vol. i. 229: there is a remarkable Christian application of this in a
dialogue between a Christian and a Jew who was curious as to the Trinity,
Hieronymi Theologi Græci, _Dialogus de sancta Trinitate_, in Gallandi,
_Vet. Patr. Bibl._ vol. vii., reprinted in Migne, _Patrol. Gr._ vol. xl.
845.
[569] διῃρημένον ἐκ τῆς οὐσίας τοῦ πατρὸς, Athan. _ad Antioch._, 3, vol.
i. 616.
[570] Cf. Harnack, i. 191, 219, 476 sqq., 580. In the Valentinian
system, the spiritual existence which Achamoth brought forth was of
the same essence as herself, Iren. 1. 5. 1. In that of Basilides, the
three-fold sonship which was in the seed which God made, was κατὰ πάντα
τῷ οὐκ ὄντι θεῷ ὁμοούσιος, Hippolytus, 7. 22: so as regards τὸ ἓν in
Epiphanes (Valentinian?), ap. Iren. 1. 11. 3 (Hipp. 6. 38), it συνυπάρχει
τῇ μονότητι as δύναμις ὁμοούσιος αὐτῇ. Cf. _Clem. Hom._ 20.7; Iren.
ap. Harn. 481, “ejusdem substantiæ;” Tert. _Apol._ 21, “ex unitate
substantiæ;” Harn. 488, 491.
[571] It was expressly rejected at the Council of Antioch in connection
with Paul of Samosata; and Basil, _Ep._ 9, says that Dionysius of
Alexandria gave it up because of its use by the Sabellians: cf. _Ep._ 52
(300).
[572] It is found, e.g., in Athan. _ad Afr. episc._ 4, vol. i. 714, ἡ γὰρ
ὑπόστασις καὶ ἡ οὐσία ὕπαρξίς ἐστι. The distinction is found in Stoical
writers, e.g. Chrysippus says that the present time ὑπάρχει, the past and
future ὑφίστανται. Diels, _Doxogr. Græci._ 462. 1.
[573] Diels, _ibid._ 372; cf. 363, where it is contrasted with φαντασία.
[574] Sext. Empir. p. 192, § 226.
[575] Diels, 318.
[576] Ib. 469. 20: so κατὰ τὴν τῆς οὐσίας ὑπόστασιν, p. 469, 26.
[577] Epict. 1. 14. 2.
[578] Ath. _Dial. de Trin._ 2: ἡ οὐσία τὴν κοινότητα σημαίνει, while
ὑπόστασις ἰδιότητα ἔχει ἥτις οὔκ ἐστι κοινὴ τῶν τῆς αὐτῆς οὐσίας
ὑποστάσεων. He elsewhere identifies it with πρόσωπον in _Ath. et Cyril.
in Expos. orthod. fid._: ὑπόστασις ἐστιν οὐσία μετά τινων ἰδιωμάτων
ἀριθμῷ τῶν ὁμοειδῶν διαφέρουσα· τουτέστι πρόσωπον ὁμοούσιον. Still the
identity of the two terms was allowed even after they were tending
to be differentiated: cf. Athan. _ad Afr. Ep._ 4, vol. i. 714, ἡ δὲ
ὑπόστασις οὐσία ἐστι καὶ οὐδὲν ἄλλο σημαινόμενον ἔχει ἢ αὐτὸ τὸ ὄν. So
_ad Antioch._, 6. (i. 617), he tolerates the view that there was only one
ὑπόστασις in the Godhead, on the ground that ὑπόστασις might be regarded
as synonymous with οὐσία. Cf. objection at Council of Sardica, against
three ὑποστάσεις in the Godhead, instead of one ὑπόστασις, of Father, Son
and Spirit.
[579] Cf. Harn. _Dogm._ 693.
[580] ἰδίαν ὑπόστασιν, Sext. Empir. _de Pyrrh._ 2. 219.
[581] Ed. Kühn, 5. 662.
[582] _Ep._ 210; Harn. _Dogm._ 693.
