THE THEORY OF THE CHURCH, AND THE HISTORY OF ITS PERVERSION.
CONCLUDING OBSERVATIONS.
"I am the good Shepherd," said Jesus: "the good Shepherd giveth his life
_for the sheep_.... My sheep _hear my voice_, and I know them, and
they follow me: and I give unto them eternal life, and _they shall never
perish_." [636:1] The sheep here spoken of are the true children of God.
They constitute that blessed community of which it is written--"Christ
loved _the Church_, and gave himself for it, that he might sanctify and
cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, that he might present
it to himself _a glorious Church_, not having _spot or wrinkle or any
such thing_, but that it should be holy and _without blemish_." [636:2]
The society thus described is, in the highest sense, "the holy Catholic
Church." Its members are to be found wherever genuine piety exists, and
they are all united to Christ by the bond of the Holy Spirit. Their
Divine Overseer has promised to be with them "alway unto the end of the
world," [636:3] to keep them "through faith unto salvation," [636:4] and
to sustain them even against the violence of "the gates of hell."
[636:5] Though they are scattered throughout different countries, and
separated by various barriers of ecclesiastical division, they have the
elements of concord. Could they be brought together, and divested of
their prejudices, and made fully acquainted with each other's
sentiments, they would speedily incorporate; for they possess "the unity
of the Spirit," [637:1] "the unity of the faith," [637:2] and "the unity
of the knowledge of the Son of God." [637:3] But these heirs of promise
cannot be distinguished by the eye of sense; their true character can be
known infallibly only to the Great Searcher of hearts; and for this,
among other reasons, the spiritual commonwealth to which they belong is
usually designated "_the Church invisible_." [637:4]
The _visible Church_ is composed, to a considerable extent, of very
different materials. It embraces the whole mixed multitude of nominal
Christians, including not a few who exhibit no evidence whatever of
vital godliness. Our Lord describes it in one of His parables when He
says--"The kingdom of heaven is like unto a net which was cast into the
sea, and gathered of every kind; which, when it was full, they drew to
shore, and sat down, and gathered the good into vessels, but cast the
bad away. So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come
forth, and sever the wicked from among the just, and shall cast them
into the furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth."
[637:5]
In the first century the profession of Christianity was perilous as well
as unpopular, so that the number of spurious disciples was comparatively
small; and so long as the brethren enjoyed the ministrations of inspired
teachers, all attempts to alienate them from each other, or to create
schisms, had little success. But still, even whilst the apostles were on
earth, some of the Churches planted and watered by themselves were
involved in error and agitated by the spirit of division. "It hath been
declared unto me of you," says Paul to the Corinthians, "that there are
contentions among you. Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am
of Paul, and I of Apollos, and I of Cephas, and I of Christ." [638:1]
The same writer had occasion to mourn over the apostasy of the Churches
of Galatia. "I marvel," said he, "that ye are so soon removed from him
that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel.... O
foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you that ye should not obey the
truth?" [638:2] The Church of Sardis in the lifetime of the Apostle John
had sunk into an equally deplorable condition, and hence he was
commissioned to declare to it--"I know thy works, that thou hast a name
that thou livest, _and art dead_." [638:3]
The circumstances which led to the organization of the Catholic system
have already been detailed, and it has been shewn that the great design
of the arrangement was to secure the visible unity of the ecclesiastical
commonwealth. The Catholic confederation was supposed to comprehend all
the faithful; and it was, no doubt, expected that, not long after its
establishment, it would have rung the death knell of schism and
sectarianism. According to its fundamental principle, whoever was not in
communion with the bishop was out of the Church. To be out of the Church
was soon considered as tantamount to be without God and without hope, so
that this test condemned all who in any way dissented from the dominant
creed as beyond the pale of salvation. Its assumptions, involving a
decision of such grave importance and of such dubious authority, were
acknowledged with some difficulty; and the question as to the extent and
character of the Church seems to have led to considerable discussion;
[639:1] but the horror of heresy which so generally prevailed
strengthened the pretensions of the hierarchy, and at length every
candidate for baptism was required to declare, as one of the articles of
his faith--"I believe in the holy Catholic Church." [639:2]
According to one interpretation the sentiment embodied in this
profession was perfectly unobjectionable. If by the holy Catholic Church
we understand the Church invisible composed of all the true children of
God, it must be conceded that every devout student of the Scriptures is
bound to express his belief in its existence and its excellence. This
Church is precious in the eyes of the Lord; it is the habitation of His
Spirit; it is the heir of His great and glorious promises. But the holy
Catholic Church, in the current ecclesiastical phraseology of the third
century, had a very different signification. It denoted the great mass
of disciples associated under the care of the Catholic bishops, as
distinguished from all the minor sects throughout the Empire which made
a profession of Christianity. A sincere and intelligent believer might
well have scrupled to give such a title to the mixed society thus
claiming its application.
It is quite true that there is no salvation out of the Church, if by the
Church is meant that elect company which Christ died to redeem and
sanctify; but the Word of God does not warrant us to assert that the
eternal well-being of man depends on his connexion with any earthly
society. Even in the days of the apostles, some who were subjected to a
sentence of excommunication were the excellent of the earth. "I wrote
unto _the Church_," says John, "but Diotrephes, who loveth to have the
pre-eminence among them, _receiveth us not_. Wherefore, if I come, I
will remember his deeds which he doeth, prating against us with
malicious words, and not content therewith, neither doth he himself
receive _the brethren_, and forbiddeth them that would, and _casteth
them out of the Church_." [640:1] This Diotrephes seems to have been
some wayward and domineering presbyter who took the lead among his
fellow-elders, and who induced them by the influence of commanding
talent, combined, it may be, with superior worldly station, to support
him in his wilfulness. [640:2] But it would be very foolish to suppose
that the brethren who were thus _cast out of the Church_ were thereby
eternally undone, for such certainly was not the judgment of the beloved
disciple. Faith in Christ, and not a relation to any visible society,
secures a title to heaven. Thousands, as well as the thief on the cross,
have been admitted into paradise who have never been baptized, [640:3]
and we might point out numberless cases in which individuals, in the
wonderful providence of God, have been led to a saving knowledge of the
truth who have never had an opportunity of joining a congregation of
Christian worshippers. But those who now assumed the name of Catholics
were continually dwelling upon the importance of a connexion with their
own association; and, assuming that they were _the Church_, they
appropriated to themselves whatever they could find in Scripture in
commendation of its excellence. The promises addressed to the Church in
the book of inspiration refer, however, not to any local and visible
community, but to the "Church of the first-born which are written in
heaven;" [641:1] and the Catholics, by misapplying them, were led to
form very extravagant notions of the advantages of the position which
they occupied. The ascription of the attributes of the Church invisible
to their own association was, in fact, the fundamental misconception on
which a vast fabric of error was erected. By reason of the indwelling of
the Spirit in all believers the Church invisible is _catholic_, or
universal, that is, it is to be found wherever vital Christianity
exists; for the same reason it is _holy_, every member of it being a
living temple of Jehovah; it is also _one_, as one Spirit animates all
the saints and unites them to God and to each other; and it is
_perpetual_, or indestructible, for the Most High has promised never to
leave Himself without witnesses among men, and all His redeemed ones
shall remain as trophies of His grace throughout all eternity. But these
attributes were represented as belonging to the Church visible, and this
radical mistake became the parent of monstrous delusions. The
ecclesiastical writers who flourished towards the end of the second and
beginning of the third century exhibit a considerable amount of
inconsistency and vacillation when they touch upon the subject; [641:2]
but, half a century afterwards, the language currently employed is much
bolder and more decided. At that time Cyprian does not hesitate to
express himself in the strongest terms of high-church exclusiveness.
"_All_," says he, "_are adversaries of the Lord and antichrist_ who
are found to have departed from the charity and unity of the Catholic
Church." [641:3] "You ought to know that the bishop is in the Church and
the Church in the bishop, and _if any be not with the bishop_, that _he
is not in the Church_." [641:4] "The house of God is one, and there
cannot be salvation for any except in the Church." [641:5] "He can no
longer have God for a Father, who has not the Church for a mother."
[642:1]
Though the Catholics were a compact body, forming the bulk of the
Christian population, their system failed to absorb all the professors
of the gospel, or perhaps even greatly to check the tendency towards
ecclesiastical separation. In their controversies with seceders and
schismatics, their own principles were more distinctly defined; and, as
they soon found that they were quite an overmatch for any individual
sect, their tone gradually became more decided and dictatorial. But the
theological position from which they started was a sophism; and, like
the movements of a traveller who has mistaken his way, every step of
their progress was an advance in a wrong direction. Some of the more
prominent errors to which their theory led may here be enumerated.
I. The theory of the Catholic Church recognized an odious ecclesiastical
monopoly. Pastors and teachers are "for the perfecting of the saints,
for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ;"
[642:2] and yet a sinner may be saved without their instrumentality. The
truth when spoken by a layman, or when read in a private chamber, may
prove quite as efficacious as when proclaimed from the pulpit of a
cathedral. That kingdom of God which "cometh not with observation" is
built up by "the Word of His grace;" [642:3] and so long as the Word
exists, and so long as the Spirit applies it to enlighten and sanctify
and comfort God's children, the Church is imperishable. The evangelical
labours of the pious master of a merchant vessel have often been blessed
abundantly; and among the tens of thousands afloat upon the broad
waters, who seldom enjoy any ecclesiastical ministrations, may be found
some of the highest types of Christian excellence. Though regularly
ordained pastors are necessary to the growth and well-being of the
Church, such facts shew that they are not essential to its existence.
But, according to the Catholic system, they are the veins and arteries
through which its very life-blood circulates. All grace belongs to the
visible society called the Catholic Church, and of this grace the
Catholic ministers have the exclusive distribution. Without their
intervention, as the dispensers of divine ordinances, no one can hope to
inherit heaven. No other ministers whatever can be instrumental in
conferring any saving benefit. Was it extraordinary that individuals who
were supposed to be entrusted with such tremendous influence soon began
to be regarded with awful reverence? If the services which they rendered
were necessary to salvation, and if these services could be performed by
none else, they were possessed of absolute authority, and it was to be
expected that they would forthwith begin to act as "lords over God's
heritage."
Under the Mosaic economy none save the descendants of a single
individual were permitted to present the sacrifices or to enter the holy
place. In the celebration of the most solemn rites of their religion the
Jewish people were kept at a mysterious distance from the presence of
the Divine Majesty, and were taught to regard the officiating ministers
as mediators between God and themselves. This arrangement was
symbolical, as all the priests were types of the Great Intercessor. But
every believer may now enjoy the nearest access to his Maker, for the
Saviour has made all His people "kings and priests unto God." [643:1]
The ministers of the gospel do not constitute a privileged fraternity
entitled by birth to exercise certain functions and to claim certain
immunities. They should be appointed _by_ the people as well as _for_
them, and no service which they perform implies that they have nearer
access to the Divine Presence than the rest of the worshippers. In the
New Testament they are never designated _priests_, [644:1] neither is
their intervention between God and the sinner described as
indispensable. But Catholicism invested them with a factitious
consequence, representing them as inheriting peculiar rights and
privileges by ecclesiastical descent from the apostles. According to
Cyprian, "Christ says to the apostles, _and thereby to all prelates who
by vicarious ordination are successors of the apostles_. 'He that
heareth you, heareth me.'" [644:2] About the commencement of the third
century the pastors of the Church began to be called priests, [644:3]
and this change in the ecclesiastical nomenclature betokens the
influence of Catholic principles on the current theology. The Jewish
sacrificial system had now ceased, and the Hebrew Christians were
perhaps disposed to transfer to their new ministers the titles of the
sons of Levi; but, had not the alteration been in accordance with the
spirit of the times, it could not have been accomplished. It was,
however, justified by Catholicism, as that system set forth the clergy
in the light of mediators between God and the people. This misconception
of the nature of the Christian ministry generated a multitude of errors.
If ministers are priests they must offer sacrifice, and must be
entrusted with the work of atonement. It is true, indeed, that the
monstrous dogma of transubstantiation was not yet broached, but it
cannot be denied that forms of expression which were exceedingly liable
to misinterpretation, now began to be adopted. Thus, the Eucharist was
styled "a sacrifice," [645:1] and the communion-table "the altar."
