tim. iv. 1.) Orthodox Judaism had suchwpenitents, e.g. Banus, whom Flavins Josephus visited in the wilderness, and John the Baptist, with his disciples. Judgeo-Christian legends have represented James, Peter, and Matthew, as given to this way of life, in which lay the buddings of ecclesiastical asceticism. Paul warns the ascetic not to judge the free. But he also forbids the latter to despise the former. (Rom. xiv. 10.) THE LABORS OF PAUL. 147 Paul llo^Yhere states whether he allowed Jewish Christians to let their children be circumcised as well as baptized. Yet we may assume that he did not for- bid that which he himself did in the case of Timothy. He joined in the Jewish celebration of Easter and Pen- tecost at Jerusalem. And yet we cannot doubt, that whether he actually appointed the corresponding feasts in the Church or not, the feasts which he thus observed had for him a new and christian import. Prayer and thanksgiving for all men were a principal part of Christian worship, and were made especially for kings and all in authority. (1 Tim. ii. 1.) The faith of one God, who willeth that all should be saved, and of one Mediator, who, being true man, belongs to all, and is alike nigh to all, led to this. In order to under- stand the importance of this obligation on the Church we must reflect on those zealots in Jerusalem, who would not suffer the presentation of the offerings sent by the heathen to the temple. (Josephus, Bell. Jud. ii. .80 [17].) The reading aloud of the Old Testament continued to be a prominent part of worship. Paul declared the whole Scriptures of the old covenant to be inspired of God (2 Tim. iii. 16, 17), full of spiritual meaning and life, and all adapted to the instruction of the Christian Church. In addition to this, his own Epistles were read to the assembled Church ; and, without doubt, many of his teachings bore reference to words and acts of Christ. These latter communications of Paul were most carefully made orally to the Churches, probably in writing to the teachers. On two points Paul felt himself obliged to repeat these communications to the L 2 148 THE LABORS OF PAUL. Corintliians, viz. the first institution of the Lord's Sup- per, and the appearances of the risen Christ. (1 Cor. xi. 23 ; XV. 3.) These passages, two fragments of his oral traditions, give us a high idea of the exact- ness and completeness with which the historical Gospel was intrusted to the Church, in addition to the many other proofs of the same. Much more in Paul's Epistles than is generally supposed rests upon sayings of the Lord ; the Avhole of his doctrine and morals, and all his more important regulations. Some things which are not in our synoptic Gospels, and many things which are in that of John alone, must have been known to Paul and his disciples as the word of Christ. The subject demands and would w^ell repay a special in- vestigation. Luke, who wTote his Gospel at Caesarea, A. D. 58 — 60, no doubt used (in addition to the unau- thentic private writings of unknown predecessors, to the Gospel of Mark, and to the rich recollections still lively in Palestine) the oral relations of Paul, and also his w^ritten remarks, such as those which he sent for from Caesarea. (2 Tim. iv. 13.) Yet his Gospel does not contain everything indiscriminately which was known to the circle of Paul's disciples. He nowdiere promises to relate all — not even all that he remembered — but only that which had been already imparted to Theophilus in oral instruction. (Luke i. 4.) On one hand his Gospel is more complete than the traditions in the Churches under Paul ; for he filled them up from sources in Palestine. But on the other it does not come near the measure of knowledge exhibited in the Epistle to the Ephesians, with w^hich no Gospel, but that of John, can be compared for depth. Luke's THE LABORS OF PAUL. 149 Gospel may liave been late admitted to ecclesiastical use. Paul knew no Church but the visible, into which we are brought by baptism (Rom. vi. 3), having thereby put on Christ (Gal. iii. 27), being dead with Him, risen with Him to a new life, and called to holiness. (Rom. vi. 3.) He knew it to be his office, not only to gather and build up the faithful, but to perfect them in one body. (Eph. iv. 13; 2 Cor. xi. 2; Rom. xv. 16.) But this call to perfection implied a corresponding dis- cipline, to purify and protect. Paul exercised this in such a way, that its practical operation corresponded, both with the two degrees of the Jewish excommu- nication, and with the directions of Christ, — admonition of him who walked disorderly, then withdrawal from him, yet wdthal a treatment of the erring person as a brother, not as an enemy. (2 Thess. iii. 6, 14, 15.) The heretic, /. e. the obstinate teacher of error, once and again rebuked, was to be avoided. (Tit. iii. 10.) Thus far went the first step of the Jewish ban (niddui). The last and most severe measure held over the blas- phemer and seducer was the anathema — corresponding to the Jewish Cherem or Schammatha — the delivering into the power of Satan. (1 Cor. v. 4, 5 ; 1 Tim. i. 20.) Yet even this was not unto eternal perdition, but, if possible, to the saving of the soul ; and w^as performed in the firm persuasion that, without human intervention, divine chastisements could, beyond the pale of the Church, find out and speak savingly to him who would not hear God's voice in His Church. We find in Paul's Churches deacons and elders, exactly as in Jerusalem. The deacon's office was a stepping- 150 THE LABORS OF PAUL. stone to that of the elder or bishop, yet quite distinct from it. (1 Tim. iii. 8; Phil. i. 1.) The nature of the case led to this; and Clement of Rome expressly states, that the Apostles set the first fruits of 'their ministry as deacons and bishops in every new place. (Clem. Rom. I ad Cor. 42.) The widows who were maintained by the Church (1 Tim. v. 3) were distinct fi'om the deacon- nesses. (1 Tim. iii. 11 ; Rom. xvi. 1.) The same men ■who were called elders in reference to their dignity, were called bishops in reference to their superintend- ence. (Acts XX. 17, 28; Phil. i. 1 ; 1 Tim. iii. 2.) All should be apt to teach. (1 Tim. iii. 2 ; Tit. i. 9.) It is a pure mistake to think that a part of the elders were excluded from the ministry of the word. We nowhere read that they were created by choice of the j)eople, either unanimously or through a majority. They were appointed by the call of the Holy Ghost. (Acts xx. 28.) And they received consecration, mission, and power, by ordination of an Apostle or his delegate. (2 Tim. i. 6 ; Tit. i. 5 ; 1 Tim. v. 22.) On the other hand, at their institution, the congregation had a voice; for the flock should certainly bear witness to the moral qualities of those who are to be set over them, who ought to have a good report even from them who are without, (1 Tim. iii. 7) ; and all objections should be heard. It is very singular that there is no trace, in the Acts or in Paul's Epistles, of the episcopate, in that form which it had already assumed in the case of James at Jerusalem, and in which it afterwards appeared in the Seven Churches of .John. This can be nothing acci- dental. Had there really been in Corinth or Ephesus a head shepherd permanently intrusted with the care THE LABORS OF PAUL. 151 of the whole ministers and people, the fact must have been noticed, even accidentally. The Apostle to the heathen must have in point of fact delayed for a pretty long period to call into exercise the episcopal order — the highest of the three. And yet we see even here tokens of its rise, since Paul conveyed to Titus and Timothy even more than mere episcopal functions. We call them Apostolic delegates, because they were not bound to an}^ one Church like a bishop proper, and be- cause their powers were greater than those of a bishop, and much more nearly approaching to those of an Apostle. They received from the Apostle a special mission, and returned to him from it. He gave them instructions, but with the consciousness that he himself must yet come and take up their work. (1 Tim. iii. 14, 15; iv. 13.) Assuming, therefore, that Paul had in- tended to introduce episcopal government, he must, when he wrote the pastoral Epistles, have regarded the con- secration and institution of bishops as a work which he could not delegate. He instructs his delegates to com- mit the truth to faithful men, and in so far to invest these men with authority. (2 Tim. ii. 2.) But these men were not bishops or angels, from the first. The mission of his delegates was provisional; and from the Epistles to them one cannot make out, whether a transfer of their functions into the hands of a permanent episcopate, or a resumption of those functions by Paul, or men like Paul, was the thing to be expected. The ecclesiastic organization as it stood in these Epistles, was not fully brought out or determined in its character. Paul regarded the Church, including those gathered by the first Apostolate, as a unity in Christ. (Eph. iv. 4 ; 152 THE LABORS OF PAUL. Gal. iii. 28.) It was easy for the heathen Christians to recognize the Churches \Yhich stood under Peter. But the reverse was more difficult. Therefore Paul labored throughout to make the Jewish Christians conscious of their unity with others, by proofs of love on the part of the latter. Yet he did not fully succeed in this. The unity, originally and essentially in Christ and from Him proceeding, was established among the Apostles, as is seen by their giving to him the hand of brotherhood; and ought to have embraced the whole else disconnected points in the periphery of the Church, without oblite- rating national and social distinctions. Paul recog- nized that organic action and combination, (as of each section, so of the whole body of Christ,) without which no true growth and perfection were to be looked for; — Christ the corner-stone; — then the foundation, Apostles and Prophets (Eph. ii. 20), not dead men, not books, but living acting men, the most indispensable part of the whole organism ; next to them. Evangelists, and Pastors, and Teachers (Eph. iv. 11), such as appear in the Acts along with Prophets ; — and all these appointed to the work of the ministry, i. e. to the exercise of that office, one in its root and essence, but divided in its functions, by which alone the Church could be per- fected. This end, as set forth in the Epistle to the Ephesians, Paul did not see attained. But he saw the Churches on the right way to it. In spite of the perilous conflicts which he had already experienced, he had succeeded, as a wise master builder, in laying the foun- dation (1 Cor. iii. 10), and bringing forth, in the wilder- ness of degraded heathenism, the wonderful phenomena of Christian order and fruitfulness. The sanctity of THE LABORS OF PAUL. 153 Christian marriage as a symbol of the highest and purest love, the education of children with the gravity and kindness of Christ, the mitigation of slavery, the law of charity to the poor, the reverence of superiors, the conscientious, not constrained, obedience to autho- rity and law,— (1 Eph. v. 21 ; vi. 9; Col. iii. 18; iv. 1,) such are the features of the manner of life, not only required but effected by Paul ; effected, not by random preaching and efforts without a plan, but by the co- operation of every instrument in that organic and divine machinery, which is nowhere to be found save in the bosom of the Church. Returning now from this digression as to the results of Paul's labors, and following him to Jerusalem and Rome, we find him in very altered circumstances, holding intercourse with Jews and with Churches not planted by him, but under the jurisdiction of James and Peter. Luke informs us how he acted in Jerusalem. (Acts xxi. 15.) But we have yet another expression of Paul's mind on this occasion in his Epistle to the Romans, the historical import of which we must now consider. The death of Claudius, a.d. 54, cut short the opera- tion of that edict by which the Jews were banished from Rome. Thereupon followed the five first years of Nero, a joyful season for the empire, worn out by the crimes of his three predecessors. The Jews returned unhindered to the capital, and the scattered Church was gathered again. It bore the same strictly Israelite 154 THE LABORS OF PAUL. character as before, and gave evidence of its being planted and still guided by Peter; although he was not present in Rome, either in 58, when Paul wrote to the Romans, or in 61, when Paul came to Rome. Mean- while, however, a minority of heathens, whom Paul once, by way of exception, addressed in his Epistle (Rom. xi. 13), had been joined to the Church ; and not a few of Paul's friends had gone thither from the East, such as Aquila, who quite shared his views. (Rom. xvi. 3.) The transference of the latter persons to Rome must have been agreeable to him, as a means of approxi- mation, agreement, and amalgamation, for both ele- ments of the congregation. He availed himself of this bond of connection, by greeting all personally known to him, at the end of his Epistle. Its beginning and con- clusion show plainly that he had before him a Chiu'ch, which was not, like that at Colosse, his work, or even that of his disciples, but owed its existence and alle- giance to another of equal authority with himself. His rule, not to build on another's foundation, determined him to do no more than visit Rome on his way and to be conducted thence to Spain. (Rom. xv. 23, 24.) For many years he had had his eye upon Rome, to preach there. But ere he could reach it, the faith of the Chris- tians there was already published throughout the world ; and he arrived there expecting to be comforted and en- couraged by their faith. (Rom. i. 8—13.) In a word, he acted as one ought to do in another's diocese. Yet he did not conceal that he could impart to them spiritual blessings which they did not yet possess. He acknow- ledged the truth of their foundation. But they had not yet received that which was peculiarly committed to THE LABORS OF PAUL. 155 him. They did not ^vithstand him. 15ut they had not yet fully recognized his Apostleship ; for they were not yet instructed in his doctrine. They regarded both his teaching and his operation with prejudices similar to those felt at Jerusalem. The object next his heart was an apology for both. (Rom. i. viii. ix. xi.) And, as they had no authentic oral information on the subject, his written exposition of both assumed a systematic com- pleteness not to be found elsewhere. He did indeed treat of tlie same subjects in writing to the Galatians. But, as these were his own children, he did so with a brevity which, had we not the aid of the Epistle to the Romans, w^ould present almost insurmountable diffi- culties. And the two Epistles differed in another important respect. In the one case he had to meet false teachers with an anathema. (Gal. i. 8.) In the other he had to deal merely with partial ignorance. The one Church had departed from the truth ; the other had not learned it. The one rose against his authority; the other had not yet acknowledged it. We see through- out all his Epistles how differently he acted towards the wolves, and towards the feeble sheep. He warned the Romans against those who caused division and offence, serving, professedly Christ, but really their own belly (Rom. xvi. 17 — 20), as he had described them in addressing the Philippians and Galatians. But he treated the Roman Church as distinct from such men, as simple adlierents of the Apostle to Israel. Peter himself was of a very diff'erent mind from those Pha- rizaic emissaries to whom Paul alluded, and who had abused the name of Peter, as we may see even from the Epistle to Romans itself. 156 THE LABORS OF PAUL. Paul therefore sought, not to correct any error, but to enlarge the heart and understanding of the Romans, and so deliver them from that anxious jealousy which their attachment to Moses engendered. He showed, first, that Israel Avas as much condemned by the law as the heathen are, and could, like them, attain to true righteousness only through faith in Christ (Rom. i. 17; iii. 30) ; nay, that Abraham, in whom the Israelite boasted, had been justified by faith w^hile he was yet a heathen, and that the Gospel brings us into the true relation of children to God (Rom. iv. 1 — 11) ; that, as through one man's fall, sin and death had come upon all, so by one man had righteousness and life come for all; which provision removed the distinction between the people under the law and others, and reduced the law itself to a mere episode in the divine go- vernment of mankind (Rom. v. 12 — 21) ; that the fruit of this doctrine was not lawlessness, as the slanderers said, but new life, in union with the risen Christ (Rom. vi. 1 — 7) ; that, although the law was holy, it could produce in man only the knowledge of sin, not life (Rom. vii. 7 — 25) ; that the true demands of the law can be fulfilled only under the kingdom of grace, by walking in the Spirit; and that, with our adoption, we have comfort in suffering, and the hope of glory. (Rom. viii.) Nor w^as the second part of the Epistle less directly applicable to the feelings of the faithful from among Israel. Rcgoice as they might over the fruits of the Gospel among the heathen, they still grudged against the reflex operation of the con- version of heathen upon Israel. Their great desire was for the illumination of Jews. But every step THE LABORS OF PAUL. 157 of progress among tlie heathen increased the estrange- ment of the Jews from the cause of Christ, and the improbability of their conversion. Every act of Paul appeared to justify the old accusation against Christ and Stephen, and to bring the Gospel into collision with the law, and the hope of the fathers. They asked ; Ought Messiah to be so preached as to offend His people ? Ought the heathen to be converted at the expense of the most sacred feelings of Israel ? Ought Israel to be repelled, and perhaps sacrificed for ever, to accelerate the salvation of the nations ? Paul found it no light matter to meet these objections, in them- selves so natural and worthy of regard. He com- menced by avowing his sorrow for his brethren after the flesh. (Rom. ix. 1.) He would be accursed from Christ for their sakes. Yet the event before his eyes — that sad schism by which a small fraction of Israel inherited, and the majority forfeited, the promise, w\as only the fulfilment of a divine purpose, and already pourtrayed in Old Testament tj^pes. In Abraham's house, Isaac first, and then Jacob, was the only heir. Who could charge God with injustice in this ? More- over, God showed then, as formerly towards Pharaoh and the Egyptians, the richness of his long-suffering over those who were already, through their own sin, ripe for judgment. The Saviour had been a stone of stumbling for Israel, only because Israel would not acknowledge righteousness by faith, and sought to bring down the Redeemer from heaven by the work of the law, as if He were not already come. But He was present as a deliverer for all who should call upon Him j and, therefore, must His messengers be sent to 158 THE LABORS OF PAUL. all. The Apostle added the consoling words; God hath not cast off His people (Rom. xi. 1) ; and there is a holy remnant. But he said more, for the waraing of the heathen against pride, for the soothing of the Jew in his distress. He prophesied the fall of the Gentile and the restoration of the Jew. The former, grafted into the true olive, should, if they exalted themselves, be cut out. As soon as the pre-determined fulness of the Gentile elect should have come in, and have passed into the glory of the kingdom, all Israel should be saved ; the ancient prophecies as to Israel should be literally fulfilled ; a mystery this, which cer- tainly rested on words of Christ, yet had not then been introduced into the public teaching of the Church. But the concluding part of the Epistle presents a question of historical interest ; namely, why is it here insisted on that the powers that be are ordained of God, and are God's ministers } The answer is, be- cause the Church, being predominantly Israelite, was in great danger of viewing the Roman authority as it had been viewed in Judea, and of being thus led into sedition. The whole Judaism of the time was penetrated by the idea, that it was not befitting the holy people to bow before a heathen sceptre, or any power but that of Jehovah and His Anointed. By this had Judas, the Gaulonite, raised the rebellion in Palestine at the taking of the first tribute. In like manner many thought that Israel was bound to effect its indepen- dence by a holy war like that waged by the Maccabees. This was the state of feeling which ultimately brought destruction on the holy city. And herein lay the sub- tlety of the question which the Pharizees and the THE LABORS OF PAUL. 159 Herodians addressed to Christ ; whether one should pay tribute or not ? If lie said, Yes ; He warranted the accusation of some that He was a betrayer of His nation. If He said, No ; others stood ready to bring Him to punishment as a mover of sedition. The Roman authorities were well aware of this state of mind, and were on their guard. And therefore it was of the utmost importance to purify the Jewish Chris- tians from this leaven, that they might escape the sus- picion attached to the other Jews. They needed to learn to regard the Roman government, not as a god- less, dark, inimical power, but as an instrument of God's government deserving their veneration. The words of Paul, " He that resisteth receiveth to himself damnation," were, in fact, a prophecy of the issue of the Jewish war. And nothing but the true doctiine as to the powers that be, could preserve the Church in the Roman capital from a fate similar to that of Jeru- salem.* While Paul discloses to us, in this Epistle, his own mind regarding the Jewish Christians, the conclusion of the Acts shows us his external conduct tow^ards them. The narrative of Luke needs no confirmation from without. In the judgment of the most competent, no other ancient account gives so true and living a picture of life in the provinces (Acts xxi — xxvi) ; and no description of a sea-voyage in ancient or modem * One cannot but observe here, how the ordinary superficial view of the Epistle to the Romans as primarily a sermon to the heathen, robs it of all historical import, true application, and internal consistency. — Tr. 160 THE LABORS OF PAUL. times, excels his in exactness and historical truth. (Acts xxvii.,&c. ; see Smith's Voyage of Paul. Longman, 1846.) The elders of the Church at Jerusalem assembled with their bishop, to hear from the mouths of the strangers, Paul and l-uke, what God had wrought by them!" (Acts xxi. 18.) Formerly James had been the only one of the Jerusalem clergy who completely re- cognized Paul. Now his elders appear to have also come on so far. They praised God for what they had heard. But they did not conceal from Paul their ap- prehension of a dangerous dispute with the myriads of Jewish Christians, who were still zealous for the law. It is not wonderful that Paul did his utmost to avoid the conflict. Pie went into the court of the temple with four men who were fulfilling their vows as Nazarites, and caused the priest to make the required offerings for all. In this he did no more than he had represented to the Corinthians as a duty in such circumstances. (1 Cor. ix. 19 — 23.) He became, to them that are under the law, as under the law, to save some of them, and was guilty of no departure from his principle, that they who held by the works of the law were under the curse, inasmuch as he in no way sought to justify himself by the law, or returned to it, forsaking the Gospel, but merely performed an act of love to brethren, and of reverence to the customs of those among whom, and to the authority under which, he was for the time. The same outward act may, in one set of circumstances and from one motive, be blamable, which, in others, is praisew^orthy. The real difficulty of what took place at Jerusalem does not lie here, but in another point. The elders desired that Paul should thus give proof THE LABORS OF PAUL. Id of his keeping the law, and answer the accusation of having tauglit the Jews, scattered among the heathen, that tliey shoukl not circumcise their chikh'cn, or keep the customs of the fathers. (Acts xxi. 24.) But how coukl he contradict this charge, seeing that it was at least half true .? The elders at Jerusalem held to the principle that, although the heathen convert was not bound to the law, the Jewish w^as. (Acts xxi. 25.) Paul, on the contrary, although a man of Israel, had taken on himself, occasionally, to walk among those without law, as if he himself were without law. And he undoubtedly brought it mediately to pass, that the Jewish converts regarded, as a thing indifferent, and ultimately let drop, the observance of the law in their famdies. This could not be unknown to the elders ;- and Paul could not conceal it. They required him to commence action on their principles by appearing as an offerer in the sanctuary. VVe do not know what Paul answered to these well intended proposals, whether he declared that he felt no longer bound by the law, and expected the time when the Jewish customs should dis- appear from the Church, or whether he kept silence. But we may be sure of this, that he did not bind him- self with chains, and sacrifice his autonomous apostolic action by any promise for all futurity. He did not need to do so, in order to follow their advice. And, in following it, he preserved intact his liberty of action in his own proper sphere, while he accommodated himself, as in duty bound, to the counsel of the bishop in a sphere that w^as not his. - ^%'^ The day after his arrest, on the occasion of which, nothing but the greatest energy, on the part of the VOL. I. ^j 16*2 THE LABORS OF PAUL. Roman commander, saved him from the rage of the unbelieving Jews, Paul stood before the Sanhedrim in a once more very difficult position. (Acts xxii. 30.) He"Toimd the Sadducees, that apostate party, who had no right to sit in judgment in Israel, and were the bitterest enemies of the cause of Christ, these he found in possession of the supreme power and the high priesthood ; while the Phai:izees, who maintained the truth, on every subject but politics, against Sadduceism, and who, since Gamaliel's counsel, had been much milder towards Christianity, were the oppressed party. He was tempted to rebuke the Sadducean high priest, who had caused him to be unlawfully beaten, because he could not re- \ cognize his conduct as that of a high priest. (Acts xxiii. 