BY E. DE PRESSENSÉ, D.D.,
AUTHOR OF "JESUS CHRIST: HIS TIMES, LIFE, AND WORK."
TRANSLATED BY ANNIE HARWOOD.
OF all the topics of the day, none is of graver importance than
the early history of Christianity, and the foundation of the Church. Every thing
points inquiry in this direction. A bold criticism claims the right to snatch from
our hands the documents of this great history, and to scatter them in fragments
to the winds. It is not enough for us to take refuge in our faith as in an inviolable
sanctuary; we must establish that faith on solid ground, and produce its original
titles. Our part is not to linger on the shore, lamenting the constraint which keeps
us there, but rather to abjure the false dominion of a faith imposed by authority,
to cross the stormy sea, and plant our feet in the enemy's country, on the much-cultivated
soil of contemporary criticism. The fact is not to be disguised that science, hostile
to Christianity, has long ago left the lonely height from which it was once wont
to bend a pitying eye upon the ignorant masses. No lips take up in our day the cry,
"Odi profanum vulgus;" every one
feels that such a motto would be the confession of weakness. The law of most democratic
reform has finally asserted itself in the world of thought; we are governed by
There can be no doubt of the ignorance which extensively prevails, even among the highly cultivated, as to the nature and origin of Christianity. This is the newest of themes, because that which has fallen into deepest oblivion. We are persuaded that the best method of defense against the shallow skepticism which assails us, and which dismisses, with a scornful smile, documents, the titles of which it has never examined, is to retrace the history of primitive Christianity, employing all the materials accumulated by the Christian science of our day; for it must be well understood among us that there is in truth such a thing as Christian science in the nineteenth century. Those who have taken upon themselves, during the last few years, to initiate other countries into the scientific movement of Germany, have only brought into view one side. The other side deserves a like publicity; and as this very subject of the early history of Christianity has been treated with a marked predilection by the greatest Christian divines of our age, we are bound, in approaching it, to remember their labors, and profit by all the treasures their patient researches have amassed.
This subject commends itself to us also from another point of
view. We are the witnesses of an unparalleled triumph of ecclesiastical authority,
which
Nor has the subject a lower claim on Protestants. Before them
also there are serious questions for solution, both in the domain of theology and
in that of the Church. There is not a single religious party which does not feel
the need either of confirmation or of transformation. All the Churches, born of
the great movement of the sixteenth century, are passing through a time of crisis.
They are all asking themselves, though from various stand-points, whether the Reformation
does not need to be continued and developed. Aspiration toward the Church of the
future is becoming more general, more ardent. But for all who admit the divine origin
of Christianity, the Church of the future has its type and ideal in that great past,
which goes back not three, but eighteen centuries. To cultivate a growing knowledge
of this, in order to attain a growing conformity to it, is the task of the Church
of to-day. This is the path in which it will find liberty and holiness—those two
attributes so closely linked together, and so necessary to enable the Church to
rise to the height of its true vocation. In the same direction it must move, in
order to make that advance in its theology which prudence and necessity alike dictate,
and which will consist only in an ever-deepening appropriation of apostolic doctrine.
Thus by a concurrence of circumstances, which reveal
This great subject we have attempted to treat in the present work, going back always for our materials to original documents. It is indeed an enviable task to take up the history of the early ages of Christianity, thanks to the abundant sources of information now opened, and to the invaluable discoveries of manuscripts made during the past few years.
It is our aim to present as full a picture as possible of this period, commencing with the apostolic age, which is so little understood, either from religious indifference or because of the unintelligent veneration which surrounds it with a legendary glory, behind which its types lose all distinctness and originality. St. Peter, St. Paul, and St. John appear too often like those fabulous heroes placed by tradition on the threshold of the historic age, after whose era history, properly so called, begins. We feel the necessity of reconquering, as part of the domain of history, this primitive age of the Church. It will thus regain color and life.
It is not possible in this day, and in view of the recent attacks
of criticism, to neglect the study of the first century, and to proceed at once
to that of the second and third. Such a course would leave untouched delicate problems
which demand a solution. We have placed in notes all that relates to the discussion
of documents, without which no serious history of the Church would be possible.
We have
Interest in the glorious past of the Church is reviving in our
day on every hand. Even in a literary
The reproduction in English of this "History of the Early Years
of Christianity" is not a mere translation of the French edition, but the presentation
of that work in a considerably altered form. We have, in the first place, dispensed
with the long introduction treating of the history of religions prior to Christianity,
partly because this has already appeared separately in England, and partly because
a very full résumé is given of it in our book on "The Life, Work, and Times of Jesus
Christ," to which the present work may be regarded as a sequel. We have, further,
endeavored to bring the English edition into a smaller compass than the French,
without
The English work will thus have its own special character, and will be more concise than the French. By removing some branches from this rather overgrown forest, we hope to let in more light.
Edmond de Pressensé.
Paris, October 27, 1868.
Note by the American Publishers.—By the above statement it will appear that our author's plan was to embrace the entire subject in three volumes. Upon further reflection, however, he has concluded that both the requisite fullness of treatment and the proper division of the matter demanded FOUR VOLUMES; and the publishers, both English and American, concur in his proposal. The topics of the FOUR VOLUMES will, therefore, be as follows: I. APOSTOLIC ERA. II. MARTYRS AND APOLOGISTS. III. DOCTRINE AND HERESIES. IV. THE CHURCH WORSHIP AND CHRISTIAN LIFE. The author's expectation is, that the French volume will be ready for the English translation in November, which will be forthwith followed by its issue from our press.
THE name of De Pressensé, the eminent leader of evangelical Protestantism in France, is favorably known in England and America by his published works, especially his "Life of Christ," and his "Religion and the Reign of Terror." By his clear maintenance of Christian truth, his ripe scholarship, his fresh and pictorial style, and the tone of modern liberality that pervades his firm conservatism in behalf of fundamental verities, he has placed himself in the highest rank of modern defenders of the primitive Christian faith. Had he, like Renan, the advantage of the zest of opposition to ancient opinions, and of a factitious originality, arising from an unrestrained liberty of shaping, coloring, and grouping the facts and characters of history to his own fancy, Pressensé could bring to the work an insight not less clear, and a style not less vivid. But he holds himself solemnly bound to TRUTH alone, whether that truth be marvelous and picturesque, or commonplace and brown. Yet truth, like wisdom, is justified of her children. She is infinitely valuable for her own sake; she is often capable of an ever-varying freshness as viewed by successive ages; and the truths which Pressensé unfolds must forever possess for the earnest spirit an unsurpassable interest and an eternal youth.
While maintaining evangelical truth in its true spirit, Pressensé,
with a genuine Protestant freedom, expresses individual views from which many devout
Christians dissent, and in regard to which the publishers are not to be held as
expressing opinions. He adopts, for instance the view of Van Oosterzee and others
in regard to the divine nature of Christ, modifies the Anselmian theory of the atonement,
and strenuously maintains immersion to be the sole mode of New Testament baptism.
Some of the views furnish grounds even for
We may add, that this is the only edition issued from the press in this country, and that it is printed by agreement with an English publishing house, under the proper arrangements with the author and translator.
First Century—Book First.
| CHAPTER I. | |
|---|---|
| COMMENCEMENT OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. | |
|
Character of the Church—Special character of the Apostolic Church—Periods of its history |
23 |
|
§ I. Actual foundation of the Church on the Day of Pentecost—Its First Mission and First Persecution—Miracle of Pentecost—Character and Office of St. Peter—His reputed Primacy—Success of the First Mission—First Persecution |
28 |
|
§ II. The Teaching and First Constitution of the Church at Jerusalem—Attacks made upon the young Church—First apology of Christianity—the Miracles—Scriptural evidence—Appeal to the conscience—Doctrine of the Primitive Church—Ecclesiastical organization—Nature of the Apostolate—Conditions of admission into the Church—Worship of the Primitive Church—General character of this period |
42 |
| CHAPTER II. | |
| FIRST INTERNAL CONFLICT, AND FIRST EXTENSION OF THE CHURCH BEYOND JERUSALEM. | |
|
§ I. The Seven Deacons of the Church at Jerusalem—Stephen—First Debate in the Church—The Primitive Diaconate—Stephen the precursor of St. Paul—Accusation brought against Stephen—His speech—His martyrdom—Saul of Tarsus, the witness of his noble death |
54 |
|
§ II. The Dispersion of the Christians—The Gospel in Samaria—Simon
Magus—Philip and the Eunuch—Philip at Samaria
|
64 |
|
III. Foundation of the Church at Antioch, and Conversion of the Centurion Cornelius—The Church of Antioch founded by simple Evangelists—Peter and Cornelius. |
75 |
|
IV. The Church at Jerusalem at the time of the First Mission beyond Judæa—The Christians at Jerusalem still Judaizing —Discussion between them and Peter—Creation of the office of Elders—The Elders of the Synagogue—Their equality—The Elders of the Church are also equal among themselves—Martyrdom of James, the son of Zebedee—Imprisonment of Peter—Death of Herod—Part taken by James, the Lord's brother—Importance of the Church at Jerusalem |
82 |
| CHAPTER III. | |
| CONVERSION OF PAUL. HIS FIRST MISSION. | |
|
§ I. Saul of Tarsus—His Preparation and Conversion—His Preparation—Saul at Tarsus—He goes to Jerusalem—Is a disciple of Gamaliel—His sincerity—His zeal for the Law—His moral malady—His contact with Stephen—Saul the persecutor—Journey to Damascus—He is overthrown by the way—The three days at Damascus—Saul in Arabia—Return to Jerusalem—Saul at Antioch I Character of the Apostolate of St. Paul |
95 |
|
§ II. St. Paul's first Journey—His first Companions—Conversion of Sergius Paulus—Paul at Antioch in Pisidia—His Sermon—Obduracy of the Jews—Paul and Barnabas at Lystra—Paul is stoned—Return of Paul |
116 |
| CHAPTER IV. | |
| THE TWO CONFERENCES AT JERUSALEM, AND THE DISPUTE AT ANTIOCH. | |
|
§ I. The Two Conferences—Origin of Polemics—Difficulties in the Church at Antioch—The Private Conference—The Public Conference—Speech of Peter—Speech of Paul—Speech of James —Decisions of the Conference—It concludes with a Compromise |
125 |
|
§ II. Dispute at Antioch |
138 |
First Century—Book Second.
| CHAPTER I. | |
|---|---|
| MISSIONS OF THE CHURCH UP TO THE CAPTIVITY OF ST. PAUL. | |
|
§ I. Second Missionary Journey of St. Paul—Paul the type of the Missionary—He separates from Barnabas and takes Timothy—Epaphras founds the Church at Ephesus—The Gospel carried to the Galatians—He passes from the East to the West—Foundation of the Philippian Church—Paul and Silas in Prison—Conversion of the Jailer—Paul at Thessalonica—Success and Persecutions—Paul at Athens—The Altar of the Unknown God—Discourse of the Apostle on the Areopagus—Paul at Corinth—Corruption of that City—A Church founded there—Paul there writes the Two Epistles to the Thessalonians—His vow —He goes to Ephesus—Conversion of Apollos |
143 |
|
§ II. Third Missionary Journey of St. Paul—Sojourn of Paul at Ephesus, then the focus of the Religions of the East—He there writes the Epistle to the Galatians—There he meets with Disciples of John the Baptist, and Jewish exorcists—Effects of his preaching—Voyage of Paul to Crete and Corinth—The Epistle to Titus, and the first Epistle to Timothy, written during this journey—Return to Ephesus—First Epistle to the Corinthians—Tumult raised against Paul—Second Journey into Macedonia—Second Epistle to the Corinthians—Presentiments of Captivity and Death—Return Journey to Jerusalem—Paul at Troas—His farewell at Miletus to the Elders from Ephesus—Paul at Cæsarea Prophecy of Agabus—Arrival at Jerusalem—Paul is arrested in the Temple—His Speech and Imprisonment |
169 |
| CHAPTER II. | |
| MISSIONS AND PERSECUTIONS OF THE CHURCH FROM THE CAPTIVITY OF ST. PAUL TO HIS DEATH AND THAT OF ST. PETER. | |
|
§ I. Various phases of the Captivity of Paul—Paul before
the Sanhedrim—He is transferred to Cæsarea—He appears before Felix —Mildness
of his Captivity—He writes the Epistles to the Ephesians, Colossians, and
to Philemon—Festus takes the place of Felix—Paul appears to the Emperor—He
appears before Festus
|
189 |
|
§ II. Missions of the other Apostles during this period—James continues to reside at Jerusalem—Jude in Phrygia—Missions of Andrew, Philip, Matthew, Bartholomew, Matthias, Simon, Zelotes, Judas Thaddeus, and Thomas—Peter at Babylon—His letter to the Christians in Asia Minor—He goes to Rome—Was never a Bishop—Mark founds the Church of Alexandria |
204 |
|
§ III. Method of Primitive Evangelization—Origin of the First Three Gospels—The Primitive Church not concerned with the writing of Books—The Living Word preferred to the Written—No Primitive Official Gospel—The memory of Christ living in the Church—The part of Christian experience in memorizing the great facts of Salvation—Written records—Apocryphal and Synoptical Gospels—Superiority of the latter—Their origin—They bear the seal of Inspiration—Living character of this Inspiration |
216 |
|
§ IV. The First Roman Persecution of Christianity—Persecution in Judæa—Death of James, the brother of the Lord—The Religious Constitution of Society in the Ancient World conducive to Persecution—Ancient Religions, State Religions—Special circumstances which render Persecution inevitable—Foreign Religions regarded with suspicion by the Cæsars—The Church confounded with the Synagogue—The holiness of Christians hateful to the Pagans—Calumnies against Christianity—Rapid growth of the Church of Rome—Persecution popular—Part of Nero in this Persecution—Martyrdom of St. Paul and St. Peter—Martyrdom of James, the brother of the Lord, at Jerusalem |
220 |
| CHAPTER III. | |
| VARIOUS FORMS OF CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE IN THE SECOND PERIOD OF THE APOSTOLIC AGE. | |
|
§ I. Fundamental Unity in Diversity—Refutation of the system of Baur—Unity prevails over Diversity—Three great types of doctrine appear at this period |
233 |
|
§ II. Doctrine of James—His characteristic idea is the permanence of moral obligation under the new covenant —Faith joined with Works—Love is pre-eminently the Work—The nature of Pardon clearly expressed—The Gospel History constantly presupposed—Moral importance of the Epistle of James |
241 |
III. Doctrinal Type of Peter—The First Two Gospels—The Gospel is to Peter, first of all, the fulfillment of Prophecy—Comforting view opened of the abode of the Dead—The Gospel of Mark recalls the type of Peter—That of Matthew represents the doctrine of Peter and James |
247 |
|
§ IV. Doctrine of St. Paul—Polemical character of his teaching—The essential feature of Paul's doctrine is the agreement of the Religious and Moral Elements—The first idea in his Theology is the idea of Justice—Justice the principle of all religion—The Fall a violation by the Creature of the Laws of Eternal Justice—Universality of the Condemnation—Various elements in fallen Man—The Body not the principle of Evil—Sin is a Transgression—The decree of Salvation a free act of Grace—It is not the Predestination of Augustine or of Calvin—Chapter ix of the Epistle to the Romans—Preparation for Salvation—Preparation in Judaism—The Patriarchal age—The Law a Schoolmaster to bring to Christ—Preparation in Paganism—Redemption—Nature of the Redeemer—Divinity and Subordination of the Son of God—His Humanity—He is the second Adam—Work of the Redeemer—Redemption is primarily an act of Obedience—Obedience in Suffering—The Death of Christ is a Free Sacrifice—The theory of Anselm is not to be found in St. Paul—Jesus Christ, raised from the Dead, sends the Holy Spirit—Appropriation of Salvation—Faith, a real Union with Jesus Christ—Justification and Sanctification—Close relation between the two—The Church—Kingdom of Good opposed to Kingdom of Evil—Future of the World and the Church—Judgment, Resurrection—Groaning of the Creation after Redemption—Connection of the two Covenants—The Law of the Letter and of the Spirit—Apology of St. Paul—His doctrine reproduces the Teaching of Jesus Christ |
254 |
|
§ V. God spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for all |
271 |
|
§ VI. The Gospel of Luke and the Epistle to the Hebrews—The gospel of Luke reproduces the doctrinal type of Paul—The same is the case with the Epistle to the Hebrews, which adds the allegorical element ot the Alexandrine school |
292 |
| CHAPTER IV. | |
| THE STATE OF THE CHURCHES DURING THIS PERIOD. FIRST SYMPTOMS OF HERESY. | |
|
§ I. Judaizing tendency in the Churches of Palestine,
Galatia, Macedonia, Achaia, and Italy—History of the Church at Jerusalem—Judæo-Christianity
is there at first kept within bounds—It
|
299 |
|
§ II. Dualistic heresies in Crete, Colosse, and Ephesus—Heresy of Simon Magus, according to the "Philosophoumena"—Heresies of Colosse, Ephesus, and the Isle of Crete—Ascetic Dualism—Abuse of the Scriptures—Medley of Judaism and Orientalism—Grievous consequences of these errors on the Christian life |
317 |
| CHAPTER V. | |
| CONSTITUTION OF THE CHURCHES DURING THIS PERIOD. | |
|
§ I. General Principles of Ecclesiastical Organization—Distinction between the Church Visible and the Church Invisible—No "Mother Church"—No Representative Assemblies—No Center of Unity—Unity of Churches entirely Moral—The Church is the Company of Christians—Is entered by Individual Adherence |
331 |
|
§ II. Gifts and offices—Gift of Tongues—Gifts of Prophecy and Healing—Gift of Teaching exercised by all Christians—Power of the Keys belongs to them—No Clerical Consecration of the Sacraments—Priesthood universal—Identity of Elders and Bishops—Only one category of Elders—Ministry of the Word not placed by itself—Maintenance of the Elders—The Deacon—Deaconesses—All Offices filled by Election—Imposition of Hands is not Ordination—Offices are Ministries |
338 |
| CHAPTER VI. | |
| WORSHIP AND THE CHRISTIAN LIFE. | |
|
§ I. Christian Worship during this period—Spirituality of the New Worship: no Priesthood; no Temples; no Holy Days—Sunday not the Sabbath—Acts of Worship—Teaching—Old Testament still the Holy Book—Faithfulness in Teaching required Prayer—Thanksgiving—Song—Sacraments—Baptism linked to Faith; has no connection with Circumcision; not administered to Children—The Communion: Mode of celebration—Ecclesiastical Discipline—Apostolic Age knew no other Sacraments than Baptism and Lord's Supper—Anointing with Oil—Burial of the Dead |
361 |
|
§ II. Christian Life—Primitive Christianity cannot act
directly in all the domains which it is to subdue in course of time—No
|
381 |
First Century—Book Third.
| CHAPTER I. | |
|---|---|
| THE FALL OF JERUSALEM AND ITS CONSEQUENCES. | |
|
§ I. Destruction of the Holy City—Roman Tyranny in Judæa —First Revolt—Commencement of the Siege—Forebodings of the Divine Chastisement—The Three Factions—Growing Horror of the Siege —Taking of the City—Burning of the Temple |
399 |
|
§ II. Consequences to the Church of the Destruction of the Temple—Enlargement of Prophetic Views—Need of a Fixed Organization—No Second Council at Jerusalem—The Synagogue formally Excommunicates the Church—Origin of Ebionitism |
406 |
| CHAPTER II. | |
| ST. JOHN, THE APOSTLE AND PROPHET. | |
|
§ I. Life of St. John—Tardiness of the Influence of St. John explained by the Nature of his Gifts and Mission—Conversion and Growth of John—He Ripens in Obscurity—John at Ephesus —He writes the Revelation before the Gospel—Fourth Gospel and the Epistles of John—Last Years of the Apostle |
415 |
|
§ II. John, the Prophet of the new Covenant—The Revelation—The same Doctrine in the Gospel and Revelation—General Point of View of the Book of Revelation—Future represented through the medium of Contemporary History—Plan of the Book—Arrangement of the Apocalypse—It proceeds on the same Plan as the Prophecy of Jesus Christ, Matt. xxiv —Prediction of the Fall of Rome—Conflict of the Church with Heresy—Fall of Rome typifies the End of the World—Nero the Symbol of Antichrist—Final Triumph of the Church—The End—Prophecy advances with History |
430 |
| THE DOCTRINE OF ST. JOHN. | |
|
§ I. Father, Son, and Holy Spirit—God is Love—The Son, the Eternal object of the Divine Love—Subordination of the Son to the Father—The Holy Spirit |
443 |
|
§ II. The Word and the World—Part taken by the Word in Creation—Relation between Man and the Word—The Fall—Sin, the Violation of Law—The Fall is not Absolute |
447 |
|
§ III. The Word and Redemption—Preparatory Work of the Word—The Attraction of the Father—The Incarnation—Redemption—The Invisible Christ |
450 |
|
§ IV. The Word in the Christian and in the Church until the end of time—Appropriation of Salvation—Grace—Faith: justifying and sanctifying—The Future of the Church |
458 |
| CHAPTER IV. | |
| THE CHURCHES IN THE TIME OF ST. JOHN. | |
|
§ I. External Condition—Persecution under Domitian |
464 |
|
§ II. Internal Condition of the Churches—Heresies—Church Organization—State of the Churches—Diminution of Piety—Heresy—Commencement of Docetism—The Nicolaitans—Cerinthus—Ecclesiastical Organization—John not the Founder of Episcopacy—Worship—Celebration of the Feasts—The Sabbath —The Passover—End of the Apostolic Age |
468 |
| NOTES. | |
| Note A. Literature of the Subject | 481 |
| Note B. The Chronology of the Acts | 484 |
| Note C. Principal Source of the History of the Primitive Church | 486 |
| Note D. The Miracle of Pentecost | 489 |
| Note E. The Council of Jerusalem | 490 |
| Note F. The Supposed Second Captivityof St. Paul | 492 |
| Note G. The Epistle of St. Paul | 495 |
| Note H. The Epistles of James and Jude | 496 |
| Note I. The Second Epistle of Peter | 497 |
| Note J. The Authorship of the Epistle to the Hebrews | 498 |
| Note K. Diversity of views on Theology of the Apostolic Age | 499 |
| Note L. The Authenticity and the Date of the Apocalypse | 500 |
|
Note M. The Authenticity of the Fourth Gospel and of the Epistles of St. John |
509 |
JESUS CHRIST came to restore the kingdom of God upon earth. He
came not simply to offer salvation to every individual man. It was his design to
found a holy community, from which, as from a new humanity reconstituted by him,
filled with his Spirit and living by his life, the Gospel should go forth into all
the world. The holy community thus founded is the Christian Church. It differs from
all the religious institutions which preceded it. It is not limited, like the Jewish
theocracy, to one special nation; it is not bounded by the frontiers of any
Strange conquerors, we must own, are these Galilean fishermen, without repute, without learning, the poorest of the poor, sent forth in their simplicity into the midst of a state of society in which dazzling splendor is combined with a power hitherto irresistible. Brute force will be let loose upon them, and they have neither might nor right to meet force with force; their weapons are to be of the Spirit only. Reviled and persecuted, they must offer no other resistance than the fortitude of their patience and the vigor of their faith; for let them at all avenge themselves on their adversaries, and they will do themselves irremediable wrong by dishonoring and striking a death-blow to their own principle. They are not suffered for one moment to forget that their strength comes from that higher and invisible world, of which they are the representatives upon earth, and which is at once their fatherland and their goal.
The Christian Church has a double vocation. It is called first to assimilate to itself more and more closely the teaching and the life of its divine Founder, to be joined to him by tender and sacred bonds, to grow in knowledge, in charity, in holiness. It is then to carry every-where the light and flame thus kindled and fed in the sanctuary of the soul, so that it may illuminate and vivify the world. To purify itself within, and to extend itself without, such is the twofold task of the Church, and the ages are given for its fulfillment.
There is, however, one period of its history which claims to be
distinguished from the rest—namely,
We say at once, that neither by the apostolate nor by inspiration was the primitive Church spared the salutary labor of the assimilation of the truth. It is a grave mistake to suppose that a definite constitution was given to the Church from its very commencement, by decrees promulgated by the Apostles, and that it was at once lifted on the wings of inspiration to the luminous height from which, subsequently, the eye of a St. Paul and a St. John surveyed the whole extent of the Gospel revelation. Many conflicts, many dissensions, many lessons of experience were to precede and to prepare this closing period of the apostolic age, which was the result and crown of all.
The revelations of the Old and New Testament were always given
progressively, because it was the will of God to establish a real harmony between
the truths which he communicated and the soul by which
We shall divide its history into three periods, each of these designated by the name of the apostle who exercised the greatest influence upon it. We have thus the period of St. Peter, that of St. Paul, and that of St. John.
In the first, the divine element predominates almost to the exclusion
of the human, which is, in comparison, reduced to passivity. This is the period
of the purely supernatural; it follows the first outpouring of the Holy Spirit,
and precedes the great internal deliberations in the Church. In the second and third,
the human element is more apparent, though always controlled and purified by the
divine: great
§ I. Actual Foundation of the Church on the Day of Pentecost. Its First Mission and First Persecution.
Fifty days after the resurrection of Jesus Christ, during the
celebration at Jerusalem of the Feast of Pentecost, which was the feast of the ingathering,
His presence in their midst was marked by one miracle more extraordinary
than those which had preceded it. The disciples began to speak in unknown tongues.
This miracle, which, with some
The miracle of Pentecost was an enacted prophecy of the happy
time when all the diversities created by evil will be lost in the unity of love.
Is not this prophecy receiving a constant fulfillment as Christianity masters, one
after another, the languages of mankind, and makes them the media for conveying
its immortal truths? "The Church in her humility," says the venerable Bede, "re-forms
the unity of language broken before by pride."
We know with what success Peter replied to the raillery of some
unbelieving Jews, who had found their way into the wondering crowd. Three thousand
persons were won to the Church by that first preaching of the Apostle. This rapid
increase was soon to bring about an open rupture between the young Church and Judaism.
The Sadducean party took the lead in the persecution. It has been declared to be
very unlikely that the Pharisees, who had been the most bitter enemies of Jesus
Christ, would have let themselves be thus outstripped by their rivals.
During all this early time the influence of the Apostle Peter
predominates. The part thus taken by him has been urged as a proof of his primacy.
But on closer examination it will be seen that he does but exercise his natural
gifts, purified and ennobled by the Divine Spirit. Peter was the son of a fisherman
named Jonas, of the village of Bethsaida, in Galilee.
Nothing but determined prejudice could construe the tender solicitude
of the Master for this disciple into an official declaration of his primacy. We
are here in the region of feeling alone, not on the standing ground of right and
legal institutions. Nor has the primacy of Peter any more real foundation in the
famous passage, "Tu es Petrus." Jesus Christ admirably
characterized by this image the ardent and generous nature of his disciple, and
that courage of the pioneer which marked him out as the first laborer in the foundation
of the primitive Church. The son of Jonas was its most active founder, and, as it
were, its first stone. He was also the rock against which the first tempest from
without spent its fury.
Every thing is natural and spontaneous in the conduct of St. Peter.
He is not official president of a sort of apostolic college. He acts only with the
concurrence of his brethren, whether in the choice of a new apostle,
The Christian mission during this period gained two altogether
exceptional successes. A few weeks after the baptism of the three thousand converts
of the day of Pentecost, five thousand souls were added to the Church as the result
of the miraculous healing of the impotent man, and of another sermon of St. Peter.
It would be a mistake also to imagine that all these new converts had reached the same stage of religious development. They differed in piety and in knowledge, but they had nevertheless received the Gospel with sincerity. In a short time the Church had gathered into itself more than ten thousand persons. This was assuredly a miracle not less amazing than that of the day of Pentecost.
To these triumphs Judaism replied by persecution. The Church has
had time, during eighteen centuries, to become accustomed to this brutal and senseless
appeal to force. We need not here dwell on the constitution of the Sanhedrim. We
know that it was composed of seventy-one members, that it was presided over by the
High Priest, and that from the time of the Roman conquest it constituted the religious
tribunal of the nation. It was not always possible to distinguish with clearness
the religious sphere from the civil, so closely had the two been united in the old
theocracy. The Sanhedrim naturally assumed as its right to summon to its bar any
who attacked the religion of the country. Now the apostolic preaching appeared,
in the eyes of those who regarded Jesus Christ as a false prophet, to be an assault
upon the national religion. A theocratic government is a government of constraint.
Freedom of conscience would have been an unmeaning sound under the Jewish economy.
But the abrogation of the ancient economy had abrogated the right of religious coercion.
Persecution on the part of the Sanhedrim was now only an odious abuse of power.
It must be
This first persecution revealed the deep-seated enmity which exists
between skeptical Materialism and the Gospel. We shall often have occasion, in the
course of this history, to show how intolerant is incredulity, and how impatient
of the freedom of sincere belief. We shall see that the Sadducean spirit is always
essentially a persecuting spirit. At this time we find that the people were not,
as subsequently, in favor of the adoption of violent measures against the Church,
for the persecutors feared to offend the multitude by maltreating the Apostles.
Immediately after the healing of the impotent man at the Beautiful
Gate of the Temple, the magistrate in charge of the sanctuary, and who appears to
have been a man of rank, since Josephus names him directly after the High Priest,
The president of the Sanhedrim asks Peter in what name he healed
the impotent man. The Apostle replies with the utmost respect to the magistrates
of his nation. He recognizes their authority like the most docile of their subordinates.
The Apostles, as they had declared, pay no heed to an unjust prohibition.
They resume their preaching with the same success as before. They are thrown into
prison. Miraculously set at large, they begin again to proclaim the Gospel. Cited
anew before the Sanhedrim, they preserve the same attitude. They are calm and immovable,
as becomes the disciples of that Jesus whom "God hath exalted to his right hand
to be a Prince and a Saviour."
The young Church thus persecuted took refuge in prayer. Hence
the majestic calmness, the blending of gentleness and indomitable energy which distinguished
it. In such conflicts the soul finds serenity only on the summits of faith. To what
an elevation were the Apostles lifted in that sublime prayer which was inspired
by the circumstances in which they had just found themselves. From the particular
fact of the persecution, they rise to the general law of the religious history which
it reveals. They see it in that opposition between the princes of this world and
the Son of God, set forth in the prophetic strains of
§ II. The Teaching and First Constitution of the Church at Jerusalem.