[583] Cf. Quintilian, who ascribes it in turn to Plautus and to Sergius
Flavius, 2. 14. 2; 3. 6. 23; 8. 3. 33: Seneca, _Ep._ 58. 6, to Cicero,
and more recently Fabianus. For _substantia_, cf. Quint. 7. 2. 5, “nam et
substantia ejus sub oculos cadit.”
[584] Cf. Harnack, 489, 543; for its use by Sabellius, &c., ib. 679; also
Orig. _de princ._ 1. 2. 8.
[585] E.g. _Ath. et Cyr. in Expos. orth. fid._, ὑπόστασις = πρόσωπον
ὁμοούσιον. In Epictetus, 1. 2. 7, 14, 28, it denotes individuality of
character, that which distinguishes one man from another.
[586] In Ath. _ad. Ant._ 7. 25, ἡ τὰ ὅλα διοικοῦσα φύσις is distinguished
from οὐσία τῶν ὅλων: so 7. 75, ἡ τοῦ ὅλου φύσις ἐπὶ τὴν κοσμοποιΐαν
ώρμησεν. For φύσις in Philo, see _Leg. All._ 3. 30 (i. 105).
[587] Leontius of Byzantium says that both οὐσία and φύσις = εἶδος, _Pat.
Græc._ lxxxvi. 1193.
[588] E.g. _adv. Prax._ 2 (E. T. ii. 337), where he makes the
distinctions within the œconomia of the Godhead to be _gradu_, _forma_,
_specie_, with a unity of _substantia_, _status_, _potestas_; cf. Bp.
Kaye, in E. T. ii. p. 407.
[589] _De Sententia Dionys._ 18, quoted in _Dict. of Christ. Biog._ under
Homoousios.
[590] Thus the Roman Dionysius, in a fragment against the Sabellians
(Routh, _Reliq._ iii. pp. 373, 374), objects to the division of the
μοναρχία into τρεῖς δυνάμεις τινὰς καὶ μεμερισμένας _ὑποστάσεις_ καὶ
θειότητας τρεῖς.
[591] ἀγνοούμενον ὑπὸ τῶν λαῶν, Athan. _de Synod._ 8 (i. 577).
[592] [As this summing up never underwent the author’s final revision,
and the notes which follow stand in his MS. parallel with the
corresponding portion of the Lecture as originally delivered, it has been
thought well to place them here.—ED.]
(1) The tendency to abstract has combined with the tendency to regard
matter as evil or impure, in the production of a tendency to form rather
a negative than a positive conception of God. The majority of formularies
define God by negative terms, and yet they have claimed for conceptions
which are negative a positive value.
(2) We owe to Greek philosophy—to the hypothesis of the chasm between
spirit and matter—the tendency to interpose powers between the Creator
and His creation. It may be held that the attempt to solve the insoluble
problem, how God, who is pure spirit, made and sustains us, has darkened
the relations which it has attempted to explain by introducing abstract
metaphysical conceptions.
[593] It may be noted that even in the later Greek philosophy there was
a view, apparently identical with that of Bishop Berkeley, that matter
or substance merely represented the sum of the qualities. Origen, _de
Princ._ 4. 1. 34.
[594] These Lectures are the history of a genesis: it would otherwise
have been interesting to show in how many points theories which have
been thought out in modern times revive theories of the remote past of
Christian antiquity.
[595] For what follows, reference in general may be made to Keil,
_Attische Culte aus Inschriften, Philologus_, Bd. xxiii. 212-259,
592-622: and Weingarten, _Histor. Zeitschrift_, Bd. xlv. 1881, p. 441
sqq. as well as to the authorities cited in the notes.
[596] Foucart, _Le culte de Pluton dans la religion éleusinienne,
Bulletin de Correspondance Hellénique_, 1883, pp. 401 sqq.
[597] The successive stages or acts of initiation are variously described
and enumerated, but there were at least four: κάθαρσις—the preparatory
purification; σύστασις—the initiatory rites and sacrifices; τελετὴ
or μύησις—the prior initiation; and ἐποπτεία, the higher or greater
initiation, which admitted to the παράδοσις τῶν ἱερῶν, or holiest act of
the ritual. Cf. Lobeck, _Aglaoph._ pp. 39 ff.