5.) He also perceived how^, without his intervention, the discussion of his case had turned into a contest on the great question between the Sadducees and the orthodox. It was no profane artiiice of war which led Paul to take the side of the orthodox, and make common cause with them. (Acts'xxm. 6.) He sought not his own advantage merely, but the vindication of Christianity, in declaring its accordance wdth Jewish orthodoxy, and endeavouring to strengthen the latter. For Christianity and Judaism were as truly allied against Sadduceism, as they are against modern jiaturalism. The resur- rection is the fundamental truth of all supernatural doctrine. AV^ith it all other facts belonging to a higher world stand or fall. Its reality is the refutation of naturalism, in every form, ancient or modern. Paul, who could not have succeeded against the Sanhedrim by any artifice, was helped out of his danger by a remarkable combination of circumstances and turn of THE LABORS OF PAUL. 163 ^mon Acts xx„,. <)),-o„e of those providences on Ills behall, ot wl,ich we can trace the series through his ^vhole joiunej. IVom Jerusalem to Rome, and to which 1.0th liis l)iographer in the Acts, and he himself, when betore Agnppa, especially adverted. (Acts xxvi oo ) it was so ordered, that Paul should give, before the people, the Sanhedrim, Felix, Festus, and Agrippa II (the last king of the house of Herod), and lastly, before be heads of the Roman synagogue, the noblest tes- tunony ior the truth, fuUilling the words of Christ, They shall bnng you before princes and kings for my sake, for a testimony unto them and the nations " tov two years the life of Paul was at the mercy of the Governor, Antonius Felix (Acts xxiii. 33; xxiv -/), th^ man of low origin, who, in the words of Tacuus (Tac. Hist. v. 9), "exercised royal power like a slave, m the most cruel and arbitrary manner," and who delayed to give him up to the Jews, only because he expected more money from the Christians for his release, than from the Jews for his death. For a mo fflent the fearless witness for righteousness touclied the conscience of this murderer and adulterer. But wick edness resumed its sway, and the sword hung con- stantly over the head of Paul. (Acts xxiv. 94-o(, ) His alternate hopes and fears, while for two years in the fangs of this tyrant, appear from tlie contradictory expressions in his Epistles, out of his imprisonment (Phil I. 2o; Ph. lem. 22; 2 Tim. iv. 6.) The second i-pistle to Timothy, written under the expectation of death, in the summer or harvest of 58, gives us a deep lusight into the state of feeling at the time. Paul's arrest, likely to end fatally, was a dreadful blow to all M 164 THE LABORS OF PAUL. his friends. (2 Tim. i. 8.) At his first answer before the Governor, no Christian stood by him. (-2 Tim. iv. 16.) But the panic was not confined to the Clnistians of Judiea. The trial was great to his fellow-labom'ers. Demas forsook him, to be well in the world. All in Asia turned away from him, shaken apparently in their faith by the apprehension lest God was no longer ap- proving and sanctioning His work, — one which, in its most prosperous form, was hard to believe in.- Luke alone was with him. (2 Tim. iv. 10.) And he sent to Ephesus for Timothy, his son in the faith (the only fellow^-w^orker whom he excepted, in saying that all sought their own and not the things of Jesus Christ) (Phil. ii. 19 — 22), in order to convey to him his last will before his departure. Every thing contributed to aggravate those mental sufferings which he must have felt, when brought into bondage, inactivity, and uncer- tainty, after such glorious success as in Ephesus, and in the midst of a world and a Church so much in need of apostolic ministry. Such an impediment to his labors must have had a connection with the internal condition of the Church. And w^e do not go too far in supposing, that a want of tlipaikfulness for the blessings brought through Paul was one cause for this binding of the Apostleship to the heathen in his person. f * "We can hardly overestimate the trouble of mind which the Jewish Christians must have had, in proportion to their sincerity and devoutness, from the torturing doubt which haunted them, lest, after all, Paul's Gentile apo- stleship was a lie, and he himself a daring intruder into the sacred office of the twelve. It was no light demand upon the faith, either of the twelve or of their followers, to acknowledge him. They perilled all, if their doing so was a delusion. But God thus illustrated the more the faith He gave them. t As the Gentile Churches certainly had a larger measure of revelation and THE LABORS OF PAUL. 105 During tliis ]^eviod of dark providence, Paul sent forth, from liis solitary confmement, his E])istles, full of liglit and comfort, to the distant Cliurches. Shortly before the second to Timotliy, he despatched those to the Ephesians, to the Colossians, and to Philemon, by Tychicus. (Comp. Eph. vi. 21, and Col. iv. 7, with 2 Tim. iv. 12, not contrad. by Col. i. L) Crescens, who went to Galatia (2 Tim. iv. 9), probably carried with him that to the Galatians. At a later period, when there was a hope of release, he sent that to the Philip- pians, probably not from Rome, but still from Caesarea. These two years were also exnployed by Luke in writing his Gospel, and gathering materials for the Acts, pro- bably by the help of the books and parchments, which Paul sent for, after having left them behind at Troas on his farewell journey. Lnke, after his experience at the side of Paul in Macedonia, and then in Judaea, had motive enough for doing something towards a recon- ciliation of the two halves of Christendom. He was himself of Greek ^Traction in Antioch (Euseb. Hist. Eccl. iii. 4), and no doubt one in sentiment with Paul. He had witnessed the true piety and also the preju- dices of the Christians in Judaea. He saw the weighty grounds of their scruples. This moved him to media- tion. His writings contain a statement of truth well fitted to obviate mutual prejudice. developement than the Jewish, it is not unreasonahle to suppose that the com- mon sin of the whole body in not going on to perfection under Apostles, was most prominently judged where it was most prominently seen. We doubt not that, although in a less patent manner, apostleship was equally bound in the other Apostles, exhibiting the Lord as a mighty man who could not save. 16^ THE LABORS OF PAUL. Paul bad appealed to Caesar. Roman law defeated the efibits of his adversaries. He was sent to the Emperor. When, after the perils of the deep and a winter in Melita, he landed in Italy, in the spring of 61, and was met at the Three Taverns by the Christians of Rome, he thanked God, and took courage (Acts xxviii. 15) ; recognizing the fulfilment of our Lord's promise to him after those days of terror in Jerusalem, " as thou hast testified for me in Jerusalem, so shalt thou witness at Rome also." (Acts xxiii. 11.) His longing was for the salvation of the heathen multitudes in the capital of the world. But he could not labour for this without first performing a duty to the Jews. He in- vited to him the chief amongst them, not the,^scribes merely ; and his frankness and confidence were re- warded. Their answer was a strange one (Acts xxviii. 21, 2*2) ; as if nothing that had happened had taken place ; no Christian Church in Rome ; no expulsion of the Jews because of the preaching of Christianity. But \ the historian reports it as a strange one. In the pro- vidence of God, no inimical reports from Palestine, as to his arrival, had, during the storms of winter, reached Rome. His behaviour, so diflerent from what they had expected, surprized and^ained them. He had forgotten and forgiven ; and so had they. Yet they gave him to understand that, although they had heard nothing against his person, they knew enough of his ^sect, of which, in order to justify their own position towards the Roman Cln-istians, they said, that it was spoken against, not only there, but everywhere. They conceded no more than to suspend their judgment, and appoint a day for hearing him. But that day was not past, ere THE LABORS OF PAUL. 1C)7 their hostility broke forth, and elicited his solemn annoimcement, " The salvation of God is sent unto the heathen— they will hear it." (Acts xxviii. 28.) This pregnant word, the last which Luke reports out of the mouth of Paul, was soon largely fulfilled. The time was come for the strengthening of Paul's work among the heathen by Peter. AiKThow great the results of the preaching, by these two princes of the Apostles, in the capital of the heathen world, were, may be inferred from the counter\yqrk of the enemy in the persecution under Nero. The hour of grace for Israel had run out. A fresh persecution of the Christians in Judaea filled up its measure of guilt. Christ's pro- phecies against Jerusalem were accomplished. The temple, and with it, the wall of partition, sank. And the Gospel mightily sjied its way throughout the world. Here we lose the sure guidance of the Acts, and learn many important facts only from the fragnientary and partly fabulous testimonies of later days. Yet we are not entirely deserted by the New Testament. From the canonical writings of that period, the Gospel of Matthew, the Epistle to the Hebrews, and the Epistles of Peter, more light can be had than is generally sup- posed. ^ (C. If we turn first to see how it stood internally with the Churches in Judaea, we have but one writing at that time from among them, viz., Matthew's Gospel ; which already existed in its present form soon after 60. That of Mark must have been then in existence ; but hardly that of Luke. On the other hand Luke certainly had 168 THE LABORS OF PAUL. not access to the Gospel of Matthew; else he would not, in endeavouring to write a perfect account, have left unsaid so much previously said by Matthew. It appears as if Matthew and Luke had written almost simultaneously, yet ignorant and independent of one another as authors. And it was most natural that the endeavour to reduce to written form and deliver authen- tically to the Churches the hitherto oral traditions of the truth, should appear simultaneously in the two separate spheres of Paul and of James. John, Presbyter, a witness who had seen the Apostles, informed Papias (Euseb. Hist. Eccl. iii. 39), that " Mat- thew wrote the holy sayings in Hebrew." x\ll antiquity believed this statement. And yet the Greek work also has been without question ascribed to Matthew. Jerome was the first to say that it was uncertain who had sub- sequently translated the Hebrew Gospel of Matthew into Greek. The Nazarenes boasted, although without ground, that the " Gospel of the Hebrews," which they possessed, was the original. We know that, in the first Christian worship, in the Church at Jerusalem, as formerly in the synagogue, two languages strove for the mastery. It was to be ex- pected that the instruction in the Church, as well as the record of the words of Christ, should be originally in that language in which Christ spake, and which was not only the native, but the sacred tongue, of the majo- rity. Though there were no witness to this fact, we should be obliged to assume it. There was really a Hebrew Gospel of Matthew, which contained both the sayings of Christ and His deeds ; forthe two were insepa- rable. " Each interpreted it," says John, Presbyter, " as THE LABORS OF TAUL. 1(59 well as he could ;" /. e. eaoli head of a congregation, on reading from it in public worship, added oral exposition in Greek ; a course to \Yhich we find ]3arallels enough both in the synagogue and in the Church. Probably these documents were at first communicated to the teachers only, not to the flocks ; else they would hardly have disappeared. And it is likely that they contained not nearly so much as we now have in the Greek ver- sion. When, how^ever, the Apostles left Palestine, when one cotemporary of Christ after another fell asleep, and when a younger race of clergy and laity arose, it became necessary to put together, into a publicly sanc- tioned record, the whole treasure of instruction which the Churches of Palestine had received from the lips of Peter, John, and James, (the three chief witnesses of Christ's life,) made complete by the insertion of all that seemed profitable for the Church at that time. The result w^as not a private composition, but a recapitu- lation of the teaching given by the Apostles in com- mon, attached to and enriching the already stereotyped form of truth. A sketch, recommended by the autho- rity of Peter, viz., the w^riting of Mark, was already there. This might, or rather was entitled to, form the basis for the complete record. It was necessary that the individuality of its compiler should not appear; for he had, in the name of the whole body of witnesses, to put their statements in writing. The Mosaic sanctuary was about to disappear. The Hebrew tongue was in consequence about to give way before the Greek, as a bond of union for all Churches. Therefore, this new record was framed, no longer in Syro-Chaldaic, but in 170 THE LABORS OF PAUL. Greek. Who sboiild be called to this work, eitliei' through special commission from the Apostles, or through the guidance of circumstances, could not be previously determined or conjectured. We might guess James the Bishop, or Philip the Evangelist, had we no information on the subject. We may therefore the more confidently assume the statement, that Matthew, (son of Alpheus, and one of the twelve,) was the author, to rest, not on conjecture, but on certain tradition. Independent of all objections, it is certain that we have actually in this work the complete narrative of the words and works of Christ, as received by the Hebrew Churches from the Apostles and their disciples. Its leading idea is — Christ — promised of the prophets, and not the destroyer, but the fulfiller of the law, although the opponent of the Pharizees. The whole is interwoven with quotations in reference to Messiah ; deep and hard to understand for us, on account of their brevity, but plain to those to whom the disciples of Christ ex- pounded the Old Testament. It was more the part of an Apostle than that of an Apostle's disciple to give these expositions of type and prophecy, and thus to fix the interpretation of the Old Testament. The works of Christ during the first half of his public ministry (Matt. iv. — xiv.) are arranged, not chronologically, as in Mark and Luke, but upon another principle, based, partly on the mutual similarity, partly on the yet incompletely discovered typical meaning, of the various acts of Christ. And the author has used a similar freedom with the words of our Lord, which are not, as in Luke, scrupulously associated, each with its proper occasion, but combined into groups. This THE LABORS OF PAUL. 171 Creates no ol)joction to the genuineness of the com- position. Yet a later writer dared not have taken such a latitude. None but an Apostle, one of the original witnesses, could have done so, without the danger of affecting the truth of the representation and the pur- port of each part.*- This course has caused many diffi- culties for the constructor of a harmony of the Gospels. But the Apostles had something more impoitant to do than to publish a chronicle, like a diary, for the satis- faction of future sceptics and critics. The absolute credibility of every narrative in the Gospel of Matthew, stands fast, even if it had been a work at second hand by an Apostle's disciple, such as Mark or Lidie. But the recent doubts as to Matthew's authorship are groundless. The Syro-Chaldaic Gospel of the Nazarenes was a third, enlarged, but not improved, unapostolic, yet not heretical, «3dition of this great record of Palestine. The first edition, the Hebrew work of Matthew, has been lost. The second, the Greek, forms part of our canon. Of the third, this Gospel of the Hebrews, fragments survive, which illustrate the canon. For the history of the Apostolic age, we have this datum ; that, at the time when the Churches of Pales- tine received the Epistle to the Hebrews, the divine dignity of Christ, the purpose of God in the calling of the heathen, and the approaching destruction of the Mosaic sanctuary, were already recognized among them. * All this shows how erroneous is the idea that the inspiration of the Fcriptures excludes the full exercise of man's faculties and judi,nnent in the writers ; as if God can never be the agent without man being annihilated. — Tr. 172 THE LABORS OF PAUL. The statements in the Acts, as to the presence of Paul in Judsca, throw clear light upon the external con- dition of things there, in the year 6S. The hatred of the fanatically orthodox had discharged itself against him as the reputed enemy of the law, while they ex- hibited more toleration towards the strictly legal Chris- tian Church in Jerusalem, and James, its head. The " myriads" of Christians who were themselves zealots for the law, had to expect no attack from the Pharizees ; and the vigorous Roman administration restrained the Sadducees then in power, by its jealous control, from any openly organized persecution of the believers in Mes- siah. This state of affairs, however, did not last. The Epistle to the Hebrews is of itself proof enough, that, even before the commencement of the Jewish war, the Jewish authorities had set on foot a new, severe, and systematic persecution of the Christians. But we have other evidence for it ; and especially that of the trust- worthy report by Josephus, in the beginning of the last book of his Archaeology. " Festus the Procurator died in Judsea, in the begin- ning of 63, after being two years in office. Nero, hearing of his death, sent Albinus as Procurator to Judaea. But the high priest. An an us the younger, (the son of Nebeda^us,) a man of remarkable daring, and one of the Sadducean party, which distinguished itself by judicial cruelty, embraced the occasion of this in- terregnum, to gather a Sanhedrim of judges while Albinus was yet on his way. He brought some before it, accused of transgressing the law, and (evidently after the sentence of the Sanhedrim) gave them over to be stoned. Bat the more impartial, although themselves THE LABORS OF PAUL. 173 strict legalists, highly disapproved of this. They secretly sent a demand to king Agrippa II., that he would check Ananus by a written admonition. Some went to Albinus on his way from Alexandria, and re- presented to him, that Ananus had no right to pass such a sentence, without liis consent ; whereupon the Procurator in anger, wrote to Ananus, threatening him Avith inquiry ; and king Agrippa (exercising his right to appoint and to depose), deposed Ananus, after the latter had been only three months high priest." Thus reports Josephus. We omit his mention of James the brother of Christ, as one of those executed on these grounds. This may be an embellishment, as well as the other notice of James in his works. But it is a most probable thing. We cannot doubt that these " trans- gressors of the law" were Christians. And we find here exactly the same tln-ee parties, Pharizees, Sadducees, and Christians, as at the end of the iVcts. The proce- dure was exactly that followed against Stephen. And the undoubted martyrdom of James cannot be placed at a more likely date than this, just after the death of Festus. Moreover, the narrative of Hegesippus has here great historical importance. (Euseb. Hist. Eccl. ii. 23.) In the first place, he speaks of the strict ascetic life led by James, as a Nazarite and penitent mourner, of his unwearied prayer in the temple for his people, and of his high estimation among the multitude. And then he adds, " He alone went into the temple," i. e. he alone had still liberty to enter the temple, at a time when it was closed against all other Christians. " Yet at length the hatred of those who believed in no resur- rection, and with whom" (it is said, although contrary 174 THE LABORS OF PAUL. to the better testimony of Josephus) " the Pharizees combined, gained the final mabtery. All the tribes of Israel and many heathen guests assembled in Jerusalem for the passover. Then the enemies of James set him on the battlement of the temple and cried out to him : ' Thou Just One, whom we are all bound to obey, tell us, now that the people allows itself to be led away after Jesus the crucified One, tell us, whether his doc- trine leads to truth, or to error ?' He answered with a loud voice, 'Why ask ye me concerning Jesus the Son of man ? He sits in heaven, at the right hand of power, and will come in the clouds of heaven.' Many, being persuaded, and praising God for the testimony of James, and crying out Hosanna to the Son of David, his ad- versaries exclaimed, ' Alas ! the Just One also is led astray.' Mounting up, they threw him down ; and, as he was not yet dead, they began to stone him. But he sank upon his knees and said, '1 beseech thee. Lord God and Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.' Thereupon one of the priests, a son of llechab, called out. Hold ! what do ye. The Just One prayeth for you. But one of the beaters struck James on the head, and he died the martyr's death. On the same spot they (probably the Christians of ^lia) buried him; and his monumental stone still stands near the (site of the) temple. Shortly afterwards Ves- pasian invaded Judasa." We hold this narrative to be credible in its essence. There was no longer an Apostle in Jerusalem. James had, as his episcopal duty re- quired, stood like a true shepherd by his flock in all dangers. But the shepherd was to fall and the flock to be scattered. And this was attempted by endeavouring THE LABORS OF PAUL. 175 to make him openly deny Christ. The most important part of this most credible relation lies in the words of Hegesippus, regarding the disposition of James, as con- trasted with the subsequent hatred of Christians to- wards Jews. " His knees were grown hard from unre- mitting prayer for the forgiveness of his people." He saw their growing guilt, and approaching judgment. He felt himself still one of them. Not as accuser, but as intercessor, did he plead. And in this work of mercy he was certainly not alone. His Church shared his feelings. They wrestled in prayer for the turning aside of vengeance. He prayed for his enemies when dying. And Hegesippus rightly regarded the events of the Jewish war as judicial consequences of the violence done to this just man. Then few martyrs fell. But the sufferings of the Christians were great. The Sanhedrim could not freely punish with death. But its spiritual power remained. The Council could, without interference on the part of the Roman governor, have recourse to, and continue measures of the most afflicting nature against the Chris- tians of Palestine. When Paul was last in Jerusalem, the Jewish Christians had still free access to the courts of the sanctuary. They might bring their offerings and take part in the w^orship. They yet enjoyed the privi- leges of the orthodox. But the Sanhedrim had power to deny them these, pronouncing against them, as against Christ, the greater excommunication. It could require them either to deny Christ, or, as excommunicate and accursed, to forfeit all communion with the holy people and its worship; and it could aggravate this, not with death indeed, but with many forms of op- 176 THE LABORS OF PAUL. pression. This was done. It is wonderful that it was not done sooner. It must have been done at the latest under Ananus, the son of Nebeda3us. And the whole tenor of the Epistle to the Hebrews proves that it was. That Epistle speaks comfort to the Churches under a trial exactly similar to that resulting from such a measure. The trial must indeed have been severe. The faithful till then clung to the hope that Jesus might still be acknowledged by their nation. They counted it a sacred duty to do so. They were filled with the idea of the unity of the old and new faith and worship. It was a thing alike important and sacred w^ith them to be sons of Israel and Christian believers. They claimed all the promises which rested on the chosen people. And now they were called upon to relinquish all this, and become no better than Samaritans, or heathen, without the blessing of the Aaronic priesthood, for- bidden the holy place, where their fathers had wor- shipped, and where Christ himself had appeared. The greater their reverence for the ancient revelations of God, the more they felt their deprivation. A Gentile can hardly measure it. In such distress, they might well be assaulted by temptations to ask, — Whether the followers of Messiah ought to be separate from His people } Whether the divine mission of Jesus was more certain than the divine election of the Jewish nation ? Whether He, for whose sake the Christian clergy demanded a ready renunciation of all part and lot in the promises through the prophets, could really be the promised One I * * Every pious and intelligent Christian must be exposed to similar THE LABORS OF PAUL. 177 Whoever may be the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews, he comforted and admonished the Hebrew Christians, with truly apostolic wisdom and grace, in their hour of trial, when called to make a miglity stride forwards in faith and knowledge. Of all canonical Epistles this goes the deepest. It presents strong meat to even those of full age in Christ. And witliout a living appropriation of the truths contained in it there can be no growth of the Church to perfection. The author cautiously approaches the subject of the new heavenly priesthood, aware how difficult must be its exposition, and how weak the capacities of the faithful for its acceptance. (Heb. v. 11.) When about to ex- pound the typical application of the tabernacle to the Christian Church, he checks himself, with the words, " of which we cannot now speak particularly." (Heb. ix. 5.) This is that part of New Testament doctrine which most demands a yet deeper entrance into the mysteries of the Scriptures. But at present we adduce the doctrine, the typical narratives, and typical admoni- tions of this Epistle, in so far only as is necessary to illustrate the history of the time at which it was composed. It was then fitting to instruct the faithful as to the eternal Godhead of the Redeemer, more prominently than at the first preaching of the Gospel in Palestine, in order that they might see how far the new covenant temptations at every fresh step Avhich God takes towards perfecting the Church. Being accustomed to cleave to what he has, as divine, he feels disposed to regard all progress which transcends the limits of past attain- ments, as a renunciation of them, especially if it is not recognized by those whom he trusts. He fears to make a supposed exchange of things certain for things uncertain. And nothing but the supernatural certainty of faith can lead him on. — Tr. VOL. I. N 178 THE LABORS OF PAUL. transcended the old, and how the old, in spite of its divine origin, must wane before the new. It was time to disclose to them the heavenly priesthood exercised by the risen Christ, when they were cut off from the blessings of the Aaronic. It was time to teach them the essence of Christian worship, their boldness of access to God, and the acceptableness of New Testa- ment sacrifices, when excluded from the Mosaic cere- monial. Such was the occasion for the dogmatic part of the Epistle. The Mosaic law was given by disposition of angels. It was needful that the new law before which it was to vanish, should be promulgated by One higher than angels.