in many parts full of caverns, to which allusions frequently occur in
the Old Testament. At Engedi, in particular, there was a cave so large,
that David, with six hundred men, hid themselves in the sides of it, and
Saul entered the mouth of the cave without perceiving that any one was
there, 1 Sam. xxiv. Josephus tells us of a numerous gang of banditti,
who, having infested the country, and being pursued by Herod with his
army, retired into certain caverns, almost inaccessible, near Arbela in
Galilee, where they were with great difficulty subdued. “Beyond
Damascus,” says Strabo, “are two mountains, called Trachones, from which
the country has the name of Trachonitis; and from hence, toward Arabia
and Iturea, are certain rugged mountains, in which there are deep
caverns; one of which will hold four thousand men.” Tavernier, in his
“Travels in Persia,” speaks of a grotto between Aleppo and Bir, that
would hold near three thousand horse. And Maundrel assures us, that
“three hours distant from Sidon, about a mile from the sea, there runs
along a high rocky mountain, in the sides of which are hewn a multitude
of grottoes, all very little differing from each other. They have
entrances about two foot square. There are of these subterraneous
caverns two hundred in number. It may, with probability, at least, be
concluded that these places were contrived for the use of the living,
and not of the dead.” These extracts may be useful in explaining such
passages of Scripture as the following: “Because of the Midianites, the
children of Israel made them dens which are in the mountains, and caves,
and strong holds,” Judges vi, 2. To these they betook themselves for
refuge in times of distress and hostile invasion:--“When the men of
Israel saw that they were in a strait, for the people were distressed,
then the people did hide themselves in caves, and in thickets, and in
rocks, and in high places, and in pits,” 1 Sam. xiii, 6. See also Jer.
xli, 9: “To enter into the holes of the rocks and into the caves of the
earth,” became with the prophets a very proper and familiar image to
express a state of terror and consternation. Thus Isa. ii, 19: “They
shall go into the holes of the rocks, and into the caves of the earth,
for fear of the Lord, and for the glory of his majesty, when he ariseth
to shake terribly the earth.”
CEDAR, ארז. The cedar is a large and noble evergreen tree. Its lofty
height, and its far extended branches, afford spacious shelter and
shade, Ezek. xxxi, 3, 6, 8. The wood is very valuable; is of a reddish
colour, of an aromatic smell, and reputed incorruptible. This is owing
to its bitter taste, which the worms cannot endure, and to its resin,
which preserves it from the injuries of the weather. The ark of the
covenant, and much of the temple of Solomon, and that of Diana at
Ephesus, were built of cedar. The tree is much celebrated in Scripture.
It is called, “the glory of Lebanon,” Isa. lx, 13. On that mountain it
must in former times have flourished in great abundance. There are some
cedars still growing there which are prodigiously large. But the
travellers who have visited the place within these two or three
centuries, and who describe trees of vast size, inform us that their
number is diminished greatly; so that, as Isaiah says, “a child may
number them,” Isa. x, 19. Maundrell measured one of the largest size,
and found it to be twelve yards and six inches in girt, and yet sound;
and thirty-seven yards in the spread of its boughs. Gabriel Sionita, a
very learned Syrian Maronite, who assisted in editing the Paris
Polyglott, a man worthy of all credit, thus describes the cedars of
mount Lebanon, which he had examined on the spot: “The cedar grows on
the most elevated part of the mountain, is taller than the pine, and so
thick, that five men together could scarcely encompass one. It shoots
out its branches at ten or twelve feet from the ground: they are large
and distant from each other, and are perpetually green. The wood is of a
brown colour, very solid and incorruptible, if preserved from wet. The
tree bears a small cone like that of the pine.”
CELSUS. A Pagan philosopher of the second century, who composed a work
against Christianity, in which he so expressly refers to the facts of
the Gospels, and to the books of the New Testament, as to have furnished
important undesigned testimony to their antiquity and truth.
CEMETERY. See SEPULCHRE.
CENSER, a sacred instrument made use of in the religious rites of the
Hebrews. It was a vase which contained incense to be used in sacrifice.
When Aaron made an atonement for himself and his house, he was to take a
censer full of burning coals of fire from off the altar of the Lord,
Lev. xvi, 12. And Solomon, when he provided furniture for the temple of
the Lord, made, among other things, censers of pure gold, 1 Kings vii,
50.