[645:2] At first such phraseology was not intended to be literally
understood, [645:3] but its tendency, notwithstanding, was most
pernicious, as it fostered false views of a holy ordinance, and laid the
foundation of the most senseless superstition ever imposed on human
credulity.
Every genuine pastor has a divine call to the sacred office, and no act
of man can supply the place of this spiritual vocation. God alone can
provide a true minister, [645:4] for He alone can bestow the gifts and
the graces which are required. Ordination is simply the form in which
the existing Church rulers endorse the credentials of the candidate, and
sanction his appearance in the character of an ecclesiastical
functionary. But these rulers may themselves be incompetent or profane,
so that their approval may be worthless; or, by mistake, they may permit
wolves in sheep's clothing to take charge of the flock of Christ. The
simple fact, therefore, that an individual holds a certain position in
any section of the visible Church, is no decisive evidence that he is a
true shepherd. Such, however, was not the doctrine of Catholicism.
Whoever was accredited by the existing ecclesiastical authorities was,
according to this system, the chosen of the Lord. When certain parties
who had joined Novatian were induced to retrace their steps, they made
the following penitential declaration in presence of a large
congregation assembled in the Western metropolis--"We acknowledge
Cornelius bishop of the most holy Catholic Church _chosen by God
Almighty_ and Christ our Lord." [646:1] Cyprian asserted that, as he was
bishop of Carthage, he must necessarily have a divine commission.
Nothing, indeed, can exceed the arrogance with which this imperious
prelate expressed himself when speaking of his ecclesiastical authority.
To challenge his conduct was, in his estimation, tantamount to
blasphemy; and, to dispute his prerogatives, a contempt of the Divine
Majesty. Once, in a time of persecution, he retired from Carthage, and
he was, in consequence, upbraided by some as a coward; but when a
fellow-bishop, Papianus, ventured to ask an explanation of a course of
proceeding which apparently betokened indecision, Cyprian treated the
inquiry as an insult, and poured out upon his correspondent a whole
torrent of invectives and reproaches. He is _God's bishop_, and no one
is to attempt, by the breath of suspicion, to stain the lustre of his
episcopal dignity. "I perceive by your letter," says he, "that you
believe the same things of me, and persist in what you believed.... This
is not to believe in God, this is to be a rebel against Christ and
against His gospel.... Do you suppose that the priests of God are
without His cognizance ordained in the Church? For if you believe that
those who are ordained are unworthy and incestuous, what else is it but
to believe that, not by God, or through God, are His bishops appointed
in the Church." [646:2] After indulging at great length in the language
of denunciation, he adds, in a strain of irony--"Vouchsafe at length and
deign to pronounce on us, and to confirm our episcopate by the authority
of _your_ hearing, that God and Christ may give _you_ thanks, that
through you a president and ruler has been restored as well to _their_
altar as to _their_ people." [647:1]
II. The Catholic system encouraged its adherents to cultivate very
bigoted and ungenerous sentiments. They were taught to regard themselves
as the "peculiar people," and to look on all others, however excellent,
as without claim to the title or privileges of Christians. How different
the spirit of the inspired heralds of the gospel! When Peter saw that
the Holy Ghost was poured out on men uncircumcised, he recognized the
divine intimation by acknowledging the believing Gentiles as his
brethren in Christ. Conceiving that God himself had thus settled the
question of their Church membership, "he commanded them to be baptized
in the name of the Lord." [647:2] But men who professed to derive their
authority from the apostle, now showed how grievously they misunderstood
the benign and comprehensive genius of his ecclesiastical polity. The
dominant party among the disciples had not long assumed the name of
Catholics when they sadly belied the designation, for nothing could be
more illiberal or uncatholic than their Church principles. All evidences
of piety, no matter how decided, if found among the Nazarenes, or the
Novatians, or the friends of Felicissimus, were rejected by them as
apocryphal. The brightest manifestations of godliness, if exhibited
outside their own denomination, only roused their jealousy or provoked
their uncandid and malicious criticisms. The Catholic bishops acted as
if they moved within something like a charmed circle, and as if a curse
rested upon everything not under their own influence. Their proceedings
often displayed alike their folly and inconsistency. Tertullian, for
example, was a Montanist, and yet he was the writer from whom Cyprian
himself derived a large share of his theological instruction. "Give me
_the master_," the bishop of Carthage is reported to have said, when he
called for his favourite author. [648:1] Thus, an individual who,
according to Cyprian's own principles, was beyond the pale of hope, was
the teacher with whom he was daily holding spiritual fellowship! The
bigotry of the party must appear all the more intolerable when we
consider that some of those who differed from them taught the cardinal
doctrines of the gospel, as zealously and as fully as themselves. The
Novatians seceded from their communion merely on the ground of a
question of discipline, and yet the Catholics could not believe that any
grace could exist among these ancient Puritans. The Novatians in their
lives might exhibit much of the beauty of holiness, and they might shed
their blood in the cause of Christianity, [648:2] but all this availed
them nothing in the estimation of their narrow-minded antagonists. "Let
no one think," says Cyprian, "that they can be good men who leave the
Church." [648:3] "He can never attain to the kingdom who leaves her with
whom the kingdom shall be." [648:4] "He cannot be a martyr who is not in
the Church." [648:5] Every man not blinded by prejudice might well have
suspected the soundness of a theory which could only be sustained by
such brazen recklessness of assertion.
III. Nothing, however, more clearly revealed the anti-evangelical
character of the Catholic system than its interference with the claims
of the Word of God. The gospel commends itself by the light of its own
evidence. The official rank of the preacher cannot add to its truth,
neither can the corrupt motives which may prompt him to proclaim it,
impair its authority. As a revelation from heaven, it possesses a title
to consideration irrespective of any individual, or any Church; and God
honours His own communication even though it may be delivered by a very
unworthy messenger. [649:1] "Some indeed," says Paul, "preach Christ
even of envy and strife, and some also of good-will.... What then?
Notwithstanding, every way, whether in pretence or in truth, Christ is
preached; and I therein do rejoice, yea, and will rejoice." [649:2] But
Catholicism taught its partizans to cherish very different feelings, for
they were instructed to believe that the gospel itself was without
efficacy when promulgated by a minister who did not belong to their own
party. They could not challenge a single flaw in the creed of Novatian,
[649:3] and yet they strongly maintained that his preaching was useless,
and that the baptism he dispensed was worthless as the ablution of a
heathen. "You should know," says Cyprian, "that _we ought not even to be
curious as to what Novatian teaches, since he teaches out of the
Church._ Whosoever he be, and whatsoever he be, he is not a Christian
who is not in the Church of Christ." [649:4] "When the Novatians
say--'Dost thou believe remission of sins and eternal life by the Holy
Church?' they lie in their interrogatory, since they _have no Church._"
[649:5]
Strange infatuation! Who could have anticipated that one hundred and
fifty years after the death of the Apostle John, such miserable and
revolting bigotry would have been current? The Scriptures teach us that,
in the salvation of sinners, ministers are as nothing, and the gospel
everything. "Whosoever," says Paul, "shall call upon the name of the
Lord _shall be saved_.... Faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by _the
Word of God._" [650:1] Cyprian did not understand such doctrine. He
imagined that the Word of God had no power except when issuing from the
lips of the ministers of his own communion. The Catholic Church must put
its seal upon the gospel to give it currency. Without this stamp it was
all in vain to announce it to a world lying in wickedness. The Catholic
pastor might be a man without ability; he might be comparatively
ignorant; and he might be of more than suspicious integrity; and yet the
King of the Church was supposed to look down with complacency on all the
official acts of this wretched hireling, whilst no dew of heavenly
influence rested on the labours of a pious and accomplished Novatian
minister! When men like Cyprian were prepared to acknowledge such folly,
it was not strange that a darkness which might be felt soon settled down
upon Christendom.
* * * * *
In the preceding pages the history of the ancient Church for the first
three centuries has passed under review, and a few general observations
may now be not inappropriately appended to this concluding chapter. The
details here furnished supply ample evidence that Christianity was
greatly corrupted long before the conversion of Constantine. It is true,
indeed, that much of the superstition which has since so much disfigured
the Church was yet unknown. During the first three centuries we find no
recognition of the mediatorship of Mary, or of the dogma of her
immaculate conception, [650:2] or of the worship of images, or of the
celebration of divine service in an unknown tongue, or of the doctrine
of the infallibility of the Roman bishop. But the germs of many
dangerous errors were distinctly visible, and when the sun of Imperial
favour began to shine upon the Christians, these errors rapidly reached
maturity. The Eucharistic bread and wine were viewed with superstitious
awe, and language was applied to them which was calculated to bewilder
and to confound. A system of penitential discipline alien to the spirit
of the New Testament was already in existence; rites and ceremonies
unknown in the apostolic age had now made their appearance; and in the
great towns a crowd of functionaries, whom Paul and Peter would have
refused to own, added to the pomp of public worship. Some imagine that
in the times of Tertullian and of Cyprian we may find the purest faith
in the purest form, but a more intimate acquaintance with the history of
the period is quite sufficient to dispel the delusion. A little
consideration may, indeed, convince us that, in the second or third
century, we could scarcely expect to see either the most brilliant
displays of the light of truth or the most attractive exhibitions of
personal holiness. The waters of life gushed forth, clear as crystal,
from the Rock of Ages; but, as their course was through the waste
wilderness of a degenerate world, they were soon defiled by its
pollutions; and it was not until the desert began "to rejoice and
blossom as the rose," that the stream flowed smoothly in the channel it
had wrought, and partially recovered its native purity. At the present
day we would not be warranted in expecting as high a style of
Christianity in a convert from idolatry as in one who had been trained
up from infancy under the care of enlightened and godly parents. By
judicious culture the graces of the Spirit, as well as the fruits of the
earth, may be improved; but when a section of the open field of
immorality and ignorance is first added to the garden of the Lord, it
may not forthwith possess all the fertility and loveliness of the more
ancient plantation. [652:1] A large portion of the early disciples had
once been heathens; they had to struggle against evil habits and
inveterate prejudices; they were surrounded on all sides by corrupting
influences; and, as they had not the same means of obtaining an exact
and comprehensive knowledge of the gospel as ourselves, we cannot
reasonably hope to find among them any very extraordinary measure either
of spiritual wisdom or of consistent piety.
When the Church towards the middle of the second century was sorely
harassed by divisions, its situation was extremely critical and
embarrassing. Christianity had appeared among men bearing the olive
branch of peace, and had proposed to supersede the countless
superstitions of the heathen by a faith which would bind the human race
together in one great and harmonious family. How mortified, then, must
have been its friends when Basilides, Marcion, Valentine, Cerdo, Mark,
and many others began to propagate their heresies, and when it appeared
as if the divisions of the Church were to be as numerous as the
religions of paganism! Had the ministers of the gospel girded themselves
for the emergency; had they boldly encountered the errorists, and
vanquished them with weapons drawn from the armoury of the Word; they
would have approved themselves worthy of their position, and acquired
strength for future conflicts. But whilst they did not altogether
neglect an appeal to Scripture, they were tempted in an evil hour to
think of sequestrating their own freedom that they might overwhelm
heresy with the vigour of an ecclesiastical despotism. By investing
their chairman with arbitrary power and by making communion with this
functionary the criterion of discipleship, they at once sanctioned a
perilous arrangement and endorsed a vicious principle. From this date we
may trace the commencement of a career of defection. The bishop and the
Church began to supplant Christ and a knowledge of the gospel. Bigotry
advanced apace, and conscience found itself in bondage.
The establishment of the hierarchical system, though imparting, as was
thought, greater unity to the structure of the Church, did not really
invigorate its constitution. The spiritual commonwealth is very
different from any merely earthly organization, for it has no
statute-book but the Bible, and it owes explicit obedience to no ruler
but the King of Zion. Freedom of conscience, in obedience to the Word,
is the heritage of all its members; and every one of them is bound to
exercise the privilege, and to resist its violation. Its unity appears,
not in adhesion to any visible head, but in cordial submission to its
one great Lord and Sovereign. When a change was made in its primitive
framework, its essential unity was impaired. After the elders had handed
over a considerable share of their authority to their president, they
could not be expected to take such a deep interest in its government as
when they were themselves individually responsible for its official
administration. They still, indeed, acted as his counsellors, but as
they no longer held the independent footing they had once occupied, they
could neither speak nor act so freely and so energetically as before.