^ The Son, by whom God has spoken unto us in these last days of the world, was that One ; — He by whom God made the worlds, who is appointed heir of all things, and ruler of the world to come. His sufferings, at which the fleshly mind of the Jew took offence, were in strict analogy with the history of those merely human sons of God, in the Old Testament, who came to honor through humility. And these sufferings formed His very qualification to be the faithful High Priest, the helper of all who were like tempted. (Heb. i.-ii.) Moses, the mediator of the Old Covenant, was faithful indeed, yet only as a servant. The Mediator of the * We do not understand the author to deny that, although Christ, as God, was higher than all angels, yet, as man, he was not exalted over them till he was raised from the dead. Till then, he shared in the subjection of the whole world, with man at its head, to the angels. And the present supe- riority of Christ, and of us in Him, to them, results, not from their detrusion, or the cessation of their functions, but from our farther exaltation to a place which man had not occupied before. — Te. THE LABORS OF PAUL. 179 New Covenant is the Son Himself. We, who are His, wander now through the wiklerness. This is our time of trial, as the forty years for Israel. The promised Sabbath is yet before us. (Ileb. iii. l-*4, 13.) Aaron, although the high priest of the chosen people, was on earth, and mortal. We have a High Priest who has passed through the heavens, called, in the Old Testament itself, a priest for ever after the order of Melchizcdec. (Heb. iv. 14; v. 10.) In such a desig- nation are implied a change of the priesthood, the abolishing of the legal covenant, and the introduction of a better. The old withered away into impotence, till it vanished before the new, the perfect, and the heavenly. (Heb. vii. 1 — 10.) Every individual part of the former sanctuary and service now finds, like the whole, its more exalted antitype among us.^ But the writer confines himself to the entrance of the high priest into the holiest with the blood of the sin offering, and applies this to the first great high priestly act of Christ, who, having been the sin offering on the cross, has gone as the High Priest with His own blood into the holiest in heaven, — there to appear before God for us, and thence to come forth unto them who wait for Plim. (Heb. ix. 28.) f So much for the dogmatic portions. Thus are those addressed who have just sustained a great loss. And the compensation to which they are here pointed refers, * The tabernacle typified the Church militant, the temple the Church triumphant. — Tr. f \(e have grace now to bring in His name the acceptable sacrifice of His body and blood as the thankful memorial of His passing into heaven ; and we have the same, as our heavenly food, on an altar of which none have power to eat who serve the tabernacle. — Tr. N 2 ISQ THE LABORS OF PAUL. as plainly as any historical document could have done, to the blessings and privileges snatched from the Chris- tians in Palestine, as those things of which the loss was thus to be supplied. One thus sees how opportune are the -warnings given against apostasy, blasphemy, and the crucifying of Christ afresh. (Heb. vi. 4, &c. ; x. 26, &c.) One sees how suitable is the comparison between our sufferings and those of Christ, how comforting the assurance of His sympathy with the tempted, and how emphatic are the words, " He suffered, (as one excom- municate,) without the gate. Let us go forth unto Him and bear His reproach ; for we have here no continuing city, but seek one to come." (Heb. xiii. 12 — 14.) One understands the motive for the repeated exhortation to bring the spiritual offerings of praise and good works, when the outlet hitherto found in the Mosaic services was closed. One understands the injunction, " Obey them that are over you," (no longer those who are over the Jews) " for they" (no longer the Jewish priesthood) " watch for your souls." (Heb. xiii. 15 — 17.) But all this is equally clear from the typical narra- tives to which the Epistle points the attention of the Hebrews. Those selected in the eleventh chapter are not merely examples of faith in God generally. They are so chosen and so expressed, that each one of them describes the very case in which the Christians of Pales- tine were at the time, and records an achievement of faith in a trial precisely similar to theirs. Why, pass- ing over so many other noble acts of faith, are we told that by faith Isaac blessed Jacob and Esau, and Jacob the sons of Joseph? (Heb. xi.20, 21.) This is a question which no commentator can answer, unless he adverts THE LABORS OF PAUL. 181 to the actual situation of those to whom the Epistle was addressed, and to the analogy between those Old Testament events and that situation. In this w^ay the author managed to set before the Hebrew Christians, as delicately, and yet as emphatically, as Stephen did to the Sanhedrim, the coming fate of their nation, and at the same time to disclose to them the futurity of the Church. The separation between the Church and the syna- gogue was appointed to be effected through many sor- rows. The Church of Christ, like the younger late born son of the family, was persecuted by the elder brother, Israel after tlie flesh. This view, already familiar to us from the Epistle to the Galatians (Gal. iv. 22), gives the key to many of these types, in some of which it is yet easier to discover the relation of the Church to its oppressors. Abel brought by faith a better offering than Cain. (Heb. xi. 4.) Israel w^as then acting like Cain tow^ards the Church. God ac- cepted the Christian worship and not the Mosaic. By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death. (Heb. xi. 5.) He prophesied of the coming flood. Before it came, he was removed. So should the faith- ful be rescued from among the Jews, and escape their judgment. Noah, moved with fear, builded an ark, to the saving of his house. (Heb. xi. 7.) The Christians saw in the Church their deliverance from the evil to come. As Abraham did (Heb. xi. 8), so did they leave their home, become strangers on earth, and, instead of an earthly Jerusalem, wait for a heavenly city of God. As, from the barren Sarah, children, innumerable as the stars and the sand, were born (Heb. xi. 11), so should 182 THE LABORS OF PAUL. the Church by patience in the day of small things, bear multitudes of the heathen, the spiritual seed of Abraham. Abraham, when tried, offered Isaac, his only son, on whom the promise hung, believing that God would raise him from the dead. (Heb. xi. 17.) So did God de- mand from these Christians the sacrifice of that which was dearest to them — people, temple, worship, all ap- pointed of God, and bound up with his promises. They did so in faith, and received all again, in a higher form, as raised from the dead. Isaac blessed the younger son with the rights of the first-born, forfeited by Esau (Heb. xi. 20) ; for Israel, acting the part of Esau, had driven away the Christians with threats, and had for- feited the primogeniture. And in like manner the better blessing came on Joseph's younger son. Joseph when dying, prophesied the Exodus. The Christians had begun their Exodus from among a people laden with heavier judgments than that of Egypt. Through faith was Moses as a child hid three months by his parents, who did not fear the command of the king. (Heb. xi. 23.) The Church also did not fear the prohibition of those in power, or betray the trust of God, but kept it with care. Moses would not be called a son of Pharaoh's daughter, preferring to suffer with the people of God, esteeming the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures of Egypt. In faith he left Egypt, not fearing the wrath of the king. In faith he kept the Passover, that the destroyer might not touch the Isra- elites. In faith they passed through the Red Sea. The Christians had the same choice. They bore with Christ the shame of expulsion. In spite of the threats of tyrants they worshipped God according to His com- THE LABORS OF PAUL. 183 mandmeiits, and thereby escaped the judgment which lighted on their adversaries. They found the way to escape, as through the Red Sea, while their enemies both behind and before them perished. Through faith the walls of Jericho fell, compassed about seven days. (Heb. xi. 30.) The earthly Jerusalem assumed the character and met the fate of the city of Canaan. Patience had its perfect work in the Church, and was crowned with victory. Through faith Rahab perished not with the unbelievers, having received the spies. (Heb. xi. 31.) The faithful were, like her, in the midst of those ripe for judgment. They believed the an- nouncement of destruction, and were exempt. Finally, they contended, like the Judges, like David, Elias, and the prophets, and like the Maccabean martyrs, who all received not the promise, and could not be made perfect without the Christian Church. (Heb. xi. 39, 40.) In connexion with this view of the passage stand some special historical events. It is almost certain, that the high priests and the Council issued an ex- press prohibition against the Christian worship, to which the words " Forsake not the assembling of your- selves together as the manner of some is" (Heb. x. 25), have a marked reference, and which drove the Chris- tians to assemble in secret. It is also probable that the Christians were not only denied the temple, but banished from Jerusalem. The Jewish authorities might have ventured thus far even during the presence of a Roman Governor. It is plain that the writer sought to prepare the faithful for that ex])atriation which Christ Himself had pointed out as the way of deliverance And all this makes it yet more likely 184 THE LABORS OF PAUL. that the Epistle was really addressed to the Churches in Palestine, and that, at a time >Yhen the Jewish polity still subsisted. This explains also why the warnings here given against cleaving to Mosaism, are of a character so different from those given to the Galatians and Colossians. When Paul, or another Christian teacher, deals else- where with Judaism, his topics are, circumcision, the keeping of the Sabbath, and the distinction of meats. Here these subjects are not touched; not because these things had been already renounced, but because it was deemed right to allow their continuance for a season. On the other hand, however, the writer seems to go farther than Paul, in pressing upon Jews separa- tion from the Aaronic priesthood and worship. On any other theory this difficulty cannot be solved. But on that above stated the answer is self-evident. Circum- cision, Sabbath, and meats, were matters on which the faithful in Palestine were untroubled. But they were excluded from one worship and forbidden a better.* They were in this Epistle encouraged to go on in the exclusive celebration of the latter. Such was the matter in hand at this great turning point of their history. The other and minor questions were postponed. And it is remarkable that the Nazarenes, the descendants of the Hebrew Christians, while acknowledged partakers of the common faith, actually continued their Jewish observances, and remained exactly where this Epistle, * Precisely the case at this moment in many parts of Christendom, where those truly Catholic are at once debarred from sectarian, and forbidden to enjoy Catholic blessings, by those who would force the Church of God into the stereotype of fleshly statistics, and police regulations. — Ta. THE LABORS OF PAUL. 185 altliough pointing to a period when Mosaism should disappear, left them for the time then being. But who was it that sent forth this Epistle, full of Apostolic power and authority, in the hour of danger ? The above investigations, and the value of the Epistle, are in no way affected by the answer to this question, whether its author was Paul, (according to this con- stant assertion of the Eastern Church, and the more recent assertion of the Western,) or another person ? It is with this document as with a magnificent painting, held to be by Raphael. If the painting is proved to be by another, we do not lose a classic work of art; we merely gain one master more of the highest order. But this question of authorship is important for the history of the time ; more so than for doctrine. And therefore we must here touch upon it. Of the very ancient differences between the Eastern and Western Churches, which appeared in the second and third centuries, one was, that the Epistle to the Hebrews and those of Paul, were publicly read in the East, and not in the West. The Councils and doctors of the fourth and fifth centuries put an end to this discrepance. Paul's authorship of the Epistle to the Hebrews was attested in the East, not by an opinion of the learned, but by a tradition of the Church. This belief cannot be justly deduced from the leaning of the Alexandrian theologians to allegory, or, more pro- perly speaking, from their peculiar capacity for un- derstanding the prophetic depths of the Scriptures. The same belief pervaded Syria, influenced even the half rationalist teachers of Antioch, and was held in Palestine itself, where one might exj^ect the surest 186 THE LABORS OF PAUL. information as to tlie history of such a treasure, in- herited from its original possessors. The Epistle was known in the West, but not adopted into the canon, and not known to be by Paul. Some of the most en- lightened fathers never used it. Some questioned it ; which they could not have done, had it formed part of the canon. Indeed they called it in question because schismatics adduced it. The Montanists and Nova- tians cited the sixth and tenth chapters as yielding the clearest proof of their truculent doctrine, regard- ing the irrevocable excommunication of the fallen. And what does Tertullian, the maintainer of similar doctrines, say .? He does not, as he w^ould too gladly have done, if he could, say, " It is the writing of Paul," but " It is the w^ork, not indeed of an Apostle, but of an Apostle's companion, Barnabas." (Tertul. de pudic. 20.) The learned in xA.lexandria acknowledged the inter- nal arguments against PauFs authorship. The words of Origen are excellent (Euseb. Hist. Eccl. vi. 25). " Every well instructed person must own that the language of the Epistle is much purer Greek than that of Paul, and yet that the thoughts are w^onderful, and not inferior to those of the Apostle. We may there- fore take the contents as Paul's, the expression and construction as those of another, who wrote down and expounded what the master had said. Therefore it can only be to the praise of a Church to receive the Epistle as the work of Paul. For the ancients have not with- out good grounds the tradition that it was so. God knoweth who wrote it down. The investigations of some (Clement of Alexandria and Pantsenus) have as- signed the w^ork conjecturally, to Clement (of Ptome) and to Luke." THE LABORS OF PAUL. 187 The question stands to this day where it did then. In addition to the difference of style, we must notice the quotations from the Old Testament, which are cer- tainly taken from the Greek translation. On the other hand the substance stands in complete harmony with the acknowledged Epistles of Paul. Indeed it forms their crown, and is especially worthy of him. One can- not avoid seeing Paul in the last chapter. Yet it is as difficult to find him in the second, (lleb. ii. 3.) If we eiT not, he himself, as was his wont, wrote the con- clusion, and did not dictate, as usual, but entrusted to the composition of another the leading ideas of the remainder. Now, is no trace of this other to be found in tradition } The words of Tertullian read like tra- dition, not conjecture. And as we do not, from other sources, know what the Churches of Asia Minor thought on the subject, it is probable that Tertullian received his information from those from whom he got his whole opinions at that period of his religious history. It were folly to demand certainty in such things, like our modern critics. But it is in a high degree probable that Barnabas was that compiler of the thoughts of Paul, whom the teachers of Alexandria in vain sought to discover. Luther's idea, lately revived, that Apollos compiled the Epistle, is without a vestige of support from antiquity. In this manner did Paul comfort the flocks of Juda?a, when their shepherd was taken from them, and the Apostles to Israel were no longer among them. He excuses his attem])t with the same modesty with which he does his Epistle to the Romans. (Heb. xiii. SS.) But he did not feel himself fettered by the compact 188 THE LABORS OF PAUL. which he and Barnabas had made with Peter, James, and John, fourteen years before (Gal. ii. 9), as to the division of hxbor. If that had not previously come to an end, it must at least have lost its force when the Apostle to the heathen became a prisoner. The mis- sion of two Apostles to the heathen was what war- ranted Peter and his associates in confining themselves to the Jews. When Paul was arrested, the duty of the first Apostles, to care for the heathen world and Gentile Churches, revived. At the same time the end of the Jewish polity approached. The signs of the times were clear to the enlightened. The first Apostles were about to lose their Jewish field of labor. And as, at the par- tition, the tw^o classes of Apostles had joined hands, in token of brotherhood in diverse labors, so did they practically declare the unity of themselves, of their office, and of the whole Church, before all Christendom, when the Apostles for the Gentiles turned to the Israelite Churches, and the Apostles for JudiBa turned to the Gentile Churches in Asia Minor. The Israelites were exhorted by Paul under the persecution by Ananus. The Gentiles were comforted by Peter in the prospect of that by Nero. The first Epistle of Peter, unquestioned by all antiquity, and proved by it contents to have been addressed to Gentile Christians, is testimony enough, that the separation of the two apostleships, if it ever had been so rigid as to exclude mutual support and aid, no longer subsisted in that degree of strictness. But how could Paul venture to address those Chris- tians whom, twenty-four years before, he would have compelled to blaspheme ? What acceptance could he expect among those who had never been thoroughly THE LABORS OF PAUL. 189 persuaded of his office ? Even if encouraged to it by Peter, his duty was hard. He did not venture to com- port himself as in his other Epistles. He needed one to introduce him, and open the hearts of the faithful towards him. Such a one he already had. Barnabas Avas at once a member of the first Church and an Apostle to the heathen, one in all essentials with Paul, and yet trusted in Jerusalem ; from the first occupied with the reconciliation of Paul and James. Once more, then, he introduced Paul to Jerusalem ; as formerly in person, so now by the Epistle to the Hebrews. We are quite free to assume that Barnabas was re- conciled with Paul, and again beside him. Mark, about whom they had quarrelled, was already again with Paul, at CsDsarea. (Col. iv. 10.) To Barnabas Paul imparted all that was on his heart on behalf of the oppressed churches of Israel. Barnabas wrought this out for him with his own peculiar talent, in words which Paul could subscribe as the expression of his own doctrine and will. We may suppose that Barnabas, a Hellenist of Cyprus, had that high education and that intimate acquaintance with Greco-religious literature, which the Epistle displays. And although, as regarded oral delivery, Paul was compared to Mercury, and Bar- nabas to Jupiter (Acts xiv. 12) ; the latter may have exhibited in writing the greater calmness, rhythm, and polish. He was a Levite, and therefore versant in the Mosaic ceremonial: he was a prophet, and therefore the composition beams with light : he was called " the son of consolation," and therefore no part of Scripture contains so much encouragement (lleb. xiii. 2*2) as this " word of exhortation :" lastly, he had apostolical 190 THE LABORS OF TAUL. authority like Paul, and therefore could speak as no Luke, Clement, or Apollos could, to these, the most venerable Churches in the world. About the beginning of the sixth decennary, the greatest strength of Christianity was concentrated at Rome. Peter went thither for the second time ; not as formerly, under Claudius, to confine himself to the Jews, but to preach Avith Paul to the Gentiles. A fixed centre of Christianity, as a city set on a hill, was needed in the West. And for this, no place was so suitable, none had such a manifest claim, or promised such influence, as Rome. It was the dictate of divine wisdom that both these Apostles should conjointly do their best and their last, to deposit their whole treasures in the Roman congregation, and be there ready to seal their doctrine with their blood. Soon after the dispatch of the Epistle to the He- brews, Peter sent his Epistle, in the year 63 or 64, to the Churches "in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia." Hence we see that flocks had mean- while been gathered in those parts also of Asia Minor which Paul had not visited. The southern coasts alone are here omitted. And it is plain, from the Epistle itself, that these Churches had been called out of almost total heathen darkness, and contained hardly any Jewish element. (I Pet. iv. 3.) The fellow- laborers of Paul must have prosecuted his THE LABORS OF PAUL. 191 work with great success, starting from the places already won by him. In a few years, as Ephesus christianized Bithynia, so had the cities of Lycaonia the interior of Galatia, and Cappadocia. It would appear, from the agreement as to Easter, that Pontus was converted, not through Ephesus, but through the more adjacent Antioch. Bithynia, although already quite Greek, had received the truth so rapidly, that in forty years the heathen worship had almost disappeared. The ex- tension of the Greek language, the immigration of the Jews, and the introduction of Roman law, had pre- pared the way for the Gospel in the most distant parts of Asia Minor. In this rich portion of the world the most diverse elements awaited the combining and purifying influence of Christianity. First, the abori- gines of Phrygia, with their worship of the shapeless mother of the gods, and with their fanatic priesthood. Then the Celtic immigrants, who, in adventurous anti- cipation of subsequent national migrations, had crossed the Hellespont, and who retained, in their new mountain- abodes, their constitution, till the times of the first Caesars, and their language, till those of Jerome, who found it the same with that of the Treviri. Then the Cappadocians, the farthest from Greek civilization, with an idolatry and a slave-trade which answered to their want of culture. Southwards from the Taurus, lived Semitic tribes. And on the north coast, in the kingdom of Mithridates, dwelt a tribe, belonging to the Indo-Germanic race, and related to the Armenians and Persians, a tribe among whom the doctrines and rites of Zoroaster, prevalent among their Armenian neighbours, had found entrance. Most probably the 192 THE LABORS OF PAUL. small Churches of the Apostolic age were first planted in those cities which afterwards became important as Metropolitan, or at least Episcopal, seats ; e. g. Nico- media in Bithynia, Ancyra in Galatia, Neocesarea in Cappadocia, and Sin ope in Pontus, Peter himself gives us to understand that his object, in addressing the newly-planted Churches in those lands, was to bear his concurrent testimony, that the word preached among them by Paul and his disciples, was eternal truth, and that they stood in the true grace of God. (1 Pet. i. 12-25; v. 12 ; 2Pet. iii. 15.) Hewould stamp the work of the Apostle to the heathen. He saw, in those Churches which formed the centre of the great camp of Christ among the nations, that holy people and chosen generation (1 Pet. ii. 9), to which the pri- vileges of Israel had, in a glorified form, passed over ; the stones of that spiritual temple which should both succeed and surpass that of Solomon. (1 Pet. ii. 5.) Sylvanus, the prophet (1 Pet. v. 12), who had once accompanied Paul over a ])art of these lands, served Peter in the preparation and conveyance of the Epistle, and in thus giving practical proof of spiritual unity. And it is not wonderful that Peter should have had in his eye and referred to the Epistles of Paul to the Ephesians and Colossians. He had learnt something from Paul, even as to the divine purposes. And the masterly didactic writings of Paul, e. g. that to the Romans, may well have lent a new character to those of Peter. But a second object is equally obvious; namely, to strengthen the Christians in the prospect of a widely extended persecution. The Epistle of Peter shews THE LABORS OF PAUL. 193 that public opinion and the Roman authorities had assumed a new attitude towards the Christians. Till then Christianity appeared to the heathen nothing but an unimportant variety of Jewish superstition. Although the Jews did what they could to excite the civil power against the Christians, they had not succeeded. In Macedonia, in Corinth, in Palestine itself, they were repelled, and the Christians acquitted, although not always shielded from violence. The words of Gallio (Acts xviii. 