[598] An interesting inscription has recently come to light, which shows
that the public slaves of the city were initiated at the public expense.
Foucart, l.c. p. 394.
[599] Cf. Origen, _c. Cels._ 3. 59.
[600] Philostratus, _Vita Apoll._ 4. 18, p. 138.
[601] _Alex._ 38.
[602] Cf. Lobeck, _Aglaoph._ pp. 39 ff. and 89 ff.; Welcker, _Griech.
Götterl._ ii. 530-532. “The first and most important condition required
of those who would enter the temple at Lindus is that they be pure in
heart and not conscious of any crime.”—Professor W. M. Ramsay in _Ency.
Brit._ s. v. “Mysteries.” For purification before admission to the
worship of a temple, see, in _C.I.A._ iii. Pt. i. 73. 74, instances of
regulation prescribed at the temple of Mên Tyrannus at Laurium in Attica,
e.g. μηθένα ἀκάθαρτον προσάγειν, various periods of purification being
specified. Cf. Reinach, _Traité d’Épigr. Grecque_, p. 133, on the inscr.
of Andania in Messenia, B.C. 91; the mysteries of the Cabiri in Le Bas
and Foucart, _Inscr. du Peloponnèse_, ii. § 5, p. 161; and Sauppe, _die
Mysterieninschr. von Andania_.
[603] Tertullian, _de Baptismo_, 5, “Nam et sacris quibusdam per lavacrum
initiantur ... ipsos etiam deos suos lavationibus efferunt;” Clem. Alex.
_Strom._ Bk. 5. 4: “The mysteries are not exhibited incontinently to all,
but only after certain purifications and previous instructions.” _Ibid._
5. 11: “It is not without reason that in the mysteries that obtain among
the Greeks, _lustrations hold the first place_, as also the laver among
the Barbarians. After these are the minor mysteries, which have some
foundation of instruction and of preliminary preparation for what is
to come after; and the great mysteries, in which nothing remains to be
learned of the universe, but only to contemplate and comprehend nature
and things.” We have thus a sort of baptism and catechumenate.
[604] The fast lasted nine days, and during it certain kinds of food were
wholly forbidden. Cf. Lobeck, _Aglaoph._ pp. 189-197.
[605] There was a lesser and a greater initiation: “It is a regulation
of law that those who have been admitted to the lesser should again
be initiated into the greater mysteries.” Hippol. 5, 8: see the whole
chapter, as also cc. 9, 20.
[606] Cf. Clem. Alex. _Protrept._ 12: “O truly sacred mysteries! O
stainless light! My way is lighted with torches and I survey the
heavens and God: I am become holy whilst I am initiated. The Lord is
the hierophant, and seals while illuminating him who is initiated,” &c.
Ib. 2: “Their (Demeter’s and Proserpine’s) wanderings, and seizure, and
grief, Eleusis celebrates by torchlight processions;” and again p. 32. So
Ælius Aristid. i. p. 454 (ed. Canter), τὰς φωσφόρους νύκτας.
[607] “I have fasted, I have drunk the cup,” &c. Clem. Alex. _Protrept._
2.
[608] Cf. Ælius Aristid. i. 454, on the burning of the temple at Eleusis.
The gain of the festival was not for this life only, but that hereafter
they would not lie in darkness and mire like the uninitiated.
[609] Fragm. ap. Stob. _Florileg._ 120. Lenormant, _Cont. Rev._ Sept.
1880, p. 430.
[610] Synes. _Orat._ p. 48 (ed. Petav.), οὐ μαθεῖν τι δεῖν ἀλλὰ παθεῖν
καὶ διατεθῆναι γενομένους δηλονότι ἐπιτηδείους. But the μυσταγωγοὶ
possibly gave some private instruction to the groups of μύσται who were
committed to them.
[611] Cf. Lenormant, _Cont. Rev._ Sept. 1880, p. 414 sq.