Thus, whilst one member of the ecclesiastical body was permitted to
attain an unnatural magnitude, others ceased to perform their proper
functions, and the whole eventually became diseased and misshapen. And
the new arrangement entirely failed in checking the growth of the
errorists. After its adoption heresies sprung up as rapidly as ever, and
the multitude of its sects continued to be the scandal of Christianity
even in the time of Constantine. [654:1] Their suppression is to be
attributed, not to the potency of Prelacy, but to the stern intolerance
of the Imperial laws. By the rigid enforcement of conformity the
Catholic Church at length reigned without a rival.
It is easy to see from the extant ecclesiastical writings of the third
century that the doctrine of the visible unity of the Church as
represented by the Catholic hierarchy already formed a prominent part of
the current creed. As there is "one God, one Christ, and one Holy
Ghost," it was affirmed that there could be but "one bishop in the
Catholic Church." [654:2] This theory seemed somewhat inconsistent with
the fact that there were many bishops in almost every province of the
Empire; but the ingenuity of churchmen attempted a solution of the
difficulty. It was alleged that the whole episcopacy should be regarded
as one, and that each bishop constituted an integral part of the grand
unit. "The episcopacy is one," says Cyprian, "it is a whole in which
each enjoys full possession." [654:3] "There is one Church from Christ
throughout the whole world divided into many members, and _one
episcopate_ diffused throughout an harmonious multitude of many
bishops." [654:4]
We have seen that the Roman prelate was already recognized as the centre
of ecclesiastical unity. A misunderstood passage in the Gospel of
Matthew [654:5] was supposed to sanction this ecclesiastical primacy.
"There is," said the bishop of Carthage, "one God, and one Christ, and
one Church, and _one chair founded by the Word of the Lord on the
Rock_." [654:6] Though the Roman chief pastor might be considered
theoretically only the first among the Catholic bishops, his zeal for
uniformity had now more than once interrupted the peace of the Christian
community. The erection of a new capital and the subsequent
dismemberment of the Empire considerably affected his position; but,
within a certain sphere, he steadily endeavoured to carry out the idea
of Catholic unity. The doctrine reached its highest point of development
after the lapse of upwards of a thousand years. Then, the bishop of Rome
had become a sovereign prince, and was the acknowledged ruler of a vast
and magnificent hierarchy. Then, he swayed his spiritual sceptre over
all the tribes of Western Christendom. Then, verily, uniformity had its
day of triumph; for, with some rare exceptions, wherever the stranger
travelled throughout Europe, he found the same order of divine service,
and saw the ministers of the sanctuary arrayed in the same costume, and
practising even the same gestures. Then, wherever he entered a sacred
edifice, he heard the same language, and listened to the same prayers
expressed in the very same phraseology. But what was meanwhile the real
condition of the Church? Was there love without dissimulation, and the
keeping of the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace? Nothing of the
kind. Never could it be said with greater truth of the people of the
West that they were "foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving divers
lusts and pleasures, living in malice and envy, hateful and hating one
another." There were wars and rumours of wars; nation rose up against
nation and kingdom against kingdom; and the Pope was generally the cause
of the contention. The very man who claimed to be the centre of Catholic
unity was the grand fomenter of ecclesiastical and political
disturbance. The Sovereign Pontiff, and the Catholic princes with whom
he was engaged in deadly feuds, were equally faithless, restless, and
implacable. Freedom of thought was proscribed, and the human mind was
placed under the most exacting and intolerable tyranny by which it was
ever oppressed.
The mutilation of this Dagon of hierarchical unity is one of the many
glorious results of the great Reformation. The sooner the remaining
fragments of this idol be crushed to atoms, the better for the peace and
freedom of Christendom. The unity of the Church cannot be achieved by
the iron rod of despotism, neither can the communion of saints be
promoted by the sacrifice of their rights and privileges. "Where the
Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty." [656:1] Christ alone can draw
all men unto Him. The real unity of His Church is, not any merely
ecclesiastical cohesion, but a unity of faith, of hope, and of
affection. It is the fellowship of Christian freemen walking together in
the fear of the Lord, and in the comfort of the Holy Ghost. It is the
attraction of all hearts to one heavenly Saviour, and the submission of
all wills to one holy law. Looking at the past condition or the present
aspect of society, we may think the difficulties in the way of such
unity altogether insurmountable; but it will, in due time, be brought
about by Him "who doeth great things and unsearchable, marvellous things
without number." Its realization will present the most delightful and
impressive spectacle that the earth has ever seen. "Every valley shall
be exalted, and every mountain and hill shall be made low; and the
crooked shall be made straight, and the rough places plain; _and the
glory of the Lord shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it
together_." [656:2] "Thy watchmen shall lift up the voice, with the
_voice together shall they sing; for they shall see eye to eye_, when
the Lord shall bring again Zion." [656:3] "And the Lord shall be King
over all the earth; in that day shall there be _one Lord, and His name
one_." [656:4] AMEN.
THE END.
[ENDNOTES]
[3:1] Mr Merivale, in his "History of the Romans under the Empire,"
(vol. iv. p. 450,) estimates the population in the time of Augustus
at eighty-five millions, but in this reckoning he does not include
Palestine, and perhaps some of his calculations are rather low.
Greswell computes the population of Palestine at ten millions, and that
of the whole empire at one hundred and twenty millions. ("Dissertations
upon an Harmony of the Gospels," vol. iv. p. 11, 493.)
[7:1] See the article [Greek: Hetairai] in Smith's "Dictionary of Greek
and Roman Antiquities."
[8:1] "We despise," says an early Christian writer, "the supercilious
looks of philosophers, whom we have known to be the corrupters of
innocence, adulterers, and tyrants, and eloquent declaimers against
vices of which they themselves are guilty."--_Octavius of Minucius
Felix._
[9:1] "De Republ.," ii.
[9:2] In the "Octavius of Minucius Felix" (c. 25), we meet with the
following startling challenge--"Where are there more bargains for
debauchery made, more assignations concerted, or more adultery devised
than _by the priests_ amidst the altars and shrines of the gods?" This,
of course, refers to the state of things in the third century, but there
is no reason to believe that it was now much better. Tertullian speaks
in the same manner ("Apol". c. 15). See also "Juvenal," sat. vi. 488,
and ix. 23.
[10:1] "Origen. Contra Celsum," lib. i. c. 49.
[10:2] Mat. xxii. 23.
[10:3] Luke ii. 25, 36.
[11:1] See Matt. v. 18; John v. 39, and x. 35.
[11:2] See Josephus against Apion, i. § 8. Origen says that the Hebrews
had twenty-two sacred books corresponding to the number of letters in
their alphabet. Opera, ii. 528. It would appear from Jerome that they
reckoned in the following manner: they considered the Twelve Minor
Prophets only one book; First and Second Samuel, one book; First and
Second Kings, one book; First and Second Chronicles, one book; Ezra and
Nehemiah, one book; Jeremiah and Lamentations, one book; the Pentateuch,
five books; Judges and Ruth, one book; thus, with the other ten books of
Joshua, Esther, Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Canticles, Isaiah,
Ezekiel, and Daniel, making up twenty-two. The most learned Roman
Catholic writers admit that what are called the apocryphal books were
never acknowledged by the Jewish Church. See, for example, Dupin's
"History of Ecclesiastical Writers," Preliminary Dissertation, section
ii. See also Father Simon's "Critical History of the Old Testament,"
book. i. chap. viii.
[11:3] Matt, xxiii. 15.
[12:1] Many proofs of this occur in the Acts. See Acts x. 2, xiii. 43,
xvi. 14, xvii. 4.
[12:2] See Cudworth's "Intellectual System," i. 318, &c. Edition,
London, 1845. Warburton has adduced evidence to prove that this doctrine
was imparted to the initiated in the heathen mysteries. "Divine Legation
of Moses," i. 224. Edit., London, 1837.
[12:3] Gal. iv. 4.
[12:4] Gen. xlix. 10; Dan. ix. 25; Haggai ii. 6, 7.
[12:5] Virgil. Ec. iv. Suetonius. Octavius, 94. Tacitus. Histor. v. 13.
[13:1] Haggai ii. 7.
[13:2] Dan. vii. 14.
[14:1] See Supplementary Note at the end of this chapter on the year of
Christ's Birth.
[14:2] Luke ii. 6, 7.
[15:1] Luke i. 11, 19.
[15:2] Luke. 26, 31.
[15:3] Luke ii. 13, 14.
[15:4] Matt. ii. 9.
[15:5] Matt. ii. 12.
[15:6] Matt. ii. 3. The evangelist does not positively assert that the
wise men met Herod _at Jerusalem_. On their arrival in the holy city he
was probably at Jericho--distant about a day's journey--for Josephus
states that he died there. ("Antiq." xvii. 6. § 5. and 8. § 1.) We may
infer, therefore, that he "heard" of the strangers on his sick-bed, and
"privily called" them to Jericho. The chief priests and scribes were,
perhaps, summoned to attend him at the same place.
[16:1] Matt. ii. 16. The estimates formed at a subsequent period of the
number of infants in the village of Bethlehem and its precincts betray a
strange ignorance of statistics. "The Greek Church canonised the 14,000
innocents," observes the Dean of St Paul's, "and another notion, founded
on a misrepresentation of Revelations (xiv. 3), swelled the number to
144,000. The former, at least, was the common belief of our Church,
though _even in our liturgy the latter has in some degree been
sanctioned_ by retaining the chapter of Revelations as the epistle for
the day. Even later, Jeremy Taylor, in his 'Life of Christ,' admits the
14,000 without scruple, or rather without thought."--_Milman's History
of Christianity_, i. p. 113, note.
[16:2] Matt. ii. 11.
[16:3] Luke ii. 38. It is a curious fact that in the year 751 of the
city of Rome, the year of the Birth of Christ according to the
chronology adopted in this volume, the passover was not celebrated as
usual in Judea. The disturbances which occurred on the death of Herod
had become so serious on the arrival of the paschal day, that Archelaus
was obliged to disperse the people by force of arms in the very midst of
the sacrifices. So soon did Christ begin to cause the sacrifice and the
oblation to cease. See Greswell's "Dissertations," i. p 393, 394, note.
[17:1] Luke ii. 40.
[17:2] Luke ii. 52.
[17:3] Mark vi. 3.
[17:4] John vii. 15.
[18:1] Luke ii. 46, 47.
[18:2] Luke iv. 16.
[18:3] Luke iii. 21-23. "It became Him, being in the likeness of sinful
flesh, to go through these appointed rites and purifications which
belonged to that flesh. There is no more strangeness in His having been
baptized by John, than in His keeping the Passover. The one rite, as the
other, belonged to sinners, and among the transgressors He was
numbered."--ALFORD, _Greek Testament_, Note on Matt. iii. 13-17.
[18:4] See Greswell's "Dissertations upon an Harmony of the Gospels,"
vol. i. p. 362, 363. John probably commenced his ministry about the
feast of Tabernacles, A.D. 27.
[18:5] See Josephus, "Antiq." xviii, 5, § 2.
[19:1] Matt. iv. 23.
[19:2] Matt. iv. 24, 25.
[19:3] Isaiah xlv. 15.
[19:4] 1 Kings viii. 10-12.
[19:5] John v. 13, vi. 15, viii. 59, xii. 36; Mark i. 45, vii. 24.
[19:6] Mark ii. 1, 2; Matt. xiv. 13, 14, 21, xv. 32, 38, 39.
[20:1] Matt. iv. 13. Hence it is said to have been "exalted unto heaven"
in the way of privilege. Matt. xi. 23; Luke x. 15. It was the residence
as well of Peter and Andrew (Matt. xvii. 24), as of James, John (Mark i.
21, 29), and Matthew (Mark ii. 1, 14, 15), and there also dwelt the
nobleman whose son was healed by our Lord (John iv. 46). It was on the
borders of the Sea of Galilee, so that by crossing the water He could at
once reach the territory of another potentate, and withdraw Himself from
the multitudes drawn together by the fame of His miracles. See Milman's
"History of Christianity," i. 188.
[21:1] John i. 46.
[22:1] Luke xxiv. 32.
[22:2] Matt. vii. 29.