From its very birth the Christian Church is called to defend itself
against the attacks of its adversaries, and to contend for the claims of truth.
The opposition to Christianity assume from the outset various forms. The first to
be encountered is that of scoffing unbelief. This foe has not yet sharpened and
polished the weapons with which, in subsequent times, it will wound by the hands
of a Celsus and a Lucian. But was not the laugh of the scorner heard on the very
day when the Holy Spirit descended upon the Church? Did not his voice cry, "These
men are full of new wine?" And from the scorner's point of view it was a fair conclusion.
The supernatural is absurd to those who discern nothing beyond the circle of the
visible; and herein is its peculiar glory. The laugh of unbelief has never ceased
in all these eighteen centuries to ring through the world. But ridicule alone was
not enough. Calumny and false insinuations must be enlisted in the same cause. The
miracles of the primitive Church were incontestable; they could not be brought in
question, but they might, like those of Jesus Christ, be ascribed to witchcraft,
and to the powers of darkness. The arts of magic were much believed in at this epoch,
as in all periods of religious crisis. There was, therefore, profound subtilty in
likening the Apostles to common magicians. Such an idea is evidently present in
the question of the Sanhedrim to Peter and John, after the healing of the impotent
man: "By what power or by what name have ye
To meet all objections, the Church had ready a simple and popular
apology. We at once admit that they appealed without hesitation to the testimony
of reason for all the facts coming within its competence. Thus, in reply to the
absurd charge of drunkenness brought against the disciples, Peter urges that it
is but the third hour of the day—the hour, that is, of morning prayer, before which
the Jews never presumed to eat or drink.
It is to be observed that the miracles are rather the occasion
than the cause of the apology which accompanies them. Peter does not say, "Believe
because of this amazing gift of tongues, or these miraculous cures." He says, on
the contrary, "Believe in the reality, the divinity, of the miracles on the scriptural
and moral grounds, which show their necessity and establish their lawfulness." These
miracles certainly contributed to the rapid spread of the new faith by the impression
they produced upon the
Next to the proof drawn from the resurrection of the Lord, that
which is most prominent in the discourses of Peter is the evidence from Scripture.
He sets himself to show the harmony of the facts, in process of accomplishment,
with Jewish prophecy. The first apologist of the Church could take no other ground.
An appeal addressed to Jews by Christians of Jewish extraction must be made to a
tribunal recognized by all, and this was no other than Holy Scripture. If the Apostles
at Jerusalem succeeded in showing that the facts of which they were the witnesses
had been foretold in the Scriptures, every upright Jew must be enlisted on their
side. The
Thus Peter commences by showing that the miracle of Pentecost
is the fulfillment of the prophecy of Joel, who foretold the outpouring of the prophetic
Spirit at the time of Messiah's appearing.
In this first apology of Christianity many appeals are made to
the conscience. The conclusion of Peter's discourses is always an invitation to
repentance, and this invitation he urges by boldly charging home the great crime
committed by the Jewish people: "You crucified the Lord of glory," he cries again
In estimating the doctrinal teaching of the Apostles at this period, it is needful to avoid exaggerating or detracting from the influence of the new ideas, which were at the basis of their belief. If there is full evidence that they declared the truth of Christ in all its essentials, the evidence seems to us no less clear that they still enveloped that truth in Jewish forms.
It would be utterly unjust, however, to confound the primitive
Church with this or that Jewish sect. It clung most closely to the prophetic portion
of the Old Testament, that is to say, to the elements in the sacred book which best
harmonized with itself. Never has transition been more admirably accomplished than
that from the old covenant to the new, for the very simple reason that the latter
struck all its roots down into the former. In the period which immediately followed
the Pentecost the primitive Church was not called to break the tie which bound it
to the temple. It still celebrated the Levitical worship. The assiduous attendance
of the Apostles in the holy place is very notable; and they scrupulously
Christian doctrine had, it is evident, at this time, no systematic
form. It was subsequently to develop all its consequences, to define its outlines,
and, in the repeated shocks of a salutary conflict, to cast away its Jewish garment.
This first era of the Church was to be the period, not of conflict and debate, but
of the manifestation of the direct, sovereign and extraordinary action of the Divine
Spirit. The history of the Church itself, properly speaking, was not to begin till
later. The first Christians had no thought of a history. They believed in an immediate
return of Jesus Christ "to restore all things." They supposed that the end of the
world was at hand, and that the last days foretold by Joel had begun to dawn.
Ecclesiastical organization was as far from being fixed, in this
first period, as was the doctrine of the
We must set aside, first of all, any ideas of sacerdotalism. It
must not be forgotten that, at the period when the apostolic authority was used
with most power in the Church, the Church still acknowledged the Jewish priesthood.
Besides, Christianity recognizes no priesthood but that of Christ, communicated
by faith to the Christian. The Apostles were not the sole organs of inspiration,
for the Holy Spirit which was promised was granted to all the disciples assembled
in the upper chamber a few days after the ascension. We have fully shown that on
the day of Pentecost all the Christians were filled with the Holy Ghost. It is incontestable
that in the primitive Church some private Christians, not invested with the apostolic
office, had more influence than the majority of the Apostles; it is enough to cite
the names of Stephen, Philip, and James. In what,
The conditions of entrance into the Church are at first extremely
simple. No guaranty of preparation, of instruction and examination is required,
because conversion has at this period an exceptionally sudden and supernatural character.
The sign of initiation into the new society is baptism. The gift of the Holy Spirit
is so far from being bound to the material act, that sometimes it precedes immersion.
The formula of baptism was not pronounced in full; the neophytes were simply baptized
in the name of the Lord.
The worship of the primitive Church is also of an exceptional
character. The disciples are continually in the temple; they go up to it at the
hour of prayer and of sacrifice. Yet they have also their secret
We must be especially careful not to deprive it of its primitive
simplicity. The teaching did not take the form of preaching, properly so called;
it was an unstudied speech, springing from the heart. The Apostles were not the
only speakers; the other Christians spoke as freely as they of the wonderful works
of God.
From all these observations, it appears that the distinction between
the ordinary and the religious life had no existence for the primitive Church, because
its ordinary life was raised to a height truly divine. Hence the supernatural character
of its piety. The Church is not satisfied, as afterward, with infusing the spirit
of Christianity into all the various social relations; it translates the pure ideal
at once into the real, and banishes poverty from its midst by the voluntary generosity
of the rich.
§ I. The Seven Deacons of the Church at Jerusalem. Stephen.
THE Church could not always remain on the calm heights to which the Spirit of God had at first carried her. It was needful that the truth, of which she was the depositary, should be made her own by laborious assimilation; that she should follow it out to all its issues, and attain, as it were, her moral majority by breaking the bonds of Judaism. But this could not be achieved without many a severe struggle; there were inveterate prejudices to be subdued, which would only yield after a sharp resistance. The disputes which arose between the Hebrew and Hellenist Jews gave forewarning of the storm soon to burst upon the Church.
Christian charity had spontaneously found a noble mode of expression
in the new society. In the first fervor of zeal the wants of all the poor members
were supplied. It was only subsequently that certain jealousies began to arise about
the distribution of the alms. The Church had been formed on the occasion of a great
festival, when numbers of foreign Jews were assembled at Jerusalem. Among these
a large proportion of its members were found. These Jews
Until now there had been in the Church no office but the apostolate;
the nomination of the seven Deacons at Jerusalem was the first new wheel introduced
into the simple machinery. This primitive diaconate must be distinguished from that
which was subsequently established in a definite form. The further we go back in
the history of the Church the more indefinite in character are all ecclesiastical
offices.
The institution of the primitive diaconate shows how free and
spontaneous is every thing in the apostolic Church. None of its ordinances are appointed
like the Mosaic institutions; there is not even the semblance of any official declaration
of them. They arise out of the necessities of new circumstances. The organization
of the Church is as supple as it is simple, and accommodates itself to the various
exigencies of its situation, avoiding only any concession to error or to evil. It
is evident that this first ecclesiastical office springs from the apostolate, and
is again cut off like a bough from the parent trunk; it is not imposed by the Apostles
on the Church, nor conferred by way of sacramental transmission. The
The seven men chosen to serve the tables were for the most part
Hellenist Jews, as may be inferred from their names. We even find among them a proselyte
named Nicholas.
At the first glance, Stephen's apology may seem too remote, too
far fetched.
Stephen makes good his statement by drawing a broad historic picture,
in which he shows, in parallel lines, the goodness of God and the ingratitude of
the people of the Jews. We feel that he has ever in view the last and highest manifestation
of that ingratitude, and that he perpetually gives to the history a symbolic and
prophetic meaning. He brings to mind, first, the origin of the nation and all the
promises which rested on its cradle, all the blessings and deliverances which were
granted to it in the person of Abraham. This recital shows, on the one hand, how
deeply Stephen has been calumniated in the charge of blasphemy against the God of
his fathers, and on the other, brings out the guilty obduracy of a people so richly
blessed. The largest part of the address is taken up with the history of Moses,
and this for the reason, that the contrast between the goodness of God and the unbelief
of the chosen people never appeared in characters more strongly marked than at that
time. This Moses, chosen to be the deliverer of Israel, miraculously saved by God
and visibly prepared for this mission, is rejected by his own people on his first
attempt to aid them.
Such is the apology of Stephen—so simple, so noble; it contains, in an historic form, ideas the most fresh and sublime, and reveals an important development of Christian thought. And, strange to say, we owe this development to a man who is not an Apostle, and who appears in this crisis superior to the twelve. We have in this fact an irrefragable proof that nothing like a monopoly of revelation was enjoyed by the Apostles.
Fiercely interrupted by the rage of his hearers, Stephen is dragged
out of the assembly. The fury of the Jews is so great that all the forms of justice
are set aside; he is, in the wild commotion, stoned without a trial. His death is
truly sublime.
The death of Stephen, like that of all the confessors, set to
his testimony a truly sacred seal, and gave it redoubled power. It not only served
Christianity in a general manner, but specially advanced that truth for which he
had given his life. His cause was gained. The glorious thought which had inflamed
his zeal was to be caught by a man who stood as yet among the enemies of the Church,
but whom God designed to use for the casting down, with a strong hand, of the barrier
between Judaism and the Gentile world. This was that young man whom the sacred writer
points out to us, holding the garments of them that stoned Stephen. Saul of Tarsus
had heard Stephen's defense with the indignation of a Pharisee of the Pharisees,
but in the midst of his anger God had darted into his soul one of those piercing
goads which cannot long be resisted. The memory of that day never faded from his
mind. The redoubling of his persecuting zeal denotes the disquiet of his spirit.
Of this we shall find further proof when we trace the story of his conversion. "If
Stephen had not prayed," beautifully says Augustine, "the Church had not had Paul."
The persecution of which Saul of Tarsus was the instigator is an indication of the sudden change in the disposition of the Pharisees toward the Church. This sect, at first favorably disposed, took little part in the first persecution: now it takes the initiative in measures of violence, and soon surpasses the Sadducees in cruelty. In truth, the religious parties which lay their crimes to the charge of God, and pretend to avenge the cause of Heaven, are the most dangerous of all, because they hold themselves bound to no moderation in their transports of rage. The first result of this second persecution was the dispersion of the Christians. They were to learn more than one lesson in this exile. Salutary experience was to give confirmation to the words of Stephen, and the successes gained by the Church on foreign soil were to raise it above the exclusiveness of Judaism.
§ II. The Dispersion of the Christians. The Gospel in Samaria. Simon Magus. Philip and the Eunuch.
Persecution, by scattering the Christians, widened at once the
field of their missionary activity and the range of their ideas. They went forth
to encounter, for the first time, paganism—the eclectic paganism of that age, which
united in its vague beliefs the East and the West. This niew adversary awaited them
in one of the cities of Samaria, to which certain of their number had directed their
steps. Samaria was not, indeed, actually a pagan country. Its inhabitants were the
descendants of that mixed population, formed of the remnant of the ten tribes and
of a colony of foreigners, transplanted by the order of Salmanasar.
We need not here show, (for we have done so elsewhere,) that from
the stand-point of natural religion, the magician was the sole Messiah, the only
deliverer that could be looked for. For those who have deified nature, the last
resource must be her hidden power; pagan dualism, not rising to the conception of
moral evil, by conjuring away the effects of the noxious powers
It might be foreseen that the same vague aspiration which impelled the multitude eagerly to follow Simon, would make it attentive to the preaching of the Gospel. Such was the actual result when Philip, driven from Jerusalem by the persecution, preached Christ to the Samaritans, and confirmed his word by signs and wonders; the people at once forsook the impostor, and thronged to hear the word of truth.
Simon, like a cunning tactician, followed the multitude, in the
hope of regaining his authority. He was baptized with his former adherents. The
Apostles, who had remained at Jerusalem, hearing of the success of Philip's preaching,
sent two of their number into this new and fruitful field of labor. They chose Peter
and John, who up to this time had displayed the greatest activity in the primitive
Church. This decision was most wise: Philip had very probably suggested it in his
letters. The work was too wide and important for his unaided efforts; it was natural
that those who had shown the greatest missionary zeal should come to his assistance.
Peter and John, as soon as they arrive in Samaria, witness, in answer to their prayer,
a descent of the Holy Ghost upon the Samaritan neophytes. The defenders of the hierarchy
magnify this fact; but in order to raise it to the height of a principle and general
Simon betrayed in these circumstances the secret of his heart.
By offering to buy the gift of God, he showed that he, like so many since his day,
had confounded grace with magic; and it is just that the abominable traffic in holy
things should bear his name. We see him for one moment trembling under
The foundation of the Christian Church in Samaria had a very happy
effect upon the growth and expansion of Christian thought. Not only did the Jews
cherish the strongest antipathy to the Samaritans, but they had raised a barrier
of legal prescriptions of extreme severity between themselves and their hated neighbors.
The Gospels give us numerous proofs of this fact. The most injurious name which
the enemies of Christ can find for him is that of a Samaritan.
Peter and John return to Jerusalem, while the Deacon Philip is
called, by a new manifestation of the will of God, yet further to extend the field
of Christian missions. It is not a Samaritan, but a pagan, whom he next instructs
in the truth. In crossing the desert which leads to Gaza, a city of the ancient
Philistines, he meets with a stranger, who, as he journeys, is reading in his chariot
a portion of the Scriptures. He was an Ethiopian eunuch, a great dignitary of the
court of Meroe, treasurer of the Queen.
§ III. Foundation of the Church of Antioch, and Conversion of the Centurion Cornelius.
The dispersion of the Christians not only carried the Gospel into
Samaria, but into the surrounding countries. Its seeds were scattered in many cities.
Damascus, so important both from its geographical position and from its history,
contained within its
The Church of Antioch was early distinguished for the abundance
of its extraordinary gifts. It had numerous prophets. The new religion, released
from the restraints of Judaism, there expanded in all its freedom and beauty. At
Antioch it first became known by its true name. This was doubtless given
At this very time the Apostle Peter was led, by a miraculous dispensation
of God, to shake off the yoke of Jewish exclusiveness. Notwithstanding the success
of his mission in Samaria, he had not abjured his old notions; he still thought
that all the prescriptions of the Mosaic law were in force. It was of the utmost
importance that the Apostle whose activity and influence were paramount at this
period, should be won over to the cause of a world-wide Christianity. God brought
about this result in a most remarkable manner, by the coincident illumination of
a special revelation and of personal experience. There lived at this time in the
town of Cæsarea a Roman centurion named Cornelius, belonging to the Italian cohort,
which maintained in those countries the authority of Rome. A heathen by birth, but
conscious, like so many of his contemporaries, of unsatisfied religious needs, Cornelius
had, from his first contact with the synagogue, forsaken the worship of false gods,
and embraced the Jewish faith.
This revelation seems, at the first glance, to have reference
only to the distinction between clean and unclean animals.
We know what were the results of his preaching. The miracle of
Pentecost was wrought afresh on these converts from heathenism, and Peter exclaimed,
"Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received
the Holy Ghost as well as we?
§ IV. The Church at Jerusalem at the time of the First Mission beyond Judæa.
The Christians who had remained at Jeursalem had experienced no
change in their religious convictions. They had taken no part in the missionary
work in Samaria, Antioch, and Cæsarea. Living in the center of Judaism, in the immediate
neighborhood of the temple, where they daily offered the sacrifices commanded by
the law, it would cost them much to shake off their national prejudices. Thus they
learned with astonishment that Peter had entered the house of a Gentile, had eaten
with him, and treated him as a brother. They reproached him sharply. "Thou wentest
in," they said, "unto men uncircumcised, and didst eat with them."
The simple machinery of the primitive Church had just been completed
at Jerusalem. A new office had been created—that of elders.
When we read in the Acts of the Apostles, without further explanation,
that the Church of Jerusalem appointed for itself elders, it is clear that the office
in question must be one already known, and the name of which would convey distinct
ideas. Had it been otherwise, the sacred historian would have used a new word to
designate an entirely new institution; he certainly would not have connected the
sacerdotal hierarchy in the Church with the democratic rule of the synagogue, when
it would have been so easy to borrow from the Jewish priesthood its honorable titles.
To suppose, as do the advocates of hierarchical theories, that the first elders
were probably the first converted priests, who received a fresh ordination from
the hands of the Apostles, is to build the whole sacerdotal system upon a pure hypothesis.
The sacred historian gives no details of the nomination of the
first elders. We may hence conclude that there was no formal institution of the
office. The Apostles were often called away from Jerusalem. The young Church, though
richly supplied with the gifts of the Spirit, could not dispense with some direction
in its daily progress and in its worship. The wisest step was to borrow from the
synagogue the institution of elders, so admirably adapted to the new dispensation.
Besides, the seven deacons first appointed had been more than deacons. They had
taught with power, and
Side by side with the elders we find the prophets. The gift of
prophecy was distinguished from the other operations of the Spirit by its sudden
and powerful character. The prophets of the primitive
A short time after the return of Peter to Jerusalem persecution
broke out anew, raised this time, not by the priests or the rabbis, but by the King,
Herod Agrippa; it was employed by him as a means of gaining popularity. This prince
succeeded in uniting under his scepter all the countries over which his uncle, Herod
the Great, had reigned. Having crept to the throne by flattery, he kept his seat
by the same means, servilely pandering to vulgar prejudices. The time was gone when
the Church was in favor with all the people; persecution was beginning to become
popular; it was to retain this character during three centuries, for nothing is
more odious to the great mass of men than the law of holiness when its requirements
are once rightly understood. James, the son of Zebedee, was beheaded by the King's
commandment.
Herod was anxious next to strike a blow at the Apostle who had
most powerfully drawn upon himself the attention of the people, and had thus enkindled
the most bitter hatred. He caused Peter to be thrown into prison and condemned to
speedy death. The alarmed disciples gathered in the house of Mary, the mother of
Mark, to entreat help from God in this terrible crisis. Threatened with a blow which
would overturn one of the pillars of the Church, they lift up earnest prayers to
Heaven. Suddenly Peter himself, delivered by a miracle, knocks at the door of the
house, and comes to teach them the omnipotence of prayer, which they were yet slow
to believe, as their incredulity of his presence proves. Soon after Herod died,
smitten with righteous judgment from God. He had gone to Cæsarea to decide some
differences with the inhabitants of Tyre and Sidon, and to celebrate games in honor
of the recovery of Claudius. He was received with the utmost enthusiasm. Appearing
on the second day of the games arrayed in a silver tunic, on which the rays of the
early morning shed a dazzling brightness, he excited universal admiration, and his
flatterers even carried
According to tradition, St. Peter went to Rome after his deliverance,
and the excitement caused in the Jewish colony by his preaching provoked the severe
measures taken by Claudius against the Jews.
The same preconception, and the same disposition to transfer the
institutions of the third century of the Church into the first, have led to an imaginary
recognition of the episcopate in the entirely moral preeminence which James,
It is not then necessary, in order to explain the influence of
such a man, to have recourse to apostolic investiture.
The Church at Jerusalem continues, during this period, a religious
center for all the Christians. From it go. forth the first missionaries; it sends
We have seen, after the brief phase of the Church's history when all was miraculous and supernatural, the commencement of internal division. The teaching and martyrdom of Stephen, the mission in Samaria, the formation of the Church at Antioch, the conversion of Cornelius, all these events, which followed each other rapidly, brought into full view the question of the relations of Christianity with Judaism. The discussion is to take still broader ground, through the influence of St. Paul; it will be at times envenomed by the evil passions of the false teachers of Galatia and the schismatics of Corinth, but we shall see it, nevertheless, steadily advancing to its solution, by means of wholesome experience and brotherly consultations, in which the free and living character of the inspiration of the new covenant will strikingly appear; but we shall find no radical opposition between the disputants; and the theories which suppose two irreconcilable forms of Christianity in the apostolic Church will prove to be as fabulous as the legends of tradition.
§ I. Saul of Tarsus. His Preparation and Conversion.
EVERY great truth which is to win a triumphant way must become
incarnate in some one man, and derive from a living, fervent heart that passion
and power which constrain and subdue. So long as it remains in the cold region of
mere ideas it exercises no mighty influence over mankind. The truths of religion
are not exceptions to this law. God, therefore, prepared a man who was to represent,
in the primitive Church, the great cause of the emancipation of Christianity, and
whose mission it was to free it completely from the bonds of the synagogue. This
man was St. Paul, and never had noble truth a nobler organ. He brought to its service
an heroic heart, in which fervent love was joined to indomitable courage, and a
mind equally able to rise to the loftiest heights of speculation and to penetrate
into the deepest recesses of the human soul. All these great qualities were enhanced
by absolute devotedness to Jesus Christ, and a self-abnegation such as, apart from
the sacrifice of the Redeemer, has had no parallel upon earth. His life was one
perpetual offering up of himself. His sufferings have contributed, no less than
his indefatigable activity,
The epistles in which these reasonings have in part come down
to us, bear on every page the impress of his heart and mind; they show ns the whole
man, and the very style depicts in vivid characters his moral physiognomy. His polemics
are especially admirable, because with him a negation always leads to a weightier
affirmation; he never destroys without replacing, and, like his Master, abolishes
only by fulfilling. He is not only an incomparable dialectician in the subversion
of error, but he is able also to discern all the consequences of a truth, and
When God is forming a powerful instrument for the accomplishment
of his designs, the process of preparation is long and gradual. Every circumstance
is brought to bear on the education of the chosen witness, and every experience,
even of wrong and error, is made to enhance the power and completeness of the testimony
rendered. When a man is called to effect some great religious reformation, it is
important that he should himself have an experimental acquaintance with the order
of things which he is to reverse or transform. The education of Paul the Pharisee,
was to him what the convent of Erfurt was to Luther. It was well that he who was
to break the yoke of Jewish legalism should himself have first suffered under its
bondage. Thus, while the question of the emancipation of Christianity had
Saul belonged to a Jewish family, rigidly attached to the sect
of the Pharisees. His name, which signifies "The desired one," has led some commentators
We may, probably, attribute to his abode at Tarsus the literary
culture displayed in his writings. He familiarly quotes the Greek poets, and poets
of the second order, such as Cleanthes, (
Jerusalem was the place of his true education. He was placed in
the school of Gamaliel, the most celebrated rabbi of his age.
While an ingenious and learned school, formed at Alexandria, had
contrived by a system of allegorical interpretation to infuse Platonism into the
Old Testament, the school at Jerusalem had been growing increasingly rigid, and
interdicted any such daring exegesis. It clung with fanatic attachment to the letter
of the Scriptures, but, failing to comprehend the spirit, it sunk into all the puerilities
of a narrow literalism. Its interpretations lacked both breadth and depth; it surrendered
itself to the subtilties of purely verbal dialectics. Cleverly to combine texts—to
suspend on a single word the thin threads of an ingenious argument—such was the
sole concern of the
Saul of Tarsus embraced the teaching of his illustrious master
with characteristic earnestness and ardor, and, it must be added, infused into it
all the passionate vehemence belonging to his nature. At the feet of Gamaliel, he
became practiced in those skillful dialectics which were the pride of the rabbinical
schools, and he thus received from Judaism itself the formidable weapon with which
he was afterward to deal it such mortal blows. Here he gained a profound knowledge
of the Old Testament. Gifted with a strong and keen intellect, he in a few years
acquired
In times of spiritual crisis, when mankind is breathlessly awaiting
a great religious revolution, the common hope and expectation are manifested in
two extremes of conduct. Some men openly abandon ancient forms: others cling to
them with desperation, and demand from them with feverish impatience the satisfaction
of the new cravings of their souls; their morbid excitement is in itself an evidence
that they have not escaped the universal restlessness. They push to its furthest
logical issues the principle in which they wish to believe; it is clear that they
are
He seems to us, in some portions of his Epistles, to be recalling
the memories of his early life. When he speaks of the powerlessness of legalism,
he does not pause long on the development of the doctrine; his argument takes a
dramatic and personal form. We feel that he is touching what were the live wounds
of his soul before his conversion. The seventh chapter of his Epistle to the Romans
is full of these sorrowful memories. When he depicts to us, with marvelous psychological
insight, that singular effect of the law in revealing evil to us, and giving it
an accursed charm by presenting it as the forbidden fruit, (
Is it not the same Saul of Tarsus who exclaims, in deep sorrow
of heart, "When the commandment came, sin revived, and I died: and the commandment,
which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death."
His contact with Stephen may be regarded as the leading event
of his life. From the day in which he heard Stephen speak—or rather, from the day
in which he saw him die, with a calmness so sublime—Paul was beside himself. He
abandoned the quiet studies of a doctor of the law; he could not go on pursuing
them till he had silenced that importunate voice within, which declared them to
be of no avail. He felt that if Stephen's words were true, all the scaffolding of
his legal virtues and Judaistic learning would fall to the ground. He was at heart
more troubled than he was willing to appear; a secret doubt gave him no rest, and
he sought to shake it off by persecuting those who had called it forth. Hence that
redoubled zeal which marks the moral crisis at its culminating point. "He breathed
out," as the sacred writer tells us, "threatening and slaughter," (
While we thus regard the conversion of Paul as the issue of a long and painful preparatory period of inward crisis, we in no way detract from the importance of the remarkable miracle which was its immediate cause. If certain dispositions of mind were required by Jesus Christ as preparatory even for a miracle affecting the body alone, such as the healing of blindness or paralysis, how much more necessary must they be for a miracle wholly spiritual. The latter can only be received in its full power and meaning by a man whose heart has been prepared by God. This important truth comes out with a high degree of evidence from the narrative of the conversion of the Apostle.
As he was on the way, and already near Damascus, suddenly there
shined round about him a light from heaven, and accompanying the brilliant flash
a voice was heard with the shock of thunder. The
Let us endeavor to give some account of the mysterious scene which
transpired on the road to Damascus, the consequences of which were so momentous
to the Apostle and to the Church. Saul of Tarsus is already secretly troubled in
mind. He has closely observed the first Christians, has watched their pure and holy
lives, and their still more remarkable deaths. The remembrance of Stephen is constantly
present with him. He has, at the same time, proved the utter impotence of the old
law; he is exhausted with inward struggles, and yet trembles at the thought of repudiating
his past life. All these mingled emotions are tumultuous within him as he journeys
toward Damascus. His conscience is ill at ease; his spirit is at once depressed
and stirred within him. At this crisis Jesus appears to him, and asks, "Saul, Saul,
why persecutest thou me?" The question wakes a deep echo in his soul; and when the
voice goes on to say, "I am Jesus, whom thou persecutest," Saul is vanquished; he
falls lightning-struck to the ground; he feels that he has long been kicking against
the piercing goad. Light bursts in upon him; his doubts are dissipated; he sees,
he believes. Stephen was not deceived; Jesus Christ is the very Lord of glory, and
it is he whom
It would be a grave mistake to suppose that Saul's conversion
was completed on the road to Damascus. His pride was then broken; his doubts were
scattered; but he did not at once rise from that tremendous blow which had severed
his life in two. He then, indeed, received his calling as an Apostle, (
The best preparation of a great servant of God for his work is
stern solitude. Saul of Tarsus, before entering on his ministry, was sent into the
wilderness, like Moses and John the Baptist, and like Jesus himself. He lived for
some years in Arabia, (
We know how frequently Paul insisted upon his privilege as an
apostle, and with what vehemence he repudiates any inferiority in this respect in
comparison with his colleagues in the apostolate. "Am I not an apostle?" he says
in his first Epistle to the
We have seen that the apostolate was not a new priesthood, but
the ideal representation of the Church. The apostle was the Christian of the early
Church in an official character; he was to raise the Christian vocation to its supreme
dignity; he was thus, pre-eminently, the witness of Jesus Christ, for the special
mission of this first generation of Christians was to preserve to the world the
living memory of the Redeemer. St. Paul, in this respect, in no way differs from
the twelve; like them, he is one of the accredited witnesses of the great fact of
salvation, only his credentials are of a peculiar kind. The essential condition
for taking rank among the twelve first apostles was, "to have been with the Lord
Jesus all the time that he went in and out among them, beginning from the baptism
of John unto that same day that he was taken up from them."
One preliminary question remains to be noticed. Paul declares,
in his Epistle to the Galatians, that the Gospel he preaches comes not from man.
"I neither received it of man," he says, "neither was I taught it, but by the revelation
of Jesus Christ."
§ II. St. Paul's First Journey.
Until the time when he was sent forth by the Church at Antioch,
Saul had confined himself to preaching the Gospel to the Jews and proselytes. He
did not enter on his great mission-field among the Gentiles till this first journey,
which was, therefore, one of great importance to himself and to the Church. It called
forth differences of opinion which led, ultimately, to the Council at Jerusalem;
and the result of that council was the first solution of the question which had
already raised more than one stormy contention among the Christians. Saul and Barnabas
left Antioch accompanied by John, whose surname was Mark.
From the island of Cyprus Paul and Barnabas cross into Asia Minor.
They only pass through Perga, where Mark leaves them, and go on to Antioch in Pisidia,
an important town, built, like the other Antioch, by Seleucus Nicator. A large Jewish
colony is there resident. To this Paul first addresses himself. He always, in his
missionary journeys, follows the
When Paul has received the invitation to speak the word of exhortation,
he turns to his countrymen and addresses to them an appeal most earnest and touching.
The plan of his discourse, of which evidently we have only the leading points, is
admirably adapted to his purpose. Speaking to Jews, he takes his stand on the ground
of the old covenant. He first shows the historic descent of Christ. Just as the
kings succeeded the judges, so the Son of David has succeeded the kings, and has
inaugurated a new kingship.