[612] Soph. _frag._ 719, ed. Dind.: so in effect Pindar, _frag. thren._
8; Cic. _Legg._ 2. 14. 36; Plato, _Gorg._ p. 493 B, _Phædo._ 69 C (the
lot of the uninitiated). They were bound to make their life on earth
correspond to their initiation; see Lenormant, _ut sup._ p. 429 sqq. In
later times it was supposed actually to make them better; Sopatros in
Walz, _Rhet. Gr._ viii. 114.
[613] See Garrucci, _Les Mystères du Syncretisme Phrygien dans les
Catacombes Romaines de Prætextat_, Paris, 1854.
[614] There was a further and larger process before a man was τέλειος.
Tert. _adv. Valent._ c. 1, says that it took five years to become τέλειος.
[615] The most elaborate account is that of the Arval feast at Rome: cf.
Henzen, _Acta fratrum Arvalium_.
[616] μύσται is used of members of a religious association at Teos
(Inscr. in _Bullet. de Corresp. Hellénique_, 1880, p. 164), and of the
Roman Monarchians in Epiph. 55. 8; cf. Harnack, _Dogm._ 628.
[617] Clem. Alex. _Protrep._ 2; Hippol. 1, _proœm._ Cf. Philo, _de
sacrif._ 12 (ii. 260), τί γὰρ εἰ καλὰ ταῦτ’ ἐστὶν ὦ μύσται κ.τ.λ.
[618] They also had the same sanction—the fear of _future punishments_,
cf. Celsus in Orig. 8. 48. Origen does not controvert this statement,
but appeals to the greater moral effect of Christianity as an argument
for its truth. They possibly also communicated divine knowledge. There
is an inscription of Dionysiac artists at Nysa, of the time of the
Antonines, in honour of one who was θεολόγος of the temples at Pergamos,
as θαυμαστὸν θεολόγον and τῶν ἀπορρήτων μύστην. _Bull. de Corr. Hellén._
1885, p. 124, 1. 4; cf. Porphyry in Eusebius, _Præp. Ev._ 5. 14.
[619] This revival had many forms, cf. Harnack, _Dogm._ p. 101.
[620] Similar practices existed in the Church and in the new religions
which were growing up. Justin Martyr speaks of the way in which, under
the inspiration of demons, the supper had been imitated in the Mithraic
mysteries: ὅπερ καὶ ἐν τοῖς τοῦ Μίθρα μυστηρίοις παρέδωκαν γίνεσθαι
μιμησάμενοι οἱ πονηροὶ δαίμονες: _Apol._ 1. 66. Tertullian points to the
fact as an instance of the power of the devil (_de præsc. hær._ 40): “qui
ipsas quoque res sacramentorum divinorum idolorum mysteriis æmulatur.” He
specifies, inter alia, “expositionem delictorum de lavacro repromittit
... celebrat et panis oblationem.” Celsus, too, speaks of the μυστήρια
and the τελεταὶ of Mithras and others: Orig. _c. Cels._ 6. 22.
[621] The objection which Celsus makes (_c. Cels._ 1. 1; Keim, p. 3) to
the secrecy of the Christian associations would hardly have held good
in the apostolic age. Origen admits (_c. Cels._ 1. 7) that there are
exoteric and esoteric doctrines in Christianity, and justifies it by
(1) the philosophies, (2) the mysteries. On the rise of this conception
of Christian teaching as something to be hidden from the mass, cf. the
Valentinians in Tert. _c. Valent._ 1, where there is a direct parallel
drawn between them and the mysteries: also the distinction of men into
two classes—πνευματικοὶ and ψυχικοὶ or ὑλικοί—among the Gnostics: Harn.