[23:1] According to Mr Greswell our Lord adopted this method of teaching
about eighteen months after the commencement of His ministry, and the
Parable of the Sower was the first delivered. "Exposition of the
Parables," Vol. i. p. 2.
[23:2] Isa. xxxv. 5, 6.
[23:3] See John v. 13, ix. 1, 6, 25, 36.
[23:4] Mark ii. 6, 7, 10, 11, iii. 5, 22.
[24:1] John vi. 9.
[24:2] Matt. xiv. 24, 25.
[24:3] Mark iv. 39; Matt. viii. 26, 27.
[24:4] John ix. 16.
[24:5] Matt. xxi. 19. Neander has shown that this was a typical action
pointing to the rejection of the Jews. See his "Life of Christ." Bohn's
Edition.
[24:6] John ii. 9.
[24:7] Matt. ix. 28, 29; Mark vi. 5, ix. 23, 24.
[25:1] John viii. 12.
[26:1] Several of the early fathers imagined that it continued only a
year. Some of them, such as Clemens Alexandrinus, drew this conclusion
from Isaiah lxi. 1, "To preach _the acceptable year_ of the Lord." See
Kaye's "Clement of Alexandria," p. 347.
[26:2] John ii. 13, v. 1, vi. 4, xii. 1. Eusebius argues from the number
of high priests that our Lord's ministry did not embrace four entire
years. "Ecc. Hist." i. c. x.
[26:3] He lived, therefore, about thirty-three years. According to Malto
Brun ("Universal Geography," book xxii.), "the _mean duration_ of human
life is between thirty and forty years," and, in the same chapter, he
computes it at thirty-three years. It would thus appear that, at the
time of His death, our Lord was, in point of age, a fitting
representative of the species.
[26:4] Luke iv. 44, viii. 1; Matt. ix. 35.
[27:1] John iii. 1, 2.
[27:2] Matt. xxvi. 63-66.
[27:3] Matt, xxvii. 38.
[27:4] Matt, xxvii. 24; John xviii. 38.
[27:5] Mark xv. 10, 15.
[28:1] Acts ii. 23.
[28:2] Matt. xxvi. 38; Mark xiv. 33.
[28:3] Luke xxii. 44.
[28:4] Matt, xxvii. 46.
[28:5] Luke xxii. 43.
[28:6] Luke xxiii. 44; Mark xv. 33.
[29:1] Matt, xxvii. 51, 52.
[29:2] Matt, xxvii. 54.
[29:3] John x. 18.
[29:4] Ps. xvi. 10; Acts ii. 31.
[29:5] John ii. 19; Mark viii. 31; Luke xviii, 33.
[29:6] John xiv. 19; 1 Thess. iv. 14.
[29:7] Rom. i. 4; 1 Cor. xv. 14, 17; 1 Pet. i. 3; Rev. i. 18.
[29:8] John xix. 33, 34.
[29:9] Matt, xxvii. 60.
[30:1] Matt, xxvii. 66.
[30:2] Matt, xxviii. 2, 4.
[30:3] Matt, xxviii. 11.
[30:4] Matt, xxviii. 12, 13, 15.
[30:5] Rev. i. 5.
[30:6] Acts x. 40, 41.
[30:7] John xiv. 22.
[31:1] Acts i. 3.
[31:2] Luke xxiv. 27.
[31:3] Matt, xxviii. 19.
[31:4] Luke xxiv. 50, 51.
[32:1] John i. 10-12.
[36:1] Isa. liii. 3.
[36:2] John vii. 39.
[36:3] Acts i. 15.
[37:1] 1 Cor. xv. 6.
[37:2] See Matt. xv. 31; John ii. 23, vii. 31, viii. 30.
[37:3] See Joshua xv. 25.
[37:4] Hence called Iscariot, that is, _Ish Kerioth_, or, a man of
Kerioth. See Alford, Greek Test., Matt. x. 4.
[37:5] Acts ii. 7.
[37:6] Compare Matt. ix. 9, 10, and Mark ii. 14, 15.
[37:7] "As St John never mentions Bartholomew in the number of the
apostles, so the other evangelists never take notice of Nathanael,
probably because the same person under two several names; and as in
John, Philip and Nathanael are joined together in their coming to
Christ, so in the rest of the evangelists, Philip and Bartholomew are
constantly put together without the least variation."--Cave's Lives of
the Apostles. Life of Bartholomew. Compare Matt. x. 3; Acts i. 13; and
John i. 45, xxl. 2.
[38:1] Compare Matt. x. 3, and Acts i. 13.
[38:2] John xi. 16, xxi. 2.
[38:3] Mark xv. 40. He was in some way related to our Lord, and hence
called His brother (Gal. i. 19). But though Mary, the mother of our
Saviour, had evidently several sons (see Matt. i. 20, 25, compared with
Matt. xiii. 55; Mark vi. 3; Matt. xii. 46, 47), they were not disciples
when the apostles wore appointed, and none of them consequently could
have been of the Twelve. (See John vii. 5). The other sons of Mary, who
must all have been younger than Jesus, seem to have been converted about
the time of the resurrection. Hence they are found among the disciples
before the day of Pentecost (Acts i. 14).
[38:4] Mark iii. 17.
[38:5] Matt. x. 2.
[38:6] John i. 42.
[38:7] Matt. x. 4; Mark iii. 18; Luke vi. 15; Acts i. 13. Some think
that _Kananites_ is equivalent to _Zelotes_, whilst others
contend that it in derived from a village called Canan. See Alford,
Greek Test., Matt. x. 4; and Greswell's; "Dissertations," vol. ii.
p. 128. Some MSS. have [Greek: Kananaios].
[38:8] Mark vi. 7. "Although no two of these catalogues (of the Twelve)
agree precisely in the order of the names, they may all be divided into
three quaternions, which are never interchanged, and the leading names
of which are the same in all. Thus the first is always Peter, the fifth
Philip, the ninth James the son of Alpheus, and the twelfth Judas
Iscariot. Another difference is that Matthew and Luke's Gospel gives the
names in pairs, or two and two, while Mark enumerates them singly, and
the list before us (in the Acts) follows both, these methods, one after
the other."--_Alexander on the Acts_, vol. i. p. 19.
[39:1] Gal. i. 19.
[39:2] Acts i. 13. See also Jude v. 1.
[39:3] Upon this subject see the conjectures of Greswell,
"Dissertation," vol. ii. p. 120.
[39:4] John i. 35, 40.
[39:5] From the great minuteness of the statements in the passage, it
has been conjectured that the evangelist himself was the second of the
two disciples mentioned in John i. 35-37.
[39:6] John iii. 30.
[39:7] Matt. xix. 27.
[40:1] Mark i. 20.
[40:2] Luke xix. 2.
[40:3] Luke xix. 2.
[40:4] Mark ii. 15.
[40:5] John vii. 52.
[40:6] John xi. 16. See also v. 8.
[41:1] John xx. 25.
[41:2] John xx. 28.
[41:3] Some writers have asserted that he is a different person from
James "the Lord's brother" mentioned Gal. i. 19, but the statement rests
upon no solid foundation. Compare John vii. 5; 1 Cor. xv. 7; Acts i. 14,
xv. 2, 13. See also note p. 38 [38:3] of this chapter.
[41:4] John i. 47.
[41:5] Mark v. 37, ix. 2; Matt. xxvi. 37.
[41:6] Acts xii. 2, 3. "It is remarkable that, so far as we know, one of
these inseparable brothers (James and John) was the first, and one the
last, that died of the apostles."--_Alexander on the Acts_, i. 443.
[41:7] See Greswell's "Dissertations," vol. ii. p. 115.
[42:1] Matt. xx. 20, 21.
[42:2] Some writers have asserted that Philip and Nathanael were learned
men, but of this there is no good evidence. See Cave's "Lives of the
Apostles," Philip and Bartholomew.
[42:3] Greswell makes it nine months. See his "Harmonia Evangelica," p.
xxiv. xxvi.
[42:4] Matt. x. 5, 6.
[42:5] See Vitringa "De Synagoga Vetere," p. 577, and Mosheim's
"Commentaries," by Vidal, vol. i. 120-2, note.
[43:1] This is the calculation of Greswell. "Harmonia Evangelica," p.
xxvi. xxxi. Robinson makes the interval considerably shorter. See his
"Harmony of the Four Gospels in Greek."
[43:2] They received new powers at the close of their first missionary
excursion. See Luke x. 19.
[43:3] Selden in his treatise "De Synedriis" supplies some curious
information on this subject. See lib. ii. cap. 9, § 3. See also some
singular speculations respecting it in Baumgarten's "Theologischer
Commentar zum Pentateuch," i. 153, 351. Some of the fathers speak of
seventy-two disciples and of seventy-two nations _and tongues_. See
Stieren's "Irenaeus," i. p. 544, note, and Epiphanius, tom. i. p. 50,
Edit. Coloniae, 1682; compared with Greswell's "Dissertations," ii.
p. 7.
[43:4] Gen. x. 32.
[44:1] The following tabular view of the names of the descendants of
Shem, Ham, and Japheth, mentioned in the 10th chapter of Genesis, will
illustrate this statement:--
SHEM. | HAM.
Elam.Asshur.Arphaxad, Lud. Aram, |Cush, Mizraim, Phut. Canaan,
Salah, Uz, |Seba, Ludim, Sidon,
Eber, Hul, |Havilah, Anamim, Heth,
Peleg, Gether,|Sabtah, Lehabim, Jebusite,
Joktan, Mash. |Raamah, Naphtuhim, Amorite,
Almodad, |Sabtechab,Pathrusim, Girgasite,
Sheleph, |Sheba, Caslubim, Hivite,
Hazarmaveth, |Dedan, Caphtorim, Arkite,
Jerah, |Nimrod. Philistim. Sinite,
Hadoram, | Arvadite,
Uzal, | Zemarite,
Diklah, | Hamathite.
Obal, |
Abimael, |
Sheba, |
Ophir, |
Havilah, |
Jobab. |
JAPHETH.
Gomer, Magog. Madai. Javan, Tubal. Meshech. Tiras.
Ashkenaz, Elishah,
Riphath, Tarshish,
Togarmah. Kittim,
Dodanim.
It often happens that one branch of a family is exceedingly prolific
whilst another is barren. So it seems to have been with the descendants
of the three sons of Noah. Thus, Elam, Ashur, and others, appear each to
have founded only one nation, whilst Arphaxad and his posterity founded
eighteen.
[45:1] Luke x. 1.
[45:2] John iv. 39.
[45:3] Mark vii. 24, 26, 30, 31.
[45:4] This is the opinion of Dr Robinson. See His "Harmony." See also
Luke ix. 51, 52, x. 33.
[45:5] Luke x. 13, 17, 18.
[45:6] Matt. xv. 24.
[46:1] Rev. xxi. 14.
[46:2] It is certain that some were called apostles who were not of the
number of the Twelve. See Acts xiv. 4. In 1 Cor. xv. 5, 7, both "the
Twelve," and "all the apostles," are mentioned, and it may be that the
Seventy are included under the latter designation. Such was the opinion
of Origen--[Greek: epeita tois eterois para tous dôdeka apostolois pasi,
tacha tois ebdomêkoita]. "Contra Celsum," lib. ii. 65. See also "De
Recta in Deum Fide," sec. i., Opera, tom. i. p. 806.
[46:3] Luke x. 9, 16, 19, 24.
[46:4] Eph. ii. 20. See also Eph. iii. 5. It is evident, especially from
the latter passage, that the _prophets_ here spoken of belong to the New
Testament Church.
[47:1] Acts xv. 6, xxi. 18.
[47:2] 1 Pet. v. 1; 2 John v. 1; 3 John v. 1. It is remarkable that
Papias, one of the very earliest of the fathers, actually speaks of the
apostles simply as _the elders_. See Euseb. book iii. chap. 39.
[47:3] Thus, Simon Zelotes is said to have travelled into Egypt and
thence passed into Mesopotamia and Persia, where he suffered martyrdom;
whilst, according to others, he travelled through Egypt to Mauritania
and thence to Britain, where he was crucified. See Cave's "Lives of the
Apostles," Life of Simon the Zealot. No weight can be attached to such
legends. Origen states that the Apostle Thomas laboured in Parthia, and
Andrew in Scythia. "In Genesim," Opera, tom. ii. p. 24.