This discourse produced a deep impression; but while the Gentiles
were filled with joy, there were murmurings of indignation among the Jews. These
could no longer be restrained when, the next Sabbath, a large concourse of Gentiles
came up to the synagogue. Paul had given his countrymen a grand opportunity of vindicating
themselves from the heavy charge which had rested on their nation ever since the
crucifixion of Christ. Far from embracing it, they sanction by their conduct the
crime of their brethren, and betray once more the obstinate pride of their race,
at the very moment when the ignorant Gentiles eagerly receive the Gospel. Paul and
Barnabas are filled with holy indignation; this confirmed resistance of the Jews
draws from them those words of incalculable import, "Lo! we turn to the Gentiles!"
A new era opens upon the Church, The
At Iconium—a neighboring city—similar scenes are enacted. The
Gospel is preached with acceptance to the Gentiles, but the exasperated Jews league
themselves with some fanatics, (
The people of this region were rude and ignorant; they still clung
to ancient paganism with its absurd fables. They were distinguished by their fanaticism,
and carried into their religious ideas the same wild passion as their neighbors,
the people of Phrygia. The worship of Jupiter and Mercury was in favor in these
provinces. In the familiar fable of Philemon and Baucis, these two divinities appear
in Phrygia. A temple to Jupiter had been built at the gates of Lystra. Such a people
would be sure to love the marvelous. The miraculous healing of the impotent man
by Paul excited, therefore, the most lively enthusiasm. On all hands the cry was
raised, "The gods are come down to us," (
This journey gave striking confirmation to all the revelations
which Paul had received. He knew now, from the conversion of Sergius Paulus and
the success of his preaching at Antioch in Pisidia, that deep spiritual needs were
felt by the Gentiles, and that the heathen world was, after its manner, looking
for redemption. But, at the same time, he had come into sharp contact with popular
fanaticism, and had learned the cost of opposing it, and he had also proved by experience
the obstinate resistance of his proud and opinionated countrymen. He had gained
clearer ideas of the vocation wherewith he was called, with its inevitable accompanying
perils and pains, and, doubtless, had already a sure presage of martyrdom as the
final seal of faithfulness to the truth.
§ I. The Two Conferences.
THE Christian Church had reached a critical moment. It had already
long passed out of the peaceful upper chamber at Jerusalem. Important questions
had arisen which clamored for solution. It must be decided if a Judaizing Christianity
or a Christianity of broader principles was to govern the Churches gathered from
among the heathen, A great step in the path of emancipation had been taken when
circumcision had been declared not obligatory in the case of Gentile converts, and
they had thus been placed on the same level with Jews by birth. This innovation
had been introduced by Paul, and it implied that he possessed authority equal to
that of the twelve Apostles. Hence arose two critical questions on which minds were
deeply stirred and greatly divided. The first referred to circumcision. Is it lawful,
it was asked, to abrogate an institution consecrated by the practice of the Church?
The question was not now confined, as in the instance of the conversion of Cornelius,
to an isolated case, or the baptism of a single family; it embraced all the thousands
of the uncircumcised. The second question was touching the apostleship of Paul.
Had he
But before following in detail these important deliberations,
we shall do well to place ourselves, as far as possible, in the midst of the various
conflicting influences which gave occasion to them. It has been asserted that the
conflict was essentially one between St. Paul and the other Apostles, who, we are
told, had not in any respect advanced beyond the limits of Judaism. This theory
is contradicted alike by the explicit declarations of St. Paul and by the narrative
of Luke. We have already sketched the history of the Church at Jerusalem up to this
period. We have seen that, while still continuing to observe the ordinances of the
law, the Church regarded itself as forming a separate society, the basis of which
was faith in Jesus Christ. It had already constructed its first simple organization.
It had also, in principle, recognized the calling of the Gentiles, though without
a full comprehension of all the consequences of that concession. The majority of
the Christians of this
It was impossible for
The moment was full of grave issues for the Apostle; it was a
decisive crisis, from which his authority must come out either seriously compromised
or sanctioned before the Church. As he himself says, the point to be resolved was,
"if by any means he should run, or had run in vain," (
It is not difficult to form an idea of the points debated
To those who demanded that he should have received his vocation
by direct transmission from the hands of the twelve Apostles, he replied with equal
frankness and boldness, "They added nothing to me."
This argument of Paul appeared irresistible to the men, who, from
the extraordinary consideration they enjoyed, may be regarded as the arbiters in
the dispute. It is impossible, except under the bias of very strong preconception,
to pretend to gather from the history that Peter, James, and John were at the head
of the adversaries of Paul, when Paul himself so distinctly draws the line between
them and the "false brethren," who had calumniated him, and so explicitly declares
their readiness to recognize his apostleship.
Besides these private conferences, the Church at Jerusalem had
public conferences, not on the question of the apostleship of Paul, but on the admission
of Gentiles into the Church. To these has been given, by emphasis, the name of the
Council of Jerusalem. No better method could have been taken to bring into strong
light the contrast between this first council and all that have succeeded it. It
differs as widely in its composition, as in the mode of its deliberations and in
its results. It is no clerical council pronouncing authoritative decisions on points
of doctrine. Not only the apostles, but the elders, and the whole multitude of the
believers, take part in the conference, because all have an equal interest in the
question at issue.
The breadth of spirit which characterized the deliberations of
the Council of Jerusalem is worthy of all admiration. We have already shown the
importance of the point to be decided. It cannot be questioned that there were strongly
marked differences of opinion in the assembly, even leaving out of view the extreme
fanatical party. Between Paul and James the divergence was great, though both were
equally devoted to Jesus Christ. Peter, whose mind had already been enlightened
by a special revelation, occupied an intermediate position. The great body of the
Christians sided with James. If each one had clung without concession to his own
peculiar views, a lamentable schism must have resulted from these conferences; but
the discussion was conducted in a spirit of Christian liberty, which obviated all
danger. It commenced evidently with hot and confused disputation, (
Paul and Barnabas immediately follow Peter as speakers. They narrate
the great results of their mission in Asia Minor. They describe, no doubt in fervent
language, the eagerness of the Gentiles to listen to the Gospel, and contrast it
with the resistance of the Jews. They point to Sergius Paulus converted at Paphos;
they dwell on the zeal and love of the Churches they have left as bright lights
in the midst of the darkness and corruption of Asiatic paganism.
It has been said that James made no real concession by this proposition-that,
in fact, he secured the triumph of the Judaizing party. But was it nothing to place
Christians converted from paganism, and who had only fulfilled the conditions required
of proselytes of the gate, on the same level with the proselytes of righteousness
and the Jews by birth? Was it nothing to consent to admit the uncircumcised into
the Church? Let it be remembered that the whole discussion originated in the question
of circumcision, and it will be evident that the solution proposed by James, while
it gave legitimate satisfaction to the Christian Jews, completely won the cause
for Paul and Barnabas. The whole conference agreed in the course proposed, and it
was decided to send delegates to Antioch, provided with a circular letter containing
the resolution unanimously taken at Jerusalem. This letter is a model of Christian
toleration. It is not weighted with anathemas; it does not even
We shall be much mistaken, however, if we suppose that the question
of the relation of the two covenants was finally determined by these conferences.
The obligation to observe the law was still laid on Jewish Christians. The concessions
made to the Gentile converts would not long suffice. There is no ground whatever,
therefore, for attributing any permanent value to the decree of the Council of Jerusalem.
This decree was a temporary compromise in the interests of the peace of the Church.
§ II. The Dispute at Antioch.
Immediately after the council at Jerusalem, Paul returned to Antioch
with Barnabas. He was quickly followed thither by Peter. At this time must have
occurred that contention between the two Apostles which is narrated with such courageous
frankness in the Epistle to the Galatians.
§ I. Second Missionary Journey of St. Paul.
AFTER the conferences at Jerusalem Paul made but a short stay
at Antioch. He was anxious to visit the Churches which he had founded, and to carry
the Gospel into new countries. According to his original plan, Barnabas was to be
his companion; but the latter was not willing to separate from Mark, and Paul judged
it not reasonable to take with them again the young disciple, who had left them
in Pamphylia. He did not wish to have his own liberal views hindered in their manifestation
by a timorous comrade, still under the thraldom of Jewish prejudice. A sharp contention
followed, and Paul and Barnabas parted. The latter repaired with Mark to the Island
of Cyprus, of which he was a native, while Paul returned into Asia Minor, accompanied
by Silas. We shall see presently how fresh fellow-laborers joined him as he went.
The support of such men, devoted to his person and his doctrine, was very
Paul manifests in this second journey all the great qualities
which make him the type of the Christian missionary. Feeble in health, with many
infirmities, his bodily strength is soon exhausted, but his zeal never, and his
very weakness gives more touching pathos to his appeals.
His tact as a missionary is no less admirable than his zeal. Never was worker so wise as he in "redeeming the time"—taking advantage, that is, of favorable occasions and circumstances. When he arrives in a city, he immediately finds means of access to the largest possible numbers. He preaches sometimes in the synagogues; sometimes, as at Philippi, by the road side; sometimes, as in frivolous Athens, in the place of public resort. He adapts himself to the customs of every country, and far and wide proclaims the name of Jesus.
Paul began his missionary journey by visiting the Churches which
he had founded in Syria and Cilicia. These were very prosperous, and daily increasing
in the number of their members. In Lycaonia the Apostle took to himself a young
disciple, converted during his previous journey, a young man full of faith, and
endowed by God with many excellent gifts. The son of a Jewish mother, he had been
taught from his childhood in the Scriptures.
Paul had also with him, at the beginning of this journey, another
companion not less faithful: he was a Christian of Greek parentage, as we gather
from his name—Epaphras, or Epaphroditus.
Paul merely passed through Phrygia, but made a longer stay in
Galatia. There he found a race entirely new to him. The Galatians were not pure
Asiatics, but a Western race, of Gallic and Celtic origin, which had settled in
Asia Minor three centuries before Christ, and which, although modified by long sojourn
in the East, yet retained in many respects their original type. The people of these
countries
The mission in Galatia seems a sort of preparation for the transition
into Europe. The time had come for Paul to set his foot on the classic ground of
philosophy and ancient art. For entering on a field of labor so wide and so new,
a direct call from God was necessary. Paul was preparing to pursue his mission in
Asia, when he was turned aside by a very remarkable vision. A man of Macedonia appeared
to him, saying, "Come over into Macedonia, and help us!" This man was the representative
of those powerful nations of the West which had accomplished such great things,
and agitated such great
It was at Troas Paul had the vision which decided him to go over
into Macedonia. It was also at Troas he associated with himself another helper—Luke,
the physician, who was to be the inspired chronicler of the apostolic age. Luke
was, according to Eusebius,
From Troas Paul went by Neapolis to Philippi. This city, built
by Philip II., on the borders of Macedonia and Thrace, and rendered illustrious
by the famous battle in which the Roman republic finally succumbed under Brutus,
had become a flourishing Roman colony, the most important in the whole
In entering on this new field, the work of Christian missions
was coming into collision not simply with Jewish fanaticism, or popular superstition
as in Asia, but with the Roman administration, so admirably constructed for the
universal suppression of liberty. Immediately on arriving at Philippi, Paul repairs
to the river side, where the Jews were accustomed to assemble every Sabbath. There
he found only a few women. To these he preached the Gospel with all his wonted earnestness
and power; and in the house of one of them, Lydia, a seller of purple from Thyatira,
the first nucleus was formed of that Church which was to be the jewel in his apostolic
crown. Into this humble family there soon came a poor servant-girl, whose condition
sheds light upon the paganism of that day. The mysterious malady, known as possession,
was not peculiar to Judea. In this time of momentous crisis, the intervention of
the powers of the unseen world was more than usually direct and sensible. It seems
as if the barrier between that world and ours was broken down. The evil spirits,
whose existence is so clearly revealed in the New Testament, act at such epochs
in a special manner on persons predisposed to their influence by an unhealthy moral
and physical condition. Natural phenomena, such as somnambulism, assume a peculiar
Paul's imprisonment had been the result of a tumult of the people.
His cause had not been tried. The decemvirs having, like other Roman magistrates,
but little leaning to religious fanaticism, now send their lictors to bring the
Apostles out of the prison. But Paul protests indignantly against the unlawful
Paul left at Philippi a Church which had received the baptism of persecution, and which was strengthened in its attachment to his person by witnessing his courageous endurance of suffering.
Of this attachment the Philippian Church soon gave him touching
proof, by sending generous aid to him at Thessalonica, whither he had gone to carry
the Gospel.
These ardent young Christians displayed heroic courage in the
conflict stirred up by the Jews.
It was, indeed, a terrible storm which broke over the Church at
Thessalonica. Paul's implacable adversaries hired men of low character, who by their
calumnies of the Apostle set all the city in an uproar. Wresting the words he had
spoken with reference to the kingdom of Christ and his speedy coming to reign, (
When they could not find either Paul or Silas, they assaulted
the house of an inhabitant of the city, named Jason, who, being probably a convert
through their preaching, had received them into his house. The magistrates committed
Jason to prison, and he was only released on giving bail. The Apostles were sent
away by their friends by night to Berea, a town about ten miles distant from Thessalonica.
Here they met with a better reception from the Jews; they even gained some adherents
in the upper classes of society.
What Athens was to the ancient world is well known. "From Athens,"
says Cicero, "philosophy and religion, agriculture and laws, have gone forth
The Athenian people were more concerned than most to appease the
gods. Philostratus puts these words into the mouth of Apollonius of Tyana: "It is
wise to speak well of all the gods, especially at Athens."
Such were the conflicting influences at work when the great Apostle
arrived in Athens. As he passed along the streets of the queenly city, where the
masterpieces of pagan art met his eye at every step. a sacred sadness seized his
soul, and he eagerly desired to preach Christ to these poor idolators. After having
proclaimed the Gospel in the synagogue, he sought access to the Epicurean and Stoic
philosophers. The Athenians, whose curiosity was easily excited, brought him to
the Areopagus, to hear him speak of these new gods. It has been erroneously imagined
that Paul was arraigned by the Athenians, and that his address was a defense of
himself rather than a general apology for Christianity. He was indeed taken to the
spot, where causes were customarily tried, but it was only that he might more easily
harangue a large assembly. Paul had before him the marvelous Acropolis, adorned
with the miracles of the chisel of Phidias; above him the temple of Theseus, the
most ancient monument in Athens; and wherever his eye turned, it rested on the altars
of false gods. It is worth observing, that the temples which were nearest to him,
in the Areopagus itself, were dedicated to those subterranean deities which inspired
so much terror in the Greeks, and which expressed the protest of outraged conscience
against
The testimony of Pausanias and of Philostratus confirms that of
St. Paul as to this inscription.
It is not our purpose here to analyze Paul's address; we shall
treat of that when he comes to speak of his doctrine. It is impossible not to notice,
however, the skill with which he finds the point of contact between the truth and
his hearers. Observing their extraordinary devotion, he traces it to its principle—the
deep necessity felt by the human heart of union with God. He reads on the altars
of paganism the avowal of its impotence, and he borrows the words of a pagan poet
to show how grand is man in his origin, and how infinite are his aspirations. That
living and true God, whom they in their ignorance are feeling after, has just revealed
himself in an amazing manner by the gift of his Son; and faith in the Christ is
the one way of escape from the terrible judgment which awaits the unpardoned sinner
at the resurrection day. The Greeks listened to the Apostle so long as he confined
himself to philosophic generalities, but they could not endure the faintest allusion
From Athens Paul repaired to Corinth. This city, washed by two
seas, the Ionian and the Ægean, united, through the activity of its commerce, the
pomp and luxury of Asia with the civilization of Greece. It had been celebrated
in all ancient times for the cultivation of the arts and sciences.
After he had thus preached the Gospel during a year and a half,
the Jews, taking advantage of the arrival of a new proconsul, accused him of professing
a strange and unauthorized religion. Happily for Paul, this proconsul was a man
of a tolerant and enlightened disposition; he was Gallio, brother of the famous
Seneca, by whom he was declared to be the mildest of men.
Paul, before leaving Corinth, had his head shaved,
From Corinth, Paul went to Ephesus, with Aquila and Priscilla.
After a short stay, he left them there, and himself went up, by way of Cesarea,
to Jerusalem, there to keep the Feast of Pentecost.
§ II. Third Missionary Journey of St. Paul.
Paul began his third missionary journey by visiting the Churches he had founded in Phrygia and Galatia. He had the grief of finding that in the latter country, where he had been so readily received, his adversaries had succeeded in partially nullifying his influence and in giving currency to Pharisaic legalism. He went on to Ephesus, sorrowful and wounded by signs so unexpected of ingratitude and changeableness. His first care was to write a letter to the Churches of Galatia. Every line evidences the painful surprise he felt at being thus distrusted by those who had at first devoted themselves to him with enthusiastic affection.
Ephesus now became the principal center of his apostolic work.
No other city could have been chosen so well adapted to be the focus from which
light might radiate over the whole of Asia. The capital of ancient Ionia, it had
been the cradle of
Ephesus was, like Corinth, and to a greater degree than Antioch, one of the centers of the pagan world, where all sects and all opinions met and came into collision. There, as in all the large cities, was a Jewish synagogue; in this Paul preached for three months; but here, as at Corinth, he came to an open rupture with his countrymen, and abandoned the struggle with the invincible obduracy of the Pharisaic spirit. He continued to teach the Gospel in the house of one Tyrannus, a public teacher of rhetoric, who had a school at Ephesus, and who had doubtless been convinced of the folly of his system by the preaching of the Apostle. Thus Christianity gained a readier victory in a school of pagan literature than in the school of the doctors of the law; and those who read Moses and the prophets showed themselves less prepared to receive the Gospel than the Greeks, nurtured on Homer, Hesiod, and Pindar. So true is it, that external revelation is a dead-letter to those whose hearts are hardened.
Besides the unbelieving Jews of the synagogue,
There was also a third class of Jews at Ephesus. These were exorcists,
who worked on the credulity and eager expectations of the people, and endeavored,
like Simon of Samaria and Elymas of Cyprus, to make gain by sorcery. They attempted
to cast out devils by the repetition of mysterious formulas, which they ascribed
to Solomon.
This incident in the history of Paul draws a well-marked line
of distinction between miracle and magic.
For three years Ephesus was the chief abode of the Apostle. During
this time, however, he made a journey of considerable extent in Europe. His first
purpose was to visit Corinth, to set at rest the unhappy contentions in the Church
of that city. He went by sea, and turned aside from the direct course to visit Crete.
It is easy to suppose that the Gospel had been already conveyed to that island by
some Christians, and that Paul's mission there, like Peter's at Samaria, was to
carry on a work already commenced, and prosperous. His stay was but short. This
island, famous for its wealth, and for the number of its towns, presented peculiar
difficulties to Christianity. The national character of its inhabitants had been
depicted in severe colors by one of its poets, Epimenides, surnamed the prophet,
who accused them of being altogether given up to sensuality and falsity.
From Crete Paul went on to Corinth, where he stayed but a short
time. During this visit he wrote
This letter was written under most touching circumstances, for
Paul was at that very time obliged to hide himself to escape the malice of his enemies.
He had been suffered for a long time to labor without hinderance in the propagation
of the Gospel at Ephesus, but persecution of singular violence suddenly broke out
against him. He encountered a kind of opposition which was more than once temporarily
to arrest the progress of the Church, and to
From Ephesus Paul went on into Europe. He had shortly before sent
Titus to Corinth, in order to ascertain the precise effect produced in that Church
by his letter.
Paul, in his indefatigable zeal, contemplated a missionary journey
into the far West. He desired to carry the Gospel into Spain, (
No remarkable incidents marked the journey to Jerusalem, except
that Paul's presentiments as to his coming captivity were confirmed by positive
predictions. At Tyre he met some disciples who, warned by the Spirit of the dangers
awaiting him, entreated him not to pursue his journey to Jerusalem. At Cæsarea,
in the house of Philip the Evangelist, a prophet named Agabus yet more clearly foretold
his captivity by a symbolic action, which reminds us of the manner of the ancient
prophets.
The Apostle arrived at Jerusalem, surrounded by his most cherished
companions, men belonging to the different Churches founded by him in Greece and
Asia. They were the representatives and pledges of the universal triumph of Christianity.
They were the first-fruits of the new Israel, to be gathered in from the ends of
the earth. Paul was received with the greatest affection by the elders of the Church.
It was quite evident, however, that the great body of Judaizing Christians were
still prejudiced against him. With a view to conciliation, he consented, on the
advice of James, not exactly to take upon himself the vow of the Nazarite, but to
pay the legal charges for four Christians of Jewish origin, who were about to fulfill
their vow in the Temple, at the very time of his arrival in Jerusalem.
More than once already the excitable crowd had risen at the voice
of the unknown agitators. A recent event gave great probability to the fears of
the tribunes. Josephus tells us that an Egyptian had come to Jerusalem, saying that
he was a prophet. He persuaded the multitude to follow him on to the Mount of Olives,
on the promise that he would make the fortifications of the city fall down at his
word, and would lead back his followers through the breach. Felix dispersed the
tumultuous assembly by force of arms, but the Egyptian had succeeded in making his
escape.
The Tribune Lysias at once took it for granted that the present
riot was excited by the return of the Egyptian, whom he supposed Paul to be.
At the first mention of his mission to the Gentiles the hoarse cries of anger burst forth afresh and drowned his voice, as on another occasion—how fresh in the memory of Saul of Tarsus!—the voice of Stephen had been drowned; and the Tribune, to save him from the violence of the people, commanded that he should be brought into the castle.
§ I. Various Phases of St. Paul's Captivity.
AS he crossed the threshold of the citadel Paul entered on a captivity
which was to terminate only with his life. Let us endeavor to follow him through
its various phases. The Tribune Lysias was much embarrassed by the presence of this
prisoner, whose crime was unknown to him. He thought his guilt might be most easily
ascertained by putting Paul under torture in its least cruel form. This was an expeditious
method recommended by the Roman law, but only to be applied to slaves, or in cases
of exceptional seriousness.
Lysias thought he had before him a common agitator, a low ringleader
of a despised people. He felt no hesitation in inflicting a degrading penalty on
a man whom he regarded as worse than a slave. Paul, however, appealed to his rights
as a Roman citizen, and the very name sufficed to cover him with a powerful shield.
The next day the Tribune brought
The Procurator Felix, to whose tribunal Paul was now brought,
was a freedman of the Emperor Claudius, brother of Pallas, the favorite of Agrippina.
He belonged to that class, famous for its baseness and immorality, which then governed
the world by governing the Cæsars, purchasing power by flattery, and using it with
tyranny to recover the price paid for it. Tacitus has characterized Felix with one
stroke of his incisive pen, when he says, "At once a debauchee and a tyrant, he
performed functions little less than royal with the spirit of a slave."
The captivity of the Apostle at this time was not
Felix was removed from Cæsarea, and Festus came in his place.
The new governor, like his predecessor, had to wage warfare with the Jewish brigands,
who under the name of Sicariii laid waste the country. He
had also some serious differences with the Temple authorities at Jerusalem.
The judicial ceremony, therefore, which was enacted at Cæsarea
a few days later, can only be regarded as a sort of amusement given by Festus to
his illustrious guests—an amusement worthy of a blasé Roman, to whom the
enthusiasm and faith of St. Paul were but a curious phenomenon. The King Agrippa,
before whom Paul appeared, was Herod Agrippa, son of the nephew of Herod the Great,
of the same name. Brought up in the palace of the Cæsars, he had attained to his
high rank by flattery, and had received from the munificence of the Emperor, to
whom he had been an assiduous courtier,
Attention has often been drawn to the sharpness of outline with
which these various personages are sketched by the sacred historian. On the one
hand we see the Roman of the decline, essentially a materialist, treating religious
questions with contemptuous irony, and charging Paul with madness when he speaks
of the resurrection of the dead, and carries his hearers into that invisible world
which has no existence for the pagan.
The incidents of his voyage are familiar to us all. In the midst
of perils of the sea, he manifests the same calmness, the same courage, the same
zeal for souls, the same unvarying forgetfulness of self. After the shipwreck, and
a sojourn of three months in the island of Malta, made use of by the Apostle for
the foundation of a Church, he lands on those shores of Italy which he was to water
with his blood, and receives at Puteoli the brotherly welcome of the Christians
of the country. Forty miles from Rome, in the little town of Appii Forum, Paul is
met by some Christians from the capital of the world; a still
After being thus repulsed by the rulers of the synagogue at Rome,
Paul turned once more with success to the Gentiles. As in the prison at Cæsarea
he had preached the Gospel to a poor slave, his companion in captivity, so now he
endeavored to win to Christ the soldiers who guarded him by turns. His bonds were
by this means to become famous through the whole prætorium.
This state of things lasted till the year 62. Then every thing
was changed. From Paul's letter to the Philippians we learn, first, that the party
of Judaizing Christians had commenced their intrigues against him; they did not
hesitate even "to add affliction to
The Jews had no interest in hastening the matter to a conclusion;
on the contrary, they might wish to allow time for the impression favorable to Paul,
produced by the reports of Festus, to wear away. They awaited some auspicious moment
for gaining the ear of the Emperor. They doubtless thought such a moment had arrived
when Octavia Poppaea was raised to the rank of empress, for she openly protected
them, and Josephus asserts that she was a proselyte.
But though he has thus once been delivered out of the mouth of
the lion, (
We shall presently consider Paul in the light of the first
of the great teachers of the primitive Church; hitherto we have regarded him only
as the man of conflict and of action, the missionary and the controversialist. If
we inquire into the peculiar character of the missions undertaken and directed by
him, we shall find that they differ somewhat from those of the foregoing period.
The Divine Spirit works not less mightily in Paul than in Peter, but the part of
the human agent is more distinctly observable. The thousands converted on the day
of Pentecost and in Solomon's porch were acted upon by a sudden and irresistible
influence, produced by the first outpouring of the Holy Spirit. Conversions in masses
like these do not recur in this second period of the Church. The proselytes are
many, but they
§ II. Mission of the other Apostles during this period.
While Paul was carrying the Gospel from Asia Minor into Europe,
and to the very center of Western
After the Council at Jerusalem, the Apostles disperse to meet no more. James, the brother of the Lord, continues to exercise paramount influence over the Church of that city; the holiness of his life, the form of his piety, the largeness of heart with which he fulfills his mission of conciliation, all contribute to strengthen it. Far from appearing as an adversary of Paul, James welcomes him, on his last visit to Jerusalem, with brotherly affection, and advises him to join himself to those Christian Jews who were about to fulfill in the Temple the vow of the Nazarite. We have no further details of his life from this time till his martyrdom; but we possess his epistle, from which we shall presently gather his doctrine. In it we shall find faithfully reproduced all the traits of his noble character—his piety, at once scrupulous and elevated; his stern and practical spirit; and, in the oriental coloring of his language, the reflection of the old prophets of Israel.
Jude, the brother of James, and consequently of the Lord, also
took an active part in the propagation of the Christian faith. It is not possible
to determine from his epistle what was the principal sphere of his work. It may,
however, be inferred, from his vehement denunciation of false teachers, that he
had come in contact with the heretics of the Churches of Colosse and Ephesus, and
that he resided in the countries where the first germs of Gnosticism appeared.
Paul, in his rapid journeys through Asia, could not have preached
the Gospel to all the inhabitants of those wide regions. He had succeeded in founding,
in a short space of time, important Churches, but these were surrounded by unbelieving
and superstitious masses. It was, therefore, very necessary that the missions of
the other Apostles should occupy, to some extent, the same ground gone over by him.
According to the testimony of tradition, Cappadocia, Galatia, and Bithynia were
evangelized by the Apostle Andrew, Peter's brother.
The Churches of Colosse, Laodicea, and Hierapolis, founded by
Epaphras and St. Paul in Phrygia, shed abroad the pure light of truth in that classic
land of superstition. But the epistles of the Apostles themselves show how severely
the triumph of Christianity was there contested. The work begun had to be constantly
renewed; therefore, the Apostle Philip went to settle in that country. He took up
his abode at Hierapolis with his daughters, one of whom had the gift of prophecy.
The Christian mission does more than consolidate the work already
commenced; it has an irresistible power of expansion. Matthew carries the divine
message into Arabia; his Gospel was subsequently found in the language of that country.
If we endeavor to derive from the tradition of the Church any
thing more than these very general indications about the Apostles, we enter the
vague region of fable. We know from Eusebius that Philip died at Hierapolis, and
that his tomb was there to be seen.
We have more precise information as to the life of St. Peter after
the Council at Jerusalem. From that time, however, his part is as inconspicuous
in actual history as it is brilliant in legend. Paul fills the whole scene. Nothing
could give stronger proof of Peter's growth in humility than the fact of his consenting
to take the second place, after having, more than any other, contributed to lay
the foundation of the Church by his courage and energy. It is clear that he has
come under the strong influence of Paul; of this his epistle is the surest evidence.
Unless we repudiate all proof, external and internal, it is impossible not to admit
that the good understanding between these two Apostles is no invention of the writer
of the Acts. Peter, however, according to the agreement voluntarily made at the
Council at Jerusalem, devoted himself almost exclusively to the preaching of the
Gospel among his countrymen. He passed by the great Churches founded by Paul in
Phrygia and Asia Minor,
Did Peter go from Babylon to Rome? This is a much disputed question.
It is impossible to answer it with certainty, but we incline to a reply in the affirmative.
It is very necessary to guard against party prepossessions. If an historian, wedded
to the hierarchical theory, has an interest in proving the sojourn of Peter at Rome,
an historian espousing opposite opinions may erroneously imagine he has an interest
in showing the contrary. Both are therefore bound to weigh with scrupulous impartiality
the testimony of Christian antiquity. For ourselves, we find it impossible to suppose
that Peter was at Rome under Claudius and at the commencement of the reign of Nero.
Besides the reasons we have already pointed out, we lay stress on the incontestable
fact that the name of Peter does not once occur in the epistle written by Paul to
the Romans, nor in any of the other letters of that Apostle dated from Rome. Admitting
the hypothesis of Baronius and writers of his school, such an omission would be
inexplicable; but, on the other hand, we are inclined to believe that Peter did
spend the last year of his life at Rome. We fully admit the uncertainty and contradictoriness
of tradition on this point. We do not attach much importance to the indirect allusion
in the epistle of Clement.