_Dogm._ 222, cf. Hipp. 1, _proœm._, p. 4, who condemns τὰ ἀπόρρητα
μυστήρια of the heretics, adding, καὶ τότε δοκιμάσαντες δέσμιον εἶναι
τῆς ἁμαρτίας μυοῦσι τὸ τέλειον τῶν κακῶν παραδιδόντες, ὅρκοις δήσαντες
μήτε ἐξειπεῖν μήτε τῷ τυχόντι μεταδοῦναι κ.τ.λ. Yet this very secrecy
was naturalized in the Church. Cf. Cyril Hier. _Catech._ vi. 30;
Aug. in _Psalm_ ciii., _Hom._ xcvi. in _Joan._; Theodoret, _Quæst._
xv. _in Num._, and _Dial._ ii. (_Inconfusus_); Chry. _Hom._ xix. _in
Matt._ Sozomen’s (1. 20. 3) reason for not giving the Nicene Creed is
significant alike as regards motive and language: εὐσεβῶν δὲ φίλων καὶ
τὰ τοιαῦτα ἐπιστημόνων, οἷα δὲ μύσταις καὶ μυσταγωγοῖς μόνοις δέον τάδε
λέγειν καὶ ἀκούειν ὑφηγουμένων, ἐπῄνεσα τὴν βουλήν· οὐ γὰρ ἀπεικὸς καὶ
τῶν ἀμυήτων τινὰς τῇδε τῇ βίβλῳ ἐντυχεῖν.
[622] Acts ii, 38, 41; viii. 12, 13, 36, 38; x. 47, 48; xvi. 15, 33;
xviii. 8; xix. 5.
[623] c. 7.
[624] _Apol._ 1. 61; cf. Otto, vol. i. p. 146, n. 14; Engelhardt, p. 102.
[625] Clem. Alex. _Pædag._ 1. 6; Can. Laod. 47, Bruns, p. 78; Greg. Naz.
_Orat._ xl. pp. 638, 639. Hence οἱ φωτιζόμενοι = those being prepared for
baptism, οἱ φωτισθέντες = the baptized. Cf. Cyr. Hier. _Catech._ 13. 21,
p. 193 _et passim_.
[626] Lobeck, _Aglaoph._ p. 36, cf. 31 ff.
[627] _Apol._ 8: talia initiatus et consignatus = μεμυημένος καὶ
ἐσφραγίσμενος. See Otto, vol. i. p. 141; cf. _ad Valent._ 1.
[628] For the seal in baptism, cf. Clem. Al. _Strom._ 2. 3; _Quis
dives_, 42, ap. Euseb. _Hist._ 3. 23; Euseb. _Vita Const._ 1. 4.
62; Cyr. Hier. _Catech._ 5; Greg. Naz. _Orat._ 40, p. 639; Orig.
_c. Cels._ 6. 27. For the use of imagery and the terms relating to
sealing—illumination—initiation—from the mysteries, Clem. Al. _Protrep._
12. The effect of baptism is illumination, perfection, _Pædag._ 1. 6;
hence sins before and after baptism, i.e. enlightenment, are different,
_Strom._ 2. 13. Early instances of σφραγὶς are collected in Gebhardt on 2
Clem. pp. 168, 169; cf. also Cyr. Hier. _Catech._ 18. 33, p. 301.
[629] Greg. Naz. _Orat._ 39, p. 632; Chrys. _Hom._ 85 _in Joan._ xix. 34;
Sozomen, ii. 8, 6.
[630] Sozomen, i. 3. 5.
[631] Dion. Areop. _Eccles. Hierar._ 3, p. 242.
[632] Clem. Alex. _Pædag._ 1. 6, p. 93; Athan. _Cont. Ar._ 3, p. 413 C.;
Greg. Naz. _Orat._ 40, p. 648; Dion. Areop. _Eccles. Hier._ 3, 242.
[633] Chrys. _Hom._ 99, vol. v.; Theod. _in Cantic._ 1.
[634] Dion. Areop. _Eccles. Hier._ 1. 1; _Mys. Theol._ 1. 1.
[635] Chrys. _Hom._ 1 _in Act._ p. 615; _Hom._ 21 _ad popul. Antioch_;
Sozomen, ii. 17. 9.
[636] Sozomen, i. 3. 5; ii. 7. 8; iv. 20. 3; vi. 38. 15; vii 8. 7, _et
passim_. These examples do not by any means exhaust or even adequately
represent the obligations in the sphere of language, and of the ideas
it at once denotes and connotes, which the ecclesiastical theory and
practice of baptism lies under to the mysteries; but they may help to
indicate the degree and nature of the obligation.
[637] For the sphere of the influence of the mysteries on the language
and imagery of the New Testament, see 1 Cor. ii. 6 ff.; cf. Heb. vi. 4.