[47:4] Acts vi. 6.
[48:1] Matt. vii. 16.
[48:2] Acts xxvi. 16; Luke x. 2; 1 Tim. i. 12.
[48:3] Such was Valentine, the most formidable of the Gnostic
heresiarchs, said to be a disciple of Theodas, the companion of Paul.
Clem. Alex. Strom. vii. Paul of Samosata and Arius were able to boast,
at least as much as their antagonists, of their apostolic descent.
[49:1] 1 John iv. 1, 6.
[49:2] 2 John 10, 11.
[49:3] Gal. i. 8, 9.
[50:1] Luke x. 16.
[50:2] 2 Cor. iii. 1-3.
[51:1] Acts i. 3.
[51:2] Luke xxiv. 46, 47.
[52:1] Acts ii. 41.
[52:2] Acts ii. 44, 45.
[53:1] See Acts iv. 34. Barnabas was probably obliged to go to Cyprus to
complete the sale.
[53:2] Acts vi. 1.
[54:1] Acts vi. 2, 3.
[54:2] Acts i. 15, 23. They selected two, and not knowing which to
prefer, they decided finally by lot.
[54:3] Acts vi. 6.
[55:1] Acts iv. 18.
[55:2] Acts iv. 19.
[55:3] That is, A.D. 34, dating the crucifixion A.D. 31. Tillemont, but
on entirely different grounds, assigns the same date to the martyrdom of
Stephen. See "Memoires pour servir à L'Histoire Ecclesiastique des six
premiers siecles," tome prem. sec. par. p. 420. Stephen's martyrdom
probably occurred about the feast of Tabernacles.
[55:4] Daniel ix. 27. A _day_ in prophetic language denotes a _year_.
Ezek. iv. 4, 5. A prophetic week, or seven days, is, therefore,
equivalent to seven years.
[56:1] "The one week, or Passion-week, in the midst of which our Lord
was crucified A.D. 31, began with His public ministry A.D. 28, and ended
with the martyrdom of Stephen A.D. 34."--_Hales' Chronology_, ii. p.
518. Faber and others, who hold that the one week terminated with the
crucifixion, are obliged to adopt the untenable hypothesis that John the
Baptist and our Lord together preached seven years. The view here taken
is corroborated by the statement in Dan. ix. 27--"_In the midst of the
week_ he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease,"--as
Christ by one sacrifice of Himself "perfected for ever them that are
sanctified."
[56:2] Matt, xxviii. 19.
[57:1] Acts viii. 6, 12.
[57:2] John iv. 9.
[57:3] Acts viii. 1.
[57:4] Luke xxiv. 47; Acts i. 4.
[57:5] Acts i. 8.
[57:6] Acts viii. 27-38.
[57:7] Acts x. 19, 30, 32.
[57:8] Acts x. 1.
[58:1] Acts x. 2.
[58:2] Acts xxi. 39.
[58:3] Strabo, xiv. p. 673.
[58:4] Rom. xi. 13; 1 Tim. ii. 7; 2 Tim. i. 11.
[58:5] Matt. x. 5, 6.
[59:1] 1 Cor. xv. 8.
[59:2] Rom. i. 1.
[59:3] Acts xxii. 3.
[59:4] Acts xxii. 3.
[59:5] Acts xxvi. 5.
[59:6] Acts vii. 58.
[60:1] Acts xxvi. 10. [Greek: psêphon]. See Alford on Acts xxvi. 10, and
Acts viii. 1. See also "The Life and Epistles of St Paul" by Conybeare
and Howson, i. 85. Edit., London, 1852. Paul says that "all the Jews"
knew his manner of life _from his youth_--a declaration from which we
may infer that he was a person of note. See Acts xxvi. 4. There is a
tradition that he aspired to be the son-in-law of the high priest.
Epiphanius, "Ad Haer.," 1, 2, § 16 and § 25.
[60:2] Acts ix. 2, and xxii. 5.
[60:3] Acts ix. 3-21.
[60:4] Gal. i. 17, 18.
[60:5] This date may be established thus:--Stephen, as has been shewn,
was martyred A.D. 34. See note, p. 55 of this chapter. Paul seems to
have been converted in the same year, and therefore, if he returned to
Damascus three years afterwards, he must have been in that city in A.D.
37. It would appear, from another source of evidence, that this is the
true date. The Emperor Tiberius died A.D. 37, and Aretas immediately
afterwards seems to have obtained possession of Damascus. He was in
possession of it when Paul was now there. See 2 Cor. xi. 32, 33. It is
probable that he remained master of the place only a very short time.
[60:6] Gal. i. 12.
[60:7] 2 Cor. xi. 5.
[61:1] Acts ix. 17, 18.
[61:2] Acts xiii. 1, 2.
[61:3] Simeon or Niger, according to Epiphanius, was one of the Seventy.
"Haeres," 20, sec. 4. Luke, the writer of the Book of the Acts, is said
to have been one of the Seventy, and some have asserted that he is the
same as Lucius of Cyrene, mentioned Acts xiii. 1.
[61:4] Ananias, by whom he was baptized, was, according to the Greek
martyrologies, one of the Seventy. See Burton's "Lectures," i. 88, note.
It is evident that Ananias was a person of note among the Christians of
Damascus.
[62:1] Acts ix. 23.
[62:2] See Josephus' "Antiquities," xviii. 5.
[62:3] See Burton's "Lectures," i. 116, 117.
[62:4] 2 Cor. xi. 32, 33.
[62:5] Acts ix. 26, 27.
[62:6] This statement rests on the authority of a monk of Cyprus, named
Alexander, a comparatively late writer. See Burton's "Lectures," i. 56,
note.
[62:7] Acts xxii. 21.
[63:1] Acts ix. 29, 30.
[63:2] Gal. i. 21.
[63:3] Acts xv. 23, 41.
[63:4] Acts xi. 25, 26.
[64:1] Griesbach, Lachmann, Alford, and other critics of great note,
here prefer [Greek: Hellênas] to [Greek: Hellênistas], but the common
rending is better supported by the authority of manuscripts, and more in
accordance with Acts xiv. 27, where Paul and Barnabas are represented,
long afterwards, as declaring to the Church of Antioch how God "had
opened the door of faith _unto the Gentiles_." See an excellent
vindication of the _textus receptus_ in the _Journal of Sacred
Literature_ for January 1857, No. VIII., p. 285, by the Rev. W. Kay,
M.A., Principal of Bishop's College, Calcutta.
[64:2] Acts xi. 20.
[65:1] John xix. 19-22.
[65:2] Acts xi. 27-30.
[66:1] It is obvious from Acts ix. 31, xxvi. 20, and Gal. i. 22, that
such churches now existed.
[66:2] Acts xii. 3, 24, 25.
[66:3] Clem. Alex. Strom, vi. p. 742, note; Edit. Potter. Eusebius,
v. 18.
[66:4] "Antiquities," xix. c. 8, § 2, xx. c. 2, § 5.
[66:5] Acts xii. 20-23.
[66:6] From the comparative table of chronology appended to Wieseler's
"Chronologie des apostolischen Zeitalters," it appears that the date
given in the text is adopted by no less than twenty of the highest
chronological authorities, including Ussher, Pearson, Spanheim,
Tillemont, Michaelis, Hug, and De Wette. It is also adopted by Burton.
Wieseler himself, apparently on insufficient grounds, adopts A.D. 45.
[67:1] Though Peter was taught, by the case of Cornelius, that "God also
to the Gentiles had granted repentance unto life" (Acts xi. 18), and
though he doubtless felt himself a debtor, both to the Greeks and to the
Jews, yet still he continued to cherish the conviction that his mission
was, primarily to his kinsmen according to the flesh. James and John had
the same impression. See Gal. ii. 9; James i. 1; 1 Pet. i. 1.
[68:1] Acts xii. 2.
[68:2] Acts xxii. 17-21.
[68:3] I here partially adopt the translation of Conybeare and Howson.
Their work is one of the most valuable contributions to sacred
literature which has appeared in the present century.
[68:4] The Second Epistle to the Corinthians was written about fourteen
years after this, or towards the close of A.D. 57. See Chap. IX. of this
Section. The Jews often reckoned current time as if it were complete.
[68:5] 2 Cor. xii. 2-4.
[68:6] Exodus iii. 2-10.
[68:7] Isaiah vi. 1, 2, 8, 9.
[70:1] Acts xiii. 1-3.
[70:2] Acts iv. 36.
[71:1] Deut. xxxiii. 10.
[72:1] Rom. i. 1.
[73:1] Gen. xlviii. 13-15.
[73:2] Lev. viii. 18, and iv. 4.
[73:3] Num. xxvii. 18.
[74:1] 1 Tim. v. 17.
[74:2] This portion of the apostolic history may illustrate 1 Tim. iv.
14, for Paul had official authority conferred on him "by prophecy," or
in consequence of a revelation made, perhaps, through one of the
prophets of Antioch, "with the laying on of the hands of the
Presbytery." Something similar, probably, occurred in the case of
Timothy. But, in ordinary circumstances, the rulers of the Church must
judge of a divine call to the ministry from the gifts and graces of the
candidate for ordination.
[75:1] Acts xiii. 4.
[75:2] Acts xiii. 4.
[75:3] Acts iv. 36.
[75:4] Until this date we read of "Barnabas and Saul," now of "Paul and
Barnabas." Paul was the Roman, and Saul the Hebrew name of the great
apostle. His superior qualifications had now full scope for development,
and accordingly, as he takes the lead, he is henceforth, generally named
before Barnabas.
[75:5] 2 Cor. xi. 26,--[Greek: potamôn].
[76:1] Acts xv. 38.
[76:2] Acts xv. 39.
[76:3] Acts xiv. 6.
[76:4] Acts xiv. 23.
[76:5] [Greek: Cheirotonêsantes de autois kat' ekklêsian
presbuterous].--The interpretation given in the text is sanctioned by
the highest authorities. See Rothe's "Anfange der Christlichen Kirche,"
p. 150; Alford on Acts xiv. 23; Burton's "Lectures," i. 150;
Baumgarten's "Acts of the Apostles," Acts xiv. 23; Litton's "Church of
Christ," p. 595.
[76:6] Acts xiv. 27.
[76:7] They set out on the mission probably in A.D. 44, and returned to
Antioch in A.D. 50. The Council of Jerusalem took place the year
following.
[77:1] Acts xiii. 48.
[77:2] Acts xiv. 13.
[77:3] Acts xiii. 6-8.
[77:4] Acts xiii. 50.
[77:5] Acts xiv. 2.
[78:1] Acts xiv. 19.
[78:1] 2 Tim. iii. 10, 11.
[79:1] Acts xv. 1.
[79:2] This inference was indeed admitted. See Acts xv. 5, 24.
[79:3] Gal. v. 2-4, vi. 13, 14.
[79:4] Acts xvi. 31; John iii. 36.
[80:1] Luke xxiii. 43.
[80:2] Ps. ii. 12.
[80:3] Acts xv. ii.
[81:1] Acts xv. 2.
[81:2] Acts xv. 23, 24, 41.
[81:3] Acts xvi. 4.
[81:4] Paul and Barnabas, with the other deputies, were sent "to
Jerusalem unto the apostles and elders" (Acts xv. 2); "when they were
come to Jerusalem, they were received of the church, and of the apostles
and elders" (Acts xv. 4); and the decrees are said to have been ordained
"of the apostles and elders which were at Jerusalem" (Acts xvi. 4); but
not one of these statements necessarily implies that these rulers were
exclusively elders _of the Church of Jerusalem_.
[82:1] It has been argued by Burton ("Lectures," vol. i. p. 122), that
the first visit of Paul to Jerusalem after his conversion took place
about the time of one of the great festivals, as he is said, on the
occasion, to have "disputed against the Grecians" (Acts ix. 29), who
were likely then to have been very numerous in the city. If he arrived
now at the time of the same festival, the interval must have been
precisely fourteen years.
[82:2] Gal. ii. 1. Some make these fourteen years to include the three
years mentioned Gal. i. 18, but this interpretation does violence to the
languages of the apostle. The system of chronology here adopted requires
no such forced expositions. Paul came to Jerusalem three years after his
conversion, that is, in A.D. 37; and fourteen years after, that is, in
A.D. 51, he was at this Synod.