The fragment of the preaching of Peter, quoted by Cyprian, belongs
to a document which, though very ancient, is nevertheless apocryphal.
Many legends are linked with the names of the other disciples
of the Apostles, and to each has been assigned a large share in the missions of
the first century; but it is absolutely impossible to discriminate between the false
and the true in this medley of fable.
§ III. Mode of Primitive Evangelization. Origin of the First Three Gospels.
Having now described the missions of the primitive Church in their
rapid and fruitful expansion, we must characterize the method adopted at this period
in the propagation of the truth. "Faith cometh by hearing," says St. Paul, (
None of the expressions by which preaching is spoken of in the
New Testament can apply to written documents. That which is intended is always the
living word, the solemn proclamation of the truth from the lips of witnesses.
For a long time the Church preferred the living to the written
word. "If I met," says Papias, "a brother who had known the Apostles, I asked him
carefully what they had said—what Andrew, Peter, Philip, Thomas, James, John, and
Matthew had said. I thought I could gather more from a living testimony than from
books."
It is in no degree our intention to detract from the
The origin of the Gospel of Mark is thus stated by Papias, who
is himself only the echo of John the Presbyter, or the Elder: "Mark, having been
Peter's interpreter, wrote down carefully, but not in order, the words and actions
of Jesus Christ. His one great concern was to give, unaltered and unadulterated,
that which he had heard."
§ IV. First Roman Persecution of Christianity. Persecution in Judæa. Death of James, the brother of the Lord.
Persecution always followed step by step in the track of Christian
missions, endeavoring to sweep away their glorious results by torrents of blood,
and
This sanguinary collision took place in the latter part of the
reign of Nero. Paganism could not have found a fitter representative than this Emperor.
Persecutions against the Church must needs break forth at Rome, for the doctrine
of the Church was on one essential point directly antagonistic to the theories of
the ancient world. In that world, religion was closely associated with political
organization. Polytheism had produced, as its natural result, State religions, which
trampled on the rights of conscience. The individual had no personal guaranty, and
must, under every circumstance, sacrifice himself to the State. Freedom of thought
could only exist in the presence of religions thus established, by means of reservations
and artifices strongly savoring of hypocrisy. The light in which religion was regarded
by pagan antiquity is forcibly described by Cicero: "No one,"
The determining cause of the persecution under Nero was the astonishing
success of the new religion in the capital of the world. It had been tolerated so
long as it could be ignored. The apocryphal letter from Pilate to Tiberius, which
is said to have led that Emperor to propose to the senate to admit the God of the
Christians into the Roman Pantheon, has no marks of authenticity.
These calumnies have no connection with the subtle and perfidious
accusations of the philosophers. We are brought face to face with popular prejudices
in their grossest form. It would be a serious anachronism to transplant into the
first century, and into the midst of the Roman populace, the learned objections
of a Celsus or a Lucian. Tacitus himself puts us on the track of the charges which,
in the year 65, were current in Rome against the Christians. "They were convicted,"
according to his statement, "not of the burning of Rome, but of the crime of hating
the human race."
When Tacitus adds, that they were odious for their crimes and
abominations,
It was not possible that the Gospel should be disseminated in the metropolis of paganism without exciting vehement opposition. It could not, for the reasons already pointed out, engage public opinion without inflaming it against itself. Was it not in the world as a burning brand which was to set on fire the rotten edifice of a voluptuous and skeptical society? The self-interested devotees of paganism, men like Demetrius the silversmith, were even more numerous at Rome than at Ephesus. The Church had but to show itself, to be accursed. Nothing is more easy of explanation than this hatred of the Roman people to Christianity, and their eagerness to heap upon it undeserved reproach.
But though the first persecution was popular, it is none the less
chargeable on the crowned tyrant who provoked it. Eusebius eloquently says, "Nothing
was wanting to Nero but to add to his other titles that of being the first emperor
who declared war against Christianity."
This first persecution produced a deep impression through the
whole Church. Nero became to the Christians the type of Antichrist, and Rome a new
Babylon, "the mother of harlots, drunken with the blood of saints." We trace this
sentiment in all its vividness in the representations of the Apocalypse, which show
us thousands of martyrs around the throne of God, crying for vengeance on the great
whore seated on the seven hills. Nero seemed to the
St. Paul was probably put to death during this persecution, at
the same time as St. Peter. According to a doubtful tradition, the latter was crucified
with his head downward. Clement of Alexandria relates that Peter's wife went before
him to death, and that the Apostle, calling her by name, addressed to her these
simple and touching words, "Remember thou the Lord."
While paganism was thus waging cruel warfare with the Church,
Judaism in Palestine was persistent
According to the statement of Hegesippus,
§ I. Fundamental Unity in Diversity.
THE apostolic age did not arrive at once at the full consciousness of the treasures of truth committed to it. After its first period, which was, like a blessed childhood, all calmness and simplicity, it entered upon an era of prolonged conflicts. Did these conflicts make, as some have asserted, a schism among the Apostles, and did they lead to the formation of two hostile Churches—the Judaistic Church, under the conduct of Peter and James, and the Church freed from the synagogue, under the leadership of Paul? Can we discover two contradictory doctrinal systems, as widely divided the one from the other as were subsequently the heresy of the Ebionites and the orthodox faith? This is the question before us for solution.
We have already several times incidentally approached it; we must
now give it full consideration, for it is the great theological question of the
day. Raised by a scholar of the first rank, distinguished for his laborious research,
and the head of a numerous school, it presents itself under continually varying
forms. In order to show its full bearing, it will be necessary first to state the
view of primitive Christianity taken by those who differ from ourselves.
Such is the system which, during almost twenty
Reduced to their true proportions, the divergences between the sacred writers no longer present themselves as radical or irreconcilable; on the contrary, they form the regular steps of a ladder, which enables us to rise gradually to the culminating point of revelation. Among these types of doctrine, two are distinguished by their originality and their broad results; the other two represent no less an important aspect of the truth, to which it was well that a sort of independent prominence should in this way be given, because it would not have been definable with sufficient clearness in the wide synthesis of doctrine presented by St. Paul and St. John.
The attempt to represent the doctrine of James and of Peter, as
opposed to that of Paul, really arises from a false view of the relation of the
Old and New Testament. Those who hold that the old economy germinally contains the
new, see no antagonism between the doctrine of James and that of the Apostle of
the Gentiles. It is too commonly forgotten that the Judaism of James had no analogy
with Pharisaism.
With these reservations, we do not for a moment deny the presence
of differences among the sacred writers; unity prevails, but diversity exists. Nor
do
Each of the sacred writers preserves his individuality and speaks his own language. The imperfections of detail in each are like his peculiar accent; they testify to his being a free organ of the Spirit of God, not a mere passive instrument. They all melt into the great central light of truth produced by the collective testimony of the Apostles. It is this collective testimony which alone is authoritative, and which sets us free from the rabbinical yoke of isolated words under which the Church has been too long in bondage.
We cannot consent, moreover, to regard the writers of the New
Testament only as the first of theologians. They moved in a sphere superior to theology;
they possessed, as no other generation of Christians has done, the Spirit of God.
Nor did they arrange their views in systematic form. "St. Paul," it has been very
justly observed, "does not decide questions by metaphysical principles, and does
not pride himself on scientific exactness."
Three types of doctrine are presented to us in this second period
of the apostolic age. Each of these is characterized by the solution it gives to
the question of the relation of the two covenants. The old covenant was based upon
two great institutions, the law and prophecy. James regards the new covenant as
the expansion of the law; Peter sees in it, primarily, the fulfillment of prophecy.
As prophecy was a sort of anticipation of Christianity, Peter is by his view brought
into closer sympathy with Paul, whose influence upon him is also very evident. Paul
is much less concerned with showing the relations of the two covenants, than with
bringing out their differences. The new covenant is to him essentially a new fact,
the proclamation of pardon, the sovereign manifestation of grace—in one word, the
Gospel.
§ II. Doctrine of James.
The main idea running through the whole Epistle of James is that
of the permanence of the law and of moral obligation under the Christian dispensation.
The law is taken by the sacred writer in its deepest sense; it is to him the expression
of absolute good. He does not speak, in fact, so much of particular precepts of
the law, as of the law regarded as an indivisible whole, and restored to that unity
which is inseparable from spirituality.
Thus understood, the law, so far from being opposed to faith,
is intimately associated with it; James never separates them. True to his practical
point of view, he brings out the indissoluble union of faith and works. Deeply convinced
that moral obligation is as real under the Gospel as under the old covenant, he
deprecates any teaching which, under pretext of magnifying salvation by faith alone,
should lessen the importance of good works. He does not pretend that these suffice
for man's justification.
In faith divorced from works, James combated intellectual dogmatism,
the opus operatum of doctrine, as Paul had combated
the opus operatum of legal formalism. Both are the
champions of true religion,
The great argument urged to prove an irreconcilable difference
between the Epistle of James and the form of doctrine presented by Paul, is the
entire silence of the former on all the historical facts of the Gospel. He says
nothing of the death and resurrection of the Saviour or of his miracles. But if
these facts are nowhere distinctly mentioned, they are every-where implied; the
views—so clear, so beautiful—of God's forgiveness and mercy expressed by James would
be unmeaning without them. The Gospel history silently but surely underlies the
whole epistle. Is it not in view of the cross, where the deepest' distress has issued
in the most glorious triumph, that James pens the noble words with which his letter
opens, "My brethren, count it all joy, when ye fall into divers temptations?"
The sacred writer designed his letter for Churches of which he
knew the internal condition. It has been wrongly asserted that he had in view only
a Judaized and Pharisaic form of Christianity, altogether alien to Pauline doctrine.
§ III. Doctrinal Type of Peter. The First Two Gospels.
While James regards the Gospel as the consecration of the law
in an enlarged and spiritualized form, it specially commends itself to Peter as
the fulfillment of prophecy. He thus comes closer to the heart of revelation, inasmuch
as the prophecy of the Old Testament had much more direct reference than the law
to Messiah and his work. Thus the person of Jesus Christ occupies a far larger place
in the Epistle of Peter than in that of James. The position taken up by the Apostle
is very clearly described in the first chapter of his epistle. Of this "salvation,"
he says, "the prophets inquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace
that should come unto you: searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of
Christ which was in them did signify,
Peter is not, like James, satisfied with simple allusions to the
person of Jesus Christ; he has not, however, the same broad and full conception
as St. Paul of his nature and work. He does not go back beyond the ages to adore
the eternal Son, in the bosom of the Father or ever the world was; though some divines
have discerned an allusion to his preexistence in one expression in the first chapter.
We have more than once observed traces of the influence of Paul
in the form of Peter's doctrinal teaching. No fact of the apostolic age appears
to us more easy of explanation than the influence exercised by the great Apostle
of the Gentiles. But if Peter reproduces some traits of Paul's doctrine he never
surrenders his own individuality. There must be singular obtuseness of spiritual
perception in those who
Having thus defined the doctrinal type of James and of Peter, we may at once recognize their impress in our first two Gospels. It is well known that Mark gives a summary of the preaching of Peter; this Gospel, so brief and graphic, presents us with the most vivid picture of the life of Christ. Written for the Church at Rome, it is marvelously adapted, in its condensed force and dramatic style, to the practical genius of the Latin race: Festinat ad res. It also corresponds very exactly to what we know of the doctrine of Peter. That Apostle, in his great desire to show that Christianity was the fulfillment of prophecy, was led to dwell mainly upon the facts of the Gospel history; he gave comparatively little attention to its speculative side. It was, therefore, natural that the Gospel written under his immediate influence should bear markedly and exclusively an historic character.
The Gospel of Matthew, which was written in Palestine and in the
Hebrew language, for the Jewish converts, reminds us of the doctrine both of James
and of Peter. The new religion is there presented as a law more perfect than that
given from Sinai. The Sermon on the Mount is the principal source from which James
draws his conceptions of the permanence of moral obligation. On the other hand,
Matthew seeks to establish, with scrupulous care,
As a whole, the first two Gospels are no more favorable to Judæo-Christianity
than are the epistles of James and of Peter. The high dignity of Messiah is recognized
in the most explicit manner. His divinity is clearly asserted in such declarations
as these: "All things are delivered unto me of my Father; and no man knoweth the
Son but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father save the Son, and he to whomsoever
the Son will reveal him."
§ IV. Doctrine of St. Paul.
Never did the connection between the thought and the life, the heart and the head, appear more manifestly than in the case of St. Paul. He is a remarkable illustration of the well-known saying, Pectus est quod facit theologum, it is the heart which makes the theologian. His theology sprang all living from his heart; it glowed with the fire that consumed him. His own moral life struggled for expression in his doctrine; and to give utterance to both at once, Paul created a marvelous language, rough and incorrect, but full of resource and invention, following his rapid leaps of thought, and bending to his sudden and sharp transitions. His ideas come in such rich abundance that they cannot wait for orderly expression; they throng upon each other, and intermingle in seeming confusion; but the confusion is seeming only, for through it all a powerful argument steadily sustains the mastery. The tongue of Paul is, indeed, a tongue of fire.
The vocation of the Apostle of the Gentiles was to effect the
final emancipation of the Church from the Synagogue; he did not, therefore, feel
himself bound to use the same caution as Peter and James, in the transition from
Judaism into Christianity. He
The theology of Paul has been repeatedly impoverished by the spirit
of system, which has sought in it only the justification of its own dogmatic preferences.
It has not been comprehended in its fullness in any of the creeds of the past. Between
these formal creeds and the doctrine of Paul, there is as great a distance as between
the testimony of the Apostles,
The first principle in the doctrine of Paul is that of righteousness.
Righteousness is the expression of the true relations which ought to subsist between
the creature and the Creator. "Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit
the kingdom of God?"
Starting from this deep conception of righteousness, St. Paul
seeks its realization in religious history. He recognizes, first of all, the fact
that humanity is in an abnormal condition, and that it has been plunged by an act
of rebellion into sin and condemnation. He then endeavors to show in what way the
fallen race is reinstated in righteousness; he is thus led to mark clearly the difference
between the old covenant and the new, while he clearly indicates the preparatory
value of the former. The fall, and the state of man since the first transgression—the
Mosaic law and its design in Providence—redemption and its results—all these are
successive chapters of the theology of
We are all familiar with Paul's forcible description of the general
corruption of mankind. Taking as his text those words in the Psalms, "There is none
righteous, no, not one," he draws with inimitable power the picture of the degradation
of the fallen race.
This melancholy fact has its own natural and inevitable consequences.
It is clear that if man had adhered to righteousness—that eternal and divine righteousness,
which ought to regulate his relations with God—he would have found that happiness
The violation of the law of God brought condemnation on all the
children of men. They are all under the wrath of God; (
Are we to take this declaration of St. Paul in its strictest sense?
Did he intend to say that every spark of the divine life was quenched in us by the
fall? Did he teach the absolute corruption of human
This does not imply that the body is the seat and principle of
evil. By such a doctrine Paul would have sanctioned by anticipation Manichæism and
all the dualistic theories of the ancient world. Instead of opposing, as he did,
oriental asceticism, he would
We shall be yet more convinced that it is impossible to accuse
Paul of dualism if we consider the solution which he gives of the tremendous question
of the origin of evil. It was, according to him, the
After having thus demonstrated that the whole race of Adam is exposed to the wrath of God on account of his unfulfilled law, the Apostle draws in broad outline the history of the work of salvation. He has set aside all the claims of Judaism to occupy a place apart in the midst of the general condemnation. By exploding all the pretensions of human pride, and destroying all its false titles to the favor of God, he has cleared the ground; and he may now triumphantly establish the doctrine of free salvation, which is, in his view, the very essence of Christianity.
A race so deeply fallen can only be raised again by free grace.
From before the creation of the world God conceived the plan of salvation;
The creation of the world was the first manifestation of the eternal
and infinite love. It was, in truth, by the Son of God, who is the highest personification
of love, that all things both in heaven and earth were created. "By him and for
him were all things."
This eternal decree of divine love has been taken by many distinguished
theologians in a sense so narrow
St. Paul does not regard salvation simply in an
Against this interpretation of the idea of the Apostle, the famous
ninth chapter of the Epistle to the Romans is adduced; but it is a violation of
all the rules of sound exegesis to isolate one portion of Scripture and to endeavor
to explain the whole Bible by one page, instead of explaining that page by all the
rest. Let us observe, in the first place, that in that chapter the Apostle is speaking
not of the election of individuals but of nations. His design is to
The work of restoration begins immediately after the fall. It
is divided into two great periods. The first, which extends to the coming of Christ,
is the time of God's patience. The world is under sentence of condemnation; but
judgment is not fully executed, because God will give sinners space for repentance;
It is impossible not to admire the broad grasp which the Apostle
takes of the intention and significance of the Mosaic dispensation. In that very
law, so strenuously urged against him, he finds fresh proof of the necessity of
Christianity. He shows that it has been the most active agent in fostering the desire
for salvation, and he fully recognizes its divine authority; so far from depreciating
it, as the Gnostics subsequently do, he lauds and magnifies it. "The law is holy,
and the commandment holy, just, and good."
The work of preparation was not confined to the Jewish people.
We find traces of it also, according to St. Paul, in the history of the Gentile
nations. To them God spoke by the voice of nature, (
§ V. God "spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all."
The whole work of redemption is summed up in these words. They
testify that it is in its very essence a manifestation of the love of the Father,
of that eternal love which formed the design of saving us, and of renewing us in
true righteousness. Before describing the work of Christ, Paul is very explicit
as to its nature. We have already said that he recognizes the eternal existence
of the Son of God, "the image of the invisible God, by whom and for whom all things
were created, who was before all things, and by whom all things consist."
St. Paul speaks no less clearly with reference to the humanity
than to the deity of Christ. If he is declared to be the Son of God according to
the Spirit, he is no less the seed of David according to the flesh.
But Christ did more than simply assume human nature; he became
the head of a new humanity, and its representative before God. Paul establishes
a parallel between the first Adam and him whom he calls the second Adam. "If by
the offense of one," he says, "many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the
gift which he hath given us by his grace, of one man, shall abound unto many."
Redemption is not, with Paul, simply the declaration of the love
of God and of his pardon; it is a positive work, a great and bleeding sacrifice.
Jesus Christ "was delivered for our offenses."
This death, being undeserved, was on his part a free sacrifice,
and an act of obedience; hence, its redemptive value. In making his death an offering
to God, an act of free and holy love, Christ reunited the broken link between man
and God; his death thus
After a careful study of the declarations of St. Paul, we find
ourselves unable to derive from them any other conception of redemption than this
The death of Christ is a demonstration of the righteousness of God, since it gives
proof that the representative of the sentenced race of man cannot save it without
submitting to the penalty of sin; but the penalty thus endured is accepted by God
as a sufficient reparation, because of the perfect obedience which it manifests.
It is in this sense a redemption, a propitiation; this is the entire theory of Paul.
Theology may find some links wanting in this dialectic chain; it may attempt to
explain and to enlarge upon the great doctrinal statements of the Apostle, but it
has no right either to suppress or to add any. The judicial theory, according to
which the suffering of Christ consisted in the feeling of rejection and of the wrath
of God, is altogether alien to the conception
The salvation achieved on the cross is consummated by the glorification
of the Redeemer. The resurrection is, in Paul's view, an essential condition of
our justification.
The natural consequence of faith is conversion, or the renewing
of the inner nature. Thus understood, it is inseparable from sanctification. If
St. Paul repudiates strongly justification by works, he does so
The Apostle, however, goes further than a merely individual appropriation
of salvation. It being the purpose of God to reconstitute a true humanity in Christ,
it was necessary that a new people of God should be formed, and a religious society
organized, in which faith and love should be essential elements of the mutual relations
between men. This new people of God is the Church. Paul compares it sometimes to
a temple of which Christ is the corner-stone; (
But the kingdom of God extends far beyond this world. The family
is in heaven as well as upon earth.
We shall not dwell at length upon the picture drawn by St. Paul
of the last times. He has not done more than paraphrase the prophecies given by
When the Gospel shall have thus subdued the obduracy of the Jews
its final triumph will be at hand, and the conversion of Israel will be the precursive
sign of the glorious consummation of the kingdom of God.
The views of the Apostle as to the nearness of this closing period
of history, which is to be inaugurated by the personal return of Christ, seem to
have undergone some modifications. In the, first stage of his apostolical career
he supposes, with all the Christians of that time, that but a very few years will
intervene before the coming of the day of the Lord; he is even persuaded that it
will arrive before his own
This exposition of the doctrine of St. Paul anticipates the solution
given by him of the great question of the relation of the two covenants. We have
seen that he fully recognizes the divine and preparatory value of the Old Testament;
(
The apology of the Apostle is closely connected with his doctrine;
it is animated by the same spirit, and in it also grace occupies the foremost place.
Truth is alien to the soul in its natural state. "The natural man discerneth not
the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness unto him."
In addressing the Jews, Paul based his arguments chiefly on the
sacred Scriptures, of which he distinctly acknowledges the full inspiration.
We are now in a position to estimate the views of the Tübingen
school on the theology of St. Paul. To that school it appears a system entirely
new, and differing widely from the doctrine of Christ. To us, on the contrary, it
seems evident that the teaching of Paul is based entirely on that of the Master.
It would be easy to connect all the essential points in Paul's theology with words
of Christ, contained in the first two Gospels. It is, in the first place, universally
admitted that his prophetic delineation of the last times is in all points in conformity
with the
§ VI. The Gospel of Luke and the Epistle to the Hebrews.
The Gospel of Luke bears distinct marks of the mind of St. Paul.
It gives special prominence to the character of mercy in the work and teachings
of the Master. It is the Gospel which contains the beautiful parables of the lost
sheep and of the prodigal son.
We have already noticed that the Epistle to the Hebrews is also
traceable to what may perhaps be called the Pauline school of thought.
It is at once obvious that the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews
has a very thorough acquaintance with the Jewish religion; he interprets its types
and symbols, and makes very effective use of exegesis as bold as it is learned.
Every page shows traces of the Judaism of Alexandria, transfigured, however, by
the Spirit of God, as the rabbinic lore of Gamaliel became in the case of Paul.
The writer insists not less forcibly than the Apostle on the exalted dignity of
Christ. He declares that he is far higher than the angels; he gives to him the name
of God. He is the Son, the brightness of the Father's glory, the express image of
his person.
To establish that under the economy of grace the justice of God
maintains all its rights; to show that the law of love is under a sanction the more
tremendous because of the boundlessness of the divine mercy declared in it; ( We can give no other interpretation to the words in [But what proof is there that what is always possible does not
sometimes, or often, happen?]—Am. Ed.
THE picture we have given of the opposition encountered by Paul, from enemies and detractors, has already shown us that this epoch was pregnant with stormy controversy in the Churches. They had to pass through a sharp, but salutary, crisis.
The conferences at Jerusalem had dissipated all misunderstanding
among the Apostles, but it was not possible that they should have quieted and reassured
all minds in the same degree. The fanaticism of the Judaizing party in the Church
was not to be so promptly disarmed by the conciliatory measures adopted in the first
Council. It had lost its cause when tried before the highest representative assembly
of the Church; it must make its next appeal to the tribunal of popular passions.
It began, therefore, to scatter every-where seeds of dissension, and sought to destroy,
both by craft and violence, the credit and authority of St. Paul. While this fanatical
party succeeded in stirring up the pride of the Jews against the comprehensiveness
of the Christian doctrine, it also found means to reach the Gentile converts, whose
faith was yet in its infancy. We shall see chiefly in Asia Minor how Jewish prejudices
made common cause with oriental dualism, and fostered dangerous errors in the Church
under the name of Christianity.
They did not originally declare themselves as constituted and organized heresies, altogether distinct from the Church. In the first century they rather sought to undermine it from within than to attack it from without; but it will not be difficult to show that such attempts were frustrated, and that the Church repudiated their dogmas as foreign and dangerous elements.
This important fact will appear very clearly in the rapid sketch we are about to give of the state of the Churches during this period. We shall not adhere strictly to the chronological order of their formation, already sufficiently indicated in our account of the missions of the Apostles, but shall follow the development of the Judaizing tendency through its various phases before describing the inroads of oriental theosophy.
§ I. The yudaizing tendency in the Churches of Palestine, Galatia, Macedonia, Achaia, and Italy.
We have seen the Church at Jerusalem forming itself into an organized
body, borrowing its principal institutions from the synagogue, but still remaining
faithful to the Jewish worship. Judging from these conditions alone we might suppose
that it would be especially distinguished by opposition to the work of St. Paul.
Such, however, was not the case, as is amply proved by the authority exercised in
that Church by James, the brother of the Lord. It is certain that the Christians
of Jerusalem rallied around James, and manifested to him on all occasions the most
sincere and respectful deference. As he exercised no episcopal function, strictly
so called, his influence must have been entirely of a moral character. We have had
evidence in the first Council of the breadth of his spirit, since he gave the right
hand of fellowship to Paul, and sacrificed without hesitation the narrow notions
of the Judaizing Christians. The author of the beautiful epistle we have analyzed
was not the man to put salvation by circumcision in place of salvation by Christ.
We cannot, then, suppose any open hostility to Paul at Jerusalem during the life-time
of James, and it is an ascertained fact that their death took place at the same
period. Further, St. Paul always continued in the most friendly relations with the
Church at Jerusalem; he visited it again and again at the close of his missionary
journeys; he himself carried thither the offerings of the converted Gentiles to
relieve the poverty of the Christians of Palestine.
It would, however, be equally erroneous to suppose that the doctrine
of Paul was fully comprehended by the majority of the Christians in Palestine. Thanks
to the influence of James, the principles asserted by Paul had not been formally
condemned; but they were not generally recognized, either in their real character
or in their issues. The first Council had bound Jews by birth to adhere to the prescriptions
of the law. The converted Jews, in Gentile cities, who of necessity lived in association
with Christians of Greek extraction, had been led to shake off, in many particulars,
the Mosaic yoke. At a distance from the religious center of their nation they had
no other synagogue than the assemblies of the new worship. Thus their habits became
gradually modified, and their spirit enlarged. At Jerusalem it was otherwise. The
Church of that city numbered several thousands of Jews zealous for the law, (
We know that the years preceding the fall of Jerusalem were marked
by numerous revolts among the Jews. The national spirit was stimulated to fanaticism,
and the passions of the people were kept in violent agitation. Some of the converted
Jews could not breathe with impunity this heated atmosphere. At their side were
ardent champions of the independence of their beloved country; was it strange if,
with renewed patriotic zeal, there should have come a revival of those religious
ideas which had ever been so closely identified with the glory of their nation?
It is possible, also, that in the persecutions which did not cease to rage against
the Church, defections
The other Churches of Palestine, and those of the neighboring
countries, were in a position similar to that of the Church at Jerusalem; being,
however, less directly under the influence of the Apostles, they were more accessible
to the spirit of intolerance. The Epistle of James, which was written for them,
discloses serious irregularities in their conduct. They had evidently allowed themselves
to be carried away by stormy contentions; into these they had thrown much bitterness
of spirit, much of that wisdom which was earthly, sensual, devilish; and, under
pretext of defending the interests of truth, they had forgotten and belied its essential
element of love.
We have described the first fervent attachment of the Galatians
to the Apostle who had preached the Gospel to them. Yielding again to the same remarkable
susceptibility to impressions, they soon allowed themselves to be led away, and,
as it were, bewitched by false teachers, the declared enemies of Paul. These false
teachers, though imbued with all Jewish prejudices, do not appear to have been Jews
by birth.
We meet again with these false, Judaizing teachers in that Church
which is certainly the most prosperous of those founded by St. Paul. Formed in circumstances
of difficulty, early tried by persecution, matured by protracted suffering, (
The false teachers of Philippi united to their legalism a kind
of immorality which went to the length of the grossest materialism, (
Judæo-Christianity did not fail to find its way into the great
metropolis of the ancient world. It attempted to creep into the Church at Rome,
and there carried on its intrigues and underhand practices. But it has no claim
to the honor of having founded that important Church, and modeled it after its own
image.
The terrible persecution raised against it by Nero shows how great
had been its progress. It was not, however, free from divisions; the fanatical,
Judaizing Christians sought there, as elsewhere, to counterbalance the credit of
their powerful adversary. They tried to add affliction to his bonds, (
The great battle between the Judaizers in the Church and the Apostle
of the Gentiles was fought at Corinth. The atmosphere of that city was favorable
to such a contest. These converted Greeks had brought into the Church the subtle
and supple spirit of their race; their old nature was but imperfectly subdued. Great
in disputation, they loved to make
All these evils were, in truth, the grievous results of that spirit
of division which had poisoned at the spring the piety of the Corinthian Christians.
From Paul's first epistle to them we gather that there were four parties in the
Church—that of Paul, of Apollos, of Cephas, and of Christ.
Paul is no less severe, however, upon his own partisans, who were
equally guilty of schism. Their attachment was to him rather than to the truth,
and they were as passionate in their defense of his personal claims as were his
adversaries in their attack upon them.
The party of Cephas or Peter had at its head the false, Judaizing
teachers. They sheltered themselves very unfairly under the revered name of Peter;
as the partisans of Apollos, without his own consent, made him their watchword.
The Epistle to the Galatians
Paul names a fourth party, which he calls the party of Christ.
The party of Christ is in truth of Jewish origin, but it belongs
to the eclectic Judaism of the period, in which there was an infusion of Gentile
elements, and which was more or less tinged with oriental dualism. It is well known
that in these times of universal syncretism, a large number of Jews at Alexandria,
in Judæa, and elsewhere, had come, to a
The letters of Paul to the Corinthians produced the happiest results.
From the second it is evident that he had already regained the leadership in that
We have thus reduced to its true value the assertion that the
Church of the first century was divided into two almost equal sections, each with
an Apostle at its head; and that to avoid the scandal of such a contest pushed to
its full and final issue, the two parties were compelled to seek an approach to
reconciliation by a series of diplomatic combinations. Judæo-Christianity was only
really powerful in the early period, before it came to a knowledge of itself; that
is, before it had been confronted with Christianity in its breadth and comprehensiveness.
After the Council at Jerusalem it was not upheld by any Apostle, for all admitted
the abrogation of circumcision in the case of Gentile converts. It may have succeeded
in raising stormy dissensions in young Churches, which, in their inexperience, were
surprised
§ II. Dualistic heresies in Crete, at Colosse, and at Ephesus.