14, 15), and of Festus (Acts xxv. 18, 19, 25,26), express the views of the Roman governors and judges. But under Nero's rule things changed. In many places the faithful came to be distinguished, as XpccTTLavoij from the Jews. (Acts xi. 26; 1 Pet. iv. 16.) And this must have been the more the case, the more important and independent the Churches became under Paul. The spread of a monotheism, w^hich supplanted all other religions and denied the Roman gods, could not long remain unheeded at a time when informers were so busy. And, as some fearless Christians, who held places in the army or in the magistracy, had already come into collision with the customs of the empire, it needed very little to bring the whole sect to be re- garded as politically dangerous by those in powder. But the most powerful argument against the Christians arose from the hatred of the heathen at the pure, humble, and chaste conversation of the faithful. The inter- nal character of the Church, and its mysteries hidden from the eye of the profane, were things which the heathen might explain in ways accordant with their own debasement, as being secret institutions for the exercise of monstrous unnameable crimes. And at VOL. I. 194 THE LABORS OF PAUL. that very time a horrid event transpired in the bosom of the Church which might have seemed to justify such an idea. The doctrine published by Paul was for the first time perverted and employed as a cloak for wick- edness. There arose persons in the Church, who, adorning a heathenish life with a Christian nomencla- ture, kept in secret shameful orgies, under the name of Christian agapae or love-feasts. The later writings of the New Testament establish this. If but one case of the kind came to the ears of the heathen, it was enough to stamp all meetings of the faithful. Men regarded the secret as detected. The pains taken by the apolo- gists of the second century to meet such slanders, shews how widely these slanders must have spread in a few years. Feasts on human flesh, like those of Thyestes — incest, like that related in CEdipus — were the abominations ascribed to the secret assemblies of the faithful : the former, a distortion of the eucharist, the latter, of the agape. Tacitus tells us distinctly, that these accusations were current and generally believed, and formed the chief motive for that universal hatred of the Christians which found vent in the persecution under Nero. On no other supposition could he have reckoned Christianity among the "homd and shameful things" i^' airocia et pudenda'")^ which were concen- trated from all quarters in Rome. In the absence of all positive proof, universal rumour and instinctive hatred seemed evidence enough. (Tacitus, Ann. xv. 44.) Peter also refers to these very slanders and the consequent persecutions (1 Pet. i. 6; ii. 1*2; iii. 14; iv. 1, 12 — 19), when he says that the enemy and the accuser, kindling animosity by such suspicions, sought THE LABORS OF PAUL. 195 thereby to frighten the faithful into apostasy and eter- nal ruin ; going about like a roaring lion, seeking whom he might devour. (1 Pet. v. 8, 9.) The Christians had now no hope of protection from the state, and everything to fear from the ijopulace. Rome gave the signal for universal attack. The blind rage of a population brutified by the combats of wild beasts and gladiators, combined, w4th the arbitrary rule of a centralized universal despotism, to make the pro- spects most ominous. In the same city appeared at once the foundation of a Christian dominion over the spirits of men and the anti-christian developement of the ancient heathen power. Rome became for the Chris- tians what Babylon had been for the Jews. As the Jews, in their dispersion, longed like strangers for their home, so did the Christians scattered throughout the Roman empire, constitute the holy seed, — the nation of pilgrims, — who waited for a better country. Hence they succeeded to the appellation " Diaspora," and Rome to that of " Babylon." (1 Pet. i. 1 ; v. 13.) Both appellations, the one at the beginning, the other at the end of Peter's Epistle, are to be understood mystically. Those " elect together with you in Babylon," were the Roman Christians, exposed to the very dangers of those addressed by him. The statement of Eusebius (Euseb. Plist. Eccl. ii. 15), borrowed from his prede- cessors, is highly credible, that this " Babylon" meant Rome. None of the ancients has, so far as we know, understood the passage otherwise. None has thought of applying it to Babylon on the Euphrates.^*^- * It is thus remarkable how the Romish Church, in assuming the universal authority, has also unconsciously acq^uired the mystical title, of heathen o 2 196 THE LABORS OF PAUL. Peter's first Epistle was for the strengthening of the faithful against the storm from without. Shortly after, not long before his death, he gave forth his second, also encyclical, and addressed immediately to the same Ghurchej^, in order to protect them against equally dangerous internal enemies. Like the dying song of Moses, and the parting address of Paul to the elders of Ephesus, so is this last word of Peter a pro23hecy of coming conflicts, then only threatening. He saw, as Paul had previously done (2 Thess. ii. 7), that the mystery of iniquity was already at work. It must have shewn itself in scattered tokens, from which he argued its progress and judgment. Christ Himself had said, that, after the good seed should have been scattered in the world, the enemy should secretly sow tares, — " the children of the wicked one," — men in whom evil should reach a higher pass than at any former period. The Christian who becomes infidel and wicked surpasses both Heathen and Jew. He possesses a power of cor- ruption peculiar to his new standing. Our Lord pro- phesied that the days before his return, i. e. during the time of the Church militant, should be like those of Noah. As then mankind apostatized from original revelation, and rebelled against God, so should it be in the Christian economy also : and the end of this latter crime should be the antitype of the flood. These pro- phetic thoughts, which the Church has best learned to Eome. Yet " Babj-lon " in the Apocalypse does not express any one Romish or other section of Christendom, but that condition of Christendom, as a whole, in which, being the mystery of God's future kingdom, it has, by departing from His ways, hindered its revelation. The Eomish Church is but the chief street of Babylon. And she exclusively deserves the name only in so far as she exclusively claims to be the Church. — Tr. THE LABORS OF PAUL. 197 understand in niodeni times, as the end approaches, occupy the second Epistle of Peter and that which .hide cast in the same mould, and were occasioned by the first appearance of heathen corruptions in Christianity — impurity, and gnostic pride — through the prostitution of Paul's writings, to justify licentiousness, and to construct a gnosis which elevated its possessors above the moral law. These delusions proceeded from men, who, although once heathen, had been really cleansed and enlightened. (2 Pet. i. 9 ; ii. 20 — 22.) Instead of fulfilling their office as stars in the ecclesiastical firma- ment, they became ignes fatui (Jude 13), and are com- pared, both with Balaam who, once a prophet of God, became a snare to God's people, and with Cain, who murdered his brother. (2 Pet. ii. 15; Jude 11.) They used shameful arts to mislead the simple and newly converted. They dealt in high sounding promises of true liberty. And they sold their esoteric doctrines to the highest bidder for lucre's sake. (2 Pet. ii. 13, 18, 19; Jude 16.) On the denial of the resurrection, followed the denial of Christ's return to judgment. (2 Pet. i. 16; iii. 4.) They held that, as the first believers had fallen asleep without witnessing it, all things should remain as they were from the beginning of the creation. We know little of their positive teaching. But, when it is said that they were not afraid to speak evil of dignities (2 Pet. ii. 10; Jude 8), we are reminded of a doctrine already ascribed to Simon the sorcerer, that the angels, who had part in the creation of the world, were inferior beings, inimical powers, above whom the initiated stood far exalted. The warning which Peter gave before his departure. 19B THE LABORS OF PAUL. against this evil was probably required by few Churches at the time. It was directed more to the future (2 Pet. i. 14, 15), like a testament to be opened long after the death of the testator. To whom it was entrusted, and whether the wishes of the writer were rightly fulfilled, we do not know. But we do know that the Epistle found no place in the primitive Canon, which existed in the second and third centuries. When that Canon was first completed, the time to which the Epistle applied had not come. And subsequently, when the apostolic authority had disappeared, and the new authority of universal Councils had not yet arisen in its place, no additions to the Canon were admitted, even although unquestionably authentic. This explains the resistance to the acknowledgment of this Epistle, when it came forth from its obscurity. The first Church that had it, and the first teachers who expounded it, were those at Alexandria. But the Church at large was so justly persuaded, by its internal worth, both of its genumeness and of its inspiration, that, when the Canon was ren- dered complete in the fourth century, this was univer- sally and without diflSculty received as one of the seven catholic Epistles. And, the more gigantic the corrup- tion, and the nearer the judgment, therein foretold, daily become, the more cause has Christendom to hold fast this sacred document. We shall conclude this chapter with a few words as to the end of the two princes of the Apostles at Rome. Luke concludes his history without saying what decision the emperor gave in the case of Paul. And the writings of Paul leave us equally in the dark. But Luke's words lead us to expect — first, that the Apostle really found THE LABORS OF PAUL. 199 opportunity to give testimony before the ruler of the world — and second, that an acquittal follo\\ed. Ac- cording to the report of Festus, the Jews could not but be cast in their suit against Paul ; for at that time, a. d. 61, there was as yet no charge against the Christians brought before the government. The persecution did not arise till four years later. It is very doubtful whether Paul fulfilled his inten- tion of going into Spain. The supposition of a second captivity in Rome has its origin in erroneous views as to the dates of his Epistles. The latest of all, that to the Hebrews, cannot be placed later than 03. Although the general result of his labors in Rome is clear, we have no certain information as to details. Were his Epistle to the Philippians really dated from Rome, and not from Ca^sarea, we should know that there were converts of his in the Praetorian camp and in the house of Caesar himself. But this " Caesar's household" (Phil, iv. 22), may have been the family of the imperial liber- tine Felix, and the Praetoriura (Phil. i. 13), the Hero- dian palace, in which Paul was kept at Ca^sarea. (Acts xxiii. 35.) Tradition makes Paul the converter of the philosopher Seneca. The writings of the latter show that he had really come in contact with Christianity. But this is all. As representative of the Stoic doctrine of virtue, and as one of those murdered by Nero, Seneca might easily have been regarded by posterity, without sufficient ground, as a witness for the truth. The strongest testimony to the impression made by the labors of the two Apostles upon the population of Rome, is to be found in the words of Tacitus (Tac. Ann. XV. 44) : " The originator of the Christian name, 200 THE LABORS OF PAUL. Christ, was, under the govermrjent of Tiberius, punished with death by the governor Pontius Pilate. But the corrupting superstition, thereby checked for a time, broke out again (rursus erumpebat), not only in Judaea, where the evil arose, but also in the capital (per nr- bem).''' He sees, therefore, in that which preceded the Roman persecution, a second rise of Christianity ana- logous to the results of our Lord's own appearance in Palestine, a progress so rapid and marked, as to rivet the attention and then to excite the anger of the people ; so that, as the first appearance of Peter in Rome led to the banishment of the Jews by Claudius, his second led to the persecution of the Christians by Nero. Nero's better days w^ere past. He had fallen into a condition (fortunately for the human race a rare one), in which, the base courting of popularity was combined with folly, Inst, and thirst for blood. It was against this diabolically corrupted monster, invested with the highest power on earth, that the two great witnesses of Christ had to contend at the beginning of the dispen- sation; a conflict of light and darkness, such as shall be re-enacted at the time of the end. Six days had already lasted the greatest conflagration which Rome had ever seen, of w^hich it is uncertain whether it was the effect of chance or the crafty w^ork of the emperor. Tacitus records both opinions. Nero did indeed provide refuge for the houseless who had not perished in the narrow streets and lofty buildings. But neither by this, nor by his great schemes of restoration, nor by his offerings to the gods, could he disabuse the people of the idea that he had been the incendiary. " Then," says Tacitus, " in order to meet this charge, he cast the guilt upon THE LABORS OF PAUL. 201 the Christians, ah'eady made hateful to the people by their horrid crimes ; and he tormented them \Yith the most refined modes of punishment. At first some were seized, who made confessions, and then, on their infor- mation, an immense number, \Yho, although not con- victed of the fire-raising, were convicted, through the hatred of the whole human race, as worthy of death. Insult was added to murder. Some, WTapped in the skins of beasts, were bitten to death by dogs. Some were crucified. Some, covered with combustible stuffs, were bumt at night, to light the streets. (Juvenal mentions that they burnt like torches, standing with their throats fastened to stakes.) Nero had opened his gardens for this exhibition. And he instituted games in the circus, in which he himself, clothed as a charioteer and mounted on a chariot, mixed with the crowd. All this excited the compassion of the people, even for those guilty and worthy of the severest punishment, wdiom they saw sacrificed, not to the public good, but to the barba- rity of one man." Thus far Tacitus. Paul and Peter w ere two of this " immense number " of martyrs. Their graves were shewn in the second century— that of Peter on the Vatican — that of Paul on the way to Ostia. (Caius, the Presbyter, ap. Euseb. Hist. Eccl. ii. 25.) There is no ground for placing their martyrdom, which undoubtedly occurred under Nero, at the end of his reign, or to place the interval of a year between their deaths. The statement, that, wdiile Paul, as a Roman citizen, underwent the nobler death of beheading, Peter was crucified, is supported, not only by the fathers, but by the last chapter of John (John xxi. 18, 19), the words of which, whatever more 202 THE LABORS OF PAUL. they may mpfcn, clearly point to Peter's crucifixion. IflKemmrch in Ephesus, at the end of the first century, when t his chapter was added to John's Gospel, knew tvhat death Peter had suffered, they surely also knew where he had died. It is impossible that tradition should have substituted a wrong place for the right one. All antiquity unanimously regards Rome as the place of Peter's death. Those only can regard his coming thither and his end there as a fable, who, for party ends, are ready to wipe out history, and write their own fancies in its place. It is not said that bloody orders against the Chris- tians were sent into the provinces. But it is to 4)e assumed, that the example, set in the capital, was fol- lowed, in many places by the authorities, in others by the populace. Such was the state of the public mind, that Peter, on the approach of the storm, could say, that the like sufferings were endured by all Christians throughout the world. (1 Pet. v, 9.) No names of martyrs are handed down as belonging to this time. Nor do we know what im])ression these events made on the faithful. But both sections of the Church, Hebrew and Greek, were struck as by one blow in the deaths of the two apostolic pillars. And we may con- clude, that while the Pauline Churches were led to cherish Paul's memory, both parts of the Church were brought into closer union, by their common loss, and by the common labors and sufferings of those whom they had lost. 203 CHAPTER III. THE LABORS OF JOHN, AND THE STATE OF THE CHURCH AT THE END OF THE APOSTOLIC AGE. AVhilst all this was passing at Rome, that storm was gathering over Judaea which destroyed the holy city. The predictions of Christ, of Stephen, and of the two Apostles to the heathen (in their letter to the Hebrew Christians), were fulfilled. Centuries of grace and long- suffering were succeeded by days of inevitable judgment on an impenitent people. All those places which noble recollections, and Christ's own presence, had rendered sacred, became scenes of tribulation ; and Jerusalem itself became the theatre of a reign of terror, which has had no parallel save in the first French revolution. The day came for the fall of this holy Ilium. The story of its destruction, worthy of a bard like Homer, or a historian like Tacitus, is preserved by no other witness than the apostate Jew, Flavius Josephus. Yet, although he mixes up with the great subject the ex- cuse of his own base character and faithless conduct, although he fails to represent aright the deeper reli- gious grounds of the desperate conflict, although he loads those whom he forsook with exaggerated accusa* tions, and withholds the praise due to their heroism; still that which he states is to be relied on, where the events occurred in his vicinity, and where his own vanity is not concerned. Tacitus, one competent to 204 THE LABORS OF JOHN. judge, has, by drawing his unfinished narrative solely from Josephus, testified his faith in the accuracy of the Jew. But the true character of the tragedy was yet more hid from the Roman Stoic than from the Jewish traitor. No Christian witness has I'ecorded these events. Had he done so, he could only have indited a song of woe like that of David at the fall of Saul and Jonathan. Pontius Pilate, Antonius Felix, Albinus, and Gessius Florus, were governors, who, by the providence of God, exercised in succession over Judaea a severer and more reckless tyranny than that of Verres in Sicily, suffi- cient to rouse the most patient people to rebellion. Florus studiously stirred th*e Jews to rage and des- perate resistance, as the only expedient by which he could escape from giving an account of his misdeeds. But the whole preceding century of the Jewish state was a period of such increasing religious excitement, that, even without the provocation of the Roman tyranny, the Jewish zealots would have undertaken the most desperate things, fanatically assured of suc- cess, and wickedly blind to the advent of the true Messiah. The return from Babylon had already oc- curred without the coming of Messiah. Daniel re- ceived, at the end of seventy years, that revelation which comforted his people in connexion with other seven times seventy years. These, if reckoned from the command of Cyrus to restore Jerusalem, reached to the days in which Herod the Idumean, son of Antipater, usurped the royal dignity. His flatterers saw in him the anointed. Those who thought more deeply awaited with increasing impatience that hero, — who should deliver THE LABORS OF JOHN. 205 Israel both from the Romans and from the Edomite dynasty of criminals, — who should cast down Rome as the mistress of the world, and set np in the place of her monstrous kingdom that of the holy people and of the true faith. AVhen Cyrenius, in the sixth year of our common a^ra, completed the taxing in the name of the heathen emperor Octavianus, and thereby impressed upon the people the mark of slavery, Judas of Gamala called Israel to arms. This was the first })opular rising to which the hope of Messiah's kingdom led. Josephus is wrong in asserting that Judas the Gaulonite added a fourth new party to the three old ones. (Jos. Bell. Jud. ii. 12. [7.] ) He only carried into act what all the orthodox teachers had taught. These risings were the necessary consequence of a consistent adherence to the prevalent doctrine of the Pharizees. Where there was no right consciousness of guilt and unworthiness, or conviction of the need for internal change and re- generation, men could have no perception of the true drift of prophecy or capacity to receive the true deli- verer. There was in such circumstances nothing left for them, but either to betray and renounce all that was sacred or honorable, or to hazard the conflict with the oppressor. Every page of the Scriptures, every verse of the Psalms, appeared, in such a state of mind, to be a call to such an enterprize, and a promise of success. Why should not the heroic conduct of the Maccabees be repeated, and again signally crowned with victory } Thus, to the carnally-minded, did the hope of Messiah become a snare, and the rock of salvation a stone that should grind them to powder. The rejection of the truth 206 THE LABORS OF JOHN. cast them into the arms of the lie. The false prophets, who, from Judas the Galilaean do\Ynwards, had in- creased in number, zeal, and influence, were, in most cases, not intentional deceivers, but fanatics, filled, partly with supposed inspiration from their own fancy, partly with real diabolical agency. And so sad was the confusion of good and evil among those who had not received Christ, that the very noblest and most pious were the most easily seduced and became the wildest. The doctrine of the Gaulonite was evidently of a very popular character. Every new martyrdom fed the excitement. And the war party had its ranks filled, at first with the virtuous and patriotic, but afterwards with the lawless, the seditious, and the desperate. At the head of the peace party were the Sadducees, and Agrippa II., the last of the house of Herod, the puppet Roman king of the north-eastern district. While the Roman despotism stood in its strength, all persons, of no fixed character, naturally ranged themselves under it. But when the events of the war so unex- pectedly favored the Jews, the multitude swam with the stream, and it required no little firmness to counsel abstinence from rebellion. Under Felix, thousands followed the false prophets into the wilderness, to see signs and wonders like those of Moses, the liberator. They ascended the Mount of Olives with that Egyptian who predicted that, at his command, the bulwarks of Jerusalem, occupied by the Romans, should fall down. They were cut down with- out mercy by the pursuing troops of the governor. (Joseph. Archaeol. xx. 6 ; Acts xxi. 38.) About the same time the inhabitants of Jerusalem were destined THE LABORS OF JOHN. 207 to hear once more a messenger of the true Messiah in the person of Paul. (Acts xxii. 1, &c.) But his oral warning, and the strange omens of the approaching destruction, were alike in vain. Under Albinus, in tlie year of James's martyrdom, the popular joy, at the Feast of Tabernacles, was dis- turbed by the appearance of the wretched Jesus, the son of Ananus, who, among the shouts of the vast crowd in the courts of the tem])le, lifted up that rending cry of woe over Jerusaknn, which never intermitted for seven years and six months, till the deadly bolt struck him in the siege. In that year in which the war broke out, at midnight of the Passover, the brazen door of the temple opened itself; a sign, interpreted by the deluded as a pledge that Jehovah was about to come forth to fight for Plis people as in Egypt of old ; but truly announcing the very opposite. And lastly,* when Pentecost arrived, the priests were alarmed by nightly voices, crying, "Let us depart hence," and by the noise of invisible beings forsaking the sanctuary, in token that God had then founded another sanctuary to which His protecting presence turned. (Joseph. Bell. Jud. vi. 31. [vii. 12.]) We are warranted in regard- ing these events as more than accident, by the many scriptural examples of the great truth, that extraordi- nary natural phenomena generally precede or accom- pany great acts of guilt or great misfortune among men. In the twelfth year of Nero, the sixty-sixth of our aera, the people rose against its tormentor, Gessius Florus. lie retired with his army to Ca3sarea. The re- mainder of the garrison at Jerusalem was traitorously * Three signs of judgment at the three great seasons of blessing.— Tr. 208 THE LABORS OF JOHN. slaughtered on the Sabbath. This first reverse of the Romans was the signal for a universal rising, for a war both national and religious, which filled town and country alike, occupied by a mixed population, with mutual massacre. (Joseph. Bell. Jud. ii. 3*2, 33. [xviii. 