[638] _Apost. Const._ 8. 32. Cf. passages quoted from Clem. Alex. and
others, _supra_, p. 287, note 1; p. 295, notes 2 and 5. See Bingham, vol.
iii. pp. 443-446.
[639] _De præsc. hær._ 41. Cf. Epiphan. 41. 3; _Apost. Const._ 8. 12.
[640] ἃ οὐδὲ ἐποπτεύειν ἔξεστι τοῖς ἀμυήτοις, _de Spir. Sanct._ 27;
cf. Orig. _c. Cels._ 3. 59 _ad fin._ and 60, e.g. “then and not before
do we invite them to participation in our mysteries,” and “initiating
those already purified into the sacred mysteries.” Cf. _Dict. Christian
Antiquities_, s. v. _Disciplina Arcani_.
[641] See p. 293, note 1; also _Dict. Christian Antiquities_, s. vv.
_Baptism_, _Catechumens_, especially p. 318, and _Creed_.
[642] _Histoire de l’église d’Alexandrie_, p. 12: Paris, 1677.
[643] _De baptismo Christi_, 4. ii. 374, τοῦ Χριστοῦ παρόντος, τῶν
ἀγγέλων παρεστώτων, τῆς φρικτῆς ταύτης τραπέζης προκειμένης, τῶν ἀδελφῶν
σου μυσταγωγουμένων ἔτι. Cyril, _Præfatio ad Catech._ 15.
[644] Mabillon. _Com. præv. ad. ord. Rom._; _Museum Ital._ II. xcix.
[645] It was one of the points to which the Greeks objected in the
discussions of the ninth century.
[646] c. 9.
[647] Bk. ii. 57, p. 87; cf. viii. 5, p. 239, lines 18, 19.
[648] viii. 11. 12, p. 248.
[649] Origen, _c. Cels._ 3. 59. Persons who have partaken of the
Eucharist are οἱ τελεσθέντες (Chrys. _de compunct. ad Demet._ 1. 6. i. p.
132), and οἱ μεμυημένοι (id. _Hom._ vi. _de beat. Phil._ c. 3. i. p. 498,
and in _Ep. ad Hebr._ cap. x., _Hom._ xvii. 4, vol. xii. 169). Degrees
and distinctions came to be recognized within the circle of the very
initiated themselves, _Apost. Const._ vii. 44, viii. 13.
[650] The earlier offerings were those of Irenæus, 4. 17. 5, where he
speaks of Christ “suis discipulis dans consilium, primitias Deo offerre
ex suis creaturis;” and again the Church offers “primitias suorum munerum
in Novo Testamento ei qui alimenta nobis præstat.” The table in the
heathen temple was important; upon it were placed the offerings: Th.
Homolle in _Bulletin de Corresp. Hellén._ 1881, p. 118. For the Eucharist
itself as a mystery, cf. φρικωδεστάτη τελετὴ, Chrys. _de sacerdot._ 3. 4,
vol. i. 382. He argues for silence on the ground that they are mysteries,
_de bapt. Christ._ 4. ii. 375. Cf. Greg. Naz. _Orat._ 44, p. 713; Conc.
Laod. 7, Bruns, p. 74.
[651] Found in Chrys. e.g. _Hom. in Ep._ ii. _ad Corinth._ v. c. 3, vol.
x. 470: τοιαύτῃ τὸ θυσιαστήριον ἐκεῖνο φοινίσσεται σφαγῇ.
[652] _Ad Ephes._ 5; see Lightfoot’s note. Cf. _Trall._ 7; _Philad._ 4;
_Mag._ 7; _Rom._ 2.
[653] _Ap. Const._ ii. 57, p. 88. But see for θυσιαστήριον in a highly
figurative sense, iii. 6, iv. 3.
[654] _H. E._ x. 4, 44.
[655] Isid. Pelus. _Epist._ 3. 340, p. 390, προσῆλθε μὲν τῷ σεπτῷ
θυσιαστηρίῳ τῶν θείων μυστηρίων μεταληψόμενος; also 4. 181, p. 516, τὰ
θεῖα μῂ διδόσθαι μυστήρια. Cf. Chrys. _de comp. ad Demet._ 1. 6, vol. i.
p. 131; Theodoret, _dial._ 2, vol. iv. 125. There was a sacred formula.