Judaizing heresy was not the only form of error which presented
itself in the path of St. Paul. In the Churches of Crete, of Colosse, and of Ephesus
he found himself confronted with the old oriental dualism so powerful at that period,
not only because it contained the final utterance of the pagan systems of religion
and philosophy, but also because it seemed to hold in reserve precious treasures
of wisdom, and to guard under the vail of its mysteries the last resource of humanity.
We have elsewhere so fully described this form of dualism that we shall not now
do more than exhibit the special aspect it assumes on its first contact with Christianity.
The island of Crete was a very favorable sphere for the development of dualistic
heresy, for Pythagorean ideas had there obtained much currency. Epimenides, the
Cretan poet, quoted by St. Paul, had made them the theme of his muse. Ephesus had
become, as we know, the metropolis of Asia Minor, and an important religious center
for the confluence of East and West. Of Colosse, we have only to remember that it
was a Phrygian city, in order to understand the early appearance of heresy in the
Church which had been there founded by a disciple of Paul. Before
We have seen that the first principle of all things in this extraordinary
system is an obscure and mysterious power, a sort of infinite potentiality.
It was impossible to give bolder expression to
The transition from the virtual to the actual was not, it seems,
effected without confusion; after the mind by its union with the idea had given
birth to the angels, these in jealousy took possession of their mother, and made
her captive in the fetters of the body.
Dualism does in fact thus lead to the two extremes of license
and asceticism. Some of its adherents imagine they triumph over the material element
by placing themselves beyond all restraint; others seek to annihilate it by the
severest mortification of the flesh. Simon Magus adopted the former method, and
his disciples were guilty of still greater excesses in the same direction. He set
himself forth as the great Deliverer, the true Christ. He said that he had appeared
as the Son in Judea, as the Father in Samaria, and as the Holy Ghost among the nations;
We have no certain information as to the history of Simon Magus
or of his school. We have already had occasion to refute the legendary assertion
of his stay at Rome and of his contest with St. Peter. It appears to us probable
that his disciples were gathered chiefly in Samaria and the surrounding countries.
These heresies, of which the Apostle carefully points out the
various phases, all bear the same impress of Judaism combined with dualism. In Crete,
at Colosse, and at Ephesus, we find substantially the same ideas, the same principles,
with this difference, that in Crete the false doctrines had not as yet effected
the threatened entry into the Church, but were still
This whole system was evidently based on a dualistic philosophy
which identified evil with matter. These heretics were not satisfied with carrying
out dualism in practice; they gave it formal expression, and endeavored to find
a speculative basis for it; they concerned themselves with fables and foolish questions
concerning the doctrine of angels.
The question now before us is to ascertain to what known sect
these first heretics belonged. They have been represented as professing Gnosticism
in a form already complete and systematized, in all points resembling that of the
second century, and this hypothesis has been used as an argument against the authenticity
of the Pastoral Epistles.
The heresies of Colosse and Ephesus ought not to be exclusively
referred to the ascetic tendency of Judaism.
We are convinced, however, that the heretics of Colosse, of Ephesus,
and of Crete, came under pagan influence not only through the medium of a Jewish
sect, but that they also borrowed new elements from paganism, and arrived at a more
decided dualism.
The latent immorality, ever characteristic of Gnosticism, thus
betrayed itself from the very first. In this its earliest form there is nothing
systematic, but it has already broad and well-marked features—its pretensions to
profound speculations, which end in "old wives' fables;" its false science, which
is ever teaching without leading to any true knowledge; its wild theories concerning
angels; its incongruous
§ I. General Principles of Ecclesiastical Organization.
WHILE, during the first period of the apostolic age, the predominance
of the miraculous prevents the Church from assuming a definitely organized form,
we are able, in this second period, to discern the essential features of its constitution.
The first broad outline is shaded and filled up. The thought embodied in the existence
of the Church finds fresh and fuller expression. Christians, while they were still
held in the bonds of Jewish exclusiveness, did not clearly comprehend that they
were called to form a religious society differing altogether from the ancient theocracy.
They were conscious of a new and special relation established between those who
had been baptized in the name of Christ; but they regarded themselves rather as
the true Israel than as the Christian Church. As Christianity extended its conquests
among the heathen, their ideas widened, and, as we have seen in the theology of
St. Paul, the true conception
It is this invisible Church which Paul beholds with the eye of
faith when he speaks of the bride of Christ, without blemish and without spot, (
According to these principles, so simple and so plain, it is obviously
a grave error to regard the primitive Church as a vast hierarchical establishment,
like the Church of the fourth century. It is no Mother Church—Mater Ecclesia—laying
the yoke of its external unity on each individual Church. Such an idea is altogether
alien to the apostolic age. The one invisible Church is realized or embodied in
the particular Churches. These Churches form their own organizations, on the same
substantial basis indeed, but with notable differences in all secondary matters.
They are united among themselves, but the bond thus formed is purely spiritual;
it is never a chain. Each of the Churches is a small republic, a society of believers,
an association of Christians, which governs itself without seeking direction or
inspiration
It is impossible to find in the whole of this period any traces
of a general organization of the Churches tending to external unity. There are no
general and periodical assemblies; more significant still, there is no center of
unity. Those who regard Rome as having been such a center are guilty of a strange
anachronism. We have seen, also, how little prominence really attaches in this period
to the part of that Apostle who has been made the head of the pretended ecclesiastical
monarchy. If the Churches had sought at this time, as subsequently they did, a religious
center, they would unquestionably have chosen Jerusalem, the glorious birthplace
of Christianity. But the Church in that city, so far from exerting a wide influence
on the development of Christian thought during the period of St. Paul, only followed
afar off the movement led by the great Apostle. The Churches founded in the midst
of paganism departed without scruple from the customs of Moses; they
Thus understood, the Church must be regarded simply as a community
composed of Christians. Its gates were opened only to believers, or to those, at
least, who professed the true faith. It could not prevent false Christians from
creeping in surreptitiously, but, in principle, it owned as members only those who
confessed with the mouth the Lord Jesus, and with the heart believed unto righteousness.
We cannot doubt, as we read the epistles written by the Apostles to the various
Churches, that they were addressed, not to a mixed multitude, among whom indifference
and even unbelief found place side by side with piety and living faith, but to an
association of Christians—to a self-governing religious society. There is no recognition
whatever of the existence in that society of two classes of members—the converted
and the unconverted. Serious evils might arise and compromise it; hypocrites might
be found among the faithful; but, as we read the epistles, we feel that, as a whole,
these Churches were Christian
That conception of the Church which regards it as the community
of believers arises naturally out of the general views of St. Paul on the relation
of the two covenants. While the old economy was a theocracy associated with outward
and material facts, the new is essentially spiritual. Before the cross distinctions
of nationality or of birth are done away. "There is neither Jew nor Greek, bond
nor free, but Christ is all and in all."
Not only did every Church in the apostolic age require a positive
and personal act of adherence from all who sought a place among its members, but
it was also enjoined to cast out of its midst any impure elements which might have
crept into it; and which, coming within the scope of the judgment of man, might
be distinguished and expelled. "Purge out the old leaven," wrote the Apostle to
the Corinthians, alluding to the notorious sinners who had insinuated themselves
into the ranks of the Christians.
§ II. Gifts and offices.
The universal priesthood was fully and practically realized in
the apostolic Churches.
Christianity is the religion of grace. It teaches that every good
and every perfect gift comes from God, who dispenses all by the same Spirit.
The gift which is most distinctly miraculous is the gift of tongues.
These peculiarly supernatural gifts abounded, for obvious reasons,
in the early history of the Church—the period of creation and formation. They may
reappear, but in a subordinate degree, in times which have some analogy with the
first century; but these miraculous endowments must never be regarded as the necessary
manifestations of the divine Spirit upon earth. The gifts which abide are not those
of a specially miraculous character; they are those which blend in beautiful harmony,
nature, and grace, the human element and the divine—the very gifts by which the
Apostles were themselves pre-eminently distinguished. We place in this second category
the gift of teaching, (
Such were the principal gifts bestowed on the Church. They preceded
the various offices; it is utterly false to pretend that they depended in any way
on those offices, and were manifested only within the limits of a fixed organization.
The wind bloweth where it listeth, and the Spirit of God never surrenders its sovereign
freeness. The advocates of the hierarchy do not deny that the miraculous gifts were
bestowed on the Christians generally; but they assert, on behalf of the ecclesiastics,
a monopoly of the gift of teaching, the use of which must, they maintain, be regulated
by official and sovereign authority, or doctrinal anarchy will inevitably follow.
The sacraments are equally far from being a monopoly of the clergy.
These principles were so deeply rooted in the Church that long after, at a time
when it had undergone most important changes, they received striking testimony from
the lips of St. Jerome. He says, "The right of the laity to baptize has often been
recognized in cases of necessity, for every one may give that which he has received."
In those Churches, however, we can discern the commencement of
various ecclesiastical offices.
Let us bring before our minds the very simple
Episcopal pretensions have frequently been founded on the passages
in Paul's epistles where the word bishop occurs. But an attentive examination of
the texts shows that the two words elder and bishop are used interchangeably, and
that, in the language of Paul, they are synonymous, representing one and the
This identity of the office of bishop with that of elder is so
very apparent in the New Testament that it was admitted by the whole ancient Church,
even at the time of the rise of the episcopate properly so-called. "The elder is
identical with the bishop," said St. Jerome, "and before parties had so multiplied
under diabolical influence, the Churches were governed by a council of elders."
In the failure of the attempt to establish the episcopate upon
the words of the Apostles, an effort has been made to uphold it, by giving an exaggerated
significance to certain facts of an exceptional and transitory character in the
primitive Church. Reference is made to the mission of organizing the Churches committed
by Paul to Titus and Timothy; the part taken by James at Jerusalem is urged in confirmation
of the same theory. But these facts, rightly understood, ought to tell against hierarchical
notions, instead of lending them any support. With reference first to Timothy and
Titus, they bear no likeness whatever to bishops governing a diocese; they are missionaries,
or, as Paul calls them, evangelists,
We have already stated our views of the ministry of James at Jerusalem.
In spite of the assertions of the "Fathers," we maintain that it presents no analogy
to the episcopate of subsequent ages.
It is very difficult to determine precisely the functions of the
elders or bishops. They formed a council
Next to the office of elders, we find, in all the Churches founded
by St. Paul, the office of deacons. This carries us back to the appointment of the
seven deacons at Jerusalem; but, like the whole of the ecclesiastical organization,
it assumed, at this period, a more decided character. It received its proper name;
it was called the diaconate.
The Churches of the first century also created an office for women,
in order to employ for the good of the Church the special gifts bestowed by God
upon them. What office could have been better suited to them than the diaconate,
the merciful ministry of succor and consolation? It is difficult to ascertain exactly
what these deaconesses of the primitive Church were.
From whatever point of view we regard it, the ecclesiastical office
appears to us always as a ministry, as the service of the Church, not as a priesthood.
It has an altogether different origin, it is bestowed by popular election, and thus
preserves its representative character. This was the case (as we have seen) with
the very first office which arose out of the apostolate. The seven deacons of the
upper chamber were chosen by the Church at Jerusalem. "Choose you out seven men,"
such is the language of St. Peter, and it sanctions the abiding privilege of the
Church.
The laying on of hands which was conferred on the deacons, elders,
and evangelists, had not at all the character of ordination.
In a word, therefore, ecclesiastical offices did not constitute
in this second period, any more than in the first, a new order of priesthood. They
were not directly and authoritatively instituted by God, but were created one by
one as the necessity for them arose in the Church. They are not, like the ancient
priesthood, of immediate divine appointment, but they proceed from divine inspiration,
and are according to the will of God. We must not, however, allow ourselves to imagine
that the Churches of the apostolic age, though of so democratic an organization,
suffered their liberty to degenerate into license. Revealed truth exerted a holy
authority over them.
§ I. Christian Worship during this Period.
WHILE the Christian converts from Judaism were continually in
the temple, and observed all the rites of the religion of their fathers, the converted
Gentiles held themselves free from any ceremonial law. In their churches, therefore,
we find the true worship of the new covenant first established. The disciples did
not comprehend immediately after the Pentecostal effusion of the Holy Spirit that
Christianity was a new creation. They supposed that the true worship—public and
solemn worship—was still to be celebrated in the temple at Jerusalem, and their
adoration in the upper chamber was of a secret and spiritual nature. The case was
altogether different in the Churches founded by St. Paul. Their worship was completely
distinct from the Jewish. There is no reason to conclude that it was less spiritual
than that presented in the earlier days of the Church, or less spontaneous because
it was more carefully regulated. We must remember that the adoration offered in
the upper chamber had more the character
The worship of the old covenant could not fail to be more or less
materialized by its association with outward conditions. It was confined to the
walls of the sanctuary; it set apart times and seasons; the priestly tribe alone
had a right to approach the altar. All these restrictions had one common cause—the
separation still existing between guilty man and his offended God. Hence the necessity
of sacrifices, which embodied the acknowledgment of guilt, while they contained
the prophecy of future reconciliation. The new covenant, which has for its basis
the great fact of a finished salvation, at once substitutes for those sacrifices
offered daily the sacrifice of Christ once offered for sin,
All the institutions which were designed to remind man of his
state of condemnation prior to redemption are alike abolished. There is no longer
any privilege attaching to certain consecrated places and consecrated persons. The
Christian Church has no temple in the true sense of the word, or rather, it is itself
a spiritual temple, built up of living stones, and founded upon Christ.
The rapid increase of the Church soon rendered these private houses
inadequate for the purposes of worship. At Ephesus Paul taught in a public school.
James points out in his epistle abuses which could only have occurred in large assemblies,
like those of the Jewish synagogues.
The primitive Church recognizes no more distinction between days
than between places. The entire life has become the calm and earnest celebration
of redemption;
We do not imagine that the Gentile converts at this period felt
themselves bound to observe any of the great Jewish feasts, not even the Passover
or the Pentecost. They had received no commandment concerning them. No stress can
be laid on Paul's example in repairing to the Holy City to keep the Pentecostal
feast, for the case is irrelevant. A Jew by birth, he faithfully observed the conditions
laid down by the Council at Jerusalem, and himself adhered to the customs of Moses,
though in a broad spirit of tolerance and charitable concession.
During the whole period of St. Paul we find only two very vague
indications of the celebration of worship on the first day of the week.
The worship of the Churches founded by Paul bears the same impress
of liberty and spirituality by which their piety was characterized. The liturgical
element is completely absent; every thing is spiritual and fiee. Some organization,
however, is found indispensable, that all things may be done decently and in order.
The rules which Paul gives refers simply to what is decorous. He desires that while
the man has his head uncovered the woman should be covered, thus marking by her
appearance the reserve of modesty so becoming to her, and which nature herself suggests
The essential acts of worship were always the reading of the Holy
Scriptures, prayer, teaching, and praise.
Nor can we include under that head the reading of the letters
of the Apostles, expressly recommended
Teaching formed an important part of primitive worship, and especially
of the worship of the Churches at a distance from Jerusalem. Teaching gained in
proportion as ritualism lost. The priest always eclipses the teacher where there
is a priesthood and sacrifice to be offered. We need not here repeat the evidence
that the right of teaching was granted to all. But if any might teach, they might
not teach any thing; the doctrine of the Apostles was to be the standard and rule,
because it was the faithful reproduction of the doctrine of Jesus Christ. "Stand
fast," writes St. Paul to the Thessalonians, "and hold the traditions which ye have
been taught, whether by word or our epistle."
In his discourse at Miletus, however, as in his later epistles,
he insists strongly on the importance of teaching.
Prayer is the soul of Christian worship, as it is the source of
all Christian life. It sprang up freely, as did the word of edification. It contained
no admixture of any liturgical element, and there is not a word in the whole of
the New Testament in support of the idea that the Lord's Prayer was repeated as
a sacred formula.
St. Paul, however, without desiring at all to infringe this liberty,
specifies some points which should not be neglected in Christian prayer, and especially
in the prayer of the Church. He desires that prayer be made for all men, especially
for kings and those in authority, thus tracing a strong line of demarkation between
the religious revolution which he desires to effect, and any thing like a political
revolution. Thus even in this free domain of prayer we discern a law
The Church does not remain satisfied, as at first, with singing
the Psalms. Christian feeling finds expression in its own spiritual song. This utterance,
like prayer and the word of edification, proceeds in the first instance from individual
inspiration. "If any man hath a psalm," says the Apostle, "let him speak."
But though we do not possess any of the hymns of the first century,
we find in the Epistles of St. Paul clear traces of what we may call the lyrical
inspiration
The idea of the sacraments entertained in the primitive Church
was in harmony with its general constitution.
Baptism, which was the sign of admission into the Church, was
administered by immersion. The convert was plunged beneath the water, and as he
rose from it he received the laying on of hands. These two rites corresponded to
the two great phases of conversion, the crucifixion of the old nature preceding
the resurrection with Christ. Faith was thus required of every candidate for baptism.
The idea never occurred to Paul that baptism might be divorced from faith—the sign
from the thing signified; and he does not hesitate, in the bold simplicity of his
language, to identify the spiritual fact of conversion with the act which symbolizes
it. "We are buried with Christ by baptism into death," he says.
In these times, when the organization of the Church
Regarded from the apostolic point of view, baptism cannot be connected
either with circumcision or with the baptism administered to proselytes to Judaism.
Between it and circumcision there is all the difference which exists between the
Theocracy, to which admission
In this second period of the apostolic age the communion is not
celebrated at every meal, as in the primitive times. It forms the conclusion of
those feasts of brotherly love, known under the name of agapce, at which the rich
and the poor sat side by side on equal terms.
It is not possible for us to represent to ourselves exactly the
mode of celebration of the communion at this period. A prayer of gratitude was doubtless
spoken as the cup passed from hand to hand. Hence the name of the eucharistic cup.
The bread was
While the Lord's Supper was thus celebrated with all simplicity
and liberty, it was, nevertheless, invested with much solemnity in the eyes of the
Church. It summed up in one symbol, chosen by the Lord himself, the whole Christian
religion. To partake of it was to make the most solemn profession of faith in Christ.
To receive it unworthily was not only to despise the Lord's body in the symbol which
spiritually set it forth, but also to make the Church partaker in the sin. Thus
serious and severe discipline was appointed not merely to prevent the profanation
of the Lord's Supper, but also to repress all kind of irregularities.
There is no trace in the apostolic age of any other sacraments
than baptism and the Lord's Supper. The anointing with oil, enjoined by James, (
§ II. The Christian Life.
Between the worship and the Christian life of the primitive Church
there was a close relation. Worship was nothing else than the solemn epitome or
concentration of the Christian life, while the entire life was raised to the height
of true service to God. This character of sacredness, impressed upon the whole existence,
is especially remarkable in the first period of the history of the first century,
when the Church lived, as it were, in heaven, raised above earth by its young and
ardent enthusiasm, or rather, by the all-powerful influence of the divine Spirit.
It seems, for the time, as if all social and family relations were absorbed in the
new relation formed among those who had received the baptism of fire; but it was
according
The question of the relations of Church and State could not come
before the apostolic age. Those relations were then very simple; they were those
of the persecuted and the persecutor. There was every thing, however, in the general
principle of Christianity to set aside any idea of a formal association of the two.
The close union between the Church and the State was one of the most characteristic
features of pagan society, in which the individual was kept in absolute subordination
to the State, his faith being no less under official control than his outward life.
Christianity, the religion of the conscience, sought only free and individual adherence.
Respect for the individual was born into the world with the respect for conscience.
A State religion, however orthodox, will be always a partial resurrection of the
pagan idea. Ancient religions were maintained only by coercion, and by the support
of wealth—both forces foreign to Christianity, which conquers by none but spiritual
weapons. It might well blush to grasp the sword which slays the body, since it has
in its hand the sword which can pierce the soul. Its kingdom is not of this world,
therefore it can assert its dominion over the whole world. Protection places it
in a servile position; it is strong in its own independence. The State is not at
variance with the Church—as the flesh with the spirit, the old man with the new.
The State, no less than the Church, is of divine institution. The Church is called
to act upon it, but only by way of influence, and the more the two spheres are kept
distinct, the greater and more penetrating
The Church is pre-eminently the realm of freedom, for it receives its members only by their own free adherence. To combine the two spheres is to confound things that differ, and to move both from their foundations. The union of Church and State reverses the apostolical conception of a religious society; it is a retrogression from Christianity to paganism, or at least to Judaism. But mankind was to purchase this' truth, like every other, at the price of long and bitter experience, by which it learned how much it costs the Church to mingle spiritual things with temporal.
The religion of Christ was, therefore, contented with laying down
the principles by which the State was to be renovated; and it pursued the same course
with reference to art. If, during the apostolic age, and the periods immediately
succeeding, it held aloof from these two spheres of human activity, its influence
was only the more efficacious in transforming them. In maintaining the independence
of conscience in relation to the State, in sanctioning its right to resist all coercion
from without, Christianity laid the foundations of all true liberty, and insured
the overthrow of all despotic powers. Martyrdom is the mightiest protest against
persecution; it shows material force the limit which it cannot pass. On the other
hand, by the creation of a new ideal, at once divine and human, the way was prepared
for truly Christian art, which should substitute for the calm; emotionless beauty
of the Greek marbles, the deeper and more pathetic loveliness of those immortal
forms,
All the reforms of Christianity have been wrought from within. The great revolution effected by it in the world had its beginning in human souls. Its first aim is to change the individual, that through him it may do its transforming work on society, and, primarily, on the family—that miniature society, source and type of the greater—upon which it has set its seal. The new religion found, in the regeneration of the individual, the lever with which to upheave the old world. It is, then, of great importance that we form a true estimate of the general principles of Christian life in the first century.
Its great principle is the imitation of Jesus Christ. To reproduce
the features of his holy image, to feel as he felt, to share his humility, his self-renunciation,
his tender compassion, to walk in love as he walked—such is the calling of his disciple.
The Christian life of primitive times seems like the life of Christ
continued upon earth. Its most striking characteristic is a fervor altogether apart
from fanaticism, which sustains it in the ordinary conditions of
This disposition to impress on the entire life a divine seal and
a religious character, was blended with a certain asceticism, to which no saving
virtue was attributed, but which was of importance in the discipline of the spiritual
life. Paul says, that he kept under his body.
One of the most beautiful creations of primitive Christianity
was the Christian family, as we see it in the Churches of those days. What the family
was in
A delicate question arose in these young Churches, composed of
converts from paganism, as to what was the right course to take when either husband
or wife became a Christian. Paul decides that the conjugal bond is not to be broken.
The Christian wife may win the husband, or vice versa.
The relations of parents and children, no less than of husband
and wife, assume a new character under the influence of Christianity. The implacable
severity of the Roman father is to be tempered by Christian love; he is to train
up with all gentleness the frail being so absolutely dependent upon him; and the
child, on its part, is bound to a submission the more perfect because not founded
on fear.
It has been made a reproach to Christianity that it did not at
once proclaim the abolition of slavery. It is forgotten by those who bring this
charge, that by taking such a course Christianity would have exchanged the religious
sphere for the civil, and would thus have confounded two domains, between which
a careful distinction is always important, and was especially so on its first introduction
to the world. It could not enter into civil matters without exposing itself to all
the perils, fluctuations, and chances of external authority. It would have become
a political instead of a moral power; it would have abdicated its true throne of
royalty, and bartered for an uncertain and hasty revolution that eternal power of
reformation, by which it is able from age to age to renew individuals and societies.
Christianity no more accepted slavery than it accepted polygamy and Roman legislation
as to divorce; and it brought into the world the principle which was to abolish
these institutions, so profoundly hostile to the morality of the Gospel. That principle
it defined with reference to slavery with so much clearness, that it did in fact
morally abolish it, so far as that was possible without going beyond its own domain.
For, firstly, Christianity regulates the relations of masters and servants according
to the laws of justice. The one are to remember that they also have a Master in
heaven, (
Christianity accepts the natural affections of man's heart, those
at least which are normal, and purifying and penetrating them with a supernatural
and divine element, it assimilates them to the highest love. The essence of this
pure and devoted love is the spirit of sacrifice, and it has received its name,
as it received its character, from the Gospel. It is called charity.
The relations of Christians with the world were regulated by Paul
with much wisdom. He was far from desiring that by an extreme and impracticable
exclusiveness they should avoid all contact with men not yet converted.
Two opposite tendencies had manifested themselves among the Christians
of that time. Some, narrow and timorous, scrupled to eat of meats which had been
sacrificed to idols; others, of a broader spirit, and maintaining that an idol is
in truth nothing at all, felt themselves justified in eating any thing that was
sold in the market. Paul holds the justness of the latter principle; (
Surrounded by all the seductions of paganism, the Churches were
to use constant watchfulness. The letters of Paul give glimpses of strange revivals
of old pagan corruption among these young Christians; and a dangerous readiness
to fall back into the mire of licentiousness is evidenced by his frequent warnings
against the sins of the flesh.
Such was an apostle and a saint in the first century. It is not surprising that no power in the world could withstand the influence of lives like this.
§ I. Destruction of the Holy City.
THIS period opens with a signal catastrophe, the consequences of which were most momentous to the Christian Church. Jerusalem, the Holy City, the religious center of Judaism, is reduced to ashes, and the Temple is but a smoking ruin. With it passes away the whole theocratic and priestly system of the old dispensation. Until this time the Church has been, so to speak, overshadowed by the Temple. Henceforward it has nothing more than a historic connection with Judaism, and a new era commences in its history.
The Jewish people, as we know, never consented to bow beneath
the yoke of their conquerors. There was a natural antipathy between the two nations,
founded, perhaps, on a certain obstinacy and invincible determination common to
both. The Jews could not submit with the softness of the Asiatic, or the suppleness
of the Greek, to foreign domination. They displayed as much perseverance in resistance
as the
The death of Nero and the elevation of Vespasian to the throne
gave the Jews a momentary respite; but the combat recommenced with augmented vigor,
under the conduct of Titus, the son of the Emperor, (A. D. 68.) Jerusalem soon became
the center of
Every feature of this siege attests it to be a judgment of God.
It is not an ordinary event of history; all the attendant circumstances are marked
by an aggravation of suffering and woe; men appear to be led by a mysterious hand,
which urges them on to commit acts not within their original intention. They are
the instruments of a chastisement as tremendous as was the crime to be visited.
Even those who were its victims seem to have felt that it was so. The Jewish historian
enumerates the omens by which the catastrophe had been foretold. Many of these are
obviously the puerile fables and inventions of popular superstition; but that very
superstition reveals a strange presentiment of coming woe. According to Josephus,
the Levites officiating in the Temple at the Feast of Pentecost heard a voice, which
cried, "Let us depart from this place."
The condition of the city at this time was indeed one of misery
almost without a parallel. Pressed by foreign armies without, it was torn within
by three hostile factions, each working for its own ends on popular fanaticism.
It had first the faction of the Zealots, under the conduct of Eleazar, who, as their
name imported, claimed to be the zealous defenders of the national cause, and under
this pretext gave themselves up to all kinds of brigandage.
The unhappy city, closely encompassed by the legions of Titus,
became the scene of the most frightful civil war. It was pillaged and sacked by
its own sons. That which one faction spared, fell into the hands of another, and
the contending parties agreed only in crime. "Such was the terror among the people,"
says Josephus, "that no one dare mourn for the dead or bury them. Tears must flow
in secret, groans must be stifled, for such tokens of lamentation
To the horrors of civil war those of famine were soon added. The
small store of food was quickly consumed by the brigands, who went from house to
house, laying hands on all they found, and roughly treating those who had nothing
to give, in order to make them betray the supposed place of concealment. On the
roofs were to be seen women and children, wasted with want, and uttering heart-rending
groans; the young people walked about the street pale and lifeless as specters,
and constantly sinking to the ground from exhaustion. Deep silence settled over
the city; night after night the dead were numbered by thousands, and all these sufferings
were slight compared with the atrocities enacted by the brigands.
Natural feeling seemed extinguished, and the spectacle-horrible
even to the vilest criminals—was seen
The Temple, contrary to the orders of Titus, was destroyed by
fire. A soldier threw into it a burning brand. He did the audacious deed unauthorized,
and actuated, says Josephus, by some demoniacal impulse.
According to Eusebius and Epiphanes, the Christians had left the
Holy City at the commencement of the troubles, and retired to Pella, in Perœa. Some
of them returned into the city after its sack, when the storm was past.
§ II. Consequences to the Church of the Destruction of the Temple.
The great truths maintained by St. Paul received emphatic sanction
from this terrible event. God had cast into the balance the weight of his judgments.
The destruction of Jerusalem was to have yet a further effect—it was to enlarge
the views of the
This revelation, so clear and positive, of the prolongation of
the period of struggling and suffering, combined with the destruction of the ancient
form of worship, to which so many of the Christians still clung, tended to promote
the more settled and permanent organization of the Church. In fact, from the year
70, there is a very marked advance toward a definite form of government and of worship.
The Church now realizes its position as the true Israel of God, the religious society
approved by him, which has taken the place of the theocracy; and it is thus led
to organize institutions which shall permanently substitute those of the past. There
was danger, however, lest in replacing these the Church should be led into imitating
them. The necessity which was felt, after the destruction of the temple, of a fixed
and clearly-defined organization, might lead to a resurrection of Judaism under
a new form. The letter of Clement of Rome to the Corinthians gives sufficient evidence
of the existence of such a tendency at the close of the first century. He says,
"We ought to do all that the Lord has commanded us to do at the times appointed.
He has commanded us to present offerings and to celebrate worship, not irregularly
and irreverently, but at the times and seasons by him determined. He has revealed,
by his most holy will; in what places and by what men the various acts of religious
service can be acceptably performed. Special functions are ascribed to the high
priest; a particular place is set apart for the priests, and the Levites have their
distinct offices. Let each one of you then, my brethren, render honor to God, in
his special order, with a good conscience, and without
It would be absurd to infer from this passage that Clement, a disciple of St. Paul, holds the perpetuity of the Levitical worship, but we can clearly mark in it the tendency to transplant into the Church the precise organization of the old law, and to introduce the fixed order of Judaism. Evidently such notions can only have arisen after the destruction of the Temple. The Christians, accustomed to regard that as their religious center, were filled with a sort of alarm after its fall; they felt about for other props; they began to be afraid of the great freedom which, until then, had prevailed in the worship and government of the Church; and thus the event which was designed to set a seal on the spirituality of the new covenant helped, by a not unnatural perversion, to bring it back under the yoke of the old.