19.] ) We may, from our recent experience of contests between Greeks and Turks, Poles and Germans, Hun- garians and Sclavonians, form some idea of that which ensued in the half-Syrian, half-Israelite cities, like Cajsarea. Where two nations in one land hated each other as fire and w^ater, where the authority which should have kept peace was destroyed, and where, by the shedding of blood, every diabolical passion was roused, it must have been a day of trouble for the dis- ciples of Christ. We have good cause to believe that the Churches in Palestine suffered terribly. They could side with no party. By the Jews, they w^ere hated as renegades ; by the heathen, as Jews. Which ever party w^as victorious, they were the victims, in this civil war ; and needed, indeed, all the consolations of the Epistle to the Hebrews. The Hebrews, on becoming masters of a Greek citj', vented their spite on the Christians. And, where they were vanquished, and, as occurred at Antioch, were forced by torture to partake in heathen sacrifices (Joseph. Bell. Jud. vii. 9. [21.]), the Chris- tians shared their fate. AVhen Josephus mentions the Essenes, who were tortured by the Romans till they should curse the name of the Lawgiver, but who, un- moved, died with smiles and without a groan (Joseph. Bell. Jud. ii. 12 [7] ), we may well conceive Christians to have been mingled with Essenes among the number of the sufferers. THE LABORS OF JOHN. 209 The Procurator had given way. But the Governor of Syria, who was over him, Cestius Gallus, advanced with the twelfth legion and many auxiliaries upon the capital. He planted his camp to the north of the city, about the time of the Feast of Tabernacles. The suburbs soon fell into his hands. He already assaulted the eminence of the Temple. He could have taken the city, especially if he had united himself with the still numerous peace party in it. But he retired in an inexplicable manner, as in our times Carlos V. from the gates of Madrid. A panic must have seized those accustomed to victory. In impassable mountain dis- tricts they were encompassed by the pursuing Jews, and suffered great loss. And the triumphant rebels returned with pceans into Jerusalem, while Cestius Gallus completed his disgraceful retreat out of the holy land. (Joseph. J5ell. Jud. ii. 39, 40 [24] .) This victory, at a time when the whole world bowed before Rome, must have appeared as a miracle and as a pledge of complete success. The Sadducees, whose heart was with the enemies of their country, did not share in the joy. That which had kept them back from the rebellion was not wisdom, but unbelief, in- difference, and selfishness. But every true Israelite must have felt it most difficult to resist the persuasion that the cause of the rebels was good, and to refrain from joining it. None but those enlightened in Christ could see through the delusion. Many of the higher classes at this juncture left the city, as a sinking ship (Joseph. Bell. Jud. ii. 40 [24] ) ; their interests being bound up with those of Rome. And the flight of the Christian congregation must have occurred, at the VOL. I. ' p 210 THE LABORS OF JOHN. latest, about this time. Eusebius relates that the most faithful in the Church received by revelation an oracu- lar announcement, commanding the whole Christian people to quit Jerusalem, and to seek a new abode in a city of Pera3a, called Pella. (Euseb. Hist. Eccl. iii. 5.) This is not at variance with the statement of Epipha- nius, that the message was brought by an angel from heaven (Epiph. de pond, et mens. c. 15) ; a statement containing an allusion to the command which Joseph received through an angel to flee with Mary and the holy Child from Herod to Egypt, and also to that re- ceived by Lot to flee out of Sodom. Christ had com- manded His disciples to escape, when they should see the abomination in the holy place, and Jerusalem surrounded with armies. The one began, when, under Felix, assassination was perpetrated in the courts of the temple ; and it was aggravated by the contests of the zealots on the mountain of the Lord's house. The other showed itself in the approach of Cestius Gallus. His retreat rendered the emigration of the Christians possible ; for when Titus, four years after, besieged Jeru- salem, there w^as hardly any room for escape. The right- eous, who by their presence had held back the calamity, disappeared from the city and from all Juda3a. The storm did not burst till the Christians had found a refuge in the Syrian city, in the territory of Agrippa. We do not know whether the faithful fled from Galilee also. If they remained, they must have been exposed to fresh sufferings; first, persecution from the Jewish tyrants ; then a share in the evils of war and conquest. Meanwhile, those heads of the people were chosen in Jerusalem who were invested with extraordinary powers THE LABORS OF JOHN. 211 to conduct the war. Galilee, with its many fortresses, and the whole of Palestine, were in the power of the Jews and of the popular war party, who had reason to expect aid from their brethren residing beyond the Euphrates, and elsewhere. Rome felt the importance of the contest. Nero sent, with three veteran legions, Vespasian, grown old in war, the most victorious of the imperial generals, conqueror of the Britons in thirty battles. (Suetonius Vesp. 4.) During the two summers of 67 and 68, he carried on the war in con- junction with his son Titus, and possessed himself of all but Jerusalem. He wasted Galilee with fire and sword, and reduced all its fortresses. On the storm- ing of Taricha^a by Titus, scenes of hoiTor surrounded the peaceful lake of Gennezaret. On its waters a work of extermination was carried on against the fugitives. Its shores were strewed with corpses. As by the Assy- rians of old, so once again the land was made desolate. The capital alone stood, protected by its precipices and lofty walls. The fugitives crowded into the holy city. Among them were many of the worst character. The danger from without was equalled by the strife within, between the peace and war parties. As during the reign of terror at Paris, those w^ere threatened with death who were suspected of sympathizing with the enemy. The zealots played each the tyrant. In this contest they filled the courts of the temple wuth slaughter. The wild Idumeans, ready for every deed of violence, and after- wards Simon of Gerasa himself, the leader of the bands of robbers, were called in to restore internal order. Ananus, who had delivered James to death, Jesus, p 2 212 THE LABORS OF JOHN. also a high priest, and Zacharias, son of Baruch, died for their courageous resistance to the desecration of the sanctuary. (Joseph. Bell. Jud. iv. 13, 18, 19 [iv. 5; V. 1] .) Jerusalem was in no less distress than at the ap- proach of Sennacherib. Yet, by a providence as un- expected as the overthrow of the Assyrian army, the Roman troops were commanded to halt. They retired, for a second time. The news of Nero's death had arrived. The civil war had broken out at home. Galba had been proclaimed emperor in Spain, and accepted in Rome. Otho effected his murder ; and the legions in Germany set up Yitellius as the rival of Otho. If other legions were able to name an emperor, the victorious troops in Palestine could follow the example. And, if any general had earned the imperial dignity, it was Vespasian. He was proclaimed in Csesarea. Syria, Egypt, the armies in Maesia, acknowledged him. He passed into Italy to contend with Vitellius. Titus went to order affairs in Egypt. Judaea breathed once more. Her civil war continued. But by Rome she was left in peace. Thus the hopes of the fanatics were revived. God's long suffering did not bring them to repentance. Tacitus reckons this season of rest at a year. (Tacit. Hist. V. 10.) Josephus reckons it not so long, till Titus returned with fresh forces from Alexandria. With this event began the last act of the tragedy. Myriads of Jews had arrived to celebrate the Passover in the city so marvellously spared. The legions encamped on the north, east, and west. The whole city was soon en- compassed with a wall, which enclosed, as in a prison, the multitudes who had arrived. The same feast which THE LABORS OF JOHN. 213 witnessed the rejection of the Messiah, saw the fate of his dehidcd nation. Every contrivance of war, aided by new inventions, was applied. It was a frightful contest between the pride and power of Rome, and the reckless fanaticism of Judaea. On the one hand, the con- fidence of universal conquest; on the other, reliance on the God of Israel, as the protector of His sanctuary. The defenders rejoiced in death, expecting a speedy resurrection at the coming of Messiah. They regarded each new success of the enemy as only a new trial of faith, on which the victory of their Saviour must follow. And all this, in spite of such ravages by hunger and despair, among the congregated inhabitants and pil- grims, as have no parallel in history. (Joseph. Bell. Jud. vi. 20, 21 [vii. 8] .) The outer wall was passed. The citadel Antonia, on the north side of the temple, was stormed. The upper city, on Mount Zion, yet stood, with its gigantic towers, built by Herod I. The whole fury of the assault was directed against the heightof the temple, the position of the boldest defenders. And its sacred porches were the scene of the concluding struggle. Then arrived, in the midst of battle and burning, that great day of sorrow, on which the daily sacrifice closed. Titus stood with his soldiers on the desacrated spot. The noise of weapons ceased. The eagles were planted. And heathen sacrifices smoked on that height to the honor of the gods of Rome. Titus entered, to behold the interior of the temple, (ere it should be devoured by the flames which he could not arrest,) on the 10th of August, in the second year of Vespasian and the seven- tieth of Christ, the very day on which the fiist temple 214 THE LABORS OF JOHN. had been destroyed by the Chaldeans. (Joseph. Bell. Jud. vi. 26—32 [vii. 9, 13] .) On the same day one of the false prophets had given to the inhabitants the pretended command of God to ascend the temple, where they should see the signs of salvation. Crowds of w^omen and children, having obeyed what they regarded as the word of God, totally perished in the flames. (Joseph. Bell. Jud. vi. 29, 30 [vii. 11].) By the "signs of salvation" which they looked for, they could have understood nothing else than the appearance of their Deliverer in the clouds of heaven, as seen by Daniel. This must have been their last hope. The extreme possible term of the seventy wrecks had arrived. They expected till the last moment the fulfilment of the vision vouchsafed to the prophet of Susa. The last of the priests climbed a yet stand- ing wall of the sanctuary, whence, waiting for divine rescue, they looked down on the scene of horror, till at the end of five days they were constrained to descend into the arms of death. (Joseph. Bell. Jud. vi. 33 [vii. 13].) On the other hand, when the upper city was stormed, the bravest combatants, who, true to their oath, rejected all offers of mercy, quitted, as in folly, the refuge of the rock-like towers, in the vain hope to escape by the south. (Joseph. Bell. Jud. vi. 42, 43 [vii. 16] .) The work of blood and destruction was soon at an end. When Titus, after the celebration of his victory, passed by, on his return from Csesarea Philippi, melancholy filled his heart, on beholding the stillness of desolation where the queen of cities had stood. (Joseph. Bell. Jud. vii. 15 [24] .) With what feelings then must the Christian congre- THE LABORS OF JOHN. 216 gations in Peraea and throughout the world have heard of the fall of Jerusalem ? They had no part in the joy of those who saw Vespasian and Titus enter triumphant into Rome through the yet standing arch. As Christ himself, descending from the Mount of Olives, wept over the city lying before Him, at the thought of its future fate, so no doubt did the faithful, on the occur- rence of that which He had foreseen, forget their own wrongs, and pour out, not reproaches, but lamenta- tions, while acknowledging the hand of the righteous judge. Centuries after, some Churches in Palestine were still used to read, in memory of the event, a book, the prophecies of which, as to the fall of Jerusalem, were ascribed to Peter. They read the " Revelation of Peter" annually at their holy assemblies, on the day of our Lord's death. (Zozomen, Hist. Eccl. vii. 19.) Their greatest day of mourning was also the anniversary of Jerusalem's destruction.* But the Christians saw in what occurred much more than the mere judgment of God on His ancient people. They saw also a prediction as to the future, taught as they were, by the spirit of prophecy in the Church, to interpret aright the indications afforded by passing * We cannot leave this description without remarking on the self-destruc- tive course of those who depart from God. The Jews, who would not listen to the true prophets, were deluded by the false. They who rejected the true Messiah expected the false. They were hurried to destruction by the wicked counterpart of that which should have saved them. They misinterpreted every sign. They drew strength in delusion from every respite given to them for repentance. And the fall of that in which they trusted made their ruin the more signal. Is the warning not needed now? Are there none in judicial blindness and peril now] Is there no Babylon now, which, like Jerusalem of old, boasts itself impregnable, and at the sudden fall of which the nations shall tremble ] Let all Christendom be warned. — Tb. 216 THE LABORS OF JOHN. events. It was a time especially rich in novel and important events, pregnant with meaning for the future. The rapid succession of external occurrences was the fit occasion for a coiTesponding prophetic developement in the Church. The divine exposition accompanied the divine actings. The spirit of prophecy, embracing beginning and end, deduced, from things present, in- timations as to greater yet to come. The time had arrived, at which, in conformity with our Lord's own predictions while on earth, and with the light which He vouchsafed through Paul, the Church should receive from her Head in heaven a third great revelation of futurity — the contents of the Apocalypse of John, or rather of Jesus Christ. This revelation is the property of the whole Church. It was primarily addressed to the seven Churches in Asia — Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamos, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, and Laodicea, — because, after the fall of Jerusalem, and before the rise of Rome, these were the centre of Christendom, the chief seat of Christian life, the symbolic representation of the whole Church, and the precursors of the whole in spiritual progress. And it was given to John, because, after the death of James, Peter, and Paul, the burden of the Church rested on him who was reckoned with them one of the pillars of the spiritual temple ; and the exercise of the apostolic office towards the widowed Churches devolved on him. .John had labored with Peter among the Israelites. (Gal. ii. 11.) He had probably also accompanied Peter THE LABORS OF JOHN. 217 to the capital of Heathenism ; for Tertullian tells us (Tert. de Pia;scr. Hcret. c. 36), that he Avas cast by the Roman persecutors into boiling oil — a mode of torture \vhich reminds us of the persecution under Nero; — and he seems to regard the event as contem- porary with the deaths of Peter and Paul. Miracu- lously preserved, John was banished to Patmos, where he received the Apocalypse. But his banishment can hardly have followed immediately on the events in Rome. The selection of Patmos for his place of ba- nishment would imply that John, after his Roman sufferings, had gone to Ephesus, to take charge of the Churches in Asia, and was there sentenced by a Roman goveraor to banishment. After the death of the tyrant, he returned, as Clement of Alexandria informs us (Euseb. Hist. Eccl. iii. 23), to Ephesus. One of the most difficult questions in the chronology of the apostolic age regards the name of this tyrant and the date of the Apocalypse. Shall we accept the confident assertions of professed critics, that the Apo- calypse was written before the destruction of Jerusalem and under Galba ? Or shall we come lower down with Irenaeus, who says, " The Apocalypse was beheld, not long ago, but almost on the border of our generation," i.e. about the end of the reign of Domitian ? (Euseb. Hist. Eccl. iii. 18.) These dates are more than twenty years apart. However high is the authority of every notice out of the second century, yet it is not impos- sible that even then an error may have crept into tradition. And if a sure interpretation of the book itself leads to a different conclusion, tradition must yield. We are thus driven to consider its interpretation. 218 THE LABORS OF JOHN. But we shall not here undertake an exposition of its predictions. We shall confine ourselves to the his- torical position of the Apocalypse; and use it, as a help to inquiry, not into the future, but into the past. We hear it asserted by a number of professed ex- pounders, that the description of Babylon in the Apo- calypse refers to heathen Rome, which Peter had already styled Babylon ; and that Nero was the beast out of the pit, which was, and is not, and yet is. Others, again, have regarded the fall of Jerusalem as the chief subject of the book, and fancied that they had discovered a poetical description of the Jewish war in its very details. And others, endeavouring to combine the two views, have applied the first half to Jerusalem, the second to Rome; so that the whole shall describe the victory of Christianity over both Judaism and Heathenism. And really there are points of simi- larity discoverable, which show that, in these more or less rationalistic views, there may be a measure of subordinate truth. Yet they all contain one capital error, the same as that which has occasioned endless contention in the exposition of the prophetic books of the Old Testament. Take for an example the Mes- sianic Psalms. Their reference to David and Solomon is so clear, that, on the decay of spiritual life and pro- phetic light in the Church, the opinion might well arise among theologians, that these Psalms were only poetic inflated descriptions of cotemporary kings and their deeds, not prophecies as to Christ. Such a theory, how- ever, overlooks the fact, that these kings were them- selves precursors of Christ — anointed ones of God — saviours for the people — men in whose history that of THE LABORS OF JOHN. 239 the future deliverer and kin^ was prefigured. The very best class of theologians have too much forgotten, that the Spirit of God has but one object of vision and discourse worthy of Himself, namely — Christ and His Church — first, in conflict and suffering, then in victory. Prophecy always reaches through to the perfect thing. On no other ground can it be defended from the charge of exaggeration. And whoever will apprehend the w^ords of prophecy truly and fully, must be carried through temporary fulfilments to their great final sub- ject, and led into the Messianic interpretation. But as Christ has His types, so has Antichrist. As the w^ay is prepared for the kingdom of God, so also for the judgment of the world. As the good approaches its full developement, so also the evil. The errors and conflicts of the last time have appeared typically in former times. Of this we have constant examples in considering the Old Testament prophecies. The spirit of prophecy attaches revelation regarding the end of all things to the existing circumstances of every time. And as the Holy Spirit is the same in all dispensations, the prophecies of the New Testament have in this respect the same character as those of the Old. The right principles of interpretation for unfulfilled pro- phecy are those to which a faithful investigation of fulfilled prophecy conducts us. On this principle, therefore, the Apocalypse has much larger objects than the events in the time of Nero and his successors. Those err greatly who regard the fall of Jerusalem, and a Roman emperor, as the final objects of the visions. The contemporaneous events were not the end in view, but the starting point of the prophetic 2*20 THE LABORS OF JOHN. discourse — the foreground, so to speak, of tlie picture, by which the eye might be led to the more distant objects. The only things to which the words of the Apocalypse can be applied without exaggeration had not yet appeared. The last conflict was yet future. Yet that time was filled with pre-indications of the end. The five years between Nero's persecution and Jeru- salem's fall were, both in and out of the Church, a strik- ing prelude of the end. The expressions of John as to his contemporaries were shadoNvs of the great drama with which this dispensation shall close. Therefore were the hearts of men so filled with the nearness of the end. Then were present many of those conditions which might have straightway evoked the consummation. And the Christians then needed exactly that light and comfort which is given in the Apocalypse. For although the meaning of this greatest of all prophecies can be exhausted by nothing less than the events which shall conclude this dispensation, and by the kingdom to come, yet the Apocalypse is written for all intervening times also of the Church militant. The man of sin was not yet seen in his full form. Yet the martyrs under Decius or Diocletian rightly found their comfort in the predictions regarding the destruction of the beast. Babylon had not yet fully appeared, as John saw her. Yet the witnesses who, since the middle ages, have tes- tified against the corruption of the Church, have been rightly comforted in their sufferings by the prediction of Babylon's fall, and the coming of the New Jerusalem. That which is written as to the complete apostasy, describes also every successive stage of its rise. There is no other principle but this, on which to recognize THE LABORS OF JOHN. 221 the historical position of the Apocalypse, without fall- ing into the dry and shallow exposition of the ration- alists. Thus alone can we at once estimate the unex- hausted depths of prophecy, and yet employ it as a glass in whicli to find the circumstances and feelings of those primitive times historically reflected. While the ancient city of God fell, and God hid his face from her, Christ counted the seven Churches of Asia worthy, as the metropolis of the new divine polity, to receive the Apocalypse. (Apoc. i. 4.) John said to the faithful, in reference to the forfeited honor of the ancient people, " He hath made vs kings and priests." (Rev. i. 6.) As the earthly sanctuary disappeared, a heavenly one was opened to John, in which the seven golden candlesticks stand, which are the seven Churches. (Rev. i. 12, 20.) The Christian Church therefore is this heavenly sanctuary. The Aaronic priesthood had died out. In its place appeared Christ in priestly gar- ments, as the minister of the higher sanctuary. (Rev. i. 13.) And the vision accorded with that description of His office, which, in the prospect of the change, had been already given in the Epistle to the Hebrews. Were nothing more said, this first chapter of the Apocalypse would be proof sufficient that, even in the primary sense of the book, Jerusalem, Zion, the temple, the tribes of Israel, are no longer to be understood in the letter. All these already belonged to the past. The earthly Jerusalem had fallen, virtually, or in fact. The earthly temple had no more place in Christendom. Old Testament seers had indeed spoken of the rebuilding of the earthly city of God. But of this the Apocalypse says not a word. And it has as little to do with the destruc- 222 THE LABORS OF JOHN. tion as with the rebuilding of the earthly Zion. It is exclusively devoted to the distinct and heaven-directed Church of Christ. It contains nothing as to the futurity of the Jews. The Jews have their Apocalypse in Ezekiel and the other prophets of the old covenant. This will serve to rescue the Apocalypse from the charge of containing nothing but narrow-minded Jewish representations. The charge originates in the unspi- ritual, literal, unworthy exegesis of those who bring it. The book of the Revelation does not constitute a continuous chronicle of the future, but seems to con- tain various cycles of visions, of which each embraces, more or less under diversified forms, the course of those events by w^hich this dispensation is to be w^ound up, seen from different points of view. The contents of the seven seals (Rev. vi. ] — 8) are a complete picture of the Christian age of the world, full of troubles, ending in judgment and deliverance. But they also form a picture of the time then being, in its eventful features — conquest — civil war — famine — pes- tilence, as in the four first seals — the cry of the souls for vengeance under the fifth, such as that under the persecution by Nero — despair at the opening of the sixth, such as that of the Jewish war — the sealing of the 144,000, such as that of the faithful ere Jerusalem was destroyed (Rev. vii. 1 — 8) — the appearance of the great company, as in the subsequent spread of the Gospel. (Rev. vii. 9 — 17.) Yet Origen is in the right in understanding the " twelve tribes " as those of the spiritual Israel. And, if so, then we must seek the proper object of this vision of the tribes, not at the com- mencement of the Christian dispensation, when those THE LABORS OF JOHN. 22S spiritual tribes, /. e. the twelve-foldncss of the Christian Church, had not been fully developed, but at the end. The seven trumpets form a second class of visions, and the seven vials a third. The sounding of the trumpets (Rev. viii. '2 — 11, 15) is introduced by the cessation of the intercession at the heavenly altar, and its conversion into judgment. (Rev. viii. 5.) To this the cessation of the daily worship at Jerusalem was analogous. But the event thus seen in vision, is a much higher and a yet future thing. The succeeding visions remind us of the Egyptian plagues, of the assaults of Roman legions, and Parthian horse. (Rev. viii. 7 — 9, 21.) But neither the events in the days of Moses, nor the wars in the time of John, form the true goal of the prophecy. It evidently points symbolically to things then future. And the same remarks apply to the vials. Earthly plagues shadow forth throughout spiritual judgments. It were a grievous mistake to understand, in a mere literal sense, the measuring of the temple (Rev. xi. 1, 2) — the sparing of the internal and the treading down of the external ; and, to conclude, that the Jewish temple was then not yet destroyed, and that John foretold that it could not be so. This were to make John directly contradict Christ, and speak as one of those false pro- phets, who fed the fond hopes of the Jews. The very passage on which such a wrong notion is founded affords its contradiction. It forces us to look at the spiritual temple which Christ promised to raise up instead of that made with hands. It foretells that, in contrast to the temple of Solomon, and its then past or impending fall, the spiritual sanctuary should, while its carnal courts were destroyed, be itself eternally preserved. 