CENTURION, an officer in the Roman army, who, as the term indicates, had
the command of a hundred men, Matt. viii, 5, &c.
CEPHAS, Κηφᾶς, from כיפא, a _rock_. The Greek Πέτρος, and the Latin
_Petrus_, have the same signification. See PETER.
CEREMONY, an assemblage of several actions, forms, and circumstances,
serving to render a thing magnificent and solemn. Applied to religious
services, it signifies the external rites and manner in which the
ministers of religion perform their sacred functions, and direct or lead
the worship of the people. In 1646, M. Ponce, published a history of
ancient ceremonies, showing the rise, growth, and introduction of each
rite into the church, and its gradual advancement to superstition. Many
of them were borrowed from Judaism, but more from Paganism. In all
religions adapted to the nature of man there must be some positive
institutions for fixing the mind upon spiritual objects, and
counteracting that influence of material things upon habits and pursuits
which is, and must be, constantly exerted. Without such institutions,
religion might be preserved, indeed, by a few of superior understanding
and of strong powers of reflection; but among mankind in general all
trace of it would soon be lost. When the end for which they are
appointed is kept in view, and the simple examples of the New Testament
are observed, they are of vast importance to the production both of
pious feelings and of virtuous conduct; but there has constantly been a
propensity in the human race to mistake the means for the end, and to
consider themselves as moral and religious, when they scrupulously
observe what was intended to produce morality and religion. The reason
is obvious: ceremonial observances can be performed without any great
sacrifice of propensities and vices; they are palpable; when they are
observed by men who, in the tenor of public life, do not act immorally,
they are regarded by others as indicating high attainments in virtue;
and through that self-deceit which so wonderfully misleads the reason,
and inclines it to minister to the passions which it should restrain,
men have themselves become persuaded that their acknowledgment of divine
authority, implied in their respect to the ritual which that authority
is conceived to have sanctioned, may be taken as a proof that they have
nothing to apprehend from the violation of the law under which they are
placed. But, whatever be the causes of this, the fact itself is
established by the most extensive and the most incontrovertible
evidence. We find it, indeed, wherever mankind have had notions of
superior power, and of their obligation to yield obedience to the will
of the supreme Being.
Under the system of polytheism which prevailed in the most enlightened
nations previous to the publication of Christianity, this was carried so
far, that the connection between religion and morality was in a great
degree dissolved, rites and ceremonies, sacrifices and oblations, were
all that it was thought requisite to observe; when these were carefully
performed, there was no hesitation in ascribing piety to the persons who
did perform them, however deficient they might be in virtuous and pious
dispositions. Even under the Mosaical dispensation, proceeding as it
did, immediately from heaven, and adapted, as in infinite wisdom it was,
to the situation of those to whom it was given, the same evil early
began to be experienced; and although it was lamented and exposed by the
prophets, and the most enlightened men among the Jews, it was so far
from being eradicated, that it continued to acquire strength, till it
was exhibited in all its magnitude in the character prevalent among the
Pharisees at the period of Christ’s manifestation. With this highly
popular and revered class of men, religion was either merely a matter of
ceremony, or was employed, for base and interested purposes, to cast a
veil of sanctity over their actions. They said long prayers, but it was
for a show; they gave alms, but it was after they had sounded a trumpet,
that the eye of man might be fixed upon their beneficence; and, as to
the point now under review, they were most strikingly described by our
Saviour, when he said of them, “They pay tithe of mint, and anise, and
cummin, but they neglect the weightier matters of the law, justice, and
mercy, and truth.” The Christian religion not only expressly guards
against an evil which had become so prevalent, but its whole spirit is
at variance with it, its own ceremonial observances being few, and
obviously emblematical of whatever is excellent and holy. But still the
Gospel finds human nature as other religions found it; and
ecclesiastical history, even from the earliest periods, shows with what
astonishing perverseness, and with what wonderful ingenuity, men
departed from the simplicity of Christianity, and substituted in its
room the most childish, and often the most pernicious, practices and
observances. The _power_ of godliness was lost in _forms_; and the
innovations of a profane _will-worship_ became almost innumerable. The
effect was, that men regarded God as less concerned with the moral
conduct of his creatures, than with the _quantum_ of _service_ they
performed in his temples; and religion and morals were so disjoined,
that one became the substitute for the other, to the universal
corruption of the Christian world.