We cannot, however, admit, with an illustrious German divine,
that in consequence of this great event a second Council was held at Jerusalem,
at which the surviving Apostles met and authoritatively instituted the episcopate.
A fact of such importance would not have escaped the ancient historians of the Church.
The early Fathers would have made more than vague allusions to it. Besides, none
of the passages adduced in support of this hypothesis are at all conclusive. Such
an apostolical council appears to
Another consequence of the fall of Jerusalem was the tracing of
a broad line of demarkation between Judæo-Christianity and the Church.
In the commencement of the following century we find a flourishing
Church, without any Judaistic tendencies, at Ælia-Capitolina, a Roman colony founded
on the ruins of Jerusalem, to which, by a decree of
§ I. Life of St. John.
AS in the first period of the apostolic age the principal part
is enacted by St. Peter, and in the second by St. Paul, so in the third period the
paramount influence is that of St. John. His natural disposition and peculiar gifts
account for this delay in the exercise of his apostleship. With a soul meditative
and mystical, he had neither the impetuous zeal of Peter nor the indefatigable activity
of Paul. On him Christianity had wrought most intensively; he had penetrated int6
the deepest meaning of the teaching of Christ; or rather, he had read the very heart
of the Master. It was his vocation to preserve the most precious jewels in the treasury
of Christ's revelations, and to bring to light the most sacred and sublime mysteries
of the Gospel. In order to fulfill this mission, he must needs wait until the Church
was ready for such exalted teaching. The first storms of division must subside.
Just as the prophet heard the still small voice, which was the voice of God, only
It is very far from the truth, however, to regard St. John as
the type of feminine gentleness, as he is represented in legend and in painting,
which is only another form of legend. The ancient Church had a far worthier conception
of him when it gave to John the Evangelist, the symbol of the eagle soaring to the
sun, as though to signify that the mightiest and most royal impulse—that which carries
farthest and highest—is love. The soul of the Apostle of Ephesus was as vigorous
as that of Paul. He was called the Son of Thunder before grace had subdued his natural
vehemence; and something of this early ardor always remained with him. In proportion
to his love of truth was his hatred of error and heresy. Such love is a consuming
fire, and when it sees its object despised or wronged, it is as ardent in its indignation
as in its adoration. The truth which St. John loved and served was no mere abstract
doctrine; it was to him incarnate in the person of Jesus Christ. He was ever the
beloved disciple of the Master, the disciple admitted to his most tender and intimate
friendship; and the Church has ever pictured him in the attitude in which he is
represented in the gospels at the Last Supper, leaning on the bosom of the Lord.
It was by the power of love so strong and deep that he was enabled to fulfill his
mission of conciliation, and to harmonize all the apparent contradictions of the
apostolic
John was the son of Zebedee, a fisherman of the Lake of Gennesaret,
who dwelt at Bethsaida.
John, Peter, and James were, as we know, admitted
We can well imagine what an ineffaceable image of unparalleled
love and sorrow would be left on the soul of John by this scene. Who can tell with
what feelings he caught those last words of the God-man, spoken almost in his parting
agony, which committed to him the mother of his Lord as a sacred legacy.
During the earlier period of the apostolic age we see John by
Peter's side lending him efficient help, but leaving to him the initiative in speech
and action.
We are free to suppose that the period of his life about which
we have no information, was devoted to climbing that spiritual Tabor on the summit
of which the only and eternal Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, was to appear
to him in all the glory of his divinity. The Apostle, like Mary, pondered in his
heart all that he knew of his Master; in the silence of devotion he listened to
his living voice, and under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, discerned more and
more of the mystery of his being. St. Augustine says: "While the three other evangelists
remained below with the man Jesus, and spoke little of his divinity, John, as though
impatient of treading the earth, rose from the very first words of His gospel, not
only above the bounds of earth, air, and sky, but above the angels and celestial
powers, into the very presence of Him by whom all things were made. Not in vain
do the gospels tell us that he leaned on the bosom of the Saviour at the Passover
feast. He drank in secret at that divine spring: "De illo pectore
in secreto bibebat."
It is certain that in this interval the Apostle must have come
in contact with the philosophic culture so widely diffused at the time among the
Jewish synagogues. The comparative correctness of his language
The time was to come when the Apostle would emerge from his obscurity,
and would in his turn exert a wide and deep influence over the Churches of the first
century. According to the testimony of Clement of Alexandria and of Irenæus, St.
John, after the death of St. Peter and St. Paul, took up his abode at Ephesus.
"Arrived in a town not far from Ephesus, after having comforted
and exhorted the brethren, he observed a young man, tall of stature, of a noble
countenance and ardent spirit. Addressing himself to the Bishop, John said: "I commit
that young man to thy charge, and call the Church and Jesus Christ to witness that
I do so." The Elder at first conscientiously
"The young man recognized the Apostle, and was about to make his
escape. John, forgetting his old age, ran after him, exclaiming: 'My son, why dost
thou flee from thy father? I am feeble and far advanced in years; have pity on me,
my son; fear not. There is yet hope of salvation for thee. I will stand for thee
before the Lord Christ. If need be, I will gladly die for thee, as he died for us.
Stop, stop,
It has been asserted that by his example and practice at Ephesus,
John confirmed the principles of Judæo-Christianity, and adopted them in the government
of the Churches.
It is not possible to determine accurately at what date St. John
suffered for the Gospel. The "Fathers" differ as to the time of his banishment to
Patmos We are inclined to place it shortly after the death of St. Peter and St.
Paul.
With reference to the gospel and epistles, tradition is agreed
in the date affixed to them. These writings are the slowly-ripened fruit of all
the labors of the apostolic age; but, at the same time, like every other good gift,
they come down from heaven, and bear the undeniable seal of inspiration. They clearly
belong to a period when heresy was rife, and especially those forms of heresy which,
denying the corporeal reality of the Saviour's sufferings, contained the first germ
of Docetism. John did not, indeed, design his gospel to be a systematic refutation
of the errors of Cerinthus, or of any other heretic. He was satisfied with setting
forth true Christian Gnosticism in opposition to false oriental or Judaizing Gnosticism;
and his gospel is beautifully characterized by Clement of Alexandria as pre-eminently
the gospel of the Spirit.
We have no detailed information of the last years of the Apostle.
Two incidents have come down to us which agree perfectly with what we know of him.
Irenæus relates, that going one day into the public baths at Ephesus, and hearing
that Cerinthus was also there, he immediately went out, exclaiming, that he feared
the house might fall, because of the presence of so great an enemy of the truth.
St. Augustine tells us, that in his time there was a very current
belief that the Apostle was not dead, but was only sleeping in his grave.
§ II. The Revelation.
Before entering on the exposition of the doctrine of St. John in its most complete form, as we find it in the gospel and epistles, it will be needful, in order to trace the gradual development of the revelations of the New Testament, that we show what is the fundamental idea of the Apocalypse.
We may observe first, that so far from being in opposition to
the other writings of St. John, this book comprehends all the essential points of
his theology, but in the condition of germs not yet fully developed. There is no
stronger evidence of this agreement than the place given in the Revelation to the
person of Jesus Christ. Every thing centers in the Saviour. He is called the "Lion
of the tribe of Judah," and the "Root of David "—expressions which point to his
humanity.
The Revelation is not a recital of doctrine—it is primarily a
book of prophecy; it opens a wide and glorious horizon to Christian hope, and paints
it with glowing colors. It bears the impress of the age in which it was written.
It raises the events of that time to the height of solemn symbols; thus, it is at
the same time the book of revelations and an important historical record. In it,
as has been well said, we breathe the very atmosphere of martyrdom. Written immediately
after the first, and, perhaps, the most cruel of all the persecutions—that in which
the brutal hatred of Roman paganism spent its first fury—the book of Revelation
catches, as it were, the lurid reflection of the flames which consumed the Christians
in the gardens of Nero; while, at the same time, it is illuminated throughout with
the certainty of triumph. Contrasting the glory of the Church above with the indignities
heaped on the Church below, the Revelation seems to drown the cries and the blasphemies
of earth in the songs of the blessed and of the angels. After depicting the conflict
and sufferings of the saints, and the terrible judgments of God upon their persecutors,
it opens a vista of the heavenly places. It is one of the grandest conceptions of
the sacred writer, perpetually to link together earth and heaven, and to show in
the events of religious history the counterpart of other events, of which the abode
of the blessed is the scene. The sealed book which contains the mystery of the destinies
of humanity is at the foot of the throne of God. From thence resound the seven trumpets
which declare
But the sacred writer is not content with proclaiming in a general
manner the suffering and triumph of the Church. The further he proceeds in his delineation
The first trumpets and the first vials announce the same order
of judgments, and both have reference to the commencement of the prophecy of the
first gospel. Jesus Christ, after predicting the chastisements and judgments of
God in nature, declared his judgments in history, and first of all, the destruction
of Jerusalem. St. John, who wrote after the overthrow of the Temple, proclaims another
judgment of God. Sentence is to be passed now, not upon Jerusalem, but upon Rome,
the impure and bloody Babylon, the incarnation at that time of the genius of evil.
What a grand delineation does the evangelical Prophet give of this diabolical paganism—now
as the beast with seven heads and ten horns, opening its mouth to pour out blasphemy
against God; now as the great whore, robed in purple and scarlet, making the inhabitants
But the Church has not only to fight against Antichrist without;
it has also to resist Antichrist within: to do battle, that is, with heresy and
false prophecy. "Many false prophets shall arise and shall deceive many," said Jesus
Christ.
Thus, in the Revelation as in the prophecy of Jesus Christ, are
unfolded the judgments of God as manifested in nature and in history, and the sanguinary
and victorious struggles of the Church with her many adversaries. The inspired writer
has added in his picture new features drawn from the historical events
In the Apocalypse two distinct periods are marked in this final
triumph of Christianity over Antichrist. The first victory is brought about by the
direct and visible intervention of the Saviour, taking up the cause of his people
and gloriously establishing the reign of his Church upon earth.
"And there shall be no more curse; but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it, and his servants shall serve him. And they shall see his face, and his name shall be in their foreheads. And there shall be no night there: and they need no candle, neither light of the sun, for the Lord God giveth them light, and they shall reign for ever and ever."
Such is this marvelous book—one of the most sublime gifts of the
Spirit of God to the Church; one which would have been its best consolation in all
ages, as it was that of the martyrs of Lyons and of Asia Minor, if it had not been
too often transformed into an unintelligible cipher, through a misconception of
its historical basis. One important truth we learn from it, namely, that history
interpreted by God is a great oracle, which, in each of its periods, repeats, with
a living comment, the prophecy of Jesus Christ concerning the last times. The struggle
which is renewed from age to age between Christ and Antichrist, the partial triumph
of the former, and the more and more decisive defeats of the latter, bring us to
the final conflict and crowning victory, which will be coincident with the return
of Christ in glory. The
How greatly were such consolations needed in the year 71, on the
eve of so much suffering and ignominy, when the few disciples gathered around St.
John saw all the brutal violence of imperial Rome, and all the seductions of heresy
arising out of the pit to fight against them.
PAUL is, in his statement of doctrine, as in his life, the man
of contrasts and antitheses. He aims to show how deep is the gulf between human
nature and God, that he may the more exalt the grace which has bridged the chasm;
and he traces vigorously the line of demarkation between the old covenant and the
new. It is not so with John. Having attained gradually, and without any sudden shock,
the highest elevation of Christian truth, he starts from the summit and gently comes
down again. He does not even pause to establish the superiority of the Gospel over
the law. With him that is a settled point, an admitted principle from which he deduces
the consequences. John does not commence, like Paul, with man and his misery, but
with God and his perfection. His doctrine, by this character of sustained
§ I. The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
At the summit of his doctrine, St. John places the idea of God.
God is the Absolute Being, the great I Am, whom no eye hath seen or can see. He
is a Spirit.
It must not be supposed, because John dwells especially on the
moral attributes of God, that he passes by in silence his metaphysical attributes.
These are all comprised in the absolute life which he ascribes to God.
But how does this invisible God reveal himself? How does He who
inhabits the inaccessible light communicate himself to the creature, and what can
be the first object of his love? We know the response of ancient philosophy to this
question. At one time, finding no means of really bringing together the Infinite
Being and the changing and finite creature, it left them face to face as two eternal
principles—Uncreated Spirit opposed to uncreated matter. Again it sought in the
Infinite Spirit the germ of the finite and perishable being, and arrived at the
second by a series of descending steps from the first. Human opinion vacillated
between Platonic dualism and the oriental or Alexandrian theory of emanation. Neither
of these solutions is that given by St. John. The prologue of his gospel, written
distinctly in view of the false philosophies of his age, solves the delicate problem
of the relation of the invisible God to the world by the doctrine of the Word-a
doctrine absolutely unknown before Christianity, and which, so far from being borrowed
from Philo, is in direct opposition to his system. What is here treated of is not
an impersonal Word, which is only a scholastic term to designate the world, or rather,
the complex of the ideas realized in the innumerable beings of which the universe
is composed.
After the Son and the Father, John recognizes a third Divine Person—the
Holy Spirit, who is sent to the Church by the Father and the Son.
§ II. The Word and the World.
The existence of the Eternal Word establishes the divine freedom, for in him absolute love finds its perfect realization.
God is under no constraining necessity to create. If he does so,
it can only be by a determination of his free love. According to St. John, the Word
takes an important part in creation. As the organ of revelation, by whom alone the
light, life, and love emanating from God can be communicated, "all things were made
by him, and without him was not any thing made that was made."
The Word not only created the world. He already, in part, gave
himself to the world: "He was in the world."
This harmony, however, has not been sustained. John recognizes
the intrusion of a principle of discord into the world. The power of sin has been
let loose. He does not enter into any argument on the origin of evil. He affirms
the fact and is content with proving it. A kingdom of darkness has set itself in
There is a law for the creature. It is this law which John calls
the old and new commandment, the commandment of love based upon the very being of
God.
§ III. The Word and Redemption.
The Word, which was the organ of creative love, is also the organ
of the compassionate love of the Father. The whole work of salvation rests upon
him. This work is twofold. It is both internal and external, for it is to effect
the reconciliation and reunion of God and man. It is not enough that God should
draw near to man by a series of revelations; it is also necessary that man should
be inclined toward God. In truth, that he may come to the fountain of living
This religious aptitude, this pre-existing and necessary harmony
between the conscience and the Gospel, John calls the drawing of the Father.
But this work within is not enough. To the infinite need of the
soul there must be a corresponding infinite satisfaction. It returns to God: God
must return to it. A positive revelation is necessary. John, like Paul, distinguishes
two successive revelations. The first has only a preparatory value, it is but twilight;
its rays proceed indeed from the Word, as all light does, but they only herald his
appearance. "The law came by Moses," says John, "but grace and truth came by Jesus
Christ."
While St. Paul dwelt especially on the work wrought by the Saviour, St. John insists mainly on his nature. The incarnation is, in his view, the capital truth of Christianity. It is not only the necessary condition of redemption, it is the permanent condition of salvation. The proclamation of pardon is only the preliminary and initiative of salvation. For a man to be saved is to possess God—that is, to possess light, life, and truth; and as in the incarnate Word humanity appears closely and indissolubly united to deity, so it is by union with him that salvation is fully realized.
The incarnation thus regarded has an entirely new significance.
Instead of being a pallid ray, which sinful man discerns quivering amid his thick
darkness, it places him in the fullness of light; it restores him
St. John does not enlarge upon the incarnation itself. There is
no trace in his writings of scholastic theories. He does not formally distinguish
two natures in Jesus Christ. He is content with affirming that the Word was made
flesh, and with showing how deeply his human nature was penetrated with the nature
of God. In the eyes of John human nature has a divine capacity or potentiality.
Est capax divinitatis. Jesus Christ is distinguished
from all other men as the "only-begotten Son of the Father," who is like the Father,
and, one with Him,
If the redemptive work of Christ is not fully brought out by St.
John under all its aspects, it would be a grave error to see in it simply a revelation
of the love of God. Such a revelation would be untrue and incomplete if it were
not in harmony with the demands of justice, which are also the requirements of the
human conscience. St. John is very far from ignoring this important aspect of Christianity.
He ascribes a redeeming virtue to the Saviour's death. He died for us.
We thus understand the Master's words to his disciples: "It is
expedient for you that I go away."
Such is the work of the Word for the restoration of the world which he created, and which he thus morally re-creates by imparting himself to fallen man in a fullness greater than any to which man could have dared to aspire even in the days of his integrity.
§ IV. The Word in the Christian and in the Church until the end of time.
Love being the primary idea in the doctrine of John, and that
which gives color to all the rest, we may expect that he will attach great importance
to the appropriation of salvation by the individual. Love in fact supposes reciprocity.
It is in vain that God has love enough for man to pardon him—it is in vain that
the Word has become incarnate, and offered the redeeming sacrifice—if this infinite
love obtains no
St. John, who never separates theory from practice, idea from
fact, the truth from its application, binds closely together justifying faith and
holiness. The latter is, indeed, implicitly contained in the former. Thus from the
absolute and ideal stand-point, the believer is a saint. "Whosoever is born of God
doth not commit sin."
His views of the future of the Church bear the same impress of
spirituality. He speaks in the gospel and the epistles as in the Apocalypse, of
a general resurrection of the dead, a final judgment, a glorious triumph of Christ,
inaugurated by his return, and a terrible conflict with the powers of darkness;
but in his gospel he more clearly shows the connection of these great outward facts
with the moral facts, which
§ I. External Condition.
HISTORY finds few events of note to record in the period which
extends from the destruction of Jerusalem to the close of the first century. It
is a time of internal development, during which the Church is gathering up all the
teachings received during the apostolic age. Missions are carried on on a less imposing
scale. The propagation of the faith is, however, far from being arrested, for we
can prove the existence, at the commencement of the following century, of a large
number of new Churches. Instead of losing ground in the countries where it had gained
a footing, Christianity became firmly established. We see from the names of the
Churches mentioned in the Revelation, that in Asia Minor, for example, the great
cities where Paul had first preached the Gospel became centers of proselytism, from
which the light spread into the neighboring towns. From Ephesus, Laodicea, and Colosse,
the new faith cast forth its roots to Smyrna in Ionia—a commercial and wealthy city—to
Philadelphia in Lydia, and in Mysia to Thyatira, and, lastly, to Pergamos, the ancient
residence of the kings of Asia, once famous for its noble library. The same expansive
movement—the truth spreading itself by
Persecution from the close of the reign of Nero to the time of
Domitian was not of a general character. It was local and intermittent, but it never
entirely ceased. The most unimportant occasion was sufficient to make it burst out
afresh in a province. It was continuous in Palestine, where Jewish fanaticism had
been stimulated by the very chastisements designed to rebuke it. We have cited the
decrees of excommunication, the effect of which was to break the last links between
the Church and the Synagogue. But, even beyond Judæa, the Jewish faction pursued
its adversaries with implacable hatred. At Smyrna, as at Philadelphia, it greatly
troubled the Christians, and succeeded in casting some of them into prison.
§ II. Internal Condition of the Churches. Heresies. Church Organization.
The position of the Churches at the close of the apostolic age
was one full of peril and temptation To the period of first enthusiasm, when no
difficulty seemed to damp the ardor of zeal and love, had succeeded a period when
the obstacles to be overcome became more and more apparent, when numerous defections
cast a doubt upon the fairest promises, when, finally, evils which had seemed completely
subdued sprang again into life. We see, in fact, from the picture drawn in the Revelation
of the seven Churches in Asia Minor, that shortly after the death of Peter and Paul,
influences from without had effected a wide entrance in their midst.
Heresy, during the period of John, is no longer vague and floating
as in the preceding age; it takes a more decided form. We have traced this process
of transformation with reference to the Judaizing heresies which do not come within
the scope of the Apostle, but which, from the time of the fall of Jerusalem, gradually
assumed a settled form. A similar change is passing upon the heresies arising out
of paganism, the first manifestations of which we noted in Asia Minor, where the
double current of Western philosophy and Eastern theosophy met. Gnosticism is just
emerging from its formative state. We cannot yet give a general description of the
system, for we
Like the prophet Balaam, and wicked Jezebel, who led the ancient
people of God to make a league with the idolators, the heretics sought to lower
the barrier between the Christians and the heathen. Thus the Revelation speaks of
them in symbolic phrase, under those well-known names which so accurately characterized
their conduct.
Already, in the heresies of this age, an idea began to gain currency
which became widely diffused in the second century—the idea, namely, that the world
was not created by the Supreme God, but by an inferior and antagonistic deity, known
as the demriurge,
The worship of the Church retained the same character of freedom
as in the preceding century. The narrative of Clement of Alexandria shows us that
no hesitation was felt in freely discussing the interests of the Church in the sacred
assemblies. The conversation between St. John and the bishop with reference to the
young apostate took place at a time when the whole Church was gathered together.
The Revelation, however, puts us on the track of a gradual transformation even then
commencing. The glowing description given by St. John of the heavenly worship is
an indirect invitation to the Church on earth to conform to this ideal. That Church
would, doubtless, delight to repeat or to paraphrase some of those sublime songs
which gave such glorious expression to the religious feeling. Nothing could be more
alien to the spirit of this grand epoch than the work of determining liturgical
formularies. Nevertheless, as one by one the miraculous gifts were withdrawn, the
great monuments of apostolic inspiration would naturally
With reference to Christian festivals, the observance of the Lord's
day becomes more marked than formerly. It was already so called in commemoration
of the resurrection.
With St. John the apostolic age closes.
Revelation is before us in all its wealth, in its inexhaustible freshness, its infinite variety, and mighty unity. The various types of apostolic doctrine succeeded and supplemented one another. But there is not one of these elements which the Church is not bound to make its own, and its whole history will be but a progressive appropriation of the true Christ—of him whose image in all its divine lineaments the first century of the Church faithfully preserved.
That eventful and checkered history is about to begin. The last of the Apostles has passed away. The Church will no longer have that visible protection, that gentle and firm guidance, which has hitherto saved it from so many perils; but these very perils are necessary to its earnest appropriation of the truth. Though the Apostles are removed, He who gave the Apostles remains, and in him the Church will find light in all darkness, lifting up after every fall—victory over every foe.
A. [See page 23.]
WE shall not do more here than indicate the principal works on
the apostolic age, those, at least, which have come under our particular notice.
It is scarcely needful to say that our fountain-head is the New Testament. We shall
treat, in the course of this work, of the title of each of its books to our confidence.
Christian Antiquity presents to us also a wealth of information. The "Ecclesiastical
History" of Eusebius;
We need not enumerate here all the historical memorials of early
Protestantism. We will content ourselves with mentioning only the "Centuries of
Magdeburg" in Germany, and in France, the learned "Ecclesiastical History" of Basnage.
It would be useless to attempt to catalogue the works which have
accumulated during the last fifty years in Germany—that fatherland of modern theology.
We will only cite the most characteristic. Let us point first to the vast treasures
of exegesis—De Wette's exegetical manuals, so full and so exact; the graphic commentaries
of Olshausen and Tholuck; the great works of Lücke on the "Writings of St. John,"
and of Bleek on the "Epistle to the Hebrews," and many other monuments of learning,
so solid and so reliable that they furnish inexhaustible resources to the student
of the primitive age of the Church. Passing on to the history of the period, properly
so called, we place in the first rank Neander's "History of the Foundation of the
Apostolic Church,"
The sacerdotal and hierarchical views, or rather the Irvingite
idea, is represented by Thiersch. In spite of the narrowness of his principles,
his "History of the Apostolic Age" is written with so much piety, skill, and delicacy
that it constantly sustains the interest in his theme. Thiersch is an adversary
to be opposed only with feelings of sympathy and gratitude.
The Tübingen school has its most eminent representative in Baur,
its learned head. His book on "St. Paul," and his "History of the First Three Centuries,"—especially
the pages treating of the first century—comprise the whole programme of that theological
school, which, after having outdone itself in Schwegler's book on the "Times Succeeding
the Age of the Apostles,"
B. [See page 23.]
It is extremely difficult to fix with precision the detailed chronology
of the apostolic age. It is necessary very carefully to guard against any
Herod Agrippa died in the year 44, according to Josephus, ("Antiquities," books xix, ix, 2.) The same author places the great famine, which took place in the reign of Claudius, under the proconsulate of Caspius Fadus and of Tiberius Alexander. Josephus, "Antiquities," xx, v, 2. Now Caspius Fadus, having been sent into Judea after the death of Agrippa, the famine could not have commenced earlier than the end of the year 44. Indeed, it only reached Judæa some time after the death of the King, for at that time the Sidonians, under stress of the dearth, came to the Jews to be succored out of the abundance in their country. It was, then, only in the course of the year 45 that Judæa was reached by the scourge, and that Paul and Barnabas carried up to Jerusalem the offerings of the Church at Antioch.
The expulsion of the Jews from Rome Suetonius ("Claudius," 25)
ascribes to Claudius. Tacitus, ("Annals," xii, 52,) who, under the name of "Mathematici,"
includes all the abettors of Eastern superstitions, places this expulsion in the
year 52.
The date of the entry of Festus on his office is determined in the following manner. According to Josephus, ("Antiquities," viii, xxii,) Felix, deposed for his exactions, only escaped condemnation through the intercession of Pallas. If this be so, then Pallas himself could not yet have fallen into disfavor. Now his disgrace and death took place in the year 62. But a year does not suffice for all that was accomplished during the proconsulate of Festus. Festus's entry upon his office must then be carried back at least to the year 60.
The date of the death of Herod Agrippa gives us the date of the
C. [See page 23.]
Our principal source is the book known under the name of the "Acts
of the Apostles." Of this book we must, first of all, prove the credibility. Its
authenticity was generally acknowledged in the early Church, from the time of Irenæus.
"Quoniam autem is Lucas inseparabilis fuit a Paulo, et cooperarius
ejus in Evangelio, ipse fecit manifestum."
Baur and Schwegler ground their theory on a supposed deep division
between the Apostles, a division which they hold to have continued until their death.
The refutation of this error will become apparent from the history. We shall show
that there were no sharp and bitter polemics, except between St. Paul and the false
teachers of Corinth and Galatia, and that if his proclamation that the Gospel was
as wide as the world caused at first a certain degree of surprise, the agreement
It has been asserted that the Acts are a compilation of several
documents. To us, however, there appears throughout a unity of style and of composition
too striking to allow us to suppose it the work of more than one hand, and that
the very hand which penned the third gospel.
The voice of tradition, which ascribes to Luke the composition
of the Acts, appears to us the best sustained opinion; it is well known that he
was one of the companions of Paul in his last journeys.
D. [See page 32.]
It is not to be denied that the narrative of St. Luke presents
some serious difficulties. It is not easy, in the first place, to understand the
object of the miracle, for the foreign Jews who were at Jerusalem all understood
the Aramaic tongue. In the next place, the extraordinary outpouring of the Spirit
does not appear in other passages of the Acts, to be accompanied with the gift of
tongues.
For ourselves, we should be very slow to admit that, on a fact of such importance, the primitive tradition of the Church can be erroneous or inexact. We see no difficulty in believing that the miracle of the gift of tongues assumed a special character on the day of Pentecost. It was the language of ecstacy, and in this respect resembled the gift of tongues at Corinth, but was distinguished from the latter by its intelligibility. Why should not the same miracle have assumed various forms in the apostolic age? Its extraordinary and unique character on the day of Pentecost is explained by supposing that the miracle reached on that day, as it were, its mightiest development. It was a glorious completion of the divine symbolism, which we have recognized in the marvelous circumstances accompanying the first outpouring of the Spirit.
E. [See page 140.]
The question of the Council and the Conference at Jerusalem is
one of those which has called forth in modern times the most lively discussions.
The Tübingen school, starting with the supposition that the narrative of the Acts,
(
F. [See page 203.]
A large number of writers, both ancient and modern, have admitted
a second captivity of the Apostle Paul. Eusebius
"It is reported that after having presented his defense, the Apostle
departed to continue his apostolic mission, and that he returned a second time to
Rome, there to suffer martyrdom. At that time, while in bonds, his second letter
to Timothy must have been written." It is clear that Eusebius does not affirm the
fact; he merely says, "It is reported." It is only the echo of a tradition, of which
he does not assume the responsibility. This tradition rests evidently on the famous
passage of Clement of Rome, in his epistle to the Corinthians. It runs thus: "Paul,
having preached righteousness through the whole world, and
The other proof adduced by Neander is founded on exegesis. He
bases it on the second Epistle to Timothy, in which Paul seems to speak of his deliverance.
G. [See page 204.]
We admit the full authenticity of all the epistles to which the
name of Paul is attached, with the exception of the Epistle to the Hebrews, which
we attribute to Apollos. There are some about which no question at all is raised.
The Epistles to the Galatians, to the Romans, and those to the Corinthians, are
beyond a doubt. Baur himself admits their authenticity. The two Epistles to the
Thessalonians have been attacked by some on the ground that they are insignificant,
wanting in special interest, and give in detail, and without occasion, specific
views of prophecy.
The objections brought against the epistles of Paul are drawn,
as we have seen, from internal evidence. No one denies that their authenticity was
unanimously recognized in the third century. Placing ourselves on the ground occupied
by our adversaries, it is impossible to us to discover in the disputed epistles
a single point not in accordance with the character of the Apostle, and with the
history of his life. What shall we say of the extravagance of a criticism which
goes so far as to assert that Paul's comparison of the Christian to a soldier, (
H. [See page 206.]
The epistles of James and of Jude have been placed by Eusebius
("Hist. Eccles.," iii, 25) among the "Antilegomena," or disputed writings. But we
see no sufficient reason for this assertion, and the external evidence is entirely
in their favor. The doubts must have arisen later from doctrinal causes, probably
in the case of James from the supposed opposition between his doctrine and that
of Paul, and in that of Jude from his quotation from the apocryphal book of Enoch.