224 THE LABORS OF JOHN. We here read, for the first time, of that great city (Rev. xi. 8), which is afterwards fully described under the name of Babylon. The city ultimately indicated must be the same throughout. It cannot be regarded as at one time Jerusalem, at another Rome. Granting that at, and long after the date of the Apocalypse, these two temporary applications were made, yet, with Christians of the present day, there can be no doubt that the spirit of prophecy pointed to a third and yet greater object. A third city {civitas) was destined to appear, which should unite in itself all the evil cha- racters of apostate Jerusalem, of heathen Rome, of ancient Babylon, and of Tyre ; a city in which Christ should be spiritually crucified (Rev. xi. 8), and the last witnesses slain, as Peter and Paul had been at Rome, after finishing their testimony, and as James, at Jeru- salem, before its fall. This frightful mystery was hidden from the view of Christian antiquity. And when it first came dimly into view, it was perverted to justify ex- clusive reproaches against the Romish Church. Not the Romish, as distinct from Protestant Churches, but the whole of Christendom, the great edifice of God, becomes, in so far as it breaks Christ's covenant, resists His ways, and quenches His life, Babylon the Great. It was easier to guess the meaning of the two follow- ing visions. (Rev. xii. 1 — 6.) The woman, clothed with the sun, and crowned with twelve stars, fleeing from her persecutor into the place prepared for her of God in the wilderness (Rev. xii., xiii.), reminded all of the Church escaping from Jerusalem to Peraea. Yet this event itself was, like the flight of Moses or Elias, only a type. No less plainly did the beast out of the sea indicate the persecution by Nero. The deeds of Caius or Nero THE I.ABOES OF JOHX 225 corresponded in almost every particular witl, tl>c pic ture. (Rev. xiii. l-io.) Nevertheless they were but harl)ingcrs of the true future fulfilment. This beast was sunilar to the fourth of Daniel, under which is .lustly understood the Roman empire. Satan a,,peared really to have given his power and throne to the Roman ,7T' ^^r- ""'''"■ -^' '" °'^'' *° ''' 1'"" "P as an Anti-Messiah, as the truculent caricature and rival of the Son of the Highest, to whom the Father has lc. And we should certainly do this, were we sure that we possess them exactly as Eusebius knew and recognized them ; for he, most probably, had them from that library which contained the official episcopal corre- spondence. The tlu'ee Syrian Epistles are liable to the suspicion of being, not an older text, but a mere excerpt from the seven genuine Epistles; for the other writings in the same manuscripts appear to be excerpts. ("Some Fragments of Ancient Syrian Divines." Bun- sen, Ep. of Ignat, 1847, p. 16.) But, on the other hand, the doubts as to the genuineness of the seven Epistles, as known since the time of Usher, are not all resolved. No manuscript has been found which con- tains only those seven which Eusebius attests — a ma- nuscript such as he must have had before him. The manuscripts which contain the text pleaded for by the Romanists and Episcopalians, embrace also the later additional spurious Epistles. And this induces the fear lest some things may have been interpolated into the seven ancient Epistles also. Therefore, in con- sidering what Ignatius himself taught, we abstain from appealing to the seven E])istles, although persuaded that they contain no anachronism, and tliat the doc- trines and rites there noticed, actually belonged to the time of Trajan. Instance — the warnings against the 302 THE LABORS OF JOHN. Docetae and Jiulaists — the repeated mention of tlie Saviour as God — the exhortation to do nothing with- out the bishop, and to follow the bishop as Christ, and the presbyters as i^postles.* The influence of Ignatius depended in no small degree on his agreement with Polycarp, as a follower of John ; because, as the apostolic oflSce disappeared, the primitive Church longed for men of similar autho- rity. The remarkable expressions of humility in the Epistles of Ignatius, arose from his observing, that the other bishops were disposed to elevate the metropolitan of Syria, a prisoner for Christ's sake, into a place which belonged to Apostles alone, and from his desire to cor- rect such an exaggeration. And an important circum- stance, in confirmation of this view, is the historical tradition, that the bishops and elders of the neighbour- ing Churches came to the prisoner on his way to Rome, " in order to receive a share of spiritual endow- ment." (Martyr. Ignat. c. 3.) The number of those who had received their ordination and endowment from the Apostles themselves had already very much decreased. Ignatius wrote in substance to the Roman Christians : " I die gladly for God, if ye will only not hinder me. Let me be the prey of those beasts, by which it is vouchsafed to me to become partaker of God. I am God's grain of wheat; and shall be bruised by the teeth of the wild beasts, that I may be found pure * An argument for the genuineness of such passages lies in the beautiful parallel which they draw between each particular Churchy and the Church universal, of which it is a visible symbol ; — each complete in itself, yet the former only as part of the great whole, at the head of which stands no mere man, but the Bishop of souls Himself, with Apostles as elders. — Tii. THE LABORS OF JOHN. 303 bread of God. Rather encourage the beasts, that they may become my grave and leave nothing of my body, that I niay not in my death be a burden to any. Then shall 1 be indeed a disciple of Christ, when the world shall not see even my corpse. Intreat the Lord that I may by these instruments be found an offering unto God. Not as Peter and Paul do I command you. They are Apostles. I am a condemned one. They are free. I am hitherto a servant. But when I shall have suffered, I shall be a freed man of Christ, and be raised again in Him as a free one. And if the beasts will not devour me, I will constrain them. Let fire and cross — anything come upon me, if I may only be partaker of Christ. I am nigh unto birth. My love (for all that passeth away) is crucified. There is in me no more fire of lust after that which is earthly. I delight no longer in food that perisheth, nor in the pleasures of this life. I long for the bread of God, which is the flesh of Christ, and for His blood as drink — which is love that passeth not away." (Ign. ad Rom. passim.) This confidence forsook him not in death. Plis desire was accomplished. By his fiery longing for martyrdom he was elevated to be a sacred ideal for the primitive Church. It is easy to say, that the desire for martyrdom, which was so frequent and so highly prized of old, exceeded the measure of the followers of Christ, and degenerated into a fanatical purpose. Instead of indulging in such censure, it would better befit us to admire that aspiration after perfection which found its expression in those who courted martyrdom, and es- pecially in Ignatius. Such desire was truly apostolic in them. And we cannot forget that, not only the means 304 THE LABORS OF JOHN. of sanctification, but the full light as to the right way of holiness, were already on the decrease. If it was felt that the Church was no longer constantly increasing in preparation for the kingdom, if she no longer supplied her children with all that their hearts desired, what was more natural than to seek perfect assimilation to Christ in heroic sacrifice for Him ? He had Himself called His sufferings a baptism, a consecration to per- fection, which He had to undergo. The thirst for martyrdom is a sign, on the one hand, of decaying hope in Christ's return, and of increasing weakness in the Church, but, on the other hand, of ardent individual desire after the prize of our calling. Antioch was the mother Church (/xT/rpoTroXts) , both of the Greeks in the neighbourhood, and of the Syrians, to a great distance. Although the Greek tongue and lite- rature had for centuries pervaded Syria, yet its ancient population, especially in the rural districts, constituted a compact body, with its Semitic language, its heathen rites, and its many Jewish colonies. And this was especially the case to the east, beyond the Euphrates. There w^ere probably still remains of the ten tribes on the upper Tigris. And there was, perhaps, no foreign land, except Egypt, in which the Jews were so largely scattered, as in the country of the two streams, down to the ancient Babylon. The influence of the Jews on the inhabitants, in preparing the way of the Gospel, was increased by the similarity of Hebrew and Syriac, which rendered a communication of Old Testament doctrines very easy. All these circumstances led to the very early appearance of what may be called a national Church, iu that great district to the west of THE LABORS OF JOHN. 305 Persia, and the south of Armenia, — a Church as com- pact, extensive, and independent of the Greek Church, as was that of Italy. Under Trajan, Mesopotamia had been the theatre of the great war against the Par- thians. For a time the contest ceased. The Parthians ruled to the Euphrates. Christianity had liberty to spread itself. The Apostles Thomas and Thaddeus visited Syria. The Syrian princes of Edessa were the first converted rulers. And, although the second cen- tury witnessed the rise of a celebrated school of Jewish scribes in Nisibis, as a rival to the Christian institu- tions, yet the Christian teachers were the deliverers of the Syrian nationality from Greek oppression, and the first promoters of moral and literary culture. The whole Syrian literature, philosophic and poetic, owes its existence to Christianity. Its first exhibition lay in the ancient accurate translation of the Bible (the Peschito), made for use in public worship. This great work dates in the second century, at least as early as the ancient Latin translation made in the West (the Itala). Yet we cannot quite agree with certain orientalists of a pretty early period, who have placed its origin in the beginning of the second, or even in the first, century ; because the corresponding fruits of Christian literature in Greece did not appear till at least the middle of the second; and because we cannot doubt, that, in the Syrian Churches, there was no lack of persons, who, knowing Greek, were able to impart by oral trans- lation to the natives, the Christian doctrines and writings, which came thither in Greek. The Syrians spread the truth to Armenia and Persia, and partly to Arabia. But their Church history begins too late VOL. I. X 306 THE LABORS OF JOHN. to inform us how far this had been effected in the first century. If we consider the importance of the Jewish settle- ments in Syria, and the fact that Paul never reached it, we may expect to find, both in the views and in the rites of the Syrians, many more Mosaic elements than among the Greeks. Their later history confirms this. The whole Nestorian system, to which the majority were devoted, bears traces of their peculiar origin. So much the more remarkable is it, that we find them, from the first down to the fifth century, in perfect harmony of creed and communion with the Greek and Roman Churches. Hence it is evident, that the Apostles to Israel laid essentially the same foundation in Syria, as Paul in Asia Minor. Nor did the Christians of the distant East remain behind that measure of developement to which John brought the Greeks. The bond of connection was probably Antioch. As to Alexandria and Egypt our information fi'om the Apostolic age is peculiarly scanty. Yet we have the series of Alexandrian bishops, reaching like a genealogy up to the times in which other historical sources fail us. Annianos, Abilios, and Kerdon, were the bishops down to Trajan; the first from 62 to 85, the second from 85 to 98, the third from 98 to 110. (Euseb. Hist. Eccl. ii. 24; iii. 14, 21.) Annianos, whose name is probably a corruption of Hananiah, and who was, if so, an Israelite, was, as uniform tra- dition bears, appointed by Mark. One authority states THE LABORS OF JOHN. 307 that Abilios was appointed by Luke. We find no trace of the personal labors of these bishops. But we have information, as to the constitution of the Egyptiau Church, which mediately throws light upon the time of its foundation. " In Alexandria," says Jerome, " the elders, from Mark the Evangelist down to the bishops Heraklas and Dionysius, were in the habit of electing, on every vacancy, one of their number, and naming him as bishop, as when the army makes an emperor, or the deacons select one of their number whose merit they know, and call him to be archde^-con." (Jerome, Ep. 101, [al. 85] ad Evangel.) Hence, while elsewhere, in the third, nay, already in the second century, it was held that none but bishops could consecrate a bishop, and that three were necessary to the act, as represen- tatives of the whole episcopate ; in Alexandria, not only the election (which would have been less extra- ordinary), but the consecration and institution w^ere performed by elders — by those of the city. This ex- ception leads to the conjecture that there were at that period no neighbouring bishops to appoint the metro- politan. And this conjecture is supported by the following tetimony from the Patriarch Eutychius of Alexandria, a later witness, but one who, in this thing (of which he might hear from his predecessors), is a credible one : " Mark set along with the Patriarch Ha- kaniah, twelve elders, in order that, on a vacancy in the patriarchate, they might elect one of their own number, on whose head the other eleven laid their hands, to bless him and make him patriarch ; where- upon they chose another person, and set him as elder in the place of him who had been raised to be patriarch, X 2 308 THE LABORS OF JOHN. that the number might continue twelve. And this aiTangement lasted till the time of Alexander, who appeared at the Nicene Council. He forbade the elders to elect the patriarch any longer, and fixed that, on the death of the patriarch, the bishops should come together to consecrate his successor, who might be chosen either from among the twelve elders or else- where. As to the question, why the patriarch of Alex- andria was called Papas, which means, * Father of the elders ;' be it known that, from Hakaniah, whom Mark set, down to Demetrius the eleventh in order, there were no bishops in the provinces of Egypt, and the patriarchs who preceded him had appointed none. He was the first Alexandrian patriarch who set bishops. Heraklas, his successor, set twenty." (Eutych. Patr. Alex. Annal. int. ed. Pocock. Oxon. 1658, i. p. 331.) This peculiarity of the Egyptian Churches must have rested on a regulation in the Apostolic age. There must have been then already a considerable number of congregations, not only in Egypt, but in Pentapolis or Cyrenaika, pertaining thereto. But there must have been only one bishop who had jurisdiction over them and their elders. This foims a striking contrast to the case of Africa, where about a. d. 200, we find seventy bishops in one Council at Carthage, and see the gradual rise of six or seven hundred small bishoprics. In the one country, a bishop for every flock — in the other, a single bishop for a whole land. And it is observable that, at the planting of the Church in Ethiopia, which took place from Egypt in the time of Albanasius, the ancient Egyptian custom, was in one respect at least followed. Indeed it appears to be so at the present THE LABORS OF JOHN. 309 day. A single bishop, called Abuna, i. e, " our father," governs the whole Church. All other clergy are mere elders. The first abuna received his consecration from Athanasius. And, to this day, when elected by the native clergy, must the abuna go to Egypt, to be or- dained by the Coptic patriarch. Neither in Ethiopia, nor elsewhere, in the ancient Church, do we find any- thing like the peculiar powers of the elders at Alex- andria. Their powers difTered, not only from those of elders in other lands, but from those of elders in the rest of Egypt. In giving a bishop to the whole land, they exercised a sort of spiritual authority over the whole, stood a step higher than other elders, and pos- sessed an original and uncontested episcopal character. Yet the bishop alone seems to have ordained ; for, while it is said that, in the absence of the bishop, priests might confirm, it is nowhere said, that they might ordain also. When all this is carefully weighed, we see that the appointment of the bishop by the elders at Alexandria, did not so much tend to obliterate the distinction be- tween bishop and elder as the short statement by Jerome might lead us to infer. It was rather a fruit of that view, according to which the collective Church in Egypt was to form, in its institutions, a symbol of the universal Church. As the whole Church has Christ for her Head, next to whom stand His Apostles, with supervision over the whole ; so, there, a bishop having twelve elders, with jurisdiction over all Churches in the land. We find here realized in a national Church that original type, which was elsewhere realized only in each particular Church. And the place which the 310 THE LABORS OF JOHN. bishop of Alexandria thus received, puts us much in mind of the honor and authority of James at Jerusalem. We do not venture to assert that Mark had all this in his eye from the outset. But both the arrangement and the idea which runs through it are at least as old as John. The Church founded in the city of the Ptolemies was not exposed to the temptation of becoming Pha- rizaic, like those in Jerusalem, Antioch, Galatia, and elsev^^here. Probably few synagogues in Alexandria belonged to the party of the Pha rize es. But it was exposed to the unholy mixture of the truth with Egyp- tian and Greek elements of falsehood, in worship and science. In the Museum endowed by Ptolemy Phila- delphus, and in the similar institution by the emperor Claudius, all the sects of Greek philosophy and all the mystical tenets of the East were represented. The Jews who had received Greek education had already been seduced to regard the lofty ideas of Plato, Pytha- goras, and Zoroaster, as identical with revealed truth, and to leaven the latter with them. And, without watch- ful care, the Christian doctrine might easily become a mere eclectic philosop y, and the Christian Church a mere theatre for philosophical and theosophical dispu- tation. This danger was increased by an event, of which, although the books of the ancient fathers do not mention it, we find traces in history. What became of the Therapeutas at the lake Moeris, whom Philo describes .? Why is his notice of them both the first and the last } Why w^as he the last writer of his school at Alexandria ? Had the Therapeuta) survived in a separate form, Eusebius could never have con- THE LABORS OF JOHN. 311 founded them with the first Christians. Yet they cer- tainly did not die out. They appeared in a Christian garb. The stream was not absorbed in the sand. It polhited the river of life. And this probably took place at the end of the Apostolic age, ^. e. at the time when Christianity made the greatest strides, although Chris- tians had not yet begun to write historical works, in which the event could be recorded. Judaism assumed, after the fall of Jerusalem, a yet more stereotyped character than before, one yet more distasteful to the half helle- nized Alexandrian Jews. The temple at Leontopolis was soon after pillaged and closed. (Joseph. Bell. Jud. vii. 37 [30] .) All these circumstances must have shown to the Therapeutse that they should seek their support, no longer in Judaism, but in the Church. They took the same step, and probably at the same (if not an earlier) time, as the Essenes in Judaea, who joined the Church under Trajan. They brought both their excellencies and their faults with them — on the one hand, great sincerity, and intelligence in the prophetic mysteries — on the other, contempt for historical truth and the letter of the law, as carnal things. We find these very faults in Clement of Alexandria and Origen. But we have proof of their existence in the x^lexandrian Church a century before. Clement held the Epistle of Baraabas for genuine. It must therefore have been highly thought of by his predecessors in Alexandria. And it is a monument to the progress of Therapeutic or Philonic ideas. It regards the relation of the Church to obsolete Judaism, and warns the faithful against the imputation of being proselytes of the latter, a warning the date of which must be sought for before the rise of 312 THE LABORS OF JOHN. the great Gnostic sects, and the second Jewish war under Trajan and Hadrian. All the questions at issue between the adherents of the Old and those of the New Testament are treated of in this pretended Epistle of Barnabas. It contains considerable light. Instance the typical application of the law regarding clean and unclean beasts to the relations of Christians to various classes of character among men ; the typical exposition of Esau and Jacob, Ephraim and Manasseh, in the former of which it nearly agrees with the Epistle to the Hebrews; and the arguments for the observance of the Lord's day, as not the last day of a past week, but the first of one to come, the entrance on a new order of things through the resurrection of Christ. Yet, along with this, it contains, not only historical errors, and extravagant exegesis, but also the false doctrine, that God never willed the sacrifices and fasts of the Jews, the keeping of the Sabbath, or the erection of a visible temple ; that the covenant with Israel was abolished when Moses brake the tables; and that all earthly things and the present dispensation are under the government and at the disposal of Satan. These errors, belonging to the false gnosis of the Jews, are thus, not by a fraud in the writer, but by a self-deception on the part of the Alexandrian readers of the Epistle, all ascribed to the Apostle Barnabas, whom the Essene Christian tradition also describes as having shared in the planting of the Church at Alexandria.* The par- tiality of Clement for this Epistle makes nothing for its genuineness. It is one of the many apocryphal productions, with which the Jews, who followed the * For the probability of this^ see before, p. 104, &c. THE LABORS OF JOHN. 313 Wcays of Greece, employed themselves, partly with in- nocent, partly ^Yith dishonest, intentions, as they had formerly done ^Yith the Sibylline oracles, and other such fabrications. There existed at one time another ancient monument of the Gnostic tendencies in the Church of Alexandria, viz. the so called Gospel of the Egyptians. Its few surviving lines, aftbrd no data for determining whether it really contained heresies, or was, as Clement of Alexandria thinks, capable of orthodox explanation. Much then contributed to prepare the soil in Egypt for the Gnostics. Indeed Egypt and Syria were the nurseries of those pestiferous mongrel religions which, inider the name of Gnostic systems, sought, in the second century, to overthrow the Church. Hadrian, on his travels, found in Alexandria a most extraordinary approximation of the worshippers of Serapis,of the Jews, and of the Christians, to each other. (Hadr. Ep. ad. Ser- vium. in Vopisc. vit. Saturnini, c. 2.) Whether his obser- vations were deep, or, as we think, superficial, there can be no doubt that such mixture formed the most deceiving snare of the Christians in Egypt. And their steadfast and triumphant opposition to this assault of the enemy, is a bright testimony to the firmness and pureness of the foundation originally laid among them. There can be little doubt that, long before Clement, the Christian inquirers and teachers were occupied with speculative delusions far more subtle, than the coarse colossal errors of Basilides and Valentinus. The spell of Platonism tended to amalgamate truth with Greek and Oriental mysticism. But it met with unshaken resistance from the Alexandrian bishops, as keepers of 314 THE LABORS OF JOHN. the true order and faith. The apostolic tradition and the New Testament canon were preserved, as purely as in any other place, at Alexandria. And this could not have been, had not the same foundation been laid here, at the first, as in the other Christian metropolitan cities. The preachers of the Gospel who afterwards sought to open a way to Egypt from the capital of Greece, found a national Church, as important and independent as that of Syria, already formed in Egypt. We know the gloomy severity of the ancient inhabitants of Egypt, from their myths and their art, — the very opposites of the Greek type. This character passed over into the Egyptian Church, and, after the lapse of two centuries, gave birth to the mortifications of those hermits and inhabitants of the deserts, who, as champions of ima- gined self-denial, underwent exercizes which nothing but a Titan power could sustain. Their contempt of the world was not new. But this was new, — that the efforts of these mourning ascetae to find peace in the wilderness sprang from their finding it no longer in the Church. From the beginning, the same gloomy, but in some respects, estimable tone of mind, although it did not lead at first to such extremes of penance, had characterized the whole Egyptian Church. Finally, let us take a glance at the Church in Rome. There were already indications of its destination to be the centre of Christianity in the West. We have no certain information as to the labors of any Apostle in THE LABORS OF JOHN. 315 Gaul, Spain, or pro-consular Africa. Yet we camiot doubt, that the Apostolic age did not elapse, without successful attempts to plant the Church there. It ap- pears that evangelists came from Asia to Southern Gaul; as many Greek elements showed themselves there, to judge from the rites which the Christians in Gaul, and even in Britain, had, in common with the Churches of Asia. Yet, wherever the Latin language was pre- dominant, the bearers of the Gospel seem to have come from Rome. So early as the second century, Rome was regarded, in Africa, and even in Southern / Gaul, as the sole apostolic seat (sedes aposiolica) for the West ; and the Roman Church was recognized as that on which others should lean. The priesthood of the Latin Church was composed of very diti'erent materials from those which formed the Greek, Syrian, or Egyptian, clergy ; of men, neither melancholy and meditative, like the Orientals, nor philo- sophically inquiring, like the Greeks ; but distinguished by practical intelligence and energy, by a sense for law and discipline, by capacity to set in order and to rule, — properties which greatly influenced their ministry. While almost all the great teachers of the Greek Church had been philosophers, almost all in Rome had been jurists, some statesmen. In the one case philo- sophy was transferred into theological speculation, in the other into ecclesiastical legislation. In the one, was developed the prophetic discernment of mysteries, in the other, the power of apostolic rule. The pillar of the one was John, the receiver of visions, the teacher as to the Logos. That of the other was Peter, the Rock, the Prince of the Apostles, invested with the power of the 316 THE LABORS OF JOHN. keys. In the one case, the nucleus of the congregation had been Greeks ; in the other, Israelites, men of law, akin, in this, to Romans. All these differences were no late importation. They were present from the first. Linus, Anencletus, Clement, Euaristus, were, accord- ing to the series of Irenaeus, the first Roman bishops. Eusebhis adopts this series, and gives us also the years of each, in his Church History, making Linus to have been bishop from the martyrdom of Peter and Paul till the year 80 ; Anencletus thence till 91 ; Clement thence till 100 (Euseb. Hist. Eccl. iii. 2, 14, 15, 34). Ter- tullian, and the Judaio-Christian tradition, make Cle- ment to have been set by Peter, whence some have re- garded him as first in the series. According to the Apostolical Constitutions, Paul consecrated Linus, and Peter, Clement. All this opens a wide field for con- jecture.