Basil says that no saint has written down the formula of consecration:
_de Spir. Sancto_, 66, vol. iv. pp. 54, 55. After saying that some
doctrines and usages of the Church have come down in writing, τὰ δὲ ἐκ
τῆς τῶν ἀποστόλων παραδόσεως διαδοθέντα ἡμῖν ἐν μυστηρίῳ παρεδεξάμεθα, he
instances the words of the Eucharistic invocation as among the later; τὰ
τῆς ἐπικλήσεως ῥήματα ἐπὶ τῇ ἀναδείξει τοῦ ἄρτου τῆς ἐυχαριστίας καὶ τοῦ
ποτηρίου τῆς ἐυλογίας τίς τῶν ἁγίων ἐγγράφως ἡμῖν καταλέλοιπεν.
[656] In Dionysius Areop. (s. v. ἱεράρχης, ed. Corderius, i. 839),
the bishops are τελεσταί, ἱεροτελεσταί, τελεστάρχαι, μυσταγωγοί,
τελεστουργοί, τελεστικοί; the priests are φωτιστικοί; the deacons,
καθαρτικοί; the Eucharist is ἱεροτελεστικωτάτη (c. 4). The deacon,
ἀποκαθαίρει τοὺς ἀτελέστους (c. 5, § 3, p. 233), i.e. dips them in the
water; the priest, φωταγωγεῖ τοὺς καθαρθέντας, i.e. leads the baptized
by the hand into the church; the bishop, ἀποτελειοῖ τοὺς τῷ θείῳ φωτὶ
κεκοινωνηκότας.
[657] Dion. Areop. _Eccles. Hier._ c. 3, par. 1, §§ 1, 2, pp. 187, 188.
[658] For in the decree mentioned in a previous note (p. 292, n. 2),
among other honours to T. Ælius Alcibiades, he is to be πρῶτον τοῖς
διπτύχοις ἐνγραφόμενον.
[659] Cf. for the use of lights in worship, the money accounts, from a
Berlin papyrus, of the temple of Jupiter Capitolinus at Arsinoê, A.D.
215, in Hermes, Bd. xx. p. 430.
[660] _Adv. Valent._ 1. Hippolytus (1, _proœm_; 5. 23, 24) says the
heretics had mysteries which they disclosed to the initiated only after
long preparation, and with an oath not to divulge them: so the Naassenes,
5. 8, and the Peratæ, 5. 17 (ad fin.), whose mysteries “are delivered
in silence.” The Justinians had an oath of secrecy before proceeding to
behold “what eye hath not seen” and “drinking from the living water,” 5.
27.
[661] E.g. Marcus, in connection with initiation into the higher
mysteries Hipp. 6. 41, and the Elkasaites as cleansing from gross sin, 9.
15.
[662] Eus. _H.E._ iv. 7.
[663] Hipp. 5. 27, of the Justinians. Cf. Hilgenfeld, _Ketzergesch._ p.
270.
[664] For the Eastern custom, see Cyril Hier. _Catech. Myst._ ii. 3,
4, p. 312: the candidate is anointed all over _before_ baptism with
exorcised oil, which, by invocation of God and prayer, purifies from the
burning traces of sin, but also puts to flight the invisible powers of
the evil one. Cf. _Apost. Const._ vii. 22, 41, iii. 15, 16; the _Coptic
Constitutions_, c. 46 (ed. Tattam), cf. Boetticher’s Gr. translation in
Bunsen’s _Anal. Ante-Nic._ ii 467; _Clem. Recog._ 3. 67; Chrys. _Hom._
6. 4, _in Ep. ad Col._ xi. 342, ἀλείφεται ὥσπερ οἱ ἀθληταὶ εἰς στάδιον
ἐμβησόμενοι, here also before baptism and all over; Dionys. Areop.