CERINTHIANS. Of Cerinthus, the founder of this sect, Dr. Burton gives
the following account: Cerinthus is said to have been one of those Jews
who, when St. Peter returned to Jerusalem, expostulated with him for
having baptized Cornelius, Acts xi, 2. He is also stated to have been
one of those who went down from Judea to Antioch, and said, “Except ye
be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved,” Acts xv,
1. According to the same account, he was one of the false teachers who
seduced the Galatians to Judaism; and he is also charged with joining in
the attack which was made upon St. Paul, for polluting the temple by the
introduction of Greeks, Acts xxi, 27, 28. I cannot find any older
authority for these statements than that of Epiphanius, who wrote late
in the fourth century, and is by no means worthy of implicit credit. He
asserts, also, that Cerinthus was one of the persons alluded to by St.
Luke, as having already undertaken to write the life of Jesus. But all
these stories I take to be entirely inventions; and there is no evidence
that Cerinthus made himself conspicuous at so early a period. Irenæus
speaks of the heresy of the Nicolaitans, as being considerably prior to
that of the Cerinthians. According to the same writer, Carpocrates also
preceded Cerinthus; and if it be true, as so many of the fathers assert,
that St. John wrote his Gospel expressly to confute this heresy, we can
hardly come to any other conclusion, than that it was late in the first
century when Cerinthus rose into notice. He appears undoubtedly to have
been a Jew; and there is evidence that, after having studied philosophy
in Egypt, he spread his doctrines in Asia Minor. This will account for
his embracing the Gnostic opinions, and for his exciting the notice of
St. John, who resided at Ephesus. He was certainly a Gnostic in his
notion of the creation of the world, which he conceived to have been
formed by angels; and his attachment to that philosophy may explain what
otherwise seems inconsistent, that he retained some of the Mosaic
ceremonies, such as the observance of Sabbaths and circumcision; though,
like other Gnostics, he ascribed the law and the prophets to the angel
who created the world. This adoption or rejection of different parts of
the same system was a peculiar feature of the Gnostic philosophy; and
the name of Cerinthus probably became eminent, because he introduced a
fresh change in the notion concerning Christ. The Gnostics, like their
leader, Simon Magus, had all of them been Docetæ, and denied the real
humanity; but Cerinthus is said to have maintained that Jesus had a real
body, and was the son of human parents, Joseph and Mary. In the other
points he agreed with the Gnostics, and believed that Christ was one of
the æons who descended on Jesus at his baptism. It is difficult to
ascertain who was the first Gnostic that introduced this opinion. Some
writers give the merit of it to Ebion; and yet it is generally said that
Cerinthus and Ebion agreed in their opinions concerning Christ, and that
Cerinthus preceded Ebion. Again Carpocrates is said to have held the
same sentiments; and he is placed by Irenæus before Cerinthus: so that
it is difficult, if not impossible, to decide the chronological
precedence of these heretics. Perhaps the safest inference to draw from
so many conflicting testimonies is this: that Carpocrates was the first
Gnostic of eminence who was not a Docetist; but that the notion of Jesus
being born of human parents was taught more explicitly and with more
success by Cerinthus. Carpocrates is reported to have been distinguished
by the gross immorality of his life; and whatever we may think of the
imputations cast upon the Gnostics in general, it seems impossible to
deny that this person, at least, professed and practised a perfect
liberty of action. There is also strong evidence that in this instance
Cerinthus followed his example.
There is a peculiar doctrine ascribed to this heretic, which, if it
originated with him, may well account for the celebrity of his name.