* The population of Rome was then much greater than the present population of Paris. Among such a mass there must have been almost from the first more than one congregation ; and each with one or more priests, deacons, and deaconnesses. The almost unavoidable certainty of this is traceable in the greetings at the end of the Epistle to the Romans, which must have been * The anachronism and other discrepancies here, may be reconciled by sup- posing, that Paul ordained Linus, and Peter^ Clement, to the priesthood ; that Linus was elevated to the episcopate by one or both, before their mar- tyrdom ; and that the others received the episcopate from other hands. AI' though the episcopate was the higher rank, yet ordination by Peter or Paul to mere priesthood, might, after their death, have been regarded as the greater distinction, in contrast with ordination by another Apostle. And, although bishops should certainly not be ordained by delegates, but by Apostles them- selves, yet it is possible that circumstances may have rendered necessary an ordination by a delegate at Rome. — Tr. THE LABORS OF JOHN. 317 sent to persons in office. The women Prisca, Maria, Tryphena, Tryphosa, and Persis, were evidently dea- connesses, who had much labored in the Lord. There were at least three distinct congregations, one under the known teacher Aquila, one under Asyncritus, one under Philologus (Rom. xvi. 3, 14, 15, 22). But Epse- netus (the first fruits of Achaia), Andronicus, Junias, and Rufus (who were among the oldest members of the Church), Urbanus (the fellow-laborer of Paul), and Apelles (the preserved in Christ), may justly be re- garded as elders in Rome. Over all these the Apostles set one as chief shepherd. A Church, so scattered and so heterogeneous, could not have been kept together with- out a bishop invested with large powers. It must have split into many rival Churches. Linus was the first who received this most weighty charge. Clement seems to have labored long with him, and under both him and Anencletus, as pastor, ordained by Peter. They who were committed to his care, and others, who at a later period regarded him with peculiar honor, appear to have looked rather to him as their guide, than to Linus or Anencletus. But this was the mere effect of partiality. He can never be regarded as a really rival bishop. The theory of Roman episcopacy, current among some, that, after the fall of Jerusalem, the most influen- ; tial Jewish Christians, migrating to Rome, there intro- duced, for the first time, the hierarchical principle and an Aaronic hierarchy, rests, partly on historical, partly on doctrinal, errors. Rome did not need to borrow an episcopate. Rome and Jerusalem both stood originally under Peter. No one but the Apostles could found a 318 THE LABORS OF JOHN. Roman episcopate. And the Christian hierachj, so far from being a mere continuation or accommodation of the Mosaic, was that abiding and glorious hierarchy of which the Mosaic was only the type and precursor. The one episcopate was as original as the other. And, if the Roman appeared later, this was owing to the fact, that Rome enjoyed the presence of the Apostles themselves longer than Jerusalem did; and did not so much feel the want of a bishop.* Neither history nor tradition lets us farther into ac- quaintance with Linus and Anencletus. Clement of Rome, on the contrary, bears one of the most honored names in all antiquity. His biography became a favo- rite topic for fable and poetry, and is presented to us like a romance. There were in the second century two much read religious works, viz. The preaching of Peter and the travels of Peter ; both originating among the Jewish Christians, though we do not know where. The former contained discourses of Peter to the Jews, the latter his labors among the Gentiles. They no longer subsist in their original form. They are combined into one by a later hand, and adulterated with much foreign matter, partly harmless, partly heretical. In the Latin translation by Rufinus, under the title " Recogni- tiones," the whole is to be found more original and less corrupted with heresy and other matter, than in the * Although the proper place of a bishop is under, and not instead of Apo- stles, the blessing of his office is most required, when Apostles, although sub- sisting, are personally absent from his Church. As to the delay in the appointment, we are apt to forget that there may have been no one yet fit for the office. A bishop cannot be had at a moment's warning. All good Chris- tians, nay, all good priests, are not fit to be bishops. Of all local offices it is the weightiest, and demands the most training. — Tr. THE LABORS OF JOHN. 319 Greek edition, which we have iiiuler the title of " Homi- lies of Clement," and which has been so deformed, by the P^ssene Ebionites, as to be useless. Long le( tures, put into the x4postle's mouth,— in part of an admirable character, interlarded with idyllic descriptions of cir- cumstances, persons, and events, and clothed in that attractive style which was formed by the first Greek romances ; a rare combination of simplicity and ele- gance, — are what we find in the work. In the writings of the heathen romance writers, Chariton, Achilles Tatios, or Xenophon Ephesius, the fair outside is dese- crated by disgusting contents. Here, in this first Christian romance, it is ennobled by moral dignity and tender sentiment. The whole hangs upon the bio- graphy of Clement himself. He professes to have experienced the whole, as disciple and companion of Peter. He was of a noble Roman family. His mother early disappeared with her two youngest sons ; his father had gone to seek them, and had not returned. The breast of the youth was now disquieted by uncertainty, as to divine things, and a future life. In this con- dition he was much affected by the tidings, that, in Judaea, a Son of the Highest had appeared, to bring truth and salvation to mortals. He found Peter in Judaea : he found that which he sought. He accompa- nied the Apostle, witnessed his miracles, and heard his preaching, by which the heathen were converted, and Churches planted, in the cities of Syria. There he found his own mother, poor and sick. She had fled from Rome with her children, to save her virtue; but had lost children, and all else, in shipwreck. She was healed, enlight- 320 THE LABORS OF JOHN. ened, and baptized by Peter. On the sea-side Clement met an aged man, whom misfortune had made a fatalist, and who now, in his solitude, murmured against God and man. In him Clement recognized his father. The wonderful re-union with his kindred melted the old man's heart. He also believed. The children, sup- posed to have perished in the ocean, were also restored to their parents. They were found among the disciples of Peter, who had rescued them from the dangerous delusions of Simon the Samaritan sorcerer. The lead- ing ideas of this really interesting story are, the love of God to man in his darkest providences, and that peace of mind, that union of the divided, that consecra- tion and blessing of domestic relations, which are to be found in Christ. Much is psychologically true, and throws light on the manners of antiquity. It is im- possible to discover whether the tale has a historical reality for its basis. It would rather seem as if older matter had been dressed up afresh by a Christian poet. This only is certain : that Clement of Rome, whether the same as he of whom Paul writes to the Philippians or not (Phil. iv. 3), was a disciple of Peter, and in intimate connection with him. Hence the Jewish Christians, among whom these writings had their origin, and who have attached many other works to his name, regarded him as a principle w^itness for tradition, and as a pillar of the Church, after the death of the prince of the Apostles. If he had not been a disciple of Peter, he could not, after the death of James, have been invested with a glory equal to that of the latter. He is stated to have reduced to wu-iting, and published the Apostolical Canons and Constitutions. THE LABORS OF JOHN. 321 These, undoubtedly apocryphal, -works began to be put together in the third century. And thus a set of traditions acquired form and currency, not l)y any official acts of office-bearers in the Church, not by councils, nor, on the other hand, by heretics, but by nameless members of the Churches who ventured on this unauthorized collection. At the same time it is to be observed, that the unknown authors, in order to give authority to the work, made a most unwarrantable use of Clement's name, so as to put him in the place of first law- giver to the Church after the Apostles. Nay, the Ebionite heretics have made yet more of him. In working up, for their own ends, the Apocryphon which contained his already mythic life, they repre- sented him, whose historical character they no longer knew, as bishop of bishops, and as, in a certain sense, inheritor of James's authority. This proves, that the heretics at least, perhaps also the orthodox Jewish Christians, already harboured the idea that a univer- sal bishop was to rule the Church after the Apostles. But we must now turn to the true history of Clement. Under him the Roman Church endured the per- secution by Domitian in 95. This tyrant, after having put many nobles to death, in a manner as arbitrary as that of Nero, turned his rage, towards the end of his reign, against the Christians. He aimed at being regarded as a vindicator of the national religion; and caused vestals, who were convicted of impurity, to be walled up. He was jealous of philosophy, as fostering political dissatisfaction. On similar grounds, he sus- pected the Christians; and seems, with the advice of his priests, to have issued a regular edict against them. VOL. 1. Y 3'22 THE LABORS OF JOHN. He put to death Flavins Clemens, the coiiSul, although he was both his cousin, and the husband of his relative Flavia Domitilla, on the ground of an accusation of atheism, brought against both. Many other Romans, who had leaned to Judaism, were condemned upon similar charges ; some to death, some to confiscation. Domitilla was banished to the island Pandataria, in the bay of Puteoli. (Xiphilini epit. Dion. Cass. 67, 14.) In the time of Jerome, one still saw, upon the island Pontia, near Pandataria, the caves in which she endured a tedious martyrdom. (Hieron. Epist. 86 [al. 27], ad Eustoch.) The names of the sufferers, if pre- served, would have yielded a rich martyrology. Chris- tian tradition assigns to this persecution the death of many apostolic men, who had outlived that by Nero, e.g. Mark, Andrew, Onesimus, Dionysius the Areopa- gite. Be this as it may, this assault had a more dan- gerous character than that under Nero. Nero sacrificed the Christians summarily in great numbers, without process of law, on the ground of supposed unnatural crimes. Domitian conducted his persecution with attention to all the forms of law. The shameful slan- ders were disproved. But the denial of the national gods and the adoption of Jewish customs he punished as capital crimes, after judicial trial. His imperial edict, armed with the power of law, punished by name the Christian faith, and that most severely in Roman citizens. Christian writers tell us, that Domitian himself, shortly before his assassination, had put a stop to the persecution. But, according to Dio Cassius (Xiphi- linus, i. c. 68. 1), it did not cease, tillNerva, with whom THE LABORS OF JOHN. 323 the series of the good emperors begins, set free tliose accused of insulting the gods, recalled the banislied, and forbade strictly all farther complaints against the so called Atheism and Judaism. Tradition bears, that Sisinius, with his household, and many other persons of distinction, friends of Nerva, were converted to the faith. (Martyrium Cleraentis, §. 14.) The designation of Christianity, at that time, in legal phraseology, as Judaism, was no accident. It proved that at Rome the Jewish element was yet predominant in the Church, and the distinction between Mosaism and Christianity not so marked as at Antioch. There may have been yet thousands of Israelites in the Roman Church. We know how Paul had to contend against their prejudices, similar to those of the Church in Jerusalem, under James. And it is a question, whether he had succeeded in overcoming these, in establishing full harmony between the Jewish and the Gentile Chris- tians, and in obtaining as full recognition for himself as for Peter. Here we must distinguish between the ruler of the Church and the Church itself. The former agreed with Paul, if not from the first, at any rate after the joint labor and death of the two Apostles at Rome. The subordinates could hardly fail in shewing the unity of their principal, and must have nearly kept pace in light with the Asiatic ministers under John. But we cannot so well determine how far the Roman congregations had been brought in the same respects. Many Jewish Christians might, like the later Nazarenes in Syria, have recognized the Apostle to the heathen as such, without acknowledging him as theirs also, or giving to his writings equal authority with the works of Y 2 824 THE LABORS OF JOHN. the Old Testament. Much contractedness may have remained. Nay, while the Church, as a body, under its bishop, might have been on an orthodox footing towards Paul, there may have lurked in so large a city many erroneous ideas. The rulers of the Church had no temporal means of preventing heretical conventicles. The opponents of Paul may have continued or revived their efforts after his death. And, when we see how early heretical sects arose in Judaea, we can hardly suppose that Rome, the receptacle of all spiritual good and evil in the world, was free from them. So much however is clear, that the Roman Church, in its recog- nized organs, never rejected Paul, or forsook the right faith. The testimony of antiquity, for the true and uninterrupted maintenance of apostolic tradition by the succession of Roman bishops, and against the pre- dominance of heresy, even the Ebionite, at any time, is undeniable. We dare not listen to conjectures where we have historical documents. In the front of these stands, the Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians, the genuineness of which is as undoubted as the original predominance of Judaism at Rome. Although Clement was a disciple of Peter, the Epistle proves that he taught in harmony with Paul. lie did not indeed yet exhibit the doctrinal type of John, but as little ariy Judaizing tendency. The incarnation of the Word was with him not so prominent as justification by faith. The Epistle, instead of cxliibiting a stage of doctrine prior to that of Paul, is, of all post-apostolic literature, the only document which precisely expresses his faith. " All they," says Clement as to the Old Testament saints (Clem. Rom. Ep. i. ad Cor. c. 32), " have not been THE LABORS OF JOHN. 325 made glorions by themselves, or tlieir works, or their rigliteons life, but by God's will. So also are we, called through His will in Christ Jesus, not rigliteous by ourselves, our wisdom, insight, ]Mety, and works wrought out of a pure heart, but by faith, through which Almighty God has justified all these from the beginning of the world." And the following passages, are as if written by Paul : " The Lord has received us in love. Because of the love which He had to us, has Christ our Lord, according to the will of God, given His blood for us. His flesh for our flesh. His soul for our soul." (c. 49.) "Let us look to Christ's blood, and see how precious it is before God, because, being shed for our salvation, it has purchased for the whole world the grace of repentance." (c. 7.) So much akin are l:is writings with those of Paul, and especially with the Episde to the Hebrews, that some of the learned in Alexandria conjectured that Clement was the person who assisted Paul in the composition of the latter. We do not think this idea w^cU founded. But we do believe, that Clement, in addressing a Church founded by Paul, studiously adopted Paul's manner of teaching, to render his own Epistle more acceptable. We see that Peter also did so. when writing to the Churches in Western Asia. All this is a testimony, however, not for the personal views of Clement alone, but also for those of his Church. For, although the Epistle was composed by him, it did not bear his name on its front ; but was sent as from the Roman to the Corin- thian Church. As, in the Apocalypse, the Church is addressed in its angel, so did the Roman Church write through its bishop.* The writing expressed the unity * It ia a prime canon of sound interpretation always to assume that 326 THE LABORS OF JOHN. of spirit subsisting, boih in bishop and people, and also in two separate Churches. This fact is of itself enough to dissipate the wild fancy of certain opponents of the New Testament, that the Ebionite heresy prevailed in the Roman Church for one hundred years after Paul. Such persons cannot maintain this hypothesis without questioning the ge- nuineness of Clement's Epistle. But to question this is a desperate attempt. At Corinth, to which it was addressed, it was publicly read in the Church as late as about a. d. 80, under the episcopate of Dionysius. This we learn from a fragment of Dionysius himself. (Euseb. Hist. Eccl. iv. 23.) The letter was therefore preserved there in the archives of the Church, with other manuscripts used in w^orship. It w^as known to the flock through constant use. It thus hsidjides piib- llca, and was completely protected from mistake and adulteration. Save the books of the primitive canon, no work of the time is so accredited. Eusebius assures us that it was similarly used in many other Churches. His statement is confirmed by the so called Apostolical Canons and Constitutions. The manuscript copy pre- served to us forms part of a splendid manuscript of the Bible, prepared for use in the cathedral Churches. Irenasus avails himself of this Epistle, to prove, against the Gnostics, that the Romish Church, which he re- garded as the preserver of uncorrupt tradition and faith, directions given to, or acts done by, a body, recognize and do not ignore the existence and use of its proper organism. Otherwise the divine commands to the Church, if appropriated and carried out by the first zealous individual, can work nothing but confusion, e. g. the command in 1 John iv. to try the spirits, which none but the bishop can fulfil. It is not enough to take hastily up the letter of any scriptural text, or living injunction. We must also be sure that we are those members of the body who are called to fulfil it. — Tr. THE LABORS OF JOHN. 327 was orthodox from the first. And from this, as well as from the letter of Dionysius to the Romans, we con- clude, that the Epistle of Clement was as well known and as thoroughly recognized in Rome as in Corinth, although not adopted into the Roman canon. But this writing of Clement is not the only work which we have from the Roman Church. Next to it stands the book of Hermas. And in it we find, not only no reference to Paul, but, strange enough, matter drawn from Jewish theology. The same absence of all allusion to Paul and his writings meets us in the writings of Justin Martyr, who, although he did not proceed from the Roman Church, stood in connection Tvith it. And, lastly, the same is the case in the Recog- nitions, which, although we cannot say whether they were composed in Rome or in Greece, and although they were regarded as apocryphal, were certainly not looked on as heretical or schismatic productions. This seems to shew, that down to late in the second century, a theology maintained itself in the Church, which met with sanction and approval, although it made no use of Paul's writings, and therefore did not yet rank him with Peter and John. And the book of Hermas esta- blishes this fact, as to Rome, by having itself obtained almost canonical authority. As to its genuineness, we cannot contradict that tradition by an author unnamed, be he Caius of Rome, Hegesippus, or another, who says (Fragmcntum de Canone Muralorianum), "Hermas has recently in our times written (or put together), at Rome, the Pastor (/. e. the collection of visions), while his brother, the bishop Pius, occupied the chair at Rome. Therefore one may indeed read the book, S28: THE LABORS OF JOHN. but not make it public in the Church, or reckon it either among the Prophets or among the writings of the Apostles." In the book itself, Hennas receives a command, in the second vision, to send it to Grapte (apparently the oldest deaconness), that it might be read to the widows and orphans, and to Clement (during whose episcopate all the visions date), for circulation among the bishops. The work contains no trace of that contest, with the great Gnostic sects, which had already begun under Pius I., A. D. 142 — 157. The chief ecclesiastical ques- tion which it treats is, whether repentance is open to those who had fallen from baptismal grace — a question which could not have been for the first time mooted by Montanus, but must have arisen as soon as men fell from grace, and may well have already received con- tradictory answers as early as the end of the first century. The whole style of the book speaks for its composition before the commencement of Christian literature. Its simplicity, and doctrinal unguardedness, its visions and inspirations, in their form and sub- stance, and its Jewish ideas, all bespeak for it high anti- quity. Had the whole been fabricated out of nothing in the middle of the second century, its high estima- tion with many would be inexplicable. Irenseus quotes from it as from the Scriptures. In the days of Ter- tullian, the African Christians adopted from it the custom (observed also by some heathens), of sitting down after finishing prayer. It became forgotten in the Latin Church. But, in the Greek, it was highly prized by Origen, and was, as late as the fourth or fifth century, recommended for the instruction of cate- THE LABORS OF JOHN. 329 chumens. It stood, not among th^^ canonical, but among the "ecclesiastical" books, which, after the last adjustment of the canon, composed a large secondary series of proved and orthodox writings. Our idea is this — that individual visions were really seen and re- corded in the Church at Rome, about the end of the Apostolic age — then, for a time, little regarded— and afterwards, under Pius the first, brought again into notice, put together, and perhaps modified. This, while it does not contradict the above unknown authority, gives full weight to the other indications as to the con- tents of the book.* It were a great error in the Church to think, that all that is inspired is therefore canonical, i. e. suited and intended to be an abiding and universal rule, by which everything is to be tried. Were this so, no occasional supernatural openings of, and illuminations in connexion with, the canonical Scriptures, would be permissible in the Church ; and the Scriptures would thus be in a great measure a sealed book, for want of the li^ht which God has appointed to be daily cast upon them, according to the requirements of the time. * Although this may be the genuine work of Ilermas, and the Epistle of Barnabas spurious, yet they seem to be both compilations, in which words of prophecy and other spiritual light thrown upon the mysteries of Scripture or the purpose of God, have been in substance collected and put in writing for preservation, after having been corrupted in their terms, distorted in their form, and perverted in their application, by oral transmission and hasty in- terpretation. All primitive traces of true typical and symbolic instruc- tion, are so mis-assorted and defaced, as only to confuse and mislead, until the Church shall recover the true light which she has lost, and is enabled to recognize it as having been given of old. Prophecy in the Church is given for present discernment and use. When it is the mere object of memory, it cannot be kept in the right analogy of faith. See even Irenaeus, adfin.~'^&. 330 THE LABORS OF JOHN. We know incontrovertibly from Paul's Epistles that prophetic utterance was of constant occurrence in the Church, and that, although a gift of the Holy Ghost, it did not lay claim at once to implicit obedience. Its fruits were to be judged of and examined. (1 Cor. xiv.; Rom. xii. 7; 1 Thess. v. 19 — 22.) Fragments of such prophecy, perhaps the most important fragments which survive, are to be found in the work of Hermas. Some at least of the visions we cannot regard as mere poetic fictions and allegories, for the adornment or enforce- ment of the truth. They must have appeared as de- scribed ; and that not without supernatural influence, and a depth surpassing the thoughts of man. And yet they appear in a disorderly form — originally mingled with the human ideas and errors of the first author — after- wards added to and adorned by the later revisor, and therefore, on many combined grounds, without cano- nical authority.* Those representations by Hermas, which have no basis in Scripture, are to be derived from the Jewish theology. So especially his doctrine as to angels. Ac- cording to him, six angels were first created, to whom God subjected all creation. Philo assumes a co-ope- ration of the angels in creation ; and both Justin and * The idea that no supernatural phenomenon can be divine if it have any defect, tarnish, or mixture, is not only contrary to 1 Cor. xiv. and other Scriptures, which warn against the wrong exercise of spiritual gifts, without impugning their reality, but argues great ignorance, as to the place and constitution of man, as the instrument of God. God does not abolish man's nature, dignity, and responsibility, by any gift. The gifted are not mere machines — but responsible for the use of the gifts entrusted to them. And the gift grows or decays, is improved or perverted, through the faithfulness or unfaithfulness of the man. — Tr, THE LABORS OF JOHN. 831 Athenagoras hold that a special oversight and care over men and all things under heaven have been committed by God to the angels. These teachers drew their doctrine from the Jewish book of Enoch. Hernias ex- pressly quotes a similar lost apocryphon — the book of Eldad and Medad. Still more remarkable is the spiri- tual agency ascribed by Hermas to angels. Those six direct the building of the Church. Michael, the prince of angels, writes the law in the hearts of the faithful. The angel of repentance, the shepherd of men (from whom the book is named), cares for those who fall away, seeks to bring to repentance, and guards the penitent against relapse — having a great responsibility. Twelve good spirits, Avhich bear the names of Christian virtues, and are seen by Hermas in the form of virgins, conduct man into the kingdom of heaven. Twelve unclean spirits, named from the like number of sins, impede him. To every man are given two genii, of whom one suggests good thoughts, the other evil.