The Church of Syria had admitted the epistle of the former into its canon. Clement
of Rome seems to refer to it: "Epistle to the Corinth.," chap. x. Origen quotes
it: "Commentar. in Joannem," vol. xix, iv, 406. Clement of Alexandria quotes the
Epistle
I. [See page 213.]
We have spoken of only one Epistle of Peter, because it seems to us impossible to admit, with any certainty, the authenticity of the second. It is noteworthy that it is only mentioned for the first time by Clement of Alexandria, and even that quotation is not direct. Eusebius, "Hist. Eccles.," vi, 24. Origen, who cites it, ("Comment. in Joannem," iv, 135,) is the first and only one of the "Fathers" of the third century who clearly appeals to its authority. The Church of Syria, the testimony of which is of great value, did not acknowledge this epistle, and Eusebius ("Hist. Eccles.," iii, 55) quotes it among the "Antilegomena." The doubt was current as late as the fourth century, for Jerome says, "Scripsit Petrus duas Epistolas, quae Catholicæ nominantur, quarum secunda a plerisqne ejus esse negatur propter styli cum priore dissonantiam." "De Viris illustribus," c. i.
On the other hand, the First Epistle of Peter has in its favor the highest possible testimony. Eusebius, "Hist. Eccles.," iii, 39; iv, 14; Irenæus, "Contr. Hæres," iv, 9, 2; Clement of Alexandria, Stromat.," iii, 73; Tertull., "C. Scorp.," i, 2.
If we proceed to the examination of the internal evidences, they
are very unfavorable to the authenticity of the Second Epistle of Peter. 1st. The
style has scarcely any analogy to that of the first epistle. 2d. The dependent relation
of this epistle to that of Jude is very marked; the author constantly takes up the
text of Jude as a theme to be worked out. (See the parallelism of the two epistles
in M. Arnaud's "Commentary on Jude.") 3d. The writer insists upon his apostolic
degree with a strange mannerism, resembling that of the apocryphal writings, (
There is nothing incredible in the pretension of the unknown author
to pass for Peter. The whole apocryphal literature of the second and third centuries
is full of fictitious scriptures, and the name
J. [See page 232.]
It is not disputed by any, that, while the Western Church for
nearly three centuries denies that Paul is the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews,
the doctors of the Church of Alexandria are almost unanimous in attributing the
epistle to him. But the opinion of the West, and of Rome in particular, has great
weight in the question, since that Church must be supposed to have had most authentic
information of all that related to the Apostle Paul, and especially of every thing
connected with his captivity. Clement of Rome, makes constant allusions to the Epistle
to the Hebrews. How would it be possible that he should never have named its author,
if he had known who he was, and especially if he had known him to be the Apostle
Paul? It is easy to understand how the Church of Alexandria should have arrived
by a philosophical synthesis, natural to its genius, at the conclusion that Paul
was the writer of an epistle which bears the impress of his thought. The internal
evidences which vindicate the judgment of the Western Church are admirably set forth
in Bleek's "Commentary." The following are the principal: ist. The striking difference
of style; the diversity of opinion on this point seems to us inexplicable. 2d. The
relation of dependence, in which
The hypothesis, which ascribes the Epistle to the Hebrews to Apollos, is the most plausible. He was certainly a warm advocate of Paul's principles; he was well versed in the Scriptures; he was at Alexandria, where great prominence was given to the typical and allegorical style. He was a man eloquent and learned. All these various characteristics are remarkably displayed in the Epistle to the Hebrews.
K. [See page 235.]
We have presented the system of the Tübingen school under its most moderate form, as it is set forth in the last book of Baur, "Das Christenthum der drei ersten Jahrhunderte." Tübingen, 1853, pp. 43-151.
The book of Schwegler, often quoted by us, "Das Nachapostolische
Zeitalter," (Tübingen, 1840,) is much more arbitrary in the use of internal
L. [See page 428.]
Notwithstanding the able and learned dissertations of Lücke on
the passages of "the Fathers" which support the authenticity of the Apocalypse,
those passages appear to us conclusive. Either external evidence must be denied
all value, or it must be admitted to be conclusive in this case. Setting aside the
passages of the writings of the apostolic "Fathers," which, in a general way, remind
us of the Apocalypse,
The first doubts on this subject were expressed by the sect of the Alogi, who denied the divinity of Jesus Christ. These doubts were carried further by Caius, and finally by Dionysius of Alexandria, (Eusebius, vii, 25,) and more or less confirmed by Eusebius. But it is only needful to study the grounds taken up by Dionysius, in order to be convinced that he reasons entirely from à priori arguments, and that it is fear of the chiliasts, or millenarians, which leads him to throw doubt upon the book of the Revelation.
Is the internal evidence in truth as adverse as is asserted? We
think not. We admit that there are great differences in substance and in form between
the Gospel of John and the Revelation, but there are also striking analogies. The
differences seem to us to have been exaggerated by Lücke and Reuss,
Stress is laid first on the difference of style and on the Hebraic
coloring of the Apocalypse. This difference is real; it is explained in part by
the fact that the Book of the Revelation is, from its very
Three points are especially insisted upon in proof of the difference
between the Revelation and the other writings of
The opposition of the Gospel of John to Judaism must not be exaggerated.
Do we not read in it these words, "Salvation is of the Jews?"
3d. It is maintained that the doctrine of the author of the Revelation
is totally at variance with that of the author of the Gospel. And first, Jesus,
it is said, is not represented as the Word of God, but only as the great revealer;
but what, then, is conveyed by those hymns to the Lamb, which blend his name in
common adoration with that of God?
Even those who pretend to discover in the Apocalypse the notion
of salvation by works, as opposed to the true Christian doctrine, are constrained
to admit that there are few books of the New Testament in which redemption by the
blood of Christ is more clearly taught.
Though we concur in the belief of the authenticity of the Apocalypse,
we are not, however, prepared to admit the traditional date for its composition.
We have already pointed out several reasons which, from a doctrinal point of view,
make us demur to this. We shall not recur to these. It is not, as we have shown,
that we charge the writer of the Revelation with a rude Judaism, as has been done
by others.
From the study of the question we draw the conclusion that it
is not possible to determine with exactness, by means of external evidence, the
date of the composition of the Apocalypse. We are, therefore, compelled to give
full weight to the internal evidence. We have already observed that the doctrinal
character of the book is adverse to its traditional date. If, now, we sum up its
historical statements, we shall find that they give some indications as to the time
of its composition. Lücke and Reuss see one such indication in the eleventh chapter,
where the sacred writer is bidden to measure the temple.
It is to us evident that the Apostle wrote a few years after the
terrible persecution under Nero. It is idle to draw any parallel between the persecutions
under Domitian, and that first truly infernal explosion
The combat is not finished, it has only commenced, and the first
century is a faint image of the true Antichrist. What is there here unworthy of
the Revelation? Is not the symbol admirably chosen? Do we not know that prophecy
has always a primary signification, which, however, is capable of progressive and
indefinite expansion? It is certain that the idea that Nero was Antichrist was widely
diffused throughout the ancient Church; the expectation of his return took a materialized
form, but its origin may be traced to this passage in the Apocalypse. It is not
more surprising to find John bringing out the true meaning of a legend, than to
find Jude quoting the Apocrypha, or Job speaking of the crooked serpent.
We have not yet spoken of the ingenious hypothesis of M. Reuss on the number of the beast, (666,) in which he says:
"We think with Lücke
Several commentaries on the Apocalypse have recently appeared
in
The beast of the thirteenth chapter is the temporal power. If
the Apocalypse gives it seven heads, it is to represent its attempt to imitate the
divine power, of which seven is the symbolic number. But it fails in this attempt,
for in
Such a system seems to us to refute itself; the symbolism of numbers on which it hinges, carries the arbitrary beyond all limit. Proceeding thus, we may see any thing or any body in the Revelation.
Ebrard, in the commentary which he published last year, upholds the old Protestant view. The Roman power is depicted in the thirteenth and fourteenth chapters, and Papal Rome in the seventeenth chapter. The system of MM. Elliot and Gaussen is found complete in Grübe's commentary on the Apocalypse. "Versuch einer historischen Erklärung der Offenbarung Johannis." Heidelberg, 1857.
M. [See page 429.]
We cannot here go over the whole discussion that has arisen as
to the author of the fourth gospel. Its authenticity was impugned with some reserve
by Bretschneider in his "Probabilia." That theologian maintained that between the
gospel of John and the synoptics the difference was absolute, especially in reference
to the discourses of the Saviour. Strauss, in his "Life of Christ," proceeded to
set forth three differences in support of his hypothesis of an evangelical mythology.
Baur and his school have taken other ground in attacking the authenticity of the
fourth gospel. It is, in their view, the last result of the struggle between Paulinism
and Ebionitism, and, as it were, a treaty of peace between the two systems, signed
upon the heights of Alexandrine Gnosticism. Baur, "Das Christ., der drei erst. Jahrh.,
133. Such a reconciliation could only take place at an advanced date, when the combatants
had become exhausted, that is to say, about the end of the second century. The most
remarkable work in favor of its authenticity is Lücke's introduction to his commentary
on the Gospel. All that M. Reuss has written on this subject, whether in his book,
"The History of the New Testament," or in his "History of Christian Theology in
the Apostolic Age," or in a separate dissertation, has great value. For ourselves,
no point of sacred criticism seems to us better established than the authenticity
of the fourth gospel. Lücke, in his commentary, had already shown how much favor
is in its eternal testimony. Pp. 41-81. It appears to us evident that Justin Martyr
makes numerous allusions to passages of the fourth gospel. "Dial. cum Tryph.," 88,
114, 108. His treatment of the doctrine of the "Word" reminds us of the prologue
of John's gospel. He even goes so far as to call Jesus Christ
μενεγενής, the only Son.
The first direct testimony is that of Theophilus of Antioch, who lived in the year I68. We read in his book to Antolicus, ii, 22: Ὀθεν διδάσκουσιν ἦμας ἀγιαι γραφαὶ καὶ πάντες ὁι πνευματοφόροι, ἐξ ὦν Ἰωάννης λέγεί Ἐν ἀρχῃ ἧν ὁ λόγος. The testimony of lrenæus is not less precise. "Contr. Hæres.," iii, 1. Comp. Tertullian, "Adv. Marconem," iv, 2, 5. The mention of the Apocalypse in the canon of Muratori proves to us that the Gospel was received into the canon of the Church of Rome at the commencement of the third century. From that time, all the "Fathers," without exception, confirm the apostolic origin of the fourth gospel. Origen, about the year 222, comments on it. The Peshito version translates it, and Eusebius ("Hist. Eccles.," iii, 24, 25) places it, without hesitation, among the "Homologoumena."
The external evidence derived from the testimony of the orthodox
Church is, then, very strongly in favor of the authenticity of the fourth gospel.
It will appear decisive and irrefragable, if we take also into account the testimony
of heresy itself. The discovery of the "Philosophoumena" has decided the question.
St. Hippolytus makes us acquainted with the first "Ophites," who are the immediate
successors of the heretics of the apostolic age, and who lived in the first quarter
of the second century. All know the doctrine of the "Word;" it occupies a prominent
place in the rough outlines of their systems; all quote positively the fourth gospel.
Thus Hippolytus attributes to the "Naassenians," the most ancient of the Ophites,
declarations like this: Τὸ γεγεννημένον ἐκ τῆς σαρκὸς,
σἀρξ ἐστι, καὶ τὸ γεγεννημένον ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος, πνεῦμά ἐστιν. "Philosoph.,"
p. 106; quotation from
Let us proceed to the internal evidence. It appears to us, first,
that there is a striking analogy between what we know of St. John and the character
of the fourth gospel. One feels that the writer is a Jew by birth, for the allusions
to the customs of his nation are many; but he is also acquainted with Greece and
its lofty culture. An allusion to the heresies of Docetism is evident from the commencement,
and is in harmony with what is known of the adversary of Cerinthus. The fourth gospel
bears the mark of a date subsequent to the first three, and this again brings us
to the time of John's abode at Ephesus. It is pre-eminent for accuracy, and shows
throughout an eye-witness in the historian. Lastly, how can we avoid recognizing
in every page the disciple whom Jesus loved, the apostle of love, who, as Clement
of Alexandria says, "discerned like by like, love by love." Objection is taken to
the marked difference between the discourses of the Saviour in the synoptics, and
in the fourth gospel. It has even been said that John gives us another Christ than
the first three evangelists. We admit that he presents him under another aspect,
precisely because of his own moral affinity for that which was transcendent in the
Master; but the Christ is essentially the same Christ. We have already observed
that the writers of the synoptics also discerned the Son of God in the Son of man.
It is not just to assert that the element of parable is completely absent from the
gospel of John while we can point to the tenth and fifteenth chapters. The uniformity
of the discourses is undeniable, and belongs to the more metaphysical character
of the gospel of John. Evidently language has less variety when it touches on the
highest points of religious teaching. We admit that John has given a certain sameness
of color to the words of the Saviour, the same color which we find in his epistle;
but the point to be ascertained is, whether John himself
When the Tübingen school sets against our statement the asserted Judaism of the author of the Apocalypse, we are prepared to reduce this objection to its true value. (See the preceding note.) Nor can any argument against the authenticity of the fourth gospel be drawn from the fact that St. John, who, in his gospel, places the last supper of Christ with his disciples on the 13th of Nisan, kept the Passover on the 14th, for he might think that the death of the true Lamb of God at that date was of more weight in fixing the paschal feast than the celebration of the same feast on the 13th of Nisan in the upper chamber.
As to the epistles of John, the first is evidently written by the author of the fourth gospel. Never was internal evidence more conclusive. Let us add that it has the most ancient testimony in its favor: "Papias in Eusebius," iii, 39; Polycarp, "Ad. Philipp.," 7; Comp. Irenæus, "Contr. Hæres.," iii, 16; Clement of Alexandria, "Stromat.," ii, 389; Tertullian, "Adv. Praxeam," 15. It has always been classed among the "Homologoumena." There is no reason of any weight for disputing the authenticity of the two smaller epistles of John. They strikingly resemble his style and manner. They also have external evidence on their side, though some doubt was entertained by Origen. Eusebius, vi, 25; vii, 28. Dionysius of Alexandria recognized their authenticity; (Eusebius, vi, 25;) so also did Irenæus, ("Contr. Hæres.," i, 163,) who speaks positively of the second as being by John.
Acts of Apostles, the Apochryphal, accounts of sufferings and deaths of Apostles in, 209.
Admission into primitive Church, 49, 51, 336.
Alexander of Ephesus, 179.
Allegorical interpretation of Scripture, the, by early heretics, 325.
Altar, the, " to the unknown God," at Athens, 160.
Ananias, of Damascus, 110 n.
Ananias, the High Priest, 190.
Ananias and Sapphira, 51.
Andrew, brother of Peter, his sphere of work, 207.
Angels of the seven Churches, the, 476.
Anointing with oil, in early Church, 380.
Antioch, foundation of Church in, 76.
Apocalypse, the, its fundamental idea, 430; its agreement with other writings of John, 430; its representations of Christ, of redemption, and of the Church, 430; its prophetic character, and its symbolism, 432; when written, and influence of circumstances of the time on its style and matter, 432; its rhythm and plan, 434; compared with Christ's prophecy of the last times, 435; the Babylon of, 435; the Antichrist of, 436; typical value of events foretold in, 438; the final triumph of Christianity over Antichrist, as depicted in, 439; the millennium and the judgment, 440; its teaching on the interpretation of history, 440; classification of commentators upon, 441 n.; authenticity and date of, Note L, 500.
Apollos, sketch of, 168.
Apostolate of St. Paul, 113, 127, 129.
Apostolic doctrine, the, 240, Note K, 499.
Apostolic office, the, its nature, 49, 113, 132.
Apostolical Succession, the true, 50.
Apostles, the, their influence and place in primitive Church, 49, 356.
Aquila and Priscilla, 163, I67, 168, 389.
Arabia, Paul's residence in, 110; Matthew's labors in, 208; Bartholomew and Nathanael in, 208.
Asceticism, the, of St. Paul, 145, 390; of the primitive Church, 388; of heretics in Ephesian and Colossian Churches, 327.
Athens, sketch of the religious condition of, 158.
Babylon, the scene of Peter's labors, 210; The Jewish population in, 211; not to be understood in a mystic sense, 211; the Babylon of the Apocalypse, 435.
Baptism in the primitive Church, 374.
Barnabas, sent to Antioch, 78; seeks Paul, 112; his difference with Paul, 116, 143; at the Council of Jerusalem, 133.
Bartholomew and Nathaniel in Arabia, 208.
Berea, 157.
Bishop, the word, in Epistles, 347; St. Jerome's account of, 348; pagan usage of, 348.
Burrhus, the prefect, of Rome, 198.
Caiaphas, a leader of the Sadducean party in Jerusalem, 33.
Calumnies brought against early Christians, 225.
Cerinthus, his doctrine, 473.
Christians, the name, 79.
Christian Church, its basis, 24; its double vocation, 25. See Primitive Church.
Christian doctrine in primitive Church; in first period of apostolic age, not systematic, 48; in second period of apostolic age, 233; were there two contradictory systems of, 233; Baur's theory of, 234; divergencies of sacred writers concerning, not radical nor irreconcilable, 237; unity of, in diversity, 239; the three types of, in the second period of the apostolic age, 240; as taught by James, 241; as taught by Paul, 254.
Christian life, the, in the primitive Church, 38; in relation to politics and art, 382; in relation to question of Church and State, 384; as an imitation of Christ, 386; its active labor, 386; its asceticism, 387; in relation to the family, 388; in relation to slavery, 391; its charity, 393; its relations with the world, 395; blemishes and beauty of, 395.
Christianity, its relations with Judaism, 94, 137, 409; how regarded by paganism, 223; Jews and pagans prepared for, 270.
Chronology of the Acts, the, Note B, 484.
Church-members, admission of, into primitive Church, 49, 336.
Circumcision declared not obligatory on Gentile converts by Paul, 125.
Citizenship, the rights of, claimed by Paul, 155.
Colosse, Church at, founded by Epaphras, 148; heresy in, 327.
Community of goods in early Church, 53.
Conversion of Paul, discrepancies in narrative of, considered, 107 n.
Corinth, 162; epistle to Church at, 176; second epistle to Church at, 180; the four parties in Church at, 311.
Cornelius, 79.
Corruption of mankind, as taught by Paul, 257.
Council of Jerusalem, the, questions before, 125; its public and private conferences, 126; its decision as to Paul's apostleship, 130; its decision as to admission of Gentiles into the Church, 131; essentially democratic, 131; its breadth of spirit, 133; its decrees, how regarded by the ancient Church, 138; its non-solution of the great problems of the primitive Church, 139, Note E, 490.
Crete, date of Paul's visit to, 175 n.; heresy of Church at, 3I7.
Damascus, Christianity in, 76; Paul's journey to, 108.
Deacons in primitive Church, 55, 354.
Deaconesses, 355.
Demetrius, 177.
Demiurge, the, 473.
Demoniacal possession, its prevalence at momentous epochs, 152.
Democratic constitution of primitive Church, 476. See Hierarchical Theory.
Diana, temple of, at Ephesus, 170; the silver shrines of, 177.
Discipline in primitive Church, 344.
Diversity of opinion as to theology of the apostolic age, Note K, 499.
Docetism, 471.
Domitian, and the grandchildren of Jude, 465; his persecutions and blasphemous pretensions, 466.
Dositheus, a false Messiah, 67.
Dualism of Paul, 287; in Crete, Colosse, and Ephesus, 317; its effects, 321.
Ebionitism, its germ in the apostolic age, 298; its obscure commencement, 414.
Ecclesiastical organization of primitive Church, 331; its unity, 334; in relation to the constitution of Churches, 336; absence of sacerdotal order in, 345; its relation to that of the Jewish synagogue, 346; its simple mechanism, 346; its development, 354; how far a pattern for later ages, 360; causes which strengthened it, 475.
Elders of primitive Church, their functions, 83, 351; their appointment to office, 356.
Election, Paul on, 264; John on, 459.
Eleusinian mysteries, the, 158.
Elymas, 117.
Epaphras, or Epaphroditus, 147.
Ephesus, 169; the temple of Diana at, 170; Exorcists at, 172; Paul's fighting with beasts at, 178; epistle to the Church at, 193; John's residence at, 423.
Episcopate, imaginary recognition of, in Church at Jerusalem, 9o, 4I0 n. See Hierarchical Theory.
Eternal Sonship of Christ, as taught by Paul, 271; doctrine not contradicted by use of word πρωτότοκος, 271 n.
Ethiopian Eunuch, the, 74.
Eutychus, 182.
Faith, its relation to works, according to James, 243; Paul's teaching on justification by, 279.
Felix, the Procurator, 191.
Festus, 194.
Free grace, Paul's doctrine of, 262.
Funerals in primitive Church, 381.
Galatians, their origin and character, 148; epistle to, 169; Judaizing teachers among the, 267.
Gallio, 165.
Gamaliel, 33; his intervention in the Sanhedrim, 40.
Gamaliel, Paul's teacher, 99.
Gentiles, Christian, how regarded by primitive Church, 125, 137; problem concerning, not solved by Council of Jerusalem, 139; gradually reconciled to Christians of Jewish origin, 237.
Gifts, the, of primitive Church, 338.
Gnosticism, in primitive Church, 326.
Gospel according to Mark, the origin of, 219; its character and style, 252.
Gospel according to Matthew, the, written in Hebrew, 220, 252.
Gospel according to Luke, the, indications in, of the mind of Paul, 292.
Gospel, the fourth, 235.
Gospels, the first three, 216, 219.
Greek paganism and Christianity, 162.
Greek poets quoted by Paul, 99.
Hebrews, the epistle to the, author of, 169, Note J, 498; probable design of, 232; its relation to Pauline thought, 292; traces in, of Judaism of Alexandria, 293.
Hellenist Jews, 54, 55.
Heresy, symptoms of, in early Church, 297; of Ephesian and Colossian Churches, 327.
Herod Agrippa, 87, 88, 196.
Hierapolis, 148.
Hierarchical theory of Church government referred to, 35, 50, 56, 71, 76, 85, 89, 110, 131, 132, 140, 164, 205, 211, 214, 333, 343, 348, 359, 476.
Humanity of Christ, as taught by Paul, 273.
Imputed righteousness, James's recognition of, 243 n.; Paul's doctrine of, 256.
Individuality, the basis of the Church, 24; preserved by the sacred writers, 238, 251, 390.
James, the son of Alphæus, his mission in Egypt, 208.
James and Jude, their epistles, Note H, 496.
James, the Lord's brother, distinguished from James, son of Alphaeus, 90 n; his position in the Church at Jerusalem, 90, 299; his character and history, 91, 206; in the Council of Jerusalem, 132, 134; his death, 231; his views of Christian truth, 237; his epistle, 241; not the mere representative of the school of Judaizing Christians, 242; his silence on the death, resurrection, and miracles of Christ, 245; the Churches he had in view in his epistle, 246.
James, son of Zebedee, the first apostle-martyr, 87.
Jerusalem, the city of, its destruction, 399; immediate occasion of the siege of, 400; terrible features of siege of, 402; hostile factions within, during siege of, 403; famine in, during siege of, 404; close of drama, 405; the burning of the temple of, 405; consequences to Christian Church of destruction of, 406, et seq.
Jerusalem, the Christian Church of, James's influence in, 91, 299; as the early religious center of Christian Church, 93; appealed to by Church at Antioch, 128; feeling of, toward Paul, 299; character and tendencies of members of, 300. See Council.
Jesus Christ, His purpose, 23; His redeeming work, according to Paul, 271; His eternal Sonship, 271; His relations to the race, 273.
John, St., his paramount influence in third period of apostolic
age, 415; his natural disposition, 415; his vocation, 415; his method, 416; not
the type of feminine gentleness, 417; his ardor, 417; his early life and preparation
for his work, 418; his first religious impressions, 418; his call, 418; his view
of Christ's doctrine-compared with that of other disciples, 419; his association
with Peter, 420; his residence in Jerusalem, and supposed journeys to Rome and the
country of the Parthians, 420; his temporary obscurity, 420; his view of Christ's
doctrine and work, 421; his contact with philosophic culture, 422; his residence
at Ephesus, 423; his sphere of
Judaizing teachers, in Galatian Church, 304; among the Philippians, 306; among the Thessalonians, 307; among the Romans, 308; among the Corinthians, 309; their real influence upon primitive Church, 316.
Judaizing tendency in primitive Church, its development, 298; among Galatians and others, 303 et seq.
Judas Thaddeus, in Mesopotamia, 208.
Jude, brother of our Lord, his work, 206.
Laodicea, 148; epistle to Church at,193.
Laying on of hands, 59, 357.
Literature of the subject of the volume, Note A, 48I.
Lord's Supper, the, celebration of, in primitive Church, 52, 377; grossly misrepresented by enemies of Christianity, 226.
Luke, the physician, his history, 151; his gospel, 292.
Lydia, 152.
Lysias, the tribune at Jerusalem, 187.
Macedonia, the appeal from, to Paul, 149.
Magicians, their influence in first days of Christianity, 66.
Mark, his gospel, 219, 252. See Gospel.
Mark, John, companion of Paul, 116, 143.
Matthew, in Arabia, 208.
Matthias, in Ethiopia, 208.
Miracles, distinguished from magic, 172; influence of on the spread
of Christianity, 43.
Missions, character of, undertaken by Paul, 203.
Missions of primitive Church, part taken in, by the several apostles, 204 et seq.; value of traditions concerning the, 207; extreme eastern point of the, 208; mode of evangelization adopted in the, 216.
Moral affinity, its influence on the apprehension of religious truth, 421.
Nathanael and Bartholomew in Arabia, 208.
Nero, 200; as a representative of paganism, 221; his part in persecution of Christian Church, 224; his mingled cruelty and buffoonery, 229; his persecution confined to Rome, 229.
Nicholas, the Deacon, 57; heresy attributed to, 473.
Octavia Poppæa, 200.
Offices in primitive Church, the, 343.
Onesimus, 194.
Origin of evil, the, Paul's teaching upon, 261.
Original sin, Paul's teaching upon, 262.
Paganism, of Greece and Christianity, 162; of Rome and Christianity, 221.
Palestine, Christian Churches of, persecution of, 230; development of Judaistic tendencies in, 299; how affected by the fall of Jerusalem, 406.
Pantheism, as taught by Simon Magus, 320.
Paul, St., his great natural qualities, 95; his testimony to Christianity,
96; characteristics of his reasonings, 96; considered as a reformer, 97; preparation
for his work, 97; early training, 98; early religious development, 1o; unlike the
Pharisees condemned by Christ, 102; dramatic form of some of his arguments, 103;
contact with Stephen, 105; preparatory period before his conversion, 106; miraculous
circumstances attending his conversion, 1o6; discrepancies in narratives of his
conversion, 107 n.; his conversion not completed on the way to Damascus,
109; his residence in Arabia, 110; visits Jerusalem, 111; commanded to preach to
the Gentiles, 111; his work in Jerusalem and at Antioch with Barnabas, 112; commencement
of his apostolic work, 112; his claim to the apostolate, 1 12; how he obtained knowledge
of the divine history of salvation, 115; his first missionary journey, 116;
his change of name, 118 n.; at Antioch in Pisidia, 118; his first proclamation
of salvation by faith alone, 120; at Iconium, 121; at Lystra, 121; end of first
missionary journey, 123; his apostleship discussed at the conference in Jerusalem,
125; his defense of his apostleship, 129; in the Council of
Pentecost, the day of, 28; miracle of, Note D, 489. See Spirit.
Persecution of the Christian Church, first outbreak of the, 37; officially commenced, 221; determining cause of, under Nero, 224; in Rome by Nero, 228; impression produced on the Church by the first, 229; in Palestine, 230.
Peter, St., his influence in the primitive Church, 33; his history as a disciple, 33; his disposition, 33; his alleged primacy, 34; before the Sanhedrim, after Pentecost, 38; as the first apologist of the Church, 44; on faith in Christ, 47; not first bishop of Antioch, 77; and Cornelius, 79; and the Christians at Jerusalem, 83; his deliverance from prison, 88; tradition of visit to Rome disproved, 89; his part in Council of Jerusalem, 132; his dispute with Paul at Antioch, 138; his secondary part in history of Church after Council of Jerusalem, 210; his relations with Paul, 210; his work, 210; his residence at Babylon, 210; his alleged residence at Rome, 211; occasion and characteristics of his epistle, 211, 247; his Christian maturity, 212; did he go from Babylon to Rome? 213; his death, 214; his share in the gospel of St. Mark, 219; particulars of his death and legend relating thereto, 230; his mode of regarding Christian truth, 241; his conception of the nature and work of Christ compared with that of St. Paul, 249; on faith, 250; on election, 251; influenced by St. Paul, 251; authenticity of the second epistle bearing his name, Note I, 497.
Pharisaism, the spirit of, indestructible, 127.
Philemon, the epistle to, 193.
Philip, the apostle, his sphere of evangelistic work, 207.
Philip, the deacon, 71; and the Ethiopian eunuch, 74.
Philippi, its history and government, 151; Paul's arrival at, 152; the Church at, 155, 306.
Prayer, resorted to by Church in persecution, 41.
Preaching, meaning of word in New Testament, 2I7.
Predestination, Paul's teaching upon, 264.
Primitive Church, the, its peculiar mission, 25; its peculiar
gifts, 26; union of human and divine elements in, 27; three periods of its history,
27; its rupture with Judaism, 32; its rapid increase, 35; first persecution of,
37; opposed by ridicule, calumny, and prejudice, 42; miracles in, 42; not to be
regarded as a Jewish sect, 46; its faith in Christ, 47; its doctrine not systematic,
48; its expectation of Christ's return, 48; absence of fixed ecclesiastical organization
in, 48; influence of apostles in, 49; admission into, 51; discipline of, 51; worship
of, 51; community of goods in, 53; jealousy about distribution of alms in, 54; diaconate
of the, 55, 354;
Priscilla and Aquila, 163, 389; at Ephesus, 167; instruct Apollos, 168.
Prophesying in primitive Church, 341.
Prophets in primitive Church, 86.
Proselytes of the Gate, 135.
Redemption, Paul's teaching upon, 271; judicial theory of, 276, 277 n.
Resurrection, Paul on the, 285, 285 n.; of Christ, its place in apostolic preaching, 44.
Roman paganism and Christianity, 221.
Romans, the epistle to the, 181; the ninth chapter of the epistle to the, 265.
Sabbath, the, under the Christian dispensation, 364; the Lord's day not put in its place, 367. See Paul and Primitive Church.
Sacraments, the Christian, in primitive Church, 373 et seq.
Sadducean spirit, the, essentially persecuting, 37.
Samaria, its people, 64; the Gospel introduced into, 71; the Christian converts in, visited by Peter and John, 71; the influence of the Church in, upon Christian thought, 73.