Cerinthus has been handed down as the first person who held the notion
of a millennium; and though the fathers undoubtedly believed that,
previous to the general resurrection, the earth would undergo a
renovation, and the just would rise to enjoy a long period of
terrestrial happiness, yet there was a marked and palpable difference
between the millennium of the fathers and that of Cerinthus. The fathers
conceived this terrestrial happiness to be perfectly pure and freed from
the imperfections of our nature; but Cerinthus is said to have promised
his followers a millennium of the grossest pleasures and the most
sensual gratifications. It is singular that all the three sources, to
which we may trace the Gnostic doctrines, might furnish some foundation
for this notion of a millennium. Thus Plato has left some speculations
concerning the “great year,” when, after the expiration of thirty-six
thousand years, the world was to be renewed, and the golden age to
return. It was the belief of the Persian magi, according to Plutarch,
that the time would come, when Ahreman, or the evil principle, would be
destroyed; when the earth would lose its impediments and inequalities,
and all mankind would be of one language, and enjoy uninterrupted
happiness. It was taught, in the Cabbala, that the world was to last six
thousand years, which would be followed by a period of rest for a
thousand years more. There appears in this an evident allusion, though
on a much grander scale, to the sabbatical years of rest. The
institution of the jubilee, and the glowing descriptions given by the
prophets of the restoration of the Jews, and the reign of the Messiah,
may have led the later Jews to some of their mystical fancies; and when
all these systems were blended together by the Gnostics, it is not
strange, if a millennium formed part of their creed long before the time
of Cerinthus. It seems probable, however, that he went much farther than
his predecessors in teaching that the millennium would consist in a
course of sensual indulgence; and it may have been his notions upon this
subject, added to those concerning the human nature of Christ, which led
him to maintain, contrary to the generality of Gnostics, that Christ had
not yet risen, but that he would rise hereafter. The Gnostics, as we
have seen, denied the resurrection altogether. Believing Jesus to be a
phantom, they did not believe that he was crucified; and they could not
therefore believe that he had risen. But Cerinthus, who held that Jesus
was born, like other human beings, found no difficulty in believing
literally that he was crucified; and he is said also to have taught that
he would rise from the dead at some future period. It is most probable
that this period was that of the millennium; and the words of St. John
in the Revelation would easily be perverted, where it is said of the
souls of the martyrs, that “they lived and reigned with Christ a
thousand years,” Rev. xx, 4.
CHALCEDONY, χαλκηδών, Rev. xxi, 19; a precious stone. Arethas, who has
written an account of Bithynia, says that it was so called from
Chalcedon, a city of that country, opposite to Byzantium; and it was in
colour like a carbuncle. Some have supposed this also to be the stone
called נפך, translated “emerald,” Exodus xxviii, 18.
CHALDEA, or Babylonia, the country lying on both sides of the Euphrates,
of which Babylon was the capital; and extending southward to the Persian
Gulf, and northward into Mesopotamia, at least as far as Ur, which is
called Ur of the Chaldees. This country had also the name of Shinar. See
BABYLON.
CHALDEAN PHILOSOPHY claims attention on account of its very high
antiquity. The most ancient people, next to the Hebrews, among the
eastern nations, who appear to have been acquainted with philosophy, in
its more general sense, were the Chaldeans; for though the Egyptians
have pretended that the Chaldeans were an Egyptian colony, and that they
derived their learning from Egypt, there is reason to believe that the
kingdom of Babylon, of which Chaldea was a part, flourished before the
Egyptian monarchy; and that the Egyptians were rather indebted to the
Chaldeans, than the Chaldeans to the Egyptians. Nevertheless, the
accounts that have been transmitted to us by the Chaldeans themselves,
of the antiquity of their learning, are blended with fable, and involved
in considerable uncertainty. There are other circumstances,
independently of the antiquity of the Chaldean philosophy, which render
our knowledge of it imperfect and uncertain. We derive our acquaintance
with it from other nations, and principally from the Greeks, whose
vanity led them to despise and misrepresent the pretended learning of
barbarous nations. The Chaldeans also adopted a symbolical mode of
instruction, and transmitted their doctrines to posterity under a veil
of obscurity, which it is not easy to remove. To all which, we may add
that, about the commencement of the Christian æra, a race of
philosophers sprung up, who, with a view of gaining credit to their own
wild and extravagant doctrines, passed them upon the world as the
ancient wisdom of the Chaldeans and Persians, in spurious books, which
they ascribed to Zoroaster, or some other eastern philosopher. Thus, the
fictions of these impostors were confounded with the genuine dogmas of
the ancient eastern nations. Notwithstanding these causes of
uncertainty, which perplex the researches of modern inquirers into the
distinguishing doctrines and character of the Chaldean philosophy, it
appears probable that the philosophers of Chaldea were the priests of
the Babylonian nation, who instructed the people in the principles of
religion, interpreted its laws, and conducted its ceremonies. Their
character was similar to that of the Persian magi, and they are often
confounded with them by the Greek historians. Like the priests in most
other nations, they employed religion in subserviency to the ruling
powers, and made use of imposture to serve the purposes of civil policy.