* These apocryphal angel theories contain no contra- diction of Paul. But Hermas does contradict him in assuming the merit of works — nay, supererogation. And in this he makes frequent allusion to the Epistle * Here are probably confounded two ministries, that of heavenly angels and that of angels of Churches. As to the former, it is alike erroneous, to suppose these inferior to man at the first, or superior to him now. Christ himself was at His incarnation made lower than angels, because He took our condition. He is now exalted over them all. And we are so in Him. Yet, although our place towards angels is altered by our advancement in Christ, the place of angels and their ministry have not been altered. They are set over the visible creation, and have still a care over us in so far as we belong to it. But, though they were used in the giving of the law, being then higher than man, they are not so in the Gospel. Ceding to man his exaltation in Christ, they learn God's wisdom from the Church, and help us, as our inferiors— Tr. 332 THE LcVBOES OF JOHN. of James. Yet, after all, the doctrines of Hermas, foreign as they are to the type of Paul, are very far removed from the errors of the Ebionites and from that hostility to him which these errors occasioned. There is no trace here of the threefold Shibboleth of heretical Judaism, which we read of in Ignatius and elsewhere — circumcision — Sabbatisra — and distinction of meats. Hermas bears a noble testimony to the purifying and saving power of baptism. He says nothing of circum- cision, or of the Ebionite doctrine as to Christ. Hermas saw the Church, in the form of an edifice, like a tower founded upon a rock. (Similit. ix. 12.) The rock, so large as to bear the whole earth, w^as very ancient. In it he saw a gate newly cut out, whence proceeded a brightness greater than that of the sun. He received the interpretation, that the rock and the gate were the Son of God— that the Son was anterior to all creatures, His Father's counsellor at the creation of the world — but that the gate was new, because He had appeared in the end of the world, to bring into God's kingdom those who shall attain salvation, and because He was the only way to God. We find here evident allusion to the doctrine of Solomon as to Wis- dom, and to John's doctrine as to the Logos. In the fifth similitude, the three persons of the Godhead are clearly distinguished (Simil. v. 5) ; only the Holy Ghost is there spoken of as Son, and the Son as servant — the former in accordance with the Jewish theology, but in a way capable of orthodox interpretation — the latter, in order, not to infringe on the divine dignity, but to express the great humiliation, of the Son. This vs^ork affords a new proof that Jewish traditions THE LABORS OF JOHN. 333 could l\cep their place in a Cliristian clothing, without weakening the bond of a common faitli, ^Yhich united tlie labors of all Apostles. We may not infer from this nnguardedness and want of precision in expression, that the doctrine of the Church also was uncertain and variable. And w^e must not forget, that Hermas, as he appears in the book, was not a presbyter, but a layman, and therefore not versant in theological tech- nicalities. The condition of the Church, as described by him, was sinking and endangered. Rich men, who forgot beneficence ; priests, who turned to their own use the offerings of the faithful ; Christians who returned to the pleasures of the world ; and those who in persecu- tion had denied the name of Christ, and forfeited (as was thought) their return to God. He saw the need for a thorough repentance and cleansing, and he felt the adaptation of the revelations and exhortations received by him, to purify and prepare the Church for a new persecution (probably that under Trajan, for Domitian's must have been passed). He reckons the Apostles, without exception, among the departed. The vision of the building of the Church (the third) which re-appears in a fuller form at the end of the book (in the ninth similitude), has a deep meaning. He sees the Church as built upon Christ the rock. Those splendid stones, put together as in one piece, which lie next to the rock, are the Apostles, the Inshops, the teachers (presbyters), and the deacons; who have walked in divine meekness, exercized the episcopate, taught, and holily and humbly served the elect of God, already asleep or yet alive. He sees 334 THE LABORS OF JOHN. the various sorts of stones, fit or unfit to be built in. The building of the tower is near its completion, when the end should come, and the feast of joy in the kingdom be held. Those Christians who are now re- jected as unfit stones, shall not, indeed, be wdth the saints in the divine edifice ; yet shall, after great suf- fering, still attain to repentance. He sees that a cessation has taken place in the pro- gress of the building. This has occurred for the sake of the Christians who are impure, that they may yet repent and be builded in. But if they will not, others shall be put in their place, and they shall be entirely rejected (Similit. ix. 14). " Do good w^orks, ye who have received earthly goods from the Lord, lest, while ye delay, the building be completed ; because for your sakes has the work of building been interrupted. If ye haste not to do that which is right, the tower shall be completed and ye shut out." So runs the con- cluding exhortation. (Similit. x. 4.) He also receives a promise of the renovation of the Church. In the filrst vision she ap])ears to him in an aged form, worn out and decayed, so that he thinks he sees " the sibyl." The interpretation is, " Your spirit has become old and slothful. Weakened by w^orldly affairs ye have yielded to indifference. Your minds are confused, and ye are grown old in your sorrow." But while the enfeebled receive the revelation made to them in the compassion of God, their spirit is renewed, their weakness cast off, and their faith strengthened. Hence Hermas sees, in his second vision, the Church again erect, with youthful looks, more joyful than at the first, yet still with white hair. In the third vision THE LABORS OF JOHN. 335 he sees her still more youtliful, adorned, and glorious in her countenance (Vis. iii. 11, 12, 13). These traits correspond exactly with the condition of the Church at the end of the Apostolic age. They contain warning and comfort, such as Christendom needed at that great turning point of her internal history. And it can hardly be doubted, that at least these visions, the most pre- cious part of the book, really date at that time, and not later.* We must now, in conclusion, once more survey the condition of the Church as a w^hole. No period of ecclesiastical history has so little light thrown upon it by direct testimony, as this period of transition from the Apostolic to the post-Apostolic age. Yet it is pos- sible to ascertain somewhat, both as to the external change which then passed upon Christendom, and as to the internal change of feeling which accompanied it. The time came when the rule of the Apostles was either to cease or to pass into other hands. Each in- * Three things are most striking in the visions of Hennas. 1st. The clear distinction between the general salvation of all who believe in Christ, and the peculiar place, dignity, office, and destiny of the baptized as members of His body, partakers of the divine nature, stones in God's temple, joint heirs with Christ. 2nd. The distinction between those who finally apostatize and for- feit their part in Christ, and those who, although they do not apostatize, yet forfeit, by sloth and unbelief, the highest honor of the elect, to be the sealed first fruits, gathered unto God before the harvest at the end of the world, and who, instead of being taken away, so as to escape the last great tribulation, have to pass through it, as unsealed. 3rd. The prophetic indication of the interruption of the building, from the disappearance of the master builders, till they shall re-appcar, and the Church shall appear us a bride. — Tu. 336 THE LABORS OF JOHN. dividual Church, which had received a bishop from the Apostles, was protected and provided for, as long as he lived. But who was to undertake the oversight of all Churches, and of those set over them ? From whom, in the event of uncertainty or discord among bishops, could instruction in the truth, and decision as to right and wrong, go forth, in a way which should both bind and satisfy all ? Who had authority to ordain elders and bishops, as the Apostles had hitherto done, and to found new bishoprics ? Who had confidence to im- part, with the same power and efficacy, that establishing grace and seal of confirmation, which the first believers had received from the Apostles themselves ? The primitive Church knew nothing of the confused and confounding modern doctrine, that all ecclesias- tical power rests in the multitude, and that a majority can elect, commission, and empower to all spiritual functions. There is, in all antiquity, no trace of the idea, that, when the Apostles died out, their authority devolved upon the whole body of the faithful, to be by them committed afresh to individuals. And men were then too cautious and scrupulous in holy things, to interpret any inward impulse to labor for the good of the Church, however powerful and genuine, into a divine commission, legitimate call, and adequate en- dowment, for such momentous functions. The majority of apostolic functions had been per- formed by apostolic delegates, as well as by Apostles. Else the Church could not have been planted in so short a time throughout the whole Roman empire.* * It is remarkable that, of twelve men called to the same apostolic office, we have no documentary evidence as to more than two, and no explicit tra- THE LABORS OF JOHN. 337 The commission of these delegates, however, was not only personal to them, but Jiot even for life, being limited to certain occasions and services. Hence we nowhere find that, on the death of John, any survivors, who had been used as delegates, undertook the care of the Church universal. The most of them, as Mark, Luke, and Timothy, were indeed, by later writers, called Apostles. But this was evidently in that vague use of the name which is common to this day. It is indeed not impossible that one or other of these men may, like Paul or Barnabas, have been actually called to and qualified for apostolic labors.* Yet there is no proof whatever of this. Tradition informs us, on the contrary, that the most of these delegates afterwards labored as bishops. Their calling, to serve the Church as a w'hole, fell into abeyance ; and they became exclusively chief shepherds of particular Churches, For this is the difference between a bishop and a dele- gate ; that the former is permanently set over and wedded to a particular Church, as Christ to the whole. dition as to more than two or three of the rest, to prove any definite work which they did. Yet we have no reason to suppose the rest to have been less faithful, though their parts were less prominent. The works of each Apostle were, in fact, those of the whole college. And the work of faith is not to be measured by mere activity. Some may have sustained at home and in secret, those who labored abroad and openly. — Tr. * As the truth of God, when forgotten, may be revived, or, when not yet developed, may be pre-indicated in a partial or distorted form, so may His ordinances be continued, revived, or anticipated, although in a feeble and limited form, and illegitimate manner. The whole intermediate history of Christendom teems with the efforts of the Spirit of Christ to preserve or restore all those divine institutions which alone can perfect the Church. And we should neither deny the reality of these efforts, on account of their imperfect form, nor yet be prevented, by recognizing them, from knowing, seeking, and expecting God's perfect ordinances and manner of working. — Tr. VOL. I. Z 338 THE LABORS OF JOHN. That ancient canon which provides, that no bishop shall be taken from one Church to be set over another, save on the most special and urgent grounds, was? doubtless, founded on Apostolic recollections. Thus we see also the difference between apostles and bishops. The former are bound to no one diocese ; the latter are. Each bishop has authority in Christ's stead over his own Church, to teach, exhort, bless, exer- cise discipline, and send out the Gospel ; but not to judge other bishops, or labor in a foreign diocese. It is well known how clearly the principle, that no bishop was responsible to another, was expressed by Cyprian, as late as 256, in the council of Carthage. And that certainly implied that none could be regarded as set over the whole Church. If it w^ere true, that the Apostles had appointed bishops, in consequence of feeling that they were about to depart, or in other words, had made the institution of the episcopate part of their testament to the Church, so that, by their dying directions, their power should be inherited bj^ bishops, the usual episcopal theory would be well founded. But the fact is not so. This episco- pal office was, in its essence and origin, no continuance of, or substitute for, the apostolic. The absence of Apostles was not the condition of its origin or agency. It did not &ome into life as apostleship died. On the contrary, it existed simultaneously with apostleship. It was instituted to co-exist with apostleship. And the condition of its right operation and developement w^as that it should be upheld by apostleship. While John was yet in the plenitude of his authority and labors, he had seven bishops, at least, under him in THE LABORS OF JOHN. 33^ Asia. Episcopacy therefore is not only quite a difFerent thing from what mere episcopalians would mal authority there — for the episcopal is embraced in the "^^^ authority of the bishop of Rome, degrades his episcopal, by assuming that he as mere bishop, could not adopt for a time a widowed Church. And it degrades the Corinthian episcopacy, if existing, by putting it under another. The " patkmrincipalitas " ascribed by Irenasus to the church at Rome, points rather to its founders as the two first of the Apostles, than to itself. Compare Iran. iii. 1, with iv. 23. — Tr. 346 THE LABORS OF JOHN. apostolic. But all this does not prove, and it cannot be shown, that the Roman bishop either was consti- tuted at the first, or ever legitimately became, heir of the collective apostolic authority. In the original di- vine plan and structure of the Church, there is no universal bishop, but Christ himself. He is the sole Head of the Church. He rules the whole, not by an individual vicar, who converts the altar into a throne, but by instruments of no estimation among men, by His Apostles as elders, through whom He does all. He draws nigh to the faithful, and His power is made glorious, and by w^iom His place is not filled, but kept and declared vacant, till He shall return.* On the extinction of the apostolic office without an adequate surrogate, Christendom was certainly neither so blind nor so indifferent, as not to feel its loss. And the New Testament itself affords to us the most accredited testimony as to the feelings of the faithful at that time. This is the addition made to the Gospel of John by his disciples .after his death. (John xxi.) Christ had already said, before His transfiguration on the Mount, " There be some of them which stand here, who shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in His kingdom." (Matt. xvi. 28.) * The question whether Peter was at Rome, labored there, planted the Church there, presided there, and died there, are all away from the true question between Romanists and other Christians ; and might all, did history permit, be answered in the affirmative, without Rome gaining anything thereby. Rome claims supremacy for its bishop, either as bishop, or as Apostle. If the the former, the answer is, that a bishop is not an Apostle, even though he may have succeeded the first Apostle in the episcopate ; and that none but an Apostle can have supremacy. If the latter, the answer is, that no pope has been called to apostleship by God, or recognized as Apostle by all Christendom. ■^ But his claims prove this— that the Church still needs apostleship. — Tr. THE LABORS OF JOHN. 347 After His resurrection, when He appeared to the seven disciples on the Sea of Tiberias, he spoke a word full of mystery to John, which came to the ears of the faith- ful, and especially occupied those among whom John spent his last days. "The saying went abroad among the disciples, that this disciple should not die." (John xxi. 23.) Many expected therefore to see fulfilled in him the above prophecy given by our Lord. And, on the decease of all the other Apostles, the expectation became more lively, that John, who had been so wonder- fully preserved, should witness the return of the Lord. But it happened otherwise. He also went to his rest after attaining the utmost limit of man's age. He did not die as a martyr — for, as the saying went, he did -iiotjieed that purgation. He died in Ephesus. His tomb stood outside the city. We may imagine the deep impression made by his death upon the faithful. The fact was then unquestionable. Was then the word of Christ to go unfulfilled ? The last chapter of John's Gospel meets this question. It is, in our opinion, cliiefly written by John himself. The last verses only are added by the elders of Ephesus, who had the keep- ing of the sacred book. Christ had foretold to Peter his martyrdom. Then asked Peter, concerning John, " But what shall this man do ?" Jesus answered, " If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee ? Follow thou me." Then comes the notice by the elders, " Jesus said not" — This disciple " shall not die ; but. If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee." The elders therefore give no interi)retation of this remarkable saying. They merely remind us of what Christ had not said. He had spoken only con- ditionally; If I will. Still His language was that of 348 THE LABORS OF JOHN. one who did entertain such a thought, and yet had reason to withhold a positive assertion. It was no meaningless abstract assertion of a possibility which no one would question. Nor was it solely a rebuke to Peter. It evidently expressed a special purpose in regard to John, although its literal understanding by the disciples was erroneous. As to this the elders are silent. Their addition to the Gospel was intended merely to obviate the troubles created by the death of the Apostle, not to give a full solution to the words of Christ, which the Church should lay up in her heart. And it is no wonder that the above idea as to the V destiny of John kept its ground in the Church. It re- \ appears iu the form of two traditions, that John had \ not really died, and that he had died and was risen again. The former is reported by Augustine in his 2-24th Homily of the Gospel on John, not as giving ^ credence to it, but the reverse. Some, he says, assert, that John descended into the grave, which he had caused to be made for himself, seemed dead, and was shut in — but that he had only fallen asleep, to awake at the day of judgment, and that the earth of his grave is lifted by the action of his breathing. On the other hand, the Greek tradition is, that God immediately after John's death raised him again, and keeps him, that he may come in the last times to testify for the truth, and along with Elias and Enoch to overcome Antichrist. (Ephraim of Theopolis ap. Photion in My- riobibl. cod. 229, p. 797, c. p. 800, b. c. Ed. 1653.) This idea, which stands in evident connection with a literal understanding of two well known texts in the Apocalypse (Rev. x. 11 ; xi. 3), became very prevalent among the later Greeks. Nay, it is expressed in their THE LABORS OF JOHN. 34d ritual. And some Latin doctors, both of the middle ages, and of later times, have inclined to it.* AVhy do we cite these fancies of a period subsequent to that of which we treat ? Because they were the last relics of an opinion as old as the Apostolic age. And whence sprang this primitive tradition with all its off- sets ? From the persuasion of the Church, at the death of John, that the apostolic office should be preserved to the Church, in the last at least of those who possessed it; that the Church still needed it; that it could not be awanting at the end of the days ; that it had yet the works to do, of conquering Antichrist, and of completing the yet imperfect preparation of the faithful for the coming again of Christ.f A longing for the preservation of the peculiar bless- ing of apostleship is thus shewn to have been felt by the primitive Church, and must have been increased by the growing conviction that the internal progress of the Church to perfection did not keep pace w^ith its out- ward extension. Widely as the Church extended under Trajan, it betrayed a marked decay of its original light and power, to which all that still remains from that time, the writings of all the so called apostolic fathers, bears sorrowful witness. So gi'eat is the differ- ence between their best productions and the apostolic * The fable of the wandering Jew, who falls asleep at the end of each centur}', and then awakes again, till the Lord comes, is evidently the counter- part of the tradition regarding John — the one, judgment — the other, grace. And the fact that John lived j,ust about one hundred years, may have deter- mined the length of the cycle. t In short, that it was dormant, but not extinct. And it is a coincidence to be observed, that Jloses, who as lawgiver and leader of the Jews, was a type of apostleship, not only had a Joshua to finish his work, but was buried by God, so that no man knew of his sepulchre. (Deut. xxxiv. 6.) — Tr. 350 THE LABORS OF JOHN. writings, that a glance at tlie respective worth and con- tents of the two classes of documents is sufficient to remove all uncertainty as to the boundary between canonical and nncanonical Christian literature. The subsequent experience of the Church confirms the verdict of antiquity in this matter. It is said that John, enfeebled by great age, being carried into the meeting of the Church, merely re- peated the words, "My beloved children, love one another." (Hieron. comm. ad. Galat. c, vi. p. 100, d.) This exhortation the Church laid to heart and followed, as we may judge from the unity in which it lived during the succeeding generation, being kept together, no longer indeed by the Apostles, but by the love which they had shed abroad in it, and by the careful obser- vance of what it had received from them. The heads of the flocks felt themselves like orphans on the death of Philip, Andrew, and John. But those orphans only kept the closer together. Faithfulness to their trust, reverence for tradition, was their motto. But, with all this, no more could be preserved than what the Church, as a whole, had really laid hold of and appropriated as a part of her life. She could never thus ripen into perfect maturity for the kingdom to come. That which she lacked, from that time forward, was the progress of that spiritual growth, which Peter,, Paul, and John had both exhibited and commenced. Whether such a progress should again be seen, was a question on which the Church had as little light as on the duration of time which should elapse before she should reach the goal of her race. We could not ex- pect to find any definite views among the teachers of THE LABORS OF JOHN. 351 that time as to a future revival of a proper apostolic action, unless it had been plain to them that centuries should elapse before the second coming of the Lord, and that the work then fresh wrought by ^Vpostles should thus utterly decay. The work of progressive building did stand still, even as Hermas saw it in vision, that many might in the interval have space for re- pentance. But no one could guess the duration of the interval. It was not known, that whole nations should stream into the Church, and that a Christian family of peoples should take the lead of the human race. The depth of the fall of Christendom was very much hidden from the eyes of the first fathers. And therefore it is not wonderful, that the ultimate deliverance from declension and ruin, and a return to an apostolic con- dition, was the object rather of their desire and indefi- nite presentiment, than of their intelligent expectation and endeavours.* * The true restoration, reformation, or perfecting of the Church, lies, indeed in a return to the unchangeable waj'S of God — but not in a return to the con^ dition of the Church at any given past time. We serve the God of feop€ — not of mere memory — the living God, who will answer us by deeds. Although there have been none to guide the Church among all the sons whom she hath brought forth; although her way seemeth hid^ and her judgment passed over from her God; yet shall she awake and stand up again, putting on her strength and her beautiful garments, because her Maker is her husband, and the marriage of the Lamb shall come. The Lord regardeth the prayer of the destitute. His arm shall awake as in the ancient days. He will turn His hand upon His people to purge away their dross, restoring their judges as at the first, and their counsellors as at the beginning. The sowers at the be- ginning, and the reapers at the end, shall rejoice togctJicr. — Tii. END OF VOL. I. :/ LONDON : G. J. PALMER, SAVOY STREET, STRAND. DATE DUE ****%^. A% ♦ GAYLORD PRINTED IN U.S.A. OUND WFSTI rvc BW960 .T433 The church in the Apostolic age Princeton Theological Semmary-Speer Library 1 1012 00076 5497 Thmmmm ^JH^^^I mM