[82:3] Acts ix. 26.
[83:1] Acts xxi. 20.
[83:2] Acts xxi. 21.
[83:3] Acts xv. 5.
[83:4] Gal. ii. 4. It is here taken for granted that the visit to
Jerusalem, mentioned in the second chapter of the Epistle to the
Galatians, is the same as that described in the fifteenth of Acts. Paul
says that he went up "by revelation" (Gal. ii. 2),--a statement from
which it appears that he was divinely instructed to adopt this method of
settling the question.
[83:5] Gal. ii. 12.
[83:6] Gal. ii. 2.
[83:7] Acts xvi. 4, xxi. 25.
[84:1] Acts xv. 12.
[84:2] Acts xv. 22.
[84:3] Acts xv. 23.
[84:4] The expression here used--"the multitude" ([Greek: to
plêthos])--is repeatedly applied in the New Testament to the Sanhedrim,
a court consisting of not more than seventy-two members. See Luke
xxiii. 1; Acts xxiii. 7. There were probably more individuals present
at this meeting.
[84:5] Acts xv. 2.
[84:6] 1 Cor. xii. 28; Eph. iv. 11.
[84:7] In Acts xi. 27, we read of "prophets" who came "from Jerusalem
unto Antioch."
[84:8] Acts xv. 23. "The apostles, and elders, _and_ brethren."
[84:9]The context may appear to be favourable to this interpretation,
for the two deputies now chosen--"Judas surnamed Barsabas, and
Silas"--who are said to have been "chief men among _the brethren_" (ver.
22), are likewise described as "_prophets_ also themselves" (ver. 32).
In Acts xviii. 27, "the brethren" appear to be distinguished from "the
disciples."
[85:1] This reading, which is adopted by Mill in the Prolegomena to his
New Testament, as well as by Lachmann, Neander, Alford, and Tregelles,
is supported by the authority of the Codex Vaticanus, the Codex
Alexandrinus, the Codex Ephraemi, and the Codex Bezae. It is likewise to
be found in by far the most valuable cursive MS. yet known. It is
confirmed also by the early testimony of Irenaeus, and by the Latin of
the Codex Bezae, a version more ancient than the Vulgate, as well as by
the Vulgate itself. The reading in the _textus receptus_ may be
accounted for by the growth of the doctrine of apostolical succession;
as, when the hierarchy was in its glory, transcribers could not
understand how the apostles and elders could be fellow presbyters.
[85:2] It is worthy of note that Peter, fourteen or fifteen years
afterwards, speaks in the style here indicated. Thus he says--"The
elders which are among you, I exhort, _who am also an elder_" ([Greek:
sumpresbuteros]).--(l Pet. v. 1.)
[85:3] Acts xv. 28.
[86:1] Gal. iii. 2.
[86:2] Acts xv. 8-10.
[86:3] Acts xi. 15, 17.
[86:4] This style of speaking was used by councils in after-ages, and
often in cases when it was singularly inappropriate.
[87:1] Acts xv. 29.
[87:2] See 1 Cor. x. 23, 31, 32.
[88:1] "Since the eating of such food, as Paul expressly teaches (1 Cor.
x. 19, 33), was not sinful in itself, and yet to be avoided out of
tenderness to those who thought it so, the abstinence here recommended
must be understood in the same manner."--_Alexander on the Acts,_ ii.
84.
[89:1] Gal. ii. 12.
[89:2] Gal. ii. 9.
[89:3] Gal. ii. 13.
[90:1] Acts xvi. 9.
[90:2] Acts xvi. 12.
[91:1] "The _Jus Italicum_ raised provincial land to the same state of
_immunity from taxation_ which belonged to land in Italy."--_Conybeare
and Howson,_ i. 302, note.
[91:2] Not the Strymon. See Conybeare and Howson, i. 316.
[91:3] Acts xvi. 14.
[91:4] Acts xvi. 14.
[92:1] Acts xvi. 16-18.
[92:2] They may have perceptive powers of which we can form no
conception, and may thus discern the approach of particular events as
distinctly an we can now calculate the ebb and flow of the tides, or the
eclipses of the sun and moon.
[92:3] Matt. viii. 28, 29; Mark i. 24, 25; Luke iv. 34, 35.
[93:1] Acts xvi. 18.
[93:2] Acts xvi. 19.
[93:3] In some parts of the Empire magistrates and men of rank acted
gratuitously, but a large portion of the priests subsisted on the
emoluments of office.
[94:1] Acts xvi. 24.
[94:2] Acts xvi. 25.
[95:1] Acts xvi. 26.
[95:2] Acts xvi. 28. "By a singular historical coincidence, this very
city of Philippi, or its neighbourhood, had been signalised within a
hundred years, not only by the great defeat of Brutus and Cassius, but
by the suicide of both, and by a sort of wholesale self-destruction on
the part of their adherents."--Alexander on the Acts, ii. 122, 123.
[96:1] Acts xvi. 29, 30.
[97:1] Acts xvi. 31.
[98:1] Acts xvi. 33, 34.
[98:2] Acts xvi. 35.
[98:3] Paul says that he was "free born" (Acts xxii. 28). It was
unlawful to scourge a Roman citizen, or even, except in extraordinary
cases, to imprison him without trial. He had also the privilege of
appeal to the Emperor.
[98:4] Acts xvi. 37.
[99:1] Acts xvi. 39.
[99:2] Acts xvi. 40.
[99:3] Phil. iv. 14-16.
[100:1] Acts xvii. 4.
[100:2] Acts xvii. 7.
[100:3] Acts xvii. 8. [Greek: etaraxan--tous politarchas]. It has been
remarked that the name here given to the magistrates (politarchs), does
not occur in ancient literature; but it is a curious and important fact
that a Greek inscription, on an arch still to be seen at this place,
demonstrates the accuracy of the sacred historian. This arch supplies
evidence that it was erected about the time when the Republic was
passing into the Empire, and that it was in existence when Paul now
preached there. It appears from it that the magistrates of Thessalonica
were called politarchs, and that they were seven in number. What is
almost equally striking is that three of the names in the inscription
are Sopater, Gaius, and Secundus, the same as those of three of Paul's
friends in this district. Conybeare and Howson, i. 360.
[101:1] Acts xvii. 11.
[102:1] Acts xvii. 16.
[102:2] Acts xvii. 17.
[102:3] See Conybeare and Howson, i. 241.
[102:4] See Alford on Acts xiii. 9, and xxiii. 1.
[102:5] 2 Cor. x. 10.
[102:6] 2 Cor. x. 10.
[102:7] Acts xvii. 18.
[103:1] [Greek: Adikei Sôkratês--etera de kaina daimonia
eispherôn.]--_Xen. Mem._ i. 1.
[103:2] Acts xvii. 19, 20. It is very evident that he was not arraigned
before the court of Areopagus as our English translation seems to
indicate.
[104:1] Acts xvii. 22, 23. This translation obviously conveys the
meaning of the original more distinctly than our English version. See
Alford, ii. 178; and Conybeare and Howson, i. 406.
[104:2] It is a curious fact that the impostor Apollonius of Tyana, who
was the contemporary of the apostle, speaks of Athens as a place "where
altars are raised _to the unknown Gods_." "Life," by Philostratus, book
vi. c. 3. See also Pausanias, Attic, i. 4.
[105:1] See Cudworth's "Intellectual System, with Notes by Mosheim," i.
513, 111. Edition, London, 1845.
[105:2] See Mosheim's "Commentaries on the Affairs of the Christians
before Constantine," by Vidal, i. 42.
[105:3] Acts xvii. 24.
[105:4] See Alford on Acts xvii. 26.
[105:5] Acts xvii. 26.
[105:6] Acts xvii. 25, 26.
[106:1] Acts xvii. 29.
[106:2] Acts xvii. 31.
[106:3] Cudworth, with Notes by Mosheim, ii. 120, and Mosheim's
"Commentaries," by Vidal, i. 42.
[106:4] Acts xvii. 32.
[106:5] Acts xvii. 21.
[107:1] Acts xvii. 34.
[107:2] These writings, which made their appearance not earlier than the
fourth or fifth century, were held in great reputation, particularly by
the Mystics, in the Middle Ages.
[107:3] Burton's "Lectures," i. 183.
[108:1] 1 Cor. ii. 1, 2, 4, 5.
[109:1] Strabo, lib. viii. vol. i., p. 549; Edit. Oxon. 1807.
[109:2] Acts xviii. 6.
[109:3] Acts xviii. 8.
[109:4] 1 Cor. i. 26.
[109:5] Rom. xvi. 23. This epistle was written from Corinth.
[109:6] Acts xviii. 8.
[109:7] 1 Cor. i. 14; Rom. xvi. 23.
[109:8] Acts xviii. 2, 26; Rom. xvi. 3; 1 Cor. xvi. 19; 2 Tim. iv. 19.
[110:1] Acts xviii. 2.
[110:2] "Rabbi Judah saith, 'He that teacheth not his son a trade, doth
the same as if he taught him to be a thief;' and Rabban Gamaliel saith,
'He that hath a trade in his hand, to what is he like? He is like a
vineyard that is fenced.'"--See _Alford on Acts_, xviii. 3.
[110:3] Acts xviii. 3.
[111:1] Epiphanius, "Haer.," xxx. 16.
[111:2] Acts xviii. 11.
[112:1] Acts xviii. 9, 10.
[112:2] See 1 Cor. i. 11, and xi. 20, 21; and 2 Cor. xii. 21, and
xiii. 2.
[112:3] See 1 Cor. vi. 9-11.
[112:4] Acts xviii. 12.
[112:5] Acts xviii. 13.
[113:1] Acts xviii. 14-16.
[113:2] Acts xviii. 17.
[113:3] 1 Thess. v. 12, 13.
[113:4] 2 Thess. ii. 2.
[113:5] 2 Thess. ii. 3-12.
[113:6] 1 Thess. i. 9.
[114:1] [Greek: Tas paradoseis].
[114:2] 2 Thess. ii. 15. Paul is here speaking, not of what had been
handed down from preceding generations, but of what had been established
by his own apostolic authority, so that the rendering "traditions" in
our English version is a peculiarly unhappy translation.
[115:1] Acts xviii. 18.
[115:2] See Conybeare and Howson, i. 454.
[115:3] Acts xviii. 19.
[116:1] Acts xviii. 24.
[116:2] Acts xviii. 25.
[116:3] Acts xviii. 26.
[116:4] It is worthy of note that she is named before Aquila in Acts
xviii. 18; Rom. xvi. 3; and 2 Tim. iv. 19.
[116:5] 1 Cor. xiv. 34, 35; 1 Tim. ii. 12.
[117:1] Acts xviii. 24.
[117:2] Acts xviii. 27.
[117:3] Acts xviii. 27, 28.
[117:4] 1 Cor. iii. 4-6.
[118:1] Acts xviii. 22.
[118:2] Acts xviii. 23.
[118:3] Acts xvi. 6.
[118:4] Acts xix. 8.
[118:5] Acts xix. 9.
[119:1] That this epistle was written after the second visit appears
from Gal. iv. 13. Mr Ellicott asserts that "the first time" is here the
preferable translation of [Greek: to proteron], and yet, rather
inconsistently, adds, that "no historical conclusions can safely be
drawn from this expression alone." See his "Critical and Grammatical
Commentary on Galatians," iv. 13.
[119:2] Gal. i. 6, iii. 1.
[120:1] Gal. ii. 16, iv. 1-4, v. 1.
[120:2] 1 Cor. xvi. 7; 2 Cor. xii. 14, xiii. 1.
[120:3] The Acts take no notice of various parts of his early career as
a preacher. Compare Acts ix. 20-26 with Gal. i. 17.
[120:4] 2 Cor. xi. 25.
[120:5] 2 Cor. xi. 26.
[120:6] Titus i. 5.
[120:7] See Titus i. 6-11, ii. 1, 7, 8, 15, iii. 8-11. The reasons
assigned in support of a later date for the writing of this epistle do
not appear at all satisfactory. Paul directs the evangelist (Titus iii.
12) to come to him to Nicopolis, for he had "determined there to
winter." This Nicopolis was in Greece, in the province of Achaia, and we
know that Paul wintered there in A.D. 57-58. Acts xx. 2, 3. See Schaff's
"Apostolic Church," i. 390.