Sanhedrim, 36; Peter before the, 38. Saul of Tarsus, 64; influence of Stephen's death upon, 63; his preparation and conversion, 95. See Paul.
Scholastic spirit, the, among the Jews, 99.
Scriptures, the holy, appealed to by Peter in proof of Christianity, 44; freedom with which quoted, 45; allegorical interpretation of, by heretics, 325; use of by Paul, 290.
Sergius Paulus, 117.
Silas, or Silvanus, 144; at Babylon with Peter, 212.
Simon Magus, 66; his system, 68, 318; his baptism, 71; his subsequent
history, 73; the first heretic, 318; his pantheism, 319; his immorality, 321.
Simon Zelotes, his sphere of evangelistic work, 208.
Socrates before Athenian judges compared with Christians before the Sanhedrim, 39.
Solitude as a preparation for great service, 110.
Spirit, the Holy, progressive action of, 26; on the day of Pentecost, 28; and the gift of tongues, 30; sometimes given before baptism, 51; often given to new converts without their concurrence, 72; never does violence to human freedom, 81.
Spiritual crisis, times of, 101.
Stephen, his natural qualities, 57; his apology, 59; his death, 62, et seq.
Stephanus, Crispus, and Gaius, 164.
Sword, the, not to be appealed to by the persecuted, 40.
Synagogue, rulers of the, 84.
Systems of theology, the product of post-apostolic times, 239.
Tarsus, the schools of, 98.
Teaching, the gift of, in primitive Church, 343.
Theosophy of the East, the attempt to combine Christianity with the, 318.
Thessalonica, 155; epistle to Church at, 165.
Thomas, in Parthia, 208. Thorn in the flesh, the, of Paul, 145.
Timothy, his history and character, 146; Paul's first epistle to, 175; second epistle to, 201.
Titus, with Paul at Jerusalem, 128; Paul's epistle to, 175.
Tongues, the gift of, 30;. error of Irenæus and Tertullian with respect to, 31; in the second period of the apostolic age, 340.
Tübingen School, the hypothesis of, concerning doctrinal differences in the primitive Church, untenable, 236.
Vow of Paul, the disputations respecting, 167 n.
Worship in primitive Church, marked by differences between Jewish and Gentile converts, 361; places in which offered, 363; times for, observed, 364; lack of liturgical element in, 368; rules for, given by Paul, 368; essential acts of, 369; teaching in connection with, 370; prayer, 371; singing, 372; the sacraments, 373; indications of a transformation in the style of, 468.
ABDIAS. On the apostolic age, 204, n.
AMBROSE. On teaching and baptizing by the laity of the early Church, 345.
ARISTOPHANES. On the use of the word "bishop," 349, n.
AUGUSTI. On the places of Christian worship in the first century, 364; oh holy days in the early Church, 367, 368 n.; on the liturgical element in early Christian worship, 371 n; on the hymns of the early Church, 373 n.; on Christian baptism, 376 n.; on the celebration of the Lord's Supper, 377
AUGUSTINE, ST. The prayer of Stephen, 63; on the decrees of the Council of Jerusalem, 138; on the ministry of James at Jerusalem, 350; on the Law of Christ, 386; on the laying on of hands, 358; on the Apostle John, 422; on tradition that John did not die, 429. 34.
BARONIUS. On Peter's preaching at Rome immediately after his deliverance from prison, 89; on the division of the world into fields of labor by the Apostles, 89; on the date of the Epistle of Peter, 212 n.; on Peter's sojourn at Rome, 213.
BAUMGARTEN. On the relation of the apostolate of the Twelve to the activity of the Christian Church, 78 n.; on the decree of the Council of Jerusalem, 137; on Paul's vow, and its fulfillment at Corinth, 167 n.; on Paul's judgment of the Jews as a nation, 199.
BAUR, F. On the part of the Pharisees in the rupture between the early Church and Judaism, 32; on the number of Christian converts on and immediately after the day of Pentecost, 35; on the identity of primitive Christianity with Judaism, 48; on Stephen's apology, 59; on the different accounts of Paul's conversion, 107 n.; on Paul's recovery from blindness at Damascus, 110 n.; on Paul's first missionary journey, 123 n.; on Paul's farewell to the elders of the Church at Ephesus, 184 n.; on the part of Judaizing Christians in the persecution and arrest of Paul at Jerusalem, 186, 300; on the radical opposition of parties in the Church of the apostolic age, 234; on the founding of the Church at Rome, 308; on the party of Cephas at Corinth, 314; on the first heretics as referred to in the pastoral epistles, 326; on the doctrine of John, 442 n.
BAUR, W. On the hymns of the early Church, 373 n.
BEDE. On the gift of tongues at Pentecost, 32.
BINGHAM. On the constitution of the Christian Churches of the first century, 331 n.; on the episcopacy of the Apostles, 351; on the worship and Christian life of the first century, 36; on the existence of "sanctuaries" in the first century, 364; on the liturgical use of the Lord's Prayer in the first century, 371; on the use of the formula of Christian baptism, 375 n.
BLEEK. On Apollos, I69 n.; on marks of the Pauline school of thought in the Epistle to the Hebrews, 292; on the apostasies which threatened the Church of Jerusalem, 302 n. BLUMHART. On the fragment of the preaching of Peter quoted by Cyprian, 214 n.
BUNSEN. On the authenticity of fragments of a book conmposed by Simon Magus, or one of his disciples, 69 n.; on the constitution of the Churches of the first century, 331 n.; on the visible Church as recognized by the Apostles, 336 n.; on the development of Church organization, 352 n.; on fragments of ancient liturgies, 372 n.; on the significance of Christian baptism in the apostolic age, 373; on the eucharistic prayers of the early Church, 378 n.; on the angels of the seven Churches, 476 n.
CALLIXTUS, N. On the fields of mission-labor occupied by the Apostles, 204 et seq.; on John's residence at Jerusalem, 420.
CALVIN. On the worship of the unknown God at Athens, I6i; on the elders of the primitive Church, 351 n.
CHRYSOSTOM. On the deacons of the primitive Church, 56 n.; on the labors of St. Paul, 203; on the name and office of Bishop, 348; on John the Apostle, 417.
CICERO. On the city of Antioch, 76; on the city of Athens, I58; on the light in which religion was regarded by Pagan antiquity, 222.
CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA. On the daughters of Philip the Apostle, 208 n.; on Peter's words to his wife on going to death, 230; on John's labors and his visitation of the Churches, 424; on John and the robber, 424 et seq.; on John's official position in the Church, 476.
CLEMENT OF ROME. His supposed allusion to Peter's sojourn at Rome, 213; on the organization of the Christian Church, 409.
CRUICE, ABBE. On the early influence of the Church at Rome, 309;
CYPRIAN. His quotation of a fragment of Peter's preaching, 214; on the laying on of hands, 358.
DENYS. On Peter's sojourn at Rome, 214.
DE WETTE. On the Jews who put forward Alexander at Ephesus, 179; on the party "of Christ" at Corinth, 314; on "the Light which lighteth every man," 448.
DIOGENES LAERTIUS. On the altar "to the Unknown God," 260.
DIUS CASSIUS. On appeals to the emperors of Rome, 195 n.; on the martyrdom of Flavius Clement and his wife, 467.
EPIPHANES. On the religious tendencies of the Samaritans, 66; on Dositheus, the pseudo Messiah, 67; on the position of James in the Church at Jerusalem, 350; on the Christians at Jerusalem at the time of its destruction, 406; on John and Ebion, 429 n.
EUSEBIUS. On the Ethiopian eunuch, 74, 75; on the tradition that
Peter founded and governed the Church at Antioch, 77; on the martyrdom of James,
son of Zebedee, 88; on the position of James "the Just" in the Church at Jerusalem,
90, 350; on John, surnamed Mark, I16; on the birthplace and nationality of Luke,
151; on the mission work of the Apostles, 204 n., 215, 218; on the labors
of Andrew, brother of Peter, in Scythia, Thrace, and Macedonia, 207; on the daughters
of Philip the Apostle, 207 n.; on the death and tomb of Philip, 209; on the
legend of the correspondence between Jesus Christ and the King of Edessa, 217; on
the part of Peter in the production of the Gospel according to Mark, 219, 220; on
the language of the Gospel according to Matthew,
FABRICIUS. On the mission work of the Apostles, 204, 215.
FROMMAN. On the doctrine of John, 442.
GIESELER. On the confusion in the minds of the Roman Emperors as to the distinction between Christians and Jews, 465.
GRIMM, JOSEPH. On the Samaritans, 66, 74; on the system of Simon Magus, 69 n.
GUERICKE. On Christian worship in apostolic times, 361.
HARNACK. On the worship of the primitive Church, 52, 361, 369; on the first Christians and the Sabbath, 53; on teaching and baptism by the laity in the primitive Church, 345; on the Lord's Supper as observed in the primitive Church, 378.
HERODOTUS. On the city of Corinth, 162.
HEGESIPPUS (in Eusebius.) On the position of James in the Church at Jerusalem, 350; on the answer of certain Christians in Palestine to the question of Domitian about the kingdom of Christ, 407; on the alleged second Council of Jerusalem, 410 n.
HIPPOLYTUS. On the history and doctrines of Simon Magus, 73 et seq.; on the heresies of the second century, 328; on the Nicolaitans and Cerinthus, 473 n., 474 n.; on the Quatordecimonians, 479.
IRENÆUS. On the gift of tongues, 31; on Nicholas, the Deacon, 57 n., 473; on Simon Magus, 68, 70 n., 320; on the place of Peter's death, 214; on the commencement of Ebionitism, 414; on the relations between Peter and John, 420; on John's residence at Ephesus, 423; on the heresy of Cerinthus, 474.
JEROME. On the Ethiopian eunuch, 75; on the founding and government of the Church at Antioch by Peter, 77; on the change of the name of Saul, 18 n.; on the labors of Paul, 203; on the administration of the sacrament by the laity, 345; on the name and office of bishop, 348; on the pontificate of John, 426 n.; on the Gospel according to John, 429.
JOSEPHUS. On the day of Pentecost, 28 n.; on the magistrate
who arrested Peter and John after the healing of the lame man, 37; on
JUSTIN MARTYR. On Simon Magus, 68; on the rulers of synagogues, 84 n.; on the calumnies against the first Christians, 226; on the Sabbath in the primitive Church, 368; on a Nazarite sect in the second century, 413.
LANGE. On the Council of Jerusalem, 137; on the city of Corinth, 163; on the vows fulfilled by Paul at Corinth, I67 n.; on the mission-work of the Apostles, 209, 210.
LECHLER. On the influence of the fall of Jerusalem upon the relations between Judæo-Christianity and the Church, 412 n.; on the doctrinal basis of the Apocalypse and the fourth Gospel, 431 n.
LEO. On division of the world into fields of labor by the Apostles, 89.
LUCKE. On John the Apostle, 415 n.; on the alleged journeys of John to Rome, and into the country of the Parthians, 420; on John the Presbyter, 423 n.; on the persecution suffered by John, 427 n.; on the posthumous influence of John, 430; on the "Light which lighteth every man," 448.
MARCELLINUS, A. On a pagan custom illustrative of the account given in Acts of the silver-shrine makers at Ephesus, 171 n.
MINUTIUS FELIX. On the practices of the primitive Christians, illustrative of the calumnies against them, 226, 227.
MONOD, A. On John the Apostle, 415 n.
NEANDER. On the community of goods in the primitive Church, 53
n.; on the gift of prophecy in the Christian Church, 87; on the name Saul,
98; on the decree of the Council of Jerusalem, 137; on the vow which Paul fulfilled
at Corinth, 167 n.; on the case of Onesimus, 194 n.; on the spiritual
position of Paul when he wrote the Epistle to the Philippians, 201 in.; on
the death of James, the brother of the Lord, 232 n.; on his doctrine, 241
n., 246; on the gift of teaching in the primitive Church, 351 nt.; on
OLSHAUSEN. On the Jewish exorcists at Ephesus, 172 n. ORIGEN.
On the creed of the Samaritans, 66 n.; on Dositheus the
OROSIUS. On the persecution by Nero, 229 n.
PAPIAS (in Eusebius.) On Peter having an interpreter at Rome, 32 ln.; on the preference of the primitive Church for the living to the written word, 218; on the origin of the Gospel according to Mark, 219; on the origin and language of the Gospel according to Matthew, 220; on John the Apostle, and John the Presbyter, 423 n.
PAUSANIAS. On the altar to the unknown God at Athens, I60; on the Temple of Diana at Ephesus, 170.
PHILOSTRATUS. On the school of learning at Tarsus, 98 n.; on the devoutness of the people at Athens, 158, 160; on the inhabitants of Ephesus, 171.
PLINY. On the name of Candace, 74 n.; on the blasphemous assumptions of Domitian, 466 n.
REUSS. On the place where the Epistles to the Thessalonians were
written, 165; on the date of Paul's voyage to Crete, 176 n.; on the period
in which the Epistles to the Ephesians and Colossians were written, 194 n.;
on "the engrafted word,"
RITSCHL. On the identity of primitive Christianity with Judaism, 48 n.; on the constitution of the Churches in the apostolic age, 331 n.; on the right of all believers to teach in the public worship of the primitive Church, 344 n.; on the supposed sacerdotal order in the Churches founded by Paul, 345 n.; on the laying on of hands, 357 n.; on the alleged second Council of Jerusalem, 411 n.; on the influence of the Fall of Jerusalem on the relations between Judæo-Christianity and the Church, 411 n.; on the angels of the Seven Churches, 476 n.
ROUTH (passages given in Routh's "Reliquæ Sacræ.) On the calumnies
against the primitive Church, 227; on the circumstances leading to the death of
James, brother of the Lord, 231 n.; on the
ROTHE. On the constitution of the Churches of the first century, 331 n.; on the words "elder" and "bishop," 348 n.; on the "elders" of the primitive Church, 351 n.; on the deaconesses of the primitive Church, 355 n.; on the laying on of hands, especially in the case of Timothy, 357 n.; on the alleged second Council of Jerusalem, 410 n.; on the angels of the Seven Churches, 476 n.
SCHAFF. On the deaconesses of primitive Church, 355 n.; on the Sabbath in primitive Church, 366; on the Lord's Supper in primitive Church, 379; on the Christian life of primitive Church, 381 n.
SCHENKEL. On the party "of Christ" at Corinth, 314 n.
SCHERER. On the apostolate in general, and that of St. Paul, 114 n.
SCHMID. On the types of doctrine presented in the second period
of the apostolic age, 240 n.; on the passage
SCHWEGLER. On the identity of primitive Christianity with Judaism, 48 n., 92 1n.; on the party "of Christ" at Corinth, 314 n.; on the first heretics as referred to in the pastoral epistles, 326 zn.; on the cessation of the Jewish sacrifices, 411 n.; on the alleged confirmation by John of Judeo-Christianity, 426 n.; on the doctrine of John, 442 n.
SENECA. On the disposition of Gallio, the proconsul, 165 7n.
SOCRATES (Ecclesiastical Historian.) On the apostolic teaching concerning holy days, 367.
STRABO. On the school of learning at Tarsus, 98.
SUETONIUS. On the banishment of the Jews from Rome by Claudius, 223; on the blasphemous claims of Domitian, 467 n.
TACITUS. On the agitation of men's minds in the reign of Claudius, I50; on the character of Felix, the Procurator, 191; on the influence of the prefect Burrhus on Nero, I98 n.; on the character of Nero, 201; on the renewal of the Haruspices under Claudius, 222; on Nero's calumnies against the Christians, 225, 226, 228; on Nero's persecution of the Christians, 229; on the miseries of the Jews after the destruction of Jerusalem, 406 n.
TERTULLIAN. On the gift of tongues in the primitive Church, 31I on the imprisonment of Paul and Silas at Philippi, 154; on Peter's residence at Rome, 214; on the supposed letter from Jesus Christ to Tiberius, 224 n.; on the calumnies against the early Christians, 227; on the laying on of hands in baptism, 358 n.; on baptism for the dead, 375 n.; on the martyrdom of John, 427 n.
THEODORET. On the missions of the primitive Church, 216; on the identity of elders and bishops, 348 n.
THILO. On the mission-work of the Apostles, 205 n.
THIERSCH. On the place where the disciples were on the day of Pentecost, 28 n.; on the observance of the Sabbath by the first Christians, 53 n.; on the office of the first deacons, 57 n.; on the apology of Stephen, 62 n.; on the basis of the sacerdotal system, 85 n.; on the preaching of Peter at Rome, 89 n.; on the advice of James concerning Christian converts from paganism, 135 n.; on the monopoly of the gift of teaching claimed for ecclesiastics, 343 n.; on the supposed second Council of Jerusalem, 410 n.; on the angels of the Seven Churches, 476 n.
THOLUCK. On John the Apostle, 415 n.; on "the Light which lighteth every man," 448 n.
TISCHENDORF. (Edition of Apocryphal Acts of Apostles and Gospels.) On the mission-work of the Apostles, 205 n.; on the spring of water said to have gushed from the tomb of John, 430 n.
TILLEMONT, L. DE. On Peter's journey to Rome, 89 n.; on Ananias of Damascus, 110 n.; on Christ's preference for John, 419 n.; on John's supposed journeys to Rome, and into the country of the Parthians, 420 n.; on the tradition that John did not die, 429 n.
VITRINGA. On the difference between the first deacons and those mentioned by St. Paul, 56 n.; on the elders of synagogues, 84 n.; on the rulers of the synagogues, 84 n.; on the constitution of the Churches in apostolic times, 331 n.; on the right of every pious Jew to teach in the synagogue, 343 n.; on the laying on of hands in the appointment of rabbis, 358; on Christian worship in apostolic times, 361 n.; on the church being the house of God, 364; on the parallel between the prayers of the Church and those of the Synagogue, 371 n.; on excommunication from the synagogue, 379.
WIESELER. On Luke's designation of Sergius Paulus, 117 n.; on the date of Paul's voyage to Crete, and of the epistle to Timothy, and that to Titus, 175.; on Paul's payment of the charges of some who had taken the Nazaritish vow, I85 n.; on torture under the Roman law, 189 n.; on the jurisdiction of the Jews in religious matters when under the Romans, 190; on military captivity under the Romans, I93; on the Epistle to Philemon, 194 n.; on the praetorian guard, I97 n.; on the death of Burrhus, and on his successors, 201 n.
WINER. On the brethren of the Lord, go n.
XENOPHON. On a custom illustrative of the usage of the primitive Church in the celebration of the Agapæ, 377 n.
XIPHILINI. See Dius Cassius, 467.
Genesis
Leviticus
Numbers
Deuteronomy
1 Samuel
1 Kings
2 Kings
Ezra
Job
Psalms
Isaiah
Matthew
2 3:17 4:18-22 4:21 9:6 9:18 9:28 10:2 10:32 10:37 11:27 13:41 15:20-28 16:16 16:17 16:18 17:1 19:15 19:30 20:16 21:2 21:5 21:7 21:22 23:37 24:1-2 24:5 24:11 26:37 28:20
Mark
Luke
1:1 1:1-3 3 5:1-11 8:3 9:49-50 9:54 10:1 10:38-42 13:13 15:11-32
John
1 1:1 1:3 1:4 1:5 1:6-8 1:9 1:10 1:11 1:13 1:14 1:14 1:17 1:18 1:18 1:18 1:18 1:29 1:37 1:44 2:18 3:8 3:14 3:16 3:17 3:18-19 3:20-21 3:36 4:9 4:22 4:22 4:24 4:24 4:25 5:21 5:24-30 5:26 5:28 5:40 5:43 5:46 6:29 6:39 6:44 6:48 6:50 6:53 6:53 7:5 7:17 7:28 7:37 7:39 8:23-49 8:42 8:44 8:44 8:48 10:4 10:11 10:18 10:27 10:30 10:37-38 11:24 11:41-42 12:24 12:26 12:36 14:3 14:6 14:7-9 14:26 14:30 15 15:1-4 15:26 16 16:7 16:13 16:13 17:21 19:25 19:26 19:27 19:27 20:8 20:22 21:15 21:22
Acts
1:13-14 1:15 1:21-22 1:21-22 2:4 2:4 2:10 2:14 2:15 2:17 2:17-20 2:22 2:25-34 2:32 2:33-34 2:38 2:38 2:38 2:39 2:42 2:42 2:46 2:46 3:1 3:15 3:15 3:18 3:19-20 4:4 4:7 4:8 4:8-10 4:10 4:11-12 4:12 4:16 4:18 4:24 4:24-30 4:26 4:34-35 4:35 5:1-11 5:4 5:15-16 5:17 5:26 5:30 5:31 5:37 5:39 6:2 6:3 6:5-6 6:6 6:13-14 7:14 7:26-29 7:29-35 7:35 7:46-50 8:2 8:3 8:10 8:13-17 8:14 8:25 8:37 8:38 9:1 9:2 9:7 9:7 9:7 9:7 9:18 9:30 9:35-36 9:36 10:1 10:3-8 10:10-17 10:44 10:44 10:47 10:47 10:47 10:48 11:3 11:17 11:19 11:19-20 11:20 11:26 11:28 11:28 11:28 11:30 11:30 12:1-2 12:12 12:12 12:12 12:23 13:2-3 13:2-3 13:3 13:5 13:9 13:12 13:23 13:25 13:32-33 13:38-42 13:44-45 13:46-48 14:3-6 14:11 14:11-12 14:11-14 14:14 14:15 14:17-18 14:23 14:23 14:27 15:1 15:1 15:1-41 15:6 15:7 15:7 15:7-12 15:12 15:15-18 15:21 15:21 15:22 15:28 15:29 16:10 16:14-15 16:15 16:17 16:20 16:21 16:32 16:33 16:40 17:7 17:7 17:12 17:23 17:26 17:26 17:27 17:28 17:28 18:2 18:2 18:3 18:7 18:8 18:8 18:17 18:18 18:24 18:26 18:28 19:9 19:22 19:27 19:29 20:1 20:4 20:4 20:5 20:7 20:7 20:17 20:17 20:19 20:23-31 20:28 20:28 20:29 20:31-33 20:35 21:17-18 21:19-20 21:20 21:38 22:2 22:3 22:3 22:9 22:9 22:9 22:17-22 23:3 23:5 24:23 25:1 25:8 25:19 26:4-23 26:14 26:14 26:16-18 26:24 26:28 27:1 27:5 28:25-27 28:25-28
Romans
1:3-4 1:6 1:7 1:17 1:18-21 1:23-32 2:5 2:5 2:13 2:14 2:14-15 2:14-15 2:23 3:2 3:10 3:21 3:23 3:23 3:24 3:24 3:25 4:15-22 4:25 4:25 5:12 5:12-15 5:12-19 5:15 5:18 6:4 6:4 6:5 6:23 7:6 7:8 7:8-9 7:9-10 7:12 7:14-24 7:23 7:23 8:3 8:3 8:3 8:3 8:9 8:12 8:15 8:17 8:22 8:26 8:29 8:32 9:5 9:11 9:16 10:1 10:17 10:17 11:13 11:15 11:23-25 11:31 12:1 12:5 12:7 12:7 12:7 12:28 13:2-4 14:6 14:9 14:10 15:15-16 15:16 15:19 15:24 15:24 15:24 15:25-27 15:31 15:32 15:32 16:1 16:4-5 16:5 16:14 16:15 16:16 16:17 16:21 16:23
1 Corinthians
1:2 1:12 1:12 1:13 1:14 1:16 1:18 1:20 1:22 1:26 1:31 2:1 2:2 2:3 2:4 2:4 2:14 2:14-15 3:3 3:4-5 3:16 3:16-17 4:14-15 4:18-20 4:20 5:1 5:2 5:4 5:7 5:9 5:10 5:11-13 6:1 6:1 6:6 6:9 6:15-20 6:19 7:1-5 7:1-40 7:5 7:7-8 7:10 7:13-16 7:17 7:21 7:26 7:32-35 7:39 7:40 8:6 8:10-13 9:1 9:5 9:11 9:12 9:13 9:14 9:27 10:4 10:16 10:16-17 10:23-24 10:27 10:27 11:4-5 11:18-22 11:19 11:20-22 11:20-22 11:23 11:25 11:30-31 12:4 12:8 12:9 12:9-10 12:10 12:12 12:28 12:28 12:28 12:28 13:1 14:2 14:7 14:16 14:25 14:26 14:26-35 14:29 14:34 14:34 15:8 15:9 15:12-38 15:14 15:21 15:24-26 15:28 15:28 15:29 15:32 15:33 15:42-45 15:45 16:2 16:2 16:3 16:5-6 16:7 16:9 16:10-11 16:15 16:15 16:19 16:20
2 Corinthians
1:5 2:6 2:12-13 3:3-7 3:6 3:6-9 3:9 4:4 4:5 4:12-13 5:7 5:10 5:14 5:15 5:19 5:21 6:16 6:16 7:5 8:1-2 8:9 8:18-24 8:23 10:10 11:5 11:5 11:21-28 11:23-28 11:23-30 12:18 13:1 13:4 13:10 13:12
Galatians
1:1 1:1 1:6 1:11-13 1:12 1:14 1:16-24 1:17 1:19 1:19 1:21 2:1 2:1 2:1-11 2:1-21 2:2 2:2 2:4 2:6 2:6 2:6-9 2:7-8 2:8 2:8 2:9 2:9 2:9 2:9 2:11-15 2:16 2:20 3:1 3:10 3:10 3:13 3:16 3:16-27 3:17 3:19-23 3:24 4:1-6 4:4 4:6 4:9-11 4:14-15 4:15 4:22-26 5:2-3 5:10-21 5:15 6:12 6:12 6:13 6:16 6:17 6:18
Ephesians
1:1 1:4 1:9 1:9-10 1:20-21 1:23 1:23 2:1 2:2 2:5 2:8 2:18 2:20 2:20-22 2:22 3:4 3:6 3:10 3:15 3:17-18 3:18 4:1 4:4-5 4:11 4:15-16 5:1 5:1-2 5:1-4 5:2 5:14 5:19 5:23 5:23-27 5:24 5:24 6:6 6:9 6:10 6:12
Philippians
1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:13 1:13 1:14 1:15-16 1:16 1:18 1:19-26 1:20-25 1:21 1:27-28 2:2-3 2:5 2:6-7 2:8 2:8 2:11 2:13 2:17 2:20 2:22 2:25 3:2 3:6 3:18 4:2 4:6 4:14-16 4:16
Colossians
1:7 1:15-16 1:15-17 1:16 1:20 1:20 2:9 2:10 2:15 2:15 2:16 2:17 2:18 2:20-23 2:21 3:1 3:5-9 3:11 3:11 3:12-13 3:14 3:16 4:10 4:12 4:14 4:15 4:15 4:16 4:16 4:16 4:17
1 Thessalonians
1:5 1:6 1:7 1:10 2:2 2:7 2:13 2:19 3:2 3:6 4:1 4:11 4:13-16 4:14-18 4:15 4:16 5:20 5:26 5:27 5:27
2 Thessalonians
1:4 1:9 2:2 2:3-8 2:5 3:6 3:10 3:10 3:13 3:14
1 Timothy
1:4 1:4 1:7 1:11 1:15 1:19 1:20 2:1-2 2:15 3:1 3:1 3:1 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:8 3:13 3:16 4:3 4:3 4:4 4:6 4:7 4:8 4:13 4:14 4:14 4:14 5:9 5:17 5:17 5:23 6:12 6:20 6:21
2 Timothy
1:1-4 1:13 1:15 2:2 2:3 2:17 2:17 2:18 3:1-2 3:1-5 3:13 3:14-15 3:16 4:1 4:1 4:3 4:4 4:5 4:6 4:8 4:10 4:10 4:11 4:11 4:13 4:16 4:16 4:17 4:20 4:20
Titus
1:3 1:5 1:5 1:7 1:9 1:9 1:9 1:10 1:10 1:11 1:12 1:12 1:14 1:14 2:13 3:12 3:13
Philemon
1:2 1:2 1:10 1:12 1:23 1:24 1:24
Hebrews
1:3 1:3-4 1:5 1:7 1:8 2:1-3 2:3 2:17 3:6 3:6 6:4 6:4-8 7:24 7:26-28 7:27 8:10-11 9:20-26 9:26 9:26 10:1 10:25 11:1 12:24 12:29 13:17 13:23 13:24
James
1:1 1:9-11 1:17 1:17-18 1:21 1:21 1:21 1:22 1:22 1:25 2:1 2:1-7 2:2 2:8 2:11 2:13 2:16-18 2:17 2:18 2:19 2:22 2:23 3:15-16 4:5 4:11 4:15 5:1-7 5:7 5:14 5:14-15
1 Peter
1:1 1:2 1:4 1:4 1:5 1:7 1:10-12 1:11 1:11 1:11 1:13-18 1:19 2:5 2:5-7 2:9 2:9-10 2:17 2:21 2:24 3:15 3:18 3:19-20 3:21 4:1 4:1 4:11 4:12 5:1-2 5:2-3 5:12 5:13 5:13 5:14
2 Peter
1 John
1:5 1:7 2:1 2:2 2:4 2:5-10 2:13 2:16-17 2:27 2:27-28 3:1 3:2 3:3 3:4 3:5 3:9 3:10-15 3:16 3:20 4:1-2 4:2-3 4:3 4:7 4:8 4:16 5:1 5:5 5:6 5:6 5:16-17 5:20 5:20
2 John
3 John
Revelation
1:3 1:5 1:9 1:10 1:13 1:17 1:18 2:4 2:4-6 2:8 2:9 2:9-10 2:13-15 2:14 2:14 2:14-20 2:15 2:15 2:19 2:24 3:2 3:8 3:9 3:15 3:15 3:17 3:19 3:21 5:5 5:9 5:9 5:13 6:10 6:12 7:1-17 7:5-9 7:13-17 7:14 7:14-15 8:1 11:1-2 11:9-11 11:11 12:1-17 12:1-16:21 12:5 12:6 12:7 12:12 12:13 12:15 13:1-14 13:3 13:3 13:3 13:4 13:7 13:10 13:11 14:3 14:3-4 14:8 14:10-11 14:34 16:15 17:12-15 18:1-24 18:20-24 19:1-21 19:13 19:20 20:1-6 20:1-15 20:11 20:12-15 21:1-27 21:1-22:21 22:1-21 22:10 22:13 22:16
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 104 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 407 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536