_Eccles. Hier._ 2. 7; Basil, _de Spir. Sanct._ 66, vol. iv. 55. For
earlier Western as distinct from Eastern thought on the subject, cf.
Tert. _de bapt._ 6 and 7; _de resurr. carnis._ 8; _adv. Marc._ i. 14;
Cyprian, _Ep._ 70. For the later Western usage, introduced from the East,
see _Conc. Rom._ 402, c. 8, ed. Bruns. pt. ii. 278; _Ordo_ 6, _ad fac.
Catech._ in Martène, _de ant. eccl. rit._ i. p. 17; Theodulfus Aurel. _de
ord. bapt._ 10; unction of the region of the heart before and behind,
symbolizing the Holy Spirit’s unction with a view to both prosperity and
adversity (Sirmond, vol. ii. 686); Isid. Hisp. _de off. eccl._ 2. 21;
Catechumens _exorcizantur, sales accipiunt et unguntur_, the salt being
made _ut eorum gustu condimentum sapientiæ percipiant, neque desipiant a
sapore Christi_ (Migne, lxxxiii. col. 814, 815); Cæs. Arelat. _serm._ 22.
[665] _Apol._ 1. 66.
[666] ap. Hipp. 6. 39.
[667] Tert. _ad Scap._ 2, holds that sacrifice may consist of simple
prayer.
[668] Cf. Celsus’ idea of faith: Orig. _c. Cels._ 3. 39; Keim, p. 39.
[669] Philo’s view of faith is well expressed in two striking passages,
_Quis rer. div. Heres_, 18, i. 485; and _de Abrah._ 46, ii. 39.
[670] Cf. “He that cometh to God must believe that He is, and that He is
a rewarder of them that seek Him,” Heb. xi. 6; and “He that is of God
heareth God’s words,” John viii. 47.
[671] It was one of Celsus’ objections to Christianity that its preachers
laid more stress on belief than on the intellectual grounds of belief:
Orig. _c. Cels._ 1. 9. Origen’s answer, which is characteristic rather
of his own time than expressive of the belief of the apostolic age, is
that this was necessary for the mass of men, who have no leisure or
inclination for deep investigation (1. 10), and in order not to leave men
altogether without help (1. 12).
[672] E.g. Rom. vi. 17, εἰς ὃν παρεδόθητε τύπον διδαχῆς; 2 John, 9, ἐν
τῇ διδαχῇ τοῦ Χριστοῦ; 2 Tim. i. 13, ὑποτύπωσιν ἔχε ὑγιαινόντων λόγων ὧν
παρ’ ἐμοῦ ἤκουσας; 1 Tim. vi. 12, ὡμολόγησας τὴν καλὴν ὁμολογίαν; Jude 3,
ἡ ἅπαξ παραδοθεῖσα τοῖς ἁγίοις πίστις. Polycrates, ap. Eus. _H. E._ 5.
24, ὁ κανὼν τῆς πίστεως: see passages collected in Gebhardt and Harnack’s
_Patres Apost._ Bd. i. th. 2 (Barnabas), p. 133.
[673] Cf. Schmid, _Dogmeng._ p. 14, Das Taufsymbol.
[674] c. 7. 4.
[675] See Acts viii. 16, xix. 5, with which compare Rom. vi. 1-11, Acts
xxii. 16. _Didaché_, 9. 5, οἱ βαπτισθέντες εἰς ὄνομα Κυρίου; and _Apost.
Const._ Bk. ii. 7, p. 20, οἱ βαπτισθέντες εἰς τὸν θάνατον τοῦ Κυρίου
Ἰησοῦ οὐκ ὀφείλουσιν ἁμαρτάνειν οἱ τοιοῦτοι· ὡς γὰρ οἱ ἀποθανόντες
ἀνενέργητοι πρὸς ἁμαρτίαν ὑπάρχουσιν, οὕτως καὶ οἱ συναποθανόντες τῷ
Χριστῷ ἄπρακτοι πρὸς ἁμαρτίαν; cf. 148, 7, and elsewhere, in composite
form. Against this Cyprian wrote, in _Ep._ 73, _ad Jubaianum_, 16-18; cf.
Harnack, _Dogmeng._ 176.