[120:8] 2 Cor. ii. 13, vii. 6, 13, viii. 6, 16, 23, xii. 18; Gal. ii.
1, 3.
[121:1] Acts xix. 10.
[121:2] See Col. iv. 13, 15, 16. These churches were not, however,
founded by Paul. See Col. ii. 1.
[121:3] "This was the largest of the Greek temples. The area of the
Parthenon at Athens was _not one fourth_ of that of the temple of
Ephesus."--_Smith's Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography, Art._
EPHESUS.
[121:4] Conybeare and Howson, ii. 72.
[121:5] Acts xix. 35.
[122:1] Conybeare and Howson, ii. 73. Minucius Felix in his Octavius
speaks of Diana as represented "at Ephesus with many distended breasts
ranged in tiers."
[122:2] Conybeare and Howson, ii. 13.
[122:3] His Life, written by Philostratus about A.D. 210, is full of
lying wonders. His biographer mentions his visit to Ephesus, book iv. 1.
[123:1] Acts xix. 11, 12.
[123:2] Acts xix. 16, 17.
[123:3] The piece of silver here mentioned was worth about tenpence, so
that the estimated value of the books burned was about £2000.
[123:4] Acts xix. 19, 20.
[123:5] It was written not long before Paul left Ephesus, and probably
about the time of the Passover. 1 Cor. v. 7, xvi. 5-8.
[123:6] 1 Cor. i. 11.
[123:7] 1 Cor. v. 1.
[123:8] 1 Cor. xv. 12. This passage supplies evidence that errorists
very soon made their appearance in the Christian Church, and furnishes
an answer to those chronologists who date all the Pastoral Epistles
after Paul's release from his first imprisonment, on the ground that the
Gnostics had no existence at an earlier period.
[124:1] Acts xix. 24.
[124:2] Conybeare and Howson, ii. 74.
[124:3] Acts xix. 25.
[125:1] Acts xix. 25-27.
[125:2] Acts xix. 28.
[125:3] See Conybeare and Howson, ii. 79-81.
[125:4] Acts xix. 29.
[125:5] See Hackett's "Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles," p. 273.
[125:6] Acts xix. 31.
[126:1] Acts xx. 34. The Asiarchs "derived their title from the name of
the province, as the corresponding officers in Cyprus, Syria, and Lydia,
were called Cypriarchs, Syriarchs, Lydiarchs. Those of Asia are said to
have been ten in number.... As the games and sacrifices over which these
Asiarchs presided, were provided at their own expense, they were always
chosen from the richest class, and may be said to represent the highest
rank of the community."--_Alexander on the Acts_, ii. 210.
[126:2] 2 Tim. iv. 14.
[126:3] Acts xix. 34. It has been observed that, according to the ideas
of the heathen, this unintermitted cry was, in itself, _an act of
worship_; and hence we may understand why it was so long continued, but
it is surely a notable example of "vain repetitions." See Hackett, p.
275.
[127:1] Acts xix. 40.
[127:2] Acts xix. 32.
[127:3] Our English version "robbers of _churches_" is obviously
incorrect.
[127:4] Acts xix. 37. It is plain from this passage that the apostle,
when referring to the Gentile worship, avoided the use of language
calculated to give unnecessary offence.
[128:1] 1 Cor. xvi. 8.
[128:2] Acts xx. 1.
[128:3] Rom. xv. 19.
[128:4] See Acts xix. 22.
[128:5] 1 Tim. i. 3.
[128:6] 1 Tim. i. 2.
[129:1] According to the chronology adopted in our English Bible, all
the Pastoral Epistles were written after Paul's release from his first
imprisonment, and this theory has recently been strenuously advocated by
Conybeare and Howson, Alford, and Ellicott; but their reasonings are
exceedingly unsatisfactory. For, I. The statement of Conybeare and
Howson that "the three epistles were nearly contemporaneous with each
other" is a mere assertion resting on no solid foundation; as
resemblance in style, especially when all the letters were dictated by
the same individual, can be no evidence as to date. II. There is direct
evidence that heresies, such as those described in these epistles,
existed in the Church long before Paul's first imprisonment. See 1 Cor.
iii. 18, 19, xv. 12; 2 Cor. xi. 4, 13, 14, 15, 22, compared with 1 Tim.
i. 3, 7. III. The early Churches were very soon organised, as appears
from Acts xiv. 23; 1 Thess. v. 12, 13; so that the state of
ecclesiastical organisation described in the First Epistle to Timothy
and the Epistle to Titus is no proof of the late date of these letters.
IV. But the grand argument in support of the early date, and one with
which the advocates of the later chronology have never fairly grappled,
is derived from the fact that Paul never was in Ephesus after the time
mentioned in Acts xx. When he wrote to Timothy he intended shortly to
return thither. See 1 Tim. i. 3, iii. 14, 15. It is evident that when
the apostle addressed the elders of Ephesus (Acts xx. 25) and told them
they should "see his face no more," he considered himself as speaking
prophetically. It is clear, too, that his words were so understood by
his auditors (Acts xx. 38), and that the evangelist, who wrote them down
several years afterwards, was still under the same impression. I agree,
therefore, with Wieseler, and others, in assigning an early date to the
First Epistle to Timothy and the Epistle to Titus.
[130:1] 2 Cor. xi. 9, 24-28, 32, 33, xii. 2, 7-9. The Second Epistle to
the Corinthians was written late in A.D. 57.
[130:2] 2 Cor. ii. 4.
[130:3] [Greek: eis tên Hellada], _i.e._, Achaia.
[130:4] Acts xx. 2, 3.
[130:5] Rom. xvi. 1, 2, 23.
[130:6] Rom. i. 8.
[130:7] Rom. xvi. 7, 11.
[130:8] Rom. xvi. 3.
[130:9] Acts xix. 21; Rom. i. 10, 11, xv. 23, 24.
[131:1] Acts xx. 3.
[131:2] Acts xx. 6.
[131:3] Acts xx. 6.
[131:4] Acts xx. 17-35.
[131:5] Acts xx. 36-38.
[131:6] Acts xxi. 8.
[131:7] Acts xx. 23, xxi. 10, 11.
[131:8] [Greek: hepiskeuaramenoi]--the reading adopted by Lachmann and
others. The word "carriages" used in the authorised version for baggage,
or luggage, is now unintelligible to the English reader. The word
"carriage" is also used in our translation in Judges xviii. 21, and 1
Sam. xvii. 22, for something to be carried.
[131:9] Acts xxi. 15.
[132:1] Acts ii. 45.
[132:2] Rom. xv. 26.
[132:3] 1 Cor. xvi. 3; 2 Cor. viii. 19.
[132:4] Acts xx. 4.
[133:1] Prov. xviii. 10.
[133:2] Acts xxi. 17.
[133:3] Acts xxi. 24.
[133:4] "It was customary among the Jews for those who had received
deliverance from any great peril, or who from other causes desired
publicly to testify their dedication to God, to take upon themselves the
vow of a Nazarite.... No rule is laid down (Numb. vi.) as to the time
during which this life of ascetic rigour was to continue; but we learn
from the Talmud and Josephus that thirty days was at least a customary
period. During this time the Nazarite was bound to abstain from wine,
and to suffer his hair to grow uncut. At the termination of the period,
he was bound to present himself in the temple, with certain offerings,
and his hair was then cut off and burnt upon the altar. The offerings
required were beyond the means of the very poor, and consequently it was
thought an act of piety for a rich man to pay the necessary expenses,
and thus enable his poorer countrymen to complete their vow."
--_Conybeare and Howson_, ii. 250, 251.
[133:5] Acts xxi. 26.
[134:1] Acts xxi. 29.
[134:2] Acts xxi. 30.
[134:3] Acts xxi. 30.
[134:4] Acts xxiii. 26.
[134:5] Acts xxi. 32.
[134:6] Acts xxi. 33, 34. There were barracks in the tower of Antonia.
[135:1] Acts xxi. 38. "_Assassins_ is in the original a Greek inflection
of the Latin word _Sicarii_, so called from _Sica_, a short sword or
dagger, and described by Josephus as a kind of robbers who concealed
short swords beneath their garments, and infested Judea in the period
preceding the destruction of Jerusalem."--_Alexander on the Acts_, ii.
289.
[135:2] Acts xxii. 2.
[135:3] Acts xxii. 22-24.
[136:1] Acts xxiii. 6.
[136:2] Acts xxiii. 7.
[136:3] Acts xxiii. 10.
[136:4] Acts xxiii. 12, 21.
[136:5] Acts xxiii. 16, 23, 30.
[136:6] "Per omnem saevitiam ac libidinem jus regium servili ingenio
exercuit."--_Hist_. v. 9.
[136:7] Josephus' "Antiq." xx. c. 7. § 1,2.
[137:1] Acts xxiv. 25.
[137:2] Acts xxiv. 27.
[137:3] See some account of him in Josephus' "Antiq," xx. c. 8, §. 9, 10.
[138:1] Acts. xxv. 11.
[138:2] Acts xxv. 12.
[138:3] Acts xxv. 13. Festus appears to have been Procurator from the
beginning of the autumn of A.D. 60 to the summer of A.D. 62. Felix was
recalled A.D. 60. See Conybeare and Howson, Appendix ii. note (C).
[139:1] Josephus' "Wars," ii. c. 12, § 8; "Antiq." xx. c. 5, § 2.
[139:2] Acts xxv. 23.
[139:3] Acts xxvi. 6.
[140:1] Acts xxvi. 22.
[140:2] Acts xxvi. 24.
[140:3] Acts xxvi. 27.
[140:4] Acts xxvi. 28. Some would translate [Greek: en oligô] "in
short," instead of "almost."
[140:5] Acts xxvi. 29.
[141:1] Acts xxvi. 30-32.
[141:2] Eph. vi. 22; Phil. ii. 1, 2; Col. i. 24, iv. 8; Philem. 7,
compared with 2 Cor i. 3, 4.
[141:3] Acts ix. 15, 16.
[142:1] Acts xxvii. 20. This part of the history of the apostle has been
illustrated with singular ability by James Smith, Esq. of Jordanhill in
his "Voyage and Shipwreck of St Paul."
[142:2] Acts xxvii. 5, 6.
[142:3] Acts xxviii. 1. That Melita is Malta has been conclusively
established by Smith in his "Voyage and Shipwreck of St Paul."
"Dissertation," ii.
[142:4] Acts xxviii. 11. "With regard to the dimensions of the ships of
the ancients, some of them must have been quite equal to the largest
merchantman of the present day. The ship of St Paul had, in passengers
and crew, 276 persons on board, besides her cargo of wheat, and as they
were carried on by another ship of the same class, she must also have
been of great size. The ship in which Josephus was wrecked contained 600
people."--Smith's _Voyage and Shipwreck of St Paul_, p. 147.
[143:1] Acts xxviii. 13.
[143:2] Acts xxvii. 17.
[143:3] Acts xxvii. 29. "The ancient vessels did not carry, in general,
so large anchors as those which we employ; and hence they had often a
greater number of them. Athenaeus mentions a ship which had eight iron
anchors." Hackett, p. 372.
[143:4] Acts xxvii. 27.
[143:5] "When the _Lively_, frigate, unexpectedly fell in with this very
point, the quarter-master on the look-out, who first observed it,
states, in his evidence at the court-martial, that, _at the distance of
a quarter of a mile_ the land could not be seen."--Smith's _Voyage and
Shipwreck of St Paul_, pp. 89, 90.
[144:1] Hackett, p. 371.
[144:2] Acts xxvii. 28.
[144:3] Conybeare and Howson, ii. 351.
[144:4] Acts xxvii. 39.
[144:5] Acts xxvii 41.
[144:6] Smith's "Voyage and Shipwreck of St Paul," p. 102.
[144:7] Smith's "Voyage and Shipwreck of St Paul," p. 92.
[144:8] Acts xxvii. 41.
[145:1] Smith's "Voyage and Shipwreck of St Paul," p. 104.
[145:2] Conybeare and Howson make the population more than 2,000,000
(ii. 376). Merivale reduces it to something less than 700,000 (iv. 520).
In Smith's "Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography" it is stated as
upwards of 2,000,000. Greswell makes it about 1,000,000
("Dissertations," iv. 46). Dean Milman reckons it from 1,000,000 to
1,500,000 ("History of Latin Christianity," i. 23).
[145:3] Merivale, iv. 391.
[145:4] Rev. xvii. 1.
[146:1] Merivale, iv. 412.
[146:2] Merivale, iv. 414-420.
[146:3] Rev. xviii. 11.
[146:4] Acts xxviii. 14.
[147:1] Acts xxviii. 14.
[147:2] Acts xxviii. 15.
[147:3] Acts xxviii. 15.
[147:4] Called in our English version "the captain of the guard." The
celebrated Burrus was at this time (A.D. 61) the Praetorian Prefect.
Wieseler, p. 393. See also Greswell's "Dissertations," iv. p. 199.
[147:5] Acts xxviii. 16.
[148:1] Acts xxviii. 17.
[148:2] Acts xxviii. 23.
[148:3] Acts xxviii. 24.
[148:4] Acts xxviii. 31.
[148:5] Conybeare and Howson, ii. 296.
[149:1] Philem. 9.
[149:2] 2 Cor. x. 10.
[149:3] See Conybeare and Howson, ii. 428.
[149:4] Phil. ii. 25; Philem. 2.
[149:5] Eph. vi. 13, 14, 16, 17.
[149:6] Phil. iv. 3. When speaking of a "_true_ yoke-fellow," he may
here refer to the way in which he was himself unequally yoked.
[149:7] See Acts xxvi. 1, 29.
[149:8] Eph. iv. 1.
[150:1] [Greek: en olô tô praitôriô]--"We never find the word employed
for the Imperial house at Rome; and we believe the truer view to
be--that it denotes here, not the palace itself, but the quarters of
that part of the Imperial guards which was in immediate attendance on
the Emperor."-_Conybeare and Howson_, ii. 428.
[150:2] Phil. i. 12-14.
[150:3] Philem. 18, 19.
[150:4] Col. iv. 7.
[150:5] Col. ii. 8, 16, 18, 23.
[150:6] Eph. vi. 21, 22.
[151:1] Eph. i. 1.
[151:2] Col. iv. 16.
[151:3] Phil. i. 3-7.
[152:1] Phil. ii. 24; Philem. 22.
[152:2] Phil. i. 23-25.
[152:3] Rom. xv. 24, 28.
[153:1] [Greek: epi to terma tês duseôs]--Epist. to the Corinthians v.
Clement in the same place mentions that Paul was seven times in bonds.
See also Greswell, "Dissertations," vol. iv. p. 225-228.
[153:2] See Cave's "Fathers," i. 147. Oxford, 1840.
[153:3] [Greek: ton phelonên]. Some think that he wished for the cloak
to protect him against the cold of winter. See 2 Tim. iv. 21.
[153:4] In the "Life of St Columba" by Adamnan (Dublin, 1857), the
learned editor, Dr Reeves, has given an interesting account of an
ancient leather book-case in his own possession. See "Life of St
Columba," p. 115. If Paul referred to a case, it was probably to one of
a larger description.
[153:5] 2 Tim. iv. 13. It is probable that, in the anticipation of his
death, he wished to give the documents as a legacy to some of his
friends. Among them may have been Scripture autographs.
[153:6] 2 Tim. iv. 20. [Greek: apelipon]. The translation "_they_ left,"
instead of "_I_ left," is given up even by Dr Davidson, though he
rejects the idea of a second imprisonment. See his "Introduction to the
New Testament," iii. 53.
[153:7] Miletum, or Miletus, in Crete, is mentioned by Homer. "Iliad,"
ii. 647.
[154:1] Acts xii. 6-9.
[154:2] Heb. xiii. 23, 24. In this epistle he apparently refers to his
late imprisonment. Heb. x. 34, but the reading of the _textus receptus_
is here rejected by many of our highest critical authorities, such as
Griesbach, Lachmann, Tischendorf, and Scholz. Respecting the second
imprisonment, see also Eusebius, ii. c. 22.
[155:1] 2 Tim. iv. 20.
[155:2] Phil. ii. 24.
[155:3] 2 Tim. iv. 13.
[155:4] Philem. 22.
[155:5] Heb. xiii. 23.
[155:6] 2 Tim. iv. 20.
[155:7] 2 Tim. iv. 16, ii. 9.
[155:8] This may refer to some powerful defence of Christianity which he
had made before the Gentile tribunal of Nero.
[155:9] 2 Tim. iv. 16, 17.
[156:1] 2 Tim. iv. 6-8.
[156:2] "Euseb. Hist." ii. 25.
[156:3] Euseb. ii. 25. See the Note of Valesius on the words [Greek:
katha ton auton kairon]. See also Davidson's "Introduction to the New
Testament," iii. 361.
[156:4] 2 Tim. iv. 11.
[156:5] Tertullian "De Praescrip," c. 36. Euseb. ii. 25. See also
Lactantius, or the work ascribed to him, "De Mort. Persecutorum," c. 2.
[156:6] According to Gregory Nazianzen, Judea was the sphere of Peter.
"Oratio." 25, tom. i. 438. If so, Paul when visiting Jerusalem was
likely to meet with him.
[157:1] 1 Pet. v. 13.
[157:2] Rev. xvii. 5, xviii. 2, 10, 21.
[157:3] Euseb. ii. 15.
[157:4] 1 Pet. iv. 12.
[157:5] 2 Tim. iv. 11.
[157:6] 1 Pet. v. 13.
[157:7] 1 Pet. v. 12.
[157:8] Acts xv. 40, xvi. 19, 25, xvii. 4, 10, xviii. 5; 1 Thess. i. 1;
2 Thess. i. 1.
[158:1] 1 Pet. v. 12.
[158:2] The Jews at this time were wont to call Rome by the name of
Babylon. It was not, therefore, strange that Peter, being a Jew, used
this phraseology. See Wordsworth's "Lectures on the Apocalypse," p. 345,
and the authorities there quoted.
[158:3] 2 Pet. i. 12, iii. 1.
[158:4] These words apparently suggest that the preceding letter was
written not long before.
[159:1] 2 Pet. i. 13. 14.
[159:2] Gal. iv. 17, 21, vi. 12; Col. ii. 16-18.
[159:3] 1 Pet. i. 1.
[159:4] 2 Pet. iii. 16.
[159:5] As Heb. vi. 4-6, vii. 1-3, ix. 17.
[160:1] 2 Pet. iii. 16.
[160:2] Euseb. iii. 1.
[160:3] Euseb. iii. 1.
[160:4] Prudentius, "Peristeph. in Pass. Petr. et Paul." Hymn xii.
Augustine, serm. 28. "De Sanctis." The testimony of earlier witnesses
represents them as dying "_about_ the same time." See Euseb. ii. c. 25.
[161:1] Phil. iv. 22.
[161:2] Caius, a Roman presbyter who flourished about the beginning of
the third century, refers to the Vatican and the Ostian Way as the
places where they suffered. Routh's "Reliquiae," ii. p. 127.
[162:1] Hab. ii. 3.
[163:1] John i. 11.
[163:2] John xix. 15.
[163:3] Acts iv. 3, v. 18.
[164:1] Acts xii. 2, 3.
[164:2] See Acts xvii. 5, xviii. 12.
[165:1] Acts xviii. 2. Suetonius in Claud. (c. 25), says--"Judaeos
impulsore Chresto assidue tumultuantes Roma expulit." The words Christus
and Chrestus seem to have been often confounded, and it has been thought
that the historian here refers to some riotous proceedings among the
Jews in Rome arising out of discussions relative to Christianity. These
disturbances took place about A.D. 53. It is remarkable that even in the
beginning of the third century the Christians were sometimes called
_Chrestiani_. Hence Tertullian says--"Sed et cum perperam Chrestianus
pronunciatur a vobis, nam nec nominis certa est notitia penes vos, de
suavitate vel benignitate compositum est." "Apol." c. iii. See also
"Ad Nationes," lib. i. c. 3.
[165:2] See Greswell's "Dissertations," iv. p. 233.
[165:3] Eusebius, ii. 23.
[166:1] "Certi enim esse debemus, si quos latet per ignorantiam
literature secularis, etiam ostiorum deos apud Romanos, Cardeam a
cardinibus appellatam, et Forculum a foribus, et Limentinum a limine, et
ipsum Janum a janua." Tertullian, "De Idololatria," c. 15. See also the
same writer "Ad Nationes," ii. c. 10, 15; and "De Corona," 13.
[166:2] 2 Tim. iii. 12. Cyprian touches upon the same subject in his
Treatise on the "Vanity of Idols," c. 2.
[167:1] The Christians were familiar with the idea of the conflagration
of the world, and there is much plausibility in the conjecture that, as
they gazed on the burning city, they may have given utterance to
expressions which were misunderstood, and which awakened suspicion.
"Some," says Dean Milman, "in the first instance, apprehended and
examined, may have made acknowledgments before a passionate and
astonished tribunal, which would lead to the conclusion that, in the
hour of general destruction, they had some trust, some security, denied
to the rest of mankind; and this exemption from common misery, if it
would not mark them out in some dark manner, as the authors of the
conflagration, at all events would convict them of that hatred of the
human race so often advanced against the Jews."--_Milman's History of
Christianity,_ ii. 37, 38.
[167:2] Tacitus, "Annal." xv. 44.
[167:3] Heb. xii. 4.
[167:4] Heb. x. 25.
[168:1] 1 Pet. iv. 12.
[168:2] 1 Pet. iv. 17.
[168:3] Tertullian, "Ad Nationes," i. 7.
[168:4] See "De Mortibus Persecutorum," c. 2, and Sulpitius Severus,
lib. ii. p. 139; Edit. Leyden, 1635.
[168:5] Dan. ix. 27.
[169:1] Matt. xxiv. 2, 15, 16, 34; Mark xiii. 2, 14, 30; Luke xxi. 6,
20, 21, 24, 32.
[169:2] See Euseb. iii. 31.
[169:3] Acts xvii. 7.
[169:4] Euseb. iii. 20.
[169:5] Matt. xiii. 55. See Greswell's "Dissertations," ii. 114, 121,
122.
[170:1] Matt, xxvii. 57; Mark xv. 43.
[170:2] Acts xiii. 7.
[170:3] Phil. iv. 22.
[170:4] Dio Cassius, lxvii. 14.
[170:5] Euseb. iii. 18.
[171:1] Rev. i. 9.
[171:2] Tertullian, "De Praescrip. Haeret." c. 36.
[171:3] See Mosheim, Cent. i. part i. ch. 5.
[171:4] According to Baronius ("Annal." ad. an. 92, 98) John was six
years in Patmos, or from A.D. 92 to A.D. 98. Other writers think that he
was set at liberty some time before the death of Domitian, or about A.D.
95. According to this reckoning, had he been six years in exile, he must
have been banished A.D. 89. This conclusion derives some countenance
from the "Chronicon" of Eusebius, which represents the tyrant in the
eighth and ninth years of his reign, or about A.D. 89, as proscribing
and putting to death very many of his subjects. If the visions of the
Apocalypse were vouchsafed to John in A.D. 89, the interval between
their revelation and the establishment of the Pope as a temporal prince
is found to be 755-89, or exactly 666 years. See Rev. xiii. 18. There is
another very curious coincidence in this case; for the interval between
the fall of the Western Empire, and the establishment of the Bishop of
Rome as a temporal prince, is 755-476=279 complete, or 280 current
years, that is, 40 prophetic weeks. But it so happens that the period of
human gestation is 40 weeks, and this would lead to the inference that
the Man of Sin was conceived as soon as the Western Empire fell. See 2
Thess. ii. 7, 8. I am not aware that these remarkable coincidences have
yet been noticed, and I therefore submit them to the consideration of
the students of prophecy.
[172:1] See Burton's "Lectures," i. 361.
[172:2] 2 John 1; 3 John 1.
[172:3] 1 Pet. v. 1; Philem. 1.
[172:4] Acts xx. 28.
[172:5] Mark iii. 17.
[172:6] Jerome, "Comment. on Galatians," vi. 10.
[172:7] See Vitringa, "Observationes Sacrae," lib. iv. c. 7, 8.
[173:1] Rev. iii. 16.
[173:2] Rev. iii. 2.
[173:3] Rev. ii. 5.