Accordingly, Diodorus Siculus relates, that they pretended to predict
future events by divination, to explain prodigies, and interpret dreams,
and to avert evils, or confer benefits, by means of augury and
incantations. For many ages, they retained a principal place among
diviners. In the reign of Marcus Antonius, when the emperor and his
army, who were perishing with thirst, were suddenly relieved by a
shower, the prodigy was ascribed to the power and skill of the Chaldean
soothsayers. Thus accredited for their miraculous powers, they
maintained their consequence in the courts of princes. The principal
instrument which they employed in support of their superstition, was
astrology. The Chaldeans were probably the first people who made regular
observations upon the heavenly bodies, and hence the appellation of
Chaldean became afterward synonymous with that of astronomer.
Nevertheless all their observations were applied to the sole purpose of
establishing the credit of judicial astrology; and they employed their
pretended skill in this art, in calculating nativities, foretelling the
weather, predicting good and bad fortune, and other practices usual with
impostors of this class. While they taught the vulgar that all human
affairs are influenced by the stars, and professed to be acquainted with
the nature and laws of their influence, and consequently to possess a
power of prying into futurity, they encouraged much idle superstition,
and many fraudulent practices. Hence other professors of these
mischievous arts were afterward called Chaldeans, and the arts
themselves were called Babylonian arts. Among the Romans these impostors
were so troublesome, that, during the time of the republic, it became
necessary to issue an edict requiring the Chaldeans, or mathematicians,
(by which latter appellation they were commonly known,) to depart from
Rome and Italy within ten days; and, afterward, under the emperors,
these soothsayers were put under the most severe interdiction.
The Chaldean philosophy, notwithstanding the obscurity that has rendered
it difficult of research, has been highly extolled, not only by the
orientals and Greeks, but by Jewish and Christian writers: but upon
recurring to authorities that are unquestionable, there seems to be
little or nothing in this branch of the barbaric philosophy which
deserves notice. The following brief detail will include the most
interesting particulars. From the testimony of Diodorus, and also from
other ancient authorities, collected by Eusebius, it appears, that the
Chaldeans believed in God, the Lord and Parent of all, by whose
providence the world is governed. From this principle sprung their
religious rites, the immediate object of which was a supposed race of
spiritual beings or demons, whose existence could not have been
imagined, without first conceiving the idea of a supreme Being, the
source of all intelligence. The belief of a supreme Deity, the fountain
of all the divinities which were supposed to preside over the several
parts of the material world, was the true origin of all religious
worship, however idolatrous, not excepting even that which consisted in
paying divine honours to the memory of dead men. Beside the supreme
Being, the Chaldeans supposed spiritual beings to exist, of several
orders; gods, demons, heroes: these they probably distributed into
subordinate classes, agreeably to their practice of theurgy or magic.
The Chaldeans, in common with the eastern nations in general, admitted
the existence of certain evil spirits, clothed in a vehicle of grosser
matter; and in subduing or counteracting these, they placed a great part
of the efficacy of their religious incantations. These doctrines were
the mysteries of the Chaldean religion, imparted only to the initiated.
Their popular religion consisted in the worship of the sun, moon,
planets, and stars, as divinities, after the general practice of the
east, Job xxxi, 27. From the religious system of the Chaldeans were
derived two arts, for which they were long celebrated; namely, magic and
astrology. Their magic, which should not be confounded with witchcraft,
or a supposed intercourse with evil spirits, consisted in the
performance of certain religious ceremonies or incantations, which were
supposed, by the interposition of good demons, to produce supernatural
effects. Their astrology was founded upon the chimerical principle, that
the stars have an influence, either beneficial or malignant, upon the
affairs of men, which may be discovered, and made the certain ground of
prediction, in particular cases; and the whole art consisted in applying
astronomical observations to this fanciful purpose, and thus imposing
upon the credulity of the vulgar.
CHAMBER. See